The Passion of the Christ

I’ve just watched The Passion of the Christ (well it is holy week)

Obviously there is lots to say but I’m going to try and avoid all the usual talk about over exaggerating this and playing on that emotion or ridiculous theology…

What struck me during conversation post film, and I believe coincides with the stories in the bible (and I expect elsewhere), is that Jesus knew he was going to die.

Jesus was fully aware that the things he was doing and saying were pissing people off so much that he would be killed. And he must have known that this death wouldn’t be pleasant…

It begs the question, why did Jesus carry on? Why stick his neck on the line?

I am not advocating a sent-from-God-on-a-mission-to-die theology. But am interested to consider why the man Jesus would choose the path of death.

This is for me where Jesus becomes interesting. Jesus offered a third way, opposed to the Roman Empire (illegitimate/violent governance?) and the Scribes and Elders (organised/controlling religion?) And he believed it so strongly he was willing to die for his cause…

Jesus’s stance was basically one of certain death because it stood in direct conflict with these groups. Jesus must have believed he was on to something to go to such great lengths…

It is this, amongst other things, that makes me think Jesus is a voice we should listen too and try to learn from.

Why did he feel so strongly? What good did he think he would achieve?

Thoughts of a dying Christian 2…

My previous post never tried to explain why or how I had come to my conclusions and there seems to be a call for explanation. A full explanation would require 24 years of history, thought, convocation and decision so this is always going to be inadequate. In fact it is often inadequate in my mind and I’m largely unconvinced of my own thoughts. Many things are a matter of opinion and mine isn‘t always made up. These are my works in progress. Nothing is comprehensive. Everything is up for debate.

.

My current thought – I’m not convinced that Jesus is the Son of God in the sense that we traditionally understand. To be more specific I’m not convinced that Jesus was actually God. God is God.

 .

My current understanding is this – in some kind of (very big) nut shell

.

Our understanding of God affects whether we can talk about God as Jesus. If you see God chiefly under the metaphor of an interventionist Father figure who creates and chooses to engage here and there then Jesus as God may make perfect sense. Equally if your starting point for God is being bound by concern with a broken relationship with humanity then Jesus might need to be God to achieve a solution. I haven’t got a problem with these views of God but it is not where I am coming from when I use the word. I see God as an indescribable force/spirit (for lack of a better word) Within and beyond nature. Within and beyond ourselves. God is creation. God is love. God is.

.

The initial problem is the degrees – I think that Jesus was God-like. He embodied God. He was God incarnate. He was a revelation of God, he may even be the foremost revelation. In this sense he may the one who bridges the gap between humanity and God, he may be saviour and possibly even Lord. But I don’t think that Jesus was God. He wasn’t a part of God but God was a part of him. Thinking about it this way means I am beginning to understand the language and metaphors used in the bible in different ways. Doing this can add to our understanding of Jesus and not necessarily take it away.

.

It wasn’t until AD325 at the council of Nicea that the debate over Jesus’ divinity was settled and it seems to have been largely assumed ever since. Between Jesus’ death and the Council of Nicea many people thought differing things – some thought Jesus was God, or just a man, some thought they were 2 different Gods. Since then I believe we have read, understood and translated the Bible in light of Jesus’ assumed divinity – that is we have thought Jesus is God and that the authors of the Bible think he is God, we think that the metaphors they use must mean he is God. By doing this we read our own theology into a situation.

.

As an example lets quickly look at John 1: 1-18. We assume that the ‘word’ is Jesus, but the ‘word’ is ‘logos’ similar to wisdom. ‘logos’ is a masculine word so the section reads ‘he’. Here it is the ‘logos’ and not Jesus who is with God and was God. As we read on the ‘word’ becomes flesh in Jesus, Jesus is the incarnation of the word, the divine wisdom. Jesus embodies the word and gives it flesh. I don’t think this means that Jesus was God but is showing a ‘fleshy’ side to God, in this section especially the wisdom of God.

.

It can also be argued that as the bible was translated it was altered to imply a certain theology, especially after people had fought so hard to come to the conclusions. I think we have to take the claim very seriously that the Bible is the product of human authors and translators, with their own history, theology, agenda and occasional mistake. Again using John 1 as an example. In the NIV verse 18 reads ‘but the one and only Son, who is God himself…’ whilst other translations omit ‘who is God himself…’

.

Jesus is described as many things, such as the Wisdom of God, Lamb of God, Son of God, Son of man, Prince of Peace, Light of the World, Living Water, Bread of life, etc Why do we seem to prescribe specific importance to some and not others, namely Jesus as the Son of God. Believing Jesus as the ‘Son of God’, or the second part of the trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) is almost used as a test for Christian faith. The trinity should be about understanding the primary ways God is known or revealed, not about a definition of God – that is God is known as the God of Israel, as God seen in Jesus and as abiding Spirit.

.

Son of God, I believe, means embodiment of God. Jesus embodied God, was God-like, had attributes of God, just like we can. He was also the embodiment of man, he embodied how we are to be fully human, in union with God. He gave the Wisdom of God flesh. Jesus lived out God’s Wisdom. Jesus triumphed peace, the Prince of Peace fought the lord’s of violence. Jesus was the ultimate embodiment of God on Earth. He was God incarnate. He was God in human form.

.

Jesus is described as ‘Messiah’ and ‘Christ’, meaning ‘anointed one’. Jesus can still be the anointed one, the chosen one, without literally being God. He can still be the saviour that Israel was waiting for and that creation climaxed in.

Jesus doesn’t seem to have much to say about him being Messiah or being God but has lots to say about reconnecting people back to God. Jesus is very ambiguous when quizzed by Pilate, He warns people not to tell others when they claim he is the Messiah. But Jesus is keen for people to follow his way, live the life he lives and understand his truth.

.

The story of Jesus’ resurrection is often used to prove he was God. I believe there is a strong claim that these stories may be stories used by 1st Century Jesus communities to explain what Jesus was like and his importance, they are not necessarily historical. It is important to remember that this is common throughout the bible, including the gospels. For example, most people would say Genesis 1 is a story told by a community to explain what God is like. Most scholars would say that Jesus’ ‘I am’ sayings in John’s gospel are a reflection of a community using metaphors to explain Jesus’ nature.

.

Some things to consider about the resurrection stories: The first gospel written, Mark, originally didn’t have any resurrection stories. All 4 gospels have differing resurrection stories, but similar death accounts. The author of Luke has Jesus ascend twice at different times, one at the end of Luke and once at the start of Acts.

.

My understanding of Jesus doesn’t nullify him, I believe it can leave a richer understanding of the person of Jesus and ultimately hopefully God. This understanding reveres Jesus and the stories about him become central. He is the stories central human character. We are to learn about and follow Jesus. He may be the gap between God and humanity. Becoming a Christian, that is a little Christ, might be really crucial to us tapping into God. Our example is in Jesus but our prayers and worship belong to God.

.

Christianity is usually defined as believing that Jesus is God’s son and therefore God. As far as I am aware this isn’t what Jesus said…I think we would be better off defining Christianity as, something like, following the way of Jesus into knowing the God Jesus knew.

.

Or, interesting, as Rowan Williams has it on the Church of England Website ‘Christian life is lived in relationship with God, through Jesus Christ’

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

(And here is a thought…if Jesus isn’t God, but God is and we are worshipping Jesus then haven’t we created ourselves an idol, a human idol…)

Thoughts of a dying Christian

I am agnostic in the sense that I don’t think we can ever fully know/comprehend God . I also think that is a compliment to God.

 

Because we can never fully know, it leads me to think that knowing isn’t as important as we make out.

 

I was brought up with a Christian world view, it is my tradition, culture and context and I am grateful for it; but if I am to remain a Christian then I need to redefine the word. Christianity to many, most but not all, is about believing that Jesus is God. If this is Christianity then I am not a Christian.

 

I would like to redefine Christianity as exploring God through, although not exclusively, Jesus. Or, if you like, following the way of Jesus into exploring God as Jesus knew.

 

Many people will not be happy with this definition and that’s ok.

 

I believe in God as some ‘thing’ beyond visibility, beyond us. Divinity if you will. What is important is that by God I’m not talking about a guy resembling Father Christmas in the sky who is either withdrawn or exercising divine intervention. ‘God’ is the great, cross-cultural, asexual, indescribable, unknowable, ever-present, ‘I am that I am’, beyond, divine, spirit, force, mystic, truth, wisdom, love, justice, peace, thing – or whatever name you wish to prescribe…all we have is metaphor, right?…

 

I don’t think that Jesus was wholly divine. But he was in touch with the this divinity, as we can.

 

For me Jesus was the ‘Son of God’ only in a purely metaphorical sense. He was the ultimate, but not the only, human revelation and embodiment of God and therefore his character and the stories about him are central, not exclusive. Other people, traditions and cultures have something to say about God too, including me and you.

 

Exploring God is about becoming fully human, in touch with all aspects of humanity. It is about restoring what’s broken, resurrecting things that were dead and evolving together towards our collective potential. This I believe is the journey that Jesus is inviting us on…

 

Life vs Death

Two questions.

Why did Jesus die?

Why did they kill him?

At a glance, very similar…but in reality I come to see them as very different and important questions. One is theological. The other political.

For me, currently, the political question, why did they kill Jesus, has taken president. This perhaps is in reaction to the fact that recently the institutional church seems to have forgotten about the political Jesus and only emphasised the theological. They, namely the local Jewish/Roman collaborators, wanted Jesus killed because he stood in the way of their religion, their power, their dominance.

So what about the theological? Why did Jesus die? Did he come to die?

Throughout history people have tried to explain Jesus’ death. Most people nowadays seem to either subscribe to a certain theory which is prescribed into their reading of the bible or they will dip in and out of various ones without really realising it.

Theologically speaking I’m willing to put my hand up and say I don’t know.

I’m not convinced that I ever will.

And I’m not convinced that knowing is all that essential.

For me Jesus life and death are of equal worth, and the two validate each other. One is nothing without the other.

I do however believe there is some kind of profound mystery at place within Jesus’ death.

There is a lot to be taken from it.

There is a bizarre power at work.

It can save people from sin and shame and guilt and fear.

It can lead people into a new way of living which is life affirming.

It can means to me that it won’t always.

For me, there is not one way of understanding Jesus death, so the good news of Jesus’ death can mean different things to different people and cultures.

…So the answer to the question Why did Jesus die? just might depend on who is asking…

PART 2: A new kind of terrorist?

(Part 2 implies there is a part 1. This may make a little more sense if you read part 1 first…or you can risk it…)

Roughly a week ago many celebrated Good Friday, Jesus’ crucifixion. Today many are celebrating the death of Osama Bin Laden.

On the first Good Friday, some 2000 years ago, Jesus was murdered by the most powerful empire in the world, an empire of violent injustice. This empire reserved a special punishment for people who stood up to their power, for terrorists. This punishment was a very public display of imperial power, it was a sign to the rest of the world that said ‘if you stand up to us we will hang you on a cross and watch you die’. The story goes that Jesus was crucified alongside terrorist’s that stood up to the Romans. These terrorists employed violence as their weapon against the empire. Jesus, the terrorist, used servanthood and forgiveness to fight the empire, and that got him killed.

Today thousands have gathered outside the Whitehouse to celebrate the death of a notorious terrorist, Osama Bin Laden. Today America (and those collaborating nations) have stamped their authority over those who question their power, they have sent a message around the world that says ‘if you stand up to us we will hunt you down and kill you’. Today has been a “good day for America” (Obama) and “a great success” (Cameron). “Today we are reminded that as a nation there is nothing we can’t do” (Obama). “justice” (Obama) has been done, violent justice. The empire of the day has asserted its power and dominance.

Today, not that far from Bin Laden, lay another body, a plumber from Wigan. His only known followers have fled him, expecting him to ignite the war, not submit to its power. His message is one of fair distribution of power and wealth, of radical non-violent justice. He had been seen eating with Bin Laden and heard pleading for the forgiveness of his sins. He declares that there is a new Power, stronger than that of revenge and murder, one of reconciliation and peace.

Ok, so again I’ve made up a story which perhaps sounds crazy, but again the point here isn’t to sympathise with violent terrorism rather to offer a comparison to the familiar Jesus story so we can see it in a new way.

In my previous post (Part 1) I said Jesus directly confronts the powers of his day and he insists that their dominance and violence aren’t the way. Hearing the Bin Laden story today I saw how the powerful nations of our day, in some ways, aren’t too dissimilar – they still impose violence in order to control their power on the world. Jesus’ way is about imagining how to “overcome evil with good” (Paul) not using violence to combat violence. Today the circle of redemptive violence has been set in motion – having killed Bin Laden we are on high alert for other attacks. Jesus’ message compels us to think of an alternative, to make the first move in ending the violence.