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

[Frank Ernest]

Well we know that He did not go to the Father until after His resurrection. I think after He died He stayed in the grave until He was resurrected on the third day.

Jesus did not stay in the grave unless you're trying to make a distinction between Jesus, the flesh man, and Jesus, the Son of God. 1 Peter 3:18-20.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

God knows everything knowable that He chooses to know WHEN He chooses to know it. Problem solved. Thanks for asking!

Jesus saw him. Was not a figurative statement, but a statement indicating His omnipresence.

Do you, like Lion, believe the Second Person of the Trinity was geographically limited to wherever the physical body of Jesus happened to be?

 

[lightbringer]

"It is the mark of an instructed mind to rest satisfied with the degree of precision which the nature of the subject admits and not to seek exactness when only an approximation of the truth is possible."

"Instructed mind" or one that is controlled, forced to accept another's final word, or just can not fathom the subject! It is mans nature to be inquisitive and to look forward to a better understanding of his surroundings and environment. Since I have been told on this thread that the men that wrote the Scriptures were inspired by God, would it be difficult to believe that God has inspired man to research all matter of things in order to come to a full understanding of this world and all things contained? Or does God only concern himself with scripture?

Who is able to make this decision? "When only an approximation of the truth is possible"?

If we stop investigating or exploring the truth, do we not stop progressing?

Hopefully no one in the Judicial system, Scientific community, Medical community or any research organization would ever accept this statement! And, why would the Religious community accept this?

 

[Evoken]

The scenario you propose is somewhat different, because God the Father is the head. God the Son and the Holy Spirit accept an obedient role to the Father. However, God is free. He could choose to sin, but He does not. What He could not do is sin and still be righteous. If God the Father sinned, I think it would destroy the Godhead, (although I won’t go into why here…it would take us too far off topic).

From what you have said so far, you don't seem to believe in one God (monotheism), rather, what you seem to believe in is three dinstinct gods that form a triad (Tritheism). You believe that two of these can be separated and remain so without destroying the Godhead and that each remains God while separated:

"...when we say that God the Son, who is now Jesus Christ, died on the cross [...] we are saying that He was separated from God the Father and God the Holy Spirit." (source)
...
"...if Jesus would have fallen, He would have been separated forever, and we could not have come back to God." (source)
...
"When Christ was there, He was still God, but separated from the trinity" (source)​

Not only are the three persons three gods that can be separated, leaving us with three different dieties. But you also say that Lord Jesus could sin and that if he did "he would be separated for all eternity from the Godhead." (source) and that the Father, who is the head, could sin and that if he did this, you think "it would destroy the Godhead" (source).

In your view not only are the Son and the Spirit not essential to the Godhead, since it is possible for the Father to continue to be as if both did not exist. But since the Father can sin, it is possible for the whole Godhead to destroy itself. Parting from what you have said so far, God is a contingent being who, while remaining righteous, his "parts" can fall away from him if they sin and he can as a whole fall into sin (against whom?) ultimately leading to his own destruction (that he does not do so is not the point, the point is that it could be the case). In other words, since God has parts he can fall apart.

Now, if the Son (and the Spirit) can sin against God and be separated forever from God, then on what sense do you think they are God? They cannot be said to be fully God, for they would then be sinning against themselves and separating themselves from themselves. For the Son or the Spirit to sin against God and for them to separate themselves from him, they would need to be dieties different from him whom they sin against and separate themselves from. God cannot be one and sin against himself, nor can he be one and separate himself from himself.

Are you sure that your views are based on Scripture?


Evo

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

"It is the mark of an instructed mind to rest satisfied with the degree of precision which the nature of the subject admits and not to seek exactness when only an approximation of the truth is possible."

Some great truths will never be known on this side of the grave. The quote exemplifies the issue and is relevant to "the nature of the subject". Of course, as you note, the truth is out there to be discovered and codified in some domains. I find the quote relevant to some biblical matters where God is silent. And when He shuts His mouth so should we.

Edit: Note to self- never participate in a discussion of sacred matters in a thread that is not exclusively Christian. :doh:

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

From what you have said so far, you don't seem to believe in one God (monotheism), rather, what you seem to believe in is three dinstinct gods that form a triad (Tritheism). You believe that two of these can be separated and remain so without destroying the Godhead and that each remains God while separated:

"...when we say that God the Son, who is now Jesus Christ, died on the cross [...] we are saying that He was separated from God the Father and God the Holy Spirit." (source)
...
"...if Jesus would have fallen, He would have been separated forever, and we could not have come back to God." (source)
...
"When Christ was there, He was still God, but separated from the trinity" (source)​

Not only are the three persons three gods that can be separated, leaving us with three different dieties. But you also say that Lord Jesus could sin and that if he did "he would be separated for all eternity from the Godhead." (source) and that the Father, who is the head, could sin and that if he did this, you think "it would destroy the Godhead" (source).

In your view not only are the Son and the Spirit not essential to the Godhead, since it is possible for the Father to continue to be as if both did not exist. But since the Father can sin, it is possible for the whole Godhead to destroy itself. Parting from what you have said so far, God is a contingent being who, while remaining righteous, his "parts" can fall away from him if they sin and he can as a whole fall into sin (against whom?) ultimately leading to his own destruction (that he does not do so is not the point, the point is that it could be the case). In other words, since God has parts he can fall apart.

Now, if the Son (and the Spirit) can sin against God and be separated forever from God, then on what sense do you think they are God? They cannot be said to be fully God, for they would then be sinning against themselves and separating themselves from themselves. For the Son or the Spirit to sin against God and for them to separate themselves from him, they would need to be dieties different from him whom they sin against and separate themselves from. God cannot be one and sin against himself, nor can he be one and separate himself from himself.

Are you sure that your views are based on Scripture?


Evo

Outstanding deconstruction, Evo! :first:

 

[Varangian]

Hopefully no one in the Judicial system, Scientific community, Medical community or any research organization would ever accept this statement! And, why would the Religious community accept this?

Actually people in every single one of those examples must, at times, accept precisely that statement in order to do their jobs. Scientists and engineers use Newtonian physics, even though we know it isn't precisely true because it's as accurate as we're able to get at this time. Doctors prescribe medicines which they've found to be effective, even if they don't fully understand how they work. (Even basic things like pain relievers fall into this category.)

Now, of course, in each of these cases we do look for and hope to have greater clarity at some point. But in order to make functional use of things, we have to at the same time accept the level of clarity we currently possess and work with it as best we can.

 

[uk_mikey]

The hypostatic union is a true mystery that no one can fully understand on this side of the grave, if ever.

I think this is the exact point where people go wrong.
It's human nature to want to understand... no... need to understand.

So when we get into discussions about things which are unknowable, and try to pin them down to our limited human understanding and experiences, it's inevitable that we trip over ourselves and argue with each other like clowns.

Faith itself demands an acceptance of mystery (No, not the TOL character. ).

 

[Newman]

I see two sides to this:

1) God can die and still be God. The whole hypostatic union of Jesus died as a perfect sacrifice.

2) God can't die and still be God. Half (the man half) of the hypostatic union died as a perfect sacrifice.

 

[Evoken]

Outstanding deconstruction, Evo! :first:

Yeah...and not only could God sin, but he also doesn't knows the future, can make mistakes and his creatures can frustrate his plans. So, I guess we must always be on our knees praying that one day, sometime, God doesn't mess up, sins and ends up destroying himself.


Evo

 

[Newman]

Yeah...and not only could God sin, but he also doesn't knows the future, can make mistakes and his creatures can frustrate his plans. So, I guess we must always be on our knees praying that one day, sometime, God doesn't mess up, sins and ends up destroying himself.


Evo

Who said God can make mistakes? or sin?

 

[Evoken]

Who said God can make mistakes? or sin?

We have Lion on record saying: "However, God is free. He could choose to sin, but He does not." (source). Given previous threads where it has been asserted that Lord Jesus, who is God, could sin while on earth, I am sure he is not alone on this issue. That he did or does not is not the issue, he can still do it, it is possible.

As far as mistakes go, according to the openists God takes risks, and these sometime fail forcing him to switch to plan B (as in dispensationalism, for example). Failed risks are quite simply...mistakes.


Evo

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Ok, so we can't blend them but we also can't seperate them. If we can't blend them then they must be seperated...er... wait....they can't be seperated if they're not blended in the first place....

I now see where you're coming from when you say that you cannot confuse it since you've made it out to be all so clear. :freak:


So just how do you suggest this was done? I guess Christ nature #2(human) had to wait until it got word from nature #1 (divine) on what it was God wanted him to do.

And how did nature #2 know that it was nature #1 relaying these messages of God to Him? :think:

Since nature #2 was human, how was it sure that it was nature #1 giving the orders from God and not just dreaming up it's own desires?

And how did the whole praying thing work out? I'm guessing anytime nature #2 wanted to know something or needed something, it asked nature #1 to "go ask Dad".

:hammer:

:rotfl:

That is AMR's MO.

AMR and folks like him love religion, they worship theology. They want their answers and statements to be as confusing, as contradictory, and as complicated as possible. That strategy affords them an extra layer of obfuscation so that other humans wont be able to understand exactly what they are saying. That way they cannot be cornered or have their feet held to the fire. No matter what you may challenge them on, they can always say... "that's what I said!"

Theological terms, ancient councils, dead theologians, and over-worded creeds, are their hiding places.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

As far as mistakes go, according to the openists God takes risks, and these sometime fail forcing him to switch to plan B (as in dispensationalism, for example). Failed risks are quite simply...mistakes.

It isn't God who fails, its us! We fail and then God is free to choose His plan B.

Don't take my word for it, take Gods!

Jeremiah 15:6 You have forsaken Me,” says the LORD, “You have gone backward. Therefore I will stretch out My hand against you and destroy you; I am weary of relenting!​

 

[Servo]

Do you, like Lion, believe the Second Person of the Trinity was geographically limited to wherever the physical body of Jesus happened to be?

Of course! Christ gave up some of His godly attributes when He humbled Himself and became man.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Theological terms, ancient councils, dead theologians, and over-worded creeds, are their hiding places.

Let's hear it for the Dead Theologians Society! If you refuse to learn anything from the masters, you can pretend and wear the T-Shirt! :rotfl:

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Let's hear it for the Dead Theologians Society! If you refuse to learn anything from the masters, you can pretend and wear the T-Shirt! :rotfl:

:chuckle: :up:

Although, I have learned something from these dead theologians.... which is... the were often horribly wrong about fundamental gospel issues.

 

[Psalmist]

Some great truths will never be known on this side of the grave. The quote exemplifies the issue and is relevant to "the nature of the subject". Of course, as you note, the truth is out there to be discovered and codified in some domains. I find the quote relevant to some biblical matters where God is silent. And when He shuts His mouth so should we.

Edit: Note to self - never participate in a discussion of sacred matters in a thread that is not exclusively Christian. :doh:

:think:

From AMR's post -
Some great truths will never be known on this side of the grave.
There Some biblical matters where God is silent.
And when He (God) shuts His mouth so should we.

I was going to add, "It is better to be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt" A quote attributed Abraham Lincoln, and few others. But that may not be nice.

What do the scriptures say?

Deut. 29:29
The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.

Daniel 2:22
He reveals deep and secret things;
He knows what is in the darkness,
And light dwells with Him.

Romans 11:33
Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out!​

That's​

- 30 -​

:scripto:. . Psalmist

 

[Sozo]

I see two sides to this:

1) God can die and still be God. The whole hypostatic union of Jesus died as a perfect sacrifice.

2) God can't die and still be God. Half (the man half) of the hypostatic union died as a perfect sacrifice.

The "hypostatic union" is a false doctrine created without any biblical support. Jesus does not have two identities or natures. He is God manifested in the flesh.

 

[Psalmist]

Let's hear it for the Dead Theologians Society! If you refuse to learn anything from the masters, you can pretend and wear the
T-Shirt! :rotfl:

:think:


Some pretend and carry a Bible.


:noid:

That's​

- 30 -​

:scripto:. . Psalmist