HomeNews & DiaryStaffChurchesYouthPlanGuest BookLinksContacts

The Bible at Easter

    Easter is a time for Celebration and Joy. It is also a time for renewal. But it is also a time when we should read the scriptures intelligently and without rose tinted spectacles.

    We are so familiar with the bible stories around Easter that we may forgot the initial sense of shock, awe and desolation that the disciples experienced at that first Easter. After that they experienced a collective sense of peace and awareness that Jesus the Christ had risen – but it took some time to sink in and for a true understanding of that Resurrection to really be understood.

    Read Mark’s Gospel – all the way through if you have the chance – it is the shortest of the gospels and the oldest, i.e. it was written first. At the end, in chapter 16, Mark has an honest piece, which speaks to me of first hand experience, about the two Marys going to the tomb, finding it empty and being told by a ‘young man in a white robe’ to go back to Galilee and prepare to meet with the risen Jesus. The women came out and ran away – frightened.

    Most commentators think – and I agree – that that is where the gospel ends, at verse 8. Then someone – or more probably a group of someone’s – who found that either unconvincing or lacking somewhat, seem to have added an extra few verses to pad it out. The style and the language are different. It’s as if they are wanting to convince and/or persuade without any of us having the chance to make up our own minds!

    Personally I prefer the gospels when they leave a few questions in the air. I empathise with those two women when they run away frightened about something they don’t understand and I am happy to leave it to the people of Christ to discover or re-discover him wherever he may be encountered in this world.

    Easter liberated Jesus Christ from a body that had served its purpose. It liberated him to be with and comfort those very first disciples, such that they could affirm his new life and grow the Church. He is available to do the same this Easter for you and me – if only we will let him.

Happy Easter!

Paul

What sort of World do you want to live in?

   I don't know about you, but I swing quite often between hope and despair when I watch the news and consider our world today. On the one hand there are some good tales to tell: progress in interfaith relationships (our Circuit recently appointed an Interfaith Youth Worker); reductions in crime in various parts and some good stories to be told in community development and work on social cohesion (see for example the Bradford Trident BD5 report). On the other hand we continue to hear about 'terrorism' and violence in different parts of the world and the atrocious things that people do to each other, often in the name of religion. Then there are the awful conditions that people are living in simply because they live under oppressive governments or areas of political tension. We might consider the difficulties in Zimbabwe, the situation in the Darfur region of the Sudan and the Israel - Palestine issue as being examples of such. Of course, none of these situations is simple and it is always difficult to determine solutions which actually resolve the problems. The point I am making is that people in many different regions of our planet (and Bradford is no exception) suffer from all sorts of problems that are often outside of their control and suffer even though they themselves are innocent.

   It is a terrible situation at times and really does make you question and ask 'why, when we believe in a loving God, can such things happen?' I do not profess to be clever enough to answer that question fully but my faith confirms my belief and my experience supports the fact that God loves all of His children - whatever their race, colour, culture or faith and that many if not all of the world's evils are caused by the behaviour of human beings themselves. God is not human and so does not view the world as we do, yet as Christians we believe that God in Jesus Christ has indeed experienced the world as we do. That, in essence, is the message of Christmas. 'Veiled in flesh the Godhead see! Hail, the incarnate Deity' as Charles Wesley put it. And now, as we move into Lent, we realise and begin to ponder the inevitable reality of what humankind will do to someone who speaks of love, in a world which is steeped in selfishness. For, it is very clear to me that, people are extremely egotistical and I mean that particularly in the sense that we (I do this too!) seek to protect 'ourselves' (whatever that image might be in our mind) and when we feel threatened we respond and sometimes that response can quickly become violent - even if only at a verbal level with a raised angry voice. Sadly, in some, that response to a perceived threat can become physically violent, even to the point where some people believe that they will only be safe if certain people are eliminated altogether. This is a recipe for racial, cultural and religious tension and ultimately war.

   Who, then, can be saved? If we continually seek to defend our 'self' image then we shall always respond in a potentially aggressive way. For example, I do something that offends someone, albeit unintentionally, but when challenged as to why I did it I feel that I need to defend myself and out come the justifications and the defensive language. Ultimately, I can hear myself saying, 'well, if you don't like it, tough. There's nothing you can do about it!' Oops! I find myself thinking inwardly, 'Why did you say that? Why did I feel that I had to defend myself?' Could I not simply have admitted my mistake and my failure to be aware that what I did has offended another? Could I not even apologise. My point is that none of these actions affect who I really am in the slightest. By accepting the reality that another person has been hurt by my actions (albeit unintentionally) am I really making myself any 'smaller' or 'less valuable' than I am? Do I really change anything at all about who I really am by my response - one way or the other? I think that, if you really consider it you will realise that any response I make will not actually affect the real 'me' in the slightest. But perhaps you are concerned about your 'ego'? That, of course, may take a knock if you apologise or cease to defend yourself. That, of course, may well feel hurt or in need of support. But my contention is that 'we' are not our 'egos'. We are much more than a mind-set or a way of thinking. We are, in fact, no less than a child of God. We are actually far removed from the physical beings that we see on the surface. The problem is, for most of us, that it is in practice all we do see.

   When we (as a human race) finally become tired of the pain and suffering that we inflict upon ourselves and others, perhaps we might finally refuse (inwardly at least) to allow our egos to run the planet. And this is what gives me ground for hope ultimately: that God, who is present by His Spirit in each and every human being, will eventually be recognised by each and every person and we shall then cease to concern ourselves with our own 'self image' but be concerned only with the real 'child of God' who exists in each and every human being on the planet. Some hope I know, but if 'self denial' is a reality and a goal to be achieved, it is this: 'It is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.' (Paul's letter to the Galatians 2:20)

   In a nutshell, the 'me', who I often believe that I am, has to go in order that the real 'me' can live beyond this physical existence and also during the time of my earthly existence. That real me is the person God created me to be, a person who puts God at the centre and not myself. This links, of course, with our covenant promise. This is rather profound and perhaps you might wish to challenge or question me about it. The realisation of this is a gift of grace and not something that is to be understood neither by intellectual effort nor through any deserving on our part (which, I have no doubt, St Paul would confirm if he could speak now). I offer my thoughts for what they are worth and invite your response.     Please respond via email if you wish.

Robert

Archive