I think most, if not all of us, agree that Jesus did not sin. However, the devil tempted Jesus, at least in the wilderness, prior to Jesus' public ministry (Matthew 4:1-11). Does this mean it would have been possible for Jesus to sin? Or was the devil just too stupid to realize his efforts were futile?
closed as primarily opinion-based by Caleb Jun 23 '14 at 15:59
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.
Jesus, in this verse, says that he has the ability to choose whether he laid down his life or not.
Because of this, he had the free will to choose to follow God's wishes or not. Therefore, yes, he had the ability to sin.
Wow, I thought this was a pretty obvious answer. Some more concepts to back up this idea:
Adam and Eve were perfect and sinless in the Garden of Eden. However, they, who knew no sin, were tempted and succumbed to sin. Clearly, perfection and not having previously knowing sin is not a preclusion to actually sinning.
Divinity does not preclude sin
Others claim that because of his divinity--more specifically, his part of the trinity--that he was incapable of sin. However, John 10:18 (shown above), clearly shows that Jesus himself (not the other members of the trinity) had the authority to choose to sin and go against his Father. Also, his prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane shows that his will and his father's will were separate. Since their wills were separate and since he had the ability to choose to sin, it would have been possible for Jesus to have put his will first and chose to go against his father's will.
Therefore, Jesus had true and complete free will and the ability to sin.
Yes and No
Yes in the sense that Jesus was tempted and had a free choice in the matter, but no in that it was against his nature.
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.
This is a paradox, but our own experience shadows that of the Master. We have each of us been tempted, but at one time or another have resisted temptation. The temptation is real in that we could have said or done something to hurt another, but ineffective in that something within us held us back from doing so. Under those circumstances, could we have committed sin? The answer is the same for Jesus (but obviously far more so).
And the angel answered and said unto her [Mary], The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing [emphasis mine] which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.
Jesus said that Satan could find nothing in himself, by which he meant Satan could find no hold at all, for Christ has no sin nature and was wholly opposed to sin.
Not if you believe in Orthodox Christianity.
He was God incarnate and had a perfect moral character.
He was because of his human side tempted and this attests to his humanity (Something that most Christian should affirm), but he overcame that temptation.
Christianity as one of it's core doctrine holds that the one who was perfect and sinless would take on the whole burden of humanities sin.
Everything Jesus did was as a man, not God (Philippians 2:6 who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal to God, 7 but did empty himself, the form of a servant having taken, in the likeness of men having been made,). Being as a man enabled Jesus to be tempted in every way, just like you and I. He just chose not to sin. If he did anything at all above what is possible for us who believe then his life would be an invalid example for us to follow. Jesus instruction "12 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father"(John 14) is the truth, otherwise we accuse him of lying. The essence of this word is that we will do it like he did because we will be the same as him as he was at the time of saying it, not after being glorified and taking back to himself his previous Deity. We are now not gods, but new creations in Him.
Jesus was like us in all things but sin.
He was free from original sin, and free to follow His Divine Intellect in a way that we are not. No one in that state would choose to sin. I'm not saying it's impossible, as Jesus, Mary, Adam and Eve had freewill. I'm just saying that it was not possible. (that may seem like a contradiction, but that's par for the course with Jesus)
What moves us to believe is not the fact that revealed truths appear as true and intelligible in the light of our natural reason: we believe "because of the authority of God himself who reveals them, who can neither deceive nor be deceived".
Jesus was also God (remember, him being one of the three persons in the Trinity), so how would He be able to choose to disobey God if He was God? That'd be like going against your own will, which is a logical impossibility. Jesus was also fully human, but that means he experienced temptation and suffering like us. But His will was God's will as they were one in the same.
Luke 22:39-46 indicates a difference in will between God the Father and God the Son, however, ultimately whatever will is followed is the will of God.
Ultimately, the simple answer is "No, because of the Trinity."
Could Jesus have sinned? Either he could have sinned or he could not.
If He could have sinned, what are the implications? God's nature is holy, but if He could sin, then He would either be acting outside of His nature, or His nature must not be holy. Yet, how could He act contrary to His nature? If Jesus could have sinned after His incarnation, then why would it not be possible for Him to have sinned prior to His incarnation or afterwards? If Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever, then it would seem that any culpability He had while on the earth would not be new or unique to that time. If God can be unholy, then it seems that He cannot be God, so the implications here seem implausible.
The other alternative is that Jesus could not have sinned. This begs the question, then, of what meaning His temptations had. He experienced the frailty of the flesh and the weakness to temptation. We can at least relieve temptation by giving in to it when we weary from the fight (though this is certainly sinful to do). He, however, did not have that as an outlet. He had to continue resisting. So, He did perhaps experience all of the power of draw of temptation, yet never gave in to it--nor could He.
You guys still don't understand His role on Earth. He was not able to sin because he defines the truth. But it doesn't mean he was a sheep...He didn't have free will because he is the free will. He defines free will...It's like asking, can a programmer of calculator calculate 2+2? Of course he can but he also can make the law that 2+2=4
If he would sin it still wouldn't be a sin because he is God. If he would kill someone it wouldn't be sin because he is the one who gives live so he can also take it. If he would sleep with the prostitute he wouldn't commit sexual sin because he defines human sexuality. Of course he wouldn't just sleep with a prostitute because he knows that this is not the right way of how to define it. And so on...
John 14:6, Jesus is not saying, I'm the one who is right in what I'm doing. He is saying that he is the very entity of the truth. So no matter he does is the truth even though our perspective might tell us he does something wrong.
Matthew 11:19 - Yet wisdom is vindicated by her deeds. Meaning the truth can't be wrong in whatever is doing!
This is one of those questions where our understanding is not sufficient to truly get to grips with.
The bible, as has already been stated, says that Jesus was able to sin. And Christians thus respect those words as being the inspired, infallible word of God, and thus appropriately ascertain that Jesus was able to sin.
However, at the same time we know that Jesus was perfect and holy in every way. He was, and is, God and how can God sin? or even be able to sin?
But if we say that Jesus was not able to sin, we contradict the bible.
I think the problems stems from an ability to understand what sinless perfection actually means or looks like, since we don't experience it and no human does (except Jesus) so we can't really study it.