Celebrate Resurrection at Easter, Even If Jesus Lived...

by Malayna

I recently saw a show on the National Geographic Channel about the Shroud of Turin in which they presented many theories about how it came to exist, and speculated on the authenticity of the supposed burial cloth of Jesus. But the idea that excited me the most, which is also explored in the book The Jesus Conspiracy, is that Jesus didn't die on the cross, and that the Shroud of Turin serves a proof that he lived on after his crucifixion, which, in itself, is uncomfortable (to say the least) but not necessarily deadly.

Controversy has surrounded the Shroud of Turin since it appeared on the scene in 1357, when the widow of a French knight put it on display in a church. It wasn't until 1898, after the shroud had been photographed, that the image of a face was clearly seen in a negative. Radiocarbon dating done in 1988 declared the cloth to be from the Middle Ages, approximately 1300 years after Jesus lived.

This is the basis of The Jesus Conspiracy theory. The authors propose that the Roman Catholic Church substituted another cloth during the testing, because they knew that if the Shroud of Turin was shown to be real, and the method of its making revealed, it would prove that Jesus didn't die on the cross, and that knowledge could destroy the church entirely.

The authors believe the image was made after medicine put on Jesus' body after his crucifixion to heal his many wounds seeped into the cloth that covered him to keep the wounds clean. As Jesus lay motionless in a coma in the cave where the "resurrection" is said to have taken place, sunlight shone upon him from an opening above, allowing the image to burn into the cloth like a photograph. Coincidentally, followers of the Islamic faith believe that Jesus lived through the crucifixion before ascending to heaven. Interesting, isn't it?

Does this negate the celebration of Easter? I don't think it needs to. As the renowned academic and author Joseph Campbell said, "Every religion is true one way or another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble."

During an interview with writer Tom Collins, Campbell explained further, "... the imagery that has to be used in order to tell what can't be told, symbolic imagery, is then understood or interpreted not symbolically but factually, empirically. It's a natural thing, but that's the whole problem with Western religion. All of the symbols are interpreted as if they were historical references. They're not. And if they are, then so what?"

The Bible is the mythology of our day. It's nice to know the historical accuracy of the text, but it's not the most important thing. It is our personal faith and belief that is truly important. The stories give us concepts to discuss and share as a culture. It is their familiarity and the connection to the themes and greater possibilities that stir and inspire.

Since everyone really just believes what they want to believe whether they've got carbon-14 dating equipment, revolutionary new image scanners or a Bible, I'm choosing to believe that Jesus met up with Mary in France, a la The Da Vinci Code, and they went on to live a peaceful life together. I have French ancestry, maybe I am one of their descendants. What an interesting possibility!

| 03/24/08 | Religion