Could Jesus Have Sinned when He took on a Human Nature?
This is a spinoff from our Solving Interpretive Challenges in the Book of Hebrews, a collection of articles examining a few of the most common interpretation difficulties and challenges that often puzzle readers of the book of Hebrews. In the Spring of 2010, I wrote an article entitled “Was Jesus Perfect?” In March of 2024, I did a follow-up article entitled Why Jesus Had to be Perfect. We know from these articles, and much more important, from the Bible, that Jesus was perfect and without sin during His time on earth, from His incarnation to His death, resurrection, and ascension.
In this article however, we want to address the question of whether or not it was even possible for Him to sin. In addition, if He could not have sinned, does this minimize His free will or the accomplishment of not sinning? We’ll attempt to answer this and other related questions in this article that was written during Passion Week of 2025. We delayed the publishing of the article until January of 2026 to allow for the completion of the other articles referenced on this page.
Related Article: The Hypostatic Union - How Can a Man be God?
Could Jesus Have Sinned when He took on Humanity? (Hebrews 2:17-18; 4:14-16)
We would like to take a two-step approach to this question. First we look at the question in light of the doctrine of the absolute versus the ordained power of God.
The Doctrine of the “Absolute” versus “Ordained” Power of God
To begin to answer our subject question, we must first be familiar with the doctrine of the “Absolute” versus “Ordained” Power of God, a sub-doctrine of the doctrine of the Sovereign Power of God. This sub-doctrine was originally formulated by theologians in the Medieval ages, although it draws its biblical basis from Romans 13:1-2. The first theologian to teach this sub-doctrine was likely Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274), arguably the most important theologian of the medieval period. Aquinas taught that, in respect to God’s sovereign power and authority, we could distinguish between His absolute power (potentia absoluta) and his ordained power (potentia ordinata). Later theologians, particularly during the period of the Reformation, continued to further develop it over the centuries.
We have written a more detailed and encompassing article on the The Sovereign Power of God, in which we also take a deeper dive into this important sub-doctrine, but we will include a very brief summary here as it relates to answering our subject question:
The doctrines of God’s absolute and ordained power were primarily formulated to address the doctrine of God’s sovereign power, particularly over, and in relation to, His creation. Basically, it attempts to explain what God can do versus what He will or won’t do. In His absolute power, God is free to do anything that is logically possible, with a few exceptions such as doing something that is inherently contradictory or that would violate established definitions (such as making square with three sides) or logical impossibilities since either would devolve into absurdity. It also includes the ability to do things that He would never ever do, such as, for example, lie, be unjust, stop loving us etc. However, in His ordained power, He self-limits Himself to what He chooses to do in His created order. In short, God’s absolute power is almost without limit (includes things that He could, but would never do) while His ordained power is self-limited or self-restrained according to His divine nature, will and purpose.
Since Jesus was also God, the doctrine would also also apply to the power of Christ. Thus, the short answer to our subject question is that in His absolute power, Jesus certainly had the power to sin, but He did not. Thus we must consider two other doctrines.
Two Views: Impeccability versus Peccability
Our subject question remains unanswered at this point. In fact, our question now becomes, could Christ have sinned in His ordained power while he was human? There are two basic doctrinal views. First, the doctrine of impeccability holds that Jesus was incapable of sinning and the doctrine of peccability holds that Jesus was capable of sinning in His humanity. It is critical to note that both camps agree that Jesus was truly tempted and that He remained sinless. Of that, there is no debate. To deny He was tempted is heresy (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2) The only debate is over His ability to sin in his ordained power.
For this reason he had to be made like them, fully human in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted (Heb 2:17-18).
Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has ascended into heaven, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin. Let us then approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need (Heb 4:14-16).
Some critics see a contradiction in the statement that Christ was fully human in every way, and with the fact that He did not sin. They contend that if Christ was truly human like us, either He was not truly tempted, based on James 1:13-14 that reads, When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me”. For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death. Thus, they argue that since Jesus is God, and God can’t be tempted, then Jesus was not tempted to sin. However, this passage is addressing the divine nature of God (Father, Son and Spirit), but Jesus also had a human nature, and it is within His human nature that He was tempted. Hebrews 4:15 above counters that argument, emphatically verifying that He was indeed tempted, and that He did not sin. On that the Bible is absolutely clear and without question. Yet that gets us no closer to answering whether or not Jesus was capable of sinning, since the Scriptures do not specifically answer whether or not it was possible for Him to have committed a sin. So let’s take a look at the various arguments from both sides.
We first examine the beliefs of the peccability position, the belief that Jesus could have sinned. This view is popular with universalists (those who believe that all humans will be saved) and those who hold to Arminianism. This belief system that emphasizes human free will and God's desire for all to be saved was named after Jacobus Arminius (1560-1609). It is popular among Wesleyans, Methodists, and Pentecostals. Those with this view believe that Jesus, similar to Adam and Eve before the fall, had the capacity to sin. A primary argument is, for Jesus to be truly tempted like us. required the possibility that He could fail. In addition, most believe that Jesus used his free will to perfectly rely on the Holy Spirit to keep from committing a sin. Many see this as a greater victory over Satan because, it was possible for Him to fail. That is, He actually had to make a deliberate moral choice in order to remain sinless.
Next we examine the beliefs of the peccability position, the belief that Jesus could not have sinned. This is actually the majority position. It is held by the bulk of the Reformed Protestant theologians, along with a majority of Evangelicals, the Roman Catholic Church, and most Orthodox theologians. Those in this camp point to Jesus dual human and divine natures (doctrine of the Hypostatic Union). Those with this view point out that Jesus, being God incarnate, sinned would mean that God could have sinned.
These passages clearly indicate that while Jesus could not sin as God, nonetheless, He was tempted to sin (but didn’t) as a man. Since Jesus had two natures, one divine and one human, a distinction must be made in what He could do in each nature. For example, He could not get tired, hungry, or sleepy as God, however He did all of these things as a man. His divine nature could not die. Yet He could (and did) die as a man. Likewise, Christ could not have sinned as God but could have sinned as a man.
Personal Thoughts
One of the biggest obstacles in understanding a sinless Jesus is that, we can’t completely identify with Jesus, since He did not have a propensity to sin. Like King David, we inherit a sin nature, even when we were in our mother’s womb (Ps 51:5-6). I’ve often wondered what it would be like not to have a proclivity to sin consistently, but can’t really imagine. I've also pondered about the best things about heaven. Of course, the very best thing about heaven is being in the very presence of Christ, seeing Him as He is, and being like Him (see 1John 3:2). This will also include being free from the very temptation and presence of sin.
As inquisitive bible students, we would of course. prefer a solid yes or no answer. Until then, we’ll have to be satisfied with learning all we can and trust Him for the rest. This will often require us to simply fall back on faith. To paraphrase the late Ravi Zacharias, “God has given us enough information that we can trust Him without reservation, but not so much that we can get by without faith”.