My God, my God...

One thing you might consider is the implicit analogy between the experience of the individual author or speaker of the psalm and the experience of Israel as a nation, how the narrative of personal suffering, abandonment and hope mirrors a narrative of national suffering, abandonment and hope. It’s suggested, I think, by verses 3-5 and the shift in the second part of the psalm to the praise of God in the congregation. You might also compare the language of the psalm with Isaiah 52:13-53:12 and the oscillation between individual and group in that passage.

It provides a powerful way of understanding the atonement: the experience and story of the one embodies the experience and story of the many. Jesus is abandoned by God, shares in Israel’s alienation and ‘exile’, suffers the brutality of Israel’s enemies, but believes that God will not ultimately hide his face from him, will vindicate him, and through that bring about his worship throughout the earth.

More food for thought on that quote of Jesus on the cross…

Some people believe that this is a poor translation from Aramaic to Greek.  I’ve read in a couple of places that in the Aramaic versions of the gospels it is "my God, my God, for this you have spared me".

If that is true then Jesus was making reference that the cross was his main purpose.  I’m not sure I buy the theory, but it is interesting.  That translation fits better with his last last statement "it is finished".

For me, I take Andrews OT approach and look at what this story tells us about the narrative of the NT authors/followers of Jesus.  It tells us that for these people, the purpose of Jesus had become his death and resurrection.  These people didn’t live with Jesus so his life and teachings were not as much of an impact on their lives directly, but they clearly valued the meaning of his death and resurrection as the key elements in the story.  So it makes sense that this is what they have him say on the cross to help tie up the loose ends of the story. 

This one statement "why has thou forsakenme" has led to some odd theological theories.  Maybe this could elimnate some of the oddity or maybe it is off-base.   I wouldn’t hang my faith on a theory like this, but I think it is worth considering.

I seem to remember this interpretation of Jesus’ quoting from Psalm 22: in quoting the first line of the Psalm, the whole Psalm is evoked - especially to those who were immersed deeply in daily prayer of the Psalms.  So, our tendency to fixate on Jesus’ feeling of abandonment - which was as real as the Psalmist’s - perhaps reflects our lack of immersion in the Psalms.  Yes, Jesus felt abandoned.  No, Jesus did not abandon hope.

vital discussion points.  i recentky came to the conclusion that Jesus not only implied he was feeling all of Psalm 22..but may well have prayed it all…aloud…in "loud voice."  Heavy clues in John (see my link below)

Ray Van Der Laan (great resource…www.followtherabbi.com) suggests, as does i thnk Craig Keener that Psalm 22 was traditionally prayed…all of it, of course.. at the exact time of day of the death of Jesus.

Here’s my Good Fri. message tying this case together

There’s no doubt in my mind that you are right. I’m very late becoming aware of opensource theology and in getting into this thread. I would like to quote an extract from my brother’s recent Good Friday sermon that seems appropriate. Please forgive me if this is a bit long but I am only giving a couple of excerpts.

“To whom is the ransom paid? Most certainly not to God. God is not to be equated with a ransom demanding blackmailer or a kidnapper. Paying off the ransom, if understood as that which is paid on behalf of the Collective of Suffering Humanity then the receivers of the ransom could only be the Collective of the Exploiters and Oppressors. God seems to be saying, “Have you not had enough through all the exploitation and oppression down the ages? All right, take the life of my Son who is in solidarity with the Collective on whom you have been inflicting pain as if that is your right. Realize now at least that what you took for granted as your privilege, and often God given privilege at that has in fact caused deep pain not just to the people whom you have been hurtful but to me, whom you call your God.

This is by no means far fetched. Nor is it an imposed reading the text will not bear. For it is this meaning which is climatically reinforced by the cry of dereliction, “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” For those of you who know your bibles these words must echo the very first verse of Ps 22. Traditionally we have been thinking that Ps 22 was written by the psalmist as a prophecy of the coming sufferings of Christ. No, an emphatic “No”. Psalm 22 belongs to the category of Lament Psalms. There are many such psalms in the Book of Psalms. Most of them follow a particular form. They begin with a lament very much like the cry of dereliction. They express despair that God seems not to care for them in spite of the terrible things they suffer, physical pain and derision. But the mood shifts to one of affirmation of faith and even to thanksgiving as if their prayers had already been answered. Jesus as the son of Man, who is in solidarity with the collective of all such faithful sufferers now leans on the experience of a past saint and expresses his faith and not his sense of despair. The veil in the Temple which stood to symbolize that God was estranged and had been approving of all the suffering these people had been put through at the moment their voice sounds in unison with the voice of the Son of Man tears down the veil and a new understanding of who God is, is born just at that very moment.

Most ironically, it is the Centurion (who was the chief executioner) who is given to understand the true nature of who Jesus was. He had faithfully executed Pilate’s order to crucify Jesus. Perhaps he too had joined in, in the mocking by other soldiers and the leaders of religion. It was under his direction, the caption Jesus King of the Jews, INRI, was written in a placard and placed over the head of the Crucified Lord. But suddenly, soon after the manner in which Jesus died letting out the cry of dereliction, the Centurion makes an astounding affirmation, saying “Truly this man was a son of God”. This should not be understood as a Christological affirmation about the divinity of Christ. Rather, it was a radical political confession. The Centurion, so far had been a faithful soldier of the Roman Emperor. All Roman emperors designated themselves as ‘son of God and lord’. This was inscribed in all Roman coins. But now the Centurion comes to understand the real meaning of being son of God and lord. The Roman emperors ruled with an iron fist. Ruthless and merciless were their repressive ways. All the tyranny that was indulged in was for the sake of law and order, to quell terrorism. They had taken it for granted that as emperors they could enjoy any amount of comfort and luxury. They could make slaves to fight wild beasts for entertainment. They could exploit and abuse women at will. Yet they wanted to be praised as benevolent rulers! The Centurion who had thus far acquiesced in all this now comes to understand that to be a king is to be in solidarity with the people who suffer most.

It was to effect such a repentance that Jesus paid the Ransom standing alongside of the Collective of the Oppressed. The Centurion who recognized in Jesus true divine kingship in operation, in all probability, would have been beheaded for that confession. Because by confessing Jesus who had been put to death for allegedly claiming to be the king as son of God he had ipso facto renounced his loyalty to Caesar. Only because of paying the extreme price, perhaps his confession comes to be recorded in the story of the Cross. For there were no witnesses to that event from among the followers of Jesus. This Centurion for ever remains our representative at the foot of the Cross. Whether he represents us in his capacity as a faithful soldier of the empire acquiescing in its ruthlessness, in its hierarchically ordered perks, privileges and power or in his converted stage as one who had come to recognize in the powerless Jesus in solidarity with all the powerless the nature of true and divine kingship is left to us to choose. Both Matthew and Mark call us to make that decision.”

From Luke’s Gospel:

“Having achieved the two kinds of reconciliation Jesus now commits his life in the hands of God with a well known prayer for every Jew who had been taught to pray every night before falling into sleep, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.” It is interesting to note that this prayer is part of verse 5 of psalm 31 another lament psalm. This psalm, however, is slightly differently structured. Vs 1-8 is a prayer of trustful commitment and the actual lament begins from vs9 f. So Luke also indicates that Jesus was one in solidarity and faith with all the suffering people of God.”

Then from the section on John:

“He envisions the world as polarized into two on going realities. On the one side is the Human Collective of the unjustly Suffering People who is represented by the Lifted up Son of Man on the Cross; on the other side is the Ruler of the World and all the people of religion who follow an imaginary superman-god, who nurture feelings of exclusivity, who endorse a culture of domination, who swear by male domination and caste discrimination as divinely ordered, who accept the capitalist way of life as being fair to the hard working and hard only on the lazy and the spongers of society… But the hour of truth dawns on them at the HOUR of the Lifting Up of the Son of Man. They come to realize that their way of life in the end hurts not just the deemed spongers and the women destined by God to serve men…but the Son of God Himself. They were in fact party to the crucifixion of Jesus the Lord of Life. When truth so dawns upon them they are drawn towards the Lifted up Son of Man into a new sense of horizontal repentance towards the Human Collective of Suffering People. When such repentance takes place immediately the Ruler of the World loses his grip over the people which he was able to maintain through a series of religiously approved and culturally accepted series of lies. This world of anti-God religion and God spurned culture stands exposed in all its nakedness and therefore is judged and the Ruler of the world who no longer has a following gets thrown out.

If this dream of our Lord is to come true we need to realize exactly to which of the two polarities we really belong. With that question in mind let us now turn towards the Cross as portrayed to us by John through his record of three sayings found only in his Gospel.

The first word of the Son of Man on the Cross is to the Mother. He seems to want to remind us all that he was in fact the Son of Woman who had to be called Son of Man in accordance with the ways of the world. God said in the garden of Eden that the Serpents head would be crushed by the Seed of Woman. This is recalled also by Paul in his letter to Galatians where Paul says that God sent God’s son into the world and caused him to be born of a woman. All these are indirect allusions to the fact that in the incarnation God did not allow the privileged male to have any part except of supporting partnership through Joseph. The lifted up son of Man addresses his Mother as Woman to remind the world from that time onwards womanhood ought to receive a new status of respect. Because the world is saved through the Lifted up Son of Man in whom were present the suffering womanhood and who was himself Son of Woman much more than the Son of Man. Jesus’ call to the Beloved Disciple is a general call to the Church to honour and respect Mary but also to treat women thereafter with a new sense of deference investing womanhood with dignity denied to it so far in the name of God.

The second and the third word belong together. They only reinforce what we have been taking note of in the other two portrayals of the Cross. Once again another Lament Psalm is recalled. This time it is Ps 69. This is the psalm chosen because it speaks of the oppressive structures of the world demanding and extracting from the oppressed sections that which is not really owed by them. How many stories of bonded labour of our culture and the sweat shop phenomenon of the capitalist mode of production we need as illustrations of this ever present unscrupulous exploitative practice? Jesus thirsts as a result of standing in solidarity with them and going through the same agonies. The world is never ready to do real justice. It is always ready to offer palliatives. That is what the soldiers do by offering sour vinegar to quench the thirst of the Son of Man.

So with that fulfilment the final debt ‘owed’ to the exploitative world is paid off and they have no more any right to demand from the exploited sections that which is not really owed. The word used for the final word “It is Finished” was used in the secular world to write against promissory notes when the debt is fully paid back and the shopkeeper supplying on credit writes across the Account Book to indicate that what is owed has been paid back. So once again we see the Son of Man on behalf of the Human Collective of Suffering and Exploited people their debt. The debt is not paid to God. God is no unjust extractor who demands and extracts what is not really owed as the earlier part of Psalm 69 clearly indicates. Rather, it is God in and through the Son who paid off the imaginary debt reckoned falsely and unscrupulously held as owed by the Human Collective in order to pave the way for their liberation to make the exploiters repent and liberate those whom they hold under bondage.”

Dr. Dhyanchand Carr

I was pleased to see the post from pastor pete and his comments on those words from the cross. It brings to light what many have held for sometime, that Christ was reminding those present the fulfilment of prophecy.

I would like to also point out that Christ never called God “God” he always called him Father.