Mike,

She says, "to take away their inclination to sin, that they might not desire to transgress."
Either you have the desire or you don't. It can't be both.

There are some people who say that Christ's human nature was sinful like ours. If that was the case, He would also have been weighed and found wanting by nature.

So you agree with me that such was not the case for Christ?

If one has the mind of Christ, that means he has no desire to sin in his mind. We agreed so far, I'm pretty sure.

If one's mind has no desire to sin, or as MM put it, sin is totally unappealing, what other part of him can have a desire to sin?

As I mentioned previously, the desire to sin is in the mind. It's not in the armpits, legs, hair, toenails, etc. If it's not in the mind, it's not there.

Did Jesus have a desire to sin?
Does a sanctified Christian have a desire to sin?
Is the answer to these two questions the same?

1.Have you read what Jones, Waggoner and/or Prescott have written on this subject?

Some, not all.

2.Do you agree with what they have written?

Most, not all.

3.If not, what is it you disagree with?

Can't find the quotes right now. But I disagree mostly with Jones' vehemence.

That doesn't make sense to me. If it's not appealing, it's not appealing to all of me. It's not like there's some sin that my mind finds repulsive, but my hand really wants to do it. My hand doesn't have a mind of its own. That concept is similar to my father's idea that he really hates sin, but he often chooses to disobey because his flesh is weak and sinful. It's just a lame attempt to excuse the sinful desires of the carnal heart.

Now, I suppose there are certain chemical imbalances in the body that could result in unholy desires. But that happens in the brain.

This comes to mind:



This sinful nature which Christ took upon Himself is our human nature, isn't it?



No, *He* wouldn't have been. His assumed sinful nature, which is "our sinful nature," would be. His own nature was sinless. He would have only been found wanting had He sinned.



What I believe is the case is that Christ took upon His sinless nature our sinful nature. I think referring to this as "sinful flesh," which was the most common way that Jones, Waggoner, and Prescott put it, is clearer than using the word "nature," as the word "nature" has many different meanings, depending upon the context. I see you use this word (i.e. "nature") in different ways, and I think this may be a significant part of the difficulty in keeping things straight. It's not clear what's being talked about. I think Jones, Waggoner and Prescott were all very clear about this.

As Prescott put it, Christ had sinful flesh, exactly like ours. He was tempted in sinful flesh, exactly like we are, but unlike us, He never said "yes" to these temptations.



Romans talks about this.



as does Galatians:



This is a fight which goes on for every person who would follow the Lord, a fight between the flesh and the Spirit. Christ fought this fight, and overcame by faith. He invites us to share in His victory, to overcome as He overcame.



I believe the quotes from Paul above cover this. Again, Christ's mind was the mind of Christ, but His flesh was our flesh, which is sinful flesh. He had our sinful flesh, with the temptations which such flesh generates, but always said "No!" to those temptations.



I'd like to know what you disagree with. And what you agree with too would be good. I'm speaking specifically to the subject of the humanity of Christ here. Here's a good specific place to consider: http://wordoftruth.seedoftruth.net/books/1/5

Thank you.

Are you suggesting she intended for us to take her to mean Jesus will completely eliminate the inclination and desire to sin so that we are no longer tempted from within to be unlike Jesus, that the unholy "lusts and affections" of our fallen flesh nature are eliminated, that our flesh nature will no longer clamor for sinful expression, that our flesh nature will encourage us to express our innocent and legitimate needs in sinless ways?

I'm not sure I follow you. Are you saying there is no communication between the "mind" of fallen flesh nature and the mind of the new man? That is, are you saying sinful flesh nature cannot tempt believers from within with unholy thoughts and feelings? If so, does that mean believers cannot be tempted from within with unholy thoughts and feelings, that all temptations originate externally through evil agencies and do not appear/arrive as unholy thouhts and feelings? If so, to what do believers attribute the presence of unholy thougths and feelings? Must they assume they are automatically guilty of sinning the instant an unholy thought and feeling pops into mind?


If this happens in the cases of believers are they automatically guilty of sinning? Or, are they guiltless and victorious if they immediately resist such desires unto the honor and glory of God?

If His human nature was found wanting by nature, it was condemned to death by nature (in fact, you say it was condemned by the law from birth).
Christ could only die for us because He didn't have to die for Himself. But how could this be possible if His human nature was condemned to death (in view of the fact that it was His human nature that died when He died for us)?

Mike, I'm not suggesting anything. I'm just asking how it can be possible not to have a desire if you have it.