I think the primary purpose of recording it in the Gospel would be to give an example to us.
I think what I’m saying here is:
–While it is impossible that He ever would have sinned…
—it is still possible that He could have sinned.
Do you mean He had the possibility of sinning as Man, but not as God?
Was Christs human nature perfect by more than the fact that He never sinned?
As I said earlier though: I don’t see how it can be much of an example.
It isn’t much of an example to refrain from doing the impossible.
To dramatize it a bit (not to be funny):
If, on Judgement Day, God looks at me and asks “What sins did you commit?” and I answer Him “Well, let me put it this way, I can absolutely say that I never committed any sins that were impossible for me to commit.” It’ll be pretty easy to gain entrance.
Oh yes! Most certainly, yes.
Of course, yes. I surely don’t mean to say that God could sin.
And I also see that leading to another circular argument.
I agree that grace never violates free will. I think that is part of the point I am trying to make. Jesus had to have the free will to choose, and He had the ever presence of God’s grace to choose wisely even if His human will was against it.
Let me give this a try…
We can establish for certain that because Christ is truly God, He cannot sin, because it is logically impossible for God to sin. The objection is that His human nature, but not His divine nature, could have allowed Him to sin, though in actuality He never would have sinned.
However, a nature does not sin; a person does. And Christ, as a Divine Person, could not sin, not even through His human nature, for that would be God sinning through a human nature. Perish the thought!
Perfect in every way. Keep reading…
I don’t think that gets us very far though. When I think about it, I ask “what is, or what could be, an imperfection in human nature?” and the only answer to that would be “sin.”
Now this can go deep into the weeds. By “imperfection” I mean a defect; something wrong.
Of course, as human beings we are imperfect. If I fall on a sharp stone, I can cut my leg, because my body isn’t perfect.
So I’ll say that His human nature is perfect in-so-far as human nature can ever be perfect (before Judgement Day). I fear we could wax philosophical about this point all night…
Yes, I could live with that.
Think on it with time and feel free to private message if you desire. Thanks.
This passage implies that it was His free decision to do the will of God. It is what nourishes Him. Years ago I actually knew a guy who for a while refused to take left hand turns when driving. Instead, to turn left, he took three right hand turns. But the fact that he never turned left did not mean he lacked the ability to do so.
Jesus never sinned. That doesn’t mean He lacked the ability to sin.
i am not disputing that I am saying Jesus was fully human,
you said Jesus was not fully human
I think a human soul and the conscience goes hand-in-hand. I know that it is not the Church’s teaching that animals do not have souls but an intense personal experience convinced me otherwise. My thinking is that somewhere along the evolutionary line God changed the animistic soul of the pre-human to a human soul and along with that man was endowed with a conscience. I see the conscience as being the thing that truly separates us from animals because it give us the drive to always seek the “greater good” or the “greater evil”. I think it is this which sparked the imagination and thus is responsible for all of the achievements and innovations of man. It is a God-given gift that has truly put in charge over the Earth.
You are opening another can of worms with me with that one Father. But it is probably best suited for another topic. I would be interested in your views on my take of it.
Or some might eat the rotten food as well if they are hungry enough.
I think we are getting into the could/would issue again. The Bible states clearly in several places that God created BOTH good and evil. So wouldn’t it be accurate to say that God would never sin, but He could if He wanted to (even though He would never want to)?
If it were not a part of His plan for creation then how do you account for the fact that the Bible states clearly in several places that God created evil? For evil to exist it had to be part of His plan. The question we have to ask is “What role does evil play in God’s plan?”
While no one but God could answer that question fully it seems to me that the role it plays lies in what it teaches us. I believe that the purpose of the physical realm is so that we could learn what God could not give us… the ability to love. Love cannot be forced and remain love; by its very nature it must be freely given. So God could not create us “already loving” as that would be a contradiction. It is something we had to learn on our own. So how do we learn to love?
I don’t know if I am repeating myself or not, but seeing you are not here to stop me I will go right on and repeat it if I already said it. It seems obvious to me that we learn to love through the experience of evil, pain, suffering, toil and death. These were the so-called “punishments” for Adam’s disobedience. I consider them realizations and awakenings. Without the complete freedom to choose to do any and all evil, even though that leads away from God and from love we would never have the freedom to reject that evil and do the good that leads towards love and God. This also explains why direct knowledge of God’s existence is denied to us because such knowledge would interfere with the freedom of our choice. Likewise, without our experience of pain, suffering, toil and death with ourselves or a member of our social circle we would never be able to learn compassion and sympathy for others experiencing the same thing. Without first learning compassion and sympathy we would never learn to care about those outside of our own social circle. And without first learning to care about others we would never be able to learn true selfless love of all.
Complete free will is a vital part of this.