Jesus really didn't suffer

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bahman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
MaryHelp777 said:
Jesus was fully God AND FULLY MAN.

Jesus had to atone for the sins of all mankind as God in Man,

Because:
Only God could pay our infinite debt of punishment owed from sin. AND because only man earned that suffering and needed to atone to get into Heaven.

What did GOD do? He, as God, in the form of His Son, truly God became truly God incarnate as a Man, to pay our debt for us.

“By His stripes we are healed.”
Jesus told the Apostles, He would “suffer grievously at the hands of sinful men in Jerusalem, be put to death. And on the third day rise again.”

Jesus suffered physical pain.
Jesus died physically.
Click to expand...
That is what we claim that he is truly human and God. He clearly declared that he is God.
 
Suffering is when an external mover acts on an object and the object is moved as a result.
Jesus had nails put in his hands and feet, and a spear in his side (from the mover, Pontius Pilate), and his body moved into death, at which time his soul was separated from his body, which is a passive act (passive equals suffering, thus the term “passion”).

So, he suffered, being human as he is (he is alive, you know, risen from the dead, because his body suffered the reunion with his soul and had to be again his living body).
 
The Divinity cannot suffer. Jesus suffered in His Sacred Humanity. Jesus is fully human and fully Divine, so He can suffer in his human nature.
 
Bahman said:
Then why he didn’t claim that he is a man?
Click to expand...
That’s your claim. Prove that he never claimed to be human. What do you think he meant when he referred to himself as the son of man? If you can’t answer that you have no right to make any claims about Christ.

You cannot wiggle out of the truth through empty sophistries. You’d be better off practicing the faith than asking questions you already know the answers to but simply refuse to acknowledge.
 
Della said:
That’s your claim. Prove that he never claimed to be human. What do you think he meant when he referred to himself as the son of man? If you can’t answer that you have no right to make any claims about Christ.

You cannot wiggle out of the truth through empty sophistries. You’d be better off practicing the faith than asking questions you already know the answers to but simply refuse to acknowledge.
Click to expand...
It is alright. We all are learning here. He couldn’t be son of any man because he was the result of a miracle by God rather than an intercourse.
 
littlestsouls2 said:
The Divinity cannot suffer. Jesus suffered in His Sacred Humanity. Jesus is fully human and fully Divine, so He can suffer in his human nature.
Click to expand...
But that is logically impossible to suffer only in his humanity because he is both human and divine. So to me it is very ironic to say that his human nature was vulnerable to suffering and his divine nature was immune to suffering because he is one person.
 
MaryHelp777 said:
The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, all testify in the Bible, that Jesus would, and did suffer, a suffering so great that it physically killed Him.
Click to expand...
Yes, he did suffer torture and die on the cross, but compared to other suffering, his did not last that long, Im not sure on the time frame, but Im assuming the time between his arrest and his death on the cross was about a week or so.

Many people go thru worse consistent suffering for years, but his suffering was not important, its WHY he did this (for us).
 
Bahman said:
It is alright. We all are learning here. He couldn’t be son of any man because he was the result of a miracle by God rather than an intercourse.
Click to expand...
He didn’t say he was son of a man, as in a specific man. “Man” here is gender neutral and mean human; Mary gave him his humanity. Jesus could have swooshed down from heaven an adult male but chose to be conceived in Mary’s womb.
 
Bahman said:
It is alright. We all are learning here. He couldn’t be son of any man because he was the result of a miracle by God rather than an intercourse.
Click to expand...
Asserted without evidence, contrary to the historical evidence of Jesus’ birth, by His mother Mary, a human.
 
Bahman said:
It is alright. We all are learning here. . .
Click to expand...
Bahman said:
But that is logically impossible to suffer only in his humanity because he is both human and divine. So to me it is very ironic to say that his human nature was vulnerable to suffering and his divine nature was immune to suffering because he is one person.
Click to expand...
Then shouldn’t it be considered even more drastically ironic logically, that you have another thread going right now, at the same time at CAF, where you claim the Incarnation is both false and impossible . . . yet here you are asserting that Chris*t “is both human and divine - and one person” . . . *

:hmmm:

“So one believes neither,” would be a most logical assumption.

Not quite sure what the OP is learning . . or what we are supposed to be learning from the OP , but this almost appears to be a form of entertainment or sport.

One danger in straddling both sides of the fence in this fashion , is that if the person slips, the consequences can be painful. 😉

. . . doesn’t really work wonders for a person’s credibility either.
 
HelenRose said:
Why did he weep and sweat tears of blood in the Garden of Gethsemane if He did not suffer?

He was True Man and True God.

He suffered as we suffer. He loved us enough to come to us and suffer with and for us.
Click to expand...
Who was there to see him weep and sweat blood? Think about it. According to the story the other Apostles were sleeping far away from Jesus when he had the passion. So who saw it?
 
Bahman said:
But that is logically impossible to suffer only in his humanity because he is both human and divine. So to me it is very ironic to say that his human nature was vulnerable to suffering and his divine nature was immune to suffering because he is one person.
Click to expand...
This is something we will never be able to comprehend, while he was human, he was also God, ‘how’ he experienced suffering is not something we can know, his very human body could definitely feel the pain, but as God, no, this would not effect him, plus he knew the outcome of his death and what a good thing it was for us…its hard to even think about.
 
Bahman said:
But that is logically impossible to suffer only in his humanity because he is both human and divine. So to me it is very ironic to say that his human nature was vulnerable to suffering and his divine nature was immune to suffering because he is one person.
Click to expand...
One Person, two natures. There is no logical impossibility.
 
NeedImprovement said:
Then shouldn’t it be considered even more drastically ironic logically, that you have another thread going right now, at the same time at CAF, where you claim the Incarnation is both false and impossible . . . yet here you are asserting that Chris*t “is both human and divine - and one person” . . . *

:hmmm:

“So one believes neither,” would be a most logical assumption.

Not quite sure what the OP is learning . . or what we are supposed to be learning from the OP , but this almost appears to be a form of entertainment or sport.

One danger in straddling both sides of the fence in this fashion , is that if the person slips, the consequences can be painful. 😉

. . . doesn’t really work wonders for a person’s credibility either.
Click to expand...
I can accept a premise for sake of argument to find our whether there is a contradiction or not. Couldn’t I?
 
littlestsouls2 said:
One Person, two natures. There is no logical impossibility.
Click to expand...
I was not arguing about his two natures. I was only arguing whether he suffer or not while having two nature. In simple word, his human nature vulnerable to suffering but his divine nature immune to suffering.
 
mikekle said:
This is something we will never be able to comprehend, while he was human, he was also God, ‘how’ he experienced suffering is not something we can know, his very human body could definitely feel the pain, but as God, no, this would not effect him,
Click to expand...
There is noting that we could not understand. This picture, one person and two natures, is problematic since we could not resolve the dilemma whether he was suffering or now. You could say he was because of human nature and I could say no.
mikekle said:
plus he knew the outcome of his death and what a good thing it was for us…its hard to even think about.
Click to expand...
Death is death, How it could possibly grant anything?
 
Bahman said:
I was not arguing about his two natures. I was only arguing whether he suffer or not while having two nature. In simple word, his human nature vulnerable to suffering but his divine nature immune to suffering.
Click to expand...
I meant that Jesus could suffer in His Humanity because He has two natures. The Divine Nature can suffer no diminution, whereas the Humanity of Jesus, like ours, is passible.
 
Salutations,
The issue here is; In heaven, NOW, does Jesus or any personalities of the triune Godhead, suffer today as we sin? Does our Beloved Lord, each Easter take the pain of our sins back on Him. For that matter, everyday, we sin. Does God feel pain with every sin we do daily?
in Christ’s love
Tweedlealice :confused:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top