S
SandwichOrder
Guest
God is omni-everything. Can he commit a sin if he can do everything and anything?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
C
cjkaupke
Guest
Sin is not a being; it is a lack of being.
Being is good, therefore lack of being is bad. God is completely good, so He is completely Being. Therefore, no sin can pertain to God, since Being cannot not be.
Being is good, therefore lack of being is bad. God is completely good, so He is completely Being. Therefore, no sin can pertain to God, since Being cannot not be.
S
SandwichOrder
Guest
I’m not understanding…how can sin be a lack of being. Kissing my mother and hitting my brother, one sinful and one not, are just as much actions of being as each other.Sin is not a being; it is a lack of being.
Being is good, therefore lack of being is bad. God is completely good, so He is completely Being. Therefore, no sin can pertain to God, since Being cannot not be.
My question stems from Jesus being tempted in the Wilderness.
Was He capable of sinning but chose not to sin?
Or, since He ia God, the tempting was only aymbolic of what we wpuld have go go through because God couldn’t sin?
T
Thorns
Guest
From the answers Ive read a lot as of late, if God does something, it isnt a sin.
So if God kills someone, it isnt murder nor is it a sin.
So if God kills someone, it isnt murder nor is it a sin.
T
TK421
Guest
No, God isn’t capable of sin. Sin is an act of rebellion against God’s divine will, so it wouldn’t make any sense to say that God would sin. He is eternally perfect in love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.
S
SandwichOrder
Guest
So God is incapable of something? How do we reconcile this with His being able to do anything?
T
TK421
Guest
There is really nothing to reconcile to begin with. It is a part of our teaching that God cannot sin, because he is perfect and cannot be divided against himself. Whoever is using this as an argument against the Christian God is taking something which we don’t believe in the first place and then using it as an argument to say that our beliefs are inconsistent, which of course is silly.
There is an uncountable list of things that God cannot do, more numerous than the sands of the Earth. He cannot fail.
There is an uncountable list of things that God cannot do, more numerous than the sands of the Earth. He cannot fail.
S
SandwichOrder
Guest
My theology teacher said it was possible because God can do anything.
Was Jesus really tempted then if He was God and therefore incapable of sinning?
Was Jesus really tempted then if He was God and therefore incapable of sinning?
T
TK421
Guest
He truly was tempted, since he was a man, but he was also truly beyond caving to that temptation, because the Incarnation was the plan of God. Remember the line at Mass “he shared in all things but sin”.
C.S. Lewis was an Anglican but he describes this rather well:
"I have heard some people complain that if Jesus was God as well as man, then His suffering and death lose all their value in their eyes, ‘because it must have been so easy for Him’. Others may (very rightly) rebuke the ingratitude and ingraciousness of this objection; what staggers me is the misunderstanding it betrays. In one sense, of course, those who make it are right. They have even understated their own case. The perfect submission, the perfect suffering, the perfect death were not only easier to Jesus because he was God, but were possible only because he was God. But surely that is a very odd reason for not accepting them? The teacher is able to form the letters for the child because the teacher is grown-up and knows how to write. That, of course, makes it easier for the teacher; and only because it is easier for him can help the child. If it rejected him because ‘it’s easy for grown-ups’ and waited to learn writing from another child who could not write itself (and so had no ‘unfair’ advantage’), it would not get on very quickly. If I am drowning in a rapid river, a man who still has one foot on the bank may give me a hand which saves my life. Ought I to shout back (between my gasps) ‘No, it’s not fair! You have an advantage! You’re keeping one foot on the bank’? That advantage - call it ‘unfair’ if you like - is the only reason why he can be of any use to me. To what will you look for help if you will not look to that which is stronger than yourself?" (Mere Christianity, page 60)
C.S. Lewis was an Anglican but he describes this rather well:
"I have heard some people complain that if Jesus was God as well as man, then His suffering and death lose all their value in their eyes, ‘because it must have been so easy for Him’. Others may (very rightly) rebuke the ingratitude and ingraciousness of this objection; what staggers me is the misunderstanding it betrays. In one sense, of course, those who make it are right. They have even understated their own case. The perfect submission, the perfect suffering, the perfect death were not only easier to Jesus because he was God, but were possible only because he was God. But surely that is a very odd reason for not accepting them? The teacher is able to form the letters for the child because the teacher is grown-up and knows how to write. That, of course, makes it easier for the teacher; and only because it is easier for him can help the child. If it rejected him because ‘it’s easy for grown-ups’ and waited to learn writing from another child who could not write itself (and so had no ‘unfair’ advantage’), it would not get on very quickly. If I am drowning in a rapid river, a man who still has one foot on the bank may give me a hand which saves my life. Ought I to shout back (between my gasps) ‘No, it’s not fair! You have an advantage! You’re keeping one foot on the bank’? That advantage - call it ‘unfair’ if you like - is the only reason why he can be of any use to me. To what will you look for help if you will not look to that which is stronger than yourself?" (Mere Christianity, page 60)
S
SandwichOrder
Guest
Thabk you.
R
Richard_White
Guest
The Answer Is: NOOOO!!!
The very definition of a sin is something, whether by commission or omission, is contrary to God’s law. Well, God, who is Being itself, is perfect in everything and his law was laid down for man to obey, not for him and that law is tied completely to his will.My theology teacher said it was possible because God can do anything.
Was Jesus really tempted then if He was God and therefore incapable of sinning?
Any deed therefore that God does is according to his will, and therefore not contrary to his nature. The notion that God can do something against his will is a contradiction, and just like all contradictions, is nothing; it doesn’t exist.
And as we all know, (nothing) is impossible with God.
You’ve gotta love Peter Kreeft.
C
Cricket2
Guest
God is the opposite of sin, therefore He cannot sin, nor would He.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.