With Easter fast approaching I was not surprised to read in my local newspaper an article entitled, “Passionate about Christianity.” It is an example of the bias for a liberal interpretation of Christianity that denys the historic foundations of the faith, in particular, the resurrection.  Since the paper does not post these columns on the net, I will take the liberty of posting the first portion of the column here and then supplying my reply below it. 

Passionate about Christianity[1]

Bonnie Schlosser Is a prophet for the emerging paradigm. She wouldn’t describe herself that way, but the president of Wood Lake Books is positioning the publishing company to support a new way of seeing and interpreting Christianity. Christianity has made many turns along its 2,000-year path, and now it is at another crossroads with what has been called the emerging paradigm by theologian Marcus Borg. The paradigm shift began more than 100 years ago and is now a major grassroots movement with both laity and clergy in the mainline church.

“(The EP) strongly affirms the reality of God, the centrality of the Bible and Jesus, the importance of a relationship with God as known in Jesus and our need (and the world’s need) for transformation,” Borg has written. “The EP sees the Bible’s origin as a human response to God and biblical interpretation is from a historical and metaphorical perspective rather than a literal-factual one. The Christian life emphasis is on transformation in this life through relationship with God.”

The emerging paradigm addresses people who no longer accept that heaven is up there with streets paved in gold and that hell is down there, with imps and demons making sure the fire never goes out.

The EP favours the ordination of women, accepts sexually active gays and lesbians as Christians and rejects Christian exclusivism. It understands that other enduring world religions are valid responses to God speaking to other traditions in other cultures, “It is also critically important to say, while there is an earlier paradigm and an emerging paradigm, neither can claim to be the Christian tradition. Both are ways of seeing the tradition,” Schlosser said.

“The EP would see both the resurrection and the birth of Jesus as crucial to Christianity — whether or not they are factual. A metaphorical interpretation of these stories doesn’t fuss about whether these accounts happened in these exact ways. Instead, it asks what is this story saying, and what meaning does it have for us?"

This is my reply.

Can Easter be Easter without a resurrection? For me, that is the bottom line question raised by your recent column “Passionate about Christianity.” According to the columnist, it is the experience of faith that counts not the reality of it. Thus he believes a metaphorical interpretation is sufficient for faith not whether an event actually happened.

This begs the question. As one commentator I read asked, “How can a non-event (a resurrection which did not occur) be regarded as a symbol of hope or indeed of anything else? If something has happened we try and see what it means, if it has not happened the question cannot arise.”[2]

So this new way of seeing and interpreting Christianity that is attributed to Borg is actually not an emerging paradigm at all. It is a way of seeing faith through the eyes of the enlightenment that has been with us since the 18^th century. Borg comes from a long line of existentialists of whom, Rudolf Bultmann and Martin Heidegger are the most well known. All of them deny the historical fact of the bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead.

Either the resurrection happened or it did not happen. Either we have hope for the life hereafter or we have no hope at all.

The Apostle Paul makes this case in 1 Corinthians 15. “For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised. If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all men most to be pitied.  But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep.”

Yes, as Borg states, this is about transformation in this life, but the greater hope is for transformation into eternal life through resurrection as Paul believes. This is a hope Borg and his fellow existentialists cannot offer.

For a more historic, more factual and more critical realist approach to understanding the Christian faith I recommend N T Wright’s series on Christian Origins and the Question of God especially his latest volume entitled “The Resurrection of the Son of God.”

N T Wright and Marcus Borg are friends and coauthored a book entitled “The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions.” For those seeking the truth about Christianity, this book will provide a more in depth look into the debate. Both authors state their case succinctly and critique one another in a respectful manner.

For an excellent discussion on the resurrection, belief and history by N T Wright google this article: Resurrection Faith: N. T. Wright Talks About History and Belief

Sincerely,

Mike McLoughlin.