By: Adrian Gibb
Hi everyone! Wonderful to be on board as a blogger and looking forward to posting all my ramblings which, hopefully, strike an accord with readers.
The first question I would like to ask on this blog stems from a discussion I had with an Anglican Rector a few years ago. We were talking about Bishop Spong, and his views on the Resurrection. This Rector suggested that Spong was on thin ice already, questioning centuries of doctrine and dogma, and he was concerned at which point the ice would break! At which point, in essence, should he cease being described as a Christian? So I thought I would conduct a bit of a Geoffey Robertson Hypothetical here, and ask you readers to imagine the following:
1) You reach the conclusion, through your searching, that you do not believe that Jesus was born of a Virgin birth.
2) You also decide that the miracles and healings described in the NT are probably not literal realities.
3) You are disinclined to believe that Jesus was God incarnate when he walked this earth.
4) You accept that there may have been a spiritual resurrection of Jesus in the minds and hearts of the disciples, but do not believe in a bodily resurrection of Christ.
5) You reject the notion of the NT being literal in any way, and see it as rather a collection of accounts and epistles by fellow followers of Christ's message.
6) You reach the final conclusion that Jesus was simply a man, engaged in a relationship with God that we can all achieve, who had a message of peace, love and social justice that resonates with you.
7) You thus decide that Jesus should have no more power or religious credence than Buddha or many of the Vedic sages.
Okay, now, has the ice broken for you? Have any of these things made it impossible for you to call yourself a Christian? If so, why? If not, why not?
Am looking forward to hearing your thoughts.