ARCHIVE: Reason to Believe: Ps. 22

[Daniel50]

Complaints of discouragement. (1-10) With prayer for deliverance. (11-21) Praises for mercies and redemption. (22-31)

Verses 1-10: The Spirit of Christ, which was in the prophets, testifies in this psalm, clearly and fully, the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. We have a sorrowful complaint of God's withdrawings. This may be applied to any child of God, pressed down, overwhelmed with grief and terror. Spiritual desertions are the saints' sorest afflictions; but even their complaint of these burdens is a sign of spiritual life, and spiritual senses exercised. To cry our, My God, why am I sick? why am I poor? savours of discontent and worldliness. But, "Why hast thou forsaken me?" is the language of a heart binding up its happiness in God's favour. This must be applied to Christ. In the first words of this complaint, he poured out his soul before God when he was upon the cross, (Mt 27:46). Being truly man, Christ felt a natural unwillingness to pass through such great sorrows, yet his zeal and love prevailed. Christ declared the holiness of God, his heavenly Father, in his sharpest sufferings; nay, declared them to be a proof of it, for which he would be continually praised by his Israel, more than for all other deliverances they received. Never any that hoped in thee, were made ashamed of their hope; never any that sought thee, sought thee in vain. Here is a complaint of the contempt and reproach of men. The Saviour here spoke of the abject state to which he was reduced. The history of Christ's sufferings, and of his birth, explains this prophecy.

Verses 11-21: In these verses we have Christ suffering, and Christ praying; by which we are directed to look for crosses, and to look up to God under them. The very manner of Christ's death is described, though not in use among the Jews. They pierced his hands and his feet, which were nailed to the accursed tree, and his whole body was left so to hang as to suffer the most severe pain and torture. His natural force failed, being wasted by the fire of Divine wrath preying upon his spirits. Who then can stand before God's anger? or who knows the power of it? The life of the sinner was forfeited, and the life of the Sacrifice must be the ransom for it. Our Lord Jesus was stripped, when he was crucified, that he might clothe us with the robe of his righteousness. Thus it was written, therefore thus it behoved Christ to suffer. Let all this confirm our faith in him as the true Messiah, and excite our love to him as the best of friends, who loved us, and suffered all this for us. Christ in his agony prayed, prayed earnestly, prayed that the cup might pass from him. When we cannot rejoice in God as our song, yet let us stay ourselves upon him as our strength; and take the comfort of spiritual supports, when we cannot have spiritual delights. He prays to be delivered from the Divine wrath. He that has delivered, doth deliver, and will do so. We should think upon the sufferings and resurrection of Christ, till we feel in our souls the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings.

Verses 22-31: The Saviour now speaks as risen from the dead. The first words of the complaint were used by Christ himself upon the cross; the first words of the triumph are expressly applied to him, (Heb 2:12). All our praises must refer to the work of redemption. The suffering of the Redeemer was graciously accepted as a full satisfaction for sin. Though it was offered for sinful men, the Father did not despise or abhor it for our sakes. This ought to be the matter of our thanksgiving. All humble, gracious souls should have a full satisfaction and happiness in him. Those that hunger and thirst after righteousness in Christ, shall not labour for that which satisfies not. Those that are much in praying, will be much in thanksgiving. Those that turn to God, will make conscience of worshipping before him. Let every tongue confess that he is Lord. High and low, rich and poor, bond and free, meet in Christ. Seeing we cannot keep alive our own souls, it is our wisdom, by obedient faith, to commit our souls to Christ, who is able to save and keep them alive for ever. A seed shall serve him. God will have a church in the world to the end of time. They shall be accounted to him for a generation; he will be the same to them that he was to those who went before them. His righteousness, and not any of their own, they shall declare to be the foundation of all their hopes, and the fountain of all their joys. Redemption by Christ is the Lord's own doing. Here we see the free love and compassion of God the Father, and of our Lord Jesus Christ, for us wretched sinners, as the source of all grace and consolation; the example we are to follow, the treatment as Christians we are to expect, and the conduct under it we are to adopt. Every lesson may here be learned that can profit the humbled soul. Let those who go about to establish their own righteousness inquire, why the beloved Son of God should thus suffer, if their own doings could atone for sin? Let the ungodly professor consider whether the Saviour thus honoured the Divine law, to purchase him the privilege of despising it. Let the careless take warning to flee from the wrath to come, and the trembling rest their hopes upon this merciful Redeemer. Let the tempted and distressed believer cheerfully expect a happy end of every trial.


Matthew Henry Commentary.

 

[john2001]

Re: Reason to Believe: Ps. 22

Re: Reason to Believe: Ps. 22

Originally posted by Turbo

The following is the first half or so of Pslam 22, written approximately 1000 years before Christ was born. Also, it should be noted that the first historical record of crucifixion is from the 6th century B.C., so it is likely that this psalm was written hundreds of years before anyone was ever crucified.
... the rest deleted

You guys are sooo naive. There is absolutely nothing in the old testament that has any bearing or relevance to jesus or any aspect of the christian cult.

Basically, what *is* recorded is the desperate shift of worldview of people trying to make sense of their superstitions and the world of their experience.

The major event of Jewish history was the Babylonian captivity and the subsequent restoration of the state of Isreal by Persian emperor Cyrus the Great, who, incidentally
being a Zarathustrian, was a monotheist. Cyrus was *the* messiah, there was no other.

Thus began the "great rewrite" of the sacred texts to agree with the notion of falling out of grace followed by restoration. (Suitably faked "prophesies" were put in place after the fact to support this notion.)

Now, along came Alexander, who conquered the eastern Mediterranian region on his way to Asia. After Big Al died, his general Selucus got the area including Judea. His descendents were Antiochus I and II

Under Antiochus II (I believe) you have a faked version of Daniel written, postdated to appear to have been written during
the Babylonian captivity, with a fake prediction of Alexander's invasion, and the whole bit. The Maccabean revolt seemed to fit the messiah story, however, just as the Selucids were out, the Romans were in and it apeared that no Messiah was showing up.

Now, this is where the christian reinterpretation happened. You take all those stories where Isreal is represented by a suffering man motif and reinterpret those to go with the crucified jesus story, combine that with the ressurrected god-man cults that were already in place, and up pops christianity.

There are no prophesies, only reinterpretations and fabrications. The more I read the bible, the less I believe.

 

[Turbo]

Re: Re: Reason to Believe: Ps. 22

Re: Re: Reason to Believe: Ps. 22

Originally posted by john2001

Thus began the "great rewrite" of the sacred texts to agree with the notion of falling out of grace followed by restoration. (Suitably faked "prophesies" were put in place after the fact to support this notion.)

When do you think this happened?

Upon what evidence do you base this assertion?

 

[Turbo]

I wonder how the Christians managed to change all the copies of the Scripture owned by the non-Christian Jews. :think:

(Not to mention the Greek translations from centuries before Christ was born.)

 

[Xior]

Re: Reason to Believe: Ps. 22

Re: Reason to Believe: Ps. 22

how is literature, which is a piece of paper. proof of someting which is real. if this other real thing is physical, show it to me, no endless number of words can prove something like the existence of god

 

[theeyologikal]

How do we know that you are real. there are just words on a screen...??? right?

 

[LightSon]

Originally posted by theeyologikal

How do we know that you are real. there are just words on a screen...??? right?

:wave: theeyologikal
I am not sure whom you are addressing, but I'm convinced of my reality. **pinch*** :taoist:

Is there something you'd like to talk about? I see that was your first post on this board. Why not try to find a conversation and participate? It works better that way.

Glad you could join us.

 

[theeyologikal]

I am replying to the last post on this thread.. all you have to do is read the one previous to mine and see what I am discussing.. And thanks for the welcome.. but I have been on this board before.. I just recently changed my info.. But the welcome was appreciated. =)

 

[julie21]

Xior:how is literature, which is a piece of paper. proof of someting which is real. if this other real thing is physical, show it to me, no endless number of words can prove something like the existence of god

When you were born, there was issued a piece of paper called a birth certificate. Now, in many,many years to come, long after you have passed away, someone within your family may decide to do the family tree.Many generations have passed of course.
Of course, you are no longer around. So first step is to trace back to you, which will lead to a piece of paper - your birth certificate.
Does this prove that you had existed? Yes, but not solely that, as we all know that record offices sometimes get it wrong.
But, there is hopefully a legacy for those trying to prove your existence on this planet...accounts written by those who actually knew you...accounts of your birth, maybe even the words recounted to some friend of your mother about how you were conceived.
Of course, the best thing too is the ongoing legacy that you would have passed on to your friends and family...the recounting on paper or in spoken words of the great person you were and the powerful things you did.
Until you look past wanting only the physical, in the flesh type of proof, and open up to the possibility of belief in what you at this moment can't see,or are not wiling to see, then your questions will remain just that.
Took me many years to see what was there all along...if I'd only been willing to let go of my own standards of reasoning.

 

[JayHoover]

Originally posted by Crow

Christ died around 33AD. James, Mark, Matthew, Luke, Acts, and 1 Peter are believed to have been written by AD 65--there is of course debate about the exact dates, James is placed in my reference as AD 45-50, 1 Peter at around AD 64.

So what makes you think this was probably oral tradition? If James, Mark, Matthew, Luke, and Peter were the same age as Christ, it is very likely some of them would have surely have survived to age 65--this is within the age range of a human lifetime. James was probably written within 12-17 years after Christ died. If some of the disciples were in their late teens or twenties, then all of the NT books could have been written within the lifetimes of those who actually witnessed Christ's ministry and the crucifixion.

I can't give you solid proof that the above people wrote the books attributed to them. It has been lost, just as much 2000 year old proof has been lost.

This then is the point upon which your argument is most severely challenged. The idea that the originals have been lost is troubling in the extreme. Consider:

You are god-- omnipotent, all powerful. You love your creation Mankind. But mankind committed an act which broke him away from you. Now you have to put into place something to redeem him (already we're in deep ewaters, because there's no overt reason any of this shold be the way it is-- an omnipotent god doesn't need all this rigamarole). It is a primary desire for you (as if omnipotent beings have desires at all) that all men should be saved.

Okay, that being said, you as this omnipotent being send your word down to mankind to facilitate the process by whcih these poor sinning men will be saved and...

...you allow the definitive original to be lost.

Why? What purpose does it serve? Indeed, losing the originals immediately begins to grow suspicions. How can the divine word be "lost"? Wouldn't it serve god's purpose to have it clearly in evidence to fulfil his own stated primary desire of salvation? Why is this loss so much in tune with the way humans treat things in general -- they are misplaced, destroyed, lost, discarded or weather away. Why no supernatural intervention in this area?

So, how do we know that men wrapped their feet in rags because they didn't have shoes at Valley Forge? We don't have photos, no one is still alive that can testify to that fact, and that's only around 230 years ago. Sure, people wrote about it, but how can we prove that the people who said they wrote about it are the actual people who wrote about it?

We don't know for certain. But the analogy fails because it doesn't affect one's eternal existence if Valley Forge soldiers wore rags instead of shoes. All of history is subject to the same categorization. It might be interesting to know for sure if this event or the other occured, but in the end, whether or not Napolean was actually exiled to Elba isn't going to matter to my eternal well being.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and if one asserts a belief in a book as a divine method of communication, that book had best survive all human attempts at impacting it in any way. The bible fails this test: Just that it's been translated at all proves man can tamper with it. The idea that there are numerous versions now proves it can be corrupted. This is a severe hampering to god's stated purpose of salvation, but only those "lucky enough" to discern <insert inerrant / partially inerrant version of bible here> are the ones blessed with salvation. The rest of us?

Tough luck, eh?

We can't know unless we count on written descriptions and accounts left by others. People who did not have the ability to take photos, and who we cannot call back to testify that "Yes, I did write this and it is true." There are books written about the event, but many of these were probably written years later.

Add nearly 1800 years, and the problem of verifying the facts increases. Ye old family legends that "great-great-great-great-grandpaw" served with Washington would be likely be lost. Little by little, more original documents are lost to human carelessness, accident, fire, whatever.

I have researched parts of my family back into the 1100's. How do I know the records are true? They might have lied. I can't ask the guy who recorded it, so it might have just been oral tradition.

Church registers in Pewsey England from the 1300's that show how my family's surname came about could be made up for some ulterior purpose. I can't interview the people who wrote the stuff. The births and marriages might have been recorded years later by people who never knew or met the actual people they wrote about.

If we are to know anything of the past, then we have to take those who recorded it at their words, particularly the further we are from the time of the even.

Absolutely.

EXCEPT: where a god would be concerned. See, the whole idea of god is that he (or she or it, take you pick) can do things we cannot do. Like make sure-- make absolutely certain his blueprints is unchangeable.

Heck, I can think of ways to do that myself, and I'm just a mortal.

In the end, your family history is likely very interesting, but its veracity (or lack thereof) is of little impact to even you. But the Christian claim that we will all suffer eternity in the fiery torments of Hell is quite a stake to be making claims about. We best be certian we have the most accurate information, right?

Hmmm... except, your post already points out why we can't.

Pesky humans, changing the plan of an immortal, omniscient, omnipotent god so cavalierly! Tsk, tsk!

 

[avaya]

Here are my thoughts.

Here are my thoughts.

Okay, I'm new here so I'll go easy. Let me preface this by saying that while I do not have it, I have no issue with those who have faith so long as they do not try to force me to their POV.

So, why do I think that the bible is not "the word of god"?

1 - It's not the first book written. If you look to the true original civilizations of that time period, back to the period of Mesopotamia and Sumeria, a great number of the stories in the Torah (and hence the Bible) are found in these civilizations stories as well. The one thing that the modern Judeo-Christian system has for it is the quantity and quality of the documentation supporting their claims. By this I mean that there is simply scant information on the civilizations that were in existance for centuries prior to Rome and Egypt.

I am willing to assume that some here have heard of the Grail King books by Sir LAurence Gardner. I highly recommend them for those who want to gain a larger picture of humanities history. It goes off on a few odd tangents here and there but all in all his books are right on target. I used several of them as a begining refference in my historical documentation PhD thesis.

I highly recommend "The Genesis of The grail Kings" as it really helps to correct a significant number of earlyer beliefs that are completely blown away by more recent discoveries.

Taking this argument into an even shorter timeline, Christianity is nothing of not an off shoot of Judiasm. As such, it is foolhardy to dismiss the former and embrace the latter simply becuase one chooses so.

As Mark Twain is famous for saying" "The ease with which I dismiss anothers religion as folly is enough to make me suspect my own."

2 - The current Church based system is whooly not what Jesus had argued for. I apologise in advance if this gets anyone hot and bothered but the entire concept of the church being the sole arbitor of redemption is so far removed from what Jesus originally preached it's physically nauseating to me.

At the time of Jesus, the concept of the One God was gaining solidity as well as another rather sad and unfortunate concept. That of god ineffable nature and man's fallible nature. Personal ambitions were essentially being pushed aside byt eh overwhelming belief that no matter how good it was it was inherrantly flawed becuase it was made by the hands of man.

This is what Jesus preached against. He preached against fearing god and preached for loving him. What we have now in the form of the Church and it's offshoots is wholly and completely contrary to the original teachings of Christ.

3 - The Torah/Bible espouses a mentality of "Do as I say and Not as I Do" being given by God.

From even the account of Genesis God is seen to be a capable liar and to punish those who tell the truth. Then later he gives Moses commandments forbidding lying. In Genesis 2 god tells Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil for doing so will cause their death. The serpent then tells Eve that she will most certainly not die but will in fact gain godly knowledge.

When god discovers that she and Adam did infact eat from the tree he was outraged and tossed them out in fear that they would also eat from the Tree of Life and become as "one of us" [one of the gods]

I've used the King James Version here but please, go and check your Bibles. I guarantee they all use pretty much the same language-(For Jews you waht the book of Bereshit)

Genesis 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Genesis 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die
Genesis 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever

God was scared that his creations which were essentially made to pay homage to him were now going to become his equals so he cast them out.

Onto another significant lie perpetrated by God.

God tells Abraham that he will raise his people above all others. Tehn they suddnely have to flee their home land from invaders, reside in another community and become citizens and generally end up being persecuted to the current day. It's things like this that make me think that this god is a sadist.

4 - The Bible/Torah has been instrumental in the establishment of a hierarchy between men and woman and has helped fuel the "race wars" pretty much since it began.

Going back to Genesis 3:
17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life

This was quoted to me so many times by my pastor that i made me want to puke. His, and others, used this phrase to often push forth their belief that women were made to be subserviant to women and as soon as we started listening to them it cause us to fall out of gods favor.

In fact, the positioning of our women can be taken from an even earlier excerpt of the Book of Genesis.

Genesis 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof.

This shows us that the woman was not taken from the foot to be beneath us but that she was taken from our ribs to be beside us. Silly argument, I know, but I like it.

5 - It's a translation. Not only it it a translation but it's a whole bunch of translations. From the Cunieform of Sumerian to Akkadian to Mesopotamian to Aramaic to Hebrew to Greek to English. Wow. To see just how difficult this can be let me make a small demonstration.

Original Phrase: And it came from the heavans.
French translation - et il est venu des heavans
French to German - und er ist von den heavans gekommen
German to English - and it came of heavans (notice the original "from the" has changed to "of")
English to Portuguese - e veio dos heavans
Portuguese to French - et venait de heavans
French to Greek - και ήρθε του heavans
Greek to English - and came heavans

We started with "And it came from the heavans" and ended with "And came heavans". This alone is more than enough for me to question the validity of the bible.

My point here is not to try and pull anyone away from their faith or relationship with god. What I am trying to demonstrate is that the bible is just not something that can be literally followed. Personally, I think I have a great relationship with god. We don't "talk" much but as I wander through his world I see his magic in everything, especially us humans.

I refuse to believe that he must be "paid homage too" as so many have tried to indoctrinate in me. Instead, I nkow that the best testament to him that I can build is to be the absolute best I can be.

Just my two cents.

Well, that's my feelings on this. I welcome comment but please realize, I have spent a significant portion of my life devoted to the analysis of the document and have come to rather logical and informed decision that pertain soley to myself. Please be as respectful of my right to make a choice as I am of yours.

Anyone commenting that I will not get into heavan or will spend eternity in damnation or any other hogwash will simply be ignored.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Anyone commenting that I will not get into heavan or will spend eternity in damnation or any other hogwash will simply be ignored.

avaya, welcome to TOL. Interesting first post.

Would you like a soda?

 

[Zakath]

Or perhaps a beer? :cheers:

 

[avaya]

Thank you but I no longer consume alcohol. A soda will do.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Thank you but I no longer consume alcohol. A soda will do.

Then a soda it will be!

 

[LightSon]

This was quoted to me so many times by my pastor that i made me want to puke. His, and others, used this phrase to often push forth their belief that women were made to be subserviant to women and as soon as we started listening to them it cause us to fall out of gods favor..

"women were made to be subserviant to women"? You may have misstated that.

Anyways, welcome to TOL.
I notice that you idtentify yourself as "agnostic", yet later state, "Personally, I think I have a great relationship with god."

I sense a certain double-mindedness in you. Which is it? Do you have a relationship with god, or are you uncertain he is there?

Your double-mindedness branches out to wanting to discredit the Bible, while alternating to "Jesus said or meant such-n-such". Which is it? I think you need to pick a cogent position and stop wandering back-n-forth between 2 opposite positions.

 

[avaya]

Actually, I had to make a choice on my signup form and had no choice that really fit me that well. since I do not adhere to any of the "organized" religions and believe that the source to god lies in all of us that makes me not an athiest but again, I'm not any of the listed reliigions. As such, it was the best, though an imperfect, fit.

 

[avaya]

Darn, hit enter before I could adress your second point.

My point is that the bible is not the word of jesus, in it's purest form. The bible/torah is a recreation of already existing religious beliefs that stemmed from ancient Sumer and Mesopotamia, hence, I question it's validity. Also, I do not believe that jesus was the messiah or any of that. I do believe, however, that he existed and that he was spot on in commenting that humans need not fear god but can love him and that humans were not inherrantly faillable but were infact divinely created.

these were the true teachings of christ which have been, imho, whooly co-opted and distorted by modern established religion.

 

[LightSon]

Darn, hit enter before I could adress your second point.

My point is that the bible is not the word of jesus, in it's purest form. The bible/torah is a recreation of already existing religious beliefs that stemmed from ancient Sumer and Mesopotamia, hence, I question it's validity. Also, I do not believe that jesus was the messiah or any of that. I do believe, however, that he existed and that he was spot on in commenting that humans need not fear god but can love him and that humans were not inherrantly faillable but were infact divinely created.

these were the true teachings of christ which have been, imho, whooly co-opted and distorted by modern established religion.

Again you reference "the true teachings of christ [sic]", and you do this in the context of scriptures you want discredited. Where did you get the idea that we should "love god"? Where did you get the notiion that humans were divinely created? Where? Do you have texts that you hold as sacred? If you are going to jettison the Bible, then were do you get your ideas from?

The Bible teaches that Jesus is the Christ. Jesus acknowledged as much about Himself, so if you want to give credence to Jesus, then do so. He said, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the Father but by [Jesus Christ]" That is what He said. You should ask yourself what wisdom there is in accepting some things Jesus said, and pitching the rest. To deny His words, is to call Him a liar. Is it wise to do that? Be very careful. I believe, as scripture teaches, that you will stand before Him at the judgment and give an answer to everything you've done and said. Be careful with these thoughts you throw out there. You affect others and yourself.

I'm still looking to see if you have a cogent position. When I see it, I'll let you know.

Jesus is Lord.

 

[Eugene51]

Again you reference "the true teachings of christ [sic]", and you do this in the context of scriptures you want discredited. Where did you get the idea that we should "love god"? Where did you get the notiion that humans were divinely created? Where? Do you have texts that you hold as sacred? If you are going to jettison the Bible, then were do you get your ideas from?

The Bible teaches that Jesus is the Christ. Jesus acknowledged as much about Himself, so if you want to give credence to Jesus, then do so. He said, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the Father but by [Jesus Christ]" That is what He said. You should ask yourself what wisdom there is in accepting some things Jesus said, and pitching the rest. To deny His words, is to call Him a liar. Is it wise to do that? Be very careful. I believe, as scripture teaches, that you will stand before Him at the judgment and give an answer to everything you've done and said. Be careful with these thoughts you throw out there. You affect others and yourself.

I'm still looking to see if you have a cogent position. When I see it, I'll let you know.

Jesus is Lord.