Why Faith Fails The Christian Delusion
Page 41
Oxford University Press, 1997), and in The New Interpreter:r Bible: New
Testament Survey (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2005).
4. Literally: rejecting this principle constitutes rejecting logic. Formally,
Bayes' theorem entails P(h I e.b) _ [P(h I b) x P(e I h.b)] / [[P(h I b) x P(e I h.b)]
+ [P(-h I b) x P(e I -h.b)] ], in which extraordinary claims are defined by P(h I b)
-* 0, and believability by P(h I e.b) > 0.5, and a strong explanation of the
evidence by P(e I h.b) ---> 1, which entails for an extraordinary claim to achieve
believability (even when that claim is a strong explanation of the evidence), P(e I
-h.b) 0. In other words, even in the best possible case, in order for an
extraordinary explanation to be believable, the evidence (as a whole) must be
extraordinarily improbable on any other explanation but the extraordinary one
and in direct proportion (i.e., the more extraordinary the claim, the more
extraordinarily improbable the evidence must otherwise be). On Bayes' theorem
and its application to history see Richard Carrier, "Bayes' Theorem for
Beginners: Formal Logic and Its Relevance to Historical Method," in Caesar.-A
journal forthe Critical Study of Religion and Human Values 3, no. 1 (2009): 26-
35.
5. The idea of "more" evidence need not mean only quantity but can include
quality and any other measures of evidentiary strength. Formally, "more
evidence" for any explanation h, when h is already a strong explanation and
extraordinary, is defined according to Bayes' theorem as any evidence that
reduces P(e I -h.b); that is, the less probable the evidence would be on any other
explanation, the "more" it supports the extraordinary explanation. There are two
other ways to have "more" evidence, but neither pertains here: (1) evidence that
increases P(e I h.b) is also "more" but can never make a difference in
believability in the case just defined; and (2) con-trafactually, if miracles like the
resurrection were commonplace (as common as people winning lotteries, for
example), then "resurrection" would not be an extraordinary claim, and thus
would not require extraordinary evidence, so if God started behaving today like
the incredible miracle worker the Bible depicts he was, that could also provide
"more" evidence for the resurrection.
6. For more examples and discussion see Richard Carrier, "Why I Am Not a
Christian," The Secular Web, 2006, http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/
richard_carrier/whynotchristian.html and the epistemological analyses of Matt
McCormick, The Case against Christ: Why Believing Is No Longer Reasonable
(forthcoming), and Chris Hallquist, UFOs, Ghosts and a Rising God-Debunking
the Resurrection of 7esus (Reasonable Press: 2009).
7. On these facts, see references in note 3.
8. On the ubiquity and significance of forgeries in early Judaism and
Christianity, see John Loftus, Why l Became an Atheist (Amherst, NY:
Prometheus Books, 2008), pp. 167-76.
9. See Richard Carrier, Not the Impossible Faith. Why Christianity Didn't
Need a Miracle to Succeed (Raleigh, NC: Lulu, 2009), pp. 161-218, 281-85,
329-68, 385-405; and chapter five, "Christian Rejection of the Natural
Philosopher" in The Scientist in the Early Roman Empire (forthcoming).
10. See, for example, 1 Corinthians 12-14; 2 Corinthians 12; Hebrews 2;
Galatians 1:12, 2:2; Ephesians 1:17, 3:3; 1 John 4:1; Mark 16:17-18; Acts 2:16-
18; and Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 30. For discussion of these
phenomena in the early church, see Gordon Fee, The First Epistle to the
Corinthians (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1987), pp. 590-99, 652-713. The
book of Acts also claims regular hallucinations and dream communications,
which were believed by the earliest Christians without hesitation: 2:1-4, 2:17-18,
7:55-57, 9:3-7, 10:9-17, 16:9-10, 22:6-11, 26:12-19, 27:21-25.
11. Again, on these facts, see references in note 3. But on what is claimed
regarding the Gospel of John specifically, see Herman Waetjen, The Gospel of
the Beloved Disciple-A Work in Two Editions (New York: T & T Clark, 2005);
C. K. Barrett, The Gospel according to St. John, 2d ed. (Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1978): pp. 15-26; C. H. Dodd, Historical Tradition in the
Fourth Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963); see also,
Carrier, "Spiritual Body," pp. 155-56, 191-93; Loftus, Why I Became an Atheist,
pp. 329-32; Robert Price, The Pre-Nicene New Testament (Salt Lake City:
Signature Books, 2006), pp. 665-718; and Andrew Gregory, "The Third Gospel?
The Relationship of John and Luke Reconsidered" in Challenging Perspectives
on the Gospel of John, ed. John Lierman (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), pp.
109-34 (although Gregory argues the reverse thesis, he nevertheless summarizes
the scholarship arguing the authors of John knew the Gospel of Luke).
12. Carrier, Not the Impossible Faith, pp. 186-87.
13. On how rampant Christian forging and meddling with documents was, see
Bart Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 2005), Lost
Christianities (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003), Lost Scriptures (New
York: Oxford University Press, 2003), and Orthodox Corruption of Scripture
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1993). See also note 8.
14. Jennifer Maclean, "Barabbas, the Scapegoat Ritual, and the Development
of the Passion Narrative," Harvard Theological Review 100, no. 3 (July 2007):
pp. 309-34. That even Mark's idea of placing women at the empty tomb has a
mythical basis, see Carrier, Not the Impossible Faith, pp. 297-321.
15. Demonstrated in Carrier, "The Plausibility of Theft," in Empty Tomb, pp.
360-64.
16. Arnold Ehrhardt, "Emmaus, Romulus and Apollonius," in Mullus:
Festschrift Theodor Klauser, eds. Alfred Stuiber and Alfred Hermann (Munster,
Westfalen: Aschendorff, 1964), pp. 93-99; and Carrier, "Spiritual Body," pp.
180-81, 191; and Carrier, Not the Impossible Faith, p. 33.
17. See, for example, Randel Helms, Gospel Fictions (Amherst, NY:
Prometheus Books, 1988) and Thomas Brodie, The Birthing of the New
Testament (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2004).
18. Contrast the chronology and depiction of events in Galatians 1-2 with that
of Acts 9, 10, and 15, or just Galatians 1:22 with Acts 7:58-8:4. On the mixed
reliability of Acts in general, see Richard Pervo, The Mystery of Acts (Santa
Rosa, CA: Polebridge, 2008), Richard Pervo, Acts: A Commentary
(Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2009), and Carrier, Not the Impossible Faith,
pp. 173-87.
19. See: Carrier, "Spiritual Body," with "Spiritual Body FAQ," http://www
.richardcarrier.info/SpiritualFAQhtml. Many other scholars have argued this:
Bruce Chilton, Rabbi Paul (New York: Doubleday, 2005), pp. 57-58; Peter
Lampe, "Paul's Concept of a Spiritual Body," in Resurrection: Theological and
Scientific Assessments, eds. Ted Peters et al. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
2002), pp. 103-14; Gregory Riley, Resurrection Reconsidered (Minneapolis,
MN: Fortress Press, 1995); Dale Martin, The Corinthian Body (New Haven, CT:
Yale University Press, 1995); Adela Collins, "The Empty Tomb in the Gospel
according to Mark," in Hermes and Athena
, eds. Eleonore Stump and Thomas
Flint (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1993), pp. 107-40; C. F.
Moule, "St. Paul and Dualism: The Pauline Conception of the Resurrection,"
New Testament Studies 12 (1966): 106-23; and James Tabor, "Leaving the
Bones Behind: A Resurrected Jesus Tradition with an Intact Tomb," in Sources
of the.7esus Tradition, ed. R.J. Hoffmann (forthcoming).
20. For this and other examples of beliefs impervious to evidence see Carrier,
"Plausibility of Theft," pp. 355-57; and Kris Komarnitsky, Doubting Jesus'
Resurrection (n.p.: CreateSpace, 2009), pp. 48-76, whose whole book is a must
read.
21. Jesus may indeed have been buried in the ground and not in a tomb:
Komarnitsky, Doubting, pp. 10-47; Peter Kirby, "The Case against the Empty
Tomb," in Empty Tomb, pp. 233-60.
22. Evidence the body could have been misplaced: Richard Carrier, "The
Burial of Jesus in Light of Jewish Law," in Empty Tomb, pp. 369-92, with
"Burial of Jesus FAQ," http://www.richardcarrier.info/BurialFAQhtml; and
Jeffery Jay Lowder, "Historical Evidence and the Empty Tomb Story," in Empty
Tomb, pp. 261-306. Evidence it could have been stolen: Carrier, "Plausibility of
Theft," with "Plausibility of Theft FAQ,"
http://www.richardcarrier.info/TheftFAQhtinl.
23. See S. Day and E. Peters, "The Incidence of Schizotypy in New Religious
Movements," Personality and Individual Differences 27, no. 1 (July 1999): 55-
67; C. Claridge and G. McCreery, "A Study of Hallucination in Normal
Subjects," Personality and Individual Differences 2, no. 5 (November 1996):
739-47.
For an excellent discussion of this fact (and references to further scholarship),
see Komarnitsky, Doubting, pp. 77-97, with extensive support in Carrier,
"Spiritual Body," pp. 151-54, 182-97; "Burial of Jesus," pp. 387-88; and "Isn't
the Idea of `Visions' Implausible?" in Carrier, "Spiritual Body FAQ,"
http://www.richard carrier.info/SpiritualFAQhtml#vsions; Keith Parsons, "Peter
Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli on the Hallucination Theory," in Empty Tomb, pp.
433-51; and James Crossley, "Against the Historical Plausibility of the Empty
Tomb Story and the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus," Journal for the Study of the
Historical Jesus 3, no. 2 (June 2005): 171-86.
The internal and comparative evidence is even more thoroughly discussed in
Michael Goulder, "The Baseless Fabric of a Vision," in Resurrection
Reconsidered, ed. Gavin D'Costa (Oxford: Oneworld Publications, 1996), pp.
48-61; "The Explana tory Power of Conversion Visions," in Jesus' Resurrection.-
Fact or Figment: A Debate between William Lane Craig & Gerd Ludemann, eds.
Paul Copan and Ronald Tacelli (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2000),
pp. 86-103; Gerd Ludemann, The Resurrection of Jesus (Minneapolis, MN:
Fortress Press, 1994), What Really Happened to Jesus (Louisville, KY:
Westminster John Knox, 1995), and The Resurrection of Christ(Amherst, NY:
Prometheus Books, 2004).
Modern examples are numerous: Roland Littlewood, "From Elsewhere:
Prophetic Visions and Dreams among the People of the Earth," Dreaming 14,
nos. 2-3 (June-September 2004): 94-106; Felicitas Goodman et al., Trance,
Healing, and Hallucination (New York: Wiley, 1974); Edward Rice, John Frum
He Come-Cargo Cults & Cargo Messiahs in the South Pacific (Garden City, NY:
Doubleday, 1974); I. C. Jarvie, The Revolution in Anthropology (London:
Routledge, 1964); Peter Worsley, The Trumpet Shall Sound A Study of "Cargo"
Cults in Melanesia, 2nd ed. (London: MacGibbon & Kee, 1968).
24. On how this could have happened, see comparative evidence in
Komarnitsky, Doubting, pp. 98-129, with additional discussion in Carrier,
"Spiritual Body," pp. 151-52, 158-61, and "Burial of Jesus," pp. 387-88; and a
more recent find that might have been involved: Israel Knohl, "`By Three Days,
Live': Messiahs, Resurrection, and Ascent to Heaven in Hazon Gabriel," The
Journal of Religion 88, no. 2 (April 2008): 147-58.
25. Most persuasively argued in Koinarnitsky, Doubting, pp. 48-76, supported
by Carrier, "Burial of Jesus," p. 392 n. 55.
26. Jesus might even have enhanced his followers' apocalyptic belief by
making it a centerpiece of his ministry. See Bart Ehrman, Jesus: Apocalyptic
Prophet of the New Millennium (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999); and
John Loftus's chapter "At Best Jesus Was a Failed Apocalyptic Prophet" in the
present volume.
27. For why this would make sense within the culture of the time, see Carrier,
Not the Impossible Faith, pp. 281-85; and Carrier, "Whence Christianity? A
Meta-Theory for the Origins of Christianity," Journal of Higher Criticism 11, no.
1 (Spring 2005): 22-34 (though "Passover" is there conflated with "Yom
Kippur"; Jesus was figured as fulfilling both). On the powerful role of public
honor and shame in motivating even suicidal behavior in antiquity, see Carrier,
Not the Impos sible Faith, pp. 219-45, 2 59-96.
28. That no miracle was needed for Christianity to succeed is extensively
argued in Carrier, Not the Impossible Faith.
29. See Carrier, Not the Impossible Faith, pp. 219-45, with: Alan Segal,
"Apocalypticism and Millenarianism: The Social Backgrounds to the
Martyrdoms in Daniel and Qumran," in Life After Death: A History of the
Afterlife in Western Religion (New York: Doubleday, 2004), pp. 285-321; W. H.
C. Frend, "Martyrdom and Political Oppression," in The Early Christian World,
ed. Philip Esler (London: Rout ledge, 2000), 2: 815-39; Arthur Droge and James
Tabor, A Noble Death: Suicide and Martyrdom among Christians and Jews in
Antiquity (San Francisco: Harper, 1992); Robin Lane Fox, "Persecution and
Martyrdom," Pagans & Christians (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1987), pp. 419-
92.
30. Against the bizarre rebuttal that God wouldn't give us any good evidence
lest he coerce us into belief, see Carrier, Senseand Goodness without God, pp.
285-86, and "Why I Am Not a Christian" (particularly section 1, "God Is
Silent"),
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/whynotchristian.html#
silentgod. That the "official" visions of Jesus ended with Paul also makes more
sense if Jesus never really rose from the dead: Carrier, "Spiritual Body," p. 195.
31. For yet other examples of how the evidence could have been better yet in
fact supports the contrary, see Loftus, Why I Became an Atheist, pp. 192-96.
That many key (yet weird) elements of the Jesus story were not unique but in
fact typical of religions of that era, see Carrier, NottheImpossibleFaith, pp. 17-20
and "Spiritual Body," pp. 180-82; Tryggve Mettinger, The Riddle of
Resurrection.- "Dying and Rising Gods" in theAncientNearEast (Stockholm:
Almgvist & Wiksell International, 2001); Alan Dundes et al., In Quest of the
Hero (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990); and Charles Talbert,
What Is a Gospel? (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1977).
32. Formally, on Bayes' theorem, since an extraordinary explanation entails
P(h I b) -* 0, but the evidence (as just demonstrated) is actually more probable
on -h than h, entailing P(e I -h.b) > P(e I h.b), it follows that P(h I e.b) must
necessarily be < 0.5, which means such an extraordinary explanation isn't
believable even if P(e I -h.b) -* 0 (which still follows even if P(h I b) is merely <
0.5, and miracles are certainly far less common than that).
33. See Carrier, Sense and Goodness without God and "Why I Am Not a
Christian."
n their chapters for this part of the book, Price and Carrier have surveyed
ample reasons not to believe the extraordinary claims of the New Testament
(NT). But even if you believe the NT is reliable, Christianity still remains
untenable. I'll argue that even if the NT is somewhat reliable, then Jesus was an
apocalyptic prophet in the tradition of other Jewish apocalyptists beginning in
the Old Testament (OT) and stretching down through John the Baptist to Paul the
Apostle. These apocalyptists all predicted an impending apocalypse, or ending of
the world. I'll argue that Jesus was a failed apocalyptic prophet because the "Son
of Man" did not come in his generation as predicted, nor did the consummation
of the ages, also known as the eschaton, from which we get the word
eschatology.
This presents Christians with a serious and even fatal problem for their faith,
which is largely unrelated to any skeptical doubts about the possibility of
miracles. We can derive this conclusion from the relevant texts themselves.
Either Jesus was a failed prophet or the NT isn't even somewhat reliable. Either
way, this falsifies Christianity. If we cannot trust the NT, then the basis for
Christian beliefs fail. But if Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet, then surely he
wouldn't get something so important so dead wrong.I
Jewish/ Christian apocalyptic writings are encoded revelations using cryptic
signs that predict an impending apocalypse. The authors describe horrible events
to fall on pagans who are not among God's chosen ones. They express a sort of
verbal eschatological revenge upon their oppressors for their wicked deeds.
After the apocalypse is to take place, they also predicted the establishment of
God's new kingdom on a new, refashioned earth with God's people reigning over
the nations.2
To see a history of these types of apocalyptic movements since the days of
Jesus, I recommend Jonathon Kirsch's readable and illuminating book, The
History of the End of the World.3 From the Montanists in the early second
century CE to modern writers like Hal Lindsey, author of The Late Great Planet
Earth, and in almost every generation in between, there have been millenarian
predictions of the consummation of the ages. In our day, Tim LaHaye and Jerry
B. Jenkins have vividly described the supposed impending doom of the world
and the coming again of Jesus in their Left Behind book series.
Various millenarian doomsday prophets have set dates for the apocalyptic end
of the world in the great and final battle of Armageddon. They have also played
what Jonathon Kirsch calls "pin the tail on the antiChrist" 4 by naming people
from the Pope to Mohammed, Napoleon, Hitler, Mussolini, Henry Kissinger,
Saddam Hussein and even Barack Obama as the antiChrist. Some of these cult
movements have been violent and dangerous, like those initiated by Charles
Manson, Jim Jones, David Koresh, and Marshall Applewhite.
Given the propensity of human beings to be fascinated with the end of the
world, and given the many doomsday prophets throughout history, it should not
surprise us if the Jesus cult movement was just another one of them. These
predictions and movements are a dime a dozen, so to speak, and to this date they
have all been wrong. At best, the Jesus cult fits this same profile. And its