My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?

That's the least retarded line in that song.

That he took all the sufferings of the world upon himself, and that the greatest suffering that the world suffers is the sense that it has been abandoned by God.

Talking Heads music videos were pure kino.
youtube.com/watch?v=I1wg1DNHbNU

Catholics believe that sins separate men from God, thus we have to go to purgatory to purify. I imagine the sins of the world would separate man from God, taking them upon himself must have been real lonely. Like you said abandoned.

>Christianity is the only religion with such kino.
t. Brainlet

>God was separated from himself
Makes sense

other kino religions? Bueller?

>He's talking to himself
Is this really the best explanation Christian theologians can come up with?

the whole crucifixion thing is a put on for the crowd. there's no point to any of it without christ "suffering" and guilt-tripping the shit out of everyone. so yeah, of course he's gonna throw in some really bleak one liners to ramp up the drama. otherwise it's just a literal god on earth mocking the experience of pain and suffering.

> it doesn't make sense to me, the all-knowing one, so it's wrong and christcucks BTFO eternally

>Believing in a persons divinity with no evidence other than ”You just have to have faith and accept he could perform miracles”

>calls people brainlet while making passive aggressive remark about Christianity
lol are you Hindu or something?

Christ is the only son of God, as such he is an extension of God's divinity. Is that so hard?

he meant he wasn't divine and was a person

>Christ is the only son of G-d
>implying we're not all G-d's children

Jesus was probably a psychotic who believed himself a prophet; his revolution failed, so when it failed they tortured him. This gave Jesus the impression god had forsaken him instead of saving him from the cross.

the idea that Jesus was both man and god, is a later invention.

>the point
>your head

>evidence jesus wasn't divine/contradictory shit
>yfw

you might like this book

It makes sense within a Christian framework.
Is he talking to his divine nature (one of two within his "body" or "entity"), or is he composed of both natures perfectly thus literally talking to himself?

"Our father..." he says to himself, the father is not the son, but both are God.

>evidence
i can't teach you if you don't want to grow user

>God was separated from himself

Let's get our orthodox Christology sorted:

Christ is:
True God,
True Man.
As God, He shares the divine substance which He took from his Father.
As Man, He shares our human substance which He took from his Mother (Mary).
There is no confusion of these substances, i.e. Christ is not one God-Man substance, a mixture of the divine and the human; no, He is both fully God and fully Man. These two substances are joined together in the hypostatic (personal) union, making Christ one Person in two Natures.

As Man, he has a human soul and a human body. Although His divine nature was always united to His human nature (body and soul); still, He allowed His human nature to undergo suffering in its senses so that, as far as the senses were concerned, He felt abandoned by God. This is also true in the lives of all suffering, i.e. the saints often underwent trials when, though in their inner spirit they were united to God, in their senses they felt completely abandoned by Him. These interior trials are part of the work of our redemption.

I find it difficult to see the new testament as anything other than some regional tale prepped up with some supernatural elements desu.

Let's be real, that's a later compromise between two warring factions within christology.

ok i see the contradiction, but i don't think it's intended for the reader to see God talking to himself. imo passages where Jesus is talking to God show his submission to the divine. He knows the material world is not the only world to exist. He is stuck in a mortal body, can he not speak from the mortal body's perspective?

He was quoting Psalm 22

that's absolutely what it is famalam

That might be true except:

1. He performed miracles, and so have His followers even to the present day - proving His divinity.

2. He fulfilled the biblical prophecies, the prophecies made by Moses and the prophets; He even fulfilled the prophecies of the pagans, e.g.

Plato:

>And at his side let us place the just man in his nobleness and simplicity, wishing, as Aeschylus says, to be and not to seem good. There must be no seeming, for if he seem to be just he will be honoured and rewarded, and then we shall not know whether he is just for the sake of justice or for the sake of honours and rewards; therefore, let him be clothed in justice only, and have no other covering; and he must be imagined in a state of life the opposite of the former. Let him be the best of men, and let him be thought the worst; then he will have been put to the proof; and we shall see whether he will be affected by the fear of infamy and its consequences. And let him continue thus to the hour of death; being just and seeming to be unjust.

Laozi:

>Hence, only he who is willing to give his body for the sake of the world is fit to be entrusted with the world.
>Only he who can do it with love is worthy of being the steward of the world.

3. "And hope confoundeth not: because the charity of God is poured forth in our hearts, by the Holy Ghost, who is given to us."

If Christians were just fanatics or sectarians moved solely by lust for power (though many with such motives have called themselves Christians, we speak here primarily of the saints who are its best representatives), then we might suspect that Christ Himself was just a fanatic or sectarian. But Christians have given their lives for others, not just for their friends, but even for their enemies. The first martyr, St. Stephen, died just as Jesus did - praying for His murderers. The love that Christianity brought into the world is truly divine. The love that made slaves and young women stand up to emperors and be martyred, while praying for those that killed them.

See Virgil's prophecy also:

>Now the last age by Cumae's Sibyl sung
>Has come and gone, and the majestic roll
>Of circling centuries begins anew:
>Justice returns, returns old Saturn's reign,
>With a new breed of men sent down from heaven.
>Only do thou, at the boy's birth in whom
>The iron shall cease, the golden race arise,
>Befriend him, chaste Lucina; 'tis thine own
>Apollo reigns. And in thy consulate,
>This glorious age, O Pollio, shall begin,
>And the months enter on their mighty march.

this user is the last hope for this thread

That one was about forty years before Christ's birth, ". . . the boy's birth in whom / The iron shall cease, the golden race arise . . ."

I remember this quote in Aramaic

‘Eloi Eloi Sabachtani’

so i'm about to probably say something heretical accidentally, but i heard a priest say that

Jesus (the human incarnation) had access to the beatific vision his entire life, but that God "hid" it from himself then

is this what God was up to?

yes but with all creation, not just jesus

I appreciate you typing this out but it honestly sounds like such a pile of hocus pocus. Where is the Biblical justification for any of this? You just seem to riffing on what you've half read in Aquinas.
Stop pretending the trinity is in any way a simple concept. Christians have tripping themselves up for centuries trying to shoehorn it into a logical framework. Even Augustine eventually shrugged and just said "dude its beyond language."
Christians operate exactly the same way on this board.
>1.
The miracles really aren't very convincing desu. Bear in mind that the gospels state that not only was Jesus resurrected from the dead but all the tombs of Jerusalem opened up and the holy dead rose again en masse. Do Christians seriously believe this happened? Where are the historical accounts by others of mass resurrection in a major city?
>2. This is like saying "a fortune-teller said I would find love and ten years later I was married - they were right!" Its not much of a prediction, and one the prophets predicted that the saviour would be a father which Jesus was not. Also, bear in mind that the historical Jesus knew the scriptures very well and so would have been actively aware of when he was fulfilling the prophecies. This could have made him a very convincing liar to many Jews.
>Plato
Plato's "prophecy" is so vague that it describes about a million different anonymous men that came before Jesus. "Be good whilst others think you are not good." That was Socrates himself.
>Laozi
Laozi's could just as easily be a reference to a brave warrior who dies on the battlefield for a noble cause, nothing explicitly similar to Jesus.
Can you seriously say with a straight face that this is a prediction of Jesus? Virgil also makes a million """predictions""" in his poetry and garbles the history of Rome whilst he's at it. How can you justify cherrypicking this phrase and calling it prophetic?
He's made no sound points, I'm afraid.

Fucked up the green text, sorry

>Motherfuck this hurts like a goddamn bitch like wtf why am I doing this bullshit? They're all going disgusting sinners for the next 200 centuries anyways

Which is what you or I or any pure man would say and think as he slowly asphyxiated because our limbs gave out from our own bodyweight whilst being pinned to a pine. Instead Jesus, with his divine relationship to the Father a humble question because his mortal flesh felt alone and unloved by all of existence in that moment.

Eloi, Eloi lama sabachtani*

>Makes sense
Not any less so than the trinity

I don't think you trusted in his self righteous suicide

but do you cry when angels deserve to die?

Based.

He meant he wanted Eli to get him lamb and some bok choi, but it was windy and he got misinterpretted and died of starvation.

Jesus is fully God, yet he was separated from God. Denying that he's fully God is to deny the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, which makes one a heretic.

So: how can God become separated from Himself?

>Side

He was both fully god and fully man mate

I too liked Marilyn Manson

No. He's quoting psalm 21 (22), and I strongly advise people to read it, because it's heart breaking and heart warming at the same time. It contains all of Jesus' purpose, and you can actually feel and understand what he was feeling on the cross. The twist at the end is amazing.

>believing that's all christians believe

He's giving a fucking quote as his last words what a madman.

>over 50 replies
>no mention of Zizek's analysis over this particular passage
What is wrong with Veeky Forums?

Realizing he wasted his life either because he didn't get the one he expected to live, or he did yet doesn't enjoy it at all

T H I S
H
I
S

Be the change you want to see in the world, user.

>1. He performed miracles, and so have His followers even to the present day - proving His divinity.
Faith is a hell of a drug

I'm just larping

>But I think one can read the Christian gesture in a much more radical way. This is what the sequence of crucifixion in Scorsese’s film shows us. What dies on the cross is precisely this guarantee of the Big Other. The message of Christianity is here radically atheist. The death of Christ, is not any kind of redemption of commercial affair in the sense of Christ suffers to pay for our sins. Pay to whom? For what? And so on. It’s simply the disintegration of the God, which guarantees the meaning of our lives. And that’s the meaning of that famous phrase: ‘Eli ele lama sabachthani’ Father, why have you forsaken me?
>Why have you forsaken me?
>Just before Christ’s death, we get what in psychoanalytic terms we call ‘subjective destitution’ – stepping out totally of the domain of symbolic identification, cancelling or suspending the entire field of symbolic authority, the entire field of the Big Other. Of course, we cannot know what God wants from us because there is no God. This is the Jesus Christ who says, among other things, ‘I bring sword, not peace. If you don’t hate your father, your mother, you are not my follower.’ Of course, this does not mean that you should actively hate or kill your parents. I think that family relations stand here for hierarchic social relations.
>The message of Christ is ‘I’m dying but my death itself is good news. It means you are alone, left to your freedom, be in the Holy Ghost, Holy Spirit, which is just the community of believers.’ It’s wrong to think that the second coming will be that Christ as a figure will return somehow. Christ is already here when believers form an emancipatory collective. This is why, I claim, that the only way really to be an atheist is to go through Christianity. Christianity is much more atheist than the usual atheism which can claim there is no God and so on. But nonetheless it retains a certain trust into the Big Other – this Big Other can be called natural necessity, evolution or whatever. We humans are none the less reduced to a position within a harmonious whole of evolution, whatever. But the difficult thing to accept is again that there is no Big Other – no point of reference which guarantees meaning.

>Being this autistic
Then why does Jesus say: "So if you who are evil know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!”
Who is our Father in heaven?
I respect Zizek, but damn, did he even read the Gospel, or enter a church during mass?

>I respect Zizek
kys

Or maybe he didn't read the bible like retards read genre fiction?

And so on and so fort
>Respecting Zizek

He was a human messiah claimant who was genuinely shocked at being killed.

>not respecting Zizek

this

You can't read a text without the context.

That is not at all what I was saying

Not for a lack of trying. I found him amusing before I actually read his cancer.

you are small

Good lord Zizek is so full of shit, why does anyone listen to this blatant retard?

An interesting take. My only concern is that it seems a modern revision view of Christian doctrine and not an explanation of the doctrine in and of itself. Of course zizek would say that this is my ideology clouding my objectivity but it's possible the same force is at play on him too with this deconstructed analysis

almost

he was God pretending to be a human messiah claimant who was genuinely shocked at being killed.

>literally directed at audiences foreign to the region

Because his admirers are even dumber, see

If he said this, the trinity dogma of the concil of Nicäa is wrong (even if you just consider the bible itself), because why should god himself ask himself why he let himself alone?

It indicates to the fact, that, if he really shouted this out, which is not difficult to believe, he never thought of himself as god, maybe not even as god's son. For some, this might be obvious, but it is definitely worth discussing. Did Jesus think of himself as the son of god or just a revolutionary prophet? Did he want to be the heir of David and revolte against the roman occupation of Israel or did he fail in this because he claimed to be more than that (which would als explain the jewish-christian schisma)?

Lmao what

i'm 99% sure this is from puppet and the dwarf which is like... alright... but his overarching claim there isnt about what christian doctrine is or isn't but rather the semi-perverse underpinings once u strip away the "ideology" that surrounds the gospel

Apparently Muslims believe that it was actually Judas on the cross, made up to look like Jesus, while Jesus hid out in a cave. I kinda like that one

>Virgil prophecy
I love this brainlet Christian meme. It's very similar to when feminists try to read patriarchy in Shakespeare's works.

For any one who doesn't know: this is a meme from (iirc) the middle ages. The classics were being rediscovered and to justify the reading of pagan works christians went full pomo and started shoehorning christian themes and interpretations into said books.

The rediscovery of Virgil and Christian interpretation of his works may be medieval, but this line of thought goes back to the early Church with writers like St. Justin Martyr, who speaks of the pagans as having "seeds of the Logos" sown among them; in other words, preparations for Christ.

Why exactly did Jesus have to die for our sins? I just don't see the connection. He died, and as long as we believe he died for us, we get rewarded. Why is belief required? Why die at all? Being a skeptic, I'm distressed for knowing I could go to Hell because I can't understand the Christian God, which makes it harder for me to want to believe. I still don't see why we would punished for not having faith, when almost every religion requires faith. If I knew for a fact Jesus not only died but rose 3 days later then I shouldn't complain if I disobeyed God and went to Hell. Adam and Eve sinned, but that was worse than our sin because they didn't need faith-- God actually spoke to them.
Like Aurelius, I think it's reasonable to live a just life and worry not about religion, because a just god would reward us. Otherwise, we shouldn't worship him. Because how can we claim that God must be good? He could just as easily be evil. How frightening to think that I could be predestined to suffer in Hell for eternity, never escaping God's wrath...

Don't bother we're just idiotic sycophants for even bothering to examine zizek.

He wasn't really separated, more like he played by the human rules. You don't (usually) break the board while playing chess (sorry for the food analogy)

My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from saving me, so far from my cries of anguish? My God, I cry out by day, but you do not answer, by night, but I find no rest.

Yet you are enthroned as the Holy One; you are the one Israel praises. In you our ancestors put their trust; they trusted and you delivered them. To you they cried out and were saved; in you they trusted and were not put to shame.

But I am a worm and not a man, scorned by everyone, despised by the people. All who see me mock me; they hurl insults, shaking their heads. “He trusts in the Lord,” they say, “let the Lord rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him.”

Yet you brought me out of the womb; you made me trust in you, even at my mother’s breast. From birth I was cast on you; from my mother’s womb you have been my God.

Do not be far from me, for trouble is near and there is no one to help.

Many bulls surround me; strong bulls of Bashan encircle me. Roaring lions that tear their prey open their mouths wide against me. I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint. My heart has turned to wax; it has melted within me. My mouth is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth; you lay me in the dust of death.

Dogs surround me, a pack of villains encircles me; they pierce my hands and my feet. All my bones are on display; people stare and gloat over me. They divide my clothes among them and cast lots for my garment.

But you, Lord, do not be far from me. You are my strength; come quickly to help me.
Deliver me from the sword, my precious life from the power of the dogs. Rescue me from the mouth of the lions; save me from the horns of the wild oxen.

I will declare your name to my people; in the assembly I will praise you. You who fear the Lord, praise him! All you descendants of Jacob, honor him! Revere him, all you descendants of Israel! For he has not despised or scorned the suffering of the afflicted one; he has not hidden his face from him but has listened to his cry for help.

From you comes the theme of my praise in the great assembly; before those who fear you I will fulfill my vows.

The poor will eat and be satisfied; those who seek the Lord will praise him—may your hearts live forever!

All the ends of the earth will remember and turn to the Lord, and all the families of the nations will bow down before him, for dominion belongs to the Lord and he rules over the nations.

All the rich of the earth will feast and worship; all who go down to the dust will kneel before him—those who cannot keep themselves alive.

Posterity will serve him; future generations will be told about the Lord.

They will proclaim his righteousness, declaring to a people yet unborn: He has done it!

>Why exactly did Jesus have to die for our sins? I just don't see the connection.

The Church's theologians have speculated that God could have forgiven man's sins in another way. In fact, if He wanted, He could have just forgiven man's sins outright without any such sacrifice being offered. Since the sacrifice of the cross was not an absolute requirement for our redemption, we have to look instead for reasons of fittingness to understand why God chose this as the means for our redemption.
One of the main themes of the Bible is that sin brought death into the world, and that sin leads to death (physical and spiritual). Though God, in terms of strict justice, has the right to punish men with death every time they commit a grave sin, out of His mercy and condescension to human weakness and frailty, He chooses to put up with them patiently until such time as they repent of their sin and receive His forgiveness. In the mean time, seeing as God has been offended by their sin, and since justice therefore demands a certain act of retribution, God allowed animals to be sacrificed and undergo death in men's place, so that men would not have to die (at least immediately) for their sins. But the New Testament proclaims that the animal sacrifices of the Old Testament are just a prefigurement of the ultimate and truly redeeming sacrifice of Christ - the Lamb of God - upon the cross.
To understand how Christ's sacrifice redeems us, think of it like this. You commit a grave crime offending a certain man, for which you are justly condemned to punishment. However, the man's son intervenes and begs for forgiveness and mercy on your behalf, and even undergoes the punishment himself just to make it that much more difficult for the man to refuse you the mercy that his son begs of him on your behalf. Similarly, whenever a sinner goes to God through Christ His only-Begotten Son, there are two things which make it easy for God to forgive the sinner's offences: the fact that Christ, who is His Son and who is Himself divine, is pleading on the sinner's behalf; the fact that Christ Himself is divine, and therefore His blood and sacrifice is infinitely precious and has infinite merits, and therefore is more good than all the sins of the world are evil.

> Why is belief required?

Christ's sacrifice has the potential to redeem all men, but for it redeem any particular man, that man has to voluntarily wash himself in the blood of Christ.
"I beheld a great multitude, whom no man could number, who had washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb."

>I'm distressed for knowing I could go to Hell because I can't understand the Christian God, which makes it harder for me to want to believe.

You won't be punished for that. God doesn't punish anyone for something they can't do. The less capability you have, the less culpability for your crime or neglect. Besides, it's not a matter of understanding, but of faith. Nobody fully understand God because He is beyond our comprehension. Faith is a gift that God gives to all that come to Him in earnest, It might seem strange to say that: because how can you come to God, if you do not already have faith to begin with? You can't exactly, but you can prepare a place for God to enter your heart by sincerely searching for the truth and avoiding what your conscience tells you is evil.

>I still don't see why we would punished for not having faith, when almost every religion requires faith.

You won't be punished for not having faith if you never had the opportunity to acquire it. You will only be punished if you did have the opportunity but neglected to use it because of your preoccupation with material things or whatever.

>Like Aurelius, I think it's reasonable to live a just life and worry not about religion, because a just god would reward us. Otherwise, we shouldn't worship him.

But our conscience tells us that if God does exist, then we rightly owe Him worship. So religion is a moral obligation, and we can't expect a reward if we forego such obligations. Besides, in order to be truly good we need to pray to God for the grace to do good and avoid evil, because our fallen nature often prevents us from truly seeking the good.

Another reason for the fittingness of Christ's cross as the means for our redemption: is that it inspired the saints to perform similar acts of self-sacrificial love. True, God could have just forgiven us immediately, but then the saints would never have reached the heights of sanctity they did through the self-sacrificial love they practiced in imitation of Christ.

I was there on that day, ask me anything.

"In every saint there lurks an arrant knave, the marrow of all holyness being absolute hellishness. That is why our Saviours are of no avail, their remedies being too strong for common man, who is the puppet of his fleshly appetite and not a sinner."

-Albert Caraco

>But our conscience tells us that if God does exist, then we rightly owe Him worship.

What do you mean by conscience, what specifically are you referring to? Whose conscience? Certainly not mine.

Please allow me to introduce myself
I'm a man of wealth and fame.

Wrong. Also nice.

Is there any kind of Christian argument against these points?

Basically that there was only one enemy left, two if you counted God seperately.