Nedumerire

Standard

Daca Isus n-ar fi murit de o moarte violenta, n-ar fi pacatuit toata viata, atunci ar mai fi murit vreodata?

10 gânduri despre “Nedumerire

  1. … sin does not belong to human nature, but is parasitic and abnormal growth. This point was vigorously stressed by St. Gregory of Nissa and particularly by St. Maximus the Confessor in connection with their teaching on the will as the seat of sin. In the Incarnation the Word assumes the first-formed human nature, created “in the image of God” and thereby the image of God is again re-established in man. This was not yet the assumption of human suffering or of suffering of humanity. It was an assumption of human life, but not yet of human death. Christ’s freedom from original sin constitutes also His freedom from death, which is the “wages of sin”. Christ is unstained from corruption and mortality right from His birth. And like the First Adam before the Fall, He is able not die at all, potens non mori, though obviously He can still die, potens autem mori.

    Therefore Christ’s death was and could not but be voluntary, not by necessity of fallen nature, but free choise and acceptance. (see St. Maximus the Confessor, ad Marynum )
    A distinction must be made between the assumption of human nature and taking up the sin by Christ. Christ is “the Lamb of God that taketh the sin of the world”[Jn 1:29]. But He does not take the sin of the world in the Incarnation. That is an act of will, not a necessity of nature. The Savior bears the sin of the world (rather than assumes it) by free choice of love. He bears it in such a way that it does not become His own sin, or violate the purity of His nature and will. He carries it freely; hence this “taking up”of sin has a redeeming power, as a free act of compassion and love. (see St. Maximus the Confessor, ad Marynum )

    from Creation and Redemption by Georges Florovsky, Nordland Publishing Co. pg. 98

    Imi cer scuze ca citatul e asa lung. Mai are si Palams cam ceva asemanator, dar nu imi mai aduca aminte in care din Omilii.

  2. Da, ar fi murit (fiind om adevarat, a mostenit si coruptibilitatea trupului), dar moartea nu ar fi putut sa-l tina. Ar fi inviat asa cum a facut-o de altfel.

  3. acu’ dadui si eu de intrebarea ta. wonderful question. Un pic de raspuns: daca ar fi tinut-o tot asa cu pretentia ca e Unsul lui Israel, Regele de drept, dar care nu saluta agenda revolutionarilor nationalisti, probabil ca – intr-un final – ar fi intrat in conflict cu Imperiul si cu conducatorii iudei. Deci tot la cruce ar fi ajuns. (cf. Jesus and the Victory of God, N.T.Wright)

    Pot sa ii ofer o intrebare-sora? Daca tot a inviat cu corp de slava, de ce nu a ramas cu noi trupeste forever? Cam ca Highlander…

  4. Da ar fi murit, deoarece odata ce s-a facut om, a luat asupra sa intreaga fire umana, inclusiv durerea, imbatranirea si moartea. Insa El nu ar fi venit decat cu un simplu motiv, motiv pentru care a si venit de fapt, sa moara pentru noi.

    • Ne-a trimis Mangaietorul adica Duhul Sfant care este cu noi.Apoi ne-am fi lenevit si am fi fost privati de frumusetea cautarii, daca exista vreun cautator, mai degraba am fost gasiti….Dar este frumoasa relatia imanent – transcendent.

      • Iarta-ma, insa sunt nedumerit in legatura cu comentariul tau. Nu inteleg ce legatura este intre ceea ce am scris eu si ceea ce ai scris tu?!

    • WOW!
      Draga Tudor,

      multumesc de intrebare, chiar daca ea este importanta, totusi are doar un rol strict personal, pe cand intrebarea mea avea un scop mult mai larg. Dar fiecare cu interesul lui.

Lasă un răspuns

Completează mai jos detaliile despre tine sau dă clic pe un icon pentru autentificare:

Logo WordPress.com

Comentezi folosind contul tău WordPress.com. Dezautentificare / Schimbă )

Poză Twitter

Comentezi folosind contul tău Twitter. Dezautentificare / Schimbă )

Fotografie Facebook

Comentezi folosind contul tău Facebook. Dezautentificare / Schimbă )

Fotografie Google+

Comentezi folosind contul tău Google+. Dezautentificare / Schimbă )

Conectare la %s