Jesus of Nazareth - the Man and the Leader

At the age of 17, I first saw the Franco Zeffirelli film Jesus of Nazareth, starring Robert Powell as Jesus. I have recently watched it again, and found it incredibly moving. Is this hypocritical of me? If I don’t believe that Jesus was the Son of God, should I celebrate Easter, which is all about such unlikely elements as God becoming man, and rising from the dead? And yet the story of this man’s life moves me immensely, as stories of other great spiritual leaders do not (or not in the same way). So I feel the need to work out just what Jesus, the man and his teachings, mean to me, a 21^st century Unitarian.

Robert Powell in the title role of Jesus of Nazareth

One thing I struggle with is the concept of the historical Jesus. Because I was brought up in a Christian society, the story of his life, as told in the Christian gospels, is a very deep part of my life. Like ghosts, I think the amount of evidence for his existence is too strong to be discounted. I think I believe that there was someone called Jesus who lived in 1^st century Palestine, who was a teacher and a prophet, and whose life touched those of many. But I cannot believe that he was the divine Son of God, begotten of a virgin, nor that he rose from death and ascended to heaven.

The conventional Christian view of Jesus is an interesting one. The Apostles Creed is used by many denominations throughout Christendom, but it says very little about what Jesus did, as opposed to what he represents. It states: “I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried, descended to hell, on the third day rose again from the dead, ascended to heaven, sits at the right hand of God, the Father Almighty, whence He will come to judge the living and the dead.” 

As Forrest Church, minister at All Souls UU Church in New York, points out:

“What does this creed affirm about Jesus’ life and teachings? Not one thing. It states merely that he was born in an unusual way and died in an unusual way, telling us nothing about the fact that Jesus lived in an unusual way. This is what was important about Jesus. … The power of his love, the penetrating simplicity of his teachings, and the force of his example of service on behalf of the disenfranchised and downtrodden are what is crucial. The Apostles Creed … entirely miss[es] this point. It seems to suggest “if you believe in Jesus, you can live forever,” not, “if you believe in Jesus, you can live well.” 

I completely agree with this. What matters to me are the teachings and message of Jesus that have come down through the centuries, that have inspired so many to live better lives by following his example. I don’t believe in him, as my saviour or whatever, but I do reverence him, or at least reverence the Jesus depicted in the gospels. The more so if he was fully human, as I do believe. His example is one I would strive to follow, all the days of my life.

For me, the message of Jesus – love God, love your neighbour and don’t forget to love yourself – is a crucially important one in the 21st century, no matter what one believes about the person saying it.

When Bad Things Happen ...

I am reading Harold Kushner's When Bad Things Happen to Good People, in an effort to make some kind of sense of the early death of a dear friend. And now, one third of the way through, I have found something that I can relate to:

"If God is a God of justice, and not of power, He can still be on our side when bad things happen to us. He can know that we are good and honest people who deserve better. Our misfortunes are none of His doing, and so we can turn to Him for help. Our question will not be Job's question: 'God, why are You doing this to me?' but rather 'God, see what is happening to me. Can You help me?' We will turn to God, not to be judged or forgiven, not to be rewarded or punished, but to be strengthened and comforted."

That (apart from the emphasis on His/Her maleness) is a God whom I could believe in and have some respect for. I have always struggled with the idea of an omnipotent God, who by this very definition could stop bad things happening to good people, but for some obscure reason, either chooses not to, or, far worse in my eyes, actually causes the bad things to happen.

For me, if God is anything, He/She/It is a God of Love and Compassion, and yes, of Justice. So God cannot be omnipotent. As Kushner goes on to say:

"We can maintain our own self-respect and sense of goodness without having to feel that God has judged us and condemned us. We can be angry at what has happened to us, without feeling that we are angry at God. More than that, we can recognise our anger at life's unfairness, our instinctive compassion at seeing people suffer, as coming from God, who teaches us to be angry at injustice and to feel compassion for the afflicted."

Yes and yes. The God I believe in is a source of strength and comfort, of love and compassion, not of pain and arbitrary judgement and punishment.

Is there Life after Death?

Unitarian beliefs about immortality have evolved considerably over the centuries. Pre-20th century Unitarians believed in life after death with some certainty. But during the last century, things have changed.

In the original version of Beliefs of a Unitarian, British Unitarian Alfred Hall stated that “Unitarians believe in the survival of human personality after death.” But by the time the third edition was published, in 1962, three years after his death, the editors added the following rider: “but now it must be said that Unitarians are far from unanimous in their views about life after death.” They summarise current (early 1960s) attitudes as follows: firstly, the general belief that “it is more important to concentrate on living the good life on earth than in speculating about the hereafter.” A variety of views are mentioned: “Some believe that life hereafter is conditional upon our using rightly the opportunities for spiritual development … in this life. Some believe that … our souls are not completed in this short phase of existence, and that future life or lives … will continue and complete the ‘making’ of the soul. Some believe that the souls of men will ultimately be absorbed into the infinite being of God. Some Unitarians … believe that human life is limited by the duration of the human body.” But the authors state that many Unitarians would still agree with Alfred Hall, “that there are rational grounds for believing in the survival of human personality.”

In his 1977 book On Being A Unitarian, Canadian Unitarian minister Philip Hewett summarises four Unitarian views on immortality. Firstly, those who believe in personal continuity – the immortality of the soul. But not in the traditional views of heaven and hell. Secondly, those who believe in reincarnation – a succession of re-births. There is an element of continuity here, but what part of us continues? Thirdly, that death is the end of everything, and that nothing continues on. Fourthly, the death of the individual but survival as part of a larger whole. The analogy here is of a raindrop falling into the sea and becoming part of the ocean. 

Bringing us right up to date, Cliff Reed has a section on life after death in Unitarian? What’s that? He states that while some believe in personal survival after death, most are less categorical, not wishing to be specific about how, where or in what form.

All views on immortality have to be conjectural. Some are congenial, some touch us, some don’t. The thing that emerges clearly is the desire for an afterlife; longings for immortality. My own view is summed up by the Quaker Geoffrey Hubbard: “The concept of the indwelling spirit of God must incline us to see resurrection as symbolising the death of the ego-self and the rebirth in awareness of God which can happen to us in this life. It also inclines us to accept death as breaking the link between the physical body and the divine light within us, letting that of God which is in us return back to complete unity and absorption with the totality of God.”   

A bit like Philip Hewett’s raindrop in the ocean. Hubbard also argues that  thinking about immortality relates back to our present life, and it is how we live this present life that is important.

Nevertheless, most present-day Unitarians hold some views on the question. Perhaps partly because of the old adage that only two things in life are certain: death and taxes. In other words, death is something that happens to all of us in due course, and it is only human nature to speculate what (if anything) happens afterwards. So much has been written in the Bible and other sacred texts about the immortal soul, that it is something we have grown up with, and perhaps accepted without thinking too much about it (that we each have one, I mean). Personally, I believe that human beings are divided into mind, body and spirit (or soul or heart). The part of us that feels and emotes and loves is not our mind and not our body; it is something other. That is what I mean by the divine spark in everyone. And it is this divine spark that “goes on” after death. 

As we have seen earlier, some Unitarians do not believe in an afterlife of any kind, believing instead that death is the end of everything. But I would guess that a majority believe in life after death in some form or another; whether it is the reuniting of the divine spark or soul or spirit with the divinity of God, or reincarnation of some kind, or simply the fact that the person “lives on” in the memories and lives of others.

I think another reason why many Unitarians are attracted to the idea of some kind of life after death is that it can be a great comfort at a time of bereavement. If you can believe that the late beloved has survived in some form, and that you might perhaps be reunited with them after death, that must be a comfort. Also, when an individual is approaching death themselves, the belief in some kind of afterlife might enable them to accept death more easily, perhaps seeing it as the next great adventure, rather than desperately clinging to this life in terror of what is to come or in fear of annihilation.

Another factor may be that life after death is one of the few things that we cannot approach using our beloved Unitarian tenet of reason. It is a mystery; perhaps the ultimate mystery. A late Unitarian friend whose word and rationality I trust had a near-death-experience, and described it in some detail. I have no reason to disbelieve him. But it is a mystery – we cannot know the answer until we are dead. So perhaps the widespread belief among Unitarians in some kind of life after death is just a matter of hedging your bets: you cannot know the answer, but it might be foolish to reject the idea completely, in case it’s true. But in any case, I think most Unitarians would believe that it is what we do in this world that matters, in the here and now.