Jesus' cry from the cross

[The Remonstrant]

Psalm 22:24 For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard.

This verse does not negate the prior abandonment. It just means that God eventually hears the cry, and eventually intervenes. Further, I will point out that verse 24 appears to be part of a quotation.

22 I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.
23 ["]Ye that fear the Lord, praise him; all ye the seed of Jacob, glorify him; and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel.
24 For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard.["]

I still do not see how you are able to cling onto a single verse (namely Jesus' utterance of Psalm 22:1) in order to substantiate your claim that the Father literally abandoned the Son on the cross. (You also have conveniently ignored the rest of my points in my prior post specifically addressed to you.)

[Obsidian]

Psalm 22:24 For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard.

This verse does not negate the prior abandonment. It just means that God eventually hears the cry, and eventually intervenes. Further, I will point out that verse 24 appears to be part of a quotation.

22 I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.
23 ["]Ye that fear the Lord, praise him; all ye the seed of Jacob, glorify him; and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel.
24 For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard.["]

[The Remonstrant]

I sure hope you are not that literal in your relationships. Hint: When a woman says, "You don't love me anymore" she is using a rhetorical emotional device. She isn't literally saying she literally believes you don't literally love her any more. Sheesh.

[Darth Xena]

To ask, "Why have you forsaken me" implies that you have forsaken me. To knowingly and falsely declare that you have forsaken me, when you have not, would be a lie. Not overly complicated.

Whenever the Bible disagrees with a person's theological construct, only one of those can be right. I wonder which one it is.

I sure hope you are not that literal in your relationships. Hint: When a woman says, "You don't love me anymore" she is using a rhetorical emotional device. She isn't literally saying she literally believes you don't literally love her any more. Sheesh.

[The Remonstrant]

To ask, "Why have you forsaken me" implies that you have forsaken me. To knowingly and falsely declare that you have forsaken me, when you have not, would be a lie. Not overly complicated.

Whenever the Bible disagrees with a person's theological construct, only one of those can be right. I wonder which one it is.

Observe the 24th verse of Psalm 22 (ESV): "For he has not despised or abhorred the affliction of the afflicted, and he has not hidden his face from him, but has heard, when he cried to him."

It is one thing to feel utterly abandoned by God and quite another to claim it as an indubitable theological truth. Jesus would not by "lying" by vocalizing his distress on the cross. Surely you familiar with the Psalms and the Prophets. The language of forsakenness and abandonment is given voice to throughout numerous passages of the Hebrew Scriptures by suffering servants of Yahweh God. Are we to suppose Job, Habakkuk and Jeremiah were all liars in expressing their angst? It would be a mistake to read all their statements as infallible propositional truths in the first place.

[robrecht]

No. I think this is one place where many have it wrong, and are being too literal. Its referencing Psalm 22. The psalms are taught to be cried out in times of need pain or prayer for the Jews. It would not have been uncommon to hear a psalm in time of great pain. But that it was this specific psalm is significant.

Who, me?

[OingoBoingo]

Must it necessarily be one or the other. Can it not be, in some sense, both?

Agreed. There's an interesting narrative being told by the Gospel writers here, taking into consideration both Isaiah and the Psalms.

Isaiah 53:4-5
Surely he has borne our griefs
and carried our sorrows;
yet we esteemed him stricken,
smitten by God, and afflicted.
But he was pierced for our transgressions;
he was crushed for our iniquities;
upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace,
and with his wounds we are healed.

Isaiah 59:1-2
Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save,
or his ear dull, that it cannot hear;
but your iniquities have made a separation
between you and your God,
and your sins have hidden his face from you
so that he does not hear.

Psalm 22:1-5
My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
Why are you so far from saving me, from the words of my groaning?
O my God, I cry by day, but you do not answer,
and by night, but I find no rest.

Yet you are holy,
enthroned on the praises of Israel.
In you our fathers trusted;
they trusted, and you delivered them.
To you they cried and were rescued;
in you they trusted and were not put to shame.

Matthew 27:46-50Luke 23:44-461 Peter 2:24
He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.

It looks like the early Christian movement takes into consideration Isaiah's view of the suffering servant as one who takes on the iniquities of the world, and that the Father separates himself from sin. Yet, the Son is not left with these inequities, rather he is delivered, and glorified. Its an intriguing understanding of the view of the second person of the trinity who, in his incarnation, suffers in all ways as man suffers, yet is redeemed and glorified in the end. If Jesus simply died a physical death for the sins of the world, would that be enough? Separation from the Father, even for a short time, seems like the true sacrifice on the cross. Jesus suffered both physical and spiritual death, and so only he can claim to know what suffering is, and to have been tempted in all ways, yet to still do the will the father.

[Obsidian]

To ask, "Why have you forsaken me" implies that you have forsaken me. To knowingly and falsely declare that you have forsaken me, when you have not, would be a lie. Not overly complicated.

Whenever the Bible disagrees with a person's theological construct, only one of those can be right. I wonder which one it is.

[The Remonstrant]

It pretty much makes both Jesus and David out to be liars if you say that they were not abandoned at least temporarily.

You will need to establish this bold claim of yours.

[Obsidian]

It is, unfortunately, not uncommon to hear evangelical preachers proclaim that the Father turned his back on Jesus when he was on the cross. This couldn't be further from the truth.

It pretty much makes both Jesus and David out to be liars if you say that they were not abandoned at least temporarily.

[Irate Canadian]

It is not proper to say that God abandoned God. This is, in fact, what one is insinuating when one makes the rather daring claim that the Father literally abandoned the Son in some way at Golgotha. The Father and the Son are/were one in purpose throughout Jesus' incarnation, his death on the cross, the resurrection, ascension, glorification, and before the foundation of the world. This unity was never broken. The Father was with Jesus even during his darkest time. Jesus was vindicated as Lord and Messiah by being raised from the dead by the Father. Jesus always did what pleased the Father and the Father never disapproved of his Son.

It is, unfortunately, not uncommon to hear evangelical preachers proclaim that the Father turned his back on Jesus when he was on the cross. This couldn't be further from the truth.

Amen..(I wonder when we can actually start doing REAL Amens again...)

[Christianbookworm]

Who would WANT to die a shameful death?

[robrecht]

I think Jesus knew the scriptures well enough to know He would never be abandoned.

Let me ask it this way. When Jesus asked, in Mark's gospel, that this cup be removed from him, did Mark think that Jesus was sincere? Or was he just kidding.

[Thoughtful Monk]

I agree! Doesn't Psalm 22 also have a description that sounds like a crucifixion?

I had heard that before. After reading Psalm 22, I'm inclined to agree with the position.

[The Remonstrant]

He was abandoned. It's just that the abandonment was not permanent.

It is not proper to say that God abandoned God. This is, in fact, what one is insinuating when one makes the rather daring claim that the Father literally abandoned the Son in some way at Golgotha. The Father and the Son are/were one in purpose throughout Jesus' incarnation, his death on the cross, the resurrection, ascension, glorification, and before the foundation of the world. This unity was never broken. The Father was with Jesus even during his darkest time. Jesus was vindicated as Lord and Messiah by being raised from the dead by the Father. Jesus always did what pleased the Father and the Father never disapproved of his Son.

It is, unfortunately, not uncommon to hear evangelical preachers proclaim that the Father turned his back on Jesus when he was on the cross. This couldn't be further from the truth.