More on Mr. Lundahl’s Groundless Speculations about Christ’s Hair and Clothing. I Already Met and Refuted Mr. Lundahl’s “Challenge” – The Gospels are Works of Fiction Pretending to be History
Kevin R. Henke
November 14, 2022
In Henke (2022fx), I protested Mr. Lundahl’s groundless speculations about how the orientation of Christ’s clothes would supposedly indicate that God did not violate any law of gravity during his walking on water or Ascension. In context, Henke (2022fx) states:
“Lundahl (2022i) describes what Christ supposedly would have looked like during his walking on water or his Ascension into Heaven:
“If God removes the gravity, the result does not violate any law of gravitation, it only involves a situation where they do not apply, because what they apply to, gravity, has been removed. However, the view of miracles proposed here is not that God removes gravity, but that He adds an action from outside gravity, in for instance miracles like the Ascension or the Walking on the Water in the Storm. Gravity not being removed is visible in Christ's clothes and hair remaining the ordinary direction.”
In my other essays, I argue that God, if he exists, could violate the laws of gravity at any time, if he wanted to. As a side issue, in Henke (2022w), I asked Mr. Lundahl how he knows what Christ’s hair and clothes would have looked like when he was supposedly walking on water or during his purported Ascension. Was Mr. Lundahl there to witness it?
Lundahl (2022q) then answers my question with a reply that is full of groundless speculation:
“If gravity had been annihilated and hair and clothes had ceased to fall as they naturally do, the Disciples in the Boat would have had lots more trouble recognising Christ, and also recognising Him as Lord rather than as a kind of Mary Poppins.”
First of all, we have absolutely no evidence that Jesus ever walked on water or Ascended into Heaven. However, let’s say that he did. Here, Lundahl (2022q) seems to be assuming that Jesus had the long hair like what is popularly shown in paintings, Roman Catholic statues, movies and television shows. Yet, we don’t know what Jesus looked like. What if Jesus had short hair? What if he was bald? Then why would his hair need to be under the influence of gravity? What would keep his disciples from recognizing him? Nevertheless, let me be clear here. If God exists, he could make Jesus, long hair or not, walk on water or Ascend into the sky anyway he wants and he could violate the law of gravitation if he wanted to. If God exists, I’m not going to be so bold as to try to tell him how he could do miracles.
Interestingly, after Jesus’ supposed Resurrection, a number of disciples did have problems recognizing Jesus (John 20:15; John 21:4; Luke 24:13-35). Rather than trying to explain why a number of disciples had difficulty recognizing Jesus, perhaps we should recognize that these stories are probably works of fiction (e.g., Carrier 2014, pp. 387-509). We could then possibly determine how and why they really originated.” [my emphasis]
Lundahl (2022w) then gives the following response to my bolded comments:
“Henke (2022fx) states:
‘What if Jesus had short hair? What if he was bald? Then why would his hair need to be under the influence of gravity? What would keep his disciples from recognizing him?’
Lundahl (2022w) replies: ‘My point would still stand for the Oriental loose garments.’”
Notice that Mr. Lundahl does not comment any further about his groundless speculations dealing with Jesus’ hair. Nevertheless, how does Mr. Lundahl know what Jesus was wearing when he supposedly ascended? How do we know that Jesus even ascended? I will fully admit that God could have interfered with the gravity so that Jesus’ hair and clothes remained in a downward normal direction as his body defied gravity and went into the sky. As I stated in Henke (2022fx), which Lundahl (2022w) chooses to ignore:
“Nevertheless, let me be clear here. If God exists, he could make Jesus, long hair or not, walk on water or Ascend into the sky anyway he wants and he could violate the law of gravitation if he wanted to. If God exists, I’m not going to be so bold as to try to tell him how he could do miracles.”
Yet, how does Mr. Lundahl know that if Christ ascended that no laws of physics were ever broken? Where’s the evidence for his blatantly groundless speculation? The point is, that Mr. Lundahl in Lundahl (2022i), Lundahl (2022q) and Lundahl (2022w) has no basis to use groundless speculations about Christ’s hair and clothing to argue how God might have affected gravity in these baseless stories.
“Henke (2022fx) further states:
‘Interestingly, after Jesus’ supposed Resurrection, a number of disciples did have problems recognizing Jesus (John 20:15; John 21:4; Luke 24:13-35). Rather than trying to explain why a number of disciples had difficulty recognizing Jesus, perhaps we should recognize that these stories are probably works of fiction (e.g., Carrier 2014, pp. 387-509).’
Lundahl (2022w) replies:
‘The disciples of Emmaus were not of the closest circle.’
No real reason to take them for fiction, especially as fiction doesn't tend to be simply weird. So, in fact a reason against taking them for fiction. Obfuscated obviously for atheists and similar freethinkers who tend to make no distinction between the weird and the marvellous and the miraculous.’
Here, Mr. Lundahl, has no evidence of what kind of relationship the disciples of Emmaus had with Jesus (Luke 24:13-35). We don’t know anything about these disciples outside of these verses and we don’t even know if they ever existed. Carrier (2014, p. 480) argues that Luke 24:13-35 is based on the ancient Roman “Vanishing Hitchhiker Legend.” Carrier (2014, pp. 482-485) also concludes that the writing style and vocabulary of Luke 24:13-35 indicate that the writer of Luke fabricated the account and that it was meant to echo the accounts in Luke 1-2 and other Bible verses. Furthermore, Mr. Lundahl still needs to explain John 20:15 and 21:4 with good evidence, or recognize that these verses are probably also works of fiction.
Mr. Lundahl finally needs to obtain a copy of Carrier (2014) and read it, and then we can discuss it in greater detail. I understand that Mr. Lundahl is having difficulty locating copies of my recommended references in Paris, France, where he lives (Lundahl 2022r; Henke 2022gt). However, if he wants to participate in this debate, he’s got to have access to better sources than Wikipedia and Lewis (1960).
Henke (2022fx) also says: ‘We could then possibly determine how and why they really originated.’
Lundahl (2022w) again responds:
‘I have been giving at least tentatively a reason why appeal to natural lawS should not lower the probability of miracle accounts being perfectly factual.
Mr. Henke has consistently refused to even tentatively meet my challenge on how the accounts could have arisen by fraud or misunderstanding. Fiction - which is distinct from these - is not an option.’”
Again, if Mr. Lundahl wants to demonstrate that miracles occur, that demonstration has to be done under strict laboratory conditions (Henke 2022b; Henke 2022co), and not by trying to apply worthless speculations to undocumented stories from the Bible and elsewhere. As for Mr. Lundahl’s “challenge”, even without the far-fetched miracle stories, I’ve already cited examples in Henke (2022fx), Henke (2022am), and Henke (2022hg), and from Carrier (2014, pp. 387-509), which indicate that the four Gospels in the New Testament are works of fiction pretending to be history. For example, in Henke (2022am), I cited the fish and bread multiplication stories in Mark 6 and 8, and argued that the accounts in these chapters portray the disciples as unrealistically stupid:
“After supposedly witnessing the first multiplication of the loaves of bread and fish in Mark 6:30-44, one might wonder why the disciples would be so unbelievably stupid as to ask in Mark 8:4 where the extra food would come from for the second multiplication. Most likely, Mark included two versions of a fictitious story, see Price (2017, pp. 58-59).”
Also see Carrier (2014, footnote #63, p. 417) for more information. Lundahl (2022w) also blatantly ignores other examples from Carrier (2014), where I argue in Henke (2022hg) that the Gospels are obviously works of fiction pretending to be history:
“Carrier (2014) provides other examples of fictional materials in the Gospels, such as, the Barabbas story in Mark (pp. 402-408), Matthew’s humorous misinterpretation of Zechariah 9:9 (p. 459, also see Price 2003, p. 293), the use of Roman myths in the Emmaus story in Luke 24 (pp. 480-484), and the evidence of corruption and rewriting in John (pp. 491-506). If Mr. Lundahl is actually willing to look up my recommended references for once, I’m willing to discuss them in more detail. Price (2007) is also rightfully critical of the New Testament’s claims about the Resurrection. Again, C.S. Lewis’ views of the Gospels [in Lewis 1960] are decades out of date.”
So, I met Mr. Lundahl’s challenge weeks ago. He is simply ignoring what I said. Again, if Mr. Lundahl is finally willing to somehow get a copy of Carrier (2014) and read it, we can then discuss some of the numerous examples in this book where the Gospels are obviously works of fiction pretending to be history.
References:
Carrier, R. 2014. On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt, Sheffield Phoenix Press: Sheffield, UK, 696pp.
Lewis, C.S. 1960. Miracles, 2nd ed., printed 1974: Harper One: HarperCollinsPublishers, 294pp.
Price, R.M. 2003. The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man: How Reliable is the Gospel Tradition?, Prometheus Books: Amherst, NY, USA, 389pp.
Price, R.M. 2007. Jesus is Dead, American Atheist Press: Cranford, NJ, USA, 279pp.
Price, R.M. 2017. Holy Fable II: The Gospels and Acts Undistorted by Faith: Mindvendor: Coppell, Texas, USA, 449pp.