Featured Did Jesus experience a separation from God on the cross?

This is very simple to answer. All you have to do is look at how Jesus said "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?". He obviously did feel a separation from God the Father on the cross. Because he was taking on the sins of the world. Sin is what separates us from God.

 

If you say so. How many times does it mean what you want it to mean?

You cannot alter the basic meaning of a word to make it fit with your theology. That way lies madness.

 

then ye shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest unto the priest: And he shall wave the sheaf before the LORD, to be accepted for you:
on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it.

But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Did Jesus on the morrow after the Sabbath, following the Passover, as high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec, ascend to his Father to be accepted for us, as the firstfruit of them that slept, had died. Do you think the Father and the Son communed with one another from the death of the Son as the Passover Lamb until the morrow after the Sabbath following that death?

For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. Ecc 9:5 Was Jesus this kind of dead?

You brought up Psalms???

Return, O LORD, deliver my soul: oh save me for thy mercies' sake. For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave (Sheol) who shall give thee thanks? Psalms 6:4,5 Jesus?
The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence. Psalms 115:17 Jesus?

 

Where/When did Christ Go when the Scriptures Say He went into the Lower Parts of the Earth?

Ephesians 4:9
1 Peter 3:19

And Where did Jesus Go when He likened His death to Jonah going into the belly of the fish?

 

i edited it with some scriptures.

 

I am going to go with this.

To my knowledge currently there has been only one man born of woman who has been resurrected, to die no more and no more to return to corruption. Jesus of Nazareth. There is a statement made concerning had there been no resurrection.

For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. 1 Cor 15:16,17

If the only one who has been resurrected to die no more had not been resurrected then all would still be in their sin and there would be no, faith.

What then would be the state of Jesus, had he not been resurrected. Where did he go?

Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it. Ecc 12:7 I would say that the spirit he commended into the hands of the Father would still be in the hands of the Father. I would say his flesh would have corrupted and returned to the dust from whence it came. Well, what about the soul? Where would the soul, Jesus, be?

Because thou wilt not leave my soul in Sheol/Hades, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Acts 2:27 If the soul Jesus had not been resurrected the soul Jesus would have been left in Sheol/Hades, the lowest parts of the earth, the heart of the earth.

He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in Hades, neither his flesh did see corruption.

 

Of course our Lord was quoting Scripture. He was quoting Psalm 22, which is absolutely about someone who feels that He is forsaken by God.

'My God, My God, why have you forsaken Me? Why are you so far from helping Me, and from the words of My groaning? O My God, I cry in the daytime but You do not hear; in the night season , and am not silent.'

How is that not about someone who feels himself abandoned by God? The Lord Jesus appropriates the verses to Himself at the very time that day had become night (Mark 15:33).. To try and deny that the verses say what they so patently do say is eisogesis of the worst sort.

Of course. our Lord was not forsaken permanently, and nor are any of God's people. 'For a mere moment I have forsaken you, but with great mercies I will gather you.' 'For in My wrath I struck you, but in My favour I have had mercy on you' (Isaiah 54:7; 60:10).

The fact that the Father forsook Christ briefly is a great comfort to His people. For when we feel ourselves bereft of God's felt presence (what the Puritans called 'the dark night of the soul'), we can comfort ourselves with the thought that our Saviour passed this way (Heb. 2:18; 4:15).

 

If I have understood your statement and question above, I would offer this thinking to be placed in view.

Was the lamb at anytime during the process "made unclean?"

Would such automatically and by definition make such a lamb (or offering) unacceptable?

Was it for the sins of the those who placed the blood upon the door posts and lintel?

Were the sins placed on the lamb being consumed by the people?
Is that the statement and picture(s) of Scriptures?

Throughout the Scriptures, the focus is not upon some thought of abandonment by God because of our sin.

Rather, the focus is continually upon the blood shed for the remission of sin. Look at the statement of Christ at the "last supper."

“This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.”
Here we are to remember the example of His daily life giving sacrifice (not just the cross) that we remember in every situation and in every moment Christ also gives us example, even to death and hope (assurance) of resurrection. Most of us take this portion of the passage as particularly applicable to that sacrifice of the Cross, but it is in deed more about the character that allowed injustice, persecution, heartache, and all manner of evil. Such example is given to us to understand we too face these for the world despises those of Christ.

“This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood."
Here is the importance and focus of the new covenant. It was not formed from abandonment, from wrath, from some payment made by obligation. The new covenant is established by the blood.

I want to know how one may be perfected who is already perfect?

Again, the sacrifice presented to the priests was to be perfect. Without blemish, no scars, no sickness, no internal or external abnormality.

That lamb was then sacrificed. It was done without wrath, or separation. The blood was collected and sprinkled for atonement.

At no time during that process was the lamb made imperfect, needing to be made more perfect, or in some manner perfected.

I, too, have enjoyed this thread.
It has been most edifying.

 

i

This is very interesting. I have looked through my posts on this thread and I cannot see where I have used the words 'separate' or 'separation.' I may have missed something; perhaps you will check this out and let me know.

The words I have used are 'forsake' and 'abandon.' I checked the two words out in the Concise Oxford Dictionary, and lo and behold, a primary meaning of 'forsake is 'abandon' and vice versa. So when you write,

You are conceding my point that God the Father forsook Christ during the three hours of darkness on the cross. Thank you. That is all I have been claiming, although I cannot see how there can be a forsaking without some sort of separation.

I think it will be helpful if we consider what the Presence of God is, and if and how it can be lost. I will put my mind prayerfully to this and (DV) start another thread in a day or three.

Finally, I gave a sermon on Christ forsaken on the cross some years ago. Here it is transcribed if anyone is interested to read it. https://marprelate.wordpress.com/2011/04/08/the-cry-of-desolation/

 

Let me ask.

Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. Romans 6:9
And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, he said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies of David. Acts 13:34

Was the Christ, Jesus of a more perfect nature before or after he was raised from the dead? Was he more glorious, before or after the resurrection from the dead?
Is the glory he prayed for in John 17:5 the same glory of 1 Peter 1:21 that states the Father gave to the Son? Is it the same glory of which we as children of God are joint heirs thereof with Christ spoken of in Romans 8:17. Glory we are heirs of, not yet inheritors of. Being we are joint heirs with Christ, when did or has Christ inherited that glory?

Did it require a perfection in nature which he did not have prior to the resurrection. 1 Cor 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. --- Did that verse apply also to Jesus?

 

I am having a bit of trouble in what measure you find corruption meeting the standard the Scripture set for an acceptable blood sacrifice.

Starting with Act 13:34 there seems to be the idea that "corruption" is implied but that is not accurate:

30 But God raised Him from the dead; 31 and for many days He appeared to those who came up with Him from Galilee to Jerusalem, the very ones who are now His witnesses to the people. 32 And we preach to you the good news of the promise made to the fathers, 33 that God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, ‘You are My Son; today i have begotten You.’ 34 As for the fact that He raised Him up from the dead, no longer to return to decay, He has spoken in this way: ‘I will give you the holy and sure blessings of David.’ 35 Therefore He also says in another Psalm, ‘You will not allow Your Holy One to undergo decay.’ 36 For David, after he had served the purpose of God in his own generation, fell asleep, and was laid among his fathers and underwent decay; 37 but He whom God raised did not undergo decay. 38 Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through Him forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you, 39 and through Him everyone who believes is freed from all things, from which you could not be freed through the Law of Moses.​

I do not find corruption at any point as that touching Christ.

Does not the passage clearly state that there was NO corruption (decay) associated with Christ?