Religulous Page #3

I mean that's what

I'm here promoting... doubt.

- That's my product.

- Right.

The other guys are

selling certainty, not me.

I'm on the corner

with doubt.

So, Dr. Collins,

you are a brilliant

brilliant scientist,

the head

of the Human Genome Project.

Now here's what's

so puzzling is that you are

the one scientist...

the one famous scientist anyway...

who's also religious.

Explain that to me.

I would argue that

if you look at the evidence,

the historical evidence

of Christ's existence is overwhelming.

What evidence?

I mean, I've never even heard

anyone propose that there's evidence.

There's been proof

that there's a Jesus.

- That's been proven.

- That hasn't been proven.

How you figure that one?

When I read the New Testament,

it reads to me

as the record of eyewitnesses

who put down what they saw.

You know

they weren't eyewitnesses.

- They were close to that.

- No.

Within a couple

of decades of eyewitnesses.

- Okay.

- Would that stand up in a laboratory

as absolute foolproof evidence

that something happened?

You are setting up

a standard for proof

that I think would really be

an almost impossible standard to meet.

No gospel tells us what he was

doing when he was a young man.

You know,

we see Jesus as an infant

and then we kind of pick up

the story when he's 30.

I think Jesus was probably

an awkward teenager...

big Jewfro,

bad at sports.

Here I am!

The records we have

are all gospels.

Gospels are not history.

Gospel writers never met Jesus,

neither did St. Paul.

No one who wrote

about Jesus ever met him.

How can you go back

into the prophets

and the prophets specifically

specifies that certain things...

Well, first of all,

the New Testament came after

the Old Testament. We agree to that?

I agree to that,

but that doesn't mean anything.

All it means is the people that

wrote the New Testament

read the Old Testament

and then made the prophesies fit.

They can't make it fit

if something didn't happen.

Of course they can.

Then you're saying

the Bible is fictitious?

- I am.

- Can't be.

I am.

We do all know that

those texts don't match.

Yeah, sure.

Would you expect them to?

I'm surprised that things

that are very important to the story

like the virgin birth

isn't in all four of them.

Wouldn't you really expect

that kind of discordance when you're

thinking about the way in which

these documents came into being?

But you'd think if you were

one of Christ's biographers,

that would be sort

of an important thing not to leave out.

Oh, God,

he was also born of a virgin.

They don't notice the virgin birth.

You know, I think that is something

if you were any sort of reporter

Rate this script:0.0 / 0 votes