|
CHURCH LETTER
` He is the Atoning Sacrifice for our sins '
An article came our way concerning moments that change the world entitled, `The Birth of Forgiveness'. It concerned the events involving Joseph and his brothers, as recorded in Genesis 45, and it was verse 8 which drew our attention. It says: `So then, it was not you who sent me here (into Egypt), but God'. There was the added comment that this event concerning Joseph was `the first recorded (in Scripture) moment in history in which one human being forgave another'. But as you read this account in Genesis you will not find the word `forgive', only that `it was not you who sent me here, but God' - although the narrative does hold his brothers guilty and deserving of punishment. However the story does not finish at chapter 45 but continues into chapter 50, which is also the last chapter of Genesis. This comment alone regarding the last chapter of `the Book of Beginnings' reveals a truth that goes beyond simple forgiveness following conviction and repentance, for as we read through verses 15-17 of chapter 50 we will find no conviction of guilt leading to repentance in the brothers. We find only that they made up a false story bringing their father's request to Joseph for forgiveness for their guilt. Verses 19-20 reveal the heart of this account of Joseph - long seen as a foreshadowing of the Messiah Jesus:
" Joseph said, `Do not be alarmed. Am I in the place of God? You intended
to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being
done, the saving of many lives. "
This saving of many lives of course refers to the saving of Joseph's family from famine by bringing them to Egypt, but as there is a continuous unveiling of a prophetic word it continued into the saving of many lives in the Exodus of the Hebrews from Egypt centuries later - and continuing to the time of Jesus, Who through His Atoning humiliation and death saves many more lives than Joseph could ever have imagined! As we have said, this was to be a gradual unveiling, and we read in Paul's Epistle to the Galatians that the Law given to the Israelites `was added because of transgressions until the Seed, to whom the Promise referred, had come'. Those transgressions were the lack of trust in the atoning humiliation of One greater than Joseph, the Seed of Promise, and so the Law `was added to lead us as a school master to that Seed, Jesus'.
Why, therefore is there no mention of forgiveness from Joseph in his words, `God intended it for good', for there is no sense of anger or bitterness in him? His forgiveness not spoken in words shows that it had happened long before his brothers came with a concocted story about his father asking Joseph's forgiveness for their guilt. Joseph had long since understood that what had happened in his brothers' past acts towards him was all within God's purpose, and if that was so then no forgiveness was required of him. Joseph's feelings, his emotions, were dealt with long before when he came to understand the purpose of God in allowing him to be sold into slavery by his brothers! Joseph's absolution (forgiveness) was given to his brothers for God's purpose through his atoning humiliation. That Greater Purpose was fulfilled, and is still being fulfilled through the crucifixion and resurection of One who is greater than Joseph, the Messiah Jesus, through His willingness to subject His emotions to the greater purpose of God for the salvation, deliverance, of many of His brothers who centuries later would accept Him as God's Greater Joseph, their Messiah!
The words of Paul in his Letter to the Romans says it more clearly: (Romans 5:6-8)
" You see, at just the right time . . . . . God demonstrates His own love for
us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. "
Joseph understood what would finally be achieved in Christ Jesus - `His life as a ransom for many'. It needed no forgiveness for it was within God's purpose that those events happened!
And so we must turn our thoughts back to that word `forgiveness'. An American classicist (that is, one who studies ancient Greek writings) has suggested that there was no concept of forgiveness in ancient Greek writings, for such a concept is not a universal human attribute and it was only `introduced' into humanity through the Hebraic writings with their understanding of the LORD God: (Exodus 34:6-7)
" The compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love
and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness
rebellion and sin. "
Within Greek and pagan cultures there was something other than `forgiveness' - something akin to forgiveness, and indeed often mistaken for it - something which could be called `appeasement, a turning away of anger'. This appeasement takes the form of the victim of rebellion or violence becoming angry and seeking revenge for the wrong done to him, and so there is a need to appease, to turn away that anger. Such appeasement comes in many forms: Blaming others . . . offering a gift . . . reminding the other person of the good things done to him in the past . . . and so on. Leaving aside for the moment any thought of a spiritual element, appeasement can take the form of the perpetrator of the problem offering the victim some form of work or recompense, or even personal humiliation, thereby trusting for acceptance from the victim and suggesting that the original hurtful act was unintended and so restoring the dignity of the victim. Before we return to the `spiritual realm' we can see this primeval urge to appease in the animal world, where seeking acceptance of a dominant one in a group requires humiliation on the part of the one seeking acceptance.
And so we return to the Hebrew script, which reveals an understanding of guilt in a person whilst remembering that guilt is only a sense of a wrong act, not repentance in itself. This sense of guilt is linked, attached to, the act, which leads to a need of absolution (forgiveness) and atonement while at the same time respecting and upholding the worth of the guilty person. In other cultures appeasement, which is an attempt to turn away anger, is in short an attempt to manage anger without repentance or remorse, thereby avoiding possible damage to one's self-worth. Such was the `culture' of both animal and human life before the Hebraic understanding of guilt came requiring atonement by another and maintaining the worth of the perpetrator. Therefore there is an essential difference between the two cultures: In the Gentile world there is a sense of shame in the perpetrator which endangers their self-worth - always being reminded of the sin through not being able to find absolution, or forgiveness - whereas in Hebrew culture and in the story of Joseph's dealings with his brothers he was teaching them `atonement' by putting them through the same events which they had inflicted on Joseph. This led to guilt and the need for absolution, or forgiveness, and in the case of Joseph's brothers their self-worth was maintained when Joseph responded to their conviction of guilt: `You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done'.
The forgiveness which the brothers were trying to receive through deceit was not the issue; Acknowledgement of guilt and the need of absolution through the atonement of Joseph's suffering was what was required. In the `mind' of Joseph (and now in our Greater Joseph) forgiveness was given long before conviction of guilt! Confession of the act was all that was required, and absolution had occured through the atoning humiliation of Joseph's suffering which led to the brothers' behavioural change! Forgiveness can only be found in a culture of guilt because of an act towards another, a seeking of absolution, or forgiveness, through the atonement of the victim, thereby leaving the violater's self-worth intact, resulting in a changed life. A culture of shame, such as is found in lands not influenced by Hebraic/Christian thought, can only lead to unassuaged guilt which damages the violaters' self-worth with a burden of shame that is known throughout the community in which they live.
We have made free use of the words of ` guilt' over an act, and `shame' upon the nature of a person, but a guilt culture leading to absolution through atonement and resulting in a changed life style can only be found in Hebraic/Christian communities. Other cultures can only offer sacrifices to appease the gods' anger, which if it does not work leaves the culprit always seeking to satisfy the gods in man's way. In the Old Hebraic Covenant this atonement was `achieved' through the repeated sacrifices of others - that is, of animals. But in the guilt culture of the `broken-off branches of Israel' since the destruction of the Temple this can only be achieved through acts of charity offered by themselves for atonement! Of course this can never happen but it leads to extreme self-righteousness - such as could be said in the words, `we are a chosen people'. In the New Hebraic Covenant, however, `a new and better way has opened up' for those who are the `grafted-in branches of Israel' by acceptance through belief in One greater than Joseph and through being `baptised into His death and raised to new life'. Guilt has been dealt with . . . there is no shame . . . we are new creations, the old has gone and as `God's children, heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ' we live in His absolution by His Atonement with `no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus'!
This is the simple yet deeply profound Gospel announced in the Temple compound by Peter as he answered the people's anguished cry: `Brothers, what shall we do?' Peter replied, `Repent (accept Him whom you rejected) and be baptised, every one of you, in the Name of Jesus Christ, that your sins may be forgiven' - baptised into a new life in Christ Jesus, receiving Absolution through the Atonement of Another. Forgiveness was not the issue. That had been dealt with by the Triune Godhead before time began! The issue here was the acceptance of One greater than Joseph, our Lord Jesus, whose suffering brought Absolution through His Atonement. However if we leave this matter at this point it gives a very lopsided understanding of Hebraic culture regarding the Law given through Moses, which had brought into the world an understanding of how God regards violations against those He created but which was in direct conflict with other cultures in the world. Here we are concerned only with the Law given through Moses which is compacted into the `Ten Words', or as we know them, the Ten Commandments. We are not concerned with the many extensions of the Talmudic scholars, for in a guilt-centered culture there has to be judgement given on the acts of the guilty person - most of which were dealt with through various Fellowship Offerings at the Temple. The more extreme violations of the Law brought more severe penalties, and in extreme cases this would lead to death, but always with the penalties directed towards the acts of the violaters. The one extreme penalty we are moving towards was death by crucifixion, which was not a penalty prescribed by the Mosaic Law.
At times during the Roman occupation of Judea and wider Israel the Sanhedrin were able to pronounce capital punishment with the authority of the Roman Procurators, but by the time of Jesus this right had been withdrawn and the ultimate penalty lay solely with the Roman authorities, which is why we read in John's Gospel the words of Pilate: `Take Him away and punish Him by your own Law'. Crucifixion was a Roman method of death, reserved for the lowest of the criminal caste and intended to inflict the maximum pain, and with the stripping the body of clothing total shame would be inflicted on the person being crucified. We read of this total shame as written by Luke: (Luke 23:35-36)
" The people stood watching, and the rulers even sneered at Him . . . . . .
The soldiers also came up and mocked Him . . . . . "
This was the objective of Roman crucifixion - total pain and eventual death, and humiliating shame, stripped of all human dignity and self-worth. But by their acts the Sanhedrin, its princes and rulers, were themselves violating the Mosaic Law, for although it is written, `cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree', the Mosaic Law prescribed such an act in this way: (Deuteronomy 21:22-23)
" If a man guilty of a capital offense is put to death and his body is hung on
a tree, you must not leave his body on the tree overnight. Be sure to bury
him that same day because anyone who is hung on a tree is under the Law's
curse. You must not desecrate the land the LORD your God is giving you. "
The act of hanging the dead body on a tree as being cursed by God was because of the act of blasphemy by a person - the self-worth of the person was still intact for the spirit of life had departed from the body. But here the Sanhedrin, its rulers and priests together with the people were mocking, shaming, a live Person on the tree, knowing that they were breaking the Mosaic Law and in doing so they were bringing that curse upon the land and upon themselves. But as Paul continues in his Letter to the Galatians: (Galatians 3:13-14)
" Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law by becoming (in Himself as a
Living Person) a curse for us . . . He redeemed us in order that the blessing
given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles (as well as the Jews) through
Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit. "
But all was within the Purpose of God as He allowed the Sanhedrin, the people and the soldiers to blaspheme God Himself that He might redeem us through this Roman crucifixion of humiliation and the shame upon the Person. The conniving of the Sanhedrin with the Romans resulted in the breaking of their own Law of judgement upon the acts of a person and brought together the two cultures of Jews and Gentiles under the judgement of God,
bringing Absolution through Atonement by Another for all guilt and shame through the redeeming work of Christ Jesus.
So why this lengthy Letter concerning what is already known by the Lord's people? We had begun to notice a growing trend in the Western Church to bring into our spiritual life that which has been dealt with by that Cross of Shame - which as the world sees its `comfort zone' of globilisation breaking up is becoming anxious over any change. It is seen in the Anglican Communion tearing itself apart, first over `the priesthood' but more recently over sexual orientation as they, together with more fundamental Church groups, openly denounce such people who are usually already marginalised by society, which causes defiance in them in order to cover their guilt. It is seen in the attack on the persons of a Muslim ethnic background, causing them extreme anxiety and resulting in a `ghetto mentality'. It is seen in Christians openly espousing political nationalism and joining it to their belief that they are a `chosen people'. It is seen in rising anti-semiticism against people only because of an early unspoken thought that `they did this or that'. It is seen also in some Christian groups who seek to `earn' their absolution which has already been given. This should not be so within the Community of Believers who through conviction and repentance and a changed lifestyle have received total absolution (which is forgiveness) through Atonement by Another in the Person of Jesus. He alone can give that Absolution through His Atoning humiliation, death and resurrection!
It is this changed lifestyle that is the `hall mark' of all believers through the Presence of the Holy Spirit within them! Such forgiveness does not change our sexual orientation, for we are made as we are, but in that New Life in Christ Jesus we can overcome sinful acts which diminish our life in the Spirit. Have we seen ethnic Muslims as people and not as potential terrorists? Have we seen Jews, Hindus - and dare we mention Catholics in a `Protestant' nation - as people made in the likeness of God and not as those who seek to change our national culture? Do we look at homosexuals with disgust and yet see those drunk on alcohol or drugs as worthy of acceptance as people? As the apostle Paul wrote in his Letter to the Romans: (Romans 8:1-12 in part)
" Therefore, there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the Law of the Spirit of Life set me free from the law of sin and death . . . . You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you . . . . . Therefore, brothers, we have an obligation - but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it. "
Have we seen the self-worth of all those who are in Christ Jesus as we walk together on our personal walk of sanctification, but also recognising that same self-worth in those still under the law of sin and death and offering them hope through the Atoning humiliation of One greater than Joseph?
Selah
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
|
You may E-mail us at: derek@northernstyletrust.com or Telephone (01493) 444494 (UK)
Our Web Address: www.northernstyletrust.com
|
