The Aquila Report

Your independent source for news and commentary from and about conservative, orthodox evangelicals in the Reformed and Presbyterian family of churches

Coram Deo Conference - click for details
  • Biblical
    and Theological
  • Churches
    and Ministries
  • People
    in the News
  • World
    and Life News
  • Lifestyle
    and Reviews
    • Books
    • Movies
    • Music
  • Opinion
    and Commentary
  • General Assembly
    and Synod Reports
    • ARP General Synod
    • EPC General Assembly
    • OPC General Assembly
    • PCA General Assembly
    • PCUSA General Assembly
    • RPCNA Synod
    • URCNA Synod
  • Subscribe
    to Weekly Email
  • Biblical
    and Theological
  • Churches
    and Ministries
  • People
    in the News
  • World
    and Life News
  • Lifestyle
    and Reviews
    • Books
    • Movies
    • Music
  • Opinion
    and Commentary
  • General Assembly
    and Synod Reports
    • ARP General Synod
    • EPC General Assembly
    • OPC General Assembly
    • PCA General Assembly
    • PCUSA General Assembly
    • RPCNA Synod
    • URCNA Synod
  • Subscribe
    to Weekly Email
  • Search
Home/Biblical and Theological/Who Really Suffers? Did Christ or His Body Suffer at the Cross?

Who Really Suffers? Did Christ or His Body Suffer at the Cross?

On Theodoret of Cyrus’s presumed Nestorianism and Cyril’s response.

Written by Wyatt Graham | Tuesday, March 3, 2026

Did Christ, the eternal Word from the Father, suffer for our sake or not? If it was only his flesh that suffered, then can we say that Christ tasted death for everyone? Or must we say, his flesh alone did? Cyril believes the Nestorian logic of the passion requires the latter belief; and he may be right.

 

Peter affirmed, “Christ suffered in the flesh” (1 Pet 4:1). This phrase and its conceptual parallels in the New Testament defined the terms for 5th-century debates over Christ’s passion (suffering).

On one side, Cyril of Alexandria championed the notion that the one Lord Jesus Christ suffered impassibly in the flesh. The emphasis here falls on the “one Lord Jesus Christ.” By contrast, others, sometimes called Nestorians, could use similar language but emphasize “in the flesh.”

This Christological debate revolved around the question who or what suffered. Was it the one Lord Jesus Christ in the flesh, or was it the flesh of the one Lord Jesus Christ?

Theodoret: The Suffering of Christ’s Body

What makes the fifth century Christological debates difficult is our historical distance. Most of the terms of the debate have been forgotten, and we tend to read theological claims from that era in a flattened way, assuming everyone merely battled over words without substance.

For example, Theodoret of Cyrus, when asked who suffered in the passion, can simply say, “Our Lord Jesus Christ.” That sounds nearly identical to the view of Cyril of Alexandria. And indeed, Theodoret would eventually affirm the Creed of Chalcedon and anathematize theological formulations attributed to Nestorius (in a guarded way). But Theodoret remains at the time of writing someone associated with the Nestorian position.

With that said, does Theodoret’s affirmation genuinely parallel Cyril’s? Probably not, since Theodoret also clarifies “the body is spoken of by the name of the person.”[2] In other words, Theodoret believes the apostolic authors use the name Christ in contexts of suffering to refer to the body, not the person (i.e., the One Lord Jesus Christ). He emphasizes the body’s (or flesh’s) suffering, flesh that is proper to the person, the one Lord Jesus Christ.

But the key here is that Christ’s human nature suffered, according to Theodoret. In this regard, he will affirm that “a body won our salvation for us” but is quick to add: “but not a mere man’s body, but that of our Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God.”[3]

Cyril: The Suffering of Christ the Word

Cyril admits that we mentally sometimes need to think about Christ as God and as man: “It is appropriate for one’s mind to sense a distinction between the natures (after all, human and divine natures are not identical), but at the same time as this acknowledgment, the mind must also accept the concurrence of the two into a unity.”[4]

Read More

Related Posts:

  • Was God Crucified?
  • We Cannot Reject EFAS By Nestorian Arguments
  • How To Suffer Well
  • Praying to God in Our Suffering
  • There Is Something Better Than Never Suffering

Subscribe to Free “Top 10 Stories” Email

Get the top 10 stories from The Aquila Report in your inbox every Tuesday morning.

Name(Required)

Archives

Subscribe, Follow, Listen

  • email-alt
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • apple-podcasts
  • anchor
Belhaven University
Coram Deo Conference - click for details

Books

Tool Small by Craig Biehl - Why Atheists Can't Know What They Say They Know
Plumbing the Depths of Darkness - click for details
How To Lead Your Family - by Joel Beeke
  • About
  • Advertise Here
  • Contact Us
  • Donate
  • Email Alerts
  • Leadership
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Principles and Practices
  • Privacy Policy

Free Subscription

Aquila Report Email Alerts

Books

The Letter of Jude - book from Tulip Publishing
  • About
  • Advertise Here
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Principles and Practices
  • RSS Feed
  • Subscribe to Weekly Email Alerts

DISCLAIMER: The Aquila Report is a news and information resource. We welcome commentary from readers; for more information visit our Letters to the Editor link. All our content, including commentary and opinion, is intended to be information for our readers and does not necessarily indicate an endorsement by The Aquila Report or its governing board. In order to provide this website free of charge to our readers,  Aquila Report uses a combination of donations, advertisements and affiliate marketing links to  pay its operating costs.

Return to top of page

Website design by Five More Talents · Copyright © 2026 The Aquila Report · Log in