Jesus held on the cross with nails in his hands

[TaFox]

DD5 is in year 1 and has been learning about Jesus at school. Great stuff in the spirit of Easter.

The RE teacher told the class how Jesus was NAILED to the cross.

This is quite graphic for a little girl who believes that the Easter bunny will leave eggs in our garden.

Should I tell school that this is too much info for little ears?

Although Brian was the 13th disciple who never made it into the Bible because he was always 5minutes late for everything!

Monty Python did get the memo and changed the narrative by making up Brian
It still made headlines as being blasphemous though.

I was brought up on the Ladybird books and cassettes (ooh, the nostalgia), but some of them were actually quite horrible, they didn't water them down so much in those days. My mum couldn't bear to hear the story of the Happy Prince, which we had on cassette. "Two boys were huddled under a bridge. A policeman saw them, and told them to go home. He did not know that they had no home to go to. They just walked out, hand in hand, into the rain..." Also the dwarfs mourning Snow White was described very poignantly, accompanied by Beethoven's 6th. "They took it turns to sit always by the coffin, day and night."

I was somewhat traumatised (aged 8) by the comic opera Candide, which my parents were obsessed with, and played all the time in the car. We laugh about it now, but it had a graphic description of the aftermath of war, narrated in a silly comic voice, with the reference "having satisfied the needs of several war heroes", which fortunately went straight over my head, and these words, just as the music rose to a dramatic climax: "Others, so badly burned they begged for their lives to be brought to an end".

Regardless of weather Brian was based on a 'real' religious person. The whole film mocked religion.

I'm with you OP. The details of Easter are horrifying and even though I was brought up Catholic now when I take my kid into a church it really hits me how messed up it all is when you see art everywhere that quite literally depict an awful method of torture and everyone's normalised it to the extent that they don't even really notice it. In a non religiously affiliated school I just think there's no need.

Which was why it was reported as blasphemous (as original post)
I was responding to MP changing the narrative and ‘getting the memo’.

KS1 curriculum
Students investigate Christianity and touch on one other religion.

Teachers are just following the stages in the curriculum.

It’s not had any effect on my and I was taught this, my 8 and 5 year old have not ‘batted an eyelid’ at being taught this. Unless it’s actually causing them distress you hear and see I wouldn’t address it.

Well if they learn about the Romans that's how the crucified 'wrong doers' well that and feeding them to the lions in the circus, and stoning them. The Romans were pretty brutal, then there was the wrack and various other toucher instruments of the middle ages, and then burning people alive or drowning them for being witches. I means humans can be brutal.

Wasn’t it just Christians that were fed to the lions or was it murderers and the likes too. ?
And just women that were stoned…that still happens in some countries very sadly.

I don't really get this though.
What sacrifices is he supposed to have made?
That he suffered pain and lost his life on the cross?

He was resurrected then afterwards for a short time, before going to heaven with God the father who is also Jesus.

Also how did Jesus's sacrifice actually help us?
What would have happened if he didn't die on the cross?

So many plotholes 😅

I don't understand what key values as human beings it's actually supposed to teach?? or that it has been effective in teaching??

Jesus allegedly died to save us from our sins including ones we had not committed yet, or the original sin of Adam.

This is where Christianity goes off the rails for me , there is a sin Jesus died for, but at end of day god could have forgiven at any time, but nah he killed his son to do it.

Right I did think in the past that it had something to do with saving us from our sins, so why then are babies still born with original sin (unless they're retracted that) and why are little kids supposed to confess their sins to a priest and why do they go on and on about sins repeatedly?

In what way were we 'saved' from our sins then?

The whole world is a disaster, it would make sense if we now lived in a beautiful peaceful world now and they could say that Jesus saved us from that but it's full of violence and war and torture, and even tiny kids are told that they're sinners so I'm not sure what Jesus was supposed to have saved people from?

It went off the rails for me as a kid. I couldn't understand why we were told God was so loving and all forgiving, yet in the stories they told us he sounded mean and vengeful.

Lots of potential threads from this:

Who ultimately was responsible for Jesus's death?
What was the point of his death and resurrection - if it was to die for our sins, what does that actually mean?
If someone says they are a Christian and they don't follow the teachings of Christ, are they really a Christian? Looking at a LOT of politicians
If Jesus had been around today, what would have happened to him?

@kkloo i don’t go along with it either really BUT you claim to be struggling with the theory of it and the theory is not hard to understand. Born with ‘original sin’ which is an acknowledgment that everyone will want to do ‘bad’ things at some point or give in to temptation. If you do, that’s okay to an extent as in an everyday sense the purpose of Jesus suffering and death was to take on our sins and his punishment/death covers it. However, surely there are times when God should be wrathful. You can’t just run around murdering people and go ‘it’s okay, Jesus died for my sins’ so I’m okay in that respect (that’s left for someone who has bad thoughts about their neighbour constantly shoving dog poo in their bin, feeling angry about it and mentally calling them a bitch). That’s where repentance and forgiveness must come in, the murderer is not just forgiven, they must actively and truthfully repent within themselves and ask for forgiveness, then will be forgiven. The Jesus on the cross suffering for our sins is also a ‘visual’ God thought necessary as otherwise it is an abstract concept that’s harder for people.

Its an interesting question with lots of similar views
Heres one after a quick google which goes back to the Old Testament which is why I picked it.
Theres are lots of explanations from various scholars and followers on the subject online.

To clarify, I was raised Catholic (not strictly though) so the theory is hard understand from the Catholics church perspective. I'm not sure about other religions.
For a long time people were told babies must be baptized or they wouldn't get into heaven, because of original sin.
There were babies who were would have died within moments of birth who weren't baptised in time and their poor parents had to despair that they've never meet the babies again.
Obviously the babies couldn't have sinned before they died..but they were supposed to be stuck in limbo because they weren't free the temptation to do bad things? Was there worries that they were going to be doing bad things in heaven? 🙄

which is an acknowledgment that everyone will want to do ‘bad’ things at some point or give in to temptation. If you do, that’s okay to an extent as in an everyday sense the purpose of Jesus suffering and death was to take on our sins and his punishment/death covers it.

Again maybe this is just a Catholic thing but if Jesus's death was supposed to cover it then why are little children told to confess their sins?

I don't think kids are as traumatised by this kind of detail as we think they are. I dimly recall knowing about Jesus being nailed to the cross from age 5 or 6, and it not really affecting me that much. Actually it traumatises me more now, if anything, now that I realise that the Romans used the nails in order to inflict the maximum pain on their victims.
If Jesus's death happened now (in the same manner), they wouldn't allow videos of it on the main news sites or on Youtube, it would be deemed too triggering or adult-rated. The traditional paintings and depictions of Christ on the Cross present a very sanitised version. The reality would have been quite brutal and bloody, and you'd need a strong stomach to watch it on video. (I think people back 2000 years ago were probably used to seeing a lot more blood and gore in life than we are these days).

It's All Saints in the RC church. Followed by All souls day (1-2nd November). The only person I have ever know to make an alter was Mexican.

Day of the dead is a bit different to going to mass three times.

Eostre is associated with hares, which are native to the UK (mountain hares that is, the ones that turn white in winter) and therefore predate rabbits (and brown hares).
Hares have featured in British folklore a loooooong time, long before anyone was writing about or telling stories about nailing anyone to a cross. They were associated with witches, with women in general and there were a lot of strange ideas about what hares could do, stemming mainly from misunderstandings about their behaviour and their ability to go from brown to white.

They also look creepy as fuck, and can produce a very human like scream.

Fuck all to do with rabbits though, they're a modern invention because they are about 10billion times cuter than hares.

Obviously the babies couldn't have sinned before they died..but they were supposed to be stuck in limbo because they weren't free the temptation to do bad things? Was there worries that they were going to be doing bad things in heaven

Again, I don’t agree myself, but am just trying to explain the philosophy of it. Babies would be born with ‘original sin’ as the human brain has been designed to have the potential for ‘sin’ (being bad deeds, thoughts, temptation etc). Therefore it is present n your brain when you are born. Part of the baptism is meant to be covering the baby under Jesus’s actions if you like, covering them for this aspect, where he takes on the original sin component for them. Obviously this is not agreed across Christianity. Some of my kids church/religion does not have this aspect (baptism as a baby) as they don’t believe anyone requires this, that Jesus has just taken it on irrespective for everyone going forward from that point. Then they have baptism as an adult when they make their own choice about actively accepting God under membership of that particular religion. At no point do they need to have the sin aspect addressed (again, already covered by Jesus death).

Again maybe this is just a Catholic thing but if Jesus's death was supposed to cover it then why are little children told to confess their sins

Again, as I understand it for those branches of Christianity that do this. It goes back to the example I gave before about the murderer. While theoretically the ‘sins’ little kids would commit would be covered via Jesus death (taking on their sins), there’s a bit of a line. A murderer will really have to truly repent, and then ask God for forgiveness. You can’t really do that as a one off leap so they give ‘practice goes’ starting from a child so you have the concept of you ever really need to swing it into action. Simplistic version obviously.

I don’t believe in a lot of this, just stating the rationale/theory, behind it by those who do, so don’t shoot the messenger and get pissy with me.

Should have added while I’m not Catholic, my parents were staunch, other grandparents were different branch of Christianity again (Baptist style), and some of my kids now a completely different branch again, so I’ve lived with a lot of different peoples beliefs/perspectives which I think has been handy.

I'm not getting pissy with you 🙂

Reading what @OOBetty posted reminded me that I read before the best explanation for it (which I don't believe anyway 😂but makes more sense to me than the rest IMO)

God and Jesus are one.
God was angry at his creation and needed to have a human experience to understand, living as a human helped him understand us, what can make people sin etc , and pain and suffering, so therefore by coming here and living as Jesus and experiencing that was what turned him into a more forgiving God.

So then in that case the 'died for our sins' narrative still really bothers me because what actually happened was God lived as Jesus so he could understand us...so just say that then 😂

If Jesus is our saviour then it's only because God didn't understand his creation because we didn't get saved from anything, except from him disliking us for not being perfect humans 😂

Jesus suffered but so did lots of people, and lots of people still do but people are supposed to be eternally grateful that God chose for a while to live as a human to experience some human pain.

I don't believe anyway obviously but interpreting it that way makes sense to me (out of a story that makes no sense) but either way I don't think that God comes across great in it at all. Which as I said was what confused me through my childhood.

I used the non Christian terminology because the PP was talking about pagan events ie in order to demonstrate a direct link.

It is a day to remember the dead, bless their graves and pray for their souls.
It’s not just about going to mass ie in a church but also going to graves and a service with the priest blessing the graves. ( Not all priests do the graveyard service but ours always has )

I was therefore indicating that some Christians do in fact have a day for the dead.

The original sin aspect I understood ( also Catholic here ) was not the babies ability to sin but the sins of their parents in having sex.
Sex caused the babies to be born and baptism cleansed them of that original sin. We carry the sins of our fathers, I believe is the phrase used.

Again my Catholic understanding is much the same idea as I previously quoted. Adam and eve were created as pure by God by then sinned, ie had sex because of a flaw in the creation ie humans are tempted to do bad things. Of them we are all created by sex and with the ability to sin.( and before anyone comes back with a comment about that one I’m actually in the Darwin camp )

The birth of Jesus was without original sin because he was born of a virgin. That’s key to the idea. Only Jesus was born pure and only Jesus therefore could save mankind from ‘eternal damnation’ and by dieing he created a pathway for everyone to live an eternal life in heaven. Or indeed come back after, which is why Catholics pray for the sole and why it was always important to bury and not cremate.
In the RC church it is understood that if you ask for forgiveness and pay penance it will be granted because that’s why Jesus died. He took on the suffering of future sinners.

As an aside. I’m am personally of the idea that the bible is a story. Not all is based on fact. I do not believe in miracles or that priests literally change wine into blood at mass, I believe in the symbolism only. I believe it is a book used to support those in understanding concepts of good works and deeds. The stories are a way of explaining those.

The birth of Jesus was without original sin because he was born of a virgin. That’s key to the idea. Only Jesus was born pure and only Jesus therefore could save mankind from ‘eternal damnation’

Actually, no. Mary was born free of original sin. That's the whole point of the Immaculate Conception. Mary was born Immaculate, not Jesus. But these days almost everyone mixes that up.