It is possible that Jesus sinned.

[Twilight Hue]

One of my favorite sites is Debate.org which is conducted by rounds and follows rules of formality by which a vote is cast by viewers to determine who won the particular debate using a point system.

I came across one questioning as to whither Jesus had sinned or not recorded in multiple scriptural texts. The winner of this particular series of rounds was the con taking the position that Jesus did not sin according to the works written about him. However I felt the debate fell short. The debate can be viewed here.......

Debate Argument: Jesus Sinned! | Debate.org

Personally I think there were instances where Jesus sinned on the pro side, yet the con came up with some counterpoints to refute some of the assertions but not all. This particular debate was won by default wheras pro cut the exchange short.

Do you agree or disagree with this debate?

 

[dgirl1986]

It is possible yes. It would be impossible to know though since it is impossible to know what would have been going through his head throughout his life.

Either he was above human and never had a sinful thought, or his sins were never recorded.

 

[ChristineES]

In my faith, we believe that Jesus did not sin but that he could have as the Gospels say that Satan tempted Him- if He was not able to sin, then Satan would not have even bothered (that's if Satan was even a literal being to begin with)

 

[captainbryce]

God allowed the devil to tempt Jesus, which suggests that he was indeed capable of sin (otherwise such tests would have been useless). So it is "possible" that Jesus sinned. However, in addition to the fact that there is no scriptural account of him committing any sins, to do so would completely invalidate his sacrifice on the cross on behalf of all mankind. If Jesus sinned, then he DIDN'T save humanity because only a sinless man could atone for everyone else's sins. If he sinned, then he'd be no better than any of the rest of us; he'd be unqualified to be our judge.

 

[nazz]

Sin according to whom?

 

[Awoon]

In my faith, we believe that Jesus did not sin but that he could have as the Gospels say that Satan tempted Him- if He was not able to sin, then Satan would not have even bothered (that's if Satan was even a literal being to begin with)

Doesn't anyone ever consider how the writers of the Jesus story sets up ever situation from a Christian point of view? "Satan" tempted him, really? Jews don't talk about any "Satan" tempting anyone. How about he went into the wilderness to contemplate his ministry and his own thoughts are recorded as temptations from "Satan," even though he was by himself and it is not recorded that he ever told anyone about his wilderness experience? Do Christians ever at all think of those?

 

[Awoon]

God allowed the devil to tempt Jesus, which suggests that he was indeed capable of sin (otherwise such tests would have been useless). So it is "possible" that Jesus sinned. However, in addition to the fact that there is no scriptural account of him committing any sins, to do so would completely invalidate his sacrifice on the cross on behalf of all mankind. If Jesus sinned, then he DIDN'T save humanity because only a sinless man could atone for everyone else's sins. If he sinned, then he'd be no better than any of the rest of us; he'd be unqualified to be our judge.

It is written in the Bible that Jesus nor God judges anyone.

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

One of my favorite sites is Debate.org which is conducted by rounds and follows rules of formality by which a vote is cast by viewers to determine who won the particular debate using a point system.

I came across one questioning as to whither Jesus had sinned or not recorded in multiple scriptural texts. The winner of this particular series of rounds was the con taking the position that Jesus did not sin according to the works written about him. However I felt the debate fell short. The debate can be viewed here.......

Debate Argument: Jesus Sinned! | Debate.org

Personally I think there were instances where Jesus sinned on the pro side, yet the con came up with some counterpoints to refute some of the assertions but not all. This particular debate was won by default wheras pro cut the exchange short.

Do you agree or disagree with this debate?

You felt the pro didn't do a thorough job refuting? Please elaborate.

 

[captainbryce]

It is written in the Bible that Jesus nor God judges anyone.

It is also written, many more times, and in a much more literal context that he absolutely does! :yes:

 

[Awoon]

It is also written, many more times, and in a much more literal context that he absolutely does! :yes:

So does he or don't he? Jesus said he doesn't judge nor does his God judge. So is Jesus sinning by saying that?

 

[captainbryce]

So does he or don't he? Jesus said he doesn't judge nor does his God judge.

No he didn't. He said he didn't come to judge. There is a difference.

So is Jesus sinning by saying that?

No, because what he actually said was true. He didn't come to judge, he came to save us by dying on the cross. Judging is what he does AFTER the fulfillment of biblical prophecy.

 

[Awoon]

No he didn't. He said he didn't come to judge. There is a difference.

No, because what he actually said was true. He didn't come to judge, he came to save us by dying on the cross. Judging is what he does AFTER the fulfillment of biblical prophecy.

He didn't come to judge and God judges no human. But he does judge? Strange teachings almost like lying to cover yer butt?

 

[arthra]

Jesus' role seems to be that of a revolutionary..

He consorted with people who normally the upper crust or priestly elements would not be caught with... prostitutes, tax collectors, etc.

He healed on the Sabbath ..

He drove out the money changers and sellers of animals for sacrifice in the precincts of the Temple...

He was "unclean" for going inside a tomb and allowing certain women to touch Him...

At the same time He was sinless...

 

[ChristineES]

When did Jesus go inside a tomb outside of His own (when He died)? If I remember correctly, Jesus called out Lazarus from outside his tomb.

 

[ChristineES]

The verse actually goes like this:

John 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

There might be many ways to interpret this verse. As you can see, it says nothing about judging, but about condemnation.

 

[Awoon]

The verse actually goes like this:

John 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

There might be many ways to interpret this verse. As you can see, it says nothing about judging, but about condemnation.

Yep and Jesus didn't judge (condemn) any prostitutes, thieves, adulterers either. So if you do any more then those you are SOL.

 

[Twilight Hue]

You felt the pro didn't do a thorough job refuting? Please elaborate.

The debate was cut short by pro in the later rounds giving con the win by default. The opening provided multiple examples contained in NT scriptures of the transgressions whereas con provided OT passages to first establish the authority of Jesus to enact "change" regarding what was originally layed out as established law set by God with a rebuttal by con regarding the establishment of Jesus's authority through OT prophecy, and the determinations of Jewish (man) made law, and that of which exclusively was decreed by God for which Jesus had violated. The argument as I understand it, was Jesus violated man made law and not God. Yet it seems there were still some that appeared to be a violation of laws established by God of which the opening round mentions. Pro however conceded thereby giving the win to con in this particular exchange.

 

[Awoon]

The debate was cut short by pro in the later rounds giving con the win by default. The opening provided multiple examples contained in NT scriptures of the transgressions whereas con provided OT passages to first establish the authority of Jesus to enact "change" regarding what was originally layed out as established law set by God with a rebuttal by pro regarding the establishment of Jesus's authority through OT prophecy, and the determinations of Jewish (man) made law, and that of which exclusively was decreed by God for which Jesus had violated. The argument as I understand it, was Jesus violated man made law and not God. Yet it seems there were still some that appeared to be a violation of laws established by God of which the opening round mentions. Pro however conceded thereby giving the win to con in this particular exchange.

The writers of the Bible covered all basis where "pro and con" can both be correct and both be incorrect. They were brilliant...CHA CHING

 

[Me Myself]

God allowed the devil to tempt Jesus, which suggests that he was indeed capable of sin (otherwise such tests would have been useless). So it is "possible" that Jesus sinned. However, in addition to the fact that there is no scriptural account of him committing any sins, to do so would completely invalidate his sacrifice on the cross on behalf of all mankind. If Jesus sinned, then he DIDN'T save humanity because only a sinless man could atone for everyone else's sins. If he sinned, then he'd be no better than any of the rest of us; he'd be unqualified to be our judge.

One of any sin equals all and all kinds and forms of sin?

That sounds like a good judgement alright

 

[nash8]

One of my favorite sites is Debate.org which is conducted by rounds and follows rules of formality by which a vote is cast by viewers to determine who won the particular debate using a point system.

I came across one questioning as to whither Jesus had sinned or not recorded in multiple scriptural texts. The winner of this particular series of rounds was the con taking the position that Jesus did not sin according to the works written about him. However I felt the debate fell short. The debate can be viewed here.......

Debate Argument: Jesus Sinned! | Debate.org

Personally I think there were instances where Jesus sinned on the pro side, yet the con came up with some counterpoints to refute some of the assertions but not all. This particular debate was won by default wheras pro cut the exchange short.

Do you agree or disagree with this debate?

It all depends on what you qualify as sin, which is extremely subjective in my view. I would however argue that according to the gospels he most definitely sinned on a few occasions.

Sin - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

He physically flipped over the moneychangers tables according to one gospel. Taking an offensive action toward others I would qualify as a sin personally, but again subjective.

The one that I think is hard to argue personally is that he dissapeared from his parents for days.

One of the ten commandments is to obey they father and mother, and he obviously disobeyed this commandment in my opinion. I don't buy the whole "I"m in my fathers house" either, anyone can use the "God told me to" excuse and be sinless.

The only way I see that he didn't sin according to this, as if his parents still lost him after he followed every instruction they gave him exactly.