What happened on the cross?

Absolutely. The Father turned his back on the Son as Jesus Who knew no sin literally became sin for us. In those hours on the cross I believe the Trinity was literally ripped apart and Jesus went into the wilderness of God-forsakenness as our sinbearer/scapegoat...

 

No, of course not. When Jesus cried out, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me," He was quoting the 22nd Psalm. Like the psalmist, Jesus was in deep agony and despair but also like the psalmist, God had not forsaken Him and He knew it. The cry of despair is hyperbole.

Jesus did not become sin for us. Rather He took upon Himself the sins of the world and suffered for them so we would not have to. His death on the cross was a sacrifice just like the paschal lamb of the O.T. That is why Jesus is referred to as the Lamb of God.

 

His first word is "Father forgive them..." His last word is "Father into thy hands I commend my spirit". In between, as Jesus became sin for us He dares not address God as Father; not till after the debt is paid and the relationship/fellowship is restored.

Or is that another hyperbole?

 

I do not believe you can 'rip apart' the Trinity, God is one being, He can not be ripped apart or seperated in being.

 

Yeah, I know my comments fly in the face of that, but that is what makes the sacrifice so incredible! God turned His back on His Son and walked away!

"Forsaken" -- what a powerful word! Throughout His ministry others may have forsaken the Lord Jesus, but never the Father (John 8:16; 16:32). Now as He becomes sin for us, God who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, "Forsakes His Son". I cannot dismiss these words as mere hyperbole.

He cried with a loud voice... Why, cry with a loud voice if it was only figurative or hyperbolic? No, it was very real. The Godhead willingly ripped Himself apart to provide our salvation. Had not really thought of this application before, but when God ratified His covenant with Abraham He instructed Abraham to divide the sacrifices in two (except the birds). When the sins were symbolically laid in the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement, the animal was led into the wilderness ALONE.

Does this stretch us? Absolutely. But what else can you do with the Words of both Matthew and Mark, but spiritualize, allergorize, or hyperbolize them away. Some may be comfortable with that, not me.

.

 

Further, if the Father did not forsake the Son and leave Him to pay the sin debt alone, why such agony in Gethsemane?

 

And during that time He showed great love for His mother by entrusting her care to his beloved disciple, John. That doesn't sound like one who has just become SIN personified.

Not sure what to call it but I believe 2 Corinthians 5:21 is definitely a figure of speech that really means to "be a sin offering."

 

If you were about to be crucified for no reason, you would probably be doing some serious agonizing also. I certainly would.

 

That was the second statement. The third was to the thief beside Him. Not until the fourth saying did Jesus fully assume our sin as His own. That was when the darkness came for three hours. We know very little of what took place in that time span. It is as if God hid the suffering of His Son from the world.

You are not sure what to call it? Dr. Bob and I do, GROSS ERROR! How can you take a clear statement like that and make it "definitely a figure of speech"?!?!?!


Wait, I do know the answer to that one. It is because you bend Scripture to fit your theology rather than bend your theology to fit Scripture. VERY DANGEROUS.

 

I believe it would do us a world of theological good if someone would do an exegesis on the Hebrew word the Psalmist used in Psalm 22 for the word "forsaken" and then reference the way that the Lord Jesus referred to it while on the cross

 

2Cr 5:19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

.

 

And I suppose you would take scripture like Luke 14:26, Acts 22:16, John 20:23 and James 5:19-20 at their face value? No, I didn't think so. But these are different, aren't they? You like 2 Corinthians 5:21 but you probably don't like these verses. When you interpret scripture it is called exegesis but when I do the same it is bending scripture. Could we be using a double standard?

 

Well, it is certainly possible that I am wrong. That happened once several years ago!


A couple of important principles of hermeneutics are worthy of mention.

1) Consider the meaning of the words in the original languages
2) Consider how the words are used in Scripture
3) Consider how the passage compares with other passages
4) Interpret a difficult passage in light of clear passages, not vice versa


Re Luke 14:26 - “hate” is a comparative term. As also in Rom 9:13 “As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.” Consistent with other uses of the word in Scripture, Jesus is saying that we must prefer Him above family. Further, Scripture is clear that Father and Mother are to be honored and respected, as are other family relationships, but these family ties are not to be held as above our love to the Lord.


Re Acts 22:16 - about 150 times, Scripture declares that salvation is by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Eph 2:8-9 clearly states that it is by grace not by works, as does Gal 2:16 and others. There is absolutely no problem in the text in connecting the “wash away your sins” with the next phrase “calling upon His name” rather that the previous reference to baptism.


Re John 20:22 - as just mentioned, salvation is clearly declared to be by grace through faith. Again, never interpret clear passages on the basis of unclear, rather understand unclear passages in light of that which is clear. In any case, the apostles were certainly given power and authority by the Lord Jesus Christ to perform great works that demonstrated that they were indeed His apostles. While I do not profess to understand all that this verse may imply, even if Jesus did give the 11 that authority, there is no indication that it continued beyond these men assembled with Jesus at that time. Nor is there any Biblical indication that any of the 11 ever exercised this authority, whatever it may have meant.


Re James 5:19-20 - there is really not much of a problem with this passage. If a believer strays from the truth and another brother persuades him to return to the path of obedience, he has kept him from a path that could lead to an early death. Therefore by turning him back to the path of obedience he does save his soul/life from death and prevent all that sins that may have occurred if he had not been “turned back” (epistrephw).


In regard to the 2Cor 5:21, there is no good reason to fail to understand it in a clearly direct and literal sense. Further, such a sense is not that far from the sense of Isa 53:6, “the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all”.


As far as the meaning of the word in Psa 22:1 this will not really suffice as a “word study” but it will be a good start for someone who wishes to perform one... The TWOT number is there for those who have this resource...

5800 ‘azab aw-zab’

a primitive root; v; {See TWOT on 1594} {See TWOT on 1595}

AV-forsake 129, leave 72, leave off 4, faileth 2, fortify 2, help 2, committeth 1, destitute 1, refuseth 1, surely 1; 215

1) to leave, loose, forsake
1a) (Qal) to leave
1a1) to depart from, leave behind, leave, let alone
1a2) to leave, abandon, forsake, neglect, apostatise
1a3) to let loose, set free, let go, free
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) to be left to
1b2) to be forsaken
1c) (Pual) to be deserted

 

Jesus told His disciples in John 16:32 "Behold, an hour is coming, and has already come, for you to be scattered, each to his own home, and to leave Me alone; and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with Me."

Jesus was anticipating the continuing presence of the Father while He was going through the passion. He is saying, even though all men abandon Him, His Father would not abandon Him.

I don't think scripture supports the notion of the God-Head being torn asunder. I don't think scripture supports the notion that the Father turned His back on Jesus and left Him alone while He was on the cross.

peace to youraying:

 

The only way I know to balance that with "My God My God, why hast Thou forsaken me!?" is to say that the Father was with Him till Jesus bore the full weight of our sin, at which point, God, Who is of purer eyes than to behold sin had to turn His back on His Son.

The Father was with Him in the garden, during the trial, in the first hours of the cross and then turned away. After the sin debt was paid, the fellowship/relationship was restored. Jesus was forsaken by the Father that we may never have to be (Heb 13:5).

What else can you do with "why hast thou forsaken me" without taking the meaning right out of the words?

Incidentally, here is the Greek for "forsaken"

1459 εγκατελιπες egkataleipo eng-kat-al-i’-po

from 1722 and 2641; ; v

AV-forsake 7, leave 2; 9

1) abandon, desert
1a) leave in straits, leave helpless
1b) totally abandoned, utterly forsaken
2) to leave behind among, to leave surviving


RJP

 

The only way to understand "My God MY God, why hast Thou forsaken me!" is to realize Jesus is quoting Psalm 22. Jesus is saying that what was happening to Him is fulfilling the prophecy of Psalm 22.

v.7 "All who see me sneer at me: They separate with the lip, they wag the head saying (8)Commit to the LORD; let Him deliver him. Let Him rescue him because He delights in him."

(16) "For dogs have surrounded me; A band of evildoers has encompassed me; They pierced my hands and my feet. (17) I can count all my bones. They look, they stare at me";

(18) "They divide my garments among them, And for my clothing they cast lots."

(23-24) "...And stand in awe of Him all you descendants of Israel. For He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; Neither has He hidden His face from him; But when he cried to Him for help, He heard."

The prayer of Psalm 22 is to encourage those who feel God has abandoned them to realize He has not. The same held true for Jesus. God the Father did not abandon Him.

Heb 13:5 says God will never forsake us.

It does not say that the reason God will never forsake us is because God the Father forsook His Son, Jesus, on the cross.

You are reading something into the text that just isn't there.

Just understand scripture in context.

peace to youraying:

 

It was the fulfilling of the passage, but not literally. The first time He cries out with a great voice, He is simply referring to a passage that teaches the exact opposite of His words?

It says, "My God, My God! Why hast thou forsaken me?" but it really is "to encourage those who feel God has abandoned them to realize He has not. The same held true for Jesus. God the Father did not abandon Him."


Wow. That just seems like a real stretch to me...

Did these happen? Or was it just to encourage people that this could never happen either? It would only feel like it happened, but not really, be encouraged.


Sorry, the manner in which I cited Heb 13:5 did look as though I was using it to support the whole thesis of my sentence. I only meant to support the last phrase... You are correct in stating...

This is certainly one of those things that I do not understand. But the fact that I do not understand it does not relieve me of my obligation to preach it none-the-less.

RJP

 

Because you are focused on one verse (and building a theology from that one verse) and not on understanding the entire Psalm in context.

Well, you preach as your conscience directs. Seeing Psalm 22 in context convinces me your wrong about the Trinity being torn asunder or the Father turning His back on His Son. As you well know, we all have to give an account. I'm surprised God hasn't already struck me down for some of the things I have preached.

Thank God for His mercy:godisgood:

peace to youraying: