Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
John 8:29 He has not left me alone, because I always do those things that please him." - because the cross pleased the Father, the Father never left Jesus alone on that cross.
|
Spoken concerning his 3.5 year mission of speaking to the people of Israel. Does not say "will not leave me alone."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
2 Corinthians 5:19. For God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, no longer counting people's sins against them. And he gave us this wonderful message of reconciliation.
|
Even this verse is past tense. It does not prove or disprove that there ever was or was not a period or time when something might have been different. Neither does it declare that the unity of the Godhead has overcome and confused the three of the trinity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
John 16:32. “You [disciples] will leave me all alone. Yet I am not alone, for my Father is with me.”
|
Once again, "I am not alone," not "I will never be alone." Present tense. Not a claim of always true or will always be true. You ignore that Jesus spoke rather clearly and without question that the Father had forsaken him on the cross, therefore you have a rather clear indication that this state of being "not alone" was not at all times true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
Romans 8:11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.
|
This verse says nothing about being one or being in Christ at any time, least of all at the crucifixion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
The whole Godhead, the Triune God indwelt Jesus's body on the cross and even while Jesus was in that tomb. The Father was with Him, never leaving Him alone nor forsaking Him, because Christ had accomplished the most obedient and pleasing act possible. The Spirit was with Him, dwelling in Christ's mortal body, ready to raise Christ from the dead 3 days later.
|
Pure conjecture based upon the mishandling of the scripture, and by example the four you quoted above.
Quote:
|
So, would it have been possible that Jesus, through His divine nature, even while His human body lay dead, could have displayed His power through resurrection? Absolutely. Jesus, speaking of His body said “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” (John 2:19) Certainly, it was “God” who raised His body (Rom. 10:9, 1 Pet. 1:21), and Jesus is God. But Scripture also teaches that the Father raised Him (Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:17,20). Even the Holy Spirit is said to have raised Him (Romans 8:11). So, the act of raising Jesus from the dead was not the operation merely of one person within the Trinity, but was a cooperative act done by the power of the divine substance. The fact that the Bible teaches that God raised Jesus from the dead, and that Jesus raised Himself is yet another testament to Christ’s divinity.
|
Yet this does not force that God, as in the fullness of the Godhead, was on the cross and died there. That is a presumption not supported by any of the scripture or even this article.
And when the article says "Jesus is God," that is not the same as saying God is Jesus. You cannot declare that Jesus, who was on the cross, was God, and by making that declaration, now drag the other two back onto the cross with Christ because they are all God.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
If the resurrection was a cooperative act, could the crucifixion not also be a cooperative act?
|
I will confess that it "could" be true. But there is nothing that makes it so, therefore I cannot (and you should not) insist that it simply is so. "Could" is a long way from "is."
And given so much of the totality of the accounts (including those that you have quoted) I cannot find a reason to think that it is more likely that it is true, rather that it is more likely that it is not. If the Father forsook Christ, and if he turned his face away (according to the scripture), then to argue that the Father was actually there on the cross being forsaken by himself is a fallacy of being true and not being true. An illogic. It is far less likely that it is true than that it is false. I realize that statistics and probabilities are not the basis for truth. But they should temper our insistence when we find that what we believe is too thoroughly contraindicated to be even close to a certainty.
And you are holding to it as a certainty.