Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

By Hank Walker | Pastor at Peach City Fellowship

A key theological question is whether Jesus COULD HAVE sinned. This question is complex and demands careful consideration of various biblical truths. Classical Christology maintains that Jesus faced temptation, like all other humans, but was INCAPABLE of sinning. This inability to sin is called “impeccability”—from the Latin “non posse peccare,” which is literally “not possible to sin.” Conversely, some argue that while Jesus never sinned, he had the ABILITY to sin or not to sin, a position called “peccability”—from “posse non peccare,” meaning “possible not to sin.” Both positions distinguish Christ from the rest of FALLEN humanity, which is irrefutably known to be “non posse non peccare”—”not possible not to sin.” Confused yet?

The first two viewpoints acknowledge that Jesus never actually sinned, as Scripture clearly states. The real question is whether he COULD HAVE sinned. For instance, Jesus DID experience genuine temptations (Luke 4:2; Hebrews 4:15). The temptations he faced, however, were different from those of ordinary humans. For instance, Jesus was tempted by Satan to turn stones into bread and to misuse his divine powers for personal gain. His unique nature meant that, while he experienced true temptations, he had no predisposition (desire) to sin, unlike the rest of us who DO have a sin nature.

The discussion is further complicated by the understanding that God cannot be tempted by evil (James 1:13). This raises questions about the relationship between Christ’s divine and human natures. If Jesus could not sin, how does he relate to humanity? Impeccability argues that because Jesus is the divine Son, his nature renders him incapable of sinning. Sin is an act of the PERSON, and since Christ is a divine Person, he cannot yield to temptation.

The impossibility of Jesus sinning is rooted in His Trinitarian relationship with the Father and the Holy Spirit. As the Son of God, He willingly obeyed the Father, making the notion of sinning unthinkable. This understanding not only affirms the integrity of God’s redemptive purpose but also highlights why the last Adam, Jesus, is superior to the first Adam (Romans 5:12-21; 1 Corinthians 15:22, 44-49). The redemption He offers is contingent on Him being an unblemished sacrifice/substitute. Jesus’ atoning work necessitated Him being tempted (as the first Adam was) yet without sin. Aren’t you glad He COULD NOT sin?

Grace and Peace, y’all.

Soli Deo Gloria