Truth Magazine

By Archie E. Proctor

The term “elder” in the New Testament, is used in two senses: first, to designate an older man as compared to a younger (Rom. 9:12; Luke 1:18). Second, to designate men who are appointed to a position of authority in a local congregation of the Lord’s church (Acts 20:17, 28). It is in this second sense to which this article is addressed.

For those readers who are not familiar with the term, elders were appointed in every church, (Acts 14:23) and had to meet certain qualifica- tions to be selected for this office (1 Tim. 3:1-7; Tit. 1:5-9). In short, elders were to be older men, not recent converts, who had been married to one wife, with believing children, who ruled their households well, were hospitable, of good reputation, sober, just, holy, full of wisdom, and well versed in the word of God.

There are two words in the New Testament that are used to refer to the office of elders. The first is presbuteros, from which we have the English word presbyter. It is variously translated as elders and presbytery in the NT. The second is episkope, or episcopal. It is rendered bishop and overseer. The words are used interchangeably, and in the New Testament refer to the same office and work.

The Bible never speaks of a single elder in any New Testament church; the term is always plural. Elders were by definition older men, there is no verse or example in the New Testament where women were authorized to direct the work of the church in the office of elder; on the contrary, the Bible forbids women to even teach in an assembly where men are present, or to have authority over a man (1 Cor. 14:34, 35).

The work of elders is well defined in the Scriptures, but in practice, the application has sometimes been lacking. The verses which define the work of the office of elder are:

• Feed the flock, the church of God (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:1).
• Watch for the souls of the congregation, and give account to the Lord (Heb 13:17).
• Take the oversight of the flock (1 Pet. 5:2).
• Rule well (1 Tim. 5:17).

To accomplish these duties, an elder of the Lord’s church must have these qualities:

• (He must) hold fast the faithful word as he has been taught.
• Able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convict the gainsayers (Tit. 1:9).

• Be ensamples to the flock (1 Pet. 5:3).

The use of the term “flock” brings to mind the meta- phor of a shepherd guarding the sheep. Indeed, Peter uses this figure in 1 Peter 5:1-4 where he speaks of Christ being the “chief Shepherd”:

The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.

It would seem that many think the principal work of elders is to maintain the meeting house, keep and increase the treasury, and keep the pews full. To this end, they seek preaching to please all and offend none. Issues that might stir up the church are to be avoided, and all who come to the meeting-house door are welcomed and accepted as members of the congregation without question.

The wise use of the Lord’s money, attention to the physical assets of the congregation, and concern for the attendance are not to be neglected by the eldership, but they are as “tithes of mint and rue” (Luke 11:42). They are important, but not the primary work of the eldership. The proper use of the talents of deacons will assure these needs are met, and the elders will be able to assure that the church is spiritually fed with the gospel, so that error will be condemned, proper application of the principles of the teaching of Christ will be made, and vigilant care of the souls of the weak and spiritual babes is maintained.

Feed The Flock

In Ephesians 4:11-16, Paul wrote that God had given a number of functions in the local church, including bishops, evangelists, and teachers. He stated that these positions are for perfecting the saints, and edifying the body of Christ, the church. The objective is that all may come to the unity of the faith, and full knowledge of Christ. As a result of this growth, Christians will reach the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ: They will become mature in the biblical sense (Matt. 5:48).

When properly fed with the gospel of Christ, children of God will grow up to be mature in Christ. They will no longer be spiritual infants who constantly need care and nurturing, and who need to understand the difference between right and wrong (Heb. 5:11-13). Those young in the faith are always subject to the danger of falling for any false teacher who speaks false doctrine in a pleasant manner (2 Tim. 3:5, 6). However, such spiritual babes, when fed with all the gospel, will become “fitly joined together,” and learn to spend their time in mutual support, edification, and brotherly love.

All teaching should be done with the objective of increasing the spiritual growth of all members, not the growth of numbers. The teaching of the truth in love may have the immediate effect of lowering the attendance, as those who will not change their lives are driven out by the truth of God’s word (1 John 2:19). When the truth is taught, error is exposed, members are properly edified, and when attention is given to these things, Paul says that “God will give the increase” (1 Cor. 3:7). The numeri- cal growth may be slower, but the numbers will not fall away at the first sign of controversy, or condemnation of error.

When Christians are constantly fed with spiritual candy, and the wisdom of men, they will become soft and of no use to the Lord. Efforts to make men feel good, and avoid controversy will ultimately destroy a flock. Sooner or later, the wolves will come in, teaching error and false doctrine. Paul says they will have a “form of godliness” and will capture those who have sins in their lives, and who are unable to come to a knowledge of the truth (2 Tim. 3:5-7).

Elders who have the opportunity, and refuse, for the sake of numbers in attendance, to teach the flock to repent of moral sins; and who will not permit, for the sake of the feelings of those who are good friends, teaching and preaching on the specific errors of false doctrines among the churches; will stand condemned with the wolves and those whom they deceived, in the Day of Judgment.

Watch For Souls

The care and concern for the souls of the congregation is a never-ending task for the eldership. There is constant watching and exhortation for the weak, lest they slip. The congregation must be taught and encouraged to “bear one another’s burdens” (Gal. 6:1, 2). A well thought out Bible teaching program is necessary, otherwise instruction might be limited to just the basic principles, and members will not be given opportunity to grow and become teachers in their own right (Heb. 5:12). Elders are commanded to visit the sick and to make prayer over them (Jas. 5:14). The need for multiple elders is manifest in the care of souls in the local church, as no one man could do it all.

Given the different personalities among a congregation, wise elders may, in some cases, seek mature members to assist in this work. They can be of value when their spiritual experience will help the weak and discouraged. This needs to be done carefully, as all such assistance must limit itself to instruction of the Word of God and its application. Many times such assistance must involve the greatest discretion, as a situation can be made worse by inclusion of one who is not thoroughly grounded in the Bible, and has not demonstrated an ability to keep such matters confidential.

A word of caution: Many times marriage problems, and resultant sinful behaviors are among the situations elders will face. All who are involved should limit themselves to being a good listener, and make proper scriptural applications to the situation from the Word of God. They should never take the role of a marriage counselor or other professional social worker. If the need is indicated for this service, a professional should be sought. If one of the elders, or a member is such a licensed professional, well and good, but their work should be separate and apart from the work of elders in this regard.

This duty is the most difficult part of the elder’s work, but we dare not neglect it. For the sake of precious souls, we must do our best “to restore such a one” who has fallen (Gal. 6:1).

Take The Oversight

The requirement to “rule” and “take the oversight” refers to a third responsibility of the eldership. The local congregation of the Lord’s church is the only expres- sion of organization in the New Testament. Each local congregation is autonomous in its function; there is no larger organized function directing the work of the church which Christ built (Matt. 16:18). As in any such organization, there are decisions to be made as to the use of buildings and other assets, use of the treasury in the support of evangelists, and matters of benevolence among the congregation. Wise elders will not make such decisions in secret, but make their decisions known to the church. They will seek out the cares and concerns of the congregation. Business meetings of the men are one tool in achieving this. Other methods include informal contact with all the men who are heads of families, and widows, and other women who have no husband.

In all these things, elders have only the authority to make such decisions as related to items which are expe dients to the work of the Church. Their authority to make such decisions is also limited by the Holy Spirit to the local congregation over which they have been given oversight (Acts 20:28). They do not have authority under any circumstances, to make such decisions for another congregation.

In the performance of this duty, there is no biblical authority for elders to limit the teaching and preaching of the full counsel of the truth of God so as to avoid controversy (Acts 20:27), or to introduce innovations in the work and worship not authorized by the Bible.

While all may freely come to the assembly to worship (1 Cor. 14:23), elders have a responsibility to examine those who wish to join themselves in membership to the congregation before they are accepted into the flock (Acts 9:26). Failure to meet this responsibility may result in a wolf in sheep’s clothing coming among them (Matt. 7:15). If Christians who have been involved in sinful practices, are permitted to join the flock without proper repentance and confession, their sin will become the leaven that “leavens the whole lump” (1 Cor. 5:6). That is, the influence of their sin will spread and cause great damage to the work.

Unless elders have full knowledge of the faith and abil- ity of a new member, they err greatly if they allow such a one to teach a class they do not attend. Otherwise, they have no opportunity to know if false doctrine is being taught. More than one congregation of the Lord’s church has been badly damaged when elders allow a new mem- ber to teach the high school class immediately after he has joined himself to the flock. In this critical transitional class between the child and the adult, an improper choice of teacher can destroy the faith of a young Christian for life.

Qualities of Elders

To feed the flock, watch for souls, and take the over- sight, elders must have two qualities. The first is a good working knowledge of the Bible. Second, he must be able to read a passage from the word of God, and to make a proper application of it. This is not to require that all elders be able to preach a sermon from the pulpit, although this is a useful skill to any eldership. However, the requirement “apt to teach” does imply that every elder should be able to teach what the Bible says in some public forum, be it class or pulpit.

All elders must be able to discern when error is being taught, and have the skills necessary to show from the Bible how the false teaching is wrong (Tit. 1:9). It is in fulfilling this need, that a good eldership will function as a “team.” Where one may not be able to immediately refute a false doctrine, the combined study of all may be presented by the one who is best skilled in public teaching.

The selection of an evangelist is crucial to the work of an eldership in spiritual growth and edification of a con- gregation. Elders must always be vigilant that not only is the whole truth of God being taught, but that proper application of that truth is made to the issues and sins in the flock. It is only by kind and patient application of the truth that spiritual babes in Christ are able to grow up and become mature Christians. Failing to teach and nurture such spiritual infants will result in their probable loss when the storms of conflict and error come.

Elders must be ready to rebuke and discipline those of the flock who become rebellious, and will not take encouragement or correction. 1 Corinthians 5:5 and 1 Thessa- lonians 3:6 require such action in the case of one who takes part in public sin to the hurt of the local congregation. There are times when such sins are ignored for the sake of “peace.” Invariably, such refusal to act will result in more than one soul being lost.

Finally, an elder must remember that he is an “en- sample” or example to the flock. If an elder engages in sinful behavior, how can he teach the truth, encourage the weak, and keep the flock as he should? 1 Timothy 5:19, 20 requires that elders are to be publicly called to account by the other elders or the evangelist, if they are guilty of public sin and will not repent.

A man who has the potential to be an elder, is under obligation to develop himself to have the qualities an elder needs. If he refuses, he becomes like the unfaith- ful servant who buried his talent in the ground (Matt. 25:24ff ). His refusal to use the ability God had given him led to his being cast into outer darkness where there was “weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Paul said that one who desires to be an elder “desireth a good work” (1 Tim. 3:1). It is important that we be fruitful in every good work (Col. 1:10).

Conclusion

In this day and time, it has become the view of many that the eldership is a hindrance to the teaching of God’s word. Preference is expressed for a business meeting arrangement where all of Paul and Barnabas ordained elders in every church where they preached the gospel (Acts 14:23). The maxi- mum time that could have elapsed between the start of a work and the time they appointed elders was about two years. Why could they have appointed elders so quickly, yet some churches today never have elders? Of course, Paul was able to lay hands on men and fill them with the Holy Spirit to know the word of God immediately. But knowing the word then, is equivalent to being educated in the Bible today. There is not a hint in the Scriptures that elders were miraculously qualified by the laying on of hands.

Too often, men who are qualified are rejected for some minor quibble by men or women who will never be qualified. These wish to maintain the business meeting arrangement, as they have the ability through political skill, to dominate and control the affairs of the church. If they accepted elders, they would no longer have such control.

Those who reject the eldership need to consider; if any church in the New Testament did not need elders, it should have been the church in Jerusalem. They had apostles to teach and strengthen it, and they had deacons to wait on tables (Acts 6:2). Yet after a few short years, they also had elders, and the elders are mentioned as acting with the apostles in the meeting that took place in Acts 15.

In many places, there is a greater need for godly elders than for the evangelist, yet many think that a good evan- gelist will substitute for elders. We need to keep in mind that God’s arrangement is to have elders in every church. This is not impossible if we dedicate our efforts helping good men become qualified. God will provide what we.

By Mike Willis

And when the people complained, it displeased the Lord: and the Lord heard it; and his anger was kindled; and the fire of the Lord burnt among them, and consumed them that were in the uttermost parts of the camp.  And the people cried unto Moses; and when Moses prayed unto the Lord, the fire was quenched. And he called the name of the place Taberah: because the fire of the Lord burnt among them  (Num. 11:1-3).

The divine record of the wilderness wanderings of Israel, like all of the Old Testament record, has been recorded for our admonition and learn- ing. Paul said,“For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope” (Rom. 15:4). “Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted” (1

Cor. 10:6). Among the incidents that inspiration records is the incident at Taberah when the children of Israel complained against the Lord.

The Historical Record

Taberah is the first stop of the children of Israel following their departure from Mt. Sinai. The journey from Egypt to Mt. Sinai took ap- proximately three months (Exod. 19:1). Israel departed from Sinai eleven months later (Num. 10:10-13). Having been to Sinai, I have some appre- ciation for what the terrain was through which they traveled. The area is mountainous with barren rock, little moisture and pasture. Walking through such country would be laborious and wearisome. Perhaps their muscles ached from the journey in the blazing hot sun, after having been settled in one location for nearly a year. And, there was nothing forcing them to move, as had been the case when they left Egypt.

For whatever reason (Scripture does not tell us why), the Israelites started complaining. The text says, “and the Lord heard it; and his anger was kindled” (Num. 11:1). Consequently, the Lord sent fire that consumed those in the outer perimeters of the camp. When Moses interceded for the people, the Lord heard his prayer and quenced the fire. The place was called Taberah. The word taberah is derived from the verb ba‘ar, “to burn, consume.” The noun Tab‘erah, means “a burning.”

The Sin of Complaining

The word “complained” is translated from ‘anan, derived from the Chaldee word that means “to be grieved, to be sad, to mourn.”The word only occurs in the Hithpolel which signifies “to show oneself sad”; hence, “to complain, to murmur” and, as used in Numbers 11:1 “with the no- tion of impiety” (Gesenius 72). Let’s consider the following truths about complaining:

1. Complaining stems from a dissatisfied spirit, which displeases God. One who complains thinks that he de- serves better from God than he is receiving. How could such ever be true of sinful men? The deserved punish- ment of sin is eternal damnation in hell; what has any of us experienced on earth that compares to the deserved punishment of hell.

Man is an unusual creature. When good befalls him, he generally thinks that it is deserved. How rare it is to hear anyone say, “I don’t deserve this good fortune that has come to me.” However, any perceived evil that befalls him is undeserved and he usually complains about his misfortune at the hand of God.

This dissatisfied spirit cannot (a) be content with the state in which he is (Phil. 4:11); (b) be thankful (Col. 3:15). One has said, “In the City of Happiness, Complaining Avenue and Thanksgiving Lane are miles apart, so that you cannot live on both streets at the same time” (Wendell Winkler, Heart Disease and Their Cure 26). G. Wagner wrote,

Now, we must all feel that right-down murmuring is very sinful, and in its worst forms most Christians overcome it; but not so complaining, for this seems to many to be scarcely wrong, and it often grows on them so gradu- ally that they are seldom conscious of it. The causes of complaint are manifold. Little difficulties in our circum- stances — little acts of selfishness in our neighbours; but complaining is most of all a danger with persons who have weak health — for weakness of body often produces depression of spirits — and this is the soil in which a complaining spirit takes deepest root. Then, too, it often grows into a habit; a tinge of discontent settles on the countenance, and the voice assumes the tone of complaint. And though this, like most habits, soon becomes unconscious, yet it is not the less mischievous on that account. It is mischievous to our own souls, for it damps the work of the Spirit of God in our hearts, and enfeebles the spiritual life. It is mischievous in its ef- fects upon others; for when Christians complain it gives the world altogether wrong impressions of the strength and consolation which the love of Christ affords, and it frequently generates the same spirit; one complains, and another, having the same or other causes of complaint, sees no reason why he should not complain too (The Biblical Illustrator: Numbers II:94).

Even pagan authors recognized the sickness that is in the soul of the man who constantly complains.Aristotle wrote,

If, as we have said, the activities determine a man’s life, no supremely happy man can ever become miserable, for he will never do what is hateful and base. For in our opinion, the man who is truly good and wise will bear with dignity whatever fortune may bring, and will always act as nobly as circumstances permit, just as a good general makes the most strategic use of the troops at his disposal, and a good shoemaker makes the best shoe he can from the leather available, and so on with experts in all fields (Nicomachean Ethics I:2 [p. 26]).

How dare us to reflect on God’s goodness toward us by complaining about his daily provisions for us! This borders on slandering God. Instead, we should be thank- ful for his gracious gifts.

2. Complaining is self-destructive. Certainly one can recognize that complaining does no harm to God. How- ever, it does something to man’s spirit. It creates the feeling of being “victimized” by God or one’s fellowman. It creates a “feel sorry for me” spirit that discourages human activity to change one’s plight. It destroys one’s ability to look at the circumstances of one’s life as a means of searching for what good God might create from those circumstances. Think of how the miseries that Joseph experienced were used in God’s providence to effect the preservation of Israel from a famine and from the even greater danger of being influenced by the pagan influences of the Canaanites. In Egypt, the Israelites were segregated because they were shepherds, thus allowing them to develop as a nation with a lesser danger of being absorbed by a pagan culture. God used Joseph’s suffer- ings to accomplish a greater good for his people.

The story is told of Caesar throwing a banquet for his noble friends. On the day of the banquet, rain poured down. He was so displeased and enraged that he com- manded his soldiers to shoot up their arrows to Jupiter, their chief god, because of his sending the foul weather. The arrows fell far short of heaven, but when they came back down, they injured many of his soldiers. Indeed, complaining is similar to firing arrows at heaven! It falls back on us to injure us!

3. Complaining damages others. Many a church has been restrained in what it can do because of several carping complainers who discourage others from fully participating in the work of the Lord. Complainers rob the church and the home of its joy. Why should visitors want to be part of a congregation that has no joy? The dour mood that settles over the congregation is destruc- tive and, for that reason, such complainers need to be addressed.

God Hears Our Complaining

The text significantly states about the complainers at Taberah, “the Lord heard it.” Our omniscient God is fully aware of our complaining and is just as displeased by it now as he was then. “His anger was kindled” against those complainers. To show his displeasure, he sent fire in the camp. What would happen in our homes, cities, and churches if God sent fire when we complain?

Conclusion

There are times when men have legitimate complaints. The word “complain” occurs more frequently in the book of Job than other books, but who can doubt that Job had reason to complain. In his grief, he took his complaints to God, not merely to others. His complaining was not destructive, but an appeal to God for understanding. In the same manner Moses took his complaints to God when the children of Israel complained when they had nothing to eat but manna (Num. 11:11). To think that one can bear all of life’s burdens without facing disappointment and discouragement is unrealistic. To allow the evils of life to make one ungrateful, bitter, and resentful is something else. When this happens, one becomes guilty of sinful complaining.

By Lewis Willis

Several Greek words are translated“compassion.”Note the words and their definitions: Oikteiro — “to have pity, a feeling of distress through the ills of others”; splanchnizomai — “to be moved with compassion;” sumpatheo — “to suffer with another . . . to be affected similarly (sym- pathy) . . . be touched with;” and eleeo — “to have mercy . . . to show kindness, by beneficence, or assistance” (Vine 218).

Compassion signifies a feeling within the heart for others because of their suffering and trouble. It promotes or produces action. The action is an expression of kindness and/or assistance to the suffering. Note that compassion, if there is no action, is empty and useless.

T h e  p e r fe c t  a n d  a b s o l u t e expression of compassion is naturally found in God. Paul wrote, “For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion” (Rom. 9:15). Also, many passages affirm the compassion of Christ: “But when he saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd”(Matt. 9:36). (See also Matt. 14:14; 15:32; 20:34.) When the prodigal son returned it was said of his father, “And he arose, and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him” (Luke 15:20). Of course, God is represented by the Father in that parable.

It would be expected, I suppose, that the same spirit of compassion would be required of God’s children. Consider: “Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another” (Rom. 12:10); “And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you” (Eph. 4:32); and “Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering” (Col. 3:12). Obviously, we are not what we are supposed to be unless we are kind, tenderhearted, and merciful to those who are in need.

To say that compassion is needed to d ay i s a n understatement. This is true of both Christians and non- Christians. It would be hard to think of a time when more people have been in more distress than they are today. I can recall all of my life hearing older people talk about the Depression. What they had in mind was the trouble and hardship of the time.

The nature of human suffering today may be dif- ferent than those days but it is just as real. People are sick; they recognize their weakness in body and spirit in dealing with their hardships; they are so concerned about what might happen that they cannot even sleep; the innocent party in a divorce is left in anger, loneliness and heartache; and death leaves many with absolute hopelessness, loss and despair. These need compassion! Their circumstances demand our action. Furthermore, the teaching of God’s Word places us under obligation to act regarding their needs.

There are too few people who seem to care when these times of trouble come. Unless we have experienced some of these situations ourselves, we may find that we do not understand the feelings of the distressed, or do not understand what to do and how to do it in our efforts to offer our support.

Many, not knowing what to say, say nothing. Others, seem to say but do nothing. People sometimes say, “Call me if I can help.” Perhaps they mean every word of it. But those in distress, not wishing to be a burden, do not feel comfortable in active — in an effort to help. By setting a definite time, we prove our offer to help is genuine.

Also, a telephone call received unexpectedly is espe- cially appreciated. Select that time when you think the person might need to hear from a friend, as in the evening or on holidays when no one is around. A card says I care. It affords an opportunity to say to the troubled there is someone who cares. Our visits give them an opportunity to express their frustrations, fears, sadness, and loneli- ness. These visits break the monotony of dreary days. And, of course, these need the power of prayer to help them through their time of despair. And they need to know that you are praying for them.

If we do what we know we are obligated to do — which is really what we want to do — it will require some of our time. Aren’t our friends and brethren worth some of our time? It will require using some energy, even at the end of our own tiresome duties, but they are worth that too. We will have to use our several abilities to find that special way to help, or that special word that will comfort, but that’s a small price to pay for the benefit it brings to others. We will have to keep our eyes open to see those who are in need, and to see the opportunities we have to serve others. That’s what being a Christian requires of us. But we do it, not out of obligation, but because we care!

Look about you, brother or sister. Is there a family member, a fellow Christian, a friend or a neighbor in need of help? Don’t wait for someone else to act. Filled with compassion, get up and do something to help them! Yes, they will appreciate it. But, you will also profit from doing as you should.

I submit this article in hopes that it will encourage discussion as well as stir some thoughts concerning this statement made by our Lord moments before his death on the cross. Perhaps we have all heard men stand before a group and, taking the statement at face-value, declare that the Son was indeed forsaken by the Father. In explaining why such was the case, these men end up drawing conclu- sions that are heavily Calvinistic in their implications. Perhaps the answer to our Lord’s question lies in the senti- ments expressed beyond the first verse of Psalm 22, from which the statement is taken.

The concern over the explanation of this statement was heightened when I listened to a tape of a sermon presented by a gospel preacher detailing what Jesus suffered while on the cross. In reading Tom Roberts’ book, Neo-Calvinism in the Church of Christ, the names mentioned and statements quoted were of men who are foreign to my acquaintance. But as I listened to this man’s sermon, a man I am ac- quainted with, I was alarmed by the familiar ring his words had with those brother Roberts’ had quoted. What seemed like useful information of some distant threat had already made its way in among those that I know. My fear was, did they know it? Do brethren detect the Calvinistic language when it is presented in its subtle forms? The brother who expressed these thoughts was very courteous in our discus- sion of them, and he is far from being the only one among those we respect to hold such a view. However, I do feel that brethren need to be familiar with the language that is being used, and consider its implications. Those using such language also need to be aware of its implications.

The general thought among some brethren seems to be that what Christ suffered while on the cross was a spiritual separation from the Father. The death that Jesus “tasted for everyone” (Heb. 2:9), was spiritual death. The language, at times, even has Christ agonizing in the Garden over the realization that he is about to come into contact with the ugliness of sin; for the first time deity is about to be sepa- rated from deity, and that which is light is about to take on darkness. It has been reasoned from Isaiah’s statement, “He was numbered with the transgressors” (Isa. 53:12; Luke 22:37), that in that the word, transgressor, as found in Luke 22:37, is the same word that is translated in other places, imputed, that our transgressions were imputed to Christ. (The Calvinist then redefines impute to mean transfer and thus transfers our sins to Christ.)

Brethren, the words may indeed be the same, but to view Jesus as a transgressor in that he was treated as such is a far cry from viewing Jesus as a transgressor because he was guilty of such; namely, our transgressions. Do others realize that this is what they are saying when they conclude that there was a spiritual separation between the Son and the Father due to his taking on our sins? Can these not see the difference between Jesus bearing the guilt of the world’s sin and his bearing the punishment of the world’s sin? Or is this is a trivial distinction that matters little? Is it Calvin-phobia, or a shift in thinking that needs to be addressed?

Why did Jesus ask, “Why have You forsaken Me?” Was something now happening that he was unaware of? If the predetermined plan was for the Son to take on himself the guilt of the world’s sin, thus separating himself from the Father (Isa. 59:1-2), would not Christ have known this? Why at the moment of its occurrence would Jesus ask, “Why is this happening?” Would not the One who was with the Father when the plan of redemption was being formed know that this separation from the Father was a necessary consequence of his taking on the guilt of the world’s sin? Our Lord was not delusional, nor was he suddenly in the dark as to what was happening as he paid the price for our sins. Nor was there any spiritual separation that took place that involved the Father turning his back on his Son. Following this statement by our Lord, as he quoted from Psalm 22, he says with complete confidence, “Father, into Your hands I commit My spirit.”

If our Lord was not forsaken, and was not delusional, why the statement from Psalm 22:1? Consider the Psalm itself, the sentiment of which is far from expressing feelings of desertion by God. The first verse is similar to lines found elsewhere in the Psalms, some of which acknowledge the thought that, “I may look forsaken” (Ps. 3:1-4), but the Psalmist knows that is far from the case. Psalm 13 begins in similar fashion, but like Psalm 22, it proceeds to express absolute trust and confidence in God’s deliverance. Indeed, our Lord did look forsaken as he hung on the cross, but if Psalm 22 expresses his feelings, then we have one declaring that same trust and confidence in God’s deliverance. And beyond the intimacy felt that would have our Lord saying, “You have answered Me” (Ps. 22:21), the psalm builds to a beautiful crescendo as it declares the praise and glory that will be given to God as a result of this monumental event. “It will be recounted to the Lord to the next generation. They will come and declare His righteousness to a people who will be born, that He has done this” (Ps. 22:30b-31).

Another thought to consider is one that I heard expressed by brother Dale Smelser, who pondered the impact that might be had on the religious leaders who stood there mocking our Lord, as they heard that line from Psalm 22. These would have been familiar with the remaining words of the psalm, so what might they have thought as they stood there and called to mind almost word for word from the psalm some of the things that were being said to our Lord (v. 8, and Matt. 27:43)? What might they have thought as they recalled, “They pierced My hands and feet . . . They divide My garments among them, and for My clothing they cast lots” (vv.16b, 18)? Might these have stopped to consider, “This is it; it is happening right before our eyes”? That some of these standing by did recognize the psalm as a call for deliverance, not of despair, can be seen in their response to our Lord’s words: “Let us see if Elijah will come to save Him” (Matt 27:49). Deliverance did come, but not as they expected.

Sure, it would have made things easier if our Lord had quoted a different line from Psalm 22, but let us give serious thought to the explanations that we give to this passage. To conclude that Jesus was forsaken, one must also consider the consequences of such reasoning and the Calvinistic implications. To take the Psalm as a whole, however, is to read the words of one who knew and trusted in his Father, one into whose hands he could commit his spirit. Psalm 22 is a psalm of deliverance and salvation, not of despera- tion. In speaking that first line, our Lord expressed the full body of that psalm with all of its words of hope and future blessings to come, because, “He has done this.”