Comments on: Was Jesus Ever Ill?

By: Edmond Chirwa

Edmond Chirwa — Sat, 13 Aug 2022 05:22:00 +0000

Jesus was not a man but God, is just that he transformed to be in almost in a same level with human beings so that people can engaged him but that does not mean he was human. He came to earth to fulfill his purpose i.e. to die for and redeem all. Getting sick was not part of the to do list but dying was.

By: Joseph Carilus

Joseph Carilus — Wed, 30 Sep 2020 12:18:00 +0000

Excellent!

By: Cassia Payoute

Cassia Payoute — Mon, 30 Dec 2019 00:24:00 +0000

Before the fall, the only sleep recorded in the Bible was when God put Adam in a deep sleep and created Eve. That sleep was for “surgery” so to speak but it doesn’t say if sleep was necessary before the fall. We do know however, that man was created to work (“to till the earth”) and it was too much for him to do alone. Hence the reason Eve was made and they were told to be fruitful and multiply. So though scripture doesn’t say he “needed” sleep, it can be implied that he did become weary with the work being “too much and needing help”

So I can only guess at best (I don’t know if there is other scripture to answer this or not) that sleep was necessary before the fall.

By: Cassia Payoute

Cassia Payoute — Mon, 30 Dec 2019 00:10:00 +0000

Sin was the fall and the fall was sin. Sin was not a consequence of the fall. Sin having power or rule over us was “a” consequence among many others. I came here (and read other articles) wondering if Jesus knew what it felt like to be sick. I know He empathizes with us on many levels and knows what it feels like (having gone through it Himself in His human body) to feel many of the things we feel and go through in this life.

But after reading I am inclined to believe that He did not subject Himself unto sickness. Yes, He very well could have, but for what purpose? He knew enough about, and had power over death without experiencing it, when he raised the dead. So He didn’t have to be dead to desire to and to accomplish raising the dead. Therefore, He didn’t have to be sick to desire to and to accomplish healing sicknesses and diseases. What would have been the purpose for Him to allow sickness in His body? (Not a hypothetical question by the way)

We know for what purpose He subjected Himself to die. But it was only possible because He allowed it to be. He LAYED down His life willingly.

Also the curse of sin or the curse of the fall was not on Him until the Father LAYED our sins upon Him. So until He allowed the curse of sin to be put on Him (which only happened on the cross), He could not have died, or much less have been sick until then.

By: Cornell Ngare

Cornell Ngare — Sun, 24 Dec 2017 19:04:00 +0000

If Jesus bore the curse, and even died (out of no sin of his own), why do we draw the line at sickness? Why couldn’t a body that gave in to death not give in to illness?

I am still prone to believe that Jesus most likely fell sick. The passages about a lamb without blemish might as well just be speaking about conscious sin and not necessarily bodily blemishes such as illness. To make the correlation so direct seems like stretching the analogy to the point of almost making the lamb and Jesus physically equivalent rather than just analogous.

Is there room for me as a believer to be convinced that Jesus got sick, knowing fully well that sin is a consequence of the fall (and a product of forces beyond just the human body, think germs etc) but taking this as part of the curse that Jesus had to bear and ultimately his physical death?

In other words, why should it be possible for an unfallen body to die but not to fall sick when both death and sickness are consequences of a fall Jesus never experienced?

By: Sam Beaulieu

Sam Beaulieu — Tue, 20 Jun 2017 21:55:00 +0000

I don’t deny Christ’ perfection but in dialogue with this post, Jesus got tired and weary no? Getting tired and weary, is that not a result of the fall? Were we created with the need for sleep before the fall? Will we get tired and weary in the new heavens and earth to come?

By: David Chin

David Chin — Thu, 18 May 2017 16:59:00 +0000

Thanks for the article. I often have difficulty maintaining balance in understanding and conceiving the theanthropos, perhaps emphasising one nature at the expense of the other. Yes, Christ could never have succumbed to illnesses, yet being man, though perfect, he would have harboured the usual skin and gut flora (commensal and mutualistic) common to man. If he had been irritated by dust and sneezed, could he have passed these germs to others?
Would it not be preferable to term the sinless weaknesses like hunger, tiredness and pain as normal physiological responses and ‘strenghts’? If Adam had not these responses, he would not know when to eat, rest or withdraw from painful stimuli.

By: Doug Smith

Doug Smith — Mon, 15 May 2017 22:36:00 +0000

“Christ, as the Holy One, did not and could not contract these illnesses and diseases.” Thanks for this meditation on the wonders of our holy Savior. This makes so much sense biblically, especially when we read of Him touching those with diseases such as leprosy.