A “believer within the Christian
paradigm”, that is how Flip Schutte is described according to this little book.
But Schutte’s book, I suppose, will by no means be a ‘little’ one for some
readers. Quite the contrary.
I wonder how many preachers there are today that does not believe in the trinity anymore. In the reformed churches, one is often led to belief that the interpretation of the life and meaning of the life Jesus is understood very uniform. Of course very few members of reformed churches are informed about catholic tradition (this excludes learned people of course). And so, believers are often totally unaware of the different ways in which the life of Jesus is understood.
Schutte provides at least some of the very important reasons as to how and why Jesus’s life is understood differently by Christians.
Schutte’s work tries to provide answers, but I do not know if any of these will, in the long run, provide answers to some of the most difficult questions facing the church today. At the very least, Schutte gives the reader a perspective on different views, and this is important for whoever cares to take notice.
In “Jesus’ resurrection in Joseph’s garden”, Schutte summarizes a great deal of history impressively, using the eye of a philosopher. As a source on the history of Christianity, this work is a useful point to start off, but the book is more about rationalizing disbelieve within the church than it is about the history of Christianity. Nevertheless, Schutte explores a wide range of themes, most of which is about the nature of narrative and the ancient approach to sacred texts. A lot is also being said about canonization.
Reading this book, what came to my mind time and again, is that the church is very often its own worst enemy. While on the one hand many theologians maintain that Jesus is the son of God, others like Schutte argue that ‘Jesus is a myth to live by’ (p.186). There is very often no continuation between what theologians say. This situation is to my mind not sustainable at all. While some very smart theologians with PhD’s and many years of experience may find it possible to rationalize their disbelief in Jesus as the son of God while still being part of the church, ‘ordinary’ Christians, those who have to face the demons of this world every day and who turn towards Jesus for their hope and inspiration, might not understand things that way...
I wonder how many preachers there are today that does not believe in the trinity anymore. In the reformed churches, one is often led to belief that the interpretation of the life and meaning of the life Jesus is understood very uniform. Of course very few members of reformed churches are informed about catholic tradition (this excludes learned people of course). And so, believers are often totally unaware of the different ways in which the life of Jesus is understood.
Schutte provides at least some of the very important reasons as to how and why Jesus’s life is understood differently by Christians.
Schutte’s work tries to provide answers, but I do not know if any of these will, in the long run, provide answers to some of the most difficult questions facing the church today. At the very least, Schutte gives the reader a perspective on different views, and this is important for whoever cares to take notice.
In “Jesus’ resurrection in Joseph’s garden”, Schutte summarizes a great deal of history impressively, using the eye of a philosopher. As a source on the history of Christianity, this work is a useful point to start off, but the book is more about rationalizing disbelieve within the church than it is about the history of Christianity. Nevertheless, Schutte explores a wide range of themes, most of which is about the nature of narrative and the ancient approach to sacred texts. A lot is also being said about canonization.
Reading this book, what came to my mind time and again, is that the church is very often its own worst enemy. While on the one hand many theologians maintain that Jesus is the son of God, others like Schutte argue that ‘Jesus is a myth to live by’ (p.186). There is very often no continuation between what theologians say. This situation is to my mind not sustainable at all. While some very smart theologians with PhD’s and many years of experience may find it possible to rationalize their disbelief in Jesus as the son of God while still being part of the church, ‘ordinary’ Christians, those who have to face the demons of this world every day and who turn towards Jesus for their hope and inspiration, might not understand things that way...
No comments:
Post a Comment