JS 423 Education, Service and Community Management
Lecture 21st April, 2007

In this lecture we were introduced to the two rival streams of religious projects: the prophetic and the purist. Both streams have their strengths and weaknesses. In a broad sense the prophetic stream is concerned with doing justice and the purist stream is concerned about the observance of the rules and keeping the law. The tension between these two approaches is a part of everyday life in general but is particularly obvious when dilemmas in the life of the church are examined. We looked at a number of examples where the tension between these two approaches is evident and then looked at the history of Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection within the context of these approaches.
We also looked at atonement theology and its feudal roots and how this has influenced modern day thinking about the death of Christ. In atonement theology Christ atones or is payback for the sins of Adam so that God is then seen as a vengeful God who intends Christ’s death. If the Bible stories are examined in the light of the purity/prophetic stream then Christ’s death is interpreted in a different way to that of atonement theology. We then see Christ as a victim of competing purist/prophetic forces within the religious world. Jesus remains faithful to the Kingdom Project and resurrection is God’s faithful response to the faithfulness of Jesus.
I found the examination of atonement theology within the context of medieval thinking to be helpful in understanding modern day religious approaches to the death of Christ. I also found the juxtaposition of purist/prophetic polarities as a way of understanding and interpreting historical events insightful.
I believe the Bible is open to different explanations surrounding Christ’s death and resurrection and for myself I find Rudolf Steiner’s work surrounding the role of Christ and the direction of humanity to be persuasive and inspiring. In this regard I believe that humanity is gradually evolving over time and that the Christ being brought the teaching of love of our fellow human to humanity. Part of this teaching was the role of resurrection and so it was necessary for Christ to die on the cross. I do not see God as being responsible for evil in the world as I see it is important for the human to evolve. The human can only truly evolve if given the freedom to do so or not to do so as the case may be. To evolve and develop in freedom then the human has the right to choose how it will evolve. Evil is a necessary part of our world and we must choose the path we will follow and whether or not we will seek to overcome evil. If we do choose to follow Christ’s path of love then we must strive further to develop ourselves by following the Christian way. Our path may be difficult but out of our suffering then we develop ourselves. God’s love is there for us if we seek it.
As my beliefs surrounding the role of Jesus differ to mainstream Catholic views I do not find it necessary to absolve God of responsibility for evil and I find Christ’s death and resurrection as powerful and necessary events. I appreciate the importance of looking at spiritual events in new ways and find it encouraging where new dialogue, discussion and ideas are being raised as part of a broad Christian dialogue.