Forsaken

[bbyrd009]

all the gods i know have fallen

 

[bbyrd009]

You are agreeing with me

i am agreeing with you, in my last post?

excuse me?
Matthew 23:9 Lexicon: "Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.
who might "anyone on earth" be then, you lost me sry
exc...what?
pls dont be ridic, of course we do
1 Samuel 8
we do? why? In this context, i mean? Seems apropos of nothing, pls help. i think
like hell we do, jesus cults are for chumps bro, sry
why do you call Me good? No one is good but Yah

we have to be very careful with our statements made from satans dialectic maybe narf, but srsly bro and i know you wont like this but Jesus did not die for our sins, Bible Search: Jesus died for our sins that was just a cover story to get our bloodthirst little minds started on the path, a surface reading, the hidden from the wise part? and you can tell bc everything they say sounds like an Edict, Sent From Above or at the very least a Hard Fact, right? them wise guys? Who caint really state a single Absolute Truth least near as i can tell an ive been steadily relaxin the definition as i go too, not even close to "there are no round squares" anymore, would you like to try? again, i mean? Bc i dont think one "exists"

anyway, just since you brought it up

bro honest i am just trying to get clarification, make a refutation that you might recognize and counter-refute, get clarification again, um, make another refute apparently, and etc?

so, ima have someone else unbiased read this, manana ok

 

[bbyrd009]

(except the last part where you draw a distinction between Christ and God) while appearing not to agree with me. I like that. It's like a riddle that, when solved, makes you forget the initial question.

well likely to your mind that was here?

Yes, Yah has given all judgement to the Son, and all will be judged by the Son, right?

1 Peter 1:17-19 If you address as Father the One who impartially judges according to each one's work, conduct yourselves in fear during the time of your stay on earth; knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers, but with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ.

i gotta say all that "anyone on earth father" stuff was strickly irrelevant, yes, not sure how we got there, but my meaning is that that v does not make God our judge again, as might be inferred from that wording. John 5:22 Lexicon: "For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, , making it irrelevant too unless i missed your point there.

 

[John Caldwell]

i am agreeing with you, in my last post?

bro honest i am just trying to get clarification, make a refutation that you might recognize and counter-refute, get clarification again, um, make another refute apparently, and etc?

so, ima have someone else unbiased read this, manana ok

Maybe we do not agree.

I am saying we call God Father. If you disagree then we disagree. If you agree then we agree.

I believe in keeping it simple. I'm too old to waste valuable brain cells. Did that when I was younger.

 

[bbyrd009]

yet you make up all these fantasies about me agreeing with you somehow, and do not respond to requests for clarification, why not?
Do not respond to refutes, how come?

Yes, we call "God" father ok, and then we give our children to Molech, right? Which i understand you did not mean "we call God father" to be hypocritical, but a point there is that it most often is, wadr. May not apply to you at all, ok? Generally speaking, iow. Applies to me, usually. etc. Yes, hypocrites call "God" father, bc they do not know or wish to know any better. If you then, being evil just cannot be applied to them i guess, like it can me :)

Guess this makes abs no sense to you right now huh, my apologies ok

where you draw a distinction between Christ and God

and Christ i did not btw Bible Search: Christ died for our sins

 

[bbyrd009]

I am saying we call God Father

many will cry "LordLord" is what comes to mind there, sorry, but to your point...well, ya
lol
we say a lot of stuff
anyway, sure we do, call "God" Father, yes--i mean we are aware there's a v for this right--
so ha maybe i am being fractious on purpose here John, caught me in a weird mood or something. Lotta times a certain phrasing just irks me or whatever...but there is a v for that nonethelesss hmm

contemplate Jesus as a "father" to us in a quite real sense, maybe, for the purposes of those vv? thats my current theory

anyway i think most ppl pray to "God" and not "Father" maybe, i noted a lot of weirdness around first saying "Father" in prayers myself.

 

[Steve Owen]

Why not just back up and answer the questions and join in now?

As I said earlier, I was reluctant to go off-topic, but since the thread has now gone off in all directions, OK.

I think the last inferred Q was "all must come before the judgement seat?"
would you like to address that now

Yep! That's in the Bible, so it must be true. However, it can't contradict Romans 8:1; John 20:31, 1 John 5:13 or a load of other similar texts. 'He [Christ] Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree.' 'By His wounds we are healed.' Therefore, when the Christian comes before the judgement seat, 'we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous' (1 John 2:1; cf. Hebrews 7:25).

There is a judgement, which will affect in some way our status in heaven, but in the Parable of the Talents, both the guy who made five talents and the fellow who made only two entered into the joy of their Lord. The third servant, who buried his talent didn't know the Master and hated Him. He thought He was a nasty, snatchy sort of Person and wouldn't work for Him.

I am not an antinomian, but before I get into that, I'll read your reply.

 

[bbyrd009]

However, it can't contradict Romans 8:1; John 20:31, 1 John 5:13 or a load of other similar texts

well so you say, but if ones understanding of those vv is also flawed i dont see why not?
How can your advocate also be the judge, may i ask?

There is a judgement, which will affect in some way our status in heaven

ah, you mean that place that you might attain after you have literally died, right, Death, More Abundantly, bc you either dont understand or dont care what the Pastor said as you were getting "baptized?" Like the hypocrite chumps we all are? Were? We're back to goodbye, ok Steve, and my apologies ok, not meaning to be taken as a blow-off, im just not interested in "nevermind that what about this" and being lectured to by another frustrated professor bro. The stork brings babies, i get it

but in the Parable of the Talents

ah, you know the king in that parable is satan, right? Talents are money, or were before the RCC manipulated the dictionary, i guess? Pretty fascinating story imo, actually, someone here taught me that one. I think its pretty much all discoverable in the etymology of "talent" if i recall right. Ok anyway best of luck ok bro, i know im bad at this. But sheesh. I mean pls listen to yourself, you got it sooo bad; "that is this and this is that and that cant be and this is always true and that is a fact" lol, jesus bro. already.

 

[bbyrd009]

contemplate Jesus as a "father" to us in a quite real sense, maybe, for the purposes of those vv?

iow in the correct or lets say spiritual sense of "fathers," not ppl who are elected by other ppl to a post, but those who have proven themselves "fathers," i guess i should dig up the vv,
Acts 13:32 Lexicon: "And we preach to you the good news of the promise made to the fathers,
Romans 11:28 Lexicon: From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God's choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers;
so, them guys; and yikes, who is "they" in them Romans vv lol? Huh?

 

[bbyrd009]

anyway one might note how um poetically this pov fits with "call no one on earth 'father'" too? I know the appellation of "Son" makes this pov a bit difficult, but imo shouldnt be too hard to contemplate Jesus as one of our patriarchs, so to speak?

 

[Steve Owen]

well so you say, but if ones understanding of those vv is also flawed i dont see why not?
How can your advocate also be the judge, may i ask?

Well, you'd better hope your Judge is also your Advocate or you're in big trouble.
Psalm 1:5. 'The ungodly shall not stand in the judgement.' but Christ 'justifies the ungodly' (Romans 4:5). The very purpose of His coming into the world was to save them (1 Timothy 1:15) and He did this by dying for them (Romans 5:6).

ah, you mean that place that you might attain after you have literally died, right, Death, More Abundantly, bc you either dont understand or dont care what the Pastor said as you were getting "baptized?" Like the hypocrite chumps we all are? Were? We're back to goodbye, ok Steve, and my apologies ok, not meaning to be taken as a blow-off, im just not interested in "nevermind that what about this" and being lectured to by another frustrated professor bro. The stork brings babies, i get it

That's fine; I've got a pile of stuff to do without trying to reason with goofballs, and if you believe that the King in the Parable of the Talents is Satan, that's what you are. I'm done.

 

[bbyrd009]

Well, you'd better hope your Judge is also your Advocate or you're in big trouble.

wadr it just doesnt work like that bro, it never has, and it never will.
An advocate is not impartial by definition

That's fine; I've got a pile of stuff to do without trying to reason with goofballs, and if you believe that the King in the Parable of the Talents is Satan, that's what you are. I'm done.

grrr lol.
It's a parable, i really have no idea ok, might even work on several levels?
but wouldnt putting Christ there--with the understanding that "talents" meant money then--suggest that usury was good, and enterprise even better?

Ok HNY, and no hard feelings i hope.

 

[Davy]

On another thread @Steve Owen mentioned that he believed that Christ was forsaken by God, I take it instead of us being forsaken. I still find the "instead of" wrong, but I am curious as to what it means that Christ became forsaken.

In Psalm 22 the psalmist (foreshadowing Christ) cries out asking why God has forsaken him. As the psalm goes on the reader is struck not only by the faith of the psalmist in God but also by the fact that God had never abandoned the author but was there and heard his cry.

Likewise, I believe that Christ was forsaken to suffer and die. He was not delivered from death but through death. And therein lies our hope.

But given the context of Steve's reply (a context that Christ was forsaken instead of us, and in the context of this being an additional element of Christ's suffering and death rather than the actual state) I realize that there are other interpretations.

What does it mean to you that Christ was forsaken?

We know that He suffered for us. That is well written of (Isaiah 53; Psalms 22; Matthew 8:17; Galatians 3:13; Hebrews 4:15; etc.).

But I believe the main reason He quoted from Psalms 22 about being forsaken was because He was still teaching, even while upon the cross. For those at that time studied in God's Word, they should have known that passage written in Psalms 22, and the subject of His crucifixion that is written there. They should have recognized it. It was a way for Jesus to show them that He is The Christ.

 

[Preacher4Truth]

Actually Jesus doesn't say "forsaken"...but 'entangled"...as in... My God My God why have you entangled Me?

The word "sabach" in Hebrew means entangled (past tense). This is a reference to Gen.22 and the ram caught in the thicket or "sevach" (hence the crown of thorns) . In Psalm 22 the word is "azav" which means forsaken. Jesus could have said that word but He did not.

This, of course, isn't exactly true and you're, as usual, adding things into texts that are not there.

Jesus didn't speak in Hebrew on the cross when he uttered this, so of course he didn't say the Hebrew word "azab". He actually spoke in Aramaic, and the meaning there is "forsaken" not "entangled."

 

[Enoch111]

Jesus didn't speak in Hebrew on the cross when he uttered this, so of course he didn't say the Hebrew word "azab". He actually spoke in Aramaic, and the meaning there is "forsaken" not "entangled."

This is exactly right. Jesus spoke Aramaic words from the cross, and forsaken means forsaken, not like some here who seek to undermine that truth and manufacture their own theology.

Matthew 27:46
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.

*Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 4518: σαβαχθάνι
σαβαχθάνι, σαβαχθανει T Tr WH (see WH's Appendix, p. 155, and under the word εἰ, ἰ), σαβακθανι Lachmann (in Matt. only) (שְׁבַקתַּנִי, from the Chaldean שְׁבַק), thou hast forsaken me: Matthew 27:46; Mark 15:34 (from Psalm 21:2 (), for the Hebrew עֲזַבְתַּנִי, which is so rendered also by the Chaldee paraphrast). (See Kautzsch, Gram. d. Biblical-Aram. (Leipzig 1884), p. 11.)