He was despised
forsaken
despised..
our griefs He bore..
our sorrows He carried..
pierced through for our transgressions..
crushed for our iniquities..
the chastening of our well being fell upon Him..
the Lord caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him..
He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
yet He did not open His mouth; like a lamb that is led to slaughter.
and like a sheep that is silent before its shearers,
so He did not open His mouth. isaiah 53.3f
blessed are the beggaredly-poor (no help, no power to provide for self or protect self) in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. matthew 5.3
blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. v10
II timothy 2.3 - SUFFER HARDSHIP WITH ME
from the greek word, sUnkokopathAsov, a compound made of three words
sUn - with
kako - evil, bad
paskO - suffer, endure (note: kakopaskO, unjust suffering)
below are extensive quotes from the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT)..an excellent article by b. gartner dealing with the verb paskO and others words in its word family...one of the best synopsises i have encountered...a real encouragement in the midst of this world of suffering. i did not check the accuracy of the scripture references..
pertaining to the verb as it is used in classical greek..
1. the BASIC MEANING of the verb in use from homer onwards, IS that of EXPERIENCING SOMETHING WHICH STEMS FROM OUTSIDE OF MYSELF BUT WHICH AFFECTS ME, either for good or ill. the OPPOSITE IDEA is expressed by verbs denoting FREEDOM OF ACTION. ie.
erxai, energein
2.a. pashchO originally meant nothing more than 'to be affected by', but how one was affected had to be expressed by additional words, ie. kakos paschein - to be in a bad situation...however, since such additions tended to be negative, the verb itself came to have a negative meaning, unless there were clear indications to the contrary. thus the idea of being affected is replaced by that of suffering...
b. the situation is similar in the case of the noun to pathos. it means THAT WHICH IS PASSIVELY EXPERIENCED, in contrast with nouns denoting action, such as ergon, praxis and poiema...but for the most part pathos DESCRIBES THE EMOTIONS OF THE SOUL,
ie. human feelings and IMPULSES WHICH A MAN DOES NOT PRODUCE WITHIN HIMSELF BUT FINDS ALREADY PRESENT, AND BY WHICH HE CAN BE CARRIED AWAY. aristotle used in both a good and a bad sense, but pathos acquired a predominantly negative meaning, that of passion, especially among the stoics.
3. at an early period questions were being asked concerning the purpose and the meaning of suffering. salutary lessons can be learned from one's own suffering and that of others; trials make men wise, according to the epic poet hesiod.
in the old testament...
1. in the LXX paschO occurs only 21 times. it translates the hebrew chamal, to feel compassion and also calah, to be affected, impressed, since there is no exact equivalent fro paschO in hebrew...despite the absence of precise hebrew equivalents, however, the ideas expressed by paschO and its derivatives are clearly present in the ot, where the question of suffering is approached from various angles.
a. the cause of suffering is most commonly seen to lie in the inherent causality of an evil deed:
such a deed brings its own retribution by virtue of its consequences, and so produces suffering. this idea is by no means restricted to the subjective and individualistic sphere (genesis 20,3f, joshua 7.1, i samuel 14.24f
and thus shows similarity with the thought of the greek tragedies:
'the moral suffering of oedipus is ...brought about by the fact...that he has done something, albeit unwittingly and unintentionally, which in itself is heinous'.
b. on the other hand, this idea is restricted to the individual, particularly in the wisdom poetry, one reason certainly being messages about individual guilt and responsibility such as that of ezek. 18, which must undoubtedly have brought relief to the minds of the exiles.
'he who digs a pit will fall into it, and a stone will come back upon him who starts it rolling prov. 26.27. each individual is personally responsible for the moral decisions he makes.
c. these two ideas, however, are not mutually exclusive. rather, they indicate that whenever israel was called upon to suffer, he always endeavoured to understand what Yahweh was doing in history. if Yahweh is not dead but a living God, then secondary causes as well. the OT therefore leaves practically no room for suffering that is fortuitous (I ki 22.19-23; job 1.1-2.10; jug. 9.23; cf. however I sam. 26.10). the question of suffering is not thought through anthropologically for man to obtain a deeper insight into his own existence, but is entirely a matter of God's providence. thus G. von Gad makes the following comment on the story of joseph:
'this chain of guilt and suffering has nothing in common with the pessimistic belief in fate found in greek tragedy, for the story of joseph distinctly has guidance as its subject. God has directed all things for good'.
d. the fact that there is no tension between the problem of suffering as such and the problem of one's own individual suffering is indicated by the psalms of lament, which show the psalmist overwhelmed with every conceivable kind of trouble (ie. psalm 22). such psalms are not biographies of the psalmist, nor do they give allegorical accounts of his spiritual experiences; rather they are liturgical formularies for common use within the OT community.
(note: is it impossible that they are human biographies, either that of the writer or of others he has seen pass through the same type of experiences...by the Holy Spirit 'mixed', heightened and intensified to become prophetic vehicles to reveal the saving sufferings of the messiah as he experienced, wrestled with and overcame SIN...while at the same time like a multi faceted, very useful gem which illuminates the dark path of other, non-divine, sinners in the midst of battle with SIN?
..important for the psalmist is not the analysis of his personal sufferings but his experience of comfort from the priestly oracle or from seeking refuge in Yahweh.
(note: could the comfort come through a non-liturgical path..that of personal experience? possibly the writer as well as we, the readers, can draw comfort directly in the reading of/meditating on the psalm as we see that the God-man suffered in the flesh just as we do:
1) without sin, and
2) turning 'bad' into 'good' by not being moved from God's will as a result of this suffering, but rather seeing the actual suffering itself as essential to the turning bad into good.
..3. the book of job in particular is radical and uncompromising in its attitude to the view of suffering dealt with under
1a. in his own case job can acknowledge no causal connexion between guilt and suffering (6.24). he comes to see one thing very clearly:
that mere man cannot enter into litigation with Almighty God (9.32f); and the book therefore ends with a hymn in which God declares His own omnipotence; His inscrutable wisdom reduces men to silence even in the face of unaccountable suffering (38.1-42.6) for what man can claim to understand the mysteries of human life or presume to give God counsel or reproof? thus the book of job challenges us not to offer blind allegiance to a theological scheme linking sin with suffering, but rather to submit to God Himself.
4a. a further aspect of the suffering of the innocent is the exemplary suffering endured by chosen individuals
moses, num. 11.11
elijah, I ki. 19
hosea, hos. 1-3
jeremiah, jer. 15.10; 18.18; 20.14f
men whose very office exposes them to suffering.
'the hearers refuse the prophet's message, and in so doing refuse the God from whom the message comes. hence the fate suffered by the prophets visibly demonstrates israel's hostility to Yahweh. by rejecting His prophets, they reject God Himself'.
b. the idea of vicarious suffering comes to a climax in isaiah's message concerning the suffering servant. His suffering is seen as punishment for the sins of others. isaiah 53.4-6
in the new testament...
1.the verb used 42 times in the NT, does not occur in OT quotations or in the gospel of john and the johannine epistles.
it is also absent from revelation apart from 2.10 and among the general epistles occurs only in I peter. paul rarely uses it (only 9 times, including sympaschO)
it is very common, however in the synoptic gospels, acts and hebrews.
...in the light of the fact that the synoptic gospels are, in a sense, passion accounts extended both backwards and forwards in time, ie. the passion is their central theme, it is striking that they make relatively little use of paschO..
3b..the NT strongly insists that Christ's passion is no accident but is of diving necessity (greek article, dei (= it is necessary) is used)... matthew 16.21; luke 13.33; 17.25; 24.26; acts 17.3. and has been predicted in the OT mk 9.12; lk.24.26; acts 3.18; I pet. 1.11). hence, the author of hebrews says that like the OT sin-offering (lev. 16.27), Jesus suffered outside the gate of Jerusalem (heb. 13.11-3)
...e.Christ's vicarious (performed, received, suffered in the place of another) suffering means, however, for His followers not deliverance FROM earthly suffering, but deliverance FOR earthly suffering. He has suffered and been tempted as we are (heb. 2.18), yet without sin (heb. 4.12); indeed, since he has shared in all His people's experiences, He is able as the exalted one to 'sympathize with their weaknesses (greek sympathAsai, heb. 4.15). His suffering was a test which He was called upon to undergo and in which he learned obedience (heb. 5.8). having been tested by suffering, He is our pattern and example (I pet. 2.21) His suffering requires us as His followers to tread a similar path (heb. 13.12f)
f. Christ is described as pathAtos, subject to suffering, only in acts 26.23. as suffering and resurrection are mentioned together, the thought here is similar to that in lk. 24.26 and acts 17.3. hence, the question is not whether Christ, being God could suffer. the more His deity was stressed in the post-NT period, the greater became the danger of docetism, which argued from His deity to His 'impassibility (inability to suffer). ignatius, however, basin his argument upon the idea of atonement, pointed out that unreal suffering meant unreal redemption. certainly Christ is apathAs, incapable of suffering, in His pre- and post existence (note: on earth), but on soteriological grounds it was necessary to maintain His complete humanity and consequently His ability to suffer (I pet. 4.1).
4. the suffering of Christ's people.
a. suffering and fellowship.
-the idea of suffering is inseparable from the NT concept of koinOnia. he who arms himself with the same mind as Christ will have to suffer in the flesh (I pet. 4.1; cf. II cor. 11.23f).
-to suffer 'as a christian' (I pet 4.16)means to share in the sufferings of Christ (I pet. 4.13; phil. 3.10), to suffer with Him (sympaschOmen, rom. 8.17). indeed, such is the mystic union existing between Christ and His body the church that their sufferings may be identified as one and the same (II cor. 1.5).
-different churches are united by the bonds of common suffering (I thess. 2.14; I pet. 5.9), and the same applies to any individual church. if the members of a fellowship are to show not merely sympathy with one another but active and practical compassion (sympaschO), then true unity in the faith is required (I cor. 12.26; heb. 10.34).
-a further important example of fellowship in suffering is that existing between the apostle on the one hand and the local church (II cor. 1.6f) or an individual disciple (II tim. 1.8; 2.3) on the other. the great example is Jesus Christ (I pet. 1.21), not only for an apostle himself as a 'witness of the sufferings of Christ' (I pet. 5.1; rom. 6.3), but also for those who follow an apostle (II tim. 3.10f) or who are called upon to imitate him (I cor. 11.1). just as the prophets were good examples of how to endure unjust suffering (kakopatheia, jas.5.10; contrast the bad example set by the generation in the wilderness, which lusted after evil things, kaka, I cor. 10.6), so now the apostles set a good example. their sufferings are part of their ministry, and serve to identify the true servants of the church (cf. II cor. 11.23f). the apostle paul's 'sufferings for ..the church (col.1.24) are not redemptive but missionary in character.
(note: could it not be said that paul becomes an example of Christ suffering not redemptively but imitatively (as an imitator of Christ who was adversely affected because of other men's sins?)
-but not all suffering is fellowship with the sufferings of Christ. for suffering to be in this category, the apostles and the church must suffer for the sake of their office or of their christian calling;
they must suffer as christians (I pet. 4.16)
unjustly (I pet 2.19f),
being regarded not as evil doers or murderers (I pet. 4.15; lk. 23.32f), ie. justly so (lk. 23.41), but merely like evildoers (I pet. 2.12) and are made to suffer as such (kakopatheO, II tim. 2.9).
-true suffering in this sense is called
suffering 'according to God's will' (I pet. 4.19),
suffering 'in the name' of Jesus Christ (acts 9.16; phil. 1.29)
'for the gospel' (II tim. 1.8)
'in mindfulness of God' (I pet. 2.19),
'for righteousness sake' (I pet. 3.14), and looking forward in hope -
'for the kingdom of God (KK thess. 1.5)
b. the eschatological aspect of suffering.
just as Christ's suffering is not an end in itself, but a means to a great end, namely, perfection (heb. 2.10), so also in the case of His people (I pet. 5.9) the essential goal for which the christian suffers is that of the kingdom of God. compared with the hope of 'eternal glory', a Christian's present period of suffering shrinks to 'a little while' (I pet. 5.10; II cor. 4.16-8). in rom. 8.18 pau emphasizes that the sufferings of the present time bear no comparison with future glory, so that even suffering may be regarded as a precious gift (phil. 1.29; I pet. 2.19) from 'the God of all grace, who has called you to His eternal glory (I pet. 5.10)...in the same way paul, in phil. 3.10, speaks of the aim of his new life as being to enter experimentally into the knowledge (first) of the power of Christ's resurrection, and (only then) of the fellowship of His sufferings. again and again in the NT SUFFERING AND GLORY (rom. 8.17; I pet. 5. 1,10), as well as SUFFERING AND PATIENCE (II thess i.4f; heb. 10.32), are mentioned in the same breath. thus paul conceives his fellowship with the corinthians as being fellowship in suffering and in comfort (II cor. 1.7). indeed, paul can take the idea of suffering as being temporary because advancing towards eschatological glory and extend it to cover the whole of creation (rom. 8.18): not only man but the whole creation is treading the path of suffering which leads to the glorious goal.THUS THE CHRISTIAN AWAITS NOT THE END OF SUFFERING BUT THE GOAL. the raising of Christ is not merely a consolation to him in a life that is full of distress and doomed to die, but it is also God's contradiction of suffering and death, of humiliation and offence, and of the wickedness of evil. b. gartner
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment