Luminous
non-existential luminary
No silly! he was quoting Psalms!
wait wait jk
he was tricking Satan
no wait wait...whatever reason I can come up with to justify it next.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Question on the death of Jesus
- Thread starter esmith
- Start date
No silly! he was quoting Psalms!
wait wait jk
he was tricking Satan
no wait wait...whatever reason I can come up with to justify it next.
filthy tugboat
Active Member
It would appear that the definition of 'fully' is being misused here. Unfortunately as has been pointed out, it is less likely that this was an emotional outcry and more likely a reference to Psalm 22.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
I don't know that this is "unfortunate." Jesus - being fully human and fully divine - said many things which layer those two attibutes of his being. I see no contradiction in saying that this statement reflects BOTH points - that as a human, he felt forsaken, and as the Incarnate Word, he was referring to the Psalms.
The layered meanings of so many biblical stories are always fascinating to me.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
If I say to my daughter, "Yesterday, my husband and I went shopping and bought a coffee maker," and then I tell my son, "Yesterday my husband and I went shopping and bought a Glock handgun," those two statements are not contradictory, misleading, or untrue. We did both. But in the two conversations, I am tailoring my conversation to a particular audience and making specific points to each one - not giving a full account of the day to either one.
Say that you go to a training seminar as a manager and you bring along your office manager, and one part of the seminar focuses on bookkeeping and the other focuses on sales. When you get back to your office, you will pass on the training to each specific person on the team - you won't train your salespeople in bookkeeping, and you won't train your bookkeepers on sales techniques. That doesn't mean that you didn't attend BOTH portions, or that either portion is more or less important.
Your office manager's account of the seminar will share some commonalities with yours, but since she went to some other breakout sessions, her account of the seminar will also have differences. But both accounts are correct.
At the final assembly, you may remember certain things the speaker said, while she may remember other things. But the speaker said all those things. Neither of you are wrong - you just focused on what was most important to you.
Say that you go to a training seminar as a manager and you bring along your office manager, and one part of the seminar focuses on bookkeeping and the other focuses on sales. When you get back to your office, you will pass on the training to each specific person on the team - you won't train your salespeople in bookkeeping, and you won't train your bookkeepers on sales techniques. That doesn't mean that you didn't attend BOTH portions, or that either portion is more or less important.
Your office manager's account of the seminar will share some commonalities with yours, but since she went to some other breakout sessions, her account of the seminar will also have differences. But both accounts are correct.
At the final assembly, you may remember certain things the speaker said, while she may remember other things. But the speaker said all those things. Neither of you are wrong - you just focused on what was most important to you.
esmith
Veteran Member
Question for those who think he is referencing Psalm 22.
In Psalm 22 the complaint is that the God has not rescued one who suffers even though he has been faithful.
If this is what you think, then why would Jesus even have gone to Jerusalem in the first place. He supposedly knew that he was going to be executed, one would assume he knew the pain he would be suffering(at least he supposedly said he did). Then when it happens, he realizes that God is not going to rescue him.
God gave him and us free will; it was his choice to go to Jerusalem and commit the acts that got him executed, it was not God forcing him to go; it was his own free will. Why then should he be begging God to rescue him, as the individual in Psalm 22 is.
You can not see the trees because of the forest; and in this case the forest is blind faith.
In Psalm 22 the complaint is that the God has not rescued one who suffers even though he has been faithful.
If this is what you think, then why would Jesus even have gone to Jerusalem in the first place. He supposedly knew that he was going to be executed, one would assume he knew the pain he would be suffering(at least he supposedly said he did). Then when it happens, he realizes that God is not going to rescue him.
God gave him and us free will; it was his choice to go to Jerusalem and commit the acts that got him executed, it was not God forcing him to go; it was his own free will. Why then should he be begging God to rescue him, as the individual in Psalm 22 is.
You can not see the trees because of the forest; and in this case the forest is blind faith.
James Humphreys
Member
Jesus was somehow in the position to redeem the mistakes of Adam. Because Adam had forsaken and turned away from God, to restore that God had to turn away from Jesus while he hung on the cross. Jesus could not feel the presence of God for the first time. But he had to maintain absolute faith even in that situation of abandonment to restore Adam's sin and become the life-giving Adam.
But there are other problems with the Gospel accounts. It's not just that one story omits details found in another; it's that they actually contradict each other. If you tell one person "yesterday, I bought a coffee maker and then a Glock", and another "yesterday, I bought a Glock and then a coffee maker", and a third "yesterday, I bought one Glock and one coffee maker", there's an error in there somewhere. They can't all be true at the same time.
If you wanted a proper analogy to the Gospels, I think the situation would have to be like this:
- you (Mark) didn't attend the session yourself decades earlier, but word of mouth tells you that it was an important session, so you get your business group to make a summary of the proceedings based on what they can piece together of it.
- meanwhile, some other managers (Luke and Matthew, who didn't attend either) get wind of what you're doing, look over your summary, and decide to expand on it. They get their teams to put together their own summaries based partly on yours and partly on other sources they dig up.
- while all this is going on, another manager (John) does a similar exercise, but his team works on their own and comes up with something that has some similarities to the work of the three groups, but is still substantially different from the others in a lot of ways.
So witnesses are always reliable? Some differences between accounts can't be chalked up to different (but accurate) perspectives.
My interpretation, and it may be wrong, is that Jesus' message is meant for those watching: they were the ones feeling forsaken, so he reminds them of the Psalm that tells then that even when a person feels forsaken, God is still with them.
Basically, in context, I see it as his way of saying to them "don't worry - things will be okay" as an allusion to the Resurrection to come a few days later.
Plato
Member
Hello Everyone,
Everyone should actually read Psalm 22. Traditionally Christianity has believed (and for good reason) Jesus was reciting this prayer at the time. It's 'NOT' at all about being forsaken by God! It's 1 1/2 pages long. If you read the whole thing it's a prayer of praise to God and prayer that everyone will know what is happening to the person praying and know God...'to the ends of the earth', and to people 'yet to be born'. The prayer is 'POSITIVE' but you need to read the whole thing. It also uncanningly seems to describe a man being crucified and Jesus' exact role, although it was written 1000 years before. Jesus just gets cut off after reciting the 1st 2 lines of the 1 1/2 page prayer, but any Jew listening at the time would probably recognize it as Psalm 22 and know what Jesus meant.
Everyone should actually read Psalm 22. Traditionally Christianity has believed (and for good reason) Jesus was reciting this prayer at the time. It's 'NOT' at all about being forsaken by God! It's 1 1/2 pages long. If you read the whole thing it's a prayer of praise to God and prayer that everyone will know what is happening to the person praying and know God...'to the ends of the earth', and to people 'yet to be born'. The prayer is 'POSITIVE' but you need to read the whole thing. It also uncanningly seems to describe a man being crucified and Jesus' exact role, although it was written 1000 years before. Jesus just gets cut off after reciting the 1st 2 lines of the 1 1/2 page prayer, but any Jew listening at the time would probably recognize it as Psalm 22 and know what Jesus meant.
Plato
Member
So, I'd totally disgree that Jesus was actually asking why God had forsaken him....because...
"My God, My God, why have you forsaken me..." is just the well known begining of the 22nd Psalm of David, known to the Jews and which Jesus was starting to recite.
So, some of the rest of Psalm 22 that Jesus seemed to be reciting when he died....
To God...
Yet you are enthroned in the holy place O glory of Israel! In you our fathers trusted, and you delivered them. To you they cried and they escaped, in you they trusted, and they were not put to shame.
Yet now I've been made like a worm, not a man, the scorn of men, despised by the people, they scoff at me, and mock me, they say..'He relied on the Lord, let him deliver him, let him rescue him if he loves him'.
**Remember this is a Psalm of David written 1000 years before the time of Jesus**.
But, Father...You have been my guide since I was first formed, my security at my mother's breast, to you I was committed at birth, in my mother's womb you were my God.
Be not far from me now for I am in distress, Be near because I have no one to help me.
Many bullies (strong bulls) encircle me.
My body is like water poured out, all my bones are racked. My heart has become like wax.... My throat is dried up like baked clay....To the dust of death you have brought me down.
Evil doers, a pack of dogs surround me, they have pierced hands and pierced my feet...They look on and gloat.
They divide my clothes and cast lots for them.
Lord be not far from me, hasten to my aid and save my soul.
I proclaim your name to my brethern, in the midst of the assembly I will praise you.
All who respect the Lord praise Him, for he has not spurned nor disdained me, a wretched man in his misery, he does not turn his face from me, but when I cried out, heard me!
So, by this gift I utter praise in the vast assembly. I will fullfill my vows..The lowly shall eat their fill...May your hearts be ever merry...
All the ends of the earth shall now remember and turn to the Lord. All nations shall bow before him. For his dominion is to rule all nations.
To him alone all who sleep in the earth, all the dead shall bow.
And my soul shall live...
Let the coming generations be told, that they may proclaim the Lord to people yet unborn....
So, even though it was written 1000 years before Jesus, it's actually seems to be about a crucified man, and exactly what's happening to Jesus right then, which is why he mentions it, and starts reciting it, so people will know. God just doesn't make him recite the whole thing because it's already been written forever.
"My God, My God, why have you forsaken me..." is just the well known begining of the 22nd Psalm of David, known to the Jews and which Jesus was starting to recite.
So, some of the rest of Psalm 22 that Jesus seemed to be reciting when he died....
To God...
Yet you are enthroned in the holy place O glory of Israel! In you our fathers trusted, and you delivered them. To you they cried and they escaped, in you they trusted, and they were not put to shame.
Yet now I've been made like a worm, not a man, the scorn of men, despised by the people, they scoff at me, and mock me, they say..'He relied on the Lord, let him deliver him, let him rescue him if he loves him'.
**Remember this is a Psalm of David written 1000 years before the time of Jesus**.
But, Father...You have been my guide since I was first formed, my security at my mother's breast, to you I was committed at birth, in my mother's womb you were my God.
Be not far from me now for I am in distress, Be near because I have no one to help me.
Many bullies (strong bulls) encircle me.
My body is like water poured out, all my bones are racked. My heart has become like wax.... My throat is dried up like baked clay....To the dust of death you have brought me down.
Evil doers, a pack of dogs surround me, they have pierced hands and pierced my feet...They look on and gloat.
They divide my clothes and cast lots for them.
Lord be not far from me, hasten to my aid and save my soul.
I proclaim your name to my brethern, in the midst of the assembly I will praise you.
All who respect the Lord praise Him, for he has not spurned nor disdained me, a wretched man in his misery, he does not turn his face from me, but when I cried out, heard me!
So, by this gift I utter praise in the vast assembly. I will fullfill my vows..The lowly shall eat their fill...May your hearts be ever merry...
All the ends of the earth shall now remember and turn to the Lord. All nations shall bow before him. For his dominion is to rule all nations.
To him alone all who sleep in the earth, all the dead shall bow.
And my soul shall live...
Let the coming generations be told, that they may proclaim the Lord to people yet unborn....
So, even though it was written 1000 years before Jesus, it's actually seems to be about a crucified man, and exactly what's happening to Jesus right then, which is why he mentions it, and starts reciting it, so people will know. God just doesn't make him recite the whole thing because it's already been written forever.
Last edited:
esmith
Veteran Member
It seems that you and the NRSV Bible are in disagreement here. This bible makes no reference in its interpretation to Jesus. According to the NRSV it is a "Plea to be delivered from relentless enemies", "The palmist attempts to motivate God to rescue him by promising that he will then give thanks among humans, in the great congregation, likely the Temple in Jerusalem".
Where do see the "uncanny" description of a man being crucified.
It continue to amaze me how Christians "attempt" to read references to Jesus in the Hebrew Bible. Is it because you want or need to have your faith vindicated by writings in the Hebrew Bible? Can not your beliefs, as written in the New Testament, stand by themselves?
Last edited:
filthy tugboat
Active Member
It still looks like the word 'fully' is being used incorrectly here. Without an explanation of this, the rest of your post can be disregarded as unsubstantiated assertion.
Plato
Member
I'm glad we're talking about Psalm 22 on this, but I'd totally disagree the Psalm is a 'complaint'. This is the misconception that keeps coming up through history, that Jesus was 'complaining' to God on the cross while reciting this Psalm, but the 32 line Psalm does not read as a complaint.
It's a request for closeness with God (lines 20-22), an affirmation of loyalty to God despite suffering (lines 23-27), an urging of all nations to be loyal to God using this sufferer as an example (lines 28-32). In (lines 7-19) the suffering person making the prayer gives the symptoms of his suffering.
The only part of the whole thing that sounds like a complaint are (lines 2-3) at the begining, but the meaning of these is made clear by the other 30 lines. Why do people try to define the other 30 lines by these 2, instead of defining these 2 by the 30? Unfortunately, it's often because by taking these 1st 2 of 32 lines out of context they can 'diss' Jesus by making it look like he was complaining and had no faith in God while he was on the cross.
Check the 32 line Psalm out, how much of it is a 'complaint' except lines 2-3? If Jesus was reciting the 22nd Psalm the 'whole' thing must be considered not just 2 lines.
esmith
Veteran Member
All of the following interpretations are taken directly from the "Fully Revised Fourth Edition of The New Oxford Annotated Bible New Standard Versions With the Apocrypha" . This is a "study bible"
The following is my comment, not taken from the NSRV.
Again I ask why must those of the Christian faith attempt to use the Hebrew Bible to validate their beliefs. Will not the New Testament stand by itself.
Verses 1-21 The complaint is that the LORD, the patron of Israel's ancestors (vv 3-5) has not rescued one who suffers even though he has been faithful (vv.9-11)
The dehumanized psalmist is mocked by his enemies. The extensive and diverse metaphors for the supplicant's trouble express the great extent of this trouble. Enemies stalk the psalmist like wild beasts. The subhuman bestial world is contrasted with the human worshipers in the Temple. The psalmist attempts to motivate God to rescue him by promising that he will then give thanks among humans, in the great congregation (v25) Likely the Temple in Jerusalem.
The following is my comment, not taken from the NSRV.
Again I ask why must those of the Christian faith attempt to use the Hebrew Bible to validate their beliefs. Will not the New Testament stand by itself.
Plato
Member
Excuse my ignorance but what does NRSV stand for? I'd say there's like 1000 Bible interpretations in print, some are right some are wrong.
As to the 'Hebrew Bible' there's no such thing. It's not like there is 2 Bibles, there's just 1 Bible in the Old and New Testaments. Christians refer to the Old Testament because Jesus was a Jew, all the apostles were Jews, as were all the 1st Christians. Christians regard Jesus as the Jewish Messiah and as the fullfillment of those very same Old Testament scriptures, so of course the Old Testament is very relevent to Christians. Christians claim the whole Bible through Jesus as fullfiller of past scripture and because Christians believe themselves the religious and spiritual heirs of the Jews.
Why do I say the sufferer in Psalm 22 clearly sounds like he is being crucified?
Because his suffering isn't like anyone elses in the Old Testament. It's completely physical, very specific and he says...his hands and feet are pierced! (line 17).
Take a look at what the sufferer in the Psalm describes........
Line 15...'I am like water poured out, all my bones are racked. My heart has become like wax melting in my bosom.'
Line 16...'My throat is dried up like baked clay, my tounge cleaves to my jaws, to the dust of death you have brought me down.'
Line 17...'Many dogs a pack of evil doers surround me, they have pierced my hands and my feet.'
Line 18...'I can count all my bones, they look on and gloat.'
Line...'They divide my garments among them, and for my clothes cast lots.'
So, from the Psalm, we have a guy surrounded by evil doers who have pierced his hands and feet while they look on and gloat. He feels life being poured from his body, his heart failing in his chest. All his bones have been stretched (racked), he has pain in (counts) every bone. He's so thirsty his tounge is swollen to his mouth, he's about to die, and as all this is going on the evil doers are right there 'looking on' and taking his clothes.
Er...This doesn't sound like a crucifixion to you? What else could it be? If this Psalm has nothing to do with Jesus and a sufferer on a cross and is just about an unknown Psalmist in the time of David, what is he decribing exactly? Why are his hands and feet pierced? Why is he going through this torture while surrounded and others look on?
To mainline Christians Psalm 22 has always sounded just like Jesus's crucifixion as described in the Gospels, which is why they believe Jesus was reciting it while he was being crucified starting with those 1st 2 lines.
Luminous
non-existential luminary
its pretty simple. As a fully devine beign, Jesus can exist within the paradox of being both fully devine and fully human.
esmith
Veteran Member
To answer your first question NSRV is the New Standard Revised Version. It is the most up-to-date version of the bible. It takes data from the Dead Sea Scrolls text of Isaiah and Habakkuk, subsequent acquisitions from the same area brought to light many other early copies of all the books of the Hebrew Scriptures (except Ester), thought most of these copies are fragmentary. During the same period early Greek manuscript copies of books of the New Testament also became available.
As to your statement that there is no such thing as the Hebrew Bible. I would think that those of the Jewish faith would disagree with you. The Hebrew Bible is actually called the Tanakh which consist of the Torah, Nevi'im, and the Kethuvim. The Christians call these books the Old Testament. It appears from your comment about Christians are the heirs to the Jewish faith that it would be of no further value to discuss Psalms 22. You are convinced that the Tanakh/Old Testament is the validation of Jesus and any further comment on my part, even using a study bible consisting of both Old and New Testaments that does not support your beliefs is a total wast of my time.
No, they can't. Not for the form of Christianity that exists today, IMO.
It all builds on ideas in the Old Testament. It's a re-interpretation of Judaism; because of this, it's inexorably linked to Judaism.
Also, the links between the New and Old Testament may very well be real, and not just figments of overactive imaginations of modern Christians... though personally, I would be inclined to interpret any link in the opposite direction: with the New Testament authors deriving inspiration from the Jewish scriptures and expressing this in their own writings. Re-interpretation in hindsight, not prophecy.