Email and response
What research have you done to show that Jesus was a man made contruct to ease the fear of death?
Dr. Simon Greenleaf a Harvard Professor of Law in the 1880’s (was not a Christian at the time) was challenged by some of his law students to look into the resurrection on Jesus Christ. Dr. Greeleaf wrote the still famous and widely used, Treatise on the Law of Evidence. The subject was what evidences are admissible in a court of law. After examing the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ he declared it to be the most well-attested fact of ancient history. He went on to say that there would not be a single un-biased jury in the world that would ever deny the historical fact of the resurrection.
Thomas Arnold, formerly Professor of History at Rugby and Oxford, one of the world’s great historians, could say:
“I know of no one fact in the history of mankind which is proved by better, fuller evidence of every sort, to the understanding of a fair inquirer, than the great sign which God hath given us that Christ died, and rose again from the dead.”
The Bible is the only book that backs up its claims by prophecy (telling whats going to happen before it does). 28% of the Bible is prophecy and over half has been literally fulfilled. There were 308 prophecies in the OT and each one was met by Jesus. We know that the complete OT existed in 285-270 b.c when it was translated from Hebrew to Greek (Septuagint).
The Bible has 66 books, written by over 40 different authors, on 3 different continents, over the course of 1500 years and each page says the same thing. It talks about God’s redemptive plan for man and points to Jesus Christ. No Word of the Bible has ever been proven false. It is the truth.
Trying reading the works of Josephus Flavius, Antiquites of the Jews. He attested to Jesus Christ and his miracles, death, and resurrection.
Let me know what you think. I urge you to ask me any questions you have about Christianity or other false religions. Your eternity is at stake.
John 14:6 Jesus answered, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one come to the Father except through me.”
Colossians 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.
It’s fine if you post this to your journal. I would love for others to read of the truth found only in Jesus.
You do me a great dis-service. I afforded you the courtesy of responding honestly and personally to your inquiries. For my trouble you cut and paste some passages from bible tracks and try to pass them off as your own thoughts. Passing off other peoples words as your own is called plagiarism. Some would call it “bearing false witness” and “stealing.” Please extend to me the same courtesy and honesty I extend to you.
Most of you arguments can be found in the following bible tracks:
http://www.godsaidmansaid.com/topic3.asp?Cat2=255&ItemId=663
http://www.youth4truth.org/YIDefendingResurrectionPart1.htm
I am unsure why you even bother quoting from bible tracks. They have no effect on anyone who has spent any time thinking about religion unless they are suffering from extreme emotional stress. I have both read and thought about religion and I am not currently suffering from undue emotional stress.
The most accessible argument for the non-existence of Jesus are found in the Jesus Puzzle ( http://pages.ca.inter.net/~oblio/home.htm) The intro text (http://pages.ca.inter.net/~oblio/jhcjp.htm) is a quick accessible article.
In reading one of Greenleaf’s essays (http://www.markers.com/ink/sgtestimony.htm) I do not read him as skeptic but as a believer, or rather an apologist. His use of the phrase ‘Our religion’ and similar constructs indicates that he doesn’t even acknowledge the existence of non-believers, not the words of an ex-skeptic. The idea that he is a skeptic is repeated by by hundreds if not thousands of websites that copy (plagiarize) each other using just about the same words. When he is mentioned by skeptics he is described as a devout Christian, and one page described him as a born again Jew. I refer you to http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.htm for an example of how a lie can take on the force of truth in a short time if it is politically expedient.
I was unable to find a biography of Greenleaf (much less one that doesn’t have a religious point to make), so I have no idea what his religious feeling were originally, but he certainly seems to be a biased believer by the time he writes the above essay. He makes the error of accepting the bible as historically accurate. Farrell Till does a fairly complete criticism of Greeleaf’s position in (http://www.errantyears.com/1998/nov98/000613.html).
By the way Greenleaf died in 1853 so we can safely assume he wasn’t professor of law in the 1880’s. Given this error it is appropriate to question your assertion of his non-christianity and his importance in the legal profession.
It is interesting that you present Thomas Arnold as “one of the world’s greatest historians” When his real fame in not his histories but his adherence to Christianity and reformation of the British secondary school system by adding organized sports. He became a deacon in 1818 at the age of 23 and takes priest’s orders in 1828. It is also worth noting that he publishes his first volume of sermons before his first volume of Thucydides. In the end he published four volumes of sermons and was much better known for his religious stance than his historical one. Let’s not pretend were dealing with an unbiased observer. You call him a historian, from where I’m sitting he looks more like a priest. (http://dogmatist.dnswh.com/religion/BCPersons/TA-Bio.html)
To the best of my ability to determine at no time did he do any scholarly work in regards to the origins of the bible or the historical truth behind his faith. This is not surprising critical historical analysis of the Christian church wasn’t common during that period of time.
Chances are neither of us is dealing with a real person as I found the following quote about Arnold’s myth and stature most enlightening “The development of public opinion about Arnold can be shown from the Times. In 1835, he was described as naturally stupid and blundering. In his obituary seven years later, The Times admits differences of opinion, but honors Arnold’s zeal in matters of right and wrong, etc. By 1896, when his bust was unveiled in Westminster Abbey, all reservations had been forgotten, his “over-warmth of feeling and expression” is forgotten and his temperance stressed.” (http://www.rugbyschool.net/history/dr_arnold.htm)
The religious belief of both these individuals does not discount their findings but it does bring into question their objectivity and bias. I have seen those in the throws of true belief twist facts and willfully blind themselves to valid arguments. With the biases of these individuals I’m not sure I can take what they say at face value. To make it clear I don’t just mean theists who have allowed their conviction’s to cloud their judgments, I’ve seen all stripes of non-theists engage in the same behavior.
I laughed for a while over the idea that no word in the bile has ever been proven false.
A small collection of contradictions and errors in the bible: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/2178/bible.html
http://web2.iadfw.net/capella/aguide/errors.htm
http://www.freethoughtdebater.com/tenbiblecontradictions.htm
http://www.2think.org/hii/matt_err.shtml
etc., etc.
Then you invoke the prophecy canard. The NT was written with the express purpose of fulfilling the prophecies of the OT. Given that it isn’t surprising that some have come true in the NT (http://www.oz.net/~cashton/atheism/page3.html) In my reading of “The Unauthorized Version” by Robin Lane Fox many of the prophecies in the OT where written after the events had already come to pass.
“…in was in this context that he [Josephus] referred to the twenty-two books which gave a written history ‘of all time’ form Creation to King Artaxerxes (465 -424 BC). They did not contradict each other, and they had been written by inspired prophets (from Moses onwards) and preserved by priests whose purity of descent (like the purity of the text) was carefully maintained…. Josephus was interestingly mistaken. He was wrong about these ‘prophetic’ authors (most of the twenty-two were written long after the events that they describe); he was wrong about the priests’ unbroken descent; he was seriously wrong about the test’s integrity. Above all, he did not stop to wonder if this single version, which struck him as so harmonious, was a sign of insufficient critical sense.”
Robin Lane Fox (Unauthorized Version, pg 173)
The bible has been changed, re-written and altered for a variety of theological and political reasons. Most of the alteration took place over 1,000 years ago, that does not minimize the significance of those changes. The bible does not give an accurate view of history of any given time and can not be taken at face value. Given the unreliability of prophecy evidence you’ll forgive me if I discard vague claims of prophecy fulfillment.
The passage in Josephus Flavius in which he mentions Jesus is largely considered a forgery of later Christians by credible historians. Reading the passage it is clear that it is written by a Christian not by a devout Jew that Josephus was. It also severely breaks the flow of the text and isn’t at all in Josephus’ style. Might I recommend http://www.mbdojo.com/~rssl/josephus.html for information about the forgery.
I have no interest in trying to convert you. I am content with my belief structure and it doesn’t require that everyone believe the same thing as me. If you want to read arguments for atheism let me recommend http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/nontheism/atheism/arguments.html or Atheism: The Case Against God by George Smith.
You initiated this conversation ostensibly on the subject of separation of church and state. I answered your points. In response I got a bible track. It is unlikely that either of us is going to come up with a new argument for or against god.
One’s path to Christianity or Atheism is an intensely personal thing, each person formed by different experiences comes to a belief structure most in tune with those experiences. Words on a screen is unlikely to do anything but bolster seeds of doubt that were already there. I’ve been engaging in online and personal discussion of religion with both believers and non-believers for many years, my atheism has only strengthened.
Unless you have something further to say I’ll leave you to your belief structure and ask that you extend the same courtesy. If you would like to discuss the existence god with a atheists (or just see the perspective) might I recommend Atheist Fools (http://boards.fool.com/Messages.asp?bid=113855) or Internet Infidels (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/index.