Did those seeking to kill Jesus, doing the desires of the Devil, put Jesus to death by godless men?

First of all, I am surprised to see you appealing to non-biblical sources. Aren't you the one who constantly mocks those who quote authors and commentaries, and prides himself on relying only on the Bible?

My position on this question has come from preaching through Mark 14 and 15, especially on Gethsemane, our Lord's arrest, trial and crucifixion which I did before Easter this year. As I prepared the sermons, it became clear to me that all Satan's efforts were directed to keeping our Lord from dying on the cross. All the commentaries that I consulted made no mention of Satan 'murdering' Christ, but rather concentrated on Christ resisting temptation and remaining faithful to His mission. I have presented the Scriptures several times already, so I won't do so again.

One last point. You quote Arthur Pink from Gleanings in Genesis. I have the book. This is one of his earliest writings and he makes IMO several errors it it. One is his reliance on the 'Gap Theory.' Another is his Dispensationalism, of which he publicly repented a little later. I have his main works concerning the Atonement: 'The Satisfaction of Christ,' 'The Doctrine of Reconciliation' and 'The Seven Sayings of the Saviour from the Cross' - the works of his maturity. In none of them can I recall seeing any mention of Satan murdering or crucifying Christ. I am not aware of any public recantation of his comments which you quoted, but nor am I aware that he ever repeated them.

However, you should not suppose that I am denying that Satan 'bruised the heel' of our Lord. I just agree with several of the people you quote that the wound was not deadly. Satan was constantly attacking Him, either by direct temptation or by using others to do so (e.g. Matthew 16:22-23), but the temptation is not to go to the cross, but to avoid it.

 

Are you stupid? Over and over and over and over again we've told you we KNOW that, BECAUSE GOD RAISED HIM FROM THE DEAD.

The Jews killed Him but God raised Him from the dead.

 

@Martin Marprelate

To drive the point home:

""Note of the redundancy of the message from the Spirit to the Jews; YOU KILLED HIM, BUT GOD RAISED HIM FROM THE DEAD.

Acts 2:
23 him, being delivered up by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye by the hand of lawless men did crucify and slay:
24 whom God raised up, having loosed the pangs of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.
36 Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly, that God hath made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye crucified.

Acts 3:
14 But ye denied the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted unto you,
15 and killed the Prince of life; whom God raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.

Acts 4:
10 be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even in him doth this man stand here before you whole.

Acts 5:
30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew, hanging him on a tree.
31 Him did God exalt with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance to Israel, and remission of sins.

Acts 7:
52 Which of the prophets did not your fathers persecute? and they killed them that showed before of the coming of the Righteous One; of whom ye have now become betrayers and murderers;
56 and said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing on the right hand of God. Acts 7

Acts 10:
39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the country of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom also they slew, hanging him on a tree.
40 Him God raised up the third day, and gave him to be made manifest,

Acts 13:
28 And though they found no cause of death in him, yet asked they of Pilate that he should be slain.
29 And when they had fulfilled all things that were written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a tomb.
30 But God raised him from the dead:["

 

Do you have any 'non-biblical sources' that support your theory that Satan was trying to prevent the crucifixion from happening?

Trust me, I can come up with more that supports the traditional orthodox view that Satan was DEEPLY involved in the crucifixion, and that from the Penal Substitution Atonement camp. Here's a few more:

"...bruise the heel of the seed of the woman. On the cross Satan bruised the heel of Christ, causing His death.

Bruising suggests something that was not ultimate or final. Christ died on our behalf being made sin for us (2 Corinthians 5:21). He bore our judgment upon Calvary's cross and, in doing so, bruised His heel. Though wounded, the damage done to Jesus was not final, for He came back from the dead three days later….”
What Does Genesis 3:15 Mean?

“…But the seed of the woman was made sin and a curse for us, so saving us from both. (2.) His sufferings and death, pointed at in Satan’s bruising his heel, that is, his human nature. Satan tempted Christ in the wilderness, to draw him into sin; and some think it was Satan that terrified Christ in his agony, to drive him to despair. It was the devil that put it into the heart of Judas to betray Christ, of Peter to deny him, of the chief priests to prosecute him, of the false witnesses to accuse him, and of Pilate to condemn him, aiming in all this, by destroying the Saviour, to ruin the salvation; but, on the contrary, it was by death that Christ destroyed him that had the power of death, Heb. 2:14. Christ’s heel was bruised when his feet were pierced and nailed to the cross, and Christ’s sufferings are continued in the sufferings of the saints for his name. The devil tempts them, casts them into prison, persecutes and slays them, and so bruises the heel of Christ, who is afflicted in their afflictions. But, while the heel is bruised on earth, it is well that the head is safe in heaven….”
MHCW Genesis 3 Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible

“…(2.) His sufferings and death, pointed at in Satan's bruising his heel, that is, his human nature….”|
Wesley Genesis 3 Wesley's Notes

“…to see in the words, “thou shalt bruise his heel,” a prediction of the sufferings and crucifixion of our Lord, as “the seed” of the woman; and in the words, “it shall bruise thy head,” the victory of the Crucified and Risen Son of Man over the forces of sin and death….”
Cambridge Bible Genesis 3:15 Commentaries: And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel."

“…In the curse God also speaks of “the seed of the woman”. That is a clear reference to the Lord Jesus (Gal 4:4). He will bruise satan on the head, while satan will bruise him on the heel. If the heel is bruised, it is impossible to walk. With the Lord Jesus this happens when people, led by satan, pierce His feet on the cross and kill Him. But just by the cross He obtains victory and bruises satan on the head (Col 2:15)….”
King Genesis 3 Kingcomments Bible Studies

“…How may Satan be said to have bruised Christ’s heel? (For the answer see Isaiah 50:1-11; Isaiah 53:1-12, Psalm 22:1-31; Psalm 69:1-36, and the chapters of the Gospels that speak of Christ’s sufferings and crucifixion.)…”
James Gray Genesis 3 James Gray - Concise Bible Commentary

 

What fun! @kyredneck, rather than deal with the Bible verses that I've quoted wants me to quote non-biblical ones! How droll!
Well, as a matter of fact I can. Earlier this week I spent three days at a church leaders' conference and I picked up a FIEC 'Primer' on spiritual warfare, This World with Devils Filled (the title is from a hymn by Luther), published jointly by the FIEC and a leading British seminary (ISBN 978-1-91327-874-8). Here are some choice extracts:

As far as the earth is concerned, God's warfare starts in Eden. He punishes Adam and Eve and punishes the serpent. There is also, grace for the human couple, and God's words to the serpent are of enormous importance in pointing to the direction that His redeeming warfare will take.
First, God puts enmity between the serpent and the woman, and between their respective seeds or offspring (Gen 3:15). In doing so He ends the woman's suicidal complicity with the serpent and draws her back to Himself, thereby establishing am absolute division (Matt. 16:22) between the two of them and, through them, between the two divergent and mutually-opposed branches of humanity. One branch will go the way of the serpent, deceived and enslaved by its lies, sharing in its rebellion and reflecting its murderous character; and the other, the "seed" of the woman, will share her enmity against the serpent and form a people belonging to God. So it is with these words - "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers" - That God announces the spiritual warfare of His people as they join in His own conflict with the serpent and all that share in his rebellion.

[Thus, though it is Christ Himself who will crush the serpent's head, it is His people (c.f. Hebrews 2:13b) who, by their union with Him will also suffer Satan's persecutions ( 1Galatians 4:29) but will also share in His victory (Romans 16:20) M.M.]

Secondly, the enmity- the warfare - will come to a head when one single representative offspring of the woman crushes the serpent's head on behalf of all her offspring. However, in doing so He suffers the bruising of His own heel: "the promise of victory includes the cost of suffering* Indeed, suffering will be a constant in the warfare of God and His people with the serpent and his people, which quickly becomes evident when righteous Abel suffers at the hands of Cain, "who belonged to the evil one and murdered His brother" (1 John 3:12). And climactically, Jesus Himself, the representative offspring of the woman ..... identified those who wished to kill Him as the offspring of the devil, "doing the works of your own father" who "was a murderer from the beginning (John 8:37, 40, 44). Even now, and until Christ's return, the dragon makes war against the rest of the woman's offspring, "those who keep God's commands and hold fast their testimony about Jesus." .......

'''''''First, Jesus is tempted by the devil. .... The temptations draw attention to the underlying cosmic background to Jesus' ministry, and the unrelenting pressure which Satan's dominion of darkness would bring to bear on Him. The temptations focus on Jesus' trusting submissions as Son to the will of His Father, and especially to the suffering wich lay at the heart of His ministry on earth and would culminate at the cross. They are temptations that would recur, though Peter's hostile response to Jesus' declaration of His coming trials, for example: "Never, Lord! ... This shall never happen to you!" (Matthew 16:22). And then down to the scoffers at the cross: "Come down from the cross, if You are the Son of God!" (Matthew 27:40).

While Satan is the tempter, he is not the real initiator of the temptations, although he seizes the opportunity to attack God's redemptive new creation work in Christ at its very beginning, just as he had attacked God's first creation in Eden. All the synoptic gospels point to the Spirit's role in sending Jesus into the desert: "Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil" (Matthew 4:1) God willed that Satan should test His Son and He permitted Satan to do so.

More where that came from, but it will do for the moment.


*J.R. Treat, The Crucified King. Zondervan, 2004

 

You've posted no new passages that haven't already been dealt with.

And I fail to see in your citation any direct statement that Satan was trying to prevent the crucifixion.

 

That because you've ignored the old ones. :)

 

<sigh> Weak. Lame.

 

it certainly was, but I have come to understand your style by now. It doesn't matter.

The word isn't "void.".

No, you are being dishonest, and not only intellectually, because I have never insisted that tetelestai only means 'paid in full' as you very well know. What I have insisted is that the word has a wide semantic range that includes 'paid.'

So are you now claiming that tetelestai means 'cancelled'? Now you are being silly and ridiculous.
At the start of the last century, Albert Schweitzer claimed that tetelestai was a cry of defeat: "It is finished!" He wrote that our Lord had expected the Father to come and rescue him, and then, at the point of death, realised that it wasn't going to happen. That is a ridiculous view, but I mention it to show that people will make of the Scriptures whatever they will.

If we want to understand what the word means, we have to compare Scripture with Scripture to reach a proper understanding. As I have written (post #115), there are at least four different meanings that the word is given in Scripture. What support do I have to show that 'paid' is a legitimate translation? Quite a lot, actually:
Mark 10:45. 'For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.' The ransom has been paid. Tetelestai!
1 Corinthians 6:20. 'For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's.' The price has been paid. Tetelestai!
Revelation 5:9, NIV. '.....You were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God.' The purchase has been made and paid for. Tetelestai!

But the best example of our Lord paying His people's debt is in Colossians 2:13-15. The Colossians had been dead because of their sins, and the sinful nature ('the uncircumcision of your flesh') that produced them, but God made them alive with Christ by forgiving their sins. Paul then uses the metaphor of a bond of debt, an IOU if you prefer, to describe how God dealt with their sins. He wiped it out, effaced it, as a scribe might smooth over the writing on a tablet of soft wax; He simply 'took it out of the way;' and most tellingly, He nailed it to the cross. By His death, the Lord Jesus paid off the 'debt,' the IOU, of human sin. Tetelestai! It has been paid! God can be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.
The whole flow of the argument in verse 15 indicates that the defeat of the powers is achieved by the payment of the bond of debt. Satan's power resides in his ability to accuse men and women before God and to demand that God punish them. When Christ pays the penalty for their sins, Satan has nothing to accuse them of. Our sins are nailed to the cross with tetelestai, 'paid in full!' stamped upon the IOU. 'Who shall bring a charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies; who is he who condemns?' Satan is defeated, and Paul gives the picture of him and his cohorts being dragged along in a Roman Triumph, being made a spectacle and a laughing-stock.

So while it is not at all wrong to think of tetelestai meaning 'accomplished,' 'finished,' 'achieved' or 'completed,' it can and does also mean 'paid,' whether you like it or not.

If Jesus was simply speaking of His obedience even to death on a cross it would be accomplished or finished (tetelestai).


You are not legitimately dealing with the actual word (you are dealing with your theory rather than Scripture).


You could say that tetelestai , if applied to a debt, means that the debt is no longer legitimate (it is paid, canceled, or in some satisfactory form made null).

But that is not what you do. You simply read your philosophy into the passage and insist it is right without actually dealing with the biblical text and words used.[/QUOTE]