Over the past few days, I've been engaged in several discussions with theists on the subject of Easter and the story of Jesus' sacrifice which, as most would argue, was the most significant event in the history of Christianity (notwithstanding the fact that the Gospels make a holy mess of corroborating the details surrounding the event). Unlike Christmas, the other big Christian celebration, Easter tends to be decidedly more sombre, as well as generally less commercialized, and is usually treated as a time of quiet reflection as opposed to joyous celebration (notwithstanding the fact that Jamaica Carnival - a hit with local Christians - actually occurs around this time). But just like Christmas, any attempt at interrogating the tenets on which the holy day was founded tend to be met reactions which range from dismissal to outright rage. Such was my experience when I questioned the authenticity of Jesus' alleged "sacrifice."Incidentally, what sparked my online discussions was a question from a Christian, one not uncommon around this time of year - "Why did Jesus have to die?" A simple and honest question, one which I imagine any well thinking Christian would've asked upon first introduction to the horrific and macabre episode which is the crucifixion. As the Bible shows, Jesus' sacrifice follows a long line of blood sacrifice practised in Hebrew mythology for atonement from sin - whenever you incurred the wrath of the Hebrew god Yahweh, an animal (or humans a few times apparently) had to be sacrificed to appease his anger. In Christian mythology, Jesus represents the last sacrifice; a pure "lamb" lead to the slaughter for the remission of the sins of all mankind, everywhere, forever more. The whole foundation of Christianity is hinged on this death - asking why it had to happen cuts right through to core of the belief system. The answers tend to be well rehearsed platitudes regurgitated from Sunday school lessons - "he did it because he loves us so much", "there can be no forgiveness without the shedding of blood", "sin is so awful that a life had to be sacrificed on our behalf" and so on ad infinitum. From where I stand however, no sacrifice took place.
Assuming we are using the standard definition of sacrifice - which is to give something up to gain something else - what exactly did Jesus lose? We know it was not his life. The story indicates that Jesus went into his own crucifixion knowing full well that he would "die" on Friday evening but be up and about in time for Sunday brunch. Additionally, if we accept Catholic dogma, there was no break in the continuity of his life - he went from the cross, to the underworld to preach up a storm, back up to the surface to say goodbye, then flew off into heaven. So, technically speaking, Jesus did not sacrifice his life - he appears to have sacrificed a couple days on planet earth. And, how genuine could such a sacrifice be anyway when you are fully aware, without a shred of doubt, that what you lament about giving up will be returned to you after two sundowns. You cannot claim to have sacrificed a thing, but yet it still remains firmly in your possession. Jesus gave nothing up.
So why then did Jesus have to die? My alternate explanation is that this is just how the most enduring hero epics are written - the hero dies a martyr. What better way to accomplish the following:
- Adding instant credibility (if not outright vindication) to your cause - your life, after all, is no easy thing to gamble with. A hero however sacrifices their life since the cause is more valuable than the life of any one person, including the hero.
- If there was any doubt among followers about the authenticity of the hero, martyrdom removes it.
- Related to the point above, followers are now imbued with the necessary confidence and certitude to carry the cause through to completion. Indeed, many heroes have accomplished more by their death than they could've ever accomplished in ten life times.
Who could deny the appeal of such a story? Which believer would not be stirred to action by such a brave act? The "Passion" story, like several other hero epics before it, all follow the same general melodramatic template - a tumultuous adventure filled with conflict and strife, culminates in a climatic finale where the hero of the story must forfeit their life for the greater good of the cause. It is literary gold, even if historically it never actually happened. Such appears to be the case with the Easter story - a sacrifice which never was, for a cause which, at present, seems to be in decline.
Cool Dude.
