I have often heard it said that God poured out His wrath on Jesus on the cross, and afterwards His wrath was appeased. This brings to mind an image of God feeling very angry and having to get it out of His system somehow. Christ was a willing scapegoat who took God's wrath upon Himself, and afterwards God felt much better.
The problem with the idea of God pouring out His wrath on Christ, aside from the fact that it makes no sense, is that the Bible says nothing of the kind. If you do a search on the way the words "the wrath of God" are used in the New Testament, they always refer to Judgment Day, when God will execute justice on the world. The words are never used in connection with the vicarious redemption of Christ.
What, then, does the Bible say about the vicarious redemption of Christ? 2 Corinthians 5:21 says: "For our sake [God] made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." Isaiah 53:5-6 prophesies, "But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed."
So God didn't pour out His wrath on Jesus, He laid on Him the sins of the world, so that He might pay the penalty for them through His death. Why? Hebrews 2:14 says, "Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil." So Jesus did not die to appease God the Father, but to defeat the forces of evil.
Before Jesus became sin on our behalf, Satan had no power over Him because it is sin that gives Satan a foothold. This is why Satan could not harm Jesus when He fasted in the wilderness, but he could tempt Him. And if Jesus had succumbed to temptation, then Satan could have destroyed Him. However, in John 14:30-31, Jesus says, "I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming. He has no claim on me, but I do as the Father has commanded me, so that the world may know that I love the Father." The "ruler of this world"--this fallen world--is Satan, and he has a claim on sinners. Sin separates us from a holy God, so we don't experience His power and protection.
Although Satan had no claim on Christ, God allowed the sins of the world to be placed on Him, and our sins separated Jesus from the Father. This meant that the spiritual forces of evil could do whatever they wanted to Him--humiliate Him, cause Him psychic torment and excruciating physical pain, and kill Him, and that is what they did. Jesus was punished for the sins of the world, thus paying the penalty that we could not pay, reconciling us to God, and granting us freedom from the power of sin and death.
This is not God demanding a burnt offering, because they never pleased Him. Hosea 6:6 says: "For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings."
Isaiah 1:11, 17 says: "'The multitude of your sacrifices--what are they to me?' says the LORD. 'I have more than enough of burnt offerings, of rams and the fat of fattened animals; I have no pleasure in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats . . . Seek justice, encourage the oppressed. Defend the cause of the fatherless, plead the case of the widow.'"
Micah 6:6-8 says: "With what shall I come before the LORD and bow down before the exalted God? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old? Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousand rivers of oil? Shall I offer my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God."
And Hebrews 10:4 says that "it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins." In other words, this ritual of burnt offerings accomplished nothing, even though the Law of Moses required it. But like the rest of the law, it was powerless to save, and was a mere shadow of what was to come: God sending His own Son to pay the penalty for our sins and bridge the chasm between God and sinners. This means that we may receive the Holy Spirit, who has set us "free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death" (Romans 8:2).
Clamflats was right when he said in a comment, "At least with the word 'appease,' we are following a ceremonial sacrifice script which is recognized cross-culturally." People sacrificed to appease their gods until Constantine, the first Christian emperor, ended the practice in the Roman Empire. Although sacrifice never pleased God and never took away sins, it was within this cultural framework that He worked His plan of salvation. But instead of demanding a sacrifice from us, God turned the "ceremonial sacrifice script" around and sacrificed Himself for us.
Charles Wesley's hymn, "And Can It Be?" aptly says, "Amazing love! How can it be, that Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?" but the sacrifice of Christ was more than just a symbol of His love. Romans 8:3-4 says, "For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit."
Wesley's hymn continues:
Long my imprisoned spirit lay,
Fast bound in sin and nature’s night;
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray—
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.
Still the small inward voice I hear,
That whispers all my sins forgiven;
Still the atoning blood is near,
That quenched the wrath of hostile Heaven.
I feel the life His wounds impart;
I feel the Savior in my heart.
I feel the life His wounds impart;
I feel the Savior in my heart.
No condemnation now I dread;
Jesus, and all in Him, is mine;
Alive in Him, my living Head,
And clothed in righteousness divine,
Bold I approach th’eternal throne,
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.
Bold I approach th’eternal throne,
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.
The atonement of Jesus "quenched the wrath of hostile Heaven," by breaking down the barrier between God and humanity. His atoning blood has the power to set us free from the chains of sin, so that we will escape the wrath of God, or His righteous judgment of sin, when He ushers in "new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells" (2 Peter 3:13). Jesus gave Himself for us, giving us His righteousness in exchange for our sin, suffering that we may be healed, and dying and rising that we may live.
34 comments:
Thank you, Anette. This is an issue that has troubled me, so I was doing a search for it and found you. Several songs that we sing talk about the wrath of God being poured out on Jesus. I'm thankful, with you, that it wasn't. I may be mentioning this controversial issue in my own blog eventually.
Thank you for stopping by, Rebecca!
I know what songs you are talking about, and they have always bothered me as well. But I noticed that when people say that God poured out His wrath on Jesus, they never give any Bible citations in support of it.
I agree that there is no support in the Bible for the idea that God poured his wrath out on Jesus, but I am not sure what you say about the atonement is quite correct either. Here is what I see.
“And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment. ” (Heb. 9:27) There are two deaths: the first death that is “the wages of sin” (Rom. 6:23) and the second death that comes at final judgment (Rev. 20:6).
Though we must die because of sin, it was God’s plan from the beginning to resurrect us. But because we are all sinners, God has no justification for resurrecting us. Jesus was not a sinner, so God is justified in raising him up. He did it for mankind; to build a kingdom. God is justified in restoring Jesus’ kingdom to him. That is why Jesus said “I am the resurrection and the life” (John 11:25). The only reason God forgives, saves and resurrects us, and gives us life is because we belong to Jesus; he does it for Jesus.
Notice that every man is resurrected, even the unsaved (Rev. 20:5-6, 11-13). Jesus is the resurrection for everyone. The problem is, however, that the justification does not apply to those who did not receive Jesus. They do not get life; they are judged by their works and cast into the lake of fire--the second death (Rom. 20: 14-15). Only those received Jesus get life and actually become part of his kingdom.
Jesus paid the penalty for sin by dying (that was the sacrifice--he was not a man, a sinner, that he should have to die, yet he became a man to die so God would have the righteous man he needed to be justified in resurrecting man), but he did not pay everybody’s penalty--we all still die! He bear the sins of many--he became one of us--all things to all men that they may be saved. We must be careful in our understanding what “bearing “ means. When we bear each others burdens, that does not mean the one who originally had the burden is free from it. What it means is that we share in it. What Jesus did was suffer the first death with us so we would not have to face final judgment and suffer the second death. He became our righteousness substitute--the justification God needed to raise man. When we repent of our sins and receive Jesus Christ as our Savior and our Lord, we become part of his kingdom and we are restored to him. God did lay the iniquity of us all on Jesus, but not in the sense that he took a proportionate amount of punishment for it; that is not in the Bible either. What it means is that all the depravity of the world came together at the Jesus--the perfect Son of God--on the cross. It was Jesus’ responsibility to endure what he had to endure is man was going to be saved. Everything that was wrong in the world came to a pinnacle in the false witness, wrongful judgment, horrible torture, and murder of the perfect Jesus Christ. It was the ultimate witness to God’s righteousness and our depravity.
That is why we repent and take up our cross with Jesus and follow him. He is not just some dude who got me off the hook and sent me along to do his bidding. He is the way, the truth, and the life. He is one to be inquired of, believed, and followed not matter what the cost. He is... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzqTFNfeDnE.
Hi Anonymous. Thanks for stopping by!
I can't tell from your comment what I said about the atonement that you disagree with. I certainly agree that Jesus is "not just some dude who got me off the hook and sent me along to do his bidding. He is the way, the truth, and the life. He is one to be inquired of, believed, and followed not matter what the cost."
I also agree that those who do not receive Jesus are not justified by faith.
So if you can be more specific about what you are referring to, we can see if we actually disagree on anything about the atonement.
It is the penal aspect that I disagree with. You state: "Jesus was punished for the sins of the world, thus paying the penalty that we could not pay, reconciling us to God, and granting us freedom from the power of sin and death." I do not find that in the Bible. What Jesus paid was the righteousness where we fell short.
The best illustration of what happened with Jesus is found in Genesis 3:21: "And to Adam also unto his wife did the LORD make coats of skins, and clothed them." God had to sacrifice an animal to make up for the shortcoming now found in man. It was a temporary fix, and it was more educational than anything, being a foreshadowing of what God was going to have to do to be justified in resurrecting man' ie, sacrifice his Son so that man could be clothed in His righteousness (Rev 3:18 and the several other passage talking about being clothed in righteousness and white linen).
Neither the animal in Genesis that was sacrificed for his skin nor Jesus were punished by God; they were sacrificed by him. Jesus was sacrificed by being delivered to evil hands. They punished him, but that is not what appeased God. What appeased God was Christ's righteousness--his willingness did become man, knowing that he would be wrongly punished by man even though he did no wrong--so that God would have a man that did not come short of the glory of God so that He would be justified in raising man from the dead, death being the consequence of sin. We are resurrected because God is restoring to Jesus the kingdom that was lost when he was murdered. Those who are lost are lost because they have rejected that kingdom.
But, again, what I disagreed with the penal aspect of the atonement. Jesus was not punished by God--he was sacrificed.
It is the penal aspect that I disagree with. You state: "Jesus was punished for the sins of the world, thus paying the penalty that we could not pay, reconciling us to God, and granting us freedom from the power of sin and death." I do not find that in the Bible. What Jesus paid was the righteousness where we fell short.
Isaiah 53:5 says: "For He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; the chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed."
The word for "chastening" can also be translated "punishment."
However, as I said in my main post, Jesus was not punished by God; however, He still died as our substitute and died to take away our sins.
It is the penal aspect that I disagree with. You state: "Jesus was punished for the sins of the world, thus paying the penalty that we could not pay, reconciling us to God, and granting us freedom from the power of sin and death." I do not find that in the Bible. What Jesus paid was the righteousness where we fell short. Isaiah 53:5 says: "For He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; the chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed." The word for "chastening" can also be translated "punishment." However, as I said in my main post, Jesus was not punished by God; however, He still died as our substitute and died to take away our sins.
Maybe “chastening” can be translated “punishment,” but it is the Hebrew chalal we need to be looking at because that is the word that was translated into “chastening” in your version, and “wounded” in mine. The Hebrew translates to:
1) to profane, defile, pollute, desecrate, begin
a) (Niphal)
1) to profane oneself, defile oneself, pollute oneself
a) ritually
b) sexually
2) to be polluted, be defiled
b) (Piel)
1) to profane, make common, defile, pollute
2) to violate the honour of, dishonour
3) to violate (a covenant)
4) to treat as common
c) (Pual) to profane (name of God)
d) (Hiphil)
1) to let be profaned
2) to begin
e) (Hophal) to be begun
2) to wound (fatally), bore through, pierce, bore
a) (Qal) to pierce
b) (Pual) to be slain
c) (Poel) to wound, pierce
d) (Poal) to be wounded
(Piel) to play the flute or pipe.
But even if it could be translated “punishment,” we would have to look at the rest of what the Bible says to determine which translation to use. Isaiah 53:4 states pretty explicitly that it was not God punishing Jesus. It says “Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted.”
That says pretty clearly that it is error to believe it was God that was punishing Jesus.
It did indeed please God to “bruise” Jesus (Isa 53:10), but the bruising was sending him to become flesh and be submitted like a lamb to slaughter, knowing that was going to be his fate if he did become flesh. God bruise Jesus by submitting him to evil me knowing it was going to happen (Actw 2:23). That was the sacrifice.
As far as Jesus being our substitute, where is the substitution? We still die spiritually (or are born dead spiritually) and physically. After this is the judgment and the second death, the lake of fire. Jesus did not die the second death--he is the judge at the second death! He died the first death, just like us. He died the first death so we don’t have to die the second death. He did not take our place to keep us from the first death; he died to redeem us--to bring us back from the first death. The only substitution you can draw out of that is a righteousness substitute; Jesus was the righteousness that justifies God in raising him up. We are raised up due to the fact that we belong to Jesus; God is restoring his people to him, like he restored Job’s family to him after he was sacrificed. Job is a picture of what happens with Jesus.
One other point about substitution. In all the passage that say Christ died "for" us that are taken to mean substitute, the Greek word translated "for" is "hyper" which means:
1) in behalf of, for the sake of
2) over, beyond, more than
3) more, beyond, over
When "for" is used to mean something more along the lines of a substitute or replacement, like "eye for an eye," the Greek word used for "for" is "anti," which means:
1) over against, opposite to, before
2) for, instead of, in place of (something)
a) instead of
b) for
c) for that, because
d) wherefore, for this cause
Why did they not use "anti" if they were talking about a substitute?
Another thing to consider: God teaches us to pray "forgive us our debts/sins as we forgive our debtors/those who sin against us." Is he telling us to find a substitute to take our wrath out on so we can forgive the offender? Certainly not. God is teaching us his ways, and he is not sending us to find a substitute. There is no substitution: there is mercy forgiveness, remission of sins for the repentant. Nothing more, nothing less. We must be very careful not to be adding things to the Bible, lest God "reprove thee, and thou be found a liar" Prov 30:6 (sorry for the harsh words, but that is how God himself addresses the issue of adding to his words.).
Anette, I had a wonderful discussion with my son in law at lunch today regarding God's providence. I am always saying that I don't believe in coincidence, that I trust His providence. I have a picture hanging in my office of the statue of Jesus at ND with the Latin inscription on the front Venite Ad Me Omnes. I decided to do some research and found your blog. I was so very blessed reading your posts and look forward to working my way through them. Your insight and understanding of His Word is so enriching. Your faith in the Lord is inspiring. Thanks so much for taking the time to share. I pray the Lord continues to use you. Blessings. Pastor Jack
Thank you so much for your encouraging words, Pastor Jack! I agree with you that there are no coincidences, and your comment is a case in point. I'm currently going through a family emergency and yesterday was a very discouraging day. But your words helped me put things in perspective--including your mention of the statue at ND.
This was so wonderfully written and brought a lot of light on the subject. This comment is merely a possible insight that came to me while reading. The wrath of God that was going to be on us during judgment day, we would have faced if Jesus would not have sacrificed his life and overcame death. So if Jesus took our place and received the punishment that we deserved, is it conceivable that He experienced that wrath? Regardless the wrath of God, that was going to be on us on Judgment Day, has been quenched for believers.
Thank you, AlysonJoy!
You raise a good point. Jesus certainly experienced God's absence, which may in one sense be like His wrath because everything good is from God.
But it has always made me cringe somewhat when Christians talk about God's wrath being satisfied when He poured it out on Christ. To me it makes God seem like an unjust, irrational, primitive deity.
And since I noticed that people say it without referencing Scripture, I decided to research the Bible to see what it actually says. I was relieved that it doesn't use those words, so now I don't have to either. :)
Have a blessed Christmas!
Hi!
I am so happy for finding your blog. I attend a Baptist church and durring one of our prayer meets one of the pastors mentioned that Jesus recieved the Wrath and judgement of God on the cross. This blew me away. I told him that it was a faulse doctrin. He told me that it was a fondamental doctrin and that it was the heart of understanding salvation...I was totally devesated. That made no sence to me. I looked up the scriptrures but found nothing to back-up his sayings. But to read your blog was a blessing and a confirmation that the teaching that that was in my heart was the teaching of the Holy Spirit. Amen
Elaine
Hi Elaine!
Good for you that you checked the Scriptures when something didn't seem right to you! It can be so easy to just believe something is biblical if we hear it enough times. I think that's what Jesus was referring to when He said to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees in Matthew 16:6-12. False teaching can spread quickly like yeast.
Jesus says in the garden'Father let this cup pass from me' Isiah 51 talks about the cup of Gods wrath, Jeremiah 25-15 talks about the cup filled with Gods wrath, Revalations 16-19 talks about the cup filled with the fury of Gods wrath. How Jesus acted in the garden(sweat of blood) i can see the wrath of God being the reason more then a cross. Either way everyone is reseaching Gods word so thats a good thing.
Hi Anonymous! Thank you for your thoughts.
How then do you explain Matthew 20:22-23, where Jesus asks the sons of Zebedee if they can drink the cup He is going to drink? And when they say that they can, Jesus says, "You will indeed drink from My cup."
Surely you don't think that James and John, two apostles and disciples of Jesus, would incur the wrath of God, do you?
As Christians we can expect suffering and persecution, like James did when he was executed by Herod, but we are not under the wrath of God.
Thank you for responding which caused me to respond back lol. In Matthew 20-22:23'You will drink My cup'First thing that came to mind because of "You will-and My cup" was 1 corinthians 11:25 'This cup is the new covenant in my blood;do this, whenever you drink it, in rememberance of me." NO I do not think James and John did. Jesus is everything pure, holy, without sin. We are the complete oppisite which GOD hates Proverbs 16-19. Now if we believe that Jesus died for the sin of all people, for something that God hates.....Right or wrong I can see were people might feel that Jesus received Gods wrath for us.
First I want to thank everyone that posted, to me it's wonderful. but I have a question if I may, about the Rainbows, Doesn't this mean that judgement is pasted. Please help, Sincerely. full of hopefull love.
Anonymous,
First I want to thank everyone that posted, to me it's wonderful. but I have a question if I may, about the Rainbows, Doesn't this mean that judgement is pasted. Please help, Sincerely. full of hopefull love.
I apologize for taking three months to reply to you, and hope you have enabled email notification so you get my response. As I say in the sidebar, I have retired this blog. However, your question is such a good one that I decided to reply to it anyway.
When God set the rainbow in the sky after the flood, He did not say that judgment had passed—He promised that a flood would never again destroy the earth (Genesis 9:11). We see that God later brought judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah, by sending down burning sulfur (Genesis 19:24).
However, the flood is a “type” of God’s final judgment. That means that it foreshadows and symbolizes what God will eventually do to the earth. But He will not destroy it with water; the Bible always talks about a final judgment of fire. So we see that the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is also a “type” of the final judgment.
Talk of judgment may make God seem harsh, but it is actually indicative of His goodness and His love. He intends to create new heavens and a new earth “in which righteousness dwells” (2 Peter 3:13). He will rid His creation of everything evil so His people will live forever in perfect peace and joy.
But if we reject His redemption we will face His judgment. This makes sense, since much of the evil in the world comes from within the human heart. If God permits that evil to remain, the problem of evil remains. In Genesis 18:20, God responds to a “great outcry” against Sodom and Gomorrah. People were suffering because of the evil in those towns, and the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were unrepentant, unlike those of Nineveh (Jonah 3). We have to repent and allow God to transform us by His grace. God is a merciful judge who sent His Son to die for our redemption, but He is still a judge.
The story of Noah and the flood contains important symbolism for us. First, after the flood, when the water had receded, a dove brought Noah an olive branch. An olive branch is an ancient symbol of peace, and the dove is a Christian symbol of the Holy Spirit. Likewise, we have peace with God through Christ when we are sealed with the Holy Spirit.
Second, the building of the ark represents obedience to God and His Word. God told Noah exactly how to build the ark long before there was any sign of a flood. Noah survived because he obeyed. Likewise, the Bible tells us how we may be saved, and it is to be obeyed in every way because it is like a “lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts” (2 Peter 1:19). When that day dawns, we will see spiritual realities and understand why God asked us to walk the way He did.
Third, the rainbow symbolizes God’s covenant of peace with those who inherit His kingdom. Revelation 21:2-4 says: “And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ‘Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.’”
In the New Jerusalem—or the new earth—God’s judgment will have passed, and with it, all the evil of this present order.
Great. However, sin did not separate the Father from Jesus. The Father allowed and planned for Jesus to die on the cross so that by His resurrection He defeated evil, and became the door for us to the Father. God could have saved Jesus, and even Jesus said that He could have called on the Father and He would have sent angels. However, that was not our Father's plan!
Jesus did take the wrath. He drank the cup. When the Bible talks about Christ taking the punishment for our sins, that is the wrath. God's wrath is the punishment of God for the sins people commit. But those who believe in Christ now do not receive wrath, not now, not ever.
This is a very important truth that without it would be compromise of the Gospel of Christ.
Luke 22:39-46 is the perfect verse. He prayed that God would take the cup from Him but He knew God's plan and that was to take the punishment for those who would believe. It doesn't give the idea that God felt better after He punished Jesus for our sins with His wrath but it is to glorify Him. God had to pour out His wrath on Jesus because someone has to be punished for sins in order for God to remain just. He is a good/righteous/holy God and sin must be punished. If a good God just passed over our sins without punishment, He would not be a good God. His righteousness would be compromised. This truth is so essential to people getting saved. We must tell them Jesus took the wrath that we deserve for our sins, the punishment we deserve.
This is a good video to understand this a little more than what I have said.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5Rbo3_TpK8&safe=active
Keep praying man and seeking truth in the Word of God. In the Love and Grace of Christ, Jon.
Back toward the top, "Anonymous" said '"Jesus was punished for the sins of the world, thus paying the penalty that we could not pay, reconciling us to God, and granting us freedom from the power of sin and death." I do not find that in the Bible.'
I would start with Romans 3:24-25.
BTW propitiation is simply the satisfaction of God's wrath.
The point of view mentioned seems to make little of the cross. As if it is just another act of obedience, no more significant than that.
It was not Christ's obedience in itself that saved us, it was the shedding of his blood. (Mt 26:28, Heb 9:22)
The center of the Gospel we preach is not that Jesus was obedient. Its his crucifixion. (1 Cor 1:23)
Thanks Anett!
is there any way I can contact your first "anonymous"commenter? If you can, he can get me at sdindinger atgmail dotcom.
The post may be old, but the subject is timeless. Both of you have really good points, but you might want to reconsider what he said about penal substitution.
Ask yourself if punnishing the innocent and the righteous fulfills Biblical,secular or your own sense of justice. "We have propitiation through His blood, the forgiveness of sins". If Jesus paid our debt, there is no more need for His precious blood or for fogiveness. It's all been paid for. We owe nothing. Take note that in your description of atonement, you do not mention forgiveness or the blood of Jesus Christ. (Red flag)
thanks,
stephen
Do a search in scripture on what is in "the cup" that Jesus refers to in the garden of Gethsemane.
Matthew 26:39 Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will."
Luke 22:42 "Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done."
John 18:11 Jesus commanded Peter, "Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?"
Very very clearly Jesus is talking about the cup of the Fathers wrath!
Jeremiah 25:15 This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, said to me: "Take from my hand this cup filled with the wine of my wrath and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it.
Job 21:20 Let their own eyes see their destruction; let them drink the cup of the wrath of the Almighty.
Revelation 14:10 they, too, will drink the wine of God's fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb.
Isaiah 51:17 Awake, awake! Rise up, Jerusalem, you who have drunk from the hand of the LORD the cup of his wrath, you who have drained to its dregs the goblet that makes people stagger.
You can only miss this if you don't want to see it.
Hi Everyone,
Thank you for reading my blog. As I say in my last comment, I have retired it (my last post was February, 2011). I apologize for not making this clearer.
I'm not going to be able to reply to all your points, but I will publish those awaiting moderation and reply to the last two. Then I'll wait a week or so to see if you have something new to say in response, and then I will close the comment box.
Steve,
is there any way I can contact your first "anonymous"commenter? If you can, he can get me at sdindinger atgmail dotcom.
No, I'm sorry but Blogger does not give me anyone's email address.
Take note that in your description of atonement, you do not mention forgiveness or the blood of Jesus Christ. (Red flag)
Actually, the whole post is about the power of the blood of Jesus to reconcile us to God, take away our sins, and impart to us the righteousness of Christ. Even if I don't use the word "forgiveness" in the post (except in the Wesley quote) I say things that mean the same thing, and I most emphatically believe that those of us who are in Christ are forgiven! I explicitly use the words "the blood of Jesus" in my description of the atonement.
James,
You are repeating an argument that I have already refuted in an earlier comment, but I will reply to it one last time since this seems to be a popular misconception.
If the "cup" that Jesus refers to in the Garden of Gethsemane is the cup of God's wrath, then John and James remained under God's wrath after the death and resurrection of Jesus. Mark 10:38 (and its synoptic equivalent) is the only other reference in the whole Bible to the "cup" that Jesus will drink, and He says that James and John would also drink it. It is the cup of suffering, not the wrath of God.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary says:
"can ye drink of the cup that I drink of?-To "drink of a cup" is in Scripture a figure for getting one's fill either of good (Ps 16:5; 23:5; 116:13; Jer 16:7) or of ill (Ps 75:8; Joh 18:11; Re 14:10). Here it is the cup of suffering."
Unless you are prepared to assert that the blood of Jesus was insufficient for the sons of Zebedee, my point stands: Nowhere does the Bible say or imply that God poured out His wrath on Jesus.
God bless you all!
Correction: My last post on this blog was February 2012, not 2011.
Where does it imply that wrath is somehow a "getting even with" attitude? If it is, then I'm not sure what this article is sidestepping, for evidently God still is feeling the need for retribution and will take it out on the world in the end. No where in scripture is the idea of wrath linked together with the concept of retribution, as you said in the first few lines of your post, "This brings to mind the idea of feeling very angry" - but, what idea it brings to mind is inconsequential to what His wrath actually was and is. If the wrath of God is His anger towards defacing and defaming the trinity, then any one part of the Godhead can feel wrath, without it being retributive, because it is on the behalf of the others not for themselves...To illustrate, if the Father has wrath against the world for its sin, He does so not due to any self serving purpose but because of the violence it is to the Son and the Spirit. That is not retributive, it is justice and love for the Godhead before and above the creation. If wrath was simply relegated to the future and that for rejecting Christ alone, I might find common ground with you, but the law worked wrath and Jesus died to remove us from the curse of the law (God's wrath) having become a curse for us. It seems to me that the wrath of God being poured out on Christ as the One who received my punishment (Isa. 53:11) is clear even though the specific phraseology is not employed in the new testament specifically.
Anonymous,
Where does it imply that wrath is somehow a "getting even with" attitude?
I'm not sure what you mean by this - I certainly didn't say or imply that. In fact, I don't object to the use of the word "wrath" at all - one that is used frequently in the Bible. I say toward the end of my post: "His atoning blood has the power to set us free from the chains of sin, so that we will escape the wrath of God, or His righteous judgment of sin, when He ushers in 'new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells' (2 Peter 3:13)."
I do object to the notion that God poured out His wrath on Jesus so that His wrath might be appeased. This is not in the Bible, and it makes God sound like some primitive deity, like a volcano god who demands a virgin sacrifice to appease his wrath.
"This brings to mind the idea of feeling very angry" - but, what idea it brings to mind is inconsequential to what His wrath actually was and is.
I should have make clear at the beginning of this article that I was responding to an atheist who understood the sacrifice of Christ and the word "appease" as a "ceremonial sacrifice script which is recognized cross-culturally." And when we defend our faith to unbelievers, the ideas our words evoke are extremely important. We are ambassadors for Christ, and as such we have a duty to choose our words carefully and biblically so we don't defame Him. If the notion that God poured out His wrath on Jesus to appease Himself is not in the Bible and it evokes the wrong ideas about God, why not choose our words differently? Why not stick to what the Bible actually does say and avoid the risk of making God seem harsh and irrational?
It seems to me that the wrath of God being poured out on Christ as the One who received my punishment (Isa. 53:11) is clear even though the specific phraseology is not employed in the new testament specifically.
If the best you can come up with is Isaiah 53:11, which only says that the Righteous Servant (Jesus) will carry our sins (something we all agree on), then you have implicitly conceded that the Bible does not say that God poured out His wrath on Jesus.
In my daily quiet time today, I read Revelation 15:1 "Then I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvelous: seven angles having the seven last plagues, for in them the wrath of God is complete." I was blown away, I've always been taught and believed that God's wrath was poured out on Christ on the cross. This verse clearly says that God's wrath will be complete in the last seven plagues. I googled and found your blog. Thank you. I read all the comments and wow, I will have to continue to study this out and pray for wisdom and revelation on this matter, but I wanted to put this verse out there for all the readers to be aware of and so they can study and pray it out themselves. Thank you Annette for this post!
I remember, years ago, watching Dr. D. James Kennedy, pastor of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, giving a sermon on the death of Jesus. As he concluded, describing Jesus suffering on the cross, he said that the Father then, (and he took a deeeeeep breath and held it), upon Jesus, (and Kennedy began to shake and quiver as he almost yelled out that upon Jesus, the Father then "POUUUUUUUUURRRRRED OUTTTTT HISSSSS WRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAATTTTHHHH!!!!!" shaking violently as he thundered this! I sat bolt upright and said to myself, NO WAY did the Father explode in rage at Jesus, the 2nd Person of the Holy Trinity, like that, venting an explosive eternal rage upon him as he was suffering on the cross. It made me ill. Thank you for this article and these comments!
Anette,
Have you considered Ps 22 where David foreshadow's Jesus death on the cross in conjunction with "Jesus being separated from the Father" on our behalf?
Read Vs 24
Anette, this is a topic which requires deep study and careful reverence. What do you think the purpose of Jehovah was when He struck Jesus? "I will strike the Shepherd and the sheep will be scattered?" In Psalm 102, which is quoted as a Messianic Psalm referring to Christ, what do you think this verse means: "In thine anger and thine wrath, thou hast lifted Me up and cast me down". Jesus said in John 3, "Just as the Serpent in the wilderness was lifted up, so must the Son of Man be lifted up". Psalm 102 indicates that Jesus was lifted up in the wrath of God. John the baptist later in John 3:36 (the very same chapter) described a present abiding wrath on those who don't have the Son. He was wounded, struck, and bruised for our transgressions, so where did that wrath that was presently abiding on us go? Why was God angry at us, and how was this resolved? "He who knew no sin became sin for us..." My point is to be careful here and study deeper. We live in a time when people won't endure sound doctrine, and they twist the Word of God...
gsixty,
As I say in the original post, "our sins separated Jesus from the Father." I’m not sure if you mentioned Psalm 22 to agree or disagree with me. ☺
Now, this raises a point that I have been thinking about: Does the wrath of God mean separation from God? If so, Jesus was under the Father’s wrath when He forsook Him. In Matthew 27:46, Jesus says, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me.”
Psalm 89, which appears to be Messianic, says: “How long, O Lord? Will you hide yourself forever? How long will your wrath burn like fire?” (Psalm 89:46) And Psalm 89:38 says, “But now you have cast off and rejected; you are full of wrath against your anointed.”
Many Bible verses in the Old and New Testaments indicate that to be far from God means destruction and to be close to God is blessing and salvation. When Israel sinned, God removed them from His presence. (2 Kings 17:18) And Jesus was called Immanuel, which means “God with us.” (Matthew 1:23)
However, if God removed His presence from Jesus, He could not be actively pouring out His wrath upon Him on the cross, which seems to be what Dr. D. James Kennedy implies in the comment by Anonymous above.
Nor was God angry with Jesus. Psalm 22:24 says, “For he has not despised or abhorred the affliction of the afflicted, and he has not hidden his face from him, but has heard, when he cried to him.”
The Pulpit Commentary says: “The Father might seem by his passivity to disregard his Son's affliction; but it was not really so. Every pang was marked, every suffering sympathized with.” And “Neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard. There was no real turning away, no real forsaking. Every cry was heard, and the cries were answered at the fitting moment.”
So let me ask this of those of you who say that God poured out His wrath on Jesus: Do you mean that He temporarily removed His presence from Jesus and abandoned Him to His enemies or that He actively poured out His anger and wrath upon His dying Son as implied by Kennedy in the above comment?
Joel,
My point is to be careful here and study deeper. We live in a time when people won’t endure sound doctrine, and they twist the Word of God…
I appreciate your comment, Joel, but there is no need to imply that people who disagree with your interpretations don’t endure sound doctrine and twist the Word of God. None of us have a monopoly on truth—the most we can do is approach the Word of God with humility and without presuppositions that might be faulty. Let’s remember that the Pharisees accused Jesus of heresy because they misinterpreted the Scriptures. He did not fit their presuppositions. So there is nothing wrong with trying to look at the Scriptures with fresh eyes to try to gain a better understanding. As Christians, it is so easy for us to read things into the Scriptures that are not actually there, because that is what we’ve always heard. The important thing is to have a teachable spirit and allow the Holy Spirit to lead us into all truth. (John 16:13)
What do you think the purpose of Jehovah was when He struck Jesus? "I will strike the Shepherd and the sheep will be scattered?"
In Matthew 26:31, Jesus says, “For it is written, ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.’” Zechariah 13:7 says, “’Awake, sword, against my shepherd, against the man who is close to me!’ declares the LORD Almighty. ‘Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered, and I will turn my hand against the little ones.’”
In the Matthew version, God says “I will strike the shepherd,” and in the Zechariah version, He says, “Strike the shepherd,” as a command. The Pulpit Commentary says, “It is here shown that all that happened took place according to ‘the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God.’ That Christ may be the Saviour he must be a sacrifice. In Zechariah the Lord gives the command to the sword; hence Christ can say, I will smite.” In other words, the fact that God intended for Jesus to die as a sacrifice for our sins does not mean that He Himself actively poured out His wrath on Jesus while He was on the cross. It simply means that everything happened according to “the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God.”
In Psalm 102, which is quoted as a Messianic Psalm referring to Christ, what do you think this verse means: "In thine anger and thine wrath, thou hast lifted Me up and cast me down". Jesus said in John 3, "Just as the Serpent in the wilderness was lifted up, so must the Son of Man be lifted up". Psalm 102 indicates that Jesus was lifted up in the wrath of God.
Please see my comment to gsixty. Do you think this means that God actively poured out His wrath on Jesus on the cross, or that in His wrath against sin He cast Jesus (who carried our sins) from His presence and abandoned Him to His enemies?
Post a Comment