Christ was tempted LIKE as we are, but He never desired or was tempted to do evil.
- Thread starter Jason0047
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
You have to stop suggesting things I didn't say. I never said he was wounded in the Garden. Isaiah is talking about when he was being whipped and beaten, etc. (i.e. wounded for our transgressions, etc.). Christ being whipped obviously happened after the Garden.
Okay, I have to sleep. Talk to ya later.
And God bless you.
Okay, I have to sleep. Talk to ya later.
And God bless you.
Last edited:
He didn't fail His mission, which is the most important thing.
If Jesus didn't worry whether He would fail, He would not have been put to the test.
I believe the father knew best, trusted in Jesus to fulfill His duty as our Saviour.
God would not have sent Jesus knowing He would fail, although His life on earth was as a man, not a super natural being that obviously has more powers than what we inferior human beings have. We are weak.
Satan is a fallen Angel but does posses super natural power. But through faith, God protected Jesus. We do not need the strength or magic like Satan has, but only faith and rejection of sin can overcome all evil.
If Jesus didn't worry whether He would fail, He would not have been put to the test.
I believe the father knew best, trusted in Jesus to fulfill His duty as our Saviour.
God would not have sent Jesus knowing He would fail, although His life on earth was as a man, not a super natural being that obviously has more powers than what we inferior human beings have. We are weak.
Satan is a fallen Angel but does posses super natural power. But through faith, God protected Jesus. We do not need the strength or magic like Satan has, but only faith and rejection of sin can overcome all evil.
K
First and foremost Jason I won't to say that I love you and by no means condemn you. You are my brother in Christ and we are of the same body. Will the thumb say to the hand I reject you? Dude Christ was tempted as we are and we fail, Just as the OT saints failed but they had faith in the cross. Abraham failed, Issac failed, Jacob Failed, David Failed, Solomon failed. But Praise God Jesus did not fail, though He was tempted and shed His blood for you and me, by his own will though it was tested. Praise God He said not my will but thine will be done.
I am glad you are striving to be loving with me here. I believe (According to Scripture) it is one of the marks, fruits, or proofs that you are a true believer.
Generally the word "dude" is an impersonal and uncaring statement if you say it to someone you don't actuallly know personally. You wouldn't say "dude" to someone who was going to hire you for a job. It would be disrespectful. You wouldn't say "what's up dude?" to a police officer if he pulled you over. He probably get a little more angry at you. You wouldn't say "dude" to a Pastor you always admired when you first met him. You wouldn't say "Thanks dude" to your best man at your wedding. If the word "dude" is said with hateful words, it just emphasizes it's offensive nature of that word even more. Granted, if you know a person face to face and he was your best friend for years and you can joke around with each other using this word in a playful way, I can understand that as being acceptable. But I would not use the word "dude" even with your best friend on a public forum for other people could see it as a sign of disrespect.
Dude: Why does it sound so offensive? - Blog by AmarasDX - IGN
Oh, and the word "bro" is another such impersonal word. Such a word is usually said to one's actual brother in love, and or with a close brother in the Lord you can joke with.
Words change with the passage of time. Yes? When my parents were growing up, they could use the word "gay" in public as in reference to one being happy and there was generally no bad connotations attached to it. Today you say that word and you could offend a lot of people. See, back in the 1600's when they translated the KJV, they spoke and wrote Old English. This language from the KJV influenced even Modern Translations that we have, too. In other words, if you were to look up the Greek word for the English word "tempted" in Hebrews 4:15, you would see that it can be defined as "tested." In fact, several Modern Translations have rendered the KJV's "tempted" as "tested." The KJV Dictionary defines "tempt" as a trial in it's defintions; And even the Eytmology (i.e. origin of the word) for the word "tempt" has "test" in it's definition. In other words, if you were to re-read Hebrews 4:15, and replace "tempted" with "tested", the passage takes on an entirely different meaning by our Modern Lingo.
Also, Philippians 2:6-9 cannot be in reference to an emptying of divine attributes but an emptying of rank or position. For He humbled himself to be a servant and did not make a reputation for Himself as God.
Scripture says He has power. I already made a list of the power Jesus exclusively had (During His Earthly Ministry) in addition to the miraculous works of the Father did within Him.
Oh, and you will not find one verse about how Jesus had the capacity to sin. Hebrews 7:26 says He was Holy, separate from sinnners, and undefiled.
So you believe it was possible for the Holy Son of God to fail? What verse suggest or claims that Jesus could have potentially failed in His mission? When I read Scripture, I get the certainty that He KNEW His mission was going to happen 100%. For Jesus mentioned His death and resurrection before it happened. He said this to his disciples beforehand so that they might believe in Him (i.e. Believe He was the Messiah and that He was God).
Generally the word "dude" is an impersonal and uncaring statement if you say it to someone you don't actuallly know personally. You wouldn't say "dude" to someone who was going to hire you for a job. It would be disrespectful. You wouldn't say "what's up dude?" to a police officer if he pulled you over. He probably get a little more angry at you. You wouldn't say "dude" to a Pastor you always admired when you first met him. You wouldn't say "Thanks dude" to your best man at your wedding. If the word "dude" is said with hateful words, it just emphasizes it's offensive nature of that word even more. Granted, if you know a person face to face and he was your best friend for years and you can joke around with each other using this word in a playful way, I can understand that as being acceptable. But I would not use the word "dude" even with your best friend on a public forum for other people could see it as a sign of disrespect.
Dude: Why does it sound so offensive? - Blog by AmarasDX - IGN
Oh, and the word "bro" is another such impersonal word. Such a word is usually said to one's actual brother in love, and or with a close brother in the Lord you can joke with.
Words change with the passage of time. Yes? When my parents were growing up, they could use the word "gay" in public as in reference to one being happy and there was generally no bad connotations attached to it. Today you say that word and you could offend a lot of people. See, back in the 1600's when they translated the KJV, they spoke and wrote Old English. This language from the KJV influenced even Modern Translations that we have, too. In other words, if you were to look up the Greek word for the English word "tempted" in Hebrews 4:15, you would see that it can be defined as "tested." In fact, several Modern Translations have rendered the KJV's "tempted" as "tested." The KJV Dictionary defines "tempt" as a trial in it's defintions; And even the Eytmology (i.e. origin of the word) for the word "tempt" has "test" in it's definition. In other words, if you were to re-read Hebrews 4:15, and replace "tempted" with "tested", the passage takes on an entirely different meaning by our Modern Lingo.
Also, Philippians 2:6-9 cannot be in reference to an emptying of divine attributes but an emptying of rank or position. For He humbled himself to be a servant and did not make a reputation for Himself as God.
Scripture says He has power. I already made a list of the power Jesus exclusively had (During His Earthly Ministry) in addition to the miraculous works of the Father did within Him.
Oh, and you will not find one verse about how Jesus had the capacity to sin. Hebrews 7:26 says He was Holy, separate from sinnners, and undefiled.
So you believe it was possible for the Holy Son of God to fail? What verse suggest or claims that Jesus could have potentially failed in His mission? When I read Scripture, I get the certainty that He KNEW His mission was going to happen 100%. For Jesus mentioned His death and resurrection before it happened. He said this to his disciples beforehand so that they might believe in Him (i.e. Believe He was the Messiah and that He was God).
Unless you grown up with a bunch of surfers or unless you watched Bill & Ted's Excellent adventure hundreds of times thru out your life, or unless you are around certain group of people all the time who do not care about how one speaks properly to each other, then I can understand your confusion. Again, you would not say, "What's up dude?" Or "What's up dudette?" ..to a female police officer who pulled you over. You would not say "Thanks dude" to the best man if he picked up your wedding ring that you might have accidentally dropped. You would not refer to the hiring person in a job interview as "dude." You can only say dude with other people who say that or with people who do not care generally in how they speak.
Why so sensitive? I thought of all people you would understand what this means. For it is common knowledge that the one topic couples have issue with in their relationship is that a man is not sensitive to a women's feelings. Many times this takes place because of a lack of love and or devotion to each other. In other words, it boils down to love. Are we being loving with our words, thoughts, actions, and deeds? We as Christians may not agree with the brother who finds eating meat offensive, but that doesn't mean we should eat a big fat steak in front of them. We are to love and understand all people. It's the Christian way.
While I do not agree with your answers to these questions, I am very happy you at least had the courage to answer me these questions directly and openly (in honesty). I believe some folks who believe this are not proud of this truth and are a little embarrassed by it. Granted, not all people feel this way, but some people do. Anyways, I believe those who will not give me a direct answer to these questions either right away or not at any point in time are embarrassed in saying Jesus can potentially do evil and or that He could have failed in His mission.
For if I heard a sermon on how Christ could have sinned, I honestly would walk out of the church during the sermon. The same would apply if I heard a sermon on how He could have potentially failed in His mission, too.
Why? Well, the Bible describes Jesus as Holy, separate from sinners, and undefiled (Hebrews 7:26). In other words, how can someone who is Holy, separate from sinners, and undefiled have the potential to sin?
As for Jesus having the potential to fail: Again, the Scriptures do not teach such a concept. On the contrary, it teaches the exact opposite. For Jesus tells them about what will come to pass (Including His resurrection), so that when those things do come to pass, they might believe. See John 13:19 (c.f. cross reference with John 13:33) and see John 14:28-29.
For if I heard a sermon on how Christ could have sinned, I honestly would walk out of the church during the sermon. The same would apply if I heard a sermon on how He could have potentially failed in His mission, too.
Why? Well, the Bible describes Jesus as Holy, separate from sinners, and undefiled (Hebrews 7:26). In other words, how can someone who is Holy, separate from sinners, and undefiled have the potential to sin?
As for Jesus having the potential to fail: Again, the Scriptures do not teach such a concept. On the contrary, it teaches the exact opposite. For Jesus tells them about what will come to pass (Including His resurrection), so that when those things do come to pass, they might believe. See John 13:19 (c.f. cross reference with John 13:33) and see John 14:28-29.
Last edited:
Jesus may not have sinned, but reality is that he could have. But it all comes back to faith and obedience Jason. Christ is above all, stronger than you and I which makes him king. He is superior. He would never sin.
Technically he won't, but being a man he could have been tempted. Not saying he ever would have because He is Jesus. Jesus would not sin.
Technically he won't, but being a man he could have been tempted. Not saying he ever would have because He is Jesus. Jesus would not sin.
