Resurrection: Litteral or Metaphorical?

Crosson

John Dominic Crosson views the Resurrection of Christ as a metaphor. That means he doesn't believe it actually happened but the story points to a grand meaning.The meaning is true even though the event itself is not.[1]Crosson thinks iconography of the Eastern church points to the grand meaning much more clearly than does the Western. The Western is more individualistic. the Eastern is more social and it accomplishes this by including other people in the image.

In the West, we have Jesus coming out of the tomb, alone, looking a bit like an athlete coming out well buffed from the gym. But in the East, you have Jesus holding the hand of Adam and Eve and leading them out of Hades. We could see it everywhere we went in Turkey...The Eastern churches have a universal vision of Jesus arising with all of humanity, symbolized by Adam and Eve. Western Christianity has a more individualistic vision of Jesus, arising glorious and triumphant but also solitary and alone.[2]

The eastern iconogrphy puts more eople wit Jesus coiimg otoftheto,b and tatindicates theresrrection frthem hhas abroader aplication to the people asa ehommentjust theindividiual for one's own salvation.As Crosson says, "In the Eastern vision, all of humanity is inside the story. I’m participating in the story. It’s not outside of me; it’s not like somebody is doing it for me. We in the West have far too much substitution."[3]

"The resurrection of Jesus Christ, the focus of this study, is understood by Crossan as a parabolic metaphor—infused with meaning, but not intended to convey historical fact. Easter means for me that the divine empowerment which was present in Jesus, but once upon a time limited to those people in Galilee and Judea who had contact with him, is now available to anyone,...." [4]

Corsson puts a negative spin on the literal view:

The last chapters of the gospels and the first chapters of Acts taken literally, factually, and historically trivialize Christianity and brutalize Judaism.  That acceptance has created in Christianity a lethal deceit that sours its soul, hardens its heart, and savages its spirit.  Although the basis of all religion and, indeed, of all human life is mythological, based on acts of fundamental faith incapable of proof or disproof, Christianity often asserts that its faith is based on fact not interpretation, history not myth, actual event not supreme fiction.  And because I am myself a Christian, I have a responsibility to do something about it."[5]

I value the political implications Crosson brings out in the metaphorical meaning of the resurrection. I can't understand why we can't have both.Jesus could be Christ and really rose from the dead and that action could then have meaning such that it speaks to liberation theology. Crosson goes on to assert that a literal resurrection, or belief in such, is socially oppressive Why this should be so is clear as mud.

I guess it's because the emphasis upon individual salvation seems to make the individual more important than the group. The fallacy there is that Jesus has a church and being saved means being added to "the body of Christ." Then the upshot of the literal view is that we become part of a community. Surely that has value toward building the community and liberated

society. If, as Crosson charges, the east has an iconography more conducive to social consciousness, then change the iconography not the doctrine.

There is good reason to believe in the literal resurrection A resurrection that was purely metaphor probably would have been exposed as not literal then announced a hoax.No amount of intellectualizing about metaphors would silence the critics. The bursting onto the world scene of christianity in the first century is hard to explain, The idea that there was no empty tomb no witneses to risen christ ian leaves the sucess of the faith more mysterious.

It seems to me that the metaphorical camp is embarrassed that their views are not sanctioned by science. They are catering to doubt and unbelief.

Sources

[1] Alicia von Stamwitz,"John Dominic Crossan on what we get wrong about Easter," Boardview, March 31, 2020, https://broadview.org/john-dominic-crossan-interview/

[2]Ibid

[3]Ibid

[4] Tawa Jon Anderson, "The Myth of the Metaphorical Ressurection," PhD dissertation for The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, May 2011. "The Centrality of Resurrection Belief in Christianity" https://repository.sbts.edu/bitstream/handle/10392/2847/Anderson_sbts_0207D_10031.pdf?sequence=1

[5] Erick Nelson quoting Crosson: in "John Domanic Crosson," July 2003, up dated December 03, 2007 https://www.ericknelson.net/Apologetics%20Papers/Metaphorical%20Gospel%20Theory/MG10/EInFavoOfMG/CScholars/C3JohnDominicCrossan.htm quoting Crossson in The Westar Institute web autobiography "Almost the Whole Truth - an Odyssey", _________________________________________

God,Science, and ideology,a book by Joseph Hinmman



God.Science, and ideology, by Joseph Hinman, is a great book. Ot argues that positions which teach the superiority of science over religion in such a way as to negate the truth content of the religious is not a scientific position but an ideological one. The books takes down such atheist greats as Dawkins and discusses the strongest God arguments.

This is an important book that spans an immense literature in a balanced and very readable form. For anyone interested in why some believe and others do not, this book will inform you of the entire range of literature in which not only can the proper questions be asked, but the reader can evaluate the often hidden ideological nature in which answers are proposed

Ralph W. Hood, Jr., Ph.D.

Professor of Psychology and LeRoy A. Martin Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies

"Hinman is highly stimulating, brilliant in places. It is rare to find a book so exuberant yet still rational."

--Lantz Fleming Miller, Ashoka University

https://www.amazon.com/God-Science-Ideology-examining-religious-scientific/dp/0982408765