“My God! My God! Why hast Thou Forsaken Me!” I have wondered if Jesus was no more 'forsaken' by God than any of us have ever been prior to coming in to salvation. Since we are born separated from God, we do not notice our condition until we know His acceptance. What Jesus was experiencing was the same Separation from God into which we are born. ( Cals & Arms please read the bottom before reading further.) The first Adam (fully human, created with no sin nature) chose to sin. This brought about an immediate wall of separation between Adam, Eve, God, all humanity and all of nature. The Second Adam (fully human, born without a sinful nature) chose to BECOME sin in order to reconcile us back to God. He did not commit any sin, but He became sin. In taking on the sin of the world, He felt the full brunt of what happened in the garden. He finally knew the darkness, the nakedness, the fear the first Adam (by his own choice) felt. Jesus then (by His own choice) became the Second Adam. At that moment, He became fully aware of His full humanity. Since Jesus had always been One with the Father the sudden pain of experiencing any barrier in that unity was felt, and realized with such force that He could only express it by quoting Psalm 22. "God turned His back on Jesus because God cannot look on sin" This is taken from Hab 1:13 “ You who are of purer eyes than to see evil and cannot look at wrong…” It is supposed to explain why the Father turned His back on the Son; He HAD to since He (Father God) was still perfect while Jesus (the Fathers’ Son) took on Himself all the sin of the world. It seems obvious to me how out of context these words are ripped, as well as how inadequate an exegesis is put forth using who knows what hermeneutic. The rest of Hab.1:13 reads “why do you idly look at traitors and remain silent when the wicked swallows up the man more righteous than he?” The person speaking in this verse seems to be saying “ Why do you who is too pure to even glance at evil and wrong sit back and easily watch as people betray each other and the wicked devour the righteous?” Yet conversely, I was told that God pursues us relentlessly while we are dead in our sin and unaware of any separation. We are not only sheep without a Shepherd; we have no concept of any such need until He wakes us up. Can the Father look on us... "while we were yet sinners", speak with Satan face to face as recorded in the book of Job, but have to turn His back on His only begotten Son because He (supposedly) cannot look upon sin? God is holy, but His holiness (and any other aspect of His nature) is not so fragile as to become compromised by having contact with us. He is so great, mighty, and full of love and grace, that our thimbles full of sin cannot contaminate nor drain the ocean of forgiveness that is He. The Father did not turn His back on Jesus just as He does not turn His back on us. The reason Jesus cried out as He did was that He, never knowing any degree of distance from His Father, suddenly experienced THE result of being fully human. Psalm 22 (the Psalm Jesus quoted) speaks of not having God turn His back on Him (verse 24 "... neither has He hid His face from Him”). Anticipating this fracture is what finally explains Jesus’ request in Luke 22:42 “Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me.” When more details of Jesus prayer in Gethsemane are presented in John17 (which speak frequently about the Oneness of the Godhead), it is easily seen that “this cup” was the total agony of distance in relationship with the Father experienced by Adam and Eve; the one thing He had never known up to that point in time. To teach that the cup was the physical pain of crucifixion alone makes no sense to me. It contradicts everything about the purpose of the Incarnation, all prophecies concerning His first coming, as well as Jesus’ own knowledge of why He came to Earth as a man. In addition, the fact that “And it came to pass, when the time was come that he should be received up, he steadfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem.” Luke 9:51. His request was not primarily a request to be able to back out on His physical suffering. He did not want to feel separated from the Father and the Spirit with whom He had always been One. Don’t get me wrong; Jesus was Fully man. If I am to believe the orthodox view of the Godhead as being a Trinity I Must believe He is FULLY God and FULLY man. He isn’t a god/man. There does not exist “the part of Him that was God” and “the part of Him that was a man.” Like any man He wanted to be able to bypass the tremendously excruciating physical pain scheduled for Him on His way to the ALTER of the cross. He submitted His will on this matter to God the Father. Like the Only begotten Son of God; from eternity past, existing as perfectly and wholly God He did not want to arrive at any place short of perfect Oneness, Unity and Harmony. He agreed with the Elohim that was Himself to know a distance which He had never known. I am convinced that, though there was a separation, there was not a total abandonment. He did come to know in every way what it is to be us. He then was able to totally identify with us in every way. Though the First Adam put all humanity in a position of alienation from God, he has never abandoned us. From the moment Adam and Eve sinned God began His pursuit of us. He did not say, "Adam, where are you?” because He could not find Adam. Rather, He wanted Adam to know where He was. He was still WITH Adam. The theme running through Scripture from beginning to end is God's constant, relentless, undying pursuit of us because of His Love; because He IS Love. From "Adam, where are you?" to "When he saw his son far off he ran to him, embraced...." to "The Spirit and the bride say, Come..." He has never left us. I also believe the Father could not have totally abandoned Jesus because it would have meant that the eternal unity, which is the Godhead, at that point in time, would have ceased to exist. For a moment, there was not God the Son. His divine nature would not just be set aside, it would not be. To 'forsake' in the way we use the word today would have the result of Jesus being CUT OFF from the Godhead. This would have been more than an injury to the UNITY. It would have done away with the Oneness. (2Tim 2:13 [ESV]) if we are faithless, he remains faithful- for he cannot deny himself. This word ‘Deny’ is - Original: ἀρνέομαι - Transliteration: Arneomai - Phonetic: ar-neh'-om-ahee - Definition: 1. to deny 2. to deny someone a. to deny one's self 1. to disregard his own interests or to prove false to himself 2. act entirely unlike himself 3. to deny, abnegate, abjure 4. not to accept, to reject, to refuse something offered - Origin: perhaps from H1 (as a negative particle) and the middle voice of H4483 - TDNT entry: 08:49,8 - Part(s) of speech: Verb The word ‘Forsaken is: - Original: ἐγκαταλείπω - Transliteration: Egkataleipo - Phonetic: eng-kat-al-i'-po - Definition: 1. abandon, desert a. leave in straits, leave helpless b. totally abandoned, utterly forsaken 2. to leave behind among, to leave surviving - Origin: from H1722 and H2641 - TDNT entry: None - Part(s) of speech: Verb This is a paper I wrote last Spring (2011) I realize that this presents a no holds barred brawl between the 'Cals' and the 'Arms'. I can't prevent that on these forums if I am going to present it at all. My personal desire is to get feedback on the BASIC Idea as my title, opening remark and my conclusion present. For me this paper isn't concerned with 'Choice vs Free will'. It is about the Cry of Jesus from the cross and how I have always been told "God turned His back on Jesus." Last year I noticed that this phrase is not used in the actual text. I decided to do further study and this is what I concluded.