'Are You Not Entertained?' - The Gladiator Who Defied An Empire

'The General Who Became A Slave. The Slave Who Became A Gladiator. The Gladiator Who Defied An Empire.' - good, ain't it! Tingles down the spine just thinking about it. Such epicness.

Rather surprisingly for me, the last time I watched Gladiator, the historical narrative of Jesus took on new light. Before the movie I'd been reading about what it meant to call someone 'Messiah' in the first century and I'd learnt that, for many, the Messiah was someone who would defy an Empire. He'd be a revolutionary like Moses, a man who had liberated his people right from under the nose of Pharaoh himself, ending centuries of oppressive Egyptian slavery.

Roll on to the first century AD and the descendants of Abraham (apparently privileged, chosen, loved by God) find themselves embarrassingly ruled over once again. This time their own nation is occupied and governed by the world's greatest superpower, the Roman Empire. To defy the Empire in the first century, to liberate and free, the Messiah would surely need to be the greatest, mightiest warrior of all time, an absoulute master with the sword.

Yet Jesus said, 'Put your sword away!'
His line of attack was distinctly non-violent.
And he was crushed.
His revolution was quashed with sheer ease.
Jesus suffered a humiliating, bloodthirsty slaughter.
On a Roman execution stake.


Set 150 years later, Gladiator shows that the Roman Empire was still as powerful, and as bloody, as ever. If Jesus' mission had been to overthrow the Empire, his mission had blatantly failed. But bizarrely, some did claim success for Jesus. These 'Christians' continued to defy Caesar's rule by declaring 'Jesus is Lord.' But this irritating rabble could be easily kept under control. They made for excellent entertainment in the Colosseum.

But then in AD 312 something strange happened.
Utterly bizarre.
Some might say miraculous.
The ruler of the Roman Empire, Emperor Constantine, declared himself a Christian.
How weird.
How weird is it that the Empire that killed Jesus, three centuries later suddenly decided to worship him?!?

The scenario is bizarre ... and problematic. I mean, how does the rich, ruling authority respond to quotes like, 'Blessed are the poor in spirit' or 'Blessed are the persecuted' or the teaching to 'Love your enemies'? Or the idea that Jesus was Jewish? I wonder, for example, how does a Roman understand the relevance of Jesus being a Son of David?

All of which leaves me thoroughly intrigued. To what extent, I ask, was the Empire impacted by Jesus' teachings? Until 312 AD Jesus' teachings had only been followed by a persecuted minority - so to what extent did the powerful majority have to rethink things?

Which brings me back to Maximus Decimus Meridius and Gladiator. With the horror of Russell Crowe's heart-wrenching cry, 'Are you not entertained?' ringing in my ears, I scanned some wiki pages and found evidence that Christian Emperors continued to sponsor gladiatoral combat.
Hmmmmmmm. Thumbs down.
But by the late 5th century the horrifying sport was viewed as just that ... horrifying.
Inhumane.
Rome was entertained no more.
Thumbs up.
Perhaps Jesus' non-violent teachings had gradually chipped away at the mindsets of the mighty, powerful, violent and bloody superpower.
Perhaps Jesus' non-violent approach to revolution had won after all.

Faults of the Old Testament and the benefits of being 3-0 down at half time

Ever thought it strange that about three quarters of the Bible is marked as 'OLD'? Why be bothered about old stuff?

Last night I was left stunned when reading a chunk from the 'New' bits. 'If the first covenant had been faultless' Hebrews reads, 'there would have been no need for a second covenant to replace it.' (8:7)
My thoughts raced away. Though the basic sentiment is preschool - new is better than old - this implies that the first attempt wasn't good enough. It says God's first covenant wasn't faultless. You what!?? God's covenant, God's word, it had faults??!
Maybe quotes from Leviticus, for example, should carry a health warning: handle with care, they've been rubberstamped 'old', they weren't good enough, they've been surpassed.

What the...

What the flip is going on here? Why would God not get it spot on the first time around?

Let's turn our thoughts to the Bible's bigger, overarching narrative. Let's turn towards the end of the Old Testament.
Cos the Old sets the stage for the New.

As a direct consequence of the inadequacies of the old covenants, the book of Lamentations is as dark as it comes. 'Jerusalem's streets,' it begins, 'once bustling with people, are now silent. Like a widow broken with grief, she sits alone in her mourning.' From amongst the rubble of destruction one onlooker writes, 'I have cried until the tears no longer come.' (2:11)

Interwoven amongst prophecies of the dark times described in Lamentations, Jeremiah offers hope. 'The day will come' says the LORD, 'when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah. This covenant will not be like the one I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand and brought them out of the land of Egypt. They broke that covenant, though I loved them as a husband loves a wife.' (31:31-32)

The old covenants WERE drenched in the deepest, most intimate, passionate love but the relationship broke down. It all ended in devastating heartbroken grief. Nevertheless, surrounded by rubble and screams of grief, the onlooker in Lamentations declared, 'I will never forget this awful time, as I grieve over my loss. Yet I dare to hope when I remember this: The unfailing love of the LORD never ends.' (3:21-22)

Enter Jesus...

Cos you see, the dawning of a new day carries most impact, significance, joy and euphoria when it ends a time of the utmost pain and suffering.
To quote U2, 'There's always pain before the child is born.'

I call this the Istanbul phenomenon. Liverpool winning the European Cup in 2005 wouldn't be half as europhic, exciting or memorable if they hadn't been 3-0 down at half time.
Fans had to experience the pains of the first half, to fully appreciate the joys of the second.
And it's the same with the Bible.

Pythagoras' Theorem - It Makes Me Wonder Why

Say the word Pythagoras and buried memories of secondary school mathematics come flooding back, perhaps causing our chests to contract in fear. In our minds, Pythagoras means triangles.

But for Pythagoras, a Greek living in the 6th century BC, life was about much more than triangles, or indeed maths. His teachings deeply entwined religious thoughts with mathematics. Pythagoras believed that mathematical proofs - powerful, timeless, concrete truths about the world - were sacred.

In the fourth century BC, Plato - who was influenced by Pythagoras' philosophical ideas - claimed that Pythagoras left a way of life. In fact, to some, Pythagoras was such a great, life-changing teacher that they thought he could be divine, a gift from the gods.

All of which makes me think of Jesus.

See the thing is, 2000 years on, billions actually devote their lives to Jesus, trying to follow his way of life. They worship him as divine.
Yet billions just link Pythagoras' name to a property of triangles.

Now that massive difference intrigues me.
It makes me curious.
It makes me wonder why.

The Bible In Miniature: The Marriage of Heaven and Earth

In the beginning, heaven and earth were the same place. In the garden of Genesis 1 and 2, soil and spirit were one. There was no sacred-secular divide. God dwelled with his people.

Then came disconnection, division, disruption. Heaven and Earth separated. They became incompatible.

Centuries later one man, God in human flesh, material and spiritual as one, bridged the divide. By fully engaging with, and triumphing over, disconnection, division and disruption, Jesus made heaven and earth compatible again. And instigated the Bible's grand finale: the marriage of heaven and earth.

'Prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband', heaven will come down to earth. The two will become one again.
And in a glorious, climactic crescendo, a thunderous voice will declare, 'Now the dwelling of God is with his people.'

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

See the thing is, for many the purpose of Christianity is to get into heaven.
For many this future destination will be spiritual.
Disembodied.
Think floaty.
Think clouds.
Other than the mission of rescuing souls, for many today's life and today's world have no purpose. A few years ago, I even heard one preacher totally disregard 2005's efforts to 'Make Poverty History'. Because the point is to escape elsewhere.
I just couldn't believe my ears.

Thankfully, Tom Wright, the Bishop of Durham, presents an alternative view. In 'Surprised by Hope,' he writes, 'What you do in the present - by painting, teaching, digging wells, writing poems, caring, etc - all these things will last into God's future'.

And in a recent podcast (16/8/09) Rob Bell said, 'Our hope is not in evacuation from earth, but in engagement with it.'

We engage with earth, we pursue the end of poverty, because heaven and earth are engaged for marriage.

When Worlds Collide

Isn’t it surprising when something suddenly makes sense. Like something really important to you. Something that you’ve heard so much about. Something you’ve investigated, researched, and really pondered. Something you’ve decided is true and maybe even committed to. Something you’ve centred other ideas around.

When something is so deeply rooted in you, isn’t it surprising when it suddenly makes logical sense. When you have the light bulb moment, the Eureka, the ‘oh, of course’.

This happened for me recently when I was reading ‘Mere Christianity’ by C.S. Lewis, a book published in 1952 which aims to present complex concepts, the depths of theology, in a straight-forward accessible way, without losing any of the depth. This achievement would have made Lewis groundbreaking for his day and has since made him one of the most quoted authors across the whole church spectrum. Author of Narnia, and Science Fiction too, what a fascinating guy!

Anyway, sorry to leave you hanging in suspense. Back to my ‘wow’ revelation:

In my last blog post I claimed that the heart cry of God to humans is, ‘Choose Life.’
But hold up right there you crazy blogger, if there’s one thing humans can be certain of it’s that we will die. To 'choose life' seems like a rather limited opportunity.
In fact, let's ramp this up a notch: the very notion of a being who lives forever, creating objects that don't live forever, well it's a contradiction, isn’t it? Utter nonsense. Particularly if the ‘Artist’ claims to have ‘painted’ in his own image.

Conclusion: There is no Artist ....

Unless ...

Unless the two worlds collide.
Unless life becomes death.

Cos that’s what ‘Christians’ believe: God, who cannot die, became man, who can.

And here comes my light bulb flash:

If Jesus was fully human then of course he would die – it was inevitable.
But if Jesus was also fully God (and that’s a big ‘if’) then of course he would live forever. Of course he wouldn’t remain dead – the resurrection at the very heart of Christianity becomes inevitable.

'Christians' believe, to quote C.S. Lewis, ‘By dying this Godman disabled death itself.’
And because of that success, we can truly, fully ‘Choose Life.'

The Bible in Miniature: A Tale of Two Trees

In the beginning, there's a choice.
It's a choice between two trees.
Only one of them is called 'Life.'
.
.
.
'Choose Life.'
.
.
.
'Choose Life.'
.
.
.
'Choose Life.'
.
.
.
In the finale, only one tree remains.
'Life.'
It has been chosen.
.
.
.
.
.

Metanoia by MGMT

This week I learnt a Greek word.
Cos we all need a few Greek words in our lives.
'Metanoia.'
It literally means 'Change of Mind.'
A U-Turn.
A 180.
In English it's the rather intimidating word 'Repent.'

So imagine my surprise when the very same day I found (through the wonder of Spotify) that possibly the most popular band of 2009, MGMT, have a song called 'Metanoia'.
Shedding some light on our often confused concept of repentence, MGMT sing:

'Metanoia, reshaping the world
It can teach you
And reprogram you
It can show you the flood
That's trapped inside'