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.

Why Prayers Aren't Answered - Part II

An Examination on Why Prayers Are Not Answered
Part One: God's Will For Your Life

Prayers are often offered up to God as an expression of our will towards Him. We desire to achieve certain statuses or obtain certain gifts, and so we ask God to give them to us. This has become the normal method of how prayer works, especially in Western culture. In fact, prayer itself is synonymous with "asking for stuff."

God, please give me safe travels.

God, please let this date go really well tonight. I like this girl a lot.

God, please give me the words to say during this job interview, because I think this job is what I should be doing with my life.

God, please bless my business and help my income.

There are also things that we ask that seem to be related to different things:

God, please heal my mother of her cancer.

It's only natural to take our cares and wants to God. When our world seems so caught up in what we want, what our goals are, we, in our self-centered mentalities, think that God must be keen on giving us those things, because they are important to Him too.

But perhaps God doesn't want the same things we do.

It's a rather self explanatory concept. If you ask God for something, and you don't get it, it is likely because God does not want you to have that particular item, or status, or even level of health. He, as the all-powerful Creator of the Universe, most likely views his desire for your life as more important, and in fact better for you, than your own. As Delta Goodrem says, "When we're busy makin' plans, God laughs.

First, I must explain what "God's will" means. Is it a micromanaging of your life, so that you do not have free will? No. Is it something we are forced to follow? Certainly not.

God's will is the basic idea for how God wants your life to go. His will is anything that he desires to occur in your life.

How do we discern this will? Through many things, I would suggest. But perhaps the biggest suggesting factor for God's will is our prayer, because it is a form of directly asking God for something and directly observing the results.

Example

Gentlemen, suppose you met a woman and you have fallen head over heels. You have been dating her for a long time, and the relationship has begun to get pretty serious. Understandably, you are now wondering if she is the one for you. What would you do to discern this?

If you are a Christian, perhaps you would pray the following prayer:

God, thank you for blessing me with Jane. She's a wonderful woman and my life has been incredible ever since she came into it. But now I'm wondering if this is the woman you want me to marry and spend the rest of my life with. Can you help me discern whether or not this is the case? Is she your will for my life?

Soon, you begin to pick up on various things about Jane that you hadn't noticed before. Some of them are rather troubling. She has strange nervous habits that make you uncomfortable. The way she laughs begins to sound piercing and irritating to you. Your nagging feeling in your stomach of uncertainty has only increased since you prayed that prayer.

It could all be coincidence. But one could suggest that perhaps this was God's way of showing you that Jane is not who he has in mind for you.^[1]

Biblical Support

Is this idea of God answering prayers according to His will Biblical? It sure is. First John 5:14 says this:

This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us.

Delta Goodrem appears to agree with Proverbs 16:9, where it says:

A man’s heart plans his way, but the Lord directs his steps.

Ephesians 1:11 describes God as one who "who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will."

Daniel 4:35 offers this hyperbolic and anthropomorphic description to illustrate the power of God's will:

All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing. He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth.

And, of course, we have Jesus himself telling us in the model for prayer to ask for God's will to be done on Earth as it is in Heaven.

Conclusion

The point of all of this is very simple:

1. Prayer, in this particular example, is the act of asking God to give you something.
2. In order for God to do something on your behalf, he has to want to do it (God's will).
   
3. If God does not want to do it, God will not answer your prayer positively.
   
4. Therefore, God answering prayer is entirely contingent on his own will.

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

^{[1] There is great debate as to whether God actually does plan out who you should be marrying. This may not have been the most air-tight example as a result, but I used it because the average Christian tends to believe that God does take an interest in our future spouses.}