Believing the Resurrection

From N.T. Wright's "Surprised by Hope" (pg. 53)...

"Surface discrepancies do not mean that nothing happened. Indeed, they are a remarkable indication that something remarkable happened, so remarkable that the first witnesses were bewildered into telling different stories about it."

Critics often come to Scripture asking historical accuracy questions -- finding minute discrepancies in the account of the Resurrection: well was Christ raised on the 2nd day or the 3rd day? Did Mary go to the tomb alone, or was she with someone? Etc.

I like the way N.T. Wright puts it -- comparing it to the way we think about the flood. There are so many myths, or stories, that exist from antiquity that chronicle the idea that there was at one time a great flood. These accounts diverge in perspective. But scholars often take this as evidence, not that a flood didn't happen, but that something big actually DID happen. We may not have the ability to know PRECISELY how it all went down, but there was almost certainly a great flood that had a massive impact on the cradle of civilization. Likewise, the Gospel stories are close enough in substance that it would be foolish to discount them all based on variant details...

SOMETHING happened.

Moses High on Sinai???

Now here's some revisionist history. Atheist biblical scholars are going to have some fun with this. Benny Shanon of Jerusalem’s Hebrew University suggests that Moses was under the influence of a hallucinogen when Scriptures witness that he encountered God. Another news summary of this article in a British philosophy journal suggests that Moses was also high when he heard a voice from the "burning bush."

At least in terms of credibility, I found this part of the news entry enlightening:

Shanon wrote that he was very familiar with the affects of the ayahuasca plant, having “partaken of the ... brew about 160 times in various locales and contexts.”

Lesser Known Text of the Week

How do we know what we know? This is the quesion of epistemology, which seeks to investigate our bases of knowledge.

The root of knowledge for science is observation: that which you can measure by sight, smell, taste, touch, or sound. Another root of knowledge for the religion/philosophy of Buddhism is intuition: that which is realized in one's everyday walk of life and, perhaps more importantly, that which is learned via meditation.

The root of Christian knowledge, however, is not achieved 1st hand. It is an external form of knowledge: revelation. Paul talks about it in Ephesians 3:2-5:

²Surely you have heard about the administration of God's grace that was given to me for you, ³that is, the mystery made known to me by revelation, as I have already written briefly. ⁴In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, ⁵which was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God's holy apostles and prophets.

Not that other roots of knowledge are unimportant. There is a sense in which we can know about God through those other ways of learning. Ecclesiastes 3:11b seems to indicate that there is an intuitive way that we can know about God. Romans 1 and Psalms 19 teach us that there is also an observational sense in which we may learn about God. But none of these are as important as that which we can gain by revelation.

Paul is very clear in this passage about how revelation works. It is, first & foremost, a gift from God ("the administration of God's grace ..."). It is to be shared rather than hoarded ("... that was given to me for you."). Contrary to popular belief in some circles of historical-critical philosophy, we can understand what God revealed by reading and comprehending what Paul & other inspired writers have recorded ("In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight ..."). And God revealed his message to a select few individuals by the Spirit.

I believe that it is imperative that we very carefully & deliberately consider what it is that we rely on as our base of knowledge. What do we draw upon for wisdom? I hope that it isn't merely intuition & observation. While those are good, we have a source of knowledge that transcends those. Let us not ignore it, nor be ignorant of it.

I've heard other people say this before, and I am finding it to be true myself. The older I get, the more respect I have for the Word of God.