Re: Geoff comment

Geoffrey Horton (
Sun, 03 Nov 1996 15:21:03 -0600

John W. Burgeson wrote:
> Geoff wrote, in part: " Some people will tell you that they couldn't accept
> Christianity if they had to believe in a physical Resurrection. They have
> accepted Christianity, or think they have. Should we therefore conclude that
> they're right about the Resurrection? "
> It is NOT "Christianity" that one accepts, but "Christ."
> The question needs to be -- "Can one accept Christ without believing in a
> physical resurrection?"
> I think the answer is "yes," but others may differ.
> But I think the question is "right."
> Burgy

The easy part first: I thank you for your substitution of "Christ" for Christianity.
You are correct.

For the second part: Accepting Christ without the physical Resurrection, if indeed it
happened (as I believe it did) means that an major portion of the picture is missing.
Undoubtedly, everyone has an incomplete picture of Christ--that's why we should always
work to grow in the knowledge and love of Him. But if what we're trying to know is
missing too much, maybe we're growing closer to something else.

I hope that's somewhat coherent!