Hast Thou Forsaken Me?

Jesus Christ fulfilled the law, and we may expect the set of virtues Christ perfected were somewhat similar to those we are all capable of. In truth, I expect just that to be so, and all the positive properties that the Father is capable of (and Christ glorified also), to be infinitely larger than that limited set of virtues I will call Ω0 which is as the requirement of the law:

Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. (KJV)

Now, given the set of all positive properties Ω is far, far greater, there will always be properties in the sets u and v over and above the closure of those properties we are all capable of exemplifying in Ω0.

The Father was present with Christ on the cross, but Christ died in exemplifying a closed subset in Ω0 where the sets u and v appear empty just as if the Father were not possibly there - as equally empty as they do to all sinners who acknowledge Christ's virtue but not His Divinity and His resurrection. (In fact, to all of us were we to be cut off similarly.) The Father, then, withdrew His own "closure" from Christ as if His Son were to die as one completely human, not at all divine. The presence of the Father's spirit on Christ that ministered to all Israel through Him did not fail to exist, nor did it abandon Him, rather Christ attained perfection as we are potentially or "possibly perfect" (though never found so before God).

So, in truth the sets u and v were never "empty" in Ω but Christ, as a human, died. This is surely a lesson that though Christ gave up His Spirit into the hands of God, the Father is not far away:

Luk 23:46 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. (KJV)

The disjunction Ω v e freely rearranged to <e> v ∅ should assure us that there is in this case (and always) an octal a closure above that of Christ in the "K4 form" of the filter. Jesus by exemplifying ∅ instead committed His life as "e" to the closure of the whole octal: It was "the only option". That closure, the Father, is one who is "greater than Christ". (That closure is shown witnessed by His disciples Peter and James and John, in Christ being seen transfigured.)

Then given u, v are never empty sets there is one answer, that <e> is not just as the K4 form but the closure of the entire octal: and there is yet an octal over that, as it sits as a static subgroup equal to the K4 form in infinite regression!

So in the disjunction Ω0 v e there appears only u, v empty; there is in truth always a "u" and always a "v": for the set Ω0 is always a proper subset of Ω for we may always imagine God to be "that than which nothing greater can be thought" as did Anselm. Then, by axiom of choice ("Zorn's lemma") I may ascend a chain of octals through that same self-reference and I find my faith in God the Father returned to me.

A closer line of reason is that the Father appears absent because either there appear to be, or are "no properties" to be found in the sets of u and v. Those would be the same sets upon which God would rest in the octal: But if the Father had withdrawn Himself from Christ in order to rest, then as Christ did find His own closure, there is no reason to suppose that Christ should share in those sets in the Father's rest - if it be so that Christ must exemplify that closure and die truly as Christ was to die to fulfil the law. (Fulfulling also the law that He should be condemned.) That the Father simply lifted the sets upon which He rested from Christ, does not mean those same sets outside of Christ were empty: Rather Christ simply became a separate member of the trinity until His resurrection. Christ, was not forsaken, but His laying down of His life was His own work: The Father would not interfere until He raised Him.

Continue To Next Page

Return To Section Start

Return To Previous Page