I have fond memories of the Anglican Church. I attended an Anglican church Sunday School as a lad. And I was later involved with High School Scripture through the ministry of a Anglican Church in Picton NSW. Then, the local minister had a Double Decker bus which he would pick us up from school, take us down to the church and then return us to the school. Later on, as a 30 year old, I was to return to that church and its there were I experienced becoming born again and the experience of being baptized in the Holy Spirit.
I have been recently posting a lot on the [im]passibility of Christ. My posts have been stirring some people up. They are making us think. One friend asked me to join in a discussion elsewhere and another asked the following question on his face book page
Did God die on the cross? Some Christians say it is important that he did, while others say, it is vital that we understand that it was Jesus the Man who died on the cross, not God.
What is your understanding? Can you point me to relevant passages in theological works where this is discussed, please?
i was pleased to see him ask the question and eagerly awaited some replies and it wasn’t long till some great answers came to pass. I’d like to pass on the comment that a Sydney Anglican minister Sandy Grant made.
a key theological phrase for this issue is the ‘communication of attributes”. You would normally see this discussed under the heading of “The Person of Christ” exploring the divine and human natures of Christ, that God the Son became true man – fully God, fully man – two natures, one person.
What theologians say is that anything either Nature does, the Person of Christ does. This is because the two natures are united in one indivisible person. Grudem (chapter 26 §3.b & c gives examples like this.
Jesus says, “Before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58), not “Before Abraham was, my divine nature existed”.
“Christ died for our sins” (1 Cor 15:3). Strictly speaking it was his human body whose blood stopped flowing and whose electrical activity ceased in the brain. But it was Christ the person who died for us.
“They crucified the Lord of glory” (1 Cor 2:8), a title which brings to mind Christ’s divine nature.
He also footnotes Acts 20:28 “Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood”. Here the textual variant ‘Lord’ for ‘God’ is far harder to explain as original, since why would scribes have moved to the more difficult reading, ‘God’?
He then pointed us to the 2nd Article of the 39 articles of the Anglican Faith.
II. Of the Word or Son of God, which was made very Man.
The Son, which is the Word of the Father, begotten from everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God, and of one substance with the Father, took Man’s nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin, of her substance: so that two whole and perfect Natures, that is to say, the Godhead and Manhood, were joined together in one Person, never to be divided, whereof is one Christ, very God, and very Man; who truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried, to reconcile his Father to us, and to be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for actual sins of men
The question of [im]passibility of God has started me to think through the issues if this can be a key feature of why some are weak on prayer. But, that is a thought for another time. I’ll keep you posted.