ANSWER by Staff on November 1, 2003

Dear Nolan: No, there is only one Messiah. The issues you raised are being misinterpreted. The altar that Jesus died upon was the Cross on Golgotha. As for the centurion and others with him looking East and thus not seeing what was happening to the West, do you not think that once the earthquakes and such began that these men would be looking in all directions? I would, and I believe anyone would. If earthquakes and such were happening I don't think a person would just stand there looking East. As for the Veil ripping, no one at Golgotha would have seen that even if they tried. The Veil was inside the temple. It would not have been seen from Golgotha regardless of where it was located. The bible is merely reporting the event, not implying that this was actually witnessed from Golgotha. As for the beard of our Lord the prophecy of Isaiah was fulfilled. But this prophecy does not imply that every single hair of our Lord's beard was pulled out. To interpret the prophecy in that way is presuming more than is contained in the text. Besides, there are images of Christ on the Cross with a straggly and patched beard consistent with what would have happened when the Romans plucked out hairs of His beard. The real issue here is that it does not matter if the images in art are historically accurate. That is NOT the point of the images. The point is that our Lord died on the Cross. Besides, there is no images that I have seen that even come close to the accurate depiction of the crucifixion scene. If you want to see a more accurate depiction of the crucifixion scene watch the upcoming movie, The Passion produced by Mel Gibson. There you will see the more accurate gory and bloody depiction of what really happened. We must remember that historical accuracy is important in terms of a historical analysis, research, and konwledge, but such absolute accuracy is not needed to convey the religious message. The way in which Christ is depicted in art, even with a full and unmolested beard, although inaccurate, conveys a religious message of his sacrifice for us. It matters not that the depiction may not be completely accurate historically in every detail. This is also true of the Bible as a whole. The Bible is not meant to be a history book, although it contains sections that give history. It is not a science book, although it contains information that is scientific. The Bible is a religious book and the infallibility of the Bible is in its religious message, not in is literal historical or scientific accuracy. For example, it matters not if God created the world in six days, or in six billion years. God is God, He could have done it either way. The point of the Creation story is to tell a religious message that God is the Creator, to tell us about the nature of God and the nature of the relationship between God and man who was made in His image. That is the point. That is the religious message. One can believe either way about the six days, but the religious message all are to believe. There are also contradictions in the Bible. In one passage it says that Judas hung himself, yet in another passage it says that Judas threw himself in the fire pit. Which is correct? It does not matter. The writers of the Gospel were merely reporting what they understood to be true. One heard the story of Judas' death one way, the other in a different way. So what? HOW Judas killed himself is NOT the point. The point is that he killed himself. Much of this has to do with issues of "form vs. substance". Ultra-traditionists and Protestant fundamentalists are much alike -- both groups seem to have an utter inability to distinguish form from substance. In the example above about Judas, the form is the "how" of his suicide, the substance is that he did in fact commit suicide. The form may be in dispute but the substance is not. That is what matters. God Bless, Bro. Ignatius Mary