For the Christians, what are the last words of Jesus (as)?

Christ's last words on the cross were "It is finished".

format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi

Christ's last words on the cross were "It is finished".

are you sure?

format_quote Originally Posted by Dawud_uk

are you sure?

Actually I was mistaken, the last words were reported to be "Father, into Thy hands I commend my Spirit."

...

edit

Christ reportedly stated 7 things while on the cross

1. "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." Gospel of Luke 23:34

2. "Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise." Gospel of Luke 23:43


3. "Jesus said to his mother: "Woman, this is your son".
Then he said to the disciple: "This is your mother." Gospel of John 19:26-27

4. "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34

5. "I thirst" Gospel of John 19:28

6. When Jesus had received the wine, he said, "It is finished";
and he bowed his head and handed over the spirit. Gospel of John 19:30


7. Jesus cried out in a loud voice,
"Father, into your hands I commend my spirit" Gospel of Luke 23:46

format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi

Christ reportedly stated 7 things while on the cross

1. "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." Gospel of Luke 23:34

2. "Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise." Gospel of Luke 23:43


3. "Jesus said to his mother: "Woman, this is your son".
Then he said to the disciple: "This is your mother." Gospel of John 19:26-27

4. "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34

5. "I thirst" Gospel of John 19:28

6. When Jesus had received the wine, he said, "It is finished";
and he bowed his head and handed over the spirit. Gospel of John 19:30


7. Jesus cried out in a loud voice,
"Father, into your hands I commend my spirit" Gospel of Luke 23:46

keltoi,

i feel you are not being entirely honest here. i dont know if that is intentional or not.

lets take the last two qoutes,

luke 23:46
Then Jesus cried out with a loud voice and said, “Father, into your hands I entrust my spirit.”After he said this, he breathed his last.

so here it is saying the last words of jesus (upon him be peace) are “Father, into your hands I entrust my spirit.”

but then we come to john 19:30
“It is finished.” Then he bowed his head and released his spirit.

so two different acounts of his last words, now either one is correct and hence the other incorrect, or both are incorrect but both are not possibly correct.

format_quote Originally Posted by Dawud_uk

keltoi,

i feel you are not being entirely honest here. i dont know if that is intentional or not.

lets take the last two qoutes,

luke 23:46
Then Jesus cried out with a loud voice and said, “Father, into your hands I entrust my spirit.”After he said this, he breathed his last.

so here it is saying the last words of jesus (upon him be peace) are “Father, into your hands I entrust my spirit.”

but then we come to john 19:30
“It is finished.” Then he bowed his head and released his spirit.

so two different acounts of his last words, now either one is correct and hence the other incorrect, or both are incorrect but both are not possibly correct.

We are referring to two different accounts of the crucifixion. No author states "These were the last words of Christ". Luke describes an account of the crucifixion, and the words of Christ that were audible to the observer, and John records another account. They are two separate accounts written by two different authors.

The two versions appear to describe a different chronology of Christ's statements, but that is hardly unexpected when two sources are written from different points of view.

I am not trying to attack here or say anything wrong, but the verses there are somehow did not make any sense to me.

1. "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." Gospel of Luke 23:34

here its obvious that he was satisfied for his end peace be upon him.

4. "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34

but here it looks as he was not satisfied with that end. Even though, he knew from the moment that he came to earth that God send him to purify human sin *as stated in the bible*

correct me if I am wrong please

format_quote Originally Posted by SAYA

I am not trying to attack here or say anything wrong, but the verses there are somehow did not make any sense to me.

here its obvious that he was satisfied for his end peace be upon him.

but here it looks as he was not satisfied with that end. Even though, he knew from the moment that he came to earth that God send him to purify human sin *as stated in the bible*

correct me if I am wrong please

Knowing the task and experiencing the result are two different things. However, on the issue of the "Why have You forsaken", there are two lines of thought. One belief is that He was quoting from the Old Testament in this instance. The other belief is that He was referring to His separation from God in those moments when the sin of the world was on His shoulders.

format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi

Knowing the task and experiencing the result are two different things. However, on the issue of the "Why have You forsaken", there are two lines of thought. One belief is that He was quoting from the Old Testament in this instance. The other belief is that He was referring to His separation from God in those moments when the sin of the world was on His shoulders.

do you mind explain more about the two thoughts you mention above? I am interesting in knowing more about this issue

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem,

May the Peace from Almighty God be upon those who follow guidance.

This is not meant as a disrespectful post.

When one takes the four accounts and weaves them together, in reality the individual has now come up with a 5 Gospel. A Gospel which has Jesus say and do things which no one of the other Gospels have him say or do. This of course has been done in history, I cannot recall the name from memory, diatasaron, or something along those lines, a compilation of the Gospels put into one, it was famous in ancient Christianity.

When one does the above, whether rightly or wrongly, one can often fail to see the emphasis placed on the actions and sayings of Jesus by the Gospel authors. The Jesus is Luke, who is in full control, tells the women to not worry about him but themselves and their children and who commands his spirit into the father, is not like the Jesus in Mark, who is silent and feels forsaken.

Of course one can find many improbable reconciliations to the texts, Catholic Scholar Raymond E Brown, in his Introduction to the New Testament notes:

The recognition that the evangelists were not eyewitnesses of Jesus’ ministry is important for understanding the differences among the Gospels. In the older approach, wherein the evangelists themselves were thought to have seen what they reported, it was very difficult to explain differences among their Gospels. How could eyewitness John (chap.2) report the cleansing of the Temple at the beginning of the ministry and eyewitness Matthew (chap.21) report the cleansing of the Temple at the end of the ministry? In order to reconcile them, interpreters would contend that the Temple-cleansing happend twice and that each evangelist chose to report only one of the two instances.17 However, if neither evangelist was an eyewitness and each had recieved an account of the Temple-cleansing from an intermediate source, neither one (or only one) may have known when it occurred during the public ministry. Rather than depending on a personal memory of events, each evangelists has arranged the material he reieved in order to portray Jesus in a way that would meet the spiritual needs of the community to which he was addressing the Gospel. Thus the Gospels ahve been arranged in logical order, nor necessarily in chronological order. The evangelists emerge as authors, shaping, devolping, pruning the transmitted Jesus material, and as theologians, orienting that material to a particular goal.

The Footnotes;

17 Many other examples of improbable reconciliations could be offered. Since Matt has a Sermon on the Mount and Luke has a similar Sermon on the Plain (Matt 5:1; Luke 6:17), there must have been a plain on the side of the mountain. Since Matt has the Lord’s Prayer taught in that sermon and Luke has it later on the road to Jerusalem (Matt 6:9-13; Luke 11:2-4), the disciple must have forgotten it, causing Jesus to repeat it. Mark 10:46 places the healing of the blind man after Jesus left Jericho, while Luke 18:35; 19:1 places it before Jesus entered Jericho. Perhaps Jesus was leaving the site of OT Jericho and entering the site of NT Jericho!

Blog

As an aspiring trainee historian wanabee I would say the words most likely to be true out of all in the Gospels, are the ones by Matthew and Mark. I think most Historical Jesus researchers would tell you the same (that's a pure guess though)

Br.al-Habeshi

format_quote Originally Posted by Dawud_uk

luke 23:46
Then Jesus cried out with a loud voice and said, “Father, into your hands I entrust my spirit.”After he said this, he breathed his last.

so here it is saying the last words of jesus (upon him be peace) are “Father, into your hands I entrust my spirit.”

but then we come to john 19:30
“It is finished.” Then he bowed his head and released his spirit.

so two different acounts of his last words, now either one is correct and hence the other incorrect, or both are incorrect but both are not possibly correct.

Greetings, Dawud_uk

As somebody who seems to spend a fair amount of time speaking with Christians at a dawah stall you are no doubt aware that the four gospels present four different accounts of Jesus' life.
Not only are they written by four different individuals, they are also addressed at different audiences.

To give an analogy, a while ago I went on a week's training course to Liverpool with a work colleague of mine.
When we returned I told people all about the events during that course. But I gave a different accounts to, say for example, my husband than I did to my friends or my children.
My friend, who had shared pretty much the same events during that week, probably gave even different accounts to her husband, her children, her neighbours, her friends etc, etc.
The event was the same; neither of us lied when we told our stories - yet the accounts we gave will differ.

It strikes me again and again that Muslims try to compare the Gospels with the Qu'ran ... and end up not being able to compare the two because they are so different in nature.

I believe the Gospels are much more akin to the Hadiths in their narrative nature: the account of other people of Jesus' life, his teachings, his actions, his death ...

Peace

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem,

format_quote Originally Posted by Q8sobieski

Each of the four Gospels are free-standing narratives and don't need to be interwoven to create a single narrative. Each narrative tells essentially the same story from different points of view. Matthew is often to be directed toward Jews whereas John was directed more toward Greeks. Each Gospel attempts to bring the main themes of Christianity to different communities in a way that would be meaningful to each community. To be sure, there are other Gospels; Thomas, Philip, Mary and others. It was Athanasius, around the year AD 300, who decided that the number of Gospels ought to be only four. His desire for four, rather than three or five, seems to have been arbitrary. Anyway, Jesus' last words in each Gospel need to be understood only in terms of that particular Gospel.

That does not seem to leave much of an answer for the person seeking to find Jesus' lost words according to the 4 Gospels.

Br.al-Habeshi

format_quote Originally Posted by Al Habeshi

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem,



That does not seem to leave much of an answer for the person seeking to find Jesus' lost words according to the 4 Gospels.

Br.al-Habeshi

I understand that some might feel the need to know for certain what Christ's last words on the cross were, but in terms of Christianity the important theme is what Christ died for and what that brought to us. That is the central message of the Gospel and what they were written to convey.

format_quote Originally Posted by SAYA

do you mind explain more about the two thoughts you mention above? I am interesting in knowing more about this issue

For a subject like this it is helpful to refer to past theologians and their beliefs on the topic.

Here is Martin Luther:




Christ was and remains just and did not commit any sins ....

But at the moment in which he suffered, he took upon himself everything that is ours as if it were truly his, suffering even for that which we should have borne because of our sins and which the ****ed already suffer....

The punishment of God which strikes because of sins is not only the pains of death but also the fear and horror of the troubled conscience which experiences the eternal wrath and as if it were eternally abandoned and driven far from the face of God ....(p. 603)

In the eyes (of God) also, Christ was like one abandoned, one accursed, a sinner, a blasphemer, one ****ed, even if he is without sin and without guilt. The fact that he says "you have abandoned me" is certainly not a joke, a game, or hypocrisy. He is truly abandoned in all, as is the sinner when he sins...(p. 605)[3]

John Calvin:


And about the ninth hour Jesus cried. Though in the cry which Christ uttered a power more than human was manifested, yet it was unquestionably drawn from him by intensity of sorrow. And certainly this was his chief conflict, and harder than all the other tortures, that in his anguish he was so far from being soothed by the assistance or favor of his Father, that he felt himself to be in some measure estranged from him. For not only did he offer his body as the price of our reconciliation with God, but. in his soul also he endured the punishments due to us; and thus he became, as Isaiah speaks, a man of sorrows, (53:3.) Those interpreters are widely mistaken who, laying aside this part of redemption, attended solely to the outward punishment of the flesh; for in order that Christ might satisfy for us, 6 it was necessary that he should be placed as a guilty person at the judgment-seat of God. Now nothing is more dreadful than to feel that God, whose wrath is worse than all deaths, is the Judge. When this temptation was presented to Christ, as if, having God opposed to him, he were already devoted to destruction, he was seized with horror, which would have been sufficient to swallow up a hundred times all the men in the world; but by the amazing power of the Spirit he achieved the victory. Nor is it by hypocrisy, or by assuming a character, that he complains of having been forsaken by the Father. Some allege that he employed this language in compliance with the opinion of the people, but this is an absurd mode of evading the difficulty; for the inward sadness of his soul was so powerful and violent, that it forced him to break out into a cry. Nor did the redemption which he accomplished consist solely in what was exhibited to the eye, (as I stated a little ago,) but having undertaken to be our surety, he resolved actually to undergo in our room the judgment of God.

John Gill:

The whole of it evinces the truth of Christ's human nature, that he was in all things made like unto his brethren; that he had an human soul, and endured sorrows and sufferings in it, of which this of desertion was not the least: the heinousness of sin may be learnt from hence, which not only drove the angels out of heaven, and Adam out of the garden, and separates, with respect to communion, between God and his children; but even caused him to hide his face from his own Son, whilst he was bearing, and suffering for, the sins of his people. [6]


That is alot of text, but hopefully it is helpful on the issue.

In the eyes (of God) also, Christ was like one abandoned, one accursed, a sinner, a blasphemer, one ****ed, even if he is without sin and without guilt. The fact that he says "you have abandoned me" is certainly not a joke, a game, or hypocrisy. He is truly abandoned in all, as is the sinner when he sins...(p. 605)[3]

But isn't, according to Christianity, Christ God himself?

Your account would be less confusing if you said that Jesus and the Father were two separate gods. But to say that God is viewing himself as abandoned, and accursed, is..... unpalatable?