How was Christ Forsaken?

[The Archangel]

Why? Through Scripture "the cup" has represented both God's wrath and His blessings. It has represented God's will in what was to come, it a situation.

Why should we believe "the cup" here represents God's wrath rather than God's will? Because you want it to be the cup of God's wrath?

This is, BTW, one example of philosophy influencing theology.

(I bet you hate that "full my cup" song )

First... In the first line you state the cup to be "Blessings" and "Wrath." Then you equate it with "God's will." So... which is it; there are now three choices.

It's a cup of wrath in Gethsemane... [edited]

The Archangel

 

[JonC]

First... In the first line you state the cup to be "Blessings" and "Wrath." Then you equate it with "God's will." So... which is it; there are now three choices.

It's a cup of wrath in Gethsemane... Because we would expect Jesus to sweat drops of blood, be in deep anguish over, and request the removal of the cup of God's blessing. </sarcasm>

The Archangel

Hey brother,

From what I understand of your reply you are having trouble grasping the concept that the Bible uses "the cup" to represent various situations other than divine wrath. If so, then perhaps your struggle is an inability to divorce your presuppositions from the text of Scripture.

If that is the case there are a few resources I would recommend. The Hermeneutical Spiral by Grant Osborne may help. It is not at an advanced level, but if you find it difficult consider Grasping God's Word by Duvall and Hayes. Both are good works, and either could help you overcome (or at least identify) what you bring into the text.

If you need any other suggestions please don't hesitate to reach out.

I will offer you this for consideration as well - Jesus told the Disciples they would also drink from his cup. Do you believe the Disciples also drank of God's wrath?


John

 

[Yeshua1]

If it were a movie about the Atonement then they'd probably opt for Penal Substitution Theory as mythology is a popular cinematic theme now days and they could probably fit Thor into the plot without much difficulty. That's Hollywood.

If they just wanted to convey Penal Substitution Theory as an allegory they'd be too late. That was called "The Godfather". It's a good movie.

You are mocking here what the majority of Reformed and Baptists see though as the primary way to explain how the atonement was provided to us thru the Cross of Christ!

 

[Yeshua1]

Christ dying?
It is in redemption- in God as just and the justifier of sinners - Christ as the "Firstborn of many brethern".

Christ suffering Hell? It would only glorify Satan by proofing God a liar.

No, rather Jesus tasted and experienced hell for us upon that Cross so that none of us redeemed would ever have to!

 

[JonC]

When it comes to the symbolism of the cup there are many biblical uses.

In Psalm 23 the psalmist refers to his cup overflowing (blessings). The cup is also used as a "cup of wrath" when so qualified. And of course, it is also God's will and the situation itself (Jesus telling the Disciples they will indeed share his cup - i.e., his sufferings).

Many times "cup" is used as we would "fate".

For those who have not done so, I strongly recommend taking a class on how to study and then how to study Scripture. In our culture today we have an issue with illiteracy in terms of comprehension. In our churches we have an issue with biblical illiteracy. We have to move away from subjective interpretation. And I recommend those resources I believe could help @The Archangel to any willing to learn.

 

[Yeshua1]

Except YOU already gave us the definition of egkataleipō. And as YOU pointed out it can also mean "left in straits" (a situation of extreme trouble or difficulty).


There was no separation because if there were we would never have been saved. But yes, Christ was forsaken in suffering the cross and when he died into the Father's hands he committed his spirit.

God never depurated from Jesus in the He ceased to be God, but in His humanity did experience being forsaken and separated from the father!

 

[Yeshua1]

CAREFUL - I've not made that mistake at all.

The idea that God was wrathful towards Christ is contrary to what Scripture says of God. The idea that God departed from Jesus is contrary to what Scripture says of God. I never made the mistake of the Father somehow placing HIs wrath upon Jesus for something that he had done. NEVER ONCE.

I demand an apology!!!!! I demand satisfaction!!!!!

(just kidding....I don't want an apology, but you did just make up something about me that is not true). Even when I held the myth that God separated from Christ as a punishment of what we would experience at Judgment I didn't think it was for something Jesus had done....I know that isn't the case. But you are making things up rather on the spot these days.

God poured out in full His wrath upon Jesus, not on Him for what he had done, but due to what he was doing for us!

 

[JonC]

God never depurated from Jesus in the He ceased to be God, but in His humanity did experience being forsaken and separated from the father!

I'd ask for a passage demonstrating this dualism, but as Dave Ramsey says, insanity is doing the same thing expecting different results.

that is fine,,

why did you not respond about the Ga Bulldogs?

'cause I live in South Carolina- Go Tigers!

 

[Yeshua1]

I have to say, brother....for an Englishman....you don't know English real good.

I wonder why you read "separated from" as the "obvious" meaning (particularly as it isn't even the meaning among scholars who would otherwise agree with your theory). Could it be that you are able to only see what is not actually there?

Whatever happened to Jesus on that Cross was what happens to all those who have to atone for their own sins to a Holy God in the Judgment!

 

[JonC]

God poured out in full His wrath upon Jesus, not on Him for what he had done, but due to what he was doing for us!

Except for the bit left in the bottom that the Disciples drank when they shared the cup.....right?

 

[Yeshua1]

Hey brother,

From what I understand of your reply you are having trouble grasping the concept that the Bible uses "the cup" to represent various situations other than divine wrath. If so, then perhaps your struggle is an inability to divorce your presuppositions from the text of Scripture.

If that is the case there are a few resources I would recommend. The Hermeneutical Spiral by Grant Osborne may help. It is not at an advanced level, but if you find it difficult consider Grasping God's Word by Duvall and Hayes. Both are good works, and either could help you overcome (or at least identify) what you bring into the text.

If you need any other suggestions please don't hesitate to reach out.

I will offer you this for consideration as well - Jesus told the Disciples they would also drink from his cup. Do you believe the Disciples also drank of God's wrath?


John

Different context, as Jesus was referring to the Apostles would experience death and suffering for His name sake...
His Cup was the Bowl of wrath only He was qualified to drink of!

 

[Yeshua1]

Hey brother,

From what I understand of your reply you are having trouble grasping the concept that the Bible uses "the cup" to represent various situations other than divine wrath. If so, then perhaps your struggle is an inability to divorce your presuppositions from the text of Scripture.

If that is the case there are a few resources I would recommend. The Hermeneutical Spiral by Grant Osborne may help. It is not at an advanced level, but if you find it difficult consider Grasping God's Word by Duvall and Hayes. Both are good works, and either could help you overcome (or at least identify) what you bring into the text.

If you need any other suggestions please don't hesitate to reach out.

I will offer you this for consideration as well - Jesus told the Disciples they would also drink from his cup. Do you believe the Disciples also drank of God's wrath?


John

Amusing that you talk down to him on how to understand what the scriptures teach, when he seems to understand it in this area better than you do!

 

[Yeshua1]

I'd ask for a passage demonstrating this dualism, but as Dave Ramsey says, insanity is doing the same thing expecting different results.

I just take the forsaken Jesus experienced as being real, and not just quoting the scriptures!

 

[Yeshua1]

Except for the bit left in the bottom that the Disciples drank when they shared the cup.....right?

They would like Paul, be suffering for his sake for his afflictions, correct?

 

[JonC]

This thread is past its expiration point and will be closed today. If there is more to discuss please start another thread to continue the discussion.

 

[JonC]

They would like Paul, be suffering for his sake for his afflictions, correct?

You tell me.

Jesus said they would share his cup. @The Archangel indicated the cup Christ drank was God's wrath. Did Paul suffer God's wrath?

And Paul wasn't a Disciple. So maybe his suffering was not God's wrath. What do you think?

 

[percho]

Yet Jesus pleads with the Father to "remove this cup." The cup is an unmistakable symbol of God's judgment. It was God who did this to Christ. Believers are accepted because of His condemnation.

The Archangel

Does, cup = suffering
suffering unto death


or is there a difference?

My thought being; Through the things he suffered he learned - the obedience. Therefore, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Cup = suffering unto death and being dead until being quickened yet, to the Spirit.

Therefore I ask, for what span of time was the judgement of the Father toward the Son?
Why was Christ dead, three days and three nights?

Just read Jon's last post so I will add:

And be baptized with

I believe, to be baptized, is different from the drinking of the cup. Not real sure just how.

 

[JonC]

Does, cup = suffering
suffering unto death


or is there a difference?

My thought being; Through the things he suffered he learned - the obedience. Therefore, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Cup = suffering unto death and being dead until being quickened yet, to the Spirit.

Therefore I ask, for what span of time was the judgement of the Father toward the Son?
Why was Christ dead, three days and three nights?

What about other uses (like in Psalm 23)?

Or the cup of blessing Paul speaks of in 1 Corinthians?

 

[percho]

What about other uses (like in Psalm 23)?

Or the cup of blessing Paul speaks of in 1 Corinthians?

Good questions.

 

[percho]

The only thing quick I can come up with is:

It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him: If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us: If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.