Was Jesus a Sinner? A Forensic Refutation of a Muslim Polemic

---

🧨 Introduction

A Muslim article titled “The Sinful Savior: Why the Biblical Jesus Was Not ‘Sinless’” argues that Jesus committed sins, contradicting Christian doctrine. The article lists alleged moral failings by Jesus — including animal cruelty, theft, lying, and disrespect — and critiques Christian responses that invoke his divine nature.

This rebuttal examines each claim with historical, grammatical, and logical precision, exposing the argument as flawed at every level.

---

🧠 Claim 1: Jesus Killed Pigs = Animal Cruelty and Property Destruction

(Matthew 8:28–34)

❌ Claim:

Jesus allowed demons to enter pigs, which drowned — thus destroying private property and harming animals.

✅ Response:

• The demons destroyed the pigs, not Jesus. He merely cast them out.

• The text makes no moral judgment on the pigs' fate — it highlights Jesus’ authority over evil spirits.

• The pigs were unclean by Jewish law (Leviticus 11:7), reinforcing the symbolic message: unclean spirits into unclean animals.

• No evidence suggests Jesus violated Mosaic Law.

🔍 Verdict: Misattribution and theological misunderstanding. No sin committed.

---

🧠 Claim 2: Jesus Disrespected His Mother

(John 2:1–5)

❌ Claim:

Jesus rudely called Mary “woman” and dismissed her.

✅ Response:

• The Greek word γύναι (“woman”) is not disrespectful; Jesus used it lovingly in John 19:26 from the cross.

• Scholars confirm it's a Near Eastern idiom without rude connotation.

• Jesus’ response reflects divine timing, not family rejection.

🔍 Verdict: Cultural ignorance + modern lens fallacy. No sin, no disrespect.

---

🧠 Claim 3: Jesus Lied About Going to a Feast

(John 7:8–10)

❌ Claim:

Jesus told his brothers he wasn’t going to the Feast of Booths, then went secretly. Therefore, he lied.

✅ Response:

• Manuscripts vary: some say “not going” (οὐκ), others “not yet” (οὔπω).

  • Early scribes harmonized the reading, but either version fits context.

• Jesus changed his method of travel, not his word. He didn’t go publicly, but later and privately.

• Lying = intent to deceive. Jesus acted strategically, not deceptively.

🔍 Verdict: No lie, no violation of Torah ethics. Misuse of manuscript variance.

---

🧠 Claim 4: Jesus Committed Theft by Taking Donkeys

(Matthew 21:1–7)

❌ Claim:

Jesus told disciples to take two donkeys without asking — that’s theft.

✅ Response:

• Jesus preempts permission: “If anyone asks, say: ‘The Lord needs them.’”

• Mark 11:3–6 shows the bystanders allow the disciples to take the colt.

• In prophetic tradition (Zechariah 9:9), this action fulfills messianic expectation, not law-breaking.

• The law allows borrowing property with intent to return (Exodus 22). No sin proven.

🔍 Verdict: Assumed theft where the text shows implied consent. No wrongdoing.

---

🧠 Claim 5: Psalm 40 Shows Jesus Had “Transgressions”

(Hebrews 10:5–7 → Psalm 40)

❌ Claim:

Hebrews quotes Psalm 40 about Jesus. Verse 12 says “my transgressions overwhelm me” — proving Jesus sinned.

✅ Response:

• Psalm 40 is David’s Psalm, not Jesus’ own speech.

• The NT uses typological fulfillment — quoting part of the Psalm to show foreshadowing of Christ’s mission, not importing David’s sin to Jesus.

• To say Jesus “confessed sin” based on Psalm 40 is a fallacy of composition.

• Muslims don’t apply this logic to their own scripture — they should not impose it on ours.

🔍 Verdict: Misapplied typology + category error. Fails completely.

---

🧠 Claim 6: Appealing to Jesus’ Divinity is Circular

❌ Claim:

Christians say Jesus was sinless because he’s God, and he’s God because he’s sinless — circular reasoning.

✅ Response:

• This is a strawman.

• Classical Christian doctrine teaches:

  • Jesus is fully God and fully man.

  • His human nature lived perfectly under the Law.

  • His sinlessness is evidence of divine identity, not its cause.

The claim ignores the doctrine of the hypostatic union, which maintains that Jesus' divinity did not override his humanity — it was his perfect obedience in human flesh that qualified him as the sinless Savior.

🔍 Verdict: Misrepresents Christian theology. Argument refuted.

---

📌 Summary Table of Errors

Allegation	Flaw	Verdict
Demon pigs = sin	Guilt by proxy	Rejected
Mary disrespected	Cultural idiom misunderstood	Rejected
Lied about feast	Misreads context + ignores manuscript issues	Rejected
Donkey theft	Assumes crime despite consent	Rejected
Psalm 40 = Jesus’ sin	Typology misused	Rejected
Divinity defense = circular	Misrepresents doctrine	Rejected

---

🔥 Final Verdict:

The entire argument collapses under forensic scrutiny.

The author:

• Misreads cultural and textual context.

• Assumes guilt where the text offers none.

• Commits logical fallacies (composition, strawman, equivocation).

• Fails to prove that Jesus violated any moral or legal standard within the Jewish or Christian framework.

Jesus remains sinless — not just by doctrinal claim, but by textual integrity and moral consistency.