The Mathematical Proof for Christianity Is Irrefutable

Christian Post ^ | 05/29/2013 | Dan Delzell

[SeekAndFind]

It is impossible that Christianity is not God's revelation of truth to man. Simply impossible. The math proves it beyond question. It doesn't take faith to believe that one plus one equals two, and it doesn't take faith to identify the religion which has mathematical certainty in its corner.

God didn't have to give us mathematical proof of His existence, but He did it anyway. God didn't have to give us proof of Christianity, but He chose to do so. And God didn't have to give us proof of His love for us, but that is exactly what He did. The proof is irrefutable.

I live in Nebraska where I serve as a pastor. Imagine someone covering this entire state in silver dollars 6 feet deep. Then mark one coin and bury it anywhere across the state. Next, blindfold a man and have him choose one coin. The odds that he would choose the marked coin are the same odds of getting 8 prophecies all fulfilled in one man. God gave us about 300 fulfilled prophecies in the Person of Jesus Christ.

Here are 8 of those 300 prophecies:

(1) The Messiah will be born in Bethlehem. (Micah 5:2; Matthew 2:1; Luke 2:4-6) (2) The Messiah will be a descendant of Jacob. (Numbers 24:17; Matthew 1:2) (3) The Messiah will enter Jerusalem as a king riding on a donkey. (Zechariah 9:9; Mark 11:4-11) (4) The Messiah will be betrayed by a friend. (Psalm 41:9; Luke 22:47,48) (5) The Messiah's betrayal money will be used to purchase a potter's field. (Zechariah 11:13; Matthew 27:9,10) (6) The Messiah will be spat upon and struck. (Isaiah 50:6; Matthew 26:67) (7) The Messiah's hands and feet will be pierced. (Psalm 22:16; John 20:25-27) (8) Soldiers will gamble for the Messiah's garments. (Psalm 22:18; Luke 23:34)

There is no way one man could have fulfilled all 8 of these prophecies unless God was making it happen. Who else controls history? Who else could give us such irrefutable proof for Christianity? The odds are one in one hundred quadrillion, or 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000.

This mathematical proof was calculated by Professor Peter Stoner. He was chairman of the mathematics and astronomy departments at Pasadena City College until 1953. He then went to Westmont College in Santa Barbara, California, where he served as chairman of the science division.

You don't have to be a mathematics professor to see that this evidence is irrefutable. No one would pick the marked coin under those conditions. No one but God could have given us these biblical prophecies, and then brought them to fulfillment right before our eyes. It is impossible that Christianity is false. The math proves it, and the Man behind the math rose from the dead, just as it had been foretold.

It doesn't take faith to see how the Bible could only have come from God. It does take faith, however, to accept Jesus as your Savior and to believe in God's promise of eternal life. God has done everything to make this way open to you. If you choose to reject it in spite of the overwhelming evidence and in spite of God's love for you, you will be walking away from an open door to paradise.

Some people won't accept proof for the Bible even when it is irrefutable. Man, by nature, is not very good at accepting the evidence which God has laid out for us. The bias against God and against the supernatural is so strong that even irrefutable evidence is viewed with suspicion and doubt.

Never mind the fact that the prophecy about Christ's crucifixion was given hundreds of years before that type of execution was being used. And who but God could have identified Bethlehem 700 years before Christ was born? You really have to have a closed mind to miss the supernatural quality of the Bible, especially when you really start to dig into it. The historical and mathematical conclusions all point to God's plan of salvation through His Son.

Here is an idea. Try looking at this mathematical proof as if you didn't have any bias against God and against the supernatural, and see how that approach works for you. The end result of your honest evaluation may shock you, and then it will change you from the inside out. That is what happens whenever man embraces the truth as revealed to us in Scripture.

One plus one equals two. Old Testament history plus New Testament fulfillment equals irrefutable proof. This is why Christianity is not a "blind faith." It is a faith built on immovable facts. Are you ready to have that firm foundation in your life? Or do you plan to finish out your time here on this planet with nothing more than an unreasonable bias against God?

No one ever said man is going to always be reasonable. That's the tragic thing about the human soul ever since sin entered the world. There are some biases which go even deeper than common sense and mathematical certainty. That's what our sin does to us, and this is why you and I need the Messiah. We need Jesus because we are sinners. We have broken God's law. And God has been gracious enough not only to give us His only Son, but even to give us conclusive proof for Christianity.

So it's no surprise to find that every other belief system and every other religion lacks even a hint of mathematical evidence, let alone irrefutable proof. The followers of those religions are no less sincere, but the foundation for their faith is not based on irrefutable evidence. Where is your faith based today? Do you have a bias against God which is keeping you from considering the mathematical certainty which supports Christianity?

If so, God still loves you, and there is still hope. Many former unbelievers who are now Christians know just what you are going through. This is a critical time for you to consider your sin against God, and your need for His forgiveness.

But don't take my word for it. Instead, accept the irrefutable proof which our Creator has kindly given us in the Old and New Testaments. He loves you far more than you can fathom. He proved it at the cross, and through the fulfilled prophecies. You would have to be blind to miss it.

Dan Delzell is the pastor of Wellspring Lutheran Church in Papillion, Neb. He is a regular contributor to The Christian Post.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“RE: I would guess their aversion to Christ comes from the deep-seated Jewish belief that the messiah would be a warrior king who would destroy Israel’s enemies.

So, how do they interpret Isaiah 53 - THE SUFFERING SERVANT?”

---

Depends on the person, I’ve heard various approaches from Jews on Isaiah 53. The last one was that the ‘suffering servant’ is Israel itself, though there are obvious problems once you examine the actual words of the chapter.

[CottShop]

[[The secularists will argue that science and math have evolved since then ;-)]]

I know it, to them there are no absolutes- (not even our inalienable rights and constitution)- If I’m not mistaken though- 2+2 still = 4 even after all these years- Math being one of hte main stay constants we’ve had over they ears, and still the progressives won’t accept hte math because it sheds a very bad light on their faith in evolution

[MrB]

There is a disconnect between those who assume, based on the Creation as revealed in Genesis, that all the information necessary for the adaptation of species to the environment in which they live was present at the time of creation, and in the animals that were on the Ark,

versus those who assume that this information was added to the species through mutation over millions of years.

The latter belief is circular with no basis other than itself.

[Prov1322]

Yes, yes I do...!

Thanks for the PING...

[CottShop]

Adaption is a built in reality- natural selection is a biological reality- Science is finding out, more andm ore, that what they first thought was ‘new information’ arising in species was not new information at all, but a rekindlign of species specific information already present, but lyign dormant

The case of the ‘Nylon Eating Bacteria’ was heralded as a ‘modern exampel of thje rise of new “NON SPECIES SPECIFIC INFORMATION” (Gonna apply for a TM on this term) in a species but later it was discovered that the bacteria always had the ability to digest the materail, even though there was no nylon way back when, but the bacterai LOST the ability (but not the information) to digest the nylon- The bacteria had the special info to digest small circular protiens but had lsot the ability (but not the information) at soem point in it’s existence- A mutation comes along and resparks the info that was already present- the mutation did NOT CREATE the information- it only sparked the info already present- Mutations can ONLY work on info already present, it can NOT CREATE info out of thin air which woudl be absolutely necessary for the evoltuion of hte many species kinds aroudn today-

the ONLY iother possibility woudl be a scenario of lateral gene transference between DISSIMILIAR kinds- and we know from science that each species kind has several built in layers of defense to protect agaisnt this kind of gene transference which makes it an impossibility to even concider- once again

The impossibilites facing mega evolution hypothesis are far too great for nature to overcome- nature owudl have to be a SUPERNATURALLY INTELLIGENT DESIGNER and wouydl have to be capable of breakign it’;s own laws, not just in a few instances, but billions, perhaps trillions of times, in order to brign about mega-evolution- Marcopevolution is biologically impossible, chemically impossible, mathematically impossible, and to top it all off, it violates the second law of thermodynamics (soem argue that macro-evolution ‘coudl happen IF’ life evolved in an open system/universe [Apparently where the second law of thermodynamics is no logner valid accordign ot evoltuionists, but it’s been proven that in such an environment, it would make hte situation of evolution even more impossible]- but the FACT is that an open system woudl be even worse, not better, for evolution)

[CottShop]

I knew I had read soemwhere abotu a chicago science meeting- here’s a little blurb from trueorigins site (the whole article is a fascinating one in which Tim Wallace destroys the concept that an ‘becausel ife is an open system, evoltuion ‘coudl be possible’ argument which evolutionists like to claim (usually while gleefully stating ‘Creationists and ID adherents are ignroant of how the Second law of Thermodynamics works ‘in an open system’’)

[[“The central question of the Chicago conference was whether the mechanisms underlying microevolution can be extrapolated to explain the phenomena of macroevolution. At the risk of doing violence to the positions of some of the people at the meeting, the answer can be given as a clear No.”
[As reported by Roger Lewin (evolutionist), “Evolutionary theory under fire,” Science, vol. 210 (4472), 21 November 1980, p. 883]]]

http://www.trueorigin.org/isakrbtl.asp#thermo

Evoltuionists liek to extrapolate a hypothesis into an ‘ipso facto’ statement- but wallace does an excellent job here of showing how silly the evoltutionist’s idea that an open system ‘which adds energy’ and which ‘could result in a lower law of entropy’ somehow negates the second law of thermodynamics, thereby making ‘evolution a possibility’ really is- (Let’s not forget, that even after facing all the chemical, biological and mathematical impossibilites, as well as the FACT that mutations only work on info already present and have no way of ADDING new non species specific info except as a possible parasitic host/symbiotic relationship, that evoltuion then still has to face the FACT that even in a system where it is ‘theoretically possible that entropy ‘could’ be reduced slightly’, evoltuion would still be boudn by the law and could not happen because of entropy spoiling hte process before it ocudl even get started (ignoring hte FACT that it couldn’t get started i nthe firstr place, because it’s biologically, chemically, and mathematically impossible)

He explains it better than i could- Her’s another short blurb:

[[However, here on earth, the popular evolutionary line of reasoning goes, we have an “exception,” because we live in an open system: “The sun provides more than enough energy to drive things,” Isaak says. And indeed, solar energy is added to the open sub-system of the earth continuously. But simply adding raw energy to a system doesn’t automatically cause reduced entropy (i.e., increased organized complexity, build-up rather than break-down). If this were true, no scientist would object to the elimination of the ozone, since more raw solar energy would only mean a welcome increase in organized complexity (a hastening of the alleged evolutionary process, as it were) in the world as we know it.

No, we know that raw solar energy alone does not decrease entropy. In fact, by itself, it increases entropy, speeding up the natural processes that cause break-down, disorder, and disorganization on earth (consider, for example, your car’s paint job, a wooden fence, or a decomposing animal carcass, first with and then without the addition of solar radiation). ]]

Same site link as above

[MrB]

“evoltuion of hte many species kinds aroudn today”

not to pick on your typing, but that’s a GREAT example of what would happen to a DNA strand that was affected by a mutation - a loss of data, not a gain.

[CottShop]

lol- I aGREE- all the info is still there- it’s just not in the right places,- perhaps a better exampel woudl be if all thel etters shoudl be capital, meanign htey are ‘active’ info, and the messed up letters get switched to small case ‘inactive’ letters in the wrong places

[aces]

Some folks want to believe that, i respect their right, there is no such thing as absolute nothing..not in physics or science..

[Revolting cat!]

The bigger question is why American Christian fundamentalists are in such love with Israel, whose religious citizens deny the divinity of Christ. (Yes, I know, Capt. Obvious, the prophecies.)