Does Jesus's Prayer Show Christianity Is False?

[Apologiaphoenix]

I would also not be able to take such findings seriously unless there was a qualified statistician. Remember, there are lies, darned lies, and statistics.

[Gary]

Why would you send it to non-religious websites and blogs? I suggest you also send it to Christian websites and blogs since they make up quite a large part of John Q Public (though apparently not a very large web presence). Unless you can guarantee absolute neutrality among the denizens of those websites and blogs you do send it to, it wouldn't really be fair to only send it to non-religious websites.

Also I think there'd probably be some quibbling over phrases like "superhero-like body". Unless you're into comics, one may not know what that means, or may assume you're using fictional terminology. How about "exalted body". Also, "but apparently to no one else" is incorrect. Paul, a skeptic, heard his voice and saw him in a vision. Might also want to mention that he was seen by his brother James who was also a skeptic. Probably good to change "grieving friends" to "hundreds of his disciples" or "hundreds of his followers" (your pick). The word "levitated" is a bit weasley and conjures in the mind slight of hand tricks. How about "ascended". I don't know anyone who preaches that Jesus traveled to the farthest extent of the universe or to another dimension. Scripture never mentions anything like that. Best to leave that out. To say that Jesus was raised or sits on the right hand of "the Hebrew God, Yahweh" is weird language. Jesus is a person of the Hebrew God, Yahweh. Probably best to refer to "Hebrew God, Yahweh" as simply "Father".

Could probably quibble about a few other issues, but as long as you're willing to send this to Christian organizations as well as non-religious ones, I'm sure you'll get a fair response. Not sure exactly what you expect to find from this though. Most Western adults have likely arrived at some sort of conclusion before looking at the evidence. That's just as true about politics, or the environment or whatever, as it is religion. Those who come to the evidence completely open-minded, and without any preconceived notions, and are willing to follow the evidence wherever it takes them will likely find the case extremely strong, but the percentage of those types in your mailing list is anyone's guess. I imagine it's not very high. And of course, there will always be those who assent to all of the evidence, but still refuse to believe. As the atheist philosopher Thomas Nagel once said, "In speaking of the fear of religion, I don’t mean to refer to the entirely reasonable hostility toward certain established religions and religious institutions, in virtue of their objectionable moral doctrines, social policies, and political influence. Nor am I referring to the association of many religious beliefs with superstition and the acceptance of evident empirical falsehoods. I am talking about something much deeper—namely, the fear of religion itself. I speak from experience, being strongly subject to this fear myself: I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God and, naturally, hope that I’m right in my belief. It’s that I hope there is no God! I don’t want there to be a God; I don’t want the universe to be like that."

At anyrate, your results, assuming you follow the advice above, should be interesting. Hopefully you get enough responses back for it to be statistically significant. I probably part ways with Nick in believing that the factual evidence is only one part in accepting belief in Jesus. I believe that experiential evidence, and the work of the Holy Spirit on a person is also a strong factor in accepting him.

Ok. I'll will try to make some of the changes you suggest. But remember, we are only listing as evidence those items that the majority of NT scholars believe are historical. We are not including items that are simply theological assertions of fact. Also, by saying that I would send the questionnaire to "non-religious" sites I meant that I would not be sending it to sites whose purpose is the promotion of religion. But neither will I send it to atheist, agnostic, or skeptic websites.

Here are examples of who I would send it to: A tech company in China; a plumbing company in Thailand; a bookstore in Nigeria; an advertising company in Japan; a furniture store in the US, etc. You are welcome to use the questionnaire yourself and do the same survey. Since the study is not done under rigorous controls, it will have no statistical significance other than to be a sample of public opinion around the world.


The evidence for the alleged bodily resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth from the dead, in Jerusalem, in circa 30 AD is the following:

1. Public execution.
2. Public burial.
3. Sealed tomb.
4. Guards at the tomb for most of the period of time in question.
5. Empty tomb, three days and two nights later, with stone rolled away. (No known witnesses to the body leaving the tomb, however)
6. Post-death sightings, sometimes by hundreds of people at once.
7. Dramatically changed behavior of disciples.
8. Very shameful, very strange new belief system in an Honor-Shame society.
9. A belief never heard of in Judaism, yet believed by several thousand devout Jews.
10. Rapid spread of Christianity.
11. Willingness of thousands of Christians to be persecuted, tortured, and painfully executed for their beliefs.
12. The apostles of Jesus believed in the bodily resurrection and preached it.

Question: Based on the agreed-upon evidence above, Mr. and Mrs. John Q. Public, do you believe the Christian claim that the dead man, Jesus of Nazareth, was brought back to life by the Jewish/Christian God, Yahweh (whom Christians believe consists of three persons, Father, Son, and Spirit; Jesus is the Son, the second of the three persons who make up this one God), exited his sealed tomb by some manner other than moving the stone, appeared in a body---that could walk through locked doors, appear and disappear in a matter of seconds, and had no need of food and water---to hundreds of friends and family members on multiple occasions (but apparently to no one else, except one Jewish rabbi on a highway a few years later in a vision), and then, forty days later, his body lifted up off of the ground from the top of a mountain, without any mechanical assistance, ascended into the clouds, and from there, in some unknown fashion, traveled to his home called "heaven", which is possibly located in outer space at the edge of the universe, as some Christians believe, or possibly it is in another dimension, as some other Christians believe, or its location in relation to the universe is unknown as other Christians believe, to sit on a throne at the right hand of the first person of the Christian Godhead, whom he calls "Father", to be the ruler of the universe?

Do you, Mr./Mrs. Public, believe that this miracle explanation of Christianity is the most probable explanation for the evidence above, or, do you believe that there are other more probable, naturalistic, explanations for this evidence?

[Christianbookworm]

Right! You can tease statistics to mean anything! Especially if you ignore the fact that correlation does not equal causation. Example; the consummation of ice cream is correlated to the number of drownings, but eating ice cream doesn't cause drownings. Rather, there is more ice cream eating and swimming in the summer because of the extra heat.

[Gary]

Right! You can tease statistics to mean anything! Especially if you ignore the fact that correlation does not equal causation. Example; the consummation of ice cream is correlated to the number of drownings, but eating ice cream doesn't cause drownings. Rather, there is more ice cream eating and swimming in the summer because of the extra heat.

Once we all agree on the wording, do you own survey. See what you get.

[Christianbookworm]

Surveys are a poor means of data collection. Especially since online surveys are self selected, which means you will only get the responses of those who care the most about the issue to bother filling out some survey that may have people take it multiple times to skew the results. Not to mention that the truth isn't based on popular vote.

[Adrift]

Ok. I'll will try to make some of the changes you suggest. But remember, we are only listing as evidence those items that the majority of NT scholars believe are historical. We are not including items that are simply theological assertions of fact. Also, by saying that I would send the questionnaire to "non-religious" sites I meant that I would not be sending it to sites whose purpose is the promotion of religion. But neither will I send it to atheist, agnostic, or skeptic websites.

You can guarantee absolute neutrality among the denizens of those websites and blogs? Also, not many websites dig having people spamming their blogs or forums with off context material. Should be interesting how well you succeed on that front.

Here are examples of who I would send it to: A tech company in China; a plumbing company in Thailand; a bookstore in Nigeria; an advertising company in Japan; a furniture store in the US, etc.

Those don't exactly seem to represent Mr. and Mrs. John Q. Public to me.

You are welcome to use the questionnaire yourself and do the same survey.

Oh, no. I think your idea of a survey is foolish nonsense, but I am interested in seeing how much effort you're willing to put into this project just to have everyone here shrug at the results. At least it'll give you something to do between seeing patients I suppose.

Since the study is not done under rigorous controls, it will have no statistical significance other than to be a sample of public opinion around the world.

Seems rather pointless and arbitrary then.

Jewish/Christian God, Yahweh (whom Christians believe consists of three persons, Father, Son, and Spirit; Jesus is the Son, the second of the three persons who make up this one God)

This is very wordy, and seems completely unnecessary. Just use the word "Father". Much simpler, and gets the point across perfectly well.

hundreds of friends and family members

Again, weird terminology here. Jesus called his followers friend, but they were more than that, and that's probably not a very academic way of referring to his followers. We don't refer to Socrates or John the Baptist's followers as "friends" we use the word "disciple", or simply "follower".

but apparently to no one else

This is speculation. Best to strike it.

except one Jewish rabbi on a highway a few years later in a vision

Two occasions, once as a blinding light and a voice, which his companions also heard, and again in a vision.

and then, forty days later, he lifted up off of the ground from the top of a mountain, without any mechanical assistance, ascended into the clouds,

The word "ascended" conveys the message perfectly fine without adding all of the weird filler you're adding at the beginning of this sentence.

and from there, in some unknown fashion, traveled to his home called "heaven", which is possibly located in outer space at the edge of the universe, as some Christians believe, or possibly it is in another dimension, as some other Christians believe, or its location in relation to the universe is unknown as other Christians believe

Where are you getting all of this from? There's nothing in scripture that teaches this, nor is it Christian dogma. The Bible simply says that the fashion got to heaven was that he was was "taken up" or that he ascended. It doesn't refer to traveling in some unknown fashion to some edge of the universe or dimension or anything like that. Unless you're attempting to stack the deck in your favor (and you wouldn't be doing that, would you?) Best to leave all of that off. Keep it simple.

Do you, Mr./Mrs. Public, believe that this miracle explanation of Christianity is the most probable explanation for the evidence above, or, do you believe that there are other more probable, naturalistic, explanations for this evidence?

Now, of course, it seems you're assuming that Mr. and Mrs. John Q Public are familiar with everything below your list. Those who aren't will likely find that whole paragraph very confusing. How about this. Why don't you keep the numbered list, lose the paragraph, and ask Mr. and Mrs. John Q Public if a non-naturalistic alternative is a possible solution to the evidence you've presented. Keeps things nice and clean, and far less confusing than everything you're laying down all at once.

[Gary]

The evidence for the alleged bodily resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth from the dead, in Jerusalem, in circa 30 AD is the following:

1. Public execution.
2. Public burial.
3. Sealed tomb.
4. Guards at the tomb for most of the period of time in question.
5. Empty tomb, three days and two nights later, with stone rolled away. (No known witnesses to the body leaving the tomb, however)
6. Post-death sightings, sometimes by hundreds of people at once.
7. Dramatically changed behavior of disciples.
8. Very shameful, very strange new belief system in an Honor-Shame society.
9. A belief never heard of in Judaism, yet believed by several thousand devout Jews.
10. Rapid spread of Christianity.
11. Willingness of thousands of Christians to be persecuted, tortured, and painfully executed for their beliefs.
12. The apostles of Jesus believed in the bodily resurrection and preached it.

Question: Based on the agreed-upon evidence above, Mr. or Ms. Citizen of the World, do you believe the Christian claim that:

--- the dead man, Jesus of Nazareth, was brought back to life by the Jewish/Christian God, Yahweh (his Father),
---exited his sealed tomb by some manner other than moving the stone,
--- appeared in a body---that could walk through locked doors, appear and disappear in a matter of seconds, and had no need of food and water---to hundreds of disciples and family members on multiple occasions,
--- and then, forty days later, his body rose without assistance off of the ground from the top of a mountain and ascended into the clouds,
--- and from there, in some unknown fashion, he arrived in his home called "heaven",
--- which is possibly located in outer space at the edge of the universe, as some Christians believe,
--- or possibly it is in another dimension, as some other Christians believe,
--- or its location in relation to the universe is unknown as other Christians believe,
--- to sit on a throne at the right hand of his Father to be the ruler of the universe?

Do you, Mr./Ms. Citizen of the World, believe that this miracle explanation of Christianity is the most probable explanation for the evidence above, or, do you believe that there are other more probable, naturalistic, explanations for this evidence?


How's that, Adrift?

[Adrift]

The evidence for the alleged bodily resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth from the dead, in Jerusalem, in circa 30 AD is the following:

1. Public execution.
2. Public burial.
3. Sealed tomb.
4. Guards at the tomb for most of the period of time in question.
5. Empty tomb, three days and two nights later, with stone rolled away. (No known witnesses to the body leaving the tomb, however)
6. Post-death sightings, sometimes by hundreds of people at once.
7. Dramatically changed behavior of disciples.
8. Very shameful, very strange new belief system in an Honor-Shame society.
9. A belief never heard of in Judaism, yet believed by several thousand devout Jews.
10. Rapid spread of Christianity.
11. Willingness of thousands of Christians to be persecuted, tortured, and painfully executed for their beliefs.
12. The apostles of Jesus believed in the bodily resurrection and preached it.

Question: Based on the agreed-upon evidence above, Mr. or Ms. Citizen of the World, do you believe the Christian claim that:

--- the dead man, Jesus of Nazareth, was brought back to life by the Jewish/Christian God, Yahweh (his Father),
---exited his sealed tomb by some manner other than moving the stone,
--- appeared in a body---that could walk through locked doors, appear and disappear in a matter of seconds, and had no need of food and water---to hundreds of disciples and family members on multiple occasions,
--- and then, forty days later, his body rose without assistance off of the ground from the top of a mountain and ascended into the clouds,
--- and from there, in some unknown fashion, he arrived in his home called "heaven",
--- which is possibly located in outer space at the edge of the universe, as some Christians believe,
--- or possibly it is in another dimension, as some other Christians believe,
--- or its location in relation to the universe is unknown as other Christians believe,
--- to sit on a throne at the right hand of his Father to be the ruler of the universe?

Do you, Mr./Ms. Citizen of the World, believe that this miracle explanation of Christianity is the most probable explanation for the evidence above, or, do you believe that there are other more probable, naturalistic, explanations for this evidence?


How's that, Adrift?

Yeah, I still gotta quibble about a few of these.

• You don't need to say "his body rose without assistance off of the ground from the top of a mountain", because the word right after that, "ascended" describes just that.
• I still think "and from there, in some unknown fashion, he arrived in his home called "heaven"," is weird and wordy. Combine both of these points and simply say "ascended into heaven". Neat and clean, and conveys what Christians believe precisely.
• "which is possibly located in outer space at the edge of the universe, as some Christians believe" "or its location in relation to the universe is unknown as other Christians believe" will absolutely not do. For the third time, this is not scriptural, nor is it Christian dogma. I have no idea where you're getting it from.

Do you, Mr./Ms. Citizen of the World, believe that this miracle explanation of Christianity is the most probable explanation for the evidence above, or, do you believe that there are other more probable, naturalistic, explanations for this evidence?

Again, I think you should remove the bottom list because it implies familiarity with Christian theology (and whatever other goofy nonsense you've thrown in). Better to simply ask if a non-naturalistic alternative is a possible solution to the evidence presented at the top of the letter. Afterall, as you mentioned in the other thread, you're not asking them to become Christians (which your bottom list is essentially asking them to do), you're asking them if there are other/better than naturalistic explanations for the evidence.

Also, you never answered my question, can you guarantee absolute neutrality among the denizens of those websites and blogs you plan on spamming? If not, then this is hardly an honest approach to surveying thoughts on the subject.

[Gary]

Yeah, I still gotta quibble about a few of these.

• You don't need to say "his body rose without assistance off of the ground from the top of a mountain", because the word right after that, "ascended" describes just that.
• I still think "and from there, in some unknown fashion, he arrived in his home called "heaven"," is weird and wordy. Combine both of these points and simply say "ascended into heaven". Neat and clean, and conveys what Christians believe precisely.
• "which is possibly located in outer space at the edge of the universe, as some Christians believe" "or its location in relation to the universe is unknown as other Christians believe" will absolutely not do. For the third time, this is not scriptural, nor is it Christian dogma. I have no idea where you're getting it from.

Again, I think you should remove the bottom list because it implies familiarity with Christian theology (and whatever other goofy nonsense you've thrown in). Better to simply ask if a non-naturalistic alternative is a possible solution to the evidence presented at the top of the letter. Afterall, as you mentioned in the other thread, you're not asking them to become Christians (which your bottom list is essentially asking them to do), you're asking them if there are other/better than naturalistic explanations for the evidence.

Also, you never answered my question, can you guarantee absolute neutrality among the denizens of those websites and blogs you plan on spamming? If not, then this is hardly an honest approach to surveying thoughts on the subject.

Ok, I made some changes. How about this:


Dear _____________. This survey asks your opinion regarding the central alleged historical event of the Christian Faith: The Resurrection of the Dead Body of Jesus of Nazareth. We will present you with the evidence surrounding this event as agreed upon by the majority of historical experts. We will then present the Christian explanation for that evidence. At the end of this survey, we will ask you whether or not you believe that the preponderance of the evidence points to a miracle as described in the traditional reading of the Christian Bible, or whether you believe that the preponderance of the evidence can be explained by a more probable, naturalistic explanation, thereby indicating that you believe that the miracle of the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus was most likely not an historical event. We are not asking you to believe in Jesus as God or to convert to Christianity. We are only asking your opinion as to the evidence and the believability of the Christian Resurrection miracle claim.

The majority of scholars/experts believe that Jesus of Nazareth was executed by the Roman Empire, by crucifixion, in Jerusalem, Palestine, in circa 30 AD. In addition, the majority of scholars/experts agree on the following as historical facts regarding Jesus' death, burial, and the period of time shortly after his death:

1. Public execution.
2. Public burial.
3. Sealed tomb.
4. Guards at the tomb for most of the period of time in question.
5. Empty tomb, three days and two nights later, with stone rolled away. (No known witnesses to the body leaving the tomb, however)
6. Post-death sightings of the resurrected body, sometimes by hundreds of people at once.
7. Dramatically changed behavior of disciples.
8. Very shameful, very strange new belief system in an Honor-Shame society.
9. A belief never heard of in Judaism, yet believed by several thousand devout Jews.
10. Rapid spread of Christianity.
11. Willingness of thousands of Christians to be persecuted, tortured, and painfully executed for their beliefs.
12. The apostles of Jesus believed in the bodily resurrection and preached it.

Christians claim that this evidence points to the following miracle, as described in their holy book, the Bible, and that this miracle is the best explanation for the evidence:

--- the dead man, Jesus of Nazareth, was brought back to life by the Jewish/Christian God, Yahweh (his Father),
---exited his sealed tomb by some manner other than moving the stone,
--- appeared in a body---that could walk through locked doors, appear and disappear in a matter of seconds, and had no need of food and water---to hundreds of disciples and family members on multiple occasions,
--- and then, forty days later, he had a final meeting with this disciples on the top of a mountain, from where he ascended into the clouds,
--- and after ascending into the clouds, he entered his home, "heaven", a place of unknown location,
--- a place where there is absolute perfection; the streets are lined with gold; where mansions await Jesus' faithful disciples after their deaths,
--- and once Jesus arrived there, he sat on a throne next to his Father, God the Father, where he still sits today, ruling from his throne as the all-powerful, all-knowing Ruler of the Universe, who will one day judge every human being who has ever lived according to his deeds, some to spend eternity in heaven with Jesus, and some to be sent to a place called Hell.

Question: Do you believe that this miracle explanation of Christianity is the most probable explanation for the evidence above, or, do you believe that there are other more probable, naturalistic, explanations for this evidence?

Please select one of the following by marking with an X:

Miracle explanation more probable: ______

Other naturalistic explanation more probable: _____


Optional:

Are you religious: ______ Non-religious: _______

Thank you for participating in this survey!

[Gary]

As for accuracy, I look at this survey as if I were going to walk out onto a sidewalk and interview random people on the street. It is just a sample of public opinion. It is not scientifically constructed.

If you have any suggestions I am open to hearing them.

[Adrift]

Seems a little strange that you keep adding to this form every time I point out an issue. Don't you think? Again I ask you (is this the third of fourth time? I've lost track) can you guarantee absolute neutrality? I'm assuming by your constant evasion of this question that you can not. If not, then all bets are off.

Question: Based on the agreed-upon evidence above, Mr. or Ms. Citizen of the World, do you believe the Christian claim that:

Nope, that's not what we're here to find out. What we're here to find out is if there is any other/better explanation than the naturalistic claim.

and had no need of food and water

What Biblical passage are you relying on for this claim?

--- and then, forty days later, he had a final meeting with this disciples on the top of a mountain, from where he ascended into the clouds,
--- and after ascending into the clouds, he entered his home, "heaven", a place of unknown location,

Nope. It's far more accurate to say, "he ascended into heaven". No need to specify that he ascended from the mountain top to the clouds and then into heaven. That's not what Christians preach, nor is it scriptural. By the way, how are you not knowing this? I thought you said you were once a Christian. Apparently you didn't attend church very often.

--- a place where there is absolute perfection; the streets are lined with gold; where mansions await Jesus' faithful disciples after their deaths,

Yeah, no, this won't do at all. One wonders why you added these phrases to your list. You're not taking this very seriously, are you? As the NT scholar Ben Witherington III points out, "'Mansions' is not a good translation, for we are talking about room or rooms within a place, not separate heavenly condominiums. The point here is that there is plenty of room for all who abide in Jesus. Jesus, then, is going to prepare the way and a place for believers. He was God's agent on earth, he is the believer's agent in heaven."

Let's just delete this entire line then.

Do you, Mr./Ms. Citizen of the World, believe that this miracle explanation of Christianity is the most probable explanation for the evidence above, or, do you believe that there are other more probable, naturalistic, explanations for this evidence?

Again, I feel the point is better made (for the third time, I believe) if you remove the whole portion of this questionnaire. It seems to accomplish the goal if you were to simply ask if a non-naturalistic alternative is a possible solution to the evidence you've presented in the first portion.

Is this thing on? Are you reading the entirety of my post? Seems not, because you keep ignoring significant portions of it.

[JimL]

I have yet to find a convincing naturalistic explanation.

How about "history is fabled by the daughters of memory?" The NT was written decades after the supposed events. The convincing naturalistic explanation is that the resurrection never happened.

[Apologiaphoenix]

How about "history is fabled by the daughters of memory?" The NT was written decades after the supposed events. The convincing naturalistic explanation is that the resurrection never happened.

When are Hannibal, Queen Boudica, and Arminius first mentioned?

[JimL]

When are Hannibal, Queen Boudica, and Arminius first mentioned?

Who cares, history is replete with both facts and fictions. I think we can reasonably assume that the claims of supernatural events within much later written historical documents are fiction.

[Apologiaphoenix]

Your claim implies that something decades later should be viewed with suspicion.

Do you view Hannibal, Boudica, and Arminius with suspicion?