OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 01, 2014, 10:53:28 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Did God Die?  (Read 3283 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,273


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #45 on: December 13, 2013, 10:33:21 PM »

I meant what I said. It's not hard. If Christ's body wasn't broken what was he showing Thomas again? Corruption means broken (broken intensely I guess to more precise), getting crucified and stuck with a sword would count as getting my body rather intensely broken.

Pretty straightforward stuff.

Then the fishermen were wrong.  

As would be St John the Evangelist, the prophets and the psalmist.  Tongue

John 19:36-37, Exodus 12:46; Numbers 9:12; Psalm 33:20, Zechariah 12:10.



Yeah, later Christians did carefully choose language to make things more poetic. But the next time some one at work pulls a muscle and talks about breaking their back, I'll forward them on to you, so you can let them know they were not broken.

And if any decide to get crucified and pierced with a sword, I'll do that same.

I am quite aware of the Scripture involved and the allegorical meanings, but if you going to talk to people who are not and don't care, you might want to put less inside nuance on it.

The Evangelist, a disciple chosen by Christ Himself, couldn't be more explicit in showing the fulfillment of the Passover lamb of the OT in the person and passion of Jesus Christ.
Logged
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #46 on: December 13, 2013, 10:37:22 PM »

I wonder if it's significant that the Nicene Creed states that "He was crucified, He suffered, and was buried," rather than "He was crucified, suffered, died, and was buried."?


Selam

Maybe Romaios or some other historian shed light on whether that is salient. The symbol of faith functioned as much of the work of councils to speak out against what was not held in common or what was threatening.

Jesus died. God died. God also didn't die since two other persons are God. If you can believe in a Trinitarian God, this isn't much of a problem, but if you are talking to people who don't, then it is a big problem.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #47 on: December 13, 2013, 10:38:26 PM »

I meant what I said. It's not hard. If Christ's body wasn't broken what was he showing Thomas again? Corruption means broken (broken intensely I guess to more precise), getting crucified and stuck with a sword would count as getting my body rather intensely broken.

Pretty straightforward stuff.

Then the fishermen were wrong.  

As would be St John the Evangelist, the prophets and the psalmist.  Tongue

John 19:36-37, Exodus 12:46; Numbers 9:12; Psalm 33:20, Zechariah 12:10.



Yeah, later Christians did carefully choose language to make things more poetic. But the next time some one at work pulls a muscle and talks about breaking their back, I'll forward them on to you, so you can let them know they were not broken.

And if any decide to get crucified and pierced with a sword, I'll do that same.

I am quite aware of the Scripture involved and the allegorical meanings, but if you going to talk to people who are not and don't care, you might want to put less inside nuance on it.

The Evangelist, a disciple chosen by Christ Himself, couldn't be more explicit in showing the fulfillment of the Passover lamb of the OT in the person and passion of Jesus Christ.

In a poetic manner the community that Gospel came out of certainly wanted to make that clear, yes, we agree.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #48 on: December 13, 2013, 10:41:22 PM »

This is a question that perplexes me. It's one of the things heretical sects and Muslims use as an argument against the Orthodox Christian Faith. It seems that the EO's can answer this by saying that Christ died in His humanity but not in His divinity. But since we don't separate Our Lord's nature, then doesn't this mean that God died? And how can God die? I know that ultimately these things are mysteries, but I'd like to know what our OO theological answer to this is. Forgive my ignorance.

God died in the same way that he was born of a Virgin. Unless you believe "Theotokos" means that Mary gave birth to the pre-eternal Godhead, yes, you do distinguish between the natures.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15,556


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #49 on: December 13, 2013, 10:41:28 PM »

I wonder if it's significant that the Nicene Creed states that "He was crucified, He suffered, and was buried," rather than "He was crucified, suffered, died, and was buried."?

The Syriac recension of the Nicene Creed, the Armenian Creed used in the Liturgy, the Roman baptismal creed known as the Apostles' Creed, and probably some others explicitly say Christ "died".  
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #50 on: December 13, 2013, 10:43:16 PM »

I wonder if it's significant that the Nicene Creed states that "He was crucified, He suffered, and was buried," rather than "He was crucified, suffered, died, and was buried."?

The Syriac recension of the Nicene Creed, the Armenian Creed used in the Liturgy, the Roman baptismal creed known as the Apostles' Creed, and probably some others explicitly say Christ "died".  

I would like to know why the syriac is different, but I am likely to lack the appropriate context to understand.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #51 on: December 13, 2013, 10:48:10 PM »

I wonder if it's significant that the Nicene Creed states that "He was crucified, He suffered, and was buried," rather than "He was crucified, suffered, died, and was buried."?


Selam

I'm fairly sure that the Syrian text of the creed does specify that he died. At least, in the Indian version it does.
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,454


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #52 on: December 13, 2013, 10:52:04 PM »

In the Creed it also says "He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered, and was buried, and on the third day, He rose from the dead..."

You can't have a rising "from death" if death didn't occur first.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #53 on: December 13, 2013, 10:55:26 PM »

In the Creed it also says "He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered, and was buried, and on the third day, He rose from the dead..."

You can't have a rising "from death" if death didn't occur first.

Hey, we are talking about theology . . . ! I know of at least four ways of getting around that one while nodding off to sleep
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #54 on: December 13, 2013, 10:55:52 PM »

St. Cyril's 12th anathema:

Quote
Whosoever shall not recognize that the Word of God suffered in the flesh, that he was crucified in the flesh, and that likewise in that same flesh he tasted death and that he is become the first-begotten of the dead, for, as he is God, he is the life and it is he that giveth life: let him be anathema.

Note that he says the Word died "in the flesh", which is the same as Chalcedonians saying "in his human nature".
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,030


« Reply #55 on: December 13, 2013, 10:58:07 PM »

This is a question that perplexes me. It's one of the things heretical sects and Muslims use as an argument against the Orthodox Christian Faith. It seems that the EO's can answer this by saying that Christ died in His humanity but not in His divinity. But since we don't separate Our Lord's nature, then doesn't this mean that God died? And how can God die? I know that ultimately these things are mysteries, but I'd like to know what our OO theological answer to this is. Forgive my ignorance.

God died in the same way that he was born of a Virgin. Unless you believe "Theotokos" means that Mary gave birth to the pre-eternal Godhead, yes, you do distinguish between the natures.

Sorry to butt in, but this apparent dilemma is not much of one when you consider the already-stated belief (see the Syrian fraction posted earlier) that it is after the union that the natures are considered to have been made one in an indivisible union, and hence not considered anymore as two. This is why our fathers were okay with the statement that He is "from two natures", but not that He is "in two natures".

It may seem like a minor point, but it isn't really.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2013, 11:05:04 PM by dzheremi » Logged

Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,095


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #56 on: December 13, 2013, 11:29:56 PM »


Jesus died. God died. God also didn't die since two other persons are God.

This question made me pull out On The Incarnation by St. Athanasius. This quote seems to be saying the same thing:

"Thus it happened that two opposite marvels took place at once: the death of all was consummated in the Lord's body; yet because the Word was in it, death and corruption were in the same act utterly abolished."


Selam
Logged

"If you stop to throw stones at every dog that barks at you along the way, you will never reach your goal." [Turkish Proverb]
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,769


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #57 on: December 14, 2013, 03:06:58 AM »

but if you going to talk to people who are not and don't care
We were talking to Gebre, yo.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #58 on: December 14, 2013, 03:24:47 AM »

but if you going to talk to people who are not and don't care
We were talking to Gebre, yo.

Gebre brought up Muslims and others. Keep up.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,354


« Reply #59 on: December 14, 2013, 04:16:08 AM »

Well, He both died and didn't die. He died because His divine nature was united with his human nature making Him just one person. He didn't die because His divine nature cannot experience any death. In other words, He was both an authentic human and authentic God.

Spiritually speaking, ultimately there is no death because our souls do not die. So, dying to the flesh, the world and death itself is actually the most life giving experience because we awaken to the reality of our indestructible soul. Death is rather the (tormenting) state of a soul who does not live, but that soul continues forever.
Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #60 on: December 14, 2013, 04:32:33 AM »

Well, He both died and didn't die. He died because His divine nature was united with his human nature making Him just one person. He didn't die because His divine nature cannot experience any death. In other words, He was both an authentic human and authentic God.

Yet we accept the theopaschite formula as orthodox ("One of the Trinity suffered for us") and believe in the communication of properties between the two natures. Just as Our Lord's humanity was deified, His divinity was also humanized, i.e. was enabled to experience pain and death.
Logged
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,354


« Reply #61 on: December 14, 2013, 04:44:27 AM »

Well, He both died and didn't die. He died because His divine nature was united with his human nature making Him just one person. He didn't die because His divine nature cannot experience any death. In other words, He was both an authentic human and authentic God.

Yet we accept the theopaschite formula as orthodox ("One of the Trinity suffered for us") and believe in the communication of properties between the two natures. Just as Our Lord's humanity was deified, His divinity was also humanized, i.e. was enabled to experience pain and death.

That's not true. His divinity can never suffer, but He can truly suffer by taking on human nature. In other words, He did fully assume human nature and suffered, but it is false to say that His divine eternal nature ever suffers.
Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #62 on: December 14, 2013, 04:49:29 AM »

That's not true. His divinity can never suffer, but He can truly suffer by taking on human nature. In other words, He did fully assume human nature and suffered, but it is false to say that His divine eternal nature ever suffers.

You can take it up with Saint Justinian, I guess. And skip the second Antiphon at DL...

Quote
Only-Begotten Son and Immortal Word of God,
Who for our salvation didst will to be incarnate of the holy Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary;
Who without change didst become man and was crucified;
Who art one of the Holy Trinity, glorified with the Father and the Holy Spirit:
O Christ our God, trampling down death by death, save us!
Logged
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,354


« Reply #63 on: December 14, 2013, 04:54:01 AM »

That's not true. His divinity can never suffer, but He can truly suffer by taking on human nature. In other words, He did fully assume human nature and suffered, but it is false to say that His divine eternal nature ever suffers.

You can take it up with Saint Justinian, I guess. And skip the second Antiphon at DL...

Quote
Only-Begotten Son and Immortal Word of God,
Who for our salvation didst will to be incarnate of the holy Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary;
Who without change didst become man and was crucified;
Who art one of the Holy Trinity, glorified with the Father and the Holy Spirit:
O Christ our God, trampling down death by death, save us!

I don't understand your argument. Exactly, who without change became man and was crucified. By that "exchange of properties" you are implying that His divine nature mixed with human nature which is a heresy. His divine nature joined with human nature, but did not fuse or mix; there is only a synergy between them.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 04:54:27 AM by IoanC » Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #64 on: December 14, 2013, 05:06:26 AM »

I don't understand your argument. Exactly, who without change became man and was crucified. By that "exchange of properties" you are implying that His divine nature mixed with human nature which is a heresy. His divine nature joined with human nature, but did not fuse or mix; there is only a synergy between them.

I talked of communication of properties, not exchange or confusion. It's like fire and iron: the iron rod becomes hot and glows - without fire it wouldn't, because iron isn't incandescent in its natural state. Not mixture, but synergy - as you say. 
Logged
Severian
God save Egypt, Syria & Iraq
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Coptic/Egyptian Orthodoxy
Posts: 5,039


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #65 on: December 14, 2013, 05:07:33 AM »

I don't understand your argument. Exactly, who without change became man and was crucified. By that "exchange of properties" you are implying that His divine nature mixed with human nature which is a heresy. His divine nature joined with human nature, but did not fuse or mix; there is only a synergy between them.

I talked of communication of properties, not exchange or confusion. It's like fire and iron: the iron rod becomes hot and glows - without fire it wouldn't, because iron isn't incandescent in its natural state. Not mixture, but synergy - as you say. 
It is heretical to believe that Christ suffered in His Divine nature. All the Patristic writers maintained that He remained impassible in His Divinity.
Logged


In solidarity with the "Nasara" (i.e. Christians) of Iraq & Syria

On hiatus from posting. PM me if you wish to contact me. Forgive me if my posts have lacked humility or tact

NOTE: Some of my older posts may not reflect my current views
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,354


« Reply #66 on: December 14, 2013, 05:13:57 AM »

I don't understand your argument. Exactly, who without change became man and was crucified. By that "exchange of properties" you are implying that His divine nature mixed with human nature which is a heresy. His divine nature joined with human nature, but did not fuse or mix; there is only a synergy between them.

I talked of communication of properties, not exchange or confusion. It's like fire and iron: the iron rod becomes hot and glows - without fire it wouldn't, because iron isn't incandescent in its natural state. Not mixture, but synergy - as you say.  

Well, then ultimately we are saying the same thing. Didn't I say in my earlier post that Christ truly died as a human? But as God, He could not die (or suffer). In fact, it would be useless for our salvation if He could because then we cannot defeat death and resurrect. Yet, you seem to imply that it His divine nature that died/suffered by receiving pain from His human nature. That's not true.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 05:14:34 AM by IoanC » Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #67 on: December 14, 2013, 05:17:22 AM »

It is heretical to believe that Christ suffered in His Divine nature. All the Patristic writers maintained that He remained impassible in His Divinity.

Funny that an OO of all people should split up natures and attribute something that happened to the Logos after the Incarnation (death) to one nature alone (humanity).  Wink

What does it mean that "One of the Holy Trinity suffered for us"?
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 05:31:19 AM by Romaios » Logged
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,354


« Reply #68 on: December 14, 2013, 05:21:59 AM »

It is heretical to believe that Christ suffered in His Divine nature. All the Patristic writers maintained that He remained impassible in His Divinity.

Funny that an OO of all people should split up natures and attribute something that happened to the Logos after the Incarnation (death) to one nature alone (humanity).  Wink

What does it mean that "one of the Trinity suffered for us"?

As far as I am concerned, I don't think we are speaking about splitting up natures, but understanding that Christ has two natures which do not fuse or mix, but are perfectly united. It is enough that He suffered in His human nature; you don't want Him to suffer in His divine nature as well.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 05:22:26 AM by IoanC » Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #69 on: December 14, 2013, 05:22:17 AM »

But as God, He could not die (or suffer). In fact, it would be useless for our salvation if He could because then we cannot defeat death and resurrect. Yet, you seem to imply that it His divine nature that died/suffered by receiving pain from His human nature. That's not true.

God could and did suffer, because He so willed it. This is what theopaschism is all about.
Logged
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,354


« Reply #70 on: December 14, 2013, 05:23:49 AM »

But as God, He could not die (or suffer). In fact, it would be useless for our salvation if He could because then we cannot defeat death and resurrect. Yet, you seem to imply that it His divine nature that died/suffered by receiving pain from His human nature. That's not true.

God could and did suffer, because He so willed it. This is what theopaschism is all about.

God did suffer as a human. His suffering was real, but His divine nature can never be touched by suffering. You can't seem to understand that the same person can have two natures and that they don't have to mix in order for God to experience suffering.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 05:24:18 AM by IoanC » Logged
Severian
God save Egypt, Syria & Iraq
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Coptic/Egyptian Orthodoxy
Posts: 5,039


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #71 on: December 14, 2013, 05:25:25 AM »

It is heretical to believe that Christ suffered in His Divine nature. All the Patristic writers maintained that He remained impassible in His Divinity.

Funny that an OO of all people should split up natures and attribute something that happened to the Logos after the Incarnation (death) to one nature alone (humanity).  Wink

What does it mean that "one of the Trinity suffered for us"?
We do not "split up the natures." You are failing to take into account the distinction between nature and hypostasis. Natures are abstract concepts which cannot act in and of themselves. The nature defines the hypostasis' class of being (I.e. whether it is God or man). Thus, Christ, the Incarnate Word of God, died in accordance with His humanity, remaining impassible in Divinity. To say otherwise is to attribute each nature's properties to each other, rather than the one hypostasis.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 05:25:49 AM by Severian » Logged


In solidarity with the "Nasara" (i.e. Christians) of Iraq & Syria

On hiatus from posting. PM me if you wish to contact me. Forgive me if my posts have lacked humility or tact

NOTE: Some of my older posts may not reflect my current views
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #72 on: December 14, 2013, 05:26:28 AM »

As far as I am concerned, I don't think we are speaking about splitting up natures, but understanding that Christ has two natures which do not fuse or mix, but are perfectly united. It is enough that He suffered in His human nature; you don't want Him to suffer in His divine nature as well.

It's not a question of what I want, but of what He wanted and did.

If the natures are "perfectly" united, how can one remain unaffected by what happens to the other? This would indeed be Nestorianism. If you put a piece of iron in the fire, does it stay cold?
Logged
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,354


« Reply #73 on: December 14, 2013, 05:30:20 AM »

As far as I am concerned, I don't think we are speaking about splitting up natures, but understanding that Christ has two natures which do not fuse or mix, but are perfectly united. It is enough that He suffered in His human nature; you don't want Him to suffer in His divine nature as well.

It's not a question of what I want, but of what He wanted and did.

If the natures are "perfectly" united, how can one remain unaffected by what happens to the other? This would indeed be Nestorianism. If you put a piece of iron in the fire, does it stay cold?

It's actually backwards. You think that the iron is God's nature and the fire is human nature? Smiley I'd say that the fire is God's nature and it affects the human nature. Anyway, this fire and iron analogy can lead to other problems. Christ is one person with two natures. As God he cannot suffer, but as human He can. It is one person who can do both.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 05:31:59 AM by IoanC » Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #74 on: December 14, 2013, 05:38:30 AM »

It's actually backwards. You think that the iron is God's nature and the fire is human nature? Smiley I'd say that the fire is God's nature and it affects the human nature. Anyway, this fire and iron analogy can lead to other problems. Christ is one person with two natures. As God he cannot suffer, but as human He can. It is one person who can do both.

The analogy is not perfect, I admit. The idea is that if one person is to function in virtue of two natures, their properties must be commonly shared. God suffered in the flesh - the deified flesh defied corruption and rose from the dead on the third day.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 05:40:51 AM by Romaios » Logged
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,354


« Reply #75 on: December 14, 2013, 05:42:06 AM »

It's actually backwards. You think that the iron is God's nature and the fire is human nature? Smiley I'd say that the fire is God's nature and it affects the human nature. Anyway, this fire and iron analogy can lead to other problems. Christ is one person with two natures. As God he cannot suffer, but as human He can. It is one person who can do both.

The analogy is not perfect, I admit. The idea is that if one person is to function in virtue of two natures, their properties are commonly shared. God suffered in the flesh - the deified flesh defied corruption and rose from the dead on the third day.

I disagree that the properties are commonly shared. The person has both properties, but the properties themselves remain perfectly unmixed. Furthermore, Christ's divine nature needs nothing from the human. He only took it on for our benefit.
Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #76 on: December 14, 2013, 05:48:15 AM »

I disagree that the properties are commonly shared. The person has both properties, but the properties themselves remain perfectly unmixed. Furthermore, Christ's divine nature needs nothing from the human. He only took it on for our benefit.

Quote from: Hebrews 2
It was fitting that God, for whom and through whom all things exist, in bringing many children to glory, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through sufferings. 11 For the one who sanctifies and those who are sanctified all have one Father. For this reason Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers and sisters, 12 saying,

‘I will proclaim your name to my brothers and sisters,
    in the midst of the congregation I will praise you.’

13 And again,

‘I will put my trust in him.’

And again,

‘Here am I and the children whom God has given me.’

14 Since, therefore, the children share flesh and blood, he himself likewise shared the same things, so that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by the fear of death. 16 For it is clear that he did not come to help angels, but the descendants of Abraham. 17 Therefore he had to become like his brothers and sisters[n] in every respect, so that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make a sacrifice of atonement for the sins of the people. 18 Because he himself was tested by what he suffered, he is able to help those who are being tested.
Logged
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,354


« Reply #77 on: December 14, 2013, 05:51:22 AM »

I disagree that the properties are commonly shared. The person has both properties, but the properties themselves remain perfectly unmixed. Furthermore, Christ's divine nature needs nothing from the human. He only took it on for our benefit.

Quote from: Hebrews 2
It was fitting that God, for whom and through whom all things exist, in bringing many children to glory, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through sufferings. 11 For the one who sanctifies and those who are sanctified all have one Father. For this reason Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers and sisters, 12 saying,

‘I will proclaim your name to my brothers and sisters,
    in the midst of the congregation I will praise you.’

13 And again,

‘I will put my trust in him.’

And again,

‘Here am I and the children whom God has given me.’

14 Since, therefore, the children share flesh and blood, he himself likewise shared the same things, so that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by the fear of death. 16 For it is clear that he did not come to help angels, but the descendants of Abraham. 17 Therefore he had to become like his brothers and sisters[n] in every respect, so that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make a sacrifice of atonement for the sins of the people. 18 Because he himself was tested by what he suffered, he is able to help those who are being tested.

You are reading it wrongly. He as a person shared the same things. It doesn't say that His divine nature can actually suffer.
Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #78 on: December 14, 2013, 05:58:39 AM »

We do not "split up the natures." You are failing to take into account the distinction between nature and hypostasis. Natures are abstract concepts which cannot act in and of themselves. The nature defines the hypostasis' class of being (I.e. whether it is God or man). Thus, Christ, the Incarnate Word of God, died in accordance with His humanity, remaining impassible in Divinity. To say otherwise is to attribute each nature's properties to each other, rather than the one hypostasis.

I agree - but it is precisely your argument that natures are abstract notions denoting classes of being that serves my position: the communication/sharing of properties in the one hypostasis. 

All I'm saying is God (i.e. One of the Trinity, not some abstract nature) suffered in the flesh.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 06:01:15 AM by Romaios » Logged
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,354


« Reply #79 on: December 14, 2013, 06:04:12 AM »

We do not "split up the natures." You are failing to take into account the distinction between nature and hypostasis. Natures are abstract concepts which cannot act in and of themselves. The nature defines the hypostasis' class of being (I.e. whether it is God or man). Thus, Christ, the Incarnate Word of God, died in accordance with His humanity, remaining impassible in Divinity. To say otherwise is to attribute each nature's properties to each other, rather than the one hypostasis.

I agree - but it is precisely your argument that natures are abstract notions denoting classes of being that serves my position: the communication/sharing of properties in the one hypostasis. 

All I'm saying is God (i.e. One of the Trinity, not some abstract nature) suffered in the flesh.

Please, be careful because you are slandering my words and someone who might read just the one post may think that I saying that the two natures are abstract notions. I never said that. The two natures are real, but distinct and unmixed. God does not need to receive anything in His divinity in order to suffer in the flesh).
Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #80 on: December 14, 2013, 06:05:00 AM »

You are reading it wrongly. He as a person shared the same things. It doesn't say that His divine nature can actually suffer.

He couldn't have if there had been no hypostatic union > communication/sharing of properties of the two natures.

Sharing does not mean confusing or mixing up.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 06:09:49 AM by Romaios » Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #81 on: December 14, 2013, 06:06:51 AM »

We do not "split up the natures." You are failing to take into account the distinction between nature and hypostasis. Natures are abstract concepts which cannot act in and of themselves. The nature defines the hypostasis' class of being (I.e. whether it is God or man). Thus, Christ, the Incarnate Word of God, died in accordance with His humanity, remaining impassible in Divinity. To say otherwise is to attribute each nature's properties to each other, rather than the one hypostasis.

I agree - but it is precisely your argument that natures are abstract notions denoting classes of being that serves my position: the communication/sharing of properties in the one hypostasis. 

All I'm saying is God (i.e. One of the Trinity, not some abstract nature) suffered in the flesh.

Please, be careful because you are slandering my words and someone who might read just the one post may think that I saying that the two natures are abstract notions. I never said that. The two natures are real, but distinct and unmixed. God does not need to receive anything in His divinity in order to suffer in the flesh).

In case you haven't noticed, it was Severian whom I quoted.

And it is persons, not words that can be slandered. Wink
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 06:35:24 AM by Romaios » Logged
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,354


« Reply #82 on: December 14, 2013, 06:07:07 AM »

You are reading it wrongly. He as a person shared the same things. It doesn't say that His divine nature can actually suffer.

He couldn't have if there had been no hypostatic union > communication/sharing of properties of the two natures.

Ok, so you believe there is communication of properties between the two natures. This is heresy and you need to do your homework.
Logged
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,354


« Reply #83 on: December 14, 2013, 06:08:59 AM »

We do not "split up the natures." You are failing to take into account the distinction between nature and hypostasis. Natures are abstract concepts which cannot act in and of themselves. The nature defines the hypostasis' class of being (I.e. whether it is God or man). Thus, Christ, the Incarnate Word of God, died in accordance with His humanity, remaining impassible in Divinity. To say otherwise is to attribute each nature's properties to each other, rather than the one hypostasis.

I agree - but it is precisely your argument that natures are abstract notions denoting classes of being that serves my position: the communication/sharing of properties in the one hypostasis. 

All I'm saying is God (i.e. One of the Trinity, not some abstract nature) suffered in the flesh.

Please, be careful because you are slandering my words and someone who might read just the one post may think that I saying that the two natures are abstract notions. I never said that. The two natures are real, but distinct and unmixed. God does not need to receive anything in His divinity in order to suffer in the flesh).

In case you haven't noticed, it was Severian whom I quoted.

Sorry, but you can still use what I said.
Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #84 on: December 14, 2013, 06:13:48 AM »

Ok, so you believe there is communication of properties between the two natures. This is heresy and you need to do your homework.

LOL - you have no idea what the notion refers to:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04169a.htm

Sharing =/= mixing up or confusing. I can share my tools with my neighbour and they'll still be mine even if he uses them.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 06:16:22 AM by Romaios » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,454


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #85 on: December 14, 2013, 06:29:47 AM »

You are reading it wrongly. He as a person shared the same things. It doesn't say that His divine nature can actually suffer.

He couldn't have if there had been no hypostatic union > communication/sharing of properties of the two natures.

Ok, so you believe there is communication of properties between the two natures. This is heresy and you need to do your homework.
ummm...no, YOU need to do your homework. Communicato idiomatum is a central tenet of the third ecumenical council. Rejection of the communication of properties is Nestorian
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,354


« Reply #86 on: December 14, 2013, 06:34:43 AM »

Well, then I am luck because my deification means that The Holy Spirit receives the properties of my nature and I receive His. In other words, we mix or even switch places. There is communication between the two natures, not communication of properties of the natures.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 06:35:10 AM by IoanC » Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #87 on: December 14, 2013, 06:39:00 AM »

Well, then I am luck because my deification means that The Holy Spirit receives the properties of my nature and I receive His. In other words, we mix or even switch places. There is communication between the two natures, not communication of properties of the natures.

That is one analogy that won't work: the hypostatic union of the two natures in Christ is of a different order than our theosis/deification.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 06:39:33 AM by Romaios » Logged
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,354


« Reply #88 on: December 14, 2013, 06:39:38 AM »

Well, then I am luck because my deification means that The Holy Spirit receives the properties of my nature and I receive His. In other words, we mix or even switch places. There is communication between the two natures, not communication of properties of the natures.

That is one analogy that won't work: the hypostatic union of the two natures in Christ is of a different order than theosis/deification.

God became man so that man can become God. Isn't that what the saints say?
« Last Edit: December 14, 2013, 06:40:14 AM by IoanC » Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #89 on: December 14, 2013, 06:42:30 AM »

Well, then I am luck because my deification means that The Holy Spirit receives the properties of my nature and I receive His. In other words, we mix or even switch places. There is communication between the two natures, not communication of properties of the natures.

That is one analogy that won't work: the hypostatic union of the two natures in Christ is of a different order than theosis/deification.

God became man so that man can become God. Isn't that what the saints say?

Yes, but you will not become one of the Trinity. You might become by grace what He is by nature.
Logged
Tags: theopaschism 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.151 seconds with 71 queries.