Did Jesus live a sinless life?

Post by **_Coggins7** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 4:53 am

Nehor - where is that written: if you are the Messiah - you can physically hurt people.

In the Bible. Neener neener neener...

Post by **_karl61** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:15 am

Gazelam wrote:Example:

A parent tells their child that if they go out and play in the mud puddle they will get a spanking.

The child slips out and plays in the mud.

Would it be wrong for the parent to spank the child?

you bruise you lose - that's what I use to tell parents.

Post by **_Trinity** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:38 am

Gazelam wrote:Example:

A parent tells their child that if they go out and play in the mud puddle they will get a spanking.

The child slips out and plays in the mud.

Would it be wrong for the parent to spank the child?

A parent tells their child that if they go out and play in the mud puddle the parent will kill them.

The child slips out and plays in the mud.

Would it be wrong for the parent to kill the child?

Post by **_The Nehor** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:39 am

thestyleguy wrote:
Nehor - where is that written: if you are the Messiah - you can physically hurt people. But or course some would say that was light compared to the anger displayed in the old testament.

I don't have the God handbook, my copy got lost in the mail. Since he created all, he owns all and can do with it what he wants. Hate to break this to you but the anger in the Old Testament is light compared to what might be coming. Hooray!!!!!

Post by **_The Nehor** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:40 am

Trinity wrote:
Gazelam wrote:Example:

A parent tells their child that if they go out and play in the mud puddle they will get a spanking.

The child slips out and plays in the mud.

Would it be wrong for the parent to spank the child?

A parent tells their child that if they go out and play in the mud puddle the parent will kill them.

The child slips out and plays in the mud.

Would it be wrong for the parent to kill the child?

If death is what the athiest thinks it is, maybe. If it's a switch of states designed to aid the child, I got no problem with it.

Post by **_Gazelam** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:54 am

I don't think God views this life the same way we do, so Old Testament style wrath is different form his perspective.

Its a difficult perspective to view things from. Its clearing the field for fresh new growth to take root.

Christ died sinless, if he had ever commited a sin then he could not have worked out the Atonement. The Atonement demanded a sinless sacrifice, a lamb without blemish.

Post by **_Inconceivable** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:30 am

43 And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it.
44 But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day's journey; and they sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance.
45 And when they found him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him.
46 And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions.
47 And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers.
48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.
49 And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?
50 And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them.

(New Testament | Luke 2:43 - 50)

In summary.

Jesus was lost to his mother and father for three days (one day's journey up/back and one whole day in a frenzied search).

When they find him, his mom asks him why he pulled this crap on them. They were freaking out. (sorrowing etc.)

Jesus gives one of those "Hey stupids, it's obvious what I've been doing. You're not the boss of me.. (at age 12!). The answer didn't sit well with his parents. They didn't understand (any better than I would).

I'm a parent. I expect a few specific apologies when my kids dole out this garbage. I note that baby Jesus didn't consider it a sin - much like my kids when they do crazy things that make us old, grey haired and nigh unto death.

12 ¶ Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

(Old Testament | Exodus 20:12)

Sinless? Sure. If you don't count this and the penance I am sure his parents exacted from him for bailing on them.

Mom and Dad: "Oh God, we've misplaced your Son, the Savior of all mankind. Man are we in trouble".

Post by **_Gadianton** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:30 am

God makes the rules. If you break God's rules that is a sin

When the pharisees were ready to stone, Jesus knew full well the rule he himself made in the Old Testament required the execution and the pharisees were right on target. Jesus amended the rule on the spot, he did not overturn the woman's judgement and justice still demanded her execution. However, by saying "Let he without sin cast the first stone," while the woman yet remained guilty as charged and under a standing imperative for her execution, the Godly outcome was delayed as all of a sudden, no one was qualified to carry out the punishment. Had one of those pharisees been without sin, it would have been his duty to cast the first stone.

But what about Jesus?

The fact that Jesus did not carry out the punishment either implies 1) he was himself also a sinner, and not qualified to cast the first stone, 2) at that moment, Jesus became a sinner as he had now violated his own law by not casting the stone.

Either way, Jesus was a sinner.

He was a blemished lamb, and his death won't redeem Gaz, Charity, Cog, or anyone else. You'll all be in hell with me and the rest of MDB.

Post by **_Inconceivable** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:41 am

Gadianton wrote:The fact that Jesus did not carry out the punishment either implies 1) he was himself also a sinner, and not qualified to cast the first stone, 2) at that moment, Jesus became a sinner as he had now violated his own law by not casting the stone.

Gad's, that's something that never occurred to me. In retrospect, I'm sure He's been hoping know one would have caught that.

Still, makes you reconsider whether He actually made that law in the first place. I doubt He had anything to do with it.

Post by **_karl61** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:38 am

Like joseph, Jesus likely saw that this woman was a hawt and wanted her for himself. We males have a lot of explaining to do when it comes to hot woman or maybe it's self evidient.