20 March 2008

Christ rose again, say 57%

It's only a brief report; Church Times - Christ rose again, say 57 per cent in British poll and I can't see things like the size or composition of the sample being reported. Though I've saved you the trouble of finding the actual article. (The Church Times really ought to consider putting links into their online offerings). It's here. "57 per cent of respondents said that they believed Jesus had been executed by crucifixion and buried, and had risen from the dead. More than half of these (30 per cent of the total) believed in a bodily resurrection, while 27 per cent of the total believed that Jesus had risen in spirit form. Asked about life after death, 44 per cent said that they believed their spirit would live on after death. Only nine per cent believed in a personal physical resurrection."
Nothing unpredictable about the 'distaste' for bodily resurrection, the main thing is the amount that would go with a statement that sounds reasonably consonant with Christian ideas. Even more bizarrely;
of the 250 or so atheists interviewed, 14% thought Easter was about Jesus dying for the sins of the world, 12% believed he rose again from the dead, and, bizarrely, 7% thought he was son of God. However confused Christian opinion is, atheist opinion beats it hands down.


It begs the question of how we can move people individually and corporately along a version of the Engel Scale. I suspect it is about addressing the lack of seeing implications other than the ones they have already drawn, and of encouraging a sense that it is about a new creation and invites our fuller participation. In other words getting beyond the comforting reassurance about life beyond death which is where it starts and stops for most, I would guess. I suspect, though, that having an approach which links spirituality and personal development (à la new age) and draws cogently and coherantly on things that can be traced back to the Resurrection of Christ would be worth pursuing further...

No comments:

"Spend and tax" not "tax and spend"

 I got a response from my MP which got me kind of mad. You'll see why as I reproduce it here. Apologies for the strange changes in types...