Matthew 27:46: “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying ‘Eli, Eli Lama Sabachthani?’ that is My God My God, why has thou forsaken me?”
This being Easter Weekend, my study partner insisted I present a study for Easter. There is really not much about the death and resurrection of Christ that has not been examined, debated, preached and chewed over by scholars so I am resurrecting one of my old studies on a topic which has had some new light shed on it in recent years in honor of this weekend. I admit my conclusions are controversial so I present the following for your examination and I will let you decided for yourself if this has any merit.
This passage in Matthew has been debated for 2,000 years and everyone seems to have their own explanation as to what Jesus means when he said Eli Eli Lama Sabachthani or My God My God why hast thou forsaken me.
It is curious that Matthew transliterated this into the Greek as the Hebrew Eli and Mark transliterated this as Aramaic Eloi. Lama is Hebrew, Lema is Aramaic and is shown as that in both Gospels in the Greek, but translators will render it as lama (Hebrew) for whatever reason. Secondly, why did they transliterate (make a word sound the same in another language) into Greek at all, why not just write out in Greek my God my Go why hast thou forsaken me? As for the word Sabachthani well, we are not sure, it appears to be from the Aramaic word sbq which means to forsake or abandon for a purpose. The Aramaic word for just simply to abandon to forsake because it is unwanted is taatani. However, it can be argued that the root word is really shwaq which means to be kept, spared or allowed or to fulfill an end. If Jesus had really meant that God had abandoned Him or forgot Him He would have used the word taatani (forsake) or nashatani (forget).
Something even more curious is that the passage suggests that Jesus is quoting Psalms 22:1 yet in Hebrew that phrase is eli, eli lama ‘azabethni not sabachthani. However the Jewish Targum (Aramaic translation of the Hebrew Bible) does use the Aramaic word sbq in Psalms 22:1, which is probably why the scribes added the footnote which being interpreted means…. This is in accordance with the Eastern Church which teaches that the scribes who wrote this out in Greek really did not understand what the phrase really meant, so they merely transliterated it into the Greek rather than translate it and then put in a short commentary or their own opinion and indicated this by the words that is to say… In other words they were not sure they had correctly quoted Jesus so they assumed he was speaking Psalms 22:1 and put in a little commentary to offer their opinion as to what he really said.
Indeed Jesus could have been misquoted from scribes or witnesses at the crucifixion if they were from Judea, for the Judeans spoke a Southern dialect of Aramaic but Jesus and his disciples were from the Northern part of Israel, Galilee, where they spoke a Northern dialect of Aramaic. So Jesus would have spoken with a Northern accent and sometimes what he said might not be clear to the people speaking a Southern dialect. This is probably why some thought he was calling for Elijah. My belief that all Scripture is the inspired Word of God makes me a little uncomfortable suggesting that the Bible misquoted Jesus. If the Bible teaches Jesus said Sabachthani, then that is what He said, no misquotation.
As I have said, Jesus spoke a Northern dialect of Aramaic. My studies have been in the middle dialect of Aramaic, more commonly known as the Jewish Babylonian Aramaic or Talmudic Aramaic. This is closely related to the Eastern Aramaic like the Mandaic and the Eastern Syriac of the Assyrian Church. I undertook this study so I could read the Talmud in the original Aramaic. So I claim no expertise on the Old Galilean or Northern dialect of Aramaic. However, from my research into the Old Galilean I find that the study of the Old Galilean is a relatively new discovery. It was felt that the Northern dialect of Aramaic or the Old Galilean dialect was a dead language, however, linguist have found a tribe in Northern Iraq that still speaks this dialect and scholars from Oxford have descended upon these people to learn some of the finer points of this dialect.
This now brings us to the word Eli. In the Southern dialect this would mean my God. However, in the Northern dialect, which is more colloquial, the word el would be used for more than just the word god, it was sometimes used in a descriptive sense. A god is someone or something that has control over you. People are, for instance, controlled by their hearts desires. Thus Jesus could have been saying, “my heart.” In the Semitic languages when a word is repeated twice it is done to show emphasis. Hence in the Old Galilean when Jesus said Eli Eli he could have been saying “listen to my heart.” The word lama (Hebrew) or lema (Aramaic) generally is used as an interrogative, but this is not necessarily set in stone. To use lema as a question, why am I forsaken or why have I been kept suggest that Jesus did not understand what was happening to Him. That is not my Jesus, He is God, and He is all knowing. In that context we could properly and linguistically render this not as a question but as a declaration, this is why. In the Old Galilean lema Sabachthani means, this is why I have been kept or this is my destiny. In fact scholars have discovered this phrase still in use in that tribe that still uses the Old Galilean. They use it in the context of this is my destiny. In other words Jesus was not speaking to God but to the people who were mourning his death, those who could understand his dialect and in His last breath what He could have been saying is, “Listen to my heart, this is my destiny.” Jesus was telling those who were in sorrow over his death, “Listen to my heart, this is why I came to earth in the first place, this is my purpose, to die for you.”
The jury is still out on this one. I am sure there are some scholars who would throw salt in the air at my conclusion and I respect that. But if I have given you something to at least awaken you to re-examine the last words of Jesus and meditate on them this Easter, then I am glad to suffer the slings and arrows of critics. So let me offer this Easter message to you from just one of many understandings of the words from the lips of Jesus in His adopted native language of the Old Galilean Aramaic, Eloi Eloi Lema Sabachthani which being interpreted means, “Listen to my heart, this is my destiny This is why I came to earth in human form and that is to die to give you eternal life.”
I always thought that Yeshua was crying out due to the fact that He took the sin of the world into Himself and was thus ‘separated’ from Father (the result of sin is separation) and He had to experience this horrific pain of separation from Abba Father.
However, what you have shared above sheds a whole new light. This is worth contemplating.Thank you so much for sharing your heart ♥
Much Shalom to you :)
Why is it that we can talk of the selfless character of a Navy Seal who will fearlessly, and sacrificially throw himself on a grenade to save the lives of his friends but we have to assign Jesus the human traits of being afraid of the cross in the garden and have to sweat drops of blood over his impeding doom and then cry out over feelings of rejection on the cross. I would like to put consider my Jesus to at the minimum be on the level of our medal of honors heroes if not a few notches above.
Sure Jesus had a human side but He also possesses a love that far exceeds any love that we as a human can feel in this realm. Christians throughout the ages have fearlessly faced death for the sake of Jesus without whining. They faced death and torture out of a deep love for Jesus and they did not sweat drops of blood while doing it. Yet we say Jesus was so terrified over his coming death He had to struggle with his human will to overcome the fear and even sweat drops of blood. I feel more comfortable believing that my Jesus faced the cross bravely and selflessly, out of total love for us that he wanted and longed to face this so that the object of His love – us – would not have to suffer. I want to believe that on the cross was not thinking and whining about His own rejection but he was suffering because there were those who were mourning HIs death he wanted them to know that he wanted to do this so they could live. That is the Jesus I believe in.
Jesus didn’t just suffer a physical death. He had to be punished and rejected by GOD at the Cross for all human sin. You show me a Navy seal that did that and I’ll show you a Navy seal that sweats blood. To view the cross in just physical form is not only inappropriate it’s severally inaccurate. If your view of Jesus crucifixion is just a notch above some medal a soldier can achieve I suggest reading a very popular book. “The bible” it’s been the top seller since it’s publication. I’m not trying to be sarcastic either, I’m just worried you arn’t reading the right book. If you tried to imagine GOD not only turning his back on you, but also punishing you for all sin after being severally beaten by Roman soldiers one after another I garranty you would sweat blood too. I could never do what Jesus did, that’s for sure.
Actually I agree with you 100%, I just did not make myself clear, which is in not unusual for me. My point is that Jesus did not sweat drops of blood out of fear, but out of something else, which you have rightly pointed out and that is taking on the sins of this world as well as suffering the feelings of guilt that we feel when we sin. Jesus could not know what the burden of guilt felt like, but once he took on the sins of the world, He understood it better than anyone could.
Thank you for your clarification.
Thanks Chaim. Your comments certainly put s a different emphasis on these words. As I read them they resonated within my heart and tears came to me eyes. I can see the direct application to me. Yes the Scripture is the inspired word of God but man’s fallibility and biases may cause misinterpretation sometimes. Keep at it Chaim in challenging my understanding. Love it:-}}}
Thanks for this! I tend to agree with your explanation as I never understood and had always been uncomfortable with the thought that God the Father could forsake His Son, especially at a time of such extreme agony. God bless you!