Critiquing: #063 Facebook Qs Pt. 2 — Bereavement, Other Faiths & Atonement

April 29, 2021 | Ask NT Wright Anything – Premier

• Atonement Theology — Bereavement Support — Interfaith Dialogue — Christian Exclusivism — New Testament Insights

---

Episode Assessment:

		Commentary
Degree of Accuracy	C+	The content presents well-researched and accurate interpretations of biblical texts and theological concepts. However, there is occasional reliance on interpretations that might not be universally accepted within the broader theological community. For instance, the analogies drawn between the Exodus and the atonement may not align with all Christian traditions. To improve accuracy, the episode could incorporate a wider range of theological perspectives and critical scholarship.
Degree of Coherence	B-	The episode maintains logical coherence throughout, with clear and consistent arguments that follow a well-structured format. Each point logically builds on the previous one, creating a cohesive narrative. However, some sections, particularly those discussing interfaith issues, could benefit from clearer delineation between the theological argument and personal opinion. This would enhance the overall clarity and logical flow of the episode.
Absence of Fallacies	C	There are some instances of potential logical fallacies, such as appeals to tradition and authority, which need further scrutiny. For example, the episode assumes the superiority of Christian theological interpretations without fully engaging with counter-arguments from other faiths. This can lead to a perception of bias. To strengthen this metric, the episode should address and refute potential counter-arguments more thoroughly, demonstrating a more balanced approach.
Degree of Evidence	C	The claims made are generally supported by references to scripture and theological tradition, but could benefit from additional empirical evidence and scholarly sources. Theological assertions, while compelling within a religious context, lack empirical verification. Including historical evidence, archaeological findings, and contemporary theological research would enhance the substantiation of the claims made, providing a more robust evidential base for the arguments presented.
Degree of Testability	D+	Many theological claims are difficult to test empirically due to their nature; however, they are internally consistent with Christian doctrine. Theological assertions about the nature of Jesus, atonement, and salvation are inherently non-empirical and rely on faith-based acceptance. While this is expected in religious discourse, the episode could enhance its testability by drawing parallels with historical events or philosophical arguments that allow for some level of critical examination and debate.
Rational Confidence	C	The confidence in the claims is moderate, reflecting the balance between scriptural authority and interpretative flexibility. The episode demonstrates a strong belief in its theological positions, but this confidence is somewhat mitigated by the lack of empirical evidence and the presence of interpretative diversity within Christianity. To increase rational confidence, the episode could acknowledge these limitations more openly and discuss the implications of different interpretative possibilities.

Potential/Apparent Weaknesses:

1. Logical Fallacies

“Christianity is not ultimately a religion either in the ancient sense or in the modern sense. Christianity is about Jesus and the question is, was Jesus of Nazareth, Israel’s Messiah, the embodiment of the Creator God, the Lord of the world or wasn’t He?”

This statement involves an appeal to tradition by asserting that Christianity transcends the concept of religion without adequately addressing the historical and cultural complexities involved in this claim. The episode could be improved by providing a more nuanced discussion of how Christianity fits within the broader context of world religions and acknowledging the various scholarly perspectives on this issue.

2. Degree of Evidence

“This will be a fascinating conversation because we’re going to be talking about identity, myth and miracles. Can we find a story to live by in a post-Christian world?”

The discussion on finding a story to live by in a post-Christian world is intriguing but lacks empirical backing. While theological insights are valuable, the episode could be strengthened by integrating findings from disciplines such as sociology, psychology, and anthropology. This would provide a more comprehensive understanding of how individuals and societies construct meaning and identity in the contemporary world.

---

Formulations of Major Arguments

Argument 1: Atonement and Cosmic Victory

Premises:

1. P1: Jesus’ actions and sacrifice on the cross are depicted using Exodus and Passover language.
2. P2: Colossians 1:13-14 describes the rescue from the power of darkness and redemption through forgiveness of sins.
3. P3: The New Testament consistently portrays Jesus’ death as achieving cosmic victory over evil powers.

Conclusion:
C: Therefore, Jesus’ atonement is both a personal and cosmic victory, involving the rescue from sin and darkness, paralleling Israel’s Exodus from Egypt.

Counter-Argument:
The interpretation of atonement as a cosmic victory is compelling within a Christian framework but lacks testability and empirical evidence. Alternative religious traditions and secular worldviews provide different narratives of redemption and victory, suggesting that the concept of atonement might be culturally and theologically specific rather than universally applicable. For instance, Buddhism offers a path to liberation that is entirely independent of the concept of a deity or cosmic battle between good and evil. Similarly, secular humanism emphasizes personal and societal improvement without reference to supernatural events. By engaging with these alternative perspectives, we can better understand the relative strengths and limitations of the atonement narrative within Christianity.

---

Argument 2: Interfaith Dialogue and Exclusivism

Premises:

1. P1: Christianity asserts that Jesus is the embodiment of the Creator God and the only path to salvation.
2. P2: Other religious paths do not accept Jesus as the exclusive way to God.
3. P3: Evangelical missions often promote conversion to Christianity based on the belief in Jesus’ unique salvific role.

Conclusion:
C: Therefore, Christianity faces a challenge in interfaith dialogue, balancing the respect for other religious paths with the exclusive claim of Jesus as the singular way to salvation.

Counter-Argument:
The exclusivist stance in Christianity can appear patronizing and dismissive of other faith traditions. A more inclusive approach would acknowledge the validity of diverse spiritual experiences and seek common ground in shared values and ethical principles, fostering genuine dialogue and mutual respect. For example, interfaith initiatives often emphasize the importance of compassion, justice, and peace—values that are common to many religious traditions. By focusing on these shared values, Christians can engage in meaningful dialogue with adherents of other faiths without compromising their core beliefs. Additionally, the concept of religious pluralism, which recognizes multiple paths to the divine, can provide a framework for respectful and constructive interfaith engagement.

◉ Addressing Argument #1:

The Ineffectiveness of Jesus’ Death in Overcoming Evil Powers

The claim that the death of Jesus overcame evil powers is a central tenet in Christian theology. According to this belief, Jesus’ crucifixion and subsequent resurrection defeated the devil and liberated humanity from the bondage of sin. However, if we closely examine the logical coherence and scriptural basis of this claim, significant issues arise.

Firstly, the notion that Jesus’ death destroyed evil powers is questionable when considering the continued presence of evil in the world. The Bible itself acknowledges the ongoing influence of the devil, suggesting that evil powers have not been eradicated. Verses such as 1 Peter 5:8, which warns believers to be vigilant because the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, and Ephesians 6:12, which speaks of spiritual battles against evil forces, indicate that the devil remains active. If the death of Jesus truly vanquished these powers, such warnings would be unnecessary.

Moreover, the concept of overcoming evil by dying for three days does not follow logically. Typically, to overcome an adversary, one would expect a direct confrontation or destruction of that adversary. The three-day death of Jesus, culminating in his resurrection, is celebrated as a triumph over death and sin, but it does not explicitly demonstrate the destruction of evil powers. Instead, it symbolizes sacrifice and atonement. This symbolic victory is not synonymous with the actual eradication of malevolent forces.

The assertion that Jesus’ death defeats evil appears to be vague hand-waving rather than a clear, actionable strategy. It requires a leap of faith that lacks empirical substantiation. The theological interpretation hinges on belief rather than observable outcomes. The credulous may accept this explanation without question, but a more skeptical perspective demands a coherent, logical justification. Without such justification, the claim remains unconvincing.

In conclusion, the argument that Jesus’ death overcame evil powers is fraught with logical inconsistencies and lacks empirical evidence. The devil’s continued presence, as suggested by the Bible, contradicts the notion of a complete victory over evil. A more robust argument would need to address these issues directly and provide a clear rationale for how a three-day death achieves the destruction of evil powers.

---

Feel free to discuss this topic further in the comments section. Your insights and perspectives are warmly welcomed!