Tuesday, November 28, 2006

It's the skepticism, stupid

Yesterday I was reading Robert Price's blog. He is a member of the 'prestigious' (or, podunkist--let the two who have ears to hear, hear) "Jesus Seminar." I came across a post on Archetyping. In it he goes through the usual song and dance of how the gospels contain elements of myth and have ties to other primitive religions, yaddi, yaddi, yadda. All of that is, of course, true. The story of Jesus of Nazareth does have similarities and parallels to myths (birth accompanied by star, kings coming to visit, virgin birth, death, healing, body and blood as food, etc.). (On a side note, what I think Price and some others miss--Rob Bell included--is that resurrection is different from life after death; Wright's tome on resurrection lays out the distinction and important difference.) The conclusion that Price, along with other skeptics, come to is that the gospels are fabricated stories and, as a result, not true. The problem is that that just doesn't follow. Why would the gospels not incorporate elements of other stories to help give shape to the story of Jesus? And why, similar to what C.S. Lewis argued, would we not expect that the story of the Son of the God whose Spirit works in mysterious ways would not be similar to the religious thought that permeates the longing of other people(s)?

This morning something hit me. The mythical elements of the Gospels are not the devastating argument against Christianity. They are just the (sad) form that the real issue takes. And what is that real issue? Skepticism. Here's a quote from Price's blog, in reference to the new creation expected by Christians:

"To tell you the truth, I just can't buy this [hope for new creation]. I don't think it's even a good idea. Get real, folks. This is the world. It contains death because we are organic, mortal beings. We ought to make the best of it. There is ecstatic glory in this mortal life, though sooner or later we must fall under tragedy's scythe. And, contra some New Age gurus, it does no good simply to wish tragedy away. It is real. There is never going to be some other world of sweetness and light to replace this one."

There's just no believing the Christian story if you have no space left for hope and have guarded yourself against the risk of disappointment. No wonder Jesus preached for those who had ears to hear.

5 Comments:

Blogger Kirk said...

I guess I'm guilty of being a skeptic. A skeptic towards the veracity of this blog!!!! How dare you speak a negative word against Rob Bell. Who do you think you are: Joyce Meyers? If there is one thing I have learned from the voices in my head it is that Rob Bell is to listened to and obeyed in everything he says and the the true worship Jesus was referring to was the music of the David Crowder Band. Don't even try to fight me here. (Wait a minute... awww crap Tim B. is in my head)

11/28/2006 02:04:00 PM  
Blogger Aaron Perry said...

kirk, are you sure you wanna go down the road of not questioning anything bell says? i bet that bell would side with me on many things that you are opposed to me on.... ;)

and, since i am willing to fight donald brashear--though i would fight dirty in that situation--i am willing to fight you on this! ;)

11/28/2006 02:21:00 PM  
Blogger matthew said...

hey AP, I think this is a great post. I probably lean towards the myths/other-religions emulating the gospel (even pre-emptively) via the Spirit moreso than the gospel writers incorporating myths to shape their own story, though I have no problem with either. And I agree that with skepticism as a core value you've found the heart of the matter.

11/28/2006 05:38:00 PM  
Blogger Aaron Perry said...

thanks, matt. i wonder how our thought on the narrative/myth workings of the Spirit in other religions gets worked out as it is pre-Pentecost... thoughts?

11/29/2006 10:00:00 AM  
Blogger Erskine said...

I wish I would have had this post at my disposal in a response I recently wrote to a King David biography written by Stephen McKenzie. The prof assigned it to challenge us. It did, in many senses. What challenged me most was McKenzie's skepticism. He forthrightly admitted to reading the Bible skeptically, against the grain. I'm fine with skepticism, and I encourage engaging your mind when you read the Bible. However, I'm not a fan of automatic skepticism from people who guard themselves against a belief based largely on hope that Jesus may be who He said He is. Good thoughts, AP.

11/29/2006 08:08:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home