Hebrews 4:15

[Fenris]

NIV: 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.

KJV: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

ESV: For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.


As the local non Christian with a middling understanding of Christianity, this strikes me as very strange.

If Jesus is God, how can he be tempted? Is God tempted? Is God capable of sin?

[RabbiKnife]

NIV: 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.

KJV: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

ESV: For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.


As the local non Christian with a middling understanding of Christianity, this strikes me as very strange.

If Jesus is God, how can he be tempted? Is God tempted? Is God capable of sin?

Ah, the mystery of the incarnation and the hypostatic union.  How can Jesus be fully human and fully God at the same time?…


It is a mystery that cannot be fully explained.   

[Sojourner]

N

NIV: 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.

KJV: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

ESV: For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.


As the local non Christian with a middling understanding of Christianity, this strikes me as very strange.

If Jesus is God, how can he be tempted? Is God tempted? Is God capable of sin?

You fail to understand Jesus' dual nature. Prior to His incarnation in the flesh, He existed eternally as the Word of God. (John 1:1-3) Moreover, He inherited a divine nature by virtue of God's Spirit indwelling Him from conception, which made Him the Son of God. Conversely, He inherited a human nature from His mother, subjecting Him to the frailties of humanity. While the Spirit of God cannot be tempted, overcoming temptation at the hands of the Devil (Luke 4:1-13), was necessary for Jesus to be our kinsman-redeemer. It's important to remember that Jesus died voluntarily as our savior, choosing the moment He gave up the Spirit. "The reason the Father loves Me is that I lay down My life in order to take it up again. 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 charge I have received from My Father.”  (John 10:17-18)

[Fenris]

It is a mystery that cannot be fully explained.

Do those two Irish guys try to explain it?

[Fenris]

You fail to understand Jesus' dual nature.

I confess that I do not understand it.

Conversely, He inherited a human nature from His mother, subjecting Him to the frailties of humanity.

I don't understand this, either.

was necessary for Jesus to be our kinsman-redeemer.

Why do we need a kinsman-redeemer?

This charge I have received from My Father.”  (John 10:17-18)

So is Jesus God, or is God a separate entity? I know those two wacky Irish guys discussed this.

[Sojourner]

You fail to understand Jesus' dual nature.

I confess that I do not understand it.

Conversely, He inherited a human nature from His mother, subjecting Him to the frailties of humanity.

I don't understand this, either.

was necessary for Jesus to be our kinsman-redeemer.

Why do we need a kinsman-redeemer?

This charge I have received from My Father.”  (John 10:17-18)

So is Jesus God, or is God a separate entity? I know those two wacky Irish guys discussed this.

We're not on the same wavelength with respect to doctrine, and that's not likely to change. I simply sought to offer input regarding your questions. My best attempts to explain will always be inadequate.  It is what it is. 

[Fenris]

We're not on the same wavelength with respect to doctrine, and that's not likely to change. I simply sought to offer input regarding your questions. My best attempts to explain will always be inadequate.  It is what it is. 

And I thank you for your efforts!

[Sojourner]

And I thank you for your efforts!

Doctrinal differences are inevitable, but pose no barrier to our friendship. 👍

[RabbiKnife]

It is a mystery that cannot be fully explained.

Do those two Irish guys try to explain it?

Absolutely!!!! Connell and Donall wrap up the “Trinity “ discussion with the Athanasian dialogue that does have a short piece in the incarnation and the hypostatic union.

The question of impeccability/peccability argument has been a favorite argument of Bible college students and seminarians for centuries but is a subset of questions of the incarnation issue

[Athanasius]

if Jesus is God, how can he be tempted? Is God tempted? Is God capable of sin?

The unsatisfactory answer --

"Well, when Jesus was incarnate and fully human (while also being fully divine), it was possible to tempt Him as He had assumed human nature. And thus, qua human, would have been capable of sin, i.e., was morally imperfect, as the capacity to sin arises only in the face of moral imperfection."

I have no idea how any of that would actually work. They're words that describe something I'm incapable of describing.

I think it's an interesting suggestion to say that the divine can take on humanity, given what that implies about humanity -- we are not some 'other', but divinely derived. A qualitative difference? Well I suppose we get there from imago Dei anyway, but you know.

[Fenris]

Doctrinal differences are inevitable, but pose no barrier to our friendship. 👍

Of course! I'm quite fond of you fellows. I think you already knew that! 

[Fenris]

The unsatisfactory answer --

"Well, when Jesus was incarnate and fully human (while also being fully divine), it was possible to tempt Him as He had assumed human nature. And thus, qua human, would have been capable of sin, i.e., was morally imperfect, as the capacity to sin arises only in the face of moral imperfection."

I would posit that the capacity to sin is a consequence of having free will and not of "moral imperfection".

I think it's an interesting suggestion to say that the divine can take on humanity, given what that implies about humanity -- we are not some 'other', but divinely derived. A qualitative difference?

If one ascribes to that theology, sure.

[Athanasius]

I would posit that the capacity to sin is a consequence of having free will and not of "moral imperfection".

What view do you hold of God's will?

[Fenris]

What view do you hold of God's will?

I'm not sure what you mean. Could you elaborate on the question?

[Athanasius]

What view do you hold of God's will?

I'm not sure what you mean. Could you elaborate on the question?

For example, do you hold that God has the the most free will, and therefore, the most capacity to sin?