Why God did not forsake Jesus

On the cross, Jesus cried out, “My God, my God! Why have you forsaken me?”

From this single sentence, Bible teachers have theorized that the Father forsook Jesus, since all our sins were laid upon Him. These teachers claim it was in this moment that Jesus experienced separation from the Father.

As dramatic and compelling that might be, the truth is this: it’s only a theory, and not a true one.

Jesus is quoting Psalm 22 to point out how the whole chapter is being fulfilled in their midst. Jesus did not, as these teachers do, take one verse out of the whole chapter, out of context. Yes, Jesus is quoting verse 1, but he also is referring to the whole of Psalm 22. By reading all four gospels, we see that Jesus, while on the cross, quotes more verses from the same chapter.

David’s testimony

Jesus quotes David, who in fact was not forsaken by God. David would later come to understand that he could not flee from God’s presence; “If I ascend into heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in hell, behold, You are there,” he said, (Ps. 139:7-8).

So Psalm 22:1 reflects David’s despair as he thought that he was forsaken, when in fact he was not. In agony, David asks God why He had forsaken him. But God does not answer that He did forsake him, rather the opposite. Thus “my God, my God” is not a statement that expresses truth, it is simply a question, and a question that was not meant to communicate that God forsook him.

Verse 2 and 6 also reflects his anguish, where he says God does not hear him, and that he is “a worm and not a man.” If we read these verses as a prophecy of what Jesus would experience on the cross, shall we then conclude that Jesus literally was a worm? Or that God did not hear Him? If God did not hear Jesus, then we are in deep trouble, because Jesus’ prayer that the Father should forgive us would not have been heard.

So in an act of co-suffering solidarity, Jesus quotes this verse to show that He has united himself to all those who’ve despaired, all those who have internalized their abandonment, and have felt that they are not seen or heard. Jesus identified with their pain. But God did not forsake Him!

Jesus was heard

“Into your hands I commit my spirit,” Jesus cried. Here He is also quoting the Psalmist (Psalm 31:5). Jesus, then, could not have thought that God had forsaken Him, or that He could not hear Him.

Jesus “offered up prayers and supplications, with vehement cries and tears to Him who was able to save Him from death, and was heard,” (Heb. 5:7).

The cries of Christ were heard, and could not then have been a declaration that He believed God had actually left Him. Rather, Jesus quoted the Psalm as a cry for help from the Father, who he knew was there, but who He may not have sensed while enduring the pain on the cross.

Not for a moment could Jesus have thought that He cried into a vacuum when he prayed: “Father forgive them.” Jesus knew that God was there, and that He heard Him.

Before the cross, Jesus had affirmed that His Father would never abandon Him:

“The hour is coming, yes, has now come, that you will be scattered, each to his own, and will leave Me alone. And yet I am not alone, because the Father is with Me, (John 16:32). Jesus knew that His disciples would forsake Him during the crucifixion, but He also knew that God would never

Neither did Peter think Jesus was forsaken: “God would not abandon Christ in Hades, but raise him from the dead,” (Acts 2:27-28). Jesus doesn’t sound very forsaken here, does He?

Note also what the following verses of Psalm 22 has to say about what God did on the cross: “You have answered Me,” (22)

“For He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; nor has He hidden His face from Him; but when He cried to Him, He heard,” (24)

So the same chapter says that God did not forsake Jesus, and that He was heard.

Unbiblical Assumptions

So the theory that Jesus experienced separation from the Father came from assumptions and Bible verses taken out of context.

Assumption #1: God is too holy to look upon sin.

Is God really too holy to look upon sin? If our God, Jesus Christ, could not see sin, then He would have done a poor job. He would have had to go blindfolded. But He didn’t and that’s why the religious elite, who were “too holy” for the sinners, criticized Him. Jesus looked at sinners with compassion. They were His closest friends. The Bible says:

“There is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him,” (Heb. 4:13).

The idea that God can’t look at sin is so silly. If it was true, God could not look at anyone since all have sinned.

But doesn’t the Bible say: “Your eyes are too pure to look at evil, and You cannot look at harm favorably”? No. That’s what the first part of the 13th verse in Habakkuk 1 seems to say. But if we read the second half of the same verse we hear the prophet asking God: “Why do You look favorably at those who deal treacherously?” So Habakkuk wraps up his statement by asking: “So, why do you look?” And not only does God look, but He “looks favorably” at the wicked.

The prophet's religious mindset could not fathom how a holy God could look at evil and unholy people, so he questioned God. But could after all only come to a conclusion that God’s goodness exceeds his understanding.

Assumption #2: Our sin separates God from us.

This false idea comes from a misreading of Isaiah 59.

“Your iniquities have separated you from your God; and your sins have hidden His face from you,” (Isa. 59:2).

We assume that this describes: 1. That God leaves us when we sin, when in fact the verse says that we are the ones that leave God. 2. That God does not see us when we sin, even though the verse does not say that. It does not say that God hides His face from us, but rather that His face is hidden from us due to the fact that we have separated ourselves from Him. Our sin caused us not to see God, although He never left us.

God is not the problem, we are. Isaiah made this clear in the first verse of the chapter: “The Lord’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; nor His ear heavy, that it cannot hear,” (Isa. 59:1)

If God can not hear sinners, then how can he hear them pray a prayer of salvation? What good would a Savior be if he refused to either hear or see the one crying for saving? And to believe that God can not hear, would be a denial of His omnipotence.

So Isaiah goes on to say that we were “departing from our God,” not that God departed from us, (13). But “the Lord saw it,” (15) “He saw that there was no man” that was righteous (16).

So what did God do? Did He therefore turn away from us and resign from being the Savior? No, “therefore His own arm brought salvation,” (16). Furthermore, God promised to never forsake us: “My Spirit who is upon you, and My words which I have put in your mouth, shall not depart from your mouth, nor from the mouth of your descendants, nor from the mouth of your descendants’ descendants, says the Lord, from this time and forevermore,” (21).

Isaiah teaches us that God does look, He sees our sin, and He does not depart from us.

Greater News

This is good enough news for me. But the good news of Psalm 22 is even better.

“All the ends of the world shall remember and turn to the Lord, and all the families of the nations shall worship before You. For the kingdom is the Lord’s, and He rules over the nations. All the prosperous of the earth shall eat and worship; all those who go down to the dust shall bow before Him, even he who cannot keep his soul alive,” (Ps. 22:27-29).

Psalm 22 predicts a universal response to Christ. All the ends of the world will join Christ. All who die will submit to Him, even those who cannot keep their souls alive.

Conclusion:

The idea that God the Father forsook Jesus is an unbiblical idea. In fact it is an heretical, Arian and Nestorian idea in its roots. If God the Father and the Son are separated during the crucifixion, the unity of the Trinity is severed. The triune God would have had to cease to be One inseparable God, if this was the case. And this is Nestorianism. And in order for the Father to forsake the Son, Jesus would have to be someone less holy or divine than the Father, and this is Arianism.