1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Justification

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Martin Marprelate, May 14, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    33,286
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Brother Martin,

    You have done a good job of defining many of your terms here as you walk us through your position. Thank you for taking the time and care to do so. I have read this thread, but I still have a few questions.

    Do you mean this word "dikaioo" in terms of God declaring us just as “Law keepers” and "morally just" based on the perfect Law-keeping of Christ (a righteousness based on the Law performed by Christ) or is this God declaring us just/righteous in the context of the Abrahamic covenant based on Christ as the Seed of Abraham (a righteousness apart from the Law through faith...perhaps even looking at Christ's own faithfulness in the Father for deliverance)?
     
  2. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    33,286
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Martin, I have one more question regarding something you stated earlier.

    I am addressing this separately from my other question so as not to confuse the two. There are areas where I think we agree. I believe that we both agree that the death of Christ was substitutionary in that He died in the stead of sinners, their guilt being imputed to Him in such a way that He representatively bore their punishment. We have, I think, in common the understanding that Justification is to declare righteous the one who has faith in Jesus Christ. It is an act of God where He declares the believing sinner righteous on the ground of Christ’s death. So yes, Jesus never sinned. I believe not only so that he would remain a suitable sacrifice (Leviticus 22:21) but also because He is God (Jn 1:1).

    We've had this conversation before and I realize we do not agree on a few points. But I have not fully grasped the reasoning that you choose one position over the other as both do not (to me) seem equally supported in scripture.

    You take Christ as calling out “why have You forsaken Me?” to indicate that Jesus was separated from God’s gracious presence for three hours. I grant that the word "forsaken" can, among other things, indicate a separation between two parties.

    My understanding of the passage is twofold. First, Jesus is in agony calling out to God in a forsaken state. Not that He is separated from God’s gracious presence in even the least degree but that God has yet to deliver Him (this One Whom we are told God will give His angels charge lest he strike his foot against a stone is dying on a cross). But secondly, and more importantly, is that this is a declaration that He is indeed the Christ, fulfilling Psalm 22, trusting in God’s righteousness and deliverance.

    What passages of Scripture do you offer to support the idea that for three hours Jesus was separated from God’s presence?

    Thank you in advance for taking the time to explain your views, and for the patience you've extended to others in so doing. I look forward to your reply as I move towards a fuller understanding of your position.
     
  3. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    33,286
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It seems we’ve run into a bit of a dead end insofar as justifying our positions on Justification :).

    Opening the question up beyond being directed at Brother Martin, but concerning the same understanding:

    Does God declaring men “just” refer to a declaration that we are as “Law Keepers” based on the perfect Law-keeping of Christ (a righteousness based in the Law performed by Christ) or is this God declaring men just/righteous in the context of the Abrahamic covenant based on Christ as the Seed of Abraham (a righteousness apart from the Law through faith…perhaps even looking at Christ’s on faithfulness in the Father for deliverance)?


    My other question which remained unaddressed involves the meaning of “forsake”. There are at least two contexts in which this has been commonly taken. One is as Brother Martin poses here – God separated from Jesus for a duration of time (Martin insists for 3 hours). The other view is that Jesus is crying out in agony (he is “forsaken” as it is the will of the Father to crush Him and offer Him a guilt sacrifice) but also that He is affirming that He is the Christ and expressing a reliance in the faithfulness of the Father for deliverance.

    While I believe the second interpretation correct (and have strong objections to the first), a couple of days ago I asked if there were passages that supported the first view (that on the cross Jesus was separated from God’s presence for 3 hours). Are there, and if so, what are they? If there are none, then how do we come the conclusion that Jesus was separated from the "God's gracious presence" for 3 hours on the cross when scripture is replete with passages to the contrary?
     
    #23 JonC, May 18, 2016
    Last edited: May 18, 2016
  4. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,913
    Likes Received:
    1,017
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Are we made righteous by the circumcision of Christ, or by being declared righteous? This is basic Christianity 101.
     
  5. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,817
    Likes Received:
    2,106
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Jonc,
    I'm sorry not to have replied to your earlier post, but I've been short of time, tied up with a discussion on the 'Other Christian Denomination' thread, and also you and I flogged the Penal Substitution thing to death on two or three other threads. However, here I am now.
    The Abrahamic covenant is a 'covenant of promise' (Ephesians 2:12; cf. Galatians 3:16 etc.). The promises are fulfilled in Christ. Christ has fulfilled all the righteous requirements of the law and He has paid the penalty in full for our sins. He is the propitiation for our sins (1 John 2:2- Passive Obedience) and He is our righteousness (1 Corinthians 1:30; 2 Corinthians 5:21- Active Obedience).

    What exactly is your difficulty?

    What exactly is the difference you see between the Father 'forsaking' the Son for the three hours of darkness (Mark 13:33-34), and 'separating' from Him for that time? I see no difference. The Scriptural evidence is Psalm 22:1-18. Why is that insufficient? Our Lord actually quoted it so that we would be in absolutely no doubt as to what was happening. After the three hours, the sun re-appeared and the Lord Jesus cried, "It is finished!" so that everyone would know that propitiation had been made; He fulfilled the last outstanding prophecy that He had to fulfil by requesting a drink, and finally cried out, "Father, into Your hand I commend My spirit," which He would not have cried if He were still forsaken by the Father. It's all very, very clear and straightforward.

    You were telling me to read books by N.T. Wright. I bet you haven't read the book on Penal Substitution I recommended. I am amazed that people will read unsound, controversial stuff until the cows come home. but they won't read something helpful and good. Here is the book again: Pierced for our Transgressions by Jeffrey, Ovey and Sach (IVP, 2007. ISBN: 978-1-84474-178-6).

    One thing I must add. the great doctrines of our faith are inter-dependent. Deny one and you (the 'yous' here are plural. I'm not getting specifically at you) will find yourself denying another and another and another. Once you deny Penal Substitution, Justification by faith alone and the Active Obedience of Christ are called into question, and pretty soon you are struggling with the whole of soteriology and hamartiology and the whole edifice of your faith will come crashing down around you.

    Alexander (A.B.) Bruce was an esteemed minister in the Free Church of Scotland, and in 1876, he was appointed Professor of Theology, Apologetics and New Testament exegesis at the Free Church College in Glasgow. Unfortunately, he imbibed 'Higher Criticism' teaching from Germany and this undermined his faith to the point that when he died in 1899, one of his friends said, "Sandy Bruce died without a single shred of Christian conviction." Not only that, but the whole denomination went down in flames and the present body is only a remnant of what was there before. Be warned! Read 1 Corinthians 10:12.
     
    #25 Martin Marprelate, May 18, 2016
    Last edited: May 18, 2016
  6. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    33,286
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Me, personally? I died in Christ and now I live in Him. And this is an experience that I can back up with scripture (Rm. 6:8). So the answer to your question, of course, is both. That's basic Christianity 101. God makes us what he has called us to be.

    But my question concerns the statement of God declaring men"just". Does “just” here refer to us as “Law Keepers” based on the perfect Law-keeping of Christ (a righteousness based in the Law performed by Christ) or is this in the context of the Abrahamic covenant based on Christ and grounded in the Cross (a righteousness apart from the Law through faith…perhaps even looking at Christ’s on faithfulness in the Father for deliverance)?
     
  7. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    33,286
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Welcome back to the flogging Wink. This time, perhaps the difference in topic will help highlight our positions and narrow the discussion (truthfully, it should be two separate threads as the idea that Jesus was separated from the presence of God for 3 hours is neither an essential idea within historic penal substitution or the doctrine of justification).

    But we're here, so maybe we can contribute to each other's understanding. I mostly would like to know those two things about your view here. I do not know how you are viewing "righteous" or "just" here, and I am not sure how you defend your position about Jesus' separation from God via scripture. And again, thank you for taking the time to explain this to me. Thumbsup
     
  8. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,817
    Likes Received:
    2,106
    Faith:
    Baptist
    JonC, I don't get to say which doctrines are essential and which aren't, but I have no wish to see how close I can sail to the shores of apostasy without running aground.
    If you will tell me what difference you see in the Father 'forsaking' the Son, 'separating' from Him or 'deserting' Him, I will answer your question.
     
  9. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    33,286
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Brother, I am in no way implying that either of us holds these understandings as essential doctrine to our faith, and if it appeared as if I was adding such views as essential to the gospel of Christ then you have my apologies.
    Sure,

    My understanding of the Jesus' cry "why have You forsaken Me" is twofold. First, Jesus is in agony calling out to God in a forsaken state. Not that He is separated from God’s gracious presence in even the least degree but that God has yet to deliver Him (this One Whom we are told God will give His angels charge lest he strike his foot against a stone is dying on a cross). But secondly, and more importantly, is that this is a declaration that He is indeed the Christ, fulfilling Psalm 22, trusting in God’s righteousness and deliverance.

    I do not believe there can ever be a separation between God and Jesus, but instead I believe in the eternally triune and immutable Godhead - Father, Son, and Spirit - inseparable, three persons, One God...(I am a Trinitarian). I believe that a doctrine of the Cross which implies a separation between any persons of the Trinity is a incomplete doctrine and error. I believe that our hope is in Christ, and that this hope includes the faithfulness of the Father (not separation but deliverance).

    As we discuss this topic, brother, I am going to try not to innodate our entire conversation with passages (I've found some try to confuse the issue by flooding posts with verses) but please let me know if I need to provide a reference (from scripture) to support what I assert. If I cannot then I will accept what is extra-biblical as such. On this topic, I am not asking for your view. You are articulate and have expressed your position very well in the past. I am asking for you to support your view via scripture.

    Thanks again for your willingness to discuss (again) this issue and perhaps show me what I missed in our previous interactions.
     
  10. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    33,286
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Let's slow down a bit here, brother Martin. I was telling you that if you wanted to discuss N.T. Wright's views that you should read his views first hand. That is a far cry from saying I need to read "Pierced for our Transgressions" in order to discuss whether or not Jesus was separated from God for 3 hours on the cross. N.T. Wright is the authority when it comes to discussing what he believes. Scripture, not Jeffrey and Ovey, is our authority of whether or not Jesus was separated from God.

    You are right, however, that our doctrines are inter-dependent (if they are correct). That is why I completely reject that Jesus was separated from God's presence on the Cross. It denies far to much, and as far as I know has no biblical support (hence my request for passages supporting such a doctrine). I know the "slippery slope theory", but I still insist that it is wrong to teach error as truth even when the intention is to keep people closely in check. Good intentions never justify bad theology.

    And I am not talking about "higher criticism" but what is stated specifically and plainly in Scripture. I am asking you to show me a verse that very clearly and straight forwardly states that Jesus was separated from the presence of God, and I am asking because I believe that such a statement denies the doctrine of the Trinity, the doctrine of divine immutability, the doctrine of the righteousness and faithfulness of God, the work of the Father in redemption, and the nature of the cross itself....all in one fell swoop. If so much is denied, then I need a bit more than "well....Jesus said that he was forsaken and then committed his spirit to God". That doesn't cut it, brother, because it presupposes the error of which we are speaking (you are assuming, still, that this supposed separation ended when Jesus committed his spirit to God when in fact it had never existed to begin with).

    For my part, as a start, I stand on the truth of scripture that God will indeed never abandon his righteous one and in fact did not separate from Jesus (Deuteronomy 31:8; 31:6; Joshua 1:9; 1:5 Isaiah 41:10-13; Psalm 22; 37:25; 37:28; 55:22; 73:23-26; Micha 7:7).

    So again, brother, slow down and discuss this with me. Are there any passages that indicate Jesus was separated from the Father for 3 hours on the cross? If so, will you please provide the passages so that we can work through them?
     
  11. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,817
    Likes Received:
    2,106
    Faith:
    Baptist
    That is my exact position.
    If He is not forsaken, and that by the Father, then why does He cry out, 'Why have YOU forsaken ME?' Those are the words and I take them to mean what they so obviously do mean. That there on the cross, the Father turned away from the Son, and that intimate union which they had had from before the foundation of the world was, for those three hours of darkness, broken. BTW, you do realise that your interpretation of Psalm 91:11-12 is actually Satan's, don't you (Matthew 4:6)?

    2 Thes. 1:9. 'These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of God and from the glory of His power.' This is the doom of sinners; shut out from the presence of God, to know nothing of Him but His abiding wrath. The Lord Jesus Christ has taken our sins upon Himself and has suffered this separation on our behalf.

    Hab. 1:13. 'You are of purer eyes than to behold evil, and cannot look upon wickedness.' Our Lord was 'made sin,' that is, the very epitome of sin. All our sin was laid upon His sinless shoulders, and the Father turned His face away while expiation was made in full.

    Psalm 75:8. 'In the hand of the LORD there is a cup, and the wine is red; it is fully mixed and he pours it out; surely its dregs shall all the wicked of the earth drain down and drink.' If my sins were not laid upon Christ, then they are still upon me. If Christ has not drained the cup of God's wrath to the very dregs (Matthew 26:39-42), then I must drink it myself.

    I can't tell you what comfort this precious doctrine is to me. That Christ has taken my sins, even mine, upon Himself and paid the penalty for them right down to the last farthing, is the most wonderful thing imaginable. But if He has not suffered separation from God on my behalf, then who else is going to suffer it for me?
     
  12. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    33,286
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I am going to briefly address the passages you have provided as a supplement for your view, but I would much prefer that you provide passages that actually demonstrate your position. I can provide verses that actually say that God will not abandon His Righteous One, that God is immutable, Jesus is God, etc. It is odd that you have yet to provide even one verse saying Jesus was separated from God's presence for 3 hours. It is a matter of your opinion rather than scripture, brother. And there is a deeper meaning to the Cross once you get beyond that error.

    Psalm 91 concludes:
    “Because he holds fast to me in love, I will deliver him; I will protect him, because he knows my name. When he calls to me, I will answer him; I will be with him in trouble; I will rescue him and honor him. With long life I will satisfy him and show him my salvation.”

    This was my point, which you either deny or misunderstand.

    2 Thessalonians 1:9 speaks of the second death as Hades is cast into Hell at judgment. It does not speak of Jesus being separated from God’s presence for 3 hours on the cross. You are reading your ideas into that passage.

    Habakkuk 1:13 is his complaint appealing to God’s holiness. It applies to Jesus Christ. It is not saying that Jesus was separated from the presence of God for 3 hours on the cross. You are reading this into your theory.

    Psalm 75 also denounces your eisegesis, which you would have seen if you had continued in the psalm instead of extracting it to your own view: “But I will declare it forever; I will sing praises to the God of Jacob. All the horns of the wicked I will cut off, but the horns of the righteous shall be lifted up.”

    I am trying to be clear here, brother. There are many verses and passages stating that God will NEVER abandon His Righteous One in terms of separation. Do you have EVEN ONE saying that He did?

    Look to God's Word, brother, not merely words and opinions for comfort. You will never find a Christ separated from God's presence, but you will find an eternally greater truth. God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself.
     
  13. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    33,286
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Faith:
    Baptist
    At the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?” (Mark 15:34)

    Up to this point, the narrative of the crucifixion has focused on the physical sufferings of Jesus: the flogging, the crown of thorns, and his immolation on the cross. Six hours have now passed since the nails were driven home. The crowds have jeered, darkness has covered the land, and now, suddenly, after a long silence, comes this anguished cry from the depths of the Savior’s soul.

    The words are an Aramaic-tinged quotation from Psalm 22, and although Matthew and Mark both offer a translation for the benefit of Gentile readers, they clearly want us to hear the exact words that Jesus spoke. At his lowest ebb, his mind instinctively breathes the Psalter, and from it he borrows the words that express the anguish, not now of his body, but of his soul.

    He bore in his soul, wrote Calvin, “the terrible torments of a condemned and lost man” (Institutes, II:XVI, 10). But dare we, on such hallowed ground, seek more clarity?

    Against All Hope
    There are certainly some very clear negatives. The forsakenness cannot mean, for example, that the eternal communion between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit was broken. God could not cease to be triune.

    Neither could it mean that the Father ceased to love the Son: especially not here, and not now, when the Son was offering the greatest tribute of filial piety that the Father had ever received.

    “Jesus did not merely feel forsaken. He was forsaken; and not only by his disciples, but by God himself.”John 1:32), and he would be there to the last as the eternal Spirit through whom the Son offered himself to God (Hebrews 9:14).

    And finally, the words are not a cry of despair. Despair would have been sin. Even in the darkness God was, “MyGod,” and though there was no sign of him, and though the pain obscured the promises, somewhere in the depths of his soul there remained the assurance that God was holding him. What was true of Abraham was truer still of Jesus: Against all hope, he in hope believed (Romans 4:18).

    Truly Forsaken
    Yet, with all these qualifiers, this was a real forsaking. Jesus did not merelyfeel forsaken. He was forsaken; and not only by his disciples, but by God himself. It was the Father who had delivered him up to Judas, to the Jews, to Pilate, and finally to the cross itself.

    And now, when he had cried, God had closed his ears. The crowd had not stopped jeering, the demons had not stopped taunting, the pain had not abated. Instead, every circumstance bespoke the anger of God; and there was no countering voice. This time, no word came from heaven to remind him that he was God’s Son, and greatly loved. No dove came down to assure him of the Spirit’s presence and ministry. No angel came to strengthen him. No redeemed sinner bowed to thank him.

    Bearing the Curse
    Who was he? He cries out in Aramaic, but he doesn’t use the greatest of all the Aramaic words, Abba. Even in the anguish of Gethsemane, distraught and overborne though he was, he had been able to use it (Mark 14:36). But not here.

    Like Abraham and Isaac going up to Mount Moriah, he and the Father had gone up to Calvary together. But now Abba is not there. Only El is there: God All-mighty, God All-holy. And he is before El, not now as his Beloved Son, but as the Sin of the World. That is his identity: the character in which he stands before Absolute Integrity.

    “He stands where none has stood before or since, enduring at one tiny point in space and time, all that sin deserved.”2 Corinthians 5:21), condemned to bear its curse; and he has no cover. None can serve as his advocate. Nothing can be offered as his expiation. He must bear all, and El will not, cannot, spare him till the ransom is paid in full. Will that point ever be reached? What if his mission fails?

    The sufferings of his soul, as the old divines used to say, were the soul of his suffering, and into that soul we can see but dimly. Public though the cry was, it expressed the intensely private anguish of a tension between the sin-bearing Son and his heavenly Father: the whirlwind of sin at its most dreadful, God forsaken by God.

    His Anguish of Soul
    But no less challenging than the torment in Jesus’s soul is his question, “Why?”

    Is it the why of protest: the cry of the innocent against unjust suffering? The premise is certainly correct. He is innocent. But he has lived his whole life conscious that he is the sin-bearer and has to die as the redemption-price for the many. Has he forgotten that now?

    Or is it the why of incomprehension, as if he doesn’t understand why he’s here? Has he forgotten the eternal covenant? Perhaps. His mind, as a human mind, could not be focused on all the facts at the same time, and for the moment the pain, the divine anger, and the fear of eternal perdition (the cross being God’s last word) occupy all his thoughts.

    Or is it the why of amazement, as he confronts a dreadfulness he could never have anticipated? He had known from the beginning that he would die a violent death (Mark 2:20), and in Gethsemane he had looked it in the eye, and shuddered. But now he is tasting it in all its bitterness, and the reality is infinitely worse than the prospect.

    Never before had anything come between him and his Father, but now the sin of the whole world has come between them, and he is caught in this dreadful vortex of the curse. It is not that Abba is not there, but that he is there, as the Judge of all the earth who could condone nothing and could not spare even his own Son (Romans 8:32).

    The Cup Is Drained
    Now, Jesus’s mind is near the limits of its endurance. We, sitting in the gallery of history, are sure of the outcome. He, suffering in human nature the fury of hell, is not. He is standing where none has stood before or since, enduring at one tiny point in space and in one tiny moment of time, all that sin deserved: the curse in unmitigated concentration.

    “The Cup is drained and the curse exhausted, and the Father now proudly holds out his hands to the spirit of his Beloved Son.”Psalm 31:5. In the original, it had not contained the word Abba, but Jesus inserts it: “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit” (Luke 23:46).

    We have no means of knowing what intervened between the two cries. We know only that the Cup is drained and the curse exhausted, and that the Father now proudly holds out his hands to the spirit of his Beloved Son.


    http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/why-have-you-forsaken-me
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. percho

    percho Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    7,304
    Likes Received:
    458
    Faith:
    Baptist
    What was, "the spirit," of the Son, that the Son commended into the hands of the Father? What did the Son mean in stating, "into thy hands I commend the spirit of me? What did the Father do with the spirit of the Son while the spirit of the Son was in his hands?

    2:7 καὶ ἔπλασεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν ἄνθρωπον χοῦν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς καὶ ἐνεφύσησεν εἰς τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ πνοὴν ζωῆς καὶ ἐγένετο ὁ ἄνθρωπος εἰς ψυχὴν ζῶσαν LXX Gen 2:7

    12:7 καὶ ἐπιστρέψῃ ὁ χοῦς ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν ὡς ἦν καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα ἐπιστρέψῃ πρὸς τὸν θεόν ὃς ἔδωκεν αὐτό LXX Ecc 12:7

    The Son, Jesus was dead, separated from the Father who then had, in his hands, the spirit of the Son that put in the blood of the Son the soul, living, of the flesh. Jesus had poured our his soul unto death when he commended the spirit of him unto the hands of the Father.

    Darby Lev 17:11 for the soul of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that maketh atonement for the soul.

    He who had no sin was made to be sin for us, forsaken of the Father for three days and three nights, then the Father, by the Spirit, quickened the Son, resurrecting the soul from Hades in body of flesh incorruptible, without blood being the soul, living, of the flesh but the Spirit.

    It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 1 Cor 15:44-46

    That has to be speaking of Christ because to date he is the only one so, resurrected.

    He wasn't forsaken forever but for three days and three nights. IMHO.
     
  15. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,817
    Likes Received:
    2,106
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The passage that so clearly demonstrates that God forsook the Son upon the cross is this. "My God, My God, why have YOU forsaken ME." If that does not mean that the Father forsook the Son then words have lost their meaning. Get real and accept the plain and clear meaning of the text.
    There is no question of misunderstanding or misapplying The Father did protect Him; when, after the three hours of darkness, propitiation had been made, Our Lord cried out "It is finished." That is as clear as the other cry. The Father was with Him in trouble and did rescue Him. What is the problem?

    It speaks of eternal separation of the wicked from God. Why are you and I not going to face that separation? Because Christ has faced it for us.

    1. God cannot look with favour upon sin.
    2. Christ was made sin for us (2 Corinthians 5:21).
    3. God could not look with favour upon Christ as He hung upon the cross.

    :rolleyes: How does that even begin to 'denounce my exegesis'??? Who are the 'righteous' in the light of Psalm 14:3? They are those for whom Christ has made propitiation. Those for whom He has drained the cup of God's wrath to the very dregs. Come on, Jon! You're better than this! Look at the text with spiritual eyes.


    Yes! Psalm 22:1, corroborated by Matthew 27:46 & Mark 15:34. When you have understood the truth being proclaimed in these verses, you will see it in these other verses.
    "My God, My God, Why have you forsaken Me?"
    Amen! Christ was God, as though He were not man, but He was also man as though He were not God. I do not pretend to understand all the mysteries of the Hyperstatic Union. God cannot suffer, and certainly He cannot die, but the Christ did both those things. I assume that it was as a Man that our Lord suffered, that He was forsaken and that He died, but what I do know is that He did all these three things and unless He did there could be no reconciliation.

    'Tis mystery all! The Immortal dies;
    Who can explain His strange design?
    In vain the first-born seraph tries
    To sound the depths of love divine.
    Tis mercy all! Let faith adore;
    Let angel minds enquire no more.'
     
  16. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,817
    Likes Received:
    2,106
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Here we see the Saviour's unswerving fidelity to God.

    The forsaking of the Redeemer by God was a solemn fact, and an experience which left Him nothing but the supports of His faith. Our Saviour's position on the cross was absolutely unique. This may readily be see by contrasting His own words spoken during His public ministry with those uttered on the cross itself. Formerly He said, "And I know that Thou hearest Me always" (John 11:42); now He cries, O My God, I cry in the daytime and Thou hearest not" (Psalm 22:2). Formerly He said, "And He that sent Me is with Me: the father hath not left Me alone" (John 8:29); now He cries, "My God, my God, why hast thou FORSAKEN Me?'
    He had absolutely nothing now to rest upon save His father's covenant and promise, and in His cry of anguish His faith is made manifest. It was a cry of distress but not of distrust. God had withdrawn from Him, but mark how His soul still cleaves to God. His faith triumphed by laying hold of God even amid the darkness. "My God" He says, "My God," Thou with whom is infinite and everlasting strength; Thou who hast hitherto supported My manhood, and according to Thy promise upheld Thy Servant- O be not far from Me now. My God, I lean on Thee. When all visible and sensible comforts had disappeared, to the invisible support of His faith did the saviour betake Himself.
    In the 22nd Psalm the Saviour's unswerving fidelity to God is most apparent. In this precious Psalm the depths of His heart are told out. Hear Him
    [ Psalm 22:4-10 ]
    The very point His enemies sought to make against Him was His faith in God. They taunted Him with His trust in Jehovah- if He really trusted in the Lord, the Lord would deliver Him, But the Saviour continued trusting though there was no deliverance, trusted although forsaken for a season! He had been cast upon God from the womb and He is still found cast upon God in the hour of His death. He continues:
    [ Psalm 22:11-20 ]
    Job had said of God, 'Though He slay me yet I will trust him,' and though the wrath of God against sin rested upon Christ, still He trusted. Yea, His faith did more than trust, it triumphed- "Save Me from the lion's mouth; for Thou hast heard Me from the horns of the unicorns" (Psalm 22:21).
    Oh what an example has the Saviour left His people! It is comparatively easy to trust God while the sun is shining, the test comes when all is dark. But a faith that does not rest on God in adversity as well as in prosperity is not the faith of God's elect. We must have a faith to live by- true faith- if we would have faith to die by. The Saviour had been cast upon God from His mother's womb, had been cast upon God moment by moment all through those 33 years: what wonder then that the hour of death still finds Him cast upon God. Fellow Christian, all may be dark with thee, you may no longer behold the light of God's countenance. Providence seems to frown upon you, notwithstanding, say still, Eli, Eli, My God, My God.

    [From Seven Sayings of the Saviour on the Cross by A. W. Pink]
     
    #36 Martin Marprelate, May 19, 2016
    Last edited: May 19, 2016
  17. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    Are you forgetting that Jesus is both God and man? True eternal deity has no separations nor can, just as it is true that eternal deity is omniscient, yet the man Jesus"grew" in wisdom and knowledge and did not know the day of his own return. The separation was between the Father and the MAN Jesus Christ.

    Abraham's faith was counted as righteous because his faith was in the promised Christ as his redeemer, just as expressed by Job (near contemporary of Abraham) when he said,

    "I KNOW my redeemer liveth"

    You are confusing regeneration with justification. We are in SPIRITUAL union with Christ by regeneration, but not so by justification. Justification by the very nature of the term refers to LEGAL union with Christ by imputation based upon representation. Representation is the basis for justification (Rom. 5:12-19). Christ fulfilled the law as our legal substitute as promised in the gospel (2 Cor. 5:21). We are seen as righteous in the sight of the Law (justified) because Christ stood in our place before the Law and fulfilled it in our behalf.
     
    #37 The Biblicist, May 19, 2016
    Last edited: May 19, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,817
    Likes Received:
    2,106
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I'm sorry. In my haste to get my reply finished, I read you comment as "I'm not trying to be clever" and answered accordingly. Please ignore and delete my response at this point.
     
  19. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    33,286
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I understand & thank you for the clarification.
     
  20. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    33,286
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Faith:
    Baptist
    We don't have to understand the mysteries of the hypostatic union, brother. Scripture tells us plainly of God's faithfulness, of His immutability, of Jesus' divinity. We can simply rely on God's Word and know that Jesus was never separated from God's presence.

    Now, if we were to say that God withdrew that forbearance towards man and it was His will to "crush Him", then we would agree. That is "forsaken" and that is what happened. But not separation. Consider Berkhof:

    “Eternal death in the case of Christ did not consist of an abrogation of the union of the Logos with the human nature, nor in the divine nature’s being forsaken of God, nor in the withdrawal of the Father’s divine love or good pleasure from the person of the Mediator. The Logos remained united with the human nature even when the body was in the grave; the divine nature could not possibly be forsaken of God; and the person of the Mediator was and ever continued to be the object of divine favor. It revealed itself in the human consciousness of the Mediator as a feeling of God-forsakenness. This implies that the human nature for a moment missed the conscious comfort which it might derive from its union with the divine Logos, and the sense of divine love, and was painfully conscious of the fullness of the divine wrath which was bearing down upon it. Yet there was no despair, for even in the darkest hour, while He exclaims that He is forsaken, He directs His prayer to God.” (Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 339)

    If Jesus was separated from God's presence for 1 second on the cross then you and I have no hope of salvation. It is precisely because there was no such separation that we are redeemed, that Jesus is the acceptable Lamb. If by "separation from God's presence" you mean something else then we could find common ground. It was not that the Father withdrew His presence but that He withdrew His deliverance for a time. But even here the Father is present at the cross active offering His Son as a guilt offering for our sins (not departing from Jesus when He needed God the most, at His darkest hour, but patiently offering His Son in love as a guilt offering and answering His cry for deliverance).
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...