Famous Atheist Tries to Destroy The Gospels But Misses the Mark!

In a recent discussion between two well-known atheists, Dr. Bart Erhman and Alex O’Connor, a fascinating conversation unfolded regarding Biblical accuracy. One particular focus was the account of Jesus’ journey to Egypt as a baby.

This conversation highlights the inconsistencies, double standards, and hypocrisy often used to critique the Bible.

This is not a new tactic. For centuries, critics have attempted to challenge the integrity of the Scripture, often using arguments that seem compelling on the surface but lack a deeper understanding of historical and theological contexts.

The conversation between Dr. Erhman and Alex serves as yet another example of how skeptics attempt to undermine Biblical truth.

The Prophecy of Hosea

Matthew 2:15 states, 

“… And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.” – Matthew 2:15

This is a fulfillment of Hosea 11:1, which originally refers to Israel. Critics argue that Matthew misapplied the prophecy. However, Jewish scholars in the first century had multiple ways of interpreting the Scripture: literal, practical application, allegorical, and mystical.

Matthew, under divine inspiration, applied this passage in its fullest sense—to Jesus, the Messiah.

Understanding the Jewish interpretive tradition is key to grasping why Matthew used this prophecy. The Jewish people viewed the Messiah as the ultimate fulfillment of all that was written in the Old Testament.

The Exodus of Israel from Egypt foreshadowed the coming of Christ, who would also come out of Egypt to redeem His people.

Did Matthew Invent the Story of Herod’s Massacre?

Skeptics question whether King Herod truly ordered the massacre of boy infants in Bethlehem, arguing that first-century historian Josephus does not mention it.

Dr. Erhman claims that if such an atrocity had happened, Josephus would have recorded it. However, this argument from silence is weak.

Herod was known for his paranoia and brutality. He executed one of his wives and even killed his own sons out of fear they would take his throne.

Given his cruelty, the slaughter of a small number of infants in a small town might not have been deemed significant enough for Josephus to record. Yet, Matthew does, and his account aligns with Herod’s established character.

Furthermore, ancient historians did not document every event that occurred, especially those involving the deaths of a few dozen children in a small village.

Historians may have considered this massacre too minor to record compared to Herod’s other well-documented atrocities, such as executing high-ranking officials and his own family members.

The Journey to Egypt: Improbable or Plausible?

Dr. Erhman further argues that Jesus’ family traveling from Bethlehem to Egypt was impractical due to distance and financial constraints. This completely ignores key Biblical details.

The Magi, before warning Joseph in a dream, had already provided expensive gifts—gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

Matthew 2:11 states, 

“On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh.” – Matthew 2:11

These resources would have funded their journey. The gifts were highly valuable and Mary and Joseph could’ve used them for their expenses. 

Another argument presented by Dr. Erhman is the supposed difficulty of traveling such a long distance, around 450 miles, without modern transportation. This is a well-known fact that people in ancient times frequently made such journeys on foot or by caravan.

The Israelites, for example, traveled from Egypt to the Promised Land, covering vast distances over time. Similarly, Jewish pilgrims traveled to Jerusalem for festivals multiple times a year.

Skeptics also question the timeline, suggesting that the journey would have taken an unreasonably long time. Historical records indicate that determined travelers could cover significant distances within weeks.

Since God instructed Joseph and Mary to flee for their child’s safety, they likely prepared well and stayed motivated to complete the journey efficiently.

Atheist Scholars and Double Standards

Throughout the discussion, Dr. Erhman switches his arguments. First, he dismisses Matthew’s account because Josephus did not record it. Then, when both Matthew and Luke mention Bethlehem, he casts doubt on Jesus’ birthplace because He later lived in Nazareth.

This inconsistency reveals a bias against the Gospel accounts.

The tactic of dismissing evidence based on selective skepticism is common among critics of Christianity. When a single source supports a Biblical event, skeptics claim it is not enough. When multiple sources confirm an event, they would say it is fabricated.

This type of reasoning reveals an agenda—one that refuses to acknowledge the Bible’s validity regardless of the evidence. The same critics who challenge Biblical narratives often embrace secular history without the same scrutiny, demonstrating a clear bias.

If one Gospel mentions an event and another does not, they claim it is unreliable. Yet, this is not how history works. Different witnesses highlight different details.

If all four Gospels were identical in every word, skeptics would claim collusion. The fact that they present complementary details strengthens their authenticity rather than weakens it.

Dr. Erhman and Alex even mockingly thanked God that the Biblical account was not real—since it meant innocent babies were spared. This contradiction is striking: atheists often critique Biblical morality while failing to offer an objective moral standard.

Atheism provides no foundation for objective moral values. If morality is purely subjective, no act can be truly good or evil. Yet, atheists often rely on the Christian moral framework to condemn Biblical events.

The Bible Remains Unshaken

Despite repeated attempts to discredit the Scripture, God’s Word remains firm. The Bible has been scrutinized more than any other book in history, yet it continues to be the ultimate source of truth.

The Bible has stood the test of time and will continue to stand the test of time against criticism. Share on X

If you found this post enlightening, check out this article about the pervasive lies promoted by the New Atheist Movement through Dr. Sarah Irving-Stonebraker’s story.

Her journey from atheism to Christianity exposes the flaws in secular ideologies and highlights the undeniable truth of faith.

WATCH THE VIDEO