Jesus did not explicitly die ...

[Oblio]

... in the Creed :)

Or at least not in the version that most English speaking Orthodox use, that I am aware of.

He suffered, and was buried, but it does not say that He died. :scratch:

Why is it not there, and is it acceptable to add it ? Is it a translational problem ?

[MariaRegina]

... in the Creed :)

Or at least not in the version that most English speaking Orthodox use, that I am aware of.

He suffered, and was buried, but it does not say that He died. :scratch:

Why is it not there, and is it acceptable to add it ? Is it a translational problem ?

Good question.

Jesus the God-man did die. This is mentioned in the Apostles Creed.

[Where is Father Gregory when we need him?]

But the Trinity did not suffer death.

[NewToLife]

The fact that he was buried implies heavily that he died.

on the third day he rose ....

also makes no sense unless he actually died.

[Oblio]

Apparently there are some English versions of the Creed that have 'died' added. Does anyone know why it was added. I agree that it is not necessary and is superfluous, but some have decided to add it, or feel that it should be.

[InnerPhyre]

The creed I was always taught was "He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried."

[MariaRegina]

The creed I was always taught was "He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried."

I think you are thinking about the Apostles Creed.

From the Catholic Marian Missal (1958), the Nicene Creed reads:

"He was crucified also for us, suffered under Pontius Pilate, and was buried."

"Crucifixus etiam pro nobis: sub Pontio Pilato passus et sepultus est."

[Oblio]

When I did a quick look at the Council (1 & 2) proclamations, I did not see any mention of 'died'. The Creed we have always used does not have 'died'. Does anyone have access to the original greek and the ability to discern it ?

Agian, I am not disputing that He died :eek: , just curious about when and why it was added to the English translation ?

[MariaRegina]

When I did a quick look at the Council (1 & 2) proclamations, I did not see any mention of 'died'. The Creed we have always used does not have 'died'. Does anyone have access to the original greek and the ability to discern it ?

Agian, I am not disputing that He died :eek: , just curious about when and why it was added to the English translation ?

Dear Reader Chris,

I do remember seeing the original Greek and the translation. It did not mention death, but death was implied in the burial.

However, from a theological point of view, Christ's body did not see corruption, and neither did the Theotokos' body according to the passages I have just read from August 15 liturgical readings. Therefore, it might add confusion to say that Christ died in the Creed when His body didn't suffer corruption and decay.

[icxn]

It's not in the Greek either.

[RobNJ]

In the BCP '79 used by us Episcopalians, we have two versions of the Nicene creed...
One starts out:
"I believe in one God,
the Father Almighty,
maker of heaven an earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen."
then later it reads:
"For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried"

The other one starts out:
"I believe in one God,
the Father Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
and of all things visible and invisible;"

that has:
"and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered and was buried;"

if that helps any??:scratch:

[Theophorus]

Someone posted a link about the Nicene council a short time ago. In that article, the author stated that desire of the bishops present was to include language that was only in the scriptures. The scriptures do not say that Christ "died" but only that people wanted to put him to death and that he "yielded up the ghost", and that he was buried.
They supposedly deviated from this in one instance to insure that no one could make Arius' mistake again. That is the word "cosubstantial", or "being of one essence with"(the Father). This would seem to explain it.

[Kripost]

As far as I know, it is not in the Greek, Latin or Slavonic versions of the Nicene Creed.

In Latin:
.... Crucifixus etiam pro nobis sub Pontio Pilato, passus et sepultus est, et resurrexit tertia die, .....

In Greek:
.... Σταυρωθέντα τε υπὲρ ημῶν επὶ Ποντίου Πιλάτου, καὶ παθόντα καὶ ταφέντα, Καὶ αναστάντα τη τρίτη ημέρα .....

(sorry, can't find church slavonic fonts :) )

[Eusebios]

Dear Reader Chris,

I do remember seeing the original Greek and the translation. It did not mention death, but death was implied in the burial.

However, from a theological point of view, Christ's body did not see corruption, and neither did the Theotokos' body according to the passages I have just read from August 15 liturgical readings. Therefore, it might add confusion to say that Christ died in the Creed when His body didn't suffer corruption and decay.
Well said Aria!
In Xp.
Eusebios.
*cursing under breath at rep police*

[katherine2001]

Didn't the soldier pierce Christ's side with the spear to make sure that He was dead?

[Alfred M]

Just my thoughts...

As Christ was truly eternal with God the Father, I have always believed that Christ went through the process of death only within the sense of "human" suffering. He felt "death" as we each will, yet He went from human life to a ressurected life in an instant. Why seek the living among the dead. Death instantly became a non-issue...as it has been conquered forever. We relate to this directly through Christ's complete humanity, that as St. Athanasius wrote is our divine journey. To be completely human is to be as Christ was human...therefore we are to be perfect as our Father, now in Heaven, is perfect. Death is a term that no longer even had meaning (except as a defeated entity) beyond the ressurection of Christ.

Just some rambling from ol' Alfred, a worthless sinner

[Oblio]

I wonder if it was left out of the Creed by the Holy Fathers of the First and Second Ecumenical Councils for just some good reason as postulated by Alfred (BTW, good to see you again :) ) above, and also for the reasons brought forth by Theophorus above ? Perhaps things such as this were discussed and not put to writing, or it is simply that they were being led by the Holy Spirit as in other things pertaining to the faith.

[33ad]

What do these verses say in Greek?




Romans 5 (King James Version)

6For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.


7For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.


8But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.



I am not disputing what you have stated above. In fact, I think I understand it very well. I agree totally with this;



He felt "death" as we each will, yet He went from human life to a ressurected life in an instant. Why seek the living among the dead. Death instantly became a non-issue...as it has been conquered forever.

[MariaRegina]

Christ truly died, but His Sacred Body didn't see corruption. And many saints also are incorrupt. Some relics (I think one is the hand of St. Mary Magdalen) are still warm to the touch.

This is mentioned in the liturgical books somewhere.

Christ has truly destroyed death by death. That is one reason why we use the term "falling asleep in Christ" -- because in the Resurrection, we will be recreated, renewed, restored with glorified bodies. Oh Death where is thy victory?

[33ad]

Christ has truly destroyed death by death. That is one reason why we use the term "falling asleep in Christ" -- because in the Resurrection, we will be recreated, renewed, restored with glorified bodies. Oh Death where is thy victory?

:amen:


Kolya

[Marjorie]

Didn't we have a thread about Christ's death a while back? I'll try to search for it later.

In IC XC,
Marjorie

[ByzantineDixie]

The Nicene Creed as used by us Lutherans also does not include the word "died" (although our Apostles creed does)...

who for us men and for our salvation
came down from heaven,
and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary
and was made man;
and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate.
He suffered and was buried.
And the third day He rose again
according to the Scriptures

However, we do believe, as was stated earlier that, Jesus, the Second Person of the Trinity died, and on the third day rose again!

Peace

Rose

[Marjorie]

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=10405060 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=10405060&postcount=1)

In IC XC,
Marjorie

[countrymousenc]

Could it be due to the Creed being formulated in answer to things that had been disputed? AFAIK, Christ's humanity had been disputed early on by gnostics, His ressurection by the Jews, and then His deity disputed by Arius, etc., but in all the hubbub His death was not a specific issue.

We do affirm liturgically that Christ "trampled down death by death," and there are other things not specifically in the Creed that we have also always affirmed, and, most likely, because they were not being disputed.

[Marjorie]

Could it be due to the Creed being formulated in answer to things that had been disputed? AFAIK, Christ's humanity had been disputed early on by gnostics, His ressurection by the Jews, and then His deity disputed by Arius, etc., but in all the hubbub His death was not a specific issue.

We do affirm liturgically that Christ "trampled down death by death," and there are other things not specifically in the Creed that we have also always affirmed, and, most likely, because they were not being disputed.

Very good point! I would rep you if that were an option.

In IC XC,
Marjorie

[icxn]

Here's what St. John Damascene says in "The Exposition of the Orthodox Faith"

CHAPTER XXVI.
Concerning the Passion of our Lord's body, and the Impassibility of His divinity.

The Word of God then itself endured all in the flesh, while His divine nature which alone was passionless remained void of passion. For since the one Christ, Who is a compound of divinity and humanity, and exists in divinity and humanity, truly suffered, that part which is capable of passion suffered as it was natural it should, but that part which was void of passion did not share in the suffering. For the soul, indeed, since it is capable of passion shares in the pain and suffering of a bodily cut, though it is not cut itself but only the body: but the divine part which is void of passion does not share in the suffering of the body.

Observe, further(4), that we say that God suffered in the flesh, bat never that His divinity suffered in the flesh, or that God suffered through the flesh. For if, when the sun is shining upon a tree, the axe should cleave the tree, and, nevertheless, the sun remains uncleft and void of passion, much more will the passionless divinity of the Word, united in subsistence to the flesh, remain void of passion when the body undergoes passion(5). And should any one pour water over flaming steel, it is that which naturally suffers by the water, I mean, the fire, that is quenched, but the steel remains untouched (for it is not the nature of steel to be destroyed by water): much more, then, when the flesh suffered did His only passionless divinity escape all passion although abiding inseparable from it. For one must not take the examples too absolutely and strictly: indeed, in the examples, one must consider both what is like and what is unlike, otherwise it would not be an example. For, if they were like in all respects they would be identities, and not examples, and all the more so in dealing with divine matters. For one cannot find an example that is like in all respects whether we are dealing with theology or the dispensation.

CHAPTER XXVII.
Concerning the fact that the divinity of the Word remained inseparable from the soul and the body, even at our Lord's death, and that His subsistence continued one.

Since our Lord Jesus Christ was without sin (for He committed no sin, He Who took away the sin of the world, nor was there any deceit found in His mouth(6)) He was not subject to death, since death came into the world through sin(7). He dies, therefore, because He took on Himself death on our behalf, and He makes Himself an offering to the Father for our sakes. For we had sinned against Him, and it was meet that He should receive the ransom for us, and that we should thus he delivered from the condemnation. God forbid that the blood of the Lord should have been offered to the tyrant(8). Wherefore death approaches, and swallowing up the body as a bait is transfixed on the hook of divinity, and after tasting of a sinless and life-giving body, perishes, and brings up again all whom of old he swallowed up. For just as darkness disappears on the introduction of light, so is death repulsed before the assault of life, and brings life to all, but death to the destroyer.

Wherefore, although(9) He died as man and His Holy Spirit was severed from His immaculate body, yet His divinity remained inseparable from both, I mean, from His soul and His body, and so even thus His one hypostasis was not divided into two hypostases. For body and soul received simultaneously in the beginning their being in the subsistence(9a) of the Word, and although they were severed from one another by death, yet they continued, each of them, having the one subsistence of the Word. So that the one subsistence of the Word is alike the subsistence of the Word, and of soul and body. For at no timehad either soul or body a separate subsistence of their own, different from that of the Word, and the subsistence of the Word is for ever one, and at no time two. So that the subsistence of Christ is always one. For, although the soul was separated from the body topically, yet hypostatically they were united through the Word.

CHAPTER XXVIII.
Concerning Corruption and Destruction.

The word corruption(1) has two meanings(2). For it signifies all the human sufferings, such as hunger, thirst, weariness, the piercing with nails, death, that is, the separation of soul and body, and so forth. In this sense we say that our Lord's body was subject to corruption. For He voluntarily accepted all these things. But corruption means also the complete resolution of the body into its constituent elements, and its utter disappearance, which is spoken of by many preferably as destruction. The body of our Lord did not experience this form of corruption, as the prophet David says, For Thou will not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt Thou suffer Thine holy one to see corruption(3).

Wherefore to say, with that foolish Julianus and Gaianus, that our Lord's body was incorruptible, in the first sense of the word, before His resurrection is impious. For if it were incorruptible it was not really, but only apparently, of the same essence as ours, and what the Gospel tells us happened, viz. the hunger, the thirst, the nails, the wound in His side, the death, did not actually occur. But if they only apparently happened, then the mystery of the dispensation is an imposture and a sham, and He became man only in appearance, and not in actual fact, and we are saved only in appearance, and not in actual fact. But God forbid, and may those who so say have no part in the salvation(4). But we have obtained and shall obtain the true salvation. But in the second meaning of the word "corruption," we confess that our Lord's body is incorruptible, that is, indestructible, for such is the tradition of the inspired Fathers. Indeed, after the resurrection of our Saviour from the dead, we say that our Lord's body is incorruptible even in the first sense of the word. For our Lord by His own body bestowed the gifts both of resurrection and of subsequent incorruption even on our own body, He Himself having become to us the firstfruits both of resurrection and incorruption, and of passionlessness(5). For as the divine Apostle says, This corruptible must put an incorruption(6).

(Source: http://orthodoxinfo.com/general/stjohn_exp3.aspx)