Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
Either Jesus Christ is divine or he truly died-but not both
Vložit
- čas přidán 14. 08. 2024
- ABSTRACT: Traditional Christian dogma affirms two propositions: first, that Jesus Christ truly died (1 Cor. 15:3); second, that Jesus Christ is a single person in two natures, one divine and the other human. In this video, I present an argument that these two opinions cannot be reconciled.
Dr. Steven Nemes has a BA in Philosophy from Arizona State University with a minor in Religious Studies (2013), and an MDiv and PhD in Theology from Fuller Theological Seminary (2016, 2021). The author of a number of articles, chapters, and books on diverse subjects in theology and philosophy, he teaches Latin at North Phoenix Preparatory Academy in Phoenix, Arizona.
why do i keep getting heretical nonsense in my YT recommended?
God is trying to tell you something.
@@drstevennemes yah, that you need prayers and to read the Holy fathers
@@joshweatherston7072
I have read the church fathers. I have a doctorate in theology. I'm not ignorant.
Do you have a response to give to the arguments I give?
@@drstevennemes debate jay dyer lets see
@@icxcnika3429
Thank you for your comment.
I don't know anything about Jay Dyer, and I do not like doing debates. I'm no good as a debater.
Nonsense. The trinity and the hypostatic union is a mystery -- a reality that cannot be fully comprehended.
@@Straitsfan
Thank you for your comment.
I address that response in the video.
I wouldn't call a revelation that adds more mysteries to the list a revelation.
It's a fairy tale. Easily comprehended.
@@drstevennemesI’ll be honest, Dr Nemes, I am fully convinced of the trinity and Christ’s divinity, but some of these responses telling you to “read the fathers” and things like that, which you’ve already done way more than any of these people commenting, are hilariously bad.
Let me be clear, I could not disagree with you more on your views of the trinity, but these people telling you it’s so obvious that the trinity is laughable considering your level of theological education.
Let us continue to pray for wisdom and illumination from the Lord. God bless
@@bigtimesully thank you for your comment!
I appreciate your work Dr. Nemes.
I think for me the biggest issue is trying to comprehend who the man Jesus is as compared to the Father.
What it seems like to me is that his person is separate and dependent on the Father (God) because initially on the cross he says “My God why have you forsaken me”, assuming that the Holy Spirit aka God’s Spirit left him at that moment, then after exclaimed “Father into your hands I commit MY spirit” implying that his (Jesus’) spirit and God’s Spirit are in fact separate.
Please let me know your thoughts. Thank you 🙏🏾
Christ is eternal.
He's eternal AFTER his death and resurrection by his God and Father.
There is no argument to be made. Christ died and came back from the dead while being the Son of the Father all at once.
Thank you for your comment.
No he didn't.
Argument made.
If He didn't die, then we are still in our sins according to the Scriptures... that also includes if Jesus was play-acting and dying in one form (body) but then cosmically being spirited away (soul) and not reeeeeally dying, which is a Gnostic teaching and was rejected by the early church.
The only real issue with Jesus actually literally completely dying is only a problem for people who conflate Jesus and the Father as being the same exact person. They are not..which means His Father raised Him up.
Thank you for your comment.
It doesn't matter to me what was or wasn't rejected by the early church. My point is only that if Christ has two natures, then he can't really have died.
He died.
Next question?
Thank you for your comment.
Death is seperation of the soul from body, not that the person or nature ceases to exist.
The Person of Son of God, the Godman's, soul was separated from the incarnate body at death but existed in soul and spirit until once again united with his body at his resurrection.
@@nathankirwan2565
Thank you for your comment.
I address this in the video.
@@drstevennemesI'd be interested in seeing discourse on this topic with Fr Dcn Dr Ananias, if it could be arranged
@@drstevennemesAccording to scripture:
Christ is eternal, begotten not created,
He inherits his divinity from the Father and shares in his essence,
He took on human nature, being born of the Theotokos,
He died,
defeated death,
He was resurrected,
and is seated at the right hand of the God the Father as Lord.
If we affirm immortality of the soul, and if we say that a death of a person must include some essential corruption of the whole, both body and soul, it follows that neither then can we say that Christ died in that strict sense of the term death.
Obviously, this is a lesser problem if one affirms human christology since here, death actually concerns the actual person of Christ.
However, I still see it as a problem. To escape it, I suppose we would have to at least
either:
1. define death in that traditional way, as a separation of the soul from the body.
or
2. deny the immortality of the soul
In the end I think that diaphysite christology suffers mainly not from the definition of the term death but from what we mean when we say "Jesus has died". Simply put, Jesus refers to a person, but since Jesus is only one person, one hypostasis, which is divine and thus immortal, it, the person, Jesus couldn't have died. And also since his human nature, according to diaphysite christology, is anhypostatic, we can't be refering to it when we say "Jesus has died".
Maybe you've addressed this in the video, but I didn't catch it. Maybe I wasn't careful enough. But I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
brother is telling us how a God (an omnipotent being) cannot do something 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 because his human (limited) mind cant comperhend it. Its like a pre fire caveman telling us why mobile phones cannot exist. I love this.
@@IZZY404_
Thank you for your comment.
Christ was both fully divine and fully man. He died a bodily death as we all will. I don't even understand the issue understanding this. You will not blink out of existence when you "die" and certainly Christ didn't.
Thank you for your comment.
My point is that if we do not go out of existence with the death of our bodies, then we do not really die. In that case, Christ did not really die, either.
On first listening, I feel encouraged to seek time to sift through the transcript.
Though my heart may not land within your Christological boundary, I do respect the evident faithfulness of your analysis.
Thank you. Go well!
Thank you for your comment!
If God created man from the dust of the earth and breathed life into his creation then there is no contradiction that Jesus could have a physical death and be resurrected because the soul and spirit continue to live on regardless.
The Bible says that soul dies, and the spirit is the breath or life force.
@@thambone30 The souls that sin shall die. Jesus never sinned.
@@jsharp9735 nice try to twist scripture.
czcams.com/video/mVtJHClo9xg/video.htmlsi=pXWW3b8VX92IdwFK
When is the forthcoming volume expected to be available?
@@DanielnKitavi
There’s no telling as of yet.
@@drstevennemes alright. Looking forward to it. Thanks!
I think the idea is that Jesus' body died but Christ is spirit and so survived.
Here you are just reading to us again. So lets just answer your title.
The Second Person of the Trinity, the Divine Logos, was (and is) God from all eternity. In the Incarnation, he entered his creation of space and time as Jesus of Nazareth. While preserving his Divinity whole and intact, he humbled himself by taking on our humanity. This meant creating a human body and also a human soul for himself. The Man Jesus is the Second Person of the Trinity, and vice versa. The Second Person of the Trinity united his human soul perfectly to his Divine Self. In doing so, he bridged the gulf created by sin between God and man.
His Birth or Death occurs only in his creation of time and space. His divinity never changes.
Thank you for your comment.
I am curious to know what your religious/philosophical beliefs align with. Such as oriental orthodox, evangelical, nondenominational etc.
Thank you for your comment.
I would consider myself a liberal Protestant.
@@drstevennemes I see
Sorry, but you don't get to make up the rules.
@@user-vg2qc2db8f
Thank you for your comment. I don’t take myself to be doing that.
Your (learned) beliefs are shaped by scriptural interpretation of the denomination of your choosing. Every faction/denomination of Christianity has slightly different beliefs. Therefore, no one denomination can rightly claim truth of reality. It is a belief system built upon a foundation of faith, ignorance, and false reassurance.
Hi Steven, I would really like to hear these videos, but I don't have time to sit and watch, so I usually download the audio and listen while I am working. Because your videos are livestreams I am unable to extract the audio. Is their a way for you to convert the videos, once they have been recorded, into a regular CZcams video?
Hi Troy,
Unfortunately, I don't know how to do that. I'm not sure it's possible.
Do an internet search for, "convert youtube to mp3" There are several converters available where you link to the video and it will give you an audio.
@@drstevennemesThe position in your video is a false dichotomy. The death of the body does not mean the cessation of existence.
The Logos existed in two states, one human, and one of pure spirit (i.e. immaterial). His human existence came to an end on the cross but he continued in a spiritual state. In that spiritual state, he was able to raise his body from death in three days.
John 2:19 "Jesus answered them and said, destroy this temple and I will raise it in three days"
Jesus raised his body from death. The death of the body does not mean the cessation of existence.
@@patrick953
From what you’re saying, it sounds like the person didn’t die, just something attached to him did. That’s not what the NT says.
@@drstevennemesThat's exactly what the new testament says. The death of the body is not the cessation of existence not even for humans, nevertheless we still say that Humans die. We say that because our human existence comes to an end.
Paul refers to the body as a tent that we shed at death. Your consciousness is "YOU", and it is housed in your body, and a new body can be created to house your consciousness.
2 Corinthians 5:1
"For we know that if the (EARTHLY TENT) we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands"
2 Corinthians 5:8 "To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord"
Revelation 6:9 "I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. 10 They called out in a loud voice, “How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?"
The Logos existed in two states, one human and one spiritual. His human existence came to an end temporarily on the cross until he took it up again three days later.
This maybe a good argument against an orthdodox with a slight bent, one that identifes as a condtionalist/annihilationist, seeing that the contemporary definition of death you are operating under is more compatible with annihilation (e.g. irreversable cessation). But the Church did not adopt this view, they adopted and adapted a view closer to the platonist schema, meaning the body-soul composite. So under the critique you're making, every death would not be a genuine death. And given your definition of death, resurrection would not be possible under any view. I think you likely reasonate with the annilationist. But it would seem God would define the parameters of annilhation, and the extent of whom and how far it applies; case by case. Rather than appealing to "ordinary/normal", or "science/biology", which are fictious accounts.
Thank you for your comment.
I do believe that under a Platonic scheme of things, we do not really die. Only our bodies do. Thus, if that’s how things really are, then there is no death for us in reality. We simply go from having a body to not having one.
@@drstevennemes Hi Dr Nemes. Thank you for your reply. It seems we are in agreement. And I do think the annihationalist view is biblical, in so far as it is in the Bible, but I think other views are also within the Bible, or implied by the Bible, so that no view is exclusive to it.
As far as since I watched your videos (the papias one being my favorite), I noticed a few videos of you from other channels (about a year ago), popped up. And they signified you were no longer trinitarian, which I was slightly disheartened by (although, from what I saw, I agreed with your exegetical method, but not the unitarian conclusion). Although technically, I'm not a trinitarian, I am in the Jesus is Divinee camp and do respect such theologies. So if and when you make a video on that topic, I'll be sure to comment. Keep up the good work!!! - Marcus
P.S Many moons ago I had a conversation with Carlos/Buzzard, and felt the unitarian positions were underwhelming.
@@UnfoldingLetter
Thank you for your kind words! I’m glad my videos have proven stimulating for you.
I would like to start a conversation with this comment, if possible, because I don’t want to hear all of your arguments in a list, because I will forget them and won’t be able to respond to them all in a single comment, I hope you understand. So, I would like to start by saying that Jesus being 100% one with the father, Jesus would have full ability to give up his spirit, as stated in John 19:30, and spirits themselves are eternal. So the spirit of Jesus never died, just as ours doesn’t. The difference is that Jesus bodily rose from the dead. How he went about the process of this is unclear to me, I doubt anyone would be able to understand it even if we witnessed the resurrection ourselves, but we must remember that the ability of God is not bound by the limits of our own understanding. God formed the foundation of the reality we live in, he can shape/bend it anyway he wants to.
How do you determine that spirits exist? Have you seen a spirit? Can you describe how it looks, or how it functions without cognitive abilities?
@@andrewc1205 you don’t believe that you have a spirit? Without it, you cannot love, hate, philosophize, or even ask such a complex question that you are right now. Expression of emotion, creativity and artwork require a soul to create. No animal has ever expressed itself by creating art, no animals have organized a protest. The evidence of soul and spirit is indicated by action and consciousness. You could have the view that every emotion you have is a chemical reaction in your mind, and that we’re all just a bunch of meat sacks, but that still doesn’t explain why animals don’t behave like humans or vice versa.
I'm sorry. it seems as if you skipped biology and went straight for theology. The difference between humans and other animals is our brain size (intelligence), our opposable thumbs, and our ability to walk upright. That's our advantage! Apes are very similar in anatomy and characteristics, only lacking our intelligence. Whales, dolphins, and certain species of birds are highly intelligent, and can perform intelligible tasks to the limits of their physical abilities.
A spirit/soul has nothing to do with cognitive abilities, or emotions.
Also, humans do behave like animals. Some more than others!
Can you explain what a soul is, or how it functions? When the brain dies, the body dies. Without a functioning central nervous system and organs, one would have no senses, no memories, no emotions, etc.
Cognitive functions are lost (or absent) when the brain deteriorates, or by impairment from disease, drugs, or other cognitive irregularities. The same applies to memory and awareness. We know this from studies in Biology, Pathology, and Psychology.
One needs some form of eyes to see, along with a central nervous system, to process the information. A soul would not have eyes.
A soul would be void of form, and would not look like a person. A soul would (definitely) not have clothing, like every depiction details.
I'm certain linen does not transfer from the material world.
Therefore I ask again, what is a soul... without the the functions and processes of a physical body and a functioning brain?
These ideas of heaven are nothing more than fantasy/fiction from the minds of mortal men.
The Judeo-Christian god is the product of cultural mythology.
@@andrewc1205 so you don’t believe in souls period, at all? Also, many animals have larger brains than humans, and still don’t behave like humans do or have. No animal has carved a sculpture, written a book, cured a disease, they just survive. No soul, instinct. Obviously I can’t pull a soul out and show it to you, but there is more to existence than what our senses can tell us. Let’s also not forget that without God, right and wrong are purely opinionated, and there is no judgement for people like Hitler and any other horrible human beings that have committed atrocities, who took the easy way out. And if God doesn’t exist, what exactly is your thesis on creation? How did the earth and life itself come to be? Because science definitely provides no clear explanation whatsoever
What is death? Could you please define death?
@@au8363
Thank you for your comment.
I address that question in the video.
could you give me the time stamp
could you also tell me if you are a unitarian as in the sense of dale tuggy?
I am not familiar with you work.
This is assuming we even have a full cosmological understanding of what death is (by any religious standard….we don’t)
Thank you for your comment.
I specify my definition of "death" in my argument. If you do not accept that definition, then my argument won't work. Even so, I think the definition is plausible enough.
@@drstevennemes thanks for insightful, gracious response
Human nature died his divine nature didn’t, you don’t understand the incarnation buddy? It’s okay
Thank you for your comment.
Go
Watch
Dan
McClellan
I think there are some confusions here. First of all the person of Christ is the who that does actions and not the natures. But also, that it is fine to say Jesus died qua his human nature and not his divine nature. Sure, the death of a part of a thing does not mean the death of a whole necessarily. But it could. Your examples only show that all of the human nature has to die which is true finally even after brain death. I agree with that. But it does not stipulate what would have to die in a being with two natures. It would be closer to saying I could have my right arm cut off while not having my left arm cut off. Not an exact analogy but what is?
Also I wonder what is your definition of death? Non-existence or something going out of existence? the cessation of all thoughts or life in all ways? What is it? I think that seems like another error. And no one is saying both natures die BTW. One is saying the person dies because of the death of the human nature. And we have analogies from human life when we say a part of person did something but contribute it to the whole. But if there are two natures in Jesus then you cannot just take how we speak about persons with one nature and sue that for a being with two natures.
Thank you for your comment.
I believe I address these issues in the video already.
The death of a part of a thing can mean the death of the whole. In the case of a normal person, the death of the brain is the death of the person. That is because the brain is the center of the person's functionality and activities. Christ's human nature does not relate to him in that way. His divine nature does, since he is divine before he is human, and he can be divine without also being human. The death of his human nature is sooner akin to a person's arm going necrotic.
I define death in the video, toward the end. Death is the naturally irreversible cessation of a thing's functionality and activity. Christ does not die when his humanity dies because he continues to function and act through his divine nature. Indeed, his divine nature cannot die in principle. So neither can he.
"Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?"
@@drstevennemes Thank you for your quick reply. You define death as " Death is the naturally irreversible cessation of a thing's functionality and activity" and I think that is one issue. Is that true of a normal human person let alone Jesus if any form of Christianity is true. No. If there is a soul and the lives on or goes to heaven awaiting the resurrection of the body, then the human person still has functionality and activity. Also, death cannot then be said to be irreversible since the body is awaiting to be resurrected. Thus, even in the normal human person the body dies but not necessarily the soul. And then you would have a part of the person dying and yet we still say the person died and that part for a whole would also work for Jesus' two natures.
the second issue is that I feel like you are using how we talk about one nature beings and transferring it over to a two nature being in an incorrect way. One way one could see death in a normal one nature person and a two-nature person (Jesus) would be that the human nature dies in both. So, we would speak about death in the same way for Jesus and for the normal human person. In both the human nature (really the body) dies only. Thus the death of a normal person is the same death as Jesus'.
@@carlpeterson8182
If it's true that a crucial part of the person survives the death of the body, then the person does not die. Only the body dies. That's Platonism 101, for what it's worth.
Whether or not the ordinary way of talking about death transfers to a two-natured person is precisely the matter at hand. We cannot simply take for granted that a two-natured person can die. That's the question at issue. The relationship between the person and the natures must be specified, and, as I show in this video, the only logically possible ways of specifying this relation are not acceptable for the proponent of the orthodox doctrine.
Let us look at this from a third perspective. What if Jesus was nothing more than a mortal man? What if our idea of a soul is nothing more than a product of our imagination?
Can you explain what a soul is or does? When the brain dies, the body dies. Without a functioning central nervous system and organs, one would have no senses, no memories, no emotions, etc.
One needs some form of eyes to see, along with a central nervous system, to process the information. A soul would not have eyes.
A soul would be void of form, and would not look like a person. A soul would (definitely) not have clothing, like every depiction details.
I'm certain linen does not transfer from the material world.
Therefore I ask again, what is a soul... without the the functions and processes of a physical body and a functioning brain?
These ideas of heaven are nothing more than fantasy/fiction from the minds of mortal men.
The Judeo-Christian god is the product of cultural mythology (folklore).
Jesus is fully human and fully God. Meaning his human body died but not his soul and his human body was resurected.
That’s the fakest thing I’ve heard and where have you heard that other than an Evangelical preacher explained that to you through his analysis of a text that clearly doesn’t say that.
The Bible literally says God is eternal and cannot die and then you said he’s God he died. Are you stupid or trolling?
@@tc3383 All major sects of christianity, Catholics, Orthodox and protestants believe Jesus is fully human and fully God. Any other belief is a heresy condemned by all of Christendom. God cannot be killed a human can therefore only the human body of Jesus was killed as God the son is eternal.
@@RickyVis that’s completely false and I’m glad you’re speaking for all sects, even though it sounds as if you only belong to one and have the knowledge of none.
@@tc3383 Name a single major christian sect that rejects the trinity?
Stupid arguments made by ignorance
@@larryalden79
Thank you for your comment.
Can you explain how?
Putting that doctorate to good use heretic 😂
Thank you for your comment.