Tuesday, April 28, 2015

IS THIS THE END ... OF MARRIAGE?

Today marks a historic occasion.  The US Supreme Court is hearing arguments for and against upholding the ability of states to ban same-sex marriages based on the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution.  This amendment prohibits states from denying individuals equal protection under law.  I am not going to weigh in on how the justices will act, nor will I offer pointless advice on how they should act.  Whatever their decision, this topic will not go away any time soon.

Religion and politics are very much in a state of matrimony with each other and have been for some time.  A true divorce of the two has never occurred in this country.  As I have pointed out in other posts, human beings are both political and religious animals.  Those of you who have read my post on "Senseless Sex in the Bible" have rightfully ascertained that I am no social conservative.

THE ONE MAN, ONE WOMAN KERFUFFLE

At first I was baffled by the kerfuffle being made by social conservatives who tried to pass a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman in order to prevent two people of the same sex entering into a legal sanctioned relationship, which for all practical purposes seemed to be the socially responsible thing to do.   I considered that attempt and the more recent attempts at state levels completely unnecessary.  Something in the move to define marriage intuitively struck me as threatening religious freedom in this country.  

Religious freedom and the right to think freely is being placed at risk by those who want to define  and protect religious freedom.

I must admit that when the issue of same-sex marriage first became a controversy, I was mildly intrigued by same-sex couples wanting to marry.  I was never against same sex marriage, but I didn't fully appreciate or had given much thought, at the time, to how marriage would be beneficial in their case.

Being in a committed, legal marriage for a number of years I didn't have to think about the  legal ramifications of being married.  I had taken them for granted.  What the same-sex marriage issue brought to the forefront for me is how important being responsible for the wellbeing and happiness of the person one loves truly is. 

The fact is I don't have to think about being responsible for the wellbeing and happiness of my wife nor does my wife have to think about being responsible for my wellbeing and happiness because we're married.  It's a given.  If we weren't married and I wanted her to have any legal say or rights to myself and my property, she and I would have to engage in all sorts of legal undertakings to do so. Marriage automatically confers those rights and responsibilities to both of us and therein is the essence of this controversy.

MARRIAGE

To have responsibilities to and for the person you love and to have that person in return love and be responsible to and for you is the ultimate perk of marriage.

A mutual loving and responsible relationship between two individuals is the definition of marriage, or it should be. 

Marriage is not about sexual orientation.  For an individual to say to two people who deeply love each other and want to care for each other, "You can love each other, but you can't have a legal responsibilities towards each other because of your sexual orientation" is cruel and inhuman and stems from and is a reflection of the potential for the mindless cruelty inherent in all religious belief systems.

THE FEAR OF LOSING CONTROL

I was not surprised by the ardent religious reaction by some to same-sex marriage.  One of the defining roles of religion has always been the regulation of  the masses by regulating their sexual behavior.  At the root of religious opposition to same sex marriage is the pervasive fear of losing control and influence over to its followers. 

If so, the question becomes what are they losing control of?

Protecting religious freedom by social conservatives is nothing more than a ruse to protect the marriage between politics and religion and the power base it affords both of them.  The fear is that if certain religious ideas are rendered impotent, political social conservatives will also lose a power base.  Regardless of what the Supreme Court decides, this controversy will not die quickly. 

THE END OF MARRIAGE

There is a principle that Jesus taught which can apply to situations like this.  There is a sense in some of Jesus' parables that trying to save or protect things that seemingly have their own intrinsic value is a lost cause.  The parable of the servant who hid the coin his master gave him comes to mind. 

Applying that parable to this situation shows that holding tightly to the view that marriage only applies to heterosexual couples is like holding onto and hiding that one coin for dear life when the intent of the master was to invest it and to increase the value of what it represents.  So too, the effort to define marriage narrowly; to keep it pristine by insisting it be defined as one man and one woman  and thereby refusing to extend its value to same sex couples has the potential of undermining the institution of marriage itself.  In the parable, control of the coin was taken from servant, so too, the institution of marriage as the legal form of a civil union could become a thing of the past.

The perception of any social injustice in this country and in the free world has a way of motivating people to avoid situations or institutions that reflect or endorse the injustice.  If the institution of marriage is perceived as or becomes the symbol of social injustice, it could very well become the ultimate the victim in this controversy. 

When it comes to relationships, religions throughout history have stressed marital responsibility.  It's ironic that religious and social conservatives are trying to prohibit same sex couples from forming responsible, legally sanctioned relationships; that by their lack of willingness to extend the blessings and responsibilities of marriage to same sex couples, they are not only undermining the institution of marriage they are seeking to protect, but also are inadvertently endorsing the very "lifestyle" they are purportedly against.

Should the Supreme Court decide in favor of same-sex marriage, social and religious conservatives will undoubtedly continue looking for other ways of depriving these couples the blessings and responsibilities of marriage, but should the court decide against same-sex marriage, the nation's demography regarding married couples will likely shift and the role of marriage may well become relegated to a religious ceremony only as a way to avoid giving it a legal definition, but in so doing marriage may well become a thing of the past.

Until next time, stay faithful

 


 



   

Tuesday, April 21, 2015

ETERNAL LOVE INCARNATE



It's time for an interlude.  As a church organist, I sometimes compose music and write hymns.  Here's a hymn I wrote in 2005:


Eternal Love Incarnate
 
                                   
                                                          Eternal Love incarnate
                                                          And living Word divine,
                                                          The source of every being
                                                          Born in mortal time.
 
                                                          I cannot probe the depth
                                                         Nor comprehend the height,
                                                         Nor measure the mystery
                                                         In which I find my life.
 
                                                         I see, but very dimly.
                                                         I grasp, but cannot hold
                                                        The very Truth which holds me;
                                                        The truth I long to know.
 
                                                        I seek that I may find it,
                                                        That which holds my life.
                                                        Your Truth I feel surrounds me,
                                                        The very source of light.
 
                                                        Eternal Love incarnate
                                                        And living Word divine,
                                                        Your Truth, Your Light, illumines me
                                                        Beyond the span of time.         
 
 
                    Norm Wright
                    August 12, 2005    
 
 
Until next time, stay faithful.             
 


Tuesday, April 14, 2015

THE BIBLE, MYTH, MYSTERY, AND THEOLOGY



THE HOLY BIBLE

The Holy Bible is an unique collection of diverse writings that contains the story of  humanity's journey with the God of Abraham.  Some of these writings are almost three thousand years old.  The Christian Bible is divided into two parts, the Hebrew scriptures (Old Testament) and the Christian Scriptures (New Testament).  There is, in my mind, a considerable difference between the diverse literary styles found in the Hebrew scriptures and the more thematic style found in the Christian Scriptures.  For example, the Hebrew scriptures contain stories, laws, history, wisdom literature, poetry, and prophetic writings.  All of them rich in meaning.

The New Testament's canon appears more contrived.  It too contains stories of Jesus' teaching and stories about Jesus.  It also contains letters from the apostles and prophecy, but all these writings appear carefully selected.  This became obvious with the discovery of the Nag Hammadi documents in 1945. The Christian world was shocked to find there existed actual writings regarding Jesus and Christianity that were thought to be destroyed and lost forever.  Prior to this discovery any information about these other writings had to be deduced from orthodox writings that denounced them as heresies.  After their discovery, it became clear that what was placed in the canon of the New Testament was done so to present a consistent orthodox understanding of Jesus as the Christ.

I do not view the Bible as the Word of God as much as I view it as words about God.  I do not treat the Bible as an idol.  I think liturgies that declare the end of a scripture reading, "The Word of the Lord," get it wrong. I realize that this has a nice liturgical ring to it, but the older and more time honored tradition of saying at the end of a reading, "Here ends the reading," gets it right. Church's should avoid saying anything that can be interpreted as stifling questions about what scripture saying.

The point of any book or collection of writings is to tell a story, provide information, and to give meaning to what it is to be human.  Fact or fiction, all writing, all literature (no matter how sacred) is the product of  human creativity, including the Holy Bible.  Having said that, the writers of these scriptures were very serious and committed to the truths they were trying to express.  Almost everything in the these writings has multiple levels of meaning.  Fundamental and literalist interpretations all but render the Holy Bible unusable.  The Bible comes alive for me when one doesn't treat it uncritically or as a self-validating resource; that is, when one questions and compares it to whatever else is out there to compare it to.  The Bible is not so much a book of answers as it is a book that invites one to mine its riches and question the theologies that have been distilled from it.

MYTH

Myth is a term Christians tend to shy away, if not, run away from.  The fact is, all religions, including Christianity have myths.  I'll go one step further and say any ideological belief system can and will foster mythic creativity.  Since we have such an aversion to the term myth, we may not always recognize it as such in our contemporary world.  The fact is mythic creativity is so obvious, that we miss it.  Consider the novels of Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Albert Camus, and Ayn Rand, for example. How about  Star Wars and Star Trek, and almost any science fiction that deals with concepts that might otherwise be above most of our heads?  Myth is a literary device that allows us to talk about and grasp abstract concepts or ideas that are better understood if explained in a story.

Not everything in the Holy Bible is a myth, but a great deal of it is.  A main criterion for identifying myth in the Holy Bible is that the story talks about phenomenon which has never been experienced or replicated in a scientifically verifiable way.  What makes this a bit challenging is that myths may have been developed around historical events, but if there is a historical element to it, any verifiable fact within the story appears secondary or even irrelevant to the story itself.  For example, we know the Red or the Reed Sea exists, that Egyptian kings where known as Pharaohs, and that slavery existed in Egypt.  What we can't verify is the Israelites walking across a divided Red Sea that should have been wet but was miraculously dried out to enable them to cross without getting bogged down while the Egyptian army foolishly chases after them down the same divided sea path and gets caught in mud and then is drowned as the sea encloses them.

Another important criterion in defining myth, is if the story has applicability. In fact, myths may have multiple applications.  The beauty of myths is that they are always current, in any age, and are multifaceted in meaning.  They can be applied to any number of circumstances.

In the Hebrew Scriptures, there are several myths: The Book of Genesis, the Book of Exodus (the ten plagues, Passover, traveling in the wilderness for forty years, etc.), the Book of Job, the Book of Ruth, the Book of Esther, the Book of Jonah to name a few.  The Hebrew scriptures are extremely powerful, and many Christians overlook their value thinking they are only included in the Christian Bible to back Christian scriptures.  The Hebrew Scriptures can stand on their own and possess their own life-giving richness apart from Christianity.

Mythic stories found within the Christian scriptures are:   The Nativity of Jesus, some, if not all, of the miracle stories of Jesus, (the Feeding of the Five/Four Thousand, Jesus walking on Water,) the Transfiguration, The Resurrection of Jesus, The Ascension of Jesus, and the story of Pentecost. The Gospel of John and the Book of Revelation contain allegorical elements but tend to be theological works rather than mythic. The epistles are all theological works.

Truths in mythic usage are not facts and do not explain why something occurred or how it happened. Truths in mythic form serve as markers to help us identify our experiences.  Mythic truths are not always blatantly apparent. Sometimes they have to be extruded.    For example, the Book of Genesis, which, in my opinion, is most important and influential book in the Bible, contains the creation myths.  The creation myths are so rich in meaning and application that whole books have been written on what they mean.  Those who have turned this story into a one time, historical event that is about the root of all the problems we human face, totally miss the value and richness contained in them.

To demonstrate this let me provide a very short excursion into the mythic applications of the Creation Myth:

* * * * * * *

The Creation Myth is a universal story that applies to all people. It tells us that people of every race and background are spiritual and physical manifestations on this small outpost of the universe of the very creative source of all life in the universe.  It tells us in poetic and thought provoking language that we are related to the stars, made of the very substance of the universe, hand-crafted by God, and breathed to life by God with the very essence of the creative forces that brought the universe into being, God. Within each of us is a microcosm of the macrocosm.  Nothing could be more intimate or meaningful than that. 

This myth teaches us the truth that we are endowed with the ability to become knowledgeable and to learn that knowledge is always dualistic and yet made of the same fabric. To know life is to know death. To know good is to know evil. To know joy is to know sorrow   Education always comes at a price.

Undoubtedly, God wanted us to choose knowledge, to know God and to know that in choosing knowledge it would come at a price, dualism: "The day that you eat of it (the forbidden fruit of knowledge) you shall surely die."  What did that even mean to someone who never experienced death?  Why did God warn Adam and Eve?  God could have left them ignorant of the fact there was a tree of knowledge.  God could have removed the tree of Knowledge, like God did the Tree of Life, but God didn't.  Adam and Eve were enticed through God's own permissive warning to let them experience temptation they did not know how to resist.  Now we do.  There is so much meaning here. 

In my opinion, the creation myths are not a sad story. It is not about original sin, it is about liberating the human mind to comprehend our actions and to feely and willfully love God in spite of what we know. They are a beautifully rendered and thoughtful stories about who we are in so many ways, and they affirm both the goodness and the divine nature in being human along with the challenges we will always face.  It describes the loving nature of God who "walks" with us and who lets us choose our course, but who is there to guide and shape us along the way. When God sends Adam and Eve out of the garden, it is loving act.  God sent us knowledgeable creatures into life to experience it and to become increasingly knowledgeable.  This story is not history.  It is not science.  It is far deeper than all of those.  This story is a myth, and, as all myths do, it is applicable to any number of personal and communal experiences.  It has held true throughout the centuries and continues to hold true today.  If all that remained of the Bible were the first four chapters of Genesis, we could deduce that God is love.

* * * * * * *
MYSTERY

When I talk about religion, I like to stay away from the term, mystery.  It's not that I'm against there being mystery or feel that "mystery" is a bad word.   Mystery abounds.  What I try to avoid is using the term to describe something as being totally beyond our comprehension and understanding, as if to say, "Don't bother. You can't get it.  Be content.  Let mystery be mysterious."  "Mystery" should not become a road sign saying, "Dead End - No Outlet."

Does that mean, that I can know and understand everything? 

Obviously, not.  I don't understand and know a great many things.  After all, I claim agnosticism by virtue of the fact that I don't know much of anything with certainty. 

What I mean by not letting mystery become a dead end is that mystery should invite us to explore and probe its meaning, and above all to question what is termed mysterious.

In Christianity, for example, mystery sometimes is applied to transcendent concepts, like "the Body of Christ." I understand it as an invitation for me to think and ponder the meaning of that concept.  At other times mystery is applied dogmatically, as something that cannot  or "should not" be question, as in the phrase "The Mystery of Faith: - Christ has died. Christ is risen. Christ will come again."  I find it interesting that this phrase has become part of the Eucharist liturgy in many mainline churches.  It seems to me to be an attempt to ferret out those who would question it as giving them pause to think twice before participating in the Eucharist.  Although I can probe the meanings of faith's mystery, that phrase in Eucharistic liturgy is not so much used to describe a mystery as it is used as an article of faith that one has to believe in order to be considered worthy of the Eucharistic table.  Everything defined as mystical or mysterious, should be questioned and probed.  Mystery should always be seen as an invitation to explore, not a dead end or a keep out sign.

THEOLOGY

Anything written about God and our relationship with God is automatically a work of theology.  As a whole, the Bible can be considered a theological work in itself.  There are, however, parts of the Bible that are pointedly more theological than others.  In the Hebrew Scriptures, theology is clothed in the stories found there.  Theology is not always straightforward in the Hebrew Scriptures, but rather has to be distilled from the stories and writings found there. 

While the Hebrew scriptures contain whole books that are devoted to law, such as Leviticus and Deuteronomy and ethical perspectives, such as, Proverbs and the Prophets, there seems to be less dogmatism in the Hebrew scriptures.  In part, I suspect that given the laws and ethical literature are some 2500 years old  that they have lost the value of their original intent and literal application.  If they were to be literally applied today as when they were formulated 2500 years ago, Judaism would be seen as draconian.  The relevancy of the Hebrew Scriptures to the age and situations in which Jews found themselves throughout the centuries and find themselves in today had and continues to be distilled. 

Judaism, it seems to me, is far more limber and advanced in this type of theological application and understanding than its progeny, Christianity and Islam.   One can see in the Hebrew Scriptures the evolution of Judaism and monotheism, as a whole.  Judaism recognizes that things change and as things change, people ask questions, people take God to task, debate and argue with God, and amongst each others as to "What does this mean?"  In fact this process of theological debate is evident throughout both the Hebrew and Christian scriptures, but it is honored in the Hebrew scriptures, whereas it is not in the Christian scriptures. 

The Christian scriptures were designed to be dogmatic.  Debate and questioning God or Jesus is not encouraged.  The new Testament is more contrived in order to present a consistent theology about Jesus and what it means to be a Christian.  As solid as the Christian scriptures appear, however, they too are affected by the passing of time. There are fissures in its doctrinal consistency as it too is subject to the age in which it is being applied.  It seems to me, however, that it is more difficult for Christians to question things about God and Jesus without becoming disorientated and experience a sort of spiritual vertigo.  Faith has become fact for many Christians and it is difficult to navigate through the shoals and rocks of dogma and dogmatism in what should be an open stream of theology.

The Protestant Reformation did little to change this.  In fact, I think there an argument could be made for saying the Reformation only resulted in placing more rocks in an already difficult to navigate theological stream.  For example, Luther is famous for pronouncement of his three Solas:  Sola Scriptura, (Scripture alone) Sola Fide (Faith alone), and, Sola Gratia (Grace alone) was trying to make some rock solid theological pointsThis list of solas has been expanded to include Sola Christus (Christ alone) and Sola Deo Gloria  (to the glory of God alone) in the 20th Century, and the list seems to be growing.  I could simplify all of them by stating what in essence they all represent, the biggest rock of them all, Sola Doctrina (Doctrine alone).
 
There is an increasing number of writers and theologians who are trying to forge new pathways within Christianity.  This is not an easy task.  Christians are not comfortable with flexibility and open-mindedness.  It's been beaten out of us over the generations.  For centuries our ancestors have been taught to believe that, whatever their Christian tradition was, it was the right one and not to wander off track or risk damnation.  I remember my own grandmother, a devout Lutheran, who took regular exception to my questioning things by periodically and sincerely telling me for my own good to "Stick to what you have been taught."  At times I tried, but over time sticking to what I was taught led me to experiences that argued with what I was taught and which, in turn, caused me to doubt and questions what I was trying to hold on to.  In the end, I found myself prompted to find or forge new channels.

One of my reasons for writing this blog is to keep Christianity relevant, limber, and meaningful by questioning it at every turn.  I believe that Judaism has survived throughout centuries of persecution and attempts to wipe it from the face of the earth primarily because it has always been bold enough to question God and to questions itself.  As a result it has stayed limber and viable.  Christianity can learn a great deal from its parent religion.  Theologies should not be allowed to stagnate, they must be stirred afresh by constant question and debate. 

Until next time, stay faithful.





  









Tuesday, April 7, 2015

RESURRECTION AND TRUTH

Now that we're into the Easter Season, it's a good time to talk about the resurrection story of Jesus.  As mentioned in my post, "Getting Real about Easter" the resurrection story cannot be considered a factual event, apart from the fact that it is a story. The only way to say it is a fact, is that one must believe it to be a fact.

STAGNANT FACTS AND TRANSCENDENT TRUTHS

Believing something to be factual that cannot be proven factual is unreasonable.  My argument against treating the resurrection of Jesus as a fact is that if considered a fact, it becomes historical; if it is historical, it becomes one-time phenomenon and nothing more.  It becomes an unsolved mystery which is void of understanding and meaning. There is no such thing as a transcendent fact.  Facts are stagnant, whereas truths are transcendent.

That the resurrection story of Jesus has been given meanings argues for transcendence and it takes on the qualities of myth rather than its being a mysterious fact.  A mysterious fact is still a fact and remains stagnant.   A mythic mystery is an invitation to explore and apply its transcendent meanings without the necessity of establishing why something happened or how it happened.  What is relevant is the story itself, not whether it is factual. 

I can hear the groans of theologians saying, "But that is the whole point of the resurrection - to demonstrate that God is involved in history, in the very structure of the mystery called life; that's God's love is so strong that it has defeated death. That's why the resurrection story has to be a historical event!" 

Think about that for a moment. 

Just think.  

At what point hasn't God and God's love been in involved the mystery of human life and, by extension, human history? 

In what way does the resurrection story make that truth more evidential?

In what tangible way does believing this one story to be a historical fact demonstrate death has been defeated when people have been dying every second of every day since that event?

Just think about that while I press on to some of the truths contained in the resurrection story of Jesus. 

The truths contained in myth are perceived and treated as guiding principles in their applicability to a variety of  human conditions and experiences.  Understanding a truth's applicability is a matter of subjective perception and mental processing. 

Bear with me on this for a bit.

SELF-EVIDENT TRUTHS

For example, the writers of the United States' Declaration of Independence understood the difference between truth and fact when they said, "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."  In other words, there was no way to verify "these truths" apart from a shared, self-evident perception, and understanding of them as guiding principles. The truths they were talking about were things like "all men are created equal..." . 

Were they talking about facts? 

No. 

There was virtually no factual evidence at the time to demonstrate that any equality, for example, existed between living human beings.  In fact, one can effectively argue today that equality is anything but factual.  That we are created equally is a principle, a truth that can be applied to a variety of human conditions and situations, but it is far from being universally accepted as fact, and there is no way to prove it factually.

Such truths remain a matter of shared perception of a transcendent idea that the signers of the Declaration of Independence were willing and eager to experiment with to see if could become realized as a guiding principle in the formation of a new nation.  In many ways, the jury is still out on that.  As such, the equality of human beings remains a truth, a guiding (living) principle, as opposed to a stagnant (dead) fact.
 
THE RESURRECTION APPLIED AND EXPERIENCED

The truths contained in resurrection myth about Jesus, and I would assume other myths like it, can be applied and experienced at a personal and communal level.  

JESUS LIVES

The story of Jesus' resurrection serves to validate his teachings; that there are some things death cannot destroy, such as truths.  One truth established in the mythic story of Jesus' resurrection is that if his teachings remain relevant and life-giving, the teacher lives on.  Jesus lives in his teachings.

For example, a truth expressed in the Bible is that where two or three are gathered in Jesus' name, he is present.  This remains true in any situation where two or more people gather together to talk about person who has passed on or is not present.  Talking about someone evokes that person's presence within our minds. The person, in mind, is present.

LETTING GO

The Passion/Resurrection story of Jesus points out that letting go of life can lead to life, that letting go of an unhealthy ego, opens a door for a better sense of being, new sense of life. It can allow one  to walk through the closed doors of bias, discrimination, and fear.   People experience this type resurrection probably more frequently than they are aware of.  Becoming detached from unproductive struggles and losing battles often allows one to move on to a new perspective of life and a new life in a very real sense as in finding a new and better job, an improved home-life, and new relationships, for example.  The resurrection story can raise one above the grim, meaningless world of fact, to the aspirational and inspirational world of truth.  The resurrection story encourages one to act and live in faith beyond belief.

MORE TO LIFE

The more common meaning that Christians, in particular, attach to this mythic story is that it hints to there being more to life than this life; that life is truly mysterious and death is nothing more than a transition from a physical manifestation to a spiritual manifestation of being.  While I can accept this as a meaning one can derive from this story, I personally remain agnostic towards it. 

It may be true and I wouldn't argue against its being a truth, but I am leery of the temptation to add meanings to a meaning that can take on moral overtones; such as, good people go to heaven and bad people go to hell after they die.

[NOTE: This is one of the problems humans have in dealing with truths.  They tend to run with them, instead of holding them lightly. Truths are only effective when they are allowed to guide and hold us. If guided and grasped tightly they become ineffective and stagnant like a fact.  Truths are fragile and can easily fragment if applied concretely.] 


PAUL - CONVERSION AS RESURRECTION

I believe my friend, the apostle Paul, understood the story of Jesus' resurrection in all of the ways described above.  For him, the truth of the resurrection was more real than any other reality in his life. In one of his more inspired moments, Paul describes, what I refer to as the three affective elements of human progress, faith, hope, and love.  Paul derives these elements from his personal resurrection experience, of letting go of what he believed was most important and what most defined his life, and allowing himself to be redefined and resurrected by his vision of the "risen Christ."  

For Paul, this experience was so great that it became the fact of his life.  At times, Paul becomes so passionate about this experience that he applies it concretely, and doing so causes him to struggle with its implications and its applications to his own life and what he saw going on around him.  Nevertheless, I feel Paul was able to catch himself at becoming this way and the result is that Paul becomes an interesting study in his own right.  Paul was able to reach beyond his concrete moments and obtain wonderful, momentary insights regarding the truths found as a result of his resurrection experience.

LIVING BY FAITH, HOPE, AND LOVE

Paul's conversion is a resurrection story in its own right.  It too takes on mythic qualities in his seeing a light that blinds him to what he thought was the clear-sighted, concrete path of his ideological beliefs and it invited him - forced him (in Paul's view) to follow a path perceived by faith  rather than sight.  For Paul seeing is not believing.  For Paul believing is a matter of faith, not a matter of fact.  As a result, Paul talks about a sure hope or a confident hope, but for Paul hope remains hope.  Hope never provides a given outcome but it serves to guide him along an unknown path.  For Paul, love is the strongest of the affective elements.  Love is what undergirds both faith and hope, and love is strongest when it persists against a mountain of insurmountable fact.

I am far less obsessed with the resurrection story than Paul.  After all, I did not have the same experience he did, and had I, I might have become as insistent on its importance as Paul did. At any rate, I'm more cautious about my personal experiences. This may have more to do with my age than anything else, but I realize that having my own, less than earth-shattering, epiphanic moments about the resurrection doesn't give me license to insist they have a particular meaning that other people should accept. 

I continue to learn from Paul's teachings about Jesus, but I don't feel bound to agree with him on anything, including the resurrection.  That I agree with Paul on a number of things is more intellectual than anything else.  For example, something I don't agree with is when Paul talks about some people being predestined for salvation (I'm sure he felt he was) and others not.  I find that whole notion of predestination contrary to the teachings of Jesus.

For Paul (and I believe he is correct in this) what can be extracted from the Jesus' resurrection myth are truths regarding faith, hope, and love; that if these three affective elements are permitted to play a role in one's daily routine, one can sense life being renewed and resurrected at any given time and in any given experience.  For me, this is the power of the resurrection myth and the truths it contains.

Until next time, stay faithful.