Was Christ ever under the wrath of God on the cross? What did He experience in the securing of the justification of God's elect?.......KK
Was Christ ever under the wrath of God on the cross? What did He experience in the securing of the justification of God's elect?.......KK
Retrubutive wrath NO..The chastisement of our peace may have more implications of justice , in other words, God satisfied His Justice for the sins s of elect.
I will move my post herte then KK<
Does wrath signify hatred or dislike? Scripture speaks continuously of Christ suffering for us, but it never speaks of Him being punished for us. I know there is a crossover between the Gov theory and the penal theory here, and perhaps it is semantics. I dont agree in the Gov theory that states if Christ was punished, there could be no forgiveness, that makes no sense. But I dont know about the penal theory either that staes he was punished.
Paul states God was in Christ reconciling the world. And I cannot imagine at the most important time in history, the cross of Christ, that the Father poured His wrath of hatred on His beloved Son. There was a forsakenness, which I am not sure of exactly, but could this equal wrath?
Suffered is the constant word in the writ. Punishment carries the connotation of hatred towards the person. If sinful man does not receive punishement, the hatred of God's wrath, but the chastisement of God's love, how can Christ have?
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law.GALATIANS 5:22
Bro Lion: Thanks to you and B-57 for your input. I'm not saying I have all the answers, but I like others are in pursuit of knowing our wonderful Savior better. I've heard some "Calvinists" say Christ was under God's wrath by being the elect's substitute for the punishment due their sin. God's Word does say Christ was made a curse ( Gal 3:13 ), and that for us. What does smitten of God mean (Isa 53:4); and that the LORD laid on him the iniquity of us all (Isa 53:6)? What is the Gov theory? What is the penal theory? Thanks brethren.........that I might know Him!..........KK
Despite what Dodd and the liberals might say, I'm still convinced that propitiation, although it may have other meanings tied up in it as well, still carries with it the meaning of a wrath removing sacrifice. I would also have to ask why Jesus was forsaken and smitten by God if he was not under God's wrath?
For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine
KK, checkout leviticus where the type is presented in the day of atonement, where aaron did this most holy work. From the details in the narrative, you really don't depict God being wrathful at the sacrifice. Just some food for thought...Originally Posted by Kentucky Kid
I agree His substitution removed or appeased god's wrath upon sin. But was this inflicted upon Christ? There are so many words and meanings, I have realized this discussion could continue forever.
Other than Isaiah 53, of which I have read could be a bad translation of some words there in the KJV, there is no NT writing that says punishment, they all say suffered. Perhaps there is no difference I am not positive yet.
redemption, ransom, sacrafice, propitiation, expiation,substitution name a few.
Can one say He suffered for the propitiation without saying He was punished?
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law.GALATIANS 5:22
Christ was bearing our sin when God poured out His wrath upon sin. He bore our sins throughout his whole life and we begin to see the great burden of that sin in the garden where Jesus sweats drops of blood and prays that the cup of suffering pass from Him. The Bible is clear that Christ suffered for our sins. Suffering for sins is not only physical. At its core suffering under the burden of sin is to suffer the wrath of God. Physical death does not the extent of suffering for sin. Christ who was very God was forsaken by God. There is certainly a great mystery there but if you try to take the element of God's wrath being poured out on Christ out of the equation you end up with nonsense.
For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine
I agree here Chuck. But does suffering equal punishment? Does the wrath of God potrayed here, equal a hateful wrath towards His son of whom He loves and is well pleased? or can wrath come in the form of chastisement?
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law.GALATIANS 5:22
I think that introducing the idea of chastisement, at least in the way that it differs from punishment, causes more problems than it solves. Chastisement is done to correct behavior. There was nothing sinful in the behavior of Christ. I think we can say that the Father never hated the Son. I think we just have to accept what the Scriptures teach us on this particular matter and leave it at that. Any attempt at rationalization will ruin the whole thing. Perhaps we will understand when we meet the Son face to face.
For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine
I made a statement that when Christ uttered the words in the Gospel "Why have you FORSAKEN me". I have found t means "To leave alone to die" or "Abandon without helping" Could this be the correct meaning of the text instead of thinking the Father showed hatred towards His only beloved son? The thought He did, in the most important time in history, to ratify the covent, to ratify the forgiveness of His chosen, is a thought I dismiss.
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law.GALATIANS 5:22
How it worked out that God poured His wrath out on Himself is not at all clear. However, what is clear is that if Christ was no under wrath for sinners we are still under God's wrath. That is the big exchange He takes our sin and the wrath it requires and gives us His reward. Totally incredible isn't it.
John 1:29 The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!
Sing with all the people of God and join in the hymn of all creation.
Blessing, honour, glory and might be to God and the † Lamb forever. Amen
Arrogance cannot be avoided or true hope be present unless the judgment of condemnation is feared in every work. Martin Luther's Heidelberg Disputation, May 1518
I haven't really done much in-depth study on this subject but off the top of my head: since the elect have been justified from eternity and our sins have always been imputed to Christ (whose sacrifice was ordained to make a complete propitiation for the elects' sin), I don't believe the elect have ever been objects of God's wrath. That said, why should Christ have to come under God's 'wrath' as part of the propitiation process in order to atone? Would not this be an anthropomorphisation? Additionally, in human society, are we concerned about a judge's wrath regarding an atoning party or act?
Even though the Bible says the elect are saved from wrath, does that necessarily mean that one must be under wrath to be saved from it? One might say that we all have been saved from a universal flood because of God's promise to Noah--however, none of us since that time have had to experience a universal flood in order to justify the language used to describe this particular salvivic reality.
Can we specifically comment on my observation please without muddyding the waters with EJ, Elect under the wrath or not.
"WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME" Is all I am concerned with. IF it does mean to leave alone to die, or abandon to death, then that makes perfect sense becasue I cannot see the Father hating the Son in whom He was ALWAYS well pleased.
Most I have read claim this phrase means the Father's love towards Christ was not present. He hated Him for those 3 hours on the Cross. His wrath of condemnation was poured out on Christ. I am not sure I agree with this
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law.GALATIANS 5:22
" My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" is a quotation of Psalm 22, the most explicit messianic prophesy of the crucifixion in the Bible.
I don't think that we are meant to view it so "Greekish", in that he is making a metaphysical statement. The Jewish audience would have understood the connection, that Christ on the cross was experiencing the extreme anguish described in Psalm 22, just as David experienced an extreme feeling of personal abandonment.
It seems like if you have a proper understanding of eternal predestination, then there is no issue about whether one is or isn't under "wrath of God". Such things are entirely outside space and time. God already knew when David wrote Psalm 22 what would happen to Christ, and yet his Son was still beloved. God doesn't hate someone one moment, and love him the next. (that is what immutable means?)
First I shake the whole Apple tree, that the ripest might fall. Then I climb the tree and shake each limb, and then each branch and then each twig, and then I look under each leaf. ~Martin Luther
This strengthens the position of abandonment rather than hatred no? Being left to die with no help from the Father
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law.GALATIANS 5:22
He was sacrificed
Dear LION,
Family Bible Notes have an interesting commentary to Matthew 27:46
"Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani"
a phrase in the Chaldaic language, as then spoken in Judea, explained in the last part of the verse. Psalm 22:1.
Psalm 22:1
¶ To the chief Musician upon Aijeleth 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 roaring?
The Lion of the tribe of Judah, did roar and then gave up the ghost. The conversation was ended.
For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
Matthew 12:40
There is certainly no mention that the Father was with the Son of man.
Jesus certainly upset the Jews with this saying:
John 10:17-19
Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.
I have not yet explored Paul on this, but I know there is much that still lies hidden from our hearts and mind.
Great time.
Christ was not forsaken by God at this point - meaning there was NO separation between the Father and the Son. What Christ is doing here is quoting Psalm 22 and making a declaration to all around that HE IS THE MESSIAH.
Ditch the Garbage! - Too many people are proud of their humility - I, on the other hand, am not humble - and am proud of it!
"Luther's New Testament was so much multiplied and spread by printers that even tailors and shoemakers, yea, even women and ignorant persons who had accepted this new Lutheran gospel, and could read a little German, studied it with the greatest avidity as the fountain of all truth. Some committed it to memory, and carried it about in their bosom. In a few months such people deemed themselves so learned that they were not ashamed to dispute about faith and the gospel not only with Catholic laymen, but even with priests and monks and doctors of divinity." - A complaint by German humanist Johann Cochlaeus.
Follow me on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/kraftb
Follow Predestinarian Network on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/predestinarian
Follow Predestinarian Network on Twitter: http://twitter.com/predestinarian
Regarding "forsaken;" I have read commentators that describe this as Christ's humanity or human nature crying out. Christ, who could heal with a thought, must have had to bring every thought captive to Himself in order to crucify the flesh ("I lay down my life")--concomittantly, how could He be separated (forsaken: left alone, abandoned) from/by Himself (God)? That is irrational in my opinion (unstudied on this point, as it is). Didn't mean to "muddy" the issue.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks