Dan Chapa had a Twitter exchange with Warren McGrew. Chapa asked Warren a question that apparently it seems there’s no explanation for. The Provisionist perspective came in and asked him to explain Warren’s view, here was Dan’s response:

@The_Idol_Killer holds to desires like hunger and sex that can be abused by excess. He explains the inevitability of sin based in the environment rather than in the person. He says we are born innocent and able to obey and sin isn’t immediate. Warren, is that right?

I think that’s a correct understanding. But those compounds the issue for Warren. If Christ also has the same nature as us, then why doesn’t he inevitably sin? Dan asked:

The immediate vs. inevitable distinction is important, but for the moment, I’ll set it aside. Given your view of Heb 2:14-18 and a shared nature between us and Christ, why is sin inevitable for us, but not for Christ?

Warren was challenged on this in my dialogue with him. Warren stated that Christ doesn’t possess everything other humans possess, but that he possesses everything they share in common. So, Warren most abandon the inevitable nature of sin is true of everyone to preserve his Christology.