As seems to be the case with most children, my friends and I went through a stage where we found great joy in tying people to things. In second or third grade we would take turns being the guys who would grab the skipping ropes and twist endless knots, fastening one of our friends to a tree or fence or flag pole. And, of course, we would take turns being the unfortunate one who was on the receiving end of the action. I remember one time when I was, thankfully, not the one being tied. It was recess, and we had only a few minutes to have our fun. We had tied a friend to a tree and it was now his time to play Houdini and escape from the ties. But something went wrong—we had tied him up too well. He struggled to get undone but could make little progress. And then, from across the school yard, the bell rang. We were torn. Should we help our friend and risk detention for being late to class? Or should we forsake our friend and look out first for ourselves? Typical children that we were, we left our friend struggling with the ropes and dashed for the door. A few minutes later he walked meekly into class, late and knowing there would be consequences.
I thought of this incident yesterday in what was a rather unlikely context. In our church’s evening service, a service that culminated in the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, we sang Stuart Townend’s hymn “How Deep the Father’s Love for Us.” Like all good hymns, this one gives a lot to think about; it contains deep and biblical content. As we sang it, I was struck by the words “It was my sin that held him there.” As we sang those words I found my mind bouncing to some of the other occasions in Jesus’ life, times when He escaped pain or death.
There were several occasions in Jesus’ life when He escaped the wrath of His enemies. For example, in John 8:56-59 Jesus called Himself by the name “I am,” utter blasphemy to the Jewish nation, and cause for death. Though they picked up stones with which to execute Him (in the temple, no less), he managed to hide Himself and to make His way out of the temple. Just a short time later, in John 10:31-39 we read that people picked up rocks and sought to stone Him. But Jesus escaped their attempts to arrest Him and to put Him to death. This was the pattern, for a while. The people would misinterpret Jesus, accusing Him of blasphemy one time and seeking to make Him king the next. Jesus would escape or rebuke to ensure that His mission did not get derailed.
But then came the Garden of Gethsemane. Peter, drawing his sword and swinging at one of the men, clearly thought this was going to be another chance for Jesus to slip away from His accusers. But Jesus knew that this time would be different. “Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?” (Matthew 26:53). With only a single word, Jesus could have summoned to his defense more than twelve legions of angels. Look to the Old Testament and you will see the kind of devastation that could be brought about by twelve legions of angels. With a single word Jesus could have caused the heavenly host that sang of His birth spring to His defense. But He did not. This was true in the Garden, in the court, and on the hill. This was true as the spikes were nailed into His body and as the cross was raised to the sky.
Some words that I first pondered a few years and that have continued to be deeply affecting to me are found in Matthew 27:50: “And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice and yielded up his spirit.” The amazing thing about these words is that they show us that Jesus was in control of the timing of His death. Though the nails had pierced His hands and feet, and though He had been beaten to be point of being almost unrecognizable, He died only when He decided to yield up His spirit. In his account of the crucifixion, John says Jesus “gave up His spirit.” This was an active, not a passive act. The significance of this wording is that it shows that Jesus was in control of the timing of His death. He did not die because His body could take no more punishment or because of blood loss. He died because He decided it was time to die. His work was accomplished and there was no reason for Him to linger. And so he gave up His spirit and returned to His Father.
All of this tells me that Townend is right—it was not the nails that held Jesus to the cross. He could so easily have escaped the cross and, even if He decided to go there, could just as easily have escaped from the cross. He could have stepped down and watched as His angels gained vengeance on the heartless men who had nailed Him to that tree. But He did not. Jesus remained there until the work was accomplished. He stayed there until He had done the work His Father had assigned Him. He stayed there until He had secured the redemption of all of His people. It was not the nails that held Him, but His love for the Father and His love for us. It was my sin that held Him there in the deepest expression of love the world could ever know. It was death by love.
The key to it all comes from John 10:17-18. “For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.” No one took Jesus’ life from Him. He did not lose it, He gave it.
How deep the Father’s love for us
How vast beyond all measure
That He would give His only Son
To make a wretch His treasure
How great the pain of searing loss
The Father turns His face away
As wounds which mar the chosen One
Bring many sons to gloryBehold the Man upon a cross
My guilt upon His shoulders
Ashamed, I hear my mocking voice
Call out among the scoffers
It was my sin that held Him there
Until it was accomplished
His dying breath has brought me life
I know that it is finishedI will not boast in anything
No gifts, no powr’s, no wisdom
But I will boast in Jesus Christ
His death and resurrection
Why should I gain from His reward?
I cannot give an answer
But this I know with all my heart
His wounds have paid my ransom
Comments (21) »
1. Don Fields
November 12, 2007
10:05 AM
Thank you for those encouraging and insightful thoughts!
2. Bill
November 12, 2007
12:20 PM
This was greatly encouraging to read. Thank you.
3. Jim Swindle
November 12, 2007
12:56 PM
Those wonderful lyrics are by Stuart Townsend. They are among my favorites.
4. Brendt
November 12, 2007
1:11 PM
We use this hymn often when celebrating communion, so I’ve been thinking about this for a while.
Oddly, we’re on the same page on nearly everything, but come to (almost) opposite conclusions. While I understand the sentiment, I think that Townend was wrong in writing “It was my sin that held Him there”. Certainly, it wasn’t the nails, but it wasn’t my sin either. It was His love.
Even had you not said this explicitly in the next-to-last paragraph, a lot of what you did say argues to that point. I do not think I am in danger of diminishing the gravity of my sin to say that nothing I did held Him there. It was all His choice.
Certainly not going to throw the baby out with the bathwater on this song. But I think that that one line is less-than-accurate theology.
5. Brendt
November 12, 2007
1:13 PM
(Let me be clear by adding “… in an otherwise incredible song.” to the end of that.)
6. Ryan
November 12, 2007
1:31 PM
Brendt - Mr. Townsend was a guest lecturer in one of my seminary classes a few years back. A student specifically asked him about that phrase in this song, challenging the theological accuracy of the statement. His reply was, first of all, very gracious. He told us that he has heard many comments on this phrase in the past. He said that he never intended for it to say precisely what you’re interpreting it to say. In fact, he would absolutely agree with you. It was his wilful decision to love us for the glory of God that kept him there. But that’s really only true on one level. There would be no reason for him to be there, had it not been for our sin. If we hadn’t sinned, he wouldn’t have needed to love us by hanging on the cross. So you see, we’re really speaking on two levels. Townsend knows that ultimately, it was his own volition and love that kept him there. But, on another level, our sin necessitated the presence of the cross. Yes, it was his love that kept him there. Yes, it was our sin that kept him there. This is really a false dichotomy to pit these against each other.
7. Tim Challies
November 12, 2007
1:36 PM
While I understand the sentiment, I think that Townend was wrong in writing “It was my sin that held Him there”. Certainly, it wasn’t the nails, but it wasn’t my sin either. It was His love.
I think my sin and God’s love are, in this case, two sides to the same coin. My sin held him there because His love determined that I should be saved. His love held Him there because He determined that He would atone for my sin. I struggled with this, too, a little bit, but really did come to see that we’re really arguing the same thing…I think.
8. Darby Livingston
November 12, 2007
2:51 PM
I can see both sides of this. On the one hand, if man’s sin didn’t exist, Christ would have had no reason to get on, let alone stay on the cross. On the other hand, I can see the reluctance to call God a “Reactor” to man’s actions, or at man’s mercy in any way. I think Tim has shown how the two ideas can be reconciled in realizing God predestined and ordained that our sin would keep Christ on the cross. God would allow Christ to remain on the cross for God’s glory so that His honor as Sovereign is protected.
9. Brendt
November 12, 2007
3:06 PM
Ryan, I didn’t think that Townend’s beliefs/understanding were wrong. But it’s nice to hear direct testimony to back that up. Thanks.
Tim, I like your “two sides to the same coin” idea. As it pertains to Christ’s death, His love and our sin are inextricably linked. Makes me think of Charlie Peacock’s line: “Cheer up, church / You’re worse off than you think”
I guess I’m just bugged by those who miss that link, make much of our depravity, and somehow manage to diminish Christ’s love. (And yes, I realize that the opposite is what happens more often.) That particular line just stands out to me as an example of that kind of thinking — even if it ultimately wasn’t, based on Ryan’s story.
10. Brendt
November 12, 2007
3:08 PM
BTW, you can catch Tim’s escape-artist act 6 days a week in Branson, MO — two shows on Saturday.
Be sure to try the veal — it’s delicious.
11. donsands
November 12, 2007
5:55 PM
Thanks for such an inspiring post. This salvation we have is beyond discription in one sense, and yet in another sense, it’s so pure and simple, and it’s an anchor for the soul. It keeps our minds steady, and our hearts pure.
I couldn’t help but feel sorrow and joy when I read this. Sorrow, because of what my sin caused, and joy because my salvation is sure; more sure than I could ever imagine.
What a Savior! He came and SAVED! What a salvation we have!
12. Russell
November 12, 2007
6:25 PM
It is good to be reminded of my own ignorance. I used to imagine that heaven would be boring. Now eternity does not seem long enough to consider the love of God expressed at the cross.
13. Daryl
November 13, 2007
5:00 PM
Tim,
Excellent post, would bring me to tears were I not at work right now.
Thank you.
14. Steve Camp
November 13, 2007
7:53 PM
Tim
Thank you for this thoughtful post. This is an excellent question to be asking, “did my sin hold Him there?”
A few thoughts I hope will add to this important discussion.
1. It is a common tendency among today’s CCM writers to make man the focus of their songs rather than the glory of the Lord. The song “Above All” serves as a good illustration of this. It says, “Like a rose trampled on the ground, He took the fall and thought of me, above all.” While this pushes romantic buttons within us, nothing could be further from the truth. We were not the chief thought of the cross; but God and His glory were. If the song were rewritten to say, “as a Lamb, He wore the sinners crown; He took it all and honored God above all” now it is all about Him and not about us. Now it is biblical and can be sung in praise solely to the King.
2. This is the similar thing to Stuart’s song. There are two key issues that should be corrected in this song for it to be biblically sound.
a. It was not our sin that held Him there—our sin was not the chief concern of the cross. The preeminent purpose of the cross was that God had to be propitiated; His holiness and justice satisfied. And in every way that He had to be satisfied so that we would be justified, Christ completely fulfilled it. IOW, Christ died for God (Roms. 3:21-31; Eph. 1:4-14). Surely the elect were saved from their sins (2 Cor. 5:21); Satan was defeated (Heb. 2:14-15); death was conquered (1 Cor. 15:54-55); and the cross was motivated by God’s love for us (Roms. 5:8). But chiefly, what held Him there was not our sin, but the covenant of redemption between the Father and the Son that was promised in times past eternal (2 Tim. 1:9; Titus 1:1-2).
On the cross God saved us from Himself. Though the line in the song is romantic, it unfortunately is not biblically true. Christ surely died for our sins—yes. But the cross was about God; all our concerns were secondary (read Eph. 1:4-14).
and…
c. There is an additional theological issue with Stuart’s song. In the first verse he says, “How great the pain of searing loss, the Father turns His face away.”
Again, this is a romantic notion, but is not true biblically. The Father did not turn His face away from His Son on the cross. In fact, just the opposite occurred. On the cross, the Father faced His Son; poured out His wrath upon Him; the wrath that you and I deserved in an eternal hell forever. As Isaiah said, Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; the chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed. But the LORD was pleased to crush Him, putting Him to grief;
Some have romantically taught that God can not look on sin and therefore as Christ bore our sin on the cross the Father had to turn His face away. Again, that is sentimental, but not biblically true.
Prov. 15:3 says, “The eyes of the LORD are in every place, watching the evil and the good.”
Jer. 16:17 says, “For My eyes are on all their ways; they are not hidden from My face, nor is their iniquity concealed from My eyes.”
God sees our sin beloved—nothing escapes His omniscient eye. So if this is true, where does this other view come from?
It comes from a faulty view of Hab. 1:13. The NASB really gets this verse right when saying, “Your eyes are too pure to approve evil, and You can not look on wickedness with favor.” God sees our sin, but He cannot tolerate it; He cannot look on it with favor. His holiness never gives approval to anyone’s sin.
So on the cross, God was exacting the punishment upon on Christ Jesus for our sins that you and I deserved. He was our divine substitute; He bore the wrath of God against us; He took the guilt, penalty and all the sins of all the elect from all the ages. God was satisfied with the perfect complete once for all sacrifice of Jesus Christ the Lord on the cross and because of this we have redemption by grace through faith in Christ alone! Amen?
So how does this effect this song. A few lyric changes could correct the problem as it did with the other song “Above All.”
I humbly offer the following to you:
How great the pain of searing loss
Jesus, God’s Lamb forsaken
To bear our sin upon the cross
Bringing many sons to heaven
And…
Christ died for God, and bore His wrath
Until He cried “it is finished!”
Eternal life won by His death
A perfect, spotless righteousness
Grace and peace,
Steve
2 Cor. 4:5
15. donsands
November 13, 2007
9:27 PM
Some good words Steve.
One question. Our Lord on the Cross began His work by saying “Father forgive them”, and His last words were, “Father, into Your hands”. But at the time when the earth became dark, our Savior, the Son of God said, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?”
I see this as the Father turning away from the Son, and forsaking Him, who became sin, and bore our wrath until it was accomplished, and He then crys out, “It is Finished.” This is such a great mystery to me, but this is how I have understood it.
Why wouldn’t the Son call out His Father as Father here?
This is very important Scripture to understand and that’s why I ask.
16. Connie
November 13, 2007
9:51 PM
Steve:
This was so encouraging. I have wondered about some of these lines in the past when it came to this song and this has helped “clear the air” for me. I guess we will never fully know in this life all of the great wonders concerning what our Lord accomplished on the cross. But what we do know from His Word is so glorious and worthy to fix our minds upon.
Thank you for pointing us to Christ in your comment.
I will be very interested to see how you answer Don’s excellent question too.
Connie
Phil. 1:6
17. Steve Camp
November 14, 2007
12:20 AM
Connie:
Thanks for your encouraging words. It is always good to cast our gaze heavenward and behold the spotless Lamb of God - Jesus Christ the Righteous. Amen?
Don:
It is always an honor to interact with you. You have asked a tremendous question and I will do my best to give an answer. (But keep in mind the frailty of the vessel before you - I see through a glass dimly.)
1. Jesus is fulfilling Scripture by proclaiming these words from the cross. It is the opening sentence to Psalm 22. He is just not quoting the Word; but affirming all that is in this Psalm and how it points to Him.
2. You are correct in your perception that the cross begins and ends with the Lord Jesus calling God the Father by the name Father. He didn’t call Him that while enduring His wrath upon the cross though. Matthew 27:45-50 records that from 12:00pm (the sixth hour) to 3:00pm (the ninth hour) that the noon day sky went black as midnight. The creation trembled under God the Father pouring out His wrath upon His Son in our place. This is called vicarious penal substitution.
3. As Luther said, “God forsaken of God - who can fully understand this great mystery” I fully agree.
4. This was the cup that Jesus sweat great drops of blood over in the Garden to fulfill. It was not simply the cup of dying; wicked, vile men had gone the way of the cross under Pilate’s bloodlust before. The Roman horizon was silhouetted with hundreds of crosses occupied by the worst of criminals deserving to die justly for their crimes.
Not so with our Lord. He was charged unjustly and led as a Lamb to the slaughter. But He uttered no threats; He did not resist; this was the sovereign plan that He knew before the foundation of the world, before anything that was made was made, before we were created - this was the covenant of redemption between the Father and the Son (2 Tim. 1:9). The Son came to fulfill that covenant with the Father. And this cup signified this reality. It was the cup of wrath – the cup that only God incarnate could drink.
Christ was forsaken… but the forsaking was not the Father turning away. The forsaking was Christ alone taking onto Himself, as the sin bearer for the elect, our sin and the wrath against it and us. He remained fully God while on the cross; He endured its shame; became the curse for us; was our Federal Head in redemption. He bore our sin and the wrath against that sin; and the guilt and penalty of our sin. The demands of the Law had to be fulfilled not just in His sinless life lived, but the penalty of the Law had to be meted out as well - in His once for all death. The Father faced His Son and the Son faced the Father and “He who knew no sin, became sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” (2 Cor. 5:21).
5. How do we know this? In Hebrews 2:17 we have the answer.
I“Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren in all things, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.”
He was in incarnation merciful to us and faithful to God. He was tempted in all points as we are yet without sin. “Able not to sin” (posse non peccare - sinless); and “not able to sin” (non posse peccare - impeccable). It took the perfect life lived; a spotless Lamb; and a sinless High Priest to secure our redemption. All three of those are contained in Christ – that is a miracle to rejoice in.
But He was also “faithful to God” as our High Priest. On the cross, Jesus Christ went beyond the veil (Heb. 6:19) and entered the holy of holies (cp, the OT priest on the Day of Atonement as a shadow of the substance to be found in Christ).
This is the first time that Jesus is referred to as High Priest in all the NT. And as High Priest, He entered the holy of holies to offer a sacrifice to once and for all completely satisfy God in every way that He had to be satisfied in order for us to be saved. Once again, God had to be satisfied before we could be justified. That is why the issue of the gospel is not how do we get lost people to a holy God; but how does a holy God come to lost people without violating His holiness and His justice? And the answer is the cross (Roms. 3:21-26). The cross is the righteousness of God put on public display. Jesus on that cross was our propitiation Hebrews says. As you know, to propitiate means to avert anger; to turn away wrath, and to satisfy.
Christ on the cross “died for God” and satisfied all righteous demands (in things pertaining to God) that He required for our salvation.
There is a little Greek phrase mentioned here in Heb. 2:17 for the phrase in all things “pertaining to God.” It is: “pros ton theon.” It means “face to face.” It is used in John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God. and the Word was God.” That second phrase I have italicized is where: logos pros ton theon. The Word, IOW, was face to face with God; of the same essence as God; God of very God. It is a great phrase depicting the deity of Christ.
However, in Hebrews 2:17, it is not referring primarily to His Deity, but to His propitiatory work on the cross. On the cross Jesus was pros ton theon – face to face with God as our divine substitute. The Father faced His Son; and the Son faced the Father; and the Father for three hours compressed eternal wrath into time and poured it out in unmitigated fury and gall upon Jesus. He faced His Son, He did not turn away, and Christ became our substitution and the Father’s propitiation. He was treated on the cross as if He lived our life - though perfectly holy - sinless. That eternal wrath is what hell will be – His wrathful presence poured out upon Satan and his demons and all He has not known from all eternity (Matt. 7:21-23).
In the intensity of those three hours of enduring the wrath of God for the elect, our Lord cried out ““ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?” (My God, My God, why has Thou forsaken Me?) The forsaking was not God turning His face away from His Son, but facing His Son, pouring out His wrath on His Son; and the Son took it all for us and fully propitiated the Father so that we would be redeemed.
At the end of this great cup of wrath being drained to the very dregs, our Lord Jesus Christ once again said (as you rightly said) “Father into Thy hands I commend My spirit…” The punishment was over. He had descended into hell, as it were, on the cross; the Father was satisfied and His anger quenched. Because of this great propitiatory work on the cross, we may now have peace with God forever!
How do we know this? Romans 5:1 tells us so, “Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,” Do you know what that phrase is in the Greek – peace with God? “Eirene pros ton theon.” Because of the perfect complete sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross and His bodily resurrection from the grave (raised for our justification) we now stand face to face before God and the war is over; we have been into peace with Him forever! Amen? Amen!
That is what I believe this all means.
Christ was forsaken; He alone took our sin, the guilt, the penalty and the eternal wrath against us and our sins; He was abandoned by the Father as our sin-bearer; He alone in the Godhead took that scourging and pain; He alone was forsaken; but God faced His Son in order for Him to be crushed for our sins. And it pleased God to do so. Amazing love, how can it be? Who can full understand it in this life?
In closing, if God turned away there would be no fulfillment of Isaiah 53; there would be no penal substitutionary atonement; there would be no imputation of righteousness; there would be no propitiation; and the cross would be simply Jesus dying with the Father closing His eyes.
But praise be to God, He actually redeemed us there 2,000 years ago. And here is the promise: all who the Father gives to the Son will come to the Son and He will in no wise cast them out. He has lost none of them. His sheep hear His voice and follow Him. The Lord knows those who are His…
I hope this helps a bit more. I’m sorry to have had to restrict my words because of space on a comment thread.
Grace and peace to you my brother; and thank you Tim for indulging me with this very long comment.
I remain…
Yours for the Master’s use,
Steve
2 Cor. 4:5-7
18. donsands
November 14, 2007
7:57 AM
“Christ was forsaken; He alone took our sin, the guilt, the penalty and the eternal wrath against us and our sins; He was abandoned by the Father as our sin-bearer”
Amen. What a Savior!
I appreciate your good thoughts here Campi. Thanks. I’ll be studying this and thinking on it, and even discussing it with my pastor.
19. Terry Rayburn
November 14, 2007
10:14 AM
Inspiring post, Tim.
I would propose that the Cross, and the work of Christ on the Cross, is a large glittering Diamond with many facets.
Facet #1: It WAS my sin that held Him there, because He died for me, to take my sins on Him. (“Christ died FOR the ungodly”, Rom. 5:6; “Christ died FOR us”, Rom. 5:8)
Facet #2: Christ did die for us because He LOVED us. (“But God demonstrates His own love toward us…” Rom. 5:8)
Facet #3: Christ DID die for God, in the sense that He died to glorify the Father by fulfilling His will in redeeming His elect, which the Father gave to Christ as His inheritance and Bride.
None of those facets negates the other. To deny one facet by negating another is to miss out on the magnitude of the Diamond.
Facet #4: The Father DID turn His face away from the Son, in the very biblical sense that the Scripture is full of, for example in the Psalms. Do a Scripture search here for the word “face” in the Book of Psalms, and you will readily see that God’s face was often symbolic of His approval and acceptance. He “shines” His face on the righteous, and “hides His face” from the unrighteous. So when Christ “became sin for us”, it’s perfectly legitimate to say that “the Father turned His face away”.
Facet #5: The Father did NOT turn His face away in the sense that He walked away and ignored the Son. Indeed He poured out His awful wrath on Him.
Neither of these facets negates the other, and there are MANY other facets, all worth our eternal meditation. We miss a lot if we exclude one because another is true.
To switch metaphors, this Diamond of the Cross, with all its facets is like the proverbial elephant which was examined by several blind men. One felt the tail and thought an elephant was like a rope. Another felt a leg and thought an elephant was like a tree, etc.
Final clarification: I’m not denying the logical Law of Non-Contradiction. We can’t say God is just, and yet God is unjust, for example. We can, however, say that God is just, and God is merciful. He’s got more facets than we will ever fully appreciate.
Blessings,
Terry Rayburn
20. Steve Camp
November 14, 2007
4:36 PM
Terry:
I always appreciate your thoughts and this is no exception. Thank you brother.
Just one thing to keep in mind regarding your facet #4: there was nothing in the pefect High Priestly work of Jesus Christ on the cross in imputation of our sin to Him as our propitiation that would cause God the Father to have or find displeasure in Him. The Lord Jesus Christ remained absolutely holy even when taking our sin, guilt and shame.
I appreciate you and thank the Lord for you.
Grace and peace,
Steve
2 Cor. 5:21
21. donsands
November 15, 2007
3:52 PM
I think I agree with Terry here. But I’ll need more time to ponder and study. Like, the rest of my life, and then throughout eternity.
Psalm27:9 —“Hide not thy face far from me; put not thy servant away in anger: thou hast been my help; leave me not, neither forsake me, O God of my salvation.”
Jesus became the curse, and was accursed, and yet never was dimished from His being the holy Lamb of God.
Also the word forsaken seems to mean, to desert, or abandon.
I guess we disagree only in that the Father looked, or didn’t look upon His Son, while He was cursed and bore the sin of the world.
One question: Did the Father look upon the Son at this time the same as He did when He said, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased”?
Very deep things to consider here, and I am considering your thoughts Steve.