"COMMUNION BETWEEN THE FATHER

AND THE SON"

 

(all Scripture quotations from

Mr. Darby's translation of the Scriptures)

 

 

The question as to communion, or fellowship between the Father and he Son, being broken during the three hours of darkness while our Lord was on the cross, has been before me of late. With fear and trembling, I present the following considerations, that relate to this question. That our Lord was forsaken by His God, is clearly stated by our Lord Himself. The question before us is, "does this mean that fellowship, and communion with His Father was also broken at that time?"

 

A few thoughts as to the difference between the Son's relationship with the Father, and His relationship with God, may be helpful in regards to this question. The Father, Son, relationship had no beginning. The Son's relationship with God did. (I speak of His taking a subordinate place in which He would say "My God, My God") When our Lord became a Man, He took a relationship as Man, with God. As the Eternal Son of God, He was in relationship with His Father from past Eternity. "..Father the glory which I had with thee before the world was.."(Jn.17:5) In Luke He is in relationship with His Father, as a man, "..that Holy thing also which shall be born of thee shall be called Son of God"(Lk.1) "Thou art my beloved Son in Whom I have found my delight"(Lk.3 ) (see also the 2nd  Psalm for the sense of this Sonship)The Father  Son relationships are emphasized in Luke and John. One His Sonship in manhood, the other His Eternal Sonship in Godhead. However, in Matthew it is characteristically "Heavenly Father", ..distance, i.e. the rule of the heavens, not intimate relationship, for the Kingdom of Heaven is much before us here and Christ presented as Messiah. "My heavenly Father" (Mt. 17&18) Then in Mark, we find the Lord only once addressing the Father, and then it is "Abba Father." (Mark 14), for in Mark He is depicted as the Servant, and the equivalent word for "Abba", in the Hebrew was a word servants called their masters. (2n Kings 5:13 & elsewhere) ( I speak as to characteristic features.) We notice, His being forsaken by God is not recorded in Luke or in John, where His relationship as Son with His Father is prominent.

 

Then there is the needed consideration of the question of the three hours of darkness. They are omitted in John's gospel. It was ministry relating to John, on which the question before us was raised. They are mentioned in Luke, but not the forsaking. None, I trust, would question the wisdom, and perfection of the Word in these omissions. Keep in mind, these two gospels do not record, the forsaking by God, of His Son. There are, no doubt, many reasons for this, most of which I do not know. I would like to observe some things relating to these facts that would touch the question of broken communion between the Father and the Son, or it not being broken. I would like to consider, the "forsaking", and the "Darkness".

 

In Genesis 1:2, we have an awful condition depicting God's Judgment on this earth. It was in a judged condition described as "And the earth was waste and empty, and darkness was on the face of the deep,.." This language is the language of God's Judgment. (Jer. 4 and elsewhere) The earth, in this condition, was not as God created it, nor did it bare the order of a Creator God, but rather the effects of a God of judgment.(Isaiah 45:18)   Typically this condition answers to the three hours of darkness, a condition of judgment.  What I desire to note in this is that this darkness, and lack of order is not found in John's Gospel. I suggest it is because John gives us the Lord Jesus as the "Burnt offering", and this offering, alone, is an offering of 'order'  "..lay the wood in order.."  cut it into it's pieces..and..lay them in order..".  Only in the Burnt Offering do we find this expression. It is not pictured to us as an offering under the judgment of God, because of our sins. In a word it is not a "forsaken" offering, depicted by darkness. It is, a sweet savor offering. Christ as offering Himself to God, where sin had violated God. So acceptable was He in this offering of Himself, "even unto death" (Phil. 2) it was a cause for His Father to love Him, not to forsake Him. "On this account the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it again....I lay it down of myself." It is a voluntary offering, not for sins,  but to Glorify a violated God, where all was darkness because of sin. In this gospel, in view of the cross, our Lord says, "They knew not that He spoke to them of the Father. Jesus therefore said to them, When ye shall have lifted up the Son of Man, then ye shall know...He that sent me is with me; He has not left me alone, because I do always the things that are pleasing to Him."(Jn.8) "Behold the hour is coming,.. that ye shall leave me alone, and yet I am not alone for the Father is with me."(Jn. 16). The thought of God's forsaking His Son, is not suited to the burnt offering, and is omitted by the gospel that portrays Him thus.

 

As to the darkness in Luke, but no forsaking of God, it is again, in keeping with the character of the gospel. This gospel gives us a perfect holy Man, walking in perfect communion with His Father, in a known relationship. It would answer to the peace offering, which gives us communion, not broken, in fellowship with God, in the then known relationship. With our Lord, and ourselves, this is fellowship with the Father. It has been noted that the Lord does not address His Father during the three hours of darkness, and supposed that this indicates there was not fellowship between the Father and the Son. It seems to me to indicate just the opposite. The verbal communications relating to the three hours of darkness were expressed between the Father and the Son in the Mount of Olives.  There He expresses His desire to not drink the "cup". It was a "cup" of darkness, a cup often indicates a judgment from God. (Ezekiel 23, Rev. 16 & elsewhere)  He must as a Holy Man, draw back from this condition of darkness where God, Who is Light, was not. He had, as a Man, always walked in communion with His God. The anticipation of going into this condition of darkness causes deep suffering of soul. But there is now displayed obedience, as the temptation of Satan in the wilderness brought out displayed dependence. The matter is here settled, and in communion with His Father He goes to the cross, immediately after the darkness we hear these most wonderful words, "Father into thy hands I commend my spirit." Unlike Matthew or Mark, where our Lord makes clearly known to us that a very awful thing had happened during those three hours, ..God, upon Whom He had been cast from His mothers womb, had forsaken Him, and He asks the question 'why?'. But, beloved, in Luke there is no such indication that any thing of this nature happened, no, not even broken communion, rather the opposite, it seems to me. In view of His death He in the confidence of faith, commits His spirit to His Father. Was there known communion during those hours of darkness as given to us in Luke? I dare not say what went on, it was darkness, no man knowing what transpired there, save as the Lord has told us, but He has not told us of being out of communion with His Father, as He has told of His being Forsaken of His God. Also we note that in Matthew and Mark, where the forsaking by God is mentioned, the veil, (separation of man from the presence of God) is not rent until after our Lord dies. But in Luke it is seen as rent prior to His death. In John, there is no veil to rend. Two gospels deal with sin, two are sweet savor offerings. Blessed Saviour! We shall never know the depths of His love, nor the depths of the sufferings He had to endure. Also, in Luke, you get the expression, "And the sun was darkened,.." I think this is in reference to the condition into which Israel entered upon the rejection of their Lord, the Son of Man. Elymas was told by Paul,(Luke is morally with Paul to the end),"..and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season."(Acts13) He represents unbelieving Israel, especially Judah, at the present time, a consequence of their rejecting their Lord. At the same time as the "sun being darkened" for Israel, the "veil is rent, in the midst" for our Lord, prior to His death, possibly, I think, as a testimony to the truth about to be expressed after His death, "In very deed, this man was just." (Lk.23) The darkened sun bears testimony to the condition into which Israel entered upon their rejection of their Lord. This condition will continue upon them as a nation until their repentance in the "new moon." Lev. 23 & Psalm 81) Even then the "sun" will be seen only by the remnant.  The Lord went through the "experience" of the sun being darkened, for the sake of this remnant, who will feel this also, before the Sun of righteousness arises with "Healing" on their behalf. Both the sun being darkened, and the darkness are mentioned in Amos 8:9, "And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord God, that I will cause the sun to go down at noon, and I will darken the earth in the clear day; And....I will make it as the mourning of an only son, and the end thereof as a bitter day." Only in Luke to you get the account "..of women, which also bewailed and lamented him.", and then our Lord's response,  "..weep for yourselves and for your children."  Israel, particularly Judah, "Daughters of Jerusalem,: had rejected their King, the Son of Man, and entered into this time of "darkness", and wailing. Prophesy is "fulfilled" as it were in Luke, by the destruction of Jerusalem, Israel is lost, while in Matthew, it remains a future thing to yet be accomplished. The significance of this to our subject is, I suggest, that the darkness over all the earth, and the sun darkened, is more the condition that Israel entered into morally at the cross, rather than depicting the judgment of the Son of Man. The "sun darkened" will mark the day of the Lord in connection with the nations also. Isaiah 13:10, Joel 3:15,..man, Jew or gentile, without light from God. The Sun of righteousness having not yet arisen with healing in His wings. (Malachi 4:2)

 

These thoughts are "considerations" I have had as to the veil being rent prior to our Lord's death, , and the darkness and the sun being darkened in Luke. The Lord, loses Israel for a season in Luke. The coin, the sheep, and the son, all a testimony to this. All possessed by the Lord prior to their being lost.

 

As to the thought of communion "mitigating" His sufferings of those three hours, communion, known communion, would have intensified it greatly. For the Son to know the feelings the Father had during those three hours, beloved, would have intensified His sufferings. Consider, in their types, Jephthah and his daughter, a beautiful type of the burnt offering of Christ. Upon seeing her father's sufferings relating to her being "offered" her greatest concern was that for her father.  Did the Father delight in His Son at that time? More, if possible, than ever. But delight does not imply the absence of suffering in the doing of God's will. Great drops of blood is not "joy", but it formed a part of delighting to do the Father's will. Mr. Bellett wrote on this time of our Lord upon the cross, as seen in Luke's gospel. "But beyond all that strikes me as characteristic in these chapters is that other utterance of the Lord on the cross-- "Father into thy hands I commend My spirit." This is peculiar, and shows us that the Lord's mind, while passing through His last hours, is not given to us in the same path in the different Gospels. In Matthew and Mark, we have the cry of conscious desertion; "My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken me?" --the cry of the smitten and bruised Lamb. In John He passes on without reference to God or the Father at all, but simply, as with His own hand, seals the accomplished work in the words, "It is finished!" But here it is between these paths that His soul is kept. It is not the sense of desertion, and its due attendant, appeal to God; nor is it the sense of divine personal authority; but it is communion with the Father, the utterance of a soul that depended on Him, and was sure of His support and acceptance. And this is quite according to our Gospel. It is that central path, so to speak, which the Mind of the Lord has been taking all through it. It is God as absent from Him that He feels in Matthew and Mark; the Father as with Him that He knows here; Himself that He is divinely conscious of in John. All these thoughts had their wondrous and holy course through the soul of the Lord in these hours. Perfect in every exercise of heart, though various; and none could trace them thus, by the pen of one evangelist after another, but the Spirit that awakened them. "When my spirit was overwhelmed within me, then Thou knewest my path."

 

(from  "The Evangelists" J.G. Bellet) (pages 311-312)

 

 

 

Mr.. Kelly wrote: ""And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit; and having said thus, he gave up the ghost." Here there is no cry to God in the sense of being forsaken, when His soul was made an offering for sin. This was given appropriately by Matthew and Mark. Nor is it the consciously divine person, the Son, pronouncing the work finished for which He had come. It is the ever perfect man, Christ Jesus, with unwavering confidence committing His spirit into His Father’s keeping.  (Compare Psalms 16 &31) It was the atoning One. ...who thought it no robbery to be equal with God . yet knew what it was to have the face of God hid from Him in judgment of sin-our sin. But the words here are no expression of His suffering as thus abandoned and atoning, but of peaceful departure of His spirit, as man. into the hands of God  the Father. He is drinking the cup in Matthew and Mark; He, the true, but rejecter Messiah, the faithful servant, nowsuffering for sin, who had laboured in grace here below.  But here the Saviour is viewed in His absolute dependence and trust in Him whom He had set before Him, as in life always, so with equal affiance of heart in death.....It is beyond all controversy,  that here the human side of Christ's death is more vividly pourtrayed than in any of the Gospels-perfect, but human; ...Thus the one only perfect man, the last Adam, who was there rejected of the Jews, and despised of men, with a loud voice, which denied the exhaustion of nature, in His death, commended His spirit, as man, to His Father, It is not here, therfore, One speaking in the sense of  God's abandonment (as we saw in Matthew and Mark), though this cup He had, indeed, drank to the dregs. But in this gospel the last words are of One who, whatever the forsaking of "God for sin, was perfectly tranquil, and peacefully committed Himself to His Father. It is the act and language of Him whose confidence was unlimited in the One He was going to. .... He who on ;the cross tasted, for expiation, the unutterable woe of which Matthew and Mark speak, is the same Jesus who, Luke tells us, never wavered for a moment, not merely in His obedience, but in unreserved confidence in God; and the expression of this, not of atonement, I read in the precious words, "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." (verses 44-46)   Accordingly, the centurion is mentioned here as owning Jesus to be "a righteous man,".

  

 

In conclusion, I desire to quote helpful considerations from the Bible Dictionary, relating to the Hebrew words used in connection with the offerings of God. They give light upon this subject.

(Morrish's "NEW AND CONCISE BIBLE DICTIONARY)

 

Burnt Offering:

 Olah, Alah, from "to make ascend" (This, I believe answers to John. a sweet savor.)

 

Peace offering

Shelem, from to be whole, complete, to be at peace, in friendship with any one. The ordinary form is plural and may be rendered "prosperities offering."

(Luke's offering)

 

Sin offering:

Chattath, from "to sin" Constantly translated sin offering.

 

Trespass offering

Asham,: From "to be guilty." Translated trespass offering.

 

We see why there is forsaking and darkness in Matthew and Mark, they present the offering up of our Lord in regards to the offerings for "sin" and "trespass", that which is to be judged by God, not offerings that  "make ascend" or "to be at peace" to, and with, Him. To introduce judgment  (forsaking) into Luke and John, in order to understand what happened in the fulfillment of these types is to put them all together, and their import and individual preciousness is forfeited to us. "Thou shalt not sow the vineyard with (seed of) two sorts, lest the whole of thy seed which thou has sown, and the produce of thy vineyard, be forfeited."(Deut. 22)  The offerings are "two sorts".

 

Now as to the burning that was involved. (from the Bible Dictionary)

 

"Beside the word alah, ...the word qatar is commonly used for burning on the altar; it signifies  "to burn incense", "to fumigate" But where the ...sin offering was burnt the word used is saraph, which signifies "to burn up, consume" Thus what ascends as a sweet savor is distinguished from what is consumed under the judgment of God.'

                                                                 

As to the question we began with, It brings confusion to introduce  "forsaking" and " the three hours of darkness" into John's gospel, for they do not belong there, as forsaking does not belong in Luke's gospel. To treat the death of Christ as given in John as a "sin" offering, which involves both forsaking and darkness, is to err.  To speak of what went on in those hours of darkness when they are not spoken of, and to say you must put them there to have proper thoughts as to the Father Son relationship of John, does not commend itself to me as discerning the intent of this most precious revelation of the Father and the Son.

 

I do not conclude there was communion during that time, because that time is left unrecorded in John, but I have not the slightest difficulty in someone saying that in John's gospel the communion between the Father and Son is not seen as broken., Truly we have there the truth of the type of burnt offering Isaac portrays and the precious thought, concerning the Father, and his son, "Take now thy (son), whom thou lovest,...and Abraham took the wood of the burnt-offering, and laid it on Isaac his son; ...and they went both of them together...."(Gen 22)  

 

Henry Short

 

October, 1999

Revised June 2000

Quote from Mr. Bellett, & Mr. Kelly added Aug 2001