Ummm…
Errr… no.
One of the “arguments” used here is that the works of Virgil and Horace are known from manuscripts written more than four centuries after their deaths. Thing is, though: the fact that the manuscripts exist indicates that they had authors. Occams Razor would have it that if the author claims to be named “Virgil,” then, great, attribute the work to Virgil.
Additionally: if you claim that you had oatmeal for breakfast… sure. I’ll believe you. If you tell me that you miracled oatmeal out of thin air and that the bowl was made out of Adamantium and the spoon from Vibranium and that the oatmeal tasted so good that it gave everyone in a five meter radius eternal youth… I’m gonna have to Press X To Doubt. The nature of your claim weighs on the believability of your claim. This Virgil talking about the goings-on of politics? Believable. Someone discussing miracles? Gonna need some evidence.
The writer if this dubious screed also claims that:
Additionally, the apostles’ willingness to die for their claims has tremendous evidential value, also confirming the truth of the resurrection. No one will die for something he invented or believes to be false.
Uh-huh. A belief in something that isn’t so is not proof that the thing is in fact so. Joseph Smith, after all, the inventor of Mormonism, died for his beliefs, as did a bunch of other first-generation Mormons… and I’d bet a nickel that the author here does not believe that Mormonisms claims about Jesus wandering around North America are factually accurate. “Heaven’s Gate.” “Nazism.” “People’s Temple.” “Solar Temple.” History is jam-packed with founders of nonsensical movements who were willing to die for their objectively wrong beliefs. And in fact a vast number of Muslims and Hindus are more than happy to die for their beliefs: does the author think that this lends weight to the factual accuracy of their beliefs?
The author claims that there are many “manuscripts [that] preserve the deeds and teaching of Jesus in the New Testament (about 25,000 total).” Maybe… but only the Bible can be considered even close to a primary source document. I often see Flavius Josephus used to back up the historicity of Jesus… but Josephus lived around 37 AD to 100 AD. He wrote about encountering Christians around 93 AD, and described their beliefs. That *they* believed that Jesus had been resurrected is hardly surprising. But there is little evidence that Josephus believed it, and an important bit of evidence that he didn’t: he was Jewish before he met the Christians, and he was Jewish afterwards. A Jew who believes in the New Testament is generally considered a “Christian.”
In the end, the terribly bad reasoning on display in the article linked above does not surprise me: the author is a “senior fellow at Discovery Institute.” The Discovery Institute spends a great deal of time and effort pushing the “Intelligent Design” myth. Anyone who uses the “watchmaker” analogy for how evolution works should never, *ever* be taken seriously.
Maybe Jesus existed, I dunno. Maybe he was nailed to a cross, died and came back. Dunno. Maybe when he died a great big earthquake wiped out a good chunk of Jerusalem, and that somehow got left out of the records. Dunno. Maybe when he died the graves in the area opened up and a whole bunch of zombies clambered out and started spooking the locals, and that rather startling detail somehow got left out of not only all the Roman records but also three out of four of the gospels. Dunno. Maybe it’s all true. But using fraudulent logic and outright lies is not a great way to convince some people.
So… Happy Easter I guess.
