Page 58 - Christology - Student Textbook

under the greatest provocation; that when He was reviled, He blessed; when He suffered He
threatened not; that He was dumb, as a sheep before its shearers, is held up to us as an example.
Temptation implies the possibility of sin. If from the constitution of His person, it was impossible
for Christ to sin, then, His temptation was unreal and without effect, and He cannot sympathize
142
with His people.

A few points can be noted from Charles Hodge’s point of view. He states that it was possible for
Christ to have sinned. Jesus Christ’s sinlessness in the midst of provocation to sin is a great example
for us.

It is not recorded anywhere in the Scripture that Jesus Christ sinned in any particular temptation.
Apostle James argues that God cannot be tempted by evil and He does not tempt anyone (Jas. 1:13).
In applying that passage to Jesus Christ, we can deduce that in His Deity, Jesus cannot be tempted.

James continues to argue that “each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own
lust” (Jas. 1:14). Notice that James used a noun, epithymia (“desire” or “lust”) from which we draw
our English words, “desire” or “lust”. In 1 Thessalonians 2:17, it is used to communicate Paul’s
passion to visit believers at Thessalonica. This is one of the few places in the New Testament in
which that noun is used as “desire” in a positive light. In most cases (including James 1:14), it is used
to denote sinful lust. In Matthew, it denotes lustful desires over a woman (Matt. 5:27). In John 8:44,
it denotes devil’s desire to continue to lie. In at least 22 times in the New Testament the meaning of
the word is sinful lust.

Jesus was 100 percent human but did not possess a sin nature. Even though He underwent
temptations, there was no possibility for him to have sinned because He was also 100 percent God.
Walvoord argues that while Jesus did not have a sinful nature, He could be tempted to sin because
143
of His human nature. He states that “While the temptation may be real, there may be infinite
144
power to resist that temptation.”

William Greenough Thayer Shedd argues:

Temptability depends upon the constitutional susceptibility, while impeccability depends upon the
will. So far as His natural susceptibility, both physical and mental, was concerned, Jesus Christ was
open to all forms of human temptation excepting those that spring out of lust, or corruption of
nature. But His peccability, or the possibility of being overcome by those temptations, would
depend upon the amount of voluntary resistance which He was able to bring to bear against
them.
145

In conclusion, Jesus was able to be tempted, but He could not have sinned because He was God. His
temptation brought to Him the pressure to sin, but His divine nature overpowered the pressure to
sin. Scriptures argue that Jesus “has been tempted as we are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15b [ESV]).

142 Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology (New York: Scribner, 1877), 2: 457.

143 Ibid, 146-47.
144 Ibid, 147.

145 William Greenough Thayer Shedd, Dogmatic Theology (New York: Scribner, 1891), 2: 336.

57