Impeccability Consistent with
Temptability
It is objected to the doctrine of
Christ’s impeccability that it is inconsistent with his temptability. A person
who cannot sin, it is said, cannot be tempted to sin.
This is not correct; any more than
it would be correct to say that because an army cannot be conquered, it cannot
be attacked. Temptability depends upon the constitutional susceptibility, while
impeccability depends upon the will. So far as his natural susceptibility, both
physical and mental, was concerned, Jesus Christ was open to all forms of human
temptation excepting those that spring out of lust or corruption of nature. But
his peccability, or the possibility of being overcome by these temptations,
would depend upon the amount of voluntary resistance which he was able to bring
to bear against them. Those temptations were very strong, but if the self-determination of his holy will was stronger
than they, then they could not induce him to sin, and he would be impeccable.
And yet plainly he would be temptable.
That an impeccable being can be
tempted is proved by the instance of the elect angels. Having “kept their first
estate,” they are now impeccable, not by their own inherent power, but by the
power of God bestowed upon them. But they might be tempted still, though we
have reasons to believe that they are not. Temptability is one of the necessary
limitations of the finite spirit. No creature is beyond the possibility of
temptation, though he may, by grace, be beyond the possibility of yielding to temptation.
The only being who cannot be tempted is God; ho gar theos apeirastos (James 1:13).
And this, from the nature of an infinite being. Ambition of some sort is the
motive at the bottom of all temptations. When the creature is tempted, it is
suggested to him to endeavor to “be as gods.” He is incited to strive for a
higher place in the grade of being than he now occupies. But this, of course,
cannot apply to the Supreme Being. He is already God over all and blessed for
ever. He, therefore, is absolutely intemptable.
Again, redeemed men in heaven are
impeccable through the grace and power of Christ their head. Yet they are still
temptable, though not exposed to temptation. Redemption, while it secures from
the possibility of a second apostasy, does not alter the finite nature of man.
He is still a temptable creature.
And, in like manner, Christ the
God-man was temptable, though impeccable. But his impeccability, unlike that of
the elect angels and redeemed men, is due not to grace but to the omnipotent
and immutable holiness of the Logos in his person. One of the reasons mentioned
in Scripture (Heb. 2:14-18) for the assumption of a human nature into union
with the second person of the Trinity is that his person might be tempted. The
Logos previous to the incarnation could not be tempted. The human nature was
the avenue to temptations, but the divine nature so empowered and actuated the
human, the divine will so strengthened the human will, that no conceivable
stress of temptation could overcome Jesus Christ and bring about the apostasy
of the second Adam.
The temptability of Christ through
his human nature may be illustrated by the temptability of a man through his
sensuous nature. A man’s body in the avenue of sensual solicitation to his
soul. A certain class of human temptations are wholly physical. They could not
present themselves through the mental or immaterial part of man. Take away the
body, and the man could not be assailed by this class of temptations. These, it
is true, do not constitute the whole of human temptations. Fallen man is
tempted through his soul as well as through his body. But we can distinguish
between the two inlets of temptation. Now, as the mind of man, which may be
called his higher nature, is approached by temptation through the body, which
is his lower nature; so the divinity of Christ, which is his higher nature, was
approached by temptation through his humanity, which is his lower nature. The God-man
was temptable through his human nature, not through his divine; and he was
impeccable because of his divine nature, not because of his human. (William G.
T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology: Complete and Unabridged, Volumes 1-3 [Reformed
Retrieval, 2021], 583-84)
