{"id":11018,"date":"2017-04-14T11:50:58","date_gmt":"2017-04-14T15:50:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/admin.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?p=11018"},"modified":"2017-04-14T11:50:58","modified_gmt":"2017-04-14T15:50:58","slug":"nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html","title":{"rendered":"Nestorian Heresy and the Tempting of Jesus"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>
\"Jesus46\"\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
Christ in Gethsemane<\/i>\u00a0(1880), by Carl Heinrich Bloch (1834-1890)<\/span> [public domain \/ Wikimedia Commons<\/a>]\n

***<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/div>\n
(4-19-05)<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
***<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
The following is from a thread on Steve Ray\u2019s Catholic Message Board<\/i>.\u00a0The words of the person (\u201cLojahw\u201d) who asserted Nestorian heresy will be in blue<\/span>.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
*****<\/div>\n

Whatever Nestorius\u2019 actual opinions (scholars differ), Lojahw\u2019s opinions are indeed heretical. He wrote:<\/p>\n

Mary indeed contributed to Jesus His human nature, His weakness. As the writer of Hebrews declared:<\/span><\/p>\n

Heb 4:15 One who has been tempted in things as we are, yet without sin.<\/span><\/p>\n

Jesus, the unique God-man, inherited his human nature, and thus the ability to be tempted, from his mother. [The same was not, nor could it be, claimed for Jesus\u2019 mother. Jesus uniquely claims this.] For as James tells us:<\/span><\/p>\n

Ja 1:13 for God cannot be tempted by evil\u2026<\/span><\/p>\n

It was Jesus\u2019 human nature, that which could be tempted, which Mary contributed to Jesus, not His sinlessness. Jesus\u2019 divine nature, of course, came from His heavenly Father.<\/span><\/p>\n

To believe that Jesus could be tempted in the sense of having interior doubt or mulling over the temptation as if the possibility of succumbing existed, is ludicrous from an orthodox Christian (and especially a Catholic) perspective (and ultimately blasphemous). He could not be tempted in exactly the same way as we are because He wasn\u2019t subject to original sin and the result of concupiscence. That\u2019s why He couldn\u2019t doubt (our fault which causes us to be tried when temptations come) and He couldn\u2019t possibly give in to the temptations, because He was God. Jesus has, therefore, no \u201cweakness\u201d in the sense which Lojahw contends.<\/p>\n

God cannot possibly sin, because that would be a self-contradiction and contrary to the very Being and Essence of an All-Holy God.\u00a0The devil can attempt to tempt God (both the Father and the Son), but he can\u2019t possibly succeed in either case. Jesus is 100% God and 100% man. But he is a non-fallen man, and not subject to the concupiscence which is a result of the Fall. That\u2019s what unorthodox Protestants of the quasi-Nestorian-type, like Lojahw, don\u2019t seem to comprehend. Man is not essentially<\/em> a \u201cweak, fallen\u201d creature. The fall distorted that. But fallen man is not the man that God created. Fallen man has original sin and the tendency to actually sin throughout one\u2019s life. Jesus has no sin, no concupiscence, and no weakness. He could suffer, but He couldn\u2019t give in to the devil\u2019s temptation.<\/p>\n

Jesus had no \u201cability to be tempted\u201d anymore than God the Father had. The devil could try to tempt Him and make Him sin (because the devil was too stupid to know that Jesus couldn\u2019t possibly sin, being God), but he also tried that with God the Father. We know this from Holy Scripture itself. In Acts 15:10 (KJV), St. Peter rebuked the Judaizers, saying:<\/p>\n

Now therefore why tempt ye [RSV: \u201cmake trial of\u201d] God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples . . .<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The Greek word for tempt<\/i> here is pirazo<\/i> (Strong\u2019s word #3985): the same exact word used in Hebrews 4:15, which informs us that Jesus was \u201ctempted in things as we are.\u201d God the Father tells us that the ancient Jews tried to tempt Him in the wilderness (Hebrews 3:9; same Greek word again).<\/p>\n

So sure, the devil could tempt Jesus, just like he tries to tempt us. The difference is that Jesus is not tempted, in the sense of being weak and able to give in to these temptations (as we are). Therefore, He was tempted exactly like God the Father was tempted (which is why the same word is applied to both!): it was a failed attempt which was destined to failure. God the Father and God the Son are no different in this respect. Lojahw tries to make out that they are somehow different, which is Nestorian heresy and blasphemy.<\/p>\n

Either Jesus is God or not. All Nicene Christians agree that He was. He was 100% God and 100% man. James 1:13 tells us that God cannot be tempted by evil (i.e., He can\u2019t succumb to it). Jesus is God, so this verse applies to Him, too. God the Father and God the Son are one. There\u2019s no way out of it; one would have to deny the deity of Christ. Lojahw has a simplistic view of both temptation and the fall, and the Two Natures of Christ. The context of James 1:13 makes it clear that it is discussing something entirely different than Hebrews 4:15 (which Lojahw tried to compare to it). What is it trying to express? It\u2019s clear in the next two verses:<\/p>\n

but each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin; and sin when it is full-grown brings forth death.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In other words, concupiscence<\/em> is being discussed. God cannot be tempted in this<\/em> sense, because He cannot give into it. Men can because they are fallen, sinful creatures. Jesus is a man but not a creature, and not a fallen man. And He is God. Hebrews 4:15 makes it clear that He is tempted without sin (i.e., the devil tries to tempt Him and fails). Therefore, it is senseless, unbiblical and blasphemous to try to make out that Jesus is more like us <\/em>in this respect than like His Father, with Whom He is one.<\/p>\n

Jesus could not doubt and \u201cmull over\u201d the lies of Satan, or be tempted by them in some sense of internal, existential agony \u2014 as if He were actually influenced by Satanic lies \u2014 He who possessed all knowledge and holiness (with no concupiscence), as a function of His Divine Nature. Even in His human nature, He possessed the Beatific Vision which all who go to heaven will one day possess. And He possessed infused knowledge.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s really all that is necessary to annihilate Lojahw\u2019s argument: all right from explicit teachings in Scripture. Nor is this only Catholic teaching. It\u2019s\u00a0the orthodox Christology of historic Protestantism, as well as of Orthodoxy. Thus, the Lutherans Bob and Gretchen Passantino wrote in a review of The Last Temptation of Christ<\/i> (which was an entire movie based on the same error Lojahw is expressing):<\/p>\n

The Last Temptation<\/i> (and many critics of the protesters) think that \u201cwithout sin\u201d only means that he didn\u2019t perform sinful acts, but that true temptation would allow him to have sinful feelings and inclinations. What hypocrisy! Here is a philosophy that says matter is more Man and spirit is more God, matter is less important and spirit is more important, and yet the sins of the spirit are not sins, but the sins of the flesh are! Jesus pierced the sham of hidden sins when he said, \u201cFor out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. These are the things which defile a man.\u201d When The Last Temptation<\/i> Jesus looked at a woman and wanted to have sex with her, but was afraid to, he fulfilled Jesus\u2019 definition of a sinner.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This is more than enough extremely serious error. But I would like to point out one other portion of Lojahw\u2019s jeremiad that I found funny and surprising, as to what I supposedly have and haven\u2019t done, in my apologetics. He cites my words: \u201cNothing in Scripture is contradictory to the Immaculate Conception.\u201d Then he replies:<\/p>\n

How about Rom 3:23, for starters? \u201cAll have sinned and fallen short of God\u2019s glory.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

In his next comment, he adds:<\/p>\n

Neither does he have a credible answer for Rom 3:23.<\/span><\/p>\n

I don\u2019t<\/i>?! That\u2019s news to me<\/i>, seeing that I have posted a paper, \u201cAll Have Sinned . . . \u201d (Mary?)<\/a>, specifically designed<\/em> to answer this particular charge and this very verse.<\/p>\n

\u201cLojahw\u201d responded again, and I replied:<\/p>\n

I certainly defended Jesus\u2019 divinity. His divine nature could not be tempted; yet His human nature was tempted \u201cin all things as we are\u201d according to Hebrews. All Christians believe that Christ, the unique God-man was not born with original sin, being the Eternal Word of God. Yet, in His identification with us by His human nature, he was tempted.<\/span><\/p>\n

If you say it was impossible for Jesus, having human nature to sin, I think you miss the point. It\u2019s no big deal for someone who can\u2019t fall not to fall.<\/span><\/p>\n

This continues to be Nestorian heresy and blasphemy (as proven by the last two sentences). Jesus could not fall into sin, being God. Period. End of sentence. It doesn\u2019t matter if He had a human nature or not. You are fundamentally misunderstanding the nature of the Incarnation.<\/p>\n

It is entirely possible that Adam and Eve could have never fallen and rebelled against God. The fall wasn\u2019t inevitable or predestined. There is such a thing (theoretically) as an unfallen race. In fact, it exists, because the angels never fell. The demons rebelled and fell but the good angels never did, so they are unfallen, uncorrupted creatures.<\/p>\n

That was a possibility for man too, but we blew it. Now, Jesus was God before He became man. And God cannot fall into sin. We fall because we are tempted and have an inherent weakness. The inherent weakness now is the fall, and specifically concupiscence, or the tendency to sin and to move toward sin in our desires and will. But that comes from the Fall itself, and is a sinful tendency.<\/p>\n

The original weakness before the fall was our limitations of knowledge, being creatures and not God. Therefore, the devil could deceive us and lead us to rebel. God has no limitations of knowledge, and cannot rebel against what He is. He is necessarily what He is, and cannot be otherwise. Since we are different from God, and creatures, and limited because of same, we can rebel against Him and fall into sin.<\/p>\n

Since Jesus didn\u2019t fall and had no original sin, He had no concupiscence; hence He could not have any desire to be enticed by temptation, as we do. He is still God, and God can\u2019t sin. Becoming a man as well doesn\u2019t change that. Sin is, therefore, impossible for Him. But you imply that it is possible for God to sin. It\u2019s not.<\/p>\n

Adam and Eve could have possibly not<\/strong> fallen<\/em>. But Jesus could not possibly<\/strong> have fallen<\/em>, even in His human nature. That\u2019s the difference, even though He was indeed a man like us. It\u2019s not possible because He is God, and God is perfectly holy, and cannot contradict Himself or be other than what He is: a perfect and perfectly Holy Being.<\/p>\n

Are you denying that Jesus experienced human weakness of all kinds? Did He not get physically exhausted, did He not thirst, did He not bleed, did He not die on the cross?<\/span><\/p>\n

Of course He did all that, but that is exactly the sort of weakness He could experience, because these are merely the limitations of having a physical body (these limitations resulted from the kenosis<\/i>; described in Philippians 2:5-8). They are not moral limitations. It\u2019s when you ascribe the possibility of moral error to the Incarnate God that you greatly err and blaspheme (though I\u2019m sure you don\u2019t mean<\/i> to; it simply follows<\/i> from the position you take).<\/p>\n

There\u2019s nowhere else to go with this. You need to renounce and retract this very serious theological error, for the sake of your soul and truth.<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u00a0 Christ in Gethsemane\u00a0(1880), by Carl Heinrich Bloch (1834-1890) [public domain \/ Wikimedia Commons] *** (4-19-05) *** The following is from a thread on Steve Ray\u2019s Catholic Message Board.\u00a0The words of the person (\u201cLojahw\u201d) who asserted Nestorian heresy will be in blue. ***** Whatever Nestorius\u2019 actual opinions (scholars differ), Lojahw\u2019s opinions are indeed heretical. He […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":11020,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[172],"tags":[459,1914,1310,427,3882,460,3883],"class_list":["post-11018","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-trinitarianism-christology","tag-christology","tag-concupiscence","tag-jesus","tag-jesus-christ","tag-nestorian-heresy","tag-nestorianism","tag-tempting-jesus"],"yoast_head":"\nNestorian Heresy and the Tempting of Jesus<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Refutation of the Nestorian heresy: a person asserting that Jesus was subject to concupiscence and could have possibly sinned.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Nestorian Heresy and the Tempting of Jesus\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Refutation of the Nestorian heresy: a person asserting that Jesus was subject to concupiscence and could have possibly sinned.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2017-04-14T15:50:58+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2017\/04\/Jesus46.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"555\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"768\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html\",\"name\":\"Nestorian Heresy and the Tempting of Jesus\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2017-04-14T15:50:58+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-14T15:50:58+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"Refutation of the Nestorian heresy: a person asserting that Jesus was subject to concupiscence and could have possibly sinned.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Nestorian Heresy and the Tempting of Jesus\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/\",\"name\":\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\",\"description\":\"Catholic biblical apologetics\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\",\"name\":\"Dave Armstrong\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Dave Armstrong\"},\"description\":\"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \\\"This Rock\\\" (now called \\\"Catholic Answers Magazine\\\"), \\\"Envoy Magazine\\\" (Patrick Madrid), \\\"The Catholic Answer,\\\" \\\"The Coming Home Journal,\\\" \\\"Gilbert Magazine\\\" (American Chesterton Society), and \\\"The Latin Mass.\\\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \\\"The Michigan Catholic\\\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \\\"Catholic Answers Live\\\" (twice), \\\"Faith and Family Live\\\" (Steve Wood), \\\"Kresta in the Afternoon,\\\" \\\"Son Rise Morning Show,\\\" \\\"Catholic Connection\\\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \\\"The Catholics Next Door.\\\" His large and popular website, \\\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\\\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \\\"index\\\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \\\"Surprised by Truth\\\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \\\"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\\\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \\\"The Catholic Verses\\\" (2004), \\\"The One-Minute Apologist\\\" (2007), \\\"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\\\" (2009), \\\"The Quotable Newman\\\" (editor: 2012), and \\\"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\\\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \\\"The New Catholic Answer Bible\\\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \\\"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\\\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \\\"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\\\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \\\"Quotable Wesley\\\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Nestorian Heresy and the Tempting of Jesus","description":"Refutation of the Nestorian heresy: a person asserting that Jesus was subject to concupiscence and could have possibly sinned.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Nestorian Heresy and the Tempting of Jesus","og_description":"Refutation of the Nestorian heresy: a person asserting that Jesus was subject to concupiscence and could have possibly sinned.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","article_published_time":"2017-04-14T15:50:58+00:00","og_image":[{"width":555,"height":768,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2017\/04\/Jesus46.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html","name":"Nestorian Heresy and the Tempting of Jesus","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2017-04-14T15:50:58+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-14T15:50:58+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"Refutation of the Nestorian heresy: a person asserting that Jesus was subject to concupiscence and could have possibly sinned.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2017\/04\/nestorian-heresy-tempting-jesus.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Nestorian Heresy and the Tempting of Jesus"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/","name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","description":"Catholic biblical apologetics","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e","name":"Dave Armstrong","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Dave Armstrong"},"description":"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \"This Rock\" (now called \"Catholic Answers Magazine\"), \"Envoy Magazine\" (Patrick Madrid), \"The Catholic Answer,\" \"The Coming Home Journal,\" \"Gilbert Magazine\" (American Chesterton Society), and \"The Latin Mass.\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \"The Michigan Catholic\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \"Envoy Magazine.\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \"Catholic Answers Live\" (twice), \"Faith and Family Live\" (Steve Wood), \"Kresta in the Afternoon,\" \"Son Rise Morning Show,\" \"Catholic Connection\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \"The Catholics Next Door.\" His large and popular website, \"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \"Envoy Magazine.\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \"index\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \"Surprised by Truth\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \"The Catholic Verses\" (2004), \"The One-Minute Apologist\" (2007), \"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\" (2009), \"The Quotable Newman\" (editor: 2012), and \"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \"The New Catholic Answer Bible\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \"Quotable Wesley\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).","sameAs":["https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics"],"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11018","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2331"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11018"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11018\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/11020"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11018"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11018"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11018"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}