I'll have to watch it again. In a way I see both Spong and Ehrman as an American reaction to American fundamentalism. I place as much, or more, on Christ's incarnation and actions and life and death than on his spoken words and parables alone. To me the crucifixion and the tearing of the veil is full of symbolism. I respect the Eucharistic sacrament as Christ's transmission down the ages.
As I've said before Jesus made it clear that he came for the hopeless and the lost -- to bring healing of broken heart and spirit by offering peace of mind and a better existence beyond the grave -- and not as an intellectual talking point or as a positive thinking guru for happiness and success in this world, or as a soup kitchen organiser.
I'm not saying those things are excluded, or that God does not do anything to ease the problems in this world of those who turn towards Him for help -- of course He does -- but that is not the main message of the Christ, imo.
Imo Christ put the first commandment first: God first, and love your neighbour flowing from that. The focus is always first to God. Not to the world. Christ as Emmanuel, God with us, demonstrates divine love -- in the spiritual sense of love as unity or one-ness between all sentient beings.
Fundamentalists try to take possession of Christ as a 'we Christians club' and Spong and others disabuse them of their higher ground by breaking the literalist reading. But they can swing too far in the opposite direction, away from Christ as Emmanuel toward a purely humanist Jesus, imo
Something like that
@wil?
I'll watch it again and make notes as you suggest.
Over to others ...
