am i the only one to have a problem believing this
even from the geek woops greek i could never see what ole cornfield vic was saying
That would appear to be the problem Cool perhaps while you were busy thinking up clever names such as cornfield vic you missed the fact that it was Aramaic not Greek for starters.
You ought to take a look at an Aramaic interlinear of it to see for yourself: You can find one here (for Mark 15) or here (for Matt 27) (requires Adobe Acrobat)
(btw, if your browser has a problem with TinyURL's, manually copy and paste the following into your web browser's address bar (and remove the space): www.pes hitta.org/pdf/Marqsch15.pdf
www.pes hitta.org/pdf/Mattich27.pdf
Or you could take a look at the TWI-created Aramaic Interlinear.
VPW used a translation of the Bible provided by one Mr. George Lamsa.
Both the Mattew and Mark references to this say, according to the www.pes hitta.org Interlinear, My God, My God, why have you spared me? (Don't believe me, look it up for yourself)
The TWI Interlinear states, My God, My God, for what purpose have you spared me? (both for Matthew and Mark)
While both are significantly different than the "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?" text, they are also much different than the Lamsa text that VPW advocated through PFAL.
An interesting thing: This extract is Jesus' pronounciation of Psalms 22:1 (again, look it up for yourself).
I don't have any references to an Aramaic Old Testament available to me, so I can't check on this...but Lamsa's rendition of Ps 22:1 says "My God, My God, why hast thou let me to live?" (The traditional English translations from Hebrew to English state, "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?")
The Hebrew of Ps 22:1 uses the word `azab (Strong's 05800). The typical translation of the word is "forsake", "leave"...but it is used in a couple of places as "repair". I don't pretend to be a Hebrew scholar and so can't speak to what it "should be" in Psalms 22:1.
The Septuagint for Ps 22:1 uses the word egkataleipo, meaning to leave behind (Strong's 1459).
I personally don't see a theological issue if the phrase "why hast thou forsaken me" or "why have you spared me" are used. I see a major theological issue if the phrase "for this I was spared" is in there.
The reason why?
Because the weight of all the sin in the world was on Jesus at that time. It must have been incredible. For Jesus to recall the words of Psalm 22 is completely justifiable and understandable. For him to shout out "for this I was spared" makes no sense at all. It sounds like an arrogant little boy saying "I gotcha," "I fooled you and now you lose the game Satan!"
Read Psalm 22 and you'll see what I'm saying:
Psa 22:1 To the choirmaster: according to The Hind of the Dawn. A Psalm of David. My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Why art thou so far from helping me, from the words of my groaning?
Psa 22:2 O my God, I cry by day, but thou dost not answer; and by night, but find no rest.
Psa 22:3 Yet thou art holy, enthroned on the praises of Israel.
Psa 22:4 In thee our fathers trusted; they trusted, and thou didst deliver them.
Psa 22:5 To thee they cried, and were saved; in thee they trusted, and were not disappointed.
Psa 22:6 But I am a worm, and no man; scorned by men, and despised by the people.
Psa 22:7 All who see me mock at me, they make mouths at me, they wag their heads;
Psa 22:8 "He committed his cause to the LORD; let him deliver him, let him rescue him, for he delights in him!"
Psa 22:9 Yet thou art he who took me from the womb; thou didst keep me safe upon my mother's breasts.
Psa 22:10 Upon thee was I cast from my birth, and since my mother bore me thou hast been my God.
Psa 22:11 Be not far from me, for trouble is near and there is none to help.
Psa 22:12 Many bulls encompass me, strong bulls of Bashan surround me;
Psa 22:13 they open wide their mouths at me, like a ravening and roaring lion.
Psa 22:14 I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint; my heart is like wax, it is melted within my breast;
Psa 22:15 my strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue cleaves to my jaws; thou dost lay me in the dust of death.
Psa 22:16 Yea, dogs are round about me; a company of evildoers encircle me; they have pierced my hands and feet--
Psa 22:17 I can count all my bones-- they stare and gloat over me;
Psa 22:18 they divide my garments among them, and for my raiment they cast lots.
Psa 22:19 But thou, O LORD, be not far off! O thou my help, hasten to my aid!
Psa 22:20 Deliver my soul from the sword, my life from the power of the dog!
Psa 22:21 Save me from the mouth of the lion, my afflicted soul from the horns of the wild oxen!
Psa 22:22 I will tell of thy name to my brethren; in the midst of the congregation I will praise thee:
Psa 22:23 You who fear the LORD, praise him! all you sons of Jacob, glorify him, and stand in awe of him, all you sons of Israel!
Psa 22:24 For he has not despised or abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; and he has not hid his face from him, but has heard, when he cried to him.
Psa 22:25 From thee comes my praise in the great congregation; my vows I will pay before those who fear him.
Psa 22:26 The afflicted shall eat and be satisfied; those who seek him shall praise the LORD! May your hearts live for ever!
It almost sounds as if Jesus was reciting this to himself, he starts off the first line then gives up the ghost.
It wasn't immediately that he gave up the ghost after this...he got some wine and then people said maybe he's shouting to Elijah (maybe Elijah will take him down)...So he could have shouted this one phrase aloud and then the rest to himself...Or maybe he shouted this through his pain so that people could look back to the prophecy contained in Ps 22...lots of maybes, but it is clear that it wasn't immediately that he died afterwards.
I've posted this link before about this topic, but here it is again from the truth or tradition site. It is one of the better explanations I have heard.
Have you ever heard of the twenty-third Psalm—maybe even before you were a Christian? Did you ever memorize the part, or all, of it? Would you agree that the twenty-third Psalm is one of the most famous sections of the Bible? You know, "The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want." And we're in the twenty-first century. What about 28 A.D.—in Jerusalem? Do you think the Israelites, to whom the Psalms were written, might have known it?
Have you ever wondered why Psalm 23 is so well known, but not Psalm 79, for example, or 32 or 57? One of the reasons is that Psalms 22, 23 and 24 form what you might call a “Messianic Trilogy,” one that virtually every Israelite knew by heart. Keep that in mind as we look at Psalm 22.
Old Testament prophecy often had both a current and future application, and here we are concerned with the future application of what is written in Psalm 22.
As we read it, we will see why Jesus said "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" Later, in John 19:30, he said, "It is finished." And what we will see is that Jesus quoted the very first phrase in Psalm 22—and the very last phrase, which, properly translated, should read, “…it is finished.”
Have you ever been listening to the radio and heard even one line from an old song that is one of your favorites? Doesn’t the whole song run through your head? Sure, because it is in your memory. Maybe you even start singing it. Well, Jesus quoted the beginning and the ending of one of the most famous, most well known, and most memorized sections of all of the Old Testament, one that vividly set forth what was taking place right in front of their eyes. No doubt for many of them who had ears to hear, the verses we are about to read flashed through their minds.
And yea -- methinks also that this belongs in doctrinal. ;)
I didn't mean he literally died right then. I think the "It is finished" phrase at the end - interesting.
I saw a show on TV recently about some people who had been stranded at sea adrift on a raft. One woman died, but as she was dying of thirst and infection and almost out of her mind, she started quietly singing in tongues, the other two survivors were amazed. I know its conjecture, maybe Jesus was doing the same thing.
If I remember the teaching correctly. It was either corps or the AC. Vic said that God showed him(Jesus Christ) revelation while he was hanging on the cross as why his life was spared.
This is my own interpitation. God must have shown Jesus something that had not been written in the scriptures. Jesus Christ as we were taught knew what his ending was going to be. This all acording to vp's teaching.
If I remember the teaching correctly. It was either corps or the AC. Vic said that God showed him(Jesus Christ) revelation while he was hanging on the cross as why his life was spared.
No offense, but that is so classic (and so believable). He comes up with some flakey interpretation of a verse of scripture that supports what he wants to push off on us. Then he does all sorts of backflips and jumps through all sorts of hoops in order to justify it. Meanwhile, if there are any verses that disagree with what he says, he works to nullify those verses that disagree with the one (ahem) clear verse. Classic VPW.
Okay crash course in LDS Theology--You want to debate its veracity --head for the doctrinal forum--it is offered here as an answer to the topic at hand
Jesus Christ created the earth and everything on it at the Direction of Heavenly Father
Jesus Christ is Jehovah of the Old Testament
In order to try to get man to live according in a manner pleasing to Heavenly father
Christ as Jehovah, among other things, sent a flood, rescued the children from Egypt, parted the red sea, gave commandments, destroyed cities, sent Prophets , etc, etc, etc all with poor to mixed results
Finally, in a move that was preordained from the foundation of the earth as a last resort, Jesus Christ surrendered the power of his divinity and came to earth as mortal as we are. Any miracles he performed were through the power of Heavenly Father working through Him.
At Gethsemane he took our sins upon himself. He sweated drops of blood the agony was so great. He then allowed himself to be captured, beaten and scourged as earthly punishment for those sins. At Golgotha there one act more necessary for Him to perform -To let himself die-to not call on Heavenly fathers angels, so that in dying he could break the bonds of death.
He hangs on that cross and the dying of his body begins. He, created as a divine being who has never known the absence of Heavenly Fathers spirit , now feels that pain, the slipping away of his spirit from his body
How else could he respond as that terrible loss overwhelmed Him but
No offense, but that is so classic (and so believable). He comes up with some flakey interpretation of a verse of scripture that supports what he wants to push off on us. Then he does all sorts of backflips and jumps through all sorts of hoops in order to justify it. Meanwhile, if there are any verses that disagree with what he says, he works to nullify those verses that disagree with the one (ahem) clear verse. Classic VPW.
No offense taken Mark. I was not saying that was true. I have seen enough debate about this subject to have changed my mind. I was (I think) just trying to point out what twi taught.
That would appear to be the problem Cool perhaps while you were busy thinking up clever names such as cornfield vic you missed the fact that it was Aramaic not Greek for starters.
woops
pardon my language
we all thought that we were all so good in all of them that i got one mixed up with the other
Uhhh..TempleLady, who wanted to debate your Mormon theology???I can't see any posts here on this topic relating to it.. but I do know you've finally got honest...you've been itchhhhhhhin to promote that b/s haven't ya ! And really, don't bother, we've been down to doctrinal a number of times and you have stated there already that 1/ Mormons go to their own heaven (and you've got a cheek to say TWI promoted an 'elitist' outlook !) 2/ Only Mormons can baptise by proxy for people (including Hitler and others-who are living in the spirit world btw, waiting for a baptism call-up) 3/ Jesus first port of call back to earth will be to America (the nameplace escapes me but it's the place where the Mormons suffered great persecution)
etc.. Sincerity sure as he*l STILL aint no guarentee of truth.
In order to try to get man to live according in a manner pleasing to Heavenly father
Christ as Jehovah, among other things, sent a flood, rescued the children from Egypt, parted the red sea, gave commandments, destroyed cities, sent Prophets , etc, etc, etc all with poor to mixed results
"My God, My GOd, Why hast thou forsaken ME??
Christ did everything are you sure let us look from Genesis to Malachi no mention of jesus himself it just says he will come soon lord does not mean jesus it means a ruler or master
Gen 1:1 IN THE BEGINNING GOD CREATED THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH there was nothing about jesus in the beginning
And some would call Wierwille's leanings bs. And some would call traditional leanings bs. Truth is, there's not much difference between what Templelady writes here and what traditional Christianity teaches.
Templelady's post has an unspoken "if" in it. If you want to debate Mormon theology, do it in doctrinal. It was a reasonable request.
I read this "trilogy" in psalms yesterday. It is just amazing. At the end of chapter 24, its entering into God's Gate - total triumph.
These three psalms begin with the total depths of human suffering, when it feels God has forsaken mankind, to the victorious hope, knowledge and glory of God. How they build from total despair to total glory. I find it fascinating this is possibly what Christ was thinking of when he died.
Christ was the sacrificial lamb, the one, who according to law, had everyone's sins laid upon him outside the camp.
Christ took the world's sins, yes, he was forsaken and estranged from God, just as the first Adam was in the Garden. I have no problem with these words, whether to begin the psalms, or Christ's recitation of them before his death.
Read the three chapters in psalms (22-24), then go to the gospels and read of his crucifiction and death, it "fits" very well.
The concept that God actually forsook Jesus is very hard for me to accept, preposterous even, and contradicts many other scriptures, not to mention plain common sense.
Would you forsake your son, in a time of extreme pain, grief and death? Heck no.
Best teachings I've heard on this subject are from VP, and the one on this thread from STFI, who learned it first from VP and augmented it.
The proof that God did not forsake his son is the resurrection. Right on!
So, Oldiesman, do you think TWI is right about how that verse should be translated in the gospels, or do you think STFI is right? Just curious. STFI rejected what Wierwille said about "My God, My God, Why hast thou forsaken me?" Their explanation is that God did not forsake Jesus, and that Jesus was not accusing God of such a thing. You (mistakenly?) give the impression that STFI and VP were in agreement on the subject.
In hindsight, of course, it's crazy for us to think that God would forsake Jesus. But that's not the point.
The Jews in the OT, as well as in Jesus' times could never reconcile the sufferings and the glory of the Messiah. They were uh, a tad bit confused. Jesus was saying one last time to those precious ones he gave his life for, "hey, don't worry, I am THE GUY." No matter what it looked like and how horrible it was, it was God's will for Jesus to suffer and die. Yeah, it looked like he was forsaken, yet we know he wasn't.
It's really not that hard to get, for us now. But it was more difficult when it was happening. MHO, as always.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
10
5
11
5
Popular Days
Feb 20
18
Feb 23
13
Apr 21
11
Feb 21
10
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 10 posts
CM 5 posts
templelady 11 posts
allan w. 5 posts
Popular Days
Feb 20 2006
18 posts
Feb 23 2006
13 posts
Apr 21 2006
11 posts
Feb 21 2006
10 posts
Lifted Up
This sounds like a good discussion topic for the doctrinal forum.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
That would appear to be the problem Cool perhaps while you were busy thinking up clever names such as cornfield vic you missed the fact that it was Aramaic not Greek for starters.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
allan w.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaaaahemmm
Link to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
Okay for the sake of this topic, we'll stick to VPW's interpretation
What exactly was Christ saved from?????
In short VPW's interpretation makes no sense
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
You ought to take a look at an Aramaic interlinear of it to see for yourself: You can find one here (for Mark 15) or here (for Matt 27) (requires Adobe Acrobat)
(btw, if your browser has a problem with TinyURL's, manually copy and paste the following into your web browser's address bar (and remove the space): www.pes hitta.org/pdf/Marqsch15.pdf
www.pes hitta.org/pdf/Mattich27.pdf
Or you could take a look at the TWI-created Aramaic Interlinear.
VPW used a translation of the Bible provided by one Mr. George Lamsa.
Both the Mattew and Mark references to this say, according to the www.pes hitta.org Interlinear, My God, My God, why have you spared me? (Don't believe me, look it up for yourself)
The TWI Interlinear states, My God, My God, for what purpose have you spared me? (both for Matthew and Mark)
While both are significantly different than the "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?" text, they are also much different than the Lamsa text that VPW advocated through PFAL.
An interesting thing: This extract is Jesus' pronounciation of Psalms 22:1 (again, look it up for yourself).
I don't have any references to an Aramaic Old Testament available to me, so I can't check on this...but Lamsa's rendition of Ps 22:1 says "My God, My God, why hast thou let me to live?" (The traditional English translations from Hebrew to English state, "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?")
The Hebrew of Ps 22:1 uses the word `azab (Strong's 05800). The typical translation of the word is "forsake", "leave"...but it is used in a couple of places as "repair". I don't pretend to be a Hebrew scholar and so can't speak to what it "should be" in Psalms 22:1.
The Septuagint for Ps 22:1 uses the word egkataleipo, meaning to leave behind (Strong's 1459).
I personally don't see a theological issue if the phrase "why hast thou forsaken me" or "why have you spared me" are used. I see a major theological issue if the phrase "for this I was spared" is in there.
The reason why?
Because the weight of all the sin in the world was on Jesus at that time. It must have been incredible. For Jesus to recall the words of Psalm 22 is completely justifiable and understandable. For him to shout out "for this I was spared" makes no sense at all. It sounds like an arrogant little boy saying "I gotcha," "I fooled you and now you lose the game Satan!"
Read Psalm 22 and you'll see what I'm saying:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunesis
It almost sounds as if Jesus was reciting this to himself, he starts off the first line then gives up the ghost.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
It wasn't immediately that he gave up the ghost after this...he got some wine and then people said maybe he's shouting to Elijah (maybe Elijah will take him down)...So he could have shouted this one phrase aloud and then the rest to himself...Or maybe he shouted this through his pain so that people could look back to the prophecy contained in Ps 22...lots of maybes, but it is clear that it wasn't immediately that he died afterwards.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I've posted this link before about this topic, but here it is again from the truth or tradition site. It is one of the better explanations I have heard.
Did God Really Forsake Jesus on the Cross?
And yea -- methinks also that this belongs in doctrinal. ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunesis
Dmiller, that is awesome, makes a lot of sense.
I didn't mean he literally died right then. I think the "It is finished" phrase at the end - interesting.
I saw a show on TV recently about some people who had been stranded at sea adrift on a raft. One woman died, but as she was dying of thirst and infection and almost out of her mind, she started quietly singing in tongues, the other two survivors were amazed. I know its conjecture, maybe Jesus was doing the same thing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
justloafing
If I remember the teaching correctly. It was either corps or the AC. Vic said that God showed him(Jesus Christ) revelation while he was hanging on the cross as why his life was spared.
This is my own interpitation. God must have shown Jesus something that had not been written in the scriptures. Jesus Christ as we were taught knew what his ending was going to be. This all acording to vp's teaching.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Thanks David for posting the link you beat me to it again. I thought that had the info about the Messianic Trilogy. It is on tape also if interested.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
No offense, but that is so classic (and so believable). He comes up with some flakey interpretation of a verse of scripture that supports what he wants to push off on us. Then he does all sorts of backflips and jumps through all sorts of hoops in order to justify it. Meanwhile, if there are any verses that disagree with what he says, he works to nullify those verses that disagree with the one (ahem) clear verse. Classic VPW.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
Okay crash course in LDS Theology--You want to debate its veracity --head for the doctrinal forum--it is offered here as an answer to the topic at hand
Jesus Christ created the earth and everything on it at the Direction of Heavenly Father
Jesus Christ is Jehovah of the Old Testament
In order to try to get man to live according in a manner pleasing to Heavenly father
Christ as Jehovah, among other things, sent a flood, rescued the children from Egypt, parted the red sea, gave commandments, destroyed cities, sent Prophets , etc, etc, etc all with poor to mixed results
Finally, in a move that was preordained from the foundation of the earth as a last resort, Jesus Christ surrendered the power of his divinity and came to earth as mortal as we are. Any miracles he performed were through the power of Heavenly Father working through Him.
At Gethsemane he took our sins upon himself. He sweated drops of blood the agony was so great. He then allowed himself to be captured, beaten and scourged as earthly punishment for those sins. At Golgotha there one act more necessary for Him to perform -To let himself die-to not call on Heavenly fathers angels, so that in dying he could break the bonds of death.
He hangs on that cross and the dying of his body begins. He, created as a divine being who has never known the absence of Heavenly Fathers spirit , now feels that pain, the slipping away of his spirit from his body
How else could he respond as that terrible loss overwhelmed Him but
"My God, My GOd, Why hast thou forsaken ME??
Edited by templeladyLink to comment
Share on other sites
justloafing
No offense taken Mark. I was not saying that was true. I have seen enough debate about this subject to have changed my mind. I was (I think) just trying to point out what twi taught.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolchef1248 @adelphia.net
woops
pardon my language
we all thought that we were all so good in all of them that i got one mixed up with the other
Link to comment
Share on other sites
allan w.
Uhhh..TempleLady, who wanted to debate your Mormon theology???I can't see any posts here on this topic relating to it.. but I do know you've finally got honest...you've been itchhhhhhhin to promote that b/s haven't ya ! And really, don't bother, we've been down to doctrinal a number of times and you have stated there already that 1/ Mormons go to their own heaven (and you've got a cheek to say TWI promoted an 'elitist' outlook !) 2/ Only Mormons can baptise by proxy for people (including Hitler and others-who are living in the spirit world btw, waiting for a baptism call-up) 3/ Jesus first port of call back to earth will be to America (the nameplace escapes me but it's the place where the Mormons suffered great persecution)
etc.. Sincerity sure as he*l STILL aint no guarentee of truth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ckmkeon
Christ did everything are you sure let us look from Genesis to Malachi no mention of jesus himself it just says he will come soon lord does not mean jesus it means a ruler or master
Gen 1:1 IN THE BEGINNING GOD CREATED THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH there was nothing about jesus in the beginning
God Bless
ckmckeon
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Aww - Allan ---she's just giving the back ground for why she believes the statement should be "Why have you forsaken me?'. :)
I don't mind it in the least.
I'll never believe that way,
but I appreciate hearing the reasoning behind it.
I put my CES leanings out there, by posting the link I did.
And some here would call those leanings BS too. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
And some would call Wierwille's leanings bs. And some would call traditional leanings bs. Truth is, there's not much difference between what Templelady writes here and what traditional Christianity teaches.
Templelady's post has an unspoken "if" in it. If you want to debate Mormon theology, do it in doctrinal. It was a reasonable request.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunesis
I read this "trilogy" in psalms yesterday. It is just amazing. At the end of chapter 24, its entering into God's Gate - total triumph.
These three psalms begin with the total depths of human suffering, when it feels God has forsaken mankind, to the victorious hope, knowledge and glory of God. How they build from total despair to total glory. I find it fascinating this is possibly what Christ was thinking of when he died.
Christ was the sacrificial lamb, the one, who according to law, had everyone's sins laid upon him outside the camp.
Christ took the world's sins, yes, he was forsaken and estranged from God, just as the first Adam was in the Garden. I have no problem with these words, whether to begin the psalms, or Christ's recitation of them before his death.
Read the three chapters in psalms (22-24), then go to the gospels and read of his crucifiction and death, it "fits" very well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
The concept that God actually forsook Jesus is very hard for me to accept, preposterous even, and contradicts many other scriptures, not to mention plain common sense.
Would you forsake your son, in a time of extreme pain, grief and death? Heck no.
Best teachings I've heard on this subject are from VP, and the one on this thread from STFI, who learned it first from VP and augmented it.
The proof that God did not forsake his son is the resurrection. Right on!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
So, Oldiesman, do you think TWI is right about how that verse should be translated in the gospels, or do you think STFI is right? Just curious. STFI rejected what Wierwille said about "My God, My God, Why hast thou forsaken me?" Their explanation is that God did not forsake Jesus, and that Jesus was not accusing God of such a thing. You (mistakenly?) give the impression that STFI and VP were in agreement on the subject.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
Oldies
In hindsight, of course, it's crazy for us to think that God would forsake Jesus. But that's not the point.
The Jews in the OT, as well as in Jesus' times could never reconcile the sufferings and the glory of the Messiah. They were uh, a tad bit confused. Jesus was saying one last time to those precious ones he gave his life for, "hey, don't worry, I am THE GUY." No matter what it looked like and how horrible it was, it was God's will for Jesus to suffer and die. Yeah, it looked like he was forsaken, yet we know he wasn't.
It's really not that hard to get, for us now. But it was more difficult when it was happening. MHO, as always.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.