[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / agatha / ausneets / baaa / cafechan / chemo / dempart / vg / vichan ]

/christianity/ - Christian Theology

Free speech discussion
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


737c34  No.2167

((Some say, “It was the second person of the Trinity Who died.” That would be a mutation within the very being of God)), because when we look at the Trinity we say that the three are one in essence, and that though there are personal distinctions among the persons of the Godhead, those distinctions are not essential in the sense that they are differences in being. Death is something that would involve a change in one’s being.

We (should shrink in horror from the idea that God actually died on the cross. The atonement was made by the human nature of Christ). Somehow people tend to think that this lessens the dignity or the value of the substitutionary act, as if we were somehow implicitly denying the deity of Christ. God forbid. It’s the God-man Who dies, but death is something that is experienced only by the human nature, because the divine nature isn’t capable of experiencing death.

https://www.ligonier.org/blog/it-accurate-say-god-died-cross/

737c34  No.2168

The proof from Cyril of Alexandria:

For we believe in one God, Father almighty, maker of all things both visible and invisible, and in one Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Spirit; and following the professions of faith of the holy fathers that supplement this, we say that the Word begotten essentially from God the Father became as we are and took flesh and became man, that is, he took for himself a body from the holy Virgin and made it his own. For that is how he will truly be one Lord Jesus Christ, that is how we worship him as one, (not separating man and God), but believing that he is one and the same in his divinity and his humanity, that is to say, (simultaneously both God and man.)-Against Nestorius(pg.141)

For (the incarnate nature of the Word is immediately conceived of as one after the union).30 It is not unreasonable to see something similar in our own case too. For (a human being is truly one compounded of dissimilar elements), by which I mean soul and body. But it is necessary to note here that we say that the body united to God the Word is endowed with a rational soul. And it will also be useful to add the following: (the flesh, by the principle of its own nature, is different from the Word of God, and conversely the nature of the Word is essentially different from the flesh). Yet even though the elements just named are conceived of as different and separated into a dissimilarity of natures, (Christ is nevertheless conceived of as one from both, the divinity and humanity having come together in a true union, Against Nestorius in Russell's Cyril of Alexandria, pg.142)


c1456b  No.2173

File: 5e0b9fde8318d19⋯.jpg (99.87 KB, 523x720, 523:720, autismus maximus.jpg)


f565e1  No.2180

>>2173

Sta mad, Nestorian


da2210  No.2290

>>2167

fuq i remeber this thread on /christian/




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / agatha / ausneets / baaa / cafechan / chemo / dempart / vg / vichan ]