As Easter nears, I think about two men 含羞草研究社� one who died, and one who didn含羞草研究社檛. Jesus died; Barabbas didn含羞草研究社檛. Or maybe it含羞草研究社檚 the other way around, in the long term.

If 1st century Israel had telephone books, Jesus could not have been listed. He didn含羞草研究社檛 qualify for a last name. Although he is commonly called Jesus Christ, Christ was not his family name. In fact, it含羞草研究社檚 not a name at all. It含羞草研究社檚 a title, an honorific, like 含羞草研究社淩everend含羞草研究社� or 含羞草研究社淧resident.含羞草研究社� Christ 含羞草研究社� Christos in Greek 含羞草研究社� is the term used for the Messiah, the anointed one, the chosen one.

In his culture, sons were identified by their father含羞草研究社檚 name. The prefix 含羞草研究社淏ar含羞草研究社� meant 含羞草研究社渟on of,含羞草研究社� just like 含羞草研究社淢ac含羞草研究社� or 含羞草研究社淢c含羞草研究社� for the Scots, and 含羞草研究社淥含羞草研究社� for the Irish.

The earliest biblical texts describe Jesus only as the son of Mary 含羞草研究社� making him a no-count illegitimate. Later versions legitimize him by providing a human father 含羞草研究社� Joseph, son of Jacob, a descendant of the legendary King David. But Jesus is never, never, described as Jesus Bar-Joseph.

And Jesus himself never refers to Joseph as his father.

He reserves the term 含羞草研究社淔ather含羞草研究社� 含羞草研究社� in Aramaic, 含羞草研究社渁bba,含羞草研究社� better translated by our familiar 含羞草研究社淒addy含羞草研究社� 含羞草研究社� for his relationship with God. John含羞草研究社檚 gospel regularly pairs Jesus with a divine father. Jesus spends almost two chapters of that gospel exploring the intimacy of his relationship with his Father, meaning God.

By a cruel irony, when governor Pontius Pilate offers to free Jesus as a goodwill gesture for the Jewish Passover, an angry crowd demands that he release, instead, a thief and murderer named 含羞草研究社淏arabbas.含羞草研究社� Barabbas 含羞草研究社� 含羞草研究社渢he son of the father含羞草研究社�.

And so the man who said 含羞草研究社淭he Father and I are one含羞草研究社� was executed on a trumped-up charge of claiming to be King of the Jews, while the man named 含羞草研究社淪on of the Father含羞草研究社� was set free. The coincidence is so keen, it almost demands further exploration.

Did the freed Barabbas go to Golgotha, to the hill of many skulls, to watch his stand-in die?

What did it do to him, to know that he was alive only because an innocent person took his place? Was he haunted by guilt? Did it change his life? Or did he grab his unexpected freedom with both hands and scamper out of Jerusalem, away from the unholy liaison between Temple and Rome, to resume his career of crime?

At least one writer has felt inspired to look at life through the eyes of the man who didn含羞草研究社檛 get executed. Par Lagerkvist wrote a 1950 novel called Barabbas.

A commentary describes the novel as founded on thesis and antithesis 含羞草研究社� similarities and contrasts. Jesus dies first; Barabbas dies later. Jesus is crucified in Jerusalem; Barabbas, in Rome. Jesus talks to God; Barabbas, to darkness. Barabbas is, in many ways, a modern person. He says he wants to believe, but can含羞草研究社檛 accept the exalted beliefs of early Christians about Resurrection and the Second Coming. What he really believes in is the 含羞草研究社渙paque and remorseless void that surrounds his life.含羞草研究社�

He is a fatalist. Where others find meaning, Barabbas finds only meaninglessness.

Perhaps the novel含羞草研究社檚 central antithesis is that because Barabbas has never known love, he can never understand someone who embodied love.

Author Jim Taylor lives in Lake Country: rewrite@shaw.ca