Ever since
the doctrine of original sin or inherited depravity has been taught,
there has been the troublesome question of whether Jesus was born
with a sinful nature. One who holds to any theory of original sin
faces a real problem in dealing with the issue of the nature of
Christ. Because the Bible teaches that He was free of sin, and since
He was born. of a woman, it is evident that according to the
doctrine of original sin, He is a contradiction. How to deal with
this contradiction becomes a central issue for those who hold his
doctrine.
Catholic
theology seeks to solve the problem by the dogma of the immaculate
conception. By this is meant that when the egg and the sperm united
in the womb of Mary's mother she was preserved from original sin.
Mary, therefore, was immaculately conceived and preserved from sin
so as to be a fit vessel to bear the holy Jesus. Consequently, He
was conceived by the Holy Spirit and was born of a woman who was
free of original sin. He, therefore, was born free of original sin,
according to the theory.
Did Jesus
have a sinful nature? The Bible is clear in expressing the
sinlessness of Jesus. Scripture is likewise clear about His having
borne the nature of men. One can be enlightened about man's nature
and whether he is born a sinner by studying what God's word says
about Jesus and His nature. This study focuses on the issue of the
nature of Jesus and its implication about the nature of man.
Jesus Had No Sin
That Jesus
was sinless the New Testament is emphatic. Jesus was tempted in all
points like as men are "yet without sin" (Heb. 4:15). No
statement could be clearer. We are also told that "we have not a
high priest that cannot be touched with the feeling of our
infirmities; but one that hath been in all points tempted like as we
are. . . " (Heb. 4:15). But these statements also pose an
issue to many about His nature. If He does not have a sinful nature,
how could He be tempted like we are? This is a question some people
raise. Does it follow that Jesus has a sinful nature? Let us study
the matter.
Tempt (peirazo)
in the New Testament has the sense of to try, to test, to prove, and
to try by enticement to sin. Jesus partook of the nature to man
(Heb. 2:16-17). He was "made like his brethren" and "took on him
the seed of Abraham." Being thus of the nature of man, He had the
same basic desires. He was tested as to whether His will to satisfy
them would be subjected to the will of God or be such as to satisfy
them in violation of the word of God. His desires did not entice Him
to violate the will of His Father. For had not His nature been the
same as man's, He could not have been tempted in all points such as
he is. Many of these occasions when He yielded to God rather than to
desire that would lead to rebellion against God brought to Him
suffering (Heb. 2:18).
Informative
in this context are James' statements about temptations. God is not
the origin of temptation nor is He tempted with evil. Man is tempted
when he is drawn away and enticed by his own lusts (Jas. 1:13-15).
Epithumia is the word translated lust and it means desire or any
synonym of it. The word itself does not indicate whether the desire
is evil or good; simply it means desire. Context must provide the
precise nature of the desire. Paul had a desire, epithumia, to
depart and be with the Lord (Phil. 1:23). There was no evil
in this wish of his. However, in James 1:15 when desire or
lust has conceived, it brings sin. Evidently, desire or lust in this
passage refers to wanting to do what God prohibits. When such a
desire is satisfied, sin is the result. Man is, therefore, enticed
by this desire to do wrong.
It should be
pointed out, however, that the occasion for the expression of lust
comes to all men. If the will is subject to the will of God, there
is no intention to satisfy the desire in violation of the will of
God. All men do have tests that reveal what it is that their will is
to do. Jesus had occasions that gave opportunity for Him to express
His desires in harmony with or in violation of the will of God. He
chose the latter and was as a result without sin. It is not that
their natures are different; it is that their response to desire is
different. The differences in response differentiate one as
righteous and the other as a sinner.
Basic desires
and drives belonging to the nature of man are in him by God's
creation. Every desire or drive has a satisfaction acceptable to
God. For instance, hunger can be satisfied by eating within
moderation. The sex drive can be satisfied in marriage in harmony
with the will of God, and working for means (money or possessions)
if these are used for meeting one's own family needs and that of
others whom he may have ability and opportunity to assist (1 Cor.
7:1-5; Eph. 4:28; 1 Jn. 3.17, etc.). But every desire can be
satisfied in violation of the will of God. Man, as did Jesus, has
the choice of obeying God or his own selfish interests and
intentions. Jesus on these occasions in His life did not seek to
satisfy His desires in violation of the will of God and was,
therefore, sinless. Being of the same nature of men, it follows that
men are not sinners by nature but by independent, intentional
choices they make when the occasions arise to express how they want
to satisfy their desires.
The
Nature Of Man
That which is
born of flesh is flesh (Jn. 3:6). The body is alive when the
spirit is in it (Jas. 2:26). The spirit comes from God
(Eccl. 12:7). When man's spirit and his body are united, he is a
living being in the world. God formed man's body from the dust of
the earth (Gen.. 2:7). Since both flesh and spirit are the creation
of God, there can be nothing inherently sinful or wicked about
either. Being made in God's image, man has a rational nature which
can make choices. These choices may be either good or evil. For his
choices man is held accountable and must stand before God and Christ
in judgment (2 Cor. 5:10; Rom. 14:12; Eccl. 12:13-14; Acts
17:30-31). Since God does not tempt man with evil and since He
made mart, it follows that man's nature is not evil. This is clear
from the fact of man's accountability because God could not hold him
accountable if he were inherently evil and incapable of doing good.
Sin made its
entrance into the world when Adam and Eve violated the will of God
(Gen. 3). It was through one man that sin entered the world
and death by sin (Rom. 5:12). As men follow his example, they
sin. Grace and righteousness came by one Jesus Christ (Rom. 5:15).
Man's condemnation is conditioned on his disobedience and so his
righteousness is conditioned on his obedience (Rom. 5:19; 6:17).
The sin of man is no more unconditional than is his righteousness.
Jesus obeyed God and was sinless. Through obedience to Him, man can
be righteous. Through disobedience in the likeness of Adam, man is a
condemned sinner. Neither is unconditional.
As has been
previously pointed out, Jesus partook of the nature of men (Heb.
2). It follows conclusively that His nature could not be sinful
inherently. Since He did not sin, it follows that His nature was
uncorrupt. If this is the case, it follows that neither is the
nature of man corrupt.
Men must turn
and become as little children to enter God's kingdom (Matt. 18:3).
Jesus said that the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as little
children (Matt. 19:14). In children, there are
characteristics such as are essential to please God. If they are
inherently wicked and incapable of doing good, these statements are
nonsense. Men become wicked by their own choices and are held
accountable for these choices. Jesus chose to do right, obey the
will of God, and was therefore sinless. It follows, that He had no
other sin by inherent nature, even though He had a fleshly nature
and partook of every part of the nature of man. From this fact, it
follows that the nature of man is not inherently corrupt and
incapable of doing good.
Presence
Of Sin Among Men
The universal
experience of men is that they sin and, in fact, all have sinned and
fall short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23). How shall one
explain this universal experience if man is not inherently evil? God
clearly gives the answer to this question. We need to listen to Him.
We must not
be deceived (Jas. 1:16). Every good and every perfect gift
comes from God above, who is the Father of lights, and with Him
there is no variation, neither shadow that is cast by turning
(Jas. 1:17). He is not fickle but rather is unchangeable
(Mal. 3:6). That He did not cause us to yield to sin is evident
because it was of His own will that He begat us and brought us forth
by the word of truth (Jas. 1:18). He would not, therefore,
seek to destroy what He had begotten. Otherwise, He would be fickle
and variable.
If God is not
the source of man's evil, whence is it? James tells us. Men sin or
do evil when they are drawn away and enticed by their own lust or
desire. When that desire has led one to a decision to satisfy it in
violation of the will of God, sin is the result (Jas. 1:13-15).
The presence of sin among men is the result of occasions presented
to them when they choose to satisfy desires in violation of the will
of God. It is a deliberate choice that results in sin. It is not a
nature that inevitably leads to sin because one is incapable of
doing good.
Conclusion
The nature of
man and the nature of Christ are inextricably bound together. As is
man by nature, so is Jesus. As Jesus is in nature, so is man. This
is the central problem to any theory of original sin or inherent
depravity by nature. If one does not teach error on the inherent
nature of man, he is not troubled by the implication that Jesus has
a sinful nature. If one believes what God says about Jesus' having
the nature of man, there is not the problem of the sinful nature of
man.
Jesus did not
have a sinful nature.
Guardian of Truth - January 1, 1987
|