A Quaker Understanding of Jesus Christ, Part 3


© Arthur O. Roberts
Articles in this Topic    Discussions in this Topic

A Quaker Understanding of Jesus Christ, Part 3
NOTES: 1. The author and the retired Contributing Editor are responsible only for the article content itself, and have no control over other page content. Suite101 management is responsible for book recommendations, the SuiteUniversity box and all other non-article content.

2. An updated version of this article is available.

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This article is taken, by permission, from an article, "A Quaker Understanding of Jesus Christ", by Arthur O. Roberts in Quaker Religious Thought, Vol. 29, No. 3, July 1999. Due to the length of that article, it is being published online here in four installments. Part 1 was published October 1, 1999. The article was adapted from a paper read at the Quaker Theological Discussion Group, Orlando, Florida, November 21, 1998, and responses to it. Arthur Roberts is the Editor of Quaker Religious Thought. He is the author of many journal articles, poems, devotional pieces, books, and other writings. He has served in the past as Professor of Religion and Philosophy and as Dean of Faculty at George Fox University, as well as a pastor in Friends' (Quaker) churches. Quaker Religious Thought is published two times a year, and subscription information can be obtained from Phil Smith, Religion Department, George Fox University, Newberg, OR 97132.]

C. Current cultural barriers to accepting early Quaker beliefs about Christ

1. Scientific method questions the credibility of revealed truth. This is particularly so in respect to empirically unverifiable claims, such as miracles, the resurrection of Jesus, the mystical presence of Christ within believers and in the church, and the afterlife. A scientific rejection of the supernatural erodes the Christological assumptions which formed the basis for the Quaker awakening. These assumptions affirmed a revelatory unity between God acting in creation and in redemption.

2. A predilection for psychological explanations makes theological ones seem archaic. According to this world view, inner feelings and subjective states can be empirically explained without reference to salvation language- to "God talk" and altered without the need of divine agency. Television confessionals and talk shows reveal the pervasiveness of psychological explanations in our culture. This stance weakens the force of the 17th century movement by implying that theological language, e.g. "there is one Christ Jesus, who can speak to thy condition," is a pre-scientific way of describing events that are now more credibly understood, and dealt with, in psychological terms.

Go To Page: 1 2 3


Post this Article to facebook Add this Article to del.icio.us! Digg this Article furl this Article Add this Article to Reddit Add this Article to Technorati Add this Article to Newsvine Add this Article to Windows Live Add this Article to Yahoo Add this Article to StumbleUpon Add this Article to BlinkLists Add this Article to Spurl Add this Article to Google Add this Article to Ask Add this Article to Squidoo