Romans 3:23
For everyone has sinned; we all fall short of God’s glorious standard.
Romans 5:12
When Adam sinned, sin entered the world. Adam’s sin brought death, so death spread to everyone, for everyone sinned.
Inerrant scripture words say all men (and women) sinned
Look up the Greek, all and everyone means all and everyone
So every HUMAN sinned per the inerrant scriptures
So, here’s the options:
A) scripture is wrong, everyone didn’t sin and is not born a filthy little sinner
B) Jesus was FULLY MAN, which would have to include sin because the Bible says so, or he wouldn’t be a spotless lamb; He made a conscious decision not to sin, and he absolutely could help it (unlike Paul’s claims in Romans 7)
C) God put on a disguise; He acted like he was fully human but he wasn’t ( in which case living a sinless life is easy for God because he spoke the universe into existence)
Philippians 2:7
….but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
He only took on the likeness of man not his full sin nature, in which case he didn’t play by the rules for us
No Christian has ever honestly answered this question
Let’s examine the premise we have been programmed to believe and critically examine the text
It has to be all one or the other for the story they tell us to be true
The truth is uncomfortable sometimes
So, which option is least damaging to the narrative?
was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2696
- Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 485 times
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #31[Replying to EarthScienceguy in post #27
Repeating an assertion doesn't make it correct.And yet He was 100%, God.
It isn't about God being like a man; it's about Jesus being like a man [temptable] and not like God [untemptable].Hurts the head doesn't it? But God is not like man, God is a spirit being so why would you expect Him to be like a man?
- EarthScienceguy
- Guru
- Posts: 2192
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:53 pm
- Has thanked: 33 times
- Been thanked: 43 times
- Contact:
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #32[Replying to Athetotheist in post #31]
Jesus is both He is the God-man. 100% God and 100% man that has been the teaching of the Church for over 1500 years. Whether you think it is logical or not really does not matter because you only know what exists in this universe. The physical laws that we perceive only exist for this universe God would have to exist outside of this universe and exist as a different substance not material.It isn't about God being like a man; it's about Jesus being like a man [temptable] and not like God [untemptable].
- JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2572 times
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #33Lacking confirmatory data regarding Jesus ever existing, what's most fully here is speculation.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2696
- Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 485 times
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #34[Replying to EarthScienceguy in post #32
Teaching something for over 1,500 years doesn't make it correct.Jesus is both He is the God-man. 100% God and 100% man that has been the teaching of the Church for over 1500 years.
If God is untemptable, then God can't be tempted in this universe. If Jesus could be tempted in this universe, then he couldn't have been a God who is untemptable.Whether you think it is logical or not really does not matter because you only know what exists in this universe. The physical laws that we perceive only exist for this universe God would have to exist outside of this universe and exist as a different substance not material.
- EarthScienceguy
- Guru
- Posts: 2192
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:53 pm
- Has thanked: 33 times
- Been thanked: 43 times
- Contact:
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #35[Replying to Athetotheist in post #0]
[Replying to Athetotheist in post #34]
"Eutyches taught that Christ possesses only one nature, that the divine nature of Christ swallows up or absorbs the human nature of Jesus, such that He is left with but one theanthropic nature (from the Greek theos, “God,” and anthrōpos, “man”). Instead of being one person with two natures, as orthodox Christology asserts, Christ is one person with one nature, according to Eutychianism."
Jesus was one man with two natures. He had a 100% God nature and a 100% human nature. Two natures one person. The two natures cannot be changed, divided, or mixed. So His God nature could not be tempted but his human nature could. The two natures do not mix.
[Replying to Athetotheist in post #34]
What you are speaking of is the Eutychian heresy. Like you were told before this was argued through a long time ago.If God is untemptable, then God can't be tempted in this universe. If Jesus could be tempted in this universe, then he couldn't have been a God who is untemptable.
"Eutyches taught that Christ possesses only one nature, that the divine nature of Christ swallows up or absorbs the human nature of Jesus, such that He is left with but one theanthropic nature (from the Greek theos, “God,” and anthrōpos, “man”). Instead of being one person with two natures, as orthodox Christology asserts, Christ is one person with one nature, according to Eutychianism."
Jesus was one man with two natures. He had a 100% God nature and a 100% human nature. Two natures one person. The two natures cannot be changed, divided, or mixed. So His God nature could not be tempted but his human nature could. The two natures do not mix.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2696
- Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 485 times
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #36[Replying to EarthScienceguy in post #35
On top of that, your position is unbiblical----
"For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin." (Hebrews 4:15)
If your assertion that
What's more, if your assertion that
And if you're incapable of sinning, leading a sinless life doesn't amount to a hill of beans.
What I'm speaking of is logic. It was logical a long time ago and it's logical now.What you are speaking of is the Eutychian heresy. Like you were told before this was argued through a long time ago.
I have offered logical argument to support my position. All you've done is repeat your position with no argument to back it up.Jesus was one man with two natures. He had a 100% God nature and a 100% human nature. Two natures one person. The two natures cannot be changed, divided, or mixed. So His God nature could not be tempted but his human nature could. The two natures do not mix.
On top of that, your position is unbiblical----
"For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin." (Hebrews 4:15)
If your assertion that
is correct, then you do have a high priest who is unable to empathize with your weaknesses.Jesus was born as 100% God so He could not sin.
What's more, if your assertion that
is correct, then the part of him which was temptable would have to be God.There was no part of Him that was not God.
And if you're incapable of sinning, leading a sinless life doesn't amount to a hill of beans.
- EarthScienceguy
- Guru
- Posts: 2192
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:53 pm
- Has thanked: 33 times
- Been thanked: 43 times
- Contact:
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #37[Replying to Athetotheist in post #36]
"yet he did not sin." And Yes Jesus was 100%, God. How is the Hyperstatic union not Biblical?
The problem that God solved with the God-man Jesus was the following. How does a sinless Holy God reconcile sinful man and still maintain His justice? God could not pure out the sin of the world on Jesus unless Jesus was 100% Human. Jesus could not remain sinless unless He was 100% God.
"Chalcedon also gave us the standard orthodox definition of the person of Christ, which says that in the one person of Christ are perfectly united the divine nature and a human nature, and that this union is without confusion, mixture, separation, or division, each nature retaining its own attributes. This is what is called the hypostatic union: Christ is one person with two natures." https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotion ... n-solution
The two natures do not mix. So God could pure out the sin of the world on Jesus and yet Jesus did not sin.
That is because I am not making an argument I am stating a definition of the nature of Christ.I have offered logical argument to support my position. All you've done is repeat your position with no argument to back it up.
Yes, Jesus was 100% human."For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are— (Hebrews 4:15)
"yet he did not sin." And Yes Jesus was 100%, God. How is the Hyperstatic union not Biblical?
The problem that God solved with the God-man Jesus was the following. How does a sinless Holy God reconcile sinful man and still maintain His justice? God could not pure out the sin of the world on Jesus unless Jesus was 100% Human. Jesus could not remain sinless unless He was 100% God.
Again the Biblical definition of Christ.If your assertion that
Jesus was born as 100% God so He could not sin.
is correct, then you do have a high priest who is unable to empathize with your weaknesses.
What's more, if your assertion that
There was no part of Him that was not God.
is correct, then the part of him which was temptable would have to be God.
"Chalcedon also gave us the standard orthodox definition of the person of Christ, which says that in the one person of Christ are perfectly united the divine nature and a human nature, and that this union is without confusion, mixture, separation, or division, each nature retaining its own attributes. This is what is called the hypostatic union: Christ is one person with two natures." https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotion ... n-solution
The two natures do not mix. So God could pure out the sin of the world on Jesus and yet Jesus did not sin.
- Clownboat
- Savant
- Posts: 9381
- Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
- Has thanked: 907 times
- Been thanked: 1261 times
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #38I did the math and I'm 200% certain that you are mistaken.EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Mon Dec 05, 2022 11:37 am [Replying to Athetotheist in post #36]
That is because I am not making an argument I am stating a definition of the nature of Christ.I have offered logical argument to support my position. All you've done is repeat your position with no argument to back it up.
Yes, Jesus was 100% human."For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are— (Hebrews 4:15)
"yet he did not sin." And Yes Jesus was 100%, God. How is the Hyperstatic union not Biblical?
The problem that God solved with the God-man Jesus was the following. How does a sinless Holy God reconcile sinful man and still maintain His justice? God could not pure out the sin of the world on Jesus unless Jesus was 100% Human. Jesus could not remain sinless unless He was 100% God.
Again the Biblical definition of Christ.If your assertion that
Jesus was born as 100% God so He could not sin.
is correct, then you do have a high priest who is unable to empathize with your weaknesses.
What's more, if your assertion that
There was no part of Him that was not God.
is correct, then the part of him which was temptable would have to be God.
"Chalcedon also gave us the standard orthodox definition of the person of Christ, which says that in the one person of Christ are perfectly united the divine nature and a human nature, and that this union is without confusion, mixture, separation, or division, each nature retaining its own attributes. This is what is called the hypostatic union: Christ is one person with two natures." https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotion ... n-solution
The two natures do not mix. So God could pure out the sin of the world on Jesus and yet Jesus did not sin.
100% of my certainty is from math, the remaining 100% comes from the spirits that know all things and guide me.
I understand you might question my certainty if I was only 100% certain, but I'm 200% certain. So no point arguing with the math... of that, I'm 200% certain.
I also filled my glass up this morning. It was 100% coffee and 100% tea. I drank all 200% on the contents of said glass. I do love coffee, that is tea, but only if there is exactly one scoop of pure 100% natural sugar that is 100% artificial.
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2696
- Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 485 times
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #39[Replying to EarthScienceguy in post #37
Appeal to Authority fallacy."Chalcedon also gave us the standard orthodox definition of the person of Christ, which says that in the one person of Christ are perfectly united the divine nature and a human nature, and that this union is without confusion, mixture, separation, or division, each nature retaining its own attributes. This is what is called the hypostatic union: Christ is one person with two natures."
But Jesus could sin, ["tempted in all things"], whereas God cannot be tempted. That isn't going away, clerical pronouncements notwithstanding.The two natures do not mix. So God could pure out the sin of the world on Jesus and yet Jesus did not sin.
You haven't explained how the temptable part of Jesus was God.Jesus could not remain sinless unless He was 100% God.
- EarthScienceguy
- Guru
- Posts: 2192
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:53 pm
- Has thanked: 33 times
- Been thanked: 43 times
- Contact:
Re: was Jesus fully human, or was he God in a disguise?
Post #40[Replying to Athetotheist in post #39]
I will go with R.C. Sproul's thoughts.
"In order to sin, a person must have a desire for sin. But Jesus' human nature throughout his life was marked by a zeal for righteousness. "My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me" (John 4:34), he said. As long as Jesus had no desire to sin, he would not sin. I may be wrong, but I think it is wrong to believe that Christ's divine nature made it impossible for his human nature to sin. If that were the case, the temptation, the tests, and his assuming of the responsibility of the first Adam would have all been charades. This position protects the integrity of the authenticity of the human nature because it was the human nature that carried out the mission of the second Adam on our behalf. It was the human nature uniquely anointed beyond measure by the Holy Spirit."
His divine nature did not make it impossible for Jesus to sin but gave him no desire to sin because of the love that the God's nature had for the Father. So the same drive that keeps Christians from sinning today a love for God is the same drive that kept Jesus's human nature from sinning a love for God.
This is only true if you are making an argument. I am not making an argument I am stating a definition.Appeal to Authority fallacy.
Could Jesus sin? This is actually a question that has never really been settled. Whether He sinned has been settled, which he did not. But if He wanted to could He have sinned?But Jesus could sin, ["tempted in all things"], whereas God cannot be tempted. That isn't going away, clerical pronouncements notwithstanding.
I will go with R.C. Sproul's thoughts.
"In order to sin, a person must have a desire for sin. But Jesus' human nature throughout his life was marked by a zeal for righteousness. "My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me" (John 4:34), he said. As long as Jesus had no desire to sin, he would not sin. I may be wrong, but I think it is wrong to believe that Christ's divine nature made it impossible for his human nature to sin. If that were the case, the temptation, the tests, and his assuming of the responsibility of the first Adam would have all been charades. This position protects the integrity of the authenticity of the human nature because it was the human nature that carried out the mission of the second Adam on our behalf. It was the human nature uniquely anointed beyond measure by the Holy Spirit."
His divine nature did not make it impossible for Jesus to sin but gave him no desire to sin because of the love that the God's nature had for the Father. So the same drive that keeps Christians from sinning today a love for God is the same drive that kept Jesus's human nature from sinning a love for God.
Yes, I did the two natures do not mix.You haven't explained how the temptable part of Jesus was God.