Chapter 25 - Reviewing the evidence about Jesus

Rather, "Chapter 25 - Trying and failing to redeem myself."

If we were to talk to a Christian about Jesus, the conversation might go something like this:

Chris: You are completely wrong about Jesus. Jesus is Lord! Jesus is resurrected and Jesus sits on the right hand of God the father almighty!

Bright: Oh, hey guys! Good to see you two again.

Norm: Why do you believe that?

Chris: I know it in my heart. I talk to Jesus every day. I have a loving, living relationship with our Lord Jesus Christ!

Bright: What about the fact that there's a great deal of evidence to support it, Chris? I think we should stop pretending that Norm isn't aware of these things.

Norm: How do you know that Jesus is resurrected?

Chris: It says so right in the Bible. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were real people. So was Paul. They have no reason to lie. They saw the resurrected Jesus.

Norm: I understand what you are saying. The thing I would like to help you understand is that the Bible is full of problems. There is no reason why we should believe the Bible when it talks about the resurrection.

Chris: The Bible is not full of problems!

Norm: That is what we saw in Section 2. The Bible thinks that slavery is great, that women are to be hated, that people should be sacrificing animals and that God loved killing children. We can open the Bible to nearly any page and find nonsense. We know that the story of Noah is nothing but a story. And so on. There are problems with the Bible everywhere we look. Given all of these problems, there is no reason to trust anything the Bible says.

Bright: Rather, it regulated a process far different from what you would call "slavery," it values women as precious children of God, and features God enacting judgment on individuals (saying nothing about God "loving" anything). Of course, you're right on one thing...It does say we should practice sacrifice. Just like every single other culture on the planet at one point.

But even if all of those were true and espoused by the Bible, that still would not prove that Jesus did not rise from the dead, or that Jesus isn't God. You're viewing the Bible as one monolithic source, which is an invalid way of viewing it. An apparent contradiction in Genesis and Second Kings doesn't discount that...

Chris: Jesus is resurrected! Jesus is Lord!

Bright: Thanks, Chris.

Norm: Let's pray to Jesus and ask that he appear to us right now to settle this.

Chris: He can't do that! Jesus can't appear to us!

Norm: Why not?

Chris: He cannot!

Bright: Hold on now, Chris. Nobody said anything about "can't" here. After all, I have a friend that claims he did directly appear to her. My grandfather, in another case, says that God appeared to him in the form of an external, audible voice. What about them?

Norm: But why?

Chris: He's so busy doing everything God needs him to do! Plus, if he just appeared right here out of thin air, it would take away our free will. We would both KNOW that he exists. He can't do that!

Norm: Then how was Jesus able to appear to Paul? How was Jesus able to appear to the 500 brethren? Why was it OK for them to KNOW that Jesus exists?

Chris: That was different.

Norm: Why?

Bright: Because Paul was a mass murderer who was killing Christians, and if it weren't for Paul and that initial five hundred brethren, Christianity would have been relegated to the status of a cult religion that lasted maybe a few years and then died off forever.

Chris: Jesus had only been dead a couple of days.

Bright: Correct. And God doesn't need to do anything more than what he's already done for us, in actuality.

Norm: Why does that matter to a timeless, omnipotent being?

Chris: You are so wrong about this!

Norm: OK, then let's pray to Jesus about anything. Let's ask Jesus to do anything for us right now. What we saw in Section 1 is that Jesus does not answer any prayers. Why don't we ask him to move a mountain for us?

Bright: What's all this "Section" business? Are you quoting a book or something?

Chris: You are so wrong.

Norm: Why can't we pray to him right now? In Mark 11:24 Jesus' message is crystal clear: "Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." He says, "Ask, and you shall receive." In Luke 1:37: "For with God nothing will be impossible." Nothing is impossible through prayer. Why won't he respond to us if we pray to him right now?

Chris: You are completely wrong. That is not how prayer works!

Bright: Right. Prayer was never intended to be a gumball machine. There are a litany of valid reasons for why prayers are not answered by God.

Norm: Here's another way to look at it. Why don't we take a vote? We take all six billion people on the planet and we ask them to vote on whether Jesus is God or not. Only two billion people on the planet are Christian, so the other four billion are going to vote against Jesus. For every Christian, there are two non-Christians who think you are delusional.

Bright: What's your point, Norm?

Chris: They are all wrong! If only they knew the Lord Jesus like I do!

Norm: You are telling me that all one billion Muslims are wrong? They believe that Jesus was a man, not God. It says so right in the Koran [Koran 5:75].

Chris: The Muslims are delusional!

Norm: Those are fightin' words.

Bright: ...Coming from a guy that believes 90% of the world's population is COMPLETELY wrong about something as fundamental as the existence of God, or the validity of spiritual experience.

Chris: They are delusional! Everyone knows it! Jesus is Lord!

Norm: So there are a billion Muslims who think that all the Christians are delusional. And there are two billion Christians who think all the Muslims are delusional. Would you consider, at least for a moment, the possibility that all three billion of you are delusional?

Bright: But there are a billion people who describe themselves as non-religious. What if they are delusional?

Chris: I am not delusional! Jesus Christ is our resurrected Lord! I talk to him every single day and he talks to me! And he answers my prayers!

Norm: OK, then give me anything -- give me any evidence at all that shows me that Jesus exists.

Chris: The Bible talks all about Jesus!

Norm: So you think we should reinstate the slave trade? You think that Christians should hate women?

Bright: You're ridiculous, Norm. Give up your childish reasoning and act like the adult you are.

Chris: NO!

Norm: Give me anything.

Chris: I cannot. Jesus must remain hidden! If he were not hidden, we would all know that he exists. It would destroy faith.

Norm: If Jesus must remain hidden, then how do you know that he exists?

The conversation can go on and on like this. See, not if you were actually talking to a theist. It's easy to make a conversation circular if you're the one talking on both sides.

To anyone who stands outside the Christian faith and looks at Jesus rationally, it is obvious that Jesus either was a complete myth who never existed at all, or was a normal human being who was turned into a myth after-the-fact. Only someone as arrogant as you would claim that such a thing is "obvious." I don't think it's "obviously" true that Muhammed was not a legitimate prophet. That takes serious argument to demonstrate. Yet, despite all the problems, contradictions and lack of evidence, a Christian will cling to Jesus. You will begin to understand why Christians do that in Chapter 27, but for now let's simply review the evidence that we have seen. Exactly what we need: psychoanalysis.

In this section of the book we have looked at Jesus from a number of different angles. False. You have looked at Jesus from a single angle: the atheistic view. What we have found is that Jesus was a human being just like you and me. Of course, this was determined merely by asking why he doesn't do miracles for every person ever. This is clearly not a valid way of finding anything out. We simply ask the questions that any normal person would ask of someone who claims to be God. For example:

1. If Jesus is God, why did he never prove it in a meaningful way? Overturning the laws of nature and rising from the dead isn't "meaningful?" Why are none of his miracles visible today? How could any of them possibly be? We examined this question in chapter 19. And my response is here. Of the questions asked in this section of the book, this one is the most important. And when it's thrown out, so is the rest of your argument against Christ. It is important for this simple reason: If a man were to walk up to you today and state that he is God, you would want to see proof. Name one instance where Jesus "walked up to" someone, out of the blue, and said he was God. The proof would have to be obvious to everyone and scientifically irrefutable. Jesus is no different. Which is why he did such things as feed 5,000 people using a single lunch. Obvious, and scientifically irrefutable.
   

2. If Jesus is God, and Jesus is resurrected, then why hasn't he appeared to you in the flesh to prove that he is resurrected? Because most of us really do not need him to. We examined this question in chapter 20. Click here. In order for the Apostles to believe in the resurrection, Jesus appeared to them. Because without a knowledge of the resurrected savior, Christianity would not exist today. In order for Paul to believe in the resurrection, Jesus appeared to him. Because without him, Christianity would not exist today, and there would have been a lot more Christians murdered by the terrorist himself. Why would Jesus, who is all-loving and timeless, think of you as any less important than Paul? It's not that we're less important. It's just that God doesn't need us to create a religion. The reason is because Jesus did not appear to anyone. Your conclusion does not logically follow.
   

3. Why do we need to eat Jesus? We don't. It's a symbolic ritual that isn't required for anything. We examined this question in chapter 21. My response is here. We have Jesus -- the all-loving creator of the universe -- demanding that we ceremonially cannibalize his body and satanically drink his blood if we want to have "eternal life." No, communion is not required for any inheritance of eternal life. It's a reminder of his sacrifice, and nothing more. The source of this bizarre ritual is not Jesus. The ritual comes from primitive pagan religions that were common at the time. His source for this is The Da Vinci Code, interestingly enough.
   

4. Why do so many children live in poverty, and why does Jesus misspeak so many times in the New Testament? In chapter 22 we examined a number of statements where Jesus is wrong. And in my response, we examined why you were mistaken, and why the amount of children in poverty do not effect the fact that Jesus rose from the dead. Why would a perfect God write things in the Bible that are incorrect? A loaded question, isn't it?
   

5. Why does Jesus need money from you every Sunday morning? In chapter 24 we examined this interesting paradox. There is absolutely nothing paradoxical about it. To call it a paradox is a grievous misstatement.
   

There are broader pieces of evidence as well. Like what? As pointed out in Section 1, Jesus does not answer prayers. As pointed out in Section 2, the Bible is provably the work of primitive men. And so on. If you've read anything up to this point on this blog, you'll know that neither of them are the case.

We can look at Jesus from several other angles and reach the same conclusion.

The biggest problem with Jesus

The biggest problem with Jesus is his incredible myopia. We can see that now looking back at him 2,000 years later. Why didn't Jesus use his omnipotence to actually do something magnificent and beautiful on earth rather than squandering his "power" as he does in the Bible? Again, how is walking on water, feeding a huge crowd with virtually nothing, healing crippled people and curing disease by touching them, or rising from the dead, not magnificent or beautiful?

At the very least, Jesus could have transcribed passages into the Bible that would have ended sexism, racism and slavery forever. Hello: Jesus didn't "transcribe" anything in Scripture. We've been over this before. As the simplest example, think of all of the suffering that slavery has caused. As described in chapter 13, millions upon millions of people have suffered through the bondage and the remarkable brutality of slavery because Jesus and his Bible fully endorse slavery. "Fully endorse" is a meaningless concept given what Jesus actually says about slavery, and what kind of slavery it actually was back then. If Jesus had simply made a clear statement -- "Slavery is forbidden, free all the slaves" -- he could have prevented much of that suffering. Is it his job to prevent suffering, or ours? Yet he did nothing of the sort. He also never spoke about marijuana, or pedophilia, or lots and lots and lots of things. That doesn't make him evil. In the same way, Jesus could have chosen women to be six of his apostles and made several speeches on the topic of women's equality and he would have put a huge dent in sexism (see chapter 15). Notice that the witnessess to Jesus's resurrection were women, and their testimony was not valid in court. The very fact that Mary Magdelene was considered a disciple, and that women could prophecy in church, should illustrate the point that Christianity was leaps and bounds ahead in terms of gender equality than its neighbors. Still today we see the effects of Jesus' shortsightedness in this area. Ironic, considering that most people regard Jesus's morality as far ahead of even contemporary models of morality.

At a larger level, if Jesus were God, he could have performed so many real miracles. You haven't even really diagnosed any of the real miracles he did perform. What business is it of yours to suggest something like this? He could have, for example, eliminated smallpox and a host of other diseases that science is busy eliminating today. And the fact that he did not proves absolutely nothing. Jesus could have given the people of Israel the knowledge that they would need to start a technological society and raise themselves above the primitive living conditions of the day. As mentioned in Chapter 17, Jesus could have taught the Israelites about metallurgy, chemistry, biology, physics, manufacturing, mathematics, medicine, engineering, etc., etc., etc. And all of it would have been meaningless and ineffective to the homeless peasant people he was talking to. He could have also taught them how to responsibly use these technologies to solve the problems of pollution and habitat destruction that so often accompany them today. He could have made clear statements to deter nuclear proliferation. Because "nuclear proliferation" means a heck of a lot to a first century Isrealite, and they totally would have considered that to be relevant enough to record in Scripture. He could have taught mankind to share wealth so that the immense problem of global poverty that we see today would have been solved long ago. He could have laid down a template for governance that would have ended monarchies, dictatorial regimes and warlords forever. Yes, we all know that governments specifically model their ideas after the Bible. He could have made his message so clear, and the proof of his godliness so obvious, that all six billion people on the planet would have aligned with him rather than fragmenting into dozens of bizarre and often warring factions. The problem is not that the message is unclear. The problem, as usual, is with you.

Jesus, if he actually were God, could have done so much. He could have prevented massive amounts of human suffering with his words and deeds. Instead, he did none of this. To any rational person, these problems make it painfully obvious that Jesus was a normal human being. No. Normal, rational people don't demand such actions out of Jesus, because he already did so much for us.

Jesus, the eternal torturer

Simply take a moment to think about the following statement:

"Hello, my name is Jesus. I love you deeply. I have loved you since you were conceived in the womb and I will love you for all eternity. I died for you on the cross because I love you so much. I long to have a loving personal relationship with you. I will answer all of your prayers through my love. But if you do not get down on your knees and worship me, and if you do not EAT MY BODY and DRINK MY BLOOD, then I WILL INCINERATE YOU WITH UNIMAGINABLY TORTUOUS PAIN IN THE FIRES OF HELL FOR ALL ETERNITY BWAH HA HA HA HA HA!"

Yes, this is the central message of Christianity. My foot.

Think about this message. We have a being who, according to the Standard Model of God, embodies love. Yet, if you do not get down on your knees and worship him, you will be physically tortured for all eternity. No, not physical torture. Not even emotional "torture." The usage of terms like "fire" are clearly metaphors. What sort of love is that?

Imagine a human being who acted this way. Imagine that a human being for some reason "falls in love with you." This person sets up hidden cameras and begins tracking you everywhere you go every minute of every day. This person leaves a book on your doorstep that professes how much he loves you. But this person gives you a deadline and says, "If you do not begin to love me by my deadline, I will capture you and physically torture you in the most hideous ways." How would you describe such a person? We would call such a person a lunatic, and we would put such a person in prison for life. On a basic level, because no human has the right to demand love.

Asking Jesus to appear

Here is another way to prove it to yourself. Simply get down on your knees and pray to Jesus. Ask him to appear to you, in the flesh, just like he did to Paul (see chapter 20). Paul's vision was auditory, not visual. Ask Jesus to demonstrate to you, personally, that he is resurrected. When he appears, take your family camcorder and record the event for posterity. Frankly, if we're talking about "just like Paul," then I know someone who had a similar experience: my grandfather. But of course, you would dismiss this out of hand.

Of course, Jesus will not appear.

What Jesus says in John 14:12 is so clear:

"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father. Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it, that the Father may be glorified in the Son; if you ask anything in my name, I will do it.

You have asked for something in his name. You have even asked him to do something that he is clearly able to do. The Bible says that Jesus appeared to hundreds of people, so it should be no problem for him to appear to you.

Yet, predictably, Jesus will not appear. I don't really need Jesus to appear, though. Most people who you would want to pray this prayer do not.

Now I would ask you to examine it at a deeper level. Look at what is happening inside your mind right now. You have read the Bible and seen Jesus' clear statement: "If you ask anything in my name, I will do it." It's also clear that there are a great number of things that have to happen before you can get to that place. He does not say, "I might do it." You have prayed for Jesus to appear and Jesus has ignored you.There are probably a thousand good reasons for why this occurs.

Even though Jesus did not appear, and even though Jesus says to you quite clearly in the Bible that he will, look at how you deal with this setback. Do you draw the obvious conclusion from the evidence? Yes, because the evidence is not contingent on whether or not Jesus appears to me. Even if he doesn't, the rest of the evidence is still there. If you are a Christian, then probably not. Wrong. Instead, in your mind, you are coming up with a thousand rationalizations to explain why Jesus did not appear:

1. It is not his will - Which is not a rationalization, but a valid reason.
   
2. He doesn't have time
3. He may appear, but it will be in the afterlife
4. I didn't pray the right way - You're right, we probably don't.
   
5. I am not worthy - You're right. We are not.
   
6. I do not have enough faith - You're right. We don't.
   
7. I cannot test the Lord- Etc.
   
8. Jesus only appeared to the apostles
9. Jesus is sitting at the right hand of God, and is no longer appearing on earth
10. Jesus is actually all around me, but I cannot see him
11. It is not part of Jesus' plan for me
12. Jesus will not appear in the flesh, but instead will appear by rearranging the dust motes in the air. But it is not dusty enough here.
13. Jesus will appear in my dreams
14. Jesus is here -- I can feel him in my heart
15. And on and on and on...

You are an expert at creating rationalizations like these. It is not your place to say that any of those are "rationalizations." You, who deliberately distorts Scripture to make your convoluted arguments; you, who refuses to adequately examine any of Jesus's miracles directly; you, who does not even consider the possibility of God having a legitimate reason for not appearing. You have to be, because Jesus constantly lets you down. The reason why you are an expert is because you have been creating rationalizations like this for Jesus your entire life. Jesus has disappointed you so many times that you expect to be disappointed. That is why creating this list of rationalizations is so easy and so natural for you. If you were raised like this, then I feel for you, man. Most Christians would never say anything like this.

But here is the more interesting thing. Let's say that there is some legitimate reason that Jesus did not appear to you. Ooh, finally trying to consider the opposition. For example, it turns out that you happened to be wearing blue jeans as you prayed, and Jesus does not like the color blue. I guess we're not actually going to try, then. The fact is that the resurrected Jesus has not ever appeared to anyone. Unproven assumption that goes contrary to the evidence. Zero people are worthy, or we would see the video clips for sale at Christian book stores. There are hundreds of videos of miracles on YouTube. Do you believe any of them?

It is easy to imagine how a Christian would respond to this experiment:

Chris: Of course Jesus would not appear to you -- that would take away your free will. And if you video taped it, it would take away the free wills of everyone else.

Norm: So Jesus can appear to no one, is that correct?

Chris: Yes, that is correct. That is why the resurrected Jesus does not appear today.

Bright: This is where your argument falls, Chris. It's not that he "can't" appear to anyone. It's that he has valid reasons for not doing so, and it is not needed anymore.

Norm: Then how did Jesus prove that he was resurrected?

Chris: By appearing to people, of course. How else would we know that Jesus was resurrected?

It is a circle of absurdity. The only way for Jesus to prove that he was resurrected was to appear to people, and that was OK, but for Jesus to appear to you is impossible.

The reason why Jesus does not appear to you has nothing to do with your free will. It has to do with the fact that Jesus appeared to no one.

The evidence of Jesus

Another way to prove to yourself that Jesus does not exist is to ask yourself this simple question:

Is there any evidence that Jesus exists today?

As you think about this simple question, you will realize that there is not. Hmm. Strange, I came to the opposite conclusion. Everything else that you believe in has left behind some sort of evidence that proves its existence. But with Jesus there is nothing except five hundred witnesses who claim to have seen him alive after he was crucified, a long trail of disciples that were willing to die for what would have been a lie otherwise, a religion that has withstood the test of time, and billions of people who claim to experience Jesus as a reality in their lives. There is no physical evidence of his existence. There is also no physical evidence of the laws of logic or mathematics. There is no miraculous evidence -- it is very strange, but not a single one of Jesus' miracles left behind any physical evidence for us to see today. You still have not really specified how this would be possible with the miracles Jesus performed. There is no prayer evidence. Except for that time when a close friend of mine prayed in Jesus's name for a deaf and mute woman to receive her sight and power of speech, and immediately afterwards, she heard and spoke for the first time in twenty years. No matter how much we pray to Jesus, nothing ever happens (see section 1). Eh? There is, quite simply, zero evidence to prove that Jesus exists today. Hold your ears if you want. Suit yourself.

A devout Christian would point out that there is the Bible -- God's perfect word. Yes, there is the Bible. The Bible talks all about Jesus. It predicts Jesus' coming (see chapter 23) and then tells us about Jesus' time on earth.

But this same Bible also tells us that slavery is great, that women should be hated, that animal and human sacrifice is necessary, and that massacring babies and small children is one of God's favorite pastimes (see Section 2 for details). We don't believe the Bible when it talks about slavery, misogyny, etc. Why would we believe the Bible when it talks about Jesus? Because the logic that one morally objectionable passage proves the entire book is morally objectionable is completely, 100% flawed.

Understanding the evidence

There are two options with Jesus. Either Jesus is God, or Jesus was a regular human being. Or, that Jesus was insane. You would have to be to carry on such a ministry and really believe you were God. When you look at all of the evidence, which of these two options seems more likely to you?

If you are a Christian, and if you have believed all your life that Jesus is resurrected and Jesus is God, all that I would ask you to do is take a few moments to look at all of this evidence.

I have. It conclusively shows that Jesus was God, and he rose from the dead. All the attempts you have made to show otherwise have failed.

See also chapter 27 to understand where your beliefs about Jesus may be coming from. I look forward to this.

© P-Dunn's Apologetics 2009. All rights reserved.

Chapter 24 - Why does Jesus need your money?

Rather, "Chapter 24 - Are you being willfully ignorant again?"

Imagine hearing this advertisement on the radio one day:

"Hello. My name is Jesus, and I am God. I am the all-powerful creator of the universe. I created everything that you see before you -- the galaxies and stars in the heavens; the oceans, the mountains and the plains of earth; the sun and the moon and the skies; along with every living thing on the planet. I created you personally, and I gave you your unique soul. I created everything!



Mr. Brain, would you actually be convinced by this sort of medium of communication? If you actually heard this radio message, would you (or even any Christians) actually believe it was Jesus coming over the radio waves?


Everything of value on earth I created. I buried thousands of tons of gold in mines around the planet. I placed billions of gallons of oil under the sands in the Middle East. I created the millions of carets of diamonds being mined in South Africa.

And I will answer your prayers. Pray to me for anything and I will hear and answer your prayers. I say it in dozens of places in the Bible, but I like the way I say it in Mark 11:24 the best: "Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." Anything you need -- money, love, happiness, you name it -- I am here to provide it for you. If you're just tuning in to this refutation, please check my earlier responses to this sort of argumentation.


Now, there is just one thing I need in return. I need your money. See, if anyone actually was convinced beforehand, they wouldn't be anymore. I need lots of your money. The Bible specifies that you send me ten percent of your gross income, but think of that as a starting point. Feel free to give more! When they pass the offering plate at church, be sure to give generously!

Because even though I created the universe and everything in it, and even though I will give you everything you ask for in prayer, I can't give a cent to any church, ever.

So, please give generously at your place of worship today! I thank you for your support!"

This is what every church tells you every Sunday morning when they pass the plate. Jesus is the all-powerful creator of the universe and everything in it, he will answer all of your prayers, but he has no money. The question is not whether God has any money. The question is whether the church has money. I (sort of) appreciate your feeble attempt to make this essay literarily interesting, but the fact remains that God is not the one who needs our money.

Why don't the ministers and deacons of the church gather together every Sunday morning and pray for Jesus to deposit $1,000,000 in gold bars in the offering plate? Why doesn't Jesus answer their prayers? Why do they have to beg for money from mere mortals when there is an immortal, all-powerful God who should provide anything they ask for?

Because, aside from the fact that prayer simply doesn't work like that, money really isn't the point of tithing. The point is for humans to make a sacrifice of what they have and dedicate it to the Lord. The point is for us to show to God that he is worth more to us than our money, seeing as he said to us that "no one can serve two masters." If God merely gave everyone the money so no one would have to tithe, that would not only go against Biblical commandments to tithe, but also would defeat the purpose of it altogether.

Plus, how would the deacons and ministers explain all of this extra money to people who keep an eye on church spending? I feel like the explanation "God did it" wouldn't satisfy many outside observers. And why would any one church need that much money anyway? A million dollars every week? Within a few years, they'd have more money than many corporations. And then, you'd likely accuse them of all sorts of financial misdeeds. And doesn't Jesus talk more about money (usually negatively) than anything else in his entire ministry, based on whats recorded in Scripture?

The reason why Jesus needs lots of your money every Sunday morning should be obvious to you at this point. Jesus doesn't need a cent of my money. Churches do, though. Churches need money to run the air conditioning, keep the electricity on, pay the staff and pastors, feed people at their events, put on events in the first place, donate to missions and other charitable endeavors, etc. This is basic economics, Mr. Brain. Christians don't operate by different economic rules than other people.

If you're really trying to make an argument for the non-existence of God by saying "Well, God doesn't put $1,000,000 in our offering plates every Sunday, so he must not actually exist," then you need to seriously rethink your education.

© P-Dunn's Apologetics 2009. All rights reserved.

Why Donate to P-Dunn's Apologetics?

If you clicked this link, you're wondering why you should donate to a blog like this. So what about Brain Is Ignorant, or any one of my blogs, deserves your financial support? Why in the world should you donate?

1. Donating any amount is an expression of appreciation for what I've done, a "thank you" for all of the time and effort it has taken me so far. This is a ministry that I've run for almost three years now. I began contributing to Brain Is Ignorant in July of 2006, and it has been an ongoing effort. I've worked a lot of hours and hopefully saved you the trouble.
   
   
2. As you can see, it is still not finished. And it will never be finished. I think that what I've done here will be a continuing effort: continually rewriting and re-evaluating what I have already put forth. And that's not just on the blog! I have a YouTube channel that is also used for apologetics, and continuing that is a goal of mine as well. Your contribution will encourage me that people really are interested in what I've done, and really do want me to continue this effort.
   
   
3. Your contribution will allow me to purchase more resources to make better responses to atheistic arguments. I have an extensive Amazon Wish List for books about Christianity, many of which are in relation to atheism, and I can't get any of them without money.
   
   

Thank you for taking the time to consider donating to P-Dunn's Apologetics. I'm not a non-profit organization, and you won't be tax exempt; I'm just a (broke) college student trying to make it. Anything you give me will be very much appreciated, especially in such a time as this.

Thank you again,
Patrick Dunnevant

Chapter 23 - Was Jesus' coming Prophesized?

Rather, "Chapter 23 - Did you really just say 'prophesized?'"

In the eyes of Christians, one of the things that irrefutably proves that Jesus is God is the fact that Jesus fulfilled many prophesies from the Old Testament. For example, if you look at the Web site for the Campus Crusade for Christ, you find this paragraph:

More than 300 prophecies like this were made in the Old Testament and then fulfilled through Jesus' life, death and resurrection. The chances of one person fulfilling a mere 8 of these prophecies are 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000. For one person to fulfill 48 of these prophecies, the number becomes staggering--1 chance in 10 to the 157th power (1 with 157 zeros after it). Add to that the 250 other prophecies and it becomes impossible for any other person except Jesus to ever fit that particular sequence of time and events. [ref]

300 certainly is a huge number of prophesies, and Christians put a lot of stock in them.

However, the "prophesies" that Jesus fulfilled are odd. According to whom, exactly? They are a collection of rather strange, oblique references scattered throughout the Old Testament. Strange? Oblique? Where are you getting these words from? People have grabbed onto them as somehow indicative of something having to do with Jesus, although it is not clear why they do that. With some, maybe. With others, it's pretty clear. Let me show you several of them so that you can see what I mean. Why thank you, Mr. Brain.

Example 1

Here is a complete chapter from the book of Isaiah so that you have plenty of context: So you've suddenly realized the benefit of reading things in context? Or is this only when its convenient for your case?

Isaiah chapter 7:

¹ When Ahaz son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, was king of Judah, King Rezin of Aram and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel marched up to fight against Jerusalem, but they could not overpower it.

² Now the house of David was told, "Aram has allied itself with Ephraim"; so the hearts of Ahaz and his people were shaken, as the trees of the forest are shaken by the wind.

³ Then the Lord said to Isaiah, "Go out, you and your son Shear-Jashub, to meet Ahaz at the end of the aqueduct of the Upper Pool, on the road to the Washerman's Field. ⁴ Say to him, 'Be careful, keep calm and don't be afraid. Do not lose heart because of these two smoldering stubs of firewood-because of the fierce anger of Rezin and Aram and of the son of Remaliah. ⁵ Aram, Ephraim and Remaliah's son have plotted your ruin, saying, ⁶ "Let us invade Judah; let us tear it apart and divide it among ourselves, and make the son of Tabeel king over it." ⁷ Yet this is what the Sovereign Lord says:

" 'It will not take place,
it will not happen,
⁸ for the head of Aram is Damascus,
and the head of Damascus is only Rezin.
Within sixty-five years
Ephraim will be too shattered to be a people.
⁹ The head of Ephraim is Samaria,
and the head of Samaria is only Remaliah's son.
If you do not stand firm in your faith,
you will not stand at all.' "


¹⁰ Again the Lord spoke to Ahaz, ¹¹ "Ask the Lord your God for a sign, whether in the deepest depths or in the highest heights."

¹² But Ahaz said, "I will not ask; I will not put the Lord to the test."

¹³ Then Isaiah said, "Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of men? Will you try the patience of my God also? ¹⁴ Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel. ¹⁵ He will eat curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right. ¹⁶ But before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste. ¹⁷ The Lord will bring on you and on your people and on the house of your father a time unlike any since Ephraim broke away from Judah-he will bring the king of Assyria."

¹⁸ In that day the Lord will whistle for flies from the distant streams of Egypt and for bees from the land of Assyria. ¹⁹ They will all come and settle in the steep ravines and in the crevices in the rocks, on all the thornbushes and at all the water holes. ²⁰ In that day the Lord will use a razor hired from beyond the River-the king of Assyria-to shave your head and the hair of your legs, and to take off your beards also. ²¹ In that day, a man will keep alive a young cow and two goats. ²² And because of the abundance of the milk they give, he will have curds to eat. All who remain in the land will eat curds and honey. ²³ In that day, in every place where there were a thousand vines worth a thousand silver shekels, there will be only briers and thorns. ²⁴ Men will go there with bow and arrow, for the land will be covered with briers and thorns. ²⁵ As for all the hills once cultivated by the hoe, you will no longer go there for fear of the briers and thorns; they will become places where cattle are turned loose and where sheep run.

That's a lot of stuff. So you look at it. You read it closely. You read it again. You read it again in a different translation. You read a commentary on this passage. You read another commentary on this passage. You look up words in the original language that you don't understand. You read about this passage from a historical perspective. It is pretty dense, I realize, and much of it is completely nonsensical (see chapter 17 on irrelevant material in the Bible). Any further comment about material being "nonsensical" or "irrelevant" will be ignored, for this reason: such a comment betrays a petulant chronocentricism, a very basic ignorance of the Bible, and a lack of desire to actually understand anything we say. I will make you a wager that you cannot get halfway through it without your eyes glazing over, but try to muscle through it and read the entire thing. If you really wanted to get the meaning of the passage, you would complete the rest of what I said too. In there is an important prophecy of Jesus' life. Can you see it? It is in verse 14. The sentence is:

¹⁴ Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

According to Christians, this sentence prophesizes that Jesus will be born of a virgin mother. And also, Immanuel means "God with us," which seems to be very indicative of God himself showing up. That is one of the 300 prophecies in the Old Testament that prove that Jesus is the son of God.

You have the context of the entire chapter -- do you see anything here that indicates we are talking about Jesus? Well, yes. The child in question would be born of a virgin, called "God with us," he will always choose good over evil, and he will come at a time where Israel needs redemption and salvation. Then there are all the other "prophesies" in this same chapter -- the flies and the bees, the curds and honey, the razor from across the river, the cow and the goats, the briers and thorns, etc. What is the relationship between curds and honey and Jesus? It shows that this child would grow up like any normal child; he would eat the same food as everyone else, not eating some sort of divine food.

Example 2

Here is another example. In the book of Hosea, chapter 11, there is an important prophecy about Jesus. This is the entire chapter so you have plenty of context:

¹ When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son. ² The more I called them, the more they went from me; they kept sacrificing to the Ba'als, and burning incense to idols. ³ Yet it was I who taught E'phraim to walk, I took them up in my arms; but they did not know that I healed them. ⁴ I led them with cords of compassion, with the bands of love, and I became to them as one, who eases the yoke on their jaws, and I bent down to them and fed them. ⁵ They shall return to the land of Egypt, and Assyria shall be their king, because they have refused to return to me. ⁶ The sword shall rage against their cities, consume the bars of their gates, and devour them in their fortresses. ⁷ My people are bent on turning away from me; so they are appointed to the yoke, and none shall remove it. ⁸ How can I give you up, O E'phraim! How can I hand you over, O Israel! How can I make you like Admah! How can I treat you like Zeboi'im! My heart recoils within me, my compassion grows warm and tender. ⁹ I will not execute my fierce anger, I will not again destroy E'phraim; for I am God and not man, the Holy One in your midst, and I will not come to destroy. ¹⁰ They shall go after the LORD, he will roar like a lion; yea, he will roar, and his sons shall come trembling from the west; ¹¹ they shall come trembling like birds from Egypt, and like doves from the land of Assyria; and I will return them to their homes, says the LORD. ¹² E'phraim has encompassed me with lies, and the house of Israel with deceit; but Judah is still known by God, and is faithful to the Holy One.

So you look at it. You read it. You read it again. Etc. Once again you notice that the material is completely nonsensical (see chapter 17). In there is an important prophecy of Jesus' life. It is in verse 1. This is supposedly the prophecy that Jesus will be called out of Egypt after God sends him there to avoid the murder of thousands of babies (see chapter 16).

You have the context of the entire chapter -- do you see anything that indicates we are talking about Jesus besides the random pair of words "my son"? Well, it's actually "Out of Egypt I called my son." Even verse 2 is nonsensical. How? It is a statement that people sacrificed to idols. They either did, or didn't. Nothing is nonsensical about saying they did. There are all the other "prophesies" in this same chapter -- the Ba'als, the incense, E'phraim, the bands of love, the return to the land of Egypt, the kingdom of Assyria, the sword, the yoke, Admah, Zeboi'Im, the lion, the birds, the doves of Assyria and so on. Many of those you just mentioned are not prophecies, but just normal statements. Are you merely assuming that literally every sentence in the book is called a prophecy by Christians? What is the relationship between all of this random material and Jesus? Well, it's all once again talking about how God loves Israel and wants to provide salvation and redemption for them.

Example 3

In Zechariah Chapter 9, there is a prophesy that Jesus will ride into Jerusalem on a donkey. Here is the context and the verse:

¹ The word of the Lord is against the land of Hadrach and will rest upon Damascus- for the eyes of men and all the tribes of Israel are on the Lord - ² and upon Hamath too, which borders on it, and upon Tyre and Sidon, though they are very skillful. ³ Tyre has built herself a stronghold; she has heaped up silver like dust, and gold like the dirt of the streets. ⁴ But the Lord will take away her possessions and destroy her power on the sea, and she will be consumed by fire. ⁵ Ashkelon will see it and fear; Gaza will writhe in agony, and Ekron too, for her hope will wither. Gaza will lose her king and Ashkelon will be deserted. ⁶ Foreigners will occupy Ashdod, and I will cut off the pride of the Philistines. ⁷ I will take the blood from their mouths, the forbidden food from between their teeth. Those who are left will belong to our God and become leaders in Judah, and Ekron will be like the Jebusites. ⁸ But I will defend my house against marauding forces. Never again will an oppressor overrun my people, for now I am keeping watch. ⁹ Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey. ¹⁰ I will take away the chariots from Ephraim and the war-horses from Jerusalem, and the battle bow will be broken. He will proclaim peace to the nations. His rule will extend from sea to sea and from the River to the ends of the earth. ¹¹ As for you, because of the blood of my covenant with you, I will free your prisoners from the waterless pit. ¹² Return to your fortress, O prisoners of hope; even now I announce that I will restore twice as much to you. ¹³ I will bend Judah as I bend my bow and fill it with Ephraim. I will rouse your sons, O Zion, against your sons, O Greece, and make you like a warrior's sword.

Once again you notice that this material from the Bible is totally irrelevant and nonsensical (see chapter 17). The prophesy is verse 9. Most would say it continues on from there, too. Do you see anything in there that says we are talking about Jesus? I am beginning to wonder if you are expecting a literal, "This is talking about Jesus" to be there...Some sort of Biblical footnote. Verse 8 is also interesting in light of Hitler. Then make your case. What does "house," "my people," and "overrun" mean in the context of this passage and its original language?

Example 4

In Micah Chapter 5 verse 2 there is a "prophesy" that Jesus will be born in Bethlehem:

¹ Now you are walled about with a wall; siege is laid against us; with a rod they strike upon the cheek the ruler of Israel. ² But you, O Bethlehem Eph'rathah, who are little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose origin is from of old, from ancient days. ³ Therefore he shall give them up until the time when she who is in travail has brought forth; then the rest of his brethren shall return to the people of Israel. ⁴ And he shall stand and feed his flock in the strength of the LORD, in the majesty of the name of the LORD his God. And they shall dwell secure, for now he shall be great to the ends of the earth. ⁵ And this shall be peace, when the Assyrian comes into our land and treads upon our soil, that we will raise against him seven shepherds and eight princes of men; ⁶ they shall rule the land of Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod with the drawn sword; and they shall deliver us from the Assyrian when he comes into our land and treads within our border.

Look at all the other stuff around this "prophecy." There is the wall, the siege, the rod, the cheek, the flock, the Assyrians, the seven shepherds, the eight princes, the Nimrods, the sword, and so on. Once again all of this material is irrelevant and nonsensical (see Chapter 17). Not if you're reading this realizing that this is all talking about a future messiah, coming to provide salvation and redemption for the Jews.

There is something else that you may notice in this passage. Look at this phrase: "with a rod they strike upon the cheek the ruler of Israel." Let's say that, at some point in the Gospels, Pontius Pilate had struck Jesus with a rod on the cheek. If that had happened, then Micah 5:1 would be a prophecy about Jesus' coming. Notice, then, that Jesus was flogged for a long time prior to his execution. So this criterion is essentially fulfilled. Where are the Christians saying this is a prophecy? Since Jesus is never struck on the cheek with a rod in the New Testament, this "prophecy" is never mentioned. Not only are you resulting to mere conjecture here, you're also somehow contorting the Bible to make it seem like literally every verse is a prophecy. How is this true? Seems like, in the context of this passage, that it is referring to the fact that the ruler of Israel at the time may have been attacked by the forces. Once you understand that, you completely understand the "300 prophecies of Jesus." So by quoting four examples, saying "These are strange and there's a lot of material that I don't think applies," you have somehow discredited an additional two hundred and ninety-six prophecies?

This "rod and cheek" phenomenon is where the "prophecies" of Jesus are coming from. The Old Testament contains thousands and thousands of words, most of them total nonsense. You're a bigotted idiot, Mr. Brain. Out of those thousands of words, you are going to get some that happen to match up with the New Testament accounts of Jesus in some obscure way. However, you are going to get thousands more, like the rod and the cheek, the curds and the honey, the razor from across the river, the Nimrods and all the rest, that do not. Are these prophecies? If you look for the ones that do happen to randomly match up and completely ignore the thousands and thousands that do not, you can claim that the Old Testament "prophesizes" the coming of Jesus. The argument you're trying to make here is noble, but it falls dramatically short. The whole Bible isn't just a prophecy about Jesus. The books prophecy about a lot of different subjects. Go audit even one Old Testament course, or read even a single book about Old Testament prophecy, and you would realize that. Any normal person, on the other hand, sees it all as gibberish. Any correspondence is complete coincidence. So you're a completely unbiased interpreter, aren't you?

In chapter 17 of this book we discussed the amount of nonsense in the Bible. In all of the quotes that you have seen around these prophecies, do you find that you are left in amazement at the word of the Lord? Am I supposed to? Or have you found it all to be completely meaningless to you? Sigh. Why, if the Bible and these "prophecies" are the word of the Lord, is book filled to the brim with such meaningless, useless, ridiculous nonsense? I will respond by quoting what I said in chapter 17:

"I've never seen such cultural snobbery, such petty self centeredness, such abject anti-intellectualism, or ridiculous stupidity. Who in the world are you, of all people, to say that certain things in a book written thousands of years ago are "useless" or "irrelevant?" Has it occurred to you in the slightest that when it was written down, these events and regulations meant literally the world to people? Have you ever considered that, to the Isrealites, these books made up probably the sole written record of the history of their people, and they spent years memorizing every single word so that they could base their lives around it?

"This is exactly the reason why the new atheists are chastised: because of their complete hypocrisy."

Here is one last thing to consider. No one would care about these "prophecies" in the Old Testament if Jesus had actually proven that he is God. Since Jesus did not prove that he is God (see chapter 19), Christians have to fall back on the "prophecies" because this is all they've got. What a laugh. Jesus provided more than enough proof that he's God. Your attempt to refute that has been miserable. Since any normal person can see that the prophecies are completely meaningless, this is a very sad place for a Christian to be. Don't patronize me, Mr. Brain. You're not in any position to.

Reaching a conclusion

If you are a Christian, you have heard the following statement over and over again: "Jesus' coming was prophesized hundreds of times in the Old Testament, centuries before Jesus' birth! The ONLY way that could have happened is if God wrote the Bible and if Jesus were sent by God! The chances of one man fulfilling all of these prophecies together are infinitesimally small -- Jesus MUST be God!" You've heard it so many times you've simply taken it on faith. Says who? You're merely assuming.

But have you ever actually taken the time to read the Bible and check out these "prophesies"? Yes. Have you ever looked at the context around them as we have here? Yes. Have you ever noticed that the "prophecies" are scattered far and wide throughout the Old Testament [as we would expect] without a single thing tying them together [except the New Testament and Jesus's life, of course] and absolutely nothing indicating that they point to Jesus [except Jesus's life and the New Testament, of course]? Have you ever noticed that there are thousands of other prophesies -- like the rod and the cheek, the bees and the curd, the seven shepherds, the eight princes, the Nimrods, the doves of Assyria, the razors from across the river, etc., etc., etc. -- that never came to pass? How do you know they never came to pass? Have you looked at extra-Biblical history? Have you looked at the actual history in the Bible and seen if it matched up?

If you read all of the examples in this chapter, and especially if you read the material in the Bible surrounding the "prophecies", I believe that you will understand two things. First, the "prophecies" that "prove" that Jesus is God are irrelevant and meaningless. Any unbiased observer can see that. No need to pretend we don't have biases, Mr. Brain. Jesus' coming was never "prophesized" in the Bible. The word you're looking for is "prophesied." Why should I think you're a credible source if you don't even know the correct term? These prophesies are as random and arbitrary as your horoscope in the newspaper -- so vague and diffused among so much irrelevant material that they are completely meaningless. Let's see about that later.

The second thing you will see is a reiteration of chapter 17 -- much of the Bible is irrelevant to us today. Since God is all-knowing and timeless, it is difficult to understand why that would be unless we assume that God had nothing to do with the Bible. Again...Nothing to say except, "You're wrong."

All right, Mr. Brain. Let's look at the Suffering Servant passage, one you seemed to completely ignore in your diagnosis of prophecies. Tell me if this is "random," or "arbitrary," or "irrelevant," or "nonsense." We'll provide the entire passage for context. Tell me that Isaiah 53 doesn't sound like Jesus:

¹ Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?

² He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

³ He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.
Like one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

⁴ Surely he took up our infirmities
and carried our sorrows,
yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted.

⁵ But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,
and by his wounds we are healed.

⁶ We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to his own way;
and the LORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.

⁷ He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before her shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.

⁸ By oppression and judgment he was taken away.
And who can speak of his descendants?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
for the transgression of my people he was stricken.

⁹ He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth.

¹⁰ Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the LORD makes his life a guilt offering,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.

¹¹ After the suffering of his soul,
he will see the light of life and be satisfied ;
by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.

¹² Therefore I will give him a portion among the great,
and he will divide the spoils with the strong,
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.

So what can we infer about this person?

1. He was hated by a lot of people. Jesus was hated by lots of people.
   
2. He was rejected by men. Jesus was even rejected by his own family.
   
3. He took up our infirmities and sorrows. Jesus felt our pains, and healed people.
   
4. He was marked and afflicted by God. Jesus was transfigured.
   
5. He was "pierced for our transgressions" and "crushed for our iniquities." Jesus was crucified for our sins.
   
6. His punishment "brought us peace." Jesus's death brings us forgivenesss.
   
7. By his wounds, we are healed. Jesus's death brings us healing from sin.
   
8. He did not resist his punishment. Jesus did not speak in his defense at the trial.
   
9. He did not have any descendants. Jesus never had any kids.
   
10. He was given a grave with the wicked, "with the rich." Jesus was buried by a rich man, killed amongst theives.
11. He had done no violence or deceit. Jesus never sinned.
12. God made him a "guilt offering." Jesus died as a guilt offering for our sins.
13. He will see the "light of life" after his soul suffers. Jesus rose from the dead and ascended to Heaven.
14. By his knowledge, his servants will justify many. His disciples and followers carried on his mission and now we have a religion in his name.
15. He poured out his life unto death, numbered as a transgressor, bore the sins of many, and made intercession for the other transgressors. That's Jesus.

So, Mr. Brain? What about that chapter? Fifteen clear indications of Jesus from this passage, and that's just from me reading it. Is this irrelevant or nonsensical?

© P-Dunn's Apologetics 2009. All rights reserved.

Chapter 22 - Why do so many children live in poverty?

Rather, "Chapter 22 - Why does Mr. Brain keep bringing up completely unrelated topics?"

If, on any Sunday morning in America, you were to visit a Sunday school class full of small children, there are two things that are nearly guaranteed. On the wall there will be a picture or poster of Jesus with a group of children around him. And the class will end up singing the song "Jesus loves the little children." Christians are quite fond of both the imagery and the music.

The question that we should ask is a simple one. If Jesus is all-powerful, all-knowing and all-loving, and if Jesus loves the little children, then why do so many children live in abject poverty? So, this is the problem of evil, then? More specifically, the "problem of hunger." A paper entitled "Chronic poverty in India" describes the poverty faced by the world's children in this way:

Poverty has been described as a situation of “pronounced deprivation in well being” and being poor as “to be hungry, to lack shelter and clothing, to be sick and not cared for, to be illiterate and not schooled…Poor people are particularly vulnerable to adverse events outside their control. They are often treated badly by institutions of the state and society and excluded from voice and power in those institutions.” Using income as a measure of poverty, the World Development Report refers to the “deep poverty amid plenty” in the world and states that a fifth of the world’s people live on less than $1 a day, and 44% of them are in South Asia. [ref]

Sounds like the environment of the New Testament.

Even in the United States -- one of the wealthiest nations on earth -- poverty is a major problem. According to the United States Department of Agriculture, more than 26 million children in the United States participate in the National School Lunch Program, which provides low-cost or free lunches to children at or near the poverty level. [ref] 26 million children represents about half of all the children in the United States.

One thing that you quickly realize, if you allow yourself to think about it, is that the number of people living in abject poverty on this planet is staggering. A "fifth of the world’s people" is more than a billion people. You also realize that $1 a day means that these people are living in hopeless, wretched conditions. Think about how little food you can buy for $1. Actually in many countries, just one American dollar goes a very long way. You would probably have known that if you've ever sponsored a child. Now consider the fact that the $1 is spent on that little bit of food, so there is no money left for housing, clean water, restroom facilities, clothing, shoes, health care, education, infrastructure, etc. etc. Disease runs rampant. Starvation is common. This level of poverty is nearly unimaginable to most people in the United States, yet more than a billion people live this way today. Ironically, in many of these same countries, there's also an immense amount of wealth restricted to a small amount of people. Greed and selfishness run rampant.

Now consider the fact that, if you raise the bar to $3 a day -- still an extremely meager amount -- half of the people on the planet are living at that level of poverty. More than three billion people. As discussed in Chapter 5, 10 million children die every year as a result of abject poverty.

Where in the world is Jesus? I think a better question is this: "Where in the world are Jesus's people?" Or even, "Where in the world are you?" Or, even, "Where are the atheist organizations fighting poverty overseas?"

Here is what Jesus has to say about poverty in the Bible. If you look in Matthew chapter 6:25, you will find this amazing quote:

"Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you shall eat or what you shall drink, nor about your body, what you shall put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? And which of you by being anxious can add one cubit to his span of life? And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin; yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O men of little faith? Therefore do not be anxious, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?' For the Gentiles seek all these things; and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all."

Read this with the context in mind that Jesus himself was homeless and living in abject poverty. So was everyone he was speaking to.

If "your heavenly Father knows that you need them all," then what in the world has gone wrong? When Jesus says, "Do not be anxious," what could he possibly mean? If you are living on $1 a day, you are going to be anxious about everything including food, clean drinking water, clothing, basic medical care, sanitation facilities and education. Does that make being anxious right? More than a billion people are living like that today.

How many people is a billion? Prepare for an emotional appeal...Take all 300 or so million people in the United States. That is a lot of people. Here it comes... Quadruple that number. That is how many people are living in abject, wretched, unimaginable poverty around the world. Ah. There it is. If Jesus loves all the little children of the world, he has a truly bizarre way to show his love. Wait, this is Jesus's fault? Somehow I thought it was our responsibility to take care of the world. Silly me!

What any normal person realizes, when looking at the facts that are plainly visible in our world, is that what Jesus said in the Bible is completely wrong. Jesus' statements about poverty in Matthew 6:25-32 are clearly false. I think it's a lot more clear that you need to contextualize the passage before you make brash, across-the-board attributions. God is not looking out for these people. Are you? God is not feeding them, nor is he clothing them like lilies. Your complaint seems to amount to, "God isn't opening their mouths and putting pre-chewed food inside, nor is he putting their clothes on for them. Therefore, he doesn't exist." God doesn't even do that with the animals, Brain. Jesus hates quite a few of the little children of the world, and he demonstrates his hatred by imprisoning them in abject poverty.

Okay, let's turn this argument around. Because you're not doing everything you possibly can do to help these poor, deprived children, you therefore are a vile person. For crying out loud. You have a website that explains how things like washing machines work. Think of how many people are dying right now that could be saved with the amount of money you pay in bandwidth and server costs every month. I guess all we can conclude is that you hate these children.

Fair?

Jesus is completely wrong

This is not the first example that we have seen in the Bible where Jesus is completely wrong. So you're recapping for basically the twentieth time in twenty chapters, then? In section 1 of this book, we saw that Jesus is clearly wrong when he talks about the power of prayer. Jesus says in Matthew 21:21 for the ninth time so far:

I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be done. If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."

That is obviously false. I don't feel like any comment is needed here other than: "You're wrong." Section 1 demonstrated dozens of examples that prove this statement to be incorrect. See in particular Chapter 7.

This statement is also false in John chapter 14:12:

Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father. Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it, that the Father may be glorified in the Son; if you ask anything in my name, I will do it.

If this were true, we would have completely eradicated all diseases and eliminated all poverty centuries ago.

This statement in Mark 16:15 is provably false:

And [Jesus] said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover."

I don't even need to mention that this is not in the original Bible. Or do I?

If this were true, we would not need doctors, hospitals or pharmaceutical companies. You would not need health insurance. And we've been over this. The two billion Christian believers on planet earth today could take care of all of our medical needs for free by simply laying their hands on us. Blah.

This passage from Matthew 15:21-28 is quite bizarre:

Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon.A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession." Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, "Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us." He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel." The woman came and knelt before him. "Lord, help me!" she said. He replied, "It is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs." "Yes, Lord," she said, "but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters' table." Then Jesus answered, "Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted." And her daughter was healed from that very hour.

The thing you notice is the incredible racism. Jesus equates the woman to a dog because she is not an Israelite. ...No, he didn't. He told her not to feed her children's food to the dogs. How you pulled that conclusion out is beyond me. Would God do that? No. Good thing he didn't. Imagine a world leader today equating someone to a dog because she is not of the correct nationality or religion. The negative reaction would be overwhelming. Probably.

What you realize is that, if you go through the Bible and actually read what Jesus says, he is completely wrong in quite a number of cases. The question you must ask yourself is this: If Jesus is God, why is he not perfect? You have failed in each instance to prove this.

Here is the thing that I would like to help you understand: The reason why Jesus was incorrect in so many places is easy to understand. Jesus was not God. Jesus was a normal human being who was way, way out on a limb. So you've stopped talking about hunger and children now? Now it's all about Jesus and how bad of a person he was? What about all the children dying of preventable diseases?

It's interesting that the only reason you ever refer to these children is to make an argument for atheism, and then you proceed to abandon them after you've made the point. Thank you, Mr. Brain, for merely using them as a pawn to further your propaganda. You don't really care about them, do you?

For those of us interested in a real response to your original argument, let's continue.

First off, check out my YouTube video called The Problem of Hunger: A Christian's Answer. I summarize my video by making this argument:

1. Suppose you are at a banquet table. You symbolize your country. God is the patron of the banquet, and there is enough food for everyone, all the countries.
2. But the rich countries push the poor countries out of the way and eat all the food. Nothing is left.
3. Suddenly, the rich countries realized what they have done, and begin to shout at God, saying, "Why didn't you put enough food on the table for everyone? How can you call yourself a good patron if these people don't get to eat?"
   
4. On the one hand, God put enough food on the Earth for everyone and commanded humans not to be selfish or covet.
5. On the other hand, we humans who are more fortunate eat comfortably while they starve to death.
6. So is it God's fault, who has given us all the necessary resources to solve this problem? Or is it our fault for continually ignoring him and failing to do so?

Furthermore, notice that almost all of the organizations that are in these poor countries doing relief efforts, and almost all of the organizations that offer us the ability to sponsor children and even entire families, are religious in nature, or founded because of religion.

Think about these organizations:

1. The Salvation Army
2. World Vision
3. Food For The Hungry
4. Christian Disaster Relief
5. Mission of Mercy
6. Operation Blessing
7. Christian World Adoption
8. Compassion International
9. World Missionary Evangelism
10. International Mission Board
11. Young Men's Christian Association, aka YMCA
12. Habitat for Humanity
13. Christian Children's Fund
    
14. Mercy Ships
15. Farndale Charity Network
16. Christian Outreach for Relief & Development
17. Christian Blind Mission
18. Food for the Poor, Inc

There are many many more. Notice that all of them were founded by Christians for the purpose of doing Christian outreach.

So, Mr. Brain? Are you sponsoring children, paying for their well being with your pocket change? Are you donating to charities, providing these organizations with the money they so desperately need to operate? Are you doing volunteer work in inner cities, providing education, cleanup, food, medicine, and love for people who do not have the ability to do these things themselves? Do you ever spend time with homeless people, feeding them meals and providing them with clothing? Are you going on relief trips to foreign countries, helping to build schools?

If you're not doing everything you can, then you cannot make the argument that God is evil because he isn't doing everything He can.

© P-Dunn's Apologetics 2009. All rights reserved.

Chapter 21 - Why do we eat Jesus?

Rather, "Chapter 21 - Willful Stupidity, Copied Almost Verbatim from Proof #29"

If you are looking for an easy way to prove to yourself that Jesus is not God, try this simple experiment. Take a small child, perhaps age 4 or 5, to church on Sunday and let the child watch communion. Because we all know that things four and five year old children say, who cannot really think for themselves nor understand complicated theological concepts, have a bearing on the validity of the truth claims of religion. You may experience something like this, though I seriously doubt it:

Child: Daddy, what are they doing?

Daddy: Well dear, this part of the service is called communion.

Child: What's communion?

Daddy: Well, it's where... Well, it's... you know, what we do is we eat Jesus' body to... Well, it's complicated. Let me see...

Child: We eat Jesus' BODY???


Bright: Hey, guys. Nice to see you in church this morning. What happened to Norm and Chris?


Daddy: Yes. Well, no, but...


Child: Why do we need to eat Jesus??? I don't want to eat Jesus!!!

Daddy: No, no, no. It's OK honey. It's OK. Be quiet now, don't cry in church. Shhhh. Shush. Now it's OK.


Bright: Don't worry, kiddo. It's symbolic.


Child: But Daddy, I don't want to eat Jesus!

Daddy: Mom, help me out here.

Mom: Honey, it is a holy sacrament. You see, we eat Jesus' body and we drink his blood because...

Child: I have to drink his blood too??? Mommy, I don't want to drink blood!!!

Mom: Honey, calm down! You don't actually drink his blood.


Bright: Right, it's just grape juice. Or maybe it's wine...I haven't been to this church in a while. Either way, it's all metaphorical.


Child: But that man up there is holding up a cup and he is saying that it is Jesus' blood! Mommy! I want to leave! I am leaving!

Mom, Dad: No honey! Wait! We can't leave now!


Bright: Seriously, guys. You need to learn how to discipline your children.

And so on...

Because Christians have been participating in the communion rite for many years, they tend to forget just how bizarre this ritual is. But any child sees it with fresh eyes. And many children are, naturally, horrified at the thought of eating Jesus' body and then drinking his blood. It is grotesque in the extreme and a child implicitly understands that. What's funny is that I don't know a single person that has ever experienced anything remotely like this. I don't know any child that was "horrified" by this, or thought it was "grotesque." Perhaps that's because we understand the symbolism, and you apparently have no creative ability whatsoever.

Or, you're merely being antagonistic for the sake of argument. You're being willfully stupid.

Have you ever wondered where this ritual came from, or why billions of people would participate in a ritual that is this bizarre? First, let's look at the part of the Bible that prescribes the ritual. You find it in Mark, Chapter 14:

And as they were eating, he took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to them, and said, "Take; this is my body." And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. And he said to them, "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.

There are a few lines in Luke chapter 22 that are nearly identical. Reading through this passage, can you seriously say you don't see the metaphor? Is it really this difficult to see the blatant symbolism here? I think any child reading this could easily make the association that bread = body, and beverage = blood. We could study this in our English courses as an example.

Jesus gets far more graphic, however, in John chapter 6:53-55:

So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

To any normal person, this sounds very much like the script of a gruesome horror film. Actually, I'd say most "normal" people totally understand what communion is all about. It sounds like some sort of revolting satanic ritual. What does "satanic" mean, Mr. Brain? It definitely does not sound like the words of the all-loving creator of the universe.

Imagine that you are a normal person, and you have never been exposed to Christianity before. Now imagine that a Christian comes up to you and quotes John 6:53. Just out of the blue? Walked up to you in the street and blurted it out for no reason? Any normal adult would rightfully assume the Christian to be insane. Probably, because the verse is out of its context. But, to be fair, if you were a "normal person" and had never been exposed to the theory of evolution by natural selection before, and someone came up to you and said that chimpanzees and humans have a common ancestor, you would likely assume that person to be insane too. That doesn't make it false. Thus, you never see a bumper sticker that says "John 6:53."

However, the assumption is accurate. You can't be serious. The dictionary describes cannibalism in the following way:

The usually ritualistic eating of human flesh by a human being

What Jesus is demanding is cannibalism. So you're serious?

No, he's not demanding anything. I think you're being really extreme when you're saying such a thing, and you're probably doing this knowing how over the top you are. To truly come to that sort of conclusion, you must rip those verses out of the rest of the context of Jesus's entire ministry and out of the entire history of Christianity.

You may be beginning to see a pattern here. The only pattern I'm observing is your complete cluelessness about Christianity. We have already discussed in chapter 14 that God, in the Old Testament, is quite captivated by animal sacrifice. Did we now? God tells people how they are to sacrifice animals in minute detail. In the New Testament things move to a completely new level and God requires human sacrifice. God is not the only one who gets excited by human sacrifice -- a flood of Christians saw the movie "The Passion of the Christ." Oh, come on.

Now we learn that the human sacrifice is not enough, and we need to ritualistically cannibalize Jesus' body, and satanically drink his blood, to have "eternal life." But what does that mean? What is a metaphor? What is a symbol?

What does your common sense tell you about all of this? My common sense, as well as the "common sense" of every "normal person," says that you're woefully misguided. Look at it through the eyes of a child who doesn't know what a metaphor is. Now it all makes sense. What we are talking about here is cannibalism, and what Christians are doing looks exactly like a pagan/satanic ritual. If you are a Christian, the two questions you may be asking yourself right now are:

1. Why in the world am I, as a sane individual, participating in ritualistic cannibalism? How in the world did I stoop to this point?
2. Why would an all-powerful, all-loving God demand that I do this? What sort of God am I worshipping?
   Actually, I don't have any of those on my mind right now. I do have another one, though:
3. Why does Marshall repeatedly ignore the concepts of metaphorical language, hyperbolic language, dramatic orientation, and symbolism?

As we saw in section 2, God condones slavery, demands animal and human sacrifice, hates women and revels in the annihilation of children. How loaded can we be? Cannibalism is just one more thing to add to this pile of insanity. I feel like there's nothing else to say other than you're an idiot.

The source of the ritual

If you are curious, here is why Christianity contains this bizarre ritual. Please tell us, oh wise one. It is not the case that an all-powerful God in heaven demands this behavior. All of the rituals in Christianity are completely man-made. Christianity is a snow ball that rolled over a dozen pagan religions. As the snowball grew, it freely attached pagan rituals in order to be more palatable to converts. Wait...Christianity is a snowball? But...I thought it was a religion...What does that mean? Mommy? DADDY?! AHHHHH!!!! The process is described succinctly and accurately in the book "The Da Vinci Code" by Dan Brown. Apparently, he still hasn't realized the incredible mistake of citing a popular fiction book as an accurate source about historical religion. The book offers these two accounts of the creation process:

1. "The vestiges of pagan religion in Christian symbology are undeniable. Egyptian sun disks became the halos of Catholic saints. Even if that were true, it wouldn't have any bearing on the validity of the faith, would it? Pictograms of Isis nursing her miraculously conceived son Horus became the blueprint for our modern images of the Virgin Mary nursing Baby Jesus. "Miraculously conceived?" I mean, sort of...Horus was born when Isis had sex with Osiris after putting his body back together. But using the term "miraculously conceived" as a comparison to the virgin birth is laughable. And virtually all the elements of the Catholic ritual - the miter, the altar, the doxology, and communion, the act of "God-eating" - were taken directly from earlier pagan mystery religions." Yeah, you're going to have to back that up.
   
2. "Nothing in Christianity is original. The pre-Christian God Mithras - called the Son of God and the Light of the World - was born on December 25, died, was buried in a rock tomb, and then resurrected in three days. By the way, December 25 is also the birthday or Osiris, Adonis, and Dionysus. The newborn Krishna was presented with gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Even Christianity's weekly holy day was stolen from the pagans." Wrong, wrong, wrong. He wasn't called the Son of God and the Light of the World...You can look through many scholarly works and you won't find those titles attributed to him. The December 25th issue is really a non-issue, since nowhere does the New Testament attribute that date to Jesus's birth in the first place. Most importantly, there are NO references anywhere in Mithraic studies literature to Mithra being buried, or even dying, for that matter; there is no resurrection three days later, because there's no death in the first place. I've also found no references to the gift giving either. Dan Brown might as well have made all of that up.
   

To any normal person, the practice of communion is one of the most bizarre things that Christians do. Jesus' cannibalistic tendencies offer explicit evidence that Jesus is not God. Actually, even if we all were real bloodthirsty cannibals, it wouldn't have any impact on whether or not Jesus was actually God or not. The two don't have any logical correlation.

When you research it historically, you realize that Jesus was a human being like any other. Your historical research is "The Da Vinci Code." You have no room to talk. The mythology of his birth, life and death are pagan stories that are all man-made. Keep shooting yourself in the foot, Mr. Brain. It can't get much worse. Or maybe it can.

© P-Dunn's Apologetics 2009. All rights reserved.

Chapter 20 - Why doesn't Jesus appear to each of us?

Rather, "Chapter 20 - Why don't you believe everyone who says he has?"

In the last chapter, we discussed Jesus' miracles. There is one miracle, however, that deserves special discussion. Jesus' resurrection after his death is the ultimate and defining proof of Jesus' divinity.

Just about everyone knows the story of Jesus' death and resurrection. The story is summarized in the Apostles' Creed. Jesus was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended into hell. On the third day he arose again from the dead. He ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. And will come to judge the living and the dead. Don't forget!

There is only one way for Jesus to prove that he rose from the dead. He had to appear to people. So your criterion to establish this is that he must appear to people. Noted. Therefore, several different places in the Bible describe Jesus' appearances after his death:

1. Matthew chapter 28
2. Mark chapter 16
3. Luke chapter 24
4. John Chapter 20 and 21

1 Corinthians 15:3-6 provides a nice summary of those passages, as written by Paul:

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.

As you can see in this passage, Jesus appeared to hundreds of people a number of different times. Which means, by the criteria you provided, his job of proving that he rose from the dead is fulfilled. You say he had to appear to people, and he appeared to hundreds of people. I'd say that over five hundred witnesses is more than enough, even overkill, to establish something like that. Done.

Being like Paul

When we look at these Bible passages, there is a question that comes to mind -- why did Jesus stop making these appearances? Why isn't Jesus appearing today? It might be an interesting question, but it has no bearing on whether he rose again back then.

Even so, I have two questions for you, Mr. Brain. First, what makes you think this is necessary? And secondly, who says he isn't?

It really is odd. Obviously Paul benefitted from a personal meeting with the resurrected Christ. Because of the personal visit, Paul could see for himself the truth of the resurrection, and he could ask Jesus questions. He also stopped being a terrorist and murderer who targeted Christians.

So... Why doesn't Jesus appear to everyone and prove that he is resurrected, just like he appeared to Paul? There is nothing to stop Jesus from materializing in your kitchen tonight to have a personal chat with you. I mean, there's a great deal. On a very basic level, I'm not worthy of such a visit. Not even in the slightest. And if you think about it, Jesus really does need to appear to each of us. No, he doesn't. Most Christians wouldn't say that. We already believe in him. If Paul needed a personal visit from Jesus to know that Jesus was resurrected, then why wouldn't you? Perhaps because we aren't terrorists or murderers who will go on to compose over half of a Testament.

It is an important question for the following reasons:

1. We are told by the Bible that Jesus appeared to hundreds of people, which therefore fulfills the criterion of, "To prove he resurrected, he had to appear to people."
   
2. We know that it is OK for Jesus to appear to people -- it does not take away their free will, for example -- because it was OK for Jesus to appear to hundreds of other people. Perhaps this was because it was necessary to prove a resurrection to even get the faith off the ground. Think about it. Do we need Jesus to appear to us now that a third of the population believes in him, and another third regard him as a very important prophet?
3. We know that it would be easy for Jesus to appear to everyone all through history, since Jesus is all-powerful and timeless. Having the ability doesn't make it more probable or necessary.
   
4. We know that, if Jesus did reappear to everyone, it would be incredibly helpful. We could all know, personally, that Jesus is resurrected and that Jesus is God. Except the Bible says that it's OUR job to seek God, not God's job to seek us. If Paul (and all the other people in the Bible) needed a personal visit to know that Jesus was resurrected, then why not you and me? Because we are not the future founders of the religion, who are responsible for spreading the Gospel so that it survives into culture.
   
5. Yet, we all know that Jesus has not appeared to anyone in 2,000 years.We all know?
   

Mr. Brain, let me tell you a story. Just for clarification, I am not making this up as an example; this actually happened.

I know a girl who claims that on the night she became a Christian, Jesus physically appeared to her. There was a great light in the room that didn't go away until she fell asleep. He stood by her and spoke comforting words to her.

If this is true, then Jesus has appeared to someone. So do you believe her?

In other words, there is nothing stopping Jesus from appearing to you, and several good reasons for him to appear. I don't think this has been established, to be honest.

Praying to Jesus

What if we pray to Jesus like this: "Dear Jesus, please appear to us, as you did to Paul and the 500 brethren, so that we can see the evidence of your resurrection. In your name we pray, amen." If we are already praying to Jesus in such a way, we likely already believe in his resurrection, and therefore don't need further evidence. Here is what Jesus has promised us in the Bible:

Matthew 7:7 Jesus says:

Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!

We've been over this. There's nothing in this verse that promises a guaranteed positively answered prayer.

In John chapter 14:14:

Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it, that the Father may be glorified in the Son; if you ask anything in my name, I will do it.

God, please kill all of the Jews. You have to do it now, right?

In Matthew 18:19:

Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

And we've been over this too.

Jesus is actually in our midst. So he is right here already, supposedly. Yet when we pray to him to physically materialize, as he did to hundreds of others, nothing happens.

Isn't it odd that Nothing happens, given the fact that Jesus promises us that something will happen? Actually Jesus promises nothing of the sort. Jesus never mentions anything about appearing to anyone in these verses. What you are doing here is called decontextualization. Isn't it odd that nothing happens when, supposedly, Jesus is right here with us already, and materialization would be trivial for him? No, it isn't odd. Not for Christians, anyway.

Let's discuss this whole "trivial" question. What does it mean for something to be "trivial" for God?

Suppose Jesus actually was to appear to you, Mr. Brain. Let's go through what would happen. You are minding your own business, most likely on the computer. A great light shines out of nowhere, and suddenly there is a person standing where there used to be just air. You, therefore, are scared out of your wits, potentially going into some state of shock. Furthermore, you would probably attribute it to some form of hallucination, not to God.

But is this business of scaring the hell out of you "trivial?" God would have to violate his hidden nature, which to me doesn't seem very trivial.

What you will find, if you think about it, is that the situation we see here is exactly like the situation in Chapter 5. We have created a situation where coincidence cannot "answer" the prayer. The only way for this prayer to be answered is for Jesus to actually, unambiguously, materialize. In this situation, we also know that it is trivial for Jesus to materialize, that there would be many benefits if Jesus did materialize, that Jesus has supposedly materialized to other human beings, and that Jesus has promised to answer our prayer that he materialize.

How do we explain the fact that this prayer goes unanswered, no matter who prays, despite Jesus' promise that he will answer our prayers? How can you say that with no proof? You are making a claim based on an assumption, with no evidence.

As you think about this, you will realize that Paul's story in the Bible must be false. Based on what logic? Simply look at Paul's story like any judge in a courtroom would. What Paul's story in 1 Cor 15 is suggesting is entirely unprecedented - a man dead three days with mortal wounds came back to life. Yet there is no evidence that it is true, and there are many alternative explanations for what Paul is saying. If the direct visual testimony of five people, in addition to the confirmation of five hundred people, is not evidence, then my name is Stephen Spielberg. Paul could be fabricating the story, which would not explain the empty tomb, other post mortem appearances, and would render his sudden change of heart from a terrorist to a humanitarian completely inexplicable. Paul could have hallucinated or dreamed the meeting, which would not explain other conversions and post mortem appearances, nor the empty tomb. Paul could have seen an imposter, which would not explain the great light, nor the experience of the people he was with, nor the post mortem apperances and conversions of others. etc. In addition, no one is seeing Jesus today, even though it would be trivial and obvious for Jesus to appear to people today just like he did with Paul. If we were in a court room, this would not be considered evidence to the contrary; one, it is an argument from ignorance; two, no judge would demand to see the murder again to establish a victim as guilty. That would be an absurd criteria.

Given this evidence, if this were any normal situation instead of a religious one, people would conclude that what Paul is saying is untrue. Would they? Suppose someone came up and told you that they saw a dead man walking around again, alive. You may dismiss his testimony. But if a mass crowd of five hundred people came up to you and confirmed his testimony, you would probably be convinced.

There is zero evidence to support Paul's story, zero reason to believe it, a motive to lie and plenty of alternative explanations. A motive to lie? That's an incredibly curious statement. Paul was a terrorist and murder who's job was to kill Christians. Why in the world would he make up a lie so that he can be one? Why would he resign himself to a life of homelessness, poverty, persecution, inprisonment, and eventual execution, forsaking all of the prowess, power, and position that he had established as a Pharisee, just so he could lie about a resurrection? Seems like there is no motive whatsoever to lie. There is also the fact that much of the rest of the Bible contains provably false stories. Funny: you haven't mentioned one. Plus the fact that it would be trivial for Jesus to provide the evidence that Paul needs to confirm his story by reappearing on earth. There is no need for us to have this done to us. Think this through. Add to that the fact that Jesus has promised to answer our prayers but refuses to materialize when we pray to him. I've shown you how fallacious this reasoning is on multiple occasions. The only thing to do is to reject Paul's story. Every bit of evidence points to the fact that the resurrection story is a myth, nothing more. Yet, the mythological explanation fails on numerous points of the criterion of explanatory power, and thus, the explanation must be rejected.

What about Jesus' famous statement in the Bible, "Happy are those who have not seen yet still believe"? A better translation would be "blessed." What you realize is that this statement creates the perfect cover for a scam. Let's say you are Jesus, you are a normal human being, you realize that you are going to die and you want to cover for this fact. Jesus had already risen when he made this claim. Here is what you would say: "Happy are those who have not seen yet still believe." What you are saying is, "I exist, and the way I am going to show you that I exist is by not showing that I exist." This is a ridiculous summary, and I think even you know why. For every other object in the universe, the way that we know it exists is because the object provides evidence of its existence. Jesus provided evidence to hundreds of people, and some people today claim he has done so for them. If you don't believe them, why should I think you would beleive Jesus? If there is no evidence for an object's existence, we call it imaginary (e.g. Leprechauns). But with Jesus, the lack of evidence is turned into evidence. That's not what he said at all. This statement has nothing to do with evidence. Quite clever, but obviously a scam.

If the resurrection were true, then Jesus would be answering prayers as he promises in the Bible. He would also appear when people pray to see him. The fact is, as we saw in Section 1, there is no evidence whatsoever that Jesus answers prayers. Wrong, time and time again.

© P-Dunn's Apologetics 2009. All rights reserved.