Amended* God cannot die and question regarding the Hypostatic union

[ViaCrucis]

28 Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not.

29 But I know him: for I am from him, and he hath sent me.

33 Then said Jesus unto them, Yet a little while am I with you, and then I go unto him that sent me.

16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.

23 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.

29 And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.

42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.

57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?

58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

45 And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me.

Amen, Christ is eternal God, only-begotten of the Father before all worlds, and He willingly humbled Himself and became man for our sake; and when we behold Him we behold also the One who sent Him, since He and His Father are one, and the Son is the radiance of the Father's glory, the perfect reflection of the Father's Person, for Christ is the image of the invisible God, and we read that no one has ever seen the Father, but that Christ the only-begotten Son who became flesh, has made Him known.

God the Son and Word of the Father became man and dwelt among us. Glory be to God.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Ann77]

I think I'm following now.

Prior to the Incarnation He is God the Son. And as we read "God is spirit" so I guess you could say that, but I think the point in saying that God is spirit is to emphasize the transcendence of God, that's why Jesus says that day would come when it wouldn't matter whether this or that mountain, because true worshipers of God will worship in spirit and truth.

When He became man, He took on a second nature, human; and that means He has a human soul/spirit.

-CryptoLutheran

Ok, good. Final question. I hope you don't mind, I appreciate all your so far answers.
This is what I'm really wondering.

How many persons is Christ now? Is there a reason we say two natures instead of two persons?

When I say person, I don't mean being or entity. I mean personality, the nature or essence of what makes us us.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Ok, good. Final question. I hope you don't mind, I appreciate all your so far answers.
This is what I'm really wondering.

How many persons is Christ now? Is there a reason we say two natures instead of two persons?

When I say person, I don't mean being or entity. I mean personality, the nature or essence of what makes us us.

He's always been one Person. He's Jesus.

We say two natures and not two persons because Jesus is a single undivided Person, His Deity and humanity concur in His single undivided Person, without confusion or separation.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Ann77]

He's always been one Person. He's Jesus.

We say two natures and not two persons because Jesus is a single undivided Person, His Deity and humanity concur in His single undivided Person, without confusion or separation.

-CryptoLutheran

Thank you.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

I don't understand what you're answering. I'm aware of their rejection of the crucifixion. I never said the Gospel was off. The idea that human nature is expressed as just flesh and experienced physical death and torture sounded off. Matt Slick from Carm said this a few times on his show.

My apologies. I am trying to say that Jesus Christ of Nazareth returned to the flesh. This is the Gospel. The confusion over the nature of man vs the nature of God or flesh vs spirit should not be the focus. It is the second death we should be concerned with. This takes place when all are resurrected back into flesh, judged and either spend eternity with our Lord or are sent to everlasting condemnation. Regeneration through the power of the Holy Spirit is what identifies the chosen who will spend eternity with Him.
Be blessed.

 

[RickReads]

My apologies. I am trying to say that Jesus Christ of Nazareth returned to the flesh. This is the Gospel. The confusion over the nature of man vs the nature of God or flesh vs spirit should not be the focus. It is the second death we should be concerned with. This takes place when all are resurrected back into flesh, judged and either spend eternity with our Lord or are sent to everlasting condemnation. Regeneration through the power of the Holy Spirit is what identifies the chosen who will spend eternity with Him.
Be blessed.

The second death would be an interesting topic to discuss and would make a great new thread. I don`t think it would be good if the whole site was about one topic. In my view, message boards such as this one aren`t very good at evangelism because there is a large varience of beliefs. It`s rare to change someone`s religeous view and for several years I would try to do just that. In the long run I ended up being influenced by those I tussled with more so then I was influencing them with my views on the gospel.I eventually burned out on talking scripture to strangers online and quit doing it for a long time.

At this point I want to get better at discussing views without expressing my intensity about the gospel. I will struggle, LOL. But, I do believe the witness of web sites like this one is in the way we interact with each other inspite of having differences in views. Everyones been pretty nice to me so far and it makes me kind of excited about participating. It has me thinking about how I express things and how I can tone down my own rhetoric a bit.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

The second death would be an interesting topic to discuss and would make a great new thread. I don`t think it would be good if the whole site was about one topic. In my view, message boards such as this one aren`t very good at evangelism because there is a large varience of beliefs. It`s rare to change someone`s religeous view and for several years I would try to do just that. In the long run I ended up being influenced by those I tussled with more so then I was influencing them with my views on the gospel.I eventually burned out on talking scripture to strangers online and quit doing it for a long time.

At this point I want to get better at discussing views without expressing my intensity about the gospel. I will struggle, LOL. But, I do believe the witness of web sites like this one is in the way we interact with each other inspite of having differences in views. Everyones been pretty nice to me so far and it makes me kind of excited about participating. It has me thinking about how I express things and how I can tone down my own rhetoric a bit.

Great post thanks!I look forward to your threads. Be blessed.

 

[RickReads]

I don't see why you think I'm saying His soul was "tinkered with". I've never said anything close to that effect. I've said that Christ in becoming human became fully human, that means He then had a human body, a human soul, a human mind, etc.



"This day" is eternal. Jesus never became God the Son. He has always been God, only-begotten of the Father.

-CryptoLutheran

Begotton is the past participle of the word beget which means bring (a child) into existence by the process of reproduction.

The list of scriptures I posted from the book of John, Jesus talked about it,

"Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me."

Jesus was begotton when He became flesh as the second Adam. The process was finished when He was begotton at His Resurrection, which according to Paul in Acts 13:33 is the day Psalms 2:7 speaks of.

 

[prodromos]

For me it`s a red flag when somebody turns to sources outside the Bible.

Your own intellect, the manner in which you interpret the Scriptures, is no less a source outside the Bible. At least with many of the Church Fathers we see evidence of the fruit of the Holy Spirit in their lives, so we can have confidence that they were in turn guided by the Holy Spirit in their interpretation of God's Word. Is it possible for you to make the same claim for yourself?

 

[RickReads]

Your own intellect, the manner in which you interpret the Scriptures, is no less a source outside the Bible. At least with many of the Church Fathers we see evidence of the fruit of the Holy Spirit in their lives, so we can have confidence that they were in turn guided by the Holy Spirit in their interpretation of God's Word. Is it possible for you to make the same claim for yourself?

Whew! I confess this one made me smile, your question, it`s not very sporting . In the case of the Romans you are calling the church fathers what you have is a collection of old books that are not entirely reliable. You haven`t seen or known any of them to know their fruit.

In my case, I`m not interested in making any claims or boasts I don`t believe in interpretations except when it comes to some Bible prophecy. I believe literal interpretation is the path and an understanding that scriptures very often interpret themselves.I believe God wants us to use the tools He gives us and so I post Bible scriptures sometimes.

 

[prodromos]

You haven`t seen or known any of them to know their fruit

Many of their lives have been recorded and we also have much of their correspondence with others when dealing with serious issues, so we know quite a bit about them.

 

[RickReads]

Many of their lives have been recorded, so we know quite a bit about them.

That`s fine, I got nothing against them. For awhile I studied some of it because some people I was engaging insisted on using them in place of scripture. I found quite a bit of to be useful in constructing my arguments but I didn`t want to take several years of my study time to absorb them into my repertoire. Mostly, they just didn`t give me the peace that Bible study does.

I got lots of saved commentaries I could put up but I like to see what someone I`m talking with believes not some cut and paste commentary someone else wrote.

 

[Jovajna]

Our Lord Jesus Christ had twofold nature, not two persons. He was God and Man. He showed his Godly nature many times while here on Earth, but most prominent on the day we now call Transfiguration of our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ. He did not 'die' as such, He sacrificed Him self for us, our liberation from sins. Since He was in our body, He suffered as we would, and died on a cross as we die (He died faster, by the mercy of God). Why did He died? To deliver us from eternal fires of hell, where all human souls were dragged after death (except three, I believe), as a natural continuation of our sins. But He could not die exactly as one of us, since He was God also. His death, dying as a man but also being God, led to the delivery of all souls from the hell. We say: He smashed the gates of hell and led everyone out of there. His death is not the same as our death. That was the right way to deliver us. Dying for us, He showed perfect Love for us. Also, He showed that a human being can be perfect while living here, there is no flaw in us, in God's creation. Further more, He had risen on the third day, and showed Him self in His body to beloved brothers and sisters. He was here, live again, resurrected, teaching for 40 days. Imagine the wonder of God! Many had seen Him, sat with Him, listened to Him. And then he rose from the Earth, to our Father in Heaven, and all present people were watching this happen in front of their eyes. He left us His promise that He'll be with us, always, even unto the end of time.

I've told this in poor words, but even so, does the question "how he could die" even has a meaning anymore?

That is a question some groups are using to get in to philosophical debate with Christians.
Philosophy is earthly amusement of one's mind, led by our limited understandings and provoked by a need to prove our selves as "deep-thinkers". As such, it can be practical but is has nothing to do with God or faith. Or hope. Or love.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Begotton is the past participle of the word beget which means bring (a child) into existence by the process of reproduction.

The list of scriptures I posted from the book of John, Jesus talked about it,

"Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me."

Jesus was begotton when He became flesh as the second Adam. The process was finished when He was begotton at His Resurrection, which according to Paul in Acts 13:33 is the day Psalms 2:7 speaks of.

Jesus is the eternal Son of the Father, true God of true God, begotten, not made.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[RickReads]

Jesus is the eternal Son of the Father, true God of true God, begotten, not made.

-CryptoLutheran

Yes, "These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God"

 

[Ann77]

@RickReads
What's the issue you have?

 

[RickReads]

@RickReads
What's the issue you have?

I`m sorry, issue in regards to what? I`m a little slow sometimes so you`ll have to clarify.

If you mean my last post, I put that up there because I think we may believe the same thing and express it in different ways.

Mostly I express my views using words from the King James and for the most part I avoid using terms that were created after the Bible was written. I don`t know some of those terms and I don`t know the particulars of many of them.

In my life I`ve mostly attended hillbilly churches and my study time has been invested in understanding the King James.

 

[Ann77]

I`m sorry, issue in regards to what? I`m a little slow sometimes so you`ll have to clarify.

No, problem. I wasn't clear. Was there a disagreement between you and @ViaCrucis or was it just a misunderstanding?

 

[RickReads]

No, problem. I wasn't clear. Was there a disagreement between you and @ViaCrucis or was it just a misunderstanding?

Well, I`m not sure. My view of the Godhead differs from some Trinitarian views. There is quite a bit of varience in the concept. The verse I quoted from Revelation is a good starting point for me. I would like to be able to come into agreement with him. That is always my goal although sometimes it may not seem like it