After reviewing ‘Killing Jesus’ I thought it could be laid to rest for this writer and I could move on to more serious critiques, perhaps those written by people whose theological foundations were more solid.
O’Reilly continues to answer those concerned enough to send him emails about the last words spoken by Christ on the cross and he insists that because no other record besides the biblical record speaks to the subject, that the bible record must be wrong.
O’Reilly has said that because he is Catholic it must have been the Holy Spirit that prompted him to write his book, but unless he was appointed as the new modern or last day’s apostle he is skirting the realm of high pride and pretentiousness.
We are not sure if O’Reilly was chosen to scrutinize the record of the apostles but we are sure that the apostles were chosen to be eyewitnesses to every word and deed that Jesus Christ uttered or performed for a solid three year period.
We also know that neither he, nor Martin Dugard were on the scene and the historians they choose to present as authorities on the subject were not present as eyewitnesses to the events.
If the twelve were hand-picked to be eyewitnesses would it not follow that they were also ‘earwitnesses.’ Did God miss this one? Had he simply forgotten that these chosen men were all hard of hearing or given to exaggeration and hyperbole that could only be corrected when in time, O’Reilly and Dugard would arrive on the scene to set the record straight?
Before calling in the biblical record to answer O’Reilly’s assertions let’s look at the O’Reilly record on other subjects. For the first two years of the Obama administration, O’Reilly often declared that Barack Obama was a ‘very smart man.’ Now five years underway with IRS scandals, Benghazi, failed bailouts, Solyndra and all the rest of the whopping big snafus of the Obama legacy along with the famous failed rollout of Obama’s signature legislation, ObamaCare, who should we believe history or O’Reilly?
If O’Reilly could be so wrong about Obama why would he venture out to correct twelve hand-picked apostolic messengers who lived two millennia before he and Dugard took their first breaths?
Has the Harvard education gone to his head, has the Holy Spirit decided to contradict himself, or should we feel lucky that O’Reilly has finally reached the heights and is now able to see that God himself made a bit of a mistake in choosing these ‘liars’ or bombastic fools given to exaggeration and fibbing, to follow his Son around and set the record straight?
Did these common men take it upon themselves to alter the record like some wannabe script writers for the great narrative they knew would traverse the ages and become the most repeated story on the planet earth? Why does the word ‘pompous’ keep coming to mind when we think of O’Reilly’s assertions?
The Foundations of Heaven Witness against O’Reilly’s Assertions
Heaven is described in the book of Revelation. The same book that alone contains a strong warning that anyone who deletes any part of it, or adds anything to it will be cursed forever. Call it allegory or figurative or wishful thinking to your own peril.