The Jewish Dilemma

[EphremHagos]

I could not agree with you more!

Seven year olds, with their undeveloped sense of self-reliance, are indeed more open-minded to the wonderful and marvellous things of God's Kingdom than adults who are hard to teach. (Matt. 18: 3-5; 21:16)

By the way, John 11: 25-26 is an excellent promise of diacritical death broadly defined and embracing not just Jesus Christ (who is the resurrection and the life) but also everyone who lives and believes in him!

[John Goddard]

According to the Bible (I assume you've read it), Jesus was immortal BEFORE he died. Ever read Colossians I - 15-20? John chapter 1? Revelation 1:8?

So, it still is odd. How can an immortal die? Does it count if the person "killed" cannot die?

There's no way around it. It's a dilemma that has no answer.

NORM

I'm not Trinitarian but Adoptionist and don't interpret pre-existence of anything but God's Spirit that came to dwell in the human Jesus with any of those verses. So that's my way around it.

[EphremHagos]

Concerning the knowledge of God, the death of Jesus Christ on the cross is the great watershed between direct and personal revelation from the God-reliant ("tree of life", i.e., the cross of Christ; and the self-reliant theology (the "tree of knowledge of what is good and what is bad").

Based on sources in scriptures, other differences include the cause and effect of Jesus' death as announced and demonstrated; identification with versus separation from God upon death; and diametrically opposed manners of Jesus' and our resurrection to glory!

According to Jesus Christ, immortality (after death at a lower level) is only the partial share of "whoever believes in him" whose full share extends incredibly to here-and-now and the time of death (John 11: 25-26)!

How infinitely more at the source, Jesus the Messiah!!!!!!!!

If the logic is right, your suggestion that Jesus was immortal after he died does not begin to solve the dilemma. Does it?

How much would your answser change if the dilemma of "the Messiah, the Son of the living God" (immortal himself) suffering and dying on the cross, was faced particularly by Simon Peter (Matt. 16: 13-28) who, after his famous 3-time denial, was fully reinstated by the time of Pentecost (Acts 2)?


Please allow me to make an intervention.

Whether in the original Nicene or later use, the theological concept of Hypostasis cannot explain the dilemma of a suffering and dying Messiah, Son of the living God.

The possibility for someone immortal to die is limited to his human nature and even that as demonstration of inherent and awesome power in oneself.

To understand "the sacrifice of a Son who cannot be sacrificed", one has to at least understand (if not to speak) the language of one who had the humble and lowly attitude Jesus had (Phil. 2: 5-11) Without which it is impossible to make full sense of his words.
Rarely can one catch him testifying on his own behalf. Jesus depended exclusively on the witness of his works (John 5: 30-37; 10: 37-38). What a difference this rule will make as a means of witnessing!

Moderated By: rogue06/mossy is the greatest

If you wish to respond to different posts please use the quote function, if not please use the edit function.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publically complain or whine, please take it to the Psychotherapy Room unless told otherwise.

[EphremHagos]

Matthew 27:45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land until the ninth hour. And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?" that is, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" And some of the bystanders, hearing it, said, "This man is calling Elijah." And one of them at once ran and took a sponge, filled it with sour wine, and put it on a reed and gave it to him to drink. But the others said, "Wait, let us see whether Elijah will come to save him." And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice and yielded up his spirit.

Jesus' did die. The earthly body he was born into physically died. And he experienced something far greater... separation from God. The blameless Word of God made flesh experienced a taste of hell to redeem those who believe in him. Jesus died through and through, and then was resurrected to glory so that we wouldn't have to experience the same.

In the context of the terms and seal of God's "new covenant" (Jer. 31: 31-34; Matt. 26: 26-29 ff), in general, and in view of a previous notice that "the Father is with me" when the time came and the disciples scattered (John 16:33), in particular, is the question, "My God, my God, why did you abandon me?" (Matt. 27:46) an expression of Jesus Christ's experience of separation from God or rather a simple rhetorical question commenting on the invariable expressions of unbelief surrounding him at his crucifixion?

[John Goddard]

According to Jesus Christ, immortality (after death at a lower level) is only the partial share of "whoever believes in him" whose full share extends incredibly to here-and-now and the time of death (John 11: 25-26)!

How infinitely more at the source, Jesus the Messiah!!!!!!!!

If the logic is right, your suggestion that Jesus was immortal after he died does not begin to solve the dilemma. Does it?

Well, yeah, the promise is not that you'll never die, but that when you are raised from the dead you'll get immortality. Having the promise now while still dying a mortal death, and being immortal from here on in, are two different things.

...or rather a simple rhetorical question commenting on the invariable expressions of unbelief surrounding him at his crucifixion?

That.

Psalms 22:1 My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?

Psalms 22:7 All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying,

Psalms 22:8 He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.

Psalms 22:24 For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard.

[NormATive]

Let's try this again. Hypostatic union. It has nothing to do with blood clots.

Hypostasis is a medical term describing blood clots.

Adding the word union still does not explain how someone who is immortal can die.

NORM

[NormATive]

I'm not Trinitarian but Adoptionist and don't interpret pre-existence of anything but God's Spirit that came to dwell in the human Jesus with any of those verses. So that's my way around it.

Now that's a theory with some legs. I can wrap my mind around G-d "indwelling" or possessing Jesus. The trinity thing is just too weird.

NORM

[Little Shepherd]

Hypostasis is a medical term describing blood clots.

Adding the word union still does not explain how someone who is immortal can die.

Sorry, I'm not going to play the hyperliteral dictionary definition(plus I'm too lazy to even google it) game. Hypostasis and hypostatic union are theological terms that have been used by Christians to describe the Godhead for hundreds of years(In English, anyway -- I'm not sure what the equivalent terms are in other languages that were used by Christians prior to Christianity reaching English-speaking peoples).

Theology is a completely different branch of study from medicine. It is more than justified to use the same word in different branches of study to refer to different things. It doesn't, however, do anything to eliminate your own responsibility to learn the most basic facts about that which you're criticizing.

[EphremHagos]

We err seriously when lacking insight into the Scriptures and the power of the God of the living but not of the dead (Matt. 22: 29-33).

The promise by the One who is the resurrection and the life is far greater than Goddard's hope of a pie in the sky. Immortality or eternal life is what one finds at the end of "the hard way and narrow gate" (Matt. 7: 13-14). Immortality or "eternal life" is an essential portion of knowing God firsthand and personally John 17:3 in Jesus Christ's death of self-revelation on the cross John 8: 21-30; 14: 15-21 with the by-products of 1) Life-within-life and 2) Life in/after death (John 11: 25-26).

This is the glory of Christ which we are called upon to share Rom. 8: 28-30. What a gracious divine Host!

[EphremHagos]

The basic distinction between mortal and immortal bodies can facilitate better understanding of their secondary characteristics.

The first Adam was formed out of the soil from the ground, i.e., mortal; the second Adam made in the likeness of God (“life-giving breath” or Spirit), i.e., immortal (Gen. 2:7; 1 Cor. 15: 45-49). In short, there are two kinds of bodies, viz.: spiritual (God’s, Christ’s) and physical (man’s).

The experience of witnessing Jesus Christ, at his death on the cross, going back to the place where he was before makes a permanent stamp of immortality on man. The body of Jesus that got torn, beaten, bloodied and died (without being killed) was his temporary human nature which practically ended on the cross placing the Spirit nature apart by itself as self-sufficient source of life. The self-revelation of Jesus Christ’s divinity, at his death on the cross, defines the resurrection and the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is also worth mentioning that there was neither a single moment nor event, between Jesus Christ’s arrest and death, outside his own full control. It is surely life-transforming to find out the details of powerful undercurrents in the records in the four gospels.

Blessings!

[Bernie]

If you can't explain it to a seven year old, you don't understand yourself.

So if a physicist can't explain physics to a 7 year old, or an astronomer astonomy, nor an auto mechanic the workings of internal combustion engines with all their peripheral components.....none of these understand what they're doing?

[NormATive]

Sorry, I'm not going to play the hyperliteral dictionary definition(plus I'm too lazy to even google it) game. Hypostasis and hypostatic union are theological terms that have been used by Christians to describe the Godhead for hundreds of years(In English, anyway -- I'm not sure what the equivalent terms are in other languages that were used by Christians prior to Christianity reaching English-speaking peoples).

Theology is a completely different branch of study from medicine. It is more than justified to use the same word in different branches of study to refer to different things. It doesn't, however, do anything to eliminate your own responsibility to learn the most basic facts about that which you're criticizing.

As a writer, I believe in sticking with the most accurate word usage possible. The term hypostasis literally means that which stands beneath.

I don't know what theologian first appropriated the MEDICAL TERM for a scientific sounding phrase to describe the dumbest theological concoction since Greek Mythology, nor do I care. It has been customary for centuries to knock on wood when predicting a desired outcome, but it doesn't save it from being a silly thing to do.

Nevertheless, let's play your game.

So, using your pet word, how does that which stands beneath explain how an immortal person can die?

NORM

[EphremHagos]

He was immortal after he died.

(and was resurrected)

On the contrary, the death of Jesus Christ on the cross, with diacritical mark, was the infallible proof of His pre-existing immortality as "Son of the living God" (Matt. 16: 13-28). Post-resurrection immortality belongs to "another Jesus" (2 Cor. 11:4) and "another gospel" (Gal. 1: 6-11)!

[EphremHagos]

we are all immortal. While our bodies will die, we will live on and get new ones. Even those in hell will live forever with their new bodies.

If one cares to stop, think and continue to search for answers, Scriptures and God's power say very differently . "The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob" is only the God of the living not of the dead (Matt. 22: 29-33).

Scripturally speaking, your statement that we are all immortal and that we will get new bodies after death does not hold any water. Geting new spiritual bodies is a here-and-now experience when we are truly born again by the light of Jesus' immortality (John 3: 1-21).

There are two extremes here. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as well as Moses and Elijah (Luke 9: 28-36), on the one hand, are in glory, i.e., alive and well
forever. "Those in hell", on the other hand, are at the other extreme whatever it means!

[Little Shepherd]

As a writer, I believe in sticking with the most accurate word usage possible.

Then you shouldn't be making a stink about hypostasis also having a medical definition. I looked it up, and it seems the term hypostasis was used in a philosophic/religious context since at least the 4th century, and that's just the earliest use in Christian writings I was able to find with a quick skim through my resources. Considering that medical knowledge wasn't all that advanced back then, I'd say that it was the medical community that abrogated with the word and gave it a new definition. After seeing both the philosophical and medical definitions, though, it's pretty clear that both relate to "that which stands beneath."

The term hypostasis literally means that which stands beneath.

Very good. Now I'll give you a little clue. Wikipedia actually has a pretty good article on the philosophic usage of the term hypostasis. If you read it, then you will understand how the term relates to "that which stands beneath."

There's also a separate article on hypostatic union, which deals with the incarnation of Jesus specifically. And don't try to retort with Wikipedia's faults. I know its limitations, and I read both articles before suggesting you go there to make sure the information was accurate.

I don't know what theologian first appropriated the MEDICAL TERM for a scientific sounding phrase to describe the dumbest theological concoction since Greek Mythology, nor do I care. It has been customary for centuries to knock on wood when predicting a desired outcome, but it doesn't save it from being a silly thing to do.

As is now clear, if anyone appropriated the term it was the medical profession. It has been used in Christian writings since at least the 4th century, and the term -- as a philosophic term -- predates its usage by Christians by at least another few hundred years.

Nevertheless, let's play your game.

No game, just facts.

So, using your pet word, how does that which stands beneath explain how an immortal person can die?

In Christian theology, the Godhead consists of 3 hypostases(persons) in one ousia(essence). In the hypostatic union, the divine and human natures are both united in the one hypostasis of the Son.

It is therefore a simple matter, really. Jesus in His humanity died bodily on the cross, yet in His Divinity remained alive, and the Trinity as a whole was involved in resurrecting Jesus bodily on the third day(the Bible makes separate references to the Father raising Him, the Spirit raising Him, and Him raising Himself).

I don't see any property of God that would necessitate any flesh one of His Persons inhabits from being able to be harmed and even killed.