Michael- you both keep your money- you are both wrong, apparently. All- I passed our question onto one of our religion profs. Got this response. I excerpted the last paragraph which tends to agree in it's gist with what, I think it was Mike, said earlier:
"Earliest Christianity tended to view crucifixion/resurrection as a unity. There appears NEVER to have been a telling of the death of Jesus without also proclaiming the resurrection. But these are important -- NOT primarily as individual events that happened to the individual, Jesus of Nazareth -- but as theological symbols to be appropriated and lived, pointing beyond themselves toward What Matters Most in terms of what gives value, meaning, direction and transforming power to people's lives. Crucifixion means nothing by itself; it means nothing unless it is linked to Jesus' message and actions which led to that event -- a message and actions which did NOT deal with his potential death as a "sacrifice for sins." Resurrection means nothing by itself, either; it underscores that what Jesus lived as What Matters Most, which led to his execution, still is What Matters Most; it's not trapped in the past; it is still to be lived. Practice, i.e., living, is the crucial criterion." For those with more free time today or more inclined to things theological here is the whole response: "You psych folks have WAY too much time on your hands! :-) You're right in viewing the question as rather goofy -- and terribly ambiguous in terms of what kinds of criteria would even be applicable for "what's more important to Christianity" -- which, of course, is why it's an "ongoing debate"! Eastern Christianity and Western Christianity would not agree on an answer. Western Christianity has largely been obsessed with issues of sin and guilt with respect to the "human situation," and got all wrapped up in viewing Jesus' death through the rather peculiar lens of "sacrifice" -- peculiar for a political execution, anyway! Even when Protestants have liked to stress the importance of the resurrection (and hence avoid crucifixes, preferring empty crosses), they're nonetheless theologically committed to emphasizing the crucifixion; in their theological system, NOTHING is at stake on Easter -- although financially, they love the HUGE Easter Sunday offering, and turn Easter services into "feel-good, we're-headed-to-heaven" celebrations, even though the resurrection message initially contained NO such element. Eastern Christianity has viewed the "human situation" considerably differently than the West. It has tended either to view the key problem facing humanity as the gulf between the finite and the Infinite (in which case, the Incarnation is viewed as "fixing" that problem -- with the Infinite appearing in finite form, thereby blessing finitude), or to view the key problem facing humanity as mortality (in which case, the Resurrection is viewed as paving the way for that "fix"). Earliest Christianity tended to view crucifixion/resurrection as a unity. There appears NEVER to have been a telling of the death of Jesus without also proclaiming the resurrection. But these are important -- NOT primarily as individual events that happened to the individual, Jesus of Nazareth -- but as theological symbols to be appropriated and lived, pointing beyond themselves toward What Matters Most in terms of what gives value, meaning, direction and transforming power to people's lives. Crucifixion means nothing by itself; it means nothing unless it is linked to Jesus' message and actions which led to that event -- a message and actions which did NOT deal with his potential death as a "sacrifice for sins." Resurrection means nothing by itself, either; it underscores that what Jesus lived as What Matters Most, which led to his execution, still is What Matters Most; it's not trapped in the past; it is still to be lived. Practice, i.e., living, is the crucial criterion." _______________________________ Timothy O. Shearon, PhD Professor and Chair Department of Psychology The College of Idaho Caldwell, ID 83605 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] teaching: intro to neuropsychology; psychopharmacology; general; history and systems "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." Dorothy Parker --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
<<winmail.dat>>
