Did Jesus have the ability to say "No" to the Father?

  • Thread starter Thread starter WileyC1949
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So are people saying Jesus could sin? (By saying no?

Does the catechism say Jesus could sin or that He could say no to the Father anywhere?

I suppose if it did we wouldn’t be having this discussion …shrugs
 
Last edited:
I hope you are not thinking that I said He did not make a sacrifice… He most certainly did. What I said was that if He did not have a choice then there would be no sacrifice. Every action we do has to be deliberately chosen for it to be either good or sinful, a sacrifice or not. Something in which we did not have a personal choice to do or not to do is of no credit to us. This is why Jesus HAD TO HAVE the ability to say no even though He never would have.
Wiley, I refer to what someone mentioned above. Free will choice doesn’t have to be a choice between good and sinful. Jesus chose to go to Jerusalem fully knowing that He could have been in danger there but what if Jesus fled to Egypt, like when He was an infant? That wouldn’t be a sinful choice, it could have been a delay of the inevitable like He did thoughout His life. Why did He chose that moment to submit to the sacrifice? This question has spurred alot of things in my mind.

Was it a sacrifice for Jesus or God the Father’s? John 3:16 (I believe because of Jesus being one with the Father Jesus couldn’t have done anything less, and the sacrifice was destined). Jesus being the sacrificial Lamb… Could a Lamb do anything less?)
Did God the Father have any indication that Jesus would not do His will in the end?
Could Jesus have sinned by not submitting to His death? That offers the question was Jesus able to sin?
Jesus made the decision to submit to Gods will before He was even born so wasn’t the decision made then?
This was Jesus destiny, Jesus asked the Father to release Him from it (letting the cup pass) so how was this His choice?
Having temptation doesn’t mean that a person can do something about it. So for example if I was tempted to eat a donut but was unable to get one does that mean I could make a choice about it?
Where in the catechism or in doctrine does it say that Jesus was able to sin (because sin is a choice against God). Everything I read says Jesus was spotless from sin. Jesus is God so how could Jesus contradict Himself? That’s like saying I’m German when I’m not. The Catechism doesn’t cover this question very well IMO.

I don’t believe you believe that Jesus didn’t sacrifice Himself, I also believe Jesus death was sacrificial. Though what I am struggling with is that part where the sacrifice was a choice between saying yes or no. I don’t believe that Jesus thought He had a choice in that. Is it possible there are things we MUST do in life that cause us pain even though we struggle with it (and they are also sacrifices)? Free will is there not only to say yes or no to God but also to help us choose our path to God.

Anyway I’ll probably have to rectify this in my mind and through prayer. To make it clear I understand Jesus sacrificed His life for us that I’m not questioning. I see I’m not alone with these same thoughts. I would like if someone could answer these questions beyond ‘if it is a sacrifice it must be a choice between yes or no’. I’ll leave things like that. I’m sorry to disrupt anyones day.
 
Last edited:
Rosa read up above. I’m not very good at copying and pasting quotes. I just did it on Wileys but don’t know how I did…🙂
 
Modern technology! I must admit to addicting my kelpie to moving images on the iPad. I don’t have the ability to say no to the worker, even if that worker has 4 legs and whiskers
 
Last edited:
Free will choice doesn’t have to be a choice between good and sinful.
I would think that if something is not good then by definition it would be sinful. But that is not what I am talking about. Jesus wished that He did not have to do the task in front of Him, but because He made the decision to always do the will of the Father He would not have done anything else even though He could have. He would not have fled from it.
Why did He chose that moment to submit to the sacrifice? This question has spurred alot of things in my mind.
That moment was chosen by God and the Word since the dawn of time. If you are not familiar with the YouTube video “The Star of Bethlehem” look it up. By using a planetarium program he was able to look at the night sky from Baghdad from (I forget the date) 4 B.C. It identifies that there actually WAS a celestial event which could easily be interpreted as a virgin giving birth to a king in Judea. The significance that it was announced in the stars since the dawn of time did not escape the Magi (astrologers) and it set them on their journey. So Jesus’ birth, life, death and resurrection were not by random chance, but a planned event from the beginning.

The timing was perfect. The Old Testament essentially is the story of one people’s growth in understanding of God. It begins with very primitive notions. They did not believe in monotheism, they accepted that other gods existed but theirs was the “Most High God”. This can be seen when Moses rod changed into a snake, but the Egyptian priests changed their rods into snakes as well by the power of their gods. Moses’ snake eating the others shows dominion over them. God was seen as a sort of super-human with all of the traits of man including anger, revenge, sorrow, etc. It was not until the Babylonian Exile that marked the birth of Judaism. It was during that time that the Torah was compiled from oral traditions and older manuscripts and the firm belief in monotheism came to be. It was not until just before the time of Christ that the view of God changed from one of a being to be feared to one of love. Jesus put a rocket pack on that and launched it.
 
Was it a sacrifice for Jesus or God the Father’s?
Neither. God needs nothing from us. Jesus’ sacrifice was for us. God is love. Love by its basic nature MUST be shared. Hence the reason He created us in His image as spiritual beings. Love is best when it is returned, but it cannot be forced and remain love. So God could not create us “already loving”; that would be a contradiction. It is my firm belief that is the reason that He created the physical realm; so we could learn to love selflessly. Jesus’ message, His suffering, death and resurrection showed us how we can be more like Him if we live our lives in love and as a result be one with God.
Having temptation doesn’t mean that a person can do something about it. So for example if I was tempted to eat a donut but was unable to get one does that mean I could make a choice about it?
Sure it does. None of us can be tempted to do something which we cannot do. I am not tempted to fly to the moon because it is beyond my capability. I am tempted to drive cross-country because I can do that. You are tempted to eat donuts only because you know you can drive down to the shop and get some. If you couldn’t get them you would not be tempted. You may wish you had some but that is not the same thing.
Where in the catechism or in doctrine does it say that Jesus was able to sin (because sin is a choice against God). Everything I read says Jesus was spotless from sin. Jesus is God so how could Jesus contradict Himself? That’s like saying I’m German when I’m not. The Catechism doesn’t cover this question very well IMO
Read #475 again: "Similarly, at the sixth ecumenical council, Constantinople III in 681, the Church confessed that Christ possesses two wills and two natural operations, divine and human. They are not opposed to each other, but cooperate in such a way that the Word made flesh willed humanly in obedience to his Father all that he had decided divinely with the Father and the Holy Spirit for our salvation. Christ’s human will “does not resist or oppose but rather submits to his divine and almighty will.”

To submit means to make a conscious decision to do something wanted by another. It was always His decision but He chose to always do the will of the Father. He could have chosen to do something else but because of His total commitment to the Father He never would have.
I don’t believe that Jesus thought He had a choice in that. Is it possible there are things we MUST do in life that cause us pain even though we struggle with it (and they are also sacrifices)? Free will is there not only to say yes or no to God but also to help us choose our path to God.
I would agree. Jesus’ human will might be opposed, but because Jesus would always choose to do the will of God He had to obey. I agree with your last sentence here as well.
 
I would think that if something is not good then by definition it would be sinful. But that is not what I am talking about. Jesus wished that He did not have to do the task in front of Him, but because He made the decision to always do the will of the Father He would not have done anything else even though He could have. He would not have fled from it.
So what you are saying appears to be in agreement with me. His decision was His free will choice to die for us. That was a free will decision, a merciful offering to redeem us. BUT Jesus didn’t have to do this He did it out of love for us. I don’t think it would be a sin if He didn’t. This was given freely, not a choice between yes or no. Now if you compare it to what Adam and Eve did, Jesus yes versus Adams no I can see that but we’re not talking about Adam, we’re talking about Jesus Son of God. Please bear with me.
 
That moment was chosen by God and the Word since the dawn of time. If you are not familiar with the YouTube video “The Star of Bethlehem” look it up. By using a planetarium program he was able to look at the night sky from Baghdad from (I forget the date) 4 B.C. It identifies that there actually WAS a celestial event which could easily be interpreted as a virgin giving birth to a king in Judea. The significance that it was announced in the stars since the dawn of time did not escape the Magi (astrologers) and it set them on their journey. So Jesus’ birth, life, death and resurrection were not by random chance, but a planned event from the beginning.
So it was the Hour. I understand that.
 
Sure it does. None of us can be tempted to do something which we cannot do. I am not tempted to fly to the moon because it is beyond my capability. I am tempted to drive cross-country because I can do that. You are tempted to eat donuts only because you know you can drive down to the shop and get some. If you couldn’t get them you would not be tempted. You may wish you had some but that is not the same thing.
But what if I were homebound or on a desert island and I couldn’t get access to donuts? hehe… Okay think about this what if a person was a gambler but yet couldn’t because he was in prison. Could that be a struggle for the person? Could we visibly see the person struggling with that temptation? Temptation itself becomes a visible struggle. I would say Jesus had some of that in the desert, where there was no water, or way to get out. He struggled and we see that struggle many times. The devil makes us struggle but it’s all false, there’s nothing to gain from what the devil has to offer. Please bear with me.
 
Read #475 again: " Similarly, at the sixth ecumenical council, Constantinople III in 681, the Church confessed that Christ possesses two wills and two natural operations, divine and human. They are not opposed to each other, but cooperate in such a way that the Word made flesh willed humanly in obedience to his Father all that he had decided divinely with the Father and the Holy Spirit for our salvation. Christ’s human will “does not resist or oppose but rather submits to his divine and almighty will.”

To submit means to make a conscious decision to do something wanted by another. It was always His decision but He chose to always do the will of the Father. He could have chosen to do something else but because of His total commitment to the Father He never would have.
So the free will choice to die for our sins was a decision. I get that and believe that. I still have to let this resonate in my soul.
 
But what if I were homebound or on a desert island and I couldn’t get access to donuts?
Then you would have a desire for donuts, but you would not be tempted because it would be impossible to get them. I would LOVE to go to the moon, but I am not tempted to do it because it is beyond my capability.

I agree with everything else you said.
 
Neither. God needs nothing from us. Jesus’ sacrifice was for us. God is love. Love by its basic nature MUST be shared. Hence the reason He created us in His image as spiritual beings
Yes I agree I stated my question incorrectly. I should have said: Was the sacrifice made by Jesus or by the Father. I would say both but it makes me think about the unity of the Father and Son and how the Son abides the Father in all things and how it would be impossible for Jesus, the Son of Man to go against this heavenly union. But I know Jesus submits to the Will of the Father even though it was a monumentally difficult task leading to His ultimate death so both suffer for our sins to provide Mercy for us.
 
Okay please Father David? It seems like such a simple question and shouldn’t be hard to find. Is it written in the catechism?
Not every yes-or-no question has a yes-or-no answer printed directly in the Catechism.

As I see it, it’s written in the Gospels—the Temptation in the Desert.

This is one of those situations where we have to carefully consider the question itself, even though it seems a very straightforward yes-or-no type.

One can re-read this thread to see how we’ve been discussing it already, so I’m not going to repeat all the details.

Yes, He could have sinned, in the sense that being fully human, it was possible.

At the same time, however, since His human and divine natures cooperated fully and completely with each other, and since sin is a violation of God’s will, that means that such a sin couldn’t have occurred.

I suppose another way to put it is “yes, it was possible, but it never would have happened”.

There is a problem inherent in this type of discussion when we ask “what if something in salvation history had happened differently?” First, it didn’t happen that way. We can discuss it and speculate, but speculate is all we can do. And we’re always going to reach the point where it becomes fruitless because salvation history simply did not happen that way.
 
After (name removed by moderator) said what she said, you said:

“Yes, I could live with that.”

In your last post there, you said He could have sinned.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
40.png
goout:
A passage isn’t an either/or proposition. Genesis has historical elements, and at the same time , it has deeper spiritual senses. These two things do not contradict one another.
Faith and reason are integrated and inform one another, and scripture expresses this.
Granted Genesis has historical elements, but it is not a history book. The first five books of the Bible is a blend of four different oral traditions. These were stories which had been told and retold for hundreds and perhaps thousands of years before the were even written.
Where did I dispute any of that???
That is in fact, the very point I am trying to make to you.
This is what you wrote that I responded to:
Actually it is connected to this thread because IF the evolutionary theory is correct in any form (including divine guidance) then the historical nature of the A&E story has to be questioned, and along with it the doctrines based on the story as being historical. As I said I do not see how evolution could be accurate as it presently stands probably for the same reasons as you. If it did occur it had to be directed by a mega-intelligence, and there actually IS scientific evidence of that.
 
After (name removed by moderator) said what she said, you said:

“Yes, I could live with that.”

In your last post there, you said He could have sinned.
And in the more recent post, I phrased it this way:
I suppose another way to put it is “yes, it was possible, but it never would have happened”.
As I’ve written several times now, these questions that are asked along the lines of “what if the events of the Gospel had been different?” really serve no purpose because all we can do is make logical circles (it couldn’t have happened because it didn’t happen that way).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
FrDavid96 thank you for your reply and it enlightened me very much. When you said: Yes, He could have sinned, in the sense that being fully human, it was possible.

I also like what you said about the what if. In my opinion we could say it’s Gods providence and leave it at that…🙂 I mean it happened this way so why go back and re-think it. I do enough of that re-thinking already and it drives my husband batty…lol Jesus I trust in You! This happened the way it happened because God loves us and theres no need to go back to a what if.

Thank you God, Thank you Father David, thank you all… You’re a blessing!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top