Simple Questions that Get to the Heart of the Matter

In #articles

E. T. Jaynes wrote extensively about Bayesian inference, and one of his strategies was to use a "Galileo's telescope for statistics", such as outlined in his paper on Confidence Intervals vs Bayesian Intervals. This method is used to distinguish between two alternate approaches to a problem. The strategy entails finding particularly simple cases where the two cases yield very different answers, and the correct one is obvious from the context and the simplicity of the problem. In this way, the difference is magnified like a telescope so that it is clear to the unaided observation.

There are, I've found, similar sorts of cases in apologetics. There are a few questions I've heard that are so simple, yet get to the heart of the matter. I've collected them here, and always enjoy finding others.

Is there free will in Heaven?

If there is, then the free-will argument for the the Problem of Evil falls apart. If there is not, then heaven is filled with automatons and the soul is meaningless.

How did Paul know it was Jesus that he saw?

Since Paul wasn't an eyewitness to Jesus, how did he know that he was being visited by Jesus in a vision? How does he know that he saw the same person that others saw? Thus, even at best, how do we know as readers that his testimony is reliable at all, as the apologists claim?

How did you determine in the Bible that God is the good guy and Satan is the bad guy?

This one points to the real source of morality - ourselves. We use our own moral intuitions to decide which parts of the Bible are worth keeping and which to ignore. Even if you look at the beginning of Genesis, the snake is the one that is correct about the Tree of Knowledge when God is not. Using the argument that God's book says that God is good is, obviously, fallacious.

Why does Paul never use the word disciple and only uses the word apostle?

This one isn't quite as strong, but it was the one that got me thinking about the evidence (or lack of evidence) for the existence of Jesus. This simple question highlights the fact that Paul never mentions anything about the life of Jesus at all. He doesn't seem to be aware that Peter and James, for example, were supposedly disciples of of Jesus - following an actual person - not just apostles - spreading the word about Jesus. He never mentions Nazareth, or anything at all that Jesus said - not a single quote from Jesus is found in any of Paul's writing, and he is the earliest and most prolific New Testament writer. I find that really interesting. For me, it makes me agnostic about Jesus existing at all as a historical figure. I've never seen a compelling case either way.

Are there any more such questions?