Why I Became An Atheist

I'm John W. Loftus, the author of the book Why I Became an Atheist: A Former Preacher Rejects Christianity.

It's unfortunate that the subtitle to my book is a bit misleading. Skeptics think "a former preacher" never knew much to begin with, while Christian philosophers think "a former preacher" cannot challenge them. But my book is being recommended by Christian apologists like Drs. Norman Geisler, James F. Sennett, Mark Linville, Dan Lambert, and Richard Knopp. It's being used in apologetics and atheism classes in both Christian and secular colleges.

My book is being hailed as the "best atheist book of the decade," a "tour de force," the "golden standard," containing the "definitive refutation" of Christianity that stands "head and shoulders above all others." It's being described as "mind-blowing," "a 428 page monster of reason and logic," "awesome," "comprehensive," "fresh, audacious and thought-inspiring." Readers are saying it's "a massive and systematic refutation of the claims of Christianity" containing "a crushing cumulative case," which is "invincibly fatal" to the faith.

I don't claim these recommendations are deserved. But that's what readers are saying. If what they're saying is even partially true, then don't let the subtitle mislead you. Just get it and judge for yourself.

Here's what they're saying:

First, a few recommendations from Christians:

 ----------------

Dr. Norman L. Geisler, Christian apologist and author of The Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics: "John’s book is a thoughtful and intellectually challenging work, presenting arguments that every honest theist and Christian should face.”

----------------

Dr. James F. Sennett, Christian philosopher and author of Modality, Probability, and Rationality: A Critical Examination of Alvin Plantinga's Philosophy: "I think his book by Loftus is an important contribution to the current intellectual defense of unbelief and appreciate it for the seriousness with which it takes faith and the intellectual case to be made for it. Scholarly unbelief is far more sophisticated, far more defensible than any of us would like to believe. John W. Loftus is a scholar and a former Christian who was overwhelmed by that sophistication. His story is a wake up call to the church: it's time for us to start living in, and speaking to, the real world."

In a published review for the Winter 2010 Stone-Campbell Journal Sennett wrote: "Loftus presents a compendium of well-reasoned arguments (wrapped together nicely in a steadily developed “cumulative case”) against the central beliefs of Christianity. His arguments are not the easily-refuted caricatures so often offered in Bible college textbooks and Sunday school materials. They are the genuine article – clear, well-articulated statements of plausible arguments by one who finds them overwhelmingly convincing. I dare say very few preachers, teachers, and Bible students have its likes on their shelves. And it should be there."

---------------------------

Dr. Mark D. Linville, Christian philosopher and contributor to the Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology: “Of the spate of books coming from the so-called 'New Atheists' that have appeared in the past few years—Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris, et al—John W. Loftus’s critique of Christian theism is by far the most sophisticated. Where, say, Dawkins might be found attacking a man of straw, Loftus understands and assesses the arguments of today’s premier Christian apologists and philosophers. Evangelicals cannot afford to ignore Why I Became an Atheist.”

--------------------

Roscoe on Amazon wrote: "I was a Christian for 26 years, two of which I was on staff with Young Life Ministries, after reading this book I willfully set my "faith" down. This book helped me realize that my God was a myth and that the Bible was indeed a product of man and not God. When doubting Christians ask me what one book they should read, I say without hesitation, Why I Became an Atheist by John Loftus. I currently have two of my Christian friends reading his book and they are stumped."

-------------------

By "Fox" on Amazon. This book changed my life: "As a former fundamentalist Christian of 26 years, I shudder to think what my life may have turned out like, had I not randomly spotted this book at my local Good Will. I picked it up, expecting to have a good laugh at the stupid atheist. I never expected it would completely alter my life forever.

When I picked up this book I was 100% certain that the Bible was the infallible word of God. When I finished it, I was 90% on my way to complete Atheism. All it took to get me to 100% were a few You Tube videos about the "big bang" and evolution. Once I realized that these "theories" were actually equatable to scientific certainties, I was a full-on Atheist."

----------------------

By rowley32256 wrote: John's book "is the "Gold Standard for Atheist Apologetics. As a believer, I found this book by far the most impressive justification I had ever read of atheism and commend it to fellow theists who are under the mistaken impression that atheists are necessarily narrow-minded, ignorant or irrational."

--------------------------

The following recommendations are by non-believers :

--------------------------

Tom Flynn, editor of Free Inquiry April/ May 2010: "Doubting Christians beginning to doubt will find this book a juggernaut. If you seek an encyclopedic compendium of arguments against almost any imaginable defense of the Christian faith, this is your book. The reader seeking a comprehensive disproof of Christianity as contemporary evangelicals defend it can do little better than to consult this volume."

----------------------

Dr. Richard Carrier, author of Sense and Goodness Without God: "John's book addresses almost every conceivable argument for Evangelical Christianity in extraordinary and sobering detail. Every important aspect of intellectual Evangelical Christian belief comes in for critique, and often in more depth than you'll find in any other pro-atheism tome. Indeed, unlike, say, Sam Harris or Richard Dawkins, Loftus is a fully-informed insider who knows what he's talking about. He was fully immersed in making the very case for Christianity that he now tears down. He was trained by the best, is well-read in the field, and gets all the nuances that apologists accuse pop atheists (like Harris and Dawkins) of missing."

"One of the best things that Loftus contributes to the field of atheist philosophy, which I think is required reading for everyone, on both sides of the debate, is his Outsider Test. Given that, and his thorough scope and erudition, I doubt any honest, rational, informed Evangelical can remain in the fold after reading this book. Even though any Christian could pick at bits, the overall force of his case is, IMO, invincibly fatal." To read more see this post.

--------------------------

Dr. John Beversluis, author of C.S. Lewis and the Search for Rational Religion: "No review can begin to do justice to an ambitious book of this scope or to the sustained theological, philosophical, scientific, textual, and historical critique of Christianity that it contains. Suffice it to say at the outset that I have never read a book that presents such a massive and systematic refutation of the claims of Christianity, and I have seldom read a book that marshals evidence (from such a wide variety of disciplines) and documents its claims in such painstaking detail."

-----------------

Dr. Valerie Tarico, author of The Dark Side: How Evangelical Teachings Corrupt Love and Truth: “What is unusual about Loftus is his breadth and depth of research in defense of the Christian faith before finally rejecting his faith. Loftus applies himself in this book with the same intellectual rigor he had applied to defending the faith, and effectively dissects those very same arguments. I found myself marveling at the impressively contorted reasoning used by apologists through the ages in defense of their received traditions. They are worth reading from the standpoint of cognitive psychology alone.”

-------------------------
Jerry Coyne, author of Why Evolution is True wrote:

I want to give two thumbs up to John Loftus’s book, Why I Became an Atheist. Despite its title, it’s far more than the story of Loftus’s journey from Christian minister to outspoken atheist. It’s really a thoughtful and well-documented dissection of religious arguments and theological claims. And there are two nice chapters on the “problem of suffering,” in which Loftus takes on and destroys the pathetic arguments offered by the faithful for why a good and powerful God allows gratuitous suffering. Link

-------------------------

By Johnathan Pearce (on Amazon U.K.): "A tour de force in the world of philosophy and theology. This far outdoes the likes of Dawkins, Hitchens et al, because it argues against theism using a theistic viewpoint. It is a much more capable and thorough approach than work from other such writers and offers serious food for thought. The Problem of Evil chapters are absolute winners, and should be read by anyone who might believe in an omnipotent/scient/benevolent God. Should be on the bookshelf of every critical thinker." 

---------------------------

David Van Allen, webmaster of ex-christian.net: "This book is an absolute 'must have' for anyone who has left the Christian faith or is having serious intellectual doubts about the Christian religion. While the book starts out explaining some of his experiential reasons for leaving Christianity, the volume goes far beyond a mere personal testimony and dives deeply into the elemental contradictions of Christianity. Loftus deals evenly with the issues, carefully explaining the strengths and weaknesses of each argument. Loftus' coverage of the problems inherent in the claims of Christianity is comprehensive. Much of what he wrote sounds like an echo of many of my own introspections except expressed through the well oiled mind of an academician."

---------------------------

David Mills, author of Atheist Universe: "John W. Loftus is to atheism what Tiger Woods is to golf, or what Babe Ruth was to baseball. Loftus has provided, in this superb and entertaining volume, the crown jewel of the new atheist movement. As much as I admire and enjoy Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens and Dennett, Loftus is, far and away, my favorite author on this riveting subject. Loftus' esteemed reputation within the freethought community is indeed richly deserved. But this book exceeded even my highest expectations."

-----------------

Dr. Hector Avalos, Biblical scholar and author of The End of Biblical Studies: “Why I Became an Atheist combines a dose of Augustine's Confessions with a cauldron of unremitting rationalism to yield one of the most potent antidotes to Christianity on the market today. If there is such a thing as the New Atheism, then John W. Loftus is one of the standard bearers. Loftus is a former Christian evangelical apologist who became an atheist, and he tells us why in a detail and a depth worthy of the best atheist writers today. It is a well-written, informed, and potent critique of religion and Christianity.”

----------------------------

Luke Muehlhauser of Common Sense Atheism ranks the book among the best books on both sides of this debate. He goes so far as to say it's the "best atheist book of the decade" which is extremely high praise given that he goes on to recommend books by Graham Oppy and Nick Trakakis.

---------------------

Christopher Hallquist, president of Atheists, Humanists, and Agnostics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison: “The Outsider Test for Faith chapter should earn Loftus a permanent place in the history of critiques of religion.”

---------------------

Edward Tabash, Chair, First Amendment Task Force, Council for Secular Humanism: “This is a wonderful book! I believe that there is no ex-theist who has done a better job of profoundly refuting the claims of religion. You are one of the most precious intellectual treasures an otherwise benighted society can have.”

----------------------

Dan Barker, author of Godless: "John has taken the claims of Christianity seriously, diving in with both feet (full immersion atheism!), unflinchingly examining the exact sources that believers urge us to ponder. When you read Loftus's penetrating analyses, you have no choice but to discard the truth claims of Christianity. As a former fundamentalist minister who has followed a similar path from apostle to apostate, I empathize completely with the deep struggle Loftus had to make in order to shed his former cherished beliefs. I respect his scholarship, but more than that, I admire his courage. There are many treasures in this book, as well as provocative and controversial arguments, all presented with a crystal-clear and brutal honesty that is rare in religious scholarship. Loftus is a true freethinker, willing to follow the facts wherever they happen to lead." 

----------------------

Michael Shermer, Publisher of Skeptic magazine, and the author of How We Believe, The Science of Good and Evil, and Why Darwin Matters. "There is trend sweeping American culture today on the God question, with commentators on all sides ringing in with their opinions and theories about whether God exists or not, the origins of morality with or without God, and the origins and importance of religion. What is unique about John W. Loftus's book is his perspective: a one time Christian apologist who changed his mind and became an atheist. Here we get both sides of the debate between two covers, an honest and honorable look into the soul of belief and what it means to be a nonbeliever."

--------------------

Jeffery Amos, Blog owner of Failing the Insider Test: "In the last year I've devoured numerous books on religion. My rankings are based on their relevance to the question “but is it true?” In order of best to worst:

1. Why I Became An Atheist: A Former Preacher Rejects Christianity– John W. Loftus. Head. And. Shoulders. Above. All. Others. If your book shopping is based on my recommendations, stop reading my blog and go buy it right now.

This is the best refutation of Evangelical Christianity that I have read. Most of his arguments are a one-two punch of philosophy and biblical analysis. The first hit shows how (insert doctrine of choice) is meaningless/contradictory/impossible and the second hit undercuts the support for the idea actually being true. His philosophical analysis is consistently stellar - he dismantles all the little things in theology that you are supposed to learn but not think about. His biblical arguments switch between the rifle and shotgun approach - he spends the better part of a chapter on a few individual problems, and with others issues his gives a long lists of problems with little elaboration." See here to read more.

----------------------

Jason Long, author of Biblical Nonsense,and The Religious Condition: "John's book is the book I wish I could write. It is probably the best comprehensive book of the issues I’ve read. If you’re looking for an in depth scholarly discussion of apologetic views, by all means, read John’s book."

----------------------------

Joe E. Holman, founder of www.ministerturnsatheist.org, and author of Project Bible Truth: A Minister Turns Atheist and Tells All: “The book's central strength lies in its information-rich content. John speaks the language of competent and well-known Christian scholars and apologists of both liberal and conservative affiliation, employing their own words against them, demonstrating that they themselves recognize the grave position they are in when facing the critical eye of a skeptical, modern world. The Outsider Test for Faith is one of those chapters that says what every doubter of religion has always thought but perhaps never said so well. The chapter is an absolute jewel. This work covers some ground that is seldom touched on in other comparable freethought works.”

----------------------

Guy P. Harrison, author of 50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God: “John W. Loftus has written an important book that should be read by every Christian who cares about truth and reality. This is not the angry rant of some disgruntled former believer with an axe to grind. Loftus is thorough, fair and convincing. As a former Christian minister and apologist who became an atheist, he knows both sides of the belief question very well. The insights and detailed information contained in this book make for enlightening reading. The chapter on superstition in the Bible was nothing less than mind-blowing. I highly recommend this book."

----------------------

Dr. Frank R. Zindler: "In the cracks between the spaces in time I have been reading your magnum opus and am enjoying it a lot. You produce a crushing cumulative case. Bravo!"

--------------------

Ken W. Daniels, author of "Why I Believed: Reflections of a Former Missionary," wrote: "As a former evangelical missionary who lost my faith nearly a decade ago…I believe the process could have been cut significantly shorter if John's book had been available to me years before my crisis finally came to a head. The value of this volume lies…in its bringing together in a single accessible package most of the important criticisms that have been advanced against the Christian faith (and theism in general) since the Enlightenment.

I found Loftus' treatment of the Atonement to be particularly incisive. I have not read a more succinct and effective rejoinder to the penal substitution theory than his.

John's book is an unremitting battery of helpfully organized arguments against orthodox Christianity. Well done, John!

----------------------

Jeffrey Mark, author of Christian No More: "John Loftus is not only a former preacher as the title says, but a trained theologian with advanced degrees. He spent enormous amounts of time learning and perfecting the philosophical arguments that he would later come to refute with this book. Loftus meticulously breaks their arguments down and shows why, when given careful consideration, they fall apart, ultimately leaving no God, no Jesus, and no Holy Spirit. The problem with many atheist vs. Christian debates is that the parties involved have drastically different training. But Loftus, on the other hand, is in a unique position, as he can see eye-to-eye with the Christian theologians. He knows and understands their arguments and can speak their language. This book will change minds. Already many people have let go of their beliefs as a result of this book, and surely many more will."

---------------------

Dr. A.M. Weisberger, non-theistic philosopher and author of Suffering Belief: Evil and the Anglo-American Defense of Theism: Loftus writes with great honesty and candor about his experiences from both sides of the theistic/nontheistic landscape. His chapters on the problem of evil offer a fine overview of the complex historical debate over the obstacle that evil presents to rational theistic belief. His writing is admirable for maintaining conceptual accuracy while engendering accessibility for the non-technical reader. Highly recommended -- both as a valuable sourcebook for all involved in religious debate, and as a good read.

-------------------

Dr. Robert M. Price, author of The Reason-Driven Life, The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man, and The Paperback Apocalypse. “In this fascinating work you will witness the profound processes that led John W. Loftus out of a deep but finally wrong-headed commitment to Christ and the Christian worldview. There is no way the book will not be of great help with your own journey. For years, apologists have thrown down the gauntlet. Now it is being picked up--by their own students!

 ----------------

Mike Tenenbaum, author of Blessed Assurance? A Demonstration that Christian Fundamentalism is Simply False: "I found this book to be very thoughtful, intelligent, well written, and, what can I say, it was a hard book to put down. I also have written a book critiquing Christianity. But I have to say, if you're going to only read one book on the matter, read John's. If you're interested in a second, maybe check out mine. lol ;) But having been immersed in the faith for myself for many years, and since becoming an atheist, having read many books along these lines, I have to say that John's book sets the gold standard."

 ---------------------

Keith Parsons: "WIBA is a serious book that deals with serious arguments. It is two or three cuts above most of the "new atheist" polemic."

---------------------

Peter Phua, writing for a CFI Blog said my book, "...outlines a comprehensive series of arguments - both philosophical and historical - against the truth claims made by the Christian religion."

"Loftus shows great breadth in the topics he covers, and he discusses the important issues at hand with an appropriate degree of depth, succinctly addressing the best replies to his arguments. The problem of evil is dealt with particularly well. Loftus does not straw-man his opponent's arguments, rather, he summarizes them in their strongest form and takes them head on. It's a book I highly recommend for current (and former) Christians who seek to familiarize themselves with an excellent contemporary summary of the strongest criticisms against the Christian faith."

--------------------------

Jeffery Jay Lowder on the Secular Outpost: "I give this book two thumbs way up. In addition to courageously sharing his personal story, Loftus applies his considerable training and expertise into developing a cumulative case against Christianity and for atheism. I cannot think of another book like it on the market. Loftus is clearly familiar with the work of evangelical apologists like Copan, Craig, Geisler, and Moreland, as his book is filled with references to their work and objections to their arguments. In fact, his book might best be described as a “counter-apologetics” textbook. Anyone who reads this blog (The Secular Outpost) but has not yet read Why I Became an Atheist should do so.

 -----------------

Skeptic Dave wrote: "Loftus has succeeded in giving us a very nice all-inclusive overview of every possible card the Christian apologist will play, and refutes them well. Naturally, would you expect anything less from someone who used to play all those cards?" It is a "428 page monster of reason and logic."

-------------

Dr. William Harwood, author of Mythology's Last Gods: Yahweh and Jesus: “Loftus wrote his book primarily to explain why he ceased to be a believer, but its main value is that it spells out the falsifying evidence that finally cured him and will cure anyone who reads it. Loftus has brought together sufficient evidence of religion’s Achilles’ heel to cause all but the most intransigent believers to ask themselves: Could he be right?”

--------------------------

Fintan Amphlett on Facebook wrote: "I would honestly rank your book alongside the best I've ever read of Hume and Russell."

-------------------------

A. Hawkins: “If there was one book that I would recommend to a Christian to make him see his religion from the outside it would be this. It's written in a language that a Christian would understand. I believe that John's approach is the best and more notably I think it will have the greatest affect on the Christian. The writing and argumentation shows many years of dealing with the debate at the highest level. Come on Christian, read it. You won't encounter a better attack of your faith."

------------------

Jennifer Weisbrodt: "'Why I became an Atheist'" by John W. Loftus is excellent from cover-to-cover. This is one of my absolute favorite books that deals with Atheism and I will continue to suggest it to others and use it as a source-book for my own future reference as well…this book is fresh, audacious and thought-inspiring, and I recommend it to all."

----------------

Sarah Schoonmaker wrote: "Loftus’ book offers the college level a solid introduction to Atheist arguments, while offering thorough responses to popular Christian Theist claims. This resource introduces Atheist objections to Christians, which many have never dealt with them. For even the seasoned Christian apologist, this work still presents a solid challenge.

-----------------

Chris Knight-Griffin: “If you have questions about your faith, read this book. Those nagging questions are addressed and exposed. Every skeptic should have this concise reference book on the desk, dog-eared, tagged, and highlighted. I’ve read Sam Harris' book, The End of Faith, and Richard Dawkins' book, The God Delusion. The other books hit the target but John’s book hits the bulls-eye. I doubt anyone with faith could walk away from this book with that faith intact. Awesome book!!!! It is honestly everything I've been looking for so far in my ‘quest’ for knowledge. Thank you!”

-------------------

Andrew Atkinson: “I have read hundreds of Christian Apologetics books. I have read all of Lewis, all of Schaeffer, all of Peter Kreeft, all of Dr. Geisler’s works along with the writings of Josh McDowell, William Lane Craig, Ravi Zacharias, J.P. Moreland, Richard Swinburne, N.T Wright, Paul Copan, etc. I was until recently enrolled at Dr. Geisler’s school to study apologetics and philosophy. This year I decided in order to be fair and honest to read all the top skeptical books on religion. John’s book was one of the first I read. It was the first skeptic book I read that made me seriously realize that I could be dead wrong! I think John has written by far the best overall refutation of Christianity in print. John’s book is much more accessible, it covers a lot more arguments, it has the best chapters on the problem of evil you can find, it is more interesting to read, it refutes more apologetic arguments then any other book, and it addresses more central issues.”

---------------------

Greg Meeuwsen: “I have read numerous publications on this topic, but I don't believe I've ever seen as many great reasons to reject religion in one place. John’s arguments are numerous and rock-solid. The level of research and brutal logic applied to the Bible is absolutely stunning, as is the sheer number of examples given. There is "no stone unturned", as Loftus takes on nearly every apologist angle ever conceived. This book will give more insight into scholarly unbelief than you ever thought possible.

------------------------

By D. Weatherford (Spanish Fork, Utah): "This is the best all-encompassing critique of Christianity that I have been able to find so far (and I have read A LOT)....if you want a convincing interpretation of the findings of biblical scholarship, archaeology, and philosophy, this is the book you are looking for...the book is so great that I will likely use it often as a reference for further study. Highly recommended!"

-----------------------

Stephanie wrote: "I have read numerous books regarding the subject matter you covered in your book and by far, John, yours is the best one for Christians to read. There is no drug we can give a Christian to get them to see how irrational Christianity and all other religions truly are. However, in my opinion, this book is next best thing."

---------------

R. Baldwin (Panama City, FL) wrote: "Definitive Refutation." "After reading the slew of atheist works published in the last 5 years or so, I was pleasantly surprised by Loftus' comprehensive refutation of every supposedly rational support of Christian positions. This book saves me a lot of research because of Loftus' knowledge of the Bible, the theological and philosophical arguments of contemporary Christian apologists as well as the great Christian theologians and deist philosophers of the past. Only a former pastor and Christian apologist could have written a work of this depth. Every Christian should read this book and judge for themselves whether their arguments stand up to a true spirit of objective analysis. Every skeptic, freethinker, agnostic or atheist who already observed the fact that agnostics and atheists have the best arguments on their side will enjoy the clarity and power with which their point of view is expressed in this book."

-------------

Kirby Wiese of Vacaville, CA, wrote: "I've been studying religion for most of my life...I've concentrated on Christianity, since that is what I was brought up on, and since I have to deal with it every day in some way living in this country. Having read the recent books by Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris, et al I wanted to let you know that, in my opinion, while those books drive nails into Christianity (and religion in general) your book drops a ton of bricks on it! I think your handling of the problem of evil would convert any CLEAR THINKING person away from the Christian concept of God."

----------------------

Dave Perry (Tampa, Florida): "I recently completed reading Why I Became an Atheist and would highly recommend this book to both Christians and Atheists. Loftus is a brilliant thinker who methodically and poignantly addresses controversial issues regarding the Christian faith. In doing so, he demonstrates courtesy to Christians and their faith as he thoughtfully and painstakingly addresses a myriad of apologetic arguments, acknowledging their merits while at the same time exposing their flaws. The book is truly a scholarly work."

---------------

Stephen St. Clair wrote: "I just completed your book and....To say I found it insightful and worthwhile would be a gross understatement. I have yet to read ONE book that addresses all of the issues more cogently (and accurately in my opinion), and I have read a great deal on both sides of this eternal debate/inquiry. Moreover, I compliment you on your efforts to maintain a writing style that made it “comfortable” read. In short, thank you for taking the time to author what should be required reading for everyone."

---------------------

Matthew J. Green: “This book is one of the best introductory texts on the philosophical problems with Christianity.”

----------------------

Geoff M. Arnold (Seattle, WA): "Loftus is a scribe: the apologist, the teacher. He was the defender of faith against its critics, and with the detailed knowledge that he acquired in this role, he has become the sharpest critic of religious apology...If you have read some of the authorities that Loftus cites - Mackie, Martin, et al - I would still recommend his book, because he pulls all of the threads together in a compact and accessible manner. If you are unfamiliar with the literature, Loftus may be all you need."

---------------------

Anthony Lawson (Kentucky USA): "I thoroughly enjoyed this book and at times just couldn't put it down. John's deconversion story was very moving and I'm sure rings true for a great many that have gone through the heartache of abandoning the Christian faith. John covers a lot of material in as little space as possible. He deals with each topic adequately and gives the reader references for further reading in the notes and bibliography. All in all one of the best books that I have read on the subject and highly recommended."

--------------------------

Paul Harrison: “If you read Christian apologetics, you owe it to yourself to have this anthology of the best arguments against Christian apologetics in your library.”

You Should Get the "Atheism Tapes"!

The Atheism Tapes are well produced, very instructive, and will be a great addition to the library of anyone interested in the God question. Jonathan Miller is a very good interviewer who invites his aptly chosen important guests to tell us what they really think and why. I found myself learning something very interesting with each interview, and I plan on viewing them again. Each episode can be used as a discussion starter for groups interested in these issues, too. We should all be thankful these interviews were not lost on the editor's cutting floor! Buy the DVD exclusively from Alive Mind.

Does God Exist? A Debate Between Rabbi David Wolpe and Sam Harris.

Link

William Lane Craig v. Robert M. Price Debate the Resurrection

This debate took place on the campus of Ohio State University in 1999. This is a spirited debate! Link.

A Comparison of Exodus to Egyptian History

A More Plausible Explanation for the Exodus Based on Egyptian History.
Submitted by Trou.

I used to think the Bible was the truth, every word of it. I studied it, assured of this fact, and used it as the backbone of my worldview. But as I became more educated and exposed to new ideas, I began to realize that the Bible was not true and it could not provide answers to the questions and challenges that were generated by scientific knowledge. Yet, I was fascinated by the stories told in the Bible. How did they come to be told and from where did these stories originate? These were the initial questions that spurred me to read as much as I could on the subject.

In my reading, I happened upon quite a few authors who wrote of the Egyptian origins of the Jewish people and religion. Although they do not all agree on the details, the general Egyptian genesis thesis can explain the early stories of the Bible, the literary figures and the religious concepts that we find in Genesis. There is very little if any historical or archaeological evidence for the early time period when Israel became a people and no historical evidence whatsoever of the patriarchs, the flood, and the exodus that corroborates the Bible version. However, there is historical and archaeological evidence for events and religious beliefs that can be shown to bear a striking similarity to the events as described in the Bible. Let me give you a background of the political and religious climate of the 18th dynasty and make a case that this was the time, the place and the events that the Book of Genesis based its myths on.

In the first part of the 19th century the remains of the city of Akhetaten were found. This was the first anyone new of the city and scholars and Egyptologists found evidence of the existence of a pharaoh who was not included in the pharaoh's list of succession. It was soon evident that this pharaoh, named Akhenaten, had been blotted out of history and the city that he had built had been destroyed.

He began his reign under the name of Amenhotep IV and ruled as coregent with his father Amenhotep III. After the first few years of his reign he changed his name to Akhenaten to signify his devotion to the god Aten instead of the god Amen. At this point his whole reign became first and foremost about the worship of Aten. This was not unusual except that this was done to the exclusion of, and not in addition to, the worship of the other gods of the Egyptian pantheon. Akhenaten funded only the priesthood that was devoted to Aten and ignored all the rest of the priesthood to their detriment. He built a new city call Akhetaten in the honor of his Aten and situated it away from the traditional worship centers of the other gods. Such disrespect for the gods and the traditional priesthood would not be forgotten.

Akhenaten is credited with being the world's first monotheist. He was innovative in several things that today we associate with Judaism. Akhenaten didn't allow any graven images of the god Aten. As the unseen God, Aten could not be represented in animal or human form as the other false gods were depicted. Aten was … "an abstract entity not known to man but designated only by a symbol of the daylight that radiated from the disk of the sun by which his power was manifest." (Akhenaten, p262, 245) This disc had rays emanating from it with ankh symbols at the end of the rays positioned near the nostrils of the pharaoh and his wife. This was an indication of the fact that Aten was responsible for the breath of life also a concept familiar to those of us who have read the creation story in the Bible.

The great hymn of Aten reads, concept for concept, just like Psalms 104. Many think that Akhenaten himself wrote this psalm. The hymn and the psalm both depict creation and the giving of life by God and it is also reminiscent of the Genesis creation account. So, the monotheism of Akhenaten featured the one god, without an image, who was the creator and sustainer of life, along with the concepts of king and father, all of which we associate with the Abrahamic faiths. (Moses and Akhenaten, p. 163-164.)

The monotheistic Atenists only had power for 12-17 years until both Akhenaten and his son Smenkare died. After this, Tutankhamen, who changed his name from Tutankhaten, came to be the boy pharaoh. His vizier, and a future pharaoh Ay, was the one with the power and influence who orchestrated the move back to the worship of the neglected gods. We can assume that a young boy would not change his religious preference from Aten to Amun, as his name change indicates, without being influenced by someone. The Aramaic bible, called the Targum, which is the oldest copy of the torah that we know of, speaks of Adon Ay when referring to the god of the exodus. The Sabbah brothers think that this is a reference to this vizier/pharaoh who, as royalty, had the status of a god, and in fact, one of his titles was Father of the God. They believe he was the one responsible for ridding the country of the followers of Aten and returning Egypt to the religious ways of the past.

The Stela of Restoration of Tutankhamen reveals some very interesting things about the conditions facing the pharaoh when he ascended to the throne and what Tut was to accomplish during his reign. A translation of a portion of the stela by John Adams Wilson (Egypt, Life and Death of a Civilization) reads, "He drove out deceit from one end of the two lands to the other. And Maat was re-established. The lie (monotheistic religion) became an abomination within the land." The monotheists were called the liars or deceivers by those who later came to power. Another translation of the text states, "Now when his majesty appeared as king, the temples of the gods and goddesses from Elephantine [down] to the marshes of the Delta [had... and] gone to pieces (or fallen into neglect). Their shrines had become desolate, had become mounds overgrown with [weeds]. Their sanctuaries (or chapels) were as if they had never been. Their halls were a footpath (or trodden roads). The land was topsy-turvy and the gods turned their backs upon this land."

Ay, seeing what monotheism had done to Egypt, was committed to returning to the old ways. There had been too much damage politically and to the infrastructure of the kingdom. But, it would not suffice to just return to the worship of the other gods because the threat that the Atenists could regain power would always loom as a future possibility. He devised a plan in which he promised a land flowing with milk and honey, the Egyptian province of Canaan, to the Atenists whose removal would appease the Amunists. This would also benefit Egypt by populating a region of the empire with an Egyptian presence in order to create a buffer in a rather troublesome region that had been giving the realm fits for a few years. The stela of restoration says "If [the army was] sent to Djahi (region in Canaan, possibly in the Judean hills.) to extend the frontiers of Egypt, no success of theirs came at all." Political unrest is indicated in the Armana letters also, (http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/a-rib-addi.htm) so it was necessary for Ay to initiate a military campaign that would help to pacify the region so this relocation of the monotheists could be carried out.

This was accomplished with the help of the Egyptian military under the leadership of Ramses and Horemheb (later pharaohs). Evidence for this can be seen in the restoration stela of Tutankhamen, the war records of Ramses I and Seti I. (http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/ramses_i_stela.htm) (http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/seticampaign.htm). There is an indication that Horemheb, as a general, fought in campaigns in Canaan as he is depicted receiving honors for his victories during the reign of Tutankhamen. This military activity continued through the reign of Ay then Horemheb, Ramses I and his son Seti who finally pacified the region.

Seti I, in his first year as pharaoh, had a series of battles that subdued all resistance to Egyptian rule. If you compare the battles of Seti to the battles of Joshua you will find similarities. The bible says that Joshua conquered 31 fortified cities in Canaan and Phoenicia. Sabbah says, "The many cities taken by Sety I during his campaign – Megiddo, Lachish, Beth-Shean, Yenoam, Geder, Tyre, etc. –correspond to those reportedly taken by Joshua." Claude Vandersleyen, "The kings of Jerusalem, of Hebron, of Jarmuth, of Lachish, and of Eglon were Amorites; Hittites and Amorites are found in the hill country of Judaea. This area corresponds to the lands traversed by SetyI and is confirmed by the texts at Karnak." (http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/setiwar.htm). The fact that both Seti I and Joshua are said to have erected victory stelae is also noteworthy. Sety erected 2 at Beth-Shean and Joshua set one at Shechem. These 2 places, it seems to me, are very near to one another. This all took about 40 years. The bible says it took 40 years of wandering in the desert till it was time for Joshua to lead the battle to clear out the promise land. The land, now free of turmoil, was ready to allow the Aten priests and their deported followers to settle there after they had been temporarily living in Moab. (Secrets of the Exodus, p.125)

I know of no direct, historical evidence that these priests were said to have been the beginnings of the Hebrews. However, the Aramaic Bible, called the Targum, does say as much by calling these priests Yahuds from which comes the word Judah. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew) The word Yahuda (Judah) comes from Yahu-Hodah meaning praise god or one who praises or adores god. The Egyptian Yahu-Daeh means adoration, prayer, homage and giving praise. The Yahuds of the Aramaic Bible correspond to the monotheistic priests who left Egypt where, as priests of Aten, they rendered homage to the dawning light. It is clear that not just anyone could have the status to worship Aten so referring to Yahuds as Jews would not be precise enough. They were the priestly class. The Aramaic Bible makes a clear distinction between the Hebrews (Children of Israel) and the Yahuds. The Hebrew Bible does not make such a distinction. (Secrets of the Exodus, p.47) The Targum also mentions that the Yahuds were escorted out of Egypt by the armies of Ay. (Aramaic Bible, Exodus 12:41. "On exactly that day, all the armies of Ay left the land of Egypt".) The Hebrew Bible reads it differently calling them the hosts of Jehovah which makes one think of a group of people and not an army. A military escort makes sense and the direction of their travel takes them by several Egyptian military outposts that would have posed a problem for them had they been fleeing instead of being led away or deported.

One other link to the restoration stela gives further credence to the idea that the Yahuds were exiled to Canaan. The stela says, "He allocated waab-priests, God's Servants and the heirs of the Chiefs of the Cities to be the sons of wise men whose reputation is established." I quote Sabbah, "According to Claude Vandersleyen, the Stela specifies that Egypt, lacking enough priests for the restoration of the cult of Amun, organized a massive recruitment drive. "The only written indication of social reorganization of the priests states that from then on, the priesthood would consist of children of the functionaries of their cities." If the customary and historic rite of succession of the priesthood had to be changed for this occasion then that must have meant that there was a shortage of priests. Where could they have gone? Could it be they chose deportation to Canaan over performing the priestly duties to Amun?

I commented earlier in a post that the Levi and Cohen names are associated with the Jewish priesthood and have a genetic marker on the Y chromosome that indicates this lineage goes back 10,000 years. Since the Jewish people can only account for 3500 years of history how can this bloodline have gone back nearly 3 times that far into the past? This thesis that I'm presenting accounts for that nicely. The Israelites came from the monotheistic priests and their followers who were formerly a part of the Egyptian priestly class and were Egyptian through and through and the Egyptian priesthood extended from father to son back into the beginning of Egypt.

Why does this whole thesis seem such a foreign concept to most scholars. First of all, Horemheb erased all mention of the Armana pharaohs from history and claimed his place in the kings list right behind Amenhotep III eliminating 4 of the pharaohs involved in this saga. In a fit of revenge at what Akhenaten did to the country, the city of Akhetaten was dismantled bit by bit to be used as building blocks for other projects so there was no knowledge of Aten and the impact his worship had on religion and culture. Also, the Bible wasn't compiled and in its final or more modern form or formalized into a holy book until the Babylonians conquered them and took them captive at about 600 BC. The Bible stories were changed to make them more acceptable to their conquerors who were enemies of the Egyptians. "The commentary of Rashi, discussing Ex, 12-40, shows that this practice was known in the oral tradition. He wrote, "This is one of the passages of the Torah which was modified to please King Ptolemy."" Sabbah, p.95. So all things Egyptian were disguised and some of it was placed in a Chaldean context to please the Babylonians. Things like camels were added to the text which were yet to be domesticated for a few hundred years, for example.

So I think that the Egyptian origins thesis fits nicely with the historical evidence that we have. In fact, what I have just written is by no means the only support for this theory. The traditional biblical version, on the other hand, is not backed up historically at all. The more one digs into the archaeology and history of Genesis the less likely is seems that there is any literal truth to it at all.

Secrets of the Exodus by Messod and Roger Sabbah

Moses and Akhenaten by Ahmed Osman

Akhenaten by Cyril Aldred

The Mystery of the Copper Scroll of Qumran, The Essene Record of the Treasure of Akhenaten by Robert Feather

Great Hymn of Aten ; http://www.touregypt.net/hymntoaten.htm

Great Hymn and Psalms 104; http://kemet.250x.com/psalm104.html

Join The Raptor Jesus Cult!

Lighting up a cigarette from that half-empty pack of Newports in his front jacket pocket, he seemed not to notice us. He didn’t even look like a man of science. He looked like a 60’s hippie, with glasses, a ponytail, and plain, casual clothes. He just stood there, leaning against the brown brick wall outside of the laboratory. When we asked to speak to Paul Gorman, the renowned Christian paleontologist, he spoke up after what could have been perceived as a rude and condescending delay. “That’s me,” he finally said, putting out the cigarette. Things were a little tense at first, but he soon loosened up to our presence, and the interview went well.

That’s what we were there for. We’d finally found the always-busy and hard-to-get-a-hold-of Dr. Gorman to meet with our Fox News Associates for an exclusive interview on his latest and most controversial claim yet. The claim: Jesus Christ – savior, prophet, and God to so many – endured his earthly pilgrimage with a raptor’s head atop his human body!

So certain was Gorman of his findings that he began his own ministry—Raptor Jesus Ministries. His goals, as he explained them to us, are twofold; first, to educate the masses on this new biblical find; second, to provide a cooler and more hip way for the younger, cyber-immersed generation to come to know Christ.

But I was skeptical. The idea that Jesus Christ had a raptor’s head on his body seemed…well…harebrained! So it was time to get some hardcore facts since I certainly couldn’t see them for myself. Now if there’s one thing Christian apologists of all calibers are experts at, it’s coming up with evidence for preposterous claims when there is none. So, yes, I was skeptical. But when Gorman began to open his mouth with the explanations of his position, I soon became hypnotically entrenched…

“You’ll find that in Job chapters 40:15-41:34, God tells us about a large, reptilian creature that is exalted above any other beast. Nowhere in scripture do we see his equal. But the problem is, God never speaks to exalt animals. He only exalts humans. And though the Almighty went through a phase where he said he wanted to wear the cologne of animal’s blood, he quickly tired of it (Isaiah 1:11). At one point, God even denied that he ever asked for animal sacrifices in the first place (Jeremiah 7:21-22), but that’s another matter. The point for us to take home here is, there was no way God could have spoken like this in the scriptures to exalt some reptile. No, God is trying to tell us that there’s more being described here than just some dumb, brute beast.

In Job 40:19, this mighty creature is called, ‘The chief of the ways of God.’ The chief of the ways of God can only be Christ. And in chapter 41:33-34, we read: ‘Upon earth there is not his like, who is made without fear. He beholdeth all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride.’ This can only be referring to Jesus. But there are other ways we know this to be true. Isaiah predicted that the savior would have sharp teeth: ‘Behold, I will make thee a new sharp threshing instrument having teeth: thou shalt thresh the mountains, and beat them small, and shalt make the hills as chaff.’ (Isaiah 41:15) This too can only be referring to Jesus.”

“Ok, you’ve got my attention,” I thought to myself. But I wasn’t yet convinced. It is difficult to believe that God would choose to take upon him the form of a man, and yet the facial form of a raptor, an extinct beast that lived over seventy-eight million years ago! Many churches still believe that fossils are a work of the devil. So how could it be that one of those inane fossils, so distantly removed from Christ, was actually the image of God’s Holy Son? Sitting spellbound at the wisdom of this scholar, I listened as he continued…

“The scripture says of the suffering messiah that he would be unattractive in appearance. (Isaiah 53:2) Even as a babe, Jesus was so hideously ugly that the Angel of God had to basically say, ‘Get that kid out of here because these folks are going to kill him when they see him!’ (Matthew 2:13) This was because his face was a raptor’s face. Throughout Jesus’ ministry, we see him rejected and scorned a number of times. This couldn’t have been because of the things he taught because the Bible says the common people heard his message and received it gladly. (Mark 12:37) This leads us to conclude that Jesus was rejected because he resembled the prophetic allusions that speak of him as the powerful, reptilian creature from Job’s time.

The mystifying presence of fish in the life of Jesus is very interesting too. Jesus kept referring to fish. He had an insatiable appetite for it. (Matthew 7:10; 17:27) Even after his crucifixion and ascension, when he was more than free to head back to the resplendent glories of heaven that he created for himself and only a few of us, he still couldn’t get his mind off of food. He chose to stay on earth and ask for meat from his disciples when he reappeared to them. (Luke 24:42; John 21:9-14) I think if Jesus were around today, he’d probably own stock in Long John Silvers or perhaps Red Lobster.

The assumed miracle of the loaves and fishes found in Matthew 14:16-21 gives us a faint clue as to how Jesus produced fish for the masses. I always wondered how he could have done that, and together with the rest of the evidence, I now believe that the raptor position makes the most sense of any. While Jesus could have done a miracle, he didn’t. He just had his disciples sit the multitudes down, and when they weren’t looking, he stuck his big raptor head under water and snatched out a few massive raptor mouthfuls of what was to be dinner! Jesus may have been a rapacious reptile, though he was certainly a very generous and benevolent one.

Paleontologists agree; the best and most proficient carnivorous land-beast at catching fish was the raptor. And as often as fish and feeding multitudes are found throughout scripture, it is a more than sound conclusion that Jesus was given a raptor’s head for precisely that purpose. He was a more effective fisherman and a more effective savior. No wonder it was said that Jesus cast out demons as the prince of the demons—any man with a raptor’s head looks plenty demonic! (Matthew 12:24) This was why people were terrified of Jesus and asked him to leave their cities. (Matthew 8:34; Mark 5:17) This was also why Jesus was unable to get married.”

For me, the pieces were starting to fall into place! I was electrified with the wisdom and scholarship Dr. Gorman showed. Before I could begin with my printed-out list of now useless questions, I realized I had created a monster of oratory! He finished what remained of his thoughts and perpetuated without missing a beat…

“And this was the main reason Jesus was rejected and crucified. Nobody expected a literally cold-blooded Jewish messiah.”

At this point, Dr. Gorman began to tear-up: “Oh sure, we love to cry at movies like ‘The Passion of the Christ,’ but do we really know what he went through? People tell me my findings are blasphemous, but this new knowledge of Raptor Jesus only brings more glory to Christ. It doesn’t take any away. It shows us that Jesus suffered more for our sins, not less!”

Bringing our three-and-a-half hour interview to a close, Dr. Gorman assured us that although it would take time and a lot of indoctrination, generations of new and impressionable minds are already laying hold onto a much cooler Jesus than the one their parents knew. There’s just something to say about a Jesus who attracts crowds like a freak-show and has pointed teeth, who has a mouth nearly the size of a punch bowl, and protruding, beady eyes. And he’s no weakling! He didn’t have to stumble, carrying that cross to Golgotha. He didn’t have to get his butt kicked by a hackneyed council of ordinary Jews and Romans who decided to have him lynched. He didn’t have to—he wanted to! He laid down his life for us. He went extinct for our sins!

As we departed (partly choked up ourselves and partly amazed at how we went through an entire box of Kleenex Ultra-Soft), Dr. Gorman, still spiritedly chatting away about the goals of his ministry, asked us: “Honestly, if you were one of these new-age kids who use words like “Pwn” and “noob,” and could text-speak faster than you could read a verse from the King James Bible, would you be more inclined to worship a resurrected Jew, or a resurrected raptor Jew?” With a smile, I told him: “Say no more, sir. Say no more!”

Who would have thought that some obscure therapod from the late Cretaceous Period would have such significance on a soteriological scale? Truly, the stones cry out, “Jesus!” And whether you agree with Dr. Gorman’s findings or not, you have to admit that adding the word “raptor” to any title or description makes the subject a whole heck of a lot cooler! I am now part of the Raptor Jesus Cult. Why not join?



(JH)

Dr. Michael Shermer's Commencement Speech

The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything. He also received an honorary doctorate...

by Professor Teresa LeVelle

Dr. Michael Shermer, you are one of America’s leading champions of science and a dedicated debunker of pseudo-scientific and supernatural claims. By questioning your own religious tenets as a graduate student in experimental psychology, your beliefs were dramatically shifted and your life was transformed. You show us – scientists and non-scientists alike – why the principles of science and scientific inquiry are important to everyone. You are the author of numerous articles, including a monthly column in Scientific American magazine. And you’ve penned ten captivating books, including the bestseller, Why People Believe Weird Things, in which you show the kinds of errors in thinking that lead even intelligent and well-meaning people to believe unsubstantiated claims. Of your most recent book, The Mind of the Market: Compassionate Apes, Competitive Humans, and Other Tales from Evolutionary Economics, one prominent reviewer said, “Roving over the entire sweep of history, and drawing on the best of modern science, Shermer attempts a grand synthesis of research from psychology and the neurosciences to demonstrate that markets are moral and that free trade meshes well with human nature. [He] entertains as well as informs.”

As a prolific author and journalist, you are one of today’s strongest provocateurs, challenging us all to consider some of humanity’s most important and compelling questions. At our College, we prepare graduates who — like you — conduct systematic research, synthesize complex information, and present cogent arguments.

As the founder of one of this country’s leading skeptics’ organizations, you are a celebrated promoter of “critical thinking and lifelong inquisitiveness.” You have been the voice of reason on many television programs and documentaries including the Oprah Winfry Show, Larry King Live and the Colbert Report. At Whittier College, we nurture these same habits of mind in our students.

As a courageous questioner, you examine the often convoluted borders among science, religion, culture, and politics, and you do it with civility, a sense of humor and a sincere interest in understanding the perspectives of others. This approach, too, we nurtured in the graduates before you today.

In addition to being an accomplished scientist, historian, and journalist, you are a dedicated father and husband. You have tested the scientific limits of human endurance by walking on hot coals barefoot, completing the Hawaii Ironman Triathlon and as a world- record-setting ultra-marathon cyclist, racing multiple times across the United States (including an amazing 83 hour ride from the Santa Monica Pier to Lincoln, Nebraska without stopping for sleep). Described as “a powerful activist and essayist in the service of… reason,” your life and your work are emblematic of many of the values we hold dear at Whittier College. For these reasons, Madam President, I am honored to present my friend Dr. Michael Brant Shermer for the degree of Doctor of Humane Letters, honoris causa.

Help Me Convince My Brother, John!

Some of you may remember Ed Owens, who recently walked away from the Christian faith. Well, I received another email from him. Maybe we can help…

Hi John, I have a question. I'm really stressed out right now. It seems every time I hear someone even mention God I want to rip their head off. What can I do to mellow out? I've never let up on my brother with the examples of Bible error and parallels with paganism. I've also sent an article about the Bible being voted on for which books to canonize but he is super hard headed and won’t budge at all. I've even tried the soft approach and nothing seems to work. Now I know he sees what I'm showing him, he isn't blind. He just refuses to acknowledge any document of authenticity from history or scientific reasoning. Is there something I'm missing? Is there a sure fire question beyond his being able to refute with old dogma answers? I am so wired and have been for a couple of weeks now I'm going crazy. That congregation is in a Gospel Meeting this week with an Evangelist named William St. John. It lasts through next Sunday. Every time I send material he just calls it trash or the devil's garbage. He can be a reasonable person it just takes nearly an act of congress for him to admit he is wrong about anything! The stress of it all is about to drive me insane. I can't give it up for some reason. I am bound and determined to win him over to the truth! Help me John, please!!!

My wife officially moved her membership last Wednesday to the congregation where my daughter attends but intends to attend at least one night of the meeting this week where we used to go. My wife still gets very defensive when she knows I'm researching atheism or bible errors!

My life is so dismal and has been for the last 3 or 4 months. The church used to be my life completely and now I feel all alone. I've tried reading and writing and surfing the net. I'm feeling pretty down and out about everything and everybody right now. I'm not searching for sympathy just answers for peace of mind.

My brother is my big objective right now. What should I do?

Ed

My response:

Ed,

I think you have this initial desire to convince everyone that you're right, especially your brother. You have this need to convince him you're not crazy, and I understand that. But I'm here to tell you that you're not. You know that you're not. You know that you're right. You don't need validated by others. They may never come around. Stop being frustrated with this. You will not be able to convince many people. Get over it. They are brainwashed. They must want to listen. They must want to consider what you have to say before they will do so. Perhaps at this point you should just be friendly. Talk about the things you did before you changed, minus the religion. That may be all you can do. If he rejects you as a person there's not much you can do about it. My advice is to learn to accept that fact. My brother first suggested I seek counseling too. I argued back, like you have done. Then we dropped it and decided to talk about the things we have in common. That's my recommendation with you. There is no smoking gun argument...none. Sorry. Remember back to when you were a Christian? What did you think about the new atheist movement? Think really hard. What did you say? You probably attributed it to the devil, right? Place yourself back in that mindset as best as you can. That's what your brother thinks of you. There's no use in beating your head against the wall on this. People are deluded just like you were. You're going to have to accept this fact. They will probably never agree with you. As a Christian you accepted the fact that non-believers didn't believe without wanting to rip their heads off. Now do the same thing as an atheist with believers. It'll be better psychologically for you. As a Christian you focused on people who were receptive to the gospel. Now do likewise as an atheist with believers. Focus on those people who are receptive to the evidence. Continue searching the net for better arguments, of course. Get into online chat rooms and test your skills to express yourself there, and not with former friends. Former friends will want to see if what you're gong through is a mid-life crisis. That will take years until they figure out it isn't. But you stand as a witness on the other side now. Once they conclude this is not a mid-life crisis they may consider your arguments and may do their own searching.

Maybe others can help Ed with additional helpful comments.

Indiana Jones and the Quest for the Holy Foreskin

Amazing info about incredible holy relics from Christianity's great age of faith.

According to Austin Cline at about.com: The power and popularity of relics in Medieval Europe was dependent upon the saintliness of the original “owner.”

The ultimate source of relics, of course, was Jesus himself. But there was just one problem: it is clear in the New Testament that after his resurrection, Jesus was “carried up to Heaven.” Thus, there just wasn’t any possibility of a church acquiring Jesus’ head or foot, as happened with various saints. For the most part, the only Jesus relics available were things like his crown of thorns, his robe, his sandals, or even pieces of the “True Cross.”

But then some astute theologian — or was it a businessman? — realized that not all of Jesus’ body could have been actually transported up to Heaven. Jesus was, after all, a faithful Jew, and as such, he would have been circumcised like every other boy. So where was his foreskin? Whatever happened to that bit of divine flesh?

And thus began a search for a very odd “Holy Grail” which resulted in not one, but up to a dozen different holy foreskins, each competing to be the genuine article. Of course, one presumes that they could not all be genuine and I am not aware of anyone who tried to argue that the unusual bounty was a miracle akin to the loaves and fishes.

In France, Charroux claimed that they inherited their foreskin from Charlemagne. In the early twelfth century they took it to Rome and paraded it through the streets alongside one of those pieces of the True Cross and Jesus’ sandals, bringing them before Pope Innocent III.

At the same time, however, the parish of Calcata north of Rome also claimed to possess Jesus’ foreskin. Then there was the abbey of Coulombos in the diocese of Chartres claiming that they were the owners of the True Foreskin. Other claimants included Puy, Metz, Anvers, the church of Notre-Dame-en-Vaux, and Hildersheim.

It shouldn’t be surprising that all of these strongly disputed the claims of everyone else. Pope Innocent III decided not to become involved and refused to judge who was right. According to him, only God could know the truth about such a “delicate” matter. It’s probably better for his legacy that he didn’t become involved — who would want to become known as the Foreskin Pope?

Imagine what it would have been like had they chosen to rule on the issue! Can you see them peering into the reliquaries, attempting to determine if the foreskin before them was from Jesus’ or just some leper’s? By what standards would they have made their judgments? Sight? Texture? Smell? Unfortunately, the pope’s reluctance to become involved just led to the “discovery” of several more “real” foreskins.

In the end, it was Charroux who “won” the battle of the foreskins when Pope Clement VII (1523-1534) issued a bull granting indulgences to any and all who made a pilgrimage to the Charroux foreskin. Just think — you could have sins forgiven by God just for getting a glimpse at a bit of severed genitalia!

But then tragedy struck: the foreskin went missing! The relic disappeared from Charroux for centuries and was thought to have been stolen. What kind of a sicko would steal a foreskin? (Of course, the same could be asked of anyone who would display one for money.)

Then, in 1856, a lucky workman discovered the reliquary hidden inside a wall, perhaps put there to protect it during the many religious wars. I wonder if that workman had his sins forgiven for the discovery? Nineteenth century Catholics hadn’t grown out of their taste for relics, and a new church was built to house the tiny ringlet of flesh. Monsignor Pie, who spoke at the dedication ceremony, informed the excited crowd that if they looked closely, they could still see a bit of coagulated blood on the holy flesh.

For some strange reason, however, the Vatican grew less and less supportive of relics, particularly foreskins. In 1900 the Vatican suggested that foreskins encouraged “irreverent curiosity” and that, somehow, this was a bad thing. Generally the foreskin fever died down with the lack of official encouragement, although it didn’t disappear entirely. One church in Italy kept up the worship right through the 1980s — and each year the relic was exposed to the adoring crowds during the Feast of the Circumcision. (I wonder — what was served?)

But in 1983, thieves broke in and stole the 300 year-old jewel-encrusted reliquary and the holy flesh it contained. Presumably they only wanted the case — but what on earth did they do with the foreskin? Is it sitting in someone’s basement right now?

Maybe Steven Spielberg should look upon this as a movie idea: Indiana Jones and the Quest for the Holy Foreskin!

SEE ALSO WIKIPEDIA'S ARTICLE, "Holy Prepuce."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A 14th CENTURY MIRACLE OF THE HOLY FORESKIN

The story of St. Blannbekin (died in Vienna 1315); (Zilch’s translation from a book in German located here.)

“This person [Agnes Blannbekin] had the habit, starting almost in childhood, to weep profoundly at the Feast of the Circumcision, touched to the heart by the blood spent by Christ, who deigned to suffer so early.... Thus she started to wonder, where the prepuce might be. And lo and behold! Soon she felt a little skin on her tongue, like the skin of an egg, full of great sweetness, and she gulped it down. Hardly had she swallowed it, when she felt the little skin again, and so she swallowed it once more. And she did so a good hundred times.... And it was revealed to her, that on the Day of Resurrection the prepuce was also resurrected. So great was the sweetness when she swallowed this little skin, that in all her limbs and in all the muscles of her limbs she felt a sweet transformation...”

St. Agnes’ confessor added after this chapter the note:

“I was greatly comforted, that the Lord would reveal himself to people this way, and burned to hear more.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

THEY CUT OFF HIS THING
(sung to the tune of "My Favorite Things" from the Sound of Music)
by Alex Murphy

They didn’t save blood
that He sweat in the Garden
Or teardrops in temples
For Jewish hearts hardened,
No skin off His back from the Roman scourging
But they saved skin that was cut off of His thing

His first baby teeth
No one’s tried to fence ‘em
No first diaper movements
on eBay for ransom,
No baby’s first zwieback, spit up on Mary
But they saved skin, cut off during His bris

Every nose hair
Each ounce of earwax
Drool by the gallon, man!
Each burst of methane from out of His being
It came from the Son of Man!

Psoriasis that fell from atop His melon
His fingerprints, taken by Romans (a felon)
Each Relic demands veneration, ka-ching!
Especially skin that was cut off of His thing

Dried up kleenexes
And half-eaten matzos
A Holy Quest is on for
His baby bottles
Dirt from the bath when He left a scum ring
If it fell off Him, it’s a Holy thing

Underarm hairs
Sand from his eyes
Every picked off scab
Just get a receipt when you turn in some meat
The foreskin will be so glad

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

IN CASE JESUS'S FORSKIN WASN'T RELIC-ENOUGH FOR YOU... THERE'S THESE

Two of the relics that the Patriarch of Jerusalem gave to King Charlemagne and that recall "with profound reverence events in the history of salvation," include fragments of the newborn Jesus' diapers, and the cloth Jesus wore around his waist on the cross, both of which one might presume to have once contained remnants of Jesus's feces. See this article:

CATHOLIC COMMUNITIES HAVE UNIQUE LINK WITH ROME AND JERUSALEM
John Paul II's Letter for 1,200 Years of Aachen Cathedral
VATICAN CITY, JAN 31 (ZENIT)-- John Paul II referred to the ties that unite the Catholic community spread over the world with the Church of Rome and the Holy City of Jerusalem, in a letter to commemorate 1,200 years since the construction of Aachen Cathedral, an event which was celebrated last Saturday and Sunday in this historic German locality. The Pope's special envoy to the celebration was Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy. The Holy Father addressed the letter to Bishop Heinrich Mussinghoff of Aachen. John Paul II pointed out that the Cathedral, dedicated to the Virgin, was built at the request of Charlemagne. That same year, 800, the emporer was crowned in Rome by Pope Leo III in the Vatican Basilica. This historical event reflects the closeness that existed between that local Church and the diocese of Rome. But Aachen Cathedral has yet "another link" that carries it "with heart and mind" to the Holy City. These are 4 precious relics that Jerusalem gave to Charlemagne and that recall "with profound reverence events in the history of salvation." The 4 relics are fragments of the newborn Jesus' diapers, the cloth Jesus wore around his waist on the cross, the dress Mary wore on Christmas Eve, and the cloth of John the Baptist's beheading.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

SELECTIONS FROM AN OFFICIAL CATALOG OF RELICS FROM PRE-PROTESTANT GERMANY

The Castle Church at Wittenberg, where Martin Luther probably posted his ninety-five theses, was famous for its extensive collection of relics, as the following excerpt from what might be called the official catalogue shows:

"... Three pieces of the city where the Virgin Mary was born. One piece of a yarn which she spun. One piece of the house where she lived at the age of fourteen. Two pieces of the city of Mt Zion where Mary lived. Two pieces of the room where Mary was greeted by the angel. Five particles of the milk of the Virgin Mary. One piece of the tree where Mary nursed the Lord near the Garden of Balsam. Four pieces of the hair of Mary. Three pieces of the shirt of Mary. Three pieces of one robe of Mary. Eight pieces of other robes of Mary. Four pieces of the belt of Mary. Seven pieces of the veil of Mary. Two pieces of the veil of Mary which was sprinkled with the blood of Christ under the Cross. One piece of the city where Mary died. One piece of the wax candle given to Our Lady when she died. Six pieces of the grave of Mary. Two pieces of the earth of the grave of Mary. One piece of the place where Mary ascended into heaven.

VI. A silver picture of the little baby Jesus. Four pieces of the city where the Lord Jesus was born. One piece of the diaper in which he was wrapped. Thirteen pieces of the manger of Jesus. One piece of the cradle. Two pieces of the hay. One piece of the straw on which the Lord lay when he was born. One piece of the gold and of the myrrh which the Three Kings offered unto the Lord. One piece of the city where the Lord Jesus was circumcised.

VII. Four pieces of the mountain on which the Lord Jesus fasted. Two pieces of the city where Christ preached the Lord's Prayer. One piece of the stone on which Jesus stood while weeping over Jerusalem. One piece of the stone from which Christ got on the donkey. Two pieces of the ground where the Lord Christ was arrested.

VIII. Five pieces of the table on which the Lord Christ held the Last Supper with his disciples. One piece of the bread of which Christ ate with his disciples during the Last Supper.

IX. One piece of the land which was bought for the thirty pieces of silver for which Christ was betrayed. One piece of the Holy Land. Three pieces of the stone where the Lord sweated blood. One piece of the ground where the Lord sweated blood. One piece of the stone sprinkled with the blood of Christ.

X. Three pieces of the Mount of Olives and of the rod of Aaron. Two pieces of the rod of Moses. One piece of the burning bush which Moses saw. One piece of an object sprinkled with the blood of Christ. Eleven pieces of Mount Calvary. Two pieces of the Mount of Olives. XI. One piece of the cloth with which the Lord wiped his disciples' feet. One piece of the robe of Christ: One piece of the seamless robe of Christ. One piece of the robe of Christ. One piece of his purple robe. Two pieces of the cloth which St Veronica received from the Lord. Three pieces of the white robe in which the Lord was ridiculed by Herod . Three pieces of the cloth with which our Lord's holy eyes were blindfolded. One piece of the beard of the Lord Jesus.

XII. One piece of the wax of the candles which touched the sudarium of Christ. One piece of the wedge with which the cross of Christ was held. Three pieces of the stone on which the cross stood. Three pieces of the place where the cross of Christ was found. Twelve pieces of the column where the Lord Christ was scourged and flogged.

The Eight Aisle. I. One piece of the rope with which Jesus was tied. Three pieces of the rod with which the Lord Jesus was scourged. Three pieces of the whip with which the Lord Jesus was flogged. One piece of the stone upon which the Lord Jesus sat when he was crowned. One piece of the stone which was crushed while the Lord carried the cross. One piece of the sponge with which the Lord was given vinegar and gall....

III. Two pieces of the crown of the Lord Jesus. Eight complete thorns of the crown of the Lord Jesus. IV. One large piece of one nail which was driven through the hands or feet of the Lord Jesus. V. A thorn which wounded the holy head of the Lord Jesus.

VI. One piece of the holy cross....

VII. Three pieces of the holy cross.

VIII. Three pieces of the three kinds of wood of the cross of Christ.

IX. A particularly large piece from the holy cross.

X. Twenty-five pieces of the holy cross.

XI. One piece of the stone which lay on the grave of Christ. Twenty-two pieces of the grave of Christ. One piece of the stone from which Christ descended into heaven.

XII. A casket lined with silver in which are found sixteen hundred and seventy-eight pieces. Seventy-six pieces of holy remains. Bones from holy places which on account of faded writing can no longer be read and identified. All in all : five thousand and five pieces. An indulgence of one hundred days for each piece. There are eight halls and each hall has an indulgence of one hundred and one days in addition. Blessed are those who participate therein.

Source: Hans J. Hillerbrand, ed. The Reformation: A Narrative History Related by Contemporary Observers and Participants (Harper and Row, Inc. 1964, Reprint Baker Book House, 1978) pp. 47-49.

Cool Design?

Coming This Fall, "The Exodus Conspiracy" -- Dr. Lennart Moller resurrects Ron Wyatt's photograph of a gilded chariot wheel

Ron Wyatt’s photo of a “gilded chariot wheel” allegedly from the Egyptian army that chased the Hebrews as they fled during the Exodus.

An email has begun proliferating this year titled, “The Red Sea Crossing,” or, “Parting of the Red Sea,” or, “Chariot Wheels Found in Red Sea,” and it is being passed around so much with so little investigation that Snopes.com has begun a page on the email and its claims. I suspect that the email is part of an advertising campaign for a film due out in Fall 2008, starring a creationist named Dr. Lennart Moller (not an archeologist, but a biologist) and titled, “The Exodus Conspiracy”

A previous film made for TV by the same company has already popularized the alleged “golden/gilded chariot wheel” that the late Ron Wyatt (another non-archeologist) “discovered in the Red Sea," where "Pharaoh's" chariots were allegedly swallowed up when two huge walls of water slammed together on either sides of them. (See the Bible's Exodus tale.)

The made for TV film also featured Dr. Lennart Moller and was titled, “The Exodus Revealed” and one portion of it featured not the actual “gilded wheel” photographed by Wyatt but a digital “recreation” of it

Announcer: “While most of the possible artifacts found off the coast of Nuweiba are covered with coral, one significant discovery was not.”

Dr. Lennart Moller: “There is one find at the Nuweiba location that is of great interest, and that is the gilded wheel. [digital ‘recreation’ appears on screen, based on photo taken by Ron Wyatt] It is a wooden basic structure of the wheel and it is covered with gold or electrum, a mixture of silver and gold, and corals have not been able to grow on it. [really? why not? see questions below] It’s been very well preserved, although it’s very fragile. It seems like the wooden content has been dissolved. So I mean you could break it if you tried to remove it.”

Announcer: “After its discovery the fragile wheel-shaped veneer was photographed, then left in place on the sea floor. Later analysis revealed that its dimensions and design resembled four-spoked chariot wheels painted on an 18th Dynasty tomb wall near the biblical date of the Exodus.”

Note that Moller does not say he discovered this “gilded wheel,” nor that he saw it, photographed it, nor touched it. There is no undersea footage of the “gilded wheel” in the film but merely a digital “reconstruction” of a photograph taken by Wyatt in the 1970s. But note that although almost no coral is shown touching this bright shiny wheel, based on Wyatt's photo, still there are plenty of thick corals growing on one another and seen all over the actual seabed of the Red Sea as shown in the film. Neither does Wyatt's original photo provide clear evidence as to whether the small piece of coral seen on the wheel simply was placed there or not, it doesn’t seem particularly well attached, not compared with the vast conglomerations of corals in the general area. And contra a statement made by Dr. Moller in the film, there does not appear to be any reason why coral should not be able to grow on an object made of gold, silver or a mixture of both, as any archeologist can demonstrate who has dug up objects made of all sorts of ancient precious metals from the sea with coral growing on them.

Even a Christian on the web has pointed out:

“Can coral grow on gold? Yes. Coral is not a plant, it is an animal, and it does not get its nutrients from the soil or rock it grows on. Instead, it eats zooplankton and other small marine bugs, and it gets its calcium, amino acids, etc. from the surrounding sea water. To structurally support themselves, corals grow next to each other and harden together, forming reefs. Thus they could grow on anything!! It doesn't matter. Coral also uses photosynthesis to make sugars out of sunlight. The only way they wouldn't grow on gold is if it were toxic to coral. I do not think this is the case, since gold has little or no affinity for binding oxygen, carbon, or nitrogen. The only thing it really has an affinity for is sulfur. So if sulfur is necessary for coral to live, then perhaps.... The only thing that my pharmacology book says gold inhibits is mycobacterium tuberculosis, nothing else. Besides the point, however, I'm all for historical evidence of the Bible, but this guy's argument is so ridiculously flawed that it's an embarrassment to believers.”

Also, after 3,500 years of water flowing into the Red Sea and carrying sand and silt along with it, that’s the deepest that such a wheel has become buried? It looks like it’s barely beneath the sand. Why is this “gilded wheel” not covered by several feet of silt and sand after 3,500 years?

Neither do Wyatt’s and Moller’s separate tales add up concerning such a gilded wheel. On the one hand Wyatt claimed in the 1970s to have photographed such a wheel and then “presented it” to Nassif Mohammed Hassan who worked at the Cairo museum whom Wyatt has on tape saying that it “resembled an ancient Egyptian chariot wheel.” (However what studies did Hassan made of the wheel if any? Did he actually handle it? What evidence is there that Hassan was “presented with” anything more than just a photograph of the wheel?) Then Hassan died a few years later. So he’s no longer available for questioning. Now compare Moller’s story in his video which speaks about the “gilded chariot wheel” as if it were extremely fragile, made of 3,500 year old “wood covered with gold or electrum, a mixture of silver and gold. And it’s very fragile. It seems like the wooden content has been dissolved. So you could break it if you tried to remove it,” and the announcer described it as nothing more than a “fragile wheel-shaped veneer.” So if Moller is right, how did Wyatt “remove” such a "fragile wheel-shaped veneer" and “present” it to the person at the museum without breaking it?*

*Maybe Moller interprets Wyatt’s story as merely the story of a photograph “presented” to Hassan, not “the wheel” itself?

Even the few photographs taken by Wyatt are not explicitly stated to be of just one wheel or of two different gilded chariot wheels. But even if there was one 3,500 year old gilded wheel solid enough to be lifted out of the sea and presented to Hassan, and a second gilded wheel in the Red Sea yet undiscovered and too fragile to excavate -- then in either case God’s providence or chance seems to have made it impossible to investigate either “wheel” story via direct investigation of the alleged “wheels,” nor via interviewing Wyatt or Hassan.

In fact there is no evidence other than Wyatt's photograph of how large the alleged "gilded wheel" was, and so it could have been smaller than a chariot wheel because it is difficult to judge an objects size in a photograph unless you place something right next to the object like a yardstick, coin, or other object of known size. Also how do we know for sure that the object was made of gold? It might have been made merely of shiny brass and be a far younger object that recently was tossed into the water, so young that it lay near the surface, was still shiny enough to catch Wyatt's eye, and also young enough such that coral had not had time to cement itself on it. (See the other modern day wheel shaped objects pictured further below.)

Below are links to another portion of the made-for-TV-film that features footage of coral formations and focuses only on those that one might imagine might have been formed around decaying chariot wheels:
Mt. Sinai, Moses & the Exodus - Part 8 of 10

Even in a conservative Christian news source like Worldnetdaily.com, Wyatt's own wife is reported as urging "caution" before jumping to conclusions, and admits a lot of coral looks like “wheels” or other alleged chariot parts. The article, titled, “Pharaoh’s chariots found in Red Sea?” also admits that the one “golden chariot wheel” that Wyatt allegedly discovered cannot be found anywhere.

SEVEN Criticisms of Wyatt’s Claim that he discovered and photographed a 3,500 year old “Egyptian Chariot Wheel”

1) While the image could be better, the above photo doesn’t show any of the type of segmenting that the chariot in the earlier museum photo exhibits. Nor does it seem to have the types of joins shown in drawings of Eqyptian chariot wheels. Someone else has already mentioned that the hub of the ocean “wheel” is greatly different then the one in the museum. The style seems more modern and looks as if the edges are milled to be beveled.

2) As to the coral formations. I don’t think anyone has brought up that coral often is spherical and or radial. I haven’t seen any convincing arguments that the formations aren’t natural. Keep in mind that different types of coral grow on top of each other. So given enough coral, time, and space all sorts of shapes are possible.

3) Cnidarians are simple, radially symmetrical, animals. Radial symmetry means that the body is a hub, like a bicycle wheel, and tentacles are spokes coming out of it.

4) I’m at a loss as to how a Saudi Law prevents anyone on the Egypt side of the sea from bringing up objects [am I missing something here?]. If they do not bring up items out of respect/fear for Saudi Law, then how did they bring up the bone?

5) Even if it turns out that the formations aren’t natural it doesn’t mean they’re chariot wheels. There is certainly more than one ship that has been lost in the Red Sea. Google: shipwreck “red sea” 5,790 matches.

6) The film features an examination of the “spokes” of various wheel-shaped coral formations and the discovery of positive metal detector readings and rust being associated with the coral. But 1446 BC is too early for extensive use of iron and Egyptian chariots didn't use much metal. The spokes were wooden. Small amounts of iron had been available to the Egyptians for a long time but we should not be seeing much, if any, at an 18th Dynasty site. We really do need better evidence for the Exodus than counting the number of spokes a coral formation appears to have. Iron Age I starts at 1200 BCE See also this and this about thehistory of metal usage. “Iron was first employed as a technology of war about 1300 B.C. by the Hittites. Within a hundred years the secret of iron making and cold forging had spread at least to Palestine and Egypt and, perhaps, to Mesopotamia as well.”

7) Comparison of Wyatt's golden chariot wheel...

...with some modern day objects found on ships and other machines.



REVIEW OF DR. MOLLER’S BOOK, THE EXODUS CASE, which was published in 2002 and inspired the made-for-TV-film, and the move to be released Fall 2008:

Lennart Moller specializes in the earth hazards of air pollutants and the damage to DNA that they cause. Since 2001, he has been a professor of environmental medicine in the department of bioscience at Karolinska Institutet, one of Europe's largest medical universities and Sweden's main center for medical training and research. Beside his academic duties, Moller is an active member of Evangeliska Fosterlands-Stiftelsen, founded in 1856, a missionary organization within the Church of Sweden. He has edited and authored books on ethics and Gospel exegesis and recently a volume on biblical archaeology, The Exodus Case.

This book is the fruit of extensive travels in the Near East and Egypt. Its stated main purpose is to test a hypothesis: that the biblical texts of Genesis 11:27 through Exodus 40:38 are historically correct. A secondary purpose is to evaluate and expand upon the works of the late Ron Wyatt (1933-1999)... There are disturbing signs already in the hook's introduction. First, it is naive to judge these long texts, preserved through thousands of years of oral and written traditions, as either true or false in their entirety. Academic historians evaluate discrete factual statements, not entire books at one go. But Moller emphasizes that he is neither a theologian, a historian, nor an archaeologist. In fact, he underlines that he does not know what these disciplines believe regarding the questions he takes on. Moller feels that he can thereby offer a fresh perspective.

Then there are the references to Ron Wyatt. If ever there was a true native of Daniken Laird, it was Wyatt. His writings on biblical archaeology are such extreme flights of fancy that even many creationist debaters dismiss them as wild imaginings.

While ostensibly scientific, Moller's perspective is at the same time explicitly antirational (p. 15). We should not be too sure of ourselves and our powers of reasoning. Only God is perfect, says Moller, and humankind is frail and weak...

Moller sets out on his biblical trek through time and space from Abraham in Ur to Moses on Mount Sinai.. He searches intensively for anything that fits with it. The idea that the selected texts are historically true is not a hypothesis for Moller, it is the basic axiom of his investigation. To the extent that he takes his pseudo-Popperian philosophy of science seriously at all, Moller appears to feel that the task of disproving the hypothesis is the reader's job, not his.

Moller stomps in brandishing revealed truth... The book interfoliates a Bible summary with absolutely vertiginous speculations in archaeology, history, geology, and onomastics (the study of the origins and forms of words). Gomorrah was located on the plain between the hilltop stronghold of Masada and the Dead Sea. The reason that there is now only a gypsum formation to be seen there is that the wicked city was built of limestone and destroyed in a rain of burning sulphur: limestone + sulphur = gypsum! Joseph, son of Jacob, is identical with Imhotep, the architect of the Stepped Pyramid at Saqqara. This identification moves the Third Dynasty a thousand years forward in time from its accepted date. This does not appear to trouble Moller, as he feels that the dynastic chronology of Egypt contains serious uncertainties. Moses is identical with Pharaoh Tutmosis II, as indicated by, among other things, the fact that the Pharaoh is depicted with a hooked nose, suggesting a Hebrew heritage! And so on. Wherever Moller goes, what he sees turns out to be relevant to his search. He finally finds Mount Sinai...

AUTHOR OF THE ABOVE REVIEW: Martin Rundkvist, review, is an archaeologist specializing in the pre- and protohistory of Scandinavia. He is a member of the board of the Swedish skeptic organization, Vetenskap och Folkbildning, and co-editor of the association's quarterly, Folkvett. He lives in the suburbs of Stockholm, Sweden, 400 meters from a Viking-period cemetery.

~~~~~

DETAILED DOCUMENTATION OF WYATT'S QUESTIONABLE AND FRAUDULENT CLAIMS AND ACTIVITIES

Wyatt Archaeological Research – Fraud Documentation

Ron Wyatt's archeological claims

Ron Wyatts supernatural claims

Who's Who in the World of Ron Wyatt?

A Review of The Exodus Revealed
Summary: The Exodus Revealed video, directed by Lad Allen and funded by Discovery (Institute?) Media Productions, is based on The Exodus Case book by Lennart Moller, which is based on the "discoveries" of Ron Wyatt. Both the video and the book include photos of a gold wheel supposedly found in the Gulf of Aqaba, presented as proof that the Bible's Red Sea crossing story is true. But a TV producer's wife "was told by one of Ron Wyatt's sons that the chariot wheels that Ron supposedly discovered in the Gulf of Aqaba were planted there by Ron." Also, John Baumgardner, who is a Christian and initially believed Wyatt and inspected Wyatt's Noah's ark "discovery", later wrote that "I am almost 100% certain that Ron 'planted' them [rivets on the Ark]." Despite this and much more evidence that Ron Wyatt was a crazy liar, both Lennart Moller and Lad Allen were insidiously dishonest in promoting Wyatt's "findings" without disclosing Wyatt's history of fraud. [See the link below for more on Wyatt, much more.]

(I know the fellow who wrote the investigative review above, and even met some of relatives who live in Greenville, S.C. The family was home-schooled and taught young-earth creationist arguments. Two or three of the sisters attended Bob Jones University. Today half of the author's siblings have left the fold.)

WYATT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH: TOO "GOOD" TO BE TRUE? YES!

Letter from Joe Zias on the “discoveries of Ron Wyatt,” including mention of the alleged chariot wheel (Zias is Curator of Anthropology/Archaeology, Israel Antiquities Authority, POB 586, Jerusalem, Tel. 972-2-292624)

Lastly, I exchanged a few emails with Pinkowski who runs the Wyatt museum, and who informed me that, "In the 22 years that Ron Wyatt performed this wonderful work for the Lord, he always maintained a very humble personality. It would have been very easy for him to become proud or boastful, but Ron did not do that. Both Moses and Ron Wyatt were extremely humble men. When asked "why" he was chosen to do this work, Ron replied: 'If 10 different people found 10 different major archaeological finds, people could say, 'Well, they were lucky, or smart, etc.,' but for one person to find all of these things is not humanly possible. Not even the most brilliant and celebrated. But God uses 'The simple things to confound the wise.' In choosing a simple, average person, He leaves no room for doubt as to 'who' is actually doing these things. Perhaps He chose me because I was willing -- I really don't know. But I can say that there is no one on earth who could be more grateful than I to be allowed to work with these things.'"

What faith Pinkowski has in the alleged authenticity of every one of Wyatt’s alleged “discoveries,” none of which have ever been verified by legitimate archeologists. Wyatt always seemed to get a glimpse of something and then it promptly vanishes, like the gilded wheel, or the Phoenician style column found on the Saudi coastline and which contained in Phoenician letters (Archaic Hebrew) the words: Mizraim (Egypt ); Solomon; Edom; death; Pharaoh; Moses; and Yahweh; or “the Blood of Christ” on the “Judgment Seat” beneath the Temple site in Jerusalem which only Wyatt saw. Other evidence/claims of Wyatt likewise vanish after closer examination. Even those who at first supported his claims to have found Noah’s ark no longer believed him after examining the evidence at the site further, including young-earth creationists belonging to major young-earth organizations.

THE ABOVE QUOTATIONS ARRANGED AND EDITED BY EDWARD T. BABINSKI