The Resurrection

I heard an Easter sermon on Easter Sunday. It wasn't about the resurrection. It was about the crucifixion. The crucifixion for those theologically impaired happened on Good Friday. Don't get me wrong. It was a good sermon. However, we don't hear sermons anymore about the theology of the resurrection. Protestants don't want to talk about the resurrection anymore. I wonder why. Is it embarassing? C. S. Lewis reports that the Resurrection is the central theme preached by the Apostles in Acts. I can't remember a time when anybody preached about it.

The author of Romans 1:4 writes about:

who was appointed the Son-of-God-in-power according to the Holy Spirit by
the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord.

If Christ did not rise from the dead, we are fools believing this stuff. The resurrection demonstrates the power of Christ. It seems to me that we need to think about the theology of the resurrection a lot more than we do. There seems to be enough material in the New Testament to get us started.

Kim

I am reading Kim by Kipling. It is a story about a young boy or man, who is white, but raised by natives in abject poverty in India. The text is mostly dialog. The religion of the various characters is a hodge-podge of different religions. It is a very strange book. Kim and his Lama are on a spiritual quest. Kim also enjoys the Game as Kipling calls it. Kim is seeking a red bull on green grass. It is significant for some reason. The Lama is seeking enlightenment by finding a river. Kim likes the game. It involves spying, sneaking and deceiving. I've read the first fifty pages and it is a very unique experience.

Anna Karenina

I just finished Anna Karenina. The book was long and boring in spots, but it was amazing. The novel does a great job of interwining the lives of seven main characters. All the characters were believable. I became good friends with them. Even when I wanted to hate them I felt sympathy for them. Levin, the male main character, converts from materialism to spiritualism and perhaps, even Christianity. He has an internal debate with himself throughout the book. He landed on the fact that some people lived for God instead of their belly. Not all people desired to be selfish, but some desired to do good. He thinks this a pointer to God. The argument is not fool proof, but experientially, it is fairly sound. Why are people generous and kind to strangers? Does evolutionary theory really predict benevolence?