People 

 Latest News 
Site Search

Sign up for our
free e-newsletter


Send us your latest local news and events

Easter - the world's most remarkable event

JamesKnight2Network Norwich columnist James Knight takes a look at the most remarkable event in the history of the world. - the Easter story.

We are told by the masses that many young people (perhaps the majority of young people) do not know what Easter truly represents. They have heard of Jesus but they do not really understand who He is or what He has done for us. Imagine their surprise if they were to hear the question put the right way round; for an even bigger question is not what we think about Christ, it is what He thinks about us. 
 
I doubt there are many people who would disagree that as a moralist Christ was a remarkable man, years ahead of His time. But of course we are asked to believe much more than that - we are asked to believe that He is, in fact, the living God, and that He will return one day to judge the world. This, for many people, takes a little more believing. While Christ was here on earth He certainly spoke with divine authority. He forgave people their sins, He allowed people to worship Him, He claimed authority over the old laws; He claimed to be the only way to the Father. He, in fact, claimed to be equal to the Father. 
 
It is true that Christ’s death, resurrection, and ascension from earth happened a long time ago, but if it is true (and all the evidence says it is), it is the most remarkable fact in the history of the world. However much modern men and women have put their hands over their ears every time His word has been pronounced (particularly at Christmas and Easter) - if these words are true they are powerful enough to alter the face of every person’s thinking regarding the meaning of life and, indeed, the meaning of the cosmos. 
 
Some scholars have in the past gone all out to disprove Christianity (Mr McDowell and Mr Greenleaf being two of the most famous); they have carefully examined all the evidence over several years of research and found that the life, death and resurrection of Christ are the three most established facts of the history of that time; that they are more corroborated than the existence and activities of any historical figure of that day, and around the time before and after. 
 
We can see from looking through the whole vast array of historical literature which has been written, that none of it is anything like the gospels. The gospels are not creative enough or artistic enough or detailed enough to be literature, nor do they entail any imagination from the authors whatsoever; they consist of things seen and heard, not of things created to be imaginative. 
 
Even if we do not go to the lengths to which either Mr McDowell or Mr Greenleaf went, perhaps we can elicit (or help others to elicit) some thoughts and feelings as to what Easter really means and what it has to say to each of us personally. If the interpretation will be different in each man, the facts will remain the same. That God created the universe and came into creation - born as a man so that He could die for our sins - and in doing so - elevate us up into His presence by our relying on His grace and accepting His Son as our Lord and Saviour. On the cross, Christ took on all of our sins Himself; He gave Himself for us. 
 
Now it seems to me that we can do only one of two things regarding such stupendous claims - we can either reject Him or we can accept Him into our lives. And if we do the former, we ought to be pretty convinced that we are right to do so - for surely the only logical grounds that one can have for rejecting Him is if we believe His claims to be false. Surely no sane person would believe it to be true and still reject Him. He calls all of us to come forward and make a decision and He tells us that if we reject Him now, He will reject us when He comes in all His glory to judge the world. If we reject Him in His weakness on the cross, He will reject us in His glory as Creator of the universe. 
 
Christ told us that He has overcome the world - and that we should even (hyperbolically speaking) cut off our hand and gouge out our eye if they stop us from following Him. We can see here from this hard language that Christ knew the seriousness of following Him; He knew better than us that our eternal future is at stake.
 
For those who do not know God, and for those who have friends and loved ones who do not know God (which is most of us), it is certainly worth considering for a moment how the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ affects each of us. The resurrection spells out grace and hope, the chance of a new life for all of us. The line between temporality and eternity vanishes, so that all who accept His dying for us can count themselves immortal. Christ rose so that we could rise - life becomes eternal. With this in mind, it is easy to see that the death and resurrection of Christ gives all of us hope and meaning - for the event that is central to the whole story; the life of Christ is the event which gives our lives meaning and hope that a new beginning can be ours, irrespective of our personal circumstances when we anticipate it. 
 
The good news of Christ can lift each of us out of the travails of everyday life, into strength, beauty and happiness. Where we see darkness, Christ sees light, for when He rose up to Heaven He made Himself available to return into our presence, stimulating the heart, mind and soul into an eternal significance. The joy of Christ does not appear at Easter and Christmas alone, it appears in every moment of universal history; for there is no point in the space-time continuum that is detached from the hope He offers us. 
 
CrossMany people ask, particularly at this time of year, where is God in my life? But the truth is, He is right there on the cross, as the abounding manifestation of love, grace and mercy; so awesome in nature that in one act, He answered every question of human suffering, human pain, human anxiety, and human loneliness that has ever been asked. He tells us on the cross not just what He has done for us, but what we can do for ourselves by accepting His dying. It really is the truest blessing. 
 
It is true that Christ suffered like no other has suffered - but this suffering brings with it the utmost hope for all who have ever wished for hope and for all who have ever felt lost, alone and afraid. But it does not, of course, just speak to those who are troubled, it speaks to those who delight in life; it speaks, in fact, to everyone whose soul can find peace on the very spot where His misery of becoming sin for us reached its climax. 
 
If it seems that the message of Christ has not always been written legibly for you to see on the face of earthly existence, do not be too surprised, for it will not be found while we are thinking of nature as we do; it will be found when we realise that nature is only a conveyor of the eternal things - and not always a very lucid conveyor. That is to say, the eternal blessings which can be ours will quite easily be corrupted into a hazy cloud of indifference if the Bad One has his way. But Christianity begins where all those false and unhelpful doctrines end. 
 
Christ had each and every one of us in mind when He was on the cross; our hearts were His from the moment the pain began; it was pain endured so that He could rise to prepare a place for us. That the world was created for the cross, I have no doubt; for His dying shows us that God’s love goes deeper than creation itself. To overlook this point is to overlook something deep within our own souls - that we owe Him everything; for everything that we find joyous, everything that we find comforting - in fact, all the things that are very likely stopping a man from thinking he needs Christ are, in truth, the things which He has given to us out of love and grace. 
 
And that is the incredible paradox of rejecting Him. Whatever you think you have to give to Him, you are not giving Him anything that is not His already. He has spoken to us by giving us life but also by His death. And if any of us can spend a little time this Easter anticipating what all this means and how it affects our own life, we shall find, if we are open to receive His grace, that the great truth of Easter is that we are to live for Him now so that we can live for Him forever. In doing this we get to see the real truth behind creation. 
 
If the message of Christ says one thing to us over this Easter period, it says this; we can only suppress the truth for so long - it will come back. You can reject it, but it won’t pass; you can nail it the cross; but it will not die. Our real knowledge of eternity is not just the Spirit inside us telling us of Heavenly things, changing our perception so that we become spiritually wise - it is so very much more. It is everything outside of wisdom, in fact, it is everything outside of creation - the only glimpse of Heaven we shall have on earth; it is a renewal of our minds - a renewal with which we can receive God directly into our own hearts. 
 
Christ, in triumphing on the cross, gave hope to everybody who has lived and everybody who will live. The life, death and resurrection of Christ are not mythologies, they are facts. And those who are one with Christ, those who have the Spirit inside them, shall see the Heavenly glory promised to all those who accept His love and grace. This is why it affects every one of us. Christianity is not something that suits the fancy of some - it is the whole story told in one moment of grace on the cross and it is told in the eternal realm to which we can belong. 
 
All those who wish to explore further the claims of Christ can do so with one step into the new dimension of faith; for once faith has occurred in your heart it will be no more hope or expectation it will be revelation - you will have ‘certainty’ written on your heart. You will be transformed into the gradual likeness of Christ, forever rejoicing in His presence. 
 
And if we dwell on this or put it aside for later, we might rob ourselves of real hope. The future is oblique; we must never rely on it outside of what Christ will do in it. We shall only have a full life when we fix our eyes on eternity, for only then does this life become a little bit like Heaven. 
 
Whoever goes on to believe, shall have new hope through the certainty of salvation. Whoever shares in Christ’s dying shall share in His eternal living. This is the true hope of Easter - it offers a chance to rejoice in the promise of salvation. The resonant wave of glory can lift us up into the arms of the divine. We can touch the hand of our eternal saviour, in whom there is hope in every situation - for we are His; whatever we do and however we feel, the risen Christ is right beside us; He is the truth on which all other truths depend, and the love, joy and pleasure to which all other loves, joys and pleasures belong.
 
I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. John 11:25-26
 
I hope Easter brings special things for you. A time when we can give thanks and praise to God for our blessings, for our opportunities, for our life, and for creation itself.
 
James Knight finishes off his 11-part new year series The Crisis Within Atheism - next week.

We welcome your thoughts and comments, below, upon the ideas expressed here, which are intended to stimulate debate. You can contact the author at james.knight@norfolk.gov.uk 

James is a Norwich local government officer, author and Proclaimers church member in Norwich. 
Feedback:
John Payne (Guest)19/03/2008 13:27
James brings us back from a long excursion to the person of Jesus. Easter is a good time to take a break from discursive thoughts and focus on the Man. I firmly beleive that Jesus is raised from the dead. Everything starts there.
Charlotte (Guest)19/03/2008 16:59
Hi James,

Another great message from you. I eagerly await your final message in the crisis within atheism series. I’ve been passing it around my church - your intellect is causing quite a stir around here.

I wonder what happened to Kirsty and Dave. Your debates were really hotting up. I guess they found your intelligence too much to compete with. You fuse intelligence and passion so very well. It must be great to know you in person.
I have a few more questions if you don’t mind.

What do you say to non Christians who think that a moral life is enough?

What do you think of liberation Islam?

You once spoke about the evils of credulity, but surely being credulous isn’t being evil, is it?

Do you think such a thing as evil exists?

Does all this Christian fightin talk from George Bush worry you?

What are your thoughts on Guantanamo bay?

What do you say to those who say that other peoples belief system might be comforting for them so leave them to their own beliefs?


Thanks in anticipation

Charlotte
James Knight (Guest)20/03/2008 09:56
Charlotte, you’re very kind. A lack of time has prevented me from answering your questions more fully (which each one ideally requires), but my short answers are as follows:

What do you say to non Christians who think that a moral life is enough?

The moral law states that it is incumbent upon us to behave morally whether religious or not.
If this is to be a point well made, then we must break the connection between ethics and religion as demagogically asserted by those who say that the former requires the latter. Christianity presupposes morality; moral awareness is an already existent feature of humanity - knowledge of it is innate in us. Christianity isn’t about trying to earn salvation through morality – it’s about realising that we rely on grace for our salvation; and thus, behaving morally because of that.

What do you think of liberation Islam?

Liberation Islam? I’ve never heard the expression. It sounds like a contradiction in terms. Liberation is the result of emancipation from false religions, of which Islam is definitely one.

You once spoke about the evils of credulity, but surely being credulous isn’t being evil, is it?

The spirit of simple credulity (often manifested in simple obedience to humility) is not, of course, evil in itself. But simple credulity can, and often does, elicit evil, and it is for this reason. A man in any position of power who can see that there are millions of credulous people in his country can take advantage of the fact, very often with bloody consequences. So those who are free thinkers and fortunate enough to come from a country where they are allowed to think are the people that have a duty to raise awareness to the point where such people are impervious to appeals made by evil people to the credulous.

Do you think such a thing as evil exists?

When people ask this they normally mean ‘does it exist as an adjective?’ A lot of people scoff at the term ‘evil’, particularly in politics (the liberal democrats used to do it frequently) - until you put ‘lesser’ in front of the word ‘evil’ and then you’ll find the majority of people are willing to jump on the political bandwagon (particularly in the advent of a general election). There are atrocities committed where ‘evil’ is the only word which aptly identifies such actions. In moral terms it can be hard to define because it’s the surplus value of tyranny, the gratuitous part that is riveted on the end of a motivated atrocity.

Does all this Christian fightin talk from George Bush worry you?

People have accused him of religious speak ‘onward Christian soldiers’ but I think this is only partially true. To me, his language - when it isn’t a syntactical train wreck - is far more evocative of the secular language of ‘emergency rendition’ and ‘extreme situations require extreme measures’ - a very old and well tried argument in the history of the USA - it goes back to Abraham Lincoln’s attempt to suspend habeas corpus in the American Civil War. So I think the language employed is more redolent of secularity than anything religious. It is foolish to confuse the fact that both Britain and the United Sates are confronting a holy war with the spurious notion that we are causing it.

What are your thoughts on Guantanamo bay?

The difficulty seems to me to be the following. If you treat the inhabitants as criminals then you can’t say you are fighting a holy war, for it becomes a question of law and order. If you say you’re fighting a war then you have to say that the inhabitants are enemy soldiers. If they are enemy solders they cannot be tried as criminals. If they say they’re holding them as criminals, why then build a court for military tribunals and have them tried as soldiers when the whole point of this debacle is that the Geneva Convention says that they’re not? It is, of course, equally unreasonable to suggest that they (the majority of them) be returned to their own country if there is a serious danger that they will be maltreated by their own governments. So this really leaves only two options, none of which are very appealing. One is to take no prisoners, and the other is to let them go, saying we have no right to hold them. It is a serious problem which hasn’t really been faced before; that is, we’ve never had so much potential devastation due to strictures and injunctions in spurious holy books. Those who dislike the Guantanamo bay situation could be justified in pointing out that nobody has ever produced a cogent argument to suggest that Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus helped to defeat the confederacy; but a reminder that the President cannot take a unilateral position on this (only Congress can do that) so to lay the blame solely at the Republican party’s door seems to me to be an imprudent judgement of the facts.

What do you say to those who say that other peoples belief system might be comforting for them so leave them to their own beliefs?

Those who seek solace in the comfort of their beliefs are entitled to do so, but solace does not always imply ‘true’. It is on this point, at least, that Karl Marx was right – that spurious belief systems can bring some form of spirit into spiritless lives; the illusions in false religion is at the same time the demand to give up the condition that requires the illusion. He went on to say that criticism of such beliefs had plucked the flowers from the chain, not so that we could wear the chain with consolation, but so that we could break the chain. And that, I think is what we are called upon to do. Christ called us to help others break the chain. Of course, Marx thought that all religions were wrong; I think that all but one are wrong.


Hope that helps a little.

Best wishes

James
Doug (Guest)20/03/2008 12:12
Hi James. I have asked this question many times before but as yet nobody has succeeded in answering it.
My church tells me that Jesus was crucified on Friday and rose from the dead early on Sunday morning, however, scripture tells me that Jesus said he would be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. It doesn't take much to work out that Friday to Sunday is not three days and three nights. Is my church deliberately telling me lies? And for what reason?
If Jesus did rise before Sunday morning, then he would have been crucified on Wednesday and not Friday.
This question is causing me great concern as to the sincerity of my church. People have told me that the time in those days was different or that what Jesus said about being in the tomb is just symbolic. I can't believe that Jesus did this over such an important issue.
If we can find the time of day of the burial, then we have found the time
of day of the resurrection. If the burial, for instance, were at sunrise, then for the body to be left an even three days and three nights in the tomb, the resurrection likewise had to occur at sunrise, three days later.
If the burial were at noon, the resurrection was at noon. If the burial were at sunset, the resurrection was at sunset, three days later.

The crucifixion day was called "the preparation," or day before "the sabbath" (Matt. 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54). This day ended at sunset, according to Bible reckoning (Lev. 23:32).

Jesus cried out soon after "the ninth hour" or three o'clock in the afternoon (Matt. 27:46-50; Mark 15:34-37; Luke 23:44-46).

Yet Jesus was buried before this same day ended -- before sunset (Matt. 27:57; Luke 23:52-54; John

19:42). John adds, "There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews' preparation day." According to
the laws observed by the Jews all dead bodies must be buried before the beginning of a Sabbath or feast
day. Hence Jesus was buried before sunset on the same day He died. He died shortly after 3 p.m.
Therefore the burial of Christ's body was in the late afternoon! It was between 3 p.m. and sunset as these scriptures prove. And since the resurrection had to occur at the same time of day, three days later, the resurrection of Christ occurred, not at sunrise, but in the late afternoon, near sunset. Startling as this fact may be, it is the plain Bible truth!
If Jesus rose at any other time of day, He could not have been three days and three nights in His grave. If
He rose at any other time of day, He failed to prove, by the only sign He gave that He was the true Messiah,
the Son of the living Creator. Either He rose near the END of a day near sunset, or else He is not the Christ! He staked His claim on that one and only sign.

Jesus was slain on the very same day the Passover had been slain every year. He was crucified on the 14th
of Abib, the first Hebrew month of the year. And this day, the Passover, was the day before -- and the
preparation for -- the Feast day, or annual high day Sabbath, which occurred on the 15th of Abib. This
Sabbath might occur on any day of the week. Frequently it occurs, and is observed even today, on Thursday.
For instance, this "high-day" Sabbath came on Thursday in 1972, 1975 and 1979, and will occur on Thursday in 1982, 1986 and 1989.

And the Hebrew calendar shows that in the year Jesus was crucified, the 14th of Abib, Passover day, the day Jesus was crucified, was Wednesday. And the annual Sabbath was Thursday. This was the Sabbath that drew on as Joseph of Arimathea hastened to bury the body of Jesus late that Wednesday afternoon.
There were two separate Sabbaths that week!
Mary Magdalene and her companions, came to the sepulcher on the first day of the week (Sunday) very early, while it was yet dark, as the sun was beginning to rise, at dawn (Mark 16:2; Luke 24:1; John 20: 1).
When the women arrived, the tomb was already open! At that time Sunday morning while it was yet dark, Jesus was not there! Notice how the angel says, "He is not here, but is risen" (see Mark 16:6; Luke 24:6; Matt. 28:5-6). Jesus was already risen at sunset Sunday morning! Of course He was. He rose from the grave in the late afternoon, near sunset! If we believe that Christ was buried late Wednesday afternoon, and that the resurrection took place at the same time of day three days later, we now know the resurrection of Christ occurred late Saturday afternoon. The Sabbath day ended at sunset. It was late on that day, before the beginning of the first day of the week. It was not, then, a Sunday resurrection at all. It was a Sabbath resurrection!
According to Mark 16:1, Mary Magdalene and her companions did not buy their spices to anoint the body
of Jesus until after the Sabbath was past. They could not prepare them until after this -- yet after preparing
the spices they rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment! (Luke 23:56.)
Study these two texts carefully. There is only one possible explanation: After the annual high-day Sabbath,
the feast day of the days of Unleavened Bread -- which was Thursday -- these women purchased and prepared their spices on Friday, and then they rested on the weekly Sabbath, Saturday, according to the commandment (Ex. 20:8-11).

A comparison of these two texts proves there were TWO Sabbaths that week, with a day in between. Otherwise,
these texts contradict themselves.
So my question is James, which day do you believe Christ was nailed to the cross?

God bless you all,
Doug
James Knight (Guest)20/03/2008 17:18
Hi Doug,

Good question. I know this has been debated since the second or third century, and that this is a question on which many scholars find it difficult to agree. I think the predominant factor in this should always be 'why' rather than 'when'. If your church is forceful and rigid about the 'when' aspect, then it might not be the most prudent position they could take. The best advice I can offer as regards any philosophical analysis is this: those who claim to have certainty where certainty has not been established are easily dispensed with by Occam's razor; thus if your church is asserting without equivocation that 'Friday' is the precise day, one might be entitled to ask where this certainty came from.

I've read a few commentaries on this subject, some of which make pretty good cases for each of the three days (Wednesday, Thursday and Friday). St Paul says in the book of Romans that scripture is to be considered the authoritative word over tradition. Therefore scripture should take precedence over contradictory utterings in churches, and subsequent festivals (of which Christmas and Easter are two). I think the principal question should be this: Is there, as a matter of fact, any verse or verses in the Bible which state unequivocally which of these days is correct? I am not certain that there is, and would be happy to hear contributions from those whose Biblical knowledge is greater than my own.

It is possible that during the week of crucifixion there were two Sabbaths (one of which would have been a Passover, and the other the regular weekly Sabbath).
Jesus certainly said, "three days and three nights " was to be a sign. (Matthew. 12:38-40).

If you count backwards from Sunday, then Thursday is the only possibility that produces three days and three nights. I'd be interested to hear from anyone who knows better, but as far as I know, the Bible does not specifically state which day of the week Jesus was crucified.
Some say that since Jesus was in the grave for part of Friday, all of Saturday, and part of Sunday, He could be considered to have been in the grave for three days, but that largely depends upon Jewish variances regarding 'days'.

One of the principal arguments for Friday is found in Mark 15:42 which notes that Jesus was crucified "the day before the Sabbath.", but that would imply a 'weekly' (Saturday) Sabbath. Mark 8:31 says that Jesus will be raised "after" three days, but notice that sometimes we refer to 'three days' when we really mean 'two, and this day'

Gleason Archer has a great book on this called Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (he argues that it was a Friday. I've found an excerpt for you:

"The uniform impression conveyed by the synoptic Gospels is that the Crucifixion took place on Friday of Holy Week. If it were not for John 19:14, the point would never have come up for debate. But John 19:14 says (according to NASB): "Now it was the day of preparation [paraskeue] for the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. And he [Pilate] said to the Jews, ‘Behold, your king!’" The NIV suggests a somewhat less difficult handling of the apparent discrepancy: "It was the day of Preparation of Passover Week, about the sixth hour." This latter translation takes note of two very important matters of usage. First, the word paraskeue had already by the first century A.D., become a technical term for "Friday," since every Friday was the day of preparation for Saturday, that is, the Sabbath. In Modern Greek the word for "Friday" is paraskeue.
Second, the Greek term tou pascha (lit., "of the Passover") is taken to be equivalent to the Passover Week. This refers to the seven-day Feast of Unleavened Bread (Heb. massot) that immediately followed the initial slaughtering and eating of the Passover lamb on the evening of the fourteenth day of the month Abib, which by Hebrew reckoning would mean the commencement of the fifteenth day, right after sunset. The week of masso-t, coming right after on the heels of Passover itself (during which masso-t were actually eaten, along with the lamb, bitter herbs, etc.) very naturally came to be known as Passover Week (cf. Encyclopedia Britannica, 14th ed., 12:1041), extending from the fifteenth to the twenty-first of Abib, inclusively. (Arndt and Gingrich [Greek-English Lexicon, pp. 638-639] state: "This [i.e., Passover] was followed immediately by the Fast of Unleavened Bread … on the 15th to the 21st. Popular usage merged the two festivals and treated them as a unity, as they were for practical purposes.") It was unnecessary to insert a specific term for "week" (such as sa-bua) for it to be understood as such. Therefore, that which might be translated literally as "the preparation of the Passover" must in this context be rendered "Friday of Passover Week."
It turns out, therefore, that John affirms just as clearly as the Synoptics that Christ was crucified on Friday and that His sacrificial death represented an antitypical fulfillment of the Passover ordinance itself, which was instituted by God in the days of the Exodus as a means of making Calvary available by faith to the ancient people of God even before the coming of Christ.
Note that in 1 Corinthians 5:7 Jesus is referred to as the Passover Lamb for believers: "Purge out the old leaven, so that you may be a new lump, just as you were unleavened. For Christ, our Lamb was sacrificed for us." The statement of E. C. Hoskyns on John 19:14 is very appropriate here: "The hour of the double sacrifice is drawing near. It is midday. The Passover lambs are being prepared for sacrifice, and the Lamb of God is likewise sentenced to death" (The Fourth Gospel [London: Farber and Farber, 1940], ad. loc.). It simply needs to be pointed out that the lambs referred to here are not those that were slaughtered and eaten in private homes-a rite Jesus had already observed with His disciples the night before ("Maundy Thursday")- but the lambs to be offered on the altar of the Lord on behalf of the whole nation of Israel. (For the household observance on the evening of the fourteenth of Abib, cf. Exod. 12:6; for the public sacrifice on the altar, cf. Exod. 12:16-17; Lev. 23:4-8; 2 Chron. 30:15-19; 35:11-16. These were all known as Passover sacrifices, since they were presented during Passover week.)
Thus it turns out that there has been a simple misunderstanding of the phrase paraskeue tou pascha that has occasioned such perplexity that even Guthrie (New Bible Commentary, p. 964) deduced an original error, for which he had no solution to offer. The various ingenious explanations offered by others, that Christ held His personal Passover a night early, knowing that He would be crucified before the evening of the fourteenth; that Christ and His movement held to a different calendar, reckoning the fourteenth to be a day earlier than the calendar of the official Jerusalem priesthood; or that He was following a revised calendar observed by the Essenes at Qumran-all these theories are quite improbable and altogether unnecessary. There is no contradiction whatever between John and the Synoptics as to the day on which Christ died — it was Friday.”


It could be the case, Doug, that no one has succeeded in answering your question because no one is enti
(Guest)20/03/2008 17:20
rely sure of the exact day. When this is the case the smartest people are, I would say, those who agree that it cannot be agreed upon. Like I sad earlier though, if anyone has any interesting propositions, I would be glad to hear from them.

The most important thing is that we know 'why' Jesus died for us, and what His resurrection means to us.

Blessings to you all.

Yours

James

We welcome article comments from users

To add a comment to most articles you must be a logged-in site member. You can either log-in or quickly sign up to become a site member below.
To join Network Norwich and Norfolk you need to register or login

Network Norwich and Norfolk > People > James Knight > Easter - the world's most remarkable event
Not rated. (6 reviews / comments)
  • Write a review or comment
  •  Norfolk Services