How was Christ Forsaken?

[Yeshua1]

Scripture teaches that it was God's will that Christ suffer at the hands of men (Acts 3), it was God's will to crush him, putting him to grief (Isaiah 53).

This is not the same as saying God punished Jesus by separating from Him on the cross. You are taking something Holy and making it historic fiction.

Jesus felt and experience being forsaken by the Father while on that Cross!

 

[Yeshua1]

Just so. We need to be careful here, and be aware of the omni-presence of God.
We read that the Lord departed from Saul (1 Samuel 16:14a), but that did not mean that He was not aware of Saul or had no dealings with him at all (v.14b). What it does mean is that God had no communication with him, and he received no comfort from Him (1 Samuel 28:6).

that, I believe is what our Lord experienced as He made satisfaction for our sins before God.

Now according to A.W. Pink (The Satisfaction of Christ), Christ's sufferings were:
1, A Federal Work.
2. A Substitutionary Work.
3. A Penal Work.
4. A Sacrificial Work.

I want just to look very briefly at the first two of these.
A Federal Work. Christ as the second Adam came to save His people; those whom the Father had given Him (John 6:39 etc.). There is a legal, covenantal union between Christ and His people. 'Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made' Galatians 3:16), but the Seed is first of all Christ, and then those who are in Him (1 Corinthians 15:22; Galatians 3:7). So what Christ has done, we have done; what has happened to Christ has happened to us. 'I have been crucified with Christ' (Galatians 2:20); 'If [or 'since'] then, you were raised with Christ.......' (Colossians 3:1; c.f. Ephesians 2:5-6).

A Substitutionary Work. Christ was the Surety for His people because He was their Substitute. Their debts became His debts; their sins, His sins; and their punishment, His punishment. Are His people due by divine justice eternal separation from God? Then Christ their Substitute is due the same by the same justice. 'The chastisement for our peace was upon Him.'

Eliphaz the Temanite asked, "Whoever perished being innocent? Or where were the righteous cut off?" (Job 4:7). We may confidently answer, no one and nowhere! Christ was personally innocent and righteous, but as our Covenant Head and as our Substitute, He was legally guilty and suffered the just punishment for all the ones for whom He was Surety.

Pink also says that Christ's sacrifice was
a. A Ransoming One.
b. A Priestly One.
c. A Propitiatory One.
d. An Expiatory One.

It might make our discussions more fruitful and less acrimonious if we use these headings.

When I see Jesus being forsaken by God, I do not see it as Him ceasing to be the Son, nor ceasing to be God, but that in that awful moment while bearing our sins before Holy God, he experienced it as If he had been...

 

[Yeshua1]

That's an awful lot of philosophical notions attached to each of those passages. No wonder it took so long for those "truths" to be fleshed out.

All of that was derived directly from the scriptures though!

 

[JonC]

All of that was derived directly from the scriptures though!

Perhaps "derived". The problem is that in the process a lot was added. Mormonism is derived from Scripture. It's the additions and changes that I find concerning. But at least your view doesn't deny the gospel.

 

[Yeshua1]

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 )

The Suffering Servant of Yahweh would be tasting that Cup of wrath that the prophets saw God collecting and storing up to pour out at time of judgment of God, correct?

 

[Yeshua1]

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?

Jesus cup was that one of wrath unique JUST to Him to have to endure, but Paul and the others endured affliction for His sake!

 

[JonC]

Jesus cup was that one of wrath unique JUST to Him to have to endure, but Paul and the others endured affliction for His sake!

Jesus did not tell Paul he would share the cup. He told the Disciples that they would.

AND they were speaking of the cup Jesus was about to drink (read the passage). Do you think Jesus walked around with a bunch of cups in his robe?

 

[Yeshua1]

Jesus did not tell Paul he would share the cup. He told the Disciples that they would.

AND they were speaking of the cup Jesus was about to drink (read the passage). Do you think Jesus walked around with a bunch of cups in his robe?

No, but he had His to drink, and His Apostles had theirs!

 

[JonC]

No, but he had His to drink, and His Apostles had theirs!

But that is not what the verse says - Christ did not say "Dudes....you'll get your own cup, leave mine alone." He was speaking of the cross and said they would drink from his cup.

Read the passage.

 

[Yeshua1]

But that is not what the verse says - Christ did not say "Dudes....you'll get your own cup, leave mine alone." He was speaking of the cross and said they would drink from his cup.

Read the passage.

They did, but all them giving their very lives for jesus!

 

[JonC]

This thread is closed.

Please feel free to start another if anyone wants to continue the topic.