My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken me?

[TedT]

What do the rest of you think of these words from the cross? Is it quite possible that the Greek translation erred in the meaning of Jesus' intent and that this reported Aramaic translation is the accurate one?

It sounds more like an interpretation to me...

But I like none of the interpretations you have offered. I accept that before the psalms were numbered they were referred to by their first line, that is, anyone hearing Him quote the first line would know He was referencing the whole psalm! AND PSALM 22 IS A PSALM OF VICTORY:
V31: They will proclaim his righteousness, declaring to a people yet unborn: HE HAS DONE IT!!

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Even Luther tried to do a sermon on these words, but could not understand how God could forsake God.

We don't need to conclude that God has forsaken God. All we know is that Jesus felt like he was forsaken. But people feel forsaken by God, even when God is not forsaking them.

What I am about to say may seem irrelevant, but bear with me. Waterboarding is an interrogation technique that was very much in the news during the controversies over Guantanamo prison camp. Some people pointed out that waterboarding is not so bad because the members of the military are subjected to it in training by their own people. No matter how waterboarding in training is done, the soldier being waterboarded knows deep down that it is being administered by his own people whom he trusts. He knows that no matter how bad it feels, they will not actually drown him. But when a soldier is in the hands of his enemies and he is being waterboarded, he does not trust them one little bit. He has no confidence at all that his torturers will not actually drip water into his nose until he drowns. The lack of confidence in what could happen is a big factor in the terror induced by the process. There is no way in training to duplicate that terror, no matter how hostile the trainers pretend to be.

Now let us return to Jesus on the cross. He is also enduring a terrible ordeal much worse than waterboarding. One of the things his passion shows is that Jesus can sympathize with our weakness, for he endured the worst a human could endure. This fact - of what Jesus endured for our sake - more than even the promise of eternal life, won over many early Christians. They had never heard of a god who emptied himself so completely of his divine privilege to suffer like us, or worse. Also, by enduring suffering like a mere human, Jesus shows us an example that we can hope to emulate. He did not use any of his divine privilege to make his suffering easier. He could have called upon angels to minister to him, but he didn't. He could have isolated himself from the pain, but he didn't. By eschewing these comforts, Jesus sets a more powerful example. One of those comforts is the feeling of the presence of his heavenly Father. Just as waterboarding done in training by friends is different from waterboarding done by enemies, dying on the cross without the comfort of friends and his heavenly Father is a more terrible experience. I believe that when Jesus said "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" he was showing us that we can endure even those times when we don't feel God's close presence. We know intellectually that God is always present - very close to us. But actually feeling it is something else again. Feelings are not a reliable indictor of faith. They can come and go. St. John of the Cross talks about the "Dark Night of the Soul" in describing this state. We as humans are always going to have periods of highs and lows. It is a mistake to assume that every time we are feeling low it must be because God has abandoned us. God is with us and loves us more than we can imagine, but he does not always make his presence felt. Jesus is teaching us that lesson from the cross - a very useful lesson too.

 

[Saint Steven]

Certainly, Jesus was pointing His listeners to the entire Psalm--which they would be familiar with--not just the first line.

I agree.
However, I wonder why those standing by thought he was calling Elijah? (see vs 47)

Matthew 27:45-47 NIV
From noon until three in the afternoon darkness came over all the land. 46 About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”).
47 When some of those standing there heard this, they said, “He’s calling Elijah.”

 

[RDKirk]

I agree.
However, I wonder why those standing by thought he was calling Elijah? (see vs 47)

Matthew 27:45-47 NIV
From noon until three in the afternoon darkness came over all the land. 46 About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”).
47 When some of those standing there heard this, they said, “He’s calling Elijah.”

Maybe those not familiar with the psalm.

 

[Saint Steven]

Maybe those not familiar with the psalm.

Only the synagogues owned scrolls. The people knew the scriptures because of the public reading. Interestingly, after saying this, they came with the wine vinegar sponge to quench his thirst. (another reference to the Psalm) See below.

Matthew 27:47-50 NIV
When some of those standing there heard this, they said, “He’s calling Elijah.”
48 Immediately one of them ran and got a sponge. He filled it with wine vinegar, put it on a staff, and offered it to Jesus to drink. 49 The rest said, “Now leave him alone. Let’s see if Elijah comes to save him.”
50 And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.

Psalm 22:15 NIV
My mouth is dried up like a potsherd,
and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth;
you lay me in the dust of death.

 

[zoidar]

These words from the cross have troubled many for centuries. There appears to be several possible explanations for Jesus saying this.

(1) Some claim that he was simply pointing to one of the Psalms as a way of showing others to have faith in God. Sorry, but most of my conservative Christian friends through the years have always told me that context is best used to interpret Scripture. Hence, the context of Jesus' suffering on the cross does not appear to lend itself to him pointing to one of the Psalms.
(2) I recall a Baptist preacher 50 years ago who spoke about these words on Palm Sunday and he said that Jesus felt forsaken on the cross by the Father and this was Jesus' way of expressing his isolation at the moment. While this explanation seems a little better than the first one, it is still not very satisfying for many of us. Even Luther tried to do a sermon on these words, but could not understand how God could forsake God.
(3) Jesus was not God, but merely the Son of God and thus truly did feel forsaken by God on the cross.
(4) Perhaps the best explanation of all is one that many of you will refuse to consider, as it could pose a problem for those who believe that the Holy Spirit protects Scripture from making any errors of significant importance. While doing online research recently, I came across what is reportedly an Aramaic translation of these words and it goes like this: "My God, my God, for this I was destined". I must say that this reported Aramaic translation makes much more sense to me. Now it is true that such a change in Scripture is not really a change that directly impacts salvation, but it is still a significant change from the translations that virtually all of us are used to seeing.

What do the rest of you think of these words from the cross? Is it quite possible that the Greek translation erred in the meaning of Jesus' intent and that this reported Aramaic translation is the accurate one?

I think of it like the Father let Jesus drink this cup of pain and death. The Father could have stopped it all. I believe Jesus' words are his expression of the anguish he was feeling, to suffer and die on the cross even he was free from guilt. The Father let it all happen to him. So Jesus' words could have been: "Father, why did you leave me to this?"

 

[RDKirk]

I think of it like the Father let Jesus drink this cup of pain and death. The Father could have stopped it all. I believe Jesus' words are his expression of the anguish he was feeling, to suffer and die on the cross even he was free from guilt. The Father let it all happen to him. So Jesus' words could have been: "Father, why did you leave me to this?"

Jesus took the responsibility for that. He said it could happen only because He permitted it happen. He was the One who let it happen.

Certainly, Jesus had aligned His will with that of the Father, but He was not a pawn of the Father, He was fully committed and willing for it to happen, not forsaken.

 

[zoidar]

Jesus took the responsibility for that. He said it could happen only because He permitted it happen. He was the One who let it happen.

Certainly, Jesus had aligned His will with that of the Father, but He was not a pawn of the Father, He was fully committed and willing for it to happen, not forsaken.

In that case why did Jesus pray to the Father to take this cup from him? Jesus will was to do the Father's will. But Jesus could have stopped it at any time of course if he wanted.

 

[RDKirk]

In that case why did Jesus pray to the Father to take this cup from him? Jesus will was to do the Father's will. But Jesus could have stopped it at any time of course if he wanted.

When Jesus stood from His knees in Gethsemane, He was fully committed to seeing it through.

 

[Saint Steven]

When Jesus stood from His knees in Gethsemane, He was fully committed to seeing it through.

Right. And there are important spiritual truths for us in that passage too. (obviously)

 

[bling]

These words from the cross have troubled many for centuries. There appears to be several possible explanations for Jesus saying this.

(1) Some claim that he was simply pointing to one of the Psalms as a way of showing others to have faith in God. Sorry, but most of my conservative Christian friends through the years have always told me that context is best used to interpret Scripture. Hence, the context of Jesus' suffering on the cross does not appear to lend itself to him pointing to one of the Psalms.
(2) I recall a Baptist preacher 50 years ago who spoke about these words on Palm Sunday and he said that Jesus felt forsaken on the cross by the Father and this was Jesus' way of expressing his isolation at the moment. While this explanation seems a little better than the first one, it is still not very satisfying for many of us. Even Luther tried to do a sermon on these words, but could not understand how God could forsake God.
(3) Jesus was not God, but merely the Son of God and thus truly did feel forsaken by God on the cross.
(4) Perhaps the best explanation of all is one that many of you will refuse to consider, as it could pose a problem for those who believe that the Holy Spirit protects Scripture from making any errors of significant importance. While doing online research recently, I came across what is reportedly an Aramaic translation of these words and it goes like this: "My God, my God, for this I was destined". I must say that this reported Aramaic translation makes much more sense to me. Now it is true that such a change in Scripture is not really a change that directly impacts salvation, but it is still a significant change from the translations that virtually all of us are used to seeing.

What do the rest of you think of these words from the cross? Is it quite possible that the Greek translation erred in the meaning of Jesus' intent and that this reported Aramaic translation is the accurate one?

About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice,

“Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God,

why have you forsaken me?”). Mat 27:46


And at three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice,

“Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God,

why have you forsaken me?”). Mrk 15:34


You do realize if you interpret Matt. 27:46 and Mark 15:34 to mean God forsook Christ while on the cross, you make the author of Psalm 22 out to be a liar?

How do you reconcile Psalms 22: 24 “For he has not despised or scorned the suffering of the afflicted one; he has not hidden his face from him but has listened to his cry for help”, with the beginning of the Psalm 22: 1 “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?...” ?

Why did Jesus switch from the Greek to the Hebrew and Aramaic language? (we can discuss the differences in Matt and Mark later but both are not Greek and Matt seems all Hebrew and Mark seems to be all Aramaic).

Who is Jesus addressing and why waste His limited precious breath at this time? Hebrew and arimaci H

Jesus seems to be talking to God before and after this, so if God forsook Christ, who is Christ talking to?

Does God leave us when we are wrongly being torture, humiliated and murdered or can we count on God being with us through anything and everything?

These and many more questions can be answered with an understanding of the style used in writing most of the individual lament of Psalms, how Jesus addresses questions, how the first century Jews knew and quoted Psalms, and who was really needing help at the cross.

1, How did Jesus address questions from satan or those wicked Jewish religious leaders:

Jesus always answered the questions (often not spoken) of the wicked Jewish religious leaders, include the one time he kept silent since saying nothing to obvious false accusations everyone knew was false is the best answer.

The question the Jewish religious leaders just asked Christ while on the cross is not best answered with silence but with Psalm 22.

Jesus is always trying move the individual or group right near to Him up to their person next spiritual level and He does not get real philosophical making broad statement for us directly, but is talking to the audience around Himself and we are just listening in.

Jesus will first use what the person already knows, so He is not always teaching something new, but reminding them of what they already know.

Jesus uses scripture heavily and/or their firsthand knowledge.

2. Who needs to be addressed/answered while Jesus is on the cross?

The question asked just before Jesus makes this statement is: Mark 15: 31 In the same way the chief priests and the teachers of the law mocked him among themselves. “He saved others,” they said, “but he can’t save himself! 32 Let this Messiah, this king of Israel, come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe.” Those crucified with him also heaped insults on him.

Matt. 27: 41 In the same way the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders mocked him. 42 “He saved others,” they said, “but he can’t save himself! He’s the king of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. 43 He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, ‘I am the Son of God.’”

These are the exact words in Psalms 22: 7 All who see me mock me; they hurl insults, shaking their heads. 8 “He trusts in the Lord,” they say, “let the Lord rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him.”

The questions of the priests and teachers of the Law are spiteful and mocking, but like other questions by evil people, Jesus will address questions with what they already know from scripture. It will be to help them, but it often shuts them up, also and Psalm 22 would shut them up.

3. What literary style is being used in Psalms 22 that might explain an apparent contrast?

All Jews would be trained in the diatribe writing style, since most individual Psalms Laments are written this way. In Biblical diatribes the author will present an idea as almost a debate with an imaginary adversary, so the adversary’s support for the wrong answer goes first and we will have a list of support for the wrong answer to the question. Thus, it is all woes to begin with and the positive is closer to the end, like you have in Psalms 22. Paul uses the diatribe method heavily in Romans, which might help sell his ideas to the Roman Jewish Christians, who are being somewhat chastised in Romans.

4. Why use Hebrews and quoting the first sentence of Psalms 22?

Jesus has to use “Eli” or “Eloi” and say them twice to quote the first verse of Psalms 22. since it is not “Father” in that verse. Jesus would normally use “Father” if he was addressing God, so the change would be due to his quoting Psalms 22.

The Psalms were not numbered in the first century and most learned Jews had all the psalms memorized, so they would recognize the first verse to any Psalm. So, if Jesus wanted the Priests and teachers of the Law to remember what Psalm 22 said, all He had to do is quote the first verse.

Jesus using Hebrew would let the Priests and teachers know He was talking to them and would cause them to stop and listen as has happened before.

Bringing the words of Psalms 22 to mind, would stop their mocking and virtually prove He was the Messiah.

God is literally at the elbow of every sinner and he was with Christ all through this ordeal as support.

 

[zoidar]

When Jesus stood from His knees in Gethsemane, He was fully committed to seeing it through.

I agree with that.

 

[TedT]

I agree.
However, I wonder why those standing by thought he was calling Elijah? (see vs 47)

There are people like that in every crowd....

 

[RDKirk]

There are people like that in every crowd....

I think perhaps the point of including that in scripture was to say, "Even seeing all this, people still didn't get it."

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I'm not super duper knowledgeable about this subject but I would guess God the Father forsook him because of the fact that he was made to be sin for us (according to 2 Corinthians 5:21) and God the Father could not have sin in his presence.

So then you believe that the Trinity was fractured and there were two gods at one point in time? If so, Jesus says that the Lord our God is one Lord (Mark 12:29). Jesus did not prophesy how God would be two lords because of what would happen at the cross. You said you are not super knowledgable about this subject. Yet, we are told to study to show ourselves approved unto God (2 Timothy 2:15 KJB). Meaning, I would encourage you to read more Psalms 22 and see why our Lord was quoting from that Psalm instead of latching on to what you want to be true, my friend.

By the way I don't think you're even saved because you promote works salvation.

Your words imply that I do not believe in grace for salvation. If so, thank you for the false slander, and I will rejoice in God my Savior who saves me by His grace. I don't believe we can be saved by “Works ALONE Salvationism without God's grace” (Which is what the apostle Paul fought against because of the heresy of those who thought they had to be first circumcised to be saved - See: Acts of the Apostles 15:1, Acts of the Apostles 15:5, Acts of the Apostles 15:24, and Galatians 5:2).

Now, while I do believe the Bible clearly teaches that after we are saved by the gospel (Which is believing that Christ died for our sins, He was buried, and He was risen three days later - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4), we need to also answer the call of the gospel in 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14. This call is... God has chosen us to salvation through Sanctification of the Spirit and a belief of the truth. For why else would the apostle Paul tell us to work out our salvation with fear and trembling? (See: Philippians 2:12). For why else would the apostle Paul tell us to fight the good fight of faith and lay hold on eternal life? (See: 1 Timothy 6:12). For why else would the apostle Paul tell us that vain deceivers can deny God by being reprobate unto every good work? (See: Titus 1:16). For why else would the apostle Paul say that there is no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus who WALK NOT AFTER THE FLESH (SIN) but who walk after the Spirit? (See: Romans 8:1). For Paul says, if you live after the flesh (sin), you will die, but if you mortify (put to death) the deeds of the body (sin) by the Spirit, you shall live (Romans 8:13). This is in reference to salvation because... the works of the flesh are told to us in Galatians 5:19-21. For Paul says: “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” Notice that Paul says the works of the flesh are various sins and that they which do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

The apostle Paul basically said that if any man does not agree with the words of Jesus Christ and the doctrine according to godliness, he is proud and he knows nothing (See: 1 Timothy 6:3-4). James 4:6 says God resists the proud and gives grace to the humble (James 4:6). Jesus clearly taught that if we are to enter into life, we have to keep the commandments (Matthew 19:17-19). This would not be the entirety of the Old Law or the Mosaic Law (i.e. the 613 Laws of Moses) as a whole or package deal. The Old Law is no more as a contract. We are not under things like the Saturday Sabbath, circumcision, dietary laws, and holy days. New Covenant believers were never under these kinds of things because they were laws given to Israel. We are to follow the commands that come from Jesus and His followers. But the point I wanted to make here is that Jesus clearly taught that we must do things to enter God's kingdom. For Jesus agreed with the lawyer that to love God and to love your neighbor is a part of inheriting eternal life (See: Luke 10:25-28). Jesus warned how various sins can destroy our souls like looking upon a woman in lust (Matthew 5:28-30), not forgiving others (Matthew 6:15), being condemned by our words (Matthew 12:37), not helping the poor (Matthew 25:31-46) (Luke 10:25-37), not preaching the gospel (Luke 9:62).

In fact, the apostle John adds that to not love your brother and to not do righteousness means one is not of God (1 John 3:10). Can a person not be of God and be saved? Surely not. In fact, the apostle John says if you hate your brother you are like a murderer and no murderer has eternal life abiding in him (1 John 3:15).

Jesus says cast the unprofitable servant into outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth (See: Matthew 25:30). Yet, the servant who was faithful over a few things was told to enter the joy of His Lord (Matthew 25:21). I quoted all of these verses by heart (Without having to confirm what they say). For I know what they say. Do you? You should know them and make them known instead of believing something you want to be true outside of God's Holy Word (The Bible), my friend.

Notice the words of Jesus below.

“And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.” (John 5:29).

It does not say that they that have done nothing but believe on the finished work of the cross will come forth unto the resurrection of life. The verse says, “they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life;” The verse also says that they who have done evil will come forth unto the resurrection of damnation.

The apostle Paul says, “For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law:” (Romans 2:12). So even if you think you are not under the Law, we can still perish for sinning without having the Law (i.e. the Old Law). For we are not under the Old Law, but we are under the commands that come from Jesus and His apostles. For Paul says that we are to regard what he has written as the commandments of the Lord (1 Corinthians 14:37). Do you disregard or despise the commandments of God?

Lets read to what happens to those who do his commands at the end chapter of your Bible.

“Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.” (Revelation 22:14).

Notice. It does not say blessed are those who did not do his commandments but trusted in the finished work of the cross. It says blessed are those who do his commandments that they may right to the tree of life and enter through the gates into the city. For what is outside the city?

“For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.” (Revelation 22:15).

Jesus said that everyone who does not do what He says is like a fool who built His house upon the sand, and when a storm came, great was the fall of that house (Matthew 7:26-27).

In Matthew 13:41-42, we learn that the Son of Man (JESUS) will send forth his angels and they will gather out of HIS KINGDOM (Christ's kingdom) all who offend and who do iniquity (sin) and they will be cast into the furnace of fire (i.e. the Lake of Fire).

Jesus says those who do not receive His words those words will judge us on the last day (John 12:48).

So I will end with saying this to you:

“Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord: Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled;” (Hebrews 12:14-15).

 

[MarshallBryant]

My first venture into such discussions deviates a little from the dialogue. After 51 years, I cannot fully grasp the mystery of the trinity itself. How can it be the same and yet distinct? I have heard many attempts to draw closer to a resolution, but none are completely satisfactory.

A man can be a Son, Husband and Father as an individual. But this would not explain how only the Father knows the day and the hour of His return. But if they are distinct, how can "My father and I are One" be true?

I must conclude then that I do not understand fully even two of the three parts of the trinity. Perhaps it is beyond mortal ability and something which will be revealed in eternity.

But to the quote from the cross, I see nothing inconsistent with any of the viewpoints. They point to prophesy and the psalms. They also point to God as Father not looking upon sin as Jesus as Son bore OUR sin. This doesn't necessarily indicate a break in the unity if we could grasp the mystery of the Trinity.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

My first venture into such discussions deviates a little from the dialogue. After 51 years, I cannot fully grasp the mystery of the trinity itself. How can it be the same and yet distinct? I have heard many attempts to draw closer to a resolution, but none are completely satisfactory.

A man can be a Son, Husband and Father as an individual. But this would not explain how only the Father knows the day and the hour of His return. But if they are distinct, how can "My father and I are One" be true?

I must conclude then that I do not understand fully even two of the three parts of the trinity. Perhaps it is beyond mortal ability and something which will be revealed in eternity.

But to the quote from the cross, I see nothing inconsistent with any of the viewpoints. They point to prophesy and the psalms. They also point to God as Father not looking upon sin as Jesus as Son bore OUR sin. This doesn't necessarily indicate a break in the unity if we could grasp the mystery of the Trinity.

God is one spirit being or one God, but He also exists as three distinct persons. Think of it like this (although it is a crude pictorial example):

So they are three persons and yet connected as one God. Another crude example would be siamese twins. They can have more than one mind, and or be distinct persons, and yet they are one being. While again these are crude examples, and I am not claiming to know all about God, I have found this is the best way to understand the Trinity or Godhead.

 

[MarshallBryant]

As I said, I have heard many attempts to explain this, but all fail at some point. I am left with Faith in GOD as my anchor and not my own understanding. I acknowledge that he has made a way and my understanding is not required to follow his path.

Don't get me wrong. I wish to understand as much as I can, but understanding his mysteries is not essential.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

As I said, I have heard many attempts to explain this, but all fail at some point. I am left with Faith in GOD as my anchor and not my own understanding. I acknowledge that he has made a way and my understanding is not required to follow his path.

Don't get me wrong. I wish to understand as much as I can, but understanding his mysteries is not essential.

Some folks have problems with analogies like father and son. However, these kinds of analogies are not meant to be taken to the exhaustive extreme when comparing it to fathers and sons who are flesh and blood. For we obviously do not think Jesus is literally a door with actual hinges because He is called the door. But the two crude analogies I have provided on the Trinity have helped me to accept that God is one and yet three. For me: This is not a problem or contradiction. I perfectly understand and accept it and it makes sense.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

As I said, I have heard many attempts to explain this, but all fail at some point. I am left with Faith in GOD as my anchor and not my own understanding. I acknowledge that he has made a way and my understanding is not required to follow his path.

Don't get me wrong. I wish to understand as much as I can, but understanding his mysteries is not essential.

We are made in the image of God. So if God is three in one that means we are three in one in some way, too.

“And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (1 Thessalonians 5:23).

We are one being or person and yet.... we have three things that are a part of us. We have a soul, a spirit body, and a physical body. Each of these things in a way can have a mind of their own (Whereby the soul is the seat or source of our primary mind, will, and emotions).