True, human beings may abound
Who growl at things beyond their ken,
Mocking the beautiful and good,
And all they haven't understood.

(J.W, Goethe in defence of Chuang Tzu)

George,
When the prodigal returns (Luke 15:11..) and the father explains to the son who remained why he is celebrating he says: because this brother of yours was dead and has come to life; he was lost and has been found." This is a resurrection story. I have no wish to reduce theology to logic but it must behave in a rational fashion if it is not to be ridiculed by a culture that thinks it is based on rationality. If there is deep mystery in resurrection it is a mystery that we are all involved in as we walk the path of faith and find we have been raised from the dead.
p.s. I always appreciate your comments.
Peter

Peter,
Still no reply, will you respond to my request? It goes to the heart of what you are stating.

.

« An ant on the move does more than a dozing ox »

Laozi

.

Dear Peter,

<<I have no wish to reduce theology to logic but it must behave in a rational fashion if it is not to be ridiculed by a culture that thinks it is based on rationality.>>

To accept ridicule is a property of Christ. To grovel before this secular culture which believes their ideas to be based on rationality - is cowardice:

"He unselfishly accepted a role that would require His being misunderstood, abused, cursed, tortured, and then crucified."

(from http://www.ifl.org.au/Insights/Insights-by-Topic/Christmas/Unwrap-Joy-This-Christmas.aspx)

Sells,

Thanks. I never heard the Prodigal Son parable interpreted as resurrection.

I reread your article again. I agree that the Resurrection “cannot be … understood as … the continuation of his ideas or ideals or morality” also because the authors of the Gospel (as well as the early Christians) understood these concepts and clearly did not see the Resurrection reduced to them. On the other hand, they did not have a clear distinction between what we now call the physical (amenable to senses and natural science) and spiritual dimensions of Reality. So they were not bothered by the “restored physical body” walking through closed doors etc.

By the way, Max Weber’s reference to a disenchanted universe was related to the fact that many of his contemporaries, including himself, lost or always lacked, this belief in that extra dimension of reality that science (and history) cannot make statements about.

To cut it short, I do not think that “the only way forward is to understand the resurrection stories metaphorically” but I agree that “ there is no life without THE body (that was destroyed by death)”. My — and I think many Christians’ — belief is that our resurrection refers to a new existence of the old soul (mind, memories) in a new body in a different world. Jesus is the only one who returned from that world (and went back to it through Ascension).

So I changed my mind — thus acting against Wittgenstein’s advice “whereof one cannot speak thereof one must be silent” — and gave you in a nutshell what I believe. It is not science, so it is silly to ask for evidence for these basic world view assumptions.