My recent critical article on a new TV series by the BBC, ‘The Bible’s Buried Secrets’, brought a few sarcastic responses from atheists. I expected it, because atheists tend to be like that. Do I care? No, not a bit.
As I said before, ‘Bible’ historians nowadays (generally) are either revisionists or just plain atheists. Both have an agenda of unbelief, and both tend to poke fun at people who believe what scripture says. They do it not because they have proof to back them up, but because they abuse evidences that they flaunt as proofs. (For those academics still unsure about the vital difference between ‘evidence’ and ‘proof’, please read the relevant article). Very basic errors!
Of course, one of the striking flaws with the new series was not that an atheist Bible historian claimed to know better than Christian academic scholars of the Bible, but that as an historian her thesis was about archaeology! That is like a medical doctor basing his expertise on, say, the first aid training manual for McDonalds’ employees… there is a vague connection (because first aid is sort-of ‘medical’), but the two are separate issues.
The presenter ignored Christian Bible academics with equally fine qualifications, and instead steered the viewer towards her own assumptions (and that is all they are). They are assumptions based on weak hypotheses that have long been debunked by actual Bible scholars who believe what the Bible says. This is important, because an atheist always begins with a negative view of scripture, so theirs is hardly a genuine approach. Of course, the atheist will say a Christian is equally prejudiced by his beliefs. No, the case is very different, because the Christian is aware of facts!
Against all rationality, atheists come to the Bible for one reason only – to disprove it. Now, scientifically, there is nothing wrong with that. But, there is something wrong with it, when they vaunt their views on TV without telling viewers where they are coming from. It is also wrong when there is no valid and immediate come-back in front of the same viewers. And that is my contention.
One critic, who claimed to be an atheistic academic who supported the programme, said that people become atheists after studying the Bible. This is not true – those who are atheists come to the Bible simply to decry it. Their starting-point is one of prejudice against scripture and Christians. Again, if this is what some wish to do, that is okay. So long as there is immediate come-back from those who really know what the Bible says. Then, let the public accept whatever they wish. But, would they accept the atheistic view once they realised that Higher Criticism has been debunked thoroughly? Or, once they realise how seriously bad this form of critical analysis really is? Or, once they knew the BBC hates Christianity?
Higher Criticism is founded on an amazingly stupid idea - that academics, thousands of years after the fact, can tell us that the writers of scripture did not mean what they say. To ‘prove’ it, they produce all kinds of very silly ‘evidences’, pretending they are ‘proofs’. I have no problem calling this stupid – because that is what atheism is.
Maybe you might shout that this is very objectionable. But, is it more objectionable than an atheist, who has not got a clue about truth in scripture, hijacking a book they cannot possibly understand? Yes, they can read Hebrew or Greek. But, that does not mean they understand what they are reading. And they cannot understand, because of their unbelief. This is because the Bible is the word of God, Who gives understanding only to those who are saved. (I pause here so that atheists can guffaw). Atheists will tell us this is just a circular argument and they need not be saved to understand a mere book. And that is their downfall. It is not just another book – it is the only book that is God’s word, a word only understood by those who belong to Him. Best of all, I do not need to prove anything to them.
There is also the absolute arrogance of men and women who think they can tell us the ‘real meaning’ of scripture, when they contradict what was written! It is just their wild guesses, not academic rigor. The only way they can make scripture say something else, is if they invent their own goalposts and game rules! Indeed, an atheist Bible scholar is an oxymoron, no matter how much they shout. These species can only exist in their own environment. When exposed to genuine experts they shrink and die.
Why do I say atheism is absurd? That is also simple. Everything in life is obviously the handiwork of God. That many do not believe in Him is not relevant, because denial of something does not prove it does not exist. The very intricacy of life proves a God, or at least a creator with intelligence. Again, that some will not accept that is irrelevant. It is irrelevant because their disbelief is not rational. Nothing in science has ever disproved God, and though no Christian can prove God, at least his evidences are overwhelming in weight. Is this not the claim of scientists – that they do not say they have the truth, only beliefs based on weight of evidence? Atheists have no ‘weight of evidence’ on their side (and so resort to lies and sarcasm). That is why I call atheism absurd; stupid.
The atheistic Bible scholar is like a man locked outside a city, a city he has never ever seen, and boldly proclaims what the inside is like, complete with colour décor and architectural details! All he has got are his own mythical beliefs. And, being totally blind and dumb, he is not on a very sound foundation. He must be blind and dumb, because the whole of creation exhibits a mighty Creator. So, of all false belief systems, I find atheism the most pathetic, the most absurd.
© March 2011
Published on www.christiandoctrine.com
Bible Theology Ministries - PO Box 415, Swansea, SA5 8YH
Please 'Make a Donation' to support the work of Bible Theology Ministries