Abortion: Woman Empowerment or Child Sacrifice

Human history is riddled with chapters of profound injustice—slavery, eugenics, ethnic cleansing—where groups of people were dehumanized through arbitrary distinctions like race, class, heritage, or ability. We look back on these atrocities with horror and vow, “Never again will we strip any group of their basic dignity and right to life.”

Yet today, in the modern era, we are repeating this same moral failure—this time with the unborn.

Abortion is often heralded as a milestone of women’s rights and a necessary step for freedom and equality. But beneath the polished rhetoric lies something far older and far darker: a rebranded version of child sacrifice.

At its core, abortion is the deliberate ending of a biologically human life—a fact not even disputed by many abortion-rights advocates. What remains fiercely debated is whether this act of ending a life can ever be morally justified.

This article contends that abortion is not only morally indefensible but that it mirrors the ancient, barbaric practice of sacrificing children—once done in the name of religion or survival, now dressed in the language of autonomy and progress.

Let’s examine the leading arguments—and why, when scrutinized, each one collapses under its own weight.

1️⃣ Development and Age: Arbitrary Standards of Worth

We’re told a fetus isn’t “developed enough” to count as fully human. But where does that logic end? Newborns are less developed than toddlers; toddlers less than teens. Yet we don’t assign human worth based on age or ability. Development changes how we function, not whether we are human. If humanity depends on development, anyone less advanced—due to age, disability, or illness—would have a weaker claim to life. History shows us how dangerous that thinking can be.

2️⃣ Geographical Location: Inches that Decide Humanity

It is astonishing how much hinges on location in the abortion debate. We are told that a fetus inside the womb has no human rights, yet mere inches away, once it exits the birth canal, it becomes a person fully protected by law.

But crossing from womb to air changes location, not essence. If we claim that geography determines human worth, we would have to accept that a child is unworthy of protection just seconds before birth but gains full rights the moment it emerges—a position no rational ethical system can sustain.

We reject this logic in every other aspect of human rights. We must reject it here as well.

3️⃣ Access to Resources and Heritage: A Dangerous Echo

Some argue that abortion is an act of mercy—preventing children from facing poverty, disability, or difficult circumstances. But this rationale eerily mirrors the thinking behind the eugenics movement, where human beings were killed, sterilized, or deemed “unfit” because they were seen as a burden on society.

No parent would be justified in ending the life of a born child because of poverty or anticipated hardship. Poverty and disability do not erase a person’s right to live—before or after birth. To suggest otherwise invites us back into a mindset we have rightly condemned: that some lives are less worth living.

4️⃣ Bodily Autonomy: A Misunderstood Argument

The argument from bodily autonomy is perhaps the most philosophically sophisticated defense of abortion. Judith Jarvis Thomson’s famous “violinist analogy” asks: if you were kidnapped and hooked up to a famous violinist to keep him alive, do you have the obligation to remain connected? The point is to argue that no one has the right to use another’s body without consent.

At first glance, this seems persuasive. But here’s the crucial flaw: pregnancy is not like being hooked up to a stranger. It is the natural result of reproduction, and more importantly, it involves a parent and child—a relationship that carries unique moral obligations.

We do not compel strangers to give up kidneys. But we do compel parents to provide basic care, shelter, and sustenance to their children, even when it’s difficult or inconvenient. No parent is allowed to abandon their newborn on the grounds of bodily autonomy. Likewise, pregnancy is not about extraordinary donation (like giving up a kidney); it is about providing the basic, natural support that every parent owes their dependent child.

If we acknowledge these obligations after birth, it is not unreasonable to recognize them before birth as well.

5️⃣ Personhood and Consciousness: Flawed Standards

Another argument is that unless the fetus has consciousness or self-awareness, it lacks personhood and moral worth. But if consciousness is the marker of who counts as human, what do we do with newborns? What about people in temporary comas, or those with severe cognitive disabilities? Should their lives be forfeited because they lack certain mental faculties?

Some ethicists, like Peter Singer, argue for this radical consistency—suggesting that infanticide and euthanasia are morally acceptable in such cases. But mainstream society overwhelmingly rejects this chilling logic.

That rejection reveals something critical: we intuitively understand that human worth is not based on current capacity but on membership in the human family. Consciousness fluctuates, but humanity does not.

6️⃣ Socioeconomic and Emotional Hardship: Tragic and Real but Rare

Pregnancy can bring deep hardship—financial, emotional, and even medical. But hardship, no matter how real, does not justify ending a human life. We don’t permit parents to kill born children because raising them is hard. Instead, we offer adoption, support programs, and counseling—responses that show true compassion by caring for both mother and child.

There are rare, tragic cases—such as when a pregnancy directly threatens the mother’s life. These fall into the moral category of self-defense. Modern medicine works to save both lives if possible, and direct conflicts are thankfully rare. But this is the only scenario where the moral waters become genuinely murky.

7️⃣ The Life of the Mother: The Sole Consistent Exception

The one morally consistent exception is when a pregnancy directly and unavoidably threatens the mother’s life. In these rare cases, medical intervention may be necessary under the principle of self-defense. Even then, modern medicine typically works to save both lives if at all possible. Direct conflicts are extremely rare, and medical advancements continue to make them even less frequent.

The Core Question: Is It Human life & What Is The Unborn?

Everything boils down to these two foundational issues

Science—not philosophy or religion—answers these questions plainly. From the moment of fertilization, a distinct human organism exists, carrying its own unique DNA. This zygote meets all the basic criteria for life: it grows, responds to stimuli, metabolizes, and develops continuously through every stage of human life—from embryo to fetus to infant, toddler, teen, and adult.

We don’t say, “That’s not a human; it’s just an infant.” Likewise, we should not pretend “fetus” means anything other than a human being at a particular stage of growth.

Let’s be honest: no one hosts a “fetus shower.” Expectant mothers don’t say, “I can’t wait to meet my fetus.” We instinctively know the truth—and we adjust our language only when we seek to distance ourselves from that truth.

The Numbers: The Hard Truth

Many cling to the belief that abortion is rare and justified mainly in extreme cases. But statistics tell a sobering story.

The Guttmacher Institute, a pro-choice research organization, reports:

~1% of abortions are due to rape.
~0.5% are due to incest.
3–4% are because of serious risks to the mother’s life or health.

That leaves 95%+ of abortions performed for elective reasons: financial concerns, career or education goals, or simply not wanting a child at that time.

Since Roe v. Wade in 1973, more than 63 million abortions have been performed in the United States—more than the population of the United Kingdom. Each year, 600,000–900,000 abortions occur in the U.S., the vast majority involving healthy mothers and healthy babies. Worldwide, according to the World Health Organization, an estimated 73 million abortions happen annually, making up nearly 29% of all pregnancies.

This is not a rare procedure. It is widespread, routine—and overwhelmingly elective.

Open to Discussion About the 1%—But the Real Issue Is the 99%: Bodily Autonomy vs. Personal Responsibility

Even the most passionate pro-lifers are open to discussing the hard cases—the 1% involving rape, medical emergencies, and true tragedies. Those are heart-wrenching situations where compassion and care are paramount.

But let’s be honest: those rare cases aren’t what drive the abortion debate. What matters most—the elephant in the room—is the 99% of abortions that happen after consensual sex between healthy adults with healthy pregnancies.

Bodily autonomy matters—no question. But from the dawn of life itself, everyone has known one thing: sex makes babies. That’s biology 101, no matter how much we pretend otherwise. Birth control reduces risk but doesn’t erase it. When you choose to have sex, you are choosing to accept the possibility of creating life. And when that happens, it is staggering to suggest that the responsibility should shift to the child—a human being who, through no fault of their own, now exists.

We often hear, “Consenting to sex isn’t consenting to pregnancy.” But that’s like saying, “I didn’t mean to crash—I just chose to drive drunk.” Intent doesn’t erase responsibility. You may not have wanted the consequence, but you knowingly took the risk. And when human life is at stake, society rightly demands accountability.

That responsibility is simple and fundamental: if you create life, you owe that human being at least the most basic protection of all—life itself. Whether you raise the child or make an adoption plan, you fulfill your duty. Killing the child to escape the consequence doesn’t make you free; it makes an innocent person pay the ultimate price for your choices.

We’re ready—always—to discuss the tragic exceptions with compassion and seriousness. But let’s be clear-eyed: the real moral question is about the overwhelming majority of cases, where the choice was made, the risk was known, and a human life is now in the balance.

Are We Really Empowering Women?

True empowerment lifts people up without tearing others down. Abortion offers freedom at the cost of a child’s life. That’s not progress—that’s a tragic bargain. We’ve dressed it up with new language, but at its core, it echoes ancient patterns of sacrificing the innocent for personal benefit.

Do You Need to Be a Woman to Speak Out?

One common retort is, “You’re not a woman; you can’t have an opinion.” But moral truth is not limited by gender. I’m not Jewish, but I condemn the Holocaust. I’ve never been enslaved, but I denounce slavery. Injustice is injustice—no matter who points it out.

Conclusion: True Progress Respects All Human Life

Abortion is not ultimately about freedom—it’s about redefining who counts as human. History shows that whenever we let convenience, ability, or location decide who lives, we end up on the wrong side of justice.

We are often told abortion is a tragic necessity in cases where a mother’s life is at risk. But in truth, those rare situations don’t require us to kill—they require us to act to save. The baby must be delivered either way, and if the child tragically dies despite efforts to save both lives, that is heartbreak—not an abortion. Directly and intentionally killing the child, even in these cases, is not medicine. It’s a choice—and a needless one.

And in over 90% of cases, abortion isn’t even about tragedy—it’s about convenience, fear, or hardship. But difficulty does not justify death, especially in a world full of life-affirming alternatives.

True progress is not measured by expanding the list of those we are allowed to kill. It’s measured by affirming the dignity and worth of every human being—no matter how small, inconvenient, or dependent.

Until we do, abortion will remain a stark reminder of our deepest moral blind spots—one that future generations may well look back on with the same horror we now reserve for the injustices of the past.

“The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members.” -Mahatma Gandhi

Side Note: Compassion Must Lead

This is not about downplaying the real pain and difficulty many women face. We need a society that provides real support—financial, emotional, and practical—so that no woman feels abortion is her only option. True compassion means caring for both mother and child, never sacrificing one for the other.

📞 Resources for Women Facing Unplanned Parenthood

Facing an unplanned pregnancy can feel overwhelming, but it’s important to know: you are not alone, and you are not without options. While abortion is often presented as the default choice, there are multiple alternatives that honor both your life and your child’s—and real support is available to help you through this.

Here’s an overview of what you can expect:

Parenting Support: Many organizations offer free medical care, baby supplies, financial aid, housing assistance, and parenting classes to help you prepare if you choose to raise your child.
Adoption Placement: If you’re unable or not ready to parent, adoption provides your child with a loving and stable future. Most hospitals work directly with adoption agencies that can arrange placement—sometimes even before you leave the hospital. Demand for newborn adoption is high, and your child will be welcomed into a prepared, waiting home.
Safe Haven Laws: Every U.S. state has safe haven laws that allow you to safely and legally surrender your newborn at a hospital or other designated location—no questions asked—ensuring immediate care and protection.

The resources listed below connect you with compassionate professionals ready to walk with you through every step of this journey. While availability of certain services (like housing or long-term financial aid) may vary by location, hotlines and referral services are always ready to help you find the best local support.

Real empowerment comes from knowing all your options—and having the help you need to choose life with confidence and hope.

24/7 Hotlines and Immediate Support

Availability of in-person services may vary by location, but these hotlines are staffed 24/7 to provide immediate guidance and connect you to local help.

Option Line (Heartbeat International)
24/7 pregnancy helpline (call or text 1-800-712-4357) offering confidential guidance, local referrals, and support for parenting, adoption, and abortion alternatives.
PROLIFE Across AMERICA Hotline
24-hour confidential counseling (1-800-366-7773) with referrals to local pregnancy centers, material aid, and adoption services.
Birthright International
24/7 hotline (1-800-550-4900) offering non-judgmental support, pregnancy tests, prenatal referrals, and personal counseling at nearly 300 U.S. locations.
Pregnancy Decision Line (Care Net)
Call 866-406-9327 for compassionate, confidential help discussing options and connecting to 1,200+ Care Net centers nationwide.

Material and Financial Assistance

While funding and resources depend on donations and local availability, these programs work quickly to provide essential aid like baby supplies, housing support, and financial assistance.

Local Pregnancy Resource Centers
Free pregnancy tests, ultrasounds, baby supplies, parenting classes, and help with medical care, housing, and more (search via Option Line or Care Net).
Catholic Charities USA
Material assistance (diapers, formula, baby gear), rent/housing support, prenatal care, and adoption services—available to anyone in need.
The Gabriel Project
Local volunteers provide baby supplies, rides, mentoring, and emotional support. Find help at local churches or visit regional sites like gabrielnetwork.org.
Let Them Live
Direct financial assistance for expectant mothers in crisis—covering rent, utilities, medical bills, and other essential needs.

Long-Term Support Programs

Space and availability may vary, but these programs offer ongoing support—like housing, job training, and parenting resources—to help mothers build stable, independent futures. Hotlines and local centers can help you navigate options and check availability in your area.

Good Counsel Homes
Safe maternity homes offering housing, parenting classes, job training, daycare, and long-term support. Call 1-800-723-8331 for help.
Sisters of Life – Visitation Mission
Personalized assistance with housing, employment, legal help, baby supplies, and counseling. Call 1-877-777-1277 or text 212-203-8716.
Embrace Grace
12-week church-hosted support groups providing community, education, and practical help, including baby showers.
Bethany Christian Services
Free counseling and support for parenting or adoption planning. Call 1-800-BETHANY (1-800-238-4269).
Her PLAN
A national directory connecting women with housing, job training, financial aid, childcare, counseling, and more.
Standing With You (Students for Life)
Find local pregnancy help near colleges and universities, plus toolkits for pregnant/parenting students.

April 20, 2025

The Myth of Christian Opposition to Science

A Historical Overview That Sets the Record Straight

Introduction: The “Conflict” That Never Was

You’ve heard the stories: the Church fought science, banned reason, and believed the Earth was flat. Galileo was “persecuted for truth,” and medieval monks feared falling off the edge of the world. These tales often paint Christianity as an enemy of science—a view known as the “conflict thesis.”

But here’s the truth: historians have debunked this narrative. The supposed war between faith and reason? It’s largely a 19th-century invention. In reality, Christianity didn’t stifle science—it helped build it.

Myth #1: Medieval Christians Believed in a Flat Earth

Let’s clear this up: educated medieval Europeans knew the Earth was round. As early as the 7th century, Church scholars accepted the Earth’s spherical shape based on ancient authorities like Aristotle and clear natural observations. Some even calculated Earth’s circumference with impressive accuracy—centuries before Columbus set sail.

That famous story of Columbus “proving” the world wasn’t flat? Total myth. Educated people of his day (including churchmen) already knew the Earth was round. The real debate was about distance—not shape.

Only two obscure Christian writers ever seriously argued for a flat Earth. Meanwhile, major theologians like St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, and St. Ambrose all affirmed Earth’s roundness. So where did the flat-Earth myth come from? Blame 19th-century authors like Washington Irving and Andrew White, who twisted history to make religion look anti-science.

Faith and Reason: A Fertile Ground for Science

Far from suppressing curiosity, Christian theology nurtured scientific inquiry. Believing that God created a good and intelligible world encouraged medieval thinkers to study it. After all, if a rational Creator made the universe, then nature should behave according to consistent rules.

This belief led to two key ideas behind modern science:

Creation is worth studying because it’s God’s handiwork.
Nature follows discoverable laws because it’s governed by a rational God.

In fact, Christians believed that since God could have created the universe any way He wanted, the only way to know how it actually works is to observe and experiment. Sound familiar? That’s the scientific method.

Myth-Busters: Devout Christians Who Changed the World

Many people assume science moved forward despite religion. But in truth, many of the greatest scientific minds were devout Christians:

Nicolaus Copernicus – Cleric and founder of heliocentrism
Galileo Galilei – Catholic scientist and astronomy pioneer
Johannes Kepler – Discovered planetary motion, glorified God through math
Isaac Newton – Deeply religious; saw science as uncovering God’s laws
Gregor Mendel – Monk who founded genetics in his monastery garden
Georges Lemaître – Catholic priest who proposed the Big Bang
Francis Collins – Christian geneticist who led the Human Genome Project

These weren’t outliers—they were the norm. Most early scientists were Christians, and their faith inspired their work.

The Church: A Supporter of Science

It wasn’t just individual believers. The Church itself was instrumental in science’s rise. During the Middle Ages:

Monasteries and cathedral schools preserved knowledge.
The Church founded universities in Paris, Oxford, and Bologna.
Universities taught astronomy, mathematics, and natural philosophy (early science).

Clergy like Albertus Magnus, teacher of Aquinas, even conducted early experiments. The Vatican funded astronomical research, supported scholars, and helped develop the Gregorian calendar we use today.

And yes, Galileo’s trial happened—but it was more about politics and personality than science. Most Church officials supported science overall and often funded it.

Conclusion: A Partnership in Truth

The idea of Christianity and science being enemies is a myth. History tells a different story—one where faith laid the foundation for science to flourish.

Christianity taught that the world was worth studying, that it followed consistent laws, and that truth—whether revealed through Scripture or science—was unified. As many medieval scholars said:
“Truth cannot contradict truth.”

Christianity didn’t fight science. It often fueled it. And recognizing this truth doesn’t just correct a myth—it helps us understand the real roots of the modern scientific world.

Sources

Baglow, Christopher T. “A Catholic History of the Fake Conflict Between Science and Religion.” Church Life Journal, University of Notre Dame, 4 May 2020, pp. 259–268.
catholicscientists.org
. (Debunks the myth that medieval Christians believed in a flat Earth by highlighting that only a couple of obscure individuals did, whereas the consensus among major theologians was that the Earth is spherical.)
Rogers, Katherin. “Medieval Mythbusters.” UD Research, vol. 3, no. 1, University of Delaware, 2011, pp. 165–174.
www1.udel.edu
. (Explains that medieval educated classes knew the Earth was round and had even calculated its circumference with impressive accuracy before Columbus.)
Rogers, Katherin. “Medieval Mythbusters.” UD Research, vol. 3, no. 1, University of Delaware, 2011, pp. 171–174.
www1.udel.edu
. (Clarifies that Columbus’s contemporaries objected to his voyage not out of fear of a flat Earth, but because they rightly believed the Earth was much larger than Columbus assumed.)
Baglow, Christopher T. “A Catholic History of the Fake Conflict Between Science and Religion.” Church Life Journal, University of Notre Dame, 4 May 2020, pp. 287–295.
catholicscientists.org
. (Recounts how the supposed opposition to Columbus was a fiction created by Washington Irving and perpetuated by A.D. White; in truth, all scholars in Columbus’s day agreed the Earth was round and debated only the Earth’s size.)
Rogers, Katherin. “Medieval Mythbusters.” UD Research, vol. 3, no. 1, University of Delaware, 2011, pp. 195–202.
www1.udel.edu
. (Quotes St. Augustine affirming the fundamental goodness of all creation, underscoring the pro-nature outlook of Christian theology in antiquity and the Middle Ages.)
Harrison, Peter, et al. “Religion and Science.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford University, 2022, sec. 2.2, lines 320–327.
plato.stanford.edu
. (Discusses how the Christian doctrine of creation posited an intelligible and orderly universe, yet one that must be investigated empirically because its laws are contingent on God’s will – a concept that encouraged the development of modern science.)
Bishop Robert Barron. “The Myth of the War Between Science and Religion.” Word on Fire, 20 Jan. 2015, lines 233–241.
wordonfire.org
. (Observes that the great founders of modern science – Copernicus, Newton, Kepler, etc. – were devoutly religious, and notes that even 19th-century giants like Faraday and Maxwell were profoundly pious, as was the 20th-century originator of the Big Bang theory, a Catholic priest.)
Funk, Cary, and Becka A. Alper. “The Paradoxical Relationship of Religion and Science.” Pew Research Center, 5 Nov. 2009, lines 188–195.
pewresearch.org
. (Highlights that for many centuries, religious institutions supported scientific endeavors: most universities were religiously affiliated and numerous scientists – Copernicus, Mendel, Galileo, Newton, Kepler – were either clergy or devout believers who saw their work as illuminating God’s creation.)
Funk, Cary, and Becka A. Alper. “The Paradoxical Relationship of Religion and Science.” Pew Research Center, 5 Nov. 2009, lines 190–195.
pewresearch.org
. (Specifically notes that Copernicus and Mendel were “men of the cloth,” while Galileo, Newton, and Kepler were deeply devout, demonstrating that religious commitment was common among seminal scientists.)
Rogers, Katherin. “Medieval Mythbusters.” UD Research, vol. 3, no. 1, University of Delaware, 2011, lines 209–217.
www1.udel.edu
. (Credits medieval Christian institutions – particularly the new universities of Western Europe – with establishing the cooperative, cumulative approach to knowledge that characterizes modern science, citing Albertus Magnus as an example of a medieval churchman who used experimental methods and earned the title “father of modern science.”)
Baglow, Christopher T. “A Catholic History of the Fake Conflict Between Science and Religion.” Church Life Journal, University of Notre Dame, 4 May 2020, lines 233–242.
catholicscientists.org
. (Explains that Galileo’s run-in with Church authorities was due more to his provocative style and the politics of the time than to a blanket religious rejection of his science, illustrating that the Galileo affair was a complex anomaly rather than proof of an eternal conflict.)

April 20, 2025April 20, 2025

Prophecies of the Bible: Odds, Evidence, and Astonishing Fulfillment

Peter W. Stoner

When it comes to testing the truth of biblical prophecy, few names are as important—or as mathematically rigorous—as Peter W. Stoner. A respected mathematician and professor of science at Pasadena City College and Westmont College, Stoner was also the chairman of the departments of mathematics and astronomy. His book Science Speaks applies the principles of probability theory to biblical prophecy in a way that is both accessible and scientifically grounded. What sets his work apart is that it was reviewed and verified by the American Scientific Affiliation, a body of qualified scientists who affirmed that his approach to estimating odds was both conservative and statistically sound. But why does this matter? Because if even a handful of prophecies written centuries before Christ were fulfilled with precision, and the odds of that happening by chance are astronomically low, then we’re not just looking at ancient poetry—we’re staring at the mathematical fingerprint of the divine. This is not just a religious question—it’s a logical and evidential problem that demands attention.

📜 How Many Prophecies Are in the Bible?

The Bible contains over 2,500 prophetic statements, of which about 2,000 have already been fulfilled with remarkable accuracy. The remaining deal with end times and the return of Christ. These prophecies range from specific predictions (like the place of Jesus’ birth) to broader geopolitical forecasts (such as the rise and fall of empires).

Many of these are messianic—over 300 prophecies relate directly to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

🧪 How Do We Know These Prophecies Predate the Events?

1. The Dead Sea Scrolls

Discovered between 1946–1956 near Qumran, these ancient manuscripts contain parts of every Old Testament book except Esther.
Most importantly, they include a complete copy of the book of Isaiah, dated to around 125 BC—centuries before Jesus was born.
This disproves claims that the prophecies were written after the events took place.

2. Carbon Dating and Paleography

The scrolls have been carbon-dated and analyzed by handwriting experts, both confirming that they were written well before Christ’s time.
This gives us archaeological and scientific certainty that the messianic prophecies existed long before their fulfillment.

🎯 Just 10 Prophecies About Jesus—What Are the Odds?

Let’s consider just 10 specific prophecies about Jesus:

Born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2)
Preceded by a messenger (Isaiah 40:3)
Entered Jerusalem on a donkey (Zechariah 9:9)
Betrayed by a friend (Psalm 41:9)
Sold for 30 pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:12)
Money thrown in the temple and used to buy a potter’s field (Zechariah 11:13)
Silent before His accusers (Isaiah 53:7)
Crucified with criminals (Isaiah 53:12)
Pierced in hands and feet (Psalm 22:16)
Buried with the rich (Isaiah 53:9)

These were written hundreds of years before Jesus’ birth, yet every one was fulfilled in the New Testament accounts.

🎲 Calculating the Odds

According to mathematician Peter Stoner, the probability of just eight of these being fulfilled by one man is:

1 in 10^17 (that’s a 1 followed by 17 zeros)

To visualize: Imagine covering the entire state of Texas two feet deep in silver dollars. Mark one of them with an X. Now blindfold someone and let them wander across Texas. The odds they pick the marked coin on the first try? Same as one man fulfilling just eight of the Messianic prophecies.

When Stoner increased it to 48 prophecies, the odds became:

1 in 10^157 —a number beyond the total number of atoms in the known universe.

These aren’t faith-based guesses. These are statistical improbabilities calculated using conservative estimates and laws of probability.

✅ Conclusion: Coincidence or Divine Fingerprint?

Fulfilled prophecy isn’t just poetic. It’s empirical evidence that the Bible:

Predicted the future before it happened,
Did so with specificity,
And has been verified through scientific dating, archaeological finds, and mathematical probability.

Fulfilled prophecy is one of the strongest rational foundations for Christian belief. It transforms the Bible from a spiritual book into a historical and mathematical marvel—a document that has stood the test of time, scrutiny, and science.

Step-by-Step Breakdown of the Math Behind Biblical Prophecy Odds

📌 Step 1: Choosing the Prophecies

Stoner selected specific, well-documented Old Testament prophecies that:

Were measurable (not vague or symbolic),
Were not under the control of the person fulfilling them (you can’t choose your birthplace),
And were historically verified as fulfilled in the life of Jesus.

For example, let’s examine the prophecy:
“The Messiah will be born in Bethlehem.”
(Prophecy: Micah 5:2, Fulfillment: Matthew 2:1)

🧠 Step 2: Assigning Probabilities (Estimating Likelihood)

Stoner gathered data (historical population, demographics, geography, etc.) to assign conservative probability estimates for each prophecy. These were reviewed by experts from the American Scientific Affiliation to ensure they were reasonable and not biased in favor of Christianity.

Here’s how he assigned values:

Prophecy	Assigned Probability	Rationale
Born in Bethlehem	1 in 280,000	Bethlehem’s estimated population vs. the total Jewish population
Entering Jerusalem on a donkey	1 in 100	Most people would walk or ride horses, not donkeys, for important arrivals
Betrayed by a friend	1 in 1,000	A relatively rare event, especially with 30 silver pieces
Crucified with criminals	1 in 1,000	Execution methods varied; crucifixion was rare and grouping was inconsistent
Pierced in hands and feet	1 in 1,000	Describes crucifixion before it was invented by Persians/Romans
Silent before accusers	1 in 1,000	Most people defend themselves when falsely accused
Buried in a rich man’s tomb	1 in 1,000	Criminals usually dumped in mass graves
Sold for 30 pieces of silver	1 in 1,000	Specific amount and context is rare

➗ Step 3: Multiply Probabilities Together

Now, to find the odds of one person fulfilling all 8 prophecies, we multiply the probabilities:

1/280,000 × 1/100 × 1/1,000 × 1/1,000 × 1/1,000 × 1/1,000 × 1/1,000 × 1/1,000
= 1 in 10^17 (or 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000)

This is how Stoner arrived at the 1 in 10^17 figure for just 8 prophecies.

💡 Why Multiply?

We multiply the probabilities because each fulfilled prophecy is an independent event. For example:

Being born in Bethlehem has no effect on being betrayed by a friend.
Each is a separate, measurable event—so to get the compound probability, you multiply the odds.

This is a standard method in statistics and probability theory.

🔢 What If We Add More Prophecies?

Let’s say we go from 8 prophecies to 48. Since the probabilities continue to be multiplied, the number explodes exponentially:

For 48 prophecies, Stoner estimated the odds at 1 in 10^157
That’s more than the total number of atoms in the known universe (about 10^80)

⚠️ Important Caveats

Stoner took a conservative approach:

He rounded estimates up (making prophecies seem more likely than they were),
He avoided any “double-counting” of related prophecies,
He only used prophecies independently verifiable through secular history.

🧮 In Simple Terms:

Here’s a simplified analogy:

Imagine you write 8 oddly specific predictions on ping-pong balls and throw them into separate oceans around the world.

Now imagine one person dives into each ocean once, randomly, and pulls up the right ball 8 times in a row.

That’s the kind of improbability we’re talking about. Statistically impossible unless someone rigged the outcome—or in our case, orchestrated it on purpose.

Conservative Recalculation: 8 Biblical Prophecies Fulfilled by One Person

Let’s assume each prophecy is more likely than Peter Stoner originally estimated. We’ll round down each probability estimate to favor natural occurrence and reduce perceived “miraculousness.” Here’s our revised list:

Prophecy	Conservative Probability Estimate
Born in Bethlehem	1 in 100,000 (vs. 280,000)
Preceded by a messenger (John the Baptist)	1 in 20 (vs. 1 in 100)
Enters Jerusalem on a donkey	1 in 50 (vs. 1 in 100)
Betrayed by a friend	1 in 100 (vs. 1 in 1,000)
Betrayed for 30 pieces of silver	1 in 200 (vs. 1 in 1,000)
Money used to buy potter’s field	1 in 100 (vs. 1 in 1,000)
Silent before accusers	1 in 50 (vs. 1 in 1,000)
Buried in a rich man’s tomb	1 in 100 (vs. 1 in 1,000)

Now multiply the probabilities:

1/100,000
× 1/20
× 1/50
× 1/100
× 1/200
× 1/100
× 1/50
× 1/100

Let’s simplify and multiply it out:

1 / (100,000 × 20 × 50 × 100 × 200 × 100 × 50 × 100)
= 1 / (100,000 × 2×10^8)
= 1 / (1 × 10^18)

🧮 Final Probability:

🔥 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 (10^18)

Even with the odds severely rounded down in favor of chance, we still get a 1 in a quintillion probability of one man fulfilling just 8 specific prophecies by coincidence.

📐 Perspective: What Does 10¹⁸ Look Like?

One quintillion seconds = about 32 billion years (longer than the age of the universe)
If you had a quintillion pennies, they’d stack high enough to reach past Pluto—and back.
This is still statistically impossible by accident, even with generous odds.

🧠 What About Just 1 in 10?

Just for comparison—if every prophecy was 1 in 10, and you picked 8 of them:

1/10^8 = 1 in 100,000,000

That’s still less likely than winning the Powerball jackpot… twice.

✅ Conclusion (Even with Rounded-Down Numbers)

Even if you try to make the odds more favorable, the probability of one person fulfilling 8–10 specific, ancient prophecies is still astronomically unlikely—unless someone intended it to happen.

April 20, 2025April 20, 2025

Meet Naturalism.

You’ve probably heard it dressed up as “science,” “reason,” or “the only way to think in the modern age.” But beneath the lab coat lies a worldview with its own untested assumptions, miraculous leaps of faith, and sacred doctrines — just without the stained glass.

So, for fun (and maybe a little truth), here’s a tongue-in-cheek brochure exploring the religion of Naturalism — the belief system that says everything came from nothing, you’re just a meat computer, and morals are optional.

👇 Enjoy. Question. And laugh a little.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kszEQiosYx72esq38DU5KqKos5-nNRuQ4KlkcPa5NkU/edit?usp=sharing

April 20, 2025

A Solid Foundation: Scientific Evidence Supporting the Christian Worldview

In an era where the Christian worldview is often challenged by secular perspectives, it’s crucial to examine the evidence that supports the biblical narrative. From the origins of the universe to the intricacies of life, and the fossil record, the data aligns remarkably well with the teachings of Scripture.

1. The Universe Had a Beginning

Modern cosmology confirms that the universe had a definite beginning, commonly referred to as the Big Bang. This aligns with the biblical assertion in Genesis 1:1: “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” The necessity of a cause beyond time, space, and matter points to a transcendent Creator.

2. Evidence of Design in Nature

The complexity and order observed in the universe suggest intentional design:

Fine-Tuning of the Universe: The precise values of physical constants allow for the existence of life.
DNA as Information: DNA contains complex information akin to a written language, indicating an intelligent source.
Irreducible Complexity: Biological systems, such as the bacterial flagellum, function only when all parts are present, challenging gradual evolutionary explanations.

These observations support the idea of an intelligent Designer, as described in the Bible.

3. The Fossil Record and the Global Flood

The fossil record presents several features consistent with a global flood as described in Genesis:

Rapid Burial: Fossils often show signs of rapid burial, such as articulated skeletons and preservation of soft tissues.
Soft Tissue in Dinosaur Bones: Discoveries of soft tissues in dinosaur fossils challenge the notion that these remains are millions of years old. For instance, Dr. Mary Schweitzer found flexible blood vessels and cells in a T. rex femur.
Fossils in Unexpected Strata: Fossils have been found in geological layers where they shouldn’t exist according to evolutionary timelines, such as pollen in Precambrian rocks. Creation.com+1Evolution Is A Myth+1

These findings suggest a catastrophic event, like a global flood, better explains the fossil record than slow, gradual processes.

4. Foundations of Science Rooted in Christianity

Many pioneers of modern science were devout Christians who believed that the universe, created by a rational God, could be studied and understood:

Isaac Newton: Developed the laws of motion and universal gravitation.
Johannes Kepler: Formulated the laws of planetary motion.
Blaise Pascal: Made significant contributions to mathematics and physics.HowStuffWorks

Their faith motivated their scientific pursuits, and the Christian worldview provided the philosophical foundation for the scientific method.

5. The Bible’s Historical and Prophetic Accuracy

The Bible has demonstrated remarkable historical and prophetic accuracy:

Archaeological Discoveries: Findings such as the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Hittite civilization confirm biblical accounts.
Fulfilled Prophecies: Prophecies about the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, written centuries before His birth, have been fulfilled in detail.

These aspects underscore the reliability and divine inspiration of Scripture.

6. Objective Morality Points to a Moral Lawgiver

The existence of objective moral values and duties suggests a source beyond human opinion:

Universal Moral Standards: Concepts of right and wrong are consistent across cultures and time periods.
Moral Accountability: The innate sense of justice and conscience implies a moral lawgiver, as described in the Bible.

Without a transcendent source, morality becomes subjective and loses its binding authority.

7. Personal Transformation Through Christ

Beyond intellectual evidence, the transformative power of the Christian faith is evident in countless lives:

Changed Lives: Individuals from diverse backgrounds testify to the life-changing impact of a relationship with Jesus Christ.
Purpose and Hope: The Christian worldview provides a coherent explanation for human existence, suffering, and the hope of eternal life.

Conclusion

The convergence of scientific evidence, historical reliability, moral reasoning, and personal experience builds a compelling case for the Christian worldview. Far from being a blind leap of faith, Christianity offers a rational and evidence-based foundation for understanding reality.

Note: For a more in-depth exploration of these topics, consider reading works by authors such as C.S. Lewis, Lee Strobel, John Lennox, and Nabeel Qureshi, who have extensively addressed the intersection of faith science and reason.

April 20, 2025April 20, 2025

Disney Star Wars: Just Corporate Fanfiction?

An examination of broken canon, squandered legacy, and the slow redemption of Jar Jar Binks

What Qualifies as Fanfiction?

Fanfiction is generally defined as unauthorized or unofficial work that uses existing characters, settings, or universes to tell a new story—typically without the original creator’s guidance. It’s often dismissed as derivative because it usually lacks the cohesive vision, thematic depth, and narrative integrity of the original.

What happens, then, when the owners of a franchise create stories that deviate wildly from what made the original great? What do we call it when the new material contradicts established lore, breaks character arcs, and uses nostalgia as a crutch rather than a tool?

That’s not a trick question. It’s what we now call Disney Star Wars.

The Corporate Fanfic Era

Since acquiring Lucasfilm in 2012, Disney has produced a Star Wars sequel trilogy and several shows, most of which feel less like visionary storytelling and more like a checklist-driven product line. These entries often have high production values, but no soul, no consistency, and no respect for what came before.

And the greatest crime? They made so many of us reevaluate Jar Jar Binks—once considered the worst thing to happen to Star Wars—and think, “Actually, he had more character development and purpose than most of the Disney cast.”

That’s how bad it got.

Broken Arcs and Lost Legends

The original Star Wars trilogy was about hope, redemption, and legacy. Luke Skywalker’s arc was one of naïve optimism triumphing over darkness. He didn’t give up on Vader—he saw the good in him when no one else did, and he was proven right.

Now compare that to The Last Jedi, where Luke becomes a cynical, cowardly hermit who considers murdering his own nephew over a bad dream. No buildup. No explanation. Just character assassination in the name of subversion.

Han Solo, once the smuggler with a heart of gold, becomes a deadbeat dad who runs away from responsibility. Leia does little more than stand around and deliver exposition.

The entire sequel trilogy threw out George Lucas’s planned legacy story, which included:

The rise of a new Jedi Order under Luke
The struggles of his children and Han and Leia’s children
A slow-burn reemergence of darkness through characters like Darth Caedus (a much better version of Kylo Ren)

They also ignored Thrawn, one of the most brilliant villains ever introduced in the Star Wars Expanded Universe. They had a goldmine of material—and threw it out for a shallow retread of the original trilogy dressed up in modern sensibilities.

Mandalorian: A Brief Glimmer of Hope

When The Mandalorian dropped, fans were cautiously optimistic. And for good reason:

Kathleen Kennedy had no creative control over Seasons 1 & 2.
Jon Favreau and Dave Filoni were at the helm—two creators who love and understand Star Wars.
The show was simple, focused, and deeply respectful of the source material.

Din Djarin quickly became a fan favorite, and Grogu (Baby Yoda) was a marketing phenomenon. But then came the interference.

✔ Gina Carano was fired over politically unpopular statements—despite being a breakout character with a strong fanbase.
✔ Grogu was brought back way too soon, undoing the powerful emotional finale of Season 2—because merchandise.
✔ Din Djarin was sidelined in his own show in favor of Bo-Katan, who suddenly became the lead.

The result? Season 3 was a mess, and many fans checked out.

The Book of Boba Fett: A Bounty Missed

Let’s talk about The Book of Boba Fett. Or rather, “How to Ruin the Coolest Bounty Hunter in the Galaxy.”

Boba Fett was supposed to be space Western perfection—a man of few words, all grit, all edge. What we got was a soft-spoken pacifist who wanted to rule through respect, spent most of the show taking baths, and was upstaged by guest appearances in his own series.

They had the chance to give us Walker, Texas Ranger—but on Tatooine. Instead, we got a meandering, oddly paced identity crisis that wasted one of the most iconic characters in Star Wars.

Rogue One: The Exception, Not the Rule

Ironically, Rogue One was a great Star Wars film—but only because it was saved from Kathleen Kennedy’s influence, not enhanced by it.

The original cut was a disaster, until Disney panicked and brought in Tony Gilroy for extensive reshoots.
The now-famous Vader hallway scene wasn’t even in the original script. It was added in reshoots—and it became one of the most beloved moments in the entire franchise.

So yes, Rogue One was great—but despite Kennedy, not because of her.

Conclusion: Time to Restore the Legacy

The Disney-era Star Wars films have more in common with corporate fanfiction than genuine storytelling. They wear the skin of Star Wars but lack its spirit, its depth, and its sense of myth.

They discarded decades of rich lore, rewrote beloved characters, and replaced them with hollow avatars designed by committee. They undermined everything the original trilogy stood for, and in doing so, alienated the very fans that made Star Wars a cultural phenomenon.

There is hope—rumors of Kathleen Kennedy stepping down, and the rise of creators like Filoni and Favreau, offer a light in the dark. But unless Disney is willing to admit the failure of the sequel trilogy, and either reboot or reframe it as an alternate timeline, then the damage will remain.

Until then, we’ll always have the originals. And yes… even Jar Jar. At least he never tried to kill his nephew in his sleep.

The Broken Canon of Disney Star Wars

How contradictions and retcons unraveled a galaxy far, far away

❌ Anakin Is No Longer the Chosen One

Original Canon: Anakin Skywalker was prophesied to “bring balance to the Force.” He did so by destroying the Sith (Palpatine and himself) in Return of the Jedi.
Disney Canon: Palpatine returns in The Rise of Skywalker, meaning Anakin failed, and the prophecy meant nothing.
Verdict: His entire redemption arc is nullified.

❌ Force Healing Breaks Everything

Introduced by Rey without training and never seen before in main canon.
Invalidates major tragedies like Padmé’s death, Qui-Gon’s death, and Vader’s injuries.
If Jedi had this power, why did anyone die?

❌ Lightsaber Wounds Are Now Optional

Qui-Gon dies from a stab.
Reva survives two lightsaber impalements.
The Grand Inquisitor is stabbed and recovers off-screen.
Lightsabers once melted blast doors. Now they’re glorified butter knives.

❌ Luke’s Character Arc Reversed

OT Luke: Redeems Vader, refuses to strike down Palpatine, embodies hope.
Sequel Luke: Contemplates murdering his sleeping nephew, becomes a bitter hermit.
The optimistic hero becomes the antithesis of everything he once stood for.

❌ Rey is a Palpatine… but Calls Herself a Skywalker

Raised with no ties to the Skywalkers.
Learns she’s a Palpatine, defeats Palpatine with his own lightning.
Declares herself Rey Skywalker at the end.
Somehow… this makes her the “heir” to Star Wars?

❌ The Force Is No Longer Special

Original: The Force is powerful, but rare. Training is essential.
Disney: Everyone’s Force-sensitive now. Rey learns Jedi powers by osmosis.
Force powers are treated like superpowers, not spiritual growth.

❌ The Republic and Resistance Make No Sense

Return of the Jedi: The Empire is defeated, a New Republic rises.
The Force Awakens: The Republic is barely mentioned. The Resistance is treated as an underdog rebellion… again.
Who’s in charge? Where’s the military? What even is the political situation?
It’s like the galaxy reset itself for nostalgia’s sake.

❌ Palpatine’s Return Was Unexplained

“Somehow, Palpatine returned.”
No setup. No hints. No logic. Just a zombie clone with Sith magic.
Anakin’s sacrifice? Pointless.

❌ Chewie Doesn’t Mourn Han – But Gets a Medal

Han dies in The Force Awakens—Chewie walks right past Leia, no moment of grief.
In Rise of Skywalker, Chewie gets a participation medal. Because why not.

❌ No Reunion for the Big Three

Luke, Han, and Leia never share a scene together in the sequels.
Han dies, Luke dies, Leia dies—all separately.
The core trio that built the franchise? Split up and discarded.

Final Verdict:

Disney’s Star Wars isn’t canon—it’s a contradictory patchwork of retcons, shallow twists, and lore-breaking conveniences that unravel everything George Lucas built.

They didn’t build on the foundation—they blew it up and tried to pretend it was an improvement.