CHRISTIAN HISTORICAL EVIDENCE

[PILGRIMSHOST]

Hi all, Im looking for a specific piece of evidence at this time and would like if anybody could point me in the right direction.

I have been involved in the christian evangelical field for some years now and have gained much insight into the subject.

In the last few days I have desided to look for historical evidence that PETER (from the new testament) was actually crucified. Im seeking this evidence to support the claim ''they didnt die for a lie!''

Thank you and I look forward to your replies

[Flail]

As a trial attorney, I have a specific view of 'evidence'...and there is nothing in the Bible that would even remotely qualify as 'evidence'....none of it would be admissible in any court of law...any attempt to introduce the Bible as 'evidence' of anything would be nothing short of laughable.

As to historical reference, the Dead Sea Scrolls, contain not one mention of Jesus or his disciples or Paul. The scrolls are basically a library of the period within which Jesus lived and preached and 'revolutionized' religious practices and philosophy. Therefore, it is not surprising that this historic 'library' of information hidden in caves for preservation from the Roman invasion, contains nothing of the anti-religious teachings of Jesus. He either didn't exist or his teachings were not known or important to the people of his time and place...or...his teachings were so controversial and anti religious that they were rejected and ignored and not preserved in writing. It was then left to the superstions and power arrogance of Paul and others to develop the concocted belief system that we now call Christianity and that has absolutely nothing to do with God or Jesus.

Rather that try to prove or disprove Jesus or his divinity, his teachings and anti-religious philosophies should be emphasized as related in the writings of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John....teachings that, but for the unfortunate influence of the Church, Paul and the OT, would make the world a better place and would be inclusive in the 'kingdom of God, all people regardless of the mindless superstions of their birth and ethnicity and about which we continue to judge and kill.

Read the book of Matthew and then give some original, common sense thought to what Jesus(who was born in a barn and rode on a donkey) would think of the multi million dollar tax exempt institutions of ritual, dogma and power that masquerade as the 'houses of God'...what woudl Jesus think of :

phoney sacaments...bumper stickers..stained glass temples...and rituals that tend to substitute religiosity for authentic conducted of love, tolerance and assistance to those in need.....rather than trying to judge and convert those who have been born or indoctrinated into a different superstition and belief system, we would better serve our creator to follow the examples and teaching of great men like Jesus, Socrates, Confucius, Bhudda, Mohammed and many others, devoid of the judgements of divinity and self righteousness...none of us know the truth...all of us know what to do....stop praying and start helping your neighbor...there is much work to be done...and much judgement to be undone.

Jesus is not a Christian

Turn the churches into soup kitchens

Pay your taxes..help the poor...instead of going to church this Sunday...take your kids to the home of a needy neighbor and roll up your sleeves..hugs and help are much more Godly than prayer, Jesus fish bumper stickers or multi million dollar tax exempt business centers.

[Easyrider]

As a trial attorney, I have a specific view of 'evidence'...and there is nothing in the Bible that would even remotely qualify as 'evidence'....none of it would be admissible in any court of law...any attempt to introduce the Bible as 'evidence' of anything would be nothing short of laughable.

Nonsense. You're a juris and have never acquainted yourself with the writings of the great legal scholar Simon Greenleaf, one of the principal founders of the Harvard Law School?

Greenleaf, one of the principle founders of the Harvard Law School, originally set out to disprove the biblical testimony concerning the resurrection of Jesus Christ. He was certain that a careful examination of the internal witness of the Gospels would dispel all the myths at the heart of Christianity. But this legal scholar came to the conclusion that the witnesses were reliable, and that the resurrection did in fact happen.

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/project ... nleaf.html

Dr. Greenleaf, the Royal Professor of Law at Harvard University, was one of the greatest legal minds that ever lived. He wrote the famous legal volume entitled, A Treatise on the Law of Evidence, considered by many the greatest legal volume ever written. Dr. Simon Greenleaf believed the Resurrection of Jesus Christ was a hoax. And he determined, once and for all, to expose the "myth" of the Resurrection. After thoroughly examining the evidence for the resurrection Dr. Greenleaf came to the exact opposite conclusion! He wrote a book entitled, An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists by the Rules of Evidence Administered in the Courts of Justice. In which he emphatically stated:

"it was IMPOSSIBLE that the apostles could have persisted in affirming the truths they had narrated, had not JESUS CHRIST ACTUALLY RISEN FROM THE DEAD, . . ."
(Simon Greenleaf, An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists by the Rules of Evidence Administered in the Courts of Justice, p.29).

Greenleaf concluded that according to the jurisdiction of legal evidence the resurrection of Jesus Christ was the best supported event in all of history!

And not only that, Dr. Greenleaf was so convinced by the overwhelming evidence, he committed his life to Jesus Christ!

http://www.av1611.org/resur.html

As to historical reference, the Dead Sea Scrolls, contain not one mention of Jesus or his disciples or Paul. The scrolls are basically a library of the period within which Jesus lived and preached and 'revolutionized' religious practices and philosophy. Therefore, it is not surprising that this historic 'library' of information hidden in caves for preservation from the Roman invasion, contains nothing of the anti-religious teachings of Jesus. He either didn't exist or his teachings were not known or important to the people of his time and place...or...his teachings were so controversial and anti religious that they were rejected and ignored and not preserved in writing.

Tsk tsk...

Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls

http://www.grantjeffrey.com/article/article1.htm

Receive Christ as your Lord and Savior for the remission of your sins before you die.

[Cathar1950]

We have been over the Christian Urban Myth of Dr. Greenleaf before.
I suggest you do a seach on this site and read up on it.
But I can go back and rewrite if you like.

[Easyrider]

We have been over the Christian Urban Myth of Dr. Greenleaf before.
I suggest you do a seach on this site and read up on it.
But I can go back and rewrite if you like.

His book - Testimony of the Evangelists , The Gospels Examined by the Rules of Evidence, with his name on it, is still available at Amazon.com.



Maybe you can make it magically disappear?

[Goat]

We have been over the Christian Urban Myth of Dr. Greenleaf before.
I suggest you do a seach on this site and read up on it.
But I can go back and rewrite if you like.

His book - Testimony of the Evangelists , The Gospels Examined by the Rules of Evidence, with his name on it, is still available at Amazon.com.



Maybe you can make it magically disappear?

I see. Point to a book,and can't even discuss it. Here is an online version of the essay, and if anybody reads it, they can see for themselves it is full of logical fallacies, bad law, and pure nonsense.

http://www.bibleteacher.org/sgtestimony.htm

[Cathar1950]

We have been over the Christian Urban Myth of Dr. Greenleaf before.
I suggest you do a seach on this site and read up on it.
But I can go back and rewrite if you like.

His book - Testimony of the Evangelists , The Gospels Examined by the Rules of Evidence, with his name on it, is still available at Amazon.com.



Maybe you can make it magically disappear?

I have read it.
Was there a point to your little half fiction Sunday school story?
The book has flaws and he was not a real skeptic.
This story has been repeated in this forum many times and it still does not make a valid point or is it persuasive yet it just keeps getting repeated.
I suggest you read some of Callahan's work and comments on Greenleaf and others like you that keep giving us useless quaint stories that prove nothing.
Do you even know the case he makes? Have you checked his critics or do you just grab it from some site because it makes you feel good?

I just did a search and found 16 topics on Dr. Greenleaf.
Another search on posts gave me 61.
If I do a Easyrider and Greenleaf I get 14 going back a year.
So tell us why you keep repeating this little sermon?
I think I had 14 hits too.

Goat wrote this in response to one of your Greenleaf cut and paste jobs.

The credibilty of Simon Greenleaf is hardly worthwhile. The criteria he used for evidence would not be acceptable in modern courts at all.

The Duke of Vandals made this comment:

Thank you for that useless appeal to authority. Please donlt spend so much time presenting fallacious arguments.

A claim made by an emotionally charged skeptic....

There really isn't a fallacy specifically for this sort of reply. The reason for that is no intellectual, scholar or postal service employee would expect to deal with the equivalent of "i know u are but hut am i?" beyond the third grade.

Honestly, I've presented in this thread and others how the Christian myth includes a healthy dose of guilt in place of evidence. Address the issue or do not, but don't waste our time with replies like the one above.

I've spent 12 years researching the evidence and have found it compelling.

Iim highly skeptical of this claim. I'd call it a lie, but I actually believe you think you've been looking at "evidence". What I'd wager is that you've done what most apologists do: you've immersed yourself in propaganda. You've read and spoken to only sources that "support" your argument and disregarded anything that's even mildly disagreed.

It's the exact same "reasoning" that told debye there were WMD's in Iraq.

Also, you've helped me evidence why faith is made into a virtue: it breeds people like you who are immune to logic & evidence and place loyalty unquestioningly with your dogmatic propaganda.

I wrote this:

It is one of the modern day believers myths among some Christians.
It usually goes I was an atheist just like you but I was lying, fooling myself, faking it but I, as the great thinker I am, decided to look into it and low and behold I was forced intellectually to accept the evidence. So in a spurt of rational insight into the great truth repented, took Jesus in my heart and now want us to not be the fool he was and join.

They usually give some dopy story about a great skeptic that gets ask by a dump humble naive believer that as a question that causes the person to study the evidence and use some means of operation. Of course these people really have a disposition and desire to be Christian and believe in Jesus. I was reading about these myths like Greenfield or Greenleaf. I have heard similar things about Josh McDowell and Kevin Bachelor or something like that, He is a Seventh Day Adventist and love to tell how he lived in a cave. There is a pattern. Then they hammer away at atheist while booting their ego with New struggling Christian that have not yet be indoctrinated to believe anything.

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... leaf#90942

I doubt the story too. It sounds like the myths of the lowly believer that challenges the scholarly non-believer and the non-believer goes and studies and become a believer. Most of those stories are about people that already have a commitment and it becomes reinforced with rationalizations and missing information.
The guy that wrote "who moved the stone" already revered Jesus. Greenleaf was a graduate of a religious college. Just myths appealing to sentiment.

Your wrote this, again:

Dr. (Simon) Greenleaf, the Royal Professor of Law at Harvard University, was one of the greatest legal minds that ever lived. He wrote the famous legal volume entitled, A Treatise on the Law of Evidence, considered by many the greatest legal volume ever written. Dr. Simon Greenleaf believed the Resurrection of Jesus Christ was a hoax. And he determined, once and for all, to expose the "myth" of the Resurrection. After thoroughly examining the evidence for the resurrection Dr. Greenleaf came to the exact opposite conclusion! He wrote a book entitled, An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists by the Rules of Evidence Administered in the Courts of Justice. In which he emphatically stated:

"it was IMPOSSIBLE that the apostles could have persisted in affirming the truths they had narrated, had not JESUS CHRIST ACTUALLY RISEN FROM THE DEAD, . . ." (Simon Greenleaf, An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists by the Rules of Evidence Administered in the Courts of Justice, p.29).

Greenleaf concluded that according to the jurisdiction of legal evidence the resurrection of Jesus Christ was the best supported event in all of history!
And not only that, Dr. Greenleaf was so convinced by the overwhelming evidence, he committed his life to Jesus Christ!

Gilbert West and Lord Lyttleton, two Oxford students, believed Christianity was a "tale gone mad" and they determined to refute the Christian faith. Lyttleton resolved to disprove the conversion of Saul of Tarsus, and West would refute the resurrection of Jesus Christ. They figured a careful, rational, examination of the evidence would easily disprove the Christian faith.

But after examining the evidence they both separately came to the opposite conclusion! Lyttleton concluded that Saul of Tarsus did, in fact, convert to the Apostle Paul through Jesus Christ. And Gilbert West concluded that the Resurrection of Jesus Christ was among the best established facts in all of history! West went on to write a book entitled, "Observations on the History and Evidences of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ".

Professor Thomas Arnold, former chair of history at Oxford, and author of the famous volumes, History of Rome, was skillfully educated in the study of historical facts. Professor Arnold, stated, "I have been used for many years to study the histories of other times, and to examine and weigh the evidence of those who have written about them, and I know of no one fact in the history of mankind which is PROVED BY BETTER AND FULLER EVIDENCE of every sort, than the great sign which God has given us that Christ died and rose again from the dead."

After investigating the evidence of the resurrection, Lord Darling, former Chief Justice of England, stated, ". . . there exists such overwhelming evidence, positive and negative, factual and circumstantial, that no intelligent jury in the world could fail to bring in a verdict that the resurrection story is true."

http://www.av1611.org/resur.html

Then you wrote this drivel:

That's wrong on a lot of different levels. I suppose the great Simon Greenleaf - the former skepic of Christianity who later turned believer, and others like him - were indoctrinated too? Get real.

And again you wrote:

Zzyzx wrote:

Can you cite evidence that persons "coming into faith" from non-faith do so based in reason, logic or history and that more go in than out of religion on the basis of logic and reason?

Iim not claiming all do, just that many do. History is full of former skeptics who used reason and evidence to come to the faith. For example:

Dr. (Simon) Greenleaf, the Royal Professor of Law at Harvard University, was one of the greatest legal minds that ever lived. He wrote the famous legal volume entitled, A Treatise on the Law of Evidence, considered by many the greatest legal volume ever written. Dr. Simon Greenleaf believed the Resurrection of Jesus Christ was a hoax. And he determined, once and for all, to expose the "myth" of the Resurrection. After thoroughly examining the evidence for the resurrection Dr. Greenleaf came to the exact opposite conclusion! He wrote a book entitled, An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists by the Rules of Evidence Administered in the Courts of Justice. In which he emphatically stated:

"it was IMPOSSIBLE that the apostles could have persisted in affirming the truths they had narrated, had not JESUS CHRIST ACTUALLY RISEN FROM THE DEAD, . . ." (Simon Greenleaf, An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists by the Rules of Evidence Administered in the Courts of Justice, hp.29). ava1611.orc

I wrote this in response to you using Greenleaf:

I was working on the Modern Christian mythmaking Zzyzx.
Greenleaf (1783-1853 is a great example. I am not sure our poster here Plagiarize it from your source as Tim Callahan in his book "Secret Origins of the Bible" traced it to Hank Hanegraaff on his radio show the "Bible answer man show". He then was referred to someone else that felt he got Frank Morison mixed up with Greenleaf. Morrison was a reporter that wrote "Who moved the stone" in the 1930s.
This is the best they can do with cut and paste apologetics. The myth goes like this, a real smart doubter is challenged by a dumb believer, studies, changes his mind and becomes a believer. It makes the gullible believer feel wise as long as they ignore those that have studied and came to the opposite conclusion.
Where did you get the information that Greenleaf thought it was a hoax Easyrider?
Greenleaf taught at Harvard from 1833-1848 when it was run by religious bodies and would hardly have a doubter teaching. Morrison had a deep and reverent regard for Jesus and his teachings. Neither one would be an honest example of an unbeliever for your myth.
But despite the historical errors they make poor arguments. If witnesses gave reports that one said go to Jerusalem and another said go to Galilee the judge would toss out the witnesses, without a substantial bribe. If one person says there were two men (angels?) at the scene and another says one you might question their testimony. If two or three of the other witnesses used the first guys account you would call it hearsay. If the first witness seems to be using words from the Septuagint and looks like he mimicked Homer you might wonder what the fuss was all about.
But when we are asked to prove their myths wrong, I can only think there is some scam going on.

There is no reason to think they are historical accounts. The author of Luke admits they are from others. They do not show any indication of being historical. In fact they seem to have been taken from the Hebrew writings and even Homer. It is you burden to prove they are historical. The beliefs and hearsay of later believers is not proof.
Also as a note, Antony Flew's wondering about ID is not proof for the claims you make concerning the gospels. He is 83 and might be mixed up for all you know.

I also wrote this:

I doubt the story too. It sounds like the myths of the lowly believer that challenges the scholarly non-believer and the non-believer goes and studies and become a believer. Most of those stories are about people that already have a commitment and it becomes reinforced with rationalizations and missing information.
The guy that wrote "who moved the stone" already revered Jesus. Greenleaf was a graduate of a religious college. Just myths appealing to sentiment.

When I did a search on You writing "No Foundation", I got 105 hits on the topic.
When I did a search on You writing "No Foundation", I got 174 hits on posts.

Is this another one of those times when you nailed us and claim victory with you repetitive, mindless, cut and paste jobs like the last few?

[Flail]

Greenleaf was a man with an opinion...just like the rest of us....the fact that he was overcome by religiousity and lost his common sense and his legal acuity has nothing to do with the nature and quality and lack of evidence anywhere in the Bible...it is a story..and nothing more.

[Cathar1950]

Greenleaf was a man with an opinion...just like the rest of us....the fact that he was overcome by religiousity and lost his common sense and his legal acuity has nothing to do with the nature and quality and lack of evidence anywhere in the Bible...it is a story..and nothing more.

As Callahans says, and I paraphrase, Even a person with a Harvard education is not immune to the irrational.
Of course we need to realize he is about 150 years behind in biblical studies.
I his day there were no Gnostic gospels or the Gospel of Thomas or even the Dead sea scrolls. He practically ignores everything and assume way to much to provide any kind of evidence or argument, rational or not.
But it just keeps getting repeated.
I guess it helped Jesus become the American folk hero he is and the favorite philosopher of our President. He is everyone's friend. The bible tells us so.
Unless you are some atheist, liberal, Jew or homosexual.

[Easyrider]

Greenleaf was a man with an opinion...just like the rest of us....the fact that he was overcome by religiousity and lost his common sense and his legal acuity has nothing to do with the nature and quality and lack of evidence anywhere in the Bible...it is a story..and nothing more.

To say a man of Greenleaf's stature was "overcome by religiosity and lost his common sense and his legal acuity" smacks of secular arrogance. He was a great legal mind and he examined the Gospel evidences and testimonies and found them not only compelling, but having a legitimate basis for being accepted under the laws of evidence.

[Flail]

Easyrider

Let me keep this simple....if you attempt to mark as an Exhibit at trial any book including the Bible, it would be thrown out on it's own lack of merit, even without objection. Any writing offered as evidence must be the original writing and any declaration within it cannot be offered to prove the truth of the matter at issue unless the 'declarant' is present in the court room and available for cross examination....otherwise it is abject hearsay...the most objectionable and illegal form of evidence in jurisprudence....stories, tales, opinions and 'he said, she said, prove nothing in court or anywhere else.