Reply to Takla website: How did Christ say while on the cross: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?!”

 

Question: How did Christ say while on the cross: “My God, my God , why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46), isn’t He God?!
Source:

http://st-takla.org/FAQ-Questions-VS...bachthani.html
The priest’s answer:
This phrase Eli, Eli Lama Sabachthani (Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?) does not mean that His divinity left His humanity, nor that the Father left the Son. It does not mean separation, but rather means that the Father left Him to suffer.
His divinity did not leave His humanity for a single moment or the blink of an eye. This is what we believe, and this is what we pray for in the Divine Liturgy. If His divinity had been separated from Him, His atonement would not have been considered unlimited, providing unlimited redemption, sufficient to forgive all sins for all people in all generations. Therefore, there was no separation between His divinity and His humanity.
As for His relationship with the Father, the Father did not leave Him, “because He is in the Father and the Father is in Him” (John 14:11).
So, what is the meaning of the phrase: "Why have you forsaken me?"
It does not mean separation, but rather: You left me to suffer. You left me to bear the divine wrath for sin. This is from the side of the soul. As for the body, You left me to feel and sense the suffering. It was possible that He did not feel pain, by the power of the Godhead. If that had happened, the crucifixion would have been a formality and the suffering would not have actually occurred, and thus He would not have paid the price for sin, and the process of redemption would not have been
completed. But the Father left the Son to suffer, and the Son accepted this abandonment and suffered because of it. And for this reason He came. He was abandoning by agreement. For the sake of His love for mankind, and for the sake of fulfilling justice. He left Him to suffer, sacrifice, and pay, without separating from Him.
It was not a hypostatic abandonment, but a dispensational abandonment. He left Him with love, "It pleased Him to crush Him with sorrow" (Isaiah 53:10). This article is taken from the website of the Church of Anba Takla. * An example to approximate the meaning: Let us suppose that a child was taken by his father to undergo surgery, such as opening a boil or an abscess. His father held him by the hand, and the doctor began to do his work, while the child cried out to his father, “Why did you leave me?!” In reality, he did not leave him, but rather held him tightly, but he left him to the pain, and left him in love. This type of abandonment, without separation, we say it merely to approximate the meaning, and to compare with the difference. The phrase “left me” means that the pains of the crucifixion were real pains. And the pains of divine wrath were excruciating. In this abandonment, all the pains of the cross were concentrated. And all the pains of redemption.. Here Christ stands as a burnt offering, and as a sin offering in which the divine fire burns until the sacrifice turns to ashes, and God’s justice is fully satisfied..




____
Comment: The priest says in his response to the questioner: “This phrase Eli, Eli Lama Sabachthani (Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?) does not mean that His divinity has left His humanity, nor that the Father has left the Son.. It does not mean separation, but rather that the Father has left Him to torment.” End. As is the custom in embarrassing questions directed to priests, he diverts the questioner from the original question and the answer is in another path to delude the questioner that this is an answer. The questioner asks a clear question:How does he mean to say how does Christ say to God?




"My God, why have you forsaken me?" while he is supposed to be God himself? This is the question, but the priest answered as if the questioner was asking: Did the divinity separate from the humanity at the moment of the crucifixion, so the humanity said to him, "My God, why have you forsaken me?" As evidenced by the priest's statement in his answers as follows: *His divinity did not leave his humanity for a single moment or the blink of an eye... This is what we believe, and this is what we pray for in the Divine Liturgy.. *If his divinity had separated from him, his atonement would not have been considered unlimited, giving unlimited redemption . *Therefore, there was no abandonment between his divinity and his humanity . *It does not mean separation. *If that had happened, the crucifixion would have been formal and the pain would not have actually occurred . *It was not a hypostatic abandonment, but a dispensational abandonment. *This type of abandonment, without separation.. *The phrase "You forsaken me" means that the pains of the crucifixion were real pains. *And the pains of divine wrath were excruciating . Is this an answer that satisfies the questioner's thirst? This is not the issue, priest. The questioner wants to inquire about: Who is speaking to Christ and calling him “my God” and you taught them that “Christ is God.” Was he speaking to himself? This is the crux of the matter, and this is the answer that makes the questioner even more confused. Therefore, if the questioner thought a little, he would know that there is definitely something wrong with the subject, because if he contemplated the example given by the priest, he would know that “God is not Christ,” as the priest gave the following example: “An example to illustrate the meaning: Let us suppose that a child was taken by his father to undergo a surgical operation, such as opening a boil or an abscess, for example. His father held him by his hands, and the doctor began to do his work, and the child screamed for help from his father, “Why did you leave me?!” In reality, he did not leave him, but rather held him tightly, but he left him to the pain, and left him in love. This type of abandonment, without separation, we say it merely to illustrate the meaning, and to compare with the difference..” End . We respond to the priest here that although we agree that the comparison with the difference, as he said, this proves that “God is not Christ,” and that “the child is not his father.” So it would have been more appropriate for the priest to put the questioner’s heart at ease directly and tell him that Christ is one of the members of the divine committee that we worship, because we are not people of monotheism, but people of the Trinity. So God is not Christ , but we believe that Christ is equal to God and of the same essence, and in this sense he is God. Bishop Raphael, who was a candidate for the papal throne, admitted this, saying: “The mistake that Christians make without realizing it is because of the non-Christian culture that has entered our minds against our will. All day long, there are microphones that control non-Christian thought. You believe in monotheism against your will, but we believe in the verse? The Trinity. What is the difference between the two? I will tell you the difference: the Father is different from the Son, different from the Holy Spirit, but the three are one in what? In essence.”" Yes , this is their true belief that they have finally begun to proclaim. Christianity is not a monotheistic religion, but rather a trinitarian one. Confusion used to occur in the past among people before this.


























Confession when they were teaching them that God is one and three hypostases without being able to convey the idea to people in this way due to its clear contradiction, and the escape from that was the inability of the human mind to understand the Trinity. But the problem is that the Old Testament, which they are required to believe in, calls for monotheism and not the Trinity, and this is where the problems occur.
Therefore, the questioner asks and the priest evades and deceives him. But thanks to Bishop Raphael who will save us a lot of talk later with many of the deceived.