Who died on the cross? - a Hall of Fame thread.

[Nathon Detroit]

Are you are so obviously interested in bashing anyone who disagrees versus honest discourse that you will derail the thread just to do so?

edit: I see after posting this that you discovered you error. Nevertheless, my response stands.

Why didn't you add.... "Good day sir!" :madmad:

Lighten up, God's just messin' with ya today.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Yes and No.

Clearly AMR believes that the Son did not die (i.e., He wasn't separated from the Father) and therefore at the time of Jesus death there were four parts of the Godhead:

1. The Father
2. The Son (who was in heaven that didn't die)
3. The Son (who was on earth that did die for our sin)
4. The Holy Spirit.

That type of Quadritarianism is unbiblical and heretical. Furthermore it makes the crucifixion nothing more than an illusion, a parlor trick - The Son didn't really suffer and die for our sins because He was still in heaven with the Father (which is hogwash).

This is your usual mis-characterization. You must be dyslexic or something.

Humanity of Christ is referred to in Scripture as the Son of Man
Divinity of Christ is referred to in Scripture as the Son of God

These help us understand many contexts, such as which nature is in view at the time. Is the passage referring to Christ's humanity or His divinity? These two designations help us come to grips with things.

What I have always maintained and you seem to be unable or unwilling to comprehend is that:
(1) The Incarnation of Christ comprised a fully human and fully divine nature in one Person.
(2) Divinity cannot die, cease to exist, or any other terms persons use to refer to the process of death.
(3) When humans die, their souls, if believers, are immediately present with the Lord.
(4) The divine nature, prior to the death of Christ, was united with a living, breathing, human nature.
(5) Christ’s death did not destroy the union of the two natures. While Christ was in the tomb, the divine nature was united with a human nature whose spirit was in paradise.
(6) When Jesus’ physical body was in the grave (tomb), the divine nature was still united with it, but not confined by it, for God is omnipresent.
(7) Death did not sever the union of the two natures of Christ, but the divine nature did not die. By 'die' I mean any commonly used euphemism associated with death. We simply cannot speak of God as being able to somehow die.

Your antics are becoming quite juvenile and I hope for better from you. You are not winning the points you are apparently desperate to win by your behavior.<o></o>

 

[Sozo]

AMR... God describes Himself as One who has a "soul" with a range of emotions, so that does not mean that Jesus has the nature of a man, unless you agree with Beloved .

None of the verses you provided describe Jesus as anything more than God manifested in the flesh. I have flesh, but my identity is in Christ. I am no longer in the flesh, but in the Spirit. Jesus was conceived of the Holy Spirit, and the Bible only speaks of His nature as being divine. No where have you provided evidence that Jesus had a nature like ours.

"God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high"

"For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse."

Paul makes a comparison in the book of Acts that clearly shows that the One who made the world has a different nature than we do...

"But when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of it, they tore their robes and rushed out into the crowd, crying out and saying, "Men, why are you doing these things? We are also men of the same nature as you, and preach the gospel to you in order that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that is in them."

Adam was a living soul, but contrast to that, Jesus is a life-giving Spirit. I do not doubt that Jesus came in the "likeness" of sinful flesh, or in the "appearance" of a man, but His identity is that of the eternal God, and His nature is Divine (qeiothv). He is God manifest in the flesh; in a body that was prepared for Him.

 

[Newman]

Your point number 2, AMR, is the only place where anyone on this thread differs. The rest is semantics.

 

[Sozo]

Your point number 2, AMR, is the only place where anyone on this thread differs. The rest is semantics.

(2) Divinity cannot die, cease to exist, or any other terms persons use to refer to the process of death.

No one ceases to exist, but the Son of God did die. To claim that somehow the man side of Jesus died, while the God side did not is bizzarre, and makes Jesus out to be two different people.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

"But when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of it, they tore their robes and rushed out into the crowd, crying out and saying, "Men, why are you doing these things? We are also men of the same nature as you, and preach the gospel to you in order that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that is in them."

Adam was a living soul, but contrast to that, Jesus is a life-giving Spirit. I do not doubt that Jesus came in the "likeness" of sinful flesh, or in the "appearance" of a man, but His identity is that of the eternal God, and His nature is Divine (qeiothv). He is God manifest in the flesh; in a body that was prepared for Him.

Fantastic! :up:

 

[Newman]

No one ceases to exist, but the Son of God did die. To claim that somehow the man side of Jesus died, while the God side did not is bizzarre, and makes Jesus out to be two different people.

I agree. :up:

 

[Nathon Detroit]

(2) Divinity cannot die, cease to exist, or any other terms persons use to refer to the process of death.

Maybe if you keep saying that the more lazy people will actually think you are making a good point. :up:

Nobody is claiming the Son ceased to exist. In fact we have corrected you on this very point no less than 6 times.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

AMR... God describes Himself as One who has a "soul" with a range of emotions, so that does not mean that Jesus has the nature of a man, unless you agree with Beloved .

None of the verses you provided describe Jesus as anything more than God manifested in the flesh. I have flesh, but my identity is in Christ. I am no longer in the flesh, but in the Spirit. Jesus was conceived of the Holy Spirit, and the Bible only speaks of His nature as being divine. No where have you provided evidence that Jesus had a nature like ours.

Sozo, as I discussed in this post, your views, which deny the true humanity of Christ, would fall into the condemned heresy of docetism. I urge you to research docetism for yourself and consider if this is where you want to place your belief system.

If Christ was not fully man, there is no sacrifice for our sins possible that would justify us before God. If Christ is not fully human, then by exclusion, Christ was fully God in a fleshly body and nothing more. Thus we have solely God being tempted (contrary to Scripture) in the wilderness.

This won't do.

 

[Newman]

Semantics. I quit. Goodbye.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Semantics. I quit. Goodbye.

:wave2:

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Sozo, as I discussed in this post, your views, which deny the true humanity of Christ, would fall into the condemned heresy of docetism. I urge you to research docetism for yourself and consider if this is where you want to place your belief system.

If Christ was not fully man, there is no sacrifice for our sins possible that would justify us before God. If Christ is not fully human, then by exclusion, Christ was fully God in a fleshly body and nothing more. Thus we have solely God being tempted (contrary to Scripture) in the wilderness.

This won't do.

"the condemned heresy of docetism" :chuckle:

AMR when are you going to learn? Theological labels don't scare us. You can call me whatever you want, I really don't care. You can tell me am contradicting the "whatever council" and the "such and such" creed. You can inform me that my views contradict a million dead theologians.... :sozo: I DON'T CARE!!! And I doubt Sozo does either. It's God's word that is important. What does God say? Who cares about dead theologians that were most likely not saved anyway?

My guess...
9 out of 10 dead theologians are in hell.

 

[Sozo]

I am very familiar with and reject docetism as a gnostic fabrication. It is not at all what anyone on this thread has been affirming.

Jesus had the body of a man, just as real as you and I. He suffered and died in that body. In His "body" He was just as much a man as you and I, but I am not just a body, and Jesus did not take on a new persona of someone who did not pre-exist. A "fully" man nature co-existing with His Divine nature. He was God manifested in a body of flesh, and bone, and blood, etc; in ALL respects a man's body that was prepared for Him. He is not an "illusion" as you are suggesting we are teaching. Please don't use the tactics that godrulz would use, that is beneath you.

Or is it? :think:

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

I am very familiar with and reject docetism as a gnostic fabrication. It is not at all what anyone on this thread has been affirming.

Jesus had the body of a man, just as real as you and I. He suffered and died in that body. In His "body" He was just as much a man as you and I, but I am not just a body, and Jesus did not take on a new persona of someone who did not pre-exist. A "fully" man nature co-existing with His Divine nature. He was God manifested in a body of flesh, and bone, and blood, etc; in ALL respects a man's body that was prepared for Him. He is not an "illusion" as you are suggesting we are teaching. Please don't use the tactics that godrulz would use, that is beneath you.

To make sure I understand, you have defined a a man's body with solely God, the Second Person of the Trinity, joined in it. Correct?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

"the condemned heresy of docetism" :chuckle:

AMR when are you going to learn? Theological labels don't scare us. You can call me whatever you want, I really don't care. You can tell me am contradicting the "whatever council" and the "such and such" creed. You can inform me that my views contradict a million dead theologians.... :sozo: I DON'T CARE!!! And I doubt Sozo does either. It's God's word that is important. What does God say? Who cares about dead theologians that were most likely not saved anyway?

My guess...
9 out of 10 dead theologians are in hell.

All the loud rhetoric notwithstanding, are you saying here that you are in full agreement with what Sozo stated? Or are you just cheering him onward?

 

[Sozo]

To make sure I understand, you have defined a a man's body with solely God, the Second Person of the Trinity, joined in it. Correct?

Rephrase your question, or explain what you mean by "joined".

 

[Nathon Detroit]

All the loud rhetoric notwithstanding, are you saying here that you are in full agreement with what Sozo stated? Or are you just cheering him onward?

Can I answer.... errr, um.. err... both? :idunno:

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Rephrase your question, or explain what you mean by "joined".

You can explain for me, but here is what I am thinking.

As before, when we talk about Personhood, we don't simply mean a physical body. The term person denotes a complete substance endowed with reason, and, consequently, a responsible subject of its own actions.

So what was the substance endowed with reason, etc., that was part of the man's body? I assume you would answer that it was only God, the Second Person of the Trinity. Am I correct?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Can I answer.... errr, um.. err... both? :idunno:

Sozo writes:

Adam was a living soul, but contrast to that, Jesus is a life-giving Spirit. I do not doubt that Jesus came in the "likeness" of sinful flesh, or in the "appearance" of a man, but His identity is that of the eternal God, and His nature is Divine (qeiothv). He is God manifest in the flesh; in a body that was prepared for Him.

No human soul.

Do you fully agree?

 

[Sozo]

You can explain for me, but here is what I am thinking.

As before, when we talk about Personhood, we don't simply mean a physical body. The term person denotes a complete substance endowed with reason, and, consequently, a responsible subject of its own actions.

So what was the substance endowed with reason, etc., that was part of the man's body? I assume you would answer that it was only God, the Second Person of the Trinity. Am I correct?

There was not an amalgamation of two minds or souls or spirits.