Results 3201 - 3220 of 3591
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: BradK Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
3201 | about melchizedek | Hebrews | BradK | 175798 | ||
Hi puzzler, As this question has been asked all too frequently, might I suggest that you type "Melchizedek" in the Search box at the upper right. That should give you ample responses along with an answer to your question. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
3202 | How does God speak to us? | Heb 1:1 | BradK | 154300 | ||
Hi Jehonadab, While I don't agree with you, I at least applaud your honesty! By your own admission you are "one of Jehovah's Witnesses". You also have a longer standing than most, if not all of your fellow "workers" who have posted on the SBF. God Bless, BradK |
||||||
3203 | Sex before Marriage | Heb 1:1 | BradK | 162117 | ||
Hi kal, Strictly speaking, you and I can do whatever we want! However, if you're looking for the biblical mandate, believers in the Lord Jesus Christ are told in numerous places to abstain from premarital sex. 1 Cor. 6:9- "Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals," Heb. 13:4- "Marriage is to be held in honor among all, and the marriage bed is to be undefiled; for fornicators and adulterers God will judge." Certainly one of the major reasons given is also found in 1 Cor. 6:19-20, "Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body." I trust this will help answer your question. BradK |
||||||
3204 | When someone states that they are a prop | Heb 1:1 | BradK | 177978 | ||
Hello Hood Rat, The initial qualification is laid out quite explicitly in Deut. 18:20-22: "'But the prophet who speaks a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.' "You may say in your heart, 'How will we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?' "When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him." For myself, and many others, this modern day "Prophet stuff" is simply presumption on God! I do not believe there are any true "prophets" today! Here's why: "God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world." [Heb. 1:1-2] God doesn't need prophets as He has left us with His Word! It is sufficient in and of Itself! Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
3205 | Miracles and Consequences of Sin | Heb 1:1 | BradK | 189492 | ||
Hi mb5, In answer to your 2 questions: 1. Sir Robert Anderson wrote a book entitled, "The Silence of God" that deals fairly and insightfully with this question. It may be of some help; 2.While our sins are forgiven (Col. 2:13), the consequences-as detailed by David's case- are not. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
3206 | HEARING THE VOICE OF GOD | Heb 1:2 | BradK | 142266 | ||
kalos, Good observation! Suppose that I said that God just spoke to me via e-mail to say He won't take any personal, audible requests anymore. There just too much volume to keep up with it! Plus, He's gone "high-tech"! Many seem to be evermore seeking the extra-ordinary, bizarre experiences that are subjective in nature and not verifiable by the Word of God. God's Word is increasingly being relegated to second class in this type of "spiritual weirdness" environment. Just to note: I hear the voice of the Lord speaking to me through His, inerrant, living and powerful Word! Just check out Hebrews 4:12. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
3207 | where would i find the 3 omni's of god | Heb 1:3 | BradK | 181836 | ||
Dear trinity06, Here, I believe is what you seek: "Omnipotence: An attribute of God that describes His limitless power; it should be remembered that this is never to be viewed as putting Him in a place of contradiction, such as making something so large that He could not move it; Heb. 1:3; Eph. 1:19. Omnipresence: An attribute of God according to which He is viewed as present everywhere in His creation at the same time, yet without being part of it (S. Pantheism); perhaps most eloquently described in Ps. 139:7–10. Omniscience: An attribute of God according to which He is viewed as knowing all things, actual as well as possible; Ps. 139:1–6, 11–12." [Paul S. Karleen, The Handbook to Bible Study] Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
3208 | Searching for the truth | Heb 1:6 | BradK | 75213 | ||
Truthseeker, I would also echo my support for Tim Moran on this matter! I too affirm the Diety of Christ. What of John 17:5," Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was." This verse most certainly shows forth the Diety of Christ along with His eternal preexistence! Only the Lord (Jehovah) is to receive glory. Isaiah 42:8, "I am the Lord, that is My name; I will not give My glory to another, Nor My praise to graven images." As there are no contradictions in scripture, How could we have Christ praying to the Father to receive glory (that's only reserved for God) if He is not indeed God in the flesh? Speaking The Truth In Love, BradK |
||||||
3209 | Angels | Heb 1:14 | BradK | 163836 | ||
Hi jason, If I'm understanding your question correctly, no! There is no Biblical basis for a human ever becoming an angel. Here are some facts about angels that may help to explain: 27 Facts About Angels 1. They are mentioned 273 times in 34 biblical books. 2. They were all created by God. Gen. 2:1; Neh. 9:6; Eph. 3:9; Col. 1:16 3. They report directly to God. Job 1:6; 2:1 4. They were present at the Creation of the world. Job 38:1, 4, 7 5. They announced Jesus’ birth to the shepherds. Luke 2:10–14 6. They do not marry. Matt. 22:30 7. They were created to live forever. Rev. 4:8 8. Their purpose is to glorify God. Rev. 4:8 9. Some angels help human beings. Heb. 1:14 10. Some angels harm human beings. Mark 5:1–5 11. They are spirit beings. Ps. 104:4; Heb. 1:7, 14 12. They are invisible beings. Rom. 1:18–32; Col. 2:18; Rev. 19:10; 22:9 13. They are innumerable. Deut. 33:2; Ps 68:17; Dan. 7:9–10; Matt. 26:53; Heb. 12:22; Rev. 5:11 14. They possess intelligence. Dan. 9:21–22; 10:14; Rev. 19:10; 22:8–9 15. They possess will. Isa. 14:12–15; Jude 6 16. They display joy. Job 38:7; Luke 2:13 17. They display desire. 1 Pet. 1:12 18. They are stronger than men. Ps. 103:20; 2 Thess. 1:7; 2 Pet. 2:11 19. They are more intelligent than men. Dan. 9:21–22; 10:14 20. They are swifter than men. Dan. 9:21; Rev.14:6 21. They are not omnipresent. Dan. 10:12 22. They are not omnipotent. Dan. 10:13; Jude 9 23. They are not omniscient. Matt. 24:36 24. Some are cherubim. Ezek. 1:1–28; 10:20 25. Some are seraphim. Isa. 6:1–8 26. The majority remained true to God. Rev. 5:11–12 27. They will join all believers in the heavenly Jerusalem. Heb. 12:22–23 [Willmington, H. L. Willmington's Book of Bible Lists.] BradK |
||||||
3210 | What does "Edens Dawn Light Mean?" | Heb 2:9 | BradK | 200938 | ||
Hello Z..., I concur with brother Hank. The Message is not a translation, but rather a loose paraphrase. I rather see it as "muddling" God's Word rather than clarifying it:-( None of the respected translations come up - or conjure up - that phrase. The NASB reads: "But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone." You would have to ask Eugene Peterson, the author of The Message what he was thinking:-) Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
3211 | What does "Edens Dawn Light Mean?" | Heb 2:9 | BradK | 200952 | ||
Hi Steve, Good comments with which I heartily agree! I had a similar conclusion in reading the background to Peterson's "Message". If only we'd not stoop down- dumb down- to the masses. If the Bible is that uninteresting and unreadable, I'd submit that speaks a great deal more of the "MTV", 30-Second-sound-bite pop culture-mentality that afflicts us, than it does the Bible itself. The Church needs the unadulterated Word of God even more today! Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
3212 | The Doctrine of Dreams | Heb 4:12 | BradK | 213220 | ||
The Doctrine of Dreams: The Doctrine of Dreams in the Old Testament- Number of Dreams. There are sixteen dreams recorded in the Old Testament (Gen. 20:3, 6; Gen. 28:12; Gen. 31:10–11, 24; Gen. 37:5, 9; Gen. 40:5; Gen. 41:1, 5; Judg. 7:13; 1 Kings 3:5; Dan. 2:1; Dan. 4:5; Dan. 7:1). Purpose of dreams. In the Old Testament God often used dreams to reveal His will. God promised to show His will unto the prophets in dreams (Num. 12:6). Job said that “God speaketh…in a dream, in a vision of the night, when deep sleep falleth upon men, in slumberings upon the bed” (Job 22:14–15). In half of the Old Testament dreams the source of the dream is specifically stated to be God. Through these dreams God revealed His will to the dreamers. While God sometimes spoke in dreams, not all dreams were attributable to Him. Dreams whose contents did not accord with reality were obviously not from God. One of the tests of a true prophet was whether his dreams came true (Deut. 13:1–5). The Israelites were warned against false dreamers (Jer. 29:8; Zech. 10:2). Dreams were inferior in comparison to having God’s Word (Gen. 12:6–8; Jer. 23:28) The Doctrine of Dreams in the New Testament- There are two Greek words translated dream. One word, honar, occurs six times in the New Testament. It occurs only in Matthew. Each time it is translated “dream” in the King James Version. Another Greek word for dream, enupnion, found only in Acts 2:17. It is translated dream in the King James Version. The verbal form of enupnion (enupnioazo)occurs in Acts 2:17 and Jude 8. Dreams or dreamers are thus referred to in only three New Testament books: Matthew, Acts, and Jude. . Interestingly, Jesus never mentioned dreams. There is no symbology in New Testament dreams and therefore no need of an interpreter. In the New Testament there is one citation of an Old Testament passage dealing with the subject of dreams (Joel 2:28). In this citation Peter at Pentecost recites to the throng the prophecy concerning the activity of God’s outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:16–21). The Doctrine of Dreams Today- Scientific research has shown that everyone dreams every night. It has also shown that dreams can be caused by a variety of conditions such as poor blood circulation, improper ventilation, and uncomfortable sleeping position, or overeating. Sigmund Freud spoke of “those disagreeable dreams one has only when one’s stomach is upset.” Obviously dreams have a diverse etiology. As was seen in the foregoing discussion, in Biblical times some dreams were caused by God. However, does God give dreams to people today in post-Biblical times? Or are dreams today better explained by other conditions and causes? Thomas Aquinas is exemplary of those who believe that dreams in the Christian era sometimes come from God. He said that dreams are: “…sometimes referable to God, who reveals certain things to men in their dreams by the ministry of angels, according to Num. 12.5. …Accordingly we must say there is no lawful divination in making use of dreams for the foreknowledge of the future, so long as those dreams are due to divine revelation….” A. J. Gordon did not claim that extra-Biblical dreams reveal the future. Nevertheless, he did agree with Thomas Aqainas in allowing that dreams may come from God. He wrote of the effect of one of his dreams and then gave instances of other dreams which had proved potent factors in human affairs. “Those who are familiar with the history of Catherine of Siena know how repeated and striking were her visions by day and by night; and readers of the life of Richard Baxter will recall his marked experience, and vivid vision of lost opportunities which so quickened his afteractivity; Christmas Evans, also, that prince of Welsh preachers…always believed that…dreams were God’s messengers sent to communicate to him some of the mightiest impulses that swayed his life. Both Thomas Aquinas and A. J. Gordon believed that dreams in the post-Biblical era could come from God. However, it is doubtful that God has communicated with men by dreams since the close of the canon. Arthur B. Fowler says that God “could reveal his will in dreams today, but the written Word of God, and the indwelling Holy Spirit have made dreams of this sort unnecessary.” There is no Biblical evidence for the contention that God speaks today in dreams. God speaks today in His Word (2 Tim. 3:16–17). He has given the Holy Spirit to every Christian to lead him into the truth (John 16:13; 1 Cor. 6:19–20). With the Bible in his hand and the Holy Spirit in his heart, the Christian has ample provision for guidance into God’s perfect will. [The Doctrine of Dreams, Richard L. Ruble; Bibliotheca Sacra : A Quarterly Published by Dallas Theological Seminary., 364 (Dallas TX)] |
||||||
3213 | God's ways of speaking to believers | Heb 4:12 | BradK | 214828 | ||
Hi oyewole, Certainly, one way God speaks to us is through His Word- "For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart." (NASB) Another way God communicates to us through prayer. (Phil. 4:6, Col. 4:2) As Oswald Chambers wisely observed, "Prayer is an interruption to personal ambition, and no man who is busy has time to pray. What will suffer is the life of God in him, which is nourished not by food but by prayer. If we look on prayer as a means of developing ourselves, there is nothing in it at all, nor do we find that idea of prayer in the Bible. Prayer is other than meditation; it is that which develops the life of God in us. When a man is born from above (RV mg), the life of the Son of God begins in him, and he can either starve that life or nourish it. Prayer is the way the life of God is nourished." I hope this helps, BradK |
||||||
3214 | should we confess to a priest or not? | Heb 4:14 | BradK | 173391 | ||
Hello granny, In Protestant theology there is no need for a mediator (such as a priest) since Jesus Christ already is the One(1 Tim. 2:5). See also Heb. 4:14-16: "Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin. Therefore let us draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need." Christ Jesus is our Mediator! I hope this helps, BradK |
||||||
3215 | Did Jesus experence real temptation? | Heb 4:15 | BradK | 164386 | ||
Hi Brazos, Consider Heb. 4:15 "For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin." The question really is how do we understand this passage. It touches upon what's called, "the Impeccability of Christ": The Impeccability of Christ The meaning of impeccability has also been debated. Some, of course, do not think Christ was sinless, but among those who do there are two views of impeccability. One says that He was able not to sin while the other states that He was not able to sin. In either case He did not sin, though one viewpoint involves the possibility that He could have. That idea is usually held because it is hard to understand how His temptations could have been real if He could not have sinned. That He did not sin and that He was tempted are facts agreed on. How could the temptations have been real if He could not have sinned? Part of the answer lies in discovering what Hebrews 4:15 says and what it does not say. Literally, the verse reads this way: “ ... having been tested according to all, according to likeness, apart from sin.” It does not say that Christ was tempted with a view to succumbing to sin. He was tested with a view to proving He was sinless. It does not say that He was tested in every particular specific test that man can be put to. It does say that His tests were in all the areas in which a man can be tested: the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. The particular tests within those areas were entirely different for Him from the ones for us. The phrase “according to likeness” apparently means that He could be tested because He took the likeness of sinful flesh. “Apart from sin” means that, having no sin nature, He could not have been tested from that avenue, as we can and usually are. His temptations were really not to see if He could sin, but to prove that He could not. Nevertheless, they were real, for the reality of a test does not lie either in the moral nature of the one tested or in the ability to yield to it. And, of course, His ability to sympathize with us does not demand a one-to-one correspondence in the particulars of the tests." [Ryrie, C. C.: A Survey of Bible Doctrine] There is a lot to chew on here, but I trust this will help you in the answering of your question. BradK |
||||||
3216 | Did Jesus have a sin nature? | Heb 4:15 | BradK | 196734 | ||
Hello Curmudgeon, No, He did not have a sin nature- nor could He to qualify as our Redeemer (John 1:29). That is why He was conceived through the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:34-35) This is the miracle of the incarnation: Heb 4:15 - "For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin." (NASB) BradK |
||||||
3217 | is it possible for Jesus to have sinned? | Heb 4:15 | BradK | 221184 | ||
Hello Arlene, You ask a great question. This touches upon what is referred to as "impeccability". Heb 4:15 tells us- "For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin." (NASB) I would hold that it was not possible for Christ to have sinned! He was 'tempted', but without sin. As the Moody Handbook of Theology notes, "Those who hold to impeccability suggest Christ’s temptation by Satan was genuine, but it was impossible for Christ to sin. Several introductory observations should be noted. Observations: The purpose of the temptation was not to see if Christ could sin, but to show that He could not sin. The temptation came at a critical time: the beginning of Christ’s public ministry. The temptation was designed to show the nation what a unique Savior she had: the impeccable Son of God. It is also noteworthy that it was not Satan who initiated the temptation but the Holy Spirit (Matt. 4:1). If Christ could have sinned, then the Holy Spirit solicited Christ to sin, but that is something God does not do (James 1:13). Christ’s peccability could relate only to His human nature; His divine nature was impeccable. Although Christ had two natures, He was nonetheless one Person and could not divorce Himself of His deity. Wherever He went, the divine nature was present. If the two natures could be separated then it could be said that He could sin in His humanity, but because the human and divine natures cannot be separated from the Person of Christ, and since the divine nature cannot sin, it must be affirmed that Christ could not have sinned. Evidence. The evidence for the impeccability of Christ is set forth by William Shedd and others in the following way. (1) The immutability of Christ (Heb. 13:8). Christ is unchangeable and therefore could not sin. If Christ could have sinned while on earth, then He could sin now because of His immutability. If He could have sinned on earth, what assurance is there that He will not sin now? (2) The omnipotence of Christ (Matt. 28:18). Christ was omnipotent and therefore could not sin. Weakness is implied where sin is possible, yet there was no weakness of any kind in Christ. How could He be omnipotent and still be able to sin? (3) The omniscience of Christ (John 2:25). Christ was omniscient and therefore could not sin. Sin depends on ignorance in order that the sinner may be deceived, but Christ could not be deceived because He knows all things, including the hypothetical (Matt. 11:21). If Christ could have sinned then He really did not know what would happen if He would sin. (4) The deity of Christ. Christ is not only man but also God. If He were only a man then He could have sinned, but God cannot sin and in a union of the two natures, the human nature submits to the divine nature (otherwise the finite is stronger than the infinite). United in the one Person of Christ are the two natures, humanity and deity; because Christ is also deity He could not sin. (5) The nature of temptation (James 1:14–15). The temptation that came to Christ was from without. However, for sin to take place, there must be an inner response to the outward temptation. Since Jesus did not possess a sin nature, there was nothing within Him to respond to the temptation. People sin because there is an inner response to the outer temptation. (6) The will of Christ. In moral decisions, Christ could have only one will: to do the will of His Father; in moral decisions the human will was subservient to the divine will. If Christ could have sinned then His human will would have been stronger than the divine will. (7) The authority of Christ (John 10:18). In His deity, Christ had complete authority over His humanity. For example, no one could take the life of Christ except He would lay it down willingly (John 10:18). If Christ had authority over life and death, He certainly had authority over sin; if He could withhold death at will, He could also withhold sin at will." [Paul P. Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology] I hope this helps, BradK |
||||||
3218 | is it possible for Jesus to have sinned? | Heb 4:15 | BradK | 221190 | ||
Hello CDBJ, Good points- and I agree! To add some more fuel to this discussion, Joseph Saul in Bibliotheca Sacra observes: "Could Jesus Christ sin? Was it possible that He could have succumbed to the temptations He faced in the world and at the instigation of Satan? All evangelical scholars affirm that Christ did not sin. But the question is whether He could have sinned. The problem centers on the question of Christ’s susceptibility to sin. Theologically, the question is whether the Savior is posse non peccare (able not to sin) or non posse peccare (not able to sin). In other words, is it only that the Lord Jesus was able to overcome sin and temptation or rather that He could not be overcome by them? Peccability refers to Christ’s being liable to or prone to sin, and impeccability speaks of His not being liable to sin and being incapable of sinning." As to why this is significant, he notes, "First, since the Lord Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Heb. 13:8), whatever attributes were true of Him during His earthly existence also must be true in His preincarnate state, as well as in His present state of glory. Second, the virgin birth, the Incarnation, and the hypostatic union, are all influenced by one’s understanding of the question concerning the impeccablity of Jesus Christ. Christ, the God-Man, had a divine nature and human nature that were inseparably linked without confusion. This union demonstrated the humanity of the God-Man prepared by the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:35; Heb. 10:5). If Christ could sin, then deity was capable of sinning. Third, this doctrine has ramifications for angelology. The Scriptures affirm the existence of a personal being known as Satan, who is the primary instigator and sole originator of evil within the universe. Yet, if the Lord Jesus Christ is not impeccable, one can begin to question the temptation accounts of the Lord in the wilderness. If it is possible that He could sin or be overcome by temptation, what assurance does one have that these temptations were not just self-induced lustful thoughts within His human intellect and were not attacks by Satan? Fourth, the question of the impeccability of Jesus Christ also has implications for biblical inerrancy and integrity. Without a doubt, at times within His earthly life, the Lord Jesus spoke from within the limits of His unfallen humanity. For example, He declared His thirst (John 19:28) or His lack of information on the exact time of His return (Matt. 24:36). If it is possible that the Lord Jesus Christ could succumb to or be deceived by sin, then one must also conclude that it is possible for Him to have given inaccurate information about eternal things when He was growing in wisdom and stature and favor with God and man (Luke 2:52)." Blessings, BradK |
||||||
3219 | is it possible for Jesus to have sinned? | Heb 4:15 | BradK | 221200 | ||
Hello Thomas, The original question in this thread had to do with the impeccability of Christ. Peter's denial is another. The question is only speculative, since Peter did deny Christ! So, it ultimately cannot be answered from scripture:-) What do you mean by, "OT predictions of Jesus just as immutable?" Can you clarify, please? Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
3220 | The Person and Work of Christ | Heb 4:15 | BradK | 223536 | ||
Regarding the Person and Work Of Christ: Heb. 4:15 tells us- in regard to His (Jesus) human nature, "...has been tempted in all things as we are, YET WITHOUT SIN". (NASB) A further issue becomes involved in this discussion. As the late John F. Walvoord wrote, it touches upon The Impeccability of Christ. He writes, "Orthodox theologians generally agree that Jesus Christ never committed any sin. This seems to be a natural corollary to His deity and an absolute prerequisite to His work of substitution on the cross. Any affirmation of moral failure on the part of Christ requires a doctrine of His person which would deny in some sense His absolute deity. A question has been raised, however, by orthodox theologians whether the sinlessness of Christ was the same as that of Adam before the fall or whether it possessed a peculiar character because of the presence of the divine nature. In a word, could the Son of God be tempted as Adam was tempted and could He have sinned as Adam sinned? While most orthodox theologians agree that Christ could be tempted because of the presence of a human nature, a division occurs on the question as to whether being tempted He could sin." Definition of Impeccability: "The point of view that Christ could sin is designated by the term 'peccability', and the doctrine that Christ could not sin is referred to as the 'impeccability of Christ'. Adherents of both views agree that Christ did not sin, but those who affirm peccability hold that He could have sinned, whereas those who declare the impeccability of Christ believe that He could not sin due to the presence of the divine nature." "The doctrine of impeccability has been questioned especially on the point of whether an impeccable person can be tempted in any proper sense. If Christ had a human nature which was subject to temptation, was this not in itself evidence that He could have sinned? The point of view of those who believe that Christ could have sinned is expressed by Charles Hodge who has summarized this teaching in these words: “This sinlessness of our Lord, however, does not amount to absolute impeccability. It was not a non potest peccare. If He was a true man, He must have been capable of sinning. That He did not sin under the greatest provocations; that when He was reviled He blessed; when He suffered He threatened not; that He was dumb as a sheep before its shearers, is held up to us as an example. Temptation implies the possibility of sin. If from the constitution of his person it was impossible for Christ to sin, then his temptation was unreal and without effect and He cannot sympathize with his people." Can an Impeccable Person Be Tempted? "It is generally agreed by those who hold that Christ did not commit sin that He had no sin nature. Whatever temptation could come to Him, then, would be from without and not from within. Whatever may have been the natural impulses of a sinless nature which might have led to sin if not held in control, there was no sin nature to suggest sin from within and form a favorable basis for temptation. It must be admitted by Hodge, who denies impeccability, that in any case the temptation of Christ is different than that of sinful men." Not only is there agreement on the fact that Christ had no sin nature, but it is also agreed on the other hand, that as to His person He was tempted. This is plainly stated in Hebrews 4:15." [Bibliotheca Sacra : A quarterly published by Dallas Theological Seminary. 1996. Dallas TX: Dallas Theological Seminary.] |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 ] Next > Last [180] >> |