Pillars of the Christian
Faith Demolished
Part 1 Miracles
Brian de Kretser
(Investigator 130, 2010
January)
When Christians
are asked
for proof of the divinity of Jesus Christ, they point to his miracles —
acts, transcending human power and the laws of nature.
Christianity
is not the
only religion which cites miracles as proof of its divine authorship.
More
than 300 systems and
sects recorded in history claim to be in support of the truth of the
divine authenticity of their various belief systems. History is thickly
studded with miracles in all ages and countries, their respective
religious books are loaded down with stories of marvellous prodigies
wrought by their gods.
A few
examples well before
the Christian era-
- Zoroaster
of Persia —
At
the request of King Gustaph caused a tree to spring up in a man's yard.
Later copied by Jesus Christ who cursed a fig tree to wither.
- Krishna of
India —
Restored
two boys to life who had been killed by bites of serpents.
- Esculapius
of Greece
—
Raised several persons from the dead. Copied by Jesus in the raising of
Lazarus from the dead.
- Bacchus of
Greece
also
known as Dionysus — Turned water into wine. Copied by Jesus six hundred
years later, turning water into wine at a wedding feast.
Gods of
the pagan/heathen
era are reported to have performed the very same miracles attributed to
Jesus, such as astonishing cures, casting out devils, raising the dead,
etc. These happened long before Jesus' time and easily proves copying.
Christianity is copied almost in entirety from earlier pagan religions,
and falsely claims that theirs is the only genuine religion, all others
are myth and fiction, but the whole system of Christianity is fiction.
This can be proved.
As for
Jesus Christ the
fact is that not one of the 300+ historians of that age makes the
slightest allusion to him or any of the miraculous incidents grafted on
to his life.
The fact
is that Jesus
finds no place in history of the era in which he lived, that not one
event of his life is recorded by anyone except in the Bible by his own
prejudiced biographers. This proves beyond doubt that Jesus is fable
and fiction.
Historians
look in vain for
any contemporary notice of the Gospels or Jesus outside of the New
Testament. It should be noted that Jesus' famous biographers Matthew,
Mark, Luke and John are not noticed in history till 190 years after the
birth of Jesus and then only by a Christian writer of dubious
reputation named Irenaeus.
Who can
believe that a god
sent from heaven to appear on earth, performing the most astounding
miracles ever recorded, to be finally publicly crucified near a great
city, and yet all histories written, pass over without the slightest
notice of any of these extraordinary events?
We find
it impossible that
this omission was so absolute that no record was made of the day or
year of Jesus' birth by any person in the era in which he lived. We are
driven to the conclusion that Jesus received but little attention
outside of the circle of his own credulous and interested followers and
consequently stands on a level with Krishna of India, Mithra of Persia,
Osiris of Egypt and other mythical gods of antiquity, all whose legends
were grafted in their histories long after their deaths.
With
Jesus none of his
evangelical biographies were written till long after his death.
Believers
find it difficult
to accept the fact that the numerous miracles ascribed to him in the
Gospels are merely the work of fiction, fabricated without a basis of
truth. But we have now found the true explanation. It is admitted also
by Christian writers that no history of Jesus' life was ever written by
a person claiming to have been an eyewitness of events reported.
Jesus'
miracles are
reconstructions of former miracles from earlier times. Several seem to
have grown out of the "messianic prophecies" which were manufactures in
order to fulfil the prophecies. Hence the history of gods, including
Jesus, were loaded with miraculous feats, each trying to outdo the
other.
Every
religious country has
their miraculous legends and the performance of their gods, these have
come down from time immemorial, all had become mixed and blended
together, until it was impossible to know whence they originated, where
they belong to, or to which god they appertained.
Great
numbers of every age
and every religion have been guilty of systematic fraud and falsehoods
to support their religions. Models of each and every miracle had
already been constructed and was already a part of the history or
tradition of older gods. It was easy to adjust these to whatever
religion or god that was being promoted.
However,
the age of
miracles is gone and belief in them has receded before advancing
science and superior general intelligence. It is the most illiterate
and ignorant nations that still struggle with superstitions. But the
light of science and advancing knowledge will win out over mythical
gods in the end.
Prof.
Brian de Kretser
Institute
for Research into
Religions
Darwin,
N.T. Australia
BIBLE MIRACLES CONFIRMED
Anonymous
(Investigator 131, 2010
March)
My approach to
Bible
miracle stories is the same as with other Bible topics — I test what is
testable. I check whatever can be checked by referring to modern
science, modern discovery, rules of logic, and common sense. This
method avoids circular reasoning, makes no assumption about the truth
or falsity of the Bible, and lets evidence speak for itself.
I also
use inductive
reasoning; that is I generalize. We know that one day has always
followed another, but this knowledge is useless unless we generalize
this information by anticipating tomorrow. Science is useless unless we
use it to make inferences/predictions.
In The
Ten Plagues of
Egypt
(#78) we saw that the plagues have a largely natural explanation. In The
Red Sea Crossing (#14) meteorologist Allan Brunt gave a
natural
explanation to the Red Sea Crossing. In Seven Bible Miracles
Explained
(#58; #59) the seven miracles again had a natural component. Additional
to these I've given plausible explanations for the Star of Bethlehem,
the darkness at Jesus' death, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah,
and several others.
The
miracle of Jesus
healing a blind man (Mark 8:22-26) is plausible because the story
hinted at a medical discovery made 19 centuries later. (#26) Prior to
about 1930 it was assumed that the ability to recognize simple shapes
is innate, unlearned. This was proved wrong as medical science
increasingly restored sight to blind people. Those who had been blind
for decades or since birth required months to learn to recognize what
they were seeing, even simple shapes. The blind man Jesus healed,
similarly, could not even distinguish people — he thought they were
trees. To set this right required a second miracle, one which
accelerated the ability to recognize what is seen.
Jesus
walking on water
(Matthew 14; Mark 6; John 6) has modern counterparts who used
attachments to their feet, "water shoes", and walked across rivers,
harbours, and even the Atlantic. (New Scientist, December 19/26, 2009)
Perhaps Jesus, being a carpenter, fashioned such items and practiced.
Some Churchgoers might be horrified by this suggestion and claim I'm
accusing Jesus of trickery. But the three gospel accounts don't specify
how Jesus walked on water. The skill level required might itself have
been miraculous — so I'm substituting one miracle for another. If,
however, a natural component to a miracle is demonstrated, then we have
a testable "fact" which adds plausibility to the claim that the
supernatural component also took place.
With
dozens of miracles
proved plausible, I do what I've done with Bible statements in almost
20 scientific disciplines (such as astronomy, biology, archaeology,
etc) — I generalize. I predict on the basis of millions of people
having been wrong in their criticisms of the Bible that more of the
same results will occur and more of the Bible (including more miracles)
will be proved (or made more credible).
We could
even generalize to
the extent of declaring the entire original scriptures to be without
error. Since this generalization is established on evidence we have
Biblical inerrancy as a scientific hypothesis.
De
Kretser refers to
alleged miracles of Bacchus and Zoroaster and claims Bible
miracle-stories are copies of these and therefore myth. This is as
mistaken as the argument that Bacchus myths are the source of modern
medical "miracles" in hospitals and the surgeons are lying. We need to
examine miracle-stories, whether by Jesus or surgeons, without
prejudging them through arbitrary comparisons with Bacchus.
De
Kretser tacked on to his
critique of miracles his previous argument that no contemporary
historian wrote about Jesus, therefore Jesus' life is myth. I answered
that argument in #130; it's simply a fallacy to make the non-mention of
something the proof of non-existence.
The fact
that an ancient
book almost everyone declares wrong has turned out correct hundreds of
times, is itself miraculous. And it's a testable miracle!
In
conclusion it's not the
miracle stories that are "pillars of faith"
but the
scientific facts.
The Bible investigated — skeptics and atheists
versus Bible believers — on
this website: