|
The Crucifixion
By Noel F. Ambery, Falls Village
For close to 2,000 years, Christians have accepted that sacrifice on Calvary as a redeeming performance which somehow confers salvation on the true believer—a beneficial effect usually to do with the afterlife. On how is this achieved, the Old and New Testaments are silent.
The cross, as a powerful religious symbol, goes back beyond the dawn of civilization. Back beyond 20,000-year-old cave drawings. It is generally conceived as a sexual symbol of life—or should I say attempted life. Noting a ring on a finger will bear this out.
The earliest Christian writer, Paul, barely skimmed over the accounts of Christ's crucifixion. The latter day authors of Mark, Luke, Matthew and John had a multitude of sources for elaboration, expansion and embellishment. They came from the legends of Krishna, Apollo, Tammus, Prometheus, Sarapis, Attis, Adonis, Pythagorus, Osirus, Horus, Jamiramis, Bacob and Ixion, and other crucified savior-gods.
But their Gospels are beset with problems. From the Resurrection through the Crucifixion to the Ascension, they give varying and conflicting accounts on important events. For instance, Luke 24:50-51 says the Ascension took place at Bethany; Mark 16:14 and 19 says it was from a room in Jerusalem; Acts 1:9-12 says it took place on Mount Olivet. They are totally at odds with one another or just plain confused. It appears that the Gospels are not a reliable record of the last days of Christ.
We read in Hebrews 9:22, "Under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins." While this concept is logical to the primitive, ancient, religious mind, it is thoroughly reprehensible to civilized 21st century man.
Then what is the motivation behind the crucifixion? Is it to atone for sin in general? Well, everyone is still sinning—so what is the point? Or was it for the "original sin" caused by the mythical Adam and Eve? Modern anthropology claims there were no such personages. Our biological beginnings, they claim, go back to the earliest ancestors of monkeys, apes and Homo sapiens—7 to 10 million years ago. If, indeed, the "original sin" goes back that far, you would think a "loving" God would have forgiven and forgotten the indiscretion, if at all there was an indiscretion.
So now we are at a theological dilemma. The Crucifixion begs the question: Who or what died on the cross? If a man died—nothing is accomplished. A man's death can neither save, redeem, nor correct past indiscretion. If a god died on earth, then who would be guarding the gates of heaven? However, according to Christian Trinitarian doctrine (three gods in one, one god in three), Christ's dying meant that the Father and Holy Ghost became deceased on that fateful day 2,000 years ago. The world would become momentarily godless—a theological dilemma turned into a theological carnival.
Well, folks, here we are at the crossroads of mythology and theology. Somewhere along the line they have merged and somehow are veering further away from the avenue of sanity.
|
|
