Evangelicals: Belief in Zombies Compulsory

Robert Tulip · Sat Nov 12, 2011 11:49 pm

Leading American Christians have confirmed that if you don't believe a large number of dead people once rose from their graves and wandered around Jerusalem, you cannot call yourself an evangelical.

Glad that is sorted.

The following news is extracted from coverage at http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/201 ... ml?start=1 with some revision and comment.

Matthew 27 says many saints rose from their graves after Jesus' resurrection. Michael Licona, a former professor of New Testament, has apparently "resigned" (been sacked?) as apologetics coordinator for the North American Mission Board over this pressing question of fact and principle.

Licona said "the raised saints are best interpreted as Matthew's use of an apocalyptic symbol". A "professor" at Veritas Evangelical Seminary in California accused Licona of denying the full inerrancy of Scripture and called for Licona to recant his interpretation, labeling it "unorthodox, non-evangelical, and a dangerous precedent for the rest of evangelicalism."

Too right it is a dangerous precedent. If you admit the zombie story is bullshit, you are on a slippery slope to recognising that the Gospels are fiction in their entirety.

Another fundie said Licona's zombie reading was a "shocking and disastrous argument". The bullies and witch burners are now on the rampage against any deviancy from the zombie line, and free thinkers are cowering in "fear of punitive measures".

One seminary professor wondered out loud if witch hunts might be "counterproductive to the important issues of the Kingdom." He better watch out or he will get purged too.

Southern Baptists have rescinded invitations for Licona to speak. Licona naturally crumbled under the onslaught, saying "to make the call and eliminate my position ... was definitely a good decision." Onya Mike.

Further comments:
http://advocatusatheist.blogspot.com/
http://nearemmaus.com/2011/09/16/even-m ... pocalypse/

... must ... believe ... zombie story ...

LanDroid · Sat Nov 19, 2011 6:16 pm

Interesting, that's one story that has not been emphasized much in my experience. Perhaps they realize this makes Jesus' resurrection not so special, AY?


	Quote: 50 And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit. 51 At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split 52 and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53 They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and[e] went into the holy city and appeared to many people. 54 When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, “Surely he was the Son of God!”

tat tvam asi · Thu Nov 24, 2011 10:10 pm

Thanks for posting this Robert. Licona has been one of the most deluded apologists to deal with and has severly taken after Murdock and other mythicists over the years. Now I can't help but to wonder if it was the mythicist's pressing him all the time about the ridiculous zombie tale that caused him to question what he was trying to apologize for in the first place. We always slam those guys with the zombie tale. It makes them look absolutely ridiculous for taking it literally. He was probably just exploring a way of trying to get around having to apologize for it all the time, which, as it turns out, was the straw that broke the camels back...

johnson1010 · Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:44 am

Interesting that he gets thrown under the bus for making a pretty tame statement, and at the end of it all he says him getting canned was a good move.

youkrst · Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:05 pm


	tat tvam asi wrote: It makes them look absolutely ridiculous for taking it literally.

yes it seems to me this is the crux of the matter ie. literalism

"hey everybody turn off your critical thinking and repeat after me: the bible is the inviolable literal word of god and you are NOT god so you better submit to show you love him or he will burn you in hell forever for denying his holy word" or "we will launch a jihad on your infidel ass" or some other such insanity.

so that the winning strategy might be, dont try to do away with religion try instead to do away with literalism.

i find interpreted symbolically and metaphorically etc etc most of the religious systems are at least quite helpful and at best quite a bit more but taken literally they are a one way ticket to mental anguish.

i think if we could show literalism to be as silly as it is the battle would be over.

and it's interesting how (as you say tat) this little incident goes strraight to the literalist problem. ie. "if you dont take these scriptures literally you are a heretic" so it's fear based submission leveraging ignorance and capitalising on peoples lack of strength to stand against this kind of monstrosity of a view of god.

if an army of people mounted an offensive against religion they could easily be dismissed as god hatersz or infidels etc etc but if an army of people successfully showed how absurd and weak minded literalism is then i think it would be mission accomplished.

but these chains have bound so many minds so long and few people it seems have the desire and stamina to figure this stuff out.

good luck fellow humans, continue to embrace literalism and die and kill or transcend literalism and live, the choice as always is yours.

tat tvam asi · Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:29 pm

It is silly. I'm sure it was driving Licona nuts having to try and defend it constantly. People rising up out of their graves and wondering the streets of Jerusalem.

You know what used to scare the hell out of me as a child? In Adventism there's a carry over belief that stems from this zombie resurrection in the gospel tale. It goes something to the tune of right before the second coming something similar will happen again. Add to that the fact that they keep everyone thinking that Jesus is just about return at any time and sha bam!!! I used to be scared that one day a dead relative or two might show up at the front door wanting to visit and proclaim the second coming of Christ, and how scary and awkward that would be. lol

How refreshing to move on...

youkrst · Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:48 pm


	tat tvam asi wrote: how scary and awkward that would be.

reminds me of the french taunter in pythons holy grail

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8yjNbcKkNY

i'll ask him, but i dont think he'll be very keen, he's already got one you see.

tat tvam asi · Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:55 pm

But seriously, to doubt the literal truth of the curtain in temple tearing from top to bottom or the Saints rising out of their graves as a foreshadow of the mass resurrection of the dead yet to come at the second coming, is a pretty big heresy for evangelicals. If it didn't really happen then, well then it opens a "slippery slope" of doubt that leads to questioning the entire fairy tale of a narrative, as Robert pointed out. I can see how it was a big enough deal for Licona to loose his position.

youkrst · Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:11 pm


	Quote: apologetics coordinator for the North American Mission Board

i wonder if or how much that position payed? making sure your apologetics are co-ordinated must be a challenging task.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Kv2lVyWzRQ

tat tvam asi · Sat Nov 26, 2011 9:24 am

I can only imagine.

johnson1010 · Sat Nov 26, 2011 11:55 am

Agreed, literalism is the problem.

What harm is there in taking the good from the story and leaving out the bad? That's what everyone should do with everything!

Take what is good, what is empowering, what enables you to live a better life, and refuse the bad.

It so happens that the actual moral lessons that we can agree to in the bible can be found elsewhere, but there's nothing wrong with embracing those particular fables. Take knowledge where you can get it, i say. The problem is always a refusal to address the reality of life for what it is. Insisting that fables are literal truth, and for most of history, killing those who disagree... Problem.

tat tvam asi · Sat Nov 26, 2011 2:13 pm

I can see that the problem with saying the zombie walk through Jerusalem is a metaphor is that every other unbelievable part of the gospel tale then comes under question. Why is the zombie walk a metaphor but Lazarus real history? The obvious answer is that both the zombie walk through Jerusalem and Lazarus are mythological metaphor. That's not acceptable though.

And this line of reasoning leads to people believing things like the four horseman of the apocalypse is in reference to four literal men, riding through the sky on four literal horses, which we should expect to see riding through the sky any day now because Jesus is coming quickly. The same problem applies here. If four horsemen are not in reference to something literal, then everything else comes under question. All of this kicking, dragging, and screaming to avoid having to use your mind and question everything.

icindy · Sat Nov 26, 2011 8:18 pm

It's kind of fun, like a Far-Side cartoon, to think of a crowd of atheists telling scary stories about religious beliefs around a campfire. Whatever stories there are to tell, on either side, however, as much one can demonstrate the foolishness of belief or non-belief, and justify, ridicule, taunt, or denigrate--should you? If you think it's okay, anything goes in the battle against the opposition, haven't we lost a bigger battle? If there are zealots on either side, should we join them?

Robert Tulip · Sat Nov 26, 2011 10:06 pm


	icindy wrote: It's kind of fun, like a Far-Side cartoon, to think of a crowd of atheists telling scary stories about religious beliefs around a campfire. Whatever stories there are to tell, on either side, however, as much one can demonstrate the foolishness of belief or non-belief, and justify, ridicule, taunt, or denigrate--should you? If you think it's okay, anything goes in the battle against the opposition, haven't we lost a bigger battle? If there are zealots on either side, should we join them?

Youkrst made a good point earlier in this thread that demonstrating the ludicrosity of religious belief is a better approach than simply arguing all religion is wrong. The zealots in this case are the fundamentalists who live in an evidence-free zone. There is also atheist zealotry. For example, some atheists think that the theory of evolution means people should stop going to church. But there are many churchgoers who struggle to reconcile their rituals with scientific knowledge, and who do not accept the inerrancy rubbish. Helping literal religion to collapse under the weight of its own absurdity through ridicule of things that are obviously untrue, such as the zombie saints, does not amount to an attack on all religion, only on the lunatic mainstream.

Forum rules

Evangelicals: Belief in Zombies Compulsory Tweet This Topic

Who is online

Chat Room Always Open!