I've discussed this at length. He had to fight the battle of Gal. 5, just like any other human since Adam's fall.



I've made clear countless times I'm not speaking of pre-natal effects. Regarding the rest of it, Christ, in addition to taking our sinful nature, took our sin. The combination of His taking our sinful nature, and taking our sin, allowed Him to be tempted in all points as we are. Jones discusses this in detail in his 1895 GCB sermons.

Do you believe Jesus was tempted internally in the same way and for the same reasons you and I are? That is, do you believe His sinful flesh nature tempted Him from within to indulge sin? Or, do you think His flesh nature encouraged Him to satisfy His innocent and legitimate needs in sinless ways? Were His internal promptings sinful or sinless?

I'm not sure what you mean, so I am unlikely to be able to provide an accurate response. Particularly, what do you mean by "innocent and legitimate needs"? How is sin ever "innocent?" If you are speaking of something that was NOT sin, then it goes without saying that Jesus would not have sinned. If however it is sin, it cannot be innocent, nor legitimate.

I do not believe Jesus had all of the same temptations we do. I do not believe such would be either possible or necessary. However, I believe that Jesus had the same types of temptation to sin that we do. In other words, temptations to be proud, to indulge in self-centeredness, to seek ease and pleasure in place of carrying out difficult duties, to indulge fleshly appetites, etc. I do not believe the temptations came in the same forms we see today. Nor do I believe Jesus faced the temptations from the same sources. But I believe He did face the same categories of temptations that we do, and that His temptations were more severe than any of us is called to bear.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

You'll notice that our pioneers (Jones, Waggoner, Prescott, Haskell, Ellen White, etc.) did not say that Christ "had" our sinful nature, but that He "took" it. This is to avoid confusion. To say that Christ "had" a sinful nature could be taken as implying He sinned. However, we can safely say that Christ "had" sinful flesh. (this was said) Or that He took fallen humanity with all its inclinations. (this was also said)

His overcoming a "temptation" like this certainly wouldn't help us much.

Have you read Jones and Waggoner?

GC, the SOP tells us that Christ accepted a heredity such as we have so that He could be tempted in all points as we are. What's an example of a "type of temptation" that would require His sharing in our heredity to experience?

I say neither. They are condemned based on their unChristlikeness - their depravity. Selfishness = death, whether it was physically committed or kept hidden within the heart.

Virtually any temptation He had while on earth would be an example. However, the three in the wilderness are good examples.

1) Temptation to be proud and prove He was the Son of God
2) Temptation to be presumptuous to defend His honor and God's
3) Temptation to believe the lie "the end justifies the means" and to escape the burden set before Him of the cross by just a small disobedience

Of course, we might also characterize them simply this way:

1) Temptation to appetite
2) Temptation to self-reliance and reason
3) Temptation to worship false gods

But the Bible says that "he was tempted in all points like as we are" and further defines this as "lust of the eyes," "lust of the flesh," and "the pride of life."

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I don't see why any of these types of temptations would require Christ's having a heredity like ours. Would you explain that please? It seems to me that unfallen Adam could have been tempted in these ways just as easily as Christ was.

Hmmm....and exactly how did unfallen Adam become fallen Adam? And exactly how did unfallen Eve become fallen Eve? And exactly how did unfallen Lucifer become fallen Lucifer? What kind of depraved flesh did God create them with anyway so that they were so easily tempted?

And exactly why is Christ called the "second Adam?"

Christ's flesh did not need to tempt Him, as you so aptly point out.

If you focus so rigidly on Christ "having a heredity like ours," you will eventually come to the conclusion that Christ should have come in our time instead of 2000 years earlier. At least I, with my logic, would do so. If you convince me that Christ needed to have depraved flesh in order to satisfy your requirements, or some Biblical or philosophical ones, then you will have convinced me that Christ only came for the first 2/3 of this earth's history. As a biologist, I can see clearly that we in this generation have weaker flesh than ever, and it is my understanding that we are significantly weaker than those of Christ's era. Would this be fair, then? Should not Christ have been tempted and afflicted "just like me?"

I'm happy to say that it matters not to me how Christ was tempted. What matters is that He died for me, showed me it was possible to live sin-free, and that because of this, I have hope.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.