Originally Posted by Charlemagne
Hello Pilgrim,

First of all, there are these two verses that would seem to say he was not
cursed by God, but only cursed by the mouths of blasphemous Jews both while he hung on the cross as well as by those who claimed that He could not possibly have been the Messiah because a proper messiah would never be cursed on a tree. Here is Psalm 109:25-28:

I am an object of scorn to my accusers; when they see me, they wag their heads. Help me, O Lord my God! Save me according to your steadfast love! Let them know that this is your hand; you, O Lord, have done it! Let them
curse, but you will bless! They arise and are put to shame, but your servant will be glad!(Psalm 109:25-28)

The words, "Let them curse, but you will bless!" are very instructive. In these verses all of the scorn, derision, and mocking that our Lord received while He hung on the cross came from the wicked hearts and mouths of those who taunted and defamed(cursed) Him as He hung on the cross. It did not come from the heart or mind of God. God's attitude was "you will bless."
1. A little instructive note in regard to biblical hermeneutics.
  1. The New Testament interprets the Old Testament.
  2. The universal interprets the local.
  3. The didactic interprets the symbolic.
  4. The perspicuous (clear) interprets the vague (unclear).

2. Psalm 109:25-28 makes no reference whatsoever to the crucifixion but rather to a general statement as to how men will look upon the Messiah. Likewise, in contrast God (the Father) will bless Him as He is the Only Begotten Son. There are many such Messianic passages throughout the OT. Thus, this passage is irrelevant to proving your view.

What is more instructive is a passage which deals more specifically (see rule #3 & #4 above), with the Messiah as viewed by men but also in regard to His passive obedience, is Isaiah 53. I recommend you meditate on this passage which clearly speaks of the Messiah bearing the sins of His people, God 'bruising' Him, being put to grief by God, bearing the transgression of His people, etc. As I have repeatedly demonstrated from Scripture, the Lord Christ's death was a vicarious, substitutionary atonement in which God looked with wrath upon Him as a sinner (imputation of sin) and punished Him in room of the elect for whom He came to redeem.

Originally Posted by Charlemagne
Paul says this:

1 Cor 12:3 Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking in the Spirit
of God ever says, "Jesus is accursed!" and no one can say "Jesus is Lord" except
in the Holy Spirit.

Paul says that no one speaking in the Spirit of God ever says, "Jesus is accursed!" Clearly this means that nobody could speak in the Spirit of God and say that Jesus Christ remains cursed now that He is no longer on the cross. But can one say, in the Spirit of God, that Jesus Christ was cursed(by God rather than mocked and cursed by men) while He hung on the cross?

Paul tells us, that for the Jew, a message of a crucified Messiah was a snare(1Cor 1:23). And in light of 1Cor 12:3, there must have been many who were saying that Jesus Christ could not have been the Messiah because He was cursed by God. When Paul presented the truth that Jesus Christ was the Christ in Acts 18:6 the Jews "blasphemed" and Paul says that he himself was a blasphemer and compelled Christians to blaspheme(Acts 26:11; 1Tim 1:13) Was this the blasphemy they spoke by saying that Jesus Christ was accursed?(1Cor 12:3)?
Actually, I thank you for bringing up 1Cor 1:23 for it goes against your view and supports the Church's and my view. How?

1. Yes, unless a sinner has been regenerated; given a new spiritual nature which is predisposed to understanding the things of God and loving God and all that is good, they will hate the one true God and worship a 'god' of their own making.

2. The blaspheme which the Jews accused Paul of making was the same accusation which they accused Jesus of making, i.e., He claimed that He Himself was God (Jh 5:18; 10:33; Phil 2:6). In the perverted reasoning of the Jews, it was impossible that Jesus of Nazareth could be God and as proof, He was cursed via the crucifixion. Obviously, they had no understanding of all the prophetic writings which spoke of the Messiah as being cursed of God in order to redeem His people, albeit not being guilty of any personal sin.

Originally Posted by Charlemagne
Having said that, these two verses would seem to indicate that Jesus
Christ was cursed by God while hanging on the cross:

Gal 3:13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us--for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree."

Deu 21:23 His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God) that thy land be not defiled, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

The question is, when Paul says that He became a curse is He talking about the mocking, derision, and cursing that came from the mouths of wicked men against Him? That is to say the mocking and cursing that is false and untrue?(Psalm 109:25-28)
Is it even disputable that God, through the inspiration of Paul, wrote that the redemption accomplished was in regard to the transgression of the LAW by becoming as one who had Himself transgressed that LAW (substitution and propitiation)? So again, ALL who have transgressed the holy LAW of God are under the just judgment and wrath of God. If the wrath and punishment of God were not specifically upon Christ, then no one would be saved from the wrath to come. I challenged you to deal with the four major terms which the NT uses to describe the Lord Christ's atonement; sacrifice, ransom/redemption, propitiation, and reconciliation, but you have not addressed any of those terms especially the most salient term to this discussion propitiation. To iterate, the biblical definition of propitiation is "to appease the wrath of an offended one through the removal of that which offends".

Originally Posted by Charlemagne
Here is another version of Deu 21:23:

Deu 21:23 ..for he that is hanged is a reproach unto G-d; that thou defile not thy land which HaShem thy G-d giveth thee for an inheritance.(Tanakh)

Various version read either "cursed by God" or "curse of God". There is a note on the NASB which said it is literally "curse of God." One Rabbi commentary said that this means that God Himself is being cursed or reproached by keeping the corpse up on the tree because man is made in the image of God and therefore to keep the man(even though he be a criminal) up long on the cross would "defile the land which God gave them for an inheritance."
1. The "Tanakh" is not an inspired text given by God and thus it has no authority to bind the conscience of anyone who professes to be a Christian.

2. Let's not overlook the immediate CONTEXT of this passage which reads:

Quote
Deuteronomy 21:22-23 (ASV) "And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree; his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt surely bury him the same day; for he that is hanged is accursed of God; that thou defile not thy land which Jehovah thy God giveth thee for an inheritance."
The Lord Christ was deemed 'worthy of death' by both men and God for He bore the sins of His people. And having been hung on a cross, Christ was accursed. Again we have a clear statement of the Messiah's vicarious substitutionary atonement. Without being 'cursed of God', redemption could not have been made in behalf of those whom the Father gave to His incarnate Son.

Originally Posted by Charlemagne
My conclusion, in light of all of the evidence above, as well as the evidence that the sacrifice of Jesus Christ was a delight, well pleasing, and a fragrant odor to God, is that when Paul says that Jesus Christ became a curse for us, he is not saying that our Lord was cursed by the heart or hand or mouth of God. Rather, He was cursed and an object of derision from the mouths of men who blasphemed Him.
Unfortunately, your conclusion is not based upon any solid evidence but rather it is the expression of your presupposition which is in contradiction to the biblical evidence which I and others have presented to you. Your view denies one of the fundamental doctrines of God and His Scripture; the vicarious substitutionary nature of the atonement, without which there is no salvation possible. How do you reconcile your view with this incontrovertible truth? scratchchin

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]