No, the question was rhetorical, as the Lord was purposely stating the prophecy that He was fulfilling. For since He bore our sins in His own body, being made sin for us,(1 Pt. :24; 3:18; 2 Co. 5:21) then in a real sense the Father turned away from His Divine Son, signified by darkness:
And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour. And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? (Mark 15:33-34)
This meaning flows from holding to what sola scriptura is to be part of (and which cults do not practice since Scripture is not the sure, supreme substantive standard for faith and practice, but their org is effectively the supreme sure authority, though such supreme interpreters can be variously interpreted), which means studying, including reading some conservative commentaries (SS is not opposed to use of such Scriptural "due us of ordinary means"), thereby understanding principles of sound exegesis, esp. context, speech forms, etc., and avoiding isolationist exegesis.
Thus those who most strongly esteem Scripture as the accurate and wholly inspired word of God, with its basic literal hermeneutic, have long testified to being far more conservative and unified in polled core beliefs and values than other large groups.
Not many can relate in such dense verbiage as to make me read something multiple times but you, Daniel, did just that. I did overlook the God-made eclipse and what it illustrated for those slow on the uptake (Romans, pharisees, etc.). You can take up the finer points with other seminarians, as I’m just a yokel who whittles it down to John 3:16. Thanks for sharing the knowledge.