"My God! My God! Why Have You Forsaken Me!"

[Windwalker]

Its message and meaning is about that one individual, Jesus, before about any of us.

Why? Would should anyone care, if it wasn't about themselves first? It's the described attributes that speaks to something that already exists in the individual that triggers a response from them to what is being symbolized or represented in something or someone else. In all cases, it's not about the object of faith, but the faith of the individual themselves. It's not about Jesus. It's about one's own self. But people confuse this, thinking it exists outside themselves where they need to find it, to be given it from outside themselves. They think it's about Jesus, when it's really about themselves. How did Jesus put it to that one woman, "Your faith has made you whole." It was hers all along.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Why? Would should anyone care, if it wasn't about themselves first? It's the described attributes that speaks to something that already exists in the individual that triggers a response from them to what is being symbolized or represented in something or someone else. In all cases, it's not about the object of faith, but the faith of the individual themselves. It's not about Jesus. It's about one's own self. But people confuse this, thinking it exists outside themselves where they need to find it, to be given it from outside themselves. They think it's about Jesus, when it's really about themselves. How did Jesus put it to that one woman, "Your faith has made you whole." It was hers all along.

Why? I wouldn't know; maybe it's the difference between Calvinism and free-will dogma, or between Catholicism and Protestantism. All I 'feel' sure about, is, that 'it', is not inherent, not inbred, not natural, not 'attribute', not 'something that already exists in the individual', but pure, Divine, supernatural, GRACE--God's Love in and through and FOR THE SAKE OF GOD'S SON, HIS ANOINTED, Jesus, our Saviour at last as well as at first, and He alone and ALL deserving: Χριστὸς τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν πληρουμένου Θεοῦ, "Christ The ALL in all fulfilling FULLNESS OF GOD", for "GOD GAVE HIM The Head OVER ALL to the Church that is His Body", αὐτὸν ἔδωκεν κεφαλὴν ὑπὲρ πάντα τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ ἥτις ἐστὶν τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ, Ephesians 1:23!

 

[Windwalker]

Why? I wouldn't know; maybe it's the difference between Calvinism and free-will dogma, or between Catholicism and Protestantism. All I 'feel' sure about, is, that 'it', is not inherent, not inbred, not natural, not 'attribute' not 'something that already exists in the individual', but pure, Divine, supernatural, GRACE--God's Love in and through and FOR THE SAKE OF GOD'S SON, HIS ANOINTED, Jesus, our Saviour at last as well as at first, and He alone and ALL deserving: Χριστὸς τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν πληρουμένου Θεοῦ, "Christ The ALL in all fulfilling FULLNESS OF GOD!" Ephesians 1:23!

It's pretty clear you didn't follow any of what I said. This is not a response to me.

 

[Ponder This]

It is told that the crucifixion of Jesus somehow enacted the absolution of sin. This is a basic teaching throughout much of Christian theology.

I get that that's what a lot of people preach. I'm just saying the obvious: God was already in the business of accepting repentance from the people and forgiving them before Jesus came along. Now maybe the Christian theologists are right and Jesus was crucified as an absolution of sin, but then the people saying that have to get a bit more specific and accurate. What do they say about the sins that were forgiven before Jesus was crucified? Do they deny that those sins were forgiven?

If "the people" were those appeased by the act of sacrificing Jesus, then are "the people" also those who somehow absolved themselves of sin? Does THAT make sense? Who was it who literally defined what sin was? Wasn't that God? So, if God is the arbiter of sin, and God is the one you have to answer to when you have sinned, then it can only be God who can absolve you of your sin, right? Who else has the power to do so? Are you saying that the crucifixion of Jesus has the power to absolve sin outside the involvement of God? Is the human sacrifice of a pure soul some magical thing that absolves sin even if God is not involved?

Who was calling for the crucifixion of Jesus? Did God speak from the Heavens and say, "I command you to crucify my son. I require this of you so that you may be forgiven"? No. He didn't. The ones calling for crucifixion were the people who hated Jesus!

I don't feel your answers so far have been answers so much as dodges. Ducking the possibility that God may have actually required a human sacrifice to be appeased over his angst that humans continually engage in "sin". That's certainly more what the story suggests. He is the judge and doles out the punishment for offenses of "sin". Therefore, if there is no longer going to be the same punishment for sins, then it is God whose judgment needs swayed on the matter. And so, the sacrifice of Jesus SOMEHOW altered the perception of God on the matter of sin. And I am asking: what, specifically, was it about the crucifixion that changed God?

That God required human sacrifice to appease His wrath because of our sins is one possibility, but I find it to be a weak excuse. The Aztecs did human sacrifice to appease gods as well. Sacrifices to appease the gods are a common motif in ancient times. People would sacrifice their children to satisfy the gods. But is the crucifixion of Christ really just typical of the sorts of sacrifices people would make to appease gods? Are we to infer from the crucifixion of Christ that God was pleased that the people denied Christ and crucified him? Is that the message Christians get when they read the Gospel?

Because that's not the message I get when I read the Gospel. The message I get is that God was not pleased that people denied Christ and crucified him, but that God was pleased with Jesus, who endured the injustice of the crucifixion for the sake of His people (that through him, they may be saved - not that through him, people will be free to sin).

 

[David T]

BSM1 said: ↑
He was quoting the start of the 22nd Psalms. As it was explained to me by a Rabbi it was the custom of the Hebrews to quote the start of the a Psalm in lieu of reciting the entire chapter.



So true!
But believe the literal Written Word for literal... Never!

Mat 19:1; 27-30
27 Τότε ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Πέτρος εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ἰδοὺ ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν πάντα
Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all,
29 καὶ πᾶς ὅστις ἀφῆκεν οἰκίας ἢ ἀδελφοὺς ἢ ἀδελφὰς ἢ πατέρα
every one that hath forsaken houses or brethren or sisters or father,

Mark 15:34,35 [Eks12:3:5 Mk7:32-35]
Ὁ Θεός μου ὁ Θεός μου, εἰς τί ἐγκατέλιπές με;
My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
Mat 27:46,47
Θεέ μου θεέ μου, ἵνα τί με ἐγκατέλιπες;
My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

Luke 23:44,45
τοῦ ἡλίου ἐκλιπόντος, ἐσχίσθη δὲ τὸ καταπέτασμα τοῦ ναοῦ μέσον.
And the sun was darkened and the veil of the temple was rent in the middle.
Mat 27:51a
Καὶ ἰδοὺ τὸ καταπέτασμα τοῦ ναοῦ ἐσχίσθη ἀπ’ ἄνωθεν ἕως κάτω εἰς δύο,
And behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom
Mark 15:38
Καὶ τὸ καταπέτασμα τοῦ ναοῦ ἐσχίσθη εἰς δύο ἀπ’ ἄνωθεν ἕως κάτω.
And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.

In the Gospels ἀφίμι is the word in context for ‘to forsake’; while the word ἐγκατέλιπες from ἐγκαταλείπω is the word in context for “choose / sanctify / separate / hide / veil”, in the Most Holy Place on the Altar of Christ’s Passover of Yahweh Suffering in Full Fellowship of Father, Son, and, Holy Spirit.

Conclusion:
KJV with 'forsaken' for ἐγκατέλιπες is wrong!

That's implied in my statement. What's interesting and I have to reflect a bit is, if we walk in nature we can have a mechanical narrative about a tree, we can have a mythological narrative as well. In christianity as example, we can have the original narrative, and then this overlay that develops over time. In a mechanical narrative we have the experience to observe, we kill the mythology narrative and look at the tree as mechanical and over time create a layered narrative as well. In modernity we would end up with layered narrative conflicting with layered narrative.that whole nonsense I think eventually collapses.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

It's pretty clear you didn't follow any of what I said. This is not a response to me.

So be it then.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

He cleansed the Temple thinking God would retake the throne. But God never intervenes.

What kills me about that is that Jesus is acting like money in the Temple is sacrilege, but God wasn't even for the stupid thing in the first place. It was always about "religious tourism". It was a money-maker. That's why many temples around the globe say you have to visit them at least once in your life. They want income.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

What kills me about that is that Jesus is acting like money in the Temple is sacrilege, but God wasn't even for the stupid thing in the first place. It was always about "religious tourism". It was a money-maker. That's why many temples around the globe say you have to visit them at least once in your life. They want income.

The point is that Judaism, like all revealed religions, believes in a personal, interactive God. Jesus had faith in that God as he'd been taught, and he exhibited tremendous faith by convincing enough followers to help him take the Temple, which he did for a day, and cleanse it. He had to have told his followers that God would assume the throne then. But God, it it exists, didn't, so many of his followers, including Judas and Peter, turned on him immediately--which explains a helluva lot about the narrative. Once you realize God is laissez-faire at the very least, everything starts falling into place.

But most people have been indoctrinated into revealed religion since childhood, so when some of them actually do rebel, they only castigate the Establishment religions, never considering what else might be in play that would actually makes sense. So far I've only found one, besides atheism, and that's deism.

 

[tayla]

What did Jesus mean when he cried out, "My God! My God! Why have you forsaken me"?

Jesus was Jewish and he was reciting a Jewish prayer, Psalm 22. It speaks of prophecies of the Messiah which Jesus was fulfilling as he was hanging on the cross. At least that's what the gospel writer wanted his readers to think. It seems they found all kinds of Old Testament passages and reinterpreted them to support Christianity for their Jewish converts.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Jesus was Jewish and he was reciting a Jewish prayer, Psalm 22. It speaks of prophecies of the Messiah which Jesus was fulfilling as he was hanging on the cross. At least that's what the gospel writer wanted his readers to think. It seems they found all kinds of Old Testament passages and reinterpreted them to support Christianity for their Jewish converts.

Psalm 22 says, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from saving me, so far from my cries of anguish?"

I fail to see how that helps....at all. That makes Jesus not only wondering why he was abandoned, but why God continues to ignore him. I know, I know, God works in mysterious ways. But there is no mystery, God has not, does not, will not intervene, ever. This passage is one of the most honest in the Bible. We know it's true because it reveals that God, if It exists, is not "revealed".

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Jesus was Jewish and he was reciting a Jewish prayer, Psalm 22. It speaks of prophecies of the Messiah which Jesus was fulfilling as he was hanging on the cross. At least that's what the gospel writer wanted his readers to think. It seems they found all kinds of Old Testament passages and reinterpreted them to support Christianity for their Jewish converts.

Jesus was not Jewish. He is the Son of Man the Son of God, Lord and God.
He 'recited' not, but is the Author and Finisher of Faith who inspired Psalms and Prophesy.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

If you believe with your heart and confess with your mouth you will be saved. If you disbelieve with your heart and question or deny with your mouth, you will not only be, but already are LOST.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Jesus was not Jewish. He is the Son of Man the Son of God, Lord and God.
He 'recited' not, but is the Author and Finisher of Faith who inspired Psalms and Prophesy.

How then did Jesus have a Jewish brother/priest, James, in the Temple. or a his cousin, John the Baptist's father was also a priest there? And why then did he go to Jerusalem to eat the Passover? And oh yeah, why was he circumcised?

So Jesus sent two of them into Jerusalem with these instructions: "As you go into the city, a man carrying a pitcher of water will meet you. Follow him.
"At the house he enters, say to the owner, 'The Teacher asks: Where is the guest room where I can eat the Passover meal with my disciples?' "

Mark 14:13-14

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

How then did Jesus have a Jewish brother/priest, James, in the Temple. or a his cousin, John the Baptist's father was also a priest there? And why then did he go to Jerusalem to eat the Passover? And oh yeah, why was he circumcised?

How then? Was James the brother of a 'Jewish person / priest'-- who rose from the dead? Or was John the nephew of a mortal sinner whose body's dust today lies mingled somewhere in concrete walls along the West Bank?

And why then did Jesus 'go to Jerusalem to eat the Passover', viz., TO SUFFER the Passover of Yahweh?
Oh, and yeah, Why was Jesus, 'a Jewish person', circumcised? So that you by the circumcision of 'a Jewish person', are "BAPTISED IN HIS DEATH"? So that you "together with and in and through" 'a Jewish person', are "CO-RAISED" with him from the dead? Or "together with and in and through CHRIST" the Anointed of GOD? Was Jesus Christ 'a Jewish person', or the Son of GOD, the Christ of God, God the Christ, God in Christ, God the Son, "ALL IN ALL THE FULLNESS OF GOD"?

Unless from the SCRIPTURES, you can show... Jesus was 'a Jewish person'.

The painful Truth to some...

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Was James the brother of a 'Jewish person / priest'-- who rose from the dead?

Don't see that as a problem. I can think of a few medical reasons Jesus "rose from the dead".

Or was John the nephew of a mortal sinner whose body's dust today lies mingled somewhere in concrete walls along the West Bank?

Jesus said people who call others fools will burn in hell. Jesus called people fools. It might explain what's taking so long for him to come back.

Was Jesus Christ 'a Jewish person', or the Son of GOD

"Son of God" was an expression. It was Hellenists who took it too literally.

Unless from the SCRIPTURES, you can show... Jesus was 'a Jewish person'.

He didn't come for you. He came for Jews. He said so himself.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

How then? Was James the brother of a 'Jewish person / priest'-- who rose from the dead? Or was John the nephew of a mortal sinner whose body's dust today lies mingled somewhere in concrete walls along the West Bank?

And why then did Jesus 'go to Jerusalem to eat the Passover', viz., TO SUFFER the Passover of Yahweh?
Oh, and yeah, Why was Jesus, 'a Jewish person', circumcised? So that you by the circumcision of 'a Jewish person', are "BAPTISED IN HIS DEATH"? So that you "together with and in and through" 'a Jewish person', are "CO-RAISED" with him from the dead? Or "together with and in and through CHRIST" the Anointed of GOD? Was Jesus Christ 'a Jewish person', or the Son of GOD, the Christ of God, God the Christ, God in Christ, God the Son, "ALL IN ALL THE FULLNESS OF GOD"?

Unless from the SCRIPTURES, you can show... Jesus was 'a Jewish person'.

I just did. But then I'm not really sure what you just wrote.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

He didn't come for you. He came for Jews. He said so himself.

Then lucky me. I believe in Jesus.

 

[Muffled]

What did Jesus mean when he cried out, "My God! My God! Why have you forsaken me"? Did he truly feel forsaken? If so, why? Had God really forsaken him, or was that just his perception?

I believe it is a quote:
Ps 22:1 «For the Chief Musician; set to Aijeleth hash-Shahar. A Psalm of David.» My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my groaning?
I believe He was telling the Pharisees that they were fulfilling prophecy and the rest of the Psalm makes that clear.

I believe not.

I believe it was not His perception because He knew exactly what He was doing.

John 3: 4 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up;
15 that whosoever believeth may in him have eternal life.

 

[Muffled]

Yes, Jehovah had to remove His spirit, i.e., His power, from Jesus in order for Jesus to die, and he had never experienced that feeling before, being without God's power in him. Even in his pre-human existence up in heaven (John 17:5), Jesus had never been without his Father's sipirit operating on him.

I believe you are in error on two counts 1. A spirit is not just a power and Jesus having the Spirit of God meant He had all the aspects of God. 2. God the Father did not take God the son's Spirit out of Him but The Spirit of God in Jesus departed from the body after he oouted the verse in Pslams.

I believe without the Spirit of God in Him, He would no longer be Jesus but only the body of Jesus.

I believe a pre-human existence of Jesus is simply God. When He departed He was simply God again.

 

[Muffled]

To me Jesus was both God and Man in one. In order to lift humanity, he had to experience life as a man would while simultaneously experiencing himself as God. By saying what he did, he was speaking as a man who was being unjustly crucified.

I believe their is some credibility to that. Certainly the physical mind of Jesus would feel abandoned even if the Spirit of God within did not.