Easter Sunday is almost over. You’ve probably had your fill of chocolate, perhaps a satisfying meal and maybe a convivial few drinks with friends and family.
And if you are happen to be a practicing Christian, you may well have gone to Church earlier today and thought about Christ dying for our sins and being resurrected after three days—the event we are, in fact, meant to be celebrating.
This publication has no position on faith — it is after all a matter of personal choice, and what you choose to believe is entirely up to you. Faith is what it is — an article of faith — proof for or against a particular belief is, by definition, impossible.
But this publication does have problem with religions, or creeds, that attempt to impose their world – or divine – view upon others. There is, unfortunately, a tendency amongst passionate believers of all religions to think that their – and only their – view of spirituality and what happens after we die is the correct and valid one. That they and their co-religionists are destined for heaven and everyone else who believes something different, or nothing at all, is destined for nothingness or eternal damnation. Often the “pagan”, ”heathen” or ”unbeliever” is seen as needing to be “saved” and in the worst case is regarded as less deserving of mercy, perhaps even less human, than the faithful believer.
All of that on the tenuous grounds of an unprovable faith is simply abhorrent.
Despite most religions preaching goodwill, love and charity as their central tenets, much blood has been shed under the guise of the “righteous war”.
There seems to be a feeling amongst those who regard themselves as holy (or holier than thou) that they are excused from adhering from the very principles of their own faith, simply because they “believe”. It is this sanctimonious hypocrisy – the thought that “I don’t need to be good, because God loves me – from so many who practice religion that repels so many people.
“Religion is the opium of the people”, said a great thinker, but many people don’t want to be drugged or bullied — they want to make up their own minds about the mysteries of the universe.
The truth is, no-one has a monopoly on knowing what will happen after we die — not us, not you, not organised religions, not anyone. It is unknowable.
But whether you believe that Christ was the son of God, or simply a philosopher of immense wisdom, you would all do well to remember his greatest words:
“So in everything, do unto others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.” (Matthew 7:12 ).
As the golden rule, this creed was around for long before Christ and is present in almost every society. We would do well to remember it. If we showed goodwill, restraint, tenderness, humility, charity and, yes, love to all our fellow beings, there would be far fewer problems in this world of ours. And what problems there were, we would face together as brothers and sisters, not sparring partners.
It is natural to doubt. All intelligent people should doubt things that cannot be reliably proven. This principle of “caution” is important in all areas of life — it prevents you being led down the wrong path.
Dogmatic belief – the thought that anyone who does not practice your religion is a less than you, and less deserving of kindness and respect – is a recipe for intolerance and destruction. So it has proven. The thought that you must not doubt or question the tenets of your faith is something that is bound to lead to closed minds, which almost always leads to small minds.
Here at Independent Australia, we’re with CS Lewis, who thought that a non-believer who follows the ten commandments is more likely to reach heaven than a Christian who does not.
So, as Easter Sunday draws to a close, we ask all people to remember the teachings of that great man, Jesus Christ, and to try to be kind to one another.
And from all of us at Independent Australia, we wish you all a very Happy Easter.








4 Comments
For those who are interested in further reading on this subject I commend to you the writings of Bishop John Shelby Spong, an Episcopalian bishop in the USA. He is one of the leading advocates in a movement called ‘New Christianity for a New World.
Spong is a strong proponent of feminism, gay rights, and racial equality within both Christianity and society at large. Towards these ends, he calls for a new Reformation, in which many of Christianity’s basic doctrines should be reformulated.
In his book ‘Jesus for the non-religious’ * Bishop John Shelby Spong writes at page 128 :Jesus was born in a perfectly normal way in Nazareth. His mother was not the icon of virgin purity. His earthly father, Joseph, was a literary creation. His family thought he was out of his mind. He probably did not have twelve disciples. He had disciples who were both male and female. He did not command nature to obey him. He did not in any literal sense give sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf or wholeness to the paralyzed and infirm. He did not raise the dead.
There was no stylized Last Supper in which bread was identified with his broken body and wine with his poured-out shed blood designed to symbolize his final prediction of death.
There was no betrayal and no romance connected with his death, no mocking crowd, no crown of thorns, no words from the cross, no thieves, no cry of thirst and no darkness at noon.
There was no tomb. No Joseph of Arimathea, no earthquake, no angel who rolled back the stone.
There was no resuscitated body that emerged from that tomb on the third day, no touching of the wounds of Jesus, no opening by him of the secrets of the scripture.
Finally there was no ascension into heaven that exists above the sky.
All of these narrative details were the creation of a community of people who individually and corporately had an experience that they believed was of God in the human life of one Jesus of Nazareth. Their way of explaining the experience has now run its course. It makes assumptions we cannot make. It uses categories of thought we cannot use.
The traditional explanation of the Jesus experience is dying. For many, it is already dead. Traditional Christians have committed the fatal error of identifying the truth of the Jesus experience with the literalness of their explanations of that experience. That never works. Every explanation dies when its time dies. The death of the explanation does not mean the death of the experience. Our task is to separate the eternal experience from the time-bound and time-warped explanations.
* Published by Harper Collins in 2007 IBN 978-0-06-123323-4
Sounds all well and good from an athiest`s perspective
Roy but you have to remember everyone, regardless of
their political or constitutional persusians, does
have diffrent belief systems, many of which are
based on the biblical account of the life of
Jesus and the principles of the bible in
general. I`m a bit of a fencesitter Roy,
i am not saying in what capacity i believe
in a paranormal existance other than to say
i believe in it to some degree. Like anything
written by humans, the bible i am sure does
contain many historical oversights and it`s
far from being 100% accurate. But that`s what
faith is all about, and many people, including
republicans, have it. I cannot understand why
people think you can alter what is written in
the bible, to suit the social trends of the
time, to make it a more accurate reflection
of what took place in the time of Christ,
even if some things in the bible are a
misinterpretation. Either you believe
in the hebrew bible or you dont, you
cant change it to say it`s OK for gays
to get married if God doesn`t tolerate
homosexuality. Whether you are athiest
or a believer, the fact is the bible is
God`s book, if you dont believe in what
is written therein then no one is stopping
you ignoring it and reading something that
rejects the theory of creationism and the
laws of God which according to the bible
clearly prohibits certain forms of human
behaviour which some humans find acceptable.
I agree with Tim, The bible cannot be altered. It can either be followed or ignored, nothing else.
Of course it can. If you read the whole bible you can see that it is so often conflicting that every interpretation can be accommodated. There is a massive difference between the old and new testament philiosophies, of course. And let’s not forget that the bible is a collection of 3rd century AD writings that the beginning of the Catholic Church selected. There is reams of apocrypha that they decided to leave out. The Christian bible, as we know it, was created by committee. The thought that you could not change a “jot or a tittle” (as the book itself says) is a flagrant display of ignorance. Moreover, the bible can not be taken literally – the world did not begin 6,000 years ago.