This is an idea that has been cooking in my brain for a while, and I'd appreciate your thoughts as to whether it is a well known idea, a slightly different take on a well known idea, or something more novel.
We talk about what Jesus was actually doing on the cross, and we can get into Christus Victor and substitutionary redemption and all those different theological ideas - which I should be able to list by now but I'm not that clever.
The image that I want to look at is more of a politician. In the UK and no doubt similar hings happen elsewhere, we are used to the press, media, and opposition MPs calling for Government ministers to resign becasue something has gone wrong in their department. And of course usually the minister in question denies it all vigorously, and the afair drags on for weeks while he hopes it will all die down, and of course it doesn't and in the end he is forced to resign after all. And it would have been better if he had resigned right a the very beginning.
This initial resignation would not mean that he himself has done wrong, only that the error has happened within the department for which he is repsonsible. It is on his patch. His watch. Therefore it is his responsibility, even if he didn't actually do it. And that is why he should resign anyway, as a matter of course.
And so we come back to the crucifixion.
In my illustration, God is the government, and Jesus is the minister.
The world says:
What about suffering?
What about natural disasters?
What about wars?
What about disease?
What about children taht die?
Jesus says:
I didn't do it
It's not my 'fault'
But it is my responsibility - it happened on my patch, my watch, so i am responsible.
His response is to 'resign', willingly, not waiting to be forced out of office. But the extent of the problem is such that a simple resignation, or abdication, is insufficient. In accepting responsibility, he takes on board the full consequences, and that means that he, the innocent and infinite God, takes on limited mortal flesh and dies, taking on himself - accepting responibility for - the sins of the world.
What about suffering? --- Jesus accepts responsibility and dies
What about natural disasters? --- Jesus accepts responsibility and dies
What about wars? -- Jesus accepts responsibility and dies
What about disease? --- Jesus accepts responsibility and dies
What about children that die? --- Jesus accepts responsibility and dies
So, am I a genius, a heretic, or just regurgitating stuff others have already thought of?
A genius - not necessarily. The Holy Spirit has given you a personal insight into the workings of His Grace.
ReplyDeleteA Heretic - no, I don't think so. Jesus knew that we wouldn't take the responsibility. His plan to bring us back into relationship with Him (just like that which Adam and Eve had in the Garden) meant that He had to go down a path that we couldn't. What you are saying isn't against what Jesus shows and teaches.
Regurgitating stuff - maybe for some, but the Holy Spirit had you write this for a reason. This may actually bring clarity to someone who had never realised what Jesus' death actually has accomplished, and what his death covers.
Just my little comments - for what it's worth.
Carl Jung's 'Answer to Job' is relevant (not quite the same) - Jesus had to die because the Father had been so awful to Job. Interesting reading.
ReplyDeleteThaks Kate and sam, for your ideas.
ReplyDeleteSam, i haven't had time to chase the Jung reference. From what you say, It is very close to my thrust but it makes me a little uncomfortable in that it implies guilt on the part of God. My thrust was a more innocent responsibility. for example, if my son breaks a neighbour's window while I am at work but have told him off many times for throwing stones, I pay for it becasue I am his Dad, not because I was to blame for the incident. I am responsible, not guilty. Similarly, Jesus takes responsibility for my misdemeanors, although he is innocent of them.