Creationist and fundamentalist Christian evangelist Ray Comfort (colloquially referred to as the Banana Man) likes to envision the post-mortem judgement of each human being as akin to a court of law. God, Comfort claims, is the divine judge, and man has broken His law.
He begins the trial with his usual technique of getting the person to admit to several point of transgression against God's law, the Ten Commandments. Once the charges have been laid, Comfort, acting as God's prosecution attorney, states that the accused has admitted to being a lying thief, a blashpemer and an adulterer at heart.
He then goes on to ask "If God were to judge you by the ten commandments, would you be innocent or guilty? Would you go to Heaven or Hell?" (I'll get back to this in just a moment). No doubt, under Comfort's proposed legal system, each and every person to take the stand would be found guilty, and that is the way he likes it, because it opens him up to present his clincher.
When the accused asks, "But I thought God is forgiving, if I confess my sins he will let me in to heaven, won't he?" Comfort pounces with all the skill of a trained salesman, "Yes, God is forgiving, but He is also a just judge. Would a righteous judge say to murderer 'Because you have confessed your sin, I will forgive you and let you go'? No, the murderer has broken the law, and justice must be served. Because God is a righteous judge, he must punish murderers, theives, liars etc."
Here is where he sells his product, having given the pitch, "You have broken God's law and He must give you justice. But God doesn't want that any should perish, so He has made a way for you to go free. The penalty for your sin is death, but God sent His only son, Jesus, to take that punishment for you. You broke God's law, and Jesus paid your fine. God can legally dismiss your case."
Well, first I would like to point out the internal inconsistency in Comfort's analogy. In the scenario of the murderer, imagine someone like Jesus offering to pay the murderer's fine. No, that would not be allowed. The punishment for murder is jail time. For Ray's analogy to work, Jesus would have to take the jail time for the murderer, and no just judge would allow that. This is what happens in Christianity, the punishment of sin is hell, which could be analogous to jail time. It would appear that Jesus did not stay the full term as punishment for the sins of man, and so justice has not been served.
But back to the point that I said I would return to. In the justice system of most modern western societies, the accused is assumed to be innocent until proven guilty. This is not the case in Comfort's analogy to the court of law, which operates under the premise that each individual is already guilty. Now, taking Comfort's scenario and applying it to real life, we can see that it does not work. First of all, Comfort has not demonstrated that the justice system of the Bible is valid. Secondly, he has not demonstrated that the supernatural court room exists. Thirdly, he has not demonstrated that the judge exists. Fourthly, he has not demonstrated that the supposed sins of lying, theft, blasphemy and adultery are actual crimes under his justice system. Comfort has not and cannot prove the guilt of the accused because he cannot prove that there is any cosmic court room awaiting all who die.
Until he can demonstrate that his premise is supported by evidence that would stand in a real court of law, there is no alternative than to declare the people he accuses, innocent.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
No comments:
Post a Comment