Lee's Trinity

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

If Christ lost his divine nature on the cross then only a man died on the cross.

But this is not what anyone has said. It is what you have been trained to claim we said so that you can attack a strawman.

The problem is not whether Christ lost his divine nature. He most definitely did not. It is whether having divine nature means that the Father is actually present just because Christ retains his divine nature. You would appear to claim such a thing, but cannot establish it as true. Instead, you have to resort to unsubstantiated claims about what presuming the other side "must" mean which you then presume forces your premise to be true.

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Now we could say that the Father could leave Christ and Christ still retain His divinity on the cross (but it still seems like a step towards Nestorianism to me). But this is not possible, because Christ's divinity came from its divine source - the Father and the Holy Spirit. Christ's Father was divinity and His mother was humanity. Take away the Father and it takes away from Christ's divinity.

What an interesting (though unsubstantiated) construct. Christ does not have divine nature but must get it from the Father and the Spirit. Your logic presumes that what is received at birth can be reclaimed at will. That your father could reclaim what he imparted to you through his DNA. The example in nature does not support such a position. And the scripture does not (that I can see) support it. Rather, it is an illogical falsehood masquerading as a spiritual truth.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by OBW

But this is not what anyone has said. It is what you have been trained to claim we said so that you can attack a strawman.

The problem is not whether Christ lost his divine nature. He most definitely did not. It is whether having divine nature means that the Father is actually present just because Christ retains his divine nature. You would appear to claim such a thing, but cannot establish it as true. Instead, you have to resort to unsubstantiated claims about what presuming the other side "must" mean which you then presume forces your premise to be true.

What an interesting (though unsubstantiated) construct. Christ does not have divine nature but must get it from the Father and the Spirit. Your logic presumes that what is received at birth can be reclaimed at will. That your father could reclaim what he imparted to you through his DNA. The example in nature does not support such a position. And the scripture does not (that I can see) support it. Rather, it is an illogical falsehood masquerading as a spiritual truth.

No one said that but that is what it implies - Christ was conceived by the Spirit, he has the Spirit's DNA. He also has the Father's DNA. Jesus was not just a man who received the Spirit at his baptism, like us. Unlike us, Jesus had the Spirit from birth.

If you say that the Father can forsake Christ (as in, actually leave), then what is stopping you from saying that the Spirit can too? If the Spirit can actually leave Christ, then Christ himself was not fully divine, but only human.

Anyway changing tack, I can use the Old Testament to show the true meaning of Christ's words on the cross is not what you suppose.

Jesus was quoting Psalm 22 when he said "why have you forsaken me". So Psalm 22 gives us insight to the context.

If we read the whole Psalm 22, we can find this verse:

Psalm 22:24
For he has not despised or disdained the suffering of the afflicted one; he has not hidden his face from him but has listened to his cry for help.

Jesus was quoting Psalm 22 for the benefit of his hearers. As a man, separated from God because of the world's sin, his was the human cry to God "why have you forsaken me?".

Based upon this one statement you have concluded that this was the spiritual reality. But what you have missed is that this was not the spiritual reality. This was Christ as a man wondering where God was. It is humanity saying "God where are you?". God withdrew His manifest presence and comforts.

But Psalm 22:24 shows us clearly that the Father did *not* leave Christ.

I am sure you have heard of the "Footprints in the Sand" story. A man is walking with God and questions why there is only one set of footprints in the sand during his most difficult times. For the man it seems as if God forsook him in the difficult moments. But the Father was with Him all along.

I hope you can see that based upon Psalm 22, Jesus wondering why the Father had forsaken Him is like the Footprints in the Sand story.

Humanity cries "God, where are you?", and God replies "I will never leave nor forsake you".

The first half of Psalm 22 is about death and Christ's crucifixion, and the last half of it is about life and resurrection.