Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Key Point
In Mark 11:24 Jesus promises Neva
Rogers that, "whatever you ask for
in prayer, believe that you have
received it, and it will be yours." In
John 14:14 Jesus promises, "if you
ask anything in my name, I will do
it." Yet when Neva prayed for
protection from the gunman, Jesus
completely ignored her. Jeff Weise
shot Neva Rogers in the head four
times, and she died in a pool of her
own blood.
A situation like this is deeply paradoxical. For any thoughtful person, the questions come in a flood. Why does
an all-powerful God completely ignore the prayers and allow ten people to die? Why does God save the student
who denies God's existence? Why doesn't God strike the gunman dead at the scene, or help him earlier in life
so as to completely derail the situation before it ever happens? How could a loving God allow such perverse,
needless and useless suffering when he clearly has the power and authority to prevent it? Why would Jesus
make an unambiguous promise to answer prayers in the Bible, and then renege? How can God have answered
millions of other prayers all around the globe on that day, while at the same time ignoring this huge tragedy and
refusing to answer any prayers there?
It is hard for us, as human beings, to know what to think because Neva Rogers' death is senseless. We have
no easy way to penetrate the mysteries of the Lord.
What we do know is that these deeply paradoxical situations happen all the time, and there must be a reason
for that...
God's Ratio
In this case, God ignores 97.5% of
the homeowners in Steve's
subdivision. The ratio is 97.5% not
blessed vs. 2.5% blessed.
When we look at Steve's situation, there is something else that is interesting to notice. What we see is
this odd statistic: 39 houses not blessed vs. 1 house blessed. Every family on Steve's street needed help,
but God saved only one of the houses. It is a terrible ratio -- a 97.5% failure rate. This ratio is so common
that we could call it God's Ratio. God was right there, guiding the path of the fire to save Steve's house.
Wasn't he? So why didn't God reach over and save the 39 other homes as well? If Steve had changed
one word in his prayer, would God have behaved differently? Should we blame Steve for being so selfish
when he prayed? Why couldn't God see that, as a believer, Steve would want to help all his neighbors
too?
What is God thinking when he allows things like this to happen to some people but not others, even if
both are fervently and faithfully praying? What was God thinking when he let Neva Rogers die? We can
say, "It is all part of God's plan," but what sort of plan is that? It can become uncomfortable if you think
about it -- what if God's plan is to shoot you in the head tomorrow, or burn your house to the ground? How
do we make sense of that?
What if you could resolve the mystery of God? What if you could completely explain this mystery in San
Diego, and the mystery at Red Lake, and the many other mysteries that we witness each day?
Before we can probe into the mystery of God completely, we should take one small detour. We need to
have a clear understanding of who God is. We need to establish the Standard Model of God.
By the numbers
Some polls estimate the number
of Americans who believe in God as
high as 90%.
More than 200 million U.S.
citizens, and approximately 2 billion
people worldwide, count themselves
as God's believers. (Another one
billion people around the world
count themselves as Muslims).
According to Time magazine,
more than 50% of Americans
believe in the Bible's account of
creation as described in the book of
Genesis.
59% of Americans believe that
the Bible's Book of Revelation will
come true. [ref]
In a recent survey of 1,087
American doctors, 72 percent
reported that they believe that
miracles can occur today. [ref] The
dictionary defines miracle as, "an
event that appears inexplicable by
the laws of nature and so is held to
be supernatural in origin or an act of
God." [ref] In other words, 72
percent of doctors believe that God
is reaching down from heaven and
interacting with our bodies
supernaturally to bring about cures
that are otherwise inexplicable.
We can call this the Standard Model of God. If you ask any believer about any of these ten core concepts,
you will get confirmation. There might be a quibble (for example, some do not believe in a literal Adam
and Eve, some are not certain that God wrote everything in the Bible, etc.), but billions of people believe
in the Standard Model. These core beliefs are solid across the denominations. Approximately two billion
human beings believe in these fundamentals.
Prayer is extremely important. People believe that we can pray to God (or Jesus) (sometimes even Mary
and certain saints) and God hears our prayers. People believe that God reaches down into our world and
uses his infinite power and love to answer our prayers. God will intervene to cure diseases. God can save
our lives in emergency situations. God will protect us from danger. God can solve a wide range of
personal problems and make our lives better through prayer. Hundreds of millions of people pray to God
daily, and they believe that God hears their prayers. According to many people, God is answering millions
of prayers on earth every day.
This summary makes one thing clear. When you ask, "Who is God?", the answer is: "God is an utterly
amazing being." This is the conventional wisdom, and a large majority of the people in the United States
believe it.
There is something that is remarkably comforting about the thought of an all-loving, all-knowing, all-
powerful being watching over us, answering our prayers, protecting us and welcoming us into heaven
when we die. He sees us in our struggles and pain on this planet. He lends us his strength and
compassion, and helps each of us to find our way. We would all like to believe in, and put our faith in,
such an amazing being.
And yet, you have to wonder. You realize that the standard model of God sharpens the paradox. Given
this definition of God, the violent murder of Neva Rogers is uncomfortable. The reason why it can be
uncomfortable is because it does not seem to fit with what we believe about God. There is something
about the death of Neva Rogers that is not quite right.
Let me give you another example to bring the paradox into focus...
Key Point
No matter how many people pray,
no matter how often they pray, no
matter how sincere they are, no
matter how much they believe, no
matter how deserving the amputee,
what we know is that prayers do not
inspire God to regenerate
amputated legs. This happens
despite what Jesus promises us in
Matthew 21:21, John 14:14, Mark
11:24, etc.
Rationalization #1
Here is an explanation that you might have heard or used before:
The reason God cures thousands of cancers, infections, etc. each day but never intervenes with
amputees is because it is not God's will to do that. It is not part of God's plan.
This explanation seems a little odd. Amputees really do seem to be getting the short end of God's plan if
this is the case. If God answers prayers as promised in the Bible, and if God is performing all of the
medical miracles that we read about in inspirational literature, then God should also be restoring
amputated limbs. Why would God help cancer victims (e.g. Marilyn Hickey's mother) and people bitten by
rabid bats (e.g. Jeanna Giese), but discriminate against amputees like this? (See Understanding God's
Plan for an in-depth look at how "God's Plan" works).
Keep in mind what Jesus promised:
• If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer. [Matthew 21:21]
• If you ask anything in my name, I will do it. [John 14:14]
• Ask, and it will be given you. [Matthew 7:7]
• Nothing will be impossible to you. [Matthew 17:20]
• Believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. [Mark 11:24]
There is no indication from Jesus that amputees will be ignored when they pray for medical help. The fact
is, all five of these statements are completely false in the case of amputees.
The five quotes in the previous paragraph are all simple, straightforward statements. Doesn't "nothing will
be impossible for you" mean "nothing will be impossible for you"? Jesus is God, and as an all-knowing
being God knows how humans interpret sentences. If Jesus did not mean "nothing will be impossible for
you," it seems like Jesus would have said something else. He also would not repeat that sentiment so
many times. And Jesus is supposedly answering millions of prayers each day, so prayer-answering
seems to be his intent (See this short video for a more in-depth discussion).
Rationalization #2
In a similar vein, many believers will say, "God always answers prayers, but sometimes his answer is 'no.'
If your prayer does not fit with God's will, then God will say 'no' to you." This feels odd because God's
answer to every amputee is always "no" when it comes to regenerating lost limbs. Jesus says, "If you ask
anything in my name, I will do it." He does not say, "If you ask anything in my name, I will do it, unless you
are praying about an amputated limb, in which case I will always reject your prayer." Jesus also says,
"Nothing will be impossible to you," and regenerating a limb should therefore be possible. The fact that
God refuses to answer every prayer to regenerate a lost limb seems strange, doesn't it?
This short video offers a perspective on the "no" response to prayers.
To understand how strange it seems, compare God's treatment of amputees to the concept of God
described in this article.
Rationalization #3
Here is another explanation that you might have heard: "God needs to remain hidden -- restoring an
amputated limb would be too obvious." We will discuss this idea in more detail in later chapters, but let's
touch on it here. Does God need to remain hidden?
That does not seem to be the case. In general, God seems to have no problem doing things that are
obvious. Think about the Bible. Writing the Bible and having billions of copies published all over the world
is obvious. So is parting the Red Sea. So is carving the Ten Commandments on stone tables. So is
sending your son to earth and having him perform dozens of recorded miracles. And so on. It makes no
sense for a God in hiding to incarnate himself, or to do these other obvious things. Why send your son to
earth, and then write a book that talks all about his exploits, if you are trying to hide?
In the same way, any medical miracle that God performs today is obvious. The removal of a cancerous
tumor is obvious because it is measurable. One month the tumor is visible to everyone on the X-ray, and
the next month it is not. If God eliminated the tumor, then it is openly obvious to everyone who sees the X-
ray. There is nothing "hidden" about removing a tumor. So, why not regenerate a leg in an equally open
way? If God intervenes with cancer patients to remove cancerous tumors in response to prayers, then
why wouldn't God also intervene with amputees to regenerate lost limbs?
Key Point
If God intervenes with cancer
patients to remove cancerous
tumors, then God should also
intervene with amputees to
regenerate lost limbs.
Another example is seen in Jeanne's rabies case discussed earlier in the chapter. Tens of millions of
people are aware of the Jeanna's rabies miracle. Personally, I read about it in a big article in my morning
newspaper. That is pretty obvious. What is hidden about her recovery?
Why, then, does God ignore the prayers of amputees? (see Chapter 19 for a complete discussion of the
"hidden God" theory)
Rationalization #4
Some people might say, "Everyone's life serves God in different ways. Perhaps God uses amputees to
teach us something. God must have a higher purpose for amputees." That may be the case -- God may
be trying to send a message. But, again, it seems odd that he would single out this one group of people to
handle the delivery. To quote Marilyn Hickey once again:
No matter what has happened in your past, no matter what is happening in your present, seek out
your heavenly Father in prayer as often as you can. Take my word for it -- He loves you and
wants to answer your prayers. [ref]
You see this logic all the time in inspirational literature and hear it every Sunday at thousands of
churches: "God loves you! God hears your prayers and will answer them for you!" See this article for an
example. Yet, for some reason, miracles never happen when it comes to regenerating lost limbs. It does
not seem to make sense that amputees would be cut off from the blessings that Jesus promises in the
Bible. And it also does not mesh with all of the prayers that Jesus seems to be answering for other
people.
Rationalization #5
Some people ascribe the problems that amputees face to free will. They will say, "Well, if you go into a
war zone and get your legs blown off, that is your own free will. God gives us free will. You made a free
choice to be a soldier. It is not God's fault, and therefore he has no obligation to repair the damage." This
logic is fascinating. What about all the people who are born with missing limbs, or the people who lose
limbs to diseases through no fault or choice of their own? How are these people any different from cancer
victims, who, supposedly, are constantly being healed by God?
We know that God ignores all amputees, regardless of the cause of the missing limb. Why doesn't God
heal thalidomide babies, who are by definition completely innocent? Or the innocent children who lose
their limbs in mine fields? Why would God heal millions of other diseases, but completely ignore any
disease that results in a lost or missing limb?
Rationalization #6
Some believers say, "God does help amputees - he inspires scientists and engineers to create artificial
limbs for them!" This logic is interesting, especially if we look at other examples. Take the case of
smallpox. Millions upon millions of people died of smallpox until the vaccine was invented in the twentieth
century. If God is the one who inspired the scientists, why did God wait until the twentieth century to do it?
Why would God want to be the source of the massive suffering that smallpox caused prior to the twentieth
century? And why do we pay the scientists, given that their work is simply God's inspiration? (we will
discuss the question of divine inspiration in more detail in Chapter 7)
Rationalization #7
Someone might say, "Thou shalt not test the Lord. It says so in the Bible." This is hard to swallow
because every prayer is a test. Either God answers the prayer or he does not. There is no difference
between praying for an amputee and praying for Jeanna Giese and her rabies.
Note also that many believers track their prayers with prayer journals. See, for example, prayer-
journal.com. Why not pray to God to heal an amputee, and then track the results of the prayer in a prayer
journal?
Rationalization #8
Some people might say something like, "Jesus never says when he will answer your prayers. Maybe your
prayer will be answered in the afterlife." But that seems uncomfortable. Jesus is answering millions of
prayers for everyone else in the here and now. Clearly that is what he means with all his verses in the
Bible. Why single out amputees for treatment in the afterlife when Marilyn and Jeanna get their prayers
answered almost instantaneously?
Rationalization #9
Someone might say, "God will answer your prayers, but not immediately. You must be patient." They will
point to a situation like that found in Mark 6:47-51:
And when evening came, the boat was out on the sea, and he was alone on the land. And he saw
that they were making headway painfully, for the wind was against them. And about the fourth
watch of the night he came to them, walking on the sea. He meant to pass by them, but when
they saw him walking on the sea they thought it was a ghost, and cried out; for they all saw him,
and were terrified. But immediately he spoke to them and said, "Take heart, it is I; have no fear."
And he got into the boat with them and the wind ceased.
A person might say, "you see, he came in the fourth watch (generally understood to be 3AM to 6AM), not
in the first or second or third. You must be patient and wait for the Lord to answer your prayers." This is
just as uncomfortable as the previous explanation. God does not answer the prayers of any amputee to
restore lost limbs.
Rationalization #10
A believer might say, "You are taking the Bible literally." But how else are we supposed to take it? Jesus
clearly says, "If you ask anything in my name, I will do it." When Jesus says that, what does he mean?
Presumably, Jesus means that if you ask for anything, he will do it. What else could he possibly mean?
Believers often respond with, "Look, Jesus was using poetic embellishment when he said, 'nothing will be
impossible for you,' and 'faith can move mountains.'" Which leads to the following question: What prayers
does God answer? It is the response to that question that is fascinating. Because the response inevitably
is, "God is omnipotent, so God can do anything."
Which leads us right back to the question, "Why won't God heal amputees?"
Rationalization #11
Finally, there is this oft-used chestnut: "There is no way to understand the mysteries of our Lord. People
have believed in Jesus for 2,000 years, and there must be a very good reason for it." This feels like a sad
point in the conversation. On one side of the conversation is a person who is defending the all-powerful,
all-knowing, all-loving creator of the universe. This person's position should be unassailable. Yet, if God
exists, and answers prayers as described in the Bible, there is no explanation for what we see in the
world around us. The Bible is silent in this case. God is silent. There is not a good, comfortable
explanation for the situation faced by amputees except to say, "We cannot understand the mysteries of
the Lord. We have no explanation for why God refuses to answer prayers to regenerate lost limbs."
Explaining the case of amputees
Just for a moment, I would ask you to consider the possibility of another explanation. If you believe in
God, then this explanation will initially appear to be complete nonsense. However, it is interesting in light
of the conversation we will be having in this book.
One explanation for the evidence that we see before us is this:
God exists, and God answers prayers, but for some reason God chooses to ignore the prayers of
amputees. We don't have a good explanation for why God acts this way, and it does seem to
contradict what Jesus teaches about prayer in the Bible, but clearly God has his divine reasons.
Now let's look at the situation with amputees from another point of view. This explanation is more
straightforward:
God is imaginary.
Let's look at what happens when we consider this explanation and see how it stacks up.
Assume that God is imaginary. The beauty of this explanation is that it fits the facts perfectly. In the case
of amputees, it is a valid way to explain the reality that we see in our world. The logic goes like this:
If God is imaginary, then he does not answer any prayers. Therefore, the prayers of amputees
would go unanswered too.
The thing that is so appealing about this explanation is that there is no hand waving. There are no
contradictions. It is completely fair. There is no paradox. This explanation makes complete sense in light
of the evidence we see in our world.
Key Point
If God is imaginary, then he does not
answer any prayers. Therefore, the
prayers of amputees would go
unanswered too. The thing that is so
appealing about this explanation is
that there is no hand waving. There
are no contradictions. It is
completely fair. There is no paradox.
This explanation makes sense in
light of the evidence we see in our
world.
Interestingly, this explanation also happens to cover the case of Neva Rogers in Chapter 1. And Steve
Homel's subdivision in Chapter 2. And Ranika in Chapter 4. If you assume that God is imaginary, then the
paradox of God evaporates in all of these cases. Why did Ranika die? Because there was no all-powerful,
prayer-answering God to save her. Why did Neva die? Because there was no all-powerful, prayer-
answering God to save her. Why did Steve's house remain standing while 39 others burned to the
ground? Because there was no all-powerful, prayer-answering God to save any of the houses (and
Steve's house was a fluke). Why did 200,000 people die in the tsunami? Because there was no all-
powerful, prayer-answering God to save them. And so on. It explains amputees too. The paradox of God
vanishes completely.
In response to this proposal, a thoughtful person might say, "Just because God never answers the
prayers of amputees, it does not mean that he does not answer other prayers. I agree with you that it is
unfair to amputees, and I agree with you that it contradicts what Jesus teaches in the Bible, but God has
his reasons. For some reason, it is not part of God's plan to help amputees by regenerating their lost
limbs. There is no way to understand the mysteries of our Lord, but he does have his reasons and they
will become clear to us when we die and go to heaven." That is one possible explanation, but words like
"unfair" and "contradicts" feel, somehow, uncomfortable. They do not fit with our mental image of an all-
loving and perfect God, nor with the words of Jesus in the Bible. Why would God have such a problem
with amputees that he completely ignores their prayers to regenerate lost limbs, while at the same time he
is answering all of these other prayers millions of times a day? When it comes to amputees, why would
Jesus renege on his promises to answer prayers in the Bible?
You can see that what we have here is a paradox:
• On the one hand we have an all-knowing, all-loving God who has made very clear and specific
statements in his Bible about the power of prayer. We have billions of people who believe that
their prayers are being answered. We have thousands of examples of the power of prayer
published in inspirational literature. We have prominent doctors at the CDC declaring that God is
reaching down onto earth and performing medical miracles. We have major newspapers and
magazines reporting on the power of prayer and prayer circles.
• On the other hand, we have a piece of explicit evidence that does not make any sense if God
exists. No matter how many people pray, no matter how sincere they are and no matter how
much they believe, God does not answer the prayers of amputees to regenerate their limbs.
There are two possible explanations for this paradox:
• Many people believe that God answers millions of prayers every day, using his love and power to
bless people all over the globe. They express their belief in articles like this, published in
magazines read by millions of people. But they also believe that God ignores the prayers of
amputees for a divine reason that is unknowable to human beings. In that case, the situation with
amputees is a mystery.
• Many other people believe the opposite. They believe that God is imaginary, and therefore he
cannot answer prayers. In that case, the situation with amputees makes complete sense.
Who is right?
The thing about amputees is that the evidence is rock solid. This solidity is what makes this example so
compelling.
A cascade of problems
It's not like I am revealing some hidden truth here. The funny thing about amputees is that this evidence is
obvious to everyone. We have all seen that God ignores the prayers of amputees. This evidence has
been plainly visible for centuries.
Amputees are not the only ones either. For example:
• If someone severs their spinal cord in an accident, that person is paralyzed for life. No amount of
prayer is going to help.
• If someone is born with a congenital defect like a cleft palate, God will not repair it through prayer.
Surgery is the only option.
• A genetic disease like Down Syndrome is the same way -- no amount of prayer is going to fix the
problem.
Or what about this. What if we get down on our knees and pray to God in this way:
Dear God, almighty, all-powerful, all-loving creator of the universe, we pray to you to cure
every case of cancer on this planet tonight. We pray in faith, knowing you will bless us as
you describe in Matthew 7:7, Matthew 17:20, Matthew 21:21, Mark 11:24, John 14:12-14,
Matthew 18:19 and James 5:15-16. In Jesus' name we pray, Amen.
We pray sincerely, knowing that when God answers this completely heartfelt, unselfish, non-materialistic
prayer, it will glorify God and help millions of people in remarkable ways. Will anything happen? Of course
not. If prayers like this worked, Christians would have prayed every disease on the planet into extinction
centuries ago. But if God were to exist, why would he ignore such a worthy prayer? [We will discuss this
particular question in much more detail in chapter 6.]
It is also easy to find corroborating evidence outside the medical arena. At the global level, we see the
evidence every day in many different ways. For example, we all see the millions of children who die every
year from the tragic effects of poverty. Unicef puts it this way:
Every year, more than 10 million children die totally preventable deaths. Some are directly caused
by illness – pneumonia, diarrhoea, measles – and others are affected by indirect causes such as
conflict and HIV/AIDS. Malnutrition, lack of safe water and inadequate sanitation are contributing
factors to more than half of these deaths. [ref]
Jesus is supposed to love all the little children of the world: "Red and yellow, black and white, they are
precious in his sight." So we can ask this straightforward question: If children are precious to Jesus, then
why is he killing 10 million of them every year with abject poverty? That's 27,000 dead kids every day --
more than 1,000 dead children each hour. If Jesus answers prayers as he promises in the Bible, then why
haven't the prayers of billions of people to end world hunger caused Jesus to solve the problem of global
poverty? (We will discuss this situation in more detail in chapter 22.)
Key Point
27,000 children die every day for
preventable reasons like
malnutrition and unsafe drinking
water. If Jesus answers prayers as
he promises in the Bible, then why
haven't the prayers of billions of
people to end world hunger caused
Jesus to solve the problem of global
poverty?
We all know that holes like these exist. It is easy to find them. The holes suggest that something very odd
is going on.
Ambiguity and coincidence
The question, "Why won't God heal amputees?" probes into an extremely interesting aspect of prayer and
exposes it for observation. This aspect of prayer has to do with ambiguity and coincidence.
Imagine that you pray for something -- It does not really matter what it is. Let's imagine that you have
cancer, you pray to God to cure the cancer, and the cancer actually does go away. The interesting thing to
recognize is that there is ambiguity in your cure. God might have miraculously cured the disease, as
many people believe. But God might also be imaginary, and the chemotherapy drugs and surgery are the
things that cured your cancer. Or your body might have cured the cancer itself. The human body does
have a powerful immune system, and this immune system has the ability to eliminate cancer in many
cases. When your tumor dissappeared, it might be a coincidence that you happened to pray. Drugs, an
immune response or a combination of the two might have been the thing the cured you.
How can we determine whether it is God or coincidence that worked the cure? One way is to eliminate
the ambiguity. In a non-ambiguous situation, there is no potential for coincidence. Because there is no
ambiguity, we can actually know whether God is answering the prayer or not.
That is what we are doing when we look at amputees.
When we pray to God to restore an amputated limb, there is only one way for the limb to regenerate. God
must exist and God must answer prayers. What we find is that whenever we create a non-ambiguous
situation like this and look at the results of prayer, prayer never works. God never answers prayers if there
is no possibility of coincidence. We will approach this issue from several different angles in this book, but
Chapters 6 and 7 are particularly important.
The fact that prayers are never answered when the possibility of coincidence is eliminated meshes with
another fact. If we analyse God's responses to prayers using statistical tools, what we find is that there is
never any statistical evidence for prayer. In other words, when we statisically compare prayer to
coincidence for explaining any situation, they are identical. For example, this article points out:
One of the most scientifically rigorous studies yet, published earlier this month, found that the
prayers of a distant congregation did not reduce the major complications or death rate in patients
hospitalized for heart treatments. [ref]
It also says:
A review of 17 past studies of ''distant healing," published in 2003 by a British researcher, found
no significant effect for prayer or other healing methods.
No scientific study has ever found any evidence that prayer works.
There are two possible conclusions to draw from these statistical studies and the situation with amputees:
1. God somehow detects every non-ambiguous situation (like amputees) and every situation where
a statistical study will be done and he "refuses" to answer prayers in those situations.
2. God is imaginary and does not answer prayers at all. In every case where it appears that God
"answers" a prayer, it truly is nothing more than a coincidence.
One problem with the first explanation is that it contradicts what Jesus teaches about prayer in the Bible.
Jesus says that he answers payers. He never says, "don't pray to me unless the situation you are praying
about is ambiguous." Another problem with the first situation is that it is possible to analyse any prayer
with statistics, meaning that God cannot answer any prayer.
In other words, we reach the same conclusion: God is imaginary.
Incredibly Interesting
Whether you are religious or not, you have to admit that what we see here is incredibly interesting.
Despite the fact that billions of people around the world believe in God, in this chapter we have seen a
credible piece of evidence that indicates that God is imaginary.
We also have many other pieces of evidence that indicate the same thing. Let's step back and look at
several of them.
First of all, we have this fact: there is no scientific evidence indicating that God exists. We all know that.
For example, God has never left behind any physical evidence that shows that he is real. None of Jesus'
miracles left behind any physical evidence either. God has never taken over all the TV and radio stations
and broadcast a message to mankind. There is the Bible, but as we will see in Section 2 the Bible has
problems of its own. And so on. So let's agree that there is no empirical evidence showing that God
exists:
• If we had scientific proof of God's existence, we would talk about the "science of God" rather than
"faith in God".
• If we had scientific proof of God's existence, the study of God would be a scientific endeavor
rather than a theological one.
• If we had scientific proof of God's existence, all religious people would be aligning on the God that
had been scientifically proven to exist.
• Etc.
Second, we have the fact that there is no statistical evidence that God answers prayers. No non-fradulent
scientific study has found any evidence that prayer works. For example, if we have a prayer group pray
for certain people in a hospital but not for others, the people who were prayed for don't get better any
faster or live any longer. The prayers have zero statistical effect. We will discuss this in much more detail
in Chapters 6 and 7.
Simply think about the world around you. First, if there were conclusive statistical evidence that God
answers prayers, that would provide scientific evidence that God exists. Second, we can see that there
are not two laws of probability -- one for Chistians who pray and one for everyone else. There is a single
law of probability that applies equally to everyone. Prayers have zero effect in any statistical study.
Key Point
There are not two laws of probability
-- one for people who pray and one
for everyone else. There is a single
law of probability that applies
equally to everyone. Prayers have
zero effect in any statistical study.
Third, we have quite a bit of daily evidence that also suggests that God is imaginary. For example, there
is the paradox of Neva Rogers from Chapter 1. In this case Neva prays openly to God and then gets shot
in the head four times. There is the paradox of Steve Homel's house, where Steve prays and his house is
saved. Unfortunately, the 39 other houses on his street are cursed and burn to the ground. That 97.5%
failure rate for prayer makes it feel like the survival of Steve's house is pure coincidence rather than a
miracle. We see paradoxes like that constantly, and they all point to the fact that God is imaginary.
Fourth, we have the fact that all of the gods of the past truly were imaginary. We all know with certainty
that the Egyptian gods, the Roman gods and the Aztec gods were completely fictitious. Otherwise we
would not have started to worship Jesus. We would be worshiping Ra or Zeus rather than Jesus if Ra or
Zeus were real.
Now we can start adding pieces of new evidence showing us that God does not exist. For example, we
have the case of amputees as described in this chapter. If God is real, it is apparent that there is
something very odd about amputees. God is supposedly answering millions of prayers on earth every
day, but he completely ignores amputated limbs and refuses to restore them. That makes no sense
according to the Standard Model of God and Jesus' statements in the Bible. God's treatment of amputees
is inexplicable if God exists, but makes a lot of sense if God is imaginary.
We have all of this evidence to show that God is imaginary. If we were in a court of law looking at this
question, the judge would quickly rule that God is imaginary. There is no concrete evidence that God is
real and lots of evidence that he is imaginary.
If you are a thoughtful, curious person, the case of amputees really makes you wonder: Is God real or is
he imaginary? Let's try looking at another example and see if it sheds any light on this situation...
Jesus' statement is utterly clear: "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about
itself." Yet health insurance is a physical manifestation of worry. You buy health insurance because you
are worried about your health tomorrow.
The question to ask yourself, therefore, is simple: If you are a believer, why you need health insurance?
Or, for that matter, car insurance, life insurance or home owner's insurance? Why are you worrying about
your health in the future when: A) Jesus has told you specifically not to worry (Matthew 6:34), and B)
Jesus has promised to cure any illness that arises (James 5:15)? In addition, why are you worrying about
money, which is what health insurance is all about, when in Matthew 6:19 Jesus specifically says:
Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves
break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust
destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your
heart will be also.
In Matthew 19:21 Jesus goes even further, telling you to sell everything and give the money to the poor.
Obviously he intended for you to give up your health insurance policy and give its monthly payment to the
poor as well.
And then there is Poverbs 3:5-8:
Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways
acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight. Do not be wise in your own eyes; fear the
Lord and shun evil. This will bring health to your body and nourishment to your bones.
Why do you own a health insurance policy when you are supposed to be putting your trust in the Lord,
who will bring health to your body?
Everything the Bible says is very clear. Why are you ignoring everything that it tells you to do?
Here is a possibility for you to consider. Is it possible that you are completely ignoring the Bible because,
in your heart, you know that God is imaginary? What other reason is there for you, as a believer, to ignore
him so profoundly by owning health insurance?
A hidden God
What may be running through your mind right now is the following: "You do not understand God at all.
God must remain hidden. If he answered our medical prayers, it would destroy faith. That is why we need
doctors." As discussed in the last chapter, this argument has several problems:
• First, as discussed in the previous chapter, there is no evidence that God wants to remain hidden.
God parted the Red Sea. God carved his commandments into stone tablets with his own finger.
God incarnated himself in the form of Jesus, who then performed millions of miracles on earth to
prove that he is God (see Chapter 19 for a complete discussion).
• Second, if God answers any prayer, it would destroy faith. In the case of our Santa Monica
housewife, she has had her faith destroyed. Therefore, under the "hidden God" theory, God can
not answer any prayers without blowing his cover.
• Third, any medical miracle that God performs today is obvious because we have so much
advanced technology. The removal of a cancerous tumor, for example, is obvious because it is
measurable. One month the tumor is visible to everyone on the X-ray, and the next month it is
not. If God eliminated the tumor, then it is openly obvious to everyone who sees the X-ray. There
is nothing "hidden" about removing a tumor.
• Another example is seen in Jeanne's rabies case. Tens of millions of people are aware of the
Jeanna's rabies miracle. Personally, I read about it in a big article in my morning newspaper. That
is pretty obvious. What is hidden about her recovery? God has unmasked himself to tens of
millions of people.
Another common explanation that you might hear is, "God is not a gumball machine. He is under no
obligation to answer prayers. God helps those who help themselves. Therefore, when you get sick you go
to a doctor. That is what God demands that we do." See Understanding the gumball machine for details
on this line of reasoning.
What if, instead of assuming that God is trying to hide or that God is refusing to be a gumball machine, we
assume that God is imaginary?
Understanding reality
Let's simply look at an example. Imagine that the rate of remission for some particularly nasty type of
cancer is 5%. That means that if 20 people get this type of cancer, it is almost always fatal. Only one in 20
of the people who get the disease will survive. Knowing this, you can see the reality:
• 20 people contract the disease
• All of them have read James 5:15, so all of them pray.
• 19 of them die
• The one who lives proclaims, "I prayed to the Lord and the Lord answered my prayers! My
disease is cured! It is a miracle! I KNEW God would answer my prayers!"
• You never hear about the 19 who died. No one ever writes about that in a magazine. "Person
prays, then dies" is not a great headline. And since they are dead, you will never hear from any of
the people who had a deadly experience with prayer.
• Therefore, if you don't look at all the facts around the "answered prayer," and you only hear about
the one out of twenty prayers that succeed, it appears that prayer is successful.
The fact is, people who pray die from this disease at exactly the same rate as people who do not.
We can see the reality of this situation simply by opening our eyes. But we do have to open our eyes --
We have to look at both the successes AND the failures of prayer to see the reality of our world. When we
take a scientific approach and we do look at both sides, we see what is really happening.
When a prayer is answered, what is happening? It is nothing but a coincidence. We know this without a
doubt in two different ways:
• If we look at disease remission rates for praying people vs. non-praying people, and we control
for all variables like income, known risk factors, etc., disease remission rates for the two groups
are identical. People who pray for a cure gain no advantage from prayer.
• We can take 200 sick people. With 100 of them we create a prayer circle and we pray for them.
With the other 100 we do not. Then we look at what happens to those two groups of people. We
find that both groups have the same outcome. The prayed-for group does not recuperate faster or
live longer.
You can pick any disease. If you analyze both the successes AND the failures of prayer, you will find the
same thing. It does not matter how many people pray, how often they pray, how sincere they are or how
devout and worthy the patient is. It simply is a fact that, statistically, God ignores all medical prayers.
Plenty of scientific studies confirm it, as shown in this article:
In the largest study of its kind, researchers found that having people pray for heart bypass
surgery patients had no effect on their recovery. In fact, patients who knew they were being
prayed for had a slightly higher rate of complications.
See also this page.
Yes, there are people who do pray and live, and their stories sound convincing. But the only reason that
they sound convincing is because the millions of people who pray and die never get to tell their stories.
Revisiting Jeanna
What about the miracle of Jeanna Giese discussed in Chapter 5? Didn't God interact with her body and
miraculously cure her rabies because of her gigantic prayer circle? How did that work? It worked
because, if Jeanna had died, the story of her prayer circle never would have appeared in the paper.
People do assemble gigantic prayer circles that fail. It happens all the time. But you never hear about
them, so it appears that prayer circles always work.
How can we know, for sure, that Jeanna's prayer circle was a coincidence? Let's assume that it was
Jeanna's prayer circle that did cure her. Millions of people prayed, God heard the prayer and God actually
did cure Jeanna. In that case, the prayer circle missed an incredible opportunity. What the prayer circle
prayed was this:
Dear God, Please cure Jeanna, Amen.
What they could have prayed is this:
Dear God, Please eliminate the disease of rabies worldwide, Amen.
This second prayer would have cured Jeanna, and it would have also helped countless other people and
animals around the world. It would have ensured that no one, ever again, would be afflicted with rabies.
Even if you believe in God, I think we can agree that the second prayer would not work. We know that
with certainty. It is obvious from the evidence that we see all around us. If the second prayer ever worked,
then people would have prayed every disease into extinction centuries ago.
Why doesn't the second prayer work? If God actually did answer Jeanna's prayer, why would he not
answer the broader prayer as well? I believe that we all know the answer to that question, even if many of
us are not willing to admit it consciously. The second prayer does not work because the first one did not
work either. The simple fact is that God does not answer medical prayers and Jeanna's cure was a
coincidence. The statistics prove it every time.
The evidence all around us
If prayer worked as promised by Mark 11:24 and James 5:15, people would not need doctors. We could
get down on our knees and pray to God in this way:
Dear God, almighty, all-powerful, all-loving creator of the universe, we pray to you to cure
every case of cancer on this planet tonight. We pray in faith, knowing you will bless us as
you describe in Matthew 7:7, Matthew 17:20, Matthew 21:21, Mark 11:24, John 14:12-14,
Matthew 18:19 and James 5:15-16. In Jesus' name we pray, Amen.
Instead, what we see in our world is this:
• As a nation, the people of America are spending approximately two trillion dollars on health care
every year. None of that money would need to be spent if God truly answered prayers as he
promises in James 5:15.
• Pharmaceutical companies are making hundreds of billions of dollars selling thousands of drugs
and medications to handle medical problems. If God truly answered prayers, we would not need
any of those drugs.
• In every city there are huge hospitals filled with patients. If God truly answered prayers, we would
not need any of these hospitals.
• If you look at both the successes AND the failures of prayer, statistical studies show no benefit
from prayer.
• And everyone you know has health insurance, including you.
In other words, what your common sense tells you, and what statistical analysis of disease and prayer
tells you, and what the overwhelming evidence in the world all around us tells you, and what your own
personal health insurance policy tells you, is that God does not answer medical prayers.
If prayer did work, then both your hospital and your insurance company would have a Department of
Prayer, and they would have employees praying feverishly day and night. Hospitals and insurance
companies want to save lives and save money just as badly as you do. If prayer worked, corporations
would be using it every day without hesitation.
The response to all of this evidence often is, "You are wrong! God can't answer my prayers. If he did, it
would take away my free will to believe in him! God must remain hidden." This is the same thing as
saying, "God does not answer prayers." If God cannot answer your prayers because it would take away
your free will, then God cannot answer any prayers.
You can elicit this response quite easily, as seen in the following conversation:
Chris: Pray to God and he will answer your prayers!
Norm: OK, let's pray together for God to do something concrete right now.
Chris: Oh, now, we can't do that! That would take away our faith in God. God cannot prove that
he exists.
Norm: That means God can answer none of your prayers. Any prayer he answers will prove his
existence.
Chris: That is not true. God answers millions of prayers every day!
Norm: Then let's pray for him to answer a prayer right now.
Chris: No, No, we cannot do that.
How can it be that God is answering millions of prayers, yet it is impossible for God to answer a prayer? It
is because all of those "answered prayers" are simply coincidences. Let's look at another example and
you will see what I mean...
Key Point
In Matthew 17:20 Jesus promises
that you can move mountains and
that "nothing will be impossible for
you." Unfortunately, the reality is that
no one can move mountains, and
thousands of things will be
impossible for you. Not even Jesus
could move a mountain.
A thoughtful person might say, "You are completely missing the point. Coal companies move mountains.
Scientists create artificial limbs for amputees. A crane can make a car levitate. These human
accomplishments are divinely inspired. God acts on this world through men."
There are three problems with this argument. In Matthew 21:21 Jesus says:
I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the
fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be
done. If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."
Jesus does not say, "You will have to hire thousands of people, spend a billion dollars on heavy
equipment and then work 24 hours a day for 20 years to move this mountain into the sea, and it will be
done." He says, "You can say, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be done." The mountain actually
moves itself in Jesus' statement.
The second problem is that the vast majority of people do not have a billion dollars. Therefore, Jesus
statement is false even if he had earth-moving machinery in mind.
The third problem is that, if these human accomplishments are "divinely inspired," then there is no reason
why God did not "divinely inspire" them 4,000 years ago. For example, why didn't God "divinely inspire" a
smallpox vaccine in 2000 BCE, rather than waiting until 1950? Why would an all-loving God want tens of
millions of people to suffer and die from smallpox over the last 4,000 years, and then suddenly decide to
"divinely inspire" a cure in the twentieth century? If that explanation is true, then God is clearly a sadist.
Only a sadist would cause the suffering of smallpox for thousands of years when he had a "divinely
inspired" cure waiting in the wings. Why would we want to worship a sadist?
The reason why we call them human accomplishments is because they are human accomplishments.
God has nothing to do with them. If God is divinely inspiring them, then the headline in the paper should
never be, "Scientist discovers transparent aluminum." It should always be, "God divinely inspires scientist
to discover transparent aluminum." In that case, you have to wonder why God is so unfair in his
distribution of inspirations. You also have to wonder why we pay the scientist, since quite clearly he didn't
do anything. And why did the scientist need to go to college?
Explaining prayer
The fascinating thing about impossible prayers is that they allow us to see what is actually happening
when a person says, "God answered my prayer."
Let's imagine that a person prays for something that is impossible, no matter what it is. For example, a
person prays that Mt. Everest fly to New Jersey. Obviously this is not going to happen, despite all of
Jesus' promises. So the religious person prays and nothing happens.
How does the religious person rationalize the prayer's failure? The person will rationalize the unanswered
prayer by saying, "it is not part of God's plan." Is this rationalization true? No - of course not. The fact is
that this event is impossible, Jesus lied and God is imaginary. That is why no impossible prayer will ever
be answered.
Now let's look a different situation. A person prays for something that is possible. For example, a person
prays to win a church raffle, and he actually does win. What is happening here is nothing more than a
coincidence. Here are the steps that led to the coincidence:
• The event in question must be possible. It has to have some non-zero probability of happening.
• Then it does in fact happen.
• A person, coincidentally, happens to pray.
That coincidence is an "answered prayer." How can we prove that this "answered prayer" is a
coincidence? We simply look at all the losers. If there were a million people entered in the raffle, then
999,999 people lost. Since it was a church raffle, they all are believers and they all prayed. That's 999,999
unanswered prayers vs. 1 answered prayer. It is a terrible ratio. As soon as we look at the successes AND
the failures of prayer, it is obvious what is actually going on. "answered prayers" are coincidences every
time.
What we are seeing here is important. There are two easy ways to unmask the illusion of prayer:
1. Ask a believer to pray for something concrete that is impossible. According to the Bible and the
Standard Model of God, God should be answering impossible prayers all the time. However, what
we will find is that every impossible prayer goes unanswered:
○ This explains why God ignores the prayers of amputees.
○ This explains why no one can move a mountain.
○ This explains why, if Jeanna's prayer circle had prayed that God completely eliminate
rabies worldwide, nothing would happen.
○ And so on...
2. Ask a believer to pray for something that is possible, and then simply count both the successes
AND the failures of the prayer. As soon as we count both sides, we can statistically analyze the
situation and see that "answered prayers" are nothing but coincidences. The statistics prove it
every time:
○ This explains why non-believers win lotteries just as often as believers do.
○ This explains why believers die of cancer as often as non-believers do.
○ This explains why believers need health insurance just like non-believers do.
○ And so on...
Even if you are a devout believer, you should be starting to see a pattern here. God does not answer the
prayers of amputees. If he did, we would see amputees regenerating their severed limbs on a daily basis.
God does not answer medical prayers. If he did, you would not need health insurance. God does not
answer impossible prayers. If he did, people could actually move mountains like Jesus promises.
If you are a believer, here is the question that you must seriously consider: Is it possible that God is
imaginary? Is this the reason why God is not answering all of these different kinds of prayers? The
advantage of this explanation is that it perfectly fits the data that we see in our world. No rationalizations,
hand waving, explanations or excuses are required. Let's look at another example that will further
reinforce this line of reasoning....
God's Ratio
Mary kills 20,000 people in the mud
slide but answers the prayers of
one. That's a 99.995% failure rate
for prayers. It should prove to you
conclusively that neither Mary nor
God answer prayers.
• "It was the most amazing flood in the history of Honduras. An immense wall of mud cascaded
down the mountain and through our city, killing 20,000 people. I was caught in the tide of sludge
and sucked deep into the bowels of the torrent. In just a few seconds I would drown and die in a
sea of mud. But I prayed to the Virgin Mary, and not one second later my head popped to the
surface, I was able to grab a nearby branch and pull myself out. The virgin Mary answered my
prayers!"
• "There is no way to explain the miracle that happened next. I said a quick prayer before my car
slammed into and then underneath the truck in front of me. As if by magic, the entire car crumpled
like a wad of paper -- the entire car, except for the passenger area where we were sitting! God
heard and answered my prayers by using his power to protect the interior of the car and save our
lives!"
• "I was on a business trip. I got drunk and had a one night stand with a stranger. It is totally unlike
me, but it happened. In the morning I realized what I had done and I was wracked with guilt. I got
down on my knees and said a very sincere prayer: "Dear God, please don't let me have AIDS. I
cannot die of AIDS. The embarrassment and pain would be too much for my spouse, my children
and my parents. It only happened one time, and I promise that it will never happen again. If you
will grant me this prayer, I will do ANYTHING that you ask. Amen." I waited three months and I
was a nervous wreck. I went to my doctor to get tested and I was clean. The relief that I felt was
incredible, like a huge burden being lifted from my soul. God personally answered this prayer for
me!"
Believers seem to love these stories. We hear miraculous personal testimonies like these all the time.
They are supposed to show the "power of prayer" and the "love of God" in our world today.
However, what I would ask you to consider is both sides of the story. Look at both the successes AND the
failures of prayer, and what we see is extremely uncomfortable. All of them display God's ratio as
described in Chapter 2. If God let millions of people die in the Holocaust, but then "heard the prayers" of
one person and saved him, what sort of God is that? To say that God killed millions and saved one is a
terrible ratio. God would have to be a monster. Killing millions of people is an unimaginable atrocity.
Believers seem to be completely comfortable with the sort of schizophrenia shown here. They are happy
about the one person saved from the Holocaust by a prayer -- they actually celebrate his story and tell it
with glee. They do not seem to care that, if it was God saving the one, then it must also have been God
who killed the millions of others by completely ignoring their prayers.
With your common sense you can examine all of these situations and see what actually happened by
looking at both sides of the story:
God's Ratio
God kills millions in the Holocaust
but answers the prayers of one.
That's a 99.99998% failure rate for
prayers. It should prove to you
conclusively that God does not
answer prayers.
• In the case of the Holocaust survivor, it was not a "miracle" that saved him. To believe that is to
believe that God killed millions of others by specifically withholding his blessings from them. What
actually happened was dumb luck and coincidence.
• In the case of the mudslide, do you believe that Mary heard the prayers of one person while
purposefully ignoring the prayers of 20,000 others and killing all of them? Of course not -- that is
ridiculous. This man's survival involves luck and coincidence as well. If the man's story were
actually true, it would make Mary a capricious demon guilty of mass murder.
• In the case of the car, it is not a miracle that the passenger compartment remained intact -- that is
how the car is designed. It is called a passenger safety cage. God had absolutely nothing to do
with it. In the United States, 40,000 people die every year in car accidents. If God actually saved
this driver, then it is an atrocity that God let the other 40,000 people die by ignoring their prayers.
• In the case of the AIDS survivor, God did not answer the prayer. Tens of millions of people have
died of AIDS. To believe that God answered the prayer is to also to believe that God killed tens of
millions of other praying people. What actually happened is random luck. Despite all the media
attention AIDS gets, in the United States less than one percent of the sexually active adult
population has the HIV virus. [ref] And it is not guaranteed that HIV will be transmitted during
every sexual encounter. So the odds are excellent that, after one sexual encounter, the person
will not get AIDS. It does not matter whether the person prayed or not -- it was simply luck
through the normal laws of probability.
The unconscionable arrogance of the blessed
Let's assume that a tremendous hurricane like Hurricane Katrina hits Louisiana. It does an incredible
amount of damage, destroying hundreds of thousands of homes, killing thousands of people and wiping
entire towns off the map.
Your sister, a devout believer, happens to live in Louisiana, and a week later when cell phone service is
restored she gives you a call. The first words out of her mouth are:
"Oh, God has blessed us so much this week! We prayed all through the storm, and he answered
our prayers. The next town over was completely decimated, but our house is still standing. We
are so blessed! God answered our prayers!"
What I would like you to do is step back for a moment, look at this statement, and think about the
remarkable arrogance that it represents. What your sister is saying is this, "I am so special and God loves
ME so much that God heard MY prayers and personally helped ME. All those millions of other people who
God cursed -- obviously God hates THEM. I am cool in the eyes of God, and all those other wretched
people out there are, obviously, uncool in the eyes of God. Otherwise he would have helped them just like
he helped ME."
For a beliver to talk about his or her blessings in a huge natural disaster like Katrina is to implicitly ignore
the damage and suffering that are plainly visible for all to see. If God "blessed" one, while completely
ignoring millions of other believers caught in exactly the same predicament, it says nothing about
blessings. It says that God is an insane demon. For anyone to believe that God personally helped her
while at the same time wreaking havoc on millions of others is a supreme arrogance. Yet believers seem
to be completely comfortable with this arrogance.
The truth of the matter is easy to see if you will take the time to look at both sides of the equation. The
hurricane hit, and God neither blessed nor cursed anyone. The hurricane did its damage according to the
laws of nature. The fact that one house is undamaged while thousands of others are swept into the sea is
not a blessing. It is random luck, nothing more.
When you hear people discussing their personal experiences with the power of prayer, simply listen to the
stories they tell and ask to hear both sides. Look for God's Ratio. In every case, the prayer's power can
be explained by coincidence, luck, normal probabilities, the laws of physics, human design or some other
normal, non-miraculous process. And God's Ratio will be terrible, just as it was on Steve Homel's street.
Here are ten passages from the Bible that clearly demonstrate God's position on slavery:
Genesis chapter 17, verse 12:
And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your
generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of
thy seed. He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be
circumcised.
In this passage God understands that people buy other people and, quite obviously, is comfortable with
the concept. God wants slaves circumcised in the same way as non-slaves.
Exodus chapter 12 verse 43:
The Lord said to Moses and Aaron, "These are the regulations for the Passover: No foreigner is
to eat of it. Any slave you have bought may eat of it after you have circumcised him, but a
temporary resident and a hired worker may not eat of it.
God again shows that he is completely comfortable with the concept of slavery and singles out slaves for
special treatment.
Exodus Chapter 21, verse 1:
Now these are the ordinances which you shall set before them. When you buy a Hebrew slave,
he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. If he comes in single,
he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master
gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her
master's and he shall go out alone. But if the slave plainly says, 'I love my master, my wife, and
my children; I will not go out free,' then his master shall bring him to God, and he shall bring him
to the door or the doorpost; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall
serve him for life.
Here God describes how to become a slave for life, and shows that it is completely acceptable to
separate slaves from their families. God also shows that he completely endorses the branding of slaves
through mutilation.
Exodus Chapter 21, verse 20:
If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must
be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is
his property.
Not only does God condone slavery, but he is also completely comfortable with the concept of beating
your slaves, as long as you don't kill them.
Exodus Chapter 21, verse 32:
If the bull gores a male or female slave, the owner must pay thirty shekels of silver to the master
of the slave, and the bull must be stoned.
Not only does God condone slavery, but here God places a value on slaves -- 30 shekels of silver. Note
that God is not sophisticated enough to understand the concept of inflation. It is now 3,000 years later,
and a gored slave is still worth 30 shekels of silver according to God's word.
Leviticus Chapter 22, verse 10:
No one outside a priest's family may eat the sacred offering, nor may the guest of a priest or his
hired worker eat it. But if a priest buys a slave with money, or if a slave is born in his household,
that slave may eat his food.
Here God shows that the children of slaves are slaves themselves, and that he is completely happy with
that concept.
Leviticus Chapter 25, verse 44:
Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy
slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of
their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your
children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your
fellow Israelites ruthlessly.
Here God states where you may purchase your slaves, and clearly specifies that slaves are property to
be bought, sold and handed down.
Luke, Chapter 7, verse 2:
Now a centurion had a slave who was dear to him, who was sick and at the point of death. When
he heard of Jesus, he sent to him elders of the Jews, asking him to come and heal his slave. And
when they came to Jesus, they besought him earnestly, saying, "He is worthy to have you do this
for him, for he loves our nation, and he built us our synagogue." And Jesus went with them. When
he was not far from the house, the centurion sent friends to him, saying to him, "Lord, do not
trouble yourself, for I am not worthy to have you come under my roof; therefore I did not presume
to come to you. But say the word, and let my servant be healed. For I am a man set under
authority, with soldiers under me: and I say to one, 'Go,' and he goes; and to another, 'Come,' and
he comes; and to my slave, 'Do this,' and he does it." When Jesus heard this he marveled at him,
and turned and said to the multitude that followed him, "I tell you, not even in Israel have I found
such faith." And when those who had been sent returned to the house, they found the slave well.
Here Jesus shows that he is completely comfortable with the concept of slavery. Jesus heals the slave
without any thought of freeing the slave or admonishing the slave's owner.
Colossians, chapter 3, verse 22:
Slaves, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters, not with eyeservice, as men-
pleasers, but in singleness of heart, fearing the Lord. Whatever your task, work heartily...
Did God mean it?
Many Christians will try to argue that
God does not intend for us to keep
slaves today. That simply is not true.
As you can see, both Jesus and the
New Testament are strong
advocates of slavery. In Isaiah 40:8
God says, "The grass withers, the
flower fades; but the word of our
God will stand for ever." In the
twenty first century, God and the
Bible fully intend for us to have
slaves.
Here God shows that he is in complete acceptance of a slave's position, and encourages slaves to work
hard. This sentiment is repeated in Titus, chapter 2 verse 9:
Bid slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect; they are not
to be refractory, nor to pilfer, but to show entire and true fidelity.
Once again God shows that he is quite enamored of slavery.
God loves slavery
If the Bible is written by God, and these are the words of the Lord, then you can come to only one
possible conclusion: God is an impressive advocate of slavery and is fully supportive of the concept.
If you are a Christian, I realize that what I am about to suggest is uncomfortable. However, it is crucial to
the conversation that we are having in this book. What I wish to suggest to you is that these pro-slavery
passages in the Bible provide all the evidence that we need to prove that God did not write the Bible.
Simply put: there is no way that an all-loving God would also be a staunch supporter of slavery.
What does your common sense tell you about God? Doesn't it seem that an all-loving, just God would
think of slavery as an abomination just like any normal human being does? If any sort of all-knowing, all-
loving God had written the Bible, shouldn't the Bible say, "Slavery is wrong -- you may have no slaves"?
Shouldn't one of the Commandments say, "thou shalt not enslave"?
As you can see, these slavery passages present us with a paradox:
• On the one hand, we all know that slavery is an outrage and a moral abomination. As a result,
slavery is now completely illegal throughout the developed world.
• On the other hand, the creator of the universe states in writing that slavery is perfectly
acceptable. Beating your slaves is fine. Enslaving children is fine. Separating slave families is
fine. According to the Bible, we should all be practicing slavery today.
The intensity of this paradox is remarkable.
The importance of the Bible
Most people in the United States are Christians, and therefore in the United States we take the Bible
completely for granted. It is like gravity or the morning sunrise -- the Bible is there all the time, so you
don't even think about it.
Because we take it for granted, we tend to forget just how important the Bible is to our lives. Let me give
you three examples of just how significant this book is.
First of all, think about Jesus. Everyone in the United States has heard of Jesus. We all know that Jesus
was born on Christmas. We know that Jesus died on the Cross and was resurrected three days later. We
know that God loved the world so much that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him
shall not perish but have eternal life (John 3:16). And so on. How do we know all of that? Because of the
Bible. If the Bible did not exist, no one would have ever heard of Jesus. Without the Bible there would be
no Christianity.
Second, there are the Ten Commandments. According to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, "Ninety-
nine percent of Americans believe in the ten commandments." [ref] Scalia has also pointed out that the
Ten Commandments are "a symbol of the fact that government derives its authority from God." [ref]
Where do the Ten Commandments come from? The Bible. And because they come from the Bible, we
assume they come from God. The Bible is God's word.
Key Point
According to Supreme Court Justice
Antonin Scalia, "Ninety-nine percent
of Americans believe in the ten
commandments." [ref] Scalia has
also pointed out that the Ten
Commandments are "a symbol of
the fact that government derives its
authority from God." [ref]
Third, think about your soul. Chances are that you believe that you have a soul. In addition you probably
believe that, when you die, your soul lives on forever. You also believe that your soul goes either to
heaven or hell. Where did those ideas come from? They come from the Bible. The Bible is the place in
our culture that tells us about heaven and hell. Without the Bible, these concepts would not exist. The
whole notion of "everlasting life" is based on the Bible.
It really is quite amazing when you think about it. We take Jesus, the Ten Commandments, heaven and
hell completely for granted. Nearly every person in America has heard of them, and few would question
their existence. The place where these core concepts originate is the Bible. Without the Bible, these
concepts would not exist. The Bible has a gigantic impact on the lives of people around the world. The
only reason it has this impact is because Christians believe that God is the author.
Let's say that the Bible were not the word of God. Imagine that it was written by a group of random men
2,000 or 3,000 years ago and God had nothing to do with it. Would you believe in heaven and hell?
Would you believe in the Ten Commandments? Would you believe in Jesus? No. Of course not. If
primitive men wrote the Bible rather than God, no one would care about the Bible. Homer was a primitive
man, and 3,000 or so years ago he wrote a book called "The Odyssey." In this book Homer talks about a
Cyclops, a goddess named Athena and a place called Hades, along with many other things. Do we
believe any of it? Of course not -- it was a fanciful story written by a man. We ignore the Odyssey in our
daily lives because the author was human.
The Bible and Slavery
So now we have opened the Bible and looked at it, and inside the Bible -- God's word -- we have found
ten extremely clear and outrageous passages about slavery. What these passages indicate, without any
question, is that the Bible supports slavery. The Bible thinks that slavery is great. According to the Bible
you are free to buy slaves and you are free to beat your slaves. There is no denying that, in the Bible,
slavery is perfectly acceptable.
If you are a Christian, you automatically and unquestioningly believe in Jesus, the Ten Commandments,
heaven and hell. Why? Because you believe that the Bible came from God.
The problem is that if you support the Ten Commandments and believe in Jesus, you must also support
slavery. The same God and the same Bible that tells us about the Ten Commandments and Jesus is also
telling us about slavery.
Take a moment right now to ask yourself this simple question: Do you believe in slavery? Having read
how God feels about slavery in the Bible, do you now believe that in America and around the world we
should repeal all anti-slavery laws and re-open the slave trade? If you are Christian, what choice do you
have? God fully advocates slavery in the Bible, and you believe the word of God.
If you are going to believe that the Ten Commandments came from God because they are in God's Bible,
then you must also believe that all of these slavery passages came from God. You, Justice Scalia and
everyone else who believes that God wrote the Bible should be perfectly comfortable with the slave trade.
An all-or-nothing book
Key Point
If you are going to believe that the
Ten Commandments came from
God because they are in God's
Bible, then you must also believe
that all of these slavery passages
came from God as well. Therefore
you, Justice Scalia and everyone
else who believes that God wrote
the Bible should be perfectly
comfortable with the slave trade.
Christians must believe that all the
laws that forbid slavery in the United
States defy God's word, and we
should be actively working to repeal
them.
If you do not believe that God wrote the slavery passages in the Bible, then the obvious question to ask
yourself is this: How can you possibly know which parts came from God and which parts were inserted by
primitive men? How can you pick and choose like that? You have absolutely no way to know whether the
slavery passages came from God or primitive men.
It is when you start thinking about the Bible in this way that you understand something very important
about the Bible. Either the entire Bible really is God's Word, or the entire Bible was written by primitive
men with absolutely no input from God. Here is the reason for this very strong dividing line:
If part of the Bible came from God and part came from primitive men, how can you possibly know
which is which? How do you know if Jesus really is resurrected, or if that's just a make-believe
story inserted by primitive men? How do you know if God wrote the Ten Commandments or not?
If any part of the Bible has been polluted by primitive men, you have to reject the whole thing.
There is no way to know who wrote what, so the entire book is invalid.
There really is no middle ground. The Bible has to be an all-or-nothing book. Either the entire Bible came
from God, or none of it did.
Drawing a conclusion
With this all-or-nothing reality about the Bible now understood, you can see that there are only two
possible explanations for the slavery passages in the Bible:
• The Bible is right, and God loves slavery. The entire Bible is God's word, so these slavery
passages must be God's word too. The laws in the United States and other modern nations that
make slavery illegal defy God's word. Justice Scalia should be promoting slavery in exactly the
same way that he promotes the Ten Commandments.
• The Bible condones slavery because the Bible was written by slave-owning men, not by God.
Chances are that you have a problem with the first explanation. God would not champion the abomination
that is slavery. We all know that.
Therefore, what you are left with is the second explanation.
Here is the thing that I would like to help you understand: You, as a rational human being, know that
slavery is wrong. You know it. That is why every single developed nation in the world has made slavery
completely illegal. Human beings make slavery illegal, in direct defiance of God's word, because we all
know with complete certainty that slavery is wrong (see also Chapter 28). If God actually had anything to
do with the Bible, then the eleventh commandment would be, "Thou shalt not enslave."
What does your common sense now tell you about a Bible that supports slavery in both the Old and the
New Testaments? Given the fact that the Bible clearly condones slavery, and given the fact that the Bible
is an all-or-nothing book, does it make more sense for you to believe that God wrote the Bible, or that
primitive men wrote the Bible without any input from God? Be honest with yourself. Make a choice, and
then let's look at another example that is just as outrageous...
The Aztecs in Mexico would take a virgin to the top of a pyramid, slice her still-beating heart out of her
chest and eat it -- or whatever -- and we all know that their practices were insane and barbaric beyond
belief. [ref] The death of the virgin did absolutely nothing to improve crop yield or rainfall, nor did it
"appease" the Aztec gods (since those gods were completely imaginary). It is impossible to understand
why the Aztecs would do something so bizarre and disgusting. Was it mass delusion? Rampant
superstition taken to the Nth degree? Total desperation? A horrific combination? There is no way to know,
but we do know that the behavior of the Aztecs was insane.
Any normal person is disgusted by religious sacrifice, and you would imagine that God is too. Ritual
slaughter like this has nothing to do with an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving, prayer-answering creator
of the universe. The idea of killing an animal, splattering its blood about and then burning its flesh is, quite
obviously, absurd and ridiculous. God would have nothing to do with animal sacrifice.
But then we examine the Bible -- the holy word of God and the single authoritative source of all
information about Jesus -- and find passages like these:
Leviticus Chapter 1
The Lord called to Moses and spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting. He said, "Speak to the
Israelites and say to them: 'When any of you brings an offering to the Lord , bring as your offering
an animal from either the herd or the flock.
"If the offering is a burnt offering from the herd, he is to offer a male without defect. He must
present it at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting so that it will be acceptable to the Lord . He is to
lay his hand on the head of the burnt offering, and it will be accepted on his behalf to make
atonement for him. He is to slaughter the young bull before the Lord , and then Aaron's sons the
priests shall bring the blood and sprinkle it against the altar on all sides at the entrance to the Tent
of Meeting. He is to skin the burnt offering and cut it into pieces. The sons of Aaron the priest are
to put fire on the altar and arrange wood on the fire. Then Aaron's sons the priests shall arrange
the pieces, including the head and the fat, on the burning wood that is on the altar. He is to wash
the inner parts and the legs with water, and the priest is to burn all of it on the altar. It is a burnt
offering, an offering made by fire, an aroma pleasing to the Lord .
"If the offering is a burnt offering from the flock, from either the sheep or the goats, he is to offer a
male without defect. He is to slaughter it at the north side of the altar before the Lord , and
Aaron's sons the priests shall sprinkle its blood against the altar on all sides. He is to cut it into
pieces, and the priest shall arrange them, including the head and the fat, on the burning wood
that is on the altar. He is to wash the inner parts and the legs with water, and the priest is to bring
all of it and burn it on the altar. It is a burnt offering, an offering made by fire, an aroma pleasing to
the Lord .
"If the offering to the Lord is a burnt offering of birds, he is to offer a dove or a young pigeon. The
priest shall bring it to the altar, wring off the head and burn it on the altar; its blood shall be
drained out on the side of the altar. He is to remove the crop with its contents and throw it to the
east side of the altar, where the ashes are. He shall tear it open by the wings, not severing it
completely, and then the priest shall burn it on the wood that is on the fire on the altar. It is a burnt
offering, an offering made by fire, an aroma pleasing to the Lord .
Burning flesh is an aroma pleasing to the Lord? Does this make any sense to you as a rational human
being?
Here is another example:
Leviticus Chapter 5
'If a person sins because he does not speak up when he hears a public charge to testify
regarding something he has seen or learned about, he will be held responsible.
'Or if a person touches anything ceremonially unclean-whether the carcasses of unclean wild
animals or of unclean livestock or of unclean creatures that move along the ground-even though
he is unaware of it, he has become unclean and is guilty.
'Or if he touches human uncleanness-anything that would make him unclean-even though he is
unaware of it, when he learns of it he will be guilty.
'Or if a person thoughtlessly takes an oath to do anything, whether good or evil-in any matter one
might carelessly swear about-even though he is unaware of it, in any case when he learns of it he
will be guilty.
'When anyone is guilty in any of these ways, he must confess in what way he has sinned and, as
a penalty for the sin he has committed, he must bring to the Lord a female lamb or goat from the
flock as a sin offering; and the priest shall make atonement for him for his sin.
'If he cannot afford a lamb, he is to bring two doves or two young pigeons to the Lord as a penalty
for his sin-one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. He is to bring them to the priest,
who shall first offer the one for the sin offering. He is to wring its head from its neck, not severing
it completely, and is to sprinkle some of the blood of the sin offering against the side of the altar;
the rest of the blood must be drained out at the base of the altar. It is a sin offering. The priest
shall then offer the other as a burnt offering in the prescribed way and make atonement for him
for the sin he has committed, and he will be forgiven.
You are an intelligent human being, so think this through. Here is the logic expressed in Leviticus chapter
5:
"Today I accidentally touched something that was 'ceremonially unclean,' and I didn't know about
it at the time, but fortunately a priest brought it to my attention, and I am guilty. Now, I can't afford
a lamb. But I can get two young pigeons for a shekel over at Saul's bird emporium, and then I can
take them both to the priest. He will wring the head from the neck of one of them, but not sever it
completely. And he will sprinkle the blood, and drain the rest. And then the priest will burn the
other pigeon. Then I am forgiven. Thank God!"
What does your common sense tell you about this? It probably tells you that it is impossible to imagine an
all-loving, all-knowing God demanding this, and you are correct.
Here is another example:
Leviticus Chapter 7, The priest's share
The Lord said to Moses, "Say to the Israelites: 'Anyone who brings a fellowship offering to the
Lord is to bring part of it as his sacrifice to the Lord . With his own hands he is to bring the offering
made to the Lord by fire; he is to bring the fat, together with the breast, and wave the breast
before the Lord as a wave offering. The priest shall burn the fat on the altar, but the breast
belongs to Aaron and his sons. You are to give the right thigh of your fellowship offerings to the
priest as a contribution. The son of Aaron who offers the blood and the fat of the fellowship
offering shall have the right thigh as his share. From the fellowship offerings of the Israelites, I
have taken the breast that is waved and the thigh that is presented and have given them to Aaron
the priest and his sons as their regular share from the Israelites.' "
Does it seem more likely that God commanded this, or that primitive men looking for the "priest's share"
wrote this?
Here is another example:
Leviticus Chapter 9
[Moses] then presented the other ram, the ram for the ordination, and Aaron and his sons laid
their hands on its head. Moses slaughtered the ram and took some of its blood and put it on the
lobe of Aaron's right ear, on the thumb of his right hand and on the big toe of his right foot. Moses
also brought Aaron's sons forward and put some of the blood on the lobes of their right ears, on
the thumbs of their right hands and on the big toes of their right feet. Then he sprinkled blood
against the altar on all sides. He took the fat, the fat tail, all the fat around the inner parts, the
covering of the liver, both kidneys and their fat and the right thigh.
Then from the basket of bread made without yeast, which was before the Lord, he took a cake of
bread, and one made with oil, and a wafer; he put these on the fat portions and on the right thigh.
He put all these in the hands of Aaron and his sons and waved them before the Lord as a wave
offering. Then Moses took them from their hands and burned them on the altar on top of the burnt
offering as an ordination offering, a pleasing aroma, an offering made to the Lord by fire. He also
took the breast-Moses' share of the ordination ram-and waved it before the Lord as a wave
offering, as the Lord commanded Moses.
We have Moses putting the blood of a freshly slaughtered animal on the ears, thumbs and toes of other
people.
What does your common sense tell you about these passages?
When looking at passages like these in the Bible, everyone can see the problem. Animal sacrifice is
abhorrent, and it has nothing to do with an all-knowing and all-loving God.
For most people, no further evidence is needed. It is obvious that primitive men wrote the Bible, not God.
God would have nothing to do with the Bible if these passages are in it, and the Bible is an all-or-nothing
book (see Chapter 13 for details). No all-powerful, all-loving God wants people to kill animals, splatter
their blood, cut them up into pieces, arrange the pieces on an altar and burn them so that he can "smell
the pleasing aroma." There is no difference between the Bible's book of Leviticus and the insanity of the
Aztecs.
Therefore, in the same way that the slavery passages in the previous chapter prove that God did not write
the Bible, these animal sacrifice passages prove that God did not write the Bible. The whole notion of an
all-knowing, all-powerful God purposefully writing this material is patently absurd to any rational human
being.
Key Point
All of this material about animal
sacrifice is found in the Old
Testament of the Bible. This is the
same place where we find the Ten
Commandments. Only about 20
pages separate Exodus chapter 20
-- the source of the Ten
Commandments -- from Leviticus
Chapter 1.
Keep in mind that all of this material about animal sacrifice is found in the Old Testament of the Bible. This
is the same place where we find the Ten Commandments. Only about 20 pages separate Exodus chapter
20 -- the source of the Ten Commandments -- from Leviticus Chapter 1.
Human Sacrifice
If you are a Christian, how do you handle these passages in the Bible? A Christian has a problem,
because it is hard to put faith in a book that harbors numerous passages where God demands animal
sacrifice. As with the slavery problem discussed in the previous chapter, there are two possible
approaches for a Christian:
1. Pretend that the passages are not there and change the subject when they are mentioned.
2. Try to develop some sort of highly convoluted rationalization on God's behalf to explain the
passages.
Christians tend to take the latter approach, and then they do something quite unexpected. You would
imagine that Christians would try to distance themselves as far as possible from animal sacrifice. But they
do not.
Suprisingly, many Christians embrace these parts of the Bible. Only in the context of this abhorent
practice does the horrific death of Jesus on the cross (as portrayed in the movie The Passion of the
Christ) make even a modicum of sense. For Christians, the human race had to actually move into the
realm of human sacrifice to finally appease their God. Senselessly killing animals was not sufficient.
According to the Christian faith, Jesus is the human sacrifice that satisfied God.
For example, here is something that a Christian minister might say:
If you read all those dry regulations for sin sacrifices in Leviticus and if you read about the
requirements for the Passover lamb, you will realize that Jesus is the perfect sacrifice for sin. He
is the first-born son, not of a sheep or a goat, but of God. He is innocent of all sin, He volunteers
of His own free will—that is, He was convicted only by His own confession. He freely submitted to
His Father’s will. He is, by the Levitical code, a perfect sacrifice, and therefore He perfectly
removes all sin. He meets all the requirements for a fellowship offering, and thus places us in
fellowship with God. Since even on the cross, none of His bones were broken, He also meets all
the requirements for a Passover lamb, whose blood protects us from the angel of death, thus He
prepares us for the Resurrection.[ref]
As uncomfortable as this sounds, this is the core belief of the Christian church. Christ had to die as a
human sacrifice for our sins to appease the "God" of Leviticus. The most prominent religion on this planet,
practiced by two billion people, has human sacrifice as its central tenet.
When we read about animal sacrifice in the Old Testament, what we discover is a God who must be
insane. No rational human being can accept that an all-loving, all-knowing, all-powerful God could
possibly support animal sacrifice.
But then we turn to the New Testament and find that God has moved beyond insanity. God becomes a
monstrous absurdity who demands human sacrifice. In other words, Christians are dwelling in the same
realm as the virgin-killing Aztecs.
Contemplating the crucifixion
Have you ever thought about how bizarre the crucifixion story is? Imagine the all-powerful, all-knowing
creator of the universe sitting on his magnificent throne in heaven. He looks down onto earth and says to
himself:
Those evil humans down on earth. I hate what they are doing. All this sin...
Since I am all-knowing I know exactly what the humans are doing and I understand exactly why
they commit each sin. Since I created the humans in my own image and personally programmed
human nature into their brains, I am the direct author of all of this sin. The instant I created them I
knew exactly what would happen with every single human being right down to the nanosecond
level for all eternity. If I didn't like how it was going to turn out, I could have simply changed them
when I created them. And since I am perfect, I know exactly what I am doing. But ignore all that. I
hate all these people doing exactly what I perfectly designed them to do and knew they would do
from the moment I created them...
So here's what I am going to do. I will artificially inseminate a virgin. She will give birth to an
incarnated version of me. The humans will eventually crucify and kill the incarnated me. That will,
finally, make me happy. Yes, sending myself down and having the humans crucify me -- that will
satisfy me. I feel much better now.
It makes no sense, does it? Why would an all-knowing being need to have humans kill himself (Jesus is
God, after all) to make himself happy? Especially since it is a perfect God who set the whole thing in
motion exactly the way he wanted it? The whole story of the crucifixion is absurd from top to bottom if you
actually stop to think about it.
Chapter 21 explains where this bizarre story actually comes from. It has nothing to do with "God".
Thinking about our sacrificial God
Have you ever stopped to think about it? If you are a Christian, have you ever thought about how
uncomfortable this is? You are worshipping a God who demanded animal sacrifice, and then was finally
"appeased" by human sacrifice. Many Christians seem to actually revel in human sacrifice. How else can
we explain the tens of millions of Christians who flocked to the movie The Passion of the Christ?
Key Point
Many Christians actually seem to
revel in human sacrifice. Tens of
millions of Christians flocked to the
movie "The Passion of the Christ".
Have you ever consciously thought about how truly uncomfortable this situation is?
Please simply take a moment and think about what you have read in this chapter. Here are two points of
view for you to consider:
1. God wrote the Bible and the Bible is the word of the Lord. God demanded animal sacrifice and he
specified how he wanted the sacrifices done in minute detail in the Bible because God enjoys
animal sacrifice. These ritualized animal killings allowed humans to atone for our many sins
against God, and the aroma of the burning flesh was pleasing to the Lord. By moving to the level
of human sacrifice, Christians were finally able to appease their God.
2. Animal sacrifice is absurd, abhorrent, ridiculous and revolting. Human sacrifice even more so.
The Bible was written by primitive men, not by God. Those primitive men were as insane as the
Aztecs.
Use both your head and your heart to analyze the situation. Which point of view makes more sense to
you?
Now, let's look at another example that is just as outrageous...
Chapter 15 - Why is God so sexist?
If you are a Christian woman, then in this chapter I would like to talk with you directly and openly about
God. And let me get right to the point. When we look at the Bible -- God's Word -- God seems to have a
major problem with women.
The dictionary defines a misogynist as "One who hates women." [ref] It defines the word "sexist" as:
1. Discrimination based on gender, especially discrimination against women.
2. Attitudes, conditions, or behaviors that promote stereotyping of social roles based on gender
Do you, as a woman, think of God as sexist, or as a misogynist? Probably not -- why would a Christian
woman worship God if he were obviously a sexist? When we think of God, we generally do not think of
him as hating anyone. Under the Standard Model of God, we think of God as an all-knowing and all-loving
father. We think of him as being fair. We think of God as loving each person equally, regardless of any
distinction like skin color or gender.
Yet, strangely, we find that God treats women quite differently than he treats men. For example, we find
this in 1 Corinthians chapter 14:
As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are
not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about
something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to
speak in the church.
This seems like a straightforward passage. And God is the one who inspired the Bible. In Isaiah 40:8 God
says that the word of the Lord will last forever, and he says the same thing again in 1 Peter 1:24-25. So
here we have God, in his eternal and everlasting Word, saying that it is disgraceful for a woman to speak
in the church.
Key Point
In the New Testament of the Bible --
God's holy word to his creation -- it
says that it is disgraceful for a
woman to speak in the church. In 1
Timothy chapter 2 it says, "I permit
no woman to teach or to have
authority over men; she is to keep
silent."
Why would God personally create man and woman in his own image, and then silence the women? What
possible reason does an all-loving, all-knowing God have to be sexist?
Even more interesting is this question: why would you, as a woman, worship a God who acts like this?
The breadth of God's sexism
There are many places in the Bible where God talks about women. This quote from 1 Corinthians 11, for
example, is odd:
But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her
husband, and the head of Christ is God. Any man who prays or prophesies with his head covered
dishonors his head, but any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled dishonors
her head--it is the same as if her head were shaven. For if a woman will not veil herself, then she
should cut off her hair; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her wear a
veil. For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is
the glory of man. (For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man
created for woman, but woman for man.) That is why a woman ought to have a veil on her head,
because of the angels.
What, exactly, is God saying there? You may find it hard to believe that something that confusing is in the
Bible, yet if you look it up you will find it is there.
Watch the video
Key Point
To any unbiased observer, the
reason for rampant sexism in the
Bible is very easy to understand:
The Bible was not written by God. It
was written by primitive men who
were flagrant sexists. Just look at
how men in primitive countries like
Afghanistan treat women today.
Those are the kind of men who
wrote the Bible. God had nothing to
do with this book.
If you are a Christian, I would ask you to consider the two possible ways to explain the sexism that we are
seeing in the Bible:
• You can assume that God actually did write the Bible and truly is sexist and misogynistic. In that
case we are directly defying God's word today by allowing women to be equal to men.
• Or you can assume that God had nothing to do with the Bible. In that case, the Bible is
meaningless and we can discard it, as discussed in Chapter 13.
Drawing a simple conclusion
To any unbiased observer, the reason for sexism in the Bible is very easy to understand: The Bible was
not written by God. It was written by primitive men who were flagrant sexists. Just look at how men in
primitive countries like Afghanistan treat women today. Those are the kind of men who wrote the Bible.
And we all know it -- Christians and non-Christians alike. The reason why modern societies (including
most Christians living in those societies) completely reject sexism is because we all know that the Bible's
sexism is wrong. It is exactly the same situation we see when Christians face slavery and animal sacrifice
in the Bible. Christians and non-Christians alike reject the Bible's teachings in these areas because the
Bible is obviously wrong. The part that is profoundly strange is that, while completely rejecting these parts
of the Bible, Chistians will claim that other parts of the Bible are God's word. They seem to be blind to the
obvious contradiction.
At some point, Christians have to accept the evidence that we all can see: Either God wrote the Bible, or
he did not. If he did, then he is wrong, and we should reject the Bible and him. If he did not, then we
should reject the Bible.
This fact should now be apparent to every woman, and to any rational man.
Key Point
It is appropriate at this point to
speak to Christians, especially the
"casual Christians" who go to church
occasionally because it seems like
the "right thing to do." Most
Christians have never read the
Bible. They have no idea that the
God of the Bible is a huge
proponent of slavery, or that God
hates women, or that God finds the
annihilation of small children so
enthralling. Should we, as human
beings living in the modern world, be
worshipping a God like this?
Doesn't it feel odd to find all of this material in the Bible? Especially the quote from Moses in Numbers 31.
You may recall that the sixth commandment is, "Thou shalt not kill."
What does God have against children? Why would an all-loving, all-knowing being act in this way? In the
case of Herod's massacre, a religious person might say, "God had to do it to fulfill a prophecy in the
Bible." But that makes no sense, because God could have left the prophecy out.
A normal person, after reading passages like these, is left first with a deep sense of disgust. Any normal
human being knows that these acts are monstrous. What we are seeing here is not a loving God, but
instead a demonic executioner working at a massive scale. Why would anyone worship this appalling
monster?
A normal person then asks the obvious question: Did God actually write these verses in the Bible? Would
God actually condone these acts?
I think we can all agree that a loving God would not condone these acts. Therefore, these parts of the
Bible could not have been written by God. It should be obvious to all of us that God did not write the Bible.
It is appropriate at this point to speak to Christians, especially the "casual Christians" who go to church
occasionally because it seems like the "right thing to do." Most Christians have never read the Bible. They
have no idea that the God of the Bible is a huge proponent of slavery, or that God hates women, or that
God finds the annihilation of small children so enthralling. Should we, as human beings living in the
modern world, be worshipping a God like this?
Chapter 17 - Reviewing the evidence about the Bible
In the last four chapters we have looked at dozens of Bible passages. We have found that God is a huge
proponent of slavery, that God hates women, that God revels in the destruction of small children, and that
God spells out detailed instructions for animal and human sacrifice. If you are a Christian, here is the
important question that you should be asking yourself:
Do you believe that an all-loving, all-knowing, all-powerful, prayer-answering God wrote these
passages in the Bible?
This question is incredibly important because of this fact:
There is no reason for you to believe that you have a soul, or that you will have eternal life after
death, or that there is a heaven and hell, or that God answers prayers, or that God wrote the Ten
Commandments, or that Jesus is resurrected, and so on, unless you believe that God wrote the
Bible.
If you insist that God wrote the Bible so that you can believe in the Ten Commandments or eternal life,
shouldn't you also be a proponent of slavery and a misogynist? It is the same book in both cases.
The point is simple. Can you imagine God sitting on his magnificent throne in heaven saying this?
"As the all-powerful, all-knowing creator of the universe, I shall write a book for my creation, and I
shall call it The Bible. Let's see, what shall I put in it??? Well, I want to be SURE to write about
my absolute endorsement of slavery in both the Old and the New Testaments -- slavery is very
important to me and I want people buying and selling slaves for thousands of years. And I want to
be CERTAIN that the book shows how much I hate women in both the Old and the New
Testaments. And I can NOT forget the parts about animal and human sacrifice, because
sacrifices are an essential element of every proper religion. I want people slaughtering animals,
splattering their blood and then burning the carcasses on a stone altar because the aroma is
pleasing to me. And I want to make human sacrifice the centerpiece of my worship. And I
CERTAINLY need to include the juicy parts about child massacre in both the Old and the New
Testaments. Baby killing is something that I will emphasize throughout this book because it is
very important to me."
Do you believe this? Of course not. Yet, clearly, if God does exist and God wrote the Bible, this is in fact
what God said to himself. You have seen with your own eyes the numerous passages in the Bible where
God displays these tendencies. Confirm them yourself by looking them up in God's word.
An all-knowing, all-loving God could not have written such appalling verses into the Bible. It should be
obvious to you that primitive men wrote this book, not God.
What should the non-Christians make of this?
If you are a Christian, and if you insist that God wrote or "inspired" the Bible, then there is a second
question that you may want to consider:
Why do you worship this God? And why do you publicly and openly admit it?
Think about the non-Christians who live next door to you. They can read the Bible. Wouldn't it seem
logical for people outside Christianity -- for example, the Muslims, the Hindus, the Buddhists and so on --
to look at you as a monster for worshipping such a being? By worshipping this God, giving him your
money, etc., you show that you yourself must believe in slavery, misogyny, animal/human sacrifice and
baby-killing. Do you not? All of these passages are right there in the Bible. Anyone can read them. By
stating that you believe the Bible, are you not endorsing these passages? By worshipping this God, do
you not show that you endorse his actions in the Bible? Why in the world would non-Christians want you
openly spreading your messages from a slavery-condoning, woman-hating, sacrifice-loving, child-killing
God?
A Christian would respond to this question with something like the following: "God is NOT a murderer!
God does NOT kill babies! God does NOT hate women! God would NEVER do any of the things that you
are talking about. God is LOVE. It says so in the Bible!" Such a person is ignoring the obvious. The
slavery-condoning, woman-hating, sacrifice-loving, baby-killing verses are all there in the Bible plain as
day. They would not be there unless God wanted them there. God is omnipotent. If God took the time to
write the Bible, he would also take the time to protect its contents from corruption. If God wrote the Bible,
then every word in it was placed there -- intentionally and purposefully -- by God himself.
It is not as though God has one slip of the tongue that might be misinterpreted as condoning slavery --
there are at least ten places in the Bible where God openly, unashamedly and absolutely endorses
slavery. God does not "sort of hint" that he might dislike women -- God displays open animosity toward
women in his words and deeds. God not only likes animal sacrifice -- he demands it, and gives explicit
instructions for how it is to be done. God does not kill one or two children -- God openly massacres
millions of children and admits it in writing.
This is the God of the Bible. This is the God that Christians worship.
Why is the Bible so irrelevant?
For many people, the last four chapters prove that God did not write the Bible. They prove it beyond the
shadow of any doubt. It is painfully obvious: Primitive men wrote the Bible, not God.
But what if you need still more proof? If so, then here is a question: Why, when you read the Bible, are
you not left in awe? Why doesn't a book written by God leave you with a sense of wonder and
amazement? If you are reading a book written by the all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving creator of the
universe, wouldn't you expect to be stunned by the brilliance, the clarity and the wisdom of the author?
Would you not expect each new page to intoxicate you with its incredible prose and its spectacular
insight?
Instead, opening the Bible inevitably creates a feeling of dumbfoundment. Have you ever noticed that?
Instead of brilliance, much of the Bible contains nonsense. The topics of the previous several chapters,
where we discussed the Bible's advocacy of slavery and animal sacrifice, the Bible's misogyny and so on,
are excellent examples. But they are just the tip of the iceberg. You can open the Bible to almost any
page and find nonsense instead of wisdom. Here are several examples:
Judges Chapter 4
But Jael, Heber's wife, picked up a tent peg and a hammer and went quietly to him while he lay
fast asleep, exhausted. She drove the peg through his temple into the ground, and he died.
Genesis Chapter 19
Lot and his two daughters left Zoar and settled in the mountains, for he was afraid to stay in Zoar.
He and his two daughters lived in a cave. One day the older daughter said to the younger, "Our
father is old, and there is no man around here to lie with us, as is the custom all over the earth.
Let's get our father to drink wine and then lie with him and preserve our family line through our
father."
Genesis Chapter 38
Then Judah said to Onan, "Lie with your brother's wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-
law to produce offspring for your brother." But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so
whenever he lay with his brother's wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from
producing offspring for his brother. What he did was wicked in the Lord 's sight; so he put him to
death also.
Judges Chapter 3
Ehud then approached him [the fat king] while he was sitting alone in the upper room of his
summer palace and said, "I have a message from God for you." As the king rose from his seat,
Ehud reached with his left hand, drew the sword from his right thigh and plunged it into the king's
belly. Even the handle sank in after the blade, which came out his back. Ehud did not pull the
sword out, and the fat closed in over it. Then Ehud went out to the porch; he shut the doors of the
upper room behind him and locked them.
Judges Chapter 19
But the men would not listen to him. So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them,
and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go. At
daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door
and lay there until daylight.
When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to
continue on his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the doorway of the house, with her hands
on the threshold. He said to her, "Get up; let's go." But there was no answer. Then the man put
her on his donkey and set out for home.
When he reached home, he took a knife and cut up his concubine, limb by limb, into twelve parts
and sent them into all the areas of Israel. Everyone who saw it said, "Such a thing has never
been seen or done, not since the day the Israelites came up out of Egypt. Think about it!
Consider it! Tell us what to do!"
Joshua Chapter 10
When they had brought these kings to Joshua, he summoned all the men of Israel and said to the
army commanders who had come with him, "Come here and put your feet on the necks of these
kings." So they came forward and placed their feet on their necks.
Joshua said to them, "Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged. Be strong and courageous. This is
what the Lord will do to all the enemies you are going to fight." Then Joshua struck and killed the
kings and hung them on five trees, and they were left hanging on the trees until evening.
1 Samuel Chapter 31
Saul said to his armor-bearer, "Draw your sword and run me through, or these uncircumcised
fellows will come and run me through and abuse me." But his armor-bearer was terrified and
would not do it; so Saul took his own sword and fell on it. When the armor-bearer saw that Saul
was dead, he too fell on his sword and died with him.
Numbers Chapter 31
Moses was angry with the officers of the army-the commanders of thousands and commanders of
hundreds-who returned from the battle. "Have you allowed all the women to live?" he asked them.
"They were the ones who followed Balaam's advice and were the means of turning the Israelites
away from the Lord in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the Lord 's people. Now kill
all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl
who has never slept with a man."
Deuteronomy Chapter 25
If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his
assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand.
Show her no pity.
There are two things to notice in these quotes. First, they are all disgusting. Second, they all tell stories
about men and women doing things that are utterly and completely irrelevant. Why do you care about a
woman killing a man with a tent peg, or a man cutting up his concubine and mailing her body parts
around? Do you care about Moses telling his soldiers, "kill everyone, but save the virgins for yourselves"?
If God is going to take the time to write a book that will last for millennia, why fill it with such useless
material?
Another problem with the Bible is that it frequently contradicts the Standard Model of God. Here is an
example from Leviticus 21:17:
Say to Aaron, None of your descendants throughout their generations who has a blemish may
approach to offer the bread of his God. For no one who has a blemish shall draw near, a man
blind or lame, or one who has a mutilated face or a limb too long, or a man who has an injured
foot or an injured hand, or a hunchback, or a dwarf, or a man with a defect in his sight or an
itching disease or scabs or crushed testicles; no man of the descendants of Aaron the priest who
has a blemish shall come near to offer the LORD's offerings by fire; since he has a blemish, he
shall not come near to offer the bread of his God. He may eat the bread of his God, both of the
most holy and of the holy things, but he shall not come near the veil or approach the altar,
because he has a blemish, that he may not profane my sanctuaries; for I am the LORD who
sanctify them.
Doesn't it seem odd for an all-loving God to discriminate against people with handicaps and genetic
problems?
Here is another example. In the book of Deuteronomy, Chapter 21:18, the Bible says:
If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not
listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him
to the elders at the gate of his town. They shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn
and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard." Then all the men of his
town shall stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it
and be afraid.
Doesn't that seem to contradict the sixth commandment, "Thou shalt not kill"? And doesn't it seem just a
tad harsh? If we applied this sort of philosophy today (as Christians should, since they proclaim the Bible
and the Ten Commandments to be God's infallible word), millions of our teenagers would need to be
stoned to death.
Here is another example. On the day Moses comes down from Mount Sinai with the stone tablets
containing the Ten Commandments, he discovers that the Israelites have created a golden calf. To punish
the people, Moses gathers a group of men and takes the following action in the book of Exodus, Chapter
32:
"Then he [Moses] said to them, "This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: 'Each man strap a
sword to his side. Go back and forth through the camp from one end to the other, each killing his
brother and friend and neighbor.' " The Levites did as Moses commanded, and that day about
three thousand of the people died.
So... one minute we have God carving into stone, "Thou shalt not kill." Then the next minute we have God
telling each man to strap a sword to his side and lay waste to thousands. Wouldn't you expect the
almighty ruler of the universe to be slightly more consistent than this? 3,000 dead people is a lot of
commandment breaking.
Some Christians try to find an out for all of this irrelevance and contradiction by saying, "Well, I don't
believe the Old Testament. God sent Jesus to cancel it out." But that really is not the case. If God wrote
the Bible, then God fully intended for the Bible -- the entire Bible -- to be a timeless book. In Isaiah 40:8
God says, "The grass withers, the flower fades; but the word of our God will stand for ever." In Matthew
5:18 Jesus says, "For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass
from the law until all is accomplished." When Jesus says "the law" what he is talking about is all of the
laws that God lays down in the Old Testament. Those laws include everything that God says about
slavery, misogyny, animal sacrifice, stoning teenagers, cutting off hands and all the rest.
An experiment
Here is an experiment for you to try. Pick up any handy Bible. Open the book to a random page. Read it.
You tell me -- is this a book that amazes you? I am trying this experiment this morning as I write this book.
Here are the five random quotes that I came upon:
Leviticus 15:
The LORD said to Moses and Aaron, "Say to the people of Israel, When any man has a discharge
from his body, his discharge is unclean. And this is the law of his uncleanness for a discharge:
whether his body runs with his discharge, or his body is stopped from discharge, it is uncleanness
in him. Every bed on which he who has the discharge lies shall be unclean; and everything on
which he sits shall be unclean. And any one who touches his bed shall wash his clothes, and
bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the evening. And whoever sits on anything on which
he who has the discharge has sat shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be
unclean until the evening. And whoever touches the body of him who has the discharge shall
wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the evening. And if he who has
the discharge spits on one who is clean, then he shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in
water, and be unclean until the evening. And any saddle on which he who has the discharge rides
shall be unclean. And whoever touches anything that was under him shall be unclean until the
evening; and he who carries such a thing shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and
be unclean until the evening.
Can you imagine every doctor and nurse following God's law?
1 Kings 8:
Then Solomon assembled the elders of Israel and all the heads of the tribes, the leaders of the
fathers' houses of the people of Israel, before King Solomon in Jerusalem, to bring up the ark of
the covenant of the LORD out of the city of David, which is Zion. And all the men of Israel
assembled to King Solomon at the feast in the month Eth'anim, which is the seventh month. And
all the elders of Israel came, and the priests took up the ark. And they brought up the ark of the
LORD, the tent of meeting, and all the holy vessels that were in the tent; the priests and the
Levites brought them up. And King Solomon and all the congregation of Israel, who had
assembled before him, were with him before the ark, sacrificing so many sheep and oxen that
they could not be counted or numbered.
Yes, so? How is this at all relevant? Why would God write this?
Psalms 89:
A Maskil of Ethan the Ezrahite. I will sing of thy steadfast love, O LORD, for ever; with my mouth I
will proclaim thy faithfulness to all generations. For thy steadfast love was established for ever,
thy faithfulness is firm as the heavens. Thou hast said, "I have made a covenant with my chosen
one, I have sworn to David my servant: 'I will establish your descendants for ever, and build your
throne for all generations.'" [Selah] Let the heavens praise thy wonders, O LORD, thy faithfulness
in the assembly of the holy ones! For who in the skies can be compared to the LORD? Who
among the heavenly beings is like the LORD, a God feared in the council of the holy ones, great
and terrible above all that are round about him? O LORD God of hosts, who is mighty as thou art,
O LORD, with thy faithfulness round about thee? Thou dost rule the raging of the sea; when its
waves rise, thou stillest them. Thou didst crush Rahab like a carcass, thou didst scatter thy
enemies with thy mighty arm.
Again, how is this relevant?
Acts 10:
The next day, as they were on their journey and coming near the city, Peter went up on the
housetop to pray, about the sixth hour. And he became hungry and desired something to eat; but
while they were preparing it, he fell into a trance and saw the heaven opened, and something
descending, like a great sheet, let down by four corners upon the earth. In it were all kinds of
animals and reptiles and birds of the air. And there came a voice to him, "Rise, Peter; kill and
eat." But Peter said, "No, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean." And
the voice came to him again a second time, "What God has cleansed, you must not call
common." This happened three times, and the thing was taken up at once to heaven. Now while
Peter was inwardly perplexed as to what the vision which he had seen might mean, behold, the
men that were sent by Cornelius, having made inquiry for Simon's house, stood before the gate
and called out to ask whether Simon who was called Peter was lodging there.
Revelations 12:
And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her
feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; she was with child and she cried out in her pangs
of birth, in anguish for delivery. And another portent appeared in heaven; behold, a great red
dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems upon his heads. His tail swept down
a third of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman
who was about to bear a child, that he might devour her child when she brought it forth; she
brought forth a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was
caught up to God and to his throne, and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a
place prepared by God, in which to be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days.
Are you amazed by these passages? Are you inspired by their brilliance and insight? Do they leave you
with a sense of wonderment? Do they have any bearing at all on you, or your life? After reading them, do
you find the Bible to be a book that you would want to continue reading? Most importantly: Do these
passages leave you with the impression that they were written by an all-powerful, all-knowing God? Or
was this book written by primitive men? Try the experiment yourself and see what you find. Think about
what you are reading in the context of an all-knowing God.
Be honest with yourself. Does the Bible strike you as a book filled with brilliance, or with nonsense?
Think about what you are reading
What do I mean when I say, "think about what you are reading?" Let's use Leviticus 15, from the previous
section, as an example. The passage is discussing "discharge." Why doesn't God in Leviticus 15 say:
"There are 47 different types of abnormal discharges that I have inflicted on the human body
when I created it. They are, in order of frequency of occurrence: 1) Discharge from an infected
skin lesion, normally caused by some sort of cut or puncture wound. What is happening here is a
bacterial infection. First off, whenever you get a cut or puncture wound, you should wash it
carefully with an antiseptic solution to kill the bacteria, and then cover the wound with a sterile
dressing to keep bacteria out. Also, make sure that your tetanus vaccination is up to date. These
steps will prevent 98.7% of all infections. But if the wound does become infected, what you
should do is incise and drain the wound. This will be painful, but it is important because if you
allow the pus to build up..."
God should know all of this stuff -- according to Christians he is all-knowing. When reading Leviticus 15,
any normal human being asks questions like these:
• Why didn't God transcribe a useful medical guide into the Bible for these primitive people, rather
than transcribing rituals that accomplish nothing?
• Why doesn't God explain how to manufacture antiseptic solutions, sterile dressings, tetanus
vaccines and antibiotic creams?
• Even better, why not explain how to build a Star Trek Tricorder to instantly heal the wound?
• Even better, why didn't God design the human immune system to prevent all infections in the first
place and eliminate the discharges completely? Why would God intentionally inflict human beings
with all of these different types of abnormal discharges?
Extending on these ideas, why doesn't God use the Bible to explain metallurgy, chemistry, biology,
physics, manufacturing, mathematics, medicine, engineering, etc. to these primitive people so they can
dramatically accelerate their development?
Why, in other words, is the Bible so useless? Why does the author of the Bible, who is supposed to be
God, who is supposed to be all-knowing, know so little? Why is the knowledge of the author limited to the
knowledge of the primitive men who wrote the book? If you think about what you are reading in the Bible
in the context of an all-knowing God who supposedly wrote it, none of it makes any sense. But if you think
about the Bible as being a book written by primitive men like you would find in the remote regions of
Afghanistan today, it makes complete sense.
Key Point
If you think about what you are
reading in the Bible in the context of
an all-knowing God who supposedly
wrote it, none of it makes any sense.
But if you think about the Bible as
being a book written by primitive
men like you would find in the
remote regions of Afghanistan today,
it makes complete sense. This tells
you everything you need to know.
The Bible was written by primitive
men, not by God.
After reading the Bible passages in this section, what is your common sense telling you about the Bible?
Do these passages from the Bible match up with your view of what an all-knowing, all-loving, all-powerful
being would write down in his book? Does it make sense to you that a book created by an all-knowing
God would contain so much nonsense? Are you left agape as you read the Bible, or are you
dumbfounded by its utter stupidity?
Weigh the evidence. Does it seem more likely that the Bible was written by God, or by a bunch of
primitive men?
Proving it to yourself
It is easy to prove to yourself that God did not write the Bible. We can do it in the following way.
I challenge you to go on national TV with me. We are going to go on a major, nationally broadcast show
with a major host like Oprah, Larry King, Bill O'Reilly, etc.
Here's all that you have to do. You are going to read for 30 minutes from the New International Version or
the New American Standard Version (your choice) of the Bible. This should be a dream come true for you
-- here you will have the chance to spread the power of God's word directly to the nation.
There is only one thing that I ask. I want you to let me choose the verses that you will read.
Would you take the challenge? Of course not. If I pick the passages, I can make you look like a total idiot
on national television. I can have you read verses about slavery, misogyny, animal sacrifice, child
massacre, sliced up concubines, tent pegs and all the rest. No one in their right mind would take this
challenge.
This is how we know, without a doubt, that God did not write the Bible. If an all-powerful, all-loving, all-
knowing creator of the universe actually wrote this book, it would not be filled with so much idiocy.
Slavery, misogyny and child-massacre are abominations and we all know it. The reason why the Bible
contains this material is because primitive men wrote the Bible, not God.
What it all means
If the Bible really were the error-free word of an all-powerful God, it would be profound, meaningful,
timeless, fascinating, and enlightening both at the spiritual level and at the technological level. It would tell
us things that we did not already know. It would stun us with the brilliance of the author. We would look at
the words in the Bible in awe.
Instead it is clear that God had nothing to do with the Bible. Simply open the book up and read it. The
Bible is the work of primitive men who lived 2,000 or 3,000 years ago, without a hint of guidance from the
"all-knowing creator of the universe." The previous chapters clearly demonstrate that beyond the shadow
of any doubt.
If you are a Christian, this leaves you with two choices:
• You can continue to proclaim that the Bible is the Word of God. You do that knowing that it is a lie.
Quite clearly an all-knowing, all-loving God cannot also advocate slavery. Nor can he be sexist.
• You can make a rational decision based on clear evidence: you can reject the Bible. You can
accept that the Bible is the work of primitive men and is therefore completely irrelevant to us
today. You can reject the Bible's authority, and you can reject all the people who claim that the
Bible is a message from God.
Once you accept that the Bible is a book written by primitive men rather than God, it is a very powerful
realization. It has many implications:
• The Bible claims that Jesus is the Son of God. Now that you know that the Bible is the work of
men rather than God, you can see reality -- Jesus was a man like anyone else.
• Both Christianity and Judaism are invalid as religions, having lost the Bible as a theological
foundation.
• The Bible can no longer be used under "God's authority" as a tool of oppression. For example,
take the Bible's position on women. In 1 Corinthians the Bible says: "As in all the congregations of
the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must
be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their
own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." That's about as
oppressive as you can get. Or look at the way the Bible discusses homosexuals. Leviticus 20:13
states: "If a man lies with a male as a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they
shall be put to death, their blood is upon them." Conservative Christians are quite fond of these
passages, and use them whenever they wish to justify their prejudice against women and
homosexuals. They do so, in their minds, with God's blessing. Since it is quite obvious that the
Bible is not the word of God, we can see that people who quote these verses are simple bigots
rather than God's messengers. The next time you hear people try to marginalize or degrade
anyone using the Bible, you are able to completely ignore them.
• The Bible's story of creation is irrelevant, so we can completely ignore "creationists" and the
proponents of "intelligent design". God did not create human beings as described in the Bible --
the entire creation story is a mythological legend written by primitive men. The concept of "original
sin" and the concept of mankind's divine creation are invalid.
• You have no soul and there is no eternal life after death. See Chapter 27 for details.
• An amazing 59% of the American population believes that the Bible's book of Revelation will
actually come true. Now it is easy to see that the Book of Revelation is a work of pure fiction.
• And so on…
The Bible clearly is not the word of God. The slavery passages in Chapter 13 provide more than enough
evidence to prove that. When you think about it and truly let that fact sink in, the full implications are
enormous. Once you eliminate the Bible, it is amazing what you eliminate with it.
As intelligent people, what do we do with the Christians -- millions of them -- who insist that the Bible is
the word of God? Let me answer that question with another question: What do we do with people who
believe in astrology? You know the people I am talking about -- they believe in horoscopes, and they
believe that the alignment of the planets affects our lives on earth today. What do we do with them? We
ignore them. We do not take them seriously. We exclude them from reasonable public discourse and
debate.
If a presidential candidate were to stand up and say, "the alignment of the planets indicates that in foreign
policy, we should follow a path that…," or if he/she were to end a speech with "Jupiter bless America," we
would not vote for this candidate.
People who believe in the Bible are in the same boat. Why would we listen to anyone who believes in
slavery, hates women and supports a God who is a flagrant baby-killer? Do we want people like that
holding public office, sitting on our courts, running our corporations or teaching our children?
The Bible is clearly the work of primitive men, many of whom were insane. Anyone with common sense
can see that. Exodus 21:20-21 alone is enough to prove it. When people insist that the Bible is the word
of God, we should ignore them and exclude them from public discourse. It's a free country, and people
have a right to their superstitions in the privacy of their own homes. But no one is required to take them
seriously in a public forum.
Simply look back through Chapters 13, 14, 15 and 16. The Bible is so wrong in so many places. What are
we thinking when we quote from this book? Why do intelligent people allow this book to be referenced in
public discourse? It is amazing when you consider how much evil this book harbors. See Chapter 28 for
additional details.
Key Point
Jesus did not provide any concrete
proof of his divinity. For any normal
person, that makes things simple --
Jesus is not God. To believe that
anyone today is God, we would
need concrete proof. Jesus does not
get a pass because he lived 2,000
years ago.
For religious people, however, it is a different story. If you ask a religious person about Jesus' divinity, you
may find yourself in a conversation like this:
Norm: If Jesus is God, why didn't Jesus ever prove that he is God?
Chris: He did! He performed many miracles, and he was resurrected. That proves that he is God!
Norm: Why did he not prove that he is God in a way that is definitive and scientifically provable --
for example, by moving a mountain?
Chris: He could not do that! That would take away man's free will to believe in him. People must
come to God through faith.
Norm: Why, then, did Jesus perform the miracles described in the Gospels?
Chris: To prove that he is God. If he had not done the miracles, culminating in his final most
miraculous resurrection, we would not know that he is God.
Norm: I thought that if Jesus performed miracles to prove that he was God, then it took away our
free will.
Chris: No.
Norm: Isn't that what you just said?
Chris: No. What I just said is that Jesus' miracles prove that he was God.
Norm: So why didn't Jesus perform real, concrete miracles like moving a mountain?
Chris: Because that would take away our free will.
Try having this conversation yourself with a Christian and you will find it to be a very odd discussion. The
circular logic will make you dizzy:
• Jesus had to perform miracles to prove his divinity, and that doesn't take away free will...
• ...But if Jesus performed miracles that we could see and scientifically verify, it would take away
free will.
Any normal person can see reality. The reason why Jesus did not perform concrete, verifiable miracles is
because Jesus was a man like any other. The "miracles" discussed in the Bible were not miracles at all.
A hidden God?
Here is a line of reasoning that Christians will frequently use to try to rationalize Jesus' behavior. In the
book "The Case for Faith," the author Lee Stroble interviews Peter Kreeft, Ph.D. Dr. Kreeft says the
following:
"Scripture describes God as a hidden God. You have to make the effort of faith to find him. There
are clues you can follow. And if that weren't so, if there was something more or less than clues,
it's difficult for me to understand how we could really be free to make a choice about him."
Clues? Hidden? According to the Bible God incarnated himself. He created an entire human body named
Jesus. That is not a "clue" -- that is a huge, obvious piece of evidence. It is very hard to "hide" a 170-
pound human being who is running around performing miracles on every street corner. Then you collect
the stories of those miracles and publish them in a book. Where is the hiding in that?
There are examples of God's desire for publicity throughout the Bible. The best known is God's parting of
the Red Sea in the book of Exodus, chapter 14:
Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the LORD drove the sea back by a strong
east wind all night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided. And the people of
Israel went into the midst of the sea on dry ground, the waters being a wall to them on their right
hand and on their left.
That is impressive, and it is utterly obvious. Thousands of Israelites witnessed this event. There are many
other events that are equally obvious: manna from heaven, the Ten Commandments carved onto stone
tablets, the Passover massacre and so on. All of it is described in the Bible, which God wrote so that
billions of people can read about these events and experience them vicariously today.
It is pretty hard to hide something that you do in front of thousands of people and then describe and
publish in billions of books. Clearly God is not a hidden God.
But there is an even more impressive sign that we often forget. If God exists and God wrote the Bible,
then rainbows are actually proof that God exists. God is not hiding at all. If you read Genesis 9:12-13 you
will find this:
And God said, "This is the sign of the covenant which I make between me and you and every
living creature that is with you, for all future generations: I set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be
a sign of the covenant between me and the earth..."
What could be more obvious than that? God left a sign for all future generations, according to the Bible.
Clearly God does not want to hide.
There are also plenty of cases in the New Testament. For example, Matthew, Chapter 17:
After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up
a high mountain by themselves. There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the
sun, and his clothes became as white as the light. Just then there appeared before them Moses
and Elijah, talking with Jesus.
Peter said to Jesus, "Lord, it is good for us to be here. If you wish, I will put up three shelters--one
for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah."
While he was still speaking, a bright cloud enveloped them, and a voice from the cloud said, "This
is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!"
These are not exactly the actions of a God in hiding. Apparently the free wills of Peter, James and John
were not that important to God. And again it is published in the Bible so that billions of other people can
read about it.
Or take this passage from the book of Matthew, Chapter 3:
As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was
opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. And a voice
from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."
Again, not exactly a hidden God.
Or this passage from the book of Luke, Chapter 2:
And there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night.
An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they
were terrified. But the angel said to them, "Do not be afraid. I bring you good news of great joy
that will be for all the people. Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is
Christ the Lord. This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a
manger."
Suddenly a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and
saying, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men on whom his favor rests."
When the angels had left them and gone into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, "Let's
go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has told us about."
The free will of the shepherds was certainly tarnished a bit here.
In 1 Corinthians 15:6, Paul says,
Then he [Jesus, after the resurrection] appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time.
Those 500 people must have lost their free will. And John says:
Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even
the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written. (John 21:25)
That's an awful lot of miracles -- so many that the world would not have room for all the books describing
them. Presumably at least one person witnessed each miracle. Think of how many names fill just one
phone book. Now imagine a whole world full of phone books. That's a lot of people. Weren't all of their
free wills affected? How is God hiding if millions of people saw Jesus and the miracles he performed?
Jesus claims to be God, and Jesus is a physical being running around Israel for all to see. He apparently
performed millions of miracles in front of millions of people. The God of the Bible is not hiding -- God is so
hungry for publicity and exposure that he actually incarnates himself and then starts performing miracles
for everyone on the planet. Then he creates a God-breathed book to describe everything and publishes
billions of copies all over the world.
Yet, for some reason, God wants none of us today to see any of those miracles because he "needs to
remain hidden" so that he will not "taint our free wills." Does that seem likely? Or is it more likely that
Jesus never performed a real miracle? When you combine this evidence with the fact that Jesus answers
no prayers (see section 1), it is clear to us what is actually happening.
Drawing a conclusion
Key Point
If Jesus needed miracles to prove to
people that he is God, and if it did
not hurt their "free wills" to see these
miracles, and if all these miracles
were written down and attested to
by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John
so that we could all experience them
vicariously today, then why is it
wrong for us to see a real miracle
and have actual proof today? Why
didn't any of Jesus' miracles have a
physical permanence that would
transcend time and prove his story
to everyone? Because Jesus was a
normal human being just like you
and me.
Here is an important question for you to ask yourself: If Jesus needed miracles to prove to people that he
is God, and if it did not hurt their "free wills" to see these miracles, and if all these miracles were written
down and attested to by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John so that we could all experience them vicariously
today, then why didn't Jesus perform a single real miracle? Why didn't any of Jesus' miracles have a
physical permanence that would transcend time and prove his story?
To better understand the question, try this: Imagine that you are watching a magician like David
Copperfield on television. He "heals" a few people -- makes a blind person see, makes a lame person
walk, etc. He demonstrates that he can "turn water into wine." Then he goes one step further and says, "I
am God! I have just proven it to you by my miracles!"
Would any of us believe him? Of course not. To believe that someone is God, we would need
incontrovertible proof. We would not accept magic tricks. We know that they are meaningless.
God is not trying to remain "hidden" -- all we have to do is open the Bible to see it. And it is obvious that, if
a person were to claim to be God today, we would demand real proof. Therefore, the fact that Jesus did
not perform a single miracle that is visible and testable today proves to all of us that Jesus was a normal
human being, just like you and me.
Chapter 20 - Why doesn't Jesus appear to each of us?
In the last chapter, we discussed Jesus' miracles. There is one miracle, however, that deserves special
discussion. Jesus' resurrection after his death is the ultimate and defining proof of Jesus' divinity.
Just about everyone knows the story of Jesus' death and resurrection. The story is summarized in the
Apostles' Creed. Jesus was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended into hell. On the third day he
arose again from the dead. He ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of God the Father
Almighty.
There is only one way for Jesus to prove that he rose from the dead. He had to appear to people.
Therefore, several different places in the Bible describe Jesus' appearances after his death:
• Matthew chapter 28
• Mark chapter 16
• Luke chapter 24
• John Chapter 20 and 21
1 Corinthians 15:3-6 provides a nice summary of those passages, as written by Paul:
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in
accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in
accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he
appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though
some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to
one untimely born, he appeared also to me.
As you can see in this passage, Jesus appeared to hundreds of people a number of different times.
Being like Paul
When we look at these Bible passages, there is a question that comes to mind -- why did Jesus stop
making these appearances? Why isn't Jesus appearing today?
It really is odd. Obviously Paul benefitted from a personal meeting with the resurrected Christ. Because of
the personal visit, Paul could see for himself the truth of the resurrection, and he could ask Jesus
questions.
So... Why doesn't Jesus appear to everyone and prove that he is resurrected, just like he appeared to
Paul? There is nothing to stop Jesus from materializing in your kitchen tonight to have a personal chat
with you. And if you think about it, Jesus really does need to appear to each of us. If Paul needed a
personal visit from Jesus to know that Jesus was resurrected, then why wouldn't you?
Key Point
If Paul needed a personal visit from
Jesus to know that Jesus was
resurrected, then why wouldn't you?
It is an important question for the following reasons:
• We are told by the Bible that Jesus appeared to hundreds of people.
• We know that it is OK for Jesus to appear to people -- it does not take away their free will, for
example -- because it was OK for Jesus to appear to hundreds of other people.
• We know that it would be easy for Jesus to appear to everyone all through history, since Jesus is
all-powerful and timeless.
• We know that, if Jesus did reappear to everyone, it would be incredibly helpful. We could all
know, personally, that Jesus is resurrected and that Jesus is God. If Paul (and all the other people
in the Bible) needed a personal visit to know that Jesus was resurrected, then why not you and
me?
• Yet, we all know that Jesus has not appeared to anyone in 2,000 years.
Key Point
The reason why Jesus has
appeared to no one for 2,000 years
is because Jesus never appeared to
anyone.
In other words, there is nothing stopping Jesus from appearing to you, and several good reasons for him
to appear.
Praying to Jesus
What if we pray to Jesus like this: "Dear Jesus, please appear to us, as you did to Paul and the 500
brethren, so that we can see the evidence of your resurrection. In your name we pray, amen." Here is
what Jesus has promised us in the Bible:
Matthew 7:7 Jesus says:
Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For
every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened.
Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish,
will give him a serpent? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children,
how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!
In John chapter 14:14:
Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it, that the Father may be glorified in the Son; if you ask
anything in my name, I will do it.
In Matthew 18:19:
Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them
by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst
of them.
Jesus is actually in our midst. So he is right here already, supposedly. Yet when we pray to him to
physically materialize, as he did to hundreds of others, nothing happens.
Isn't it odd that Nothing happens, given the fact that Jesus promises us that something will happen? Isn't
it odd that nothing happens when, supposedly, Jesus is right here with us already, and materialization
would be trivial for him?
What you will find, if you think about it, is that the situation we see here is exactly like the situation in
Chapter 5. We have created a situation where coincidence cannot "answer" the prayer. The only way for
this prayer to be answered is for Jesus to actually, unambiguously, materialize. In this situation, we also
know that it is trivial for Jesus to materialize, that there would be many benefits if Jesus did materialize,
that Jesus has supposedly materialized to other human beings, and that Jesus has promised to answer
our prayer that he materialize.
How do we explain the fact that this prayer goes unanswered, no matter who prays, despite Jesus'
promise that he will answer our prayers?
As you think about this, you will realize that Paul's story in the Bible must be false. Simply look at Paul's
story like any judge in a courtroom would. What Paul's story in 1 Cor 15 is suggesting is entirely
unprecedented - a man dead three days with mortal wounds came back to life. Yet there is no evidence
that it is true, and there are many alternative explanations for what Paul is saying. Paul could be
fabricating the story, Paul could have hallucinated or dreamed the meeting, Paul could have seen an
imposter, etc. In addition, no one is seeing Jesus today, even though it would be trivial and obvious for
Jesus to appear to people today just like he did with Paul.
Given this evidence, if this were any normal situation instead of a religious one, people would conclude
that what Paul is saying is untrue. There is zero evidence to support Paul's story, zero reason to believe it,
a motive to lie and plenty of alternative explanations. There is also the fact that much of the rest of the
Bible contains provably false stories. Plus the fact that it would be trivial for Jesus to provide the evidence
that Paul needs to confirm his story by reappearing on earth. Add to that the fact that Jesus has promised
to answer our prayers but refuses to materialize when we pray to him. The only thing to do is to reject
Paul's story. Every bit of evidence points to the fact that the resurrection story is a myth, nothing more.
What about Jesus' famous statement in the Bible, "Happy are those who have not seen yet still believe"?
What you realize is that this statement creates the perfect cover for a scam. Let's say you are Jesus, you
are a normal human being, you realize that you are going to die and you want to cover for this fact. Here
is what you would say: "Happy are those who have not seen yet still believe." What you are saying is, "I
exist, and the way I am going to show you that I exist is by not showing that I exist." For every other object
in the universe, the way that we know it exists is because the object provides evidence of its existence. If
there is no evidence for an object's existence, we call it imaginary (e.g. Leprechauns). But with Jesus, the
lack of evidence is turned into evidence. Quite clever, but obviously a scam.
If the resurrection were true, then Jesus would be answering prayers as he promises in the Bible. He
would also appear when people pray to see him. The fact is, as we saw in Section 1, there is no evidence
whatsoever that Jesus answers prayers.