Blogs
The Profane Saint |
Tuesday, December, 4, 2018
The serpent hissed to the woman in Eden and she responded with her interpretation – a liberally gracious commentary on her probable twisted answer revealing her innermost desires.
In a roundabout way I want to use Eve’s response as a connecting point to us as there is a tendency to put words in God’s mouth many times when we interpret scripture without thinking about what we’re saying. I’m as guilty of this as anyone, maybe even more than others, but it still riles me when I hear someone, especially from the pulpit, state something as fact when in my mind (and study) the scriptures don’t back the stated interpretation.
There are two issues that come up periodically that stir up my spiritual juices, and they both take all I can do to stay quiet when they occur. Primarily because the issue is usually raised by a pastor preaching his or her sermon (as was the case this past Sunday) with me as a sheep in the congregational flock. And to me it’s simply a case of it being a repeated interpretation of scripture without any real study to compare it to what we know of God – as if we can know much about him without skewing it in our favor. It’s similar to regurgitating a belief that you’ve heard so often that it becomes a sacred writing, almost as common as “God helps those that help themselves.” (In case you’re not informed, that statement is not in scripture.) The two issues are: 1) music needing to be solemn and melancholy else it won’t praise the Lord; and 2) Christ was abandoned on Calvary. I’ll address the latter in this writing. The other issue can wait.
So Eve, we assume, heard the word directly from God that she was not to eat from trees in the middle of the garden. Somehow when the serpent approached her she added some information and gave it a spin so as to reveal a heart desiring not to please the Lord. So let us then use that context to address the purpose of this composition.
You have heard it said that when Jesus hung on the cross and cried out, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani,” that God the Father turned his back and forsook his one and only son. We believe, and I do, too, that Jesus took on our sin on himself so that our debt due to God would be paid in full. The reason many believe, and here’s where I jump off the bandwagon, that God forsook Jesus is because not only did Christ ask that in his cry, but Habakkuk 1:13 says, “Your eyes are too pure to look on evil”. Therefore, because Christ became sin (taking on our sin) then God, whose eyes are “too pure to look on evil” couldn’t watch Jesus suffer so he turned his back on him. So God cannot see sin because it’ll stain his purity. Yet we say that God is omniscient (he’s all-knowing) and omnipresent (he’s everywhere). Are they saying then that God is everywhere, and knows everything, but will not see everything? He’s only getting reports of what happened? It doesn’t jive with what we say about the Lord Jehovah. Further, if sin stains God, then how can he look upon us? Isn’t he the compassionate one who is slow to anger, abounding in love, and relents from sending calamity and this in reference to a sinful people that he chose? Jesus saw the people and wept for they were harassed. Isn’t harassment of our soul a characteristic of sin in spiritual battle? A better translation is that God does not tolerate sin. But not looking on is somewhat fathomable, meaning I could concede that point, except for the following point. It is further explained that God thus separated himself from Jesus so that he was forsaken on the cross, and that was done so that the Lord wouldn’t then forsake us. It makes sense until you begin putting a key piece together that doesn’t fit, namely, unity of the Trinity.
I mean, let’s see, Jesus said, “I and the Father are one,” (John 10:30 NIV) and then proceeded to teach them, the religious leaders, what the scriptures have said all along; “…the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”
Where I believe, and I stand firmly on this, Christians generally stop at what is quoted in Mark 15:34 NIV and determine that Jesus asked why he was forsaken, thus he was forsaken. They don’t go read where that was first stated, Psalm 22. Or, they’ll go to the Psalm, but not read the whole passage, and thus miss some pertinent information within the passage (context) that I believe accurately explains what Christ was saying.
So a quick summary of Psalm 22; It is a messianic psalm and it prophesies Christ’s crucifixion in amazing detail. The poetic discourse is as detailed and informative about the suffering our Lord went through than any other writing – very descriptive of the sensations felt, even that of being forsaken, but as we shall see that was a sense of it, not an actual abandonment.
According to my interpretation – I can see eyes rolling now and hear your thoughts, “So why is our interpretation wrong and his right?” – the key to Psalm 22 is in verse 24. “For he has not despised or scorned the suffering of the afflicted one; he has not hidden his face from him but has listened to his cry for help.” NIV
So why did Jesus cry out as he did? Primarily because it was excruciatingly painful, yet I believe he still had the wherewithal to preach to the crowd, and direct them to the scriptures so that they could see that what they were witnessing had been destined and planned, and God was right there in the middle of it holding Christ in his Fatherly arms. And you can’t hold your child with your back to them.
