Adrian,
Thanks for your kind note and blessings. I do appreciate your forthrightness and respect your convictions.
Your brother in Christ,
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: Adrian Teo
To: 'Robert Schneider' ; asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 1:03 PM
Subject: RE: Living with Mystery (was BIBLE: Marcus Borg)
Bob,
This latest post of yours has really clarified for me where you stand on this issue of historicity, and I agree wholeheartedly with you about the mystery surrounding these events and the grounding in actual historical events. The 100% certainty that many search for is obviously a myth, but one does not need to fall into the other extreme of rejecting all evidence because that level of certainty cannot be obtained. I still, however, take issue with Borg on his denial of the continuity between the historical, crucified Jesus and the Resurrected Christ. That is not to say that he is necessarily any less a Christian, but simply that we have a deep disagreement. Logically, his position makes little sense to me, which was what led me to the question of why bother preaching the gospel, given his premises.
BTW, I too am equally impressed with the thought of Aquinas.
Blessings to you on most Holy of weeks, and may we all remain focused on the Passion and Resurrection of our Lord, Jesus the Christ!
Adrian.
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Schneider [mailto:rjschn39@bellsouth.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 9:17 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Living with Mystery (was BIBLE: Marcus Borg)
I want to thank Howard Van Till for his kind words of affirmation, and George Murphy for his thoughtful perspective (and theological references) on the historicity of the resurrection. As we approach the most important festival day of Christian faith, the day on which we especially celebrate it, the resurrection seems like a fitting topic for readers of our ASA discussion group to meditate on. Let me add a few more thoughts.
I appreciate that the notion of "faith seeking understanding" guides so much of our desire to make sense of biblical revelation. I became a medievalist in my youth because I was bowled over by the brilliance of Aquinas' philosophical and theological writings, which so exemplified this dictum; I made my acquaintance with Anselm, Abelard, Bonaventure, and others who did likewise. One could add the names of the great Reformers to this list. I still honor them, as I do all who humbly seek that understanding. And, I am also all too aware of the dark side of this search, in which "certitude" replaces "understanding" and becomes the measure of faith, in which the "formulation about" occupies the judgment seat and declares who is in or out, orthodox or heterodox, and what is "the Christian way" of thinking about everything from the Bible to scientific paradigms.
I believe in the reality of the resurrection of Jesus and believe that this reality is grounded in a historical event, but I am content to let my understanding of it be wrapped up in the mystery of it. Not that understanding doesn't matter, but it seems to me, as I have come to live with mystery, that it still remains darkly mirrored and will only be fully disclosed when we are face to face. And that is sufficent for me.
Bob Schneider
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 27 2002 - 14:02:47 EST