While Graham Downie (''Revolutionary with spirit'', April 6, p10) identifies the resurrection correctly for many as the foundation belief without which there would be no Christianity, this is worth a second thought. Christ is not recorded as preaching about his death and resurrection, but about how to live according to different principles. Trying to do this is I think regarded by most Christians as the fundamental of living their faith. My enduring image is not the manner of his execution or a subsequent miracle, but him telling thousands of people to reverse worldly and self-centred values. People of any or no faith can understand this message. If we discovered tomorrow that he had not existed, it would not alter the wisdom of it.
Chris Clarke, Kambah
It is time J. Halgren (Letters, April 1) stopped picturing God as an omniscient, omnipotent old man up in the sky with a long beard. However, the reality may not be all that different. One of the conceptions of God that appeals to me is the one advanced most recently by the philosopher and physicist Mariano Artigas.
According to this view, a process of ''mentation'', or mind-formation, occurs in self-organising systems. These systems include individual humans or animals, natural ecosystems, tribes, organisations, states, planets and their satellites, solar systems, galaxies, and the universe itself. Each of these systems, apart from the universe itself, overlaps with or is contained in other systems, and each develops a controlling centre or ''mind''. According to this conception, God is not the creator, but the mind of the universe. The obvious next question is: What is the nature dare I use the term ''personality'' of this mind? Christians of course believe that the nature of this mind is revealed in Christ.
Michael McCarthy, Deakin
More inaction
On the point of my continuing disagreement with ACTION abolishing Routes 40 and 41 in Belconnen and their replacement with Route 10 (which is essentially the old weekend service), it has now reached new levels of ACTION and the Government not listening and zero public consultation. Jon Stanhope, the Minister for Transport, has advised that the best option for travelling from Jamison Centre to the city is not to travel on the Route 10 bus (to the City Interchange), but to travel back to Belconnen Interchange (presumably on the Route 10 bus going in the opposite direction) and then transfer to another bus to the city. Why then is there a Route 10 bus from Jamison to the city? Stanhope also suggests the alternative Route 704 express service. That would be fine if you wanted to travel on one of the only two daily services, which are between 8am and 8.30am and one that returns at 5.24pm. The other problem here is that Route 704 does not go anywhere near Jamison Centre. Stanhope's explanations and alternatives are neither satisfactory nor plausible.
Steven Hurren, Macquarie
Better to stay home
If Sam Nona (Letters, April 4) finds taxpayer-funded overseas travel so arduous, why does he go? Tele-conferencing has been available for decades and the printing press for centuries.
I have worked for people who managed to spend three months abroad on the most spurious of grounds; one program was the Pacific Rim Talks which ran for two years until someone asked what it was, and no one knew. Another case was where three senior Defence officials went to Norway to sign a memorandum of understanding, a nebulous document of no legal status. After a month's sojourn in Europe they arrived in Norway to find none of them had taken the memorandum with them, and so it had to be faxed from Australia, the Norwegians unsure if this was Australian humour. Later, the delegation leader, on finding his services in Washington no longer required, managed to take over three months for the return journey, complete with a large family, at taxpayer expense. It would have been quicker by windjammer.
John Coochey, Chisholm
Email a friend