....do you think anyone besides Jesus has ever experienced suffering anywhere near what Christ did?
Physically yes many have, one example being those crucified alongside Him, they had their legs broken, He did not, He had 'given up the ghost' already and missed that (so that the scriptures would be fulfilled).
Do you think we can even begin to imagine what He went through?
I don't think we can imagine the life He was giiving on the cross as compared to the life of a mortal.
Finally, do you think the agony Christ suffered on the cross is about the punishment the unsaved will experience in the Lake of Fire?
No, it's about fullfilling the scripture 'cursed be everyone that hangeth on
a tree':
Pink on 'The Two Trees':
"...In studying
the typical teaching of the Old Testament Scriptures we learn from them sometimes
by way of contrast and sometimes
by way of comparison. A striking illustration of this double fact is found in the second chapter of Genesis. In the ninth verse we read of
"The tree of knowledge of good and evil." In Acts 5:30 we read, "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and
hanged on a tree"; and again in 1 Peter 2:24, "Who His own self
bare our sins in His own body on the tree."....."
"Let us consider some of
the points of contrast first.
1.
The first tree was planted by God. "And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden and the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil" (Gen. 2:9) This tree then was planted not by Adam, but by Adam’s Maker— God. But
the second tree, the tree to which our Lord was nailed, was planted by man. "And they crucified Him" (Matthew 27:35) is the brief but terrible record. It was human hands which devised, provided and erected that cruel tree on the hill of Calvary. In marked contrast from the first tree, it was the hands of the creature and not the Creator which planted the second tree.
2.
The first tree was pleasant to the eyes. "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat" (Gen. 3:6). Exactly in what this "pleasantness" consisted we do not know, but the Divine record seems to indicate that this tree was an object of beauty and delight. What a contrast from
the second Tree! Here everything was hideous and repellant. The suffering Savior, the vulgar crowd, the taunting priests, the two thieves, the flowing blood, the three hours darkness—nothing was there to please the outward eye. The first tree was "pleasant to the eyes," but concerning the One on the second tree it is written, "They saw in Him no beauty that they should desire Him."
3.
God forbade man to eat of the first tree. "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it" (Gen. 2:17). A divine prohibition was placed upon the fruit of this tree. But again,
how different from the second tree! How startling the contrast! There is no restriction here. In this case
man is freely invited to draw near and eat of the fruit of this tree. The sinner is hidden to "Taste and see that the Lord is good." "All things are ready, Come." The position is exactly reversed. Just as man was commanded not to eat of the fruit of the first tree, he is now commanded to eat of the second.
4. Because God forbade man to eat of
the first tree, Satan used every artifice to get man to eat of it. Contrariwise, because God now invites men to eat of the second tree, Satan uses all his powers to prevent men eating of it. Is not this another designed contrast marked out for us by the Holy Spirit? Humanly speaking it was solely due to the cunning and malice of the great enemy of God and man that our first parents ate of the forbidden fruit, and can we not also say, that it is now primarily due to
the subtle devices of the old serpent the Devil that sinners are kept from eating the fruit of that second tree?
5.
The eating of the first tree brought sin and death "For in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Gen. 2:17). It was through eating of the fruit of this tree that the Curse descended upon our race with all its attendant miseries.
By eating of the second Tree comes life and salvation. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life" (John 6:53, 54). Is there not in these words of our Lord a latent reference to the history of man’s fall, and a designed contrast from the first tree? Just as by the act of "eating" man lost his spiritual life, so by an act of "eating" man now obtains spiritual and eternal life!
6.
Adam, the thief, through eating of the first tree, was turned out of Paradise, while the repentant thief, through eating of the second Tree, entered Paradise. We doubt not that once again there is a designed antithesis in these two things. A thief is connected with both trees, for in eating of the forbidden fruit our first parents committed an act of theft. Is it not then something more than a coincidence that we find a "thief" (yea, two thieves) connected with the second Tree also? And when we note the widely different experiences of the two thieves the point is even more striking. As we have said one was cast out of Paradise (the garden), the other was admitted into Paradise, and to say the least, it is remarkable that our Lord should employ the word "Paradise" in this connection—the only time He ever did use it!
Now, briefly, let us consider some of the
points of resemblance:
1.
Both trees were planted in a garden. The first in the Garden of Eden, the second in a garden which is unnamed. "Now in the place where He was crucified there was a garden’’ (John 19:41). Are we not told this, for one reason, in order that we should connect the two trees? Is it not a striking point of analogy, that both the first Adam and the last Adam died in a "garden"!
2. In connection
with both trees we find the words "in the midst." "The tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil" (Gen. 2:9). The word "and" connecting the two trees together and intimating their juxtaposition in the midst of the garden. In like manner we also read concerning our Savior, "They crucified Him, and two others with Him on either side one, and Jesus in the midst?"
3.
Both are trees of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Where in all the world, or in all the Scriptures, do we learn the knowledge of good and evil as we do at the second Tree—the Cross? There we see Goodness incarnate. There we behold the Holiness of God displayed as nowhere else. There we discover the unfathomable love and matchless grace of Deity unveiled as never before or since. But there, too, we also see Evil see it in all its native hideousness. There we witness the consummation and climax of the creature’s wickedness. There we behold as nowhere else the vileness, the heinousness, the awfulness of sin as it appears in the sight of the thrice holy God. Yes, there is a designed resemblance as well as a contrast between the two trees. The Cross also is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
4. Finally, there is another tree beside the one that was planted in Eden, of which Genesis 3:6 is true, "And when the woman saw that
the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat." Ah! that second Tree is surely "good for food," too.
The Cross of Christ and all that it stands for, is the very
meat and marrow of the believer’s life. It is "good" as "food" for the soul! And how "pleasant" it is "to the eyes" of faith! There
we see all our sins blotted out. There
we see our old man crucified. There
we see the ground upon which a holy God can meet a guilty sinner. There
we see the Finished Work of our adorable Redeemer. Truly,
it is "pleasant to the eyes." And is not
this second Tree also "a tree to be desired to make one wise"? Yes;
the preaching of the Cross is not only the power of God, but "the wisdom of God" as well.
The knowledge of this second Tree makes the sinner "wise" unto salvation."
