Joel Kontinen
A recent editorial in New Scientist magazine begins with the words:
“FOR millions of people around the world, this weekend is a special occasion – a time to celebrate the central article of their religious faith, Jesus's resurrection and ascension to heaven.”
The writer missed a pertinent detail, i.e., Jesus’ ascension took place 40 days after His resurrection.
The article goes on to say:
“Not one of these people can really know what happened 2000-odd years ago in Jerusalem. And yet they believe their version of events is true.”
Now, here’s where the beliefs of the writer provide an interpretation of what might have or might not have happened.
It seems that Christmas and Easter are difficult times for unbelievers.
Perhaps they remind them of the truth that their naturalistic /materialistic worldview is not entirely logical.
We actually do have eyewitness accounts of the resurrection. In 1 Corinthians 15 the Apostle Paul lists a number of people who saw the risen Christ with their own eyes.
It’s good to remember that Paul wrote within 20 years or so after the event that happened in real history
The NS article ignores this, however, and attempts to elevate the naturalistic interpretation of science above the Bible: “The scientific method is based on verifiable evidence, and is thus not a belief system.”
I would say that it is. One’s presuppositions do colour and even distort one’s conclusions. They might cause some people to deny historical events attested to by many eyewitnesses.
Source:
Don't believe in belief. New Scientist 3015 (1 April 2015).
Posts
