Right, the weakness of your hermeneutics.
He was arrested as sinners are arrested. Tried as sinners are tried. Executed as sinners are. Cursed as a sinner. Forsaken as a sinner.
Didn't just feel forsaken. Was forsaken.
-
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!
How was Christ Forsaken?
- Thread starter JonC
- Start date
- Status
He was arrested as sinners are arrested. Tried as sinners are tried. Executed as sinners are. Cursed as a sinner. Forsaken as a sinner.
Didn't just feel forsaken. Was forsaken.
Mikey
Active Member
this comparison is poor. Jesus as we all know is special. his whole life was for a specific purpose, to become sin. Do any of us do this? No.
Last edited:
Well, here's one for a start. And since you have graded the post as 'winner,' you are quite obviously another.
If Psalm 22 does not teach that Christ was forsaken,and if the fact that our Lord quoted it whilst hanging on the cross does not mean that He was forsaken whilst hanging on the cross, words have lost their meaning.
That Christ was not pernanently forsaken is rather glaringly obvious (Isaiah 53:11-12; Philippians 2 :9-11, not to mention Psalms 22:21b.ff), but that He was forsaken, almost certainly between the third and ninth hours (Psalms 22:2), but at the very least during the hours of darkness is so abundantly obvious that I cannot understand how you and @JonShaff fail to see it.
Could it be you fail to see?Well, here's one for a start. And since you have graded the post as 'winner,' you are quite obviously another.
If Psalm 22 does not teach that Christ was forsaken,and if the fact that our Lord quoted it whilst hanging on the cross does not mean that He was forsaken whilst hanging on the cross, words have lost their meaning.
That Christ was not pernanently forsaken is rather glaringly obvious (Isaiah 53:11-12; Philippians 2 :9-11, not to mention Psalms 22:21b.ff), but that He was forsaken, almost certainly between the third and ninth hours (Psalms 22:2), but at the very least during the hours of darkness is so abundantly obvious that I cannot understand how you and @JonShaff fail to see it.
Mikey
Active Member
Yes, Jesus was quoting Psalm 22. However this does not deal with the issue of was Jesus forsaken?
Mikey
Active Member
Or could it still be you who fails to see?
This could go on forever, so lets stop and go back discussing with scripture.
Then we believe exactly the same, except that I believe that there was a purpose behind it. 'He Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree.' He was made sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
No. You have eviscerated the meaning of 'forsake' in order to wrench the Scriptures to your support.
Martin Marprelate said:
I have done so.JonC said:
'But You are holy, enthroned in the praises of Israel. Our fathers trusted in You; they trusted, and You delivered them. They cried to You, and were delivered; they trusted in You and were not ashamed.
But I am a worm, and no man........' And so forth. Tell me, why does the Lord Jesus twice say, "Be not far from Me" (v.11,19), if the Father was already near Him?
What we do know is that when the Lord Jesus uttered those words, it was the ninth hour (Mark 15:34), and at the ninth hour the darkness ended (v.33). Until that point, the Lord Jesus had refused the wine mixed with myrrh (Mark 15:23), because He had to suffer the full weight of God's righteous anger against sin. But then, He actually asked for a drink of 'sour wine' (John 19:28) because He knew that 'all things had been accomplished' (apart, of course from His actual death which followed almost at once) Propitiation had been made, reconciliation between man and God was now possible, Satan had been defeated. So He needed to wet His throat to give that great cry of victory: "It is finished!"
Pastor_Bob
Well-Known Member
This wasn't a Father turning His back on a Son; this was a holy God staying true to His nature and turning His back on sin.
Habakkuk 1:13 Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity...(KJV)
Jesus literally became sin for us (II Corinthians 5:21).
Jesus literally became a curse for us (Galatians 3:13).
Jesus literally had the iniquity of us all laid on Him (Isaiah 53:6).
God will never forsake us because He doesn't see us as sinners; He sees us clothed in the righteousness of His Son, Jesus Christ. Amen and Amen!
And the strawman come marching in
.I didn't say Jesus "felt" forsaken. I said He WAS forsaken to suffer (God did not deliver Christ FROM the cross).
And you just proved my point. God did not arrest Christ. God didn't convict Christ. God didn't whip Christ. God didn't crucify Christ. God didn't execute Christ. God didn't esteem Christ as stricken. God didn't consider Christ as a curse.
Man did. And Christ became a curse for us. This was God's will.
Christ was forsaken to suffer the cross. It was God's design. But Scripture teaches He was never separated from God.
Your "defense" is nothing but eisegesis. You've swapped man for God in your explanation to create a myth that supports your ideas.
No, we don't believe exactly the same (although at one time we did). Your theory here relies on humanistic philosophy as a lens to view all of Scripture. What you end up with is a myth intertwined with the gospel. Thankfully the gospel shines through the superstition (which is amazing, if you think about it).
For example, where I read that it was God's will to crush Him, your post presents it as if God authored the sin. Where I read in Isaiah that "we" considered Him accused and stricken, your comments substitute God for man in the passage. And the philosophical approach of your theory ultimately creates a shallow, man-centered, and weak view of the Cross.
But we do turn to the same passages. I don't disagree with those words. But I do reject the philosophy your statements here impose on God's Word. I believe Scripture sufficient.
You have to consider these psalms as a whole. They are not a list of verses from which we can pick and choose. Read the entire psalm without pulling it apart or reading into it.Well, here's one for a start. And since you have graded the post as 'winner,' you are quite obviously another.
If Psalm 22 does not teach that Christ was forsaken,and if the fact that our Lord quoted it whilst hanging on the cross does not mean that He was forsaken whilst hanging on the cross, words have lost their meaning.
That Christ was not pernanently forsaken is rather glaringly obvious (Isaiah 53:11-12; Philippians 2 :9-11, not to mention Psalms 22:21b.ff), but that He was forsaken, almost certainly between the third and ninth hours (Psalms 22:2), but at the very least during the hours of darkness is so abundantly obvious that I cannot understand how you and @JonShaff fail to see it.
Ooh look! That makes three!
No. You read the entire psalm, in the light of Matthew 27:46 & Mark 15:34, without pulling it apart or reading into it, and you will come to the conclusion that the Lord Jesus was forsaken because that's what the text says.
[insults edited]
Again, brother, you are ignoring what I’ve been saying.No. You read the entire psalm, in the light of Matthew 27:46 & Mark 15:34, without pulling it apart or reading into it, and you will come to the conclusion that the Lord Jesus was forsaken because that's what the text says.
You believe you believe Scripture is sufficient, but you don't. 'You were running a good race. Who cut in upon you?'
Jesus WAS forsaken. But He was not abandoned by God. You keep drifting from what we are talking about. The text is not about God abandoning the Afflicted BUT God NOT abandoning the Afflicted even though He be forsaken. God is faithful.
“There is a condition worse than blindness, and that is, seeing something that isn’t there.” (Hardy).
Until you find yourself able to see the text itself, without reading into it, without “seeing something that isn’t there” I really don’t see that a discussion can be had. We will only talk in circles because I actually believe that you see your philosophy in the text.
Only if you ignore the context. That is the problem throughout our interaction. You have a habit of pulling things apart to suit your needs.
You have to start being more careful, brother. You already challenged one member's faith (because you didn't read the comments), and you've repeatedly misrepresented other people's views (because you didn't read the comments). This is what you've done throughout your eisegesis. You seem to have adopted a method that seeks to prove your philosophical presuppositions concerning Scripture rather than allowing Scripture itself to dictate its own meaning.
Are there ANY passages that state God departed from Christ? No, of course not. Scripture does not contradict itself. Did you realize that Scripture does use the word "depart"? But did Christ say" My God, My God, why did you depart from me?" as you seem to see when viewing the text? NO! Scripture says "why did You forsake me".
Why would anyone read that to be "why did you depart from me?"
I believe the answer is in the presuppositions that are brought into the text. People see what is not there because they read into it the idea that Jesus had to spiritually die because they understand this to be the penalty of sin we will otherwise face. So (they reason) the Cross was an "interruption" to Scripture whereby Jesus is (for three hours) not considered to be God but considered instead to be considered sin because God has laid our sin upon Him. And He can't look upon sin (neither could Christ, if we were to consider Him God"). The downside, of course, is that this ignores reality (God considering Jesus as if He were sin or a sinner is in reality divine self-delusion which does not match truth). So God had to depart from Jesus because He will cause the wicked at Judgment to depart from Him.
You are seeing what is not actually there.
Hold on....are you claiming that this verse doesn't apply to Christ's nature as well?
Psalm 22:24
Not too mention, God our Father Raised His Son from the Dead--not to be "philosophical", but Even when it "went dark", God Still did not abandon His Son. God will never Forsake His Own.
That's the problem, brother. There are no passages of Scripture that state Christ was abandon by God in the Bible. What is being argued is that "forsaken" has to mean "departed" rather than to indicate a forsaken state (not at that moment being delivered"). It was God's redemptive plan that Christ bear our sins, suffer and die for us. But nowhere is it stated that God ever, even once, departed or separated from Christ. We can't go to passages that don't exist.
Read 1 Peter.
Chapter 2
20 But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. 21 To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.
22 “He committed no sin,
and no deceit was found in his mouth.”
23 When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. 24 “He himself bore our sins” in his body on the cross, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; “by his wounds you have been healed.” 25 For “you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.
Pastor_Bob
Well-Known Member
Brother, aren't you the one above decrying the use of strawman arguments???
- Status