The resurrection of Christ is fundamental to the Christian faith.
Yet, no natural scientist can confirm resurrections. If you can't see a conflict between the resurrection story and science... I don't understand.
Why does science need to confirm the resurrection as a matter of faith? The Bible does not teach that we are saved by evidence, does it? Do you need to believe it has scientific veracity, in order for it to have meaning to you?
So what do you mean by “unnecessary”, if you say it’s unnecessary to believe things that cannot be confirmed by modern science in order for a Christian to be a Christian – it’s not the biblical stance, as I see it.
Is it necessary to believe that the stories of the Bible must be read and understood literally, as matters of hard scientific facts, in order to have truth and value spiritually? I see that insistence as central to causing a crisis of faith for more than a few in this modern age, myself in the past as one example.
If you look at the story of "doubting Thomas", as an example, the story serves essentially as a
rebuke of Thomas' inability to have faith without some form of "proof". And you can see that throughout the gospels stories, how Jesus gently chastises those whose faith has to stand on some concrete evidences, as opposed to just hearing the truth with their hearts, instead of relying on their reasoning minds. As Jesus said to Thomas, "Blessed are those who have not seen, and have believed," in other words, true faith does not need to see hard proofs.
Yet, you have modern apologists trying to make the Bible stories "scientific" for some reason. I see that as misguided at its very heart.
In my opinion, you cannot be called a Christian if you still believe that Jesus is dead, this is at least my interpretation of Romans 10:10 and John 3:16. You have to believe the "hogwash" of the resurrection.
Christians can understand the resurrection, and have faith in it, in ways that do not have to be interpreted in hard, concrete literal ways. It is after all, a "spiritual" event. Powerful spiritual truths, typically are not physical in nature. They are "subtle". They exist beyond the physical, gross planes of exists, between form and formlessness, between the material and causal. Historically Christians have understood it differently from each other, yet all are considered Christian.
To say it must be understood as a physical resurrection by all Christians, is to basically take what Romans 14 says about how not every believer believes the same ways, but that each believes by the sincerity of their own hearts before God, whom before him alone they stand or fall, and basically ignores that in making statements that "If you don't believe the resurrection (that is understood as how they understand it), you're not a Christian". That's wrong. And it also is what drives people away from Christianity, even while they still have faith.
If you and the other former Christians in that atheist forum you speak of came to disbelieve Christ because they cannot believe in the miracle of the resurrection…. I have nothing to say. As sad as it may sound.
To be clear, I used to consider myself an atheist. I no longer do. I've been able to reclaim the baby, the true and meaningful parts of my faith, from the bathwater of earlier views of faith which caused an inability to grow any further because of the conflict between reason and faith it created for me.
As for "I have nothing to say," to those who don't believe what you do, I hope what I just said in the couple paragraphs above before this may help soften that rhetoric. It's heard by others as, "you have to believe as I do," or you are not a Christian. It says, Christianity is only as I believe, not others. That drives people away, and when a whole group of them say that, it causes an exodus.
But if they (and you) draw a line between the resurrection and, say, the Adam and Eve story… they still can be saved according to the corresponding passages. If you say the resurrection is valid and Jesus Christ is Lord... however all of the rest about the biblical miracles is hogwash according to you... then I simply don't understand you, but we are still in the same boat.
If you were to ask my understanding of the resurrection, I don't approach that as a literal dead corpse being reanimated and getting up and walking and talking again. Many do think of it like that, based on how they read the scriptures. I don't, based on not just on how I read the scriptures, but for many other reasons as well from a spiritual perspective.
The meaning of it, that of overcoming this world and living spiritually liberating, is "rising with Christ", which is what the meaning of the story is meant to communicate through its symbolisms. That's how I, and many within the Christian faith hold their understandings of it.
Does my not reading it as a literal reanimation of dead flesh, mean you view that as non-Christian? If so, there are a lot a Christians out there you are denying their faith to them. Are you willing to deny their faith to them that way?
They and you in this case even can belong to the so-called body of Christ which is the world-wide community of believers. Baptism is needed there as explained by Paul in Romans. And if they don’t commit a certain class of sins… they even can belong to the Kingdom of God and enter heavenly Jerusalem, see end of the Book of Revelation.
In short, they are brothers and sisters.
However, from my experience, churches that do not believe in the inerrancy of scriptures… tend to have problems in their marriages. Since they say there are reasons to divorce for marital problems (also speaking from own experience).
What I hear in all of this comes off as patronizing, and dabbling in arrogance about other Christians that don't think or believe in the ways you do. "They can
even belong to the body of Christ," implying that despite the errors of their beliefs, God may still accept them, even though if you look at their churches, they are a mess, lots of marital problems, and such.
I think that's something you may wish to consider a little better. It doesn't come off very well.
This can be really hurtful. Have you ever spoken to a (former) wife of a Pastor that was kicked by her former husband just for marital problems – while her husband in turn had been invited to preach in front of the congregation about the love of Jesus… even after the breakup of his marriage?
Do you know the pain in her soul?
I've seen a lot of hypocrites in the church, those who preach messages of love, and yet live their lives opposite of that, all the while judging and condemning other Christians for not believing the ways they do about faith and the Bible. Countless examples. And that, is another reason there is such a mass exodus underway. It's also very hard for those who want to reclaim the baby of their Christian faith, from the bathwater of all of that.
But to be clear, the examples I am speaking of is the hard-core, bible-believing, literalist, inerrancy driven fundamentalist branches of the Christian faith. I wasn't thinking of liberal or progressive churches,
not to deny problems aren't there too. But don't fool yourself into imagining, the fundamentalists are 'walking the walk", when they proclaim from the pulpits with fury about the righteous of God on Sunday mornings. I can tell you from experience, hypocrisies abound.
My personal stance: Christians may believe science more than the Bible – if they still stick to the resurrection, it’s ok. However, it can be extremely hurtful in their lives.
Thank you for being frank and open about your past, I would be eager to learn more.
Thanks for letting me speak of where I am at a little bit in this. I hope this can lead to some better understandings of where a lot of others are at in the journey of their faith on their path to Truth.
BTW, have you watched that series The Chosen, which is about the story of Jesus through the perspectives of the biblical charters, like Mary Magdalen, Matthew, Simon, etc.?
