jesus is a sinner?

[Dennis4Jesus]

ok, so ivebeen thnking about this for a whilenow, jesus knew judas was gonna betrayhim, by saying befre the rooster did the roostersound 3 times he wuould betray him, anyway... jesus let judas betray him, letting him do a not so very nice hevanely thingy... and jesus ket him... is jesus bad now?

[cslewislover]

ok, so ivebeen thnking about this for a whilenow, jesus knew judas was gonna betrayhim, by saying befre the rooster did the roostersound 3 times he wuould betray him, anyway... jesus let judas betray him, letting him do a not so very nice hevanely thingy... and jesus ket him... is jesus bad now?

I'm sorry, but the rooster calling had to do with Peter, not Judas. We have free will, which God lovingly gave us, and so often when we make bad choices God lets it happen. Peter was able to see how weak and feeble he really was by his denial of the Lord (the rooster crowed after his three denials). Later, Jesus restored him. Judas was not restored, however.

[jlay]

Work hard so you can present yourself to God and receive his approval. Be a good worker, one who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly explains the word of truth. 2 Tm 2:15

All scripture is God breathed and good for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness.

A little rebuke and correction needed here. You say you've "been thinking for a while now," yet your post is in great error about a specific character and situation. Me thinks you not thinking straight. Thinking is great, when we are thinking with Godly wisdom.

I hesitate to even answer the question, because the question demonstrates error from the onset. One can't expect to understand the scriptures if they lack a basic fundemental knowledge.

First, if you are going to ask a question about scripture then study them that you might have basic understanding. And then commit yourself to prayer, that God will grant you wisdom to KNOW His Word that it might work effectively in you.

[B. W.]

ok, so ivebeen thnking about this for a whilenow, jesus knew judas was gonna betrayhim, by saying befre the rooster did the roostersound 3 times he wuould betray him, anyway... jesus let judas betray him, letting him do a not so very nice hevanely thingy... and jesus ket him... is jesus bad now?

Hi Dennis,

Here are some points to ponder in your search. God is angry with sinners everyday. Yet, he makes the rain fall on the just and unjust.

In Lev 26:3, 14, 15, 18-37 the Lord gave many 'if' statements to them he foreknew would rebel. He gave them choice.

What does that reveal to you about God?

Next, what did Jesus do on that cross and why was it so important? It is here you'll discover your answer my friend to your question.
-
-
-

[caporegime]

In the "Pericope Adulterae" (Gospel of John, 1611 KJV):

{8:1} Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
{8:2} And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
{8:3} And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
{8:4} They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
{8:5} Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
{8:6} This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with [his] finger wrote on the ground, [as though he heard them not.]
{8:7} So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
{8:8} And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
{8:9} And they which heard [it,] being convicted by [their own] conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, [even] unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
{8:10} When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
{8:11} She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

Verses 8:6 and 8:8 clearly indicate a nervous behavior (trying to hide as if guilty of something), not to mention he neither condemns the woman.

[cslewislover]

Caporegime, your response here does not seem to address the topic, and it doesn't even seem to make sense. Read all the verses, and in context.

Also, if you have not seen the Discussion Guidelines for the site, please read them: http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... hp?f=1&t=4

Thanks

[caporegime]

Caporegime, your response here does not seem to address the topic, and it doesn't even seem to make sense. Read all the verses, and in context.

Also, if you have not seen the Discussion Guidelines for the site, please read them: http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... hp?f=1&t=4

Thanks

My apologies ma'am but it's rather 'advanced' (cryptic, lighter side) stuff, also considering there are no other explanation as to why Jesus ever "stooped down and wrote on the ground" twice in the Pericope. I'm just addressing the general issue (as the topic title suggests) of whether or not Jesus is a "sinner". He is but then he is entitled to, IMHO. Btw, I know it's odd I'm a Jesus believer I believe he's God but I am not a Christian.

[cslewislover]

I've never seen any commentaries put out that Jesus was nervous here, that that was the meaning of the text. Lol. And even if he were, being nervous is not a sin, so it's not addressing the topic. And that is not advanced or complicated. Read the texts in context.

Being a Christian means following Christ, obeying Him, making Him LORD of your life. You can believe that Jesus existed and other things about Him, but if you don't believe He was sinless, then His sacrifice isn't what the bible says it is. He wouldn't have been able to die for each of our sins.

Again, I suggest you read the board guidelines and purpose.

http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... f=1&t=2517

Board Purpose
This board is a part of Evidence for God from Science (G&S), a Christian website, which serves to provide a defense and persuasive case for Christianity as well as encouragement and instruction for Christian people and seekers.

Who is the message board intended for?
This message board is publicly open to anyone who wishes to register, and participate in discussions, however it is only intended for a specific audience. It is intended to serve as a place for:

1. Sincere seekers to inquire and ask questions;
2. Christians to give and receive encouragement and instruction; and
3. Non-Christians who are willing to "walk a thin line" and dialogue sensitively and respectfully.

This board is not for those who have strongly made up their mind that Christ is "not" for them; who merely wish to put down, debate, and argue against essential Christian beliefs. As such, those who are Christian, have not made up their minds, or desire civil discussions about Christianity are encouraged to join, while others who merely wish to attack and try to discredit Christianity are discouraged and will be heavily moderated."

[B. W.]

Caporegime, your response here does not seem to address the topic, and it doesn't even seem to make sense. Read all the verses, and in context.

Also, if you have not seen the Discussion Guidelines for the site, please read them: http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... hp?f=1&t=4

Thanks

My apologies ma'am but it's rather 'advanced' (cryptic, lighter side) stuff, also considering there are no other explanation as to why Jesus ever "stooped down and wrote on the ground" twice in the Pericope. I'm just addressing the general issue (as the topic title suggests) of whether or not Jesus is a "sinner". He is but then he is entitled to, IMHO. Btw, I know it's odd I'm a Jesus believer I believe he's God but I am not a Christian.

A Christiian is someone who follows Christ so what do you mean you believe in Jesus but not a Christian?
-
-
-

[Gabrielman]

In the "Pericope Adulterae" (Gospel of John, 1611 KJV):

{8:1} Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
{8:2} And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
{8:3} And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
{8:4} They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
{8:5} Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
{8:6} This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with [his] finger wrote on the ground, [as though he heard them not.]
{8:7} So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
{8:8} And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
{8:9} And they which heard [it,] being convicted by [their own] conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, [even] unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
{8:10} When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
{8:11} She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

Verses 8:6 and 8:8 clearly indicate a nervous behavior (trying to hide as if guilty of something), not to mention he neither condemns the woman.

How did you even come to this conclusion? The main idea here is that instead of answering them, he begins to write, what you may ask? The most likely scerio is that he was writting down the names of people who were there and their sins, then He makes His point. He says "let he who is without sin cast the first stone", and none of them were without sin, save Christ who was not there to kill sinners, but sin. Read it all, the accusers went away and as they were convicted by their own conscience that they were not sinless. This is off topic, though you could start a thread on it.
No Jesus was not a sinner. He knew Judas would betray Him, yes, but He wasn't going to force Judas to not be allowed the chance to use his free will and sin or not sin. What kind of God would do that? Not a good one, Christ allows us to use our free will, even if we use it to sin. Though Christ took our sins to the Cross to set us free, that is true.
God bless!

[caporegime]

I've never seen any commentaries put out that Jesus was nervous here, that that was the meaning of the text. Lol. And even if he were, being nervous is not a sin, so it's not addressing the topic. And that is not advanced or complicated. Read the texts in context.

Well it's just a cue, you can always read between the lines so to speak.

Board purpose understood. Thanks. But just this time please allow me to reply to a couple more respondents.

A Christiian is someone who follows Christ so what do you mean you believe in Jesus but not a Christian?

At the least I don't view him the way Christians do. Perhaps I see a bit of playfulness if not naughtiness hidden in his scheme. Haven't you ever wondered why the word "God" is one 'o' short of the word "Good"? Taken in the same context (the opposite) we'd say "Baad" to indicate added intensity than simply "Bad"?

How did you even come to this conclusion? The main idea here is that instead of answering them, he begins to write, what you may ask? The most likely scerio is that he was writting down the names of people who were there and their sins, then He makes His point. He says "let he who is without sin cast the first stone", and none of them were without sin, save Christ who was not there to kill sinners, but sin. ...

But as you can see he stooped down the second time, and then seemingly oblivious to whether the crowd stayed or gone. Well you see I once had an affair with a married woman (I'm never married and have since repented), and reading the pericope for the second time years ago came as a BIG surprise to me (the first time didn't register at all) --having had a few close calls myself of being found out (with regards to the affair) I could relate to how Jesus responded.

[Gabrielman]

Well it's just a cue, you can always read between the lines so to speak.

Really? You serously think that the authors back then were saying that Jesus was nervous? You do realze how culture has evolved since then and the things now don't mean the same thing as they did back then.

At the least I don't view him the way Christians do. Perhaps I see a bit of playfulness if not naughtiness hidden in his scheme. Haven't you ever wondered why the word "God" is one 'o' short of the word "Good"? Taken in the same context (the opposite) we'd say "Baad" to indicate added intensity than simply "Bad"?

Okay now it is just getting rediculous. Seiously, good and God being one letter off... you realized it is the word of Yahweh right? God is simply a title. Yahweh is the name of our God, whom we love and respect for His kindness and love. It is Yahweh's word, and don't try screwing around with His holy name to make some less than stellar point.

But as you can see he stooped down the second time, and then seemingly oblivious to whether the crowd stayed or gone. Well you see I once had an affair with a married woman (I'm never married and have since repented), and reading the pericope for the second time years ago came as a BIG surprise to me (the first time didn't register at all) --having had a few close calls myself of being found out (with regards to the affair) I could relate to how Jesus responded.

Yes He stooped down once again to finish. He was in the middle of writing and He answered them, face to face in a respectful manner, then continued to write. They realized what was going on and saw that none of them were sinless as Christ had written all their names and sins down, they left. He is all knowing so He knew they would leave, He waited untill they were gone to make His point to the woman. He asked "Where are those thine accusers? Hath no man condemned thee? 11: She said, no man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Nither do I condemn thee: go and sin no more". He did not come here to accuse sinners, but to call them to repentence. He would not stand there and accuse her, He forgave her. He didn't get to finish by the time they asked the question, so He stopped and answered them. He did what was well mannered, at least back then. So far as your own little story... you are not on the same level as God, sorry. He and you are two totaly different beings, so you sinning... and Him sinning... not likely for Him, in fact impossible, you... well we all screw up right? God showed us His perfection and humility, we cannot be that.
God bless!

[zoegirl]

It was very common in those days for teachers and rabbis to write in the sand when teaching their students. It's one of the main reasons one of the most common interpretation of His actions is that He was stooping to write the laws in the sand, much as a rabbi would.

It also explains their sudden silence as they read the Laws condemning them as they were condemning the woman.

It would be similar to a classroom situation when a teacher would start writing on the board in silence when the students were bickering. We wouldn't read any more in that action that Christ stooping to write in the sand.

[cslewislover]

A Christian is someone who follows Christ so what do you mean you believe in Jesus but not a Christian?

At the least I don't view him the way Christians do. Perhaps I see a bit of playfulness if not naughtiness hidden in his scheme. Haven't you ever wondered why the word "God" is one 'o' short of the word "Good"? Taken in the same context (the opposite) we'd say "Baad" to indicate added intensity than simply "Bad"?

"Naughtiness" in his scheme? What kind of naughtiness, and what scheme (salvation for those who believe He is God's son)?? As for the words, well, these are modern English words . . . not the original language. I always thought it was interesting that He said his burden was light (Matt 11:30), which in the context of the verse meant "not heavy," but the word also means "not dark." Since Jesus is light and we are to be light, that meaning could also apply. I always assumed, though, that this double meaning was probably unique to our language.

How did you even come to this conclusion? The main idea here is that instead of answering them, he begins to write, what you may ask? The most likely scerio is that he was writting down the names of people who were there and their sins, then He makes His point. He says "let he who is without sin cast the first stone", and none of them were without sin, save Christ who was not there to kill sinners, but sin. ...

But as you can see he stooped down the second time, and then seemingly oblivious to whether the crowd stayed or gone. Well you see I once had an affair with a married woman (I'm never married and have since repented), and reading the pericope for the second time years ago came as a BIG surprise to me (the first time didn't register at all) --having had a few close calls myself of being found out (with regards to the affair) I could relate to how Jesus responded.

Why would you assume that he was oblivious to the people around him? That doesn't follow to me at all. He could very easily have looked at who was around him before he stooped down a second time, and then saw their feet, heard them, etc. The point of it is this: "7When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." 8Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground. 9At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first . . . " (John 8:7-9). The older you are, the more you're aware of your sin (generally) and, hopefully, the more humble you are about it. In any case, what are you getting at, that you could relate to how Jesus responded? Are you accusing him of some other sin, aside from what you said earlier about him being nervous? Lol. He said to her, "Go and sin no more."

I liked your posts, Gabrielman and Zoegirl.

[caporegime]

Well before anyone sinfully appends (Rev 22:18) to the Scriptures thanks all for your insights, although all these reminds me of a conversation with a Catholic cousin of mine, that he won't accept Jesus as having sex at all. I said what if he has or he wanted to? It's not up to you to decide on that, not unless you consider him to be a dummy.