Jesus was experiencing separation from God the Father right at height of the atoning!
-
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!
The Fundamentals -- Torrey, Dixon and others
- Thread starter Just_Ahead
- Start date
No, it doesn't. That is what reading into the passage causes.
Do you not see the words "it PLEASED" - and yet you read it as if it stated that God had somekind of glee at the manner humankind was treating the Son.
What was the reaction of the father of the son sent to receive of the laborers. To whom does the parable say the wrath was directed.
In the Revelation, to whom is the wrath of God pour out upon.
Again reading into the conversation and not drawing the proper conclusions as a result.
No doubt, however, separation does not mean abandonment.
As the action takes place on the field of play, I am separated from my child, but neither my child nor I consider such separation as abandonment.
I have heard folks say that because "God cannot look upon sin, He had to turn away from the Son." Absolutely one of the most foolish and unscriptural statements that I have encountered, over and over again.
When shown that God does in fact look upon the sinner, the sin, all aspects of it, there is no defense to even suggest God abandoned the Son.
Separated in the manner of withdrawing support, but not abandonment.
Consider the angles at multiple occasions attending to the Lord, even at the final hours in the garden, yet were is such support when the gang came to claim Him from that rest?
Acts2:23 speaks to it
Genesis 22 speaks to it.
Genesis 22 speaks to it.
Acts 2:
23this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. 24God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it. 25For David says concerning him,
“‘I saw the Lord always before me,
for he is at my right hand that I may not be shaken;
26therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced;
my flesh also will dwell in hope.
27For you will not abandon my soul to Hades,
or let your Holy One see corruption.
28You have made known to me the paths of life;
you will make me full of gladness with your presence.’
for he is at my right hand that I may not be shaken;
26therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced;
my flesh also will dwell in hope.
27For you will not abandon my soul to Hades,
or let your Holy One see corruption.
28You have made known to me the paths of life;
you will make me full of gladness with your presence.’
Genesis 22:
10Then Abraham reached out his hand and took the knife to slaughter his son. 11But the angel of the Lord called to him from heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” 12He said, “Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.” 13And Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him was a ram, caught in a thicket by his horns. And Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son. 14So Abraham called the name of that place, “The Lord will provide”; as it is said to this day, “On the mount of the Lord it shall be provided.”
15And the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven 16and said, “By myself I have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, 17I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of his enemies, 18and in your offspring shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because you have obeyed my voice.” 19So Abraham returned to his young men, and they arose and went together to Beersheba. And Abraham lived at Beersheba.
See how wonderful the Father is!15And the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven 16and said, “By myself I have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, 17I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of his enemies, 18and in your offspring shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because you have obeyed my voice.” 19So Abraham returned to his young men, and they arose and went together to Beersheba. And Abraham lived at Beersheba.
He plans, He provides, and His will is with authority.
That there is no wrath by God shown in either passage is typical of the atonement sacrifice and puts the part of the PST concerning God's wrath poured out upon the Son as needing revision.
Did the sacrifice not die aS a substitute?
Paul in Roman's 1 said God's wrath is revealed from Heaven.
Those who go into the second death will have wrath, without mercy.
Paul in Roman's 1 said God's wrath is revealed from Heaven.
Those who go into the second death will have wrath, without mercy.
Sometimes people like to reduce opposing theories (theories they oppose) to characterizations, superficial, or extreme positions as it is much easier to argue against. At the same time, sometimes people like to expand their own theories to incorporate history that is not really theirs (to assume past persons would have held their theory had it been presented to them based on the decontextualization of their writings.
"Ransom Theory" in general is the view that Christ was a ransom for the human race. Some early writers have used "Satan" as an embodiment of "sin and death" and presented that Christ was a random to deliver us from Satan. Some have presented this as a payment to Satan. Some to the principle of death. Some to God. Others to no one (a ransom accomplished, no one "paid"). It is easier to simply pretend that the Ransom Theory was meant literally by Origen (that God paid to Satan a ransom) although most contemporary scholarship questions this was Origen's intention. It is easier to simply pretend others did not hold the theory differently. Part of the reason is by the Medieval era this is exactly what most took the theory to mean. "Christus Victor" is today what Ransom Theory was at the start, but presented in context of Christ's victory over sin and death rather than the "human family's" deliverance from that bondage.
"Penal Substitution Theory" is also often misrepresented. It is not, as some would claim, some type of "cosmic child abuse" because the theory acknowledges the divinity of Christ (this is, per the theory, God taking punishment upon Himself).
It is something that people need to explore on their own because it is a very fundamental and basic teaching which influences our understanding of other doctrines. There are too many internet disciples on discussion forums for a meaningful exploration on this board. The problem, of course, is often people will study only from a perspective that supports their already held theories (I was no exception).
More than once I have referred to the pictures of the crucifixion presented by both the temple/tabernacle and the actual atonement sacrifices.
WHEN was the wrath of God demonstrated at such a sacrifice.
At a single time.
From Exodus 28:
While standing before the Ark, if the high priest was not pure, they would die.
The sacrifice was not impure, nor was the sacrifice ever handled by God in any manner of wrath.
But, those handling the sacrifice, just as those handling the Son, have God's wrath upon them.
WHEN was the wrath of God demonstrated at such a sacrifice.
At a single time.
From Exodus 28:
31“You shall make the robe of the ephod all of blue. 32It shall have an opening for the head in the middle of it, with a woven binding around the opening, like the opening in a garment, so that it may not tear. 33On its hem you shall make pomegranates of blue and purple and scarlet yarns, around its hem, with bells of gold between them, 34a golden bell and a pomegranate, a golden bell and a pomegranate, around the hem of the robe. 35And it shall be on Aaron when he ministers, and its sound shall be heard when he goes into the Holy Place before the Lord, and when he comes out, so that he does not die.
While standing before the Ark, if the high priest was not pure, they would die.
The sacrifice was not impure, nor was the sacrifice ever handled by God in any manner of wrath.
But, those handling the sacrifice, just as those handling the Son, have God's wrath upon them.
I am not in dispute with substitution theory.
I am contending that a single part of PST is not found as supported by Scripture.
That is the demand that during the crucifixion God's wrath was poured out upon the Son, and that God had to reject and abandon the Son.
David and Peter Psalm referred to abandoning Messiah in the Grave, not being separated while on that Cross!
Again,
You must be taking "abandon" as if it means to have nothing to do with or exercise no authority over. But that isn't the truth presented in Scriptures. The work of the Son, without the Father's support continued.
But God did not and can not ever separate from Himself.
The Words of prophecy and the statements of the Scriptures carried the authority for Christ to both to lay down His life and to take it up again.
Do you really propose to have the Trinity not in directly in control of all matters concerning the Trinity?
Such thinking doesn't even make sense in human terms, and much less when it comes to the Scriptures.
God the Father beheld Jesus the Christ become the Sin Bearer, and as such, God cannot have fellowship with Him, and turned away and abandon Jesus to experiencing what all lost sinners will when judged for their sins!
37818
Well-Known Member
And while on the cross forsaken by the Father, never ceased being God, Hebrews 1:3, ". . . when he had by himself purged our sins, . . ." I am in awe.
it tells us just how extremely bad it will be the eternal state of those who have died rejecting Jesus to save them from their sins!
Much of what you wrote is all talk and no Scripture.
1) God doesn't have to judge. Non-believers are already condemned. At the last judgement, there are no appeals, but a review of life in the books and a search to see if the name is written in the book of life. No name written, that person is already condemned to the Lake of Fire. When God and judgement are paired in the Scriptures, it is generally stated as having already been determined, not in a manner of some future decision to be made.
2) Believers are individually to stand before the judgement seat of Christ (2 Corinthians 5) in which they are not judged concerning salvation but their works and motives are judged for validity.
3) It is nonsense that God cannot have contact with sinners. He does all the time both look upon and deal with sinners. One cannot be saved without such contact.
4) There is no Scripture support for God not being able to have fellowship with Christ as the Sin Bearer. In fact, Revelation 5 presentation would certainly refute that thinking.
5) If (not that I agree but to pretend) "turned away and abandon Jesus to experiencing what all lost sinner will when judged for their sins" statement is true (and it is not - for the reformed simply do not endorse that thinking by aligning all atonement benefits only believers) then it would follow a universal atonement presentation and not what you hold.
Note to the readers:
I do support the Scripture statements that the BLOOD of the Redeemer was shed for all sin of all creation. Sin became a non-issue in the reconciliation between God and Man. That is what the Scriptures teach.
However, the Scriptures are very specific concerning the death and resurrection of Christ benefiting ONLY the believers.
This is supported in various places such as this from Colossians 2:
8See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. 9For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, 10and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. 11In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, 14by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. 15He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.
See how the blood is not mentioned in relationship to believers, but the death and resurrection are certainly to their benefit and not the benefit of the unbeliever?On a side thought:
The question must be asked, did the apostle think of only earthly rulers and authorities being put to open shame and being conquered?
My opinion, the answer is No. For we don't wrestle against flesh and blood, but against those satanic forces which were put "to open shame" and Christ triumphed over them.
No human could hold together the elemental composites of creation while those same compounds were being used in attempts to eliminate him.
Yet, the one who created and sustained all things maintained and sustained all things even throughout the crucifixion and resurrection.
How is it that some then would present that The Father, the Holy Spirit, and The Christ were ever in opposition to one another? They worked in concert to bring about redemption!
37818
Well-Known Member
He was nevertheless forsaken for a time on the cross for our sins. So I am in awe.
The Incarnation event was what allowed Jesus to do what He did, as if just God and no sinless Humanity, would not qualify as Redeemer!
Who ever said that they were against each other? God the father did what he had to do, as sis the Son and Holy Spirit, in full Agreement!
By presenting that God poured wrath out upon the Son, deserted the Son, and other such themes that have been posted on the thread, there was no working in a concert presented by the Trinity.
The very most important aspects of all the Scriptures revolve around the events of the crucifixion.
There can be nothing less than total cooperation and unity of purpose at all times in the Trinity.
Wrath does not bring unity. Abandonment does not promote unity.
37818
Well-Known Member
What you seem to fail to perceive is death of Christ's soul and suffering on the cross for sins is evidence of the eternal sufferring of dead souls in the immersion in the lake of fire.