I want people who share the same theological views as me to instruct me.
"does this mean a part of God died?" [SHQIPTARSOULJA]
I'm not sure how to answer this :S He died like a human but He was brought back to life. Some say He went to Hell to evangelize but I'm not quite sure.
My initial reaction is that SHQIPTARSOULJA seems more interested in expressing his personal opinions against what he has heard of Christian expressions about the nature of the Trinity than he is curious to receive clarification as to what those views are.
So SHQIPTARSOULJA's interest in any clarification or explanation you offer is probably intended to be mined for further "evidence" against the Trinity or against Jesus rather than as an increased basis for fair judgment. Beware of casting your pearls before swine, as Jesus said.
The above does not necessarily mean you should not offer explanation or clarification. For one thing, your remarks may reduce the number of objections s/he has. Maybe. Or the clarification may have some effect SHQIPTARSOULJA did not intend.
But I also think one of the items you may do well to point out to SHQIPTARSOULJA, Raiyuu, is that his or her personal opinion about what God "must be like" (or not like) is not necessarily of greater authority and reasonableness than Christian tradition or the Bible as they all relate to the doctrines of the Trinity and of Jesus.
The above being said (or rather written), the only doctrinally questionable part of your proffered comments in my understanding (and in the version I have seen) is your admittedly tentative response to SHQIPTARSOULJA's question, " ... Does this mean a part of God died?" (See quote above.)
And I'm not sure I myself can offer a definitive rejoinder to your remarks.
But my understanding of your "some say He went to Hell" is that in church liturgy it probably derives especially from a clause that is a late (and hence probably not original) addition to the (authoritative, but extra-canonical) Apostle's Creed: "He [Jesus] descended into hell [Greek "Hades]" (in addition to "the grave," also in the Apostle's Creed--which you may Google).
Complicating matters is that this clause may comprise a summary of interpretations of various canonical texts, including the obscure and debated 1 Peter 3:19 (in context), with some interpretations possibly contrasting with Hebrews 9:11-12 which imply Jesus went to the heavenly tabernacle with His own blood (when?).
In summary, why risk bringing all that up with SHQIPTARSOULJA? It engages in the obscure and is unnecessary for the topic. And SHQIPTARSOULJA has already admitted that Jesus died.
Otherwise your response here is germane and theologically safe in my judgment, namely in your sentence: "He died like a human but He was brought back to life"--save that I would prefer substituting the word "as" for "like" lest it be taken to imply Jesus was only "like" a human rather than a human. Jesus died as a human.
But the debate here is not that Jesus as a human died. SHQIPTARSOULJA apparently is more interested in whether, as s/he puts it, "a part of God died" (or as we might prefer, the question whether "God the Son died") but that requires careful definition (e.g., "died" means what?), and in some views at least, is debatable or theologically wrong headed.
More to the point, your "safe" sentence above (as I label it, maybe substituting "as" for "like") probably will suffice for SHQIPTARSOULJA even if s/he is not satisfied by it or probably by much else that you might offer by way of response.
Or you may want to revamp your response per the above as a contest of personal opinion versus revelation. Or you may want to ask if the miracles were real or accent human sin and the justice of God.
If, at the end of the day, SHQIPTARSOULJA responds positively to the gospel message that you and perhaps others proffer, it will be because the Holy Spirit has so worked. You are just a witness to the truth.
