It's against my religion but.....
December 20, 2007
Ok, it's against my religion, but I'm going to have to agree with Rick here. I remember when I was on faculty at the University of Aberdeen hearing a brilliant piece of NT theology/exegesis from a respected colleague. But when it came to questions such as `Did the resurrection actually happen?', he became very concerned that that was a modernist-fundamentalist kind of question, with no real relevance to the theological point being made.
Obviously, there are deep philosophical issues involved in the whole complex issue of narrative, historical construction, linguistic referentiality etc which need to be seriously addressed; and my own thinking on the gospels in particular has been shattered and reshaped by reading some of the great narrative-theological commentaries of the last decade. But, as nuanced and complicated as these issues may be, if the tomb wasn't empty, if Christ wasn't raised, then our faith is in vain and we are more to be pitied than anybody else. The narrative opens our eyes but it doesn't save; only the act of God in Christ in space and time saves.
Obviously, there are deep philosophical issues involved in the whole complex issue of narrative, historical construction, linguistic referentiality etc which need to be seriously addressed; and my own thinking on the gospels in particular has been shattered and reshaped by reading some of the great narrative-theological commentaries of the last decade. But, as nuanced and complicated as these issues may be, if the tomb wasn't empty, if Christ wasn't raised, then our faith is in vain and we are more to be pitied than anybody else. The narrative opens our eyes but it doesn't save; only the act of God in Christ in space and time saves.
