Thread by @scottrswain

Good question! Folks in my Presby neck of the woods sometimes worry about Wesley's hymn for two reasons. Thread.

https://twitter.com/iamcalmorrison/status/1402722513487122432

(1) Their first (legitimate) worry is that the hymn might imply the idea, popularized in 19th century Kenoticism, that the Son of God "emptied" himself of certain divine attributes when he became incarnate.

However, whatever Charles Wesley may have meant by that particular line, I don't think Kenoticism is necessarily implied by the hymn, which can be taken in a very straightforward Pauline sense (a la Phil 2).

(2) The second (illegitimate) worry arises from the hymn's claim, "that thou, my God, should die for me." The worry here is that God doesn't die. But this worry is an example of "telling on oneself."

It is true: God doesn't die. God is immortal, impassible, etc. Only creatures die. But here's where the "actiones sunt suppositorum" principle comes in.

Only persons, not natures, act and suffer. And, in the case of the incarnation, there's only one person who could be the candidate for any and all of the things Jesus did or suffered: the second person of the Trinity.

And so, while it is certainly true that the Son of God died a purely human death on the cross (because God cannot and does not die). It's also true that nobody else died on the cross for you and me than, "my God," the second person of the Trinity. Wonder of wonders. Hallelujah.