I would like to visit the subject of whether it was possible for Jesus to have sinned.
Reading most Reformed theologians on the subject, they believe it was not possible for Jesus to have sinned. This however is not a subject that all Reformed theologians agree on. RC Sproul for example as well as many others believed that Jesus in His human nature could have sinned.
I favour Sproul’s understanding.
However, it appears most of my Reformed friends completely disagree with it and go as far as to say that the view that says Jesus could have sinned is “gross error.”
The problem they seem to have basically is that you cannot separate God’s divine nature, with His human nature. Jesus is one person not two.
The following is also something that is also fairly common among those who believe Jesus could not have sinned.
I received this question via email from SC:
Was Jesus capable of sin but it was just easy for him to choose not to? Or was he incapable of sinning altogether because he’s perfect?
And do you know why Angels are capable of sinning and falling? Are they not exactly perfect?
I’m trying to better understand how perfection corresponds to free choice of sin. I was also told there’s a difference between perfection and innocence. That Adam and Eve were innocent (ignorant of evil) but not perfect like God (all knowing) before they ate the fruit. Which honestly makes sense to me.
I hope I made sense.
Thank you in advance.
Though many disagree, it is clear that Jesus was unable to sin. Here are two reasons why. First, God cannot sin (Titus 1:2; Heb 6:18; Jas 1:13). Jesus was and is God in the flesh. Thus He cannot sin. Second, perfect humanity cannot sin. Jesus was and is perfect humanity. Thus He could not sin in His perfect humanity or in His deity.
Although Jesus is fully human, He was not born with the sinful nature that we are born with. He certainly was tempted in the same way we are, in that temptations were put before Him by Satan, yet He remained sinless because God is incapable of sinning. It is against His very nature (Matthew 4:1; Hebrews 2:18, 4:15; James 1:13). Sin is by definition a trespass of the Law. God created the Law, and the Law is by nature what God would or would not do; therefore, sin is anything that God would not do by His very nature.

To be tempted is not, in and of itself, sinful. A person could tempt you with something you have no desire to do, such as committing murder or participating in sexual perversions. You probably have no desire whatsoever to take part in these actions, but you were still tempted because someone placed the possibility before you. There are at least two definitions for the word “tempted”:
As well as:
Jesus had one nature, human, but Jesus had two, human and divine. Two natures, one person inseparable. Jesus Human nature did not die.
Any thoughts on these issues, would be helpful.

I would like to add a few.
Another problem with the view that Jesus could have hypothetically sinned; is the fact that you cannot separate the divine and human natures of Jesus. Just like both the human and divine nature died on the cross, it is equally true that to say that in Christ’s human nature he could have hypothetically sinned, that this would not have also included Christ’s divine nature. Jesus is God and God cannot sin.
It does not follow, that just because Jesus could not have sinned that the temptations etc.., that Jesus experienced were not real.


Last edited by Tom; Sat Jan 16, 2021 4:20 PM.