Tom,

In your opinion on the cross nothing different happened from what Christ had been experiencing during His whole life?

No, that's not my opinion. Christ's greatest temptations and sufferings were experienced at the cross. The cross is what most fully reveals God's character, the character of Satan, the character of sin, and our character, in the persons of the Romans and Jews who crucified Christ. The cross caused this to happen:

OK, but speaking specifically about our sins being upon Christ, did something different happen or not?

Yes. Christ was more fully aware of our sins at certain times than at others. For example, during His temptations in the wilderness, at Lazarus' funeral, a week before His death at the temple, and especially at Gethsemane. But at the cross He experienced our sin to the greatest level possible.

The sins were not poured out on him till this time, thus it was the reason God had to withdraw from him. It was the cup that was before him to accept and bear the wight of all these sins that he did not deserve and die for them although he was without sin or blemish himself.

Christ was always bearing the sins. If this had caused God to withdraw from Him, God would have had to have withdrawn from Him since birth. Here's an example of Christ's bearing our sins before the cross:



A more literal translation would be, "Look, the Lamb of God, who is bearing the sin of the world!" which is very close to what Young's Literal Translation has.

Also, God did not withdraw from Christ at the cross, but drew close.



Psalm 18 (from which EGW quotes) eloquently describes God's drawing near to Christ.

Tom,
My brother, dont try to read into the bible what is not there...

God the Father hid his presence from flesh and Christ died on the cross as flesh seperated or sundered from the Father. The phrase "Look, the Lamb of God,who takes away the sin of the world!" is correct as the Jews expected and knew the purpose from the sacrifices at the Tabernacle and Temple, but at the time of the sacrifice is when the sin was put on the lamb.

Rick

John 1:29 should be translated as a gerund. That is, an accurate translation, as the YLT has, uses the gerund:



This is not reading something into Scripture which isn't there, but simply leaving it there where it belongs.

There are other texts that bring this out as well. For example, Matt. 8:17 quotes from Isa. 53:



Matt. 8:17 is well before Christ was crucified.

Also that God drew near to Christ is in Scripture, Ps. 18 (quoted by EGW), as well as from the Gospel accounts. There is no doubt that EGW is correct in asserting that God and holy angels were with Christ at the cross.

It's true there was a sundering of Father from Son, but this was due to Christ's identification with sin, not something the Father was doing (other than allowing this to happen; "giving Him up" as Scripture puts it).

doesnt necessarily mean Christ was carrying our sins at that moment. didnt Christ "take away the sin" also, or maybe more accurately here, by His life, His rejection of all sin, whenever presented to Him?

some of these discussions seem to be presenting two different true perspectives of the same picture.

Tom,

I have to disagree, as the lamb did not take away sin till the sacrifice, that is made clear in the instructions and why the ceremonies were laid out so detailed. Every Jew knew when the sins would be laid on the lamb, this had been drilled into them for centuries. That was the whole purpose in telling them as they would know what Christ was going to do for them. Yes when you saw the lamb going to the Tabernacle/Temple you knew it was to take the sin, but the actual time was when the sins were put on the lamb. This made clear to them the whole process, this is where the answer lies..

I dont think our salvation depends on this point of when the sins were put on Christ, so lets leave it for now till we have time to study it and maybe some more from others who may have something specific and see if it is made clearer....

Rick