The Seven Last Sayings of Christ: A Petition to the Father - by John MacArthur ("Why have you forsaken me?")

Found here. Our comments in bold.

--------------------------

Today's article is a cobbled-together rehash of the Doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement. We discuss this false teaching here. We will also elaborate below.

Dr. MacArthur does quote some Scripture, thankfully, but his documentation disappears at the very moments he asserts his Critical Premises. 

Dr. MacArthur is reading through the lens of his doctrine, and that leads him astray.

-------------------

This post was first published in March, 2015. —ed.

Famous last words can be tragic or inspiring. Not everyone has the opportunity to choose their last words carefully, but for those who see death coming, what message of wisdom, love, confession, or summation do they deliver with their final breaths?

In preparation for the celebrations of Christ death and resurrection later this week, we’ve been considering Christ’s last words from the cross. What did the Lord have to say to those gathered as He suffered the punishment of countless sins He hadn’t committed? (The Father did not punish Jesus for our sins. There is no verse that says this. We will explain below.)

As we’ve seen already, His words pointed forward to God’s redemptive purpose in His suffering, and illustrated His love and compassion.

Christ’s fourth saying from the cross is by far the richest with mystery and meaning. Matthew writes,

Now from the sixth hour darkness fell upon all the land until the ninth hour. About the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” that is, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” (Matthew 27:45–46)

It might seem at first glance that Christ was merely reciting the words of Psalm 22:1 (“My God, my God, why have You forsaken me? Far from my deliverance are the words of my groaning?”). But given the fact that all of Psalm 22 is an extended prophecy about the crucifixion, it might be better to see the psalm as a prophetic anticipation of the cry of Jesus’ heart as He bore the sins of the world on the cross. It was no mere recitation. (Dr. MacArthur accurately states that Jesus was specifically pointing to Psalm 22 because it is a messianic psalm. But for some reason he will persist in the idea that Jesus was forsaken by the Father when He wasn't. 

We will regard this as Critical Premise #1. This is an important Premise, for if the Father did abandon Jesus, that sets up other intertwined Critical Premises.)

Corrupting the Cross

Some commentators have gone to great lengths to explain why Jesus would utter such words. To them, it seems unthinkable that Jesus would actually feel abandoned on the cross—and even more unthinkable to surmise that God in any sense abandoned His beloved Son. (Since the Bible doesn't teach these things, it only makes sense that people would recoil at the idea.)

And so they insist that Jesus was merely reciting Scripture, not expressing what He truly felt in His heart. (This is a false choice. "Merely reciting Scripture" is not the opposite of "what He truly felt in His heart." In fact, we have never read anyone assert that Jesus was merely reciting Scripture. 

Would would such a statement mean, anyway? Was Jesus prone to randomly quoting Scripture? Of course not. Jesus was very purposeful in quoting this Scripture, as Dr. MacArthur said. But contrary to his assertion, that very Psalm denies Jesus was forsaken:

Ps. 22:24 For he has not despised or disdained the suffering of the afflicted one; he has not hidden his face from him but has listened to his cry for help. 

He was not abandoned. The Father did not turn His face away. Critical Premise #1 is false.)

But that betrays a serious misunderstanding of what was taking place on the cross. As Christ hung there, He was bearing the sins of the world. (We will regard this as Critical Premise #2, that to bear our sin means to be imputed with our sin. We disagree with this.

Let's look at a a couple of Scriptures. He bore our sin: 

1Pe. 2:24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed.

The word "bore" is anapheró, from ana and phero; to take up (literally or figuratively) -- bear, bring (carry, lead) up, offer (up). He took up lifted, carried, our sin away. 

He took away our sin:

Col. 2:13-14 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having cancelled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.

"Took" is airó, raise, lift up, take away, remove. He was our burden-bearer. He was the vehicle by which our sin was transported. He carried it like a bag of garbage to be thrown into the trash. The Father did not punish Him for our sin, because He packed our sin to the cross and nailed it there.

So Critical Premise #2, "to bear our sin means to be imputed with our sin," is incorrect.)

He was dying as a substitute for others. (Here is Critical Premise #3, that Jesus' death was substitutionary. Dr. MacArthur will amplify this below.)

To Him was imputed the guilt of their sins, (Back to Critical Premise #2.)

and He was suffering the punishment for those sins on their behalf. And the very essence of that punishment was the outpouring of God’s wrath against sinners. In some mysterious way during those awful hours on the cross, the Father poured out the full measure of His wrath against sin, and the recipient of that wrath was God’s own beloved Son! (Dr. MacArthur's documentation disappears. Probably because there is no Scripture that teaches this.)

In this lies the true meaning of the cross. Those who try to explain the atoning work of Christ in any other terms inevitably end up nullifying the truth of Christ’s atonement altogether. (This is an astounding statement. Every other opinion besides Dr. MacArthur nullifies the atonement? He's the only one who has it right? There is no legitimate alternate perspective?)

Christ was not merely providing an example for us to follow. He was no mere martyr—a victim of the wickedness of the men who crucified Him. He wasn’t merely making a public display so that people would see the awfulness of sin. He wasn’t offering a ransom price to Satan—or any of the other various explanations religious liberals, cultists, and pseudo-Christian religionists have tried to suggest over the years. (How about this: Jesus died as the Lamb of God for our sake, and His spilled blood washed away our sin. There is no need to punish Jesus. The sacrificial animals were not regarded as guilty. Jesus was not regarded as guilty.)

Divine Substitution

Here’s what was happening on the cross: God was punishing His own Son as if He had committed every wicked deed done by every sinner who would ever believe. (Critical Premise #3 again asserted, but not documented. The idea of substitution has never been a part of Hebrew thought regarding the sacrificial animals. They were killed to spill their blood, and the blood atoned ["covered over"] the sins of Israel.)

And He did it so that He could forgive and treat those redeemed ones as if they had lived Christ’s perfect life of righteousness. 

Scripture teaches this explicitly: 

• “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21). (There is no mention of punishment here. There is no substitution here either.)

• Surely our griefs He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried; yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But 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. . . . He had done no violence, nor was there any deceit in His mouth. But the Lord was pleased to crush Him, putting Him to grief . . . as a guilt offering. (Isaiah 53:4–5; 9-10) ("Bore" and "carried." "Bore" is sabal, to bear (a heavy load). And "carried" is nasa, to lift, carry, take. Here we have the same concept as the NT verses. Jesus was our burden bearer, who carried, lifted, took our sins to the cross and nailed them there.)

• “What the law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh” (Romans 8:3). “ (Quite true. Jesus' death was a sin offering, a sacrifice. For our sake, His spilled blood washed us clean.)

• Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us—for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree’” (Galatians 3:13). ("For us." huper, on behalf of, for the sake of, concerning. He became a curse "for our sake." We benefitted by His sacrifice. He did not substitute, He acted for our benefit.

By way of illustration, if George tells Jennifer that he will pay her bail because she's in jail, he did not substitute himself. He performed a task for her sake, on her behalf.

This is the same with Jesus. He died a sacrificial death for our sake, on our behalf, for our good. This is not substitutionary.)

• “Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh” (1 Peter 3:18). ("For" is huper again.) 

• “He Himself is the propitiation for our sins” (1 John 2:2). ("Propitiation" is hilasmos, to appease wrath. Literally, "He is the appeaser of wrath concerning our sins.")

Propitiation

That word propitiation speaks of an offering made to satisfy God. Christ’s death was a satisfaction rendered to God on behalf of those whom He redeemed. “The Lord was pleased to crush Him” (Isaiah 53:10, emphasis added). ("Crush" does not mean "punish for another's sin.")

God the Father saw the travail of His Son’s soul, and He was satisfied (Isaiah 53:11). (A misrepresentation of the verse: 

Is. 53:11 After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light of life and be satisfied...

It says that Jesus will be satisfied, not the Father. God the Father was not satisfied by the travail of Jesus, but rather by the spilled blood. [...without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. He. 9:22])

Christ made propitiation by shedding His blood (Romans 3:25; Hebrews 2:17). (Well, dang. Dr. MacArthur asserts several falsehoods, then reverses course and asserts the truth, contradicting himself. 

There is something wrong with this man's thinking.)

It was God’s own wrath against sin, God’s own righteousness, and God’s own sense of justice that Christ satisfied on the cross. (True.)

The shedding of His blood was a sin offering rendered to God. (True.)

His death was not merely a satisfaction of public justice, nor was it a ransom paid to Satan. (True.)

Neither Satan nor anyone else had any right to claim a ransom from God for sinners. (True.)

But when Christ ransomed the elect from sin (1 Timothy 2:6), (Um... who gave himself as a ransom for all men... All Men.)

the ransom price was paid to God. (True.)

Christ died in our place and in our stead (False. It seemed that Dr. MacArthur had forgotten all about his Critical Premises and started laying out the Gospel. But then he lapsed back into his false doctrine, seemingly unaware that he refuted himself.)

—and He received the very same outpouring of divine wrath in all its fury that we deserved for our sin. (No! He was not punished by divine wrath, He was punished by evil men. [Lk. 24:7])

It was a punishment so severe that a mortal man could spend all eternity in the torments of hell, and still he would not have begun to exhaust the divine wrath that was heaped on Christ at the cross. (No. No. No. Dr. MacArthur keeps reasserting this repugnant idea without a single shred of biblical evidence.)

This was the true measure of Christ’s sufferings on the cross. The physical pains of crucifixion—dreadful as they were—were nothing compared to the wrath of the Father against Him. (No. NO. NO!)

The anticipation of this was what had caused Him to sweat blood in the garden. This was why He had looked ahead to the cross with such horror. We cannot begin to fathom all that was involved in paying the price of our sin. (He did not pay the price for our sin. There is no Bible verse that says this. Rather:

1Co. 6:20 you were bought at a price.

1Ti. 2:6 ...who gave himself as a ransom for all men...

Jesus didn't pay for our sin, He paid for us.)

It’s sufficient to understand that all our worst fears about the horrors of hell—and more—were realized by Him as He received the due penalty of others’ wrongdoing. (No. Critical Premise #2 again.)

And in that awful, sacred hour, it was as if the Father abandoned Him. (We're back to Critical Premise #1. The reader can now see the twisted web that is required in order to make Dr. MacArthur's doctrine work. 

It's hard to tell how it starts, but we can see that if one is confused about Jesus' "forsaken" statement on the Cross, that would require a reason for Him being abandoned. Thus, Jesus was being punished.

Or maybe it starts out with misunderstanding the nature of sacrifice. If sacrifice becomes a sanction, then it's not a sacrifice.

Or perhaps it's a matter of thinking that He "bore our sin" means becoming the Substitionary receiver of punishment.

In any case, it takes at least three Critical Premises working in concert to arrive at this false doctrine.)

 Though there was surely no interruption in the Father’s love for Him as a Son, God nonetheless turned away from Him and forsook Him as our Substitute.

The fact that Christ—suffering from exhaustion, blood loss, asphyxia, and all the physical anguish of the cross—nonetheless made this cry “with a loud voice” proves it was no mere recitation of a psalm. This was the outcry of His soul; it was the very thing the psalm foretold.

We should keep Christ’s suffering in mind, not just this week but always, and remember that He willingly endured the physical and spiritual horrors of the cross for the sake of our redemption. His immense sacrifice on our behalf is humbling.