以下的是另一個流傳版本，通稱「反基督教版本」，又稱「教授勝利版」。
中譯：
「就讓我解釋一下，信耶穌在科學上有甚麼問題。」一個無神論的哲學教授上課時說。他頓了一頓，叫了一個新生站起來，問：「孩子，你是基督徒吧，是不是？」
「是，先生。」
「那麼你是信上帝了？」
「絕對是。」
「上帝是不是善的？」
「當然！上帝是善的。」
「對了。」
「那麼你是善還是惡？」
「聖經說我是惡的。」
教授露齒而笑：「啊，聖經！」他想了一回，說：「給你一個問題。如果這裏有個病了的人，你有能力醫治他，你會醫治他嗎？起碼試一試？」
「我會的，先生。」
「那麼你便是善的了……」
「我可不會這樣說。」
「為甚麼不會呢？當你有能力，你會去幫助生病和殘廢的人……事實上當我們有能力，我們大部份人都會這樣做……但上帝不會。」
沒有回應。
「祂沒有這樣做呀，祂有嗎？我的兄弟是基督徒，他患了癌症，懇求耶穌醫治，可是結果他死了。耶穌怎會是善的？唔？ 你能答我嗎？」
沒有回應。
老人表示同情，「不，你不能回答，是嗎？」他拿起書桌上的杯子，喝了一口水，好讓那學生有時間喘一口氣。教哲學時，得對初學者寬容一點。「年輕人，我們再開始過吧。」
「呃……是。」
「撒旦是不是善的？」
「不是。」
「撒旦從那裡來？」
那學生支吾地說：「從……上帝那兒……」
「對了，上帝造了撒旦，是不是？」老人用瘦骨嶙峋的手梳梳稀薄的頭髮，對嘻嘻笑著的學生聽眾說：「各位，我想這個學期將會十分有趣。」他回過頭來，對那個基督徒學生說：「孩子，告訴我，這個世界是否有惡存在？」
「是的，先生。」
「哪裡都充滿了惡，是不是？上帝是不是創造所有東西？」
「誰創造了惡？」
沒有回應。
「世上有疾病，是不是？不道德呢？仇恨呢？醜陋呢？所有使人苦惱的事──存在於這個世界嗎？」
那學生顯得坐立不安，勉強答道：「是的。」
「誰創造它們？」
沒有回答。
教授忽然提高聲調說：「是誰創造它們的？請告訴我！」教授把臉湊到那基督徒學生面前。
一把輕而平穩的聲音說：「孩子，上帝創造了所有的惡，是不是？」
沒有回應。那學生嘗試堅定地直視教授，但失敗了。教授突然走開，在班前踱來踱去，活像一隻老黑豹。全班都被迷住。「告訴我，」他說，「這個上帝不斷地創造一切的惡，衪怎會是善的？」教授揮舞著雙臂以包括著世上所有的邪惡。「這個善的上帝所造的仇恨、殘酷、痛苦、折磨、死亡和醜陋，以及所有苦難充斥著這個世界，是嗎，年輕人？」
沒有回應。
「你看不見這一切都在嗎？唔？」
教授走上前，對那學生輕聲說﹕「上帝是善嗎？」
沒有回應。
「孩子，你信耶穌嗎？」
那學生顫抖的聲音出賣了他：「教授，我信。」
老人惋惜地搖搖頭。「科學說你有五官去確認和觀察你周遭的世界。你有看見過耶穌嗎？」
「先生，我沒有。我從來沒看見過他。」
「那告訴我們，你有聽見過耶穌嗎？」
「我沒有，先生。」
「你有否觸摸過你的耶穌、嚐到你的耶穌、或是嗅到你的耶穌……
實際上，你對上帝有沒有任何感官認知（譯按：請注意，教授沒有說這個認知是直接還是間接、透過儀器等等的）？」
沒有回應。
「請回答我。」
「沒有的，先生。我恐怕沒有。」
「你恐怕……你沒有？」
「沒有，先生。」
「你還信祂？」
「……是……」
「那真需要信心呀！」教授向學生微笑：「根據實證、可測試和可證實的定律，科學說你的上帝不存在。孩子，你以為怎樣？你的上帝在哪裡？」
那學生答不上來。
「請坐下。」
那位基督徒坐下來……被擊敗了。
另一個基督徒舉手說：「教授，我可以發言嗎？」
教授微笑著說：「啊，另一個基督徒先鋒！來，來，年輕人，給大家說些恰當的見識。」
那基督徒環視房中四周，「先生，你正在提出一些有趣的論點。現在我有一個問題想問你。有一樣東西叫熱嗎？」
「有，」教授答，「世上有熱。」
「有一樣東西叫冷嗎？」
「有的，孩子，世上亦有冷。」
「沒有的，先生，世上沒有冷。」
教授的笑容凝結起來。班房突然變得很冷。第二個基督徒繼續說：「你有很多種熱，很熱、超熱、巨熱、白熱、少少熱或是沒有熱，但我們沒有一樣東西叫『冷」』。我們有零下458度（譯按：華氏），這是沒有熱，但就不可以再降低些。沒有一樣東西是叫冷的，不然我們會有冷過零下458度的溫度──先生，你看，冷只是一個用來形容欠缺熱的字。我們不能量度冷。因為熱是能量，熱可用熱量單位來量度。冷不是熱的相反，先生，這只是熱的欠缺。」
……一片死寂。
教授回應：「首先，我沒有說過冷是熱的相反。你暗示我有，硬說成是我說的。冷是熱的相對量度方式，特別是低過零度時。所有零下的溫度都可以用冷的定義來形容。如我所說，冷不是熱的相反，僅是一個對熱、涉及它在絕對零度的相對狀態的描述。再者，我能引申你論點的前提，及將之應用在對體積的描述。沒有一樣東西叫收縮，因為小只是大的欠缺，或者體積增長的欠缺。宇宙中最小的粒子是在原子邊緣的電子。所有收縮的東西都只能收縮到這個體積，不能再小，我們可以說收縮不存在嗎？」
那基督徒困惑、迷亂起來。這個基督徒已準備放棄，不然他就會說出不知所謂的東西，在餘下的學期成為別人的笑柄。
寂靜掠過班房。一陣短暫的停頓後，聽眾開始騷動起來，靠在椅邊跟鄰座交換意見。
一張紙從那個基督徒的手中落下來。紙上是一份他預先準備好的問題清單；那些問題現在提出來就太荒謬了。由於那個基督徒差不多準備返回座位，他被要求留下來挑戰教授。他只好不情願地照做。
「教授，這個世上有沒有一樣東西叫黑暗？我知這現在是一條愚蠢問題。」
「孩子，這現在的確是一條愚蠢問題。如果沒有黑暗的狀態，夜晚是甚麼？你在指責甚麼……？上帝不是在你的聖經說『讓這裡有黑暗』'嗎？你在否認這個所謂上帝的舉動嗎？」
「那麼你是說有一樣東西叫黑暗了？」
「我會答『是』──假如用你的說法、根據你的聖經；我會答『否』──因為黑暗是一個狀態而不是一件東西。」
「你又錯了，先生。黑暗不是某種東西，而是欠缺某種東西。你能夠有低光、正常光、強光、閃光，但如果你連續地沒有光，你是甚麼都沒有，而這叫黑暗，是不是？」
教授稱：「笨蛋，這正是我所說的。我說黑暗不是一種東西，就像飢餓、細小、富有、貧窮、黑暗、光明都不是一種東西。黑暗可以是某東西相對存在的狀態。」
「這是我們用來為字詞定義的意思。在真實情況下，黑暗不是一樣東西。如果它存在，你就可以造些較暗的黑暗及給我一瓶黑暗。教授，你可否……給我一瓶較暗的黑暗？」
「當然，只有像你的笨蛋才會問一條問題誤導別人去表示黑暗是一樣東西。你可否給我一瓶『細小』、『飢餓』。你的上帝自稱全能又可否如此？」
儘管佔了上風，教授還是對他眼前厚顏的年青人微笑。「這將會是一個很好的學期。年輕人，你介意告訴我們多些你的想法嗎？」
「好的，教授。我的意思是，你的哲學前提一開始就錯了，所以你的結論必定有錯……」
教授生氣起來：「錯了……？你好大膽……」
「先生，我可以解釋一下我的意思嗎」
全班都豎起耳朵。
「解釋……噢，解釋吧……」教授幫那基督徒從剛才給教授智慧的表現鎮懾的不穩狀態恢復過來。
一如平常，他是如此和藹可親的。他揮動雙手安靜全班，讓那學生繼續說。
「你正在二元論方法的前提上下工夫，」那基督徒解釋道，「例如有生存有死亡，有好神有壞神。你將上帝的概念看成有限的、我們可量度的東西。先生，科學連思想都解釋不了。它用到電力和磁力，但這些都不曾被看見，對它們離完全了解還差得遠。將死亡視作生存的相反，是忽視死亡不是一種實在的東西的事實。死亡不是生存的相反，僅是生存的欠缺。」
「我有說過生存是死亡的相反嗎？我有說過用二元論方法來看待事物嗎？沒有一個狀態是相反的。就像嬰兒不是老人的相反、或健康的新生女嬰不是患癌的老婆婆的相反。所有東西的狀態只存在於一條連續統一體的線上。人類是四腳動物和植物的延續。這是進化，著眼於生長的科學。你從未見過人家寫聖經，我們可不可說聖經是外太空生物寫成的？」
那年輕人從書桌拿起一份鄰座在看的報紙。 「教授，這是這個國家其中一家最下流的小報。是不是有樣東西叫不道德？」
「當然不是，經驗和事實的好壞只在於我們為它賦與的意義。沒有東西是不道德的，就如沒有東西是道德的。」
「先生，你又錯了。你看，不道德僅是道德的欠缺。有沒有一樣東西叫不公義？沒有。不公義是公義的欠缺。有沒有一樣東西叫惡？」那基督徒頓了一頓。「惡是否善的欠缺？」
「不是，不道德不是道德的欠缺。不道德是持有此看法的人眼中的道德。就是如此。」
那基督徒繼續說：「教授，如果世上有惡，而我們都認同，那麼上帝──如果存在──必定是透過一個有惡的機制在工作。那是甚麼工作呢？聖經告訴我們，這工作是看看我們每個人自由意志的意願，是選擇善還是惡。」
「邪惡與正義是一個零和遊戲，原則上互相抵銷對方。一個人的舉動可以被同時考慮成邪惡和正義。它們同時存在，並非互相排斥。為甚麼你覺得即使上帝存在，祂也是在工作的？這只是你的假設，認為上帝不會袖手旁觀。如果邪惡是那個機制，那它的目的是去減弱那所謂正義，因為這同樣是一個零和遊戲。」
教授面露慍色：「作為一個哲學科學家，我不會將這個情況視為可在任何選擇上做任何事；作為一個實在論者，我絕對不承認上帝這概念或其他神學因素等可作為對世事解釋之一部份，因為上帝是不可被觀察的。」
那基督徒回應：「我覺得在世上，上帝道德準則的欠缺（譯按：學生的意思是指不道德）大概是最能被觀察的現象。」
「甚麼東西令你覺得，只因道德準則不是出自聖經這個世界就沒有道德準則？」
「每週對它的報道為報紙賺來以億計的金錢啊！」
「那麼報紙對基督徒暴力舉動的報道呢？我們經常讀到類似的新聞。那些人給上帝的意願控制了思想。」
「教授，告訴我，你會告訴學生他們是從猴子進化出來嗎？」
「如果你是說自然進化過程，年輕人，我當然會。」
「先生，你有親眼觀察過進化嗎？」
教授冷冷地瞪著他的學生。
「教授，由於連觀察過進化的人都沒有，連證明這個過程是在進行都不能，先生，你這豈不是在教授你的意見而已？抑或說你此刻不是科學家，而是傳教士？」
教授不滿地說：「你能證明你的胃已經吸收了你今天的早餐嗎？五十年前的早餐又怎樣？你能用肉眼證明地球是圓的而不需任何科學儀器？如果你目睹有人槍擊一個受害者，由於子彈進入受害人的身體後就永遠不能被你看見，你能證明那受害人真的被子彈所殺嗎？如果你在法庭作證，指你目睹甲向乙開槍，你不只在提供意見。再者，子彈被槍管射出飛過空中，快得你永遠看不見。如果我們連自己的觀察都不能相信，你和你的上帝的精神連繫還有啥值得相信。在哲學討論中，我就即管不理你的無禮行為。現在你說完沒有？」
「那麼你不接受上帝的道德準則去衡量甚麼是正義？」
「如果任何人相信任何一套道德準則，他只會很易受影響去相信任何其他的道德準則──我選擇科學！」
「啊，科學！」那學生露出鄙夷的笑容。「先生，你正確地指出科學是觀察現象的學問。科學的前提同樣有錯……」
教授急促地說：「科學沒有錯，只是你現在對科學的理解有錯。科學在人類在世上漫步前早已存在。所有的答案已在，它們只是在等待被發現。」
教授的洞察令全班騷動起來。那基督徒一直站著，直至騷動平息下來。
「為了引申你先前向另一位同學提出的論點，我可否給你一個例子來解釋我的意思？」
教授明智地保持沉默。
那基督徒環視房中四周。「班上有沒有人看見過教授的腦袋？」
全班爆發出巨大的笑聲。
那基督徒指向他年老、漸漸垮掉的導師。
「這裡有沒有人聽見過教授的腦袋……觸摸過教授的腦袋、嚐過或嗅過教授的腦袋？」
看來沒有人試過。那基督徒惋惜地搖搖頭。「看來沒有人對教授的腦袋有任何感官認知。那麼， 根據實證、可測試和可證實的定律，科學說教授沒有腦袋。」
教授回應道：「讓我糾正你的錯誤。就說一個盲人永遠看不見你這實體，你能說你從未存在過嗎？這個世界能被看見，但又能被一些糖衣包裝、由一些不誠實、無原則的政客或宗教領袖放出的偏見所蒙蔽。」
班上一片混亂，為教授歡呼狂喜。
那基督徒慚愧地坐下……因為這正是他原本應有的狀態。
原文版本：
LET ME EXPLAIN THE problem science has with Jesus Christ." The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand. "You're a Christian, aren't you, son?"
"Yes, sir."
"So you believe in God?"
"Absolutely."
"Is God good?"
"Sure! God's good."
"Yes."
"Are you good or evil?"
"The Bible says I'm evil."
The professor grins knowingly. "Ahh! THE BIBLE!" He considers for a moment. "Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here, and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help them? Would you try?"
"Yes sir, I would."
"So you're good...!"
"I wouldn't say that."
"Why not say that? You would help a sick and maimed person if you could.........in fact most of us would if we could... God doesn't."
No answer.
"He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm?
Can you answer that one?"
No answer.
The elderly man is sympathetic. "No, you can't, can you?" He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax. In philosophy, you have to go easy with the new ones. "Let's start again, young man."
"Er... Yes."
"Is Satan good?"
"No."
"Where does Satan come from?"
The student falters. "From...God..."
"That's right. God made Satan, didn't he?" The elderly man runs his bony fingers through his thinning hair and turns to the smirking, student audience. "I think we're going to have a lot of fun this semester, ladies and gentlemen." He turns back to the Christian.
"Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?"
"Yes, sir."
"Evil's everywhere, isn't it? Did God make everything?"
"Who created evil?"
No answer.
"Is there sickness in this world? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All the terrible things - do they exist in this world?"
The student squirms on his feet. "Yes."
"Who created them?"
No answer.
The professor suddenly shouts at his student. "WHO CREATED THEM? TELL ME, PLEASE!" The professor closes in for the kill and climb into the Christian's face.
In a still small voice: "God created all evil, didn't He, son?"
No answer. The student tries to hold the steady, experienced gaze and fails. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace the front of the classroom like an aging panther. The class is mesmerized. "Tell me," he continues, "How is it that this God is good if He created all evil throughout all time?" The professor swishes his arms around to encompass the wickedness of the world. "All the hatred, the brutality, all the pain, all the torture, all the death and ugliness and all the suffering created by this good God is all over the world, isn't it, young man?"
No answer.
"Don't you see it all over the place? Huh?"
Pause. "Don't you?"
The professor leans into the student's face again and whispers, "Is God good?"
No answer.
"Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?"
The student's voice betrays him and cracks. "Yes, professor. I do."
The old man shakes his head sadly. "Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen your Jesus?"
"No, sir. I've never seen Him."
"Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?"
"No, sir. I have not."
"Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus...
In fact, do you have any sensory perception of your God whatsoever?"
No answer.
"Answer me, please."
"No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't."
"You're AFRAID... you haven't?"
"No, sir."
"Yet you still believe in him?"
"...yes..."
"That takes FAITH!"
The professor smiles sagely at the underling. "According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son? Where is your God now?"
The student doesn't answer.
"Sit down, please."
The Christian sits...Defeated.
Another Christian raises his hand. "Professor, may I address the class?"
The professor turns and smiles. "Ah, another Christian in the vanguard!
Come, come, young man. Speak some proper wisdom to the gathering."
The Christian looks around the room. "Some interesting points you are making, sir. Now I've got a question for you. Is there such thing as heat?"
"Yes," the professor replies. "There's heat."
"Is there such a thing as cold?"
"Yes, son, there's cold too."
"No, sir, there isn't."
The professor's grin freezes. The room suddenly goes very cold. The second Christian continues. "You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We can hit 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold, otherwise we would be able to go colder than 458 - You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it."........Silence.
The professor replied,"First . I have never said that cold is the opposite of heat. By your implying that that I did, you are putting words in my mouth. Cold is a relative measurement of heat especially below zero. Any temperature of heat under zero can be described by the definition of cold. As I said that cold is not the opposite of heat, it is merely a description of heat in relation to its relative state to absolute zero. Furthermore, I can extend the premise of your arguement and apply it to the description of size. There is no such thing as shrinkage because being small is just the absence of being big or absence of positive growth in size.
The smallest particle in this universe is electron that resides in an atom, Since anything that shrinks will eventually end up not going any smaller, can we say that the process of shrinkage never exists?"
The Christian is perplexed and confused. This Christian is really ready to give up knowing otherwise that he would make a scene out of himself and be the laughing stock of others for the rest of the semester.
Silence sweeps through the room. After a brief pause, the crowd is thrilled and thrown to the edges of their seats between this exchange of words.
A piece of paper drops from the Christian's hand. On the paper is a list of questions that the Christian has prepared previously which he perceives now to be too ridiculous to bring up. As the Christian is almost ready to make his way back to his seat, he is asked to stay further more to challenge the professor. He reluctantly obliges.
"Is there such a thing as darkness, professor? I know it is now a stupid question."
"That's a dumb question,right on, son. What is night if it isn't a state of darkness? What are you getting at...? Didnt God say in your Bible,' let there be dark' Are you getting at denying this so-called act of God?"
"So you say there IS such a thing as darkness?"
"Yes..., speaking in your own term as according to your Bible....and No in the sense that darkness is a state and not a thing."
"You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something, it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly, you have nothing, and it's called darkness, isn't it?"
"That is what I said, you idiot. I said that darkness is not a thing just as being hungry,being small, being rich,being poor, being dark, being light is not a thing. Well darkness can be the state of relative presence of something."professed the professor.
"That's the meaning we use to define the word. In reality, Darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker and give me a jar of it. Can you...give me a jar of darker darkness, professor?"
"Of course, only idiot like you would come up with the question of misleading somebody into acknowledging that darkness is a thing. Can you give me a jar of "small", "hungry". How about your God which claims to be omnipotent?"
Despite getting the upper hand, the professor smiles at the young effrontery before him.
"This will indeed be a good semester. Would you mind telling us what more you have got in your magic box, young man?"
"Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with and so your conclusion must be in error...."
The professor goes toxic. "Flawed...? How dare you...!"
"Sir, may I explain what I mean?"
The class is all ears.
"Explain... oh, explain..." The professor makes an admirable effort to help the Christian regain control because he is suffering from an unstable state of mind after being overwhelmed by the professor's show of intelligence.
As usual, he is affability itself.
He waves his hand to silence the class, for the student to continue.
"You are working on the premise of duality," the Christian explains.
"That for example there is life and then here's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science cannot even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism but has never seen, much less fully understood them. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, merely the absence of it."
"Did I say life is the opposite of death? Did I say that I am viewing things in duality? There is no such state as being in the opposite. Just as there is no such thing as baby being the opposite of old man or healthy new-born baby girl being the opposite of old woman with cancer. All things only exist in a state along a line of continuum. Human is a continuation of four-legged animal and plants.This is evolution, the science of the respect for growth. You never witness the folks compling the Bible, can we say that Bible can be written by aliens from outer space?"
The young man holds up a newspaper he takes from the desk of a neighbor who has been reading it.
"Here is one of the most disgusting tabloids this country hosts, professor. Is there such a thing as immorality?"
"Of course there isnt, experience and facts are only as good as the meaning we attach to them. Nothing is immoral just as nothing is moral"
"Wrong again, sir. You see, immorality is merely the absence of morality. Is there such thing as injustice? No. Injustice is the absence of justice. Is there such a thing as evil?" The Christian pauses. "Isn't evil the absence of good?"
"No, immorality is not the abscence of morality. Immorality is morality in the eyes of the beholder.PERIOD"
The Christian continues. "If there is evil in the world, professor, and we all agree there is, then God, if he exists, must be accomplishing a work through the agency of evil. What is that work, God is accomplishing? The Bible tells us it is to see if each one of us will, of our own free will, choose good over evil."
"Evilness and righteousness is a zero-sum game. They cancel out each other in principle. One's act can be considered as evil and righteous at the same time. They co-exist and can not be mutually exclusive. What makes you think that God is accompishing something even if he exists? This is just your assumption that God can not stand doing nothing and sitting around. If evilness is the agency then its purpose is to combat the so-called righteousness because it is again a zero-sum game. "
The professor bridles. "As a philosophical scientist, I don't view this matter as having anything to do with any choice; as a realist, I absolutely do not recognize the concept of God or any other theological factor as being part of the world equation because God is not observable."
"I would have thought that the absence of God's moral code in this world is probably one of the most observable phenomena going," the Christian replies.
"What makes you think that there is no moral code in this world just because it is not coming from the Bible?"
"Newspapers make billions of dollars reporting it every week!"
"How about newspaper reporting Christians acting in voilence? We read news like that all the time.Those are people mind-controlled by God's will."
"Tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?"
"If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do."
"Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?" The professor makes a sucking soun
中譯：
「就讓我解釋一下，信耶穌在科學上有甚麼問題。」一個無神論的哲學教授上課時說。他頓了一頓，叫了一個新生站起來，問：「孩子，你是基督徒吧，是不是？」
「是，先生。」
「那麼你是信上帝了？」
「絕對是。」
「上帝是不是善的？」
「當然！上帝是善的。」
「對了。」
「那麼你是善還是惡？」
「聖經說我是惡的。」
教授露齒而笑：「啊，聖經！」他想了一回，說：「給你一個問題。如果這裏有個病了的人，你有能力醫治他，你會醫治他嗎？起碼試一試？」
「我會的，先生。」
「那麼你便是善的了……」
「我可不會這樣說。」
「為甚麼不會呢？當你有能力，你會去幫助生病和殘廢的人……事實上當我們有能力，我們大部份人都會這樣做……但上帝不會。」
沒有回應。
「祂沒有這樣做呀，祂有嗎？我的兄弟是基督徒，他患了癌症，懇求耶穌醫治，可是結果他死了。耶穌怎會是善的？唔？ 你能答我嗎？」
沒有回應。
老人表示同情，「不，你不能回答，是嗎？」他拿起書桌上的杯子，喝了一口水，好讓那學生有時間喘一口氣。教哲學時，得對初學者寬容一點。「年輕人，我們再開始過吧。」
「呃……是。」
「撒旦是不是善的？」
「不是。」
「撒旦從那裡來？」
那學生支吾地說：「從……上帝那兒……」
「對了，上帝造了撒旦，是不是？」老人用瘦骨嶙峋的手梳梳稀薄的頭髮，對嘻嘻笑著的學生聽眾說：「各位，我想這個學期將會十分有趣。」他回過頭來，對那個基督徒學生說：「孩子，告訴我，這個世界是否有惡存在？」
「是的，先生。」
「哪裡都充滿了惡，是不是？上帝是不是創造所有東西？」
「誰創造了惡？」
沒有回應。
「世上有疾病，是不是？不道德呢？仇恨呢？醜陋呢？所有使人苦惱的事──存在於這個世界嗎？」
那學生顯得坐立不安，勉強答道：「是的。」
「誰創造它們？」
沒有回答。
教授忽然提高聲調說：「是誰創造它們的？請告訴我！」教授把臉湊到那基督徒學生面前。
一把輕而平穩的聲音說：「孩子，上帝創造了所有的惡，是不是？」
沒有回應。那學生嘗試堅定地直視教授，但失敗了。教授突然走開，在班前踱來踱去，活像一隻老黑豹。全班都被迷住。「告訴我，」他說，「這個上帝不斷地創造一切的惡，衪怎會是善的？」教授揮舞著雙臂以包括著世上所有的邪惡。「這個善的上帝所造的仇恨、殘酷、痛苦、折磨、死亡和醜陋，以及所有苦難充斥著這個世界，是嗎，年輕人？」
沒有回應。
「你看不見這一切都在嗎？唔？」
教授走上前，對那學生輕聲說﹕「上帝是善嗎？」
沒有回應。
「孩子，你信耶穌嗎？」
那學生顫抖的聲音出賣了他：「教授，我信。」
老人惋惜地搖搖頭。「科學說你有五官去確認和觀察你周遭的世界。你有看見過耶穌嗎？」
「先生，我沒有。我從來沒看見過他。」
「那告訴我們，你有聽見過耶穌嗎？」
「我沒有，先生。」
「你有否觸摸過你的耶穌、嚐到你的耶穌、或是嗅到你的耶穌……
實際上，你對上帝有沒有任何感官認知（譯按：請注意，教授沒有說這個認知是直接還是間接、透過儀器等等的）？」
沒有回應。
「請回答我。」
「沒有的，先生。我恐怕沒有。」
「你恐怕……你沒有？」
「沒有，先生。」
「你還信祂？」
「……是……」
「那真需要信心呀！」教授向學生微笑：「根據實證、可測試和可證實的定律，科學說你的上帝不存在。孩子，你以為怎樣？你的上帝在哪裡？」
那學生答不上來。
「請坐下。」
那位基督徒坐下來……被擊敗了。
另一個基督徒舉手說：「教授，我可以發言嗎？」
教授微笑著說：「啊，另一個基督徒先鋒！來，來，年輕人，給大家說些恰當的見識。」
那基督徒環視房中四周，「先生，你正在提出一些有趣的論點。現在我有一個問題想問你。有一樣東西叫熱嗎？」
「有，」教授答，「世上有熱。」
「有一樣東西叫冷嗎？」
「有的，孩子，世上亦有冷。」
「沒有的，先生，世上沒有冷。」
教授的笑容凝結起來。班房突然變得很冷。第二個基督徒繼續說：「你有很多種熱，很熱、超熱、巨熱、白熱、少少熱或是沒有熱，但我們沒有一樣東西叫『冷」』。我們有零下458度（譯按：華氏），這是沒有熱，但就不可以再降低些。沒有一樣東西是叫冷的，不然我們會有冷過零下458度的溫度──先生，你看，冷只是一個用來形容欠缺熱的字。我們不能量度冷。因為熱是能量，熱可用熱量單位來量度。冷不是熱的相反，先生，這只是熱的欠缺。」
……一片死寂。
教授回應：「首先，我沒有說過冷是熱的相反。你暗示我有，硬說成是我說的。冷是熱的相對量度方式，特別是低過零度時。所有零下的溫度都可以用冷的定義來形容。如我所說，冷不是熱的相反，僅是一個對熱、涉及它在絕對零度的相對狀態的描述。再者，我能引申你論點的前提，及將之應用在對體積的描述。沒有一樣東西叫收縮，因為小只是大的欠缺，或者體積增長的欠缺。宇宙中最小的粒子是在原子邊緣的電子。所有收縮的東西都只能收縮到這個體積，不能再小，我們可以說收縮不存在嗎？」
那基督徒困惑、迷亂起來。這個基督徒已準備放棄，不然他就會說出不知所謂的東西，在餘下的學期成為別人的笑柄。
寂靜掠過班房。一陣短暫的停頓後，聽眾開始騷動起來，靠在椅邊跟鄰座交換意見。
一張紙從那個基督徒的手中落下來。紙上是一份他預先準備好的問題清單；那些問題現在提出來就太荒謬了。由於那個基督徒差不多準備返回座位，他被要求留下來挑戰教授。他只好不情願地照做。
「教授，這個世上有沒有一樣東西叫黑暗？我知這現在是一條愚蠢問題。」
「孩子，這現在的確是一條愚蠢問題。如果沒有黑暗的狀態，夜晚是甚麼？你在指責甚麼……？上帝不是在你的聖經說『讓這裡有黑暗』'嗎？你在否認這個所謂上帝的舉動嗎？」
「那麼你是說有一樣東西叫黑暗了？」
「我會答『是』──假如用你的說法、根據你的聖經；我會答『否』──因為黑暗是一個狀態而不是一件東西。」
「你又錯了，先生。黑暗不是某種東西，而是欠缺某種東西。你能夠有低光、正常光、強光、閃光，但如果你連續地沒有光，你是甚麼都沒有，而這叫黑暗，是不是？」
教授稱：「笨蛋，這正是我所說的。我說黑暗不是一種東西，就像飢餓、細小、富有、貧窮、黑暗、光明都不是一種東西。黑暗可以是某東西相對存在的狀態。」
「這是我們用來為字詞定義的意思。在真實情況下，黑暗不是一樣東西。如果它存在，你就可以造些較暗的黑暗及給我一瓶黑暗。教授，你可否……給我一瓶較暗的黑暗？」
「當然，只有像你的笨蛋才會問一條問題誤導別人去表示黑暗是一樣東西。你可否給我一瓶『細小』、『飢餓』。你的上帝自稱全能又可否如此？」
儘管佔了上風，教授還是對他眼前厚顏的年青人微笑。「這將會是一個很好的學期。年輕人，你介意告訴我們多些你的想法嗎？」
「好的，教授。我的意思是，你的哲學前提一開始就錯了，所以你的結論必定有錯……」
教授生氣起來：「錯了……？你好大膽……」
「先生，我可以解釋一下我的意思嗎」
全班都豎起耳朵。
「解釋……噢，解釋吧……」教授幫那基督徒從剛才給教授智慧的表現鎮懾的不穩狀態恢復過來。
一如平常，他是如此和藹可親的。他揮動雙手安靜全班，讓那學生繼續說。
「你正在二元論方法的前提上下工夫，」那基督徒解釋道，「例如有生存有死亡，有好神有壞神。你將上帝的概念看成有限的、我們可量度的東西。先生，科學連思想都解釋不了。它用到電力和磁力，但這些都不曾被看見，對它們離完全了解還差得遠。將死亡視作生存的相反，是忽視死亡不是一種實在的東西的事實。死亡不是生存的相反，僅是生存的欠缺。」
「我有說過生存是死亡的相反嗎？我有說過用二元論方法來看待事物嗎？沒有一個狀態是相反的。就像嬰兒不是老人的相反、或健康的新生女嬰不是患癌的老婆婆的相反。所有東西的狀態只存在於一條連續統一體的線上。人類是四腳動物和植物的延續。這是進化，著眼於生長的科學。你從未見過人家寫聖經，我們可不可說聖經是外太空生物寫成的？」
那年輕人從書桌拿起一份鄰座在看的報紙。 「教授，這是這個國家其中一家最下流的小報。是不是有樣東西叫不道德？」
「當然不是，經驗和事實的好壞只在於我們為它賦與的意義。沒有東西是不道德的，就如沒有東西是道德的。」
「先生，你又錯了。你看，不道德僅是道德的欠缺。有沒有一樣東西叫不公義？沒有。不公義是公義的欠缺。有沒有一樣東西叫惡？」那基督徒頓了一頓。「惡是否善的欠缺？」
「不是，不道德不是道德的欠缺。不道德是持有此看法的人眼中的道德。就是如此。」
那基督徒繼續說：「教授，如果世上有惡，而我們都認同，那麼上帝──如果存在──必定是透過一個有惡的機制在工作。那是甚麼工作呢？聖經告訴我們，這工作是看看我們每個人自由意志的意願，是選擇善還是惡。」
「邪惡與正義是一個零和遊戲，原則上互相抵銷對方。一個人的舉動可以被同時考慮成邪惡和正義。它們同時存在，並非互相排斥。為甚麼你覺得即使上帝存在，祂也是在工作的？這只是你的假設，認為上帝不會袖手旁觀。如果邪惡是那個機制，那它的目的是去減弱那所謂正義，因為這同樣是一個零和遊戲。」
教授面露慍色：「作為一個哲學科學家，我不會將這個情況視為可在任何選擇上做任何事；作為一個實在論者，我絕對不承認上帝這概念或其他神學因素等可作為對世事解釋之一部份，因為上帝是不可被觀察的。」
那基督徒回應：「我覺得在世上，上帝道德準則的欠缺（譯按：學生的意思是指不道德）大概是最能被觀察的現象。」
「甚麼東西令你覺得，只因道德準則不是出自聖經這個世界就沒有道德準則？」
「每週對它的報道為報紙賺來以億計的金錢啊！」
「那麼報紙對基督徒暴力舉動的報道呢？我們經常讀到類似的新聞。那些人給上帝的意願控制了思想。」
「教授，告訴我，你會告訴學生他們是從猴子進化出來嗎？」
「如果你是說自然進化過程，年輕人，我當然會。」
「先生，你有親眼觀察過進化嗎？」
教授冷冷地瞪著他的學生。
「教授，由於連觀察過進化的人都沒有，連證明這個過程是在進行都不能，先生，你這豈不是在教授你的意見而已？抑或說你此刻不是科學家，而是傳教士？」
教授不滿地說：「你能證明你的胃已經吸收了你今天的早餐嗎？五十年前的早餐又怎樣？你能用肉眼證明地球是圓的而不需任何科學儀器？如果你目睹有人槍擊一個受害者，由於子彈進入受害人的身體後就永遠不能被你看見，你能證明那受害人真的被子彈所殺嗎？如果你在法庭作證，指你目睹甲向乙開槍，你不只在提供意見。再者，子彈被槍管射出飛過空中，快得你永遠看不見。如果我們連自己的觀察都不能相信，你和你的上帝的精神連繫還有啥值得相信。在哲學討論中，我就即管不理你的無禮行為。現在你說完沒有？」
「那麼你不接受上帝的道德準則去衡量甚麼是正義？」
「如果任何人相信任何一套道德準則，他只會很易受影響去相信任何其他的道德準則──我選擇科學！」
「啊，科學！」那學生露出鄙夷的笑容。「先生，你正確地指出科學是觀察現象的學問。科學的前提同樣有錯……」
教授急促地說：「科學沒有錯，只是你現在對科學的理解有錯。科學在人類在世上漫步前早已存在。所有的答案已在，它們只是在等待被發現。」
教授的洞察令全班騷動起來。那基督徒一直站著，直至騷動平息下來。
「為了引申你先前向另一位同學提出的論點，我可否給你一個例子來解釋我的意思？」
教授明智地保持沉默。
那基督徒環視房中四周。「班上有沒有人看見過教授的腦袋？」
全班爆發出巨大的笑聲。
那基督徒指向他年老、漸漸垮掉的導師。
「這裡有沒有人聽見過教授的腦袋……觸摸過教授的腦袋、嚐過或嗅過教授的腦袋？」
看來沒有人試過。那基督徒惋惜地搖搖頭。「看來沒有人對教授的腦袋有任何感官認知。那麼， 根據實證、可測試和可證實的定律，科學說教授沒有腦袋。」
教授回應道：「讓我糾正你的錯誤。就說一個盲人永遠看不見你這實體，你能說你從未存在過嗎？這個世界能被看見，但又能被一些糖衣包裝、由一些不誠實、無原則的政客或宗教領袖放出的偏見所蒙蔽。」
班上一片混亂，為教授歡呼狂喜。
那基督徒慚愧地坐下……因為這正是他原本應有的狀態。
原文版本：
LET ME EXPLAIN THE problem science has with Jesus Christ." The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand. "You're a Christian, aren't you, son?"
"Yes, sir."
"So you believe in God?"
"Absolutely."
"Is God good?"
"Sure! God's good."
"Yes."
"Are you good or evil?"
"The Bible says I'm evil."
The professor grins knowingly. "Ahh! THE BIBLE!" He considers for a moment. "Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here, and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help them? Would you try?"
"Yes sir, I would."
"So you're good...!"
"I wouldn't say that."
"Why not say that? You would help a sick and maimed person if you could.........in fact most of us would if we could... God doesn't."
No answer.
"He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm?
Can you answer that one?"
No answer.
The elderly man is sympathetic. "No, you can't, can you?" He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax. In philosophy, you have to go easy with the new ones. "Let's start again, young man."
"Er... Yes."
"Is Satan good?"
"No."
"Where does Satan come from?"
The student falters. "From...God..."
"That's right. God made Satan, didn't he?" The elderly man runs his bony fingers through his thinning hair and turns to the smirking, student audience. "I think we're going to have a lot of fun this semester, ladies and gentlemen." He turns back to the Christian.
"Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?"
"Yes, sir."
"Evil's everywhere, isn't it? Did God make everything?"
"Who created evil?"
No answer.
"Is there sickness in this world? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All the terrible things - do they exist in this world?"
The student squirms on his feet. "Yes."
"Who created them?"
No answer.
The professor suddenly shouts at his student. "WHO CREATED THEM? TELL ME, PLEASE!" The professor closes in for the kill and climb into the Christian's face.
In a still small voice: "God created all evil, didn't He, son?"
No answer. The student tries to hold the steady, experienced gaze and fails. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace the front of the classroom like an aging panther. The class is mesmerized. "Tell me," he continues, "How is it that this God is good if He created all evil throughout all time?" The professor swishes his arms around to encompass the wickedness of the world. "All the hatred, the brutality, all the pain, all the torture, all the death and ugliness and all the suffering created by this good God is all over the world, isn't it, young man?"
No answer.
"Don't you see it all over the place? Huh?"
Pause. "Don't you?"
The professor leans into the student's face again and whispers, "Is God good?"
No answer.
"Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?"
The student's voice betrays him and cracks. "Yes, professor. I do."
The old man shakes his head sadly. "Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen your Jesus?"
"No, sir. I've never seen Him."
"Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?"
"No, sir. I have not."
"Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus...
In fact, do you have any sensory perception of your God whatsoever?"
No answer.
"Answer me, please."
"No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't."
"You're AFRAID... you haven't?"
"No, sir."
"Yet you still believe in him?"
"...yes..."
"That takes FAITH!"
The professor smiles sagely at the underling. "According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son? Where is your God now?"
The student doesn't answer.
"Sit down, please."
The Christian sits...Defeated.
Another Christian raises his hand. "Professor, may I address the class?"
The professor turns and smiles. "Ah, another Christian in the vanguard!
Come, come, young man. Speak some proper wisdom to the gathering."
The Christian looks around the room. "Some interesting points you are making, sir. Now I've got a question for you. Is there such thing as heat?"
"Yes," the professor replies. "There's heat."
"Is there such a thing as cold?"
"Yes, son, there's cold too."
"No, sir, there isn't."
The professor's grin freezes. The room suddenly goes very cold. The second Christian continues. "You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We can hit 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold, otherwise we would be able to go colder than 458 - You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it."........Silence.
The professor replied,"First . I have never said that cold is the opposite of heat. By your implying that that I did, you are putting words in my mouth. Cold is a relative measurement of heat especially below zero. Any temperature of heat under zero can be described by the definition of cold. As I said that cold is not the opposite of heat, it is merely a description of heat in relation to its relative state to absolute zero. Furthermore, I can extend the premise of your arguement and apply it to the description of size. There is no such thing as shrinkage because being small is just the absence of being big or absence of positive growth in size.
The smallest particle in this universe is electron that resides in an atom, Since anything that shrinks will eventually end up not going any smaller, can we say that the process of shrinkage never exists?"
The Christian is perplexed and confused. This Christian is really ready to give up knowing otherwise that he would make a scene out of himself and be the laughing stock of others for the rest of the semester.
Silence sweeps through the room. After a brief pause, the crowd is thrilled and thrown to the edges of their seats between this exchange of words.
A piece of paper drops from the Christian's hand. On the paper is a list of questions that the Christian has prepared previously which he perceives now to be too ridiculous to bring up. As the Christian is almost ready to make his way back to his seat, he is asked to stay further more to challenge the professor. He reluctantly obliges.
"Is there such a thing as darkness, professor? I know it is now a stupid question."
"That's a dumb question,right on, son. What is night if it isn't a state of darkness? What are you getting at...? Didnt God say in your Bible,' let there be dark' Are you getting at denying this so-called act of God?"
"So you say there IS such a thing as darkness?"
"Yes..., speaking in your own term as according to your Bible....and No in the sense that darkness is a state and not a thing."
"You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something, it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly, you have nothing, and it's called darkness, isn't it?"
"That is what I said, you idiot. I said that darkness is not a thing just as being hungry,being small, being rich,being poor, being dark, being light is not a thing. Well darkness can be the state of relative presence of something."professed the professor.
"That's the meaning we use to define the word. In reality, Darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker and give me a jar of it. Can you...give me a jar of darker darkness, professor?"
"Of course, only idiot like you would come up with the question of misleading somebody into acknowledging that darkness is a thing. Can you give me a jar of "small", "hungry". How about your God which claims to be omnipotent?"
Despite getting the upper hand, the professor smiles at the young effrontery before him.
"This will indeed be a good semester. Would you mind telling us what more you have got in your magic box, young man?"
"Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with and so your conclusion must be in error...."
The professor goes toxic. "Flawed...? How dare you...!"
"Sir, may I explain what I mean?"
The class is all ears.
"Explain... oh, explain..." The professor makes an admirable effort to help the Christian regain control because he is suffering from an unstable state of mind after being overwhelmed by the professor's show of intelligence.
As usual, he is affability itself.
He waves his hand to silence the class, for the student to continue.
"You are working on the premise of duality," the Christian explains.
"That for example there is life and then here's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science cannot even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism but has never seen, much less fully understood them. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, merely the absence of it."
"Did I say life is the opposite of death? Did I say that I am viewing things in duality? There is no such state as being in the opposite. Just as there is no such thing as baby being the opposite of old man or healthy new-born baby girl being the opposite of old woman with cancer. All things only exist in a state along a line of continuum. Human is a continuation of four-legged animal and plants.This is evolution, the science of the respect for growth. You never witness the folks compling the Bible, can we say that Bible can be written by aliens from outer space?"
The young man holds up a newspaper he takes from the desk of a neighbor who has been reading it.
"Here is one of the most disgusting tabloids this country hosts, professor. Is there such a thing as immorality?"
"Of course there isnt, experience and facts are only as good as the meaning we attach to them. Nothing is immoral just as nothing is moral"
"Wrong again, sir. You see, immorality is merely the absence of morality. Is there such thing as injustice? No. Injustice is the absence of justice. Is there such a thing as evil?" The Christian pauses. "Isn't evil the absence of good?"
"No, immorality is not the abscence of morality. Immorality is morality in the eyes of the beholder.PERIOD"
The Christian continues. "If there is evil in the world, professor, and we all agree there is, then God, if he exists, must be accomplishing a work through the agency of evil. What is that work, God is accomplishing? The Bible tells us it is to see if each one of us will, of our own free will, choose good over evil."
"Evilness and righteousness is a zero-sum game. They cancel out each other in principle. One's act can be considered as evil and righteous at the same time. They co-exist and can not be mutually exclusive. What makes you think that God is accompishing something even if he exists? This is just your assumption that God can not stand doing nothing and sitting around. If evilness is the agency then its purpose is to combat the so-called righteousness because it is again a zero-sum game. "
The professor bridles. "As a philosophical scientist, I don't view this matter as having anything to do with any choice; as a realist, I absolutely do not recognize the concept of God or any other theological factor as being part of the world equation because God is not observable."
"I would have thought that the absence of God's moral code in this world is probably one of the most observable phenomena going," the Christian replies.
"What makes you think that there is no moral code in this world just because it is not coming from the Bible?"
"Newspapers make billions of dollars reporting it every week!"
"How about newspaper reporting Christians acting in voilence? We read news like that all the time.Those are people mind-controlled by God's will."
"Tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?"
"If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do."
"Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?" The professor makes a sucking soun
