This Makes More Sense To Me Now

[Enoch111]

But I will say something doesn’t sit right with me about Jesus losing or stumbling in His trust at the end and thinking God had abandoned Him.

Obviously you have not given serious thought to what actually took place at the cross during those three dark hours. So let's go to the New Testament (Mt 27:46) and see that all your sources are full of baloney.

περὶ δὲ τὴν ἐννάτην ὥραν ἀνεβόησεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς φωνῇ μεγάλῃ λέγων, Ηλι ηλι λαμὰ σαβαχθανι* τοῦτ' ἔστιν Θεέ μου θεέ μου ἱνατί με ἐγκατέλιπες
And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

*Strong's Concordance
sabachthani: you have forsaken me
Original Word: σαβαχθανί
Part of Speech: Aramaic Transliterated Word (Indeclinable); Hebrew
Transliteration: sabachthani
Phonetic Spelling: (sab-akh-than-ee')
Definition: you have forsaken me
Usage: thou hast forsaken me.

*Strong's Concordance
egkataleipó: to leave behind, i.e. (in a good sense) let remain over or (in a bad sense) desert
Original Word: ἐγκαταλείπω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: egkataleipó
Phonetic Spelling: (eng-kat-al-i'-po)
Definition: to leave behind, (in a good sense) let remain over or (in a bad sense) desert
Usage: I leave in the lurch, abandon (one who is in straits), desert.

When we quote from Brown-Driver-Briggs and Strong's Concordance, that is indeed FACT CHECKING! So kindly dump your sources in the garbage.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

I once heard a man who understands the Hebrew language quite well make a case for a better translation from Hebrew to English being “entangled” rather than “forsaken.” Entangled like the horns of the animal God provided for sacrifice being entangled in the bush. You know the passage right?

Yes, it is in a few places, because Jesus quoted Psalm 22. Lets start with Psalm 22 and my Hebrew Masoretic Text bible with all of the original wording, and the later added wording, and the links to the definitions of said words via the Strong's concordance and others like Brown. This is right down my alley, smile.

Psalm 22:1 ¶ [[To the chief Musician 5329 z8764 upon x5921 ´Ayyele± אַיֶּלֶת 365 Šaçar שַׁחַר, 7837 A Psalm 4210 of Däwið דָּוִד.]] 1732 My ´Ël אֵל, 410 my ´Ël אֵל, 410 why x4100 hast thou forsaken 5800 z8804 me? [why art thou so] far 7350 from helping 3444 x4480 me, [and from] the words 1697 of my roaring? 7581

5800 equals this below

#5800 עָזַב `azab {aw-zab'}
a primitive root; TWOT - 1594,1595; v
—Hebrew Word Study (Transliteration-Pronunciation Etymology & Grammar)

1) to leave, loose, forsake
1a) (Qal) to leave
1a1) to depart from, leave behind, leave, let alone
1a2) to leave, abandon, forsake, neglect, apostatise
1a3) to let loose, set free, let go, free
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) to be left to
1b2) to be forsaken
1c) (Pual) to be deserted
2) to restore, repair
2a) (Qal) to repair
—Brown-Driver-Briggs (Old Testament Hebrew-English Lexicon)

A primitive root; to loosen, that is, relinquish, permit, etc.:—commit self, fail, forsake, fortify, help, leave (destitute, off), refuse, X surely.
—Strong's (Hebrew & Chaldee Dictionary of the Old Testament)

It is pretty clear the Hebrew word azab used here means to forsake, or to leave all alone. God left Jesus on the cross all alone, to bear the sins of the world on his shoulders, because God the Father can not abode sin via all of his abundant glory, it would destroy everything via the abundance of His great glory without the requited blood sacrifice. That is why only the High Priests could enter the holy of holies also, and only after sprinkling blood.

The Hebrew seems to be clear, no use moving on the Greek via Matthew.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

It was a question, not a statement of fact.

God did not. Jesus felt that way, but was totally submitted to God.

Jesus was quoting Psalm 22, but David foresaw what he would say also. Jesus the man/Son of God, (he was both) simply asked the Father why He left him all alone, but of course he knew the answer, Jesus was doing what great professors in classes do, asking a pointed question to try and get his pupils to dig deep and find the answers. So, why would God the Father leave God the son all alone on the cross by himself? Because he had the sins of the whole world upon him. God loves us so much he sent His only son to take in a gruesome burden, in order to give us all life eternal, via Christ Jesus' blood.

Paradise was always a physical location. Not a holding cell for souls. If Paradise was under the earth containing souls, then Jesus would have called it Paradise instead of Abraham's bosom. Abraham's bosom was the holding place of souls.

They can and are the same thing, lots of things have two names. No one goes to Heaven until the Rapture (in general) or else Paul lied.

The Cross and Atonement removed the physical barrier from Paradise placed there in Genesis 3. The Cross emptied Abraham's bosom, and filled Paradise. We don't go to Abraham's bosom. We go to Paradise. It was not a name change. It was a totally different location change. Paradise existed long before Abraham's bosom was necessary.

Paul said WE SLEEP, then we are raised at the Last Trump. Jesus (Man in Linen) and Gabriel told Daniel he would be raised at the very end (Dan. 12:1-2).

 

[Ronald D Milam]

It means Jesus memorized the words of David and could quote them. I can also quote David! ewq1938 says to everyone reading, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Was I talking about myself? No. I don't think God forsook me in the slightest.

Not quite, it means David was shown a vision of THE FUTURE. God lives in all time at once.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Yes, it is in a few places, because Jesus quoted Psalm 22. Lets start with Psalm 22 and my Hebrew Masoretic Text bible with all of the original wording, and the later added wording, and the links to the definitions of said words via the Strong's concordance and others like Brown. This is right down my alley, smile.

Psalm 22:1 ¶ [[To the chief Musician 5329 z8764 upon x5921 ´Ayyele± אַיֶּלֶת 365 Šaçar שַׁחַר, 7837 A Psalm 4210 of Däwið דָּוִד.]] 1732 My ´Ël אֵל, 410 my ´Ël אֵל, 410 why x4100 hast thou forsaken 5800 z8804 me? [why art thou so] far 7350 from helping 3444 x4480 me, [and from] the words 1697 of my roaring? 7581

5800 equals this below

#5800 עָזַב `azab {aw-zab'}
a primitive root; TWOT - 1594,1595; v
—Hebrew Word Study (Transliteration-Pronunciation Etymology & Grammar)

1) to leave, loose, forsake
1a) (Qal) to leave
1a1) to depart from, leave behind, leave, let alone
1a2) to leave, abandon, forsake, neglect, apostatise
1a3) to let loose, set free, let go, free
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) to be left to
1b2) to be forsaken
1c) (Pual) to be deserted
2) to restore, repair
2a) (Qal) to repair
—Brown-Driver-Briggs (Old Testament Hebrew-English Lexicon)

A primitive root; to loosen, that is, relinquish, permit, etc.:—commit self, fail, forsake, fortify, help, leave (destitute, off), refuse, X surely.
—Strong's (Hebrew & Chaldee Dictionary of the Old Testament)

It is pretty clear the Hebrew word azab used here means to forsake, or to leave all alone. God left Jesus on the cross all alone, to bear the sins of the world on his shoulders, because God the Father can not abode sin via all of his abundant glory, it would destroy everything via the abundance of His great glory without the requited blood sacrifice. That is why only the High Priests could enter the holy of holies also, and only after sprinkling blood.

The Hebrew seems to be clear, no use moving on the Greek via Matthew.

Noooo! Not again!
Could you do me a favor? Would you look up the word “sabbachthani” for me in your Hebrew concordance and then translate it into English?

 

[Ronald D Milam]

Noooo! Not again!
Could you do me a favor? Would you look up the word “sabbachthani” for me in your Hebrew concordance and then translate it into English?

That is not Hebrew, that is Greek. It comes from Matt. 27:46.

Matt. 27:46 περὶ "About" δὲ "moreover" τὴν "to-the-one" ἐνάτην "to-ninth" ὥραν "to-an-hour" ἐβόησεν "it-hollered-unto," ὁ "the-one" Ἰησοῦς "an-Iesous," φωνῇ "unto-a-sound" μεγάλῃ "unto-great" λέγων "forthing," Ἐλωί "Eloi," ἐλωί "Eloi," λεμὰ "lema" σαβαχθανεί; "sabachthanei." τοῦτ' "The-one-this" ἔστιν "it-be," Θεέ "Deity" μου "of-me," θεέ "Deity" μου, "of-me," ἵνα "so" τί "to-what-one" με "to-me" ἐγκατέλιπες; "thou-had-remaindered-down-in?"

#4518 H7662 with pronominal suffix; TDNT - n/a; Aramaic transliteration

—Greek Word Study (Transliteration-Pronunciation Etymology & Grammar)
1) thou hast forsaken me
—Thayer's (New Testament Greek-English Lexicon)

Of Chaldee origin [H7662] with pronominal suffix; thou hast left me; sabachthani (that is, shebakthani), a cry of distress:—sabachthani.
—Strong's (Greek Dictionary of the New Testament)

It means the same thing sister. This is what I do, this is my calling. Men can make all kind pf arguments, they can even get people to believe the Pre Trib Rapture is not true, when it is. That is why I stay in tune with the Lord, any other way leads us into a confused state of being.

 

[ewq1938]

Not quite, it means David was shown a vision of THE FUTURE. God lives in all time at once.

No. David complained that God had forsaken him but David was wrong.

Christ never addressed his Father by saying "God" he always used "Father" when speaking to or praying to Him proving that he was not speaking to his Father when he said those things on the cross. He was indeed teaching.




Have you ever quoted scripture? Does it mean you are saying those words and that they apply to your life? I've quoted that same portion in Psalms but didn't mean that God forsook me. Christ probably quoted the entire chapter but even if he stopped with that one verse it means that he was fulfilling the prophecy of Messiah and dying for us as we see in that chapter. It was David that felt God had forsaken him and it wasn't true. God didn't forsake David and he didn't forsake his own son.





Psa 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?


He wasn't talking to his Father but quoting scripture to show prophecy had been fulfilled. Not everything in the Psalms 22 is Messianic prophetically speaking.

Psa 22:2 O my God, I cry in the daytime, but thou hearest not; and in the night season, and am not silent.


Christ didn't cry in the day time and his Father certainly heard him when he did speak to Him. David said God didn't hear yet Paul wrote that when Christ prayed in the garden, he was heard!




Heb 13:5 Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.


If God will never leave or forsake us, why think he forsook his own son who is God as well?


Some claim Christ was made sin (a figure of speech that means he was the sin offering NOT that he was sin) and that somehow meant the Father couldn't stand him or had to look away or something like that but the truth is God can be in the presence of any sinner whether literally or spiritually. He spent time with satan himself in heaven with no issues. The Father wouldn't have any reason at all to abandon or forsake his own Son! God fellowshipped with sinners like David and Moses and countless others. God won't fellowship with those that don't love him. Only those would he forsake and only because they forsake him first which is similar to when God forsook Israel. He only did so because they had committed religious adultery and fornication with false gods.



Let's ask ourselves who really benefits from the theory that God the Father can forsake God the Son ie: one person of the Trinity forsaking another person of the Trinity? Satan benefits! Anti-Trinitarians benefit. It shows a weak Trinity who can turn their back against themselves yet in Job we see God having multiple conversations with the most evil, sinful being that has ever existed. So would God really turn his face from his own beloved Son and not turn his face from satan? Seriously, the doctrines people believe in astonish me at times!



Mat 27:44 The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth.
Mat 27:45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.
Mat 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?


About the 9th hour Christ supposedly exclaims that God has forsaken him yet in Luke at the same time we see something quite different:

Luk 23:44 And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.
Luk 23:45 And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.
Luk 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

So was he forsaken because God could not stand the sin he bore or was he confident he was about to be received into the hands of his Father who did not have his back turned to him and who was not forsaking him at all?


Act 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Act 2:24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.
Act 2:25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:
Act 2:26 Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope:
Act 2:27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

The Lord never left or abandoned Christ according to this.

Clarke:

For David speaketh concerning him - The quotation here is made from Psa_16:8-11 (note), which contains a most remarkable prophecy concerning Christ, every word of which applies to him, and to him exclusively.

Gill:

Acts 2:25
For David speaketh concerning him,.... The Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ, in Psa_16:8. The whole psalm belongs to the Messiah, and everything concerning the person in it agrees with him; such as his trust in God, Psa_16:1 as he was man and Mediator; his very great regard to the saints, and delight in them, Psa_16:2 his disregard to others who were hastening after another God, or another Saviour, whose sacrifices, as an high priest, he would not offer up, nor make intercession for them, Psa_16:4 his exceeding great satisfaction in having the God of Israel for his portion, and in having his lot cast among his peculiar people, who were a delightful inheritance to him, Psa_16:5 his thankfulness for advice and direction in the time of his sorrows and sufferings


Joh 16:28 I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.
Joh 16:29 His disciples said unto him, Lo, now speakest thou plainly, and speakest no proverb.
Joh 16:30 Now are we sure that thou knowest all things, and needest not that any man should ask thee: by this we believe that thou camest forth from God.
Joh 16:31 Jesus answered them, Do ye now believe?
Joh 16:32 Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me.

The disciples would abandon Christ but the Father never would! This is prophecy and Jesus is not a false prophet so his words are true. The disciples would leave him but the Father would not.


Ask yourself who benefits from the idea that one person of the Trinity forsook another, that the Trinity isn't fully united and one person of the Trinity showed the same type of wrath God shows to his morally evil enemies.

 

[ewq1938]

That is not Hebrew, that is Greek.

No, it's Aramaic.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Jesus' spirit and body, he does't need a new body like we do, he always had a glorious body, thus he went to the Prisons (holding cells/Paradise) to preach to those in the earth Peter says.

He had His spirit always but not in the form of His resurrected body. His resurrected body is glorified but when you see Him, He looks very much like He did on earth. He didn't have appearance before He came down from heaven.

Jesus has no need to leave his body, he has a Glorious Body

His physical body died and was buried and His spirit left His body and went to Paradise - the same day.

But his spirit was never killed, in reality we never die in spirit either, we were made in God's Image, we are also eternal beings, we merely sleep until the Rapture.

Nobody said His spirit died. Soul sleep? Nope. Sounds like SDA theology.

NOWHERE does he says as soon as we die (get absent from the body) we go to be with the Lord

Sorry, you can't symbolize that verse all you want, twist it, distort it ... To be absent the body IS TO BE PRESENT WITH THE LORD. There is no unconscious waiting period. We are already a new creature spiritually and alive IN Christ. Being "In Christ" is not asleep, it is alive. There are millions of conscious souls in heaven now, just as Abraham, Moses, Enoch, all the old Testament godly people and Christians who have died.

 

[Timtofly]

. So, why would God the Father leave God the son all alone on the cross by himself?

He did not leave Him alone. That is the point of digging deeper in Scripture. Keep digging and one day you will find that it was the Lord God Almighty on the Cross.

They can and are the same thing, lots of things have two names. No one goes to Heaven until the Rapture (in general) or else Paul lied.

Paul lied when he declared there were humans already in Paradise?

He could not remember if they had bodies, yet he said, and I quote:

"For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens."

He remembered in this verse.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

That is not Hebrew, that is Greek.

Ahhh, I guess I’m not going to continue this part of our conversation. I do look up some things about languages but really not all that often - sometimes it helps me and other times it mucks me up and I wish I hadn’t done it! In this case, I only poked into it a bit at some point because something seemed uneasy and wrong to me in saying Jesus stumbled in His trust in the last moments of His life. And I can’t think of anything I would dislike more than to have a conversation over transliteration versus translation. As for sabbachthani being Greek, I think you’re wrong and it is Aramaic, but, once again, I wouldn’t look forward to the conversation. I was just trying to get you to see that it didn’t make sense to me to take a phrase originally spoken in Aramaic and try to translate it into English VIA transliteration of Aramaic to Hebrew. That seems to me a bit like the telephone game we used to play at parties when I was a kid Where everyone got in a circle and one person was given a phrase that she whispered into the ear of the kid beside her and on down the line until by the time it was whispered into the first child’s other ear by the last person of the circle, it was nowhere NEAR what was originally whispered but instead was a mangled mess.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

No. David complained that God had forsaken him but David was wrong.

Well unless Matthew lied he said My God, My God, by saying El, which means God. He said God on purpose quoting David's Psalm, so those around him knew he was quoting Psalm 22. Yes, David may not have saw it correctly, we see in part darkly, but God foreknew what David would wrote, thus when David saw the vision, he saw My God My God (El). Why? Most of the Prophets did not understand the coming Messiah in full tbh. So, David naturally understood the Messiah to be a man, who came to SAVE his peoples. God would not even show Daniel that the 1290 was a False Prophet High Priest gone rogue, else every other High Priest between then and 70 AD's life might have been in peril. God did leave Jesus on the cross because God can not abide sin, I got that 37 years ago as a young baby Christian, you should be able to get that sir. You are well up there in age I think, I am on about 10 sites with you, lets see my moms 88 born in 1934 so you are in your 80s, looks like you may be here fir the rapture my friend. Keep on fighting for the truth. Amen.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

No, it's Aramaic.

Yes, I now that, but the point is its not Greek, and I was not going to go back in to change that portion, PLUS if I say Aramaic instead of Hebrew it might throw them off, so I kept it simple, because Israel are Hebrew speaking peoples, and they wrote it. So, why add in an unneeded point, when the point was it is not Greek. Keep it simple.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

He had His spirit always but not in the form of His resurrected body. His resurrected body is glorified but when you see Him, He looks very much like He did on earth. He didn't have appearance before He came down from heaven.

Sure he did, the Man in Linen in Daniel 12 was Yeshua/Jesus. Look at how Daniel saw him and how John saw him in Revelation one, the exact same appearance. Jesus could disappear from the crowds and did quite often when pressed by evil men seeking to kill him.

His physical body died and was buried and His spirit left His body and went to Paradise - the same day.

The body disappeared also brother. If you want to preach unto those in prison you might want to show your wounds and the fact that you have overcome death.

Nobody said His spirit died. Soul sleep? Nope. Sounds like SDA theology.

This kind of argument will never work on me brother. I do not care if a cult who are wrong on something, accidently gets one thing right or not, I will never make my decisions about the truth on ANYTHING just because you or others find a cult who also sees that (probably by accident tbh) Pssstt, I will also never try to get you to change your mind in this manner, I will point out the Herbert W. Armstrong doctrine to people, because many do not even understand who it came from and why it is in error.

Lets look at scriptures to settle the debate, that is what I do.

1 Cor. 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption(Sin Flesh) inherit incorruption.

51 Behold, I shew you a mystery(Musterion/Secret by God's Silence/to SHUT The Mouth); We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

So, is Paul lying, or are you just incorrect on this?

Daniel 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up(70th week/1260 event), the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

A verse in the Old Testament and a verse in the New Testament shows us that our human souls SLEEP in the earth and then AWAKE, when Jesus blows the last trump, which really means his voice quivers as a trump according to Rev. 4:1. The Last Trump always ended the Harvest Season so think Church Age ends via the Last Trump. This leaves only the Feast of Atonement and Tabernacles to be fulfilled, and Israel has to Atone, then they Dwell (Tabernacle) with Jesus who is God the Redeemer, for 1000 years.

So, Paul says we SLEEP until Jesus calls us home, and Daniel says we sleep until the very end. Yet we don't sleep, I guess because you actually think we go straight to heaven and nowhere is this show to be the case. Its a BAD Men's Traditions that seeps in unawares. I will go with Paul and Daniel over other men my friend.

Sorry, you can't symbolize that verse all you want, twist it, distort it ... To be absent the body IS TO BE PRESENT WITH THE LORD. There is no unconscious waiting period. We are already a new creature spiritually and alive IN Christ. Being "In Christ" is not asleep, it is alive. There are millions of conscious souls in heaven now, just as Abraham, Moses, Enoch, all the old Testament godly people and Christians who have died.

That is what you did sir, all you have to do is read the full context, its very, very obvious, the problem is people with agendas hear what they want to hear brother. They get tunnel vision and I guess at times we all do this a wee bit.

So, Daniel says WE SLEEP, as does Paul, until the very end. So, Paul is saying its OK to die, do not fret dying, if you read 1 Cor. and 2 Cor. in full you would understand the Corinthians fears of dying and not being raised from the dead, brought these letters to start with. He had to write two letters to the Thessalonians also because they feared they were in the DOTL/God's Wrath.

It gets no plainer than 1 Cor. 15:50-51 and Daniel 12:1-2 WE SLEEP until Jesus calls us home. It is just that simple, I could care less what the SDA say, nothing they say or do not say will ever make me change what God teaches me to be His truths. Never ever ever.

God Bless.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Sure he did, the Man in Linen in Daniel 12 was Yeshua/Jesus.

.
Yes, but it also wasn't in Daniel's time, it was a vision of a future time, a time that Daniel saw Jesus resurrected body.

The body disappeared also brother.

So you are not SDA, where did you learn your theology, what church?
His body did not disappear. He was resurrected and He walked out of the tomb. He showed His scars to doubting Thomas, yet His body was not the same, it had new eternal qualities and abilities to appear and disappear, ascend and discend,, travel great distances on a moments time. He met the disciples at the Sea of Galilee after his resurrection 70 miles away and 3 days walk - do you think He walked their? He appeared in the upper room, dematerialized as if traveling through the walls. He didn't
Walk through the door.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

Ahhh, I guess I’m not going to continue this part of our conversation. I do look up some things about languages but really not all that often - sometimes it helps me and other times it mucks me up and I wish I hadn’t done it! In this case, I only poked into it a bit at some point because something seemed uneasy and wrong to me in saying Jesus stumbled in His trust in the last moments of His life. And I can’t think of anything I would dislike more than to have a conversation over transliteration versus translation. As for sabbachthani being Greek, I think you’re wrong and it is Aramaic, but, once again, I wouldn’t look forward to the conversation. I was just trying to get you to see that it didn’t make sense to me to take a phrase originally spoken in Aramaic and try to translate it into English VIA transliteration of Aramaic to Hebrew. That seems to me a bit like the telephone game we used to play at parties when I was a kid Where everyone got in a circle and one person was given a phrase that she whispered into the ear of the kid beside her and on down the line until by the time it was whispered into the first child’s other ear by the last person of the circle, it was nowhere NEAR what was originally whispered but instead was a mangled mess.

Yes, I knew it was Aramaic, but I didn't want to confuse you on any further, it was written during New Testament times, the point is it is not Hebrew, and thus that meaning will not be the same as the one is Psalm 22 per se. But even there it basically means the same thing.

You stated it was Hebrew. Basically nothing in the New Testament is Hebrew. The facts are I have been studying these things 37 years, I am nit just guessing haphazardly. God had to leave Jesus all alone on the ross because God the Father can not abide sin because He has the abundance of the Glory. Why do people think God needs an ATONEMENT to allow the Sinners into His presence? He can not abide sin. Moss couldn't even look upon God, do you not get that? Now that Moses has a glorious body, he can look upon God. The transfiguration shows Elijah and, Moses already have received their glorious bodies.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

You stated it was Hebrew.

No I didn’t.
I was trying to understand why you were using the Aramaic word transliterated into Hebrew to…oh never mind, not important.
But there is some newer Aramaic scholarship to suggest the word has a better Aramaic to English translation. That’s all.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

Yes, but it also wasn't in Daniel's time, it was a vision of a future time, a time that Daniel saw Jesus resurrected body.

No, he saw Yeshua, there is a Spirit body and a flesh body, but Yeshua/Jesus' body was always a glorious body, as were the two Angels with him, he never mentions any wounds.

So you are not SDA, where did you learn your theology, what church?

The bible teaches us that we sleep in the grave until we are resurrected. I showed you where, that can not be overcome, even if we see Green Aliens saying that, its still a truth of God.

His body did not disappear. He was resurrected and He walked out of the tomb.

It never says he walked out of the tomb, Jesus' body was always a glorious body, he disappeared when people sought to stone him. Means he could disappear and reformulate his body to different places. He did the exact same thing when he went to preach in the prisons in the earth. When Mary saw he he even changed his looks, she did not recognize him at all. Jesus is God the Redeemer. When it says he went to the prisons in earth to preach to the lost he carried his wounds with him, of course.

He showed His scars to doubting Thomas, yet His body was not the same, it had new eternal qualities and abilities to appear and disappear, ascend and discend,, travel great distances on a moments time. He met the disciples at the Sea of Galilee after his resurrection 70 miles away and 3 days walk - do you think He walked their? He appeared in the upper room, dematerialized as if traveling through the walls. He didn't
Walk through the door.

He was disappearing to the masses whilst alive. All of this ability came unto him after he was tested by Satan in the desert. He was led into the wilderness by the Holy Spirit, BUT.........he came out in the POWER of the Spirit. Once he starts operating in the spirit, he can do all things. So, whilst I agree, he can do all of those things, he always had that power after he came out of the desert.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

I once heard a man who understands the Hebrew language quite well make a case for a better translation from Hebrew to English being “entangled” rather than “forsaken.” Entangled like the horns of the animal God provided for sacrifice being entangled in the bush. You know the passage right?

Well, it seems to me that you did just that here, but you may not have understood you way saying it that way via the New Testament passages. We may have crossed each other up, maybe I assumed you were speaking about the New Testament (I still think you were because you used the Aramaic word) but you might have been speaking about Psalm 22.

TBH, its not relevant, it means God left Jesus alone on the cross to bear our sins in all three places. I hear professors argue all kind of weird stuff, I wouldn't trust them no further than I can throw a rock. Most do not have the holy spirit.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Well, it seems to me that you did just that here,

No. Just having a conversation.
The only reason I even ever went snooping around concerning it was because it never sat easy with me that Jesus slipped in His trust in God at the end and believed God had abandoned Him. My mind said, whatever is not of trust (faith) is sin…Jesus was spotless…doesn’t really compute…
But, why have you entangled Me or, to this entanglement I came and desired to come - to this entanglement was I born in human flesh, takes away the problem I saw that made me so uneasy.
Thats all.