I liked this comment:
The intention in the Facebook Passion is three fold:
(a) To express all the funny stuff we have thought about regarding the Passion, but were afraid to talk about;
(b) For those who may be “bored” or “jaded” with the Passion story to look at it in a new way, and thus to think about it again from a different angle;
(c) As a subversive form of evangelism. There are people who may read that who would never read the actual Biblical narratives. And the mockery of Bart Ehrman is a ploy to show how that kind of Enlightenment-Empirical reading of the text just misses the point entirely…
If I was going to use it with a youth group, I would point out how Ehrman’s reading of the text(s) just misses the point entirely. Are there divergences of viewpoint in the Gospels? Yes. Are the viewpoints divergent enough to cause questions? Some of them.
But, is it clear that there is core Reality of the Risen Christ that all four point to? Yes. Is it clear that this Risen Christ radically transformed the disciples in a way not accountable by merely psychological or sociological means? Yes. Does this Risen Christ still transform people in the same way? Yes.
Some people think that because the resurrection is BEYOND words to fully explain (i.e. mystical and miraculous) then it is somehow LESS than historical (i.e. mythical and magical). That’s a confusion of categories. It is only BEYOND words because it is FULLY historical. In CS Lewis’ words, Christ is the “MYTH become FACT”.