Jesus may have been progressive in more ways than one, according to a new billboard in Auckland.
The St Matthew in the City billboard, which is released each Christmas, this year depicts the baby Jesus in his crib surrounded by a halo of rainbow colours.
"It's Christmas," the billboard reads. "It's time for Jesus to come out."
Reverend Glynn Cardy said the sign was about trying to lift the humanity of Jesus.
Biblical ways wrote: Well I am glad that somebody else got the Biblical message. If "IN" Christ then that would make Jesus a sinner as John implies. If any where else then where is that sin located? In mankind? If in mankind then does Christ "struggle" for every sin or type of sin or or or .....??? Christ's "struggle" was not *WITH* sin. HE IS and ALWAYS WAS TOTALLY SINLESS. If you reduce Christ to the ranks of those who "struggle" with sin, ie saved mortals, then you place Christ in the human category of sinner. But the difference between man and Christ was that HE had NO sin (to struggle with) therefore our "struggle" cannot equate with Christ's work on earth to save and atone. God reconciled us by the death of Christ, and saved us by HIS life. (Rom 5:10).
Yes, it appears we agree on the major issues involved here and I have enjoyed reading your comments. But, once again let me defend my friend John UK, although he doesn't need me to do it. John may have a different way of looking at this issue, BUT, at no time would he say or even think that Christ wasn't our sinless and perfect Lord and Savior.
Frank wrote: HE DID NOT STRUGGLE against sin, even in the garden or in the wilderness
Well I am glad that somebody else got the Biblical message.
If we are to conclude that Christ did "struggle" against sin - where was the sin HE struggled against? If "IN" Christ then that would make Jesus a sinner as John implies. If any where else then where is that sin located? In mankind? If in mankind then does Christ "struggle" for every sin or type of sin or or or .....???
Isaiah 53:4 Surely he hath borne *OUR* GRIEFS, and carried *OUR* SORROWS: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. 5 But he was wounded for *OUR* TRANSGRESSIONS, he was bruised for *OUR* INIQUITIES: the chastisement of *OUR* PEACE was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. Christ's "struggle" was not *WITH* sin. HE IS and ALWAYS WAS TOTALLY SINLESS.
If you reduce Christ to the ranks of those who "struggle" with sin, ie saved mortals, then you place Christ in the human category of sinner. But the difference between man and Christ was that HE had NO sin (to struggle with) therefore our "struggle" cannot equate with Christ's work on earth to save and atone. God reconciled us by the death of Christ, and saved us by HIS life. (Rom 5:10).
Very interesting discussion and many of the comments caused me to ponder the issue; that is always a good thing. But, I want to at least end my thoughts on a positive note. Christ was perfect and He could not have sinned. That thought is incomprehensible to me and I have thought that issue out! In my mind, He never debated within Himself whether He should obey His heavenly Father or not obey His heavenly Father. That form of temptation happens to us, but not to Him. HE DID NOT STRUGGLE against sin, even in the garden or in the wilderness.
His essence can never be fully understood, but He did not have an Adamic nature. Scripture says it was Adam's sin that resulted in the fall of man; not Eve's. Eve as with women today are susceptible to deception; whereas Adam made a willful choice to disobey. So, how Eve's genetic code affected Christ's humanity is mysterious, but scripture says we have all sinned in Adam; not in Eve. I only mention this for the occasional RC who have posted on this thread. Christ did not have an Adamic nature.
But, very good discussion and I really enjoyed reading "most" of the comments that were made. Thanks.
I'm not going to comment in this thread anymore. I'm really just expressing my thoughts but the whole thing is starting to make me feel uncomfortable. Sometimes I don't explain my thoughts correctly so I don't want the thread to take any left turns because of that.
Homosexuality aside. I'm not talking about that at all. The article aside, I'm just wondering if, while as a man, Jesus was tempted with general sin as we are. Nothing, nothing, nothing, to do with the article about homosexuality, just so I'm clear with everyone.
Our precious Jesus, the Son of God, did not sin, was not tempted to sin! It is pure blasphemy to even allow thought on Jesus to be associated with homosexuality. A wicked vile sin. A Christian should not even contemplate otherwise!
... I figure that if the angels, being spirit, can choose to sin at any time, then being half man, so could Jesus at the time. I don't think simply seeing a cookie in a cookie jar, while starving, is being tempted, I think that some part of you must want to eat that cookie in order for it to qualify as a temptation. Didn't He experience everything that we do and that's how He understands our struggles? I always thought that. I don't know...just my thoughts, but I'm open.
The way I see it is that God Himself cannot be tempted with evil, but God, the Son, born of a woman with a sin nature, could be but resisted, overcame, and remained without sin. The reason I think this is because the human half of Jesus, knowing the torments that he would have to endure, struggled. His human stress level caused Him to sweat drops of blood pleading with the Father to take the cup from Him if it was possible. On the cross, Jesus thought that His Father had abandoned Him. Satan knew perfectly well who He was yet tried to tempt Him anyway, so he must have thought it was possible. My main thing is this: Any Angel, right at this moment can be tempted and choose to turn from God. Satan, the most glorious of God's creation, was tempted and fell from grace. The angels, who knew God intimately, were tempted by Satan and fell from grace. Angels of God were tempted, filled with lust, had relations with "woman of all they chose" and fell from grace. What I'm getting at is the fact that Jesus was half man and experienced everything that we do. He took on our human nature, but triumphed against all temptations and remained without the stain of sin. I figure that if the angels, being spirit, can choose to sin at any time, then being half man, so could Jesus at the ti
Mike wrote: James 1:13-15 "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death." By James' use and understanding, could Jesus/Immanuel/God with us be tempted with evil? Temptation may also mean testing. There are apparently differences in the Greek application of the word.
Thanks Mike, I've had this text at the back of my mind, but the interpretation thereof is not so easy. Scripture records that Jesus was tempted by the devil outwardly; not inwardly of his own lusts, because Jesus had no sin within, no sinful nature.
The only thing I can think of is that God can never be "successfully" tempted, unlike created Eve who, despite having no sin nature within, "was" successfully tempted.
"Because That, When They Knew God, They Glorified Him Not As God, Neither Were Thankful; But Became Vain In Their Imaginations, And Their Foolish Heart Was Darkened.
Professing Themselves To Be Wise, They Became Fools,
And Changed The Glory Of The Uncorruptible God Into An Image Made Like To Corruptible Man, And To Birds, And Fourfooted Beasts, And Creeping Things.
Wherefore God Also Gave Them Up To Uncleanness Through The Lusts Of Their Own Hearts, To Dishonour Their Own Bodies Between Themselves:
Who Changed The Truth Of God Into A Lie, And Worshipped And Served The Creature More Than The Creator, Who Is Blessed For Ever. Amen.
For This Cause God Gave Them Up Unto Vile Affections, For Even Their Women Did Change The Natural Use Into That Which Is Against Nature:
And Likewise Also The Men, Leaving The Natural Us Of The Woman, Burned In Their Lust One Toward Another, Men With Men Working That Which Is Unseemly, And Receiving In Themselves That Recompence Of Their Error Which Was Meet.
And Even As They Did Not Like To Retain God In Their Knowledge, God Gave Them Over To A Reprobate Mind, To Do Those Things Which Are Not Convenient;
Being Filled With All Unrighteousness, Fornication, Wickedness, Coveteousness, Maliciousness; Full Of Envy..." Romans 1:19-29
James 1:13-15 "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death."
By James' use and understanding, could Jesus/Immanuel/God with us be tempted with evil? Temptation may also mean testing. There are apparently differences in the Greek application of the word.
BroBill wrote: If there was not the possibility of Him falling for temptation then He could not have been tempted as we are. But his ability to resist temptation is something we don't have because we are born with a sin nature. We are fallen, He is not. Paul say "sin reigns in us" and that is what causes us to fall. If we were not born with a sin nature then we would be like Adam and Jesus, both born without a sin nature. Adam was tempted and fell. Jesus was tempted and overcame. It was 'possible' but not probable.
Yep! It is a good cause of great rejoicing that the Saviour overcame, or we could not have been saved. We underestimate the "finished work of Christ". The battle against the devil was fierce all the way through, even from birth when the Lord came under attack. Mary and Joseph had much work to do, and much struggling, to avoid the local genocide planned by the devil.
It's interesting that we have been set free from the dominion of sin, don't you think?
John UK wrote: All good points. But I wonder if you imagine that the Son of God was incapable of falling for temptation....
If there was not the possibility of Him falling for temptation then He could not have been tempted as we are. But his ability to resist temptation is something we don't have because we are born with a sin nature. We are fallen, He is not. Paul say "sin reigns in us" and that is what causes us to fall. If we were not born with a sin nature then we would be like Adam and Jesus, both born without a sin nature. Adam was tempted and fell. Jesus was tempted and overcame. It was 'possible' but not probable.
BroBill wrote: The fact that Eve contemplated the temptation instead of saying, "Yep, all except the one," and then trying to reason why not, is what brought her into sin. She should have gone right back to picking flowers or whatever she was doing and not given the serpent another thought. Walking the street past rows of peep shows, keeping your mind on Christ rather than craning your neck to see what's going on is resisting temptation. Temptation was all around Jesus. He hung out with sinners! Did he ever consider joining in their sinful deeds? NO! Like the answer he gave His mother when he was 12, "I must be about my Father's business." Focused on the righteousness and glory of God. We don't have that focus. We are tempted and fall into sin. Christ? Never.
All good points. But I wonder if you imagine that the Son of God was incapable of falling for temptation. If that were the case, then the temptation was no temptation. And then we would not have a great high priest who can empathise and give succour to those who are tempted in the same way.
John UK wrote: Hey brother - great to hear from you my dear friend. Are you still on the same e-mail address? If so I will write. If not, I'll post mine own one next post. Blessings to you and yours also!
Not sure what email you have for me and I do change them quite often to keep spam mail at bay.
Best if you let me have your contact details through
John UK wrote: You're just woffling, that's all. I see you do not like to answer my question about sinless Eve struggling with the devil when he tempted her....
The fact that Eve contemplated the temptation instead of saying, "Yep, all except the one," and then trying to reason why not, is what brought her into sin. She should have gone right back to picking flowers or whatever she was doing and not given the serpent another thought. Walking the street past rows of peep shows, keeping your mind on Christ rather than craning your neck to see what's going on is resisting temptation. Temptation was all around Jesus. He hung out with sinners! Did he ever consider joining in their sinful deeds? NO! Like the answer he gave His mother when he was 12, "I must be about my Father's business." Focused on the righteousness and glory of God. We don't have that focus. We are tempted and fall into sin. Christ? Never.
SC wrote: Hello John good friend. Just popped onto SA to see if you're still posting and lo and behold a post from you! How are you keeping these days? How is work and the church situation? Are you still street preaching? Would love to catch up sometime, but don't have any contact details for you. Lord Bless!
Hey brother - great to hear from you my dear friend. Are you still on the same e-mail address? If so I will write. If not, I'll post mine own one next post.
Hello John good friend. Just popped onto SA to see if you're still posting and lo and behold a post from you!
How are you keeping these days? How is work and the church situation? Are you still street preaching? Would love to catch up sometime, but don't have any contact details for you.
Lord Bless!
35
There are a total of 74 user comments displayed | add new comment |
Dr. Steven J. Lawson | 6/13/2010
Dr. Alan Cairns | 4/6/2009
COMMENTS | 
