Did the sacrifice of Christ appease God's wrath on mankind?

..

The real question is, which denomination is most likely to vote no?

zoidar said:

I don't know. Catholics, Orthodox?

Click to expand...

Christian?

zoidar said:

?

Click to expand...

That is a minimal post.

My question implies that it is a Christian view to vote "no" rather than a specifically Catholic or Orthodox view. The idea is that God is not angry with people, he loves them, and redemption is about rescue of a loved one rather than appeasing the wrath of an angry God. Only a diminishing number of Christians see themselves and the world as "Sinners in the hands of an angry God".

zoidar said:

Maybe an easy question, still...

Click to expand...

Maybe clarify - since according to all Scripture (God's Word) most of mankind gets burned to a crisp in the lake of fire ....
is that what you mean by wrath ?

spiritualchristian7 said:

The real question is, which denomination is most likely to vote no?

Click to expand...

Why would that matter at all ?

My opinion: yes and no. Yes, Jesus took our punishment. No, it's not cosmic child abuse, as in, a Dad killing his son. The trinity is three in one. So, IMO, the plan for our redemption was formed by all. So it's not the father punishing the son as much as them both taking our punishment on themselves.
Then, you have evil ultimately being defeated on the cross, (Christus victor) the moral influence theory, The Ransom theory, the satisfaction theory, the governmental theory, and the scapegoat theory... And so on. Most have at least some truth in them.

zoidar said:

Last time I heard from a Catholic he said that God's didn't pour his wrath on Jesus.

Click to expand...

I would say the same thing

I believe in the Wrath of God but not the Protestant idea.

zoidar said:

Maybe an easy question, still...

Click to expand...

Yes, still... Because the truly interesting and awesome truth is that God, Himself, was hanging on that cross. Was He appeasing Himself? For our sake He was certainly taking upon Himself the work that we could never accomplish on our own. A very different kind of God, this Hero of ours.

zoidar said:

M.aybe an easy question, still...

Click to expand...

Only because the question is so general.

Jesus's sacrifice only applies if one has accepted it.

So No Jesus does not save.

zoidar said:

I mean the Father turned his face away from Christ when he hang on the cross. The wrath God had for sinful life Jesus took on himself to appease the Father.

Click to expand...

God loved His Son He did not hate him.

"Love God with all your heart" Deut 6:5 so the Father Loved the Son with all His heart... and yet they both agreed to this sacrifice to save mankind. Part of that sacrifice is that the wrath of God against the cancer of sin -- would be poured out on Christ as the sinner's substitute. The debt each person owes in the "fire and brimstone" lake of fire of Rev 20... paid in full at the cross. Yet not applied to the sinner apart from repentance, confession (1 John 1:9) and choosing to walk in perseverance with Christ rather than against Him. 1 John 2:4-6, Romans 2:4-9, Romans 11:22-23

"Why would God hate the moral cancer of sin?" someone might ask.
Answer: "because sin kills the beloved".

God made Adam and Eve as His children "Adam the son of God" for Adam had no other father than God himself. (Much to the chagrin of blind faith evolutionism) - and sin separates God's children from God Isaiah 59:1-2 , gives them a depraved sinful nature... a bent toward evil.

zoidar said:

I mean the Father turned his face away from Christ when he hang on the cross. The wrath God had for sinful life Jesus took on himself to appease the Father.

Click to expand...

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 partly Hebrew and 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 and 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 use “Father” if he was addressing God.

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.

renniks said:

My opinion: yes and no. Yes, Jesus took our punishment. No, it's not cosmic child abuse, as in, a Dad killing his son. The trinity is three in one. So, IMO, the plan for our redemption was formed by all. So it's not the father punishing the son as much as them both taking our punishment on themselves.
Then, you have evil ultimately being defeated on the cross, (Christus victor) the moral influence theory, The Ransom theory, the satisfaction theory, the governmental theory, and the scapegoat theory... And so on. Most have at least some truth in them.

Click to expand...

All have a lot of unexplained issues to them and combining theory just adds the issues.