Critics often draw comparisons between Jesus and other ancient figures who had miracles attributed to them. It's often suggested that there's no or insufficient reason to favor Jesus over those other figures. A few points, among many others that could be made:
- Before we even get to distinguishing among these individuals by means of miracles, there are other significant reasons to distinguish among them. Given factors like Jesus' character, the longevity of Christianity and Judaism before it, and Jesus' prominence in the world, he's a far more plausible candidate for revelation than somebody like Hercules or Apollonius of Tyana.
- Christianity not only allows the possibility of non-Christian miracles, but even reports many of them (e.g., the miracles of Pharaoh's magicians in Exodus, the miracles of the Antichrist in Revelation), and Christians outside the Bible have frequently acknowledged non-Christian miracles in extrabiblical contexts (God's healing of non-Christians in the context of common grace, individuals who have paranormal abilities, near-death experiences, poltergeists, hauntings, etc.). A Christian could attribute a miracle associated with Vespasian, for example, to human paranormal abilities, demonic activity, or whatever other source while maintaining a traditional Christian view of Jesus and his miracles.
- I don't know of any of the ancient figures under consideration who has anything comparable to the ongoing reports of apparitions of Jesus, healings done in Jesus' name, and such. I read a lot of paranormal literature and follow the field in other ways, and I don't get the impression that Zeus is thought to be doing much these days. You don't hear much about Augustus, Honi the Circle-Drawer, or Mithra either.
- Jesus is far superior in the context of ancient miracles as well. See, for example, Robert Newman's discussion of how Jesus' crucifixion occurred during the sixty-ninth sabbatical cycle after Artaxerxes' decree to rebuild Jerusalem, followed by the Roman empire's destruction of both Jerusalem and the temple, which lines up well with Daniel's Seventy Weeks prophecy. Similarly, Rome fulfilled Daniel's prediction of a fourth great empire and the timing of it and implemented the penal practices, including some highly unusual ones, needed to fulfill Psalm 22 and the third Servant Song in Isaiah 50. Jesus' alignment with these and other prophecies are significantly evidential in favor of Christianity even if we think he only fulfilled the passages in a typological or secondary manner, though I've argued that he was their primary fulfillment. Given the high contexts and high language involved in these passages (e.g., what Daniel 9:24 says about what's going to be accomplished, the geographical and chronological scope of Psalm 22:27-31, the Divine language applied to the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah 52:13) and other factors involved, taking these passages as referring primarily to an eschatological messianic figure makes more sense than seeing them as referring primarily to some lesser individual. But even if somebody were to take the latter view, it would still be highly unlikely that Jesus' life would line up so well with these passages by normal means. See here for links to some other posts in which I've addressed these issues in more depth. The evidence for Christian miracles in antiquity goes beyond prophecy fulfillment, but the prophecy category alone is enough to put Jesus well above somebody like an Egyptian or Greek god or a Roman emperor.
- I've written a lot about alleged parallels within the Bible and between Biblical and extrabiblical sources. Go here for a recent overview. And here's my response to Andrew Lincoln's use of that sort of argument in the context of the virgin birth. In another post, responding to Annette Merz, I wrote more about alleged parallels between Biblical and extrabiblical sources, focusing especially on parallels with the Old Testament and Judaism more broadly.
No comments:
Post a Comment