God’s Wrath Poured Out on Jesus on the Cross

chevyontheriver · Mar 15, 2021

Nathan@work said:
We do - it is Christ in us.

He suffered death so we would not. Since it is finished, it is now done - we who have Christ will not die but be transformed.

Our bodies, flesh, will die. But that should not concern a Child of God because we know that once we are free of this body we will receive a new incorruptible one. This is why Paul talked about actually wanting to die, but knew it was better for the Philippians(and others) that he remain.

So you are saying that physical death will not separate me from God. But I think you said Jesus was separated from God. So I'm not following. If you are saying that emotionally he felt some separation from God on a human level, fine. But I'm not clear what you really intended.

Guojing · Mar 15, 2021

Dorothy Mae said:
It doesn’t say Jesus took the wrath of God.

Jesus became sin for us at the cross. 2 Corinthians 5:21

How does God deal with sin?

Nathan@work · Mar 15, 2021

chevyontheriver said:
So you are saying that physical death will not separate me from God. But I think you said Jesus was separated from God. So I'm not following. If you are saying that emotionally he felt some separation from God on a human level, fine. But I'm not clear what you really intended.

He was separated. There is the physical, and there is the Spiritual.

Jesus experienced both. It was not just a physical death.

If you have been born from above, you will not die spiritually when your flesh dies.

This is what Jesus secured for when He rose again. Once and for all.

If you still don’t understand what I’m saying feel free to ask a specific question. I don’t do so well with vague ones.

chevyontheriver · Mar 15, 2021

Nathan@work said:
He was separated. There is the physical, and there is the Spiritual.

Jesus experienced both. It was not just a physical death.

If you have been born from above, you will not die spiritually when your flesh dies.

This is what Jesus secured for when He rose again. Once and for all.

If you still don’t understand what I’m saying feel free to ask a specific question. I don’t do so well with vague ones.

So are you saying Jesus died a spiritual death and a physical death, but that we will not die a spiritual death when we die a physical death?

Nathan@work · Mar 15, 2021

chevyontheriver said:
So are you saying Jesus died a spiritual death and a physical death, but that we will not die a spiritual death when we die a physical death?

Correct.

Gregory Thompson · Mar 15, 2021

Dorothy Mae said:
Today’s sermon mentioned God pouring out His wrath on Jesus on the cross. The question I have is where does it say in the Bible that God poured out His wrath on Jesus on the cross?

That Jesus died for sins is not in question. I’m not asking for a theological dissertation on the subject. I’m asking where the scripture says He was wrathful and poured it out on Jesus that day.

Also, if God poured out His wrath on sin that day, why does the Bible say He pours out His wrath on sin (or sinful man) in Revelation?

Thanks for answers. I did a simple search myself and couldn’t find it but that doesn’t mean it isn’t there.

It's a two step theology.

1) The just reward for sin is the wrath of God poured out.
2) Jesus took the punishment in our place.

So for point 1) you might want to look into the wrath of God passages. A lot of hits in the letter to the Romans such as
Romans 2:5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;

For point 2, the propitiation verses in the old translation.
Romans 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
1 John 4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

God pours out His wrath out in Revelation because the time period alluded to in the parables was over.

Luke 13
6 ¶ He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none.
7 Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground?
8 And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it:
9 And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.

Mark 8:24 And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees, walking.

Dorothy Mae · Mar 16, 2021

Guojing said:
Jesus became sin for us at the cross. 2 Corinthians 5:21

How does God deal with sin?

Sorry to answer a ? with a ? but when a parent corrects or even disciplines a child are they always angry? Is it possible to deplore or hate a behavior and not get angry? Aren’t their other emotions available?

Guojing · Mar 16, 2021

Dorothy Mae said:
Sorry to answer a ? with a ? but when a parent corrects or even disciplines a child are they always angry? Is it possible to deplore or hate a behavior and not get angry? Aren’t their other emotions available?

God is angry with sin, and Jesus became sin.

Jesus himself even called him "My God", for the first time, to tell us how God the Father treated his son then.

Dorothy Mae · Mar 16, 2021

Bible Highlighter said:
Well, it's not called adding (i.e. I take this to mean you are saying that “I am adding to God's Word”), but it is called a logical inference based on what other verses say. Some folks do not think horror movies are a sin because the Bible does not condemn them using explicit wording like: “Thou shalt not watch horror movies.” But it is a logical inference that they are condemned based on the light of looking at a bunch of verses that indirectly condemn them. The same can be said of inappropriate content or doing drugs.

See I can see that in reference to man’s behavior and matters of right and wrong. But trying to make a logical inference from a being we admit we do not understand is a mistake.

The word “we” is referring to the believer.
While this would have been the Israelite during that time, I believe it spoke ahead to all believers;
And Jesus says that if anyone does not receive us, they are not receiving Jesus.

“He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.” (Matthew 10:40).

In addition, Isaiah was writing divinely inspired Scripture and I believe He was referring to how God's people would view the sacrifice of Christ. This does not mean that God's people are in error for viewing the Lord Jesus as stricken, and smitten of God (Which is what you are implying).

Not at all.I clearly said people THOUGHT Jesus smitten by God. Some people thought Jesus had a demon. What people think of others doesn’t make it so. Doesn’t make it not do either.

Anyways, your interpretation sounds like a desperate attempt to distance yourself from the truth what this verse is actually saying all because you don't like the idea that God sends forth wrath against sin within the body of Jesus on the cross. For why else would Jesus feel separated from God the Father? The Judgment of God was upon the sins of the people within His body when He took our place.

Read in Genesis how God felt about man’s behavior before the flood. Does it say he was wrathful?

God is angry at the wicked every day.

God is angry with the wicked every day (Psalms 7:11).

Why is he angry at the wicked? Because of their sin (ungodliness) and rebellion against God.

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men (Romans 1:18).

God has more than two emotions. Do you want scripture?

Sins is what hardens a person's heart.

“To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.” (Hebrews 3:13).
“Harden not your hearts, (Hebrews 3:8).

A hardened heart stores up the wrath of God against a person.

“But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath” (Romans 2:5).

Proverbs 6:16-19 says,
These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

A proud look,

a lying tongue,

and hands that shed innocent blood,

An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations,

feet that be swift in running to mischief,

A false witness that speaketh lies,

and he that soweth discord among brethren.

So if God hates these kinds of sins, then it is only natural that Jesus paid the price for these sins on the cross, and God who hates these kinds of sins would naturally hate these kinds of sins of the people that Jesus took upon His own body so as to pay the price for them.

All true but doesn’t address the OP.

I would say that God was not only grieved by the sin of those who perished in the global flood, but He also was angered at sin because that is what we see in other places of the Bible involving man's sin.

You are now adding to the Word accusing God of a wrath it doesn’t say He had at that point in time.

“For they provoked him to anger with their high places, and moved him to jealousy with their graven images.” (Psalms 78:58).

"It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." (Hebrews 10:31).

That was not before the flood.

Nope. Sorry, your denial of the verse does not undo what it says, especially when we look at the context.

I deny no verse. I asked for a verse that say that God poured out his wrath on Jesus. There is none.

23 “They will exclaim, ‘The whole land is devastated by sulfur and salt. It is a wasteland with nothing planted and nothing growing, not even a blade of grass. It is like the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboiim, which the LORD destroyed in his intense anger.’
24 And all the surrounding nations will ask, ‘Why has the LORD done this to this land? Why was he so angry?’
25 And the answer will be, ‘This happened because the people of the land abandoned the covenant that the LORD, the God of their ancestors, made with them when he brought them out of the land of Egypt.
26 Instead, they turned away to serve and worship gods they had not known before, gods that were not from the LORD.
27 That is why the LORD’s anger has burned against this land, bringing down on it every curse recorded in this book.” (Deuteronomy 29:23-27).

God is able to be angry and yet be in perfect control of that anger and or be justified in what He does in anger because God is incapable of making mistakes. God is perfect, holy, and righteous in all He does even when He is angry at sin.

God has more than two emotions.

Dorothy Mae · Mar 16, 2021

Guojing said:
God is angry with sin, and Jesus became sin.

Jesus himself even called him "My God", for the first time, to tell us how God the Father treated his son then.

Don’t you want to rephrase that or are you an opponent of God and you do accuse Him of treating Jesus badly?

I repeat, God has more than two emotional responses to man, anger or happy.

Dorothy Mae · Mar 16, 2021

Michael Collum said:
It's a two step theology.

1) The just reward for sin is the wrath of God poured out.
2) Jesus took the punishment in our place.

So for point 1) you might want to look into the wrath of God passages. A lot of hits in the letter to the Romans such as
Romans 2:5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;

For point 2, the propitiation verses in the old translation.
Romans 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
1 John 4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

God pours out His wrath out in Revelation because the time period alluded to in the parables was over.

Luke 13
6 ¶ He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none.
7 Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground?
8 And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it:
9 And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.

Mark 8:24 And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees, walking.

Have you looked into Gods emotional response to the sin in Noah’s day? Neither of your steps fit.

Dorothy Mae · Mar 16, 2021

My purpose in this thread is as I said, to see if someone does know a verse that says God poured out His anger on Jesus.

In 50 years of following Jesus I haven’t heard that theology except at this church so I was curious..

Dorothy Mae · Mar 16, 2021

Nathan@work said:
Actually, the passages about God's wrath typically all speak about a future one, not one in the past or present.

[1Th 1:10 ESV] and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.

There are a fair number of ones in the past too, dealing of course with the adultery of Israel.

Guojing · Mar 16, 2021

Dorothy Mae said:
Don’t you want to rephrase that or are you an opponent of God and you do accuse Him of treating Jesus badly?

I repeat, God has more than two emotional responses to man, anger or happy.

That is your claim, not mine.

You don't understand the significance of that cry by Jesus at the cross?
'My God, My God, Why Have You Forsaken Me?'

Do you understand the principle of divine exchange?

ViaCrucis · Mar 16, 2021

Guojing said:
How does God deal with sin?

Forgiveness.

-CryptoLutheran

Guojing · Mar 16, 2021

ViaCrucis said:
Forgiveness.

-CryptoLutheran

That came after the wrath was poured on Jesus at the cross.

Dorothy Mae · Mar 16, 2021

Guojing said:
That is your claim, not mine.

Forgive him, Father. He doesn’t know what he is writing.

You don't understand the significance of that cry by Jesus at the cross?
'My God, My God, Why Have You Forsaken Me?'

I understand it better than you do, apparently. I don’t accuse God of evil.

Do you understand the principle of divine exchange?

Likely not. I’m not much into man theories on what God does. I prefer to ask Him directly.

Dorothy Mae · Mar 16, 2021

Guojing said:
That came after the wrath was poured on Jesus at the cross.

There is no scripture that affirms this.... not one. I highly recommend taking ones theology from the Bible itself instead of man theology.

Butterball1 · Mar 16, 2021

Guojing said:
God is angry with sin, and Jesus became sin.

Hebrews 4:15 "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin."

Hebrews 7:26 "For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;"

1 Peter 1:19 "But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:"

1 Peter 2:22 "Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:"

If Jesus became sin, if He became a sinner then that contradicts the above verses completely and totally. If Christ became sin, if He became a sinner, a thief, a muderer, an adulterer then we no longer have the unjust death of an innocent man on a cross but a justifiable death of a guilty man on a cross and Christ's death provides no benefit to anyone.

Presbyterian minister, Albert Barnes, commentary on 2 Corinthians 5:21: (my emp)

To be sin - The words ‹to be‘> are not in the original. Literally, it is, ‹he has made him sin, or a sin-offering‘ ἁμαρτίαν ἐποίησεν hamartian epoiēsen. But what is meant by this? What is the exact idea which the apostle intended to convey?

I answer, it cannot be:

(1)That he was literally sin in the abstract, or sin as such. No one can pretend this. The expression must be, therefore, in some sense, figurative.

Nor,

(2)Can it mean that he was a sinner, for it is said in immediate connection that he “knew no sin,” and it is everywhere said that he was holy, harmless, undefiled.

Nor,

(3)Can it mean that he was, in any proper sense of the word, guilty, for no one is truly guilty who is not personally a transgressor of the Law; and if he was, in any proper sense, guilty, then he deserved to die, and his death could have no more merit than that of any other guilty being; and if he was properly guilty it would make no difference in this respect whether it was by his own fault or by imputation: a guilty being deserves to be punished; and where there is desert of punishment there can be no merit in sufferings.

But all such views as go to make the Holy Redeemer a sinner, or guilty, or deserving of the sufferings which he endured, border on blasphemy, and are abhorrent to the whole strain of the Scriptures. In no form, in no sense possible, is it to be maintained that the Lord Jesus was sinful or guilty. It is a corner stone of the whole system of religion, that in all conceivable senses of the expression he was holy, and pure, and the object of the divine approbation. And every view which fairly leads to the statement that he was in any sense guilty, or which implies that he deserved to die, is “prima facie” a false view, and should be at once abandoned.

(4) If the declaration that he was made “sin” ( ἁμαρτίαν hamartian) does not mean that he was sin itself, or a sinner, or guilty, then it must mean that he was a sin-offering - an offering or a sacrifice for sin; and this is the interpretation which is now generally adopted by expositors; or it must be taken as an abstract for the concrete, and mean that God treated him as if he were a sinner.

Who knew no sin - He was not guilty. He was perfectly holy and pure. This idea is thus expressed by Peter 1 Peter 2:22 (NAS) 22 who committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in His mouth ;

26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens;
">Hebrews 7:26, it is said he was “holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners.” In all respects, and in all conceivable senses, the Lord Jesus was pure and holy. If he had not been, he would not have been qualified to make an atonement.

Butterball1 · Mar 16, 2021

1 Peter 1:24-25
"Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed. For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls." (Peter refers to Isaiah 53:6)

"bare our sins in His body" cannot mean that man's sins were transferred to Christ whereby Christ Himself became a sinner. For 1) sin nor righteousness are not things that are transferred from one person to another, Ezekiel 18:20 and 2) such an idea completely contradicts what Peter says in 1 Peter 1:19 and 1 Peter 2:22 Christ had no sins.

The full phrase is "in His body on the tree" The phrase 'on the tree' shows the action that Christ's body took on the tree, that action being making Himself a sin sacrifice for our sins on the tree. As Barnes pointed out, Christ was a sin sacrifice for our sins or a figure of speech is being used, mytonomy (one thing for another) that God allowed Christ to be treated AS IF He was a sinner though He was not a sinner in any sense.

Matthew quotes Isaiah 53 as Peter:
Matthew 8:14-17
And when Jesus was come into Peter's house, he saw his wife's mother laid, and sick of a fever. And he touched her hand, and the fever left her: and she arose, and ministered unto them. When the even was come, they brought unto him many that were possessed with devils: and he cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses.

Matthew cites 2 miracles performed by Christ and directly ties those miracles to Isaiah 53:4-5. How can "bore" or "borne" mean impute or transfer when in the 2 miracles Christ performed NOTHING was imputed but instead the demons were "cast out" not imputed into Christ, the fever "left" not imputed into Christ.

In Isaiah 53:4 "borne (nasa) our griefs and carried (sabal) our sorrows"

Isaiah 53:11 "He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear (sabal) their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare (nasa) the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors."

The same Hebrews words (nasa, sabal) used about sickness, griefs and sorrows in (v4) are also used for sin/transgression in vs.11-12.

We saw from Matthew the fever and demons were cast out (not imputed). Therefore when Matthew says Christ "bare our sickness" then "bare" does not mean "impute" for the fever and demons were "cast out". These same Hebrew words (nasa, sabal) used about sickness/sorrow are also used about sin/transgression and would carry the same idea that sins/transgressions, just as the fever and demons, are cast out and not imputed.

God’s Wrath Poured Out on Jesus on the Cross

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Always ready :)

Well-Known Member

Always ready :)

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Confessional Lutheran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads