Google apps
Main menu

Post a Comment On: Bruce Charlton's Notions

1 – 5 of 5
Blogger Chiu ChunLing said...

Well, there are theological errors in that, but as long as one is content with the practical core of it, that we must love Jesus and trust His offer of life after death, the theological errors are unimportant.

14 December 2018 at 09:34

Blogger Bruce Charlton said...

@CCL - Not errors, but different assumptions; based on the primary assumption of the Fourth Gospel being correct.

And my background assumption is the pluralist metaphysics of Mormon theology.

Given those assumptions, this argument is coherent.

Furthermore, this is more coherent (internally, and with other Christian primary assmptions - especially God as loving parent) than is mainstream/ classical theology.

14 December 2018 at 09:45

Blogger Andrew said...

I've tried but I can't yet get on board with the Lazarus as John idea, nor that he was raised from the dead into a resurrection body. I'm convinced by the view that Jesus had to be the first person to be transformed into a resurrection body because his death, crucifixion and ascension to the Father after three days was what enabled the New Jerusalem Glory of the Father to be released (He alone, as the Lamb of God, was worthy to unseal the scroll of God's plan in Daniel and John's visions) which is what makes the resurrection life possible.

14 December 2018 at 14:19

Blogger Seijio Arakawa said...

I do find the idea of immortals among us fascinating. It’s to my mind more plausible than the far more popular conspiracy theories about lizard people / aliens / etc.... and far more Hopeful.

Of course, identifying specific resurrected people is a difficult endeavour. Any people who understood enough to do this for certain would not share their findings in public either. However, we can ask in general, what kind of resurrected person is still around and why?

The picture that seems to transpire is that Jesus decided to resurrect certain people early and give them the choice of remaining on Earth, or (if they did not want to do that) to decamp to Heaven but with the option-of intervening with some Earthly affairs.

A straight reading of Gospel of John makes an obvious case for Lazarus choosing to remain on Earth. There is also a case for John the Baptist, or some of the Old Testament prophets.

For example, according to Catholic tradition, the Virgin Mary has been resurrected but is not on Earth (only appearing on occasion via hologram). I’m not so sure... as she has real estate on Mount Athos, and the place seems to be defended against intervention in subtle but effective ways. I can’t help but connect the Russian Empire’s heavy-handed 1913 military intervention into a petty theological controversy on the peninsula (the Name Worship incident) with the final disintegration of the Russian Empire... I can only assume they were warned and there were choices that would lead to a different outcome. There was plenty of rot in the Empire that could have caused them to ignore such a warning, with the clerics of the Church essentially reporting to a bureaucrat in an office, with a bureaucratic title (Ober-Procurator of the Synod). Another interesting thing: I don’t fully understand the motivation (from Mary’s point of view) of the rule behind not admitting other women to Athos, but it seems both flexible (flouted when actually necessary e.g. in times of war) and non-negotiable in principle. At one point in 2003 the EU put pressure to rescind the rule, then there was a great silence. I can only assume they were warned as well. It seems unusual for such a mass media campaign to just vanish into nothing. Although now the question has come up again as an implication to a new Greek law permitting recording a sex change in official documents....

The Repentant Thief is another candidate.

19 December 2018 at 18:06

Blogger Bruce Charlton said...

@Seijio - I don't have any solid opinion on this - Lazarus/ Beloved Disicple was a one-off. The Book of Mormon - which I regard as valid overall - has other examples.

To be resurrection the individual would need to have an immortal body. But I *think* it is likely to be rarer than reincarnation - that is, a great-soul reborn with a different and mortal body, but in some sense having benefitted from previous incarnation.

I think even Christians must always take reincarnation seriously, since it seems to be the spontaneous and most widespread human belief - although very varied in its specifics. Taking this at face value, one might suggest that reincarnation was normal before Christ, and afterwards became very rare/ specific.

19 December 2018 at 18:58