The Great Context
διὰ τοῦτο ἀναλάβετε τὴν πανοπλίαν τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἵνα δυνηθῆτε ἀντιστῆναι ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ πονηρᾷ, καὶ ἅπαντα κατεργασάμενοι στῆναι.
— ΠΡΟΣ ΕΦΕΣΙΟΥΣ 6:13 [i]
Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
—Ephesians 6:13 [ii]
Toolbox Inventory
This is the final lesson in this course--this Prolegomena—How to Study the Bible with the Greek NT. It is hoped that, in learning about the various exegetical techniques we covered in the last ten weeks, you have acquired both a deeper appreciation for the Greek NT, and a clearer understanding of the miracle that is the Bible—the Holy Word of God. May the Lord bless you and increase your knowledge of Him as you become more adept at using the new tools in your Bible Study Toolbox.
As this is the final lesson, let’s do an inventory of our toolbox to date, briefly reviewing our study tools and their meanings and applications:
1. A Translation is NOT the Word of God: This is the foundational insight of the course. The inspired texts of Scripture were recorded in Hebrew, Chaldee and Koine Greek, not English, Latin or Te Reo Maori. And remember that language is inextricably linked to culture.
2. Beware of English-Only Bible Study: If General Principal Number 1 is correct, then it follows logically that Bible Studies that do not take into account the original texts of the Bible will be woefully incomplete at best.
3. The Bible is a Closed System of Revelation: Everything needed to understand the figurative language and abstract imagery of the Bible can be found in the Bible itself. Things like the Law of First Mention and cross-referencing the OT with the NT can often reveal what at first seems unknowable. Remember, the Bible was written to be understood by believers.
4. Always Consider the Source: The Majority Text/Textus Receptus is the authoritative Greek NT. Should we use any dictionaries, lexicons or concordances, we must take note of which Greek text the authors, publishers and editors of these books consider authoritative.
5. Parsons Must Parse: Parsing is breaking down sentences and words into their constituent parts. We cannot avoid grammar when studying a text. It therefore behoves us all to learn how to use analytical lexicons and other short-hand parsing tools.
6. Learn the Additions and Removals of the NT: By their very nature, translations must alter the original text of the NT. Even the modern formatting of the GNT is an alteration. We must be aware of the types of changes made and the reasons (good and bad) for making them.
7. Always Parallel the Gospels: Any study involving the Gospel must always consider the other three Gospel accounts. Single-Gospel Study is ¾ incomplete.
8. Claim Your Baggage: We all have baggage; we just have to identify it and determine whether it is beneficial or detrimental to our understanding.
9. Remember the Other Original Language: As with #1 above, we must be ever mindful that the OT was written in Hebrew. Also, the NT was written in Hebraised Greek from a 1st Century Jewish cultural perspective.
Our tenth and final General Principle is going to be given over the course of this lesson.
“My God, My God”
What I’d like to do now, as a way of illustrating the effectiveness of our General Principles, is to try and answer a doctrinal puzzle by using all the tools in our toolbox. The doctrinal question we will be looking to answer is, “Was Jesus forsaken by God?” This question is prompted by Christ’s calling out from the Cross, “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?” in both Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34.
We are all familiar with these words of Jesus, so there’s a good chance we all have our own preconceptions regarding them. It’s a certainty that we could all give some kind of answer to our doctrinal question without even looking at the text. So we’ve all got baggage here.
Of course, we have to remember that not all baggage is bad. As Christians we know it’s correct to interpret the OT through the prism of the NT. So, let’s all put aside whatever it is we already believe about this question and examine it as objectively as we can. That way we’ll see clearly whether our baggage should be kept or not.
Verse Comparison
Here are the verses in question in English, Greek and Hebrew:
Matthew 27:46.
And about the ninth hour, Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” That is to say, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”
περὶ δὲ τὴν ἐνάτην ὥραν ἀνεβόησεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς φωνῇ μεγάλῃ λέγων· Ἠλί, Ἠλί, λαμὰ σαβαχθανί; τοῦτ᾿ ἔστι, Θεέ μου, Θεέ μου, ἱνατί με ἐγκατέλιπες;
וכעת השעה התשיעית ויזעק ישוע בקול גדול אלי אלי למה שבקתני והוא אלי אלי למה עזבתני׃[iii]
Here’s Mark 15:34.
And at the ninth hour, Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?” which is, being interpreted, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”
καὶ τῇ ὥρᾳ τῇ ἐννάτῃ ἐβόησεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς φωνῇ μεγάλῃ, λέγων, ᾿Ελωΐ, ᾿Ελωΐ, λαμμᾶ σαβαχθανί; ὃ ἐστι μεθερμηνευόμενον, ὁ Θεός μου, ὁ Θεός μου, εἰς τί με ἐγκατέλιπές;
ובשעה התשיעית ויזעק ישוע בקול גדול אלהי אלהי למה שבקתני ופרושו אלי אלי למה עזבתני׃
And Psalm 22:1:
אלי אלי למה עזבתני
My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
What’s He Saying?
It is usually taken for granted that the Lord is quoting the first verse of Psalm 22, but this is possibly just baggage based on the word “forsaken” in the English translation of these verses. To help determine whether or not that’s the case, I included the readings from the Hebrew NT.
I want to mention two things about the HNT before we continue: One, the version I’m citing here is the 1883 HNT, now in the public domain, that is available free on e-Sword. I do not know at this time whether this version is a translation from a GNT or from the King James Version; and two, we have to remember that, regardless of the target version, being in Hebrew, it is still a translation. Even though the Lord might’ve been speaking Hebrew on the Cross, His words were recorded in Greek, not Hebrew (or Aramaic).
Okay, let’s examine our verses.
The first thing to note is that we have two versions of the words of the Lord in each of our verses. We have the direct speech version transliterated from Hebrew or Aramaic (or both!) into Greek, and we have the interpreted version supplied by the Evangelist.
When we examine the direct speech part of the quotation up to, but not including, the verb at the end, we see that, in all three versions, Mark and Matthew differ. Matthew has Ἠλί, Ἠλί, λαμὰ, “Eli, Eli, lama…”, אלי אלי למה; Mark has ᾿Ελωΐ, ᾿Ελωΐ, λαμμᾶ, “Eloi, Eloi, lama…”, אלהי אלהי למה.
The Hebrew “lama” [למה] is a combination of the prepositional prefix “La” (for) and the interrogative “Ma” (what?); so, literally, “for what?” The double Mu in Mark is simply a legitimate difference in transliteration choice. The Aramaic for “why” is slightly different; not “lama”, but “almah”, which is literally “upon what”. The Hebrew “El” means “God”; the pronominal suffix “i” means “my”; so, “Eli” means “My God”. Altogether this shows that this part of the direct quote is definitely Hebrew, not Aramaic.
This is verified by the Hebrew of both the interpreted line and Psalm 22:1, where “My God, My God, why” is אלי אלי למה [Eli, Eli, lama]. So, Matthew has “correct” transliterated Hebrew, but Mark does not.
Actually, most of Mark’s transliteration is very strange. The word ᾿Ελωΐ doesn’t appear to fit the proper transliteration of the Hebrew or Aramaic for “my God”. Unless the Omega is Mark’s way of indicating a hidden “h”, making the word “Elohi”, the possessive “my” on the plural “Elohim”? Hard to say.
As for the verb, we have a consensus in both Greek texts, the word: σαβαχθανί. The first thing to note about this transliteration is that the Greek cannot accurately capture the sounds of the non-Greek word. According to Strong’s Concordance (H7662) and my Brown, Driver Briggs Lexicon, the Aramaic root of this word is שׁבק [ShBQ], so the word would’ve been שְׁבַקְתָּנִי, pronounced “shabachthani”—note the Shin, not Sin, of the first syllable and the possible Veyt, rather than Beyt, of the second. The Greeks have no “sh” sound, so they used Sigma for Shin. They have no “v” sound, either, so Beta for Beyt or Veyt.
At this point, it is interesting to note what is written in the HNT. We see that in both verses, while the verb in the direct quote is שבקתני [shabachthani], the interpreted version has עזבתני, which is “azavtani”. Azavtani is the Hebrew word for “forsake” and is the same word in the Hebrew of Psalm 22:2.
So it would appear that the transliterated phrase Ἠλί, Ἠλί, λαμὰ σαβαχθανί is actually a mixture of Hebrew and Aramaic. And, that being the case, then technically, the Lord wasn’t quoting directly from the Hebrew Scriptures!
This mixture of Hebrew and Aramaic, along with the unusual ᾿Ελωΐ, could lead us to doubt the veracity of the NT, if it weren’t for one thing: Both Matthew and Mark, inspired by God, also tell us what the Lord meant—they interpreted what He said in Greek so we would be in no doubt. They could’ve transliterated the Lord’s words as “Elly, Elly, lamba Subaru-nanny” and it wouldn’t have made any difference, because the important phrase is their interpretation, not transliteration. So let’s now examine the interpretations.
Again, we notice that Matthew and Mark differ in their wording except for the verb. In the opening phrase, Matthew opts for the Vocative form, Θεέ μου, indicating direct address to God. Mark, however, uses the Nominative form, ὁ Θεός μου, indicating that the words spoken by the Lord were not a direct address by Him to God. This is an important point. Hebrew has no Vocative form, so the interpretation of the Lord citing the Scriptures could either be Helenized—using the Vocative like Matthew did—or not Helenized—using the subjective case of the Hebrew like Mark did. Or, conversely, if the Lord were saying “my God, my God, why” as a personal appeal to God at that moment, both Gospel writers would’ve had to use the Vocative case. So, in having paralleled the two forms, we rule out the possibility that this was a personal appeal, because it can’t be both and neither writer can be wrong.
Matthew and Mark also use different forms of the interrogative (ἱνατί and εἰς τί, respectively), but this difference is insignificant. The important thing, as we noted above is that the same verb is used: ἐγκατέλιπές; a form of ἐγκαταλείπω, which is made up of the prepositions ἐν, meaning “in”; and κατα, meaning “down” literally, but used as an intensive in compounds; and the verb λείπω, “to set” or “to leave”—or “forsake”, as the KJV puts it.
References to Psalm 22
So, we are now certain that the Lord was saying “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” We also have strong evidence that it wasn’t a direct appeal, but a citation, almost certainly of Scripture. Yet, by no means have we proven that the citation to be referencing Psalm 22. For that, we will have to gather more evidence.
If we expand our paralleling to the entire chapters and cross-reference them to Psalm 22, we discover many echoes between the OT and the New:
The people at the crucifixion mock the Lord. Matthew even describes the same words of mockery as the Psalm:
Psalm 22:7-8: All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying, “He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.”
Matthew 27:41-43: Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said, “He saved others; himself he cannot save…He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God.”
Mark 15:29-32: And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads…Likewise also the chief priests mocking said among themselves with the scribes, “He saved others; himself he cannot save. Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross that we may see and believe.”
The Lord’s garments were divided up and lots drawn for them:
Psalm 22:18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.
Matt 27:35 And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, “They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots”.
Mark 15:24 And when they had crucified him, they parted his garments, casting lots upon them, what every man should take.
Luke 23:34 And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.
John 19:23 Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part;
The crucifixion is mentioned in Psalm 22:16, too (many centuries before this type of execution was devised):
For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.
There is another echo, but it is perhaps a bit subtle. Take a look at Psalm 22:9-10:
But thou art he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother's breasts. I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my mother's belly.
Might this be an oblique reference to John 19:26-27, where the Lord tells the disciple “whom he loved” that Mary is his mother, and he is her son? In other words, the implication is that the Lord has no mother, but a Father only, upon whom He “was cast upon from the womb”?
In any case, in light of all those echoes, there can be no doubt that the Lord’s cry from the Cross was a reference to Psalm 22. But is Psalm 22 a cry of personal distress? Was the Psalmist prophesying that the speaker, the Lord, would be truly forsaken by God?
Psalm 22
Of course, the tendency in English is to “hear” the verse as a cry of anguish, because of the idiomatic sense of the particular phrasing, “Why did you do such-and-such to me?” If you think about it, you will see that this form of question is not understood as literally seeking a reason, but is rather hurling a somewhat surprised accusation of betrayal at the doer of “such-and-such”. We must be careful not to impose this idiomatic sense of the English phrasing onto either the Hebrew or the Greek.
As a matter of fact, there is nothing in either the Greek or the Hebrew to discount the possibility that the question is merely rhetorical; posed by someone who is about to supply the answer, like “Why did the chicken cross the road?”
It is certainly possible that the Lord was asking the question rhetorically, in order to do two things: One, reference the Psalm and prove He was Messiah; and, two, to supply the answer to the mockers’ question “How can Jesus be the King of Israel and yet be so wretchedly treated by His subjects?”
To everyone assessing the Cross with carnal values, the Lord does appear to be forsaken by God, rather than favoured by Him, but to those assessing the Cross prophetically, which you will be more likely to do because the Lord references a prophetic Scripture, an entirely different picture emerges. When we examine the entire Psalm, we see that it is actually prophesying God’s loyal omnipresence with Messiah, not His abandonment of Him. As David says has it in verse 24:
For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard.
As well, we must remember what Psalm 139:7-10 tells us about God’s omnipresence:
Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me.
Of course, to see just who all the pronouns are referring to in these verses, we have to understand the special nature of Messianic Scriptures. Just because Psalm 22 is prophesying the crucifixion, not everything in the 1st person in the Psalm is “spoken” by Jesus. Often, there is a subtle switching of viewpoints. Even in the very same sentence, one 1st Person reference might be from the prophet’s perspective, while the next 1st Person reference will be from Messiah’s.
If we look at Acts 2:25-31, the Apostle Peter gives us an example of 1st person perspective blending. He is speaking of Psalm 16 and explains that David is the one whose flesh shall rest in hope, but Christ is the one whose soul will not be left in Sheol.
It seems clear that not every aspect of even the most Messianic of verses in the OT can be attributed equally between the OT prophet and Jesus. Applying that to Psalm 22, we can see that, even if David is under personal distress when he wrote the words the Lord would reference on the Cross, we cannot automatically project his feelings onto Christ. Again, the Lord might only be quoting the words to call attention to confirm once more that He was messiah.
His Mission
So, we have just about answered our question, but I not quite; one final thing is required. What we need to give prove without a shadow of a doubt whether Jesus was actually forsaken is what I call the “Great Context”—the context in which everything Jesus said and did should be placed: the context of Why He exists: His Mission.
This brings us to our final General Principle. Whenever we study the Bible, we must always view the subject of our study within the Great Context of the Messiah’s purpose; we must always Remember His Mission.
If we always bear in mind why God became flesh and dwelt among us, then we will always understand the things He said and did. And just what was the Lord’s mission on Earth? Let’s take a look at Jeremiah 31:32-36:
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, “Know the LORD”: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts is his name: If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.
The light and day and ordinances of the moon (monthly) and of the stars refer to Genesis 1:14. The prophet is saying that, should these ordinances end, the seed of Israel, the natural, genetic children of Abraham will stop being the Lord’s nation; Israel. The context tells us that this will occur when the New Covenant is instituted.
Well, in Colossians 2:14, the Apostle Paul tells us that the handwriting of ordinances—the Torah as recorded by God on the tables of stone and given to Moses—was nailed to the Cross of Christ; alluding to the 1st Century practice of nullifying a contract (a covenant) by putting a nail through it. So, in other words, with the crucifixion, the Old Covenant was nullified, completed or, as Jeremiah has it, “depart[ed] from before [God]”.
So, Christ’s flesh, as the embodiment of the Old Covenant, was nailed to the Cross to end the Mosaic Covenant and His sacrifice was made to seal the New Covenant in His blood. The Mission of Christ was to put an end to the contract whereby all physical Jews became members of God’s Israel, and begin the new contract whereby all spiritual Jews become members of God’s Israel. Christ came to begin open the Kingdom of Heaven to all believers in Him; all those who will have the Law written on the fleshy tables of the heart, who will worship in spirit and in truth.
All of the OT verifies this Messianic Mission: Isaiah 11:10.
…a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek; and his rest shall be glorious.
Echoed in Romans 15:9-12:
…and that the Gentiles might glorify God
Isaiah 42:1, 6:
…to bring forth judgement to the Gentiles…for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles
And echoed in Luke 2:32:
…a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.
And Acts 13:47:
…set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.
We also have Isaiah 6:9, wherein the Jews are prevented from understanding the Lord by God Himself. This passage is shown to be messianic when Jesus references it in all four Gospels (Matt 13:13-16; Luke 8:10, Mark 4:12, John 12:37-41) and the Apostle Paul mentions it twice in reference to the inability of the majority of physical Jews to recognise Jesus as Messiah (Acts 24-28, Romans 11:8) and “that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it”.
Here is how Matthew records the Lord’s reference to Isaiah 6:9:
Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias [Isaiah], which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
This blindness of the unbelieving Jews is evidenced by their not knowing what He was saying when He yelled out from the Cross; the sightedness of the Disciples is shown by their accurately interpreting His words for us.
Jesus’ Mission on earth was to fulfil the prophecy of God that He would one day make salvation available to everyone who will believe in His Son, whether Jew or Gentile—that He would take the title of “Israel” (God’s Family) away from the physical, genetic Jews and give it to spiritual Jews—all those who serve Him in Truth and Spirit. These were to be the New Covenant People.
In the light of this Great Context, we can see clearly that the cry on the Cross was simply a last confirmation of Jesus’ Messiahship, because He wasn’t being abandoned; He couldn’t be abandoned. His every step was firmly on the path set out for Him. He was neither in the throes of despair, nor self-pity, as shown by His telling the women crying for Him to rather weep for themselves, and His interceding for the soldiers who nailed Him to the Cross. He knew everything that was to befall Him, and that everything was according to the Father’s Will.
Conclusion
So, there we have the final General Principal in our Prolegomena for studying the Bible with GNT. The Word of God is a large treasure chest that is not always easy to unlock. It is therefore advisable to use all the tools at our disposal. But, because it puts every word and action of the Lord’s into the proper context, it is especially important to always bear in mind why He was sent, why He came to dwell among us; in short, to always Remember His Mission.
Thank you and God bless!
[i] All Greek citations from THE NEW TESTAMENT IN GREEK ACCORDING TO THE TEXT FOLLOWED IN THE AUTHORISED VERSION TOGETHER WITH THE VARIATIONS ADOPTED IN THE REVISED VERSION, edited by F.H.A. Scrivener; CAMBRIDGE: At the University Press 1949.
[ii] Whilst all English Bible verses are taken from the King James Version, modern punctuation and quotation markings will often be used where appropriate without reference (I.e. Capitalization after question marks; double inverted commas on opening quotes, then single inverted commas for internal quotations.).
[iii] All Hebrew New Testament verses are from the e-Sword Hebrew New Testament, published in 1883, now in the public domain. Hebrew Old Testament verses are from the e-Sword Hebrew Old Testament (Tanach), derivative work, now in the public domain.
