Whenever I see an essay of this type, I am in a conundrum of sorts as to whether I want to respond or not. I no longer think it necessary to correct factual and historical errors of believers because it comes down to no matter what proof I offer in my argument, how completely inarguable my side appears to be, I will never get the other person to admit that they may be wrong. Then there are times when I think I have to make a few comments on some of the claims made.
This is what got my attention, the first sentence:
There are mountains of evidence — historical, scientific, medical, archeological, literary, logical, philosophical and more — that point to Jesus Christ as God, the creator and sustainer of the universe.
Let me be explicit: No, there’s not “mountains of evidence” in any discipline that points to Jesus Christ as anything at all. In fact, there is absolutely no contemporaneous evidence that Jesus ever existed. No (non-Christian) writer, philosopher, or historian ever mentioned “Jesus” in the 1st century and only in the early 2nd centruy was any notice paid at all around the Roman Empire. One good reference is David Fitzgerald’s, Nailed.
I am not one of those non-believers that want to crash a believers day, I just wish they’d get their facts from somewhere other than their holy text or, even more, apologists who get their facts from the same. Reading this piece had me believing that this author was indeed a believer and not just a Sunday-go-to-meetin’ Christian, or even worse, one that showed up during Christmas or Easter. No, this one is what I have always referred to as a person that doesn’t just claim his belief, but does his best to live it out. Yes, that’s rare today.
We then are subjected to several paragraphs of how and why he became a true believer and how this belief has changed his life forever. Okay, I guess there may be some people interested in another’s personal story. I’m not. It may, however, inspire another person. I kind of wished he’d spent more time on his evidentiary journey but is one of those that believes whatever he says is true, evidence to the contrary.
For instance, he could’ve have used Paul who first wrote about Jesus between 48 CE and 64 CE. That’s pretty close to when Christians believe Jesus was crucified. What’s insteresting about Paul is that he appears to be writing to already established churches during this time because he never claims to have started any of those of which we have letters. Of course, Paul can’t prove Jesus ever existed either because he never met him and as far as we know, never spoke about the life of Jesus. Maybe because, there never was one.
Finally he jumps from there to the real truth that no one is able to deny The Resurrection. This is a very simplistic defense of the most important event in Christianity and does nothing to settle any of the questions as all of the evidence presented, is of course from biblical writers (Gospels) that weren’t there to witness the event. The tomb was empty! So? What sort of defense is that? All that says is that the person stating this believes there was a tomb to begin with. So that last. part is mor of the same we hear from Christians all the time, again without any proof. As always.