The "God can't die" argument

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pieman333272
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Pieman333272

Guest
I was watching a video where a Christian was talking with a Muslim and the Muslim argued that Christian theology contradicts itself in sayinig Jesus is God and that Jesus died on the cross, as God can’t die.

What is a good reply to this?
 
“ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God…
and the Word became flesh ”
 
What is death? It is the separation of the human soul from the human body. That could happen to Jesus because he had a human nature. But he also had a divine nature and was a divine person.

If God chooses to take on a human nature, of course he can (humanly) die. That was his whole purpose in taking on a human nature. It doesn’t mean that at any instant God ceased to exist.

I’d recommend an in depth resource, such as the chapters on the Incarnation in Frank Sheed’s “Theology for Beginners.”
 
God didn’t die… Jesus’s body died, but it was resurrected. His soul/spirit is eternal.
I think the Muslim(s) you spoke with are confused about what happens when we die.
 
Pieman333272 said:
I was watching a video where a Christian was talking with a Muslim and the Muslim argued that Christian theology contradicts itself in sayinig Jesus is God and that Jesus died on the cross, as God can’t die.

What is a good reply to this?
Click to expand...
I would probably argue that Jesus’ **body ** died and was resurrected. Remember, that you have to understand the Bible in a holistic fashion to make any sense of it all. During the Old Testament, the price of reparation for sin was in essence blood…to make an offering of an animal to God. Jesus removed this need by His body dying on the cross; in essence, Jesus’ Precious Blood was spilled to save Mankind. This is why Christians no longer have to bring animals to the altar to satisfy God.

Also, it would be important to note that we must also ask why we believe God can’t die? Well, one reason (outside the very definition of God that He is eternal) is because God has never sinned (“the wages of sin is death” as it says in the Bible). But then if that’s the case, how does that explain the fact that the Blessed Virgin Mary died, and she too lived a life without sin? If the Blessed Virgin Mary died, living a life without sin, what would make it surprising that Jesus Himself died, even when He is the epitome of moral perfection?

I wouldn’t come down so hard on the person who said this however. It seems like a genuine critical position.

Thank you,
Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk
 
JimG said:
What is death? It is the separation of the human soul from the human body. That could happen to Jesus because he had a human nature. But he also had a divine nature and was a divine person.

If God chooses to take on a human nature, of course he can (humanly) die. That was his whole purpose in taking on a human nature. It doesn’t mean that at any instant God ceased to exist.

I’d recommend an in depth resource, such as the chapters on the Incarnation in Frank Sheed’s “Theology for Beginners.”
Click to expand...
This. 👍

Thank you,
Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk
 
As a Muslim, who was a Catholic, the argument the Muslim brother is attempting, unsuccessfully, to use, is bunk.

From within the doctrine taught by mainstream Christianity, that of vicarious/substitutionary atonement: Jesus did not die except in the flesh, as his spirit is eternal (the uncreated Logos) and is of the same essence (ousia) as that of God (this is how substitutionary atonement works: because God is infinite, and Jesus was God, so Jesus’ death/suffering could be infinite, and therefore able to atone for all of the finite sins of humanity, as a finite death could not) but instead descended in to Hell, then rose again, and then ascended to Heaven.

Such as this: according to doctrine, Jesus was 100% God and 100% Man. The entirety of his human nature could, and did, die, without affecting his Godly nature, whereas his Godly nature was responsible for the workings of substitionary atonement.

Not to mention that it is obvious from the Bible that God was still in Heaven while Jesus was on Earth (cf. next paragraph), so that even if Jesus died fully and completely, God would not be dying. Many people less knowledgeable in the theology of multiple religions will use such pedantic and narrow arguments, cherry-picking parts of each Holy Book in order to try to bolster their own position (a “straw-man” argument) in my experience.

There are many better arguments against the hypostases/ousia Trinitarian theory, some being that Jesus prayed to God many times (cf. the Agony in the Garden), and said words to the effect of, “I do not know the time appointed, nor do the angels in Heaven: that knowledge is of the Father alone”, or the famous last words (“eloi lama sabachthani”)of Jesus upon the Crucifix, from off the top of my head.

The doctrine of substitutionary atonement leads to antinomianism: no matter how many creeds reject it (antinomianism), the only logical conclusion of “salvation by faith alone” is the complete abrogation of all mortal and divine law.

Essentially, the concept of the Trinity is not a rational one: it is a “divine mystery”, and requires faith, as, according to doctrine, it is too large, alien, divine, et cetera for a human mind to be able to comprehend: even within Christianity there are more interpretations of the Trinity (and grace as a whole, resistible, efficacious, etc.) than verses in the Gospel according to John.
 
Khalid said:
As a Muslim, who was a Catholic, the argument the Muslim brother is attempting, unsuccessfully, to use, is bunk.

From within the doctrine taught by mainstream Christianity, that of vicarious/substitutionary atonement: Jesus did not die except in the flesh, as his spirit is eternal (the uncreated Logos) and is of the same essence (ousia) as that of God (this is how substitutionary atonement works: because God is infinite, and Jesus was God, so Jesus’ death/suffering could be infinite, and therefore able to atone for all of the finite sins of humanity, as a finite death could not) but instead descended in to Hell, then rose again, and then ascended to Heaven.

Such as this: according to doctrine, Jesus was 100% God and 100% Man. The entirety of his human nature could, and did, die, without affecting his Godly nature, whereas his Godly nature was responsible for the workings of substitionary atonement.

Not to mention that it is obvious from the Bible that God was still in Heaven while Jesus was on Earth (cf. next paragraph), so that even if Jesus died fully and completely, God would not be dying. Many people less knowledgeable in the theology of multiple religions will use such pedantic and narrow arguments, cherry-picking parts of each Holy Book in order to try to bolster their own position (a “straw-man” argument) in my experience.

There are many better arguments against the hypostases/ousia Trinitarian theory, some being that Jesus prayed to God many times (cf. the Agony in the Garden), and said words to the effect of, “I do not know the time appointed, nor do the angels in Heaven: that knowledge is of the Father alone”, or the famous last words of Jesus upon the Crucifix, from off the top of my head.

The doctrine of substitutionary atonement leads to antinomianism: no matter how many creeds reject it (antinomianism), the only logical conclusion of “salvation by faith alone” is the complete abrogation of all mortal and divine law.

Essentially, the concept of the Trinity is not a rational one: it is a “divine mystery”, and requires faith, as, according to doctrine, it is too large, alien, divine, et cetera for a human mind to be able to comprehend: even within Christianity there are more interpretations of the Trinity (and grace as a whole, resistible, efficacious, etc.) than verses in the Gospel according to John.
Click to expand...
I’ll be the first to admit that I do not know many of the words you are using. Are you a professional theologian, by any chance 🙂 ?

That said, I would think at least that some of what you have described is not that difficult to answer. When Jesus “prayed to God”, He was essentially abiding by the Fourth Commandment of the Ten Commandments to “honour your father and your mother”. This has several important implications for Catholicism, indirectly, such as the significance of the Blessed Virgin Mary’s intercessory abilities (as seen at the Wedding at Cana). As Christians, we believe that Jesus also came down to Earth to show Humanity how to live, and by honouring His father and His mother, Jesus further demonstrated His moral perfection.

The Trinity, you are correct, can not fully be understood in the mechanical sense that we know how a car works. But this would only be logical, since Humans have finite minds, and as such, can only comprehend *so *much of God. If memory serves me correct, I think it was St. Paul who remarked that we see God on Earth through a “blurry glass”. The Bible instructs us that we will never be able to fully comprehend God whilst we are on Earth, best seen in the Book of Isaiah:

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord.
For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts.” (Isaiah 55:8)

This would suggest that any attempt of understanding God is futile and bound to failure. In the Book of Job, God “mocks” Job, asking Job if he was there when God laid the foundations of the world together. Thus, to aptly grasp the Trinity would at the very best be a most difficult task. We can only put our faith in the Church’s 2000±year stance on Truth that the Trinity is God’s nature.

Thank you,
Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk
 
Hey. I remember this tough question from the 1993 edition of This Rock. Frankly, I couldn’t answer it then really, but here is a cut and paste of that item.

15. At the Crucifixion

a. Jesus’ human nature died on the cross.

b. Only the human person of Jesus, not the divine person of Jesus, died on the cross.

c. God died on the cross.

d. Jesus’ human and divine natures both died on the cross, but the universe was kept going by the Father and the Holy Spirit until Jesus’ Resurrection.

e. None of the above.

(ANSWER)
Question 15

a. Wrong, because natures aren’t put to death–persons are. When you die, it is not your human nature which dies, but you as a distinct person.

b. Wrong, because there is no human person in Jesus. There is only one Person, the divine, who already (by definition) had a divine nature and who took on a human nature.

c. Correct, because the Person who died on the cross was a divine Person, commonly called the Son of God. Since that Person is God, it is proper to say God died on the cross, even though that sounds odd and may make some unthinking people conclude that it means that God ceased to exists, which, of course, was not the case. (If you were sure this answer could not be right, don’t fret–you’re in good company. Most people miss this question because the correct answer “just doesn’t sound right.”)

d. Wrong, first because natures don’t die, persons do, and second because the answer suggest Jesus couldn’t keep the universe going, as though he ceased to be God between the time of his death and his Resurrection.

e. Wrong, because 15c is correct.
/
 
Bohm_Bawerk said:
I’ll be the first to admit that I do not know many of the words you are using. Are you a professional theologian, by any chance 🙂 ?

That said, I would think at least that some of what you have described is not that difficult to answer. When Jesus “prayed to God”, He was essentially abiding by the Fourth Commandment of the Ten Commandments to “honour your father and your mother”. This has several important implications for Catholicism, indirectly, such as the significance of the Blessed Virgin Mary’s intercessory abilities (as seen at the Wedding at Cana). As Christians, we believe that Jesus also came down to Earth to show Humanity how to live, and by honouring His father and His mother, Jesus further demonstrated His moral perfection.

The Trinity, you are correct, can not fully be understood in the mechanical sense that we know how a car works. But this would only be logical, since Humans have finite minds, and as such, can only comprehend *so *much of God. If memory serves me correct, I think it was St. Paul who remarked that we see God on Earth through a “blurry glass”. The Bible instructs us that we will never be able to fully comprehend God whilst we are on Earth, best seen in the Book of Isaiah:

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord.
For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts.” (Isaiah 55:8)

This would suggest that any attempt of understanding God is futile and bound to failure. In the Book of Job, God “mocks” Job, asking Job if he was there when God laid the foundations of the world together. Thus, to aptly grasp the Trinity would at the very best be a most difficult task. We can only put our faith in the Church’s 2000±year stance on Truth that the Trinity is God’s nature.

Thank you,
Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk
Click to expand...
That’s one of the best rebuttals to the statement I put forth that I’ve ever heard (“Jesus was following the commandment to honour mother and father, when he prayed to his father”) brutal in simplicity as well.

Not a professional theologian, but an amateur one. A professional chemist, actually.
 
Khalid said:
That’s one of the best rebuttals to the statement I put forth that I’ve ever heard (“Jesus was following the commandment to honour mother and father, when he prayed to his father”) brutal in simplicity as well.

Not a professional theologian, but an amateur one. A professional chemist, actually.
Click to expand...
I hope you’re not being sarcastic 😊

Thank you,
Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk
 
Pieman333272 said:
I was watching a video where a Christian was talking with a Muslim and the Muslim argued that Christian theology contradicts itself in sayinig Jesus is God and that Jesus died on the cross, as God can’t die.

What is a good reply to this?
Click to expand...
God became man, and His flesh is what died. Jesus was pretty busy between His death on the cross and His resurrection. He freed the righteous dead from limbo and lead them to heaven during this time.
 
God died on the cross.

From how I understand it: The Hypostatic Union teaches that Christ is *one person *with two natures - a divine nature and a human nature. Since He is one person (both God and human) and that one person died, then both God and human person died. His human nature was killed. His divine nature was not.

It is the human nature that is resurrected on Easter and the human person that receives the transfigured body which ascends into Heaven.

Taking a step back, kind of makes you stop to think that God so loved you he would die for you, does it not?:hmmm:
 
Khalid said:
As a Muslim, who was a Catholic, the argument the Muslim brother is attempting, unsuccessfully, to use, is bunk.
Click to expand...
I would like to hear your (de)conversion story. I agree that the argument, while reasonable to some extent, doesn’t work because it doesn’t properly understand the Christian teaching.
From within the doctrine taught by mainstream Christianity, that of vicarious/substitutionary atonement
Click to expand...
Catholics reject the Protestant notion of substitutionary atonement, since Protestants fail to understand what the Bible means by “Atonement.”
There are many better arguments against the hypostases/ousia Trinitarian theory, some being that Jesus prayed to God many times (cf. the Agony in the Garden), and said words to the effect of, “I do not know the time appointed, nor do the angels in Heaven: that knowledge is of the Father alone”, or the famous last words (“eloi lama sabachthani”) of Jesus upon the Crucifix, from off the top of my head.
Click to expand...
How are those “better arguments” when they are answered plainly in the proper distinction of hypostases (Person) and ousia (Nature). The Person of the Son could pray to the Person of the Father, without affecting their Nature. If I pray to myself, that makes no sense, because I’m one person. If I pray to you, even though we both have the same nature (human), that can make sense because you are another person.
The doctrine of substitutionary atonement leads to antinomianism
Click to expand...
There is some truth to this, but only Protestants believe in that form of atonement.
Essentially, the concept of the Trinity is not a rational one: it is a “divine mystery”, and requires faith, as, according to doctrine, it is too large, alien, divine, et cetera for a human mind to be able to comprehend: even within Christianity there are more interpretations of the Trinity (and grace as a whole, resistible, efficacious, etc.) than verses in the Gospel according to John.
Click to expand...
The concept is “not rational” in so far as it transcends human comprehension, but all religions who believe in an Almighty God should believe God always transcends human comprehension. And you are right, Faith is required, because such a concept cannot be accepted by reason alone. Reason only works to an extent, such as demonstrating the Trinity is not logically contradictory, but we cannot accept these divinely revealed truths without a divine gift called Faith. Faith should not be thought of as an excuse to claim whatever we want, but rather it should be thought of as a telescope that allows us to see and accept things (e.g. distant stars) that our human eyes cannot see by themself.
 
Post No. 10 with the Quick Quiz from This Rock magazine makes it clear:

God died on the cross!

How can we say that?
Jesus’ human nature didn’t die, because natures don’t die. Persons die. And the person who died on the cross was the Second Person of the Trinity, who is both God and man.

But, the Second Person of the Trinity didn’t cease to exist!
No, because to die doesn’t mean to cease to exist–not even for us.
It just means our human body got ripped apart from our human soul. The person we are remains and is judged.
 
Pieman333272 said:
I was watching a video where a Christian was talking with a Muslim and the Muslim argued that Christian theology contradicts itself in sayinig Jesus is God and that Jesus died on the cross, as God can’t die.

What is a good reply to this?
Click to expand...
God can do anything He wants.
 
Pieman333272 said:
I was watching a video where a Christian was talking with a Muslim and the Muslim argued that Christian theology contradicts itself in sayinig Jesus is God and that Jesus died on the cross, as God can’t die.

What is a good reply to this?
Click to expand...
Jesus is God
Jesus the divine person, took on a human form. He is both divine and human in the same person.

Jesus died on the Cross
Yes, the person died - natures don’t die.

Therefore, Jesus as both God an man, died on the cross
And it does not mean that God ceased to exist. Jesus dying on the cross is not equivalent to saying His existence was terminated. On the contrary. The Christian theology does not contradict itself.
 
Catholic Dude,

The lens on my telescope is not smeared with vaseline.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top