Wed 5 Oct 2011
During this evening’s Internet wanderings, I came across the following comments by Cathy Cooper, proprietress of an atheist blog, on a post titled “The Abundant Evidence for Christian Theism” at The Lord God Exists blog:
Jesus DID sin. He picked corn on the Sabbath (a sin) He told the crowd not to stone the woman for adultery, when stoning was the law (he told the crowd to break one of Yahweh’s laws–which is a sin)
If the Romans did not think him a sinner, they would not have hung him on the cross. Please give a reference to your claim that the Romans were in agreement with Jesus not being a sinner. You won’t have one, because there isn’t one, as the Romans kept no records of him. The claims you make are ad hoc nonsense.
Let’s take a moment to analyze these comments.
First, we should notice how the two claims made in her first paragraph are factually incorrect. She states that Jesus “picked corn on the Sabbath.” This is false; the relevant texts (Matthew 12:1, Mark 2:23, Luke 6:1) specify that it was the disciples who picked and ate the grains, not Jesus. Next, in regards to the stoning of the woman caught in adultery (John 8:1-11) again a factually incorrect statement is made. Notwithstanding that for several hundred years it’s been common knowledge among scholars that those verses are likely a later addition to the text (and are noted as such in any modern translation) nowhere does Jesus tell “the crowd not to stone the woman for adultery.” So unlike what is claimed, he never tells them to “break one of Yahweh’s laws.”
Second, in regards to the Romans being in agreement that Jesus was sinless, in addition to the reference given by The Lord God Exists website author (to Pilate’s declaration in John 18:38 that “I find no basis for a charge against him”) we also could consider the centurion’s declaration recorded in Luke 23:47 after Jesus’ death when he said “Surely this was a righteous man” (or “Certainly this man was innocent” in ESV). But is what is being requested here actual “Roman records” stating that Jesus was sinless? Does it sound at all plausible that the Romans would keep records of crucifying an innocent man?
Finally, the greater problem I see with this general approach is the following: It’s totally arbitrary. The accusation above that Jesus committed sins is argued for from the biblical texts. But if a person considers those biblical text accurate -and they must, because why would a person use texts that they think are inaccurate as the sole basis to build a rational case for anything- then why ignore the many references to Jesus’ sinlessness in the Bible? (Ex, 2 Corinthians 5:21, 1 John 3:5, 1 Peter 2:22, et al.)
This cherry-picking approach, that grasps hold of certain verses while arbitrarily ignoring others, is misguided at best. Why treat certain passages as authentic and others as inauthentic? It doesn’t seem to be for any reason stemming from textual criticism; it’s a capricious method to conveniently ignore whatever doesn’t fit into the person’s paradigm. This method is in entirely “ad hoc” … the exact thing the commenter claims about the original post!
January 9th, 2012 at 12:30 pm
Yes Jesus did sin in fact he sinned a lot which makes me a pretty useless sacrifice!!
January 9th, 2012 at 12:31 pm
sorry duh – I need to correct that Jesus did sin in fact he sinned a lot which makes HIM a pretty useless sacrifice ….
January 12th, 2012 at 12:48 pm
Yvonne, how do you claim to know that Jesus sinned? The biblical records, our oldest and most reliable witnesses about Jesus, claim repeatedly that Jesus did not sin.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:48 pm
1. He called Gentiles “dogs”
2. He started a violent incident with a whip in the temple.
3. He called his mother ‘woman’ and disowned her ‘woman, what is there between me and you?’
4. He taught parents to ‘hate’ their children.
5. He lied and said ‘I go not up to the feast’ and then went in secret.
6. He hung out in the temple knowing his parents would be worried about him, and didn’t care.
He sinned at least 6 times. Its not ‘orthodox’ to admit it. But I guess what’s ‘wrong’ with these Christian who admit it is they are more HONEST than the ‘orthodox’.
May 4th, 2012 at 6:51 pm
“The biblical records…claim repeatedly that Jesus did not sin.”
I am only aware of one verse that say he didn’t sin. 1 PETER 2:22 “Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth” — that is not ‘repeatedly’.
Even so, the 6 sins I listed above certainly were committed according to the gospels.
And I will add another: He said he was God (according to John only) which if it is true is also a sin. We know he was not God because of the first 6, and therefore saying he was God adds a 7th sin.
May 5th, 2012 at 5:25 pm
rey, thank you for taking the time to comment!
First, regarding verses that claim Jesus was sinless, in addition to 1 Peter 2:22 (which for some reason you interpret as meaning Jesus did not sin “repeatedly” when the verse does not specify that?) there is also 1 John 3:5, 2 Corinthians 5:21, Hebrews 4:15, etc. (Another example is when Jesus asks people to convict him of sin, but no one does in John 8:46.)
So it seems as though it’s important to affirm that Jesus did not sin. Regarding the six times you listed, I don’t know why 1 & 3 would be considered sin; at worst they would be considered being a bit harsh but harshness is not the same as sin, and when we study the background of why Jesus spoke as he did (via any in-depth commentary) we can better understand the language he used and why he did so.
Re 2, I don’t understand why this is sin either? It’s not like he went around whipping *people*, and it was because of the sin and defilement of the temple that he acted as he did; sometimes forceful action is necessary to correct sinful behavior. (How many of today’s churches sadly operate like the temple back in Jesus’ time?) Re 4, this is clearly hyperbole and not intended to be taken literally (ex, Jesus made sure his mother was taken care of before his death, John 19:25-27). Re 5, Jesus didn’t go up to the feast right away (John 7:9), nor did he attend the feast in the way the disciples wanted him to, so it was not a lie. Re 6, I don’t see how this was sinful either. Jesus did what he knew he needed to do, despite the fact that his parents were (unnecessarily, as it turns out) worried about him. It may be the case that a person must defy their parents to do what they think is right (almost like a obligatory action vs a supererogatory action) and to do so is not sinful.
But let’s just say for the sake of argument that none of those explanations are persuasive (and we ignore the fact that Jesus, being fully God, a priori could not sin). Here’s the better question: If the Bible, God’s Word, tells us that Jesus did not sin (as I think it clearly does) who are we to say that he actually did sin? The question is this: Is God the judge of what is sin, or are we? Clearly, God is the judge of what is sinful. So if God claims Jesus did not sin I will take his word for it.
In conclusion, I don’t think that any of the six “sins” you’ve listed qualify as sin for the reasons I’ve listed, and even if we thought they did, we should trust what God considers to be sin more than our own personal preferences or culturally shaped perceptions.
May 7th, 2012 at 2:11 pm
About Jesus staying behind at the temple, while his parents travelled home. Scripture tells us he was 12 years lod. According to Hebrew custom of the time, 12 was the age of adulthood. They could marry, etc. In other words, He was entitled to go off on his own. Compare facts with facts and you will realise He was indeed the sinnless offer for you and me.