I was talking with a few friends of mine and was caught off guard about their response.

We were talking about the humanity of Christ and I mentioned that here is a perfect human who never got sick. I was surprised that my friends all thought that Jesus probably got sick. What is your opinion?

I think that this view of Christ being able to be sick has serious consequences. How is it that the wind and seas obey Christ, but germs can get him? Also, if Christ is the lamb of God and our substitution for atonement, does it make sense that He would be perfect and withouth blemish (illness, broken bones, etc.)?

If He could not get sick, how was He able to be beaten and crucified?

They seem closely tied together, ot me. He was FULLY human, He just never sinned.

I would have to agree fully with Jaltus.

I think that this view of Christ being able to be sick has serious consequences. How is it that the wind and seas obey Christ, but germs can get him?

Remember Jesus' statement that with enough faith you can move mountains? Jesus, being filled with the Holy Spirit of God, obviously had this much faith, and I don't think it was the seas and the winds obeying him; they were obeying God the Father, who was responding the Jesus' request of faith to calm the waters.

Why should we associate sickness with being beaten and crucified? Would you believe that you are sick if someone beaten you?

We need to differentiate sickness from Christ's crucifixion due to the reason that He allowed and submitted himself to such brutality out of his own volition. According to Christ when He was arrested, He could have had legions of angels come to His rescue if He desired. Again, Jesus was in full control of himself and all creation obeyed Him. It would be strange that the God-man can control every aspect of nature but viruses and germs.

In response to Believer, were the disciples amazed by Jesus' faith or that He commanded and the wind and sea obeyed? Though my argument is from silence, we do not know how He rebuked the wind and waves. I think it is interesting that the disciples were asking who Jesus was and not amazed by His faith.

I think that the sickness issue goes deeper. I believe that sickness and disease are due to the Fall of mankind just like weeds and hardships. I would find it hard to say that diseases were around before sin entered the earth.

The other aspect of this argument deals with Adam-Christology. If Christ is the second Adam as Paul argues, then would not Christ have similar characteristics to Adam prior to the Fall?

Is dying part of the pre-fall Adam? Of course not! Sin brought death, both physical and spiritual. If Jesus was to be fully human, how could He not experience sickness?

Remember Phil 2:5-11, He emptied Himself and became human. Nowhere is sickness ruled out.

For all we know, He had allergies.

It is an interesting thought Jaltus, but Jesus did not die because of his sin but as a sacrifice He gave up his life.

According to your logic here, since Jesus never experience committing a sin, does this disqualify Him from being truly human especially since all humans sin. How about those individuals who have never been ill, broke a bone, etc., (rare they are but it is a possibility) are they less human? We should not expect Jesus to have to experience ever aspect of life to be human, for no individual has ever experienced everything that life has to offer.

Why does Jesus need to experience sickness to be human? Yes, He "emptied" himself but that does not make him less God does it? Did He every give up his authority? Does He no longer have authority over germs and viruses, but only other aspects of nature? That is the ultimate question. For if he does, then there should be no reason to think that He was sick but if not then we come close to questioning His deity.

Hebrews 7:26-28 states: For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens; who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. For the Law appoints men as high priests who are weak, but the word of the oath, which came after the Law, appoints a Son, made perfect forever.

The term, perfect, resonates with the idea resonated in the Law of Moses especially regarding the sacrifice for sins. Hebrews is full of parallels with the Law, priesthood, and sacrifice. God required that all sacrifices had to be perfect, blameless, without defect, or blemish. In essence, no weaknesses. If Christ is the atonement for our sins, He must be a perfect sacrifice.

Just some food for thought.

It is an interesting thought Jaltus, but Jesus did not die because of his sin but as a sacrifice He gave up his life.

He died because of OUR sin, sin was still the cause of His death. I did not say it had to be His sin, just sin.

According to your logic here, since Jesus never experience committing a sin, does this disqualify Him from being truly human especially since all humans sin. How about those individuals who have never been ill, broke a bone, etc., (rare they are but it is a possibility) are they less human? We should not expect Jesus to have to experience ever aspect of life to be human, for no individual has ever experienced everything that life has to offer.

No, you are assuming that I think sin is part of being human, but I do not. The consequences of sin are part of being human, but sin is something that corrupted humanity, not an integral part of it.

Why does Jesus need to experience sickness to be human? Yes, He "emptied" himself but that does not make him less God does it? Did He every give up his authority? Does He no longer have authority over germs and viruses, but only other aspects of nature? That is the ultimate question. For if he does, then there should be no reason to think that He was sick but if not then we come close to questioning His deity.

He does not need to experience it, but if He was free from the effects of sickness, then why was He not free from all the effects of the fall? You cannot take some and not others.

Hebrews 7:26-28 states: For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens; who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. For the Law appoints men as high priests who are weak, but the word of the oath, which came after the Law, appoints a Son, made perfect forever.

The term, perfect, resonates with the idea resonated in the Law of Moses especially regarding the sacrifice for sins. Hebrews is full of parallels with the Law, priesthood, and sacrifice. God required that all sacrifices had to be perfect, blameless, without defect, or blemish. In essence, no weaknesses. If Christ is the atonement for our sins, He must be a perfect sacrifice.

Ok, that is true, but perfect in what sense? You are assuming physicality as the answer, but that is an assumption. Human "perfection" does not deal with physicality but spirituality. Note the key word "blameless."

He died because of OUR sin, sin was still the cause of His death. I did not say it had to be His sin, just sin.

Sin brought both physical and spiritual death and Christ did not suffer the latter. If sin was the cause, would he not redeem us from both physical and spiritual death. You stated that sin brought death but this is not the cause for Christ's death. For He died on His own volition. He chose to die for us, which we cannot say for ourselves. We do not have such an ability; we can only accept death as inevitable. Nonetheless, Jesus died because that was what was established in the foreshadowing of the sacrificial lamb in the OT for atonement.

He does not need to experience it, but if He was free from the effects of sickness, then why was He not free from all the effects of the fall? You cannot take some and not others.

What other effects of the Fall are you talking about? I do not recall arguing for this. This does remind me though that you never did answer the question of His authority over germs and viruses.

Ok, that is true, but perfect in what sense? You are assuming physicality as the answer, but that is an assumption. Human perfection does not deal with physicality but spirituality. Note the key word blameless.

I do not see "blameless" used in the passage of Hebrews 7:26-28. I believe that "perfect" in this context describes the characteristics listed in verse 26, holy, without fault, undefiled or pure, and separated from sinners. The "separated from sinners" is an interesting description.

It is just as much an assumption that perfection only deals with spirituality. Was not the sacrificial lamb needed to be perfect without blemish? You may think that this is comparing apples to oranges but have the demands from God for atonement changed from OT to NT? I think that perfect could imply both spiritual and physical.

Besides all this I will ask again the question I have posted before. Does He no longer have authority over germs and viruses, but only other aspects of nature (a.k.a calming the storm)? That is the ultimate question. For if he does have authority over this aspect of creation, then there should be no reason to think that He was sick but if not then we come close to questioning His deity.

PuritanD

Jaltus,

Have you given up on this thread? I would really like to hear your answer regarding the last question in my previous post.

PuritanD

I have read nowhere in the bible that Jesus was ever sick.. although He sufered greatly when He was crucified..

I'll be back, was just sick the entire weekend.

Hey Jaltus,

Are you ever going to get around to answering my question???

Just curious...

03-04-2003 @ 09:45 AM post located here
Jaltus:

If He could not get sick, how was He able to be beaten and crucified?

They seem closely tied together, ot me. He was FULLY human, He just never sinned.

According to his own words, Jesus sinned. He stated that anger was the same as murder (Matthew 5:21-22) yet the majority of the posters online (and yes, I recognize the largest screamers and abuses from every theology board also run this crap here) love to state that it's ok to be angry and hate since Jesus himself did. Rather than read Matthew 5:21-22 and accept those words as (since most here can't accept that no where does the bible state that the NT texts are 'Gospel') 'gospel', they come in here and throw hissy fits screaming at every opposing view and using the phrase "God hates a sinner"

The bible can not be gospel for the majority of the posters in this forum since they spend their lives looking for loopholes to justify their actions, their hatreds, their prejudices, their biases, and more than anything else, their pride. They need to be seen as 'biblethumpers' online so they can act like fools offline.

Too many here quote what they refuse to follow. They will undoubtably attack this post, and me, in their efforts to refuse to acknowledge their shortsitedness and own sins that will keep them from "heaven'.

You can not be following Jesus words if you refuse to follow Jesus actions.

If you want to prove Jesus without the bible, walk His walk. That will be louder than anything you can ever say. Until then, you are nothing but pharisees creating more and more laws until no one can enter heaven, including you.

Attack away my friends. I know what is coming because I have seen you do it at every theology thread on the web. I've watched freak ignore child prostitution in Thailand in order to 'exorcise' the spirit houses.

I recognize almost every name here and know how truly scary some of you are since you claim to represent God, yet couldn't possibly act an further from him if you tried.

You want to prove there is a Christ? Become like him. Until that is in your every thought you will only create more atheists.

[quote]
We were talking about the humanity of Christ and I mentioned that here is a perfect human who never got sick. I was surprised that my friends all thought that Jesus probably got sick. What is your opinion?


[comment]
Perhaps this is a strawman - whatever - how does sickness firgure into creation? When were viruses and bacteria created? - by whom? and for what purpose?


[quote]
You want to prove there is a Christ? Become like him. Until that is in your every thought you will only create more atheists.

[comment]
There is more "Christ" in this atheistic body of mine than many, many Christians. But the main pint of this comment is that proof is not given by those that "walk in another's shoes". That act only defines the one walking. I would not be affended by being called "Christ-like" or Buddha-like"- thus I can say that the innate evil in man does not create atheists

Hi Puritan,

Might you consider reading Hebrews Ch 2 and explain why it is NOT saying that Jesus took the same flesh and blood of the children of men and that He likewise shared in the same?

Consider two eagles. Both are flying. One has a five pound weight strapped onto him.

Which would you say is a greater accomplishment?

To say that Christ took our flesh, as our flesh is after the fall, and yet to insist that Jesus rendered a perfect obdience while so laden, isn't that most glorious?

Honestly, your position is bad news. I need a Svior who knows MY experiences. Not one who knows pre-fallen Adam's.

I need a grace that reaches even as low as I am, I need more than a grace that only reaches to pre-fallen Adam.

God Bless,

Tony (o2)