Weren't we speaking about the sinful desire?

The text says, "that they might not desire to transgress."

And what is the source of the sinful desire? The "inclination to sin."


He wasn't inclined to sin but His flesh was. This does not make sense. The inclination manifests itself in the desire, which of course is in the mind.

Mike,

To me the sinful suggestion is different from the sinful desire. The 10th commandment says that the sinful desire is sin. And, as I see it, sinful inclinations/propensities produce sinful desires.

Sure it makes sense.



This is the same idea.

Satan uses the flesh to control the mind, and God uses the mind to control the flesh. The flesh that we have isn't sinless flesh, but flesh which tempts us to sin. The mind of Christ says "No!" and the temptations of the flesh are resisted.

Before the fall the flesh was in perfect harmony with the mind, so there was no need for the mind to say "no!" to the temptations of the flesh because the flesh didn't generate any temptations. Temptations could only come from an external source.

But since the fall, it's not necessary for us to be tempted by an external source. As Christ was tempted in all points as we are, and especially as He specifically took our fallen nature and accepted our heredity to so do, it follows that He was tempted by His sinful flesh just as we are tempted by ours.

The difference between Him and us is He also said "No!" The mind of Christ held firm, even at the cross, when all evidences were that He had been abandoned. This mind He offers us, to receive by faith, so that we, with sinful flesh as He had, can share in His victory over that flesh.

Sinful flesh can produce sinful desires, if the temptations of the flesh are not denied.

Do you see a difference between a sinful temptation (i.e. a temptation to do something sinful, generated from the flesh) and a sinful desire?

yes, i think of that often.

Here's another one to think about:
Weighed and found wanting by how? Nature.

Didn't somebody write something about "but" showing that what comes next is the opposite of what came before?

Arnold, you've Jones and Waggoner, haven't you? I really don't understand your objections. They've explained in detail the questions you're bringing up, and I would have thought you've read these explanations.

Of course weighed and found wanting is our inscription by nature. How could it be otherwise? We have sinful natures, and that's it, until we are converted. But this isn't true of Christ, is it? I don't understand why you're bringing this up.

What is it you think the issue is? I don't think this has been clarified.

Please allow me to ask some questions.

1.Have you read what Jones, Waggoner and/or Prescott have written on this subject?
2.Do you agree with what they have written?
3.If not, what is it you disagree with?

I think without specifying answers to these questions, we're likely to continue to see issues being brought up that no one disagrees with.


Thanks.

Do suggestions to sin come devoid of desire? That is, can someone be tempted to be unlike Jesus without it producing unwanted desires? Aren't such sinful desires temptations too? Otherwise, how would it be possible to be tempted if the unholy suggestion possessed zero appeal?

Again, however, all such desires and appeal in Christ would be viewed as repulsive and disgusting. The desires of sinful flesh nature are not the desires of the heart of the new man in Christ. The two are in constant conflict. The same was true of Jesus while He walked in sinful flesh. His fallen flesh clamored for sinful expression while Jesus Himself desired to be like the Father.

Is this how you see it?

Amen! Do you apply this to fallen flesh nature too? That is, do you think Jesus takes away the inclination and desire for sinful expression from fallen flesh nature? If so, does it mean sinful flesh nature ceases to tempt from within to be unlike Jesus?


Amen! But we're not talking about sinless beings. Instead, we are talking about people conceived and born in sin, born with sinful flesh nature, a nature that wars within them against the will and law of God, ever tempting them to experience their innocent and legitimate appetites and passions in sinful ways.

Sinless beings are not tempted from within to be unlike Jesus. They have no idea what it is like to live day after day constantly being tempted from within to be unlike Jesus. But Jesus was like us. He was tempted from within to be sinful and selfish and self-serving, to satisfy His innocent and legitimate needs in sinful ways. But, praise the Lord, He never once yielded to the sinful lusts and desires of His fallen flesh nature.

Is this how you see it?

I took the liberty of adding a couple of parenthetical phrases by way of clarification, MM, as I'm sure this is what you meant. I did so because, on the one hand, you said that sinless beings cannot be tempted from within, but Jesus was like us, and was tempted from within. Without the clarification, it might appear you were implying Jesus was not a sinless being, which I know was not your intent.