The Crux of the Matter

Haven’t posted in a while. Been working on a writing assignment for Cokesbury. They’re publishing a new resource for laypersons (Sunday School teachers and small group Bible study leaders) called ABS Illustrated (for “Adult Bible Studies Illustrated”). The purpose of the four-color magazine is to provide background resources for laypersons who want to be able to interpret the Bible in its context and not just our own. My article was on ancient Ephesus, using archaeology, inscriptions, numismatics, primary literary sources, and geography to reveal to the reader something of the Ephesus Paul knew, an Ephesus that no longer exists, predicated on the principle that in order to understand Acts 19 and Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians, one must know something of Paul’s Ephesus, otherwise there is likely to be as much mis-use as use of the Bible. I was pleased to write for the new publication, at least in part because I am convinced that nothing is more critical for the Church right now than a recovery of contextual biblical interpretation. Some of you who read my stuff know how troubled I am by what I’ve called the “ouija board approach to interpreting the Bible” (see my blog: “The Ouija Board Bible”) where the inspired author’s meaning is virtually ignored.

The importance of contextual biblical interpretation may not be immediately apparent to everyone, but its impact is unmistakable. It came home to me recently in Bethlehem. I was guiding a group of pilgrims to the Holy Land and over coffee one evening had a curious conversation with the local tour company representative. He expressed some surprise that I was guiding my group to places many Protestant pilgrims never go; namely, the Via Dolorosa and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Himself a Palestinian Christian (Roman Catholic), he expressed astonishment that I would take my group to those places. He said that typically Protestants aren’t interested in either of those places because they seem “too Catholic,” preferring instead Gordon’s Calvary and the Garden Tomb (which we also visit). I said, “I don’t think that’s quite it. I think, rather, that Protestants prefer the Garden Tomb to the Via Dolorosa and Holy Sepulchre because we prefer to think of the Risen Christ rather than the Crucified Christ, and those two places are much too graphic reminders of just how brutal the crucifixion was.”

Think about it. Protestants don’t typically wear crucifixes. We prefer an Empty Cross and an Empty Tomb. Catholics, who on the whole are far more willing to reflect on the Suffering Christ than are we Protestants, wear their crosses with Jesus still on it, a not so subtle reminder of just what our redemption required, both of God and of us. For most Protestants, on the other hand, the Cross has become tamed, civilized, sanitized. It was not.

I was a young PhD student when I read Professor Martin Hengel’s The Crucifixion. He points out, among other things, that the Latin word for cross, crux, was a four-letter word, literally and figuratively. It was not a word one said in polite company, both because only dregs of society suffered it, and because the method of execution was so gruesome and grizzly that one did not speak of it (which is what the word “obscene” literally means). He said that it was hard to bring the word crux into English with the same sense of offense that it carried in the ancient world. I don't want to shock you, s0 use your imagination. Got it? Crux was a word more spat than said.

If you’ve seen Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ, you got a glimpse at Golgotha. It was violent, ugly, brutal, bloody. Ironically, Gibson was criticized by Christians, by Christians, for making it so gruesome that it carried an “R” rating. As a New Testament scholar, I applaud him for not sparing us. Christians need to see it for what it really was – an obscene, shocking, brutal murder of the Son of God. Only then are we able to comprehend the consequence of the words, “And he became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.” Only then dare we sing, “I have decided to follow Jesus; no turning back…no turning back.”