Christ was fully human and he suffered

Faith & Science Conversation
30

Indeed.

I believe there was a discussion in one topic about making us in His image. This rings true as it is the same promise in Christian cannons.
Concluding one part of being made in His image is being eternal.
thanks

Suggesting another way to name pride as the first sin.

I will have to assume the ‘torment’ being described is from the wicked as described. And if they try, then we get into the armor of God discussion.

All things are in Him, and He is in all things knowing both innocence and wickedness through the eyes of His children. Where is awe and wonderment, surprise followed by laughter except in us. I even dare say God is living through the eyes of His children and we are the Life of our Father.

Thanks for sharing.

2 Likes
31

Also nice topical selections Terry, it read well. Was that you?

1 Like
32

Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition
My selections.

1 Like
33

Didn’t Jesus say, in His prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane, that it was for this hour that He came into the world? That does sound like a plan…as well as inevitable.

1 Like
34

Your point is full of rhetoric stuffed with vacuously pious metaphor upon metaphor. The point, if Jesus was God incarnate, for which His death-resurrection is the only warrant, is none of that. The point is that: Jesus’ death-resurrection is the warrant for God. Period. For Love transcendent rampant. Competent. For all being well for all.

35

An interesting, if unhelpful question. If Peter, James, and John fell asleep, who heard what Jesus prayed?

There were no videos or mobile phones to record with. There was not a scribe or stenographer to write down every word that Jesus spoke. No newspapers or investigative reporters and no editor to double check or verify facts. Gospels do not conform to any form of literature be it journalism or historical record

Having said that, it seems clear from how Jesus is portrayed across all the Gospels that He knew His path. The Garden of Gethsemane shows the humanity we need to see in Christ. In theory, He not only knew about His death but also His resurrection. As such he could have been cold and calculating and lacking all human emotion, but for it to matter He had to really live it. It is called “The Passion” for a reason.

Part of the reason for Christ coming to earth is to demonstrate empathy and understanding of the human life (including suffering and death).as well as sovereignty over all of it.

There is still faith in Christianity that supercedes the written words of the bible. The bible is the start, not the end of understanding.

Richard

36

Jesus. . . . .

37

Funny? I didn’t know that He had written one of the Gospels.

Richard

38

WEll…good thoughts. But my question was not unhelpful given the comment I was responding to. Jesus did say, in the Gospels, “Could you men n ot keep watch with me for one hour?” He said this to Peter — who must have been awakened by Jesus (Matthew 26:41) and then told them to “watch and pray…” v 42…Elsewhere He said “Get up and pray so that you will not fall into temptation” (Luke 22:46) That remark is also in Mark and in similar form in Matthew. They were asleep and then they awoke briefly, evidently when prodded by Jesus…and probably heard bits and pieces of His prayers to God before falling asleep again…It happens that way with you and me as well at times.

BUT…I was addressing something else that was quoted at the top of this blog. The comment included the quote:

Well, then, did the Father want Jesus to be crucified? And, if so, why? The answer as I see it is again: No. The mission of Jesus from the Father is not the mission to be crucified; what the Father wishes is that Jesus should be human

The comment seems to be by someone who concluded that “as the writer saw it” the Father did not want Jesus to be crucified…This remark seems to upend – or forget – a whole boatload of biblical theology … about a range of things from sin to forgiveness for sin to the need for an atonement for sin to the point of the whole Old Testament temple sacrificial system ( which pointed to our need for a Savior and also to the reality that human sin is serious business and that there has to be consequences, and serious enough that those consequences necessitated the shedding of blood --and not just “any” shedding of blood …etc …etc…) and ultimately the sacrificial system ended with the coming of “the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world” (read John the Baptist’s remarks)…

And what did Jesus know and when did He know it? What did the Father want or not want? The quote from McCabe [was this Joseph McCabe, by chance?] asserts that “the Father did not want Jesus to be crucified” and that Jesus’ mission was to “be human.” [see McCabe not me].

But Jesus said in His prayer “Now my heart is troubled, and what shall I say? 'Father save me from this hour? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. Father, glorify your name!” (John 12: 27)

And now that I look into it…this statement by Jesus, in prayer, was NOT at Gethsemane (although who knows what He said when the three men were asleep?) …This statement was made during prayer and in front of a crowd, likely after raising Lazarus from the dead and at or before the day when He rode a donkey into the city —that is, the week before His crucifixion.

So I stand corrected on the sequence of events.

39

No. Good plans have contingencies and Jesus prayer in the garden does not at all sound like that part was inevitable.

BUT, by the end of that prayer in the garden Jesus concludes that this is the will of the Father.

Yeah that just makes me laugh… Jesus was human. It is strange to call that a mission. If we want His mission then I would suggest looking to Jesus words on the matter…

John 10:10 “I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly”

John 18:37 for this cause came I into the world , that I should bear witness unto the truth.

and people must have their sacrifices… this speaks more to what people wanted rather than what God wanted. So they shouted “crucify Him!” and Pilate washed his hands of it.

40

That was never my intention.

The Gospels go out of their way to include Jewish Scripture in the pathway laid out for Christ. And Christ knew Scripture better than anyone. However there is a perceived gap between the Father and sone while Christ was on earth. Maybe due to the limited capacity of the human brain, or maybe just a necesary dynamiic for God in human form. Perhaps, sometimes we try and fathom too much. Perhaps we should just stick to

God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten son.

And stop before all this talk about judgement because that is also part of the text.

God did not send His Son to be its judge, but to be its saviour.

Richard

41

Ζει

Screenshot 2022-04-16 at 16-48-46 Forgiven paintings copy

2 Likes
42

Yes, I know you were not correcting the sequence of events. I was correcting myself. Jesus did say that He did not come to judge the world, but … this of course does not seem to have meant that He did not regard the world as not needing it…there is a Second Coming still lurking in the wings. Jesus made assertions that He knew He had come to carry the consequences of our sins, and He made them earlier than in the Garden of Gethsemane. The angels also told Mary about it --“he will save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). There was also a good deal of expectation in that era that some sort of Jewish messianic figure – also divine – was soon to come.

The Gospels include “Jewish Scripture” because that was the totality of the biblical text of that era. “He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows and familiar with suffering … he was despised and we esteemed him not. …But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed.” …Isaiah 53: 3a, 5.

The concept of a Suffering Messiah was part and parcel of Jewish tradition from ancient times up until our era. See Boyarin, Hurtado, Flint…likely others on this. The touchy-feely “saw it on Oprah” sort of messiah that McCabe seems to imagine-- is something for our era. Interesting footnote but not the whole story. Jesus did not die because you or I have low self-esteem or a bad hair day.

, As for the matter of “a perceived gap between the Father and the son” while Jesus was here —that is the stuff of many a controversy over the past 2000 years. I have heard that argument also from people who think that, now that He is back on the throne, Jesus is able to tell them (not maybe you and me, but them) many things like the date and time of His Second Coming…and all that based on this perceived gap.

Let’s not go down that road. When Jesus said “I and the Father are One…He who has seen Me has seen the Father” …told the priests in the Temple that He [the young Jesus] must be in His Father’s house (which His parents, who had lost track of Him, would have presumed was Nazareth) —and various other statements…that’s about as close as we can come to anything. Beyond that is a struggle…

All for now…and Happy Easter

43

Thanks, Mitchell. Appreciate your thoughts. I probably should just refer you to what I just said in response to Richard. And the quote from Jesus was not from the Garden of Gethsemane but earlier. The Judaism of that era was expecting a messianic figure to come – a la Daniel 7 and other passages. Jesus in places linked Himself to those passages. Isaiah 53 — “the Suffering Servant” image – includes that idea.

And if McCabe is/was Joseph McCabe – then I have encountered his writings elsewhere along the way. But maybe there is another McCabe out there.

HAPPY EASTER…HE IS RISEN!! (and I mean physically as well)

44

I find the model presented by Myers informative:

The Patristic Atonement Model, by Benjamin Myers.

The Patristic Atonement Model | PDF (scribd.com)

45

The Suffering servant in Isaiah is Israel, originally. It was repurposed to Jesus.

Richard

1 Like
46

It is Herbert McCabe

47

There seems to be two meanings in the ‘suffering servant’.
First one is Israel as you wrote and as most Jewish readers understand the texts of Jewish scriptures. Jesus took and fulfilled the task that was given to Israel, to be the light of the world.

Some passages do not fit well to a group or tribe. In these passages, the suffering servant is clearly an individual and interpreting the individual as Israel leads to problematic conclusions.

Isaiah 53 (for example, 5-7) describes the one who is suffering for the sake of others. There are clearly two players (in addition to God), someone taking the burden (described as an individual) and ‘we’/‘us’ that will benefit from what the individual is doing. If we assume that both players are Israel, the meaning of the verses would become confusing. Hitting me will save me from the hit??

1 Like
48

Why should they be? The others can be other nations.

Richard

49

Thanks GJDS…different McCabe then