Did God Kill His own Son Upon The Cross?

[Skandelon]

I just read through this entire thread and I have a very simple solution.

If you want to discuss this question with a rational, objective, and reasoned individuals from the Calvinistic perspective who will give you an answer that is more representative of actual Calvinistic scholars then you need to engage with Archangel or zrs6v4. I actually agreed with both of their answers, as would most non-Calvinistic scholars.

If you want to continue to banter with someone who makes unqualified, provocative and controversial statements then I think it is obvious who you can engage. Clearly, since Archangel's and zrs6v4's posts remain mostly ignored, it is more fun to engage the provocateurs. I think this goes to show the state of our media today...we are drawn to the sensational and controversial, rather than the rational and reasonable.

 

[Skandelon]

It is not a good hermeneutic to ask "Did God kill Jesus" and expect to get a one-faceted answer.

Did I kill Jesus? Yes, by my sin. Did you (any of you) kill Jesus? Yes, by your sin. Did the Gentiles kill Jesus? Yes, the Romans crucified Him. Did the Jews kill Jesus? Yes, they delivered Him over to the Romans. Did God the Father kill Jesus? Yes:

[25] whom [Jesus] God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. [26] It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. (Romans 3:25-26 ESV)
​

The answer is that we all killed Jesus in one way or another. But the ultimate "killer" of Jesus was, indeed, God the Father who put Him forward as a propitiation.

The participation of the Jews, the Romans, you, and me were all ordained (do not understand that to mean "caused") by God to bring about the death of Christ for God's intended purpose. But make no mistake, God is ultimately responsible for the death of Christ (who volunteered, by the way) because it was the Father who decided to forgive--and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin and the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sin.

The Archangel

:thumbsup: Well stated.

 

[Skandelon]

I'm way late on this discussion, but:

God allowed it, but sovereignly brought it t pass. He did not just sit back and watch it happened nor did He come and indwell the lost to cause them to fight against Himself. He both allowed it to happen and Jesus offered Himself up literally. In His providence God had a complete control over every event building up to this proper timing of Jesus first coming.

1. We know it couldn't have happened solely based on God being passive and seeing it happen from the day of the fall.

2. we know God did not come and directly cause this evil rejection within the Jews or any evil building up to this event.

3. So it is safe to say He willed it, indirectly caused it, allowed it, and wanted it to happen so He could provide a way to make salvation possible so that His grace would be realized in full. Jesus' knowing the eternal decrees of God knew before He came why He came. He willingly stepped into this dark world in accordance with His Father's (and His) decree to pay for sin. It wasn't just a fluke or an accident God saw after the fall that He said, "Oh wow that is a good path to allow to happen and hey cool I can also forgive sin because the cards fell that way"..

Does that make sense?

Another well stated response! :applause:

 

[Skandelon]

Now, zrs6v4 and Archangel,

Does God's active involvement to ensure the crucifixion prove that God takes the same type of active role to ensure all other kinds of evil (such as Dahmer molestation of children etc)?

In other words, couldn't it be that God actively intervened to ensure the crucifixion due to its redemptive purpose and thus it was divinely unique. Must we conclude that God actively intervenes to ensures the molestation of a child in the same manner? As some might argue that God's active role to ensure the crucifixion is proof that God actively ensures all evil.

What do you think?

 

[Aaron]

The world was created for the Cross. That Adam would have remained uncorrupted, and sin not have entered in was impossible.

 

[preacher4truth]

I think Luke2427 may not like what I have to say, and may well get angry with me, maybe not.

I happen to believe the thread titles itself could be worded differently, but that is Luke2427's choice. The problem with this is it draws ire from others just in the way it is worded. Perhaps the title could be formed into a question, then others could accept it more readily, but I won't make excuses for them either.

The fact is that God did crush His Son. Part of what we see here in the reactions to the title is that persons are shocked with things not explored, in things of God not really spoken about much in churches involving the Sovereignty of God. Unfortunately God is not multi-faceted in churches these days, but is painted as "Love" and "Tolerance" and "Kind" and in some senses almost a pushover. How can one stand "in awe" of God with the present theologies that are possessed by the churches? One simply cannot. The totality of God's being must be expressed or we are teaching a lie to people, and some are going to be very surprised about all there is to God someday.

So, let's rightly divide the Word, and preach God in all His glory, not just the parts that don't offend or only the parts that sound pretty to us. By the way, this fact Luke2427 presents, which is really "Bible" paints God to me so glorious in His knowledge and wisdom, it is absolutely priceless in its beauty. It is the Biblical truth concerning God. Some are afraid to embrace these truths, as they have God all neatly packed into their theological box, and anything that threatens their limited concept has to be incorrect. This my friends is shameful, yet at the same time true.

The thing he is getting at, and the way I would state it is that God is the Author of our Salvation, and is the Author of all of it, including crushing His Son. This includes seeing to it His Son die upon the Cross for our sins, even the most grotesque sins of mankind laid upon Him and being charged to Him, to the extent that He exercised justice upon His Son as guilty for what we had done, and as the text says "It pleased God to crush Him." Perhaps if we understand it in these terms, that He did crush Him for the sake of justice meted out upon Him for our sins, persons could see this and accept the truth, that in fact God did do this very thing.

Gods hand was in it all. We should stand in awe of all of His workings.

 

[The Archangel]

Now, zrs6v4 and Archangel,

Does God's active involvement to ensure the crucifixion prove that God takes the same type of active role to ensure all other kinds of evil (such as Dahmer molestation of children etc)?

In other words, couldn't it be that God actively intervened to ensure the crucifixion due to its redemptive purpose and thus it was divinely unique. Must we conclude that God actively intervenes to ensures the molestation of a child in the same manner? As some might argue that God's active role to ensure the crucifixion is proof that God actively ensures all evil.

What do you think?

The question misses the mark by assuming that we believe that God actively causes Dahmer, molestation of children, etc. The Calvinists that I know and studied under and read summarize the answer to the question this way: God foreordains the free and sometimes sinful actions of human beings to serve His purposes and display His glory.

The Jews that delivered Christ to the Romans and the Romans that Crucified Christ were acting of their own free will. We do not believe they were coerced in any way.

The murders that Dahmer committed, the molestation that was [allegedly] committed at Penn State were all the result of free human agents--without coercion from the Almighty.

Our position states that God doesn't actively cause these things, but He ordains that they be and He ordains that they happen. God super-intends all things (and I do mean all without exception). For the elect, all things work together for good--whether it serves to bring that person to Christ or serves to strengthen a believer's faith. For the non-elect, things are not so certain.

If you look at the account of the life of Joseph in the Old Testament you see God ordaining the free actions of the brothers--selling Joseph into slavery--in order to serve His greater purposes--getting Israel to Egypt so that Exodus could happen, providing food for the family, etc.

On a side note: It is very interesting that the brothers of Joseph, in their plan to kill him (which later changed to selling him) and the execution of that plan, actually brought about the very circumstances they tried to avoid. Had they not acted in their sinful way, the family likely would have starved to death along with the rest of the known world. It was not happenstance that brought Joseph to power, it was God and it was done in His perfect timing through the sinful actions of the brothers and Potiphar's wife.

Remember: "[29] Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. [30] But even the hairs of your head are all numbered. [31] Fear not, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows." (Matthew 10:29-31 ESV)

If a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without the permission of the Father, then nothing in all the earth happens with out that permission. As I've already stated, though, giving permission for something to happen is not the same as causing something to happen. After all there is a very big difference between me standing aside as a friend jumps off a bridge and me throwing that same friend off a bridge.

The Archangel

 

[Jerry Shugart]

NOTE: NON-BAPTISTS (not active members of a Baptist Church) may NOT post in areas for Baptists only

​

 

[JesusFan]

6 pages is the length of this thread so far and so far YOU have not given one single solitary verse and have not brought to bear any one single solid passage to exegete for us concerning the issue you raise above

Gracious, Luke!!! Do you need any of us to do the "Vulcan Mind Probe" on you or something??????:smilewinkgrin:

Why would it be wrong for the Father to ordain that Hi9s Som would come to the Cross and die to atone for the sins of His people though?

God provided the Lamb, as was typed in the sacrifice of issaic by Abraham, so why is it wrong that God sent Jesus by direct cause to die as the Messiah foreshadowed/foretold in the OT?

 

[percho]

Christ allowed himself to be killed.
He went willingly.
He allowed the authorities to take him and crucify. He allowed them.

Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee? 11 Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin. (John 19:10-11)

I would say it means he was obedient unto death even the death of the cross.
Which is a little different than allow.

 

[Luke2427]

I think Luke2427 may not like what I have to say, and may well get angry with me, maybe not.

I happen to believe the thread titles itself could be worded differently, but that is Luke2427's choice.

This is not my thread, Bro. And you are right. I would not have worded it that way.

The problem with this is it draws ire from others just in the way it is worded. Perhaps the title could be formed into a question, then others could accept it more readily, but I won't make excuses for them either.

You mean like I usually do- "Where is the IFB sytematic theology?" and such?

I think you are right. That is the better practice.

So, let's rightly divide the Word, and preach God in all His glory, not just the parts that don't offend or only the parts that sound pretty to us. By the way, this fact Luke2427 presents, which is really "Bible" paints God to me so glorious in His knowledge and wisdom, it is absolutely priceless in its beauty. It is the Biblical truth concerning God. Some are afraid to embrace these truths, as they have God all neatly packed into their theological box, and anything that threatens their limited concept has to be incorrect. This my friends is shameful, yet at the same time true.

Right.

The thing he is getting at, and the way I would state it is that God is the Author of our Salvation, and is the Author of all of it, including crushing His Son. This includes seeing to it His Son die upon the Cross for our sins, even the most grotesque sins of mankind laid upon Him and being charged to Him, to the extent that He exercised justice upon His Son as guilty for what we had done, and as the text says "It pleased God to crush Him." Perhaps if we understand it in these terms, that He did crush Him for the sake of justice meted out upon Him for our sins, persons could see this and accept the truth, that in fact God did do this very thing.

Agreed.

Gods hand was in it all. We should stand in awe of all of His workings.

Absolutely.

 

[preacher4truth]

My apologies brother Luke2427. I saw your name in this thread so much I forgot Jesusfan started this thread!!!! :laugh:

 

[percho]

Exactly. Thank you.

An age old conundrum of the scriptures, .....whodunnit?

And again the anger of Jehovah was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them, saying, Go, number Israel and Judah. 2 Sam 24:1

And Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel. 1 Chr 21:1

14 And Jehovah God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, cursed art thou above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
15 and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Gen 3

Yet it pleased Jehovah to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of Jehovah shall prosper in his hand. Isa 53:10

Who moved David? Who bruised Christ? Who afflicted Job? etc., etc., etc..

Satan the source and the very reason Adam was created the way he was and was a type of the one to come.

The second Adam died the very death assigned to the first Adam so God could destroy death and him that has the power of death (sin), that is Satan.
Satan sin and death were present when it was said, "Let there be light." This has to be true for the Lamb was already considered "slain" and man had not been created yet.

It is through the regenerated man child, the Christ that God did this by his resurrection from the DEAD, his being the firstborn from the dead.

However evil is still in the world, in this present age and to me that is the importance of the gospel of the kingdom of God. That Jesus is going to return and, "And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed:" "And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. It will be a different world, age. The resurrected will rule with Christ. Evil will be dealt with and in time will vanish. Satan will not be allowed to deceive and will eventually be destroyed.

It isn't about Calvin and some other guy IMHO.

 

[Skandelon]

The question misses the mark by assuming that we believe that God actively causes Dahmer, molestation of children, etc.

No, the question didn't assume anything. I asked IF that is your view or not. Clearly it is not your view, which is all I wanted to know. Thank you. I'll let Luke debate you now because I've spent the last year trying to get him to admit that is NOT the Calvinistic view.

The Jews that delivered Christ to the Romans and the Romans that Crucified Christ were acting of their own free will. We do not believe they were coerced in any way.

Me 2 :thumbsup:

Our position states that God doesn't actively cause these things, but He ordains that they be and He ordains that they happen.

Can you explain the difference in the way God ordains that which He actively brings to pass (like the inspiration of scripture for example) and that which He permissively degrees? This may help those who make the mistake of equating the two. Actually you seem to do that when you go on to write...

If a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without the permission of the Father, then nothing in all the earth happens with out that permission. As I've already stated, though, giving permission for something to happen is not the same as causing something to happen. After all there is a very big difference between me standing aside as a friend jumps off a bridge and me throwing that same friend off a bridge.

The Archangel

Amen! :thumbsup:

 

[Skandelon]

This is not my thread, Bro. And you are right. I would not have worded it that way.

The guy who has unapologetically and without qualification has said at least a dozen times, "God killed Jesus" now says the question of this OP was "poorly worded?" Really?!?

 

[convicted1]

The question misses the mark by assuming that we believe that God actively causes Dahmer, molestation of children, etc. The Calvinists that I know and studied under and read summarize the answer to the question this way: God foreordains the free and sometimes sinful actions of human beings to serve His purposes and display His glory.

Please expound on that last sentence I bolded. How can God foreordain something to come to pass, and yet not be active. Now, if you mean that He allowed certain things to happen, such as the child molestations, murders, rapes, robberies, etc., then I am in agreement with you. But would you please expound on what I bolded a little more? Thank you in advance.

The Jews that delivered Christ to the Romans and the Romans that Crucified Christ were acting of their own free will. We do not believe they were coerced in any way.

Agreed. :thumbsup:

The murders that Dahmer committed, the molestation that was [allegedly] committed at Penn State were all the result of free human agents--without coercion from the Almighty.

Agree again. :thumbsup:

Our position states that God doesn't actively cause these things, but He ordains that they be and He ordains that they happen. God super-intends all things (and I do mean all without exception). For the elect, all things work together for good--whether it serves to bring that person to Christ or serves to strengthen a believer's faith. For the non-elect, things are not so certain.

Again, expound on God foreordains all things. Sounds like sin is part of that plan considering the fall happened by God allowing it to come to pass. God chose to put the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden to fulfill His purpose, but it was Adam's and Eve's choice to eat of it or not. Now, I agree that God allowed it to come to pass, but to state that He stood behind it, and caused it Himself, is a bit much. I am not stating you are stating this, but I want you to dig a little deeper in your explanation to me.

If you look at the account of the life of Joseph in the Old Testament you see God ordaining the free actions of the brothers--selling Joseph into slavery--in order to serve His greater purposes--getting Israel to Egypt so that Exodus could happen, providing food for the family, etc.

On a side note: It is very interesting that the brothers of Joseph, in their plan to kill him (which later changed to selling him) and the execution of that plan, actually brought about the very circumstances they tried to avoid. Had they not acted in their sinful way, the family likely would have starved to death along with the rest of the known world. It was not happenstance that brought Joseph to power, it was God and it was done in His perfect timing through the sinful actions of the brothers and Potiphar's wife.

Believe it or not, I am in complete agreement with you here. God knew what was going to take place, so in His providence, He made a way for the twelve tribes of Israel/Jacob to survive through the famine that was going to come. :thumbsup:

Remember: "[29] Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. [30] But even the hairs of your head are all numbered. [31] Fear not, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows." (Matthew 10:29-31 ESV)

If a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without the permission of the Father, then nothing in all the earth happens with out that permission. As I've already stated, though, giving permission for something to happen is not the same as causing something to happen. After all there is a very big difference between me standing aside as a friend jumps off a bridge and me throwing that same friend off a bridge.

The Archangel

Agree with this. :thumbsup:

 

[DHK]

I would say it means he was obedient unto death even the death of the cross.
Which is a little different than allow.

He was obedient: obedient to the cross, obedient to the Father in all things. Yet He still said to Pilate that he could have no power at all unless it was given to him by my Father in heaven. Pilate was not forced to make the decision to hand him over to the Jews to be crucified. He chose to. It was his will to do so. God allowed him to make that choice, as Christ allowed Pilate to hand him over to the Jews. Christ still had the power to stop him, had he chosen to use it.

 

[Aaron]

The question misses the mark by assuming that we believe that God actively causes Dahmer, molestation of children, etc. The Calvinists that I know and studied under and read summarize the answer to the question this way: God foreordains the free and sometimes sinful actions of human beings to serve His purposes and display His glory.

The noncalvinist cannot see the difference, because at the heart of his disagreement is a carnal sense of justice. If God foreordained evil actions then He must be the cause, and is the one at fault. You will find that the argument always boils down to "why doth He yet find fault, for who hath resisted His will?"

The Jews that delivered Christ to the Romans and the Romans that Crucified Christ were acting of their own free will. We do not believe they were coerced in any way.

Could they have done otherwise? Does anyone coerce a sow to wallow in the mire, or a dog to eat its own vomit? We could say the sow and dog were free, but did they choose their lusts? Could the children of the Devil have done any other than murder God's Son?

As I've already stated, though, giving permission for something to happen is not the same as causing something to happen. After all there is a very big difference between me standing aside as a friend jumps off a bridge and me throwing that same friend off a bridge.

But if you have the power to intervene in that friend's attempt to rape a child, and you do not, can you escape responsibility? (As if child rape is somehow a more heinous crime than the murder of God's Son.) More than that, if you send that "friend" knowing what his lusts are and what he will do, arguing that you are not the first cause of the rape is futile.

 

[Aaron]

Did God Kill His own Son Upon The Cross?

Did Eisenhower kill thousands of Americans on D-Day? Or did he liberate Europe?

 

[kyredneck]

Did Eisenhower kill thousands of Americans on D-Day? Or did he liberate Europe?

:thumbs:

It was indeed a war between the kingdom of Satan and the kingdom of God.

Satan has been defeated.