Who Says Resurrection Is All That?

Last night I happened to see an article posted on Facebook titled, "The Challenge of Easter." It's a very thoughtful and well-articulated statement of the importance of Easter, and the event it celebrates--the resurrection of Jesus after his crucifixion and death--for the Christian world-view. There's one passage in particular that I thought was interesting:

If you don’t believe in the Resurrection, you can go on living your life while perhaps admiring Jesus the man, appreciating his example and even putting into practice some of his teachings. At the same time, you can set aside those teachings that you disagree with or that make you uncomfortable—say, forgiving your enemies, praying for your persecutors, living simply or helping the poor. You can set them aside because he’s just another teacher. A great one, to be sure, but just one of many.

If you believe that Jesus rose from the dead, however, everything changes. In that case, you cannot set aside any of his teachings. Because a person who rises from the grave, who demonstrates his power over death and who has definitively proven his divine authority needs to be listened to. What that person says demands a response.

In short, the Resurrection makes a claim on you.

Uhhh... why? I don't entirely get the logic here, the one that says "resurrection → authority." And I'm not even talking here about my own personal quibble with the "god → authority" logic, although I do also have a problem with that. No, I'm talking about the "resurrection → god" step in the reasoning. Because there's plenty of non-god creatures that can rise from the dead. Vampires, for instance, and zombies. Or wights, though they're less popular these days. Oh, and Time Lords, of course. (Jesus was clearly a Time Lord.) The simple fact of his resurrection doesn't really narrow down which of these he was. Now, you may say, ah, yes, but vampires, zombies, and Time Lords aren't real. Okay, but... neither is god. It's a level playing field!

Or, at least, we haven't yet established that god exists: the author uses his resurrection as evidence for his authority. Obviously if you already believe he's god, then he's god, but if you don't already believe that he's god, I don't see how his supposed resurrection really gets you any further toward that destination. I might be very impressed by someone who can rise from the dead (presuming, of course, that he's not in the zombie/vampire/etc. scary-undead category of people who rise from the dead), but why on earth should I conclude that he's my sovereign?

Jesus was a Conservative? Dude, do you know what "conservative" means?

Herman Cain apparently thinks that Jesus Christ was a conservative. No, seriously. "Never before and not since has there ever been such a perfect conservative." The substance of his argument seems to be that in the years of Jesus' life the welfare state did not exist.

Now, never mind the fact that, as far as I can tell, Jesus Christ never espoused anything remotely resembling a political philosophy, save perhaps for the line about giving to Caesar what is Caesar's, which sounds to me like an early formulation of separation of church and state. He's all about moral philosophy, and his moral philosophy is all peace, love, and kindness (plus a bit of theology). Now, conservatives like to claim that that's their moral philosophy, but that they just don't believe the government is the appropriate agent for that philosophy. But liberals also claim that that's our moral philosophy, and that government should be the agent. So the fact that Jesus' moral philosophy was peace/love/kindness doesn't seem to suggest any particular political philosophy. Even if it did, he was living in the pre-democratic age when all things political philosophic were different.

But, uh, does Herman Cain know what the word "conservative" means? It means resisting change!!! That's the definition. Wishing to preserve the status quo. "Holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in politics or religion." Does that sound like Jesus Christ to you? Hell no! He was a frickin' revolutionary! The Pharises and such were the conservatives, the ones who saw this rabble-rouser trying to overthrow their nice elite-empowering religious traditions and didn't like it one bit. Jesus was the guy trying to upset the applecart, to radically re-shape all ideas theological or philosophical. The one deeply and profoundly critical of the system. The guy with the beard and sandals. Not a conservative. Look it up.