I enjoyed reading both of these posts, and I look forward to learning whether Andrew thinks Peter’s reading of him is accurate and fair. I appreciate the emphasis Andrew places on the resurrection; it has not escaped my notice that the liturgical calendar gives more emphasis to the resurrection (Easter) than to the cross (Good Friday). Perhaps here is an example of the church’s theology (theory) needing to catch up to its worship (practice).

Then again, Peter’s re-narration of the biblical narrative sounds very similar to my own reading. I especially like his last paragraph, as it takes the whole story of Jesus seriously. As I put it in a sermon recently, “His whole story counts.”

It seems to me that one of the most crucial points of disagreement hinges on how one interprets 2 Corinthians 5:14—and even more specifically the little word “all.” (Interestingly, this little word has been much debated in a different context, that of the argument between Calvinists and Arminians, with Calvinists claiming that “all” refers only to all the elect.) Did Jesus die only for the sins of Israel, or did he die for the sins of humankind?