The philosophy of objectivism, as Ayn Rand taught, requires that religion and brute force are to be rejected, and that only reason is to be used to obtain the goal of laissez faire capitalism.  Although the aspiration of laissez faire capitalism is a goal worth striving for, Rand missed the mark on how to achieve such a respectable ambition.  The greatest ingredient of objectivism is Jesus Christ, for reason and the laws of logic would be impossible if the Biblical worldview is not correct .  The evidence supporting the Bible and Jesus Christ is overwhelming, and to reject the objective facts would be to render other history books null and void.  Christianity is desperately needed in the philosophy of objectivism and there is a prescribed practice to incorporate God with objectivism.

    Before we continue I feel it is necessary to proctor a sort of test, if you will.  Imagine you woke up tomorrow and Christianity was 100% proven correct.  Saying  “God is real” and “Jesus Christ died for our sins” was the same as saying “the sky is blue”.  Would you become a Christian, read the Bible, pray, get baptized, memorize scripture, display the cross on your person, ask for forgiveness for your sins, witness to others, try to obey the Ten Commandments, display the cross in your home, stop yourself from using the Lord’s name in vein, stop saying curse words, and stop lusting?  If you answer no then perhaps your heart and mind are filled with a subjective bias, which wouldn’t be very objective of you. “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” – John 3:16

PART 1: CONTRADICTIONS IN OBJECTIVISM

    To Ayn Rand altruism is the root of all evil.  She gave an example of altruism as being a businessman who turns down a promotion so the guy beneath him can flourish instead.   However, during an interview Rand said that relationships weren’t altruistic, because people take “selfish pleasure” in seeing their counterpart prosper.   On the Donohue Show Rand went on to say that if she believed for a moment that there was a God then she would kill herself to make a case for her husband in order for him to go into Heaven.    Perhaps for the businessman more money brought on more stress and wasn’t in his hierarchy of value.  For the businessman his family time was the selfish pleasure he desired.  If a very lucrative CEO of a multi-billion dollar corporation prayed to Jesus Christ a hundred times a day and flew around the world to help starving kids, while taking selfish pleasure in doing so, would that rid him of Ayn’s altruistic label?  An Evangelical does not give up a value for a non-value.  The Evangelical gives up a lower value for a higher value.   “Rather be openhanded and freely lend him whatever he needs.” – Deuteronomy 15:8

    Objectivism enforces that reality is used to vindicate our environment, and never faith.  Ayn Rand sates, “ Those who claim that man obtains his knowledge of the world by deducing it exclusively from concepts, which come from inside his head and are not derived from perception of physical fact… to put it more simply: those who joined the Witch Doctor (Christianity), by abandoning reality.”    In other words, reality is what we perceive things to be, and what we can see and assert reason to around us.  However, the foundation of reality is a mystery. We declare that we know and can use you developed science to dissect our very existence. We cling to the theories of “evolution” and “the big bang” as a means to justify our perceived reality. Yet, only one theory exists that tells us the fundamental question: why is there an outer space? What is outer space? What is it contained in? What is the purpose of human existence? That theory is Creation.  The big bang theory comes half way into the game.  A better question to ask is not how but who.  Who created the materials to have the “big bang” if not God?  The foundation of our reality is that we are on a sphere floating in the middle of nowhere and ONLY creation tells us why. How can we even begin to state that we know what’s going on when the foundation is a variable? To an extent we can grasp the objective facts that are built up upon our mysterious foundation, but would that not make the assumed “objective facts” a variable itself? To the atheist, is all this just a weird fluke?  How can one rationally denounce the only explanation for human justification and replace it with nothing?  Faith is having confidence in things we do not see.  We do not see the laws of logic, yet we have confidence in them.  We presuppose some type of faith in logical reasoning .  It’s as if Rand is saying, “if we can’t see it, then it’s not true” (naturalism), but we can’t see objectivism, so the law of non-contradictions win again.  Scripture tells us that,” The reality, however, is found in Christ.” (Colossians 2:17) Using the scripture, Norman Geisler gives words of encouragement to Christians by telling them, “Christianity is true.  That means that reality will always be on our side.”   Geisler further explains the mystery behind our universe:

Evolutionary scientists have told us that the universe either came from nothing by nothing or that it was always here… holding to such beliefs has a high cost for the scientist, for [it] violates a fundamental law of science: the law of causality.  [That view] requires that the scientist believe in events happening without a cause… Now [in regards to thermodynamics] if the overall amount of energy stays the same, but we are running out of usable energy, then what we started with was not an infinite amount.  You can’t run out of an infinite amount.  This means the universe is and always has been finite.  It could not have existed forever in the past and will not exist forever into the future.  So it must have had a beginning.

    Aristotle has always been a corner stone of Ayn Rand’s philosophy, despite her being an atheist.  Rand praised Aristotle’s work whenever she got a chance.  Rand said,  “Aristotle’s philosophy was the intellect’s Declaration of Independence. Aristotle, the father of logic, should be given the title of the world’s first intellectual, in the purest and noblest sense of that word. No matter what remnants of Platonism did exist in Aristotle’s system, his incomparable achievement lay in the fact that he defined the basic principles of a rational view of existence and of man’s consciousness: that there is only one reality, the one which man perceives—that it exists as an objective absolute.”   However, Geisler reminds us that Aristotle was a key player in Christian theology:

Since there is a universe, it must have been caused by something beyond itself.  It is based on the law of causality, which says that every limited thing is caused by something other than itself… Plato is the first thinker to have developed an argument based on causation.  Aristotle followed.

To Ayn Rand, “Faith, as such, is extremely detrimental to human life: it is the negation of reason.”    However, the religious never negates reason.  An Evangelical Christians have to use reason to survive their daily lives.  A Christian cannot put a loaded gun to his head and pray the bullet was manufactured wrong and doesn’t fire.  A Christian cannot stand in the middle of an interstate and pray cars don’t hit him.   Christians have faith; yet have to assert reason to get the ball rolling.  Christians lead by faith, but have reason.  Author Francis Collins explained, “faith is reason plus revelation, and the revelation part requires one to think with the spirit as well as the mind.”   Rand has faith in everything unseen, yet relied on (i.e. Laws of Logic, memory, etc) .  Objectivists also have said that to have faith and to pray is weakness.  Yet, praying could be equated to wishing or hoping for something to happen.  Would wishing for something be a sign of weakness as well?  Scripture teaches us to, “Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight. Do not be wise in your own eyes.” (Proverbs 3:5-7)  Geisler shows the relationship between reason and faith:

Reason cannot judge what is true about faith, and faith is not subject to reason nor provable by it.  The method for determining truth about this world don’t work in the other world.  Hence, science is right about scientific matters, and the Bible is right about spiritual matters.

    Andrew Bernstein, a leading objectivist philosopher, stated that to, “Jesus Christ… charitable kindness is the solution… in the way that most benefits society’s least productive individuals.”   However, Bernstein went astray when he said “in the way that most benefits society’s least productive individuals.”  There is nothing wrong with being charitable, and by being charitable the government would be less likely to become a totalitarian welfare state, which can be seen in the present state of the US, and other socialistic countries.  Even Ayn Rand said, “My views on charity are very simple… There is nothing wrong in helping other people.”   Charity is an act of love for fellow humans, and is the only “safety net” in laissez faire capitalism. “Remember this: Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows generously will also reap generously. Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” – 2 Corinthians 9:6-7

    Love is one of the greatest virtues on earth, and subsequently a key pillar in happiness.  Ayn Rand will have you believe that you should not love everyone indiscriminately, as Jesus Christ has advised.  She said, “The man who tells you that it is possible… to love those whom you appraise as worthless, is the man who tells you that… paper money is as valuable as gold…to love those who are worthy of it is self-interest; to love the unworthy is sacrifice.”    In different term, if you went to your favorite sporting event you would feel camaraderie and love for your team.  If you were to find out that one of the team members shoplifted, you would hate the sin, but love the sinner.  We are all descendents of Adam, and all equally deserving of love, but not the sin that is committed.  “And live a life of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.” – Ephesians 5:2

    To the objectivist, selfishness is one of the greatest virtues, and selflessness is to be a sacrificial animal.  Bernstein explains, “Egoism is the moral theory stating that an individual should be the beneficiary of his own actions.  It endorses self-interest, the pursuit of one’s own happiness… selflessness is any moral code that exhorts a man to place… God… above his own self-interest.”   Yet, Ayn Rand stated that she would have killed herself for her husbands’ salvation, placing his well being over hers for the sake of selfish pleasure.   Would it not be satisfactory to Rand if someone took selfish pleasure placing God above their own selfish ambitions?  Rand’s, at one time, protégé Nathaniel Branden describes the necessary requirements for selfishness, “(a) a hierarchy of values set by the standard of one’s self-interest, and (b) the refusal to sacrifice a higher value to a nonvalue.”   To the Christian, Christ is the highest value and would override less significant values.   A stab at Christianity and selflessness, Ayn Rand said, “Witch Doctor’s morality of human sacrifice… The relationship of reason and morality is reciprocal: the man who accepts the role of a sacrificial animal, will not achieve the self-confidence necessary to uphold the validity of his mind, will not achieve the self-esteem necessary to uphold the value of his person and to discover the moral premises that make man’s value possible.”   The basis of this is skewed, because a Christian is not a sacrificial animal. The initial thought of becoming Christian is a selfish thought. “I want to have eternal life with Jesus Christ!” or “I want to go to heaven.”   To get into heaven we have to go through Jesus Christ and there is a prescribed method to get there, which is an act of selflessness. Because Christians take selfish pleasure in knowing they’re saved, they will conduct charitable acts of kindness and be selfless, which will benefit them and strengthen their relationship with the creator.  “Don’t copy the behavior and customs of this world, but let God transform you into a new person by changing the way you think. Then you will learn to know God’s will for you, which is good and pleasing and perfect.” – Romans 12:2

    Evangelicalism is not seen as “rational thinking” nor involved with “honest work”, to the objectivist.  Bernstein defines rational thinking as, “employment of mind power to gain knowledge and then apply it to such positive, life-promoting activities.” And attributes honest work with “growing food” or “curing diseases.”   However, success, rational thinking, life-promoting activities, and honest work are subjective to each individual.  Money could be seen as success to someone, whereas more family time is success to another.  Playing golf could be seen as a life-promoting activity to someone, and reading literature to another.  Christianity prescribes a successful method to acquire access into heaven, and consequently betters people’s lives while on earth.  In regards to honest work, Bernstein brings up that Mother Theresas produces nothing.   Well, what do police officers produce?  They produce a safe means for productive members of society to continue producing.  Likewise, Mother Theresas produces the advancement of faith, which enhances humans’ time on Earth, and leads people to eternal life with the Father.  She also spread the Christian worldview, which if weren’t true no one could actually know anything at all .  Scripture tells us, “But my life is worth nothing to me unless I use it for finishing the work assigned me by the Lord Jesus—the work of telling others the Good News about the wonderful grace of God.” – Acts 20:24 (NLT)

    Objectivism asserts that the individuals should not have Biblical parameters to suppress independent thought.   Bernstein explains that, “the source of a man’s value is his independent thinking – and that to sacrifice his values is to thereby surrender his mind.”  However, Objectivists claim to be the most moral philosophy, and would reject independent thought on how to kill babies.  So the objectivists impose moral parameters on independent thought themselves.  Biblical parameters could be equated moral parameters.   When you die you will not be judged by your actions alone, but by your thoughts as well.  Trying to obey the Ten Commandments is not only moral, but also commanded of you by your creator.  Scripture reminds us to, “Be careful how you think; your life is shaped by your thoughts.” – Proverbs 4:28

    The claim made by Bernstein is that, “According to Christians, their God came to earth for the sole purpose of being tortured and murdered in order to provide a path to salvation for the sinners who choose to accept his sacrifice.  The example He thereby sets… is that… loss of one’s life in service of morally delinquent men is the highest ethical ideal.”   There are several obvious misconceptions here, which show the narrow mindset of atheists.  The most obvious erroneous belief is that life is being lost, when it is eternal life that is being gained.  Objectivists are looking at Christianity as if it were a philosophy, when it is historical fact, a commandment to obey, and a life style prescribed by God to live by.  The statement Bernstein makes here is obviously not completely accurate.  If it were, Christians would be lining up to give their lives to “morally delinquent” people to obtain the “highest ethical ideal”. “And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.  He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.”  - 1 John 5:11-12

    To the objectivist, virtue cannot be strived for if you believe the assertion that you are a sinner.    Though, to obey the Ten Commandments is to be moral, and to be a sinner is to be immoral.  Do objectivists not admit their mistakes?  Evangelical Christians admit their sins (immoral mistakes) to God, and God alone.  There is no one closer to God than you, so confessing to a Pastor is not needed.  “Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin.” – John 8:34

    According to Nathaniel Branden, “To sacrifice one’s happiness is to sacrifice one’s desires; to sacrifice one’s desires is to sacrifice one’s values; to sacrifice one’s values is to sacrifice one’s judgment; to sacrifice one’s judgment is to sacrifice one’s mind.”    The part of this that lacks legitimacy is, “to sacrifice one’s desires is to sacrifice one’s values.”  However, one’s values keep one’s desires in line.   If I’m stricken with road rage and desire to run a car off the road it is my values that override my desire.  If a Christian sacrifices a desire because Jesus commands of it, then they’re sacrificing the desire for a higher value in the hierarchy of values.  “But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” – Matthew 5:28

    Many objectivists argue that pride must be a necessity for self-esteem.  Bernstein points out, “Ayn Rand’s position on pride stands… religion is a primordial foe… Christianity, for example, damns pride as one of ‘the seven deadly sins.’”   Everyone, however, feels pride, in different ways.  When a Christian has done a good thing, such as turn someone to Christ, pride is felt toward God, for it is He who is to commend.  The Christian is merely the voice of God who warns people of the upcoming cliff dive into Hell, if people aren’t prepared.  Scripture tells us, “Do not deceive yourselves. If any one of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a "fool" so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness"; and again, "The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile. “  So then, no more boasting about men! All things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future—all are yours, and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God.” -     1 Corinthians 3:18-23

PART 2: EVIDENCE FOR CHRISTIANITY


SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE

    The scientific evidence for creation is too immense to include all aspects.  This is because evolutionist and creationist have the same evidence, but interpret the evidence differently due to the different worldviews.  When the creationist shows evidence for creation, the evolutionist inserts a rescuing devise, and vice-versa.  The argument should not be about evidence, but which worldview is correct?  Which worldview can account for the preconditions of intelligibility?  Some evidence for a 6,000 year old earth, as the Bible says (Genesis 5, 11; Matthew 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38), is:  If you were to believe that the earth is 3 million years old, given the population growth since the birth of Christ, there would be around 150,000 people per square inch; The oldest living things we have are dated no farther than around 4300 years ago (when Noah’s flood occurred); Genetic deficiencies of humans is on the raise.  Geneticists have found 1300 different genetic disorders, showing we were made perfectly and are going down hill; The Sahara Desert expands 4 miles per year, if the earth was billions of years old then the Sahara would have taken all of Africa; The sediment on the ocean floor is relatively small showing that there is only a few thousand years of accumulation; The rate of salt in the ocean is raising, showing at this rate the oceans would be much saltier today if the earth was in fact billions of years old; The oil pressure underground  would have been too intense to maintain for more than a few thousand years; The erosion rate of the continents shows that the erosion would  be at sea level in just 14,000,000 years; The earths rotation is getting slower, showing that if the earth was billions of years old the spin would have been massively slower; Comets only last thousands of years; Blue stars only last thousands of years;  The earths magnetic field declines 6 percent every 150 years; a Russian scientist showed recently that the sun doesn’t have a core like once thought.    Instead it’s still forming, and in young stages.  An entire library couldn’t hold all the evidence for a young earth, so I’m not going to attempt to here.  I would recommend the science web-site AnswersInGenenis.org (or the Creation Museum) founded by Ken Ham and his team of renowned PhD. scientists from Harvard and other secular colleges for in depth information on a young earth, to include carbon 14 dating, radiometric dating, geography, distant star light, dinosaurs, etc.

PHILOSOPHICAL EVIDENCE

    Humans naturally want to know the unexplainable.  Our minds will not rest until we have validated our existence.  Ronald H. Nash explains,” principle of sufficient reason is the belief ‘that there is some explanation for the existence of anything whatever, some reason why it should exist’… belief in principle of sufficient reason ‘seems to be almost a part of reason itself.’  There is something about the human mind that leaves us restless in the presence of something that we’re told is simply unexplainable.”   The question would then be: is the being that created us a contingent or a necessary being?  Nash defines them as,” a necessary being, if it exists, is the complement of a contingent being.  Since a contingent being is one whose nonexistence is possible, a necessary being is one whose nonexistence is impossible.”   British philosopher J. L. Mackie explains in greater detail:

Nothing occurs without a sufficient reason why it is so and not otherwise.  There must, then, be a sufficient reason for the world as a whole; a reason why something exists rather than nothing.  Each thing in the world is contingent, being casually determined by other things: it would occur if other things were otherwise.  The world as a whole, being a collection of such things, is therefore itself contingent.  The series of things and events, with their causes, with cause of those causes, and so on, may stretch back infinitely in time; but, if so, then however far back we go, or if we consider the series as a whole, what we have is still contingent and therefore requires a sufficient reason outside this series.  That is, there must be a sufficient reason for the world which is other than the world.  This will have to be a necessary being, which contains its own sufficient reason for existence.  Briefly, things must have a sufficient reason for their existence, and this must be found ultimately in a necessary being.  There must be something free from the disease of contingency, a disease which affects everything in the world and the world as a whole, even if it is infinite in past time.

    People who have had experiences with God can say with out a doubt that God does in-fact exist.  The same criteria is used to perceive a religious experience versus a non-religious experience, yet is met with more controversy.  The Bible portrays many examples of religious experiences, such as the vision Mary and Joseph had.  Hash reaffirms, “ people can know that God exists on the basis of their having a direct experience of God.  It is possible to know that God exists in much the same way I know that the black telephone on my desk exists.”  Philosopher William Rowe explains further in five steps:

1.    When subjects have an experience they take to be of x, it is rational to conclude that they really do experience x unless we have positive reasons to think their experience delusive.
2.    Experiences occur which seem to their subjects to be God.
3.    There are no reasons for thinking that all of most experiences which seem to their subjects to be of God are delusive.
4.    It is rational to believe that at least some experiences which seem to their subjects to be God really are experiences of God.
5.    Therefore, it is rational to believe that God exists.

        Nash points out that one of the most important parts in Christian thinking history is called Perfect Being Theology.  Whereas, “God is that being than which no greater being can be conceived.  Consider any candidate for the title God that you like… suppose we call the candidate A.  Now if you conceive of a being greater than A, it follows that A cannot be God… even though humans can never fully comprehend the essence of God… how, someone might ask, can I have an idea of God if I’m an atheist... it does remind us… humans are not creatures whose minds are empty of all knowledge of God.  Our minds are not blank tablets.  Since we approach the search for God already equipped with some implicit knowledge of God, we have some idea what we’re looking for.  As for how we can comprehend the incomprehensible, we can’t- at least comprehensively.”   Therefore, it is asinine to assume that we can comprehend our world in which we live, making the perfect being a rational thought provoked by reason.

        Truth can be used to show the existence of God.  We know truth exists, and is indisputable, eternal, mental, and superior to the human mind, therefore truth is God.   Truth is superior to the human mind in that it is not subjective to each individual, but objective.  Nash explains, “Even though beliefs vary from one person to another, truth itself cannot change.  Moreover, the human mind does not stand in judgment of truth; rather truth judges our reason… if truth and humans were equal, truth could not be eternal and immutable since the human mind is finite, mutable, and subject to error.  Therefore, truth must transcend human reason; truth must be superior to any (or all) human mind(s).  From this it follows that there must be a mind higher than the human mind in which truth resides… since truth is eternal and immutable, it must exist in an eternal Mind.  And since only God possesses these attributes, God must be truth. “    “Guide me in your truth and teach me, for you are God my Savior” – Psalm 25:5

    Only by unbiased reason will one come the conclusion that Jesus Christ is God.  God used the Incarnation of Jesus Christ to manifest himself among his creations.  When all the other alternatives are explored the only rational argument that persists is the Christian belief, and with the accumulative denouncing of the alternatives we find truth.  Scripture tells us, in John 20:31, “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”  In further detail Nash analyzes why other alternatives fall short of reason:

    How can we assess the rationality of the belief that Jesus Christ was God incarnated?  One perfectly sensible approach to this issue involves several steps.  The first step requires that one identify all the reasonable alternatives to the traditional Christian understanding of Jesus.  In the second step, one carefully analyzes those alternatives.  Such an analysis will bring one to an evaluation of the relative probability of each alternative vis-à-vis the Christian belief that Jesus was God incarnated.  Suppose we refer to the belief of incarnation as A and use the letters B, C, D, and so on to refer to alternative hypotheses… each individual argument-for shows that in any choice between A and the other disjunct of that argument, the falsity or likely falsity of the other disjunct entails truth of A, the Christian hypotheses.  Of course, no single argument of itself proves that A is true.  But when, after all these arguments are taken together, A emerges as the clear victor, it would seem that we’ve provided all the confirmation for A that any reasonable person could expect… most opponents of incarnation are willing to acknowledge that… (A) Either Jesus was God incarnated or (B) Jesus was merely a good human being… the view that Jesus was nothing more than a good man is in deep trouble… some attempts to argue that Jesus, the good man, never made the claims that are the source of such embarrassing to Unitarians.  But I’m afraid that won’t fly.  We now know that the Gospels were written within the lifetime of people who were eyewitnesses to the things Jesus said and did… but what about other alternatives?  If it doesn’t make sense to say Jesus was just a good man, surely there are other options open to us.  Unfortunately, the other alternatives appear to face even more insurmountable obstacles… it is hardly surprising, then, that so many people who have looked at this argument have concluded that the most sensible choice to make, given the alternatives, is to believe that Jesus Christ is God.  Such a decision is not a blind leap of irrational faith – an act made only by a suspension of their critical faculties.  It is a decision that makes perfectly good and rational sense to anyone whose own critical faculties are not under the control of naturalistic presuppositions.  If and when a person sees that Jesus Christ is God, some pretty important implications begin to follow.  For one thing, if Jesus Christ is God, then it follows that God exists… secondly, if Jesus Christ is God, his teachings are not guesses or mere human speculation; Jesus’ words are the Word of God… moreover, if Jesus Christ is God, we have more than a revelation from God in human language.  God has reveled himself… Our decision regarding the Incarnation and the deity of Christ turns out therefore to take place at the most important fork in our personal and intellectual quest for truth.  As I have tried to show, a decision for the Christian hypothesis is one in which we have reason on our side.

PSYCHOLOGICAL EVIDENCE

        Many skeptics have thought that perhaps Jesus was mentally ill, only claiming to be the Son of God.  However, during Lee Strobel’s interview with renowned psychologist Gary R. Collins, Jesus is clinically validated as actually being the Son of God.  According to Collins, “psychologists don’t just look at what a person says.  They’ll go much deeper than that.  They’ll look at a person’s emotions, because disturbed individuals frequently show inappropriate depression, or they might be vehemently angry, or perhaps they’re plagued with anxiety.  But look at Jesus: he never demonstrated inappropriate emotions.”   Even when Jesus got angry it was a “healthy kind of anger” according to Collins.  Dr. Collins’ detailed clinical critique of the psychology of Jesus Christ:

He was loving but didn’t let his compassion immobilize him; he didn’t have a bloated ego, even though he was often surrounded by adoring crowds; he maintained balance despite an often demanding lifestyle; he always knew what he was doing and where he was going; he cared deeply about people, including women and children, who weren’t seen as being important back then; he was able to accept people while not merely winking at their sins; he responded to individuals based on where they were at and what they uniquely needed… Jesus wasn’t just making outrageous claims about himself.  He was backing them up with miraculous acts of compassion like healing the blind… All in all, I just don’t see signs that Jesus suffered from any known mental illness… He was much healthier than anyone else I know – including me!   

 
        Some skeptics even go as far as saying Jesus was a hypnotist, and put everyone in some sort of spell or trance.    Entertaining this asinine claim, Collins points out that the problem with this assertion is hypnotizing a crowd of people at the same time.  People have different levels of susceptibility to hypnosis.  Collins shows several other loopholes:  “when Jesus multiplied the bread and fish, there were five thousand witnesses.  How could he have hypnotized them all”; “Jesus certainly couldn’t have hypnotized the Pharisees and Roman authorities, and they would have gladly produced his body if it had remained in the tomb”; “Jesus healing ten lepers in Luke 17.  They were instantaneously healed – and 100 percent.  That’s not explainable merely by hypnosis.”  

        Collins also supports the fact that Jesus performed exorcisms and casted out evil spirits.  He points out that the majority of society believes in angels or spiritual forces, so what’s so hard in grasping a person being possessed?  Although Collins doesn’t have clinical experiences with demonic possessions, his friends have.   Collins gives deeper insight to modern day demonic possessions in the field of psychology:

People who deny the existence of the supernatural will find some way, no matter how far-fetched, to explain a situation apart from the demonic.  They’ll keep giving medications, keep drugging the person, but he or she doesn’t get better.  There are cases that don’t respond to normal medical or psychiatric treatment… Our society today is caught up in ‘spirituality’.  That’s a term that can mean almost anything, but it does recognize the supernatural.  It’s very interesting what psychologists are believing in these days.  Some are into Eastern mystical stuff; some talk about power of shamans to influence people’s lives…whereas twenty-five years ago the suggestion of demonic activities would have been immediately dismissed, many psychologists are beginning to recognize that maybe there are more things in heaven and earth than our philosophies can account for.

BIBLICAL EVIDENCE

    Within the Bible itself resides many pieces of evidence substantiating the validity of the scriptures.  For instance, there can be found 100 prophecies in the Old Testament that Jesus fulfilled in the New Testament.     This is mathematically impossible for someone to accidentally fulfill all 100 prophecies, which Jesus did.   Lee Strobel shows the mathematical probability would be “one chance in a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion.”   A few of the prophecies Jesus Christ fulfilled are: entering Jerusalem on a donkey (Zechariah 9:9); Child is born and a son given who will be called Prince of Piece (Isaiah 9:6); The virgin will give birth to a child and he will be called Immanuel (Isaiah 7:14); Band of evil men will pierce my hands and feet (Psalm 22:16-18); Jesus born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2); Jesus betrayed by a friend (Psalm 41:9); Jesus betrayed for thirty pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:12-13); Jesus would raise from the dead on the third day (Genesis 22:4).  In Isaiah 52:13-15, 53:1-12 it is further prophesized:

“See, my servant will act wisely, he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted.  Just as there were many who appalled at him… so he will sprinkle many nations, and kings will shut their mouths because of him… he was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering… but he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us piece was upon him… and the Lord has laid on him the iniquities of us all… he was assigned a grave with the wicked… though he had done no violence… yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.  After the suffering of his soul he will see the light of life and be satisfied by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities…. For he bore the sins of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.”

    In the beginning of the book of Luke in the New Testament, which was written in 59 to 63 A.D., it starts off by assuring the reader that his word is accurate and his investigation was done carefully.   Luke 1:1-4 reads:
Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

    Jesus confirmed the authority of the Old Testament.  Throughout the New Testament we see Jesus reciting scripture and referred to it as the ‘Word of God’.  In Luke 16:17 we read, “It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of the letter of the Law to fail.”  Even during Jesus’ times of suffering He recites the Word of God.  When the devil tried to tempt Him (Matthew 4:4), and even during His crucifixion (Psalms 22:1, 31:5).

The eyewitness testimony of the resurrection of Jesus Christ is abundant.  In 1 Corinthians, written in 54 to 55 A.D., Apostle Paul relays that there were more than 500 eyewitnesses.  In today’s standard 500 eyewitnesses would be more than enough to be identified as objective fact. Further vindicating Paul’s claim, Nash reminds us that, “We now know that the Gospels were written within the lifetime of people who were eyewitnesses to the things Jesus said and did.”  1 Corinthians 15:3-8 reads:

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

    The fact that Jesus’ disciples were willing to suffer and die for their cause means they really believed what they saw and experienced.  After watching the miracles performed by Jesus and witnessing the resurrection of Christ, they were at piece with the thought of dying in order to spread the Word of God.  Lee Strobel shows:
They certainly regarded their beliefs to be true… They didn’t willfully lie about this.  Lairs make poor martyrs.  Second, the disciples didn’t just believe Jesus rose from the dead, but they knew for a fact whether he did.  They were on the scene and able to ascertain for sure that he had been resurrected.  So it was for the truth of the resurrection that they were willing to die… Paul himself says that he was converted to a follower of Jesus because he had personally encountered the resurrected Jesus… Then we have six ancient sources in addition to Paul – such as Luke, Clement of Rome, Polycarp, Tertullian, Dionysius of Corinth, and Origen – reporting that Paul was willing to suffer continuously and even die for his beliefs… He had nothing to gain in this world – except his own suffering and martyrdom – for making this up.

     Yet another story of a skeptic who was converted to Christianity due to a personal experience with the resurrected Jesus, was Jesus’ half brother James.  We know that Jesus had at least four half brothers (James, Simon, Judas, and Joseph) and four half sisters (names unknown).  Surprisingly enough, Jesus’ siblings had very little faith in Him.  Strobel shows:

Mark and John both report that none of Jesus’ brothers believed in him.  In fact, John’s passage is particularly interesting.  It suggests that his brothers had heard about his alleged miracles but didn’t believe the reports and were, in a sense, daring their brother to perform them n front of crowds… [How do we know this story is authentic?]… People are not going to invent a story that’s going to be embarrassing of potentially discrediting to them, and would be particularly humiliating for a first-century rabbi not to have his own family as his followers… At the crucifixion, to whom does Jesus entrust the care of his mother?  Not to one of his half-brothers, who would be the natural choice, but to John, who was a believer… Then, however, the pivotal moment occurs: the ancient creedal material in 1 Corinthians 15 tells us that the risen Jesus appeared to James.  Again, this is an extremely early account that has all the earmarks of reliability… As a result of his encounter with the risen Jesus, James doesn’t just become a Christian, but later he becomes leader of the Jerusalem Church.  We know this from Acts and Galatians.  Actually, James was so thoroughly convinced of Jesus’ Messiahship because of the resurrection that he died as a martyr, as both Christian and non-Christian sources attest.

    Many agnostics question the authenticity of the claim that Jesus’ body was missing from the tomb due to resurrection.  They assert that perhaps His body was taken out of the tomb by his disciples, or made up, etc.  Knowing the social parameters of the times back then one can see the problem with such claims.  One of the problem lays in the fact that women found the body missing.  Strobel digs deeper:

I think the empty tomb is very well supported if the historical data are assessed without preconceptions.  Basically, there are three strands of evidence: the Jerusalem factor, enemy attestation, and the testimony of women… [Jerusalem factor] refers to the fact that Jesus was publicly executed and buried in Jerusalem and then his resurrection was proclaimed in the city.  In fact, several weeks after the crucifixion, Peter declares to a crowd right there in Jerusalem: ‘God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact’…  What we do here is enemy attestation to the empty tomb.  In other words, what were the skeptics saying?  That the disciples stole the body.  This is not just reported by Matthew, but also by Justin Martyr and Tertullian.  Here’s the thing: Why would you say someone stole the body if it were still in the tomb?  This is a implicit admission that the tomb was empty…  In addition, we have the testimony of women that the tomb was empty.  Not only were women the first to discover the vacant grave, but they are mentioned in all four Gospels, whereas male witnesses appear only later and in two of them… In both first-century Jewish and Roman cultures, women were lowly esteemed and their testimony was considered questionable… if you were going to concoct a story in an effort to fool others, you would never in that day have hurt your own credibility by saying women discovered the empty tomb… this is another example of the criterion of embarrassment
The means in which we received the Bible is evidence in itself.  The Bible was written by 40 different authors, on 3 different continents, over a span of 2,000 years, using 3 different languages, and it all says the same message.  The Bible is truly the infallible Word of God!  Scripture tells us, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.  - 2 Timothy 3:16-17.

GEOGRAPHICAL EVIDENCE

    Rob Wyatt, who founded Wyatt Archeological Research or W.A.R., was among the first to discover the true location of Mt. Sinai: Jebel el Lawz, where God gave the Ten Commandments to Moses.  Wyatt and his sons snuck into Saudi Arabia illegally to explore the possible site when they were apprehended for espionage.  During their 75-day imprisonment, Wyatt talked with the guards and peeked some of their interests into exploring the mountain.  After returning to the States, Wyatt was contacted by Samran Al-Motairy, who talked him into returning to Saudi Arabia, but legally this time.   Upon doing so many discoveries were found: Phoenician-style granite column, top of the mountain is blackened, local populace referred to mountain as Moses' mountain, rectangular marble stone, altar with the Egyptian-style petroglyphs of cows and bulls, altar at the base of the mountain, corral, and The Golden Calf Altar.  However, the lack of support of the Saudi government has made further excavations almost impossible.   

    The Red Sea Crossing, mentioned in 1 Kings 9:26 says, ” King Solomon also built ships at Ezion Geber, which is near Elath in Edom, on the shore of the Red Sea.”  This piece of scripture informs us that Solomon had a port on the northern part of the Gulf of Aqaba.  In Hebrew Red Sea is translated to mean Yam Soph or sea of land’s end.  Using underwater 3D mapping of the Red Sea, Wyatt shows a swatch on the sea floor from Nuweiba across to the Saudi shore.   Scripturally, Bob Cornuke, with Bible Archeology Search & Exploration Institute (BASE), shows that the Bible passage “mean that the ‘sea of land’s end,’ at the tip of the Sinai Peninsula (near Nuweiba), was the site of the Israelites’ crossing. At the very least, the use of the same Hebrew term--both for the place where the Israelites crossed and for the Gulf of Aqaba at Elath--shows that the body of water in question is not an isolated lake, but includes the bulk of what we know as the Red Sea.”
    

Sodom and Gomorrah, a city destroyed by God due to their sinful nature, is another discovery Ron Wyatt had revealed.  The cities were discovered southeast of the Dead Sea in 1989.  The Bible tells us, “Then the LORD rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the LORD out of the heavens” Genesis 19:24. “If he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly” 2 Peter 2:6.   One of the amazing discoveries at the site was golf ball sized sulfur, which are not the result of any geo-thermal activity, and is the only placed on earth where 96% pure monoclinic sulfur in round balls can be found.  The remnants of the buildings show signs of extreme heat.  Wyatt explains, “The extremely high burning temperatures created a multi-shaded layering of ash that was formed by thermal ionization, caused by electrons repelling and attracting, creating a swirling effect in the remains.  The intense fire, which God rained down upon these cities, was so hot that it burned the limestone blocks that were used in the construction of the cities.  The ash there today is composed of Calcium Sulfate and Calcium Carbonate which are by-products of the limestone and sulfur burning.”   To vindicate the evidence found so far, the cities are visible on satellite photographs due to their ashy presence.

     Many authors in the Bible have accurately depicted the geography in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc.  Through mapping and studying of Biblical references many scriptures have been validated.  For instance, the author of Exodus had in depth knowledge of Egyptian geography.  McDowell shows in greater detail:

The writer of Exodus had thorough knowledge of Egyptian territory.  He knew the Egyptian papyrus (Ex. 2:3), the character of the Nile Bank, and well acquainted with the sandy desert (Ex. 2:12).  He knew of such places as Rameses, Succoth (Ex. 12:37), Etham (Ex. 13:20), and Pi-Hahiroth (Ex. 14:2).  The mention in Exodus 14:3 that “the wilderness had shut them in” shows an intimate knowledge of the geography of Egypt.  In fact, chapter 14 cannot be understood without knowledge of Egyptian geography.

HISTORICAL EVIDENCE

    The intense amount of historical evidence for Jesus Christ is overwhelming; in fact there is more evidence for Jesus than any other religion, according to Dr. Edwin M. Yamauchi, PH.D, with Miami University.  Dr. Yamauchi explains:

We have better historical documentation for Jesus than for the founder of any other ancient religion… for example, although the Gathas of Zoroaster, about 1000 B.C., are believed to be authentic, most of the Zoroastrian scriptures were not put into writing until after the third century A.D.  The most popular Parsi biography of Zoroaster was written in A.D. 1278…. The scriptures of Buddha, who lived in the sixth century B.C., were not put into writing until after the Christian era, and the first biography of Buddha was written in the first century A.D.   Although we have the saying of Muhammad, who lived from A.D.570 to 632, in the Koran, his biography was not written until 767 – more than a full century after his death… So the situation with Jesus is unique – and quite impressive in terms of how much we can learn about him aside from the New Testament.

    One thing that sets Jesus Christ of Nazareth apart from other religious figures and even other indubitable historical figures is that His biographies were written within a lifetime of Jesus’ life.  Making the case that there’s more evidence for Jesus than other historical figures, during an interview with Lee Strobel, Michael Licona, M.A., PH.D., the director of apologetics and interfaith evangelism for the Northern American Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, explains:

 We have written sources, such as Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John… written in the first century.  Even very liberal scholars will concede that we have four biographies written within seventy years of Jesus’ life that unambiguously report the disciples’ claims that Jesus rose from the dead…  Our two best sources on Alexander the Great, for instance, weren’t written until at least four hundred years after his life… As for Caesar Augustus, who is generally regarded as Rome’s greatest emperor, there are five chief sources used by historians to write a history of his adulthood: a very brief funeral inscription, a source written between fifty and a hundred years after he death, the three sources written between a hundred and two hundred years after he died.  So it’s really remarkable that in the case of Jesus, we have four biographies that even liberals agree were written within thirty-five to sixty-five years after his execution.

    Outside of historical Christian documents, there are many other ancient historians who wrote about Jesus.  One of which is Josephus, also known as Yosef Ben Matityahu and Titus Flavius Josephus, who was born in A.D. 37, and not even a Christian friendly person, wrote:

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who wrought surprising feats and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ.  When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing among us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not cease. On the third day he appeared to them restored to life. For the prophets of God had prophesied these and myriads of other marvelous things about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still up to now, not disappeared.

    Other ancient historians also mentioned Jesus in their writings, such as: Suetonius, Tacitus, Pliny, and Talmud.  Talmud wrote about Jesus the Nazarene, and thought Jesus did magic.  Talmud went on to say, “Rabbi Eleazar ben Dama was bitten by a snake. And Jacob of Kefar Sama came to heal him in the name of Jesus.”   During an interview with Professor M. Wilcox and Edwin M. Yamauchi, Strobel shows in his book The Case For Christ:

The Jewish traditional literature, although it mentions Jesus only quite sparingly (and must in any case be used with caution), support the gospel claim that he was a healer, and miracle-worker, even though it ascribes these activities to sorcery.  In addition, it preserves the recollection that he was a teacher, and had disciples (five of them), and that at least in the earlier Rabbinic period not all of the sages had finally made up their minds that he was a “heretic” or a “deceiver”… Put it all together – Josephus, the Roman historians and officials, the Jewish writings, the letters of Paul and the apostolic fathers – and you’ve got persuasive evidence that corroborates all the essentials found in the biographies of Jesus.  Even if you were to throw away every last copy of the gospels, you’d still have a picture of Jesus that’s extremely compelling – in fact, it’s a portrait of the unique Son of God.

    While many Christians feel the New Testament is 100% accurate, historians agree the accuracy is at least 99.5%.  In fact, the accuracy of the New Testament is greater than the ancient writings of Plato, Caesar, Aristotle, and Homer, and to dispute the New Testament would be to dispute these other writings as well.  There are presently 5, 686 Greek manuscripts for the New Testament, while most other ancient writings only have 2 – 650.  Being that Jesus was crucified 30 A.D., and the New Testament was written before end of the first century, then the New Testament was compiled in 70 years, while people that knew Jesus were still alive.  When you look at the other time spans between the other ancient writings you’ll find that none even come close.  The times span between the date the manuscript was written and the earliest copy for Suetonius is 800 years, and for Aristotle it is 1400 years.   Geisler reaffirms the authenticity of the New Testament:
We have 100 percent of the New Testament and we are sure about 99.5 of it… But if we can be this certain of the text of the New Testament and have an Old Testament text that has not changed in 2,000 years, then we don’t need the originals to know what they said.  The text of our modern Bibles is so close to the original that we can have every confidence that what t teaches is truth… we have a great deal of evidence that to show that the Bibles we have in our hands represent the original manuscript with a very high degree of accuracy… The Bible in your hands is God speaking to you.

    Skeptics often question the exactitude of scripture passed down by oral translation.  Skeptics have wondered how the same details could remain if it’s going from person to person, and usually when you pass a message down a line of people at the end the massage it is skewed.  This, however, is a “bad analogy” according to J.P. Moreland, a professor of Philosophy at Biola University.  Moreland points out that Rabbis in Jesus’ time saw oral tradition as sacred and holy.  He also shows studies that prove oral cultures can pass down stories generation to generation with every detail of original context.  Likewise, Geisler shows that, “Jewish tradition laid out every aspect of copying texts as if it were law, from the kind of materials to be uses to how many columns and lines were to be on a page… Any copy with just one mistake in it was destroyed.  This guarantees us that there has been no substantial change in the text of the Old Testament in the last 2,000 years and evidence that there was probably very little change before that.”   In Lee Strobel’s documentary “The Case For Christ” he shows the authenticity of oral tradition and the New Testament:
Young Rabbis were often forbidden to comment on a passage of scripture until they memorized it perfectly.  In fact, it was not uncommon for Rabbis of Jesus’ time to commit the entire torah to memory.

    The fact that Jesus was virgin born is hard for skeptics to wrap their heads around.  However, history shows that Jesus was often referred to as “Son of the Virgin” around His time.  Even those who attempted to slander Jesus and Mary admit Joseph and Mary weren’t together when Jesus was conceived.  McDowell explains:

In the Talmud, the titles “Ben Pandera (or ‘Ben Pantere’) and “Jeshu ben Pandera” are used of Jesus.  Many scholars say pandera is a play word, a travesty on the Greek word for virgin, which is parthenos.  The Jewish scholar Joseph Klausner says, “The Jews constantly heard that the Christians (the majority of whom spoke Greek from the earliest times) called Jesus by the name ‘Son of the Virgin’… and so, in mockery, they called him Ben ha-Pantera, i.e., ‘son of the leopard.’”

    Through the advancement of historical understanding, we find that Luke was a very accurate historian.  Luke had a great understanding of officials’ titles, as well as different cities.  Geisler explains the historical accuracy of Luke:

In addition to [Gallio, Lysanias, and Erastus], Luke gives correct titles for the following officials: “Thessalonica - ”politarchs,” Ephesus – “temple wardens,” Cyprus – “Proconsul,” Malta – “the first man of the island.”  Each of these have been confirmed by Roman usage.  All in all, Luke names thirty-two countries, fifty-four cities, and nine islands without making a single error.

Surprisingly enough, there is quite a bit of evidence for The Flood of Noah.   Many other cultures have told stories of a great flood, ancient writings have referenced the flood (Gilgamesh Epic Tablet 11), and fisheries have been discovered present day where no water ever existed, and not only inland, but at considerable heights up to 300 feet.  The Book of Genesis, which has been described as a ship’s log, details The Flood and Noah’s Ark.  Astonishingly enough, Noah’s sins are even mention, which shows the truth was sought out, when the faults of the great survivor is laid out for all to see.  McDowell explains further:

As with the creation accounts, the flood narrative in Genesis is more realistic and less mythological than other ancient versions, indicating its authenticity… Similar flood accounts are found all over the world.  The flood story is told by the Greeks, Hindus, the Chinese, the Mexicans, the Algonquins, and the Hawaiians.   One list of Sumerian kings treats the flood as a historical reference point.  After naming eight kings who lived extraordinary long lives (tens of thousands of years), this sentence interrupts the list: “[Then] the flood swept over [the earth] and when kingship was lowered [again] from Heaven, kingship was [first] in Kish.”   There are good reasons to believe that Genesis relates the real story… only in Genesis is the year of the flood given, as well as dates for the chronology relative to Noah’s life… there is geological evidence to support a worldwide flood.  Partial skeletons of recent animals are found in deep fisheries in several parts of the world, and the flood seems to be the best explanation for these.  

ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE

A magnificent archaeological discovery that supports creation was the discovery of The Ebla Tablets.  From 1964 to 1968 archaeologist Dr. Paolo Matthiae and epigrapher Dr. Giovanni Pettinato discovered the tablets during an excavation at Tell Mardikh, in northern Syria.  Although Ebla saw the apex of authority in 2300 B.C., with a populace of 260,000 people, it was destroyed in 2250 B.C.  16,000 tablets were found, and they were also dated 600 years before the Babylonian era, which proves that the theory of creation was not adapted from the mythical Babylonian theory.  McDowell shows the importance and authenticity of the find:

In Ancient Near East, the rule is that simple accounts or traditions give raise (by accretion and embellishment) to elaborate legends, but not in reverse.  So the evidence supports the view of Genesis was not myth made into history.  Rather, the extrabiblical accounts were history turned into myths… The creation tablet is strikingly close to Genesis, speaking of one being who created the heavens, moons, stars, and earth… The Ebla tablets reportedly contain references to names found in the book of Genesis, including Adam, Eve, and Noah… Tablets contain the names of cities Ur, Sodom, and Gomorrah, and such pagan gods mentioned in the Bible as Baal… and on one of the tablets the cities are listed in the exact same sequence as appears in Genesis 14… Ebla evidence supports the view that the earliest chapters of Genesis are history, not mythology… Importance [of] the discovery [is] the oldest known creation accounts outside the Bible.

Archaeological finds have validated much of the Old Testament.  In fact, the archaeological finds have been so vast it would take up too much room to include them in this paper.  To name just a few of them: Abraham’s ancestral home was excavated from Ur (modern day Iraq), Beni Hesan tomb painting depicts some of the armaments available to Abraham, The Law of Hammurapi found in Susa (modern day Iran) shows the laws very similar to the Old Testament laws (Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy), The Hittite Capitol in Boghazkoy (90 miles east of Ankara, Turkey) was found with numerous artifacts, Village of Haran (in modern day Turkey) found bearing the names of Abraham’s great grandfather & grandmother (Serug and Nahor), Stories of the Canaanite gods and goddesses found in Ugarit (Syria) showing many of the gods the Old Testament says not to worship, Megiddo (Armageddon) City of War found where army of Christ battles forces of Satan in end times (Revelation 16:16, 1 Kings 4:12, 9:15, 2 Kings 23:29, 2 Chronicles 35:22), City of Gezer that was a gift to King Solomon was found, Pool of Gibeon found at the location mentioned in the Bible, The House of David inscription found making it the only reference to King David outside the Bible, ruins of ancient Babylon found (56 miles south of Baghdad) to include the palace of King Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 4:29, 5, Jeremiah 25:12, 51, Isaiah 13:19-20), Silver amulets found in Jerusalem are the oldest (600 B.C.) scripture passages (Numbers 6:24-26) ever found, House of Yahweh Ostracon (writing on a piece of pottery) is the oldest mention to Solomon’s Temple out side the Bible, The Moabite Stone found near the Dead Sea is one of the earliest finds that mention biblical people (King Omri, son Ahab, Moab, King Mesha, house of David), and King Uzziah’s burial place found near a Russian Church on the Mt. of Olives reading, “Here, the bones of Uzziah, King of Judah, were brought.  Do not open.”

One of the greatest discoveries that validates the Old Testament was the discovery of Noah’s Ark (Genesis 8:13) in üzengili Turkey, which was previously called "Nasar", that happens to be the Babylonian name for “Noah's city”.  Heavy rains and three earthquakes made the discovery possible in 1948, which removed the loose dirt that had covered it for centuries.  The original discovery was given to a Kurdish shepherd boy named Reshit Sarihan, but Ron Wyatt was credited for conducting more in depth studies of the area.   Wyatt surveyed the site throughout the late 70’s and into the 90’s, and at one point was even taken hostage for 21 days in the mountains of Turkey.  In the mid-80’s Wyatt conducted sub-surface radar scans of the area and found the boat shaped structure continued beneath the surface, and even found “wrought iron.”  After mini-excavations, lab tests, measurements matching biblical descriptions, and the discovery of deck timber, a rivet, and a possible anchor, the object was found to be Noah’s Ark by the team of archaeologists and the Turkish government.

Arguably the most powerful discovery of all times was the discovery of the Ark of the Covenant.  The Ark is the carrier of the Ten Commandments, which had disappeared right before the Babylonian invasion (Deuteronomy 31:26).  In the Apocryphal Gospel (7 Apocryphal Gospels were canonized by the Roman Catholic Church into their Bible, but were rejected by other Christian denominations) 2 Maccabees 2:4-8 describes the prophet Jeremiah as secretly removing the Ark.  Despite the claims that the Ark of the Covenant is currently resting in a temple guarded by monks in Axum, Ethiopia, which was also validated by eye whiteness accounts and engravings by the Knights Templar  (the modern-day Freemason Cult was said to have derived from the Nights Templar), Ron Wyatt claimed to have seen the Ark in Zedekiah's Cave located in Israel.  Wyatt discovered the Ten Commandments, an ephod, 4 out of the 5 scrolls of the Books of Moses, and a sword.  Wyatt has visited the Ark several times and has written about the discoveries in his articles, however Wyatt has to be careful what he discloses due to the confidential agreements that Ron has made with the Israeli government.  A few artifacts Wyatt was allowed to put in an Israeli museum from the site was: Ivory pomegranate from top of a scepter, and an oil lamp from the chamber with drawings on it.

Perhaps the most reassuring discovery was that of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which reassured that the Bible translation is as accurate today as it was before Christ.  Discovered in 1947 by a Bedouin shepherd boy named Muhammad while he was looking for a lost goat.  Muhammad tossed a rock into a hole on the side of a cliff, located on the west side of the Dead Sea, and heard pottery shatter.  To the boys amazement it was ancient scrolls, in which pictures of them found their way to biblical archaeologist Dr. W. F. Albright of John Hopkins University.   The Dead Sea Scrolls are made up of 14,000 inscribed fragments, which were found among eleven caves, and allowed for the reconstruction of 500 books.  Until this discovery the oldest scripture found was dated around 900 A.D., so having these scrolls dating back to 125 B.C. helps validate our current Bible.  Among the scrolls, the complete Hebrew manuscript of Isaiah was found, and was just about word for word (three letter were different in one chapter) with no variation in meaning, even after a thousand years of translation.  Cave #1 revealed fragments from: Genesis, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Judges, Samuel, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Psalms, Enoch, Sayings of Moses, Book of Jubilee, Book of Noah, Testament of Levi, Tobit, Wisdom of Solomon, Daniel 2:4, Micah, and Zephaniah.  Cave #2 housed fragments from: Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Jeremiah, Job, Psalms, and Ruth.  Cave #4 showed: Samuel, Psalms, Isaiah, Nahum, and 100 copies of all Old Testament Bible books, excluding Esther.  Cave # 7 revealed portions of the New Testament.  And Cave #11 exposed portions of: Psalms, apocryphal Psalms, Leviticus, and Apocalypse of the New Jerusalem.

The copious amount of archaeological evidence for the New Testament is too vast to include in this paper.  However, here are just a few of the archaeological finds: The Church of the Nativity in the outskirts of Bethlehem is where Jesus was found to have been born, city of Bethsaida where Peter was born, Gergesa where Christ cast out demons was discovered in 1970, Pool of Bethesda where Jesus healed the paralyzed man (John 5:2), village of Bethany where Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead (John 11), The tomb of Joseph of Arimathea where Jesus was buried (Mark 15:45-46), In 2002 a limestone box was found in Israel with inscription “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus,” King Herod’s palaces found near Bethlehem, The Ten Cities Of Decapolis (Mark 5:20),  The Holy of Holies Temple found (Hebrews 6:19), The Belma at Corinth (Acts 18:12-17), Philippi where Paul preached in Europe, “God Fearers” inscribed by non-Jews who believed in God of Israel (Acts 13:16, 26, 43), Seven Churches of Revelation (Revelation 1:11), Book of John found dating back to 150 A.D, Oldest complete copy of New Testament dated back to 350 A.D., and Cana the site of the wedding feast where Jesus turned water into wine was found.

Luke, the author of The Book of Luke and The Book of Acts, showed that for many years our scholars didn’t have a clue regarding Lysanias.  Strobel shows that our scholars believed that Luke was wrong when he wrote Luke 3:1, “In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar—when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene.”  Our scholars asserted that, “Lysanias was not a tetrarch but rather the ruler of Chalcis half a century earlier.  If Luke can’t get the basic fact right nothing he has written can be trusted.”   John McRay, PH.D., a professor of New Testament and archaeology, reveals how Luke was right all along:    

An inscription was later found from the time of Tiberius, from A.D. 14 to 37, which names Lysanias as tetrarch in Abila near Damascus – just as Luke had written… It turned out there had been two government officials named Lysanias!  Once more Luke was shown to be exactly right.  

Yet another example of Luke’s historical accuracy can be found in Acts 17:6, “and not having found them, dragged Jason and certain brethren before the politarchs, crying out, These [men] that have set the world in tumult, are come here also.”  The word ‘politarchs’ is another word for ‘city officials’.  For many years historians thought that perhaps Luke had been mistaken, due to the lack of evidence for any such use of the word ‘politarchs’.  However, a first-century arch was found with the inscription, “In the time of the politarchs.”  The arch can now be seen in a museum in Britain.  Since the discovery of the arch 35 other inscriptions have been found referencing ‘politarchs’.

Further evidence for Christianity can be found by other non-biblical references to New Testament individuals, such as Pontius Pilate.  Antonio Frova, an Italian archaeologist, discovered a inscribed stone slab in 1961 at Caesarea Maritima.  The slab read, “Tiberium, Pontius Pilate, Perfect of Judea.”  This is the oldest archaeological reference to Pontius Pilate and his title out side the Bible.

PART 3: WHY OBJECTIVISM NEEDS CHRISTIANITY

    Now that I have shown the contradictions in the philosophy of objectivism and evidence for Christianity, it isn’t hard to figure out why objectivism desperately needs Christ.  I have even shown that we have more evidence for Jesus than Ayn Rand’s beloved Aristotle.  

    So far this paper has been somewhat “evidence-first” in nature .  I’ve been showing evidence that you will interpret in your own worldview.  Science isn’t “smooth”.  You always have to start with a presupposition as to interpret the evidence, and depending on your worldview will depend what assumptions you make.  The evolutionist and creationist have the same evidence, but different “hardware” of interpretation.  In a debate we would throw the same evidence at each other, yet come to different conclusions due to different worldviews.    When you examine the different worldviews you find that the Biblical worldview is the correct worldview, as PhD. Astrophysicist Dr. Jason Lisle with the Creation Museum will explain:

In order for a worldview to be rationally defendable, it must be internally consistent… A rational worldview must provide the preconditions of intelligibility… The preconditions of intelligibility are things most people take for granted… we take for granted that our senses and memory are basically reliable, and that there are laws of logic… in a biblical creation worldview, these preconditions make sense; they are perfectly compatible with the Bible… a logically correct worldview must provide these preconditions of intelligibility, because without them we could not know anything about the universe… only in the biblical creation worldview do the preconditions of intelligibility make sense… morality is a difficult problem  for the evolutionary worldview…evolutionists have no logical reason to believe in any sort of moral imperative within their own worldview.  In the evolutionary worldview, right and wrong can be nothing more than electro-chemical reactions in the brain… by attempting to be moral, therefore, the evolutionist is being irrational, for he must borrow biblical concepts that are contrary to his worldview.

    Objectivism focuses on objective facts that can be backed up with evidence.  Then how can a person like Plato, or Caesar, or Aristotle be looked at as factual when more evidence exists for Jesus, and Ayn Rand looks at Christ as being mythological?   I feel that Colossians 2:8 really speaks about Ayn Rand’s philosophy of objectivism, “Don’t let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual principles of this world, rather than from Christ.”  

    Now that we can reasonably say that the evidence is on the side of Christianity, it is time to look at what Christ is all about.  Since there is a Heaven we know there is a Hell.  Seeing as the better place to go is Heaven you should ask yourself how many Commandments you have broken.  Of course no one is sinless (except Jesus), but God forgives (Luke 13:5); therefore it is not too late to turn toward Christ, and be born again (John 3:3,7; 1 Peter 1:3, 23 NLT).       

Objectivism and Christianity aren’t too far from each other, so becoming Christians won’t be a huge change.  The end goal of objectivism is laissez faire capitalism.  Likewise, Kelly Boggs, a columnist for the Baptist Press, wrote an article entitled “Capitalism’s Biblical Principles”, where Boggs concludes that capitalism is “more Christian.”    The Bible also defends the ownership of weapons (Luke 22:36), and is against the welfare system (Deuteronomy 15:8; Matthew 10:8, 20:1; 2 Corinthians 9:6-7; Acts 17:25).

    There is also a sixty-page paper floating around on the Internet trying to make the case that Jesus was an anarchist.  The paper, written by James Redford, uses the following examples to try to make the case: Jesus was born and died in defiance to the government; Jesus took on vigilantism when He cleansed the temple; Jesus considered tax collectors as sinners (Luke 3:12-14); Jesus defends private property rights; many disciples act in defiance to the government; Christians had to evade governments; Jesus only said to give Caesar the denari, that has Caesar’s face on it and was the currency required for taxes, which he did so to avoid being hauled away at that time, so the prophecy would not be broken;  Jesus said, ”Woe to you also, lawyers! For you load men with burdens hard to bear.” (Luke 11:46,52); Jesus said to avoid judges (Matthew 5:25,26, Luke 12:57-59, James 2:6), Jesus warns about using freedom as a disguise to do evil (1 Peter 2:16); Bible supports legalization of drugs  (Mark 7:15, 21-23, Romans 14:14); Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament laws, so we don’t have to follow them; Jesus will overthrow all governments of the world and kill kings in his second coming (Psalms 110:5-6, Isaiah 24:21-22, Rev. 16:14; 17:2; 18:3,9; 19:19); 1Corinthians 15:23,24 says: “But each one in his own order: Christ the first fruits, afterward those who are Christ's at His coming. Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power.”; Jesus makes counterfeit money for taxes (Matthew 17:27); God’s kingdom shall be volunteers (Psalm 110:3); and God warns about having kings rule over you (Deuteronomy 17:15, 1 Samuel 12:1-3).   As interesting as this is, the title ‘anarchist’ is not accurate (Romans 13:6-7, Jude v.8, 1 Peter 2:13-17, 1 John 3:4, Hebrews 13:17, Titus 3:1).  Perhaps minarchist, or limited government (i.e. capitalism, libertarianism) would be more appropriate?

    I’ve talked with numerous objectivists that dabble with conspiracy theories.  For the sake of dotting the I’s and crossing the T’s, I will cover all the bases and entertain this thought.  The Georgia Guidestones, in Elbert County, Georgia, stands what is called the ‘American Stonehenge’.  The stones were constructed under mysterious conditions.  A well-dressed man using a fake name had the stones constructed in 1979.  Engraved in the stones is what is said to be the ’10 commandments of the New World Order’.  America became aware of the New World order by the numerous times President George Bush Senior described the New World Order in his speeches.  In these ‘commandments’ we find written, in eight different languages, to reduce the population by nine-tenths, and to abolish Judeo-Christian beliefs.   If this were true, then being that the ‘New World Order’ wants to abolish Christianity, would it not validate the authenticity of Christianity?

    Taking in all that is shown, the objectivist needs Christ in his/hers life.  For Ayn Rand and other objectivists, atheistism comes from a subjective bias.  Rand described a time in her life when she looked into Christianity, but her description didn’t include her reading the Bible or other Christian literature.  How can one have an opinion when only one side is looked into?  You have to know both sides before you can have an opinion.   I find it ironic that she had to stand on a biblical worldview to have reason and logic, only to attack the very “ledge” she was standing on.   You absolutely cannot know anything if the biblical worldview isn’t correct .  Rand’s worldview cannot account for the preconditions if intelligibility, therefore her worldview is arbitrary, and without basis.   I shutter to think where she is now, or the look on her face when she met Jesus.  I can only hope she was saved before she passed away!  I recommend heeding the warning from Luke: "Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man." (Luke 21:36)

PART 4: HOW TO INTEGRATE CHRISTIANITY WITH OBJECTIVISM

    Many objectivists have claimed to have had an ‘awakening’ when they became objectivists.  They claim to have looked around for the first time and realized that everyone was doing the wrong things and were lost.  Well, the 2nd ‘awakening’ will happen when the objectivists becoming a Christian, and realizing that a lot of people are sprinting toward a cliff (Hell) getting ready to hurl themselves off of it, and you feel compelled to warn them.  

    Reason will not be abolished nor overridden, just added to.  Faith in God will keep the Christian objectivist on the right track.  As mentioned earlier, Geisler shows that reason and faith are different entities that work together. Besides reason would not be possible if the biblical worldview was not correct.

    To be a Christian the Bible tells us to: accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior (John 20:31), ask for forgiveness for sins (Daniel 9:20, Numbers 14:18), turn away from sin (Ezekiel 18:17), memorize scripture (Psalms 1:2, 119:11; Joshua 1:8; Ephesians 6:17), bring others to Christ (1 Corinthians 9:16, Romans 1:15-16), go to church (Hebrews 10:24-25; 1 Timothy 4:13; Acts 2:42-47; Matthew 18:20; Romans 1:14), be born again (John 3:3, 1 Peter 1:3, 23 NLT), and pray (1 Thessalonians 5:17).  The Bible also tells us that by doing these things we will find eternal life (John 3:16), for, as believers, we are a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17), and are not of this world (John 15:18-19), nor will we see death (John 8:51).  Salvation is achieved only by faith, never by your own works (Galatians 3:3-5, 9-12; Romans 9:30-32), and praying should be done in the name of Jesus, not Mary or Saints (Ephesians 5:20; 1 Timothy 2:5; Hebrews 7:25).  Now that we’ve established that our existence isn’t a freak accident, it’s time to stop ignoring our creator, and live by His Word!

    To conclude: seeing that objectivism is riddled with contradictions, Christianity has a substantial amount of evidence, and how to live as a Christian; we are able to formulate the new philosophy of ‘Evangelical Objectivism’ through a biblical worldview.  Remembering Kirk Cameron said that atheist aren’t intellectual, because they can’t prove an absolute, we can see Ayn Rand was operating in an ‘intellect free-zone’.   Even Albert Einstein, also know as the ‘king of physics’, believed in God, saying, "The fanatical atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who – in their grudge against traditional religion as the 'opium of the masses' – cannot hear the music of the spheres."  When Einstein was asked if he accepted the historical existence of Jesus, he replied, "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus.  His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."  To still be an atheist, seeing the copious amount of evidence for creation, means that you are subjectively closing off your little objective heart.   The purpose of this paper was not to show every detail and every piece of evidence.  I merely scratched the surface, so my hope is that I’ve ignited an interest in you to learn more, and to show other resources to further your walk toward Christianity.  I’m going to end like Robert Jastrom, founder and former director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, in his book God and the Astronomers closed his book, by saying:

For the scientist who lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream.  He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.

The mixed economy of the United States is riddled with downfalls. Like philosopher Ayn Rand says, “Mixed economies only go one way. Either more capitalist or more statist.” Too often throughout history it is the good aspects of our society, the capitalist aspects, which are blamed for our countries anguish. Like our economy, our health care is currently mixed with the free market and government controls. When health care costs raise beyond affordable range the people misguidedly look toward the government for help, and blame the free market. Americans will often implore for more regulations, expanding of licensing requirements, and universal health care, by asking the government to commit theft by taxation to fund their “right” to health care.

Medicare, Medicaid, and HMO’s represent some of the government controls that are embedded into our current health care system. Medicare and Medicaid are cost intensive to the taxpayers, result in loss of freedoms for patients, render substandard care and fail to show any validity for the need of such programs. In Michael Cannon’s book Healthy Competition, it is conservatively estimated that $405 billon of our tax money goes into funding these tasteless programs each year. Michael Cannon also points out the immense loss in patients’ freedoms. Not only are the amounts of choices a patient is allowed, in regards to choosing health plans and doctors, restricted, but also if a senior opts out of Medicare they forfeit their past and future Social Security benefits. A classic example of just how substandard health care become when government gets involved is the fact that Medicare was based off the 1965 Blue Cross/ Blue Shield insurance coverage. When private insurance companies decided to cover outpatient prescription drug coverage in the 1970’s, Medicare needed an act of Congress to allow such coverage, which was passed in 2003. The evidence for the need of these government controls in health care shows the exact opposite. Historian David Beito points out that in the 1920’s the health insurance arena was dominated by mutual aid societies, which were societies that would finance medical care. According to Sue Blevins, president of the Institute for Health Freedom, “In the 10 years before Medicare’s enactment, the number of retirees with health insurance nearly doubled.” OBGYN Dr. Ron Paul reminds us that, “Before 1965 physicians and hospitals strove to charge the minimums; because payment now comes so largely from third parties, they instead charge the maximums.” Dr. Paul goes on to point out that, “HMOs have become corporate, bureaucratic middlemen in our health care system, driving up cost while degrading the quality of health care.”

One of the biggest travesties to happen to health care is the development of the Food and Drug Administration. The FDA takes unreasonably long to certify new drugs, at times passes dangerous drugs into the medical field, encourages people to be less self-reliant, and probably increases morbidity. It now takes well over 15 year to certify new drugs that could potentially save lives. By the 1970’s economist Steven Wiggins projected the increasing costs of regulations would reduce the amount of new drugs by 60% a year. Market based certification certifies “off label” use of drugs at least 2 ½ years before the FDA. Dale H. Gieringer with the CATO Institute shows that 10,000 lives are saved by FDA regulations, while up to 120,000 lives are lost due to FDA regulations. Cannon illustrates the different types of errors made by the FDA. Type I errors occur when the FDA passes a dangerous drug, which causes them to be directly ridiculed. Type II errors occur when the FDA takes too long to pass a new drug causing people to suffer. Type II are less known to the public, and consequently is the more preferred by the FDA to avoid type I errors.

Government monopolies, regulation and licensing requirements cause wastefulness, needless deaths, and reduce quantity of doctors. David Bergland describes in his book Libertarianism In One Lesson that in the early 20th century the American Medical Association lobbied and got the governments backing to monopolize on medical schools. The government declared that any medical school that was not associated with the AMA was not allowed. The results did nothing for the quality, yet hindered the quantity of doctors. Government regulations act as a hidden tax. Christopher Conover of Duke University approximates that regulations provide $170.1 billion of benefits, however costs $339.2 billion. The result is $169.1 billion in a hidden tax. The Institute for Medicine estimated around 18,200 people die annually due to lack of health insurance. However, Conover estimates 22, 200 people die due to government regulations. Currently the government restricts payment for organs to be above $0 resulting in fewer donors and more deaths. Another dangerous aspect of government controls is licensing requirements. Conover estimates $6.5 billion is the cost Americans have to bear each year due to medical licensing requirements. Milton Friedman wrote, “I am myself persuaded that licensure has reduced both the quantity and the quality of medical practice… that it has forced the public to pay more for less satisfactory medical services, and that it has retarded technological development both in medicine itself and in the organization of medical practice.”

Universal or socialist health care is the complete opposite direction our health care system needs to go. It is due to government involvement that our current system is in disarray and by furthering the involvement of the government we would deepen the travesty of our current system. The fact is that the US is more socialized than other nations that claim to be socialized. Over ¼ of Americas health care system is currently financed by the government. A glimpse of universal health care can be seen in our current VA hospital quagmire. The VA has a terrible reputation for substandard and prolonged health care. Some have said it’s like they haven’t any health care at all. You can also see socialized medicine in other countries. At any given time 1 million British are waiting to be admitted into the hospital. In Sweden heart surgery is a 15 – 25 weeks wait. Canadians have to wait an average 17 ½ weeks for care. Central planning by the government on what Americans need is impossible. Technology and the needs of consumers change to swiftly, and the only tool up for the job is the free market. The price tag attached to universal health care is probably the most shocking aspect of universal care. The average Canadian family pays 47% of its income in taxes largely due to universal health care. Dennis Kucinich estimated universal heath care would cost $6 trillion in the US. Another aspect to look at is when people don’t pay for health care, they tend to overuse it, buy name brand prescription drugs rather than generic, and take less care of themselves. If everyone felt the cost burden of health care people would be less inclined to smoke and eat fast food. The common fallacy is that people have a “right” to health care. The fact is your rights end where someone else’s begins. You cannot have a “right” if it infringes in someone else.

The free market is the best tool to bring quality health care to the most people without being immoral. Cannon reveals the best problem-solving tool is competition. Competition drives down costs while increasing quality. Doctors would operate in more transparency and maintain their pristine reputation to gain the most consumers. The consumers would be more self-reliant in deciding which doctor to see. In areas of our current health system that allow for more competition, such as over counter drugs, we see better prices compared to other countries. The type of competition we often see is on the wrong level. Rather than having providers competing for patients, we see hospitals and health plans competing for bureaucracies that provide care for the patients. Technology also increases on the free market. Likewise, when government controls society technology actually regresses. This is the reason that the US has 65% more CT scanners, 4 times as many lithotriptors, and 3 times as many MRI scanners than Canada. An attempt for the free market to break through the government controls in this country was the sprouting up of specialty hospitals. Specialty hospitals could focus on specific areas and afford to over pay their staff. However, Congress stepped in and impeded the growth of the specialty hospitals after the larger hospitals lobbied Congress. A helpful proponent of the free market system is the health savings accounts or HSA. The HSA allows people to save for future major medical expenses. The only current problem with the HSA is that government has put extensive control measures limiting freedoms and choices. These control measures hinder the original intend if HSA’s.

Our current system is flawed due to government controls, and the only remedy is the free market. A free market health care system would drive down costs and make health care more affordable for more people without sacrificing the quality. For those people who can’t afford healthcare, you’d have charitable hospitals and church based hospitals that would operate for free. Under this system prescription drugs would also be legalized and sold over the counter. This way you wouldn’t have to go to the doctor just to get a prescription filled. By allowing people to take charge of their own lives and make their own decision, more people will prosper. Universal heath care isn’t free. It brings about substandard quality, wastefulness, and immorality. It would be wise to take heed from the warnings given by Ayn Rand and Ludwig von Mises, "If man speculates on what "society" should do for the poor, he accepts thereby the collectivist premise that men's lives belong to society and that he, as a member of society, has the right to dispose of them, to set their goals or to plan the "distribution" of their efforts." – Ayn Rand. “A society that chooses between capitalism and socialism does not choose between two social systems; it chooses between social cooperation and the disintegration of society. Socialism: is not an alternative to capitalism; it is an alternative to any system under which men can live as human beings.” – Ludwig von Mises

For some reason politics became as private as getting undressed, which has caused our country get off track. When you read quotes, speeches or books by our founding fathers it’s easy to see we’ve lost our way. If Thomas Jefferson ran for president today he would more than likely meet the same fate as Congressman Ron Paul’s presidential run. The American people have forgotten the wishes of our founders and what capitalism really means. Socialism is a proven failed system, but because no one talks politics it is overcoming capitalism in America.

Politics need to become more of a talking point than sports. Being politically healthy means you talk politics at home, work, church, school, and even while hanging out with friends. If someone has a different point of view, then have a friendly debate until all knowledge on the subject is exhausted.