The book of Job teaches that not all those who suffer are either punished or abandoned by God. Jesus taught on this subject (John 9:2; Luke 13:1-6) in his lead up to the cross. In Luke 13, when commenting upon Pilate’s evil, he warns about what could happen to the entire nation.
In Jesus’ prophetic work, he called Israel to abandon its ethnocentric violence. He saw Israel’s revolutionary approach towards Rome leading to destruction. In one way, his crucifixion was an enacted parable, representing Rome’s eventual destruction of ancient Israel.
Jesus says as much in Luke 23:28-31, quoting the Hosea 10:8 prediction of the Israel’s destruction by Assyria (v. 30; see also Rev 6:16) and basically saying, “If they do this to one who is innocent (Luke 23:4, 14, 22, 47), what will they do to the truly guilty?” (v. 31).
Jesus was punished for being a false messiah/king (Luke 22:67, 70f; 23:2). That was the charge leveled at him. That was the sign above the cross & the reason for the mocking. At his trial Jesus affirms the reason for the charge, citing Dan 7:13 & Ps 110:1 (see Luke 20:42; 21:27).
Jesus’ death on the cross is deemed evidence that he is not the Messiah/king (Matt 27:40, 42f; Mark 15:32; Luke 23:35, 37, 39). Because he does die on the cross, people then believed he was not the Messiah, therefore the punishment was just. That’s the logic of the thinking.
In Mark 15:34, Jesus cries out in Aramaic “Eloi, Eloi, Lama Sabachthani?” Mark then translates this into Greek (ho theos mou). Why give the Aramaic at all? Because in v. 35, people who originally heard Jesus speak think he’s calling out for Eli-jah to save him. Eloi-Eli.
The recording of the Eloi-Eli mishearing points to the fact that everyone misunderstood what was occurring. The people there at the crucifixion misinterpreted the event. “Eloi, Eloi” is a quote from Psalm 22:1.
Read Ps 22. In vv 1-23, b/c of his affliction it appears as if the psalmist has been abandoned by God. But then comes v. 24: “For he has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; nor has he hidden his face from him; but when he cried to him for help, he heard.”
Indeed, the psalmist’s affliction becomes a poetic representation of all the poor and afflicted (vv. 24, 26). God hears the poor and afflicted, they will receive help, and God deserves praise because of it (v. 25).
Then comes the startling predictions of vv. 27-31. The gentiles will turn towards God in worship (v. 27). The Kingdom is God’s; he rules over the nations (v. 28). Even those who died will worship God (v. 29). God’s covenant-faithfulness will be proclaimed (v. 31).
What Jesus meant by referencing Psalm 22 is now clear: “If you think God has abandoned me because of my affliction, you are wrong. He hasn’t abandoned me. This is how the Kingdom comes, the gentiles turn to God, the resurrection comes, and God is true to the covenant.”
That interpretation of the crucifixion shouldn’t surprise us. That meaning is found in Daniel 7 (which Jesus references). And the concept of the crucifixion leading to exhalation is found in 1 Pet 2-3; Phil 2; Eph 1:19-23; Col 2:15; 1 Cor 15; Rom 8; Mark 10:35-45; Matt 20:20-28.
In many of these same places, the suffering/submission/selflessness that leads to exhalation is deemed a model the disciples of Jesus are to follow. Jesus himself made it a requirement (Matt 10:38; 16:24; Mark 8:34; Luke 9:23; 14:27).
In Mark 10:35-40 and Matt 20:21ff, Jesus predicted the cross is where he’d be enthroned in his kingdom. The description of the crucifixion is that of a macabre coronation (Matt 27:27-31; cf. Mark 15:16-20; John 19:1-5).
This method of “suffering leading to exhalation” is one that Peter initially rejected (Matt 16:21-28; Mark 8:31-38), but later accepted (1 Pet 2-3). But again, at Christ’s crucifixion, everyone misunderstood. Like Job’s three friends, they saw the suffering as just punishment.
When God resurrected Jesus from the dead, he was reversing the charge. God was the higher court reversing the verdict of the lower court. He was saying that Jesus was innocent of the charge. The punishment had been unjust. It was vindication, just as in Dan 7.
Again, Jesus was punished to death for claiming to be the Messiah, the king, the “son of God” (Mark 14:61; Matt 26:63; Luke 22:70; John 19:7). The resurrection proved Jesus was who he claimed to be (Rom 1:4; 1 Tim 3:16; 1 Cor 15:3-4). His suffering and punishment were unjust.
The problems with penal substitutionary atonement (PSA) are legion (so to speak). To limit the mentions to the current discussion, we note that the suffering of the cross is programmatic for disciples as a method for victory over the powers of evil.
Also, per the Book of Job, Psalm 22, and the teachings of Jesus, the existence of suffering is not necessarily evidence of divine punishment. Furthermore, the meaning of Psalm 22 argues that (in my nod to Twain) appearances of divine abandonment are greatly exaggerated.
Most importantly, if you say that God punished Jesus, then, from a historic point of view, you are unintentionally implying that God agreed with the charge that Jesus was a false Messiah. Indeed, you are making the same mistake as those who mistook Eloi for Eli.
Please. Let us abandon PSA. Our God and Christ has given us a method of ending evil. Let the bravest believers adopt it for victory (Ps 110; Dan 7; Rom 8; 1 Cor 10; 1 Pet 3; Rev 21-22).
Addition: That the earliest disciples adopted the "cross" as a method of discipleship & victory indicates they were certain of its effectiveness. It seems highly likely that this was principally due to their certainty in Christ's resurrection.
In all these non-synoptic references, the resurrection of Jesus is explicitly noted, apart for Philippians 2 which is implied by Paul's use of "exalted". (See 3:21)
Furthermore, given that this method is supported by many different writers, and that these early disciples knew the pre-crucified Jesus, it seems likely that they had first-hand eyewitnesses to the risen Jesus, which is what Paul says in 1 Cor 15:5.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Sunday, Nov 1st 1992 @ 11:55am, I vividly remember the senior pastor of my church telling the congregation, "I don't know how you can be a Christian and vote for Democrats."
For decades since, I've observed similar statements made by Christian leaders. What causes such thinking? Spiritual myopia? Political idolatry? Hardhearted unmercifulness?
Perhaps it's justice that similar criticism of them reached such heights in the past four years (though it has been around for 40 yrs). But perhaps it wasn't justice.
Have any of the figures associated with CBN or the Founders raised a cry about ESS, or any way close to the prophetic doom they herald about CRT and women preachers? 1/4
I'm not suggesting they go after Bruce Ware (they shouldn't!). For 1,700 yrs, Christianity said doctrines about God's nature are of highest importance for which councils, creeds, & excommunications are necessary. But the self-appointed defenders of orthodoxy have no interest. 2/4
My point is that these "defenders" are not behaving in ways that Christians have always said defenders of orthodoxy should react when faced with matter such as ESS. Why is that? 3/4
An attempt at balance. Far better than the vitriol that characterized SBC leadership in the past. 1/5 swbts.edu/news/an-open-l…
For me, this is the most important part. This is an exceptionally vague characterization & justification. Of course, both sides of this issue have lacked specificity. 2/5
Scripture may be the "spectacles through which our own experiences must be evaluated", but 1) our own inherited Western worldview is an inescapable lens through which we interpret both life and Scripture ... 3/5
As expressed in Rom 13, government is a power created by God to fight, punish, & hold back evil, particularly thru violence (though not to defeat it). Government executes vengeance b/c it receives that authority from God (Rom 12:19; Heb 10:30; Deut 32:35). 1/12
Initially, God did not want Israel to have a king (1 Sam 8:7). He was to be the king over Israel while the other nations had their gods (Deut 32:8 LXX, DSS). But sin and Israel's accompanying desire to be like other nations brought this about. 2/12
In permitting a king, God warned Israel of the corruption & oppression that would follow (1 Sam 8:11-18). Noting a king would be Israel's choice (Deut 17:15; 28:36), God set rules to limit the power of the king to oppress (17:14-20). 3/12
"['The world' (cosmos)] refers to the order of society and indicates that evil has a social and political character beyond the isolated actions of individuals." Order (cosmos) "that which is assembled together well."
"Evil exists in the society outside the individual and exerts an influence upon him or her."
Mott (1982) explaining the Hellenistic view of power, "Abstract power without a concrete attachment was inconceivable." This is close to the view of Wink (1984) who popularized the view that spiritual Powers have a physical basis. 1/2
McAlpine notes Berkhof argued the weapon the Powers wield is ideological: claims to legitimacy. After self-proclaimed guardians of truth/justice crucified God, false claims were exposed. I've yet to find this argument fully satisfactory, though it points in the right direction.
Wink delves into the above significantly, noting Étienne de la Boetie in his Discourse on Voluntary Servitude. The latter argued tyrants have power b/c the people give it to them. I de-flesh that out a bit myself for how idolatrous Powers enslave humans in *part*.