On the other hand, since Martin Luther, Protestants have argued that the meaning of the Bible is obvious and plain. Believing otherwise would leave too much subjectivity in the argument, leading to disagreement and creating the need for a Church authority to step in.

What I think we’re seeing here is the problem created by holding both of these traditions. G&T want this passage to talk about Jesus, but they can’t accept that this meaning is hidden. So they’re forced to argue that the message is different from the one the author intended, but that it’s so obvious and clear to us that it becomes the “plain sense” meaning of the text.

The argument fails because it isn’t obvious and clear. But G&T are probably so committed to their argument that they’ll never be able to see that.

Three ideas are given.

The trees moving.

The prediction of Jesus suffering.

Jesus actual suffering.

Shuffle.

introduce the trees moving as if that were fact.
Describe the ‘prophecy’.
Explain that since ‘we’(true believers) know that since Jesus suffered, then Psalm 22 MUST be predicting it. i.e. “It’s close enough.”

And, they are right, it IS close enough for them and their target audience.

Then again, cold reading is close enough for some folk who wish to contact their dead loved ones.