I find it bizarre people like @JennaEllisEsq are attacking @ReverendWarnock for discussing the transcendence of the meaning of the Resurrection. (In the process, abandoning part of that meaning.) We discussed this in seminary classes decades ago. Not a new thought. Read this. 
...what the critics are doing is taking the primary meaning of the Resurrection - salvation through Christ - and reducing purely to a limited Pauline interpretation, where personal redemption through faith is all there is to it. But in reading the actual *teachings* of Jesus...2
...you find the underlying meaning of "salvation through faith in Christ." If it is reduced to "I believe" and that's it, then there are Nazis in heaven. You cannot separate faith in salvation through Christ from His teachings. Literally, entire classes are taught on the....3
...meaning of "through Christ" or "through faith in Christ." Those words are the underpinning of Christianity, and if you just take it without delving into the meaning of Paul's writings combined with Jesus's teachings, it is very difficult to reconcile faith of evil people...4
...with the meaning of Jesus's teachings. So no, @JennaEllisEsq - this is not heresy, unless they teach heresy in seminary. This is an understanding of the resurrection through both Paul's writings and Jesus's teachings. There are those who think Paul is all that matters and...5
...dont even realize that is what they are saying. But if both Paul's analysis and Jesus's teachings are not studied, together, in terms of the Resurrection, a lot of the meaning is lost.
end
end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
