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

[Easyrider]

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.

That's your opinion, which I reject.

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.

Then throw all your history books in the trash, Flail, at least all of the accounts from antiquity for everyone who doesn't measure up to your particular standards.

I'll believe a man of Greenleaf's stature before I believe you.

[Goose]

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.

That's your opinion, which I reject.

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.

Then throw all your history books in the trash, Flail, at least all of the accounts from antiquity for everyone who doesn't measure up to your particular standards.

I'll believe a man of Greenleaf's stature before I believe you.

Here are two links that might be of interest to Flail having a legal background.

http://www.trinitysem.edu/journal/pehrsonpap.html

http://www.trinitysem.edu/journal/5-1/4 ... idence.htm

However, I think Flail is making two mistakes.

1. Confusing a court of Law with the Court of History as already pointed out by Easyrider.

2. A narrow definition of what constitutes evidence. Evidence for matters of history and other issues is not necessarily limited to only that which would be admissible in a modern day court of Law.

[Zzyzx]

.

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.

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.

Excellent points – particularly the latter. All the “Good Christian” talk accomplishes nothing.

[Cathar1950]

The Dead Sea Scrolls had many variations in the writings as well as commentaries.
The reason Eisenman makes a good case for a relationship between the writers and the early Jesus movement that seems to have been a Messianic(King from the line of David, and not a god/man) directed at what they saw as the corrupt temple establishment that had bonded with Rome. This seems to be what got Jesus killed as well as James his brother and the other leaders that followed.
So far the site we keep getting from Easyrider are pure apologetics and propaganda with little or no historical understanding.
I think using what you think is a great 19th century mind is overlooking what he fails and refuses to address. I am sure you would like to toss out all other text but the bible but that has been tried when Orthodox Christianity became the approved state religion. It seem early on there were many heresies(choices or opinions). But the early Jerusalem followers of Jesus were at odds with Paul and withdrew from him do to his teachings and innovations aimed at gentiles that was disregarding the Law. Later the ones that stayed Jewish became heretics because Pauline Christianity had out numbered and out lived the Jerusalem assembly and after the wars became the status quo.
If you want to know what James and Jesus taught you would be better off looking at the Ebonite and other traditions. Greenleaf even thinks Matthew was the first gospel.

[Flail]

Matters considered as "historical fact" that have been established and verified are an exception to the hearsay rule...

Santa is much more 'evident' than are the stories of the Bible. I have seen Santa...I even sat on his lap...I have heard stories about his travels on Christmas eve on the Weather Channel...my parents and those of my childhood told me all about him and confirmed my 'belief in him"....he ate my cookies and left me blessings all wrapped up under the tree.

So I understand how difficult it can be when one begins understanding that what they thought was the 'infallible truth' and supported by 'evidence' was in fact a lie and a fraud.....which is much the same process that needs to happen with the concocted tales of Christianity.

Turn the churches into soup kitchens

Jesus was not a Christian.

[joer]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion

Saint Peter, Christian apostle: according to tradition, Peter was crucified upside down at his own request (hence the Cross of St. Peter), as he did not feel worthy to die the same way as Jesus (for he had denied him three times previously). Note that upside-down crucifixion would not result in death from asphyxiation.

And so this man Peter, an intimate of Jesus, one of the inner circle, went forth from Jerusalem proclaiming the glad tidings of the kingdom with power and glory until the fullness of his ministry had been accomplished; and he regarded himself as the recipient of high honors when his captors informed him that he must die as his Master had died--on the cross. And thus was Simon Peter crucified in Rome.

[Cathar1950]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion

Saint Peter, Christian apostle: according to tradition, Peter was crucified upside down at his own request (hence the Cross of St. Peter), as he did not feel worthy to die the same way as Jesus (for he had denied him three times previously). Note that upside-down crucifixion would not result in death from asphyxiation.

And so this man Peter, an intimate of Jesus, one of the inner circle, went forth from Jerusalem proclaiming the glad tidings of the kingdom with power and glory until the fullness of his ministry had been accomplished; and he regarded himself as the recipient of high honors when his captors informed him that he must die as his Master had died--on the cross. And thus was Simon Peter crucified in Rome.

Of course tradition is not historical evidence except for evidence of tradition.
The 2nd and 3rd century were full of traditions and tales as well as many fantastic writings. It seems the late first century had its share too. We now call them the 4 gospels. After a list was made of what was "acceptable" and what was not acceptable they eliminated many of them as it became against the law to even own or use them in the 4th century. The gospel of Mark almost got lost with the Gospel of Thomas as Matthew and Luke were meant to replace Mark and John went one step farther then Paul on the way to a Gnostic view that went as far as calling Jesus God while claiming he was incarnate God in the flesh opposed to others that saw Him as spirit and the adoptionist.

[bernee51]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion

Saint Peter, Christian apostle: according to tradition, Peter was crucified upside down at his own request (hence the Cross of St. Peter), as he did not feel worthy to die the same way as Jesus (for he had denied him three times previously). Note that upside-down crucifixion would not result in death from asphyxiation.

And so this man Peter, an intimate of Jesus, one of the inner circle, went forth from Jerusalem proclaiming the glad tidings of the kingdom with power and glory until the fullness of his ministry had been accomplished; and he regarded himself as the recipient of high honors when his captors informed him that he must die as his Master had died--on the cross. And thus was Simon Peter crucified in Rome.

Gidday Joer

And from whence does this story arise?

Origen, writing in the 3rd century CE is the first to report that St. Peter was crucified head downward, for he had asked that he might "suffer in this way"

The 'fact' in you first paragraph is based on centuries old hearsay, your second paragraph is unfounded hyperbole.

yours in 'spirit'

b

[Goose]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion

Saint Peter, Christian apostle: according to tradition, Peter was crucified upside down at his own request (hence the Cross of St. Peter), as he did not feel worthy to die the same way as Jesus (for he had denied him three times previously). Note that upside-down crucifixion would not result in death from asphyxiation.

And so this man Peter, an intimate of Jesus, one of the inner circle, went forth from Jerusalem proclaiming the glad tidings of the kingdom with power and glory until the fullness of his ministry had been accomplished; and he regarded himself as the recipient of high honors when his captors informed him that he must die as his Master had died--on the cross. And thus was Simon Peter crucified in Rome.

Origen, writing in the 3rd century CE is the first to report that St. Peter was crucified head downward, for he had asked that he might "suffer in this way"

Not exactly bernee. The Acts of Peter is the first to mention the upside down crucifixion of Peter. It was written probably around the second half of the second century. There is some manuscript evidence that suggests it might be a much earlier tradition as wiki notes:

It concludes describing Peter's martyrdom as upside-down crucifixion, a tradition that is first attested in this work. These concluding chapters are preserved separately as the Martyrdom of Peter in three Greek manuscripts and in Coptic (fragmentary), Syriac, Ethiopic, Arabic, Armenian, and Slavonic versions. Because of this, it is sometimes proposed that the martyrdom account was the original text to which the preceding chapters were affixed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Peter

1 Clement 5 is the first work to speak of the martyrdom of Peter, though it does not mention an upside down crucifixion. It was written around 95AD, still during the lifetime of possible witnesses to the event.

The 'fact' in you first paragraph is based on centuries old hearsay,

Centuries as in plural is an exageration (a hyperbole of your own ). Most ancient history is reported this way. We look for early and or multiple attestation to bring confirmation.

your second paragraph is unfounded hyperbole.

It's a bit flowery true, but it isn't unfounded. Much of it is taken from the Gospels and Acts.

[joer]

Thanks Goose! That was good stuff. Here's a couple more references for PILGRIMSHOST.
http://books.google.com/books? id=9mQ2AAAAMAAJ &pg=PA357 &lpg=PA357 &dq=%22the+crucifixion+of+peter%22&source=web &ots=j9tAtKpj0S &sig=mRBKrrgBMd6KaONxJxrFxDB2QVc #PPA357,M1

"Founded in 1849 by the alumni of Marshall College at Mercersburg, Pennsylvania, this periodical emphasized the historical basis of Christianity. Originally called the Mercersburg Review, it was first edited by John W....

1851.] The Apostie Peter. p.357

to the Corinthians, we can see clearly that he ascribes a greater significance to this Apostle for the Roman church than he does to Peter. Irenaens and Eusebius name Linus rather as the first Roman bishop, and even Epiphanius himself makes a distinction plainly between the apostolical and episcopal offices.'0 The martyrdom, of Peter. It is the universal voice of antiquity, that Peter was crucified in the persecution wider Nero. Consequently, as already remarked, his death cannot fall in the year 67, as even most later historians give it, following Eusebius and Jerome, but must be placed in ihe year 64, in which this persecution broke out directly after the firing of the city in July, and in which also an end was put to the earthly labors of Paul, only-perhaps somewhat earlier and by the less degrading process of decapitation. As the place of his punishment, according to the testimony of Caius already quoted, was pointed out at the end of the second century the Vatican hill beyond the Tiber, where lay the Circus and Nero's Gardens, and where according'to Tacitus the persecution of the christians actually took place. There also was built to his memory the church of Peter, as over Paul's grave on the way to Ostia without the city the church of Paul. The oldest testimony for the crucifixion of Peter we find already in the appendix to John's Gospel c. xxi: IS, 19, where our Lord himself, in the memorable dialogue there recorded, foretells to him that in his old age he would stretch forth his hands, and that another should bind him and lead whither naturally he would not wish. Tertullian remarks expressly, that Peter in his passion was made like the Lord." The statement, that he suffered crucifixion with his head downwards toward the earth, meets us first in Origen," and this was taken afterwards '"

See Schlicrmann't Clementinen (1844) p. 115, and Gieseler's K. G. I. 1,
p. 103. 281. . "
De praescr. haeret. c. 36. - - Romam - - - ubi Petrus passioni Domi-
nicae adaequatur. "
In Euseb. H. E. Ill, 1 : nirpas - - - of »ni tiri riXci ir 'PiS/il ycvSiicvos ai'tcxo- ^
oTiflji? Ka-a «^aXi7;, ovrwy ntrdf »f«itra; rarefy. This is then thus paraphrased
in the spirit of monkish piety by Rufima: crucifilus est deorsum capite
Jemerso, quod ipseitafieri deprecatus est, tie txaequari Domino viderttur. In
like style Jerome, who had a special relish fdr such traits, ?)e vir. illustr. c. '
1: a qno (Neroti'e) et affixus cruCi, martyrio coronatus ett, capite ad terrain
verso et in sublime pedibus elevatis; asserens se indignum, qw sic cruci-
figiretur ut Dominus suus.

http://www.livius.org/cg-cm/christianity/tacitus.html

Tacitus on the Christians
On 19-27 July 64, Rome was destroyed by a great fire: only four of its fourteen quarters remained intact. The emperor Nero was blamed by the Roman populace, and in turn blamed the Christians. The Roman historian Tacitus explains what happened.

, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called 'Christians' by the populace.

Commentary
Rome was destroyed by fire in July 64; Tacitus' story suggests that the Christians were killed in the same summer. The early Christian tradition adds some details, such as the decapitation of Paul and the crucifixion of Peter. There is no reason to be skeptical about these traditions, although it must be noted that there was a very old tradition that Paul was executed in Hispania (First letter of Clement 5.7). ...In the First letter of Clement, we also read about women being tortured as if they were the mythological Danaids or the legendary criminal Dirce (6.2). The climax of these cruel shows was the mockery of the crucifixion of Christ: according to a second-century tradition, the Christian leader Peter was crucified upside down.

http://www.giveshare.org/churchhistory/ ... e/ch6.html

PETER IN ROME?
CHAPTER VI
The Third Century — Tertullian And Origen
In our study of statements linking Peter with Rome by the early ecclesiastical writer, we come now to the first of the Latin writers, Tertullian, a Carthaginian whose works were done in the first quarter of the third century. It is from this Western presbyter that we receive the most definite statements about Peter’s death at Rome — along with some other surprising statements.
Though he later had a falling out with the Roman clergy for his Montanist views, Tertullian was a vehement opponent of heresy and wrote profusely, especially against Marcion and Valentinus. In his Prescription Against Heretics we read:
Since, moreover, you are close upon Italy, you have Rome, from which there comes even into our own hands the very authority (of Apostles themselves). How happy is its church, on which Apostles poured forth all their doctrine along with their blood! where Peter endures a passion like his Lord’s… [Tertullian, The Prescription Against Heretics, trans. by Peter Holmes (Vol. III, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson; Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1951; p. 260), I, 36.]
Here we have not only the clear inference that Peter was crucified at Rome and that Paul was there beheaded …
Eusebius tells us he was well acquainted with Roman laws, having his early training as a lawyer. [Eusebius, Church History, trans. by Arthur C. McGiffert (Vol. I, The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, ed. Phillip Schaff and Henry Wace; Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1952; p. 106), II, 2, 4.] In Scorpiace, Tertullian writes:
And if a heretic wishes his confidence to rest upon a public record, the archives of the empire will speak, as would the stones of Jerusalem. We read the lives of the Caesars: At Rome Nero was the first who stained with blood the rising faith. Then is Peter girt by another, when he is made fast to the cross.
Origen
What little we can glean from Origen (185-254 A.D.) has been preserved for us only by Eusebius, who makes the following statement concerning Peter and Paul:
Peter appears to have preached in Pontus, Galatia, Bithynia, Cappa­docia, and Asia to the Jews of the dispersion. And at last, having come to Rome, he was crucified head-downwards; for he had requested that he might suffer in this way. What do we need to say concerning Paul, who preached the Gospel of Christ from Jerusalem to Illyricum, and afterwards suffered martyrdom in Rome under Nero? These facts are related by Origen in the third volume of his Commentary on Genesis. [Ibid., (pp. 132-133), III, 1, 2.]
Here we find the crucifixion of Peter at Rome repeated with the additional detail that it was head-downwards at his own request. Origen is the first to give this tradition though afterward it became quite common and well accepted.