This article presented the critical remarks relating to the understanding of the resurrection, proposed by Ph. Clayton and S. Knapp in their book The Predicament of Belief. Science, Philosophy, Faith. The main objections relate to the incorrect putting the research problem, that is interpretation of the resurrection compatible with modern science and erroneous approach to the New Testament’s relations about the resurrection of Christ. A way of solving of this problem is also causing reservations, that is to support the proposed understanding of the resurrection on the theory of emergence, its participatory approach and an understanding of the resurrection appearances as the personal but nonphysical theory of Jesus’ postmortem presence. Doubts are also caused by panentheism, and above all by the rejection of the deity of Jesus Christ. Taking all this into account, it turns out that the resurrection becomes subjective and deeply spiritual event, and the divine action is performed by the impact on the human minds and is not a miraculous event, and it does not suspend the laws of nature. According to the authors, such an approach is compatible with modern science. It is doubtful, however, whether their understanding of the resurrection of Christ makes it possible to understand the phenomenon of Christianity.

The article presents a new interpretation of the concept of a Russian thinker that emerged at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. It was fanned by Nikolai Fyodorov, who is now considered one of the forerunners of Western transhumanism. The concept of the religion of technology, taken from David Noble, is a thread that unites the unsystematic, incomprehensible, even irrational thought of the Russian philosopher. The article is written in the form of a polemic with the generally accepted interpretation of this idea, which was proposed by the Polish historian of philosophy Andrzej Walicki. The issue of the opposition of the ideas of secularism and postsecularism is crucial to this polemics.

The author puts forward a hypothesis related to the interpretation of the thought of Joseph Ratzinger – Benedict XVI on the interrelation of time and eternity. Different religions offer different ways of departing temporality - the way of being within the confines of time - towards some extratemporal existence, commonly referred to as eternity or immortality. This perspective evokes a fundamental question: if time wants to reach beyond itself towards eternity, is it that eternity - in its turn - stays in a kind of interrelation to time, or is it a kind of negative atemporality? In its view of the matter, Christianity makes a clear statement that God has power over time, which implies that God participates in the temporal reality. This participation manifests itself overtly through the Incarnation of the Son of God. Consequently, this participation shows that man takes part in the eternity of God. In this sense, a Christian reaches eternity through his/her existence in the Person of the Resurrected Jesus. This ability to eternally remain in Jesus rests on the immortal element of the human being - that is his/her spiritual soul. The soul opens a path towards salvation and the relational eternity, that is a relationship of a Christian person with the Son of God and through Him with God as Trinitary Love. This is how Christianity – while respecting the linear nature of time – promotes a positive cyclical (yet not a reiterative) concept of time, which manifests itself in the exitus - reditus relationship. Exitus is an autonomous act of God’s creation, while reditus - is a human self-sacrifice as exemplified by the Son of God. Jesus’ self-sacrifice to God the Father is a model of how time can be projected onto a new way of existence: eternity. Therefore, Christ brings time to its fullness. His Event marks the beginning of eternity for the faithful