Salient: Victoria University Students' Paper. Vol. 29, No. 10. 1966.
Sir,—It seems to me that one of the lectures of Montefiore, perhaps better named Montefurore, deserves comment. He stated that it did not matter whether or not the Ascension, the Virgin Conception, the Second Coming of Christ and the Resurrection were historical facts or not, the important thing was their meaning for us. It seems to me that this derives from a basic unstated principle that the historical event is less important than its meaning for us today. If we apply this principle to the life of Christ it seems to me that His existence as a historical person is irrelevant, the main thing is the meaning of His life for us. However Montefiore stated quite definitely that Christ was unique—a unique expressing of God. If he really does hold the principle that the meaning is the important thing then we must accuse him of inconsistency. If he does not really hold this we must accuse him of arbitrariness. I suggest that it is important whether or not Christ was a genuine unique historical figure, and hence also important whether or not the other events occurred.
N. E. Whitehead.