Did Jesus have a fallen human nature?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tomo_pomo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
But angels are bound to time in some way, are they not, since some of them used their free will to revolt against G-d, with Lucifer as their leader? In other words, the bad angels cannot repent but they did change from good to evil early on.
 
Last edited:
meltzerboy2 said:
But angels are bound to time in some way, are they not, since some of them used their free will to revolt against G-d, with Lucifer as their leader? In other words, the bad angels cannot repent but they did change from good to evil early on.
Click to expand...
All those events basically occurred before time as we know it began, or rather, before the material universe itself began with the Big Bang, which is the origin of time for us. The days of Genesis indicate the order in which everything happened (They aren’t literal days since they are from G-d’s perspective and for Him, a day is like a thousand [or more] years. Ps. 90:4)
 
meltzerboy2 said:
All right. I had thought that Jesus’ temptation meant He had some inclination toward sin even though He did not actually complete that inclination. So you’re saying the temptation remained an external force which was not entertained by Jesus. I take it then there was no struggle within Jesus whether or not to yield to the temptation.
Click to expand...
Correct. Only the temptation did remind the poor guy how hungry he was 😃
 
All spirits had free will. In Catholic belief, they made one irrevocable choice of whom they would serve. The devil and 1/3 of the angels stated, as it is put in Latin, “non serviam” or that they would not serve God. They were formed perfectly, as were Adam and Eve, but had the free will, which they misused in their rebellion.

So, the devil, who is temptation, tried in his arrogance and failed to seduce Jesus with promises of everything the world offered.
 
Last edited:
Actually, now he is sin, he constitutes sin, as he emptied himself of all that is good. Swiss theologian Karl Barth called him “die Null” - the zero, the nothing.
 
tomo_pomo said:
This is what I understand so far:
Original sin is cause of our fallen human nature. Because of that we are inclined to sin.

So if Jesus was true human did he also acquire our fallen nature? If he didn’t why was he tempted if temptation implies inclination to sin. If He wasn’t inclined to sin how He could then participate in our human nature without such an important aspect of our nature?
Click to expand...
Jesus Christ was born without original sin, by virtue of his divinity. Being born with original sin means an absence of the state of sanctifying grace at conception. A baptized Christian has the state of sanctifying grace, provided it was not lost after that time. A baptized Christian experiences temptations even though there is the state of sanctifying grace.
 
Last edited:
MarysLurker said:
40.png
Wesrock:
Traditional teaching on angels is that their intellect is superior to our own (in fact, what they essentially are are intellects, whereas we also have bodies). They were created with infused knowledge. Their first “act” upon existing was to reflect upon their knowledge and being and God. They then selected the objects of their wills. Most of the angels chose God as their highest end. Some didn’t.
Click to expand...
And since angels have no bodies, they aren’t bound to time the way we are: so their decision between “smoking” or “non-smoking” is permanent. This is why the devil can’t repent.
Click to expand...
It’s not so much them being aeviternal but more about the lack of bodies and them just being intellects. There’s no discursive thinking in angels, it’s not a material process like in us. They also don’t have animal appetites changing minute to minute, nor senses like we have senses.

It’s been awhile since I’ve read Aquinas on this point, though.
 
Human nature didn’t change with the Fall. It simply lost its vital connection or union with God which man is lost, dead, wounded without. Jesus always experienced this union; He did not know the state we call “original sin”.
 
Interesting question for sure but in the end, curiosity often gets the best of us, this is what causes most temptations
 
MarysLurker said:
Yes to all. He took on an immaculately conceived body from His Mother which became glorified at the Resurrection. Same thing will happen to all of us when we rise (unless we are lost).
Click to expand...
Did he feel hunger? Is hunger consequence of fallen nature?
Did he feel attraction to girls as we most of the men do, especially in teenage?
If not, then how is his temptation comparable to ours who are not only tempted, but inclined to follow temptation and sin?
We know the pleasures of sin. Did he know too?
 
tomo_pomo said:
Did he feel hunger? Is hunger consequence of fallen nature?
Did he feel attraction to girls as we most of the men do, especially in teenage?
If not, then how is his temptation comparable to ours who are not only tempted, but inclined to follow temptation and sin?
We know the pleasures of sin. Did he know too?
Click to expand...
Unlike Adam and Eve, Jesus and Mary had immaculate human nature in a fallen world.

When you look at a person… you don’t have to see what’s inside. And if you catch a glimpse… it’s very slight. But They… they saw everything.

Can you imagine looking at a person and seeing all their sins?

If anything it made it harder to get by!
 
Last edited:
tomo_pomo said:
40.png
MarysLurker:
Yes to all. He took on an immaculately conceived body from His Mother which became glorified at the Resurrection. Same thing will happen to all of us when we rise (unless we are lost).
Click to expand...
Did he feel hunger? Is hunger consequence of fallen nature?
Did he feel attraction to girls as we most of the men do, especially in teenage?
If not, then how is his temptation comparable to ours who are not only tempted, but inclined to follow temptation and sin?
We know the pleasures of sin. Did he know too?
Click to expand...
Actually, an interesting discussion point. In some eastern theology, the main/only consequence of Adam and Eve’s sin to their nature was that they went from immortal to mortal. And it’s their mortality that makes men susceptible to temptation of hunger and other pleasures or needs of the flesh. If we go with this much (while acknowledging Catholic teaching goes further) and think of Jesus, then we can think of it this way: Jesus, though without sin, humbled himself to accept a mortal nature like ours. As such, he did feel hunger and other things as we do (and not like Adam and Eve before the Fall). However, even so, he still never sinned, conquering them in a way we often fail to do.

My understanding of Saint Thomas Aquinas’ position on Jesus and temptation is that he did feel hunger and attraction and pain as we do, but still never sinned in thought or deed. As a man Jesus truly was after God’s own heart.
 
Last edited:
That is not quite my understanding. The absence of concupiscence, immortality, and infused knowledge that Adam and Eve were given were preternatural gifts that God gave man which were not part of our human nature, we had no right to them based on our create nature. They were taken away as a result of the fall. Death, concupiscence, and lack of knowledge were not inflicted punishments, they were gifts that were taken away.
 
Certainly Jesus was subject to death, so that part of original was with Him. But he was never without grace, and never suffered from concupiscence.
 
tomo_pomo said:
So if Jesus was true human did he also acquire our fallen nature?
Click to expand...
Hebrews 4:15

“For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are–yet he did not sin.”
tomo_pomo said:
If He wasn’t inclined to sin how He could then participate in our human nature without such an important aspect of our nature?
Click to expand...
Sin is not necessary to be human. Neither Jesus nor Mary inherited Original Sin. Adam and Eve were also created pure before they chose to sin and precipitated the Fall.
 
@tomo_pomo Temptation does not imply inclination to sin. Concupiscence is the lack of integrity between our soul and our base desires. That is the inclination to sin, that we can choose sin with little/no temptation. The devil certainly tempted Adam and Eve and they had no inclination to sin.
 
Last edited:
meltzerboy2 said:
Do you mean the devil’s pride and arrogance led to his own temptation or to the temptation of Jesus, or both? If the former, where did the devil’s pride and arrogance come from if he was created as Lucifer, one of the most majestic and perfect of G-d’s creatures?
Click to expand...
this scenario in the Gospels gives us a glimpse into the thoughts of an angel with the ability to “become”, hence a decision making process. Within this thought process, God places free will which culminates in the ability to make a decision. It appears they are capable of determining a course of action based on conclusions they’ve drawn about God in relation to themselves or anyone else, including us. Think about it.

God did not create the arrogance of a fallen angel, the angel created their own realisms, they either looked to themselves or they focused their gaze on God. Their conclusions formed their conscience, and conscience formed their being and free will animated their actions.

To your first question, both. To your second, they are not unlike us and although we are “a little lower than the angels”, God made that which was inferior, superior, because all was “placed under their feet and was made subject” to us.

Angels were made to serve God, and Lucifer serves a purpose for mankind to choose the Lord God which cannot be possible without free will, so it was allowed by God. Christ the First Fruit demonstrated to us that it may be overcome. How? Awareness of the ploys of the devil. Period. And how do we know this? Because “God cannot be tempted by evil, nor can He tempt anyone”. Everything is a plan for our salvation.
 
Catholics will tell you that Jesus did not have original sin because Mary was preserved from sin. But, of course, we know from the Bible that this isn’t true for two reasons: First, that Mary was a sinner, just like everyone else. Second, that Romans 5 says the sin nature is passed down through the father, not the mother. Because Christ did not have an Earthly father, there was no sin nature to be passed down. Simply put, Jesus did not have original sin because His Father did not have original sin to pass on to Him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top