COULD JESUS HAVE SINNED?

By Herb Evans


For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: All these evil things come from within, and defile the man. -- Mark 7:21-23



In order to properly consider such a challenge to the IMPECCABILITY of Jesus Christ, one must extend the prospect far enough to bare the horrible consequences of such an insult to Christ. Where sin enters is not the issue here, and such a consideration can only muddy the water as one examines the question. Extra-scriptural, theological arguments, which deal with

the presentation of sin, the illumination, the debate, the thought, and the act of sin in conjunction with the prospect of whether Jesus could sin only DELAY THE INEVITABLE.

If Jesus could have "debated" about changing the stones into bread, He could have "thought" about changing them. And if He could have "thought" about changing them, he could have sinfully "acted." Consequently, if He could have "debated" about blasphemy, murder, fornication, and adultery, and lying, He also could have "debated," "thought," and "acted" out these sins. The horrible conclusion to this kind of error is to relegate these sins into Jesus' heart only to be brought out or not be brought out by temptation. Such an idea should be repugnant to any Christian.



Was Jesus More than Adam?

And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and WORSHIPPED him . . . -- Matt. 2:11

. . . He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. -- John 5:23

. . . if any man serve me, him will my Father honour. -- John 12:26

Opponents of Jesus' "impeccability (incapable of sin)" will quickly remind us that Jesus was also a man besides being God, and we certainly have no problem with that. We are admonished that He hungered, thirsted, wearied, suffered, and was put to death as a man. The implication that they are trying to get across is that "half" of Jesus could have sinned - the human half, imagining that the two halves of the "God/man" can be separated. * We wonder what the "deity half" of Jesus would be doing, when the "humanity half" of Jesus decided to sin. We wonder who (or Who) would control the situation. Perhaps, the Mormons or Russelites could help us here.

If it is pointed out that Adam (and even Satan) was perfect until he sinned and that there was also the possibility of sin here with Christ, since He is the second Adam. We must take exception to that kind of reasoning. We must remind our friends that Adam was never to be worshiped, never to be honored as the Father, and ever to be served. Jesus was, as the God/man, to be worshiped, honored, and served (even as a child).

To infer that Jesus is nothing more than a second Adam or that He had no greater character that Adam is to subscribe to the Mormon view of Christ and God. Moreover, it raises serious question as to whether Jesus can sin now! It also raises serious question as to either the possibility of our sinning in our resurrection bodies or else the possibility of our resurrection states being superior to God manifest in the flesh on earth.



The Temptation of Christ

Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents. -- 1 Cor. 10:9

When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years. -- Heb. 3:9

Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out. -- Acts 5:9

Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? -- Acts 15:10

Some would point out that Jesus the MAN was tempted and therefore could sin. They also tell us in the same breath that GOD cannot be tempted and therefore could not sin. This argument overlooks the fact that Jesus was tempted before He was in the flesh and that He still can be tempted. To ask, "Why would the devil bother to tempt Christ, if he already knew Christ could not sin?" It is like asking, "Why would the devil try to destroy the Bible or God's plan, when he already knows it can't be destroyed?" Who says he knew or knows?

It seems reasonable to ask, "If one of the members of the God—Head (the Son) could be tempted and thus sin, could the other temptable members of the God-Head sin?" (Heb. 3:9; Acts 5:9; Acts 15:19) If the Son could have sinfully debated the prospect, thought, or acted - why not the Father and the Holy Spirit?



Could the Father Be a Possible Accessory to Sin?

Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. -- John 5:19

Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things. -- John 8:28

If the gainsayer is not prepared to allow the possibility of the Father or Holy Spirit sinning, will he consider the possible implication of the Father as an accomplice or accessory or teacher of whatever he imagines that Christ was capable of doing? Clearly, there is an unbreakable link between Christ and His father in His thoughts, actions, and impeccable character. If Jesus could have sinned, the Father would have had to be an accomplice to the crime.



Can the Scripture Be Broken?

Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you . . . -- 1 Pet. 1:20

But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be? -- Matt. 26:54

If Jesus could have sinned. God's sinless Lamb, slain from the foundation of the earth, could not have been the sinless sacrifice for sin of the world that is etched in the rock of scripture. How could Christ fulfil the many prophecies concerning Himself, making the Father and Holy Spirit liars? The very integrity of the Father and the Holy Spirit as well as the integrity of the scriptures are at stake on this point.

How can we consider the possibility of the Living Word being corrupted and not consider the possibility of the Written Word being corrupted and vice versa? It is not that Jesus' life, death, and sinlessness were more than pageantry or ritualistic fulfillment of a pre-decreed course of action; His impeccable nature and character made another outcome impossible, and the Father and Holy Spirit knew this before hand, causing them to pre-record what would happen without the slightest reservation or consideration that anything else could transpire.

If the Father had this kind of confidence in Jesus before the fact, what manner of confidence should we have after the fact? If a man would allow the possibility of Jesus sinning, what would the same man do if he lived in the same time frame as Jesus' ministry? Would he reserve his trust, worship, honor, and service until a later date, because he still had not determined whether or not Jesus was going to sin?

Should Jesus' contemporaries have had confidence that Jesus would not sin . . . or not? We insist that Jesus was, still is, and forever shall be impeccable (incapable of sin). Could Jesus have sinned? Only if you are a Nestorian! *



*NOTE: “With a peccable Human Nature he was impeccable; not because He obeyed, but being impeccable, He so obeyed, because His human nature was inseparably connected with His Divine Nature. TO KEEP THIS UNION OF THE TWO NATURES OUT OF VIEW WOULD BE NESTORIANISM, The Words and Works of Jesus Christ by J. Dwight Pentecost, p. 99



*NOTE: "The NESTORIANS (Nestorius, removed from the Patriarchate of Constantinople, 431) denied the REAL UNION between the divine and the human natures in Christ . . . they virtually held to two natures and two persons, instead of two natures in one person (hypostatic union)." -- Systematic Theology, p 671, by Agustus Strong.



Flaming Torch - Nov/Dec 1984, p. 1

Baptist Examiner - March 23, 1985, p. 10

 >