> General Discussions
"of" or "in"?
Kat:
Well I just consider if the main commentaries teach it, then it's a teaching of the 'church.'
Albert Barnes' commentary--
these sufferings were sent upon him as the wrath of God manifested against sin that God inflicted them directly upon him by his own hand, to show his abhorrence of the sins of people for which he was about to die.
Matthew Henry's commentary--
there it pleased the Lord to bruise him, and crush him, that fresh oil might flow to all believers from him, that we might partake of the root and fatness of that good Olive. There he trod the wine-press of his Father's wrath, and trod it alone.
John Gill's commentary--
and fell on his face, and prayed; partly to show his great reverence of God, the sword of whose justice was awaked against him, the terrors of whose law were set in array before him, and whose wrath was pouring down upon him; and partly to signify how much his soul was depressed, how low he was brought, and in what distress and anguish of spirit he was, that he was not able to lift up his head, and look up.
I really don't know what they teach inside the church these days, but the internet has plenty of sites that say it was God's wrath on Jesus, I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT, but here is one that show what they teach.
In the New Testament, the act of propitiation always refers to the work of God and not the sacrifices or gifts offered by man. The reason for this is that man is totally incapable of satisfying God’s justice except by spending eternity in hell. There is no service, sacrifice or gift that man can offer that will appease the holy wrath of God or satisfy His perfect justice. The only satisfaction, or propitiation, that could be acceptable to God and that could reconcile man to Him, had to be made by God. For this reason God the Son, Jesus Christ, came into the world in human flesh to be the perfect sacrifice for sin and make atonement or “propitiation for the sins of the people” (Hebrews 2:17).
Again I do not believe this teaching, I just got it off the internet and I am not trying to stir up things by bringing it up. The church also believe in the trinity and that God the Father is a separate 'person' from the Son, so they would not think He was pouring His wrath out on Himself...
But anyway my point was to Lurquer, to see if this was maybe what he had heard/read and it was in some way what was causing him trouble with this passage. because it's really hard to totally get all the false teaching out of our minds. Sorry for the confusion.
mercy, peace and love
Kat
Gina:
I can totally see why you would say that church teaches it. You make a very good point. The church certainly teaches plenty of baloney.
I've also read on the internet where Jesus is the "sin-offering." And I recently heard one mainstream pastor in Birmingham, Alabama talk about the renewing ... I N G ... of our minds, to bring out the fact that we aren't born with the mind of Christ but that it is a process. He was totally in to tithing, but ya know -- slowly but surely mainstreamers will come around.
Certainly, whatever is out of God (man), although subject to vanity initially, has to eventually grow to become whole and of sound mind because ... it comes from God. Hello? It has to eventually, for the simple fact that we originate from God and God doesn't make mistakes. It's a no-brainer.
So, when Jesus was doing all that he did for humanity, he had faith that it wouldn't fail to produce good results because he knew where He came from and where He was going, even though the whole of mankind at that point didn't know. He knew exactly where he came from and how everything would turn out eventually. And that's what got him through all that agony and terror -- the prize set before him.
It's just fascinating to note that the first Adam was just a man who couldn't stand his own station in life and wanted to be immortal and God. And he was driven out of the garden.
And Jesus, the last Adam, actually was God but volunteered to lower Himself to the point where he was considered by man to be lower than a common criminal. And ends up helping the first Adam to eventually become like He truly is. Which is what the first Adam wanted all along but not in the right way.
Anyway, the dichotomy there just totally blows me away. Our God is so fascinating.
lurquer:
--- Quote from: Kat on January 08, 2015, 09:27:41 AM ---
Hi lurquer,
I'm wondering if you are not thinking along the lines of what the Christian world believes... they think that Christ was to actually become 'sin' for us and that He was struggling with the thought of God turning away from Him.
2Co 5:21 For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
This is a wrong translation, Christ became a "sin offering," big difference. Ray spoke on this heresy to a great degree, here are the Bible studies.
Bible study audio Oct/Nov 2006
http://bible-truths.com/audio/WS_10001.WMA
http://bible-truths.com/audio/ChristSinII.wma
http://bible-truths.com/audio/ChristSinII.mp3
transcript
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,6719.0.html
So people believe that He literally became sin and that the Father could not look upon Him as such (Habakkuk 1:13) and so turned His back on Jesus when He needed Him the most. And to top it off the church believe that the Father then poured His wrath on Christ. This is all a gross mis-translation of what happened.
So I'm just trying to figure out your hesitance to believe. That when Christ as a human man was greatly troubled by what He was about to go through. He was God and what He was about to endure was the absolute depths of human degradation possible. Sure other people have went to their death fearlessly... but they were not the God of the universe, who had been in existence for billions of years and was now about to suffer and die... I think for good reason that this was the greatest act of sacrifice possible.
Maybe I've gotten it all wrong about what you may be thinking, but this could help somebody else I suppose, so I thought it was worth mentioning.
mercy, peace and love
Kat
--- End quote ---
Kat, no worries. I've listened to/read all of Ray's studies. Can't say I disagree with any of them on content... I utterly reject the churchianity notion that Christ was, or became sin. It is indeed a despicable heresy.
But I don't know what you mean by my "hesitance to believe" (?) Certainly I believe that Jesus was a man and was in extreme agony that night. The question though, is why? Fear of death itself? The physical suffering? I don't think so. Maybe--I don't know. But it just doesn't sit right with me. That explanation just seems like a simple, human understanding (of course any of us would have opted out of that given the chance!) However, there are a plethora of historical examples of other christian martyrs who chose not to opt out of the most horrendous deaths rather than deny Christ. Indeed, there are accounts of many going to their deaths singing praises and hymns, appearing to be in no pain at all, even though they were being burned alive... Even the thief hanging next to him was still able to yuk it up and mock Jesus while in the same agonizing predicament...
In any case, none of us knows, nor likely ever will in this age. It is just one of those things that is yet unrevealed. We're only speculating. Like Gina said, these are deep things. Things I wonder about...
John from Kentucky:
This matter is not that hard to understand.
There is a Scripture that tells us all things are possible with God.
Jesus had a sound mind. No one with a sound mind would want to go through His suffering.
Therefore He asked the One Who could make a difference if this cup could pass. God's answer was No. This way was the way God wanted it done. God had a good reason to do it the way He did, but that is another topic.
When the time came, Jesus stood tall. He did not whine or complain or bemoan His fate.
When He said, "My God, My God, why have you forsaken Me?"; Jesus was quoting the 22nd Psalm, the first part of which discusses the sufferings of the Messiah, and the 2nd part discusses His ultimate triumph. This leads into the 23rd Psalm which states, "The LORD is my shepherd..." These were Jesus' thoughts right before the soldier stabbed Him to death.
I am as proud as punch over the way Jesus handled Himself, when He was faced with an ultimate physical trial. It is one reason I call Him Lord of Lords and King of Kings. I will gladly follow Him anywhere.
lurquer:
Okay John, I hear what your saying. But it is a bit more difficult for me to fully understand than you I guess. Maybe I'm just a tad thick. ;)
I'm with you 100% though in being proud of my Lord's conduct (all of his conduct!), but especially when it came time to drink that cup. And he did drink it to the dregs. But, all I'm saying is he knew all along he was going to drink it, "Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour." (john 12:27). But then we see him praying for just that. This is not a simple thing for me to understand.
I don't want to be misunderstood, though. His suffering and death was more than most men could have ever endured. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy (so to speak!). And perhaps, as Kat and Gina implied, what made it all the worse was at any moment he could have come down off that cross, destroyed those mocking him, then torched the earth and said, "these people aren't worthy of me--I'm starting over!". Any mere man with that sort of power would never have gone like a sheep to his slaughter. But Christ did it... to please his Father! Wow.
Just one minor quibble, though .. Jesus wasn't "stabbed to death" by the soldiers. He had already "delivered up his spirit" before they came to "brake the legs" and finish them off. The stabbing was to prove he was, indeed, dead. (john 26:32)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version