Jacob

Yes, you are quite right - it is belief in a literal resurrection which has the kind of implications I describe.

But as to “whether it did or did not happen is almost beside the point”, I beg to differ from you. This simply takes us back to the modernist myth that the resurrection works equally well if not better as a metaphor for inner spiritual experience (Christ rising in our hearts etc). There is nothing to stop people developing this line of thinking, provided we do not confuse it with the Christian faith as reflected in the New Testament.

The resurrection needs to be taken as an event alongside other historical events (despite it being an event which towers above all other events), because it addresses realities which need to be taken as equally historical - such as, that the world and our lives, for all their continuing reflection of an original divine imprint, are fundamentally off target. That death, as we experience it, is not part of the original divine purpose, and that it is a power which has infected the divine creation with futility.

More than anything, the resurrection of Jesus points to God’s continuing purposes for a material creation, of which we are part. It can be argued that none of this is necessary, that we can take New Testament language (and its Old Testament antecedents) as spiritual metaphor, as a way of emphasizing a valid idea. All this is possible, but we end up with something which is not, in the end, New Testament Christianity, and I would argue, fundamentally compromises its message.