Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
Anytime we approach the Trinity if we jump to conclusion based on human reasoning we can easily fall into error.
The point is not that the co-inherence argument doesn't seem to suggest that somehow all of the Trinity died on the cross. The point is the Bible never suggests anyone died on the cross but the Son, so we should stick with that.
|
Here is where the divinity and humanity of Christ are relevant to the conversation.
According to His divinity the Son was, is, and always will be co-existing, coinhering, and co-equal in the Godhead. John 6:46, 7:29, and 16:27 testify that the eternal status of the essential Trinity is maintained even during the Lord's sojourn on the bridge of time. That is orthodox.
Further explanations must not abandon that basic orthodox view else you end up in a ditch.
The teaching of "only the Son died on the cross" suggests that the essential Trinity does not coinhere uninterrupted from eternity past to eternity future. That is not an orthodox view but veers toward the ditch of tritheism.
To say when the Son died on the cross the Triune God died on the cross maintains the orthodox view of the "co's" in the Godhead. OBW, this is not veering towards the ditch of modalism as Father, Son, and Spirit co-exist, co-active, simultaneously, collaborate from eternity past to eternity future.
Drake