Skip to comments.Atheist Taunts Christians With ‘Easter Challenge’
Posted on 03/31/2013 11:46:55 AM PDT by CHRISTIAN DIARIST
Norman Barker performed a duet with Judy Garland in the 1948 film Easter Parade. His son, Dan, became a pastor, before falling away from his Christian faith in 1984.
In 1990, Dan Barker, by then a devout atheist, published an essay, which he titled An Easter Challenge For Christians. And he has reissued his transparent attack on Easter every year since then.
This year, his challenge appears on a blog hosted by the so-called Freedom From Religion Foundation, an atheist hate group, based in Madison, Wisconsin, for which Barker and his wife serve as co-presidents.
In his anti-Easter essay, Barker writes, My straightforward request is merely that Christians tell me exactly what happened on the day their most important doctrine was born.
The atheist suggests that, since he first issued his challenge nearly a quarter-century ago, only an Assemblies of God pastor and Lutheran grad has ever taken him up on it. And neither ultimately got back to him.
But heres the rest of the story that Barker, the deceiver, conveniently ignores: His challenge is not straightforward. Indeed, The important condition of the challenge, he writes, is that not one single biblical detail be omitted.
Of course, such trickeration is to be expected from those who shake their fists at God; who deny the divinity of Jesus Christ; who disbelieve that He conquered the grave.
Barker seeks to cast doubt upon the Easter story by deconstructing every jot and tittle of the four Gospel accounts of the Easter story, as well as the briefer accounts that appear in the book of Acts and I Corinthians.
He maintains that any putative discrepancy in the Biblical accounts, any apparent inconsistency in Biblical detail (however small, like the matter of whether visitors to Christs empty tomb on Easter morning saw one angel or two), is prima facie evidence that the resurrection was a fiction.
But thats an absurd proposition. Sure there are discrepancies in the Gospel accounts. But no more than those to be found in reading the various biographies of, say, Abraham Lincoln. Does Barker question whether Lincoln truly served as president of the United States?
And while the atheist makes the case that the Gospel accounts of Easter were ahistoric, they actually were corroborated by the first century Roman-Jewish historian Flavius Josephus.
In the Testimonium Flavianum, Josephus writes about Jesus, a wise man who was a doer of wonderful works. He attests that Jesus was condemned to the cross and that he appeared alive again the third day.
Barker can dispute Josephus historic account of the Easter story, as he questions the Gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. But there is no dispute, no question that something miraculous happened on the first Easter Sunday.
For the frightened disciples who abandoned Jesus on the night he was arrested, who hid themselves away when he was crucified, were suddenly emboldened three days after Christs death.
In His name, they set out to make disciples of all nations. And it is no coincidence that, two thousand years later, Christianity is the worlds dominant faith.
Amen, He is. Praise God.
I just do not understand how someone goes from being a pastor to being an avowed atheist. It makes no sense to me.
He is risen, indeed! Alleluia!
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Counterchallenge to Barker:
Tell me exactly why you are so obsessed with Christ.”
The atheists are becoming more obnoxious than their homosexual brothers and sisters.
It actually makes a great deal of sense. Begin with a false notion of what the Scriptures actually are, and a false notion of how to read and interpret them. Then apply those false notions to the actual Scriptures. Find that the Scriptures are not at all congruent with what the false notions suggest that the Scriptures should be. Conclude, therefore, that the Scriptures themselves are false (rather than the notions).
If the Scriptures are false, then Christianity, Judaism, and Mohammedanism are also false and must be rejected.
Polytheism is ridiculous on its face.
Buddhism is a largely non-theistic philosphy.
Outright atheism is not a far stretch at all.
I have an idea, why doesn’t he just read the story for himself, its all there.
Is he afraid to pick up a Bible, one has to conclude that.
The Mohammedans have already declared our scriptures false.
It’s like saying an event didn’t happen because all the witnesses descriptions are not identical.
Utterly ridiculous. Not even the screwed up courts we have go this far.
Sin and his condemnation in it. Some people love sin so much that when they feel the condemnation for it they do not run to the savior they run from him and accuse him of their sin.
Blaspheming of the holy spirit is the only sin not accounted for by Christ Blood. It is what the blasphemer wants, to be held personally accountable for it for eternity not accepting the sacrifice.
Sad, really sad.
Most atheists that are serious about examining the evidence, don’t give themselves an “out” to blame others for shoddy research, or they just assume Christians are going to be biased somehow, they do the work themselves. Some become convinced and believing Christians from it.
Not entirely ... they accept some aspects as being true, but accuse us of falsifying parts. The Mohammedans accept most of the major characters in the Scriptures from Ibrahim to Issa ... but the mohammedan understanding of them is wildly inconsistent with ours. So much so as to be largely contradictory. Logically, we could be right. Or the mohammedans could be right. Or we and the mohammedans could both be wrong. But we and the mohammedans CANNOT both be right.
Wow, and Atheist biblical literalist. LOL!
If the same standard was applied in our court system, nobody could be convicted of anything.
The Koran already declared that the Scriptures as the Jews and Christians possess them have been polluted with false doctrines. That was the Koran’s way of getting around Mohammed’s doctrinal differences with Scripture, with the unilateral declaration of Mohammed being the “last prophet” piled on top to prevent deviation from the Koranic version.
There is only one Bible verse quoted in the Koran, in addition.
The Koran is far too different from the Bible for there to be any real commonality. I’ve read it.
It isn’t a surprise at all. People are just people.
Some doctors are there for connections and golf and money.
A few lawyers are there to actually help people.
More and more officers are just thugs with badges.
A few teachers actually care about teaching instead of their pensions and crying about how poor they are working a job it’s virtually impossible to be fired from.
A few bankers really do want to help a small businessperson start their business.
Many restaurant servers want their diners to be happy with their service.
It’s not a surprise we have some pastors and priests who are there for other reasons than they believe what they’re doing. They either keep getting more and more warped or they get tired of the charade and leave, a few can really stick it out but they’re just punching a clock. People really do not like having to do stuff they don’t believe in, for years and years. When it feels like the effort isn’t worth whatever they feel the reward is, they often go.
My sister proudly claims that she is an athiest. One day, she asked me if that made me mad or uncomfortable. I said, “Why should it, you’re the one going to hell, not me.”
That shut her up.
>>I just do not understand how someone goes from being a pastor to being an avowed atheist. It makes no sense to me.
It makes more sense than you think. Many pastors have lost their faith and are just going through the motions because that is their vocation. In most cases, it is what they got their degree(s) in and they’ve never worked in another job since college. If they can’t retire, they just reuse old sermons, drone through the sacraments, and act as a social worker to their congregation. I could imagine that some would get angry and become an atheist, especially the “shaking-fist-at-the-God-I-don’t-believe-in” type of atheist we find today.