I saw on Twitter today a little Easter humour from Chris Priestly.
What do you mean “at the end he died on a cross”? That makes no sense! And what of his companions? *newtestamentrage* #retakeeaster
Now, clearly Chris was venting a little spleen over the fact that no one likes the ending of Mass Effect 3. That their attempt to leave it ambiguous and open-ended has back fired, largely because they specifically promised the ending would be neither ambiguous nor open-ended. Chris’ clever tweet leads me to two conclusions:
1. The ending of Mass Effect 3 is a weak Christ-analogue after all
It’s been hurled as an accusation, what with the ascension in a beam of light and the sacrifice. Hell, Shepard even bleeds from her side.
Well now we know, thanks to Mr Priestly. It is just the Christ story. Nothing more.
2. The end of the bible story is Jesus dying on the cross
That’s right, folks. The ending of Mass Effect 3 is as good as the ending of Jesus’ story. Which is an apt post to make on Easter Sunday because Jesus’ story ended three days before Easter on Good Friday when he was crucified. In fact, there is no Easter, because there is no more to Jesus’ story than that he died on the cross.
There’s no story of Jesus rising again. Nothing in the Bible about how his followers’ responded to Jesus’ death. He certainly didn’t return, address his followers and ascend into heaven as a saviour.
Except, of course, that all of that is wrong. The Bible tells a clear, specific and non-ambiguous story of what happens to Jesus after the death on the cross. I doubt Christianity would have quite the same followers if the ending had literally been a death on the cross and not even a nod to what happened to the disciples. Would EA, perhaps have ended the Bible with a nearly blank page, in the center of which was printed:
Jesus Christ has become a legend by dying on the cross for your sins. Now you can build that legend by giving money to the church.