This changes everything…

I went to see Tom Wright talk about ‘Can a scientist believe in the resurrection?’ last week (put on by the Faraday Institute). He had an interesting point about epistemology. The context was apologetics and the question: can we prove the claims of Christianity? Or alternatively, are the claims outside the realm of proof?

Wright took a middle-ish ground: If the resurrection is true then we are forced to re-shape our epistemology around it. However, our existing epistemology can get us to the point where the resurrection becomes a historical possibility; at that point we have to chose whether we accept or reject it. So, there is overlap between the two epistemological systems – our historical investigation gets us to the resurrection, but if we take the step of accepting it as truth then we are forced to re-build our entire view to accommodate what we have accepted.

You know what, he said it a lot better than that…

Anyway, this made two connections for me.

The first is Michael Ramsden’s emphasis that becoming a Christian is a ontological change — it changes who we are, rather than simply being an intellectual shift, etc. As Paul says — ‘if anyone is in Christ – new creation!’. He draws an interesting conclusion: it is often said that to be honest in apologetics, we have be prepared to be proved wrong. But if the change is ontological not intellectual, then perhaps this is not true. Once a Christian, I do not conitnue to believe because I am persuaded, but because I am changed. Intellectual argument is not going to reverse that. As a poor example — if I have develop the power to see through walls, I may have to work to persuade you of this, but I am I being dishonest if I am not open to the possibility of being proved wrong? Of course, this may lead to the question of our confidence in the claim that we are changed.

Connecting this with Tom Wright — in both views new creation (of me or the resurrection) produces a fundamental re-structuring, which impacts the very basis of the process that got me there in the first place.

The second connection was back to a previous post. I was playing with the importance of having our worldview framed not just by creation and fall, but by incarnation and new creation. Again, when the resurrection comes in, it changes everything…

Tags: ,

3 Responses to “This changes everything…”

  1. Steven Carr Says:
    Steven Carr June 16th, 2007 at 8:36 am

    Why did early converts to Jesus-worship in Corinth scoff at the idea that God would choose to raise corpses?

    Why does Paul tell them that Jesus became a spirit?

    Why does Paul call them idiots for even discussing how a corpse can return from the dead – telling them that you do not plant the body that will be?

    Why does he remind them that earthly beings differ from heavenly beings the way that a fish differs from the moon?

    Why does he trash the idea that God would make resurrected beings from the dust of the earth , as follows

    ‘The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. And just as we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, so shall we bear the likeness of the man from heaven.’

    Why does Paul plead in Romans 7:24 for somebody to rescue him from his body of death?

    All this and more, is ignored by Wright.

  2. Paul Says:
    Paul June 16th, 2007 at 9:15 pm

    Why do you assume that things from heaven are not physical? You seem to assume that Paul was a follower of Plato.

    (And for that matter, why do you think that the moon is not physical? ;-)

  3. Steven Carr Says:
    Steven Carr June 16th, 2007 at 11:55 pm

    Paul explains that heavenly and earthly beings are made out of different materials.

    So a corpse cannot become a heavenly body, no more than a fish can turn into the moon.

    It is not my fault that Paul did not know that celestial things are made out of the same matter as earthly things.

    It took science many centuries to find that out.

Leave a Reply