Greatest Adventure Stories from the Bible

As a child of the 80's I grew up watching some of the greatest cartoons of all time (Ninja Turtles, Dragon Ball Z, Voltron, and Thundercats just to name a few). Growing up in a Christian home, violence driven cartoons were frowned upon so I also watched "safe" shows like The Greatest Adventure Stories from the Bible. If you're unfamiliar with this quaint little Hanna-Barbara gem just imagine Superbook but less anime like Captain Planet, throw in two American college archeologists and their scampy little "nomad" friend, an Egyptian time-traveling door (not to confuse this door with a Stargate, there is a difference) which apparently only traveled to Biblical events and you get The Greatest Adventure Stories from the Bible. And since it's Bunny season I thought it would be fitting to post the Easter episode. Enjoy.



Part 2 and 3 can be found here. What I found exceptionally curious about this show, watching it again as an adult, is that there are several oddities, I never would have caught as a child, which helped to shape my perception of the Bible until adulthood. For Example, did you notice...

• The crowd, including Jesus, was mostly fair skinned.
• Jesus has Blue eyes.
• "The men of power" looked borderline supervillian evil (it's all in the eyebrows!).
• Judas is rockin' a devilish goatee
• The trial scene looked kind of thin, where was everyone else?
• The voice of Caiaphas is done by Tony Jay who does a lot of villainous roles.
• There is very little violence for such a barbaric execution (children don't really think of the violence of the crucifixion, or at least I never did).
• The time-traveling trio defend Peter's denial of Jesus but make no attempt to defend Pilate or even Judas even though Mark, the narrator, states that nothing could have stopped the crucifixion since it was the Son of God's mission to die.
• I wonder if Moki was the cause for the lost ending of the Gospel of Mark when he trips over Mark's scrolls? Whoops!
• Mark, the narrator, mentions that Easter happened 35 years prior placing his writing right before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 c.e.

Of course this is a children show so I may be making a big whoopla out of nothing but the imagery portrayed in this cartoon is very common in Sunday School class. Growing up with the Scandinavian Jesus may not be completely damaging to kids who eventually learn that 1st century Jews may have looked more like this. In my opinion, the real damage is in the fear of asking "heretical" questions ("Learn and Burn!") while ignoring Christianity's room full of elephants (don't forget about the pink one in the closet). Most everyday Christians don't dig deeper into the text looking to ask tough questions because they themselves are yearning for solid answers. Why burden yourself with more questions when it's so much easier to get your answers from your local pastor or priest. I believe no solid or worthwhile answers can be given by the church or God, we're only given the chance to discover those answers for ourselves. Yet while mainstream Christians may bend over backwards to harmonize the gospels into one historical account to protect their theology (and probably their state of mind), others are questioning the traditional views and beliefs they inherited from their parents and grandparents. The greatest adventure stories from the Bible are not the stories where the heroes blindly obeyed God, but where the characters questioned divine justice, embraced compassion, and walked humbly and intimately with the Divine.

God's Identity Crisis?

I got a chance to catch up on Mr. Deity season 3 episodes today. My favorite one, and probably most theologically amusing thus far, is Mr. Deity and the Identity Crisis. For those unfamiliar with Mr. Deity he's a brief rundown. Mr. Deity is a series of short 2-7 minute comedy films by Brian Keith Dalton about the behind the scenes workings of the universe surveyed by Mr. Deity (God) and his assistant Larry (the Holy Spirit). in this clip Mr. Deity and Jesse (Jesus) are attempting to figure out the theological paradox that is the Trinity. Enjoy, and see if you can keep up.

The Jewish Gospels: Part 1- Jesus, the Jew?

Traditional Christians believe Jesus Christ had a flesh and blood mother. Joseph and Mary followed Jewish practices and customs, so what about Jesus? He couldn't have been Jewish, could he? The Jews argued with Jesus and later tortured and crucified him, so how could he possibly be one of them? Well unless you're a Docetist, believer in Christ being fully divine, then I can't see any logical argument that could undeniably support Jesus being anything other than a 1st century Palestinian Jew.

[Jesus teaching in a Synagogue, Author Unknown.]

---

Oh, people have tried to argue that he wasn't Jewish, which surprised me when I attempted to read their fear-induced propaganda. Now, I must confess that I never connected the dots between Jesus and his Jewishness until well into my teen years. In fact, I never really considered Jesus' humanity throughout my childhood because we were raised to believe he is the Son of God. The divine nature of Jesus was incredibly emphasized, overshadowing his humanity. Rereading the Gospels as an adult there is no escaping that Jesus was born and raised Jewish. I should probably attempt to clarify what it means to be Jewish. Today, you can be considered Jewish by birth (your parents, specifically your mother, are Jews), by nationality, and by religious status (converted to Judaism). I'm sure the lines were more black and white when it came to being a Jew in 1st century, Roman-occupied, Palestine. In fact, I can't think of any group/nationality/persons that would have been allowed to participate in Temple practices if they weren't Jewish. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Temple and all things Jewish was an exclusive enterprise: either you were Jewish or you weren't.

Luke 2 is riddled with Jewish traditions and practices that the holy family practiced during the early years of Jesus. There are plenty more examples of the Jewishness of Jesus scattered throughout the Gospels which begs the question, if Jesus was a Jew, and his disciples were Jews, then shouldn't we be reading the Gospels, which were written for Jewish Christians, with a modicum understanding of Judaism? Should we not read the Gospels as Jewish works? John Shelby Spong brings up this fundamental question in his book "Liberating the Gospels: Reading the Bible with Jewish Eyes". This excerpt summarizes the need to rethink and reread the Bible from a Jewish perspective.

"So the Jewishness of Jesus, the Jewishness of Mary, his mother, the Jewishness of the Apostles, the Jewishness of Paul, and even the Jewishness of the heroes of the Hebrew past was at worst systematically denied and at best subtly understated. It is thus easy for me to understand today that few people in the Christian West have been able to think of the Bible, including both testaments, as a Jewish book. If one cannot even embrace emotionally the Jewishness of Jesus, then why would one study the sacred scriptures of the Jewish people as the primary means of knowing and understanding this Jesus? How aware are people today, for example, of the fact that every author in the entire Bible was Jewish by birth or conversion and that there was only one convert? How often has the interpretive task of the Christian expositors of the Gospels begun with the suggestion that, since the books we call Gospels were written by Jewish authors, we might want to study just how it was that Jewish people wrote sacred narratives so that we might understand even the Gospels? Has it not occurred to anyone to ask, 'How can a Jewish work be understood if one ignores the Jewish context, the Jewish mind-set, the Jewish frame of Reference, the Jewish vocabulary, and even the Jewish history that shaped and formed the writer?' But that has been the reality of the Christian West for most of our history."(Ch. 2. The Gospels are Jewish Books)

Are we not ignoring the human nature of Jesus by ignoring his ethnicity, traditions, and culture? If Jesus was truly fully God and fully Man what aspects of his humanity are compromised or even dwarfed to obscurity by his divine nature within Traditional Christianity? If our religious beliefs, culture, traditions, and ethnicity helps to shape our individuality and are important elements to being human, what pieces from the enigma that is Jesus of Nazareth are we throwing out by excluding his Jewishness? Even though the Gospels are seen and read as Christian works I believe that even the most conservative of Christians could learn something important about Jesus and his teachings when understood through Jewish eyes. If we struggle to understand the world and culture that shaped Jesus of Nazareth, how can we come close to understanding his message?

Deus Sol Invictus or Constantine the Henotheist?

Matthew 17:1-2 (NIV)
¹After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. ²There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light.

John 8:12 (NIV)
¹²When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

Constantine The Great changed the course of history during his battle at the Milvian Bridge. He had a vision which not only put Christianity on the global map, but elevated it from a persecuted minority to the dominate majority, forever changing the West.

[Representation of Christ as the sun-god Helios or Sol Invictus riding in his chariot. Mausoleum M, from the Tomb of Pope Julius I in the pre-fourth-century necropolis under St Peter's Basilica.]

---

As we move through the early centuries of the early church in my History of Christianity class I was intrigued by a singular comment on Henotheism (and within Christian Legend, Monotheism) within the Roman world before Constantine's conversion in 312 A.D. I'm not talking about the rising popularity of Christianity before the Edict of Milan in 313. A.D. but the isolated movements towards a form of single god worship during this period in a polytheistic world.

"...the cult of the sun god became a major and, at times, dominant force in Roman religion. The cult of the Syrian sun god from Emesa, installed at Rome under the emperor Elagabalus (218–222), was short-lived, but in 274 the emperor Aurelian began a vigorous campaign of propaganda celebrating the sun god as the exclusive protector of Rome's imperial might. Under the epithets oriens ("the rising one"), invictus ("the invincible one"), and comes Augusti ("comrade of Augustus"), Sol was hailed as "the rising sun who dispels the forces of evil," as "invincible conqueror of Rome's enemies," and as the "companion and guardian deity of the emperor." (Sol Invictus from Encyclopedia of Religion.)

I have yet to study the influences that Greek and Roman society, thought, and beliefs may have had on Christianity (another topic we touched on last week), but if there were state sponsored campaigns which placed a single deity above all the others predating Constantine then, in my humble opinion, this would have been a factor in creating an environment more welcoming to the Christian faith. (I'm curious now to know what caused Diocletian to persecute Christians so heavily. Were Christians undermining the empire or even supporting one of his rivals? I'll have to grok this some more...) Without going into the laundry list of similarities between Jesus and Christianity and the various Mediterranean and eastern gods and their religions, I find the concept of a growing trend of Monotheism (or more probable, Henotheism) in the Roman world predating Constantine very intriguing if it actually happened (I'm a Religion nerd, I admit it). The legend that Constantius I, Constantine's father, was also Christian is quaint but still a Christian legend (The Life of Constantine, Eusebius, Ch. 13-21). Even in Eusebius' account of Constantine's conversion the emperor seeks out the help of the Divine for political and military purposes (Eusebius, Ch. 27-28). He wanted to win so he asked God's help (the Christian God), and he won. So did Constantine notice a growing trend towards Monotheism and jump on the popularity train? I don't know, But it seems more likely that he included Christianity as part of his popularity propaganda instead of an actual conversion since the Arch of Constantine (triumphal arch over Maxentius at the Battle of Milvian Bridge) and coins (until 324) contained pagan imagery. Even though Constantine supported the church it seems that, to retain his popularity base, he still recognized other gods along with the Christian God as a henotheist for political purposes.

How did the Senate react to the growing trend towards a monotheistic religious system? How did the commoners react? How did this affect the economy? Decrease in sacrifices to gods must have put a few butchers out of business. Religion was and still is a business. Before 70 A.D., the ancient Jewish sacrificial system must have profited from sacrifice at the Temple, the Quraysh, the guardians of the Ka'aba, held a booming economic market until the radical turn towards monotheism led by Muhammad in the 7th century A.D., and even churches today collect offerings from it's members. How did this affect social life in the Empire? More importantly how did this affect the theology, faith, and traditions of Christianity itself? Many people have pointed out (Google "Jesus Pagan gods" to see for yourself) that Christianity was seriously influenced by pagan religions. I'm no historian and I do see similarities but this is of little relevance to the modern Christian. Why? Because Christianity as we know it today would not be recognizable to the Christians during the first few centuries. The Christianity of today is not the Christianity of yesterday.

Even if Christ was equated with or even represented as Sol Invictus in the 3rd and 4th centuries he is not today by Traditional Christianity. It is important to keep in mind how history has viewed Jesus, but as time progresses so does all aspects of human life. Jesus Christ and Christianity 2000 years from now can (and probably will) be just as alien to us as our Christianity would be to the early church. We must remember that the believers of the first few centuries were limited by their world view and may have seen Jesus Christ differently than we do, be it Sol Invictus, Jewish prophet, or even non-trinitarian. There is no way for us to turn back the clock to a "golden age" of the Christian faith, nor should we. Faith should always progress forward even if it means challenging our present views, beliefs and the memories of our past.

Christians In Exile: Part 2- Ille qui nos omnes servabit

Where is the boundary between Christianity and everything else, and if we step over this boundary are we still considered Christians? Recently Don Rogers over at Reflections posted a Blog series on a new vision of Christianity, Jesus, and the relationship between this new vision and traditional Christianity. This is a very personal topic on religious identity that I continue to struggle with since I am surrounded by those within traditional Christianity that can not accept me as one of their own. I have written a few posts on how I view myself within Christianity which can be found in three parts, here.

[Screenshot from the Season 5 finale of Lost.]

This is a 3 part response to Don's three posts on what it means to be a Christian in Exile, what Jesus means to an Exile, and the never ending journey as a Christian in Exile. Please read these before moving on.

---

Only within the last few hundred years have we begun to discover alternative interpretations of Jesus' message, life, and teachings which have been overshadowed by the towering statuesque institution of the church. So what will guide this new vision of Christianity? Ille qui nos omnes servabit. The title of this post is Latin for "he who will save (or protect) us all". The phrase is taken from the Season 5 finale of Lost as the response to the one question that has been burning through the minds of fans since the question was first asked: "What lies in the shadow of the statue?" I am a HUGE Lost fan, and if I had more time on my hands I'd probably be a fanatic. So what does this have to do with Christians in Exile? Probably not much, except as an excuse to mention my eternal love for Lost. I'm not going to analyze the show's symbolism or explain what the smoke monster is (although, like most Lost fans, I have my theories) since there are more experienced bloggers on the web that do a much better job than I ever would (click here for a list of my favorite sites). The Season 5 finale was filled with so much religious symbolism that I couldn't help but notice parallels to the topic of exiled Christians: a displaced people (in space but not time), the tension between the forces that displaced them, and He who will save them all.

In Christians in Exile, Don pointed out the dissatisfaction exiled Christians have of the traditional beliefs set and defended by the church. In the second post, As An Exile…What to do with Jesus, Don explains a new interpretation of Jesus for an exiled people, those dissatisfied with traditional Christianity. Jesus Christ is the focal point of every form of Christianity (that I know of) regardless how each sect interprets him and his teachings. But is an interpretation of the life and teachings of Christ outside of the traditional interpretation still seen as Christian? I believe that depends entirely on the communal identity of the religious group. The beliefs of the group are what sets the boundaries of their identity. Yet within Christianity all groups can agree that there is a spirit of Love and Compassion that must be included within each individual group's identity to be accepted as Christian by other denominations. For example, a white supremacist group (or a hate group of some other form) may proclaim that they are Christian yet the spirit of the group is not one of Love and Compassion but of outright hated and bigotry. I believe that a religious group can meet two basic requirements and be labeled Christian: following Christ message and teachings, and internalizing the same spirit of Love and Compassion found within that message.

I believe Jesus to be an imitatio dei - an imitation of God, who is an example of God's central quality, compassion. This vision of Jesus does not have him die for our sins as a perfect sacrifice because this would envision a God of Judgement instead of a God of Compassion, a God that demands sacrifice (human sacrifice!) to atone for the sins and mistakes of a fallible race. I believe Jesus brought salvation to humanity by revealing to us our highest potential of becoming loving, compassionate people. Don summed up the relationship between Jesus, God, and the exiled Christian with the following statement.

Being a follower of Jesus does not require me to make literalized creedal affirmations about him or about the theistic God who supposedly invaded our world and lived among us in the person of Jesus. Neither does being a follower require that I literally believe all things spoken about him in the New Testament. It only requires me to be impowered by him to do as he did, imitating the presence of God in him by: living fully, loving wastefully, and having the courage to be all that God created me to be. It doesn’t mean that I have to turn away from life, to shun life, to make contact with the holy, because the holy is within me. It does mean that my contact with God is shown by the degree to which I can give my life, my love, and my being away to others.

What I seek is to increase that degree in which I can "give my life, my love, and my being away to others." It is this seeking through Jesus that makes me a Christians, but seeking outside of the traditional church that makes me an exile.

These new visions of Christianity and Jesus I believe have enriched my spirituality and have broken the barriers erected during my childhood. These new visions may not work for anyone else but they work for me. I believe it doesn't matter HOW you interpret Jesus as long as it leads you to becoming a better person. Traditional Christianity just doesn't work for ME anymore, but that doesn't mean that it is wrong nor does it mean it is an outdated system which needs to be tossed out. Traditional Christianity brings hope, strength and love to billions of people on the planet, and I hope it sticks around for another 2000 years. Yet I have outgrown this system because my spirituality is not a destination I seek but a never ending journey I travel. As my spirituality grows the borders of my beliefs may change but my foundations of Love and Compassion will always stay the same because we share the same guide, Traditional and Exiled Christians, who will guide us back to God: Ille qui nos omnes servabit.

---

Christians in Exile Blog Series:
Part 1- New Beginnings
Part 2- Ille qui nos omnes servabit
Part 3 - The Never Ending Journey

Or, you can read all three back-to-back, here.

Sacred Images

Could we? Should we? Must we?

Are we not butchering truth by slicing up the mainstream view of Christ? The phrase "historical Jesus" assumes that the Jesus we knew as children was make believe. So how historically accurate is the Lord Jesus Christ as portrayed in the Bible? 80%? 60%? It can't be lower than 50%, can it? When it comes to matters of the spirit I don't believe we are asking the right questions by asking if the Jesus of the Bible is historically accurate. True, it would help us in understanding the man and his message but there are only two possibilities concerning the accuracy of his biblical portrayal: either it's historically true or it's not.

[Modern 3D rendering of how Jesus might have appeared, Illustration by BBC Photo Library.]

---

It seems too polarizing to say that the Biblical Jesus is either historically true or not true, but stating that the historical accuracy of the Biblical Jesus varies by degrees doesn't help much either. What we must understand is that one Christian group among many won the rights to rewrite history in the early years of the church. The Bible didn't descend from heaven nor was it preserved from error. It is through the lens of history that we may find the historical Jesus, but if we find something different, what then do we do?

In Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time, Marcus Borg attempts to clear the confusion by separating the sacred image of Jesus into two: the Pre Easter Jesus and Post Easter Jesus. The Pre-Easter Jesus was the real historical flesh and blood Jesus reconstructed by historians based on the best possible evidence available of how he walked, talked, and lived in Roman occupied, 1st century Palestine. Some people would stop here and say that the Jesus of the New Testament is historically accurate because his followers (and God) made sure of it by writing it down in the Gospels. As I stated earlier one group, the proto-orthodox group, among the many other Christian groups (Read Bart Ehrman's Lost Christianities) won the battle of orthodoxy and went on to select which books were accepted into the Bible. They decided how the story of Jesus would be told based on their beliefs and how they experienced a resurrected Christ, the Post Easter Jesus.

I define the Post Easter Jesus as the Jesus of Christian tradition and experience. That is the Post Easter Jesus is not just the product of early Christian belief and tradition, but an element of experience....After Easter, his followers experienced him as a spiritual reality, no longer as a person of flesh and blood, limited in time and space, as Jesus of Nazareth had been. Rather, Jesus as the risen living Christ could be experienced anywhere and everywhere. Increasingly he was spoken of as having all of the qualities of God. Prayers were addressed to Jesus as God, and praise was offered to Jesus as God in Christian worship. In short, his early followers experienced the risen Christ and addressed the risen Christ as the functional equivalent of God, as "one with God."(Borg, pg. 16)

The purely historical Jesus can be found by sifting through the church's beliefs, tradition, and experience of the post-Easter Jesus. This is what historians do to find out who Jesus was, what he taught, and how his final days might have actually played out.

The quest for the historical Jesus should not lessen our personal sacred image of Jesus but in fact enhance it just as the stories about Jesus should also enhance our spirituality. All we have of Jesus are stories left on bits of paper and parchment. We must each as ourselves which has more significance and meaning to YOU: Stories on fragments of parchment, a historical reconstruction of the life of Christ, or the message of compassion and love that Jesus brought, taught, and lived throughout his short life on Earth? I believe they are all important but the message itself is what I hold closest to my heart.

imitatio dei - An Imitation of God

Be compassionate as your Father is compassionate. Luke 6:36 SV

---

There have been so many different views on Jesus that the one characteristic common between all of them is his compassion. There was one line in Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time by Marcus Borg on Jesus' message of compassion that caught my attention:

"This crystallization of Jesus' message speaks of a way of life grounded in an imitatio dei - an imitation of God." (Borg, pg, 46.)

Borg goes on to describe the differences between the common translation of Luke 6:36 as merciful rather than compassionate. The Hebrew and Aramaic word for compassion translates as the plural for a noun that means "womb" in the singular. This is used to describe how a mother feels compassion for her unborn child and how a man also feels compassion for his brother, who comes from the same womb (Borg, 47). But the "aha" moment for me was when Borg described the difference between being merciful and being compassionate.

In English mercy and merciful most commonly imply a superior in relationship to a subordinate, and also a situation of wrongdoing: one is merciful toward somebody to whom one has the right (or power) to act otherwise. Compassion suggests something else. To paraphrase William Blake, mercy wears a human face, and compassion a human heart. (Borg, 47-48)

To others this might be a no brainer, but I was completely dumbfounded! All my life, whenever I read mercy or compassion in the Bible the two were interchangeable. But why would Jesus tell his followers to be merciful to others when the very people he was addressing were most probably the bottom rung of society? Lepers, peasants, prostitutes, liars, and thieves followed Jesus, there was no other social group that was inferior to them which is why I agree with Borg that compassionate is a much better translation than merciful, or even Matthew's translation as Perfect.

Another "Aha moment" followed shortly after on the central quality of God: Compassion. Borg states that Jesus' message was a reflection of God's central characteristic. The first verse I thought of was Genesis 1: 27:

So God created human beings in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. (Genesis 1: 27 NIV)

Maybe the Old Testament authors meant that God created us as beings capable of enormous potential of Love and Compassion? We then are walking, talking examples of the life giving (think womb!) Source that created us, our Father, our Mother. Believing in God is not a prerequisite to being compassionate. Now, in the 21st century more than any other time in history, we need to remember, embody, and BE the compassionate beings we are capable of being.

Jesus: The Living Parable or That's Friggin' Religulous Part 2

Back in May on the very last day of my Judaism, Islam, and Christianity class we watched and discussed Bill Maher's new film, Religulous. If you haven't seen it then I recommend watching it because it might introduce you, the viewer, to new and (maybe) challenging views on religion. I wrote a post describing my thoughts on Religulous back in November before I got a chance to watch it. Bill Maher's point is not to abolish and ridicule religion but to ask serious questions on what we consider sacred, although, to me, it did seem like he was ridiculing the faithful. Should we question the sacred, and if we come up with answers that challenge our current beliefs how do we then live with them?

[Bill Maher talking with Jesus at the Holy Land Experience in Religulous]

---

Try Googling "Jesus Pagan gods" and you get over 700,000 results on this very controversial topic. Do myths and deities of "pagan" religions share similarities with the unique Son of God? You can get lost quickly in the garbled debates of the unique nature of Jesus but outside of the biased canonical texts,which believers claim have been protected and guided by the hand of God, there are no existing 1st century original copies of ANY manuscript that describes Jesus in detail, divine or not. All we have are stories, and if those stories share similarities then it is because those similarities speak clearer to the human heart than any other elements of storytelling.

Did Jesus actually exist as the Bible portrays him? I believe that he did indeed exist but his portrayal in my protestant Bible was skewed to fit the theology of those who won the bible battle during the history of the early church between warring Christianity sects. Is Jesus then a mishmash of ancient deities and myths? A question like this is only challenging to those who put Christ on a pedestal above the message he brought to humanity. I believe that Jesus the man, Rabbi, and Jewish prophet very well could have existed but we have no contemporary outside sources to verify his existence outside of a brief and questionable reference by Josephus.

We ended class with our professor, Rabbi Rami, asking what we would say to Bill Maher's statement that Jesus is a mythical character made up of deities that predate him. The class was speechless, nobody said a word, including myself. Rabbi Rami's response in a nutshell is that the Jesus story is just one of a long chain of other myths that have spoken to the inner core of the human spirit. There is nothing unique about the Jesus story since elements of it have been told in other religions. This does not mean that Jesus is a fictional creation of the early church but that the story of Jesus should be more important than the historicity of the man the story is based upon.

Those who heard Jesus tell the parable of the good Samaritan would not have been outraged if Jesus told them that the characters of the story never existed. The moral of the story which speaks to humanity's inner spirit is what should be held sacred and not the characters who take a part in the story. Jesus is more of a symbol, a finger pointing to the moon, who points beyond himself to something greater. Christ's message, which is the heart of Christianity, becomes untouchable, an eternal flame, when divorced from the pointless battle over the historicity of the man. The finger may be broken, bent, replaced, or even cut off but the moon will still remain.

What Maher is saying is that we have the lessons and no longer need to keep anything that keeps humankind from progressing forward. This is not a move away from God but a leap and a stride towards it. His view is that organized religion is detrimental to the progression of man since it's views are static and works to keep men in the dark. All Bill is doing is asking whether or not these symbols still work for man in our enlightened age. Are we able to stand on our own feet and say "I will serve my fellow man for the greater good" without an external source prodding us to do so? Until humanity instills the lessons that Jesus and others have brought we will continue to rely on them for guidance. This is why I like to describe Jesus as a walking, talking, living parable: he is a manifestation of what humanity yearns for more than anything else: Love.

Hangin' Out with the J Man.

Ohhhh snap! I forgot I was gonna hang out with J.C. today, let's call him up and see what he's up to.

Sup J.C., where you at?

Over at St Philip Neri Catholic church? The one in Uckfield, East Sussex, right?

You saw who? Munoz? Will why didn't your main man Benedict come himself, was he busy? Ohhhhh, OK.

You want me to bring what? Sure I can bring my Nintendo Wii, you up for a little Mario Kart?

OK, see you in a few J.C.

[Photo: Images International]

---

I love the Daily Show and the Colbert Report. Even though it is infotainment I get more news from these two show then I do from any other "news network". Click here and here for the background story to this bronze statue. Click here if you can't see the video. Check this out.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
ThreatDown - Charity, Casual Jesus & Robot Teachers
colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Gay Marriage

Offended? Intrigued? Confused? How does Casual Jesus make you feel about your image of the Lord and Savior to billions? I think it is an incredible repackaging, but not reshaping, of what Jesus means to people. He is a transcendent figure that is just as relevant today as he was 2000 years ago. Mark Twain was right when he said that "clothing makes the man", your image can help or hinder your status in society. I believe that Jesus, as a symbol, transcends our fickle social rules even though WE put limits as to how Jesus is portrayed. And I'm sure to some Jesus in Jeans is very offensive. It is taboo to change the traditional image of Jesus in any way, because for some changing the image equates with changing the message.

But why? If Jesus were to appear among us in the 21st century he would stand out like a sore thumb if he DIDN'T wear clothing from this century. Jesus did not strive to stand out in 1st century Palestine and I doubt he would try 2000 years later. In all of the various Christianities (plural) Jesus always carried the appearance of a commoner regardless of his nature (fully Human, fully Divine, or both). It is through his common appearance (one of us!) that we relate to his spirit speaking to us from within. Truth carried and shared in ANY vessel can still be recognized as Truth. It doesn't matter if Jesus wears jeans, a dress, or is completely naked.

Any change to the traditional image of Jesus still rattles too many cages. Back at GCA during Sabbath School we were shown a short video on the life of Jesus and I had mentioned how he looked like a hippie in the film. As soon as the words came out I knew that it was a bad idea to share my thoughts and that I had worded them improperly. I was given a mini-lecture on hippies and their wild drug induced, "free love" adventures and how I should avoid equating Jesus with those sinners. I was 16 at the time and my knowledge of the outside world, let alone the 60s, was very limited. I knew about the drugs and free love but what I was trying to point out was that Jesus wore sandals, loose clothing, and long hair; the outside appearance reminded me of hippies and not the inward appearance of the character. I tried to argue my point but was quickly shot down. The statement alone can be offensive around certain people and it didn't help that my friends were suspected of participating in a recent school drug scandal; to them I was guilty by association. The moral of the story kids is if you attend a private Christian boarding school you should not associate with questionable characters nor speak your own thoughts if they run against the school's official teachings.

Does Jesus in Jeans offend or inspire? Sculptor Marcus Cornish said

"The clothing is loosely contemporary in order to connect Christ to his people now as much as to his past. I hope this sculpture will inspire and communicate in very human terms, reaching out and being relevant to both the congregation and local community."

It's not that it's necessary for us to change the image of Christ so that we can relate to him in the 21st century but as time progresses so do the languages and symbols that define the Truth contained within the Logos. Humanity needs symbols to grasp, understand, and experience the divine and because of the difficulty to internalize God do we need "a finger pointing to the moon" to show us the way. The finger, let alone its appearance, is of little importance compared to what it points towards.

Religion in 20XX: Part 2- E.T.'s Jesus

Within the last month I've become intrigued by the vast amount of sci-fi books that mention religion. Outside of the Dune series I had no idea that sci-fi writers would even acknowledge religion let alone interweave them into the plot. Sci-fi, as a genre, has enormous potential and room to grow. It can take us to worlds we can only dream of and envision possible futures for humanity here on Earth. We must always keep in mind that even though the future is not set in stone we must learn to guide our race towards peace so that we can live to see it unfold.

---

In a previous post, where I first mentioned this book, I had asked (in the title) who would save E.T.'s soul? If there are aliens on other planets then they MUST have souls to save, so who's going to save them? The first site I stumbled upon in my quest to search where Sci-fi and Religion cross was Sci-Fi Gospel, a blog maintained by the author of The Gospel According to Sci-Fi by Gabriel Mckee. That is how I came across Jesus on Mars by Philip José Farmer. How can this NOT be an interesting book, the title itself screams scandal and heresy. I'm guessing there are two kinds of reactions concerning this book: those that glance at it and automatically think "garbage" and those that pick it up to see what on Earth is Jesus doing on Mars? And soon after that other questions begin bubbling up to the surface. How did he get there? What is his mission? Is it really Jesus or someone claiming to be Him? Is Mars Heaven? If not, why did he make a pitstop there? This is what I love about the book, a subject so off the wall that goes against the grain of most literature, including Sci-fi, that it beckons you to read it. I guess that the Da Vinci Code falls along this same category (which I own but have yet to read).

The story revolves around Richard Orme's struggle with his faith after being captured by the Krsh, the alien race coexisting with humans in a subterranean society deep beneath Mars surface. Richard Orme along with three other fellow marsonauts are slowly introduced to the only near Utopian society known in the solar system. The story intensifies as the characters come to find out that Jesus of Nazareth has been living with these Martians for the last 2000 years. Or has he?

The Earthmen (and one Earth woman) are introduced to their religion, society, ethics, technology, and everyday life. One of the most burning questions in the novel is how this will affect the citizens of Earth, not only on religious issues but on technological, social, and ethical issues. The one question that I would like to tackle here is this: If you had proof (not evidence, but proof) literally staring you in the face would you accept it even if it challenged your belief system?

A person's identity is crucial to their existence, and to some religion is so bonded to their identity that only that same person, with enough strength, is able to unfasten it if they so choose. Changing your religious views is difficult for most people that some dare not consider the option. I became aware of that option and willing chose to reinvent my spirituality. It was a difficult process that took many months and many sleepless nights, but I overcame my "religious identity crisis" and now I feel that I'm more aware of my spirituality than I've been in my life. I'm not a saint, in fact I'm far from it, but I strive to improve myself so that I may better understand and love my fellow man. Jesus on Mars challenges the reader to think that if we got the proof we prayed for some would struggle to accept anything that contradicted with their beliefs. I'm guessing most Christians would be shocked if Jesus appeared before them saying that he's been living on Mars for the last 2000 years. Either Christ or Antichrist, the faith of billions would be put to the test. Does it really matter who, or what, the father chooses to be the Messiah as long as His will is done?

Who Will Save E.T.'s Soul?

In my Judaism, Christianity, and Islam class on Tuesday we talked about the Gnostic Gospel of Phillip. It was an interesting discussion on Gnosticism, but what really got me thinking was when the conversation sidetracked to the salvation of alien life. I don't remember exactly how we got onto the topic but it got me thinking: will E.T. be saved?

When I was a young lad (7, maybe 8 years old) I remember being told a very interesting idea on Sin and alien life. In SDA belief, God had placed the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil on every planet with sentient life to test their faithfulness and obedience to Him. Every single planet had passed the test and now continue to live in paradise except for one: Earth. We are the only planet that has fallen and the entire universe is now watching our history unfold.

[Jesus on Mars by Philip José Farmer. I love the monkey in the space suit sitting on Jesus' cross.]

As a young boy fascinated with science (I wanted to be an astronomer when I grew up) this idea that unfallen extraterrestrial lifeforms were watching me both intrigued and scared me. I initially envisioned aliens looking down at us like the doctors that observe a surgery in stadium seats. Since I thought aliens, and God, watched my every move I would periodically stop, look up, and wave hello. It seems silly now but I was 8, what would you do if aliens, and God, were watching your every move?

But what would happen if we did indeed make contact with alien life? What if their religion were completely different than ours? What if they have no religion or have evolved without it abandoning religion completely for science? The list of questions can go on and on. How would this affect mankind's view on God and the universe knowing that we are not alone? Adventists believe that Sin would never leave this solar system to spread like a virus, God simply wouldn't allow it, which means no alien contact.

In Jesus on Mars by Philip José Farmer, an unmanned probe finds an alien ship buried on Mars. And, as the title suggests, a manned expedition lands on Mars and finds an alien race living harmoniously with humans along with Jesus himself. Not only do these Martians (the aliens crashed there escaping from another alien race) believe in Jesus Christ they actually live with him! I stumbled upon this book the other day and I kept wondering if any sentient alien life had religious practices.

If we do come in contact with alien life our religious leaders would be very nervous that the aliens might state views on religion contrary to our own. Of course then the masses will get out their torches and pitchforks calling the aliens blasphemers and demons. Hopefully, if an interstellar war were averted, we will be able to learn something from these visitors before we attempt to convert them, that is if they didn't come here to convert us first. All hail Xenu, the Galactic Lord of the Universe!

---

[Update (3/27/09): I ordered a used copy of Jesus on Mars by Philip José Farmer (it is no longer in print) and it just came in today. I'm currently reading Calculating God by Robert Sawyer and I'll move on to Jesus on Mars when I'm done.]

Axis mundi: Part 2-The Tree of Life

"Every Microcosm, every inhabited region, has a Centre; that is to say, a place that is sacred above all." ~Mircea Eliade

The axis mundi is a ubiquitous symbol found in just about every religion and civilization throughout history. It is the navel, the center of the world and the universe, a sacred space set aside that has been represented in a variety of shapes be it natural or man-made. They represent man's attempt at unifying around a common deity, concept, or belief. Although the axis mundi is represented by various symbols it is what the symbol represents that unifies Man.

[From Northern Antiquities, an English translation of the Prose Edda from 1847. Yggdrasil painted by Oluf Olufsen Bagge]

Click here to go for Part 1 and Part 3.

---

The World Tree is present in several religions and mythologies, particularly Indo-European religions. The world tree is a colossal tree which supports and connects three planes of existence: the heavens (sky), the earth (terrestrial plane), and underground (underworld/Hell). The World Tree acts as a symbol that ties and interconnects all planes of reality. In Norse mythology, Yggdrasil (represented as an ash tree), the world tree, is central and considered very holy where the Æsir, gods of the Norse pantheon, go to hold their courts.

Among pre-Columbian Mesoamerican cultures the world tree embodied the four cardinal directions, and to the Maya the world tree was represented by a ceiba tree.

In Hindu mythology, the ashvastha ( the sacred Fig) is a sacred tree mentioned extensively in their texts. Buddhist call it the The Bodhi Tree, a tree where Siddhārtha Gautama, the supreme Buddha, sat under until gaining enlightenment.

There are two trees that carry strong symbolism throughout Christianity: the Tree of Life and the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil. In Genesis the Tree of Life is a tree planted by God whose fruit gives everlasting life. The Eastern Orthodox Church has understood the Tree of Life as a foreshadowing, a prefiguration, of Christ's sacrifice in which the Cross came to be called the Tree of Life.

In Galatians, Paul speaks of two paths that the church could take: the path of (Jewish/Old Testament) Law, and the path of (Christ/New Testament) Faith. Those who follow the Law are under a curse (Gal. 3:10) whereas in Galatians 3:13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." Galatians 3:13 (NIV)

At the end of the verse Paul is quoting Deuteronomy where the Law instructs the Israelites to treat the body of a dead person with enormous respect even the bodies of an executed prisoners and military opponents. This might have something to do with the body being ritually unclean after death occurs which might desecrate the land.

²² If a man guilty of a capital offense is put to death and his body is hung on a tree, ²³ 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 God's curse. You must not desecrate the land the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance. Deuteronomy 21:22- 23 (NIV)

There is another allusion to Christ being 'lifted up' in John.

¹⁴Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, ¹⁵that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. John 3:14-15 (NIV)

John was referring to the story of the Nehushtan where the Israelities were once again complaining ("Oy, G_d, where's the meat!") about lack of water and the miserable food. So the Lord sent poisonous serpents into their camp for speaking against Him. The people begged and pleaded with Moses to speak to the Lord, and The Lord told Moses to fashion a serpent onto a pole. Anyone bitten by the serpents may look upon the bronze serpent and live.

---

Here is how all of this ties together. Jesus compared himself to the Nehushtan, the bronze snake on a pole, that through him all may receive eternal life. He is hung on a cross (historically some people were crucified on a single vertical stake) which later comes to also represent a "tree of Life". The Nehushtan bears a striking resemblance to the rod of Asclepius ⚕, which also consists of a serpent on a staff, "is an ancient Greek symbol associated with astrology and with healing the sick through medicine." The serpent wrapped around the staff (axis) is portrayed as a guardian of knowledge. In Shamanism, Shamans, healers and communicators with the Spirit Realm, "gain knowledge and power by traversing the axis mundi and bringing back knowledge from the heavens." The shaman's staff is the physical representation of the axis where the two realms (earthly and spirit) the shaman walks in join.

The Cross then become a nexus of the three realms of existence: the heavens, earth, and underground. "Anyone or anything suspended on the axis between heaven and earth becomes a repository of potential knowledge." Jesus, suspended on the staff/cross/pole is a symbol of spiritual healing brought to humanity. We too can connect with the Divine realm by following Jesus' teachings of Love, Compassion, and Justice. Jesus and the Cross became a gateway, a bridge to the heavenly realms for the world too receive heavenly knowledge. It is with Jesus' teachings (heavenly knowledge), brought back to the earthly realm, that we can begin to heal the wounds of humanity caused by man's hatred, ignorance, cruelty, and injustice.

"I Wish You had Believed Me..."

I am a HUGE fan of ABC's tv series Lost. It is a complicated show that operates on so many levels that you have to be an avid watcher to keep up. I will keep the outline to the show as brief as possible or else we will be here all day long. I just want to touch on a subject that was brought up in last week's episode entitled "316". I will though (as best as possible) explain the context of the episode but be forewarned that there are spoilers.

[The Incredulity of Saint Thomas by Caravaggio. Thomas seen here actually sticking his finger into the wounds of resurrected Christ.]

---

Lost revolves around the survivors of Oceanic flight 815 that crashed on a mysterious island. Six of the survivors managed to get off the island return home, but because they left bad things started to happen to those that were left behind. The only way to save everyone on the island is for everyone that left to return by recreating the circumstances that first brought them to the island. For this to happen one of the survivors of Flight 815, John Locke, must leave the island and bring them back, by sacrificing himself. There is a scene where Ben Linus, "native" of the island, and Jack Shepard, leader of the survivors, are at a church awaiting to return to the island. Ben begins talking about Thomas the Apostle. He quotes Thomas' response to Jesus returning to Judea knowing that he would probably be murdered there.

John 11:16 (NIV)
16Then Thomas (called Didymus) said to the rest of the disciples, "Let us also go, that we may die with him."

---

Ben Linus-"But Thomas was not remembered for this bravery. His claim to fame came later when he refused to acknowledge the Resurrection. He just couldn't wrap his mind around it. The story goes that he needed to touch Jesus' wounds to be convinced."

Jack Shepard- "So was he?"

Ben Linus-"Of course he was. We're all convinced sooner or later, Jack."

---

Jack Shepard is known as the Man of Science throughout the show and John Locke is known as the Man of Faith. This is the first time in the show that Jack begins to believe that he is part of something greater. Jack is told that Locke had to die to bring them back and to serve as a proxy for Jack's father, Christian. [On the original flight 815 Jack was bringing his father's body back to LA to give him a proper burial. And, if you remember, to get back they must replicate the conditions of their trip as close as possible.] During the flight Jack is hesitant in reading a letter addressed to him before Locke's death. The letter reads, "I wish you had believed me." Jack now feels that if he had just believed in Locke (and about not leaving the island) in the first place, Locke might not have had to sacrifice himself.

In Christian theology Adam and Eve failed to believe (and obey) God by eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil which condemned all of humanity to death. God then sent his Son to redeem Humanity and bring them back. In Lost, Jacob (God?), the mysterious voice that gives instructions to the protectors of the island, sends Locke (Christ) to bring back the Oceanic Six (Humanity) back to the island. Jack (Doubting Thomas) as a Man of Science needs to "touch" in order to believe. This was such a powerful episode full of symbolism, but at the core is the concept of Faith vs. Science, Belief vs. Reason. The Dharma Initiative, a group of scientists that ran experiments on the island, used science to find and get to the island. Science is not enough to return Jack to the island, he must also take "a leap of faith".

So are you a Man of Science or a Man of Faith? Does it matter? I see myself as both. I believe yet doubt, but my doubting does not hinder my spirituality, it increases it. By doubting I find new avenues and streams of thought. I am not tied to one stream but I flow freely guided by Reason and Spirit. I doubt so that I may believe, and I believe so that I may doubt. The two compliment each other and answers questions that the other cannot. Somewhere in between I slowly find my way back to our Creator, to our Source, by belief and doubt.

The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved

John 13:19-27 (NIV)

¹⁹"I am telling you now before it happens, so that when it does happen you will believe that I am He. ²⁰I tell you the truth, whoever accepts anyone I send accepts me; and whoever accepts me accepts the one who sent me."

²¹After he had said this, Jesus was troubled in spirit and testified, "I tell you the truth, one of you is going to betray me."

²²His disciples stared at one another, at a loss to know which of them he meant. ²³One of them, the disciple whom Jesus loved, was reclining next to him. ²⁴Simon Peter motioned to this disciple and said, "Ask him which one he means."

²⁵Leaning back against Jesus, he asked him, "Lord, who is it?"²⁶Jesus answered, "It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish." Then, dipping the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, son of Simon. ²⁷As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him.

---

The Disciple whom Jesus loved has always been a mysterious character within canonical and non-canonical scripture. The traditional view is that it is a self-reference to John the Evangelist himself. Within the last century alternative identifications have been proposed including Mary Magdalene, Lazarus, Mark the Evangelist, and even the unnamed youth in Mark 14:51-52. Whoever it was we will never know, unless we uncover a manuscript that identifies him. Maybe we were never meant to know.

John 21:16-25 (NIV)

¹⁶Again Jesus said, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me?"
He answered, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you."
Jesus said, "Take care of my sheep."

¹⁷ The third time he said to him, "Simon son of John, do you love me?"
Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you."

Jesus said, "Feed my sheep. ¹⁸ I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go." ¹⁹Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, "Follow me!"

²⁰Peter turned and saw that the disciple whom Jesus loved was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, "Lord, who is going to betray you?") ²¹When Peter saw him, he asked, "Lord, what about him?"

²²Jesus answered, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me." ²³Because of this, the rumor spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?"

²⁴This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.

²⁵Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

It is barely noticeable but you can almost see a hint of jealousy coming from Peter concerning the unnamed Beloved Disciple, and how can you blame Peter. Jesus just stated that Peter might have to die for following Him, while Jesus has something else in store for the unnamed Beloved Disciple. Follow me to death and do not worry what I have in store for your fellow followers. This does not mean that the unnamed Beloved Disciple would not face persecution and death for following Him but that it does not matter what Jesus has in store for him. The focus is on the Shepard and not the flock.

One of the more interesting ideas as to the identity of the unnamed Beloved Disciple, stated by Martin L. Smith, is that it is a literary device meant for the gospel readers to better identify with the relationship the disciples had with Jesus. In a sense You become one of the disciples which brings you in closer to the gospel and Jesus. You now so close and so loved by Jesus that even Peter, the rock of the church, comes to You with questions about what he is truly saying.

The unnamed Beloved Disciple works wonders for me as a literary device than it ever did as an actual character in the gospel. Instead of just reading the gospel I become a part of it and begin to feel God's love through Jesus Christ. As I become a part of the gospel I become a part of the powerful love that radiates from it. I then become a "living gospel" as I live in Jesus and Jesus lives in me. This Unconditional Love radiates throughout my being and out towards my fellow man so that all may see, learn, and love. We are then no longer tied to the literal teachings, rituals, and beliefs created by man that help to guide us to this state of Unconditional Love because we are already there. We are all the unnamed Beloved Disciple, and we are all beloved by God.

Give Us Barabbas!

Mark 15:6-15 (NIV)

6Now it was the custom at the Feast to release a prisoner whom the people requested. 7A man called Barabbas was in prison with the insurrectionists who had committed murder in the uprising. 8The crowd came up and asked Pilate to do for them what he usually did.

9"Do you want me to release to you the king of the Jews?" asked Pilate, 10knowing it was out of envy that the chief priests had handed Jesus over to him. 11But the chief priests stirred up the crowd to have Pilate release Barabbas instead. 12"What shall I do, then, with the one you call the king of the Jews?" Pilate asked them.

13"Crucify him!" they shouted.

14"Why? What crime has he committed?" asked Pilate.
But they shouted all the louder, "Crucify him!"

15Wanting to satisfy the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas to them. He had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.

---

"Give Us Barabbas!" They yelled. The crowd wanted justice for the crimes committed. Take away the criminal and give us our Savior. Barabbas is portrayed as an insurrectionists, a Zealot. Israel was being choked by the chains held by the Sadducees and the Romans. They were bleeding the land and its citizens dry of wealth, pride, dignity, and honor. The Jewish people were uniquely blessed that Rome allowed them to keep their religious traditions instead of adopting Roman ways. Religion is by far the best control in keeping the populace docile, so Rome allowed them keep their One god, for now. Those that felt Rome's iron grip tightening felt it was time to take actions into their own hands instead waiting for the Messiah.

The Zealots were a Jewish political movement in the 1st century which sought to incite the people of Iudaea Province to rebel against the Roman Empire and expel it from the country by force of arms, most notably during the Great Jewish Revolt (AD 66-70).

This is the group that historians originally thought that Barabbas was apart of (or even led) but there is no record of this group until after Jesus' execution. Still, as the story goes, he was arrested for inciting an insurrection.

Jesus and Barabbas are two sides of the same coin. Both resisted the establishment but took two different methods: Barabbas took on the sword while Jesus took the path of non-violent resistance (a.k.a. turn the other cheek). Some historians say that Jesus taught ways to resist Rome non-violently and that some verses like "turn the other cheek" have been interpreted without taking 1st century Palestine custom's into considerations. You can read a brief summary of it here.

Now the heart of the story between Barabbas and Jesus has to do with shifting blame of Jesus' death from the Romans onto the Jews.

Matthew 27:25 All the people answered, "His blood is on us and on our children!"

This verse is only found in Matthew and has been used by Christians to demonize the Jewish people throughout history. The Sadducees, the political Jewish group in power, worked with Rome to remove Jesus, the non-violent resistor, who was drawing in massive crowds. Because of guerrilla fighters like Barabbas, Rome does not like huge crowds of people where the Zealots can hide and attack the Romans unnoticed.

So now we have two freedom fighters, one uses violence, the other non-violence. So which one do the crowds ask Pilate to release as by tradition (no record of this tradition is found outside of the Gospels) during Passover? The crowds yell for Barabbas, but when you look closer at Barabbas' name things begin to get really interesting.

In Aramaic "Barabbas" translates to "son of the father".

(Aramaic: בר-אבא, Bar-abbâ, "son of the father")

One of Jesus' titles may have been "Son of the Father" because of his custom of addressing God as Father in prayer. In a handful of our 5000 surviving Greek manuscripts Barabbas also is referred to as Jesus Barabbas. So now we have two prisoners of Rome BOTH called Jesus Barabbas (Jesus 'Son of the Father'). So which one does the crowd call to be released? Jesus Barabbas!

The theory is that the people truly wanted Jesus of Nazareth released and that Barabbas was just a fictional character used as literary tool to place the blame of Jesus' death on the Jews. Did Barabbas the criminal ever exist? We may never know but at least Jesus, our model of humility, love, and compassion forgave the world during his last moments on Earth.

Luke 23:34 (NIV) "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."

The Prophet Isa: Part 3- What He Means to Me

This is one of the most interesting topics I've ever read in Islamic theology. Before I read or knew anything about the Islamic view of Jesus (Isa) I thought Christianity and Islam had very little in common. They still don't have much in common but I think this hope they share in Jesus' message and eventual return is vital to any remaining dialogue between the two faiths in this post 9\11 world.

[Jesus meditating near Mt. Kailash in Tibet by Bruce Harman]

Part 1
Part 2

---

Jesus Christ is one of the most widely known and beloved figures in history. As a spiritual teacher Jesus is many things to many people: to the Bahá’í he is a manifestation of God; to Hindus, a shaktyavesha Avatar; to Muslims, a messenger of God; to Buddhists, a bodhisattva; to Christians he is Messiah, Son of God. In Part 1- A Sign for Humanity I went over the basic beliefs Muslims have on Jesus and what he represents, and in Part 2- A Long Awaited Hope I wrote about the hope that Christians and Muslims both share in the second coming of Jesus. In this last segment on the Prophet Isa I'd like to focus on what he means to me.

I no longer consider myself a Christian. Some Christians may cringe at the thought that anyone that has received Christ into their heart (which I truly did in my youth) would be willing to forsake Christ, but all I really left was a man-made church and its man-made teachings to follow the true spirit of Jesus. It is because his teachings touch upon that vein of love buried at the foundations of our world religions that he is accepted, loved, and followed by billions. Can non-Christians follow Jesus and his teachings without worshiping him as God incarnate? This is the exact predicament that I face when I speak with Christians. Some believe it's all or nothing, "either you love Jesus, the Son of God, or you don't. You can't separate Jesus the man from Logos the Word, and by doing so you attack everything Jesus represents and did for humanity." The doctrines of the Trinity and the divinity of Christ are hard for me to swallow only because it does not help me to commune with the Divine. I can not imagine a God that I could not come directly to in prayer and meditation. This is not because I feel I am righteous enough to come before the Almighty but because the relationship becomes more personal without an intermediary.

So where does Jesus fit in my beliefs? He is my model to how I should interact with my fellow man and how to worship our Creator. I do not believe the original message of Jesus was to declare worship for himself as God or to become a sacrificial lamb for our sins, but I believe he intended to rekindle the flame of love inside our hearts so that it radiates throughout our bodies and pours off of our tongues. He is my signpost, my guide, my compass, not the destination. I felt so strongly about what he means to me that I designed a symbol and had it tattooed on my right forearm. At that point in my life I saw myself as a Christian and I wanted to get a tattoo that represented my beliefs. I did not want to get a crucifix so I decided to base my tattoo on the first two letters in the Greek spelling of the word Christ, the Chi Rho. I replaced the Greek letter chi with a sword and a hammer representing that I am a soldier and worker for Christ's message and teachings. I had it placed on the inside of my right forearm for several reasons:

• The right hand in biblical symbolism is associated with the righteous.
• It is kept from direct view on the inside of my arm to symbolize my belief in religion being a private matter.
  
• The point where the hammer and sword cross right below my wrist is the point where Christ could have been nailed to the cross.
  

I had it done because I never imagined myself as anything other than a Christian. It is my daily reminder of how we should fight injustice and work towards a loving and compassionate society.

Although the title of this post is on the Prophet Isa I see both the Muslim and Christian Jesus as one and the same. Both were messengers of God who taught that by unifying yourself (harmonizing the inside and outside of spirit and body) we can begin to heal the scars that divides Humanity. When a unified Humanity arises then we can truly come to understand the mysteries of the universe and its Creator.