Critiquing: #068 — Live Audience Show with Tom Wright and Tom Holland Pt 1

June 3, 2021 | Ask NT Wright Anything – Premier

Christian revolution — Heaven and hell — Biblical interpretation — Emotional worship — Resurrection

---

Episode Assessment:

		Commentary
Degree of Accuracy	B	The content accurately reflects traditional Christian beliefs and historical interpretations, though certain theological positions may be contested within academic circles.
Degree of Coherence	B-	The discussion maintains a logical structure overall, but some transitions between theological and historical topics are abrupt, leading to occasional loss of clarity.
Absence of Fallacies	C+	While major logical fallacies are avoided, some arguments exhibit potential biases and unexamined assumptions, particularly regarding historical interpretations.
Degree of Evidence	C	The episode relies heavily on anecdotal evidence and personal interpretations rather than empirical data or peer-reviewed theological research. This affects the robustness of the arguments presented.
Degree of Testability	D	Many theological claims, such as the resurrection and the nature of hell, are inherently difficult to test empirically. This limitation is inherent to discussions of religious faith.
Rational Confidence	C	The confidence expressed in the arguments is moderate. However, the lack of empirical evidence and reliance on theological interpretation reduces the overall rational confidence.

Potential/Apparent Weaknesses:

1. Absence of Fallacies:

“My problem with that is basically biblical that in the Bible Jesus is talking about the kingdom of God arriving on earth as in heaven and that it’s in the particularly the medieval tradition but comes ultimately from Plato that we’ve swapped that for this idea of leaving this earth and going either to heaven or to hell and that’s become absolutely basic for a whole lot of western Christianity and it isn’t totally wrong in that of course in the New Testament God the Creator loves his creation and can’t stand the thought of people messing it up and destroying it and defacing themselves and other human beings and if God is a good God he must hate apartheid he must hate child abuse etc.”

This segment presents a complex argument without fully clarifying the connections between different theological points, leading to potential logical inconsistencies. The argument jumps from the concept of the kingdom of God to Plato’s influence on medieval theology and then to moral imperatives without establishing a clear logical thread.

2. Degree of Evidence:

“I didn’t hear the thing that Josh McDowell was doing but of course that has been traditional in some parts particularly of certain styles of American Christianity and Protestantism but also in many parts of traditional Catholicism one thinks of that awesome scene in Joyce’s Portrait of the Artist as a young man where there’s this great sermon fulminating about hell and all that’ll happen in it etc.”

The evidence presented is largely anecdotal or based on literary references, which do not provide strong empirical support for the claims made. References to personal experiences and literature, while illustrative, do not constitute robust evidence in a theological or historical context.

---

Formulations of Major Arguments

Argument 1: Hell as a Conversion Tool

1. Premise: Some individuals convert to Christianity due to fear of hell.
2. Premise: Traditional Christianity has historically used hell in evangelistic efforts.
3. Premise: Preaching about hell can lead to genuine conversions.
4. Conclusion: Fear of hell can be an effective, though controversial, tool for conversion.

Counter-Argument:
While the fear of hell might indeed lead some to conversion, this method often fosters a faith based on fear rather than love, which can lead to a distorted understanding of God’s nature. Theologically, Jesus’s message centered more on the kingdom of God and love rather than a binary afterlife of heaven and hell. Conversion driven by fear may result in a superficial faith that lacks a deep, personal relationship with God. Additionally, such a fear-based approach may be psychologically harmful and can lead to an unbalanced view of Christian doctrine, emphasizing punishment over grace and forgiveness.

Argument 2: Emotional vs. Rational Worship

1. Premise: Modern churches sometimes prioritize emotional worship experiences.
2. Premise: Emotional worship can alienate individuals who value intellectual engagement.
3. Premise: Balanced worship should integrate heart, mind, soul, and strength.
4. Conclusion: Churches should strive for a balance between emotional and rational elements in worship.

Counter-Argument:
While emotional worship can be deeply fulfilling and foster community spirit, neglecting intellectual engagement can render faith experiences shallow and transient. Conversely, overly rational worship risks appearing cold and uninviting, failing to engage worshippers emotionally. A balanced approach, integrating both emotional and intellectual elements, can cater to a broader audience and nurture a more holistic and sustainable faith. Emotional experiences should complement rather than replace theological education and rational discourse, ensuring a well-rounded spiritual life.

Argument 3: Resurrection and Historical Validity

1. Premise: The resurrection of Jesus is a central tenet of Christian belief.
2. Premise: Historical evidence and personal testimonies support the resurrection narrative.
3. Premise: The resurrection narratives in the gospels are unique and not fabricated.
4. Conclusion: The resurrection is a historically and theologically valid event.

Counter-Argument:
The historical validity of the resurrection is highly debated. Skeptics argue that the historical evidence for the resurrection is insufficient, relying heavily on religious texts subject to bias. Alternative explanations, such as metaphorical interpretations or the development of myths over time, challenge the literal view of the resurrection. While the resurrection is a foundational Christian belief, its acceptance largely depends on one’s theological perspective. Empirical evidence for such an event is lacking, and the extraordinary nature of the claim requires extraordinary evidence. The belief in the resurrection, therefore, remains a matter of faith rather than historical fact.

◉ Addressing Argument #3:

The Ambiguous Accomplishments of the Resurrection

The resurrection of Jesus is a central tenet of Christian belief, heralded as the pivotal event that underpins the faith. However, within Christianity, it is never made clear what the resurrection is supposed to have accomplished or the dynamics involved in that accomplishment. This essay explores the Christian claims about what necessitated the resurrection and how Jesus’s resurrection purportedly achieved these outcomes. It then provides a rebuttal, demonstrating that these alleged dynamics have the essence of a “just-so” story and could have been fabricated by anyone with a sufficient imagination.

Christian Claims About the Resurrection

1. Atonement for Sin: Christians claim that the resurrection was essential for the atonement of humanity’s sins. The resurrection is said to validate Jesus’s sacrifice on the cross, confirming that his death successfully atoned for the sins of humanity.
2. Defeat of Death: Another claim is that Jesus’s resurrection defeated death itself. By rising from the dead, Jesus is believed to have conquered death, providing believers with the promise of eternal life.
3. Proof of Divinity: The resurrection is also seen as proof of Jesus’s divinity. It is argued that by rising from the dead, Jesus demonstrated that he is the Son of God, validating his divine nature and teachings.
4. Foundation of Christian Hope: The resurrection is claimed to be the foundation of Christian hope. It assures believers of their own future resurrection and eternal life, fostering hope and perseverance in the faith.
5. Fulfillment of Prophecy: Lastly, Christians assert that the resurrection fulfilled Old Testament prophecies. It is viewed as the culmination of God’s plan for salvation, prophesied throughout the Hebrew Scriptures.

Rebuttal: The “Just-So” Nature of Resurrection Dynamics

The dynamics purportedly at play in the resurrection’s effects have the essence of a “just-so” story—narratives that are convenient and self-justifying without empirical grounding. These claims about spiritual dynamics lack testability, rendering them indistinguishable from fabrications conjured by imaginative minds.

1. Atonement for Sin: The mechanism by which the resurrection validates atonement is never clearly defined. The link between a physical resurrection and the forgiveness of sins remains speculative and untestable, feeling more like a narrative convenience than a demonstrated reality.
2. Defeat of Death: While the resurrection is said to defeat death, this claim rests on the assumption of an afterlife, which is itself untestable. The idea that one person’s resurrection could universally conquer death lacks empirical evidence and appears to be a theological construct rather than a factual outcome.
3. Proof of Divinity: The resurrection as proof of divinity is circular reasoning. It presupposes the belief in Jesus’s divinity to accept the resurrection as proof. This self-referential logic weakens the argument, making it appear as a crafted story rather than an independent verification of divinity.
4. Foundation of Christian Hope: The hope derived from the resurrection is based on belief rather than evidence. The assurance of future resurrection and eternal life is an untestable promise, which can be easily envisioned by anyone seeking to inspire hope in followers.
5. Fulfillment of Prophecy: The fulfillment of prophecy claim hinges on selective interpretation of ancient texts. The alignment of Jesus’s resurrection with Old Testament prophecies is a retrospective justification that could be formulated to fit any number of events with sufficient creative interpretation.

In summary, the spiritual dynamics attributed to the resurrection have the feel of being conjured up out of thin air because they likely are. These dynamics are untestable and rely heavily on narrative constructs rather than empirical evidence. This lack of testability and reliance on imaginative storytelling cast doubt on the authenticity of the resurrection’s purported accomplishments.

---

I hope this essay has provided a thought-provoking perspective on the resurrection and its claimed accomplishments. I warmly invite you to discuss this topic further in the comments section. Your thoughts and insights are highly valued and contribute to a richer understanding of this significant theological concept.