Atheists and other critics of Christianity have no shortage of claims against the Bible’s reliability; therefore, we should be equipped to answer these objections. In this section we will be examining the things that are presented as the strongest evidences against Christianity. Let me stress again what was stated a bit earlier; the Christian should not get caught up in endless arguing against the never ending barrage of attacks, for if the strongest evidence comes to nothing, we should not be concerned with the tedious details that atheists will doubtless throw out as a last ditch effort to land a blow against biblical truth. The Bible instructs us not to get caught up in endless disputings over words and railings that come from the proud who seek to do nothing more than cause strife[i]. The scriptures also instruct us to avoid foolish questions that are unprofitable and vain[ii]. Jesus instructed His disciples not to cast their pearls before swine for they will reject it and come back to trample you[iii].
For the reasons above, I stress again that the purpose of this study is not to arm the Christian with fodder to blast at the atheist, but to be a tool to give the believer confidence that the attacks against God are nothing and to be used as an evangelistic tool. If we answer the objections of the critics of God and find that there is an open door to share the truth of salvation in Christ, these things are indeed profitable in a discussion; however, if we answer objections and find an atheist begins to entrench himself and launch into machinegun fire argumentation, obey the Bible’s instruction and withdraw yourself knowing that he is proud, puffed up by his vain imagination and is self-condemning[iv]. There are many who have adopted atheism simply because they have never heard anything that refutes it and may be open to the truth. There are others who are atheists because they are revolted by the thought of God ruling over them and will cling to anything that gives them hope that He does not exist.
With or without external evidence, the Christian stands firm
if they stand upon the word by applying it to their own lives. Even with
evidence to back every argument, if you are not standing in obedience to the
word of God in your own life, you will have no sure foundation. Look at Matthew 7:24-27
24 Therefore whosoever
heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise
man, which built his house upon a rock:
25 And the rain descended, and the
floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for
it was founded upon a rock.
26 And every one that heareth these
sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which
built his house upon the sand:
27 And the rain descended, and the
floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and
great was the fall of it.
We have all seen people in the church whose faith collapses
when they are blindsided by the trials of life or attacks on their Christian
beliefs. There are other examples of Christians who grew into a deep maturity
with the Lord when they were blindsided by these same things. Based on our
willingness to obey, this is either the strength or the weakness of the
Christian life. Apologetics has its place, but it cannot replace knowing and
walking in the word of God. If you are a hearer and doer of the word, you will
stand. If you are not grounded deep in the rock of Christ through the word of
God, every wind will shake you and a mighty storm will collapse your faith.
This can come as a hardship, temptation, disappointment, or compelling sounding
argument against your faith. When you truly know God and are walking with Him,
there is nothing that can persuade you to turn from the God you know. Richard
Dawkins quotes from a letter written by the president of a historical society
in
God is a spirit and cannot be found through the telescope or microscope, no more than human thought or emotion can be found by analyzing the brain. As everyone knows, religion is based on Faith, not knowledge. Every thinking person, perhaps, is assailed at times with religious doubt. My own faith has wavered many a time. But I never told anyone of my spiritual aberrations for two reasons: (1) I feared that I might, by mere suggestion, disturb and damage the life and hopes of some fellow being; (2) because I agree with the writer who said, ‘There is a mean streak in anyone who will destroy another’s faith.’ (Quoted from ‘The God Delusion’)
This letter is representative of the confusion found in many church members but does not agree with true biblical faith. Though everyone will have doubts of some kind during the course of their lives, I do not believe that hiding it benefits others and it surely does not benefit the individual who has doubts. The scripture instructs us to share our struggles with one another so that we can pray for one another[v], we are told to bear one another’s burdens in the church[vi], and we are told that when we struggle, our companions can pick us up, but woe to him that falls when he is alone[vii].
I also do not agree that God cannot be seen through the telescope or microscope. The truth is that God cannot be found by those whose hearts are veiled by pride and human nature, but when you examine creation, it all declares the glory of God. By Richard Dawkins’ own admission, a billion billion earth like planets are a conservative estimation and there are more than a billion galaxies believed to exist. Does not a billion galaxies testify to a Creator? The faith in a ‘cosmic egg’ is preposterous when you look at the vast expanse of the universe we can see. The fact is that we cannot see the end of it and for all we know it may be infinite. Can a finite bang create an infinite universe? Or is it more fitting to believe an infinite God created an infinite universe to testify to His own unsearchable depths? Look in any direction and you will see evidences of an infinite God.
If you look outward, the earth begins to look small as we enter the solar system. This then begins to look small when you see our galaxy. The galaxy looks small when you see the expanse of the universe and we can see no end. In fact, what we thought was empty space turns out to have only appeared empty because of our inability to look beyond our point in space. The more our ability to look outward grows, the more we realize that we haven’t skimmed the surface of what is out there. The sun is 109 times bigger than our earth, but that pales in comparison to Antares which is nearly 100 times bigger than our sun. Our planet becomes microscopic compared to Antares which is approximately 10,900 times larger than earth.
If you look downward you also see infinity. There was a time when man could only see with the naked eye. The little dots swimming in water were thought to be the smallest living organism and dust was the smallest particles man could observe. When technology gave us the ability to see beyond what our natural eyes could observe, we found that there were microbes living and moving in a world that could live in a drop of water. We soon found out that viruses were a fraction of the size of what we thought was the smallest living creature. We found that molecules were smaller than cells and that they were assembled by yet smaller parts. When the electron microscope arrived, we found that atoms were the particles that made up everything. As technology advanced, we found that atoms were not the smallest particles for they were made up of electrons and neutrons which are kept in orbit around a nucleus by a small magnetic field. Now do we assume that this is the end simply because we have reached the limits of our technology? Perhaps we should learn from our earlier misconceptions and realize that an infinite God has built creation upon His infinity to show man his own limitations and realize that it all points to the glory of God.
Faith
is the knowledge of God and as we honestly explore the knowledge of our
universe, faith is strongly affirmed. It is a false statement to say that faith
is not by knowledge for the Bible declares that faith comes by hearing the word
of God and that is indeed knowledge. It would be true to say that faith cannot
be found by mere knowledge without ever seeking the knowledge of God. The Bible
states that man who is devoid of the knowledge of God is “Ever learning, and never able to come to the
knowledge of the truth.[viii]”
The type of argumentation Dawkins uses as examples
to back his arguments against reasonable faith unfortunately is common among
Christians. Apathy is a great threat among Christians for when so-called facts
are presented they are accepted as proof and rarely challenged. Very few will
bother researching to see if the things being taught are so. This is true when
it comes to false doctrine and it is true when it comes to what is falsely
called science. It takes only a little effort to search out the facts to see if
it is based on truth, speculation, or is blatantly false as we will see shortly
when I examine the claims that Christianity is borrowed from paganism. I once
watched a Christian and an atheist arguing about evolution. The atheist rattled
off a barrage of claims that would have been easily picked apart for their
inaccuracy, but the Christian asked, “Are you going to believe the facts, or
are you going to believe the Bible?” It would have been more accurate to say
that the facts make more sense through the lens of scripture than through the
unfounded assumptions of evolution and then follow up with a reasonable
explanation of the facts.
When Christians testify to the world that the
Bible is not based on evidence and is in opposition to facts, it is no wonder
that we are losing the cultural war for truth. Some have gone so far as to
claim that there are two parallel truths and even though they are opposed to
each other, both are true and must remain separate from one another. This is a
false belief for God does not change, He is not the author of confusion, and
since He is the Creator of all things, all things must ultimately point to His
glory. Don’t forget that even the atheist and everything that opposes God will
one day bow and testify that Jesus is Lord to the glory of the Father[ix].
What is unseen does not contradict the truth of what is seen. We live in a
fallen world that is corrupted by sin. Even though sin stands in opposition to
the holiness of God, it does not contradict God but all of creation groans with
anticipation for the final redemption when it will again be as God has designed
it to be[x].
Corruption may pollute the truth, but it does not alter the truth. What is true
in science is also true in faith. What is false in science will indeed
contradict the truth of God. As we shall see, the evidences presented against God
are in fact corruptions of the truth, which, of course, makes them a lie.
In 2007 ‘Zeitgeist, The Movie’ was released. The
makers of this movie present a series of arguments against Christianity in
which they claim to prove that the early Christians and the Bible plagiarized
pagan religions to create a fictitious Jesus with borrowed attributes from
other pagan gods. Even if you have not heard of this movie, you will most
likely hear many of the claims that were popularized by this movie. By
searching the Internet, a plethora of atheist websites will be found that
recite the so-called facts found in this movie as though they were concrete
evidences.
Many plagiarize this information by presenting
them as their own arguments and pretend this information was discovered by
examining the facts. Since these facts do not exist, it is not possible to hide
their plagiarism. This also exposes the apathy of those who call themselves
atheists for they have done nothing to verify the claims of this movie or
validate any of the sources of this information. The evidence is so
overwhelmingly against this movie that it brings into question the integrity of
these producers.
The production ‘Zeitgeist – the Movie’ is another example of atheistic propaganda that is intended to overthrow the faith of Christians while inoculating the unbeliever from the gospel. In the writings of Richard Dawkins he stated that his goal was for Christians to pick up one of his books and be an atheist when they put it down. One of the strategies of atheism is to exclude information that contradicts their argument while introducing assumptions as facts that support their ideas. As we saw in an earlier portion of this writing, Dawkins admits that many of their theories are lacking in facts and need to be supported by assumptions. After acknowledging their ignorance to how origins fit science he states, “But if we now import some new assumptions into our estimate, things change”.
This is the ‘strength’ of the atheistic argument. When the evidence can’t be proven, they plead ignorance but then assure us that their ideas are true. They ‘prove’ this by interjecting assumptions (or imaginary facts) which changes the outcome of how we would interpret the evidence. Zeitgeist also employs the power of assumption but then takes this much farther into the realm of blatant dishonesty as we shall soon see. It should not be surprising that an atheist would employ a dishonest argument. One of the fundamental beliefs of atheism is that man, at his core is good. For this reason, man determines moral tenets. In the humanistic mindset, there are no moral absolutes but man, through reason, is able to make the right moral choices based on the situation at hand.
An example of this can be seen through a political campaign controversy that occurred a few years back. A politician who was trying to push an agenda on socialized medicine made a claim that veterinary medicines are identical to medical prescriptions but cost significantly less. When this was challenged with evidence to the contrary he admitted that what he said he knew to be ‘untruthful’, but went on to justify the intentional deception by saying that it was intended to persuade others to come to a conclusion that he believed was true. In other words, to lie in order to persuade someone to your point of view is not considered to be wrong. If mankind determines what is morally acceptable, who is to say that lying is wrong? It becomes merely a tool of persuasion.
Zeitgeist the Movie employs this very practice as we shall soon see. The movie is divided into three parts. The first part is dedicated to convincing the viewer that the Bible was plagiarized from pagan religions. One of the ironic scenes in this movie was a clip from ‘Network: 1976’ where a speaker is scolding the audience for being so dumbed down that they believe whatever they see on media. The movie then goes on to capitalize on this weakness by using the same media to misrepresent the truth knowing that the masses would believe it simply because this media claims it to be so. While informing the viewer that this same media is used to deceive, they then use it themselves to deceive. It is amazing that they tipped their hand to the audience and still the masses accepted what was fed to them without question and now atheists are echoing the information in this film as fact without verifying any of it.
In Part 1, the viewer is bombarded with over an hour’s worth of claims against the trustworthiness of the Bible. Obviously it would take a book’s worth of rebuttals to answer them all, but that shouldn’t be necessary. As I stated earlier, one of the tactics of atheism is to bombard you with so many objections that it becomes impossible to answer every question. Machinegun fire argumentation only insulates the argument from being honestly examined. It also gives the false impression that the evidence is so overwhelming that many are persuaded to assume their point is true without taking the time to examine it. It is an attempt to hypnotize the masses with information overload.
It should be a sufficient rebuttal to answer the strongest objections, for if the strength of the argument fails the test of evidence, the petty objections have little bearing. In the examination of this atheist film I will show the misrepresented information of their main arguments, but I also want to look at the points raised in light of the scriptures. Why are there similarities between pagan religions and biblical accounts? Rebutting the claims is only half the issue. We also should have an answer so that we understand how this all fits into our faith and affirms our confidence in the scriptures.
The two main arguments of this movie is that the Bible plagiarized pagan religions through the story of the Egyptian god Horus and the pagan astrology practices through the zodiac. Zeitgeist applies most of its biblical criticism through these two examples so these will be the main focus of this examination.
It is claimed that Jesus was given the attributes of dozens of pagan gods beginning with Horus. It is falsely said that the story of Horus is from 3000 BC, he was born December 25th, born of a virgin, his birth was announced through a star in the east, adored by three kings, teacher at 12 years of age, baptized at 30, had 12 disciples, walked on water, called the lamb of God and the light, betrayed by Typhon, crucified, dead three days and resurrected.
Those making this claim are either completely ignorant or they are blatantly being ‘untruthful’ in order to persuade. In Christian circles we call this deception. Let’s examine the story of Horus taken directly from the Egyptian Hieroglyphics where it was first discovered. The discovery of these Hieroglyphics was made in the mid 1800s and the story of Horus was translated by Chabas in 1857 in the Revue Archéologique, p. 65 ff.
The Egyptian story begins with the god Osiris who inherited
the earth from his father Keb and the sovereignty of heaven from his mother
Nut. Isis, the mother of Horus, was the sister and wife of Osiris - not a
virgin as these Bible critics claim. There is no story of a virgin birth in
this myth nor does it contain any references to a holy spirit overshadowing her
to give miraculous conception. The myth claims that she was a 'witch-goddess'
whose tongue was trained to perfection and she cast spells non-stop to place
protection on Osiris and his shrine from evil enemies. According to the
Egyptian hieroglyphics, Osiris was killed in a war with the evil god Set and
cast to the ground.
The latter part of this myth varies slightly from earlier
accounts. This hieroglyphic was estimated to have been written under the
XVIIIth Dynasty (1550-1292 BC) and
varies slightly from the traditions that are believed to date as far back as
the 5th or 6th Dynasties (between 2500BC and 2184 BC). In earlier legends the
account of drawing out the essence of Osiris are not mentioned. The original
story (around 2500 BC) claimed that
You should be able to see some immediate contradictions
between Egyptian mythology and the claim that Horus and Jesus are related.
There was no implication of a virgin birth and Zeitgeist misrepresents the date
to add to its credibility but doesn’t mention the fact that the Horus myth
didn’t include him receiving his dead father’s essence until as late as 1292
BC. In Egyptian mythology, Horus could not have been crucified and raised after
three days for they attest that Horus never died. Some accounts claim that
Horus was his father Osiris brought back to life through the womb of
Crucifixion was a method of execution used by the Persians,
Seleucids, Carthaginians, and Romans from approximately 600 BC to 400 AD when
The remainder of the claims about the relationship between Horus and Jesus hold equal validity – none. There are sights that are supposedly from an Egyptologist that make all these claims, but there are no references to hard facts, only conjectures – or should we say assumptions. Some of these attributes are a combination of different pagan gods and some cannot be found at all in pagan mythology (Egyptian or otherwise). Some Horus stories equate the essence he received from his dead father Osiris is equivalent to Osiris returning from the dead, but reincarnation is a common pagan belief today and is not comparable to the resurrection of Christ and doesn’t fit the claim that Horus was raised from the dead.
Another humorous irony is that this great Egyptologist that many atheist cite is Gerald Massey. Massy is the first known to make the claim that Jesus is a copy of Horus. He also makes the connection between Jesus and 2000 other pagan gods of which Zeitgeist repeats as a fact and rapidly scrolls 2000 names across the screen. The humor of this claim is that Gerald Massey was not a studied Egyptologist; he was a poet who died in 1913 and has no credentials with anyone but the atheists who cite him thinking that he was a researcher. This error was further propagated by Acharya S (her real name is Dorothy Murdock) in her book ‘The Christ Conspiracy’. She also sells a book called ‘A Companion Guide to Zeitgeist’.
Many of the so-called facts are unsubstantiated claims from fictional writers and this ‘evidence’ finds its origins solely in the imaginations of these writers. Like Dawkins who interjects conjured up evidence to supposedly ‘clarify’ his arguments, these experts also interject conjectures and present them as facts to manipulate their audience into thinking that there is a basis for these claims. In any other arena this false testimony would be considered perjury.
The claim that wise men followed a star from the east also is quite an embellishment from the truth. It is only the radical critics of Jesus that seem to take one word or phrase and transform it into imaginary evidence. Consider this song to the myth taken from the Pyramid Text, Teta, l. 276.
Thy sister
The only mention of a star is in relation to Horus being called the dweller in the star Septet. So the critics have seized upon the word ‘star’ and equated it to the biblical account of the Babylonians who saw the star from the East. Notice that another account from the Egyptian myth of Horus also acknowledges that Horus was conceived by the union between Isis and Osiris – not a virgin birth as Zeitgeist and ‘The Christ Conspiracy’ claims.
The claim that Horus was baptized at the age of thirty is a completely fabricated account. In the Egyptian stories, Horus was never baptized, never walked on water, was never called the Lamb of God and was never betrayed by Typhon. Acharya S. made this claim in her book but there are no supporting documents other than that of the poet G. Massey. This is far from a credible source and how it could become a great controversy over a writing of a pagan poet more than 100 years ago is beyond comprehension. It should give the Christian great confidence to know that the best evidence against the biblical account of Jesus was an imaginary musing of a dead poet.
Gerald Massey does claim to have gotten his ideas from ancient text; however, he does not cite the text he supposedly translated from. Since he appears to be the only one who found these secret texts and it cannot and has not been verified by any credible source, it does not stand as evidence but only speculation at best. Many have searched the ancient texts he studied, but none have found any evidence to support his writings. Since Massey never cited any original text, his writings show to be more of a fictional story than an attempt at translation.
The movie also quotes James Frazer as one of its experts, but he also states that his work does not represent a whole system of mythology. In other words, the characters came from mythology and much of what he wrote was intended to be fictional. Once again there are no sources provided by Frazer. None of these claims can be found in the actual ancient mythology. Massey and Frazer make radical claims that differ greatly from what is known and verified by actual evidence and Acharya S quotes Massey and Frazer as the source for her evidence. Zeitgeist quotes all three as though they were independently verified sources while hiding from the audience the fact that they are quoting from each other and have created a circular quoting system. They quote each other but none use historical evidence or quote from any credible researched work. Many have searched the text Massey supposedly studied, but independent research has not been able to turn up any of Massey’s claims.
The example of Horus not only falls short of proof, but it
fails in every aspect. There is no comparison for the stories do not even come
close to each other. The critics who hold up Horus even go as far as to claim
that angels announced to
The movie did not put a lot of emphasis on Issa, but this was listed in the list of gods and is emphasized in the ‘Christ Conspiracy’ book by Acharya S. Since it is likely that Christians will be presented with this character at some point, it should be addressed here. In her book, Murdock (Acharya S) states the following:
"The Arabian Issa purportedly
lived around 400 BCE in the western Arabian region of Hijaz, where also existed
places called Galilee,
As is the pattern among the circle of quotations between
Murdock, Massey, and Frazer, no legitimate historical citations were provided
and there is no verification of these claims. Contrary to Murdock’s claim,
Galilee,
It was claimed that Jesus travelled through
Most of the stories of Isa come from writings associated with Islam. Muhammad lived between 570 and 632 AD and the writings of the Qur’an are not believed to have been written down for more than 100 years after the death of Muhammad. The earliest manuscripts are from 800 AD. Murdock is quoting from writings written in the beginning of the ninth century as verifiable evidence for something that she states took place four hundred years before Christ. The 400 BCE date given by Murdock is misinformation for the Muslims believe the Arabic Isa to be born of the virgin Mary (or Maryam in Aramaic). The dates of Isa is the same date as the Jesus of the Bible. In fact, a Muslim will tell you that Isa is Jesus of the Bible though they do not believe in His divinity, crucifixion or resurrection. It is unknown where she pulled this date from, but the contradictions should not be surprising at this point.
There is no historical evidence that Jesus traveled through
It is also claimed that the Jews borrowed from the pagan god
Tammuz. Supposedly Tammuz is worshipped as a savior in
There are over 2000 gods that this movie claims have the attributes of Jesus. The reader is free to look up the poems of G. Massey and Acharya S. to research all two thousand if desired, but what has been examined here should be sufficient to show the misrepresentation and fabrication of false evidence intended for no other purpose than to cast doubt on the truth. It would be tedious to go through additional gods that Bible critics have claimed Christianity was patterned after, but thus far all have proved to be exaggerations, misrepresentation, and fabrications of the narrators and sources they quote. The myth of Horus was presented as the strength of the argument and the remainders were cited with similar claims. Since Horus was presented as the most credible example, it should be sufficient to say that if this has failed the test of scrutiny, the others hold little hope of validating the plagiarism claims. The other gods examined have also proven to be an embellishment of the facts as well.
Perhaps we should ask why it is necessary to fabricate evidence in an effort to disprove the Bible? If the evidence is a fabrication, it stands to reason that the entire belief systems around these are fallacious as well. Thus far we have a zero percent accuracy from the evidence provided by the critics of scripture. The remainder of the evidence does not improve their percentage of accuracy.
One consistent problem with the flawed logic of Zeitgeist is the fact that the makers of this movie consistently mix modern astrology and its terms with ancient astrology. For example, the narrator claims that the number 12 is replete throughout astrology and compares this with the usage of this symbolism in the Bible. However, many ancient zodiacs also focus on the number eighteen, six, and three as well as twelve. Modern astrology has evolved to be quite a variation from the ancient practice.
Another example is the claim that the Southern Crux (or Southern Cross) was part of ancient practices. Bible critics claim that ancient religions believed that the sun spent three days in the Southern Crux December 22-24th before returning northward and emerging from the cross three days later to ultimately be celebrated as a new life several months afterward on Easter. The claim is that Christianity borrowed this pagan belief and created a Jesus myth where He was dead three days and returned to life. This is not possible for the Southern Crux was not discovered and integrated into astrology until the 1500s. That is more than one thousand, five hundred years after the birth of Christianity. The discovery of the Southern Cross was made by a Portuguese voyager named Andrea Corsali in 1515 BC. The National Library of Australia states the following:
It provides the only known
narrative of a Portuguese voyage in 1515 down the African coast, around the
Cape of Good Hope, and into the Southern and Indian Oceans, making landfall at
Goa on the Indian coast, later travelling down to Cochin at the foot of India.
After rounding the
The Southern Cross is out of view for most of the year and
is not easily visible. This constellation cannot be seen above 27 degrees
latitude south and is best seen in the month of May. This means that it is not
possible that that it could have been viewed by astrologers during the month of
December in ancient civilizations that are in the Northern hemisphere. The
civilizations that practiced astrology (including nations around
There are other flaws with this belief. Zeitgeist mixes and matches numbers, dates, and claims at will even though they contradict their own arguments. December 25th is the date that the sun supposedly emerged from the cross which should be Easter, but they claim that the 25th was the birth of Jesus and try to pass this off as a parallel to an ancient myth. A myth that does not exist as we have seen. It should be noted that the Bible does not mention the date of Jesus’ birth and it most certainly has no relationship with December 25th. This date did not enter into church traditions until it was made an official Catholic holiday around 400 AD. The scripture gives no date or timeframe for Jesus’ birth other than the coalition to the Jewish feast days. It is most likely that Jesus was born on the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles that represents God abiding with His people. We will look at feast days shortly. This is an educated guess because there are no historic testimonies that would pinpoint the day when He was born.
Eddie Snipes
Exchanged Life Outreach
<<Click Here to Sign up for Weekly Messages>>
Return to the Bible Studies Page