I see there are Monophysites alive and well in the Baptist Church, if that is the case. And since Col 1:16-17 says not only that all things whatsoever were created by, through and for the Son, but that they also hold together in him, I presume he would have to affirm also that all things ceased to exist between his death and the resuurection, which is slightly problematic as far as history, as well as the Esater narrative, is concerned.
Me, I prefer 1600 years of Chalcedonian Christianity to much of what individual scholars speculate today.
I do not think charges of heresy are helpful in this discussion, nor do I think they are appropriate. Cary recognizes the two natures of Jesus Christ as do I. The question is what happened when Jesus died. He was two natures, which He maintains, because Christians believe in the Resurrection of the body, so Jesus still has the same body that suffered on the Cross.
If only one nature of Jesus died on the Cross, then it would seem that He was only half dead. That does not seem right, but if both natures died that contradicts all that we know about God, including the passage from Colossians.
In some sense I prefer the second view, because God the Father sent God the Son to live on earth as a human being in every was as we are, except to be without sin. That would seem to mean to suffer death like we do. Yes, that raises some good questions, but we know that we do not know all the answers.
We certainly cannot explain how God the Son became a human being in Maryâs womb. @Edward
A great answer, Relates. I really like this answer. Dr. Cary is a nice person, isnât he? You and Jon are too. It has been nice hearing from both of you. God bless you and your families. Also, I wish to say that it has been splendid that both of you have responded to the statement about our Lord Jesus. Jesusâ situation is unique and difficult for anyone to explain.
I appreciate the clarification. There have been a number of papers and commentaries on this aspect, and I am sure that they will continue. A rupture of the heart in various ways, with blood from some of the chanbers etc mixing with fluids from elsewhereâthis sort of thing has been suggested. And there is another suggestion --also by a physician â that it had nothing to do with the heart but rather a buildup of fluids within the chest as a result of the beatings incurred prior to the crucifixion. I have also heard â somewhere along the way in life â that the separation of blood and water simply meant the heart had stopped beating and the fluids in the blood had separated â in other words, the soldiers knew that Jesus was dead as a doornail.
Thank you again for the information. The blood and water makes sense because that is what the soldiers were interested in, whether Jesus was dead or not. Blood is of course symbolic for communion, but so is water for baptism.
What I am concerned about is that these conjectures about the cause of death are physical causes. The emphasis on Good Friday is the spiritual/psychological suffering of Christ.
The two other men who were crucified were not dead, just Jesus. Why? I would not think that He was physically not as strong as they, but He was under much other stress.
Good questions, Robert. I recall a teacher telling the class years ago that the Bible gives âbare bonesâ accounts of things. This is probably the case here too. If the soldiers were in a hurry to finish the job of crucifixion before the Passover â so much so that they broke their legs to hasten their deaths â then I would suppose the other two individuals also were dead pretty quickly. Broken legs do not help in facilitating breathing while hanging on a cross⌠But the situations of these two are not mentioned, save for the promise Jesus gave the one repentant fellow that âthis dayâ he would be with Jesus in Paradise.
As for âWhyâ they were not mentioned â they were not the focus of the Gospels. Simple as that. As my teacher said â bare bones accounts.
If Jesus said âthis day,â then I presume He meant it and this thief entered Paradise. A dead person hanging on a cross by the roadside at the Passover time â thus potentially contaminating all around him â this was something I think they wanted to avoid. That was why the legs were broken. So they probably all three died but only Jesus is mentioned. And as He said, âIt is finishedâ â once He had accomplished the task, He did not need to âhang aroundâ any longer â no pun intended.
The problem with Christianity is that it is divided into many denominations. The Pentecostals believe God is One. So do the Trinitarians but they word it differently. Those who say that Jesus was fully God and fully man are not connecting the dots. Jesus Was Elohim. God plural. Elohim said, Light Become! and Elohim separated His Word from Himself as another Spirit. Now, we have Yehovah the Spirit and The Holy Spirit Isaiah 11:2 who overshadowed Mary and she had the Son of Man. Jesus/The Word Was God, became a little lower than the angels yet, filled with the fullness of the Father. Jesus was anointed when He was baptized. A voice from Heaven said, This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. as the Holy Spirit descended and rested upon Jesus. Thatâs three right there. Jesus said, Father, take this cup from Me, nevertheless, Your will be done. So, He did know what was in store for Him. Jesus was a Carpenter. Hammer, nails, wood, splinters⌠âDo not cling to Me,â Jesus said, âfor I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go and tell My brothers, âI am ascending to My Father and your Father, to My God and your God.ââ John 20:17 This is why Jesus would say, My God, My God⌠To the one who is victorious, I will grant the right to sit with Me on My throne, just as I overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne. Rev. 3:21
P.S. The Catholics love Jesus but call an old man âHoly Fatherâ. Jesus said to call no man Father, especially Holy Father. They pray to Mary, Saints and angels but no one can approach the Father except through His Son Jesus. Jesus is the Way, the Truth and Life.
Jesus (rather clearly) meant to call no other man God.
Wrong
When He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp, and they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.
3 Another angel, who had a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense to offer, with the prayers of all Godâs people, on the golden altar in front of the throne. 4 The smoke of the incense, together with the prayers of Godâs people, went up before God from the angelâs hand.
The actual word is Master but an old man is still not the Holy Father or the Vicar of Christ. There is no substitute. Those who accept Christ as Lord are Saints. Not men chosen by the Catholic Church. Bible Search: and all the saints
Yes. Prayers to the Father in the name of Jesus are incense. The rosary is not prayed in the name of Jesus. Jesus is only mentioned in the Hail Mary as an infant, not a resurrected savior. â Until now you have not asked for anything in My name. Ask and you will receive, so that your joy may be complete. John 16:24
Looks like i missed the rest of this thread somehow.
I wonder if you missed my answer further up. To me it is clear that his words were meant to sing the psalm about the prediction of his death, particularly with his final words
âes ist vollbrachtâ, as the recognition for it to be done to glorify the father. But what did he do to glorify the father as it said in the psalm.
does not make sense. Jesus saved us for showing us that God can carry us through death so that we do not die with our physical end. That would glorify the father, not to declare him to turn his back on you at the critical point in time. And how would Jesus have save us by becoming sin?
If Jesus, to fulfill his role of being totally human, had to suffer in all the ways humans can, then he had to suffer the pains of self-doubt, which can be the most devastating pain of all. After enduring all the physical pains of his passionâbelieving that he was fulfilling his role as the Savior of humankind, this belief was suddenly snatched away (if only momentarily) it must have caused more mental anguish than all the combined physical wounds. To me, that would seem to be the most unbearable experience possible. But Jesus wanted to make sure that every human in the future-- no matter what level of suffering they were being asked to endureâthey should not dispair, for Jesus has led the way and He can be looked to for sympathy and saving grace.
Al Leo
To me the hole point of his death is to show us that we can overcome all suffering when we are with God. To believe that he is not there in the moment of need is fatal to our understanding of a loving God. It is like asking were God was when Banda Aceh or at the Bataclan. Suffering is the discrepancy between wanting to have your will done instead of Godâs will to be done. Once you accept Godâs will you canât suffer. It is the difference between Marschall Brain who asks why doesnât God heal amputees - and Nick Vujicic and life without limbs.