50 Popular Beliefs That People Think Are True Part 10

I have not sent these prophets, yet they have run with their message: I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied.

-G.o.d, quoted in Jeremiah 23:21 For as long as I can remember I have heard talk of prophecies.The G.o.ds, it seems, are always sharing with us key information, critical facts, important predictions, dire warnings, and spectacular insights about what is happening and about to happen to us. I have had Nostradamus experts and pulpit-pounding preachers declare to me with absolute confidence that earth-shattering events were close. Over time, however, I began to notice that the end was always near but never quite here. While such talk may have been mildly concerning the first few times I heard it, I'm a bit more skeptical these days. I have since learned that supernatural prophecies are not the rock-solid predictions of future events they are so often made out to be. Nonetheless, claims of "fulfilled prophecies" serve as powerful anchors of faith for many millions of believers who follow many different religions.

All around the world, prophecies are cited as justification for believing in the accuracy and validity of entire belief systems. In the Middle East, for example, some Muslims have told me with deep conviction that the Koran contains a prediction that foretold the Apollo Moon landings: "The Moon has split and the hour has drawn closer."1 They explained to me that "the Moon has split" refers to the return to Earth of Apollo astronauts with lunar rocks and "the hour has drawn closer" refers to the fast-approaching end of the world. They insist that a seventh-century book accurately predicting an important twentieth-century event is ironclad proof that Islam is the one and only true religion. I'm not sure how you feel, but I'm not convinced that this was an accurate prediction of the Moon landings. I am sure, for example, that if the Moon cracked in half tomorrow, many Muslims would then say that the "Moon has split" line referred to that and not astronauts taking away rock samples. This is typical of the problem with most religious predictions. They are too vague and can be interpreted by believers in ways that may make them appear to fit actual historical events when they really don't. Christianity has its prophecy of a messiah that is predicted and fulfilled all within the same limited collection of sources. That doesn't seem fair, or very convincing. Imagine if I showed you a book that described in chapter 1 a magical city made of gold rising up in Australia ten thousand years ago. Then, in chapter 20 of the same book, the city was said to have vanished forever without a trace five thousand years ago. Would you be impressed if I then declared that the city of gold is a fulfilled prophecy and proof that my book is true? Didn't think so.

Rather than list a long string of prophecies that are flawed in one way or another, let's look closely at one major prophecy that most people are familiar with. I feel like I know this one very well because I have seen it with my own eyes.

VISIT TO A PROPHECY.

I'm not sure why, but I reach out and touch the yellow stone of Jerusalem's famed Western Wall. I do not believe there is any point to this other than to make a tangible connection with a place millions of other people view as extremely important and intensely sacred. I suppose maybe I am trying to channel some of that human pa.s.sion, to see if I can feel some of what they feel, if only for a moment. Or maybe I'm just nervous and trying to blend in with the believers around me. The surface of the gigantic wall is old and rugged. Folded papers of various sizes fill virtually every crack in the wall. These are written prayers, stuffed into a portal to the divine by believers who hope that a G.o.d will read them. On both sides of me, Jewish men with gray beards and black hats rock back and forth. Prayers stream out of them in the form of endless rhythmic chants. I can't understand any of it, but there is an obvious commitment to each word.

Although there is no agreement about whom he favors, what he desires of his followers, or even if he exists or not, the G.o.d of Abraham certainly has made an impression upon humankind. Approximately half of the world's population currently believes he is real. Numerous versions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam declare him to be not only the creator of Earth and the universe, but also relevant and involved in the affairs of society today. If Yahweh/G.o.d the Father/ Allah had an address, I'm guessing it would be right here in Jerusalem somewhere.

Earlier I spent hours exploring the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, just a short walk from the Western Wall. Run by rival Christian sects, the site contains an odd forced collaboration of shrines. The building stands over the precise patch of land where Jesus is believed to have been executed some two thousand years ago. Obviously it is profoundly sacred to many Christians. The body of Adam, believed to be the first human, is also said to lie beneath the floor here. Christian or not, one cannot help but be captivated by the bustling mix of sweaty tourists, dazed pilgrims, shuffling monks, pickpockets, fanatics, schizophrenics, and genuinely nice people who share the dim hallways. But Christians are not the main attraction in Jerusalem. Jews and Muslims dominate my attention here.

I see a Jewish man carrying a baby. He has an a.s.sault rifle slung over his shoulder, a reminder of all the hate and tension that partly define the Holy Land. Of those people who can be identified by their clothing, I see only groups of Jews and groups of Muslims. Never do I see a mixed group strolling along in casual conversation. It is odd to see a society ripped apart believe in the same G.o.d. I wonder what the future holds for Jerusalem. Will these people go on killing one another at a measured pace, or will the streets be turned into rivers of blood again as happened during the Crusades centuries ago? Will a day come when the fiery blast of a nuclear warhead finally quiets the hate once and for all? Many believers in the G.o.d of Abraham say they are confident that the world will end in a chaotic bloodbath of destruction very soon. Of course, people have been saying this for many centuries so it has lost much of its shock value. But ideas about "G.o.d's plan for the world" are still profoundly interesting in Jerusalem. Armageddon just feels closer here-maybe because it is. Hundreds of millions of people believe that their G.o.d is coming soon and this is the place where he will first appear. This will be the first battlefield in the final war. But that prophecy concerns the future, what about something that has already happened?

The entire nation of Israel and its capital, Jerusalem, are a fulfillment of divine prophecy, according to millions of Christians and Jews. The very existence of this nation is seen by many as conclusive proof that Judaism and Christianity are accurate religions. I think about this as I walk the streets of this young country that feels so old. Are my feet treading on magical dust? Was this nation really created by a G.o.d in order to keep his promise to the Jews? Maybe, but I don't think that would be the best available explanation we have. I know another, far less extraordinary, story of how Israel was created. And this one does not require a G.o.d, magic, or even faith.

For many centuries Jews throughout the world held a strong belief that this land had been promised to them by their G.o.d and that it would one day be a nation for Jews. For many this was not seen as a mere wish or hopeful thinking. They viewed it as a dream they had to make come true by any means necessary. The creation of a Jewish nation in Palestine would happen someday, somehow. The constant persecution inflicted by Christians upon Jews in Europe was no doubt additional motivation for them to dream of their own country. But not all Jews were content to hope, pray, and wait. Many of them worked to make it happen. Zionism became an international movement to create a Jewish homeland. Men like Theodor Herzl (1860-1904) dedicated much of their lives to founding a new nation for Jews. Many wealthy and influential Jews around the world pushed hard for it. Over time, many Christians supported the goal. They too saw it as something G.o.d wanted. The horrors of the Holocaust helped make the newly formed United Nations and the governments of the United Kingdom and United States agreeable to the idea of a Jewish state, and by 1948 it came to pa.s.s.

This event was historic and important to world affairs, no doubt, but the important question here is why a G.o.d would be given credit for it when humans clearly did all the work every step of the way. Perhaps, as some claim, people were the instruments of G.o.d in achieving the goal. But there is no evidence for this. Having been to Israel, I can attest that all the buildings, homes, and streets appear to be humanmade. Nothing I saw suggested that any government buildings or flagpoles miraculously sprung from the soil. Then US president Harry Truman was a Christian who was well aware of the idea that G.o.d had promised the Jews a homeland in the Middle East. Are we to believe that he was under the spell of G.o.d when he decided to officially recognize the new state of Israel? Isn't it far more likely that he simply was influenced by the geopolitics of the day and perhaps his own personal religious beliefs?

MY PROPHECIES ARE BETTER THAN YOUR PROPHECIES.

The biggest clue that something is wrong with prophecy-as-proof arguments is that they only impress people who are already committed to the particular religion making the claims. We don't see Jews flocking to Islam the moment they hear about the "split Moon" prophecy. Hindus are not converting to Judaism and Christianity by the millions upon hearing that the creation of Israel was a divine promise fulfilled by the Abrahamic G.o.d. Most Sikhs are not won over by claims that the life of Jesus was accurately predicted within the Bible. If there was one religion that really did have an important prediction, made many centuries or thousands of years ago, and it specifically described an important event, with great accuracy and detail, then this religion would have an overwhelming advantage over all of its rivals. Imagine if seventh-century Islamic scrolls were discovered this year and included the following prediction: In a year to be called 1969, a chariot of metal will fly to the Moon in three days carrying three men named Neil, Buzz, and Michael. Two of the men will walk upon the surface clad in gleaming white suits. They all will return home and safely splash upon the sea.

Now, if the scrolls' age could be verified and it was determined that they had never been known to the modern world (so they could not have influenced events), we would have a very impressive prophecy. We might all be Muslims by the end of the week. But we have never seen anything remotely like this. No religion today, or ever, has been able to dominate the world's believers. There has always been disagreement and splintering of the ma.s.s of believers because no religion has an advantage on evidence, logical arguments, or prophecies.

A key reason that "fulfilled" religious prophecies are still embraced by many people around the world is that most are still unfamiliar with the simple ways in which one can cut through fog and spin to recognize empty claims for what they are. These "fulfilled prophecies" are nothing more than vague predictions that can be easily a.n.a.lyzed and shown not to necessarily rely on supernatural events. When confronted with one of these divine-prediction-come-true claims, always be sure to poke it and prod it with an inquiring mind to see if it's worthy of your trust.

PROPHECY CHECKLIST.

Keep the following points in mind when thinking about supernatural predictions: Was the prediction made before the event? Sometimes they aren't. Psychics and Nostradamus enthusiasts have been known to pull this trick. One always has to check.

Was the prediction specific enough to make it clear that it could only mean one thing, or is it so vague that it could apply to many things and be interpreted in many ways?

Is it a prediction of something that people could have accomplished by natural means without a G.o.d's help?

Are the odds favorable for the prophecy to come true no matter what? A prediction of victory in a war between two sides, for example, is not impressive because there is a fifty-fifty chance of being right.

Could it just be a coincidence or something that was bound to happen anyway? Predictions of economic hard times, natural disasters, wars, and so on mean nothing because those things have been occurring over and over for millennia.

Keep in mind that when many predictions are made, some are bound to come true by chance alone. Remember the old saying: even a broken clock shows the correct time twice per day.

GO DEEPER...

Books Allan, Tony. Myths of the World: The Ill.u.s.trated Treasury of the World's Greatest Stories. New York: Duncan Baird, 2009.

Dennett, Daniel. Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon. New York: Penguin, 2007.

Other Sources Humanist (magazine).

If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer.

-Matthew 21:21 Why won't G.o.d heal amputees?

-WhyWontG.o.dHealAmputees.com During my travels on six continents I always made sure to ask people about their religious beliefs. Religion fascinates me and I understand its importance to history and contemporary culture. The many conversations I had with believers taught me a lot about how they think about their particular religions and what they feel is important. A statement I heard over and over was: "I pray." The world's believers pray to their G.o.ds often and with great enthusiasm, it seems. They may worship different supernatural beings, revere contradictory holy books, and follow different rules, but they all pray. So what is this thing called prayer, why is it so popular, and, most important, does it work?

Like everything else in religion, prayer means different things to different people but most commonly it is nothing more than an attempt to establish some kind of a communication link with a G.o.d. It can be in the form of a request for something like healing from illness, world peace, or a new bicycle for Christmas. Prayer can also be a "thank you" or an unselfish form of worship, a way of showing respect and reverence to a G.o.d or G.o.ds. But when people say that prayer "works," they usually mean that they asked for something and their G.o.d delivered it. Based on my interviews and research, I believe that this aspect of prayer-asking and getting-is one of the most popular justifications for religious belief worldwide. When I ask Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Mormons, Jews, and so on to explain how they know their G.o.ds are real, an answer I hear almost every time is, "my prayers were answered."

The amazing thing about this common confidence in prayer is that there is no proof to back it up. There have been studies designed to test the ability of prayer to help sick people, but the results are not convincing. Nonetheless, it seems that billions of people are confident that their G.o.ds not only hear their requests but often respond to them positively. There clearly is a problem here. If billions of prayer requests are being acted on every day, then it should be easy to doc.u.ment and establish this as a real phenomenon. But n.o.body has ever been able to do it. How can this be? Surely all of these people who say prayer works are not lying. They are not insane. So what are they talking about?

First of all, I should note that challenging the claim that G.o.ds answer prayers is not necessarily a total condemnation of the act of praying. It seems clear that people can gain some psychological benefits from it. It might be helpful for some by making them feel unified with others who also pray, or it could provide a sense of peaceful solitude. Many Buddhists do not pray to a G.o.d but they do meditate, a ritual that can be very similar to prayer, and they seem to gain practical benefits from it.1 If praying lowers one's blood pressure and heart rate, then it may be beneficial, but that is not proof of anything supernatural.

Those who are convinced from personal experience that prayers are acted upon in favorable ways by a G.o.d are most likely falling victim to confirmation bias, that troublesome habit we all have of emphasizing and remembering things that confirm what we believe while ignoring and forgetting things that contradict our beliefs. Unfortunately, very few schools and families teach children critical thinking skills or encourage skepticism. So it's no surprise that many children grow up to become adults who think that their prayers are answered when a bit of simple record keeping could prove otherwise. Claims of "answered prayers" seem to rest on the same foundation that professional psychics rely on to make a living: believers remember the hits and forget the misses. So when someone prays for a new job and then gets it a month later, he is likely to credit prayer without any thought given to his efforts to land that job as well as all the other prayer requests for things that never materialized.

The idea that prayers are answered by "my G.o.d" comes with that insurmountable contradiction problem raised in the chapters about belief in G.o.ds and religious preference. How can the claim of answered prayers be accepted when so many people in very different belief systems talking to very different G.o.ds make the exact same claim? For example, how can it be that a Hindu, Wiccan, Muslim, Christian, and ancient Roman all prayed and received positive supernatural results? One may have asked Ganesha to heal a sick aunt and another asked Allah to relieve his migraine headaches. The Wiccan wanted a tree to grow tall and strong. Meanwhile, the Christian asked Jesus to cure a dying father and the Roman asked Jupiter for a new chariot. How are we to explain it if they all claimed to have had their prayers answered? The universe is just not big enough to contain Jesus, Allah, Ganesha, and Jupiter. Based on their core claims, Christianity, Islam, Wicca, Hinduism, and ancient Roman religion cannot all be true. Maybe one of them is right or maybe none of them are right. Yet I have heard repeatedly from Christians, Muslims, and Hindus that their prayers are answered favorably. They claim to pray to their specific G.o.d in their specific way and get positive results. And, of course, this is seen by them as proof that their religion is the accurate one and their G.o.d or G.o.ds are the real ones. Some of these people, or all of them, must be mistaken. To push the point further, even if one religion is valid and all its claims are true, its followers should still be skeptical of the power of prayer and how they measure its success. They only have to look around the world and acknowledge the obvious: that just about anyone can be convinced that prayers are answered no matter what is really going on. Today's intellectually honest Christian or Muslim should be troubled by the idea that her "answered prayers" are a real phenomenon but the "answered prayers" of animists, pagans, and so many others over the last several thousand years are not.

THE MOST IMPORTANT PRAYER OF ALL.

As a habit, I also observe and learn as much as I can about the poorest people in any city or country I visit. Global poverty, particularly as it relates to children, is an important issue for me. I founded a small charity that raised more than $100,000 for UNICEF, and I have written numerous published commentaries and news articles about the poorest of the poor. I have seen, smelled, and touched this jagged edge of human existence, and it is not pretty. The slums of Africa and India changed me. Actually, it's more like they wounded me. Forever. I saw the tiny bodies of child beggars twisted and tormented by malnutrition, polio, and elephantiasis. I saw the vacant stare of listless babies who were riding out a death sentence for the crime of choosing the wrong society to be born into. My small efforts to raise money and awareness for the poor have nothing to do with saving the world (it won't) or posing to appear heroic (there are easier and less disturbing ways to do that). The truth is, I do it purely for selfish reasons. It helps me push back against the sounds and images of the poor people who haunt my mind. It's a comfort thing, my simple way of feeling a little less uncomfortable for being born over on the lucky side of fate.

One thing I noticed about the poorest places on Earth is that they are also the most religious places on Earth. Atheists are scarce in those parts. The many millions of people who try their best to make do on a few dollars a day tend to be devout believers. And whether they are Muslims in Syria, Hindus in India, or Christians in Haiti, they pray frequently and they pray hard. I've seen many of them speaking to their G.o.ds and was struck by their pa.s.sion. And this is where I found the most glaring problem of all with the claim that prayer works.

In the developing world, approximately ten million babies under the age of five die each year in poverty. They die because they couldn't get a two-dollar vaccine, a cup of clean water, or fifty cents worth of food. This is a stunning statistic and few people in wealthy nations know about it. Sure, everyone knows that there are suffering children around the world. But I don't think very many know just how many of them die each year, and I don't think very many people pause to consider how much suffering and agony this toll translates to every day. It's nearly a double Holocaust-every year. Don't underestimate the horror of death by dysentery or some other disease that could have been prevented. It's usually a slow, cruel death, and parents trapped in extreme poverty, with feelings of love and responsibility like any other parent-have to watch their children slip away from them.

The societies with the world's highest child mortality rates correlate strongly with the world's most religious societies. Therefore, it is reasonable to a.s.sume that virtually all of the parents of these ten million babies are believers and that they pray intensely for a G.o.d or G.o.ds to save their babies during the most desperate moments. Understand, we are not talking about praying for a promotion at work or to make an A on a math test. I would think that prayers to a G.o.d in the form of a mother's plea to save her suffering and dying child must be among the most powerful and valuable words ever uttered. In my view, this is the best test of prayer we can ever hope for. And prayer fails.

Nations with the highest rates of nonbelief-Sweden, Denmark, Finland, j.a.pan, Canada, and the UK, for example-have the world's lowest child mortality rates. It's reasonable to a.s.sume that this means significantly fewer prayers for a baby's good health are spoken or thought by all these nonbelieving mothers. But in places where virtually all the mothers are praying like mad for a G.o.d to give their babies good health, babies suffer and die by the millions.

In 2011, the charity organization Save the Children released its rankings of the best and worst places to be a mother on planet Earth. Again, the pattern of prayer not seeming to do much for children is evident: A prayer advocate's response to the challenge of dying babies and their praying mothers might be that child mortality rates are determined by the state of local economies and are impacted by poor or nonexistent healthcare and sanitation. But that would be the secular answer for why ten million babies die in the arms of praying mothers each year. Prayer, according to most of those who believe in it, is supposed to be able to transcend details such as the availability of clean water and antibiotics. Why would a prayer have to be reconciled with earthly economic conditions and doctor-patient ratios?

When we look back over history and consider all the natural disasters, famines, wars, and other dire circ.u.mstances people have found themselves in, it is clear that countless trillions of desperate and sincere prayers for help were sent up to the heavens but never answered as hoped. I suppose one could argue that the G.o.ds of these various religions are unimaginably cruel and simply ignore such pleas. However, another possible explanation is that the G.o.ds hear no prayers for the simple reason that they do not exist in the first place.

GO DEEPER...

Barker, Dan. G.o.dless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists. Berkeley: Ulysses Press, 2008.

Harris, Sam. The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values. New York: Free Press, 2010.

Harrison, Guy P. 50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a G.o.d. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2008.

Stenger, Victor J. The New Atheism: Taking a Stand for Science and Reason. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2009.

It's a comforting feeling to think that it could never happen to you.

-Deborah Layton, Jonestown survivor I avoid using the term cult and advise others to as well. The general public and news media use this label inconsistently and illogically. The result is that unpopular, weak, or unusual groups are denigrated unfairly. It is wrong, for example, when larger and older religions slander smaller and newer religions as "cults," especially when most well-established religions were once condemned as cults before achieving mainstream acceptance. But there is another reason not to use the term cult that is even more important than basic logic and fairness.

The primary reason the cult label is a bad one is because it too often gets in the way of opportunities to learn important lessons when bad things happen. Imagining a separate and distinct beast called "cults" suggests that we don't need to be on guard against any and all groups that exercise excessive control over members, encourage fanaticism and irrational belief, and are led by people who are abusive and power crazed. It is dangerous to believe that one only has to steer clear of "those evil, weird cults" and that it's OK to let your guard down around popular groups and organizations. The safer way is to always be cautious and skeptical.

THE LOST LESSON OF JONESTOWN.

In 1978, more than nine hundred people died in "Jonestown," the jungle community built in Guyana by members of an organization called the Peoples Temple that was headquartered in San Francisco. Today most people think of the Jonestown event as a ma.s.s suicide by crazy, brainwashed cult members who willingly drank cyanide-laced Kool-Aid because their leader, Jim Jones, told them they had to in order to go to heaven. The phrase "drink the Kool-Aid" even became entrenched as a pop-culture reference to blind loyalty to anything weird or untrue and is still heard often today.

Rarely, if ever, is Jonestown described as an event in which the Reverend Jim Jones, head of a popular Christian organization, forced more than nine hundred people to their deaths. But that would be a more accurate description of what happened. I learned this thanks to a long interview with a Jonestown survivor, a woman who escaped that nightmare jungle shortly before the end. She knew what was coming and tried unsuccessfully to warn the world.

"n.o.body joined Peoples Temple thinking they were going to be taken to South America and killed," explained Deborah Layton, a seven-year member of the People's Temple.1 She said that Jim Jones was a prominent and respected preacher in California and a member of a human rights commission who received positive coverage from the news media.

"n.o.body joins a cult," she said. "You join a religious group. You join a political organization. You join a self-help group. Then things change gradually and at some point you stop and ask, 'What am I in?' It is OK to use the word cult in the dictionary, but not when discussing various religions that are active now."

Layton's perspective on the 1978 deaths at Jonestown is significantly different from the popular version of the tragedy: [Large] groups of people do not commit suicide. Children do not take their own lives. In Jonestown, two hundred babies and children died first. Mothers were holding onto their babies. They had no idea what else to do. [Imagine] if someone has a gun on you and your family, you try to think like they do and figure out how you can escape. Those people at Jonestown did not commit suicide. They were coerced. They were frightened by guards with guns pointing at them. [You think,] "OK, I'll run into the forest. But wait, what if I get shot in the back and my baby will be pulled from my arms, screaming and crying? Do I stay here and hold my baby? Do I give my child these last few moments with me holding him?" So many chaotic thoughts go through your head that by the time you figure it out it's too late.

Layton's view from the inside of Jonestown left no doubt in her mind that most people are vulnerable to becoming trapped by dangerous people and dangerous groups. The process of seduction and capture is deceptive. She believes it may comfort people to believe that it could never happen to them, but the reality is that it can: One of the ways we do a real disservice to our kids is that when something like Jonestown happens we tell them that they were just a bunch of nuts. This sets up our children to one day be in a situation that is a little bit weird and think, "Oh, it can't happen to me." Their antennas won't be up. But if we tell our kids that this kind of thing can happen to the best of us, then they will be aware.

Layton is also annoyed by what she feels is a common misconception that the Jonestown victims were "just a bunch of uneducated black people." That's just not true, she says. According to her, many of the black members were well educated. There were also highly educated white people who died, including her own mother.

WATCH OUT FOR DANGERS, NOT LABELS.

Layton warns against belonging to a group or organization that discourages questions or forbids dissent. Other signs of danger she cites include being told that if you leave the group you can never come back or that you must separate from family members who do not join. "I think the most dangerous [groups] tell you that their way is the only way," she said. "I know that a lot of mainstream organizations fit this description, but it is dangerous for so many of them to be willing to just cut out so many people. To say, for example, that if you are not 'born again,' you will burn in h.e.l.l. I also think that it is very dangerous when the only enlightened person is the leader of the organization and to question him or her is forbidden. That is a huge warning sign. Dissent is imperative."

Layton's comments offer an important warning for all of us. If ever you find yourself seduced by a person or an organization that has all the answers, perhaps it is only because you have failed to ask enough questions. We should always maintain awareness and caution, not only toward fringe groups that may be considered weird, but also toward powerful and popular organizations as well. Some of the most respected organizations in the United States and the world have by any reasonable measure controlled their members excessively, exploited people, stolen from them, abused them, and even killed them in some cases. When it comes to risky allegiances, it is not the cult label that matters; it's the danger. If I had to, I would choose an odd but safe cult over a respected but dangerous religious organization. Wouldn't you?

GO DEEPER...

Haught, James. Holy Horrors: An Ill.u.s.trated History of Religious Murder and Madness. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 1999.

Layton, Deborah. Seductive Poison: A Jonestown Survivor's Story of Life and Death in the Peoples Temple. New York: Anchor, 1999.

If history and science have taught us anything, it's that pa.s.sion and desire are not the same as truth.

-Edward O. Wilson,

Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge

Many years ago I remember watching a doc.u.mentary about Noah's ark. The program made the claim that remains of the ark had been found on Mount Aratat in Turkey. Obviously those filmmakers were either incompetent or dishonest because no such discovery has ever been made.

In the years since that doc.u.mentary aired, I have seen many more such claims come and go. Aside from shoddy doc.u.mentaries, the ark is a popular topic with believers. Whenever someone tells me that the ark or parts of it have been found, I always ask them for details about the discovery. But they never have any. This is a dead giveaway. Trust me, if a team of university archaeologists, a Christian expedition, or some lost hiker ever finds a five-thousand-year-old wooden ship with fossilized dinosaur feces inside of it and Noah's name carved in the hull somewhere, you will hear about it in great detail. It will be a media sensation. The reality, however, is that the story in Genesis is all we have to go on. But that's enough for many millions of people when it comes to this popular belief.

The basics of the story are well known to almost everyone. The G.o.d of Abraham was disappointed with the humans he created, so he decided to murder them all and start from scratch. Noah was the last good man on Earth, so he and his family were to be spared. But G.o.d gave him a ch.o.r.e to do, a big one. Noah had to build a ma.s.sive ship and take care of two animals of every "kind" onboard while G.o.d drowned the world. After forty days of rain and months of drifting, the water finally receded and the ark came to rest on top of a mountain. Noah and his family disembarked along with the animals and proceeded to repopulate Earth.

There are numerous problems with this story that should be obvious. But that doesn't stop hundreds of millions of people from believing that it's true. An ABC News poll found that 60 percent of Americans believe that it happened exactly as described in Genesis.1 The Noah's ark story is one of those beliefs that easily generate endless debate over minor details that never lead anywhere. As one who has wasted far too much time discussing the lesser aspects of the story, I recommend sticking to the big issues. For example, could all the land on Earth have been completely flooded only five thousand years or so ago? Impossible, say all credible geologists, climatologists, physicists, historians, archaeologists, and marine scientists. Could Noah have saved enough animals on his ark to have repopulated the entire animal kingdom within the time frame claimed by believers? Impossible, say all credible biologists, zoologists, and geneticists. Could an eight-member family give rise to numerous cultures, civilizations, and a global population of seven billion people alive today in less than six thousand years? Impossible, say all credible archaeologists, anthropologists, historians, and geneticists.

WE'RE GONNA NEED A BIGGER BOAT.

The vessel's dimensions are not known precisely, but most ark believers seem to agree that it was around four hundred to five hundred feet long. That's a fairly big boat, for sure, but not nearly large enough to house two representatives of every land species in the entire animal kingdom. Excluding plants and aquatic life, there is still a staggering amount of life Noah would have had to board and care for on his ship. In fact, no one today can even guess how many because we are still discovering new species all the time. Millions await discovery, say biologists. There may be more than twenty million unnamed species alone! Clearly we can't know how big Noah's boat would have to have been because we don't know how many pairs of species representatives would have needed a place on it. I'm guessing the ship would have to be about as big as the continents of Africa or Australia to do the job.

Speaking of continents, how did animals from different continents make it to the ship for boarding and how did animals disperse to various continents after the flood? Challenges of a peaceful and timely boarding and disembarking process aside, it seems very unlikely that two representatives of millions of mammal, bird, and reptile species could live aboard a five-hundred-foot ship for nearly a year. Many believers recognize these basic problems and don't even try to explain them. They prefer to call it a miracle and leave it at that. Supernatural herding of animals and magical violations of population breeding requirements are one thing, but everyone should be aware that the laws of nature and scientific evidence do not support this story in any way. In fact, virtually everything we know undermines it. There simply is no compelling case for the entire planet being flooded four or five thousand years ago, and all of today's land life, including humans, being descended from the pa.s.sengers of a single boat.

It is important to note that having doubts or outright rejecting the flood story does not mean one must necessarily abandon one's religion. While some do argue that every detail of this story and others must be believed, the fact is there are hundreds of millions of sincere Christians, Jews, and Muslims around the world who do not accept the flood story as literally true and yet still adhere to their religion. Those believers who insist that one must believe every line of every story in a holy book in order to be a credible follower of a particular belief system are expressing an opinion and nothing more.

I have learned over the years that ark believers can be very clever in defending their claims. Most young Earth creationists say dinosaurs were on the ark, a stunning claim given the size of many dinosaur species. But believers have explained to me that larger dinosaurs such as argentinosaurus, sauroposeiden, and spinosaurus may have been taken aboard as smaller juveniles or even in unhatched eggs. A neat answer, indeed, but I'm still not convinced.

Perhaps the weirdest aspect of the ark story is the way many believers present it as a positive and inspirational event that should be admired and shared with children. I have seen many children's books, for example, that depict the flood as happy and upbeat, complete with smiling animals and cheery old Noah waving from the deck of the ark. Let's not kid ourselves, if the Noah's ark story really happened, it would have to rank as one of the most horrible events in history. According to Genesis, G.o.d flooded the entire world for the specific purpose of killing everyone on it-babies included. In addition to people, however, the collateral damage would have been horrifying. Imagine all the puppies, kittens, and cute bunny rabbits bobbing in the water, kicking frantically until they exhausted themselves and sank beneath the surface to cruel deaths. Even if every adult on every continent was sufficiently evil to warrant death by drowning, surely at least a few children here and there weren't so evil to deserve death by drowning. Imagine the screams that would have filled the air as people struggled in the raging waters before dying. Remember the terrible tsunamis of 2004 and 2011? Imagine that sort of death and destruction striking everywhere on Earth. Not a cheerful story, definitely not a children's story, in my opinion.

NOAH'S ARK DISCOVERED-NOT!

Although reports pop up from time to time about someone claiming to have found Noah's ark, no one has to date. But you might be able to see and board the famous ship anyway. A group linked to the antiscience Creation Museum in Kentucky plans to build a $125 million "Ark Encounter" theme park nearby. The centerpiece will be a $24 million full-size replica of the ship. The ark will be "perfectly proportioned" and allow visitors inside to explore where they can see both live and animatronic animals. The developers expect the attraction to draw 1.6 million people in its first year and make a $4 billion economic impact in the region over ten years. Donations to fund the project are currently being sought from the public. If interested, you can even sponsor an official wooden ark peg for $100, a plank for $1,000, or a beam for $5,000. The purpose of the ark, say organizers, is to show people how Noah lived and how he built the ark.2 No word yet if they plan to have thousands of animatronic twitching victims in the surrounding waters and bloated corpses littered about the property to further enhance the realism.

GO DEEPER...

Asimov, Isaac. Asimov's Guide to the Bible. New York: Wings, 1981.

Asimov, Isaac. In the Beginning: Science Faces G.o.d in the Book of Genesis. New York: Crown, 1988.

Archaeology has confirmed many of our church's claims.

-A Mormon interviewed by the author Thanks to a dry climate and long streak of human habitation, the Middle East offers an abundance of both historic and prehistoric treasures. Certainly no archaeologist would dispute that. People have been living in that region for many thousands of years and left behind a wealth of artifacts that help illuminate their cultures for us today. Stick a trowel in the ground just about anywhere in this region and there is a good chance you will come up with something.

During casual strolls around Cairo, Damascus, Amman, or Jerusalem I had the feeling I was at or near excavation sites at all times. Archaeology never seemed very far away in these places. The ancient greeted me every time I turned a corner. The always-present theme of the deep past magnifies the intense pressures of modern life in the Middle East as well. No matter how important it may be, archaeological work often goes unnoticed and unappreciated in most parts of the world. Here, however, an archeological dig can be seen as work toward vital confirmation of the most important truth in the universe-and even a reason to kill someone. Archaeology matters in the Middle East. There is something powerful and appealing about tangible evidence that few believes can resist. Faith is wonderful and adequate on its own, say believers. But clearly they also love the idea of evidence that can be seen and touched.

Biblical archaeology, vaguely defined as archaeology related to people and stories contained in the Bible, is a robust little international industry. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of books have been published on the subject; seminars are held, and cla.s.ses taught. There are websites, magazines, newsletters, and clubs to join. Land tours and even sea cruises are available to travelers interested in learning about biblical archaeology. There is one significant fact that seems to have become lost in all this excitement and activity, however. Nothing has ever been found-not one artifact-that proves any supernatural claims found in the Bible. After many years of effort, biblical archaeology has failed to deliver on the point that matters most. The same is true for all religions. No archaeological artifact has ever been discovered that confirms any paranormal/supernatural claims made by any religion ever. But this does not stop some followers of various religions from overreaching when it comes to archaeology. For example, I read the line, "archaeology testifies to this event," in an article about G.o.d's destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in a Jehovah's Witness booklet. This is either an error based on ignorance or an outright lie because no archaeological discovery has ever confirmed that any city anywhere has ever been destroyed by a G.o.d.

While believers may point to archaeology for confirmation of their G.o.ds' activities, the truth is that this important and productive scientific discipline has not provided evidence of anything other than human activities. In every case, archaeology has proven nothing more than the existence of ancient human believers, but never the target of their belief. Such discoveries showing supernatural claims are possible. For example, if the fossilized skeletons of Pegasus, the flying horse, or Cerberus, the three-headed hound of Hades, were discovered tomorrow near the Acropolis in Athens, it certainly would prove that at least some ancient Greek religious claims were true. The discovery of something like the Ark of the Covenant-with demonstrable magical powers intact-would be powerful evidence for the Torah's accuracy. If the Bible is correct, this sacred box that is believed to contain holy relics such as the Ten Commandments should emit supernatural powers detectable to scientific methods. After all, the Bible claims this box made rivers go dry and delivered magical military victories for the Jews. And what about all the relics held in churches across Europe? Many believers and clergy say they have the power to heal and protect with divine magic. So why haven't biblical archaeologists been able to confirm the supernatural properties of even just one? Just imagine if a splinter from the cross Jesus was crucified on or the finger bone of a saint was found to have extraordinary powers. Something like that would be very strong evidence, possibly even proof, that the Bible's supernatural claims are valid. So far, however, we have nothing but claims and anecdotes.

The fact is, despite all of the time, money, and energy devoted to biblical archaeology, there is nothing to show for it beyond natural and human artifacts. No trace of G.o.d, angels, demons, or magical artifacts. Work described by some as biblical archaeology may have contributed to our knowledge of Middle Eastern cultures, and that's great. But it goes no further than that. Unfortunately, many believers confuse the meaning of some artifacts and discoveries. Did a certain place mentioned in the Bible really exist? Sure. Did a place named Jericho once have a wall around it? OK. Did the Romans execute people by brutal means? Absolutely. The important question, however, is whether or not there is archaeological evidence to back up any of the Bible's supernatural content: the big stories about angels, demons, miracles, and G.o.d. Yes, finding an ancient boat in the Sea of Galilee (the "Jesus Boat") was a big deal, but it didn't prove that Eve was made from a rib, that a snake talked, or that Jesus walked on water. According to believers, the primary point of the Bible is not to shed light on human activities. It is primarily supposed to make the case for the existence of the Jewish/Christian G.o.d and make his desires known. Therefore, the claim that archaeology has verified the Bible's accuracy is wrong because, so far, archaeology is silent on all of the important claims. Excavating ancient streets, temples, and oil lamps just doesn't cut it if one is trying to verify occurrences of supernatural events and the existence of a G.o.d. For example, I have been to Athens and Rome where I saw many artifacts in museums and touched the hard stone of many ancient ruins. They do exist. Never once, however, did I imagine that the existence of these things proves the existence of Greek and Roman G.o.ds. Those things only establish the reality of ancient Greek and Roman people, just as biblical archaeology to date has only been able to confirm the existence of ancient Jewish and Christian people.

I have interviewed many believers about their religions over the years, and a number of them tried to play the archaeology card with me. I don't like friendly talks to degrade into arguments if it can be avoided, so I always resisted challenging them too harshly on this. The way I usually handle it is to simply ask: "What is the single most important archaeological discovery that confirms your religion?" Blank stares and silence almost always follow. A few might say the Dead Sea Scrolls. I explain that the Dead Sea Scrolls are ancient doc.u.ments that include some text of the Bible/Torah. But an old partial copy of the Bible just doesn't prove the claims within the Bible are true or that anyone other than people were responsible for producing it. I add that I've been to the Israel Museum in Jerusalem where I saw the Dead Sea Scrolls. The exhibit was impressive and it was thrilling to see something so old, but nothing about it suggested to me that it was magical or anything other than something written by people a long time ago.

I am certain that virtually everyone on Earth would have heard about it by now if there were even one archaeological discovery that confirmed one of the Bible's supernatural claims. Surely any archaeologist who discovered something so important to so many people would be a well-known figure, at least as famous as the fictional character Indiana Jones. Even Howard Carter, discoverer of the tomb of Tutankhamun, is fairly well known. Can you name the most successful and famous biblical archaeologist?

Speaking of Tutankhamun, the young pharaoh-G.o.d, those who are p.r.o.ne to give biblical archaeology more credit than it deserves might ask themselves a simple question: If bricks and scrolls found in Israel prove the existence of the Judeo-Christian G.o.d, then, by that same standard, wouldn't the treasures found in Tut's tomb prove that he was a G.o.d as well?