Could Jesus Sin?

[Richard]

​

Could Jesus sin? If he couldn't, then doesn't this mean when he was tempted, it was not a real temptation?

Answer​

This answer is covered in a series by IIIM called the, "Apostles' Creed," (APC - 3rd Lesson) and the "We Believe in Jesus," (JES 2nd Lesson) video series. Here is a brief summary.

The word "impeccability" means "inability to sin." Christians have used it for centuries to refer to the fact that Jesus was incapable of sinning. Theologians often talk about Jesus' impeccability in conjunction with His temptation because it was the time in his life when he would have been most likely to sin if that were possible (which it is NOT).

There are a few things worth saying about Jesus' impeccability:

• (1) Natures don't sin; only persons sin. Jesus is the second person of the Trinity. His person is fully divine. God can't sin. Therefore, Jesus can't sin.
• (2) There is no mixture or confusion between Jesus' natures. Impeccability is a divine attribute, and part of Jesus' divine nature. Divine attributes are immutable. Therefore, Jesus' human nature can't change his divine attribute of impeccability.
• (3) The ability to sin is not an essential human attribute. We lose the ability to sin when we are glorified. Therefore, one can be fully human without having the ability to sin.

Jesus was born without sin and lived a perfectly sinless life. The Bible specifically speaks of his sinlessness in passages like Hebrews 4:14-15 and 9:14. So, how do we reconcile this idea with the assertion that Jesus had a true and complete human nature? Simply, the commission of sin, and even the ability to sin, are not essential to being human.

 

[TibiasDad]

​

Could Jesus sin? If he couldn't, then doesn't this mean when he was tempted, it was not a real temptation?

Answer​

This answer is covered in a series by IIIM called the, "Apostles' Creed," (APC - 3rd Lesson) and the "We Believe in Jesus," (JES 2nd Lesson) video series. Here is a brief summary.

The word "impeccability" means "inability to sin." Christians have used it for centuries to refer to the fact that Jesus was incapable of sinning. Theologians often talk about Jesus' impeccability in conjunction with His temptation because it was the time in his life when he would have been most likely to sin if that were possible (which it is NOT).

There are a few things worth saying about Jesus' impeccability:

• (1) Natures don't sin; only persons sin. Jesus is the second person of the Trinity. His person is fully divine. God can't sin. Therefore, Jesus can't sin.
• (2) There is no mixture or confusion between Jesus' natures. Impeccability is a divine attribute, and part of Jesus' divine nature. Divine attributes are immutable. Therefore, Jesus' human nature can't change his divine attribute of impeccability.
• (3) The ability to sin is not an essential human attribute. We lose the ability to sin when we are glorified. Therefore, one can be fully human without having the ability to sin.

Jesus was born without sin and lived a perfectly sinless life. The Bible specifically speaks of his sinlessness in passages like Hebrews 4:14-15 and 9:14. So, how do we reconcile this idea with the assertion that Jesus had a true and complete human nature? Simply, the commission of sin, and even the ability to sin, are not essential to being human.

Good question, Richard; nice to meet you!
That he is human with a human will and freedom of choice, not unlike Adam and Eve, the second Adam is theoretically capable of sin. While it is “possible” the probability factor is zero because of who he is. The temptation is real and dynamically as powerful as it is with any one of us, but his purity of character and strength of relationship with his Father makes his willingness to sin practically impossible.

Our ability to withstand any temptation is possible because he who withstood temptation is in us.

1 John 2:1My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. 2He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world. 3We know that we have come to know him if we keep his commands. 4Whoever says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person. 5But if anyone obeys his word, love for God is truly made complete in them. This is how we know we are in him: 6Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did.

1 John 3:8The one who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work. 9No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God. 10This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not God’s child, nor is anyone who does not love their brother and sister.

Doug

 

[MTMattie]

​

Could Jesus sin? If he couldn't, then doesn't this mean when he was tempted, it was not a real temptation?

Answer​

This answer is covered in a series by IIIM called the, "Apostles' Creed," (APC - 3rd Lesson) and the "We Believe in Jesus," (JES 2nd Lesson) video series. Here is a brief summary.

The word "impeccability" means "inability to sin." Christians have used it for centuries to refer to the fact that Jesus was incapable of sinning. Theologians often talk about Jesus' impeccability in conjunction with His temptation because it was the time in his life when he would have been most likely to sin if that were possible (which it is NOT).

There are a few things worth saying about Jesus' impeccability:

• (1) Natures don't sin; only persons sin. Jesus is the second person of the Trinity. His person is fully divine. God can't sin. Therefore, Jesus can't sin.
• (2) There is no mixture or confusion between Jesus' natures. Impeccability is a divine attribute, and part of Jesus' divine nature. Divine attributes are immutable. Therefore, Jesus' human nature can't change his divine attribute of impeccability.
• (3) The ability to sin is not an essential human attribute. We lose the ability to sin when we are glorified. Therefore, one can be fully human without having the ability to sin.

Jesus was born without sin and lived a perfectly sinless life. The Bible specifically speaks of his sinlessness in passages like Hebrews 4:14-15 and 9:14. So, how do we reconcile this idea with the assertion that Jesus had a true and complete human nature? Simply, the commission of sin, and even the ability to sin, are not essential to being human.

Alright,

But the temptations we feel then cannot be the same as Jesus temptation.

To not sin we must make a decision.... yes or no.

Not so in Jesus case because He would not be able to say "yes, I will", because He simply would have no desire.

I think the writing or translation from the Holy Word that tells us he was tempted in every way is faulty, But not knowing ancient Koine Greek or even Aramaic I could not begin to work on it to see if, where or how.

 

[civic]

Another word for temp, temptation is test or tested. God was tested/tempted many times by Israel in the OT. Jesus was tested/tempted by the evil one but to no prevail. Christ was not tempted from within, but externally by the evil one.

 

[TedT]

The definition of free will is perfected in the ability to choose to sin, to go against GOD's holiness.

GOD has a free will, therefore GOD has the ability to choose to sin.
GOD is holy, ie, perfectly dedicated to being true to HIS perfect nature of being loving, kind, righteous and just, etc. HE will never choose sin, ie, to break HIS holiness, because HE knows the destruction that would cause, not because HE can't choose. Therefore James 1:13 When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He tempt anyone.

True temptation comes not from the source of the offered choice such as Satan, but from one's own already sinful heart, which is no temptation at all to a truly holy heart: 14 But each one is tempted when BY HIS OWN EVIL DESIRES he is lured away and enticed.

Satan tried to tempt Christ in the desert but a temptation ignored is not a temptation. This suggests that only by giving in to the urge or suggestion one might / should sin that the urge to sin can be called a temptation. Heb 4:5 then tells us that though He was surrounded by the offers (?) of temptation (called temptations) but without sin, ie without in fact being tempted from within as James tells us true temptation is defined.

Berean Standard Bible
Heb 4:5 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who was tempted in every way that we are, yet was without sin.

 

[Dizerner]

You have to deny Jesus had free will to believe he literally cannot sin.

 

[praise_yeshua]

You have to deny Jesus had free will to believe he literally cannot sin.

No true. Freedom of will isn't all about sin. Peccability is a good topic to discuss.

Christ had no desire to act contrary to His Character. The Incarnation never changed the Character/Nature of Christ.

The way most people approach this subject is entirely wrong. They try to involved some sense of propensity or capability to sin. Christ has always been above sinning. He doesn't have the capability to sin.

Also, the idea that since we've been born again, we are equally incapable of sin as Christ, is preposterous. "Knowing sin" the way we know sin isn't possible with Christ. He shared in our judgement but He never shared in our guilt.

Such distinctions need to be made in these types of conversations.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Jesus left his diety behind, He entered the human body born of mary and the HS.

He was born as Adam was created.. Able to to sin. but also able to sin.

to say Jesus was not able to sin destroys his high priest duties and the cross..

if you rnot able to sin, you can;t say you kept the law. because you were not able to break the law (it was impossible)

 

[praise_yeshua]

Jesus left his diety behind, He entered the human body born of mary and the HS.

You shouldn't have said this. This is so ridiculous at "face value"...

He was born as Adam was created.. Able to to sin. but also able to sin.

Nope. Adam wasn't "begotten". Christ was born from a single seed. The "seed of the woman".

to say Jesus was not able to sin destroys his high priest duties and the cross..

Guilt isn't a requirement to be faithful. You need to deal with "experience" relative to the Incarnation. How was the "experience" relative to these aspects of the work of God in Christ.

if you rnot able to sin, you can;t say you kept the law. because you were not able to break the law (it was impossible)

Christ didn't keep the law of Moses. Such was never a requirement. The value of Deity in Christ Jesus is what made the Sacrifice meaningful. Not what you think about the law of Moses. Jesus contradicted the law of Moses many many times. He touched lepers. He told His disciples to pick and eat on the Sabbath day. What you believe about the law of Moses is the issue.

 

[MTMattie]

Another word for temp, temptation is test or tested. God was tested/tempted many times by Israel in the OT. Jesus was tested/tempted by the evil one but to no prevail. Christ was not tempted from within, but externally by the evil one.

That makes a whole lot of sense... the tested idea. @civic..... thank you, thank you, thank you.....

Interlinear says this for Matt 4:1

πειρασθῆναι
to be tempted

Strongs says

peirazó: To test, to tempt, to try, to examine
Original Word: πειράζω

Strongs also says

peirasmos: Temptation, trial, testing
Original Word: πειρασμός

πειράζω | Free Online Greek Dictionary | billmounce.com​

to test, tempt; to try to trap; to examine (oneself).

Definition:
to test, tempt; to try to trap; to examine (oneself). The difference between a test and a temptation is found in the tester's motivations and expectations; the devil tempts that the believer might fail God's standards of faith and so sin; God tests that he might determine and sharpen true character, with no focus on making the believer fail.

No matteer. I shall fix all my bibles. Especially my main study one with all the notes and highlights. To test when it concerns Satan going after Jesus.

Biblical Hermeneutics says

Why is peirazo "tempts" in James 1:13 but "test" in John 6:6?​

James qualified the testing with κακῶν (with evil). In English we say tempted rather than tested with evil. Thus, κακῶν qualifies the meaning of πειράζω in this passage. Usually context makes this determination, but here James is very clear.

In John 6:6 Jesus wasn't testing Philip with evil. In that respect Jesus tested Philip with good. As stated, Jesus knew how Philip would answer. The test was a pre-examination for Philip to know where he stood before Jesus fed the 5,000. While Jesus asked Philip and only Philip answered, the other disciples who heard would ask themselves and answer to themselves the question; although Andrew did openly answer differently. Thus, they also pre-evaluated themselves.

Figure 1. The senses of πειράζω as used in the New Testament (generated with Logos Bible Software)