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

[Ask Mr. Religion]

On another thread AMR stated....Curious....

How would you respond to a statement like that?

It seems to me that AMR is introducing a fourth member of the Godhead:

- The Father
- The Son (who never died on the cross)
- The Son (who did die on the cross)
- The Holy Spirit

Didn't the Son of God come in the flesh and die on the cross for our sins? Or was the incarnation just an illusion (i.e., body double) as AMR seems to be suggesting?

Context is eveything. From a previous thread, I wrote describing how the two natures (divine, human) of the person of Christ are referred to in the Scriptures:

"The Son of Man title is always used when referring to the humanity of Christ. The Son of God title is always used when referring to His divinity."

From Scripture we will always read that the Son of Man was crucified, meaning that the human nature is what died on the cross, not the divine nature. God cannot die. Incarnate Christ was one person, with two natures, one divine and one human.

See my Top-10 Cheat Sheet on the Incarnation here. A more complete treatment of the Incarnation is given here.

Knight writes:

God is a person in three parts. Therefore God (as a whole) did not die. Yet, one of those parts (the Son) became flesh and walked the earth and was killed on the cross and raised on the third day for us. If that wasn't really the Son (the second part of the trinity) there must be 4 parts of the trinity i.e., The Father, The Son (who wasn't on the cross), The Son (who was on the cross), and the Holy Spirit.

Knight's is the error from the Arian heresy that was denounced along with several others by the Chalcedonian Definition of the Incarnation. Chalcedon refutes all who teach that the Messiah was not truly God; or, was not consubstantial (i.e., of the same substance; or, identity of essence) with the Father. To step outside the bounds of the Chalcedonian definition is to land into one of six heretical groups:

1. deny the genuineness (Ebionism) or the completeness (Arianism) of Christ's deity
2. deny the genuineness (Docetism) or the completeness (Apollinarianism) of His humanity
3. divide His person (Nestorianism) or confuse His natures (Eutychianism)

God is not divisible into parts. God comprises a single indivisible essence. Christ was truly God and truly man.

From the above, Knight assumes God actually died on the cross. God cannot die. God is what is known as a simpliciter. This means that His essence is indivisible, for if God were divisible into parts then God could change His very being by adding to or subtracting from that being. If God is composed of anything He can be decomposed of something, and this is a heretical belief system. To say that God is comprised of parts is to place oneself outside of all of Christendom, both Catholic and Protestant, both groups of which agree to the Chalcedonian Description. Not even the published openists of Boyd, Pinnock, Sanders, etc., will go so far as to deny this doctrine.

Please review the Top-10 cheat sheet and/or the more complete treatment given in the link above.

 

[Newman]

Gosh, AMR makes it sound so good! I think I'm torn on the issue. So I'll just go away and decide.

 

[amosman]

OK, so what do you think of AMR's assertion.....

"God, the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, in no way died on the Cross. Who did die? The Son of Man, Jesus, the man."

I guess I would have to say he is mistaken. Because The Son of God and Yeshua the Son of Man are one in the same.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

That's the awesome part of the gospel, it wasn't an illusion, it wasn't fake.... it was actually 1/3 of the trinity that was placed on the cross to pay for our sins.

Error! 1/3 of the Trinity was not on the cross.

See here or here:
2. The “oneness” of God

a. There is only one God (Duet.6:4; Is. 45:14; James 2:19, etc.) – There can only be one perfect being. If there were two they would not differ at all and would thus be the same being.

b. The one God is not divisible into parts – Since God is spirit by nature and not material in composition, He cannot be divided into 3 parts of 1/3 God each. God the Father, God the Son or God the Holy Spirit therefore cannot be conceived of any anything less than wholly God in essence.

What is the Trinity?:
"The Trinity is not three substances but three persons existing simultaneously, which are the one essence. These person's are not separate from the essence, they subsist in it. Nor are there three essences that would make them three God's. God is tri-une as persons but in nature one God."

"...The church has always maintained the indivisibility of God."


Research this on your own, read, study, and understand to avoid this grave error.

 

[Psalmist]

OK, so what do you think of AMR's assertion.....

"God, the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, in no way died on the Cross. Who did die? The Son of Man, Jesus, the man."

Who did die? God’s Son, also call the Son of Man. God’s perfect Redeemer for lost, sinful, depraved mankind.​

"God, the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, in no way died on the Cross."​

That would sound like "The Gospel" and the "Incarnation of Jesus" with a new twist.​

:think:

I know I'm not I putting this "To the letter," you know "Jots and tittles" perfect.

Previously posted by "amosman"- Son of Man or Son of God = The same Person.

I believe that "The Son of God" and "The Son of Man" are one in the same.

That same person -

The Son of God, Second person of the God Head (Trinity), God’s Son.
The Son of God, the Mediator between God and man.
The Son of God, the Redeemer for man’s soul.
The Son of Man, Second person of the God Head (Trinity), condescending,
identifying with man.
The Son of God, the Son of Man, one person, died on the cross (Luke 24:36),
not unless Jesus had a twin.​

Christ Jesus, the God man, the Father’s perfect man Jesus Christ (The Righteous) the man God, being identified with man. I like that, "The Son of Man" identified with me, died for me.


The Son of God, the Son of Man, same person.​

That’s​

- 30 -​

:scripto:. . Psalmist

 

[godrulz]

The Lord Jesus Christ, the God-Man, one person with 2 natures, is the one who died on the cross. The Father and Holy Spirit did not incarnate.

AMR: Was it Luther or some Reformer who said something like God cannot die, but the one who died was God?

http://www.carm.org/doctrine/obj_Jesusdied.htm CARM is Calvinistic. I think this is an issue Calvinists, Arminians, and Open Theists should agree on.

I don't think Knight or AMR are denying the Deity of humanity of Christ. Some of it is semantics or speculation on exactly how the divine and human natures relate in one person. We affirm they do, but it is not explicit how they do (cf. exact nature of triune relations).

While we are at it, how many angels can dance on a pin head and did Adam have a belly button?

 

[Newman]

I don't think Knight or AMR are denying the Deity of humanity of Christ. Some of it is semantics or speculation on exactly how the divine and human natures relate in one person.

Exactly!

 

[OMEGA]

The Logos , who was one of the two Gods was reduced by the Supreme God, the Father and put into Mary.

Mary gave birth to a human child with the Spirit Mind of the Logos.

The Human child grew and was given Mind Energy from the Father to give him self-control and past knowledge and later Miraculous Power.

The Human being was Crucified and the body died and the spirit was taken up and stored with the Father and later put back into the Human body.

The Human body was later taken up to God the Father and Engulfed by the Father's Spiritual Energy and changed back into the LOGOS and some of his spirit mind which had stronger character which he developed here on Earth was sent down at Pentecost to help the Christians to Develop Godly Character .

 

[Nathon Detroit]

I don't think Knight or AMR are denying the Deity of humanity of Christ. Some of it is semantics or speculation on exactly how the divine and human natures relate in one person. We affirm they do, but it is not explicit how they do (cf. exact nature of triune relations).

Semantics? I really don't think so. Let me ask you and AMR... where was God the Son when Jesus was on cross?

 

[godrulz]

The Logos , who was one of the two Gods was reduced by the Supreme God, the Father and put into Mary.

Mary gave birth to a human child with the Spirit Mind of the Logos.

The Human child grew and was given Mind Energy from the Father to give him self-control and past knowledge and later Miraculous Power.

The Human being was Crucified and the body died and the spirit was taken up and stored with the Father and later put back into the Human body.

The Human body was later taken up to God the Father and Engulfed by the Father's Spiritual Energy and changed back into the LOGOS and some of his spirit mind which had stronger character which he developed here on Earth was sent down at Pentecost to help the Christians to Develop Godly Character .

Huh? Heresy (your Armstrong roots are showing).

 

[godrulz]

Semantics? I really don't think so. Let me ask you and AMR... where was God the Son when Jesus was on cross?

Jesus is the Son of God and the Son of Man. He is one person, so the Son of God (you say that I am; Peter also confessed this about Him in the flesh; cf. Jn. 1) was on the cross. Without understanding it, apparently He was also still omnipresent in heaven at the right hand of God (not dogmatic; based on one proof text)?

 

[Lion]

Jesus, who was the Son of God, and God the Son, emptied Himself of His Godly attributes and came as a baby into the fleshly world of men. Jesus was a new creation. The first time in all of history that God became flesh. When he did that, he really did it. It wasn't pretend... it wasn't symbolism, it was real and true. God the Son is no more. Now, and forevermore, there is Jesus Christ.

And He died on the cross for our sins. Who died? Jesus, the Son of God, God the Son, died on the cross.

So, what is death? Death is separation from God. When Adam ate of the fruit, God said "for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." Adam did not go to the grave on that day, but he did die. He became separated from God on that day.

So, when we say that God the Son, who is now Jesus Christ, died on the cross we are not saying that he ceased to exist (as Knight has stated so aptly already in this post). No, we are saying that He was separated from God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. It was the first time the Trinity had been separated and it was terrible for the Father, Jesus (the Son), and the Holy Spirit. it was a true price paid, with the attendant consequences of sin, which Jesus became for us.

Christ then went to hell to (a) Proclaim to the fallen angels in hell that their plan to stop the incarnation had failed;

1Pet 3:18-20 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient,

and (b) to take the believers in Abraham's Bosom from Hades to heaven.

Ephesians 4:8-10 Therefore He says: “ When He ascended on high, He led captivity captive, And gave gifts to men.” (Now this, “He ascended”—what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.)

Knight asked a great question; Where was God the Son when Jesus died on the cross? The answer is that they are one and the same. God the son became flesh (Jesus Christ) and was forever changed. God and man as one. Death is separation. Jesus was separated from the Godhead but was reunited because He was righteous.

 

[SOTK]

I seriously can't believe this topic is being discussed. Even before I was a Calvinist or got into reading any type of theology, I understood that Jesus is both God in the flesh and God in spirit. I learned this as a kid in Sunday School. AMR's stated position is basic Christianity (At least I thought so). I've never once met anybody in Christian circles that didn't understand that Jesus, his nature as the man, died for our sins on the Cross.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

AMR's stated position is basic Christianity (At least I thought so).

:shocked:

Wow! The quadritarians are coming out of the closet.

Jesus IS the Son of God, they are one and the same.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Lion = POTD :first:

 

[Lion]

Mr. Religion?...maybe that's the problem.

Mr. Religion?...maybe that's the problem.

Mr. Religion said;

Context is everything. From a previous thread, I wrote describing how the two natures (divine, human) of the person of Christ are referred to in the Scriptures:

"The Son of Man title is always used when referring to the humanity of Christ. The Son of God title is always used when referring to His divinity."

From Scripture we will always read that the Son of Man was crucified, meaning that the human nature is what died on the cross, not the divine nature. God cannot die. Incarnate Christ was one person, with two natures, one divine and one human.

I have a problem with this. When we speak of human nature we are usually referring to sin nature. Christ was born without the sin nature. He was in a perfect state as was Adam. So when Christ’s sin nature died on the cross the only thing you could be referring to is our sin that was placed on Him.

The Gospels portray Jesus in different ways at different times. In the book of John His divine nature is portrayed, in the book of Luke His human nature. But never is He shown as two separate beings. We Christians have two natures as well. We have our old man and our new man. The new man is the spirit of change that happened to us when we accepted the gift. But we are still one person.

 

[Lion]

4x's the fun?

4x's the fun?

:shocked:

Wow! The quadritarians are coming out of the closet.

Jesus IS the Son of God, they are one and the same.

Maybe they are referring to the four faces of the beasts, or the four natures of Christ as referred to in the gospels. YIKES! maybe they are right. The quadritarians!:jawdrop:

 

[Evoken]

Jesus was separated from the Godhead but was reunited because He was righteous.

Could it be the case that a "part" of the divine nature, that is, of God (the Son in this case), is killed and remains dead and separated and yet the other two "parts", the Father and the Holy Spirit continue to be without problem?


Evo

 

[Ktoyou]

The body of Christ died on the cross. This was the only moment that Jesus Christ could become fully human so he could take on the sin of the world! The Divine Jesus could not sin because His nature was not sin, yet Jesus could let the Divine side of Himself rise out and in that moment take on all sin. That is why He came as to us with two natures

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Could it be the case that a "part" of the divine nature, that is, of God (the Son in this case), is killed and remains dead and separated and yet the other two "parts", the Father and the Holy Spirit continue to be without problem?

Did you read Lion's post? :idunno: It doesn't sound like you did.

Note the following part of Lion's post....

So, when we say that God the Son, who is now Jesus Christ, died on the cross we are not saying that he ceased to exist (as Knight has stated so aptly already in this post). No, we are saying that He was separated from God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. It was the first time the Trinity had been separated and it was terrible for the Father, Jesus (the Son), and the Holy Spirit. it was a true price paid, with the attendant consequences of sin, which Jesus became for us.