The World and Everything in It: April 18, 2025

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Good morning!

Today on Culture Friday: The UK Supreme Court affirms reality … Colorado moves to punish it … and Saturday Night Live makes a joke of it.

NICK EICHER, HOST: John Stonestreet is standing by. Also today:

AUDIO: Pinocchio represents kind of an all-time pinnacle in the craft of making animated films.

The Disney classic turns 85 … we’ll have a fresh look.

And for Good Friday … a Christian author reflects on the crucifixion through the eyes of silent eyewitnesses.

ATHNOS: If we could get down to the depths of the disillusionment, maybe we would more greatly respond to the heights of the resurrection.

BROWN: It’s Good Friday, April 18th. This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Myrna Brown.

EICHER: And I’m Nick Eicher. Good morning!

BROWN: Up next, Kent Covington with today’s news.

KENT COVINGTON, NEWS ANCHOR: Meloni meets with Trump on EU tariffs » President Trump is taking a very active role in talking trade with world leaders.

On Thursday he welcomed a key European ally to the White House.

TRUMP:  She's a very special person and it's nice to have you with us. Thank you very much.

MELONI:  Thank you very much, much, Mr. President. Thank you for video warm. Uh, warm welcome.

Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni heard there after a private lunch meeting with the president. The two leaders discussed a range of topics, but trade and tariffs topped the list.

Meloni, of course, talked about U.S. trade with Italy. But she also in many ways spoke for the European Union.

MELONI: The goal for me is to make the West great again. And I think we can do it together.

Trump said he has no doubt that the U.S. will reach a new trade deal with the EU, but suggested he feels no sense of urgency to get it done.

TRUMP:   We're gonna have very little problem making a deal with Europe or anybody else because we have something that everybody wants. You know what that means, right? We have something that everybody wants.

That something, presumably being open access to the U.S. market, the biggest consumer base in the world.

IMF head on future of global economy » But Trump’s tariffs have plenty of critics. The head of the International Monetary Fund, Kristalina Georgieva, said Thursday that she believes U.S. tariffs will slow global economic growth. But she does not foresee a global recession.

GEORGIEVA:  We will also see markups to the inflation forecast. For some countries, we will caution that protracted high uncertainty raises the risk of financial market stress.

The White House says the U.S. has been treated very unfairly on trade and a reboot of the global trade system is necessary.

But Georgieva says that reboot is testing the resilience of the global economy.

Trump on Jerome Powell » Her remarks come one day after Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell also said Trump’s tariffs could fuel inflation. He added that the Fed will wait to see how the tariffs affect the economy before lowering interest rates further.

The president is not happy with any of that. He accused Powell of playing politics with his remarks. That’s something Powell strongly denies.

POWELL:  We're never gonna be influenced by any political pressure. People can say whatever they want, that's fine. We, that's not a problem, but we will do what we do.

President Trump, though, says he believes Powell has been too slow to act on interest rate changes and is no longer the right man for the job.

But there is a legal question as to whether the president can legally fire the fed chairman. Powell said this week that his legal understanding is that members “are not removable except for cause.”

POWELL: We are not removable except for cause. We serve very long terms.

The president may be set to test that interpretation of the law.

 The Wall Street Journal reports that Trump is now eyeing former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh to replace Powell.

SCOTUS - Trump birthright citizenship » The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments next month regarding President Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship. WORLD’s Christina Grube has more.

CHRISTINA GRUBE:  On his first day back in the Oval Office, President Trump signed an order that he says aims to clarify the 14th Amendment.

AIDE:  This next order relates to the definition of birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment of the United States.
TRUMP: That's a good one. Birthright.

This order asserts that children born in the U.S. are not automatically citizens unless at least one parent is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.

But a slew of lawsuits followed.

Plaintiffs said the 14th amendment is clear: that anyone born in the United States is a citizen. And several district courts blocked the order.

The White House wants it to take effect in parts of the country while the legal battle plays out.

The Supreme Court is blocking the order for now, but they've agreed to hear arguments on the issue next month.

For WORLD, I’m Chrsitina Grube.

Iran nuclear » U.S. officials are set to meet with Iranian negotiators again this weekend for another round of nuclear talks.

The president says the Iranian regime faces a clear choice:

TRUMP: I'd like to see Iran thrive. And they can do that, I think, very easily. Or, they can do it the other way, and the other way is not gonna be good for them. It's gonna be very bad for them.

His remarks follow a report from The New York Times stating that Israel recently was all set to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities with help from the U.S., but that President Trump halted that plan. The Times reports that the president wanted to give diplomacy one more chance.

Trump told reporters that he did not waive off any planned attack. But he said that he does want to try and prevent a nuclear-armed Iran peacefully.

TRUMP: And I think Iran is wanting to talk. I hope they're wanting to talk.

But the two sides are very far apart at the moment.

U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff says any agreement will require Iran to completely dismantle its nuclear program. But Iran insists it has a right to enrich uranium, and that’s not negotiable.

FSU shooting » At least two people are dead after a gunman opened fire on the campus of Florida State University on Thursday.

The shooter is believed to be a student at the school. The two people killed were not students. Six people were hospitalized, including the gunman, who was shot by police. Leon County Sheriff Walt McNeil:

MCNEIL: The shooter is 20-year-old Phoenix Ikner, and he’s the son of a Leon County Sheriff Deputy.

McNeil said the alleged shooter's mother has served with the sheriff’s office for more than 18 years.

One witness said the gunman appeared to fire a rifle in her direction, but no one was struck.

WITNESS:  And then he turned back into his car and grabbed a pistol, and that's when I watched him shoot the lady in front of him.

Authorities believe that handgun to be the former service weapon belonging to the shooter’s mother.

Investigators say the 20-year-old son of a sheriff’s deputy opened fire on campus with his mother’s former service weapon.

No word yet on a motive.

I'm Kent Covington.

Straight ahead: Culture Friday with John Stonestreet. Plus, A Disney animated classic turns 85 years old.

This is The World and Everything in It.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: It’s Friday the 18th of April.

Glad to have you along for today’s edition of The World and Everything in It. Good morning, I’m Myrna Brown.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher.

It’s Culture Friday.

Joining us now is John Stonestreet. He’s president of the Colson Center and host of the Breakpoint podcast.

Good morning and welcome back, John.

JOHN STONESTREET: Thank you very much. Good morning to you both!

BROWN: A major decision from Britain’s highest court is making waves, John. The U.K. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that under its 2010 Equality Act, the legal definition of woman refers to biological sex.

In other words: Men who possess a government-issued gender-recognition certificate cannot be counted as women for equality-related policies.

Let’s listen to the court’s deputy president, Lord Patrick Hodge, reading the ruling:

HODGE: It is not the task of this court to make policy on how the interests of these groups should be protected. Our role is to ascertain the meaning of the legislation which parliament has enacted to that end. The unanimous decision of this court is that the terms “woman” and “sex” in the equality act, 2010, refer to a biological woman and biological sex.

The case was brought by the group For Women Scotland. They argued that a 2018 Scottish law requiring half of public board members to be female could effectively be filled entirely by men identifying as women. They made the simple point that this undermines the very idea of female representation.

As I say, this decision is in the UK, but does it have implications for U.S. law or culture? Could it signal a broader change and we'll talk about what's happening in your state in a moment … but will the trajectory remain very different here, do you think?

STONESTREET: I think it’s a great question. What’s happening in my state in Colorado legally makes me think that there’s a lot more ground to cover, at least when it comes to U.S. law—and U.S. culture.

There’s so many interesting things here: First of all, the argument legally on authorial intent—in other words, what did those who produce this law mean by this language?

I didn’t think we did that in law anymore. I thought we were all into “positive law” that just interpreted whatever was good for the moment. That to me was a significant statement. And for the simple reason that it reflects a deep philosophy of what we think about words and what we think about language. This is what we think of as highly nerdy, academic, philosophical stuff.

As we’ve seen in the last half of a century, this has had incredible implications. What we mean by words, what we mean by language, is really important. But at some point, Romans 1 is really right. (I know we were supposed to say that as a Christian organization.) Good heavens, the ability of people, including entire nations and maybe civilizations to self-deceive, that is chapter two of the Biblical story of the fall, and just how deep and wide that can actually run.

The last thing I’ll say is, look, you can defeat bad ideas. This is a defeat of a bad idea in a particular area. But what makes that defeat sustainable is that the bad idea is replaced by a good idea.

So, the wrong understanding and idea about what it means to be human, male and female, has to be replaced by the right view. Whatever this means long term, the reality is law and culture have this interdependent relationship, and there’s work that has to be done both directions to secure what is true on the other shore, so to speak.

EICHER: All right, John. I have to wonder whether NBC affiliates in Colorado might find themselves in hot water for airing what I’m about to play—because this next clip pokes fun at something you’re apparently not allowed to joke about anymore: the contradictions baked into today’s debates.

This aired last weekend on Saturday Night Live—a mainstream comedy show not exactly known for punching left. But this sketch did just that. It imagines a homosexual male couple arriving with a surprise baby. And when their friends ask the most basic question—“Where did the baby come from?”—the answers get more and more evasive, defensive, and absurd.

WOMAN 1: Whose baby is that?

COUPLE: Excuse me? It's ours.

WOMAN 2: 
Wait, but uh, how?

COUPLE: Okay, I'm sorry, but gay people can't have a baby?

WOMAN 1: Yeah, but like, where did it come from?

COUPLE: 
Wow, you are not allowed to talk like that. / That is so invasive.

WOMAN 2: What we're asking is, how did this happen?

MAN 1: 
I think we're just wondering who the mother is.

COUPLE: Hey, well, between the two of us, I'm more emotional and I like shopping. So me, I think. / Yeah, but I mean, I have long hair and he is an alcoholic, so I guess it's like two moms, I guess.

WOMAN 2: 
Guys, how did you get this baby?

MAN 2: What's confusing us is you've never mentioned that you were having a baby, so this feels pretty sudden.

COUPLE: Uh, yeah! ’cause it wasn't planned. Sometimes it's an accident.

WOMAN 2: How does a gay couple have a baby by accident?!

COUPLE: Hey, what do you want us to say that we stole her?


WOMAN 1: Did you?

COUPLE: Well, we like to think of it as she stole us.

MAN 2: So, does that mean yes?

COUPLE: 
Why are you confused?

MAN 1: Where is your baby from?!

COUPLE: Us!

WOMAN 2: 
But how did you get it?

COUPLE: “It”?! You mean she/they—until he tells us otherwise.

Now, comedy works because it reveals something true—and this sketch taps into a real cultural confusion, where even asking questions about sex and biology can be labeled as hate.

Which brings us to Colorado. Lawmakers there have just advanced a slate of bills that go even further than this.

So, John: What do you make of this juxtaposition? When parody sounds like policy—and when the law begins to enforce a worldview that comedy writers are already starting to question?

STONESTREET: Well, first of all, I did see the Saturday Night Live skit and I appreciate that take on it. Here’s how it connects to Colorado. I’m not sure that that SNL was punching left as much as it was mocking the fact that homosexual marriage and everything that goes along with it is absolutely untouchable.

In fact, it’s so untouchable, “we’ll even make fun of ourselves—and you’re still not allowed to ask. We know that we’re untouchable.”

What’s crazy about this really is that this was an entire sketch about a consequence of legalizing same-sex marriage, which then mandates the “right” of same-sex parenting. That the right to marriage guarantees the right to have children. Of course, in that relational arrangement, you’re not having children. You’re acquiring children. This is what’s called universal parentage laws that whatever it takes to give a couple the child they desire, that has to be legalized and some even argue that it’s covered by insurance.

Now, look, it’s been ten years since Obergefell. (The same-sex marriage decision of the U.S. Supreme Court) mandated same-sex marriage across America, including on those states that had defined marriage otherwise—including, for example, Colorado.

We were told then that marriage has nothing to do with procreation. Marriage is about acceptance. Marriage is about not discriminating against love. (Remember? “Love is Love.”) Many people, us included, said that, you know, there’s no way to change the definition of marriage without changing the definition of mother and father, without changing the definition of man and woman.

That’s where all of this goes. That sketch to me is proof, right? So 10 years later, we now have a sketch. Maybe the charitable take is yours. Or maybe it’s holding this up as, yep, it’s now untouchable, even as crazy and absurd and bizarre as it now looks.

EICHER: But let’s do get into Colorado here. I think what’s going on in your state is really interesting. This idea of penalizing people for “misgendering” or “deadnaming” someone—including parents—and make it part of child custody rulings.

Supporters say these laws protect transgender rights. But critics argue they’re more dangerous than merely that: That they criminalize disagreement, sideline parents, and collapse the very categories—like male and female—that make human life intelligible in the first place.

So, what is going on?

STONESTREET: Absolutely. Let’s get into Colorado, because what we have is a United States that is divided state by state, as it was prior to the Civil War, over matters of significant moral weight. We have not been divided state by state over such a significant moral question since slavery and Jim Crow.

You mentioned the transgender bill. There’s also a bill that would put into place what the voters approved, which was taxpayer-covered abortion in many circumstances. It also has a trans-medicine tag on the end of it.

Now, written into this in the state of Colorado, are a couple realities. The first reality is that this would effectively put the state, in a whole new way, in between children and the parents. Kids belong to the state, and if parents don’t go along with what the state requires, then they will take the children away.

Second thing we need to note is that a lot of people are asking, “Why aren’t you guys fighting this?” Everyone’s fighting it. The problem is, there’s a super majority in the legislature. So, the folks who tell us that Christians shouldn’t get involved in politics, this is what you end up getting—where there’s nothing we can do really to stop these things.

People are trying. There’s a group of pastors courageously showing up at the state house. There’s a lot of us that have signed petitions and that sort of stuff, but this is now a decision.

If all of my kids were young and we were facing, you know, what’s it going to be like to live in this culture, I would not live in Colorado. I wouldn’t take the risk.

The last thing I want to say is, I moved to Colorado in 2007. Somewhere around 2014 (or ’15, I can’t remember the specific election cycle), we put on the ballot doctor-assisted suicide. At the time, a number of Christian groups worked together to put out a whole lot of resources, videos, sermon outlines, and so on.

What we were told then by several prominent pastors and church leaders in the state was, “that’s too political. We’re not going to talk about it at church.” So, we were talking about causing death to “alleviate suffering,” but that was too political.

Of course, inherent in that is a fundamental misunderstanding between what is a political issue—and what is a moral issue with political ramifications. That and the inability to tell the difference between those two things is a deep virus that infects the American church, particularly in some places.

Now this is what we have. We have a group of pastors that are begging big church pastors to speak out—and many of them aren’t. They’re saying, this is political and we don’t talk about political things in church.

My question is, at what point does something stop being political and start being a question of human rights? The right to life, the right to know your mom and dad, the right of moms and dads to protect their own children. This is where this devolves to, this bad thinking that churches don’t have anything to say in the public square. They’re saying we don’t want to be unpopular and we’re not willing to stand up for what is true. Ironically, some of these pastors who say that these sorts of issues are too political were very quick to march with Black Lives Matter.

So I’m just trying to make sense of it all. I just know that the system we’re currently employing in our public theology is leading further down the hole in states like Colorado.

BROWN: On this Good Friday, I don’t know about you, John, but I’ve spent much of Holy Week thinking about something I’ve heard you say more times than I can count: elections have consequences. And after hearing President Trump’s Palm Sunday message, I can finally echo that line—not with a grimace, but with a smile and a grateful heart. What a difference a year—and an election—can make, politically, culturally, and spiritually.

STONESTREET: Well, there’s no question it’s much better to get a recognition this time of year of Easter and Palm Sunday about the crucifixion of Christ and His resurrection than a “Trans Day of Visibility—which happened, I think, last year on Easter Sunday.

That obviously was not just a shout out to the trans community. It’s a shout in the face of a much larger Christian community.

You’re right, elections do have consequences. They also have limits and that’s what we’re seeing on the state-by-state level not to go back to the last question.

But your question has to do with something much more important than elections and who’s in the White House—and that’s who’s on the throne of heaven and earth. That is a wonderful and important thing to remember.

We told our team this week that, you know, we tend to just kind of realize, oh, it’s Palm Sunday and oh, it’s Easter and forget that there is this whole series of events during Holy week from the beginning to the end, for which we should prepare about which we should think deeply. That includes what Christ commanded us at the Last Supper, including the abandonment of the despair the Friday afternoon, including what Christ accomplished through His death, His resurrection, and then what it means that He’s now ascended to the right hand of the throne of God and everything has been put under his feet.

The Bible talks about all these events, not just as realities of history, though it does, but as realities that happen in history that define all of reality. These aren’t just matters of private personal belief. They are cosmic realities that have fundamentally changed things about whose world it is, who owns it, who runs it, and what it means for us to have hope.

So I hope that as we wrestle even with the limits of temporal power as important as that is, we remember over and over who is King, who is Lord, as Peter said, it’s the one God raised from the dead who has been made Lord in Christ.

EICHER: John Stonestreet is president of the Colson Center and host of the Breakpoint podcast. Thanks, John. See you next time.

STONESTREET: He’s risen indeed. Thank you both.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Today is Friday, April 18th.

Thank you for turning to WORLD Radio to help start your day.

Good morning. I’m Myrna Brown.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher.

Coming next on The World and Everything in It: a Disney classic turns 85.

Pinocchio may sparkle with charm, but beneath the wish-upon-a-star magic lies a story that has weight. As reviewer Max Belz puts it, the tale echoes C.S. Lewis—where reckless choices turn boys into beasts and real life begins with sacrifice.

MAX BELZ: Pinocchio is a feast for the eyes. It was Walt Disney’s second feature movie and it looks markedly better than Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs which had come out three years earlier. Here’s film historian JB Kaufmann,

JB KAUFMANN: Pinocchio represents kind of an all-time pinnacle in the craft of making animated films… It’s one of the most lavishly detailed, gorgeously produced films that anyone has ever made.

The animation is dynamic and detailed. We see shadows dancing against the wall. A sequence under the ocean water is complete with bubbles and reflected sunlight. Early shots in the workshop have a short depth of field, drawing the main characters into crystalline focus.

MOVIE CLIP: Little puppet made of pine.. The gift of life is …

In addition to the beautiful animation, Pinocchio is a story with lasting themes about the pursuit of life. The movie opens with the toymaker Geppetto putting the finishing touches on a new marionette. Before climbing into bed, he wishes that his puppet could be a real boy.

MOVIE CLIP: Star bright…

Much to his surprise, a fairy partially grants his request: In order to become a fully real boy, Pinocchio must prove himself by being brave, truthful, and unselfish.

MOVIE CLIP: Prove yourself.. And some day you will be a real boy.

This quest for true humanity is key to the movie.

But if you remember the story, poor Pinocchio is turned aside by temptations from the start. He doesn’t even make it to the first day of school, but instead finds his way into a theater act and locked in a cage. Later he takes up with a bad kid named Lampwick who goes with him to Pleasure Island.

MOVIE CLIP: Ever been to pleasure island…tear the join apart…

All through these missteps his conscience–Jiminy Cricket–tries to keep him on the straight and narrow.

MOVIE CLIP: Now you see the world is full of temptations…

But beneath the schmaltz of wishing on a star and dreams coming true, the story is frightening, reminiscent of a Grimm fairytale. The stakes are high for Pinocchio in both his actions and the results of his actions.

MOVIE CLIP: O look at my nose… perhaps!

On the one hand, Pinocchio is promised full boyhood—or full life—if he behaves himself. On the other hand, the more he indulges himself, he actually moves farther away from enjoying real life, sprouting ears and a tail. Much like Eustace in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader whose greed changes him into a dragon. So too Pinocchio starts to become a jackass, a beast of burden.

MOVIE CLIP: Hey you laugh like a donkey…. did that come out of me.

The other boys drink, carouse, and fight. They smash a home with baseball bats and clubs. But as they indulge these vices they also change into animals. Once their transformation is complete, their overlords corral them into crates and ship them away to work in salt mines. They are transformed—and ultimately enslaved—by their own reckless living.

MOVIE CLIP: Where’d all the donkeys come from… and what’s your name.

It’s a troubling consequence. But like an old fairytale, the curse of becoming an animal looms large. To fully lose your humanity is to lose connection and love. What could be better than being a human being, even with all the pain or loss that comes with it?

MOVIE CLIP: So this is where I find you… you’re coming home with me right this minute

The groundbreaking visual effects with water, smoke, and shadows pushed animation towards new possibilities. Disney’s 9 Old Men—the studio’s legendary team of artists—also worked hard to imbue the characters with human traits. They had mirrors above their desks so that they could copy their own facial expressions and movements. Here’s Disney animator Ollie Johnston describing his own process,

OLLIE JOHNSTON: I have to think…  if he’s terrified and then I try to make these drawings..and I feel the terror myself.

By the end of the movie, Gepetto gets what he wished: the fairy transforms Pinocchio into a real boy after he rescues Gepetto from the terrible whale Monstro. His selflessness is tied to greater life. And the boy and his father live happily after.

Sight and sound are the basic elements in a movie, and this classic brings them together in a fresh and enduring way. Even at 85 years old Pinocchio still crackles with life.

I’m Max Belz.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Today is Friday, April 18th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Nick Eicher.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: And I’m Myrna Brown.

Holy Week is a time for reflection—a time for Christians to consider the life, death, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. It’s also a time to ask how that reality shapes the way we live.

EICHER: Sometimes, a fresh perspective can deepen our understanding of the most important event in human history.

Today, we turn to a short book of meditations by author Gregory Athnos. He’s Professor Emeritus at North Park University in Chicago. He taught there for three decades as a conductor and lecturer in music history and literature. His choirs have performed all over the world.

BROWN: Athnos is author of several books, and this Good Friday, we’ll hear about his book Silent Voices: Meditations for Holy Week. One of those “silent” voices is Barabbas—a passage read here by actor John Gauger:

GAUGER: The disgrace of crucifixion I deserve are being transferred to the innocent carpenter’s son? He dies a murderer’s death while I, the murderer, go free? Who is this man? Why does he willingly take my place?

EICHER: WORLD’s Mary Reichard talked with Greg Athnos about the book. Here is part of her interview.

MARY REICHARD: Greg, Silent Voices takes on different points of view of people who were present on Resurrection Day. And you focus on these silent figures who speak very little or not at all through the Scriptures. What drew you to tell the passion through their eyes?

GREG ATHNOS: Well, we’ve lived with the story our entire life. We've grown up in the church, and so we know the main characters. We know who they were, what they did, what the reactions were. But what about those other figures that don't speak, but they're part of the story? What were they thinking? And so I thought, if I can figure out, if I can get myself inside their sandals and robes and see the events through their eyes, that might enlighten me more deeply about the story itself.

REICHARD: Mm, hmm. Now, one of the things that some people might have a concern about is that you are blending Scripture and tradition with your own imagination. So that might concern some people. How did you, Greg Athnos, approach this without losing Biblical grounding?

ATHNOS: It was a challenge. I know the story. It's part of my life, and I want to be true to the story as scripture tells it. But I also wanted to get in addition to the facts, something, the emotions of it, which you sometimes don't pick up from Scripture. Facts are there. Emotions are sometimes in the background. …So I wanted to put myself in a pre-resurrection state of mind and speculate what could be possible situations and responses to those situations of those people? I was constantly trying to be creative and imaginative, and yet every time I came up with an idea, I had to put it against the facts of Scripture. …Now, can I say for sure what they did and what they thought? No, I can't. But I wanted the reader to assume the same position. So if you were that person, what would you do? And if your response was different from mine? That's the whole point of the exercise.

REICHARD: Why do you think it's important that we do this exercise and put ourselves in the sandals and robes, as you say, of these silent people?

ATHNOS: You know, we're like a smooth stone skipping over the surface of a calm lake. That's about how deeply we know the story because we've known it our whole life, so we can just skim over the surface of it and leave the murky bottom sort of untouched. I felt if we could find ourselves more engaged with the terrible thought that this person we followed for three years was going to have to die, and this went against everything we knew about and everything we anticipated about Messiah, the disillusionment would be overwhelming. ..And if we could get down to the depths of the disillusionment, maybe we would more greatly respond to the heights of the resurrection that follow. So the more deeply we understand the dark side, the more profoundly we can understand the bright side.

REICHARD: Let’s take a moment and hear a longer excerpt reading from one of the silent voices, who is this first one?

ATHNOS:  Let's see. I think the soldier at the tomb. What did he see? The Scripture doesn't tell us anything about what happened, except it was an earthquake and the stone was rolled away. So I said, well, what would the resurrection have actually felt like and looked like? And I had to put myself in the eyes and hearts of the guy standing at the tomb witnessing all of this.

REICHARD: All right, that’s the set up. Let’s have a listen:

JOHN GAUGER: "I was peering into a new dimension. Shall I embrace it or flee from it in terror like the others? I lay there alone, naked of all pretense, ignorant of fear, immune to trembling, held captive by a blind and dumb neutrality. I could not escape those crimson flames, nor could I embrace them. As a Roman, I did not believe in hell and there was no heaven, just life and the void called death. I was trapped, caught between mind and heart. My heart wanted what the living presence offered, but my mind doubted my need to want. My heart wanted what I saw of divinity, yet my mind felt reluctant to part with my humanity. The two forces, negative mind and positive heart, fought within me. As a Roman guard, I foolishly allowed the one I had always lived by to reign, that hellish force of mind, narrowing my choices, obliterating all hope. If I fled, I would die in Pilate's court for dereliction of duty. If I stayed, I would most certainly die in the all consuming light of that living presence. I was a dead man, regardless. I made my decisive and destructive choice: I ran. I ran for my life. I, one of the crack troops of Rome, fled in utter, unfettered, uncontrolled terror. I refused the crimson invitation. I chose my Scarlet sepulcher over his white as snow paradise."

ATHNOS: I saw that all that God had ever put together in creation, all the laws that he had put in place to keep things going, they all disintegrate….And so we say “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven,” and we say it so casually, but what that really means is everything that we have done to a perfect creation has to be destroyed in the process, which means that the return to Eden is violent and totally uprooting. So I tried to picture that as best I could in the writing. But then bottom of the line was, well, this soldier saw it all! Did he believe? Well, Scripture says nothing about that. And so, well, why didn't he, from what he'd seen, certainly he should have believed. Why didn't he? And so that was a … I was shocked by that, by having created a picture of what the resurrection did, who would not say yes to it? …

BROWN: There’s a lot more from Mary’s conversation with Greg Athnos that we don’t have time for today…So later this afternoon we’ll post a short episode in our feed that features the rest of this interview and a few more dramatic readings from Jon Gauger. We pray that it will be a meaningful reflection for your Good Friday observances.

NICK EICHER, HOST: It’s time to say thanks to the team members who helped put the program together this week:

Mary Reichard, David Bahnsen, Emma Eicher, Addie Offereins, Anna Johansen Brown, Mary Muncy, Brad Littlejohn, Leo Briceno, Onize Oduah, Janie B Cheaney, Bekah McCallum, Cal Thomas, John Stonestreet, and Max Belz.

A couple new voices this week: Trevor Sides and Elizabeth Shenk.

Thanks also to our breaking news team: Kent Covington, Lynde Langdon, Steve Kloosterman, Lauren Canterbury, and Christina Grube.

And thanks to the guys who stay up late to get the program to you early, Carl Peetz, and Benj Eicher.

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Harrison Watters is Washington producer, Lindsay Mast and Leigh Jones are our features editors while Kristen Flavin is out for a few months, Paul Butler is executive producer, and Les Sillars our editor-in-chief.

The World and Everything in It comes to you from WORLD Radio. WORLD’s mission is Biblically objective journalism that informs, educates, and inspires.

The Bible says: “[But] he was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed.” –Isaiah 53:5 And also: “He is not here, for he has risen, as he said.” –Part of Matthew 28:6

Lord willing, we will meet you right back here on Monday.

But on Resurrection Sunday, we implore you, don’t miss the opportunity to proclaim to your brothers and sisters in Christ: He is Risen!

EICHER: He is Risen, indeed! Go now in grace and peace.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.