Forsaken: The Trinity and the Cross, and Why It Matters

I cannot remember the last time I read a theology book I so thoroughly enjoyed. Perhaps it is because of receiving training in philosophy or being overexposed to certain (overrepresented) segments of the literature, the fact remains: I have become picky if not an outright crank. But as I finished up Thomas H. McCall's Forsaken: The Trinity and the Cross, and Why It Matters I became reacquainted with that old feeling of excitement, passion, and most importantly, reverence for a discipline I used to immerse myself in without abandon. If you don't know about McCall, you should. After reading this book it is easy to see why he is considered to be a rising star (hailing from the Arminian tradition no less) as he deftly weaves knowledge and insight from philosophical, historical, and biblical theology.While it no doubt is derived from his more scholarly work on the Trinity, Forsaken appears to be the results of a course taught at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, a course that surveyed contemporary issues in Christology. The central question he addresses is this: what does Jesus' cry of dereliction mean? When Jesus said "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" was the perfect fellowship of the Trinity `broken'? Did God the Father express the full extent of his wrath on his Son by `separating' him from the glory of God? Did God `kill his Son' so that he could properly love us? McCall's book is a serious attempt to answer these questions, and he comes to some surprising conclusions.McCall contends that the fellowship between the Son and the Father was not broken on the cross. Part of his argument takes the form of a reductio: suppose it is the case that the Father truly "forsook" the Son. Then it appears the doctrine of the Trinity is false. If the Father `disowned' his Son, then there was a time when the Father was not a father. Yet this renunciation of paternity is not the sort of thing that is possible, at least on any classical (or modern) model of the Trinity. That is to say, if the Father made himself not a father and the Son became fatherless, they would cease to be. Nor is it the case that the Father forsook the Son's humanity. If that were the case, then our salvation is undermined since he was not perfect in his humanity, and perhaps the heresy of Nestorianism is vindicated as there seems to be two personal subjects to which the Father relates on the cross (you can't `forsake' a substance). In any case, we should ask: why would the Father do this? If it is because "Christ was made a sinner," then Christ would not have been a perfect sacrifice. Worse, yet Christ could not properly be called `God' because he would not be holy.This is not to say that Christ was not abandoned on the cross. The proper way to understand the cry of dereliction is through the lens of Psalm 22 which represents the cry of the afflicted, "Why, O God have you abandoned me to such cruelty, why are you allowing me to be destroyed by such evil people?" That is the heart of the question, and no doubt it is a very human question. But by virtue of their perfect fellowship, the Father hears the Son and raises Jesus from the dead. McCall takes time to show from Acts that this was understood by the apostles when they first began to preach the gospel. Peter says, "God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah" (Acts 2:36). The pattern of their preaching is this: God sent the Son, we killed him, and God raised him from the dead.But didn't God intend Jesus' death? Don't we read from Acts that "This man was handed over to you by God's deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross" (Acts 2:23)? Doesn't this mean that God causally brought about every event down to the last drop of blood that dripped from the cross? No. By virtue of their foreknowledge, each member of Godhead knew what we would do if the Father sent the Son, and yet he sent him anyway so as to make it possible for us to share in the love and fellowship of the triune God. God's foreordained plan does not demand a commitment to determinism. If it did, McCall argues, then we would not be able to make sense of human obstinance (Acts 7:39, 51), human responsibility (no one is responsible for events that occur before one's birth, events that eventually necessitate one's present and future actions), or God's good character (God apparently causes sin and evil).Other topics addressed include a theology of the atonement and how it relates to the believer's justification and sanctification. Nor should I forget to mention that the discussion of God's simplicity and impassibility helpfully makes sense of the relationship between God's attributes of love and justice, and his mercy and wrath.In the end, McCall puts together a sound work of theology that is both accessible and (sufficiently) rigorous. I could not recommend it more to new believers, educated laypersons, seminarians, or members of the academy. One whose faith is Christian will be nurtured. Those committed to simplistic slogans will find no refuge in its pages, and that, of course, is a good thing.

Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection is the central event in the Christian story. What we believe about what happens in this short period shapes everything else we believe. Little has been more confusing for many Christians than what happened when Jesus died.When Jesus is on the cross, he cries outMy God, My God! Why have you forsaken me?What did Jesus mean when he called out those words? How we answer that question informs a lot of what we believe: who we understand God to be, what our relationship with God looks like, how we live out our faith in the world.Many Christians have heard that Jesus' statement means that the Trinity was broken in these moments. That God the Son became sin, so God the Father abandoned him. That because Jesus became our sin on the Cross, the Father poured all his wrath onto Jesus (instead of us), so now God can love us because his wrath has been satisfied.All of those statements are completely, dangerously wrong.In his excellent new book Forsaken, theology professor and pastor Thomas McCall comes to the Cross, arriving with a robust, fully-formed and orthodox Trinitarian theology. Looking at Jesus' death through the lens of the Trinity helps us to understand the God who rescues us more fully.Dr. McCall arranges the book with four questions that take us through his argument clearly and succinctly:1. Was the Trinity Broken?In a word, No. McCall boils some complex and often-confusing theological positions on the nature of the Trinity down to accessible, understandable concepts. Because God is fundamentally Love, because God is essentially relational, McCall argues thatIf the being of God is a relational being, and if the relationships are sundered, then surely there is no God at all.To say that the Trinity is divided is to say that God ceases to be God. To say that any one person of the Trinity ceases to be God is to claim that all persons in the Trinity cease to be God.As McCall concludes:The works of God in creation and redemption are always undivided, and the Son's communion with the Father is unblemished.2. Did the Death of Jesus Make it Possible for God to Love Me?An important issue in dealing with the Crucifixion is the relationship between divine Love and divine Wrath. As McCall notes, we often pit these against each other to the extent that Jesus the (loving) Son is in tension with God the (wrathful) Father.Having established that the Trinity is always and fully undivided in the last chapter, McCall is able to go on to show thatThe Son does not love me and bless me while the Father hates me and curses me (or would like to do so, and would do so, if not for the presence of the Son between us). Rather, it is God who is for us.Working carefully through exactly what divine Love and Wrath are (and what they are not), McCall demonstrates that these attributes are never in conflict. Rather, God's Love (the essence of who God is), is the foundation of God's wrath.God's wrath is God's judgment of sin, but it is a judgment in which God asserts that he is the God of the sinner and that the sinner is God's creature... Holy love is the "source" of God's righteous wrath. Wrath is not essential to God's nature; God would be God without it. In short, God doesn't love us because Jesus died for us. God died for us because God loves us.3. Was the Death of Jesus a Meaningless Tragedy?Obviously, McCall answers No. But this chapter is really an exploration of how Jesus atoned for our Sin. McCall explores all three major models of Atonement - Penal Substitution, Christus Victor and Moral Influence. After carefully defining each theory, McCall weaves all three together. He claims that we can't discard any of them without missing some vital aspect of what Jesus' death accomplished.As the sin offering, Christ makes satisfaction for our sin and guilt. As the one who gives himself away, Christ shows us how to live a life pleasing to God in the power of the Spirit. As the one who wins the decisive victory for us in his death and resurrection, Christ defeats the enslaving powers of sin.4. Does it Make a Difference?From his strongly Trinitarian foundation, McCall builds in his final chapter a picture of what Christians are called to.Rightly observing that most discussions on the Cross center on what we were saved from (justification), McCall reminds us that we were also saved for:Forensic justification, important and precious though it is, is not and cannot be the whole sum of the gospel message... It is impossible to read Scripture carefully and come away with the conviction that God's only (or even primary) purpose is to change our legal status.McCall is talking about Sanctification, the process by which we are made holy. With language as clear and compelling as it's been throughout the book, McCall dispels the legalism that often accompanies discussions of sanctification.This final chapter is a wonderful summary of themes McCall sketches throughout the book. Sanctification is God inviting us into the holy, Trinitarian love that is God's essence. We are not just saved from Sin and Death, we are also saved for Life.Bottom Line: Though it's a bit technical, Forsaken deserves to be read carefully and discussed thoroughly. It's an excellent reminder of who God actually is, and a helpful corrective to a lot of the bad theology that's out there.

I would recommend this book to ever Christian who loves the Lord as Savior, Comforter, and living God, to those who struggle with some portion of the trinitarian theology, and for those who struggle with the meaning of Jesus' cry from the Cross for you to understand the truth of that victory cry found within Psalm 22.

This book is a must read for any pastor who seeks to understand the great gift of salvation in Christ Jesus as revealed in the person and work of Jesus Christ. McCall points out the modern theological trend of preaching a separated trinity on the cross, a trend that deviates greatly from the tradition of the early Church fathers. He economically describes the issues at hand and wets your appetite to dig deeper into this crucial theological topic. One slight warning though, if you are a Calvanist, chapter three might be a bit of an annoyance. McCall makes a case against determinism but doesnt quite make it to free will either. The question McCall asks in chapter three is extremly important, however, it is the weaker chapter of the book. But please do not let that hinder you from reading it anyway.

Extremely helpful and well-written book! I read it all in one day and enjoyed it thoroughly. It’s deepened my love and gratitude for the triune God. Highly recommended!

This book is a must read by anyone wanting to truly worship the God of the Bible.

Read it. It will help you rethink about Christ's Passion!

McCall's approach to the broken-Trinity subject is profound. The attention he pays to the Scriptures and respect given to early Christians to accurately evaluate contemporary/modern understanding of the Gospel message makes it superb. Buy it.

This really got me thinking deeply, but did so gently. Nice book.