"Well, I dont think Jesus even existed!"

I am always surprised to hear this objection in person.  Usually I picture it as an Internet based issue that rational people don't really hold to.  But recently I encountered it again, so I thought I would write a quick blog about it.

  The claim that Jesus didn't even exist simply flies in the face of history and textual criticism.  In fact someone who would make this claim would be a history denier.  But I am amazed how strongly many people hold to this claim when in scholarship the view is considered to be quite silly.  In my conversation recently I was saying that I have never found a scholar to support this view can you suggest any?  The person then referenced the book "The Jesus Mysteries" by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy and added that they were scholars.  Well a quick google search turned out that these authors are not scholars, they do not have one peer reviewed paper between them also their education is a B.A and a M.A which I appreciate but their degrees are not relevant to the field and they are not scholars.  This book is mainly about the idea that Jesus was a myth.  I almost feel bad when I see how much the scholarly world is against Jesus mythicists.  In a article I read recently Bart Ehrman was saying of mythicists

"there is not a single mythicist who teaches New Testament or Early Christianity or even Classics at any accredited institution of higher learning in the Western world. And it is no wonder why. These views are so extreme and so unconvincing to 99.99 percent of the real experts that anyone holding them is as likely to get a teaching job in an established department of religion as a six-day creationist is likely to land on in a bona fide department of biology."

Another objection along these lines that I often hear is that since the historical documents concerning Jesus are biased and contain supernatural claims they cannot be trusted.  This is simply not true at all.  All historical documents are biased and many contain supernatural claims.  This is simply the art and science of the historian and textual critic.


Also I hear people say "well of course there was a guy walking around first century Palestine named Yeshua but not who we now call Jesus Christ.  Since I am a layman Ill pass this one over to Bart Ehrman again:

"With respect to Jesus, we have numerous, independent accounts of his life in the sources lying behind the Gospels (and the writings of Paul) -- sources that originated in Jesus' native tongue Aramaic and that can be dated to within just a year or two of his life (before the religion moved to convert pagans in droves). Historical sources like that are is pretty astounding for an ancient figure of any kind. Moreover, we have relatively extensive writings from one first-century author, Paul, who acquired his information within a couple of years of Jesus' life and who actually knew, first hand, Jesus' closest disciple Peter and his own brother James. If Jesus did not exist, you would think his brother would know it."

So we have numerous independent accounts, we have sources that can be dated to within just a year or two of his life (I'm pretty sure he is talking about the creed in 1Corinthians 15 there), we have the writings of Paul and testimony from Peter and Jesus' own brother.  Seems like pretty good evidence to me. 

   When I do go through this with friends they will usually change their opinion to that Jesus did exist BUT there is no reason to accept the supernatural claims.  At this point that is fine for the moment, because I believe in trying to stay on one topic at a time.  At least if you review the evidence with someone they may stop publicly preaching about how Jesus didn't even exist.  Which is great because the case for Christianity is a cumulative case, so when we take down a roadblock like "Jesus never existed" that's just one part of the cumulative case.

Biblical Hermaneutics in a Union Meeting

So I was in a Union meeting for my job the other day.  The union rep is talking about a respectful workplace and an upcoming vote when he turns to talking about the book of rules, policies and procedures.  He said "this book is just like the Bible, its all up to interpretation and everyone reads it differently."  So of course I spoke up.  "Actually that is not what the Bible is like at all, we have a discipline called hermeneutics which is the art and science of text interpretation"  The union rep let out a groan, and said OK its not like the Bible and moved on.  But the point here is this really is how many people view the Bible which is shocking!

   We Christians do recognise the Bible as the inspired word of God, but it is very important to understand that many of the interpretations of the Bible are not.  The Bible along with most texts is not a book where you just pick it up and can fully understand it.  The Bible was not written yesterday and in our own culture and context so some extra work has to be done to get a full understanding of the text.

  Really I just want to give a quick introduction to Biblical hermeneutics, so here are a few points to consider when reading the Bible.

 1.  Who is the author of this passage?
 2.  Who is the intended audience?
 3.  What is the context of the passage?  Both directly and over the larger picture
 4.  What is the cultural context? 
 5.  Where have similar themes or quotes appeared before in the Bible?
 6.  Are there certain words that require further examination?

As I write this I'm already sure that I will edit it later on, Ill be walking down the street and remember I should add more.  But really this is just for consideration for you to dive deeper into the Bible and to know that the Bible is not a book where we can all interpret it differently.  We work together in community and follow Hermeneutics to fully understand the Bible

"Will there be animals in Heaven?"

Ive received a few questions from my blog recently, which I really enjoy.  Mostly this blog has been about objections I receive but I am very happy to give it my best shot to answer questions.  I just want to clarify again, I am merely a layman.  I'm just trying to be a $1 apologist is J Warner Wallace suggests :)

    First I would like  to point out that we do not have a straight forward answer regarding this question in scripture.  But that does not mean that we don't have many verses that speak towards this issue.  Also before I begin I would like to say that animals are very important to God.  Just see Psalm 50:11 "I know every bird in the mountains, and the creatures of the field are mine."  Also its amazing to see the deep emotional connections that humans make with animals.  I have had 2 cats pass away and the loss was very deep.  So I would also like to point out that animals are very important to people, and people are very important to God so something meaningful is going on here.



   Animals were a big part of the original creation, in Eden.   Animals are an amazing part of creation, maybe one of the best parts!  So in the restored creation it makes sens that animals would continue to be a part of creation.  The is just simply no reason to think that this amazing part of creation would be left out in Heaven.

   "But will my cat Puddles be there?  Do animals have souls?"

Animals are referred to as "living creatures" in Genesis 1:20 and throughout church history this has been understood as having a soul.  But a soul that is qualitatively different than a human soul.  Thomas Aquinas taught that an animal's soul is dependent on the body.  So when the body dies so does the soul.  This also hard to back up with scripture but there is a good point there.

So will my same pet be in Heaven?  Why not? is my answer.  There is no reason to not think so.  I am open to more info, but for right now I don't really know but have no reason to not think so.  God is a God who loves to lavish love on his children, so what ever is in store will be good.

"In the earliest Gospel Mark, Jesus doesnt even claim to be God" Thats only in later Gospels and must have been added in"

  I was very surprised when I first heard this argument from an atheist friend in a coffee shop.  Mainly because I had been hearing it from Jehovah's Witnesses for many years before that.  I really have nothing bad to say about JW's other than their doctrine.  One of the reasons I am a Christian today is because a group of four JW's met with me weekely for many months to discuss issues of God.  I still have JW's over to the house every couple of months, they are always welcome here. 

  So I am in the coffee shop with me friend and the topic of Jesus being God comes up and I hear that in Mark, that Jesus never claimed to be God.  So maybe he was just a good man who after he died people made it up that he claimed to be God.

   Frankly this objection is quite silly, the evidence in overwhelming for Jesus's personal claims.  First I asked my friend if he had actually read the Gospel of Mark and the answer was no.  But that this was a popular claim on the Internet.  With this said, I then asked "why do you think Jesus was crucified?"  To which the answer was "I'm not sure"  so then I decided to speak about two points, the same two points I always talk about with my JW friends. 

   First we read Mark 4:35 - 5:13

³⁵ That day when evening came, he said to his disciples, “Let us go over to the other side.” ³⁶ Leaving the crowd behind, they took him along, just as he was, in the boat. There were also other boats with him. ³⁷ A furious squall came up, and the waves broke over the boat, so that it was nearly swamped. ³⁸ Jesus was in the stern, sleeping on a cushion. The disciples woke him and said to him, “Teacher, don’t you care if we drown?”
³⁹ He got up, rebuked the wind and said to the waves, “Quiet! Be still!” Then the wind died down and it was completely calm.
⁴⁰ He said to his disciples, “Why are you so afraid? Do you still have no faith?”
⁴¹ They were terrified and asked each other, “Who is this? Even the wind and the waves obey him!”

5 They went across the lake to the region of the Gerasenes.^{[a] 2} When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an impure spirit came from the tombs to meet him. ³ This man lived in the tombs, and no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain. ⁴ For he had often been chained hand and foot, but he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet. No one was strong enough to subdue him. ⁵ Night and day among the tombs and in the hills he would cry out and cut himself with stones.

⁶ When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him. ⁷ He shouted at the top of his voice, “What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? In God’s name don’t torture me!” ⁸ For Jesus had said to him, “Come out of this man, you impure spirit!”
⁹ Then Jesus asked him, “What is your name?”
“My name is Legion,” he replied, “for we are many.” ¹⁰ And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area.
¹¹ A large herd of pigs was feeding on the nearby hillside. ¹² The demons begged Jesus, “Send us among the pigs; allow us to go into them.” ¹³ He gave them permission, and the impure spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned.



Thank you for reading all that first :)

OK so what we have here first is Jesus and the disciples are in the boat, and a storm comes and they are afraid until Jesus tells the wind and the waves "Quiet, be still" and then Mark makes it clear that the disciples were more scared of Jesus after that than they were of the storm.  Keep in mind here the context.  We are reading a Jewish narrative.  Why were they terrified?  Because in their context, who alone tells the seas what to do?

The next story we have which is connected, because when Mark was written there was not chapters and verses, they were added later.  The very next story we get is Jesus encountering a very scary demon possessed man.  Jesus asks the impure spirit "what is your name?"  to which the spirit replies "Legion"  now what would the name Legion bring up in the minds of the first listeners within the Jewish culture?  They would have thought about the Roman Legion which was a basic Roman army unit comprised of up to 5000 soljers.  The Romans were oppressing the Jews at the time and they longed for freedom from the Romans.  So Jesus then casts Legion into the pigs and they run into the water and drown.

So ask yourself this question.  In the Jewish narrative, who alone controls the waters and then drowns Israels enemies in it?  This is a direct reflection of the Exodus story where God parts the red sea and then drowns Pharaoh's armies in it.

Second I will read Mark 14:60-64

⁶⁰ Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, “Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?” ⁶¹ But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer.
Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”
⁶² “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
⁶³ The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked. ⁶⁴ “You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?”

So here Jesus is before the Sanhedrin and is brought up on charges.  People are giving false testimony so the high priest just straight up asks Jesus if he is the son of God.  Jesus replies powerfully and says that he is indeed the Son of Man, and the high priest tears his robes because of the perceived blasphemy. 

So that is my usual two talking points when it comes to this topic.  Since the objection is bible based you have to actually read the bible for the answer.  So here I just use two points so not to overwhelm people, but if they are interested then I would go further. 

I  reviewed this with my friend, and he said "alright, fine" and that was the end of that.  I still go deeper on this though with my JW friends, my only bit of advice with JW's is that you be willing to use their bible. It is a pretty bad translation, but you can do it :)

Jesus is just a reinvention of Mithras and other pagan religions!!

   Well first I want to say I took a serious break from blogging, but over the last few months I have still been collecting many stories to share about the interesting encounters I have as a Christian in Vancouver a city with one of the lowest rates of Church attendance in North America.

  So last week I was having coffee with a young Christian friend of mine, who's faith was rocked by the accusation of this idea of Jesus Christ just being a reinvention of the Gods of the mystery religions.  He was specifically impacted by a picture that he saw on reddit. 

So as you can see this was some kind of advertisement taken out by people trying to refute Christmas and the person of Jesus of Nazareth. Personally Ive never seen the ad, but it looks a little funny to me so I actually think its Photoshop, but Im sure someone will help me out with this. I'm amazed how much I run into this issue, its been dead for 100+ years but it still pops up on the internet mainly because a lie can travel half way across the world on the internet before the truth can even get ready.  What amazes me most is when in conversations with Atheists who say they prise critical thinking, peer review, evidence etc will then throw out this mystery religions idea when their only source is an internet based movie like Zeitgeist.  So lets have a quick look at these claims on this advertisement.

First Ill say that Mithraism was one of the major religions of the Roman empire.  It was very popular within the military and Mithra was Mithra was the god of war, battle, justice, faith, and contract.

Mitras was born of a virgin on December 25th...Just like Jesus?  False
Mitras was born from a mountain or a cave, and there is no record at all of the Date of his birth.  Also everyone knows Dec 25 is not the date that Jesus was born, it is the date that we celebrate his birth.

Mithras had 12 disciples...Just like Jesus?  False
Mithras is said to have had one to two disciples, but not twelve.  There is a stone carving though that shows Mithras killing a bull while 12 people watching.

Mithras was known as the Son of God...Just like Jesus?  I'm not sure
I did really look for this one, but all I could find was that Mithras was of course the son of a god.  But when Jesus referred to himself as son of God this was not his claim to divinity.  This is something that Christians mix up quite a bit.  Many people referred to themselves as son of God.  It was actually the claim of being the Son of Man from chapter 7 of the book of Daniel that Jesus used to claim divinity.

Mithras was resurrected three days later after his death...Just like Jesus?  Absolutely false
Actually there is absolutely zero mention of Mithras death or anything about a resurrection in Mithraic texts.  In fact there is no reference, none at all of any dying and resurrected Gods before the first century. 

So really, I feel sorry for the atheist that chooses to spend money on an ad like this.  Also for the atheist who uses this in a debate.  But what breaks my heart is when I see Christians have their faith challenged because they never decided to educate themselves on what they believe and why they believe it.