Was Jesus' Death a Good Thing or a Bad Thing?

Cross. Image source.

I'm trying to finish my blog series blogging through the gospel of Matthew, so let's look at Matthew 27. This chapter describes Jesus' trial and crucifixion. So I want to talk about the question, was Jesus' death a good thing or a bad thing?

---

The evangelical take on this question

From an evangelical perspective, Jesus' death is a good thing. I mean, of course we feel sad for him because he suffered so much and didn't deserve it, but this was something that needed to happen. It was part of God's plan. We needed this to happen, so we can be saved.

In this ideology, sin is a really big problem which causes a separation between people and God, and means that all people deserve to go to hell, because we have all sinned at least once. God was really heartbroken about this problem, and had a plan in the works for hundreds of years for how to solve it. The plan was for God to become a person, to live a perfect life with no sin, and then to die a terrible death- this will "count" as payment for all the sins that all people have committed, so then we can be forgiven and go to heaven if we believe in Jesus.

(This is actually a Calvinist idea, called "penal substitutionary atonement"- evangelicalism is very much influenced by Calvinism.)

It's a very big deal that Jesus was perfect and never sinned. See, it had to be Jesus- it would only "work" if it was a perfect sinless person who suffered and died. If any of us normal imperfect people suffer and die, well, we deserve that anyway because of our own sins- so that can't be used to "pay for" anybody else's sins.

Also, it is very important to the plan that Jesus suffered an extremely painful death. One common evangelical fan theory says that Jesus' death was the worst and most painful death that any human has ever suffered. I've even heard the claim that Jesus had to live during the time of the Roman Empire, because crucifixion was the most cruel execution method ever used throughout all of history- so crucifixion had to be the one they used on Jesus. (I'm very skeptical about that- people have been coming up with inhumane things to do to each other all throughout history. I'm not sure I can really say which one is the worst.)

(Note, though, that the bible itself seems to contradict this claim that Jesus suffered the worst death ever. Jesus was crucified alongside 2 other criminals, and when they were on the crosses, at some point the soldiers came to break their legs so they would die faster. But Jesus was already dead, so they didn't break his legs. Hmm, kinda seems like maybe those 2 other guys suffered more than Jesus did.)

I've heard Christians going on and on about crucifixion from a medical perspective, and just how horrific it was... sort of fetishizing it... because it's so so so important that Jesus had to suffer so much.

And I've also heard the claim that, even though the physical pain was excruciating, that wasn't the worst part for him. The worst part was that God the Father turned away from him. That spiritual separation from God, which caused Jesus to cry out, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" was the worst part.

This was God's plan, and Jesus totally knew the plan, and chose to stick to it. He was God; he could have called down angels to fight for him, but he didn't. He chose to go through all of that because of his love for all of us. This is the interpretation of Jesus' death I always heard in evangelical land.

---

But then I read James Cone

In 2018, I wrote a blog series review the book "The Cross and the Lynching Tree" by James Cone. It's a book that makes the connection between Jesus' crucifixion and anti-Black lynching in the United States. Jesus was lynched. And, as poet Countee Cullen wrote, "The South is crucifying Christ again."

When I was reading "The Cross and the Lynching Tree," there was something about the way Cone talked about Jesus' death which felt strange to me, like he was coming at it from an angle that I couldn't quite make sense of. Then I realized, it's because he's talking about Jesus' death like it was a bad thing. Which felt very surprising and new to me, coming from an evangelical background.

Cone talks about how it's bad that lynching victims were innocent and they were unjustly killed, just like Jesus was innocent and was unjustly killed. This is totally NOT how evangelicals would see it. No, in evangelical ideology, Jesus is totally different from us! Jesus was perfect and never sinned, so his suffering was a completely different thing than when average people suffer. And Jesus' death was God's plan, it had to be that way! Not like when Black victims were lynched- that wasn't "God's plan," that was obviously a terrible thing that should have never happened.

So I came to find out- not just from James Cone but from other sources too- there are Christians who don't interpret Jesus' death to be about "It was God's grand plan, to pay for our sins and save us, and Jesus had to be perfect unlike us, and he had to suffer more than anyone else, and the grand ledger that God keeps in heaven ticks over to allow us to get in, but this has nothing to do with any real-life suffering or injustice going on in the real world." Shocking! 

No, there's an interpretation of Jesus' death that goes more like this: When someone comes to teach a message of truth and love, of love being greater than power, the powers-that-be respond with violence. This is how the world is, this is something that happens over and over. Jesus should not have been killed, but this is just how the world is. Jesus was one victim among many, throughout all of history. All victims of oppressive societies which treated marginalized people with violence, and killed anyone who tried to make a change. Jesus stands in solidarity with everyone who has ever suffered unjustly in this way. And the Resurrection shows that this isn't "just the way it is." It shows that power doesn't always win. Love can triumph over power. It gives us hope as we fight for justice in this world.

(For more on this, you can look up "solidarity theory of atonement." Yeah, what I'm describing here are "theories of atonement", ie, Christians discussing the question "what exactly does it mean that 'Jesus saves us'?")

Ah, notice that this is the first time the Resurrection has come up. Yeah, notice that the evangelical interpretation I talked about above never mentioned the Resurrection.

And yeah, indeed, when I was evangelical, I believed the whole point was that Jesus' death paid for our sins. That that's really the main thing. Not the Resurrection. I remember one time I was one of the trainers at an evangelism training, and I was giving an example of how to "share the gospel"- I did the whole spiel about how we are sinners who deserve to go to hell, and Jesus' death pays for our sins, wow that's such good news. And then someone said to me "maybe next time you share the gospel, don't forget the Resurrection." And at the time I kinda laughed and modified my gospel presentation to tack it on at the end, but I didn't exactly *get* why the Resurrection would matter, when one is "sharing the gospel." The "gospel" is that Jesus' death paid for our sins and we can go to heaven if we believe in him, right? The Resurrection is... an extraneous detail? I kind of discussed this with some evangelical friends and came to the conclusion that the Resurrection is proof that it "worked" when Jesus died to pay for our sins.

Looking back at it now, I'm like, yikes. Christians who can't figure out whether the Resurrection is important. Yikessss.

As Christians, we believe that, in some sense, "Jesus saves us." But what does that *mean*, actually? Well, there are many different Christian groups with many different explanations. I didn't know that, when I was evangelical. I thought it was obviously penal substitutionary atonement (ie, the belief that Jesus died because God has to follow these very technical rules about when he's allowed to forgive sins and let people into heaven, and the only way is if a perfect sinless person dies a terrible death, and then that can count, in God's math, as payment for everybody's sins).

Or, here's another way to think about it: Of these 4 aspects of Jesus life, which do you think is the most important?

1. Jesus' birth. The Incarnation. God becomes a human. The Word became flesh and lived among us. God experienced all the things that we do.
2. Jesus' life- his teachings, miracles, the way he interacted with people
3. Jesus' torture and crucifixion
4. Jesus' Resurrection

Christians can have all sorts of different opinions on this question. In my experience in evangelical land, Jesus' death was the HUGE BIG IMPORTANT THING, and these other things were just, like... you know how when you're writing a story, and you have an idea for a really cool scene, but you have to figure out how to maneuver all the characters into the right places for the cool scene to happen, and so you have to write all this boring stuff leading up to the cool scene? Well, Jesus' life is like that.

As Rachel Held Evans said in the book "Inspired," this focus on Jesus' death treats Jesus' life as nothing more than "an interesting backstory." (I don't have the book in front of me but I think I remember this correctly.) And a recent post from the Slacktivist responds to the evangelical claim "Without the Bible and the Cross there is no gospel" by saying:

The problem here is theological, but it is also simply chronological. If “there is no gospel” without the Bible and the Cross then there was no gospel until “the Bible and the Cross.” Which means there is no gospel in the Gospels. It means that Jesus’s preaching and teaching, whatever it was, was not and could not yet have been “the gospel.”

And so it means that whatever Jesus had to teach or to say is of secondary importance.

And I would respond to that by saying, well, yeah. When I was evangelical, I thought that Jesus' teachings were important, sure, but they weren't *the* most important thing. The most important thing is we have to believe in Jesus the correct way so God will "count" Jesus' death as paying our way out of hell. That's the gospel. Jesus' teachings and miracles weren't "the gospel." He was just killing time before getting crucified.

Yeah, I very much do not view it that way any more.

Also, American Christians should all read James Cone.

---

Christian feminist paper "For God So Loved the World?"

In a 2023 blog post, I discussed this 1989 paper: "For God So Loved the World?" by Joanne Carlson Brown and Rebecca Parker. This paper takes issue with the concept of "redemptive suffering"- ie, the idea that when people suffer abuse or oppression, it's somehow okay and they should accept it, because on some level suffering is a good thing- the victims are being like Jesus, who also allowed himself to suffer unjustly. This idea has been used to tell women that we should accept abuse and mistreatment.

The paper discusses several different Christian perspectives on what Jesus' suffering means. (My own view is closest to what the paper calls "the suffering God.") But, it finds all of them to be unacceptable, because all of them treat Jesus' suffering as meaningful in some sense. The writers of this paper don't like that- they argue that if we believe we can say anything positive at all about Jesus' death, this leads to marginalized people internalizing the idea that they should accept injustice rather than fighting for their rights.

I'll say I don't personally agree with that- I think Jesus' death *was* important- but they make a lot of very good points.

Some quotes from the paper:

If the best person who ever lived gave his life for others, then, to be of value we should likewise sacrifice ourselves. Any sense that we have a right to care for our own needs is in conflict with being a faithful follower of Jesus. Our suffering for others will save the world.

and

Christianity is an abusive theology that glorifies suffering.

and

No one was saved by the death of Jesus.

This paper is a must-read if you are interested in the intersection of Christianity and feminism.

---

To sum up: In the evangelical/Calvinist, "penal substitutionary atonement" view, Jesus' death was a good thing, because all of us deserve to suffer like that, and go to hell, but because Jesus suffered in our place, we don't need to. Jesus is completely different from us, because he was perfect and didn't deserve to suffer, but we are sinners and we do. Jesus' death was full of spiritual meaning but has nothing to say about systemic injustice on earth.

A more progressive Christian interpretation, from Black and feminist Christians, says that Jesus' death was a bad thing, because no one deserves to suffer like that. And yet, so many people do. This world is oppressive and violent to so many people. Jesus is the same as us; Jesus stands with every person who suffers injustice/oppression/abuse. And actually, in some sense, it *is* a good thing that God has experienced this, that They suffered right along with people. Having a God who understands what it's like. (And this is basically what I believe now.)

Brown and Parker, writers of the paper "For God So Loved the World?" go even farther than that; they disagree with any Christian ideology which believes anything positive at all about Jesus' death. Because this kind of idea is used to tell women and marginalized people that the injustice we suffer in the world is in some sense *okay*. They make some very good points. I personally don't go that far, because the idea of a Christianity that doesn't treat the crucifixion as important doesn't really make sense to me.

---

This post is part of a series on the gospel of Matthew.

Previous post: One Of You Will Betray Me (a bible fanfic) (Matthew 26)

Click here to go to the beginning of the series.

---

Related:

"The South is Crucifying Christ Again"

Blogaround (1/18/23)

Good Friday is R-Rated 

Yes, I Want Justice (A post about white evangelicals and #BlackLivesMatter)

About that White-Supremacist "Statement on Social Justice & the Gospel" 

"On earth as it is in heaven" 

Sure Of What We Hope For

"The Berenstain Bears: The Very First Easter" (kids' book review)

Book cover for "The Berenstain Bears: The Very First Easter." 

I got this book for my kids: The Berenstain Bears: The Very First Easter. Here's my review of it.

---

Summary

This is a book which gives a very basic outline of these events from the bible: Palm Sunday, the Last Supper, praying in the garden of Gethsemane, Judas's betrayal, Jesus being questioned by Pilate, the crucifixion, the angel at the tomb, and Jesus appearing to his disciples again after his resurrection. Each of these events is described pretty briefly, just a few sentences.

All the characters are depicted as bears because this is the Berenstain Bears universe.

---

My take on this book

My son is at the age where he's learning to read. My daughter is at the age where she likes to tear books with her fast little hands. This book is not for her, lol. It's paperback.

I'm starting to teach my son bible stories, but he doesn't know that many of them yet. We don't go to church, and yeah, you know from all my other blog posts that I have a lot of issues with how bible stories are typically presented to children. I want him to know the stories, but I want to avoid all the problematic messages I got from these stories when I was growing up evangelical.

For the Easter story specifically, my 2 main concerns in telling this story to kids are:

1. How much graphic violence is shown when Jesus is tortured and crucified?
2. Does it say "Jesus died for your sins" or anything like that?

The Easter story, as told in the bible, is extremely violent. Jesus is beaten, flogged, a crown of thorns is stabbed onto his head, he is forced to carry his cross, his hands and feet are nailed to the cross, and then after he dies, a soldier stabs a spear into his side. 

It's a lot!

In my experience, Christians are a little bit too enthusiastic about how graphically violent this all was. Making a big deal about how Jesus needed to die the worst death ever, to pay for all our sins. How it was so horrific but he chose to do it out of love for us, and we should feel really really bad about our sins that did this to him.

I don't view it this way any more. I've read stuff from black Christians and/or feminist Christians who do NOT see it as a good thing that Jesus [supposedly] suffered the maximum possible amount of suffering. In the book, "The Cross and the Lynching Tree," James Cone says that Jesus was lynched. American Christians should all read James Cone. I've read articles from feminist Christians about why it's harmful to portray Jesus' suffering as a good thing- this has direct consequences in the way that women are socialized to put up with bad behavior from men, and marginalized people are told to accept their oppression because suffering is good for them and God will reward them in the long run- like, hey, it's not cool to tell people that suffering is a good thing because it makes them like Jesus- how about instead, we make society better so that people don't have to suffer in the first place?

Okay but can we get back to talking about the Berenstain Bears? How does this book portray the violence of Jesus' death?

This book doesn't really show any of the violence at all- it just says Jesus was hung on a cross, and died, and the illustration shows the silhouettes of people on the three crosses, but it doesn't show any violence beyond that. No blood. Nothing at all about Jesus being beaten/flogged.

I think this approach is very good. I want my son to know the basic plot points of the story, but I don't think there's any need to show all the graphic violence to kids.

And for my second concern: Does this book say anything about "Jesus died for your sins"? Because I don't want to teach my kids that.

No, "The Berenstain Bears: The Very First Easter" doesn't say "Jesus died for your sins." It pretty much just gives a simple overview of the story, and doesn't get into any questions about why things happened or what they mean. It doesn't say anything at all about what Jesus' death and resurrection mean for us. Seriously. Nothing. It doesn't say anything about sin. There's no "so we need to believe in Jesus," nope, nothing like that at all. It's actually quite surprising.

I feel that it's really good to have a book like this, which simply tells the story without also presenting an interpretation from some particular brand of Christianity.

My son asked me a lot of "why" questions, while reading this. Why did Judas betray Jesus? Why did people want to kill Jesus? I told him a few different possible reasons, but said we don't really know for sure, and people have different interpretations.

---

In which I make a joke about Catholics

In the part about the Last Supper, the book says that Jesus said, "This bread and wine is like my body and my blood." I then remarked, "I guess this wasn't written by Catholics" and then my husband and son both said "what?" so I guess I shouldn't make any clever little remarks that reference obscure debates within Christianity like that. Turns out my household is not the right crowd for that.

(Catholics believe that when Christians have communion, the bread and wine *are* the body and blood of Jesus, rather than being *like* the body and blood of Jesus. I don't understand what that even means. I always went to churches that believed it was a symbol. Note that in the actual bible, Jesus says "this is my body" and "this is my blood"- referring to the bread and wine- so it's an interesting choice to add the word "like" when telling this version of the story.)

And I suppose I could make a lot of little observations about which details this book includes, and how it words things, and what that says about the brand of Christianity it's coming from. But I don't think that really matters- as I said above, my main concerns are the amount of violence, and whether it says we need to feel guilty about how our sin killed Jesus. This book is very good on those two points. It tells the basic story, it doesn't get into any graphically violent details, and it doesn't say anything at all about what it means for us.

I certainly have opinions on what Jesus' death and resurrection mean for us- I'm a Christian, of course I have opinions on that- but let's just teach kids the story first, before getting into that.

---

Conclusion

I like this book because it's simple, and therefore doesn't get into any of the problematic stuff that Christian children's books often get into. It gives a brief overview of the bible story of Jesus' death and resurrection. This is what I want; I want my son to know the story. It doesn't say anything at all about what Jesus' death and resurrection mean. I like that. For now I just want my son to know the story. There will be plenty of time in the future to think about what it means. Maybe I'll spend my whole life doing that.

---

Related:

Good Friday is R-Rated 

Reviews of Christian Children's Books 

"Text, Image, & Otherness in Children's Bibles" (I LOVE THIS BOOK SO MUCH)

Blogaround

Links not related to the antichrist:

1. The great global redistributor we never hear about: money sent or brought back by migrants (January 13, via) "According to the UN, migrant workers send back about 15% of their earnings on average. But even a little money from rich countries can make a big difference in poorer ones. For example, 15% of the average annual income in the United States is nearly twice the average annual income in Colombia."

2. The Unbearable Loudness of Chewing (January, via) "But I think a second, larger reason is that misophonia is weird. It’s hard to explain and difficult to understand and doesn’t make any intuitive sense. After all, everyone hates the sound of chewing."

3. Democrats unveil legislation raising federal minimum wage to $17 an hour (April 8) It's a good idea. I'm skeptical about its chances of passing though.

4. Pulling Out The Big Guns For Needle Phobia In An Insane World Where Nobody Seems To Take It Seriously (February 20) I'm linking this because, I don't have needle phobia but I have similar things... This post takes it seriously and gives extremely practical suggestions, which is really rare to see. Usually people just treat you like you're being silly and making a big deal for no reason, and everything would be fine if you would just "relax."

5. Tidy Profit: Camera Captures the Cleaners Changing Lives (April 16) An article about women in China working as domestic workers (they are called "ayis" in China). We have an ayi who works for us, to take care of our baby while we're at work. (This is common in China because there aren't really daycares for infants.) She also does housework. In China if you can afford it, it really helps a lot to have an ayi.

6. Intuit, Owner of TurboTax, Wins Battle Against America’s Taxpayers (April 17) "Instead, it continued cajoling lawmakers and the White House into forcing millions of Americans to shell out hundreds, sometimes thousands, of dollars to file with expensive and confusing tax prep software."

7. Holy Saturday (April 17) "And now it’s Saturday and Jesus is dead and we’re all going to die and everything I’ve told you about him turns out to be in vain and everything I’ve staked my life on turns out to be in vain. Our faith is futile and we’re still hopeless in our sins. Jesus is dead and we are of all people most to be pitied."

8. Life and Living Not Death and Dying (April 17) "Christian theologians from multiple marginalized communities have spent years critiquing a theology that centers the good news on Jesus’ suffering rather than how life triumphed over suffering by undoing, overturning, and reversing that death."

Related to that: Good Friday Without Divine Violence (April 17) 

---

Links related to the antichrist:

1. The Trump Administration Threat To Transgender Adult Care Is Growing At Lightning Speed (April 16) 

Also from Erin in the Morning: Washington State Passes Bill To Cover Some 12-Month Hormone Therapy Stockpiles (April 17) This is good news for trans people in Washington state. The thing that really surprised me was, it says actually hormone replacement therapy is usually for other health issues (menopause, etc)- trans people are only a small fraction of the people who need this kind of medical care.

2. THE GOOD TROUBLE CHECKLIST (April 3) "Figure out what your lane is. Then figure out who is local to you and already doing some of that work. How can you be useful? How can you extend existing efforts? How can you show up and raise hell? Do something."

3. 'Homegrowns are next': Trump hopes to deport and jail U.S. citizens abroad (April 16) WTF. And remember, he sent immigrants there without showing any proof that they were "gang members." He also wants to send US citizens there without showing any such evidence.

4. Trump exploiting antisemitism fears to undermine rule of law, warns Jewish coalition (April 16) "'Our safety as Jews has always been tied to the rule of law, to the safety of others, to the strength of civil society, and to the protection of rights and liberties for all,' reads the statement."

5. In the middle of a hepatitis outbreak, U.S. shutters the one CDC lab that could help (April 16)

6. Confusion reigns as asylum seekers who used CBP One receive notices to leave U.S. within 7 days (April 16) "'We have families who said ‘well, I’m just going to hide, because I can’t go back to my home country, I will be killed, so I prefer to hide,’' she said."

7. U.S.-born American citizen under ICE hold in Florida is released (April 18)

8. Exclusive: Senator Chris Van Hollen talks with Rachel Maddow live from El Salvador (April 17)

And: A Maryland senator visits his wrongfully deported constituent in El Salvador (April 17) "'I said my main goal of this trip was to meet with Kilmar,' Van Hollen wrote on X. 'Tonight I had that chance. I have called his wife, Jennifer, to pass along his message of love.'"

Blogaround

1. Thank you to the readers who have taken my 2023 Reader Survey! If you haven't taken it yet, go ahead and do it. (Survey will be open until June 19.)

2. The veil of gender ignorance (May 19) "To correctly follow the veil of ignorance argument, we ought to imagine ourselves not as ourselves, but as some random young’un who may or may not be like who we are in actuality. So we would have to imagine ourselves as many different things: as cis, as trans, as straight, as gay, as ace, etc. If you grew up today, maybe you would believe you were trans, and maybe you would also be trans."

3. The Shanghai Museum Keeping Memories Of Jewish Refugees Alive (May 18) An important bit of history. (I visited this museum in 2018, here are my photos.)

4. Celebrating #Affirming Sunday (May 16) Very cool- some churches are celebrating "Affirming Sunday" on June 4, the first Sunday of Pride Month.

5. Ecological Stations of the Cross: #6 – The Ruthless Death of Eco-Crucifixion (April 7) "On Good Friday, we remember the ruthless death Jesus endured in the crucifixion.  This year, 43,000 animals died a ruthless death from a toxic train derailment in Ohio.  It’s just one more example of eco-crucifixion."

6. May Anti-Trans Legislative Risk Map (May 20, via) "Every day, I’ve gotten messages from worried people wondering how they are supposed to assess their risk of staying in their home state. The messages range from parents of trans youth wondering if their children will be taken from them to trans teachers wondering if their jobs will be safe in coming years. Sometimes people just want to know if there is a safer state they can move to nearby."

7. Trans Teen Hatches Nefarious Plot To Undergo Years Of Medical Treatments And Counseling To Win At Swimming (May 16, via) "'It’s oh, so simple: several years of sweet-talking medical professionals, receiving hormone therapies, and enduring complex gender-affirming surgeries, and that swimming trophy will be mine!' said the 17-year-old high school senior, who provided a step-by-step account of her knavish conspiracy to take fourth or even third place in a high school or Division III collegiate swimming competition by transitioning to a female identity."

8. Rudy Giuliani accused of sexual harassment by ex-employee (May 16) [content note: sexual assault] Wow this is bad.

Taking My Kid To Church: God Loves My Son

A children's book called "Jesus Loves Me!" Image source.

Part of the Taking My Kid To Church blog series

-----------------

It's Lent now, so I'm thinking to myself, "Maybe I should buy some books about Easter for Square Root." He loves books. He likes to point at the pictures and identify what they are- he says "moo" and "mama" and Chinese words for "fish" and "cat" etc. He can say so many words; he's just amazing.

So. Easter books. Well, I don't know, I am thinking he's not ready for the bible story about Easter. Too much torture and death, and honestly I think it's effed-up how we show children pictures of Jesus on the cross like it's no big deal.

So for now I'm not getting him any books like that. But as I was browsing around online, I did see some books about "God loves you." And I feel like, yes, I do want to get him a book like that.

I believe God loves him. I mean, just look at him, look at this little sweetheart, his beautiful eyes, his little precious feet. He's a toddler now, which means he runs around everywhere and he "helps" us with housework. Carrying a container of laundry detergent all over the apartment, getting all of Daddy's socks out of the drawer, opening and closing the kitchen cabinets over and over, yep so helpful. He found 3D glasses that we bought at a movie theater and now he insists I wear them while breastfeeding. How could anyone not love him? Yes, God loves him.

I want to tell him God loves him. But it's fine if he doesn't believe in God. My husband doesn't believe in God, and that's fine- actually, I think it's good for Square Root to see that people have different opinions about religion. So what I really want him to believe is this: If there is a God, a good and loving God, then Square Root deserves God's love.

That's it. That's what I want him to know. He deserves God's love. If he doesn't believe in God, okay that's fine too. But the idea that we don't deserve anything, that God is so "merciful" for stooping down and holding back feelings of disgust and loving us- no honey, no. You are wonderful and amazing and you deserve love and happiness.

God loves you, honey. But more importantly, you deserve God's love.

-------------

Related:

I Deserve God's Love 

Taking My Kid To Church (Blog Series) 

Perfect

Blogaround

1. The “Good News” Starts with Bad News (posted March 27) "Look around and see if you can find a guide to sharing the gospel that doesn’t start with bad news. I don’t think it exists." She's absolutely right, which is why I reject that "gospel."

2. The Violence of the Cross and Children: Thoughts Before Holy Week (posted 2018) "Under no other circumstance would we give five year olds a coloring page with a man whipping another man."

3. I Use A Wheelchair & Dating Involves Way More Planning Than It Should (posted March 29) "I’ve called ahead to ask a restaurant if it’s wheelchair accessible only to find that when they said “Yes,” what they actually meant was, “Yes, except for a couple steps and the close-together tables that actually make it very much not wheelchair accessible.”"

4. More Evidence that Young Earth Creationism Is Literally Unfalsifiable (posted April 1) "Take a moment to notice the question Chaffey is asking: Could Noah’s ark as described in Genesis have successfully remained afloat, or did it take a miracle? Now consider the question Chaffey is not asking: Could Noah’s ark as described in Genesis have successfully remained afloat, or is the story impossible?"

"The South is Crucifying Christ Again"

W. E. B. Du Bois. Image source.

[content note: lynching]

This week we’re looking at chapter 4 of The Cross and the Lynching Tree, which is called “The Recrucified Christ in Black Literary Imagination.” In this chapter, Cone talks about how black artists and writers connected the crucifixion of Jesus with the injustice of lynching in their own society.

The chapter starts off with the poem “Christ Recrucified” by Countee Cullen:

The South is crucifying Christ again
By all the laws of ancient rote and rule:
The ribald cries of “Save yourself” and “fool”
Din in his ear, the thorns grope for his brain,
And where they bite, swift springing rivers stain
His gaudy, purple robe of ridicule
With sullen red; and acid wine to cool
His thirst is thrust at him, with lurking pain.
Christ’s awful wrong is that he’s dark of hue,
The sin for which no blamelessness atones;
But lest the sameness of the cross should tire,
They kill him now with famished tongues of fire,
And while he burns, good men, and women too,
Shout, battling for black and brittle bones.

Cone says that white pastors were silent on lynching, and black pastors sometimes talked about it but not as directly as black artists did. He asks, “What prevented these theologians and ministers, who should have been the first to see God’s revelation in black suffering, from recognizing the obvious gospel truth?”

Oh. Hmm. Well on the one hand, yes, lynching was basically the same thing as what happened to Jesus. And as I’ve said in previous posts about this book, I’m kind of angry that nobody in the church ever mentioned that to me. So yes, we can ask this question along with Cone, and be astonished that white Christians weren’t making the connection.

But… um. Actually, I kind of know why they didn’t recognize that lynchers were “crucifying Christ again.” Or rather, I can give an answer from the perspective of the type of white evangelical Christianity I was taught.

Ahem.

Reasons Why Christians Don’t Conceptualize the Unjust Suffering and Death of Marginalized People as “Recrucifying Christ”:

1. Jesus was “innocent.” In the Christianity I learned, a big deal was made about how we are all sinners and deserve to die and go to hell- with Jesus being the one and only exception. Jesus suffered and died even though he was 100% innocent and didn’t deserve it. Regular people suffer and die and that’s a sad thing but they technically do deserve it- we all deserve it. (And to be honest, when I started reading this book, I was getting a little stuck when Cone refers to a lynching victim as “innocent”. In the Christianity I learned, there’s no such thing as an innocent person- though it may be the case that the victim was innocent of the specific crime they were accused of.)
2. Jesus’ death was “God’s Plan.” My impression, from reading this book, is that Cone views Jesus’ death as much more of a bad thing than white evangelicals do. We talk about it in grand spiritual terms, find symbolic meaning in each part, and go on and on about how it was so graphically violent and how it HAD TO be that way because of this or that theological reason. I’ve never heard anyone say anything along the lines of “isn’t it terrible that Jesus was so brutally murdered when he was innocent?” We don’t see it as a bad thing. We don’t see it as an injustice. It’s called “Good Friday” for god’s sake. On the other hand, when we see injustices like lynching in our own world, we wish those things didn’t happen. We wish we could prevent them. They are the result of sin, whereas Jesus’ death was the result of “God’s Plan.”

Yes, in my church I heard people talk about “whatever you do for the least of these, you do for me” and how we have a responsibility to help poor people in other countries because it’s the same as helping Jesus. But there was never anything anywhere near as direct as the “Jesus is a lynched black man” idea that we here in this chapter.

Moving along- on page 100, Cone says, “In competition with each other, both the NAACP and the Communist Party sponsored anti-lynching exhibitions in 1935 featuring drawings, paintings, and sculptures by many participating artists.” I found images online of some of the artwork that Cone mentions. Here they are:

"By Parties Unknown," by Hale Woodruff. A drawing showing a lynched man left on the steps of a church. Image source.

"The Lynching," by Julius Bloch. A painting showing a black man tied to a tree (that looks like a cross) surrounded by a mob of white men. Image source.

Cone also talks about W. E. B. Du Bois, who wrote stories depicting Jesus as a black man in the United States, and Langston Hughes, a poet who wrote poems along those same lines. Here’s one part from Du Bois I thought was interesting:

[content note: N-word]
Whites become exceedingly angry when they hear Joshua [the Jesus character] preach: “Blessed are the poor; blessed are they that mourn; blessed are the meek; blessed are the merciful; blessed are they which are persecuted. All men are brothers and God is the Father of all.” Whites complain bitterly: “He’s putting ideas into niggers’ heads.” “Behold, he stirreth up the people.” Then “they seized him and questioned him,” saying, “What do you mean by this talk about being brothers—do you mean social equality?” “What do you mean by ‘the meek shall inherit the earth’—do you mean the niggers will own our cotton land?” “What do you mean by saying God is you-all’s father—is God a nigger?” “Joshua flamed in mighty anger,” appropriating the words of Jesus and John the Baptist in the Gospels, calling the whites “hypocrites,” “serpents,” “generation of vipers” who will not “escape the damnation of hell!”

This was surprising to me because I read Joshua’s words as cliché Christian platitudes, or bible verses I’ve heard so many times they seem mundane to me. But the white characters in the story took them as threats. And, yeah, if Jesus is talking about God’s kingdom coming on earth as it is in heaven, then that is a threat to those in power who are oppressing people. I believe the gospel is good news- but not for the oppressors.

And check out this quote from page 108:

It is one thing to think about the cross as a theological concept or as a magical talisman of salvation and quite another to connect Calvary with the lynching tree in American experience.

Wow, yes, wow. Well said. Christians should all think about that.

Also this, from page 115:

That is what Jesus’ life, teachings, and death were about—God’s protest against the exploitation of the weak by the strong. 

So, uh, I was raised in the white evangelical church, and uh, that’s totally not what we thought “Jesus’ life, teachings, and death were about.” Like, not even close. Back then, I might have said something like “That is what Jesus’ life, teachings, and death were about—God’s mercy saving sinners who didn’t deserve it.” We also believed we should help poor people and try to make the world a better place, but that was a secondary concern. That wasn’t the point of what Jesus did. That wasn’t “the gospel.”

But now I am the type of Christian who agrees with Cone here. And I think the “gospel” that I learned was a convenient way for people with privilege to ignore systemic injustice. Emphasizing that we’re “all sinners” so we’re all the same along the dimension that matters most. That stuff about ending oppression is just a temporary earthly concern, it’s negligible next to the eternity in hell we are all facing if we don’t believe the correct things about Jesus. …Yeah, what a convenient excuse.

One more thing I want to say: Cone talks about how there were essentially 2 different versions of Jesus in American Christianity- white Jesus and black Jesus. “The White Christ gave blacks slavery, segregation, and lynching and told them to turn the other cheek and to look for their reward in heaven.” Several of the poems Cone quotes in this chapter even talk about how white Christians were the ones doing the lynching. White Christians ignored lynching, condoned it (“to protect the purity of the white race” [page 99]), or actively participated. In contrast, black Jesus was the victim of lynching and all the other injustices that black people suffered.

This chapter emphasizes how important the roles of artists is. They find meaning and make connections that others ignore or don’t notice. Black artists called out the United States for crucifying Christ again.

-------------

Lynching is STILL HAPPENING NOW. Just in the past week or two, Stephon Clark and Saheed Vassell were killed by police- even though they were unarmed. Christ is crucified again. #BlackLivesMatter

-------------

Posts about The Cross and the Lynching Tree (by James H. Cone):

Reading US History Inerrantly
Ending Slavery Didn't Address the Real Problem
For the Sunday School Kids Who Never Heard About "the Curse of Ham" Or "Black Simon" 
Dr. King and What Taking Up the Cross Actually Looks Like
"The South is Crucifying Christ Again"
"Strange Fruit"
"The Cross and the Lynching Tree": Conclusion

Good Friday is R-Rated

Scene from a church Easter play. Image source.

[content note: graphic violence, crucifixion]

[also, this has got to be the weirdest spoiler warning I've ever written, but: spoilers for "The Passion of the Christ"]

The movie "The Passion of the Christ" came out in 2004, when I was in high school. I remember reading the gushing reviews from Focus on the Family- they were like, "This movie is really great because it actually is a biblically-correct, Christian movie! Not like all those other times Hollywood tries to make a 'biblical' movie but embellishes the story all wrong, adding all kinds of false teaching. So everyone should go see 'The Passion of the Christ,' and see it on opening weekend so it will make a lot of money, and we'll show this secular society that a lot of people really do want to see good, biblical movies." (Because God forbid the directors and writers have some creativity and play with the story a little, and it strays from "correct" evangelical doctrine.)

So I was super-excited to see it. But then my parents and I read the reviews in the newspaper, that said it was extremely, shockingly violent. (Wikipedia says that one reviewer wrote, "The movie is 126 minutes long, and I would guess that at least 100 of those minutes, maybe more, are concerned specifically and graphically with the details of the torture and death of Jesus. This is the most violent film I have ever seen.") We started to wonder if maybe I shouldn't see it.

My parents went on opening weekend, and afterward said it wasn't that bad, it was fine for me to see it. So the next weekend I went with my mom and we saw it, and I was like "yeah that wasn't that violent, it was pretty much exactly what I expected."

We chalked it up to Christian persecution. "The media" didn't want people to see such a good, biblical movie, so they made a big huge deal out of the violence, when it really wasn't that bad.

From the time I was a little kid, growing up in church, I saw tons of images of Jesus being tortured. It was so normal. Books, movies, Easter musicals, all showing a man being beaten and tortured to death. Little kids see Jesus beaten, flogged, covered in blood and screaming in pain, and finally nailed to a cross. It feels so normal that Christians don't even realize how disturbing, how graphic, how horrifically violent it is.

There is artwork with Jesus "wearing" the crown of thorns. Holy crap. Long thorns being stabbed into his brain, and that's just a completely normal image to have in your church lobby, people walk by it every day and barely notice. There is so much artwork with Jesus bleeding out incredible, scary amounts of blood.

Furthermore, Christian culture makes a big deal about how it's so important that Jesus' death was so violent and painful. I've heard church people say things like, "Crucifixion was the most painful method of execution ever invented- that's why Jesus was born during the time of the Roman empire, because he needed to have the worst death possible." (Nevermind that he died pretty quickly after being nailed to the cross- the other 2 victims had their legs broken because they hadn't died yet. Seems like maybe they suffered worse than he did.) I've read articles which went on and on about how horribly painful it is to be nailed through the wrist. For some reason, a lot of Christians believe that it's absolutely necessary that Jesus' death be so tortuous and painful.

And there's guilt that comes along with that. Sunday school teachers tell kids that Jesus suffered all this pain for you and because of you. Your sin is so bad; you tortured and killed Jesus. And kids are taught that because Jesus suffered so much for you, you HAVE TO devote your life to him. Guilting them into it. This is spiritual abuse.

Church people seem to think that, if only people KNEW just how much Jesus suffered FOR THEM, then they would definitely become Christians. We wanted our Easter musical to look realistic. One time, a kid in my Sunday school class said, "If we could actually crucify someone, and people could see how bad it was, then they would believe. But probably we can't find anyone willing to be crucified, so, oh well." That's just the opinion of one naive kid, don't worry, none of the church leaders literally believed "it's too bad we can't actually kill the actor in our Easter musical." But it is consistent with the idea that "if only people could really see how much Jesus suffered for them, then they would believe."

So we grow up seeing, over and over, images of incredibly graphic violence, not suitable for children, and we get used to them, desensitized, and then pastors keep trying to come up with innovative new ways to describe just how horrifically painful Jesus' death was- to try to shock us and get us to commit our lives to Jesus even more. It's a pretty messed-up dynamic.

So when I went to see "The Passion of the Christ," it was pretty much exactly what I expected. I expected to see Jesus beaten and flogged, his entire body covered in blood. I expected to see him fall down and scream in pain during the flogging. I expected to see him collapse when they tried to get him to carry his cross- again, totally covered in blood. I expected that he would scream when they pounded nails into his wrists and feet. I expected a huge amount of blood to gush out when the soldier thrust the spear into Jesus' side.

It was the same thing I had seen over and over in books, movies, and church musicals that told the story. The only difference was "The Passion of the Christ" was the most realistic-looking.

Oh, wait. There was one bit I didn't expect. I didn't expect a bird to peck out the eyes of the thief who mocked Jesus. My mom told me to cover my eyes for that part. That was the only thing in the movie that we thought was "too scary." Because none of the other depictions I had seen of Jesus' death included it. (It's not from the bible.)

Christians become desensitized to the violence in the story of Good Friday. We don't even realize how graphic and disturbing it is. Like the time I posted the lyrics "What can wash away my sin? Nothing but the blood of Jesus" on facebook, and a non-Christian friend was like "HOLY CRAP what is this?" But Christians talk about being "covered in Jesus' blood", not realizing it sounds like something out of a horror movie.

So what's my point? What should we do differently? I have 4 suggestions:

1. Content notes/ trigger warnings. It's fine to have images, movies, and musicals depicting graphic violence, but you should warn people first. Don't put a picture of Jesus all bloody on the cross somewhere that an unsuspecting passerby will suddenly see it with no warning- that is extremely graphic and it's understandable that people might not want to see it. If you post pictures on social media of Jesus on the cross, or being flogged, or with a crown of thorns, make sure to put a content note or trigger warning on it and post it in such a way that people can choose not to look at it.
2. Let's reconsider how we tell this story to children. Is it really appropriate for kids to see images- even cartoon images- of Jesus covered in blood? Is it appropriate for kids to see an actor in your church play being (fake) nailed to a cross? That is scary and disturbing. I believe it really happened and it's important, but we need to seriously have a talk about how we tell this story, especially to children.
3. The meaning of Jesus' death isn't in the sheer amount of suffering he endured. Within Christianity, there are many different perspectives on the meaning of Jesus' death. I was taught that "the gospel" was penal substitutionary atonement, which means that people deserve to be punished for our sin, but Jesus was punished instead. From this perspective, it makes sense to go on and on about just how bad the pain was for Jesus. It needed to be The Worst Suffering Ever in order to pay for all of humanity's sins. But I no longer believe in penal substitution, and I no longer think we need to focus on just how incredibly violent the crucifixion was in order to *get* the meaning of what Jesus did for us. Other factors like politics and systemic injustice are much more important than the sheer amount of pain. There's no value in trying to shock ourselves with more and more graphic and realistic descriptions of the pain Jesus suffered.
4. Don't guilt people. The idea that "Jesus died because of your sin- you killed Jesus" is spiritual abuse which can do long-term damage to people's emotional and mental health. But in my experience in the evangelical church, this was a completely normal thing to say to children. And pastors and Sunday school teachers would go on and on about how because Jesus suffered so much for you, you owe him your life- you need to devote your life to Jesus or else you are being ungrateful and mean to him. This is extremely coercive and abusive. How about we stop teaching it in church?

The story of Jesus' death is extremely, horrifically graphic and violent. It's easy for Christians not to even notice that because we're so used to seeing extremely graphic images of Jesus' suffering. We need to reconsider how we tell this story.

-------

Credit goes to Morgan for some of the ideas in this post~ I first heard the idea of "people really need to have content notes if they talk about crucifixion" from them.

Also, funny story: When "The Passion of the Christ" came out, some church people were like "but isn't it a sin to see R-rated movies? so can we see it or not?" lololol as if the movie rating people have the power to decide what is and isn't "sin."

Jesus did NOT "have a bad weekend"

Peter denies Jesus. Image source.

[content note: violence, PTSD]

Here's something I've heard many times from atheists: It makes no sense to say "Jesus died for your sins" because (as the story goes) he resurrected a few days later- which is so incredibly different from dying and staying dead that it doesn't even make sense to use the word "die." You should say "Jesus had a bad weekend for your sins."

All right, I'm an ex-evangelical, I have a lot of criticism for the way the story of Jesus' death and resurrection is told in the white American evangelical church. Usually I find myself agreeing with atheists when they point out the parts that don't make sense. But not in this case.

This attempt to frame it as "Jesus had a bad weekend" claims that, in the story, Jesus "died" but then a few days later he was alive again and totally okay. Real death lasts forever, but Jesus' suffering only lasted for one weekend.

In other words, they're claiming that there are no long-term psychological effects from trauma and torture.

Seriously, think about it. Let's say you're arrested under shady circumstances, falsely accused, abandoned by all your friends, violently beaten and tortured- and yet somehow you manage to survive it. Just because you survive, does that mean you're okay and everything's back to normal? All the pain is in the past and you can just go on living your life?

Come on.

Even though he resurrected, you really think Jesus was "fine"? After what had happened to him? After God and his disciples had all abandoned him? He showed the disciples the scars on his hands. He had physical scars; he had emotional scars too.

Yes, there are things you can criticize about the concept of "Jesus died for your sins." Even though I'm a Christian, I don't believe that- or rather, I don't believe "Jesus died for your sins" in the sense of "Because you sin, you have this big debt that you owe God, and Jesus died to pay that off for you." That's not good news.

But don't say "Jesus just had a bad weekend." If you really think the story of Jesus' death and resurrection is nothing more than "having a bad weekend," then you're saying mental health isn't real and PTSD isn't real. Go ahead and criticize Christianity if you want, but don't throw victims with long-term emotional trauma under the bus.

---------

Related post: The Scars

Blogaround

Image source.

1. Why Christians Should Not Host Their Own Passover Seders (posted 2014) "Because Jewish people do not believe this interpretation of their holy texts and given the atrocities committed by members of our own faith because of this difference in belief, it’s like adding salt to the wounds of history for a Christian family to take one of the most sacred Jewish celebrations and twist it to reflect our own beliefs."

2. 10 Situations Where Christian Bakers Should Refuse To Bake Wedding Cakes (posted March 30) "If one is a Christian and one is not (or say, if one is a real Christian but the other is a fake Christian like an Episcopal), you need to boldly say “no cake for you!” — and should probably throw in a solid “repent ye!” as well."

3. Nine-Year-Old Sluts and Masturbating Dinner Guests (posted March 30) "It is not normal for a dinner guest to go into your bathroom and masturbate. Period. Dinner guests come to spend time with the hosts and the other guests, not to masturbate in their bathrooms. Seriously, who does that?!"

4. Why Christians Should Kiss the Courtship Debate Goodbye (posted March 31) "I was afraid of messing up. I was afraid of divorce. I was afraid of taking my life into my own hands." Well a-freakin-men to this.

5. Should Mom-and-Pops That Forgo Gay Weddings Be Destroyed? (posted April 3) "But I also believe that the position I'll gladly serve any gay customers but I feel my faith compels me to refrain from catering a gay wedding is less hateful or intolerant than let's go burn that family's business to the ground."

6. Gethsemane: The Most Troubling Story in the Bible? (posted April 2) "The divine nature served, supposedly, as a kind of emotional backstop to keep Jesus from becoming too wimpy and weepy."

7. God’s Not Dead 2: American Revolution (EXCLUSIVE FIRST LOOK!) (posted April 5) "JOSH picks up his history textbook in one hand and his Bible in the other. He looks back and forth between the two as an AUDIO ADRENALINE song plays. Finally, Josh throws the history textbook through his dorm room window. It explodes on the lawn outside."

8. Loveless ethics and the enormous, mendacious, disembodied anus (posted March 31) "Yes, the giant, invisible anus demands that its followers be nice, courteous, helpful and charitable, and its dictates will therefore probably produce in them some simulacrum of those things, but this kind of system can never produce the genuine article. It can only provide a counterfeit."

9. Jewish A Capella Group Releases Passover Parody of ‘Uptown Funk’ (posted March 25) This is fantastic.

Blogaround

Image source.

1. Matthew the τελώνης (“Toll Collector”) and the Authorship of the First Gospel (posted April 15) "This view of Matthew’s occupation does not cast Matthew, a tax collector, as someone deeply familiar with Jewish Law or with extensive religious training. The problem is, however, that the Gospel of Matthew is the most Jewish out of the canonical Gospels."

2. Good Friday Means Nothing Without Easter Sunday (posted April 18) "In particular, today’s Christian has a tendency to reduce the Gospel to Good Friday. The result? Grace is also reduced to one theme: atonement—to Christ shouldering and then reversing the wrath of God."

3. Haha. This picture:

Image source.

4. Holy Saturday (posted April 18) "Seriously, just look around. Does it look like the meek are inheriting the earth?"

5. When Every Touch Is Sexualized (posted April 19) "That is how incredibly significant physical touch can be to those in the purity culture. Touch between unmarried individuals of opposite genders is not only forbidden but also, as a result, thoroughly sexualized."

Good Friday: The one thing that can never change

Image source.

Remember back in college, when I wrote a few letters to my "future husband"?

Yeah... yeah. I thought it would be so great, years later when I got married and I would give them to him. But now the kind of guy I wrote the letters to isn't the kind of guy I want to marry.

I thought I'd always believe that stuff, but I've changed.

And I've changed so much. Everything I believed as a "good Christian"... The stuff about hell, the stuff about sin, the stuff about purity... I just kind of think back to it and feel like, "nobody believes that anymore, do we?"

Except Good Friday.

Everything changed, but one thing that can't change is that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.

That's still true, right?

So Genesis 1 didn't really happen (but is still valuable). Okay, whatever. And the bible has some mistakes. Fine. And I used to think I knew all the answers, and I knew everything about Jesus and why he died, but now those answers don't make sense and I have some new opinions about that but I don't want to say what they are now because I might confuse my own opinion with God's.

But, this is true: That Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.

I don't care about the rules anymore, about purity and modesty and you have to read your bible every day or else you're a bad Christian. And I'm no longer going to automatically believe someone because they say "this is God's way" and call others "false teachers." And I'm figuring it out using my way, using my own brain- yeah, not "trusting God" and all that.

But, I'm still a Christian, because I believe Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.

If that's not true, screw the whole religion.