Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Atheist Comhradh - For Your Eyes Only!

"There is not one piece of corroborating evidence to suggest that Jesus lived or died as he is described in the Bible."

While this is a statement made by Comhradh, it is typical, typical, typical. Just another atheist justifying his denial of God by adopting a blind faith state of belief without first checking the facts.

Extra Biblical, Non Christian documentation from the time of Jesus and / or his disciples:

Regarding Jesus died due to Crucifixion -
“The Christians, you know, worship a man, the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites and was crucified on that account.” Lucian of Samosata - (The Death of Peregrine), 11 - 13

“Nero fastened the guilt of the burning of Rome and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, Called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.” Tacitus - Annals 15.44

“When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing amongst us, had condemned him to be crucified.” Josephus - (Fides et Historia) 13

“Or what advantage came to the Jews by the murder of their Wise King, seeing that from that very time their kingdom was driven away from them?” Mara Bar Serapion, in a letter to his son from prison. - Fragment currently at the British Museum, Syriac Manuscript

“On the eve of the Passover, Yeshua was hanged on a cross.” The Babylonia Talmud - Sanhedrin 43a - I. Epstein Editor and translator, London
=================

Extra Biblical documentation from the time of Jesus and / or his disciples:

Regarding the dramatic changes in the character in the disciples and claims of witnessing the resurrected Jesus.

“Therefore, having received orders and complete certainty caused by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and believing in the Word of God, they went with the Holy Spirit’s certainty, preaching the good news that the kingdom of God is about to come. Jesus’ apostles were fully assured by Jesus’ resurrection. Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried on earth a very long time, and when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom, departed this life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles.” Clement of Rome - (1 Clement ) 47

“Bishop Clement has conversed with the apostles to the extent that it might be said he had their preaching still echoing and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone, for there are many still remaining alive who had received instructions from the apostles. When I was still a boy I saw you in Lower Asia with Polycarp, when you had high status at the imperial court and wanted to gain his favour. I remember where Polycarp sat and conversed, his comings and goings, his character, his personal appearance, his discourses to the crowds and how he reported his discussions with John the apostle and others who had seen the Lord. He taught what they reported about the Lord and his miracles and his teaching, things that Polycarp had heard directly from eyewitness of the word of life and reported in full harmony with Scripture.” Irenaeus - (To Florinus) 5.20

“For this is the manner in which the apostolic Churches transmit their registers: as the church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed therein, by John the apostle; as also the church of Rome, which makes Clement to have been ordained in like manner by Peter.” Tertulian - (The Prescription Against Heretics) 32.

“Paul himself and the other apostles, for they did not love the present age, but Him who dies for our benefit and for our sake was raised by God.” Polycarp - (To the Philippians)

The above sources point to multiple, very early and eyewitness testimonies to the disciple’s claims of witnessing the risen Jesus. The late New Testament critic at the University of Chicago, Norman Perrin, who rejected Jesus’ resurrection wrote, “The more we study the tradition with regard to the appearances, the firmer the rock begins to appear upon which they are based.” What we have are three categories of evidence that the disciples claim to have seen the risen Lord. 1) Paul 2) Oral tradition 3) Written Tradition.
Paul had firsthand fellowship with the disciples. We have an oral tradition originating from the time of Jesus resurrection. We have written tradition that attests to the disciples claims.

Extra Biblical documentation from the time of Jesus and / or his disciples:

Regarding the suffering and martyrdom of the disciples:
“The greatest and most righteous pillars have been persecuted and contended unto death. Peter, endured, not one or two, but many afflictions, and having borne witness went to the due glorious place. Paul pointed to the prize. Seven times chained, exiled, stoned, having become a preacher both in the East and in the West, he received honour fitting of his faith. Thus he was freed form the world and went to the holy place. He became a great example of steadfastness.” Clement of Rome - (1 Clement ) 5:2-7

“. . . the unlimited endurance of Ignatius, Zosimus and Rufus as well as the apostle Paul and the rest of the apostles among others. In association with Jesus they also suffered together. For they did not love the present age. Polycarp - (To the Philippians)

“And when Jesus came to those with Peter, he said to them: “Take, handle me and see that I am not a bodiless demon.” And immediately they handled him and believed, having known his flesh and blood. Because of this they also despise death.”
Ignatius - To the Smyrnaeans 3:2

“That Paul is beheaded has been written about. And if a heretic wishes his confidence to rest upon a public record, the archives of the empire will speak. We read the Lives of the Caesars: At Rome Nero was the first who stained with blood the rising faith. There is Peter girt by another, when he is made fast to the cross. Then does Paul obtain a birth suited to Roman citizenship, when in Rome he is ennobled by martyrdom.” Tertulian - Scorpiace, 15

According to Tertullian, if one did not want to believe the Christian records concerning the martyrdoms of some of the apostles. He could find the information in the public records, namely “The lives of the Caesars.”

“The disciples’ devotion to the teachings of Jesus was attended with danger to human life and that they themselves were the first to manifest their disregard for death’s terrors. Jesus who has both once risen Himself, and led His disciples to believe in His resurrection, and so thoroughly persuaded them of its truth, that they show to all men by their sufferings how they are able to laugh at all the troubles of life, beholding the life-eternal and the resurrection clearly demonstrated to them both in word and deed by this one, Jesus.” Origin - Contra Celsum - 2.56

. Papias cites both Paul and the apostle John and records their sufferings and deaths. (Fragments: Traditions of the Elders) 2,5 (Fragment 5)

. Eusebius in Ecclesiastical History 2.23 cites Dionysius of Corinth - Tertullian, Origen, Josephus, Hegesippus, Clement of Alexandria, all who wrote of the “martyrdom of James the brother of Jesus.”

All these non-Biblical sources affirm the disciples’ willingness to suffer and die for their claims that Jesus rose from the dead. The disciples’ willingness to suffer and die for these claims indicates that they certainly regarded those claims as true. The case is strong that they did not willfully lie about the appearances of the risen Jesus, for liars make very poor martyrs.

. On his way to be martyred in Rome Ignatius of Antioch penned several letters to various churches. All of which attest to the reality of Jesus and the suffering of His disciples.

In his letter to the church in Smyrna, Ignatius writes that the disciples were so encouraged by seeing and touching the risen Jesus that “they too despised death” and that after his resurrection, Jesus ate and drank with them like one who is composed of flesh. 3:2-3 “So pay attention, however, to the prophets and especially to the Gospel, in which the Passion has been made clear to us and the resurrection has been accomplished.” 7:4

In his letter to Philadeophians, Ignatius writes concerning the gospel, which of course was at the centre of Christian preaching. “But the Gospel possesses something distinctive, namely, the coming of the Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ, his suffering, and the resurrection.”

In his letter to the Magnesians, he writes, “I want to forewarn you not to get snagged on the hooks of worthless opinions but instead to be fully convinced about the birth and the suffering and the resurrection, which took place assuredly by Jesus Christ.” 11:2-4

“And the wonderful thing is, that, though he did not accept Jesus as Christ, he yet gave testimony that the righteousness of James was so great; and he says that the people thought that they had suffered these things because of James. Origen on Josephus - (Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol 10) (Antiquities of the Jews) (Contra Celsum) 1.47

“Jesus appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning Him.” Agapius - (Historia) 1.7.13

“Peter preached the Gospel in Pontus, and Galatia, and Cappadocia, and Betania and Italy, and Asia, and was afterwards crucified by Nero in Rome with the head downward, as he had himself desired to suffer in that manner. Andrew preached to the Sythians and Thracians, and was crucified, suspended on an olive tree at Patrae, and town of Achaia; and there too he was buried. John, again, in Asia was banished by Domitian the king to the isle of Patmos, in which also he fell asleep at Ephesus, where his remains were sought for, but could not be found. James, Jesus brother, when preaching in Judea, was cut off with the sword by Herod the tetrarch, and was buried there. Philip preached in Phygia, and was crucified in Hierapolis with his head downward in the time of Domitian, and was buried there. Bartholomew again, preached to the Indians, to whom he also gave the Gospel according to Matthew, and was crucified with his head downward. And was buried in Allanum, a town of the great Armeia. And Matthew wrote the Gospel in the Hebrew tongue, and published it at Jerusalem, and fell asleep at Hierees, a town of Pathia. And Thomas preached to the Pathians, Medes, Persians, Hyrcanians, Bactrians and Margians and was thrust through in the four members of his body with a pine spear at Clamene, the city of India, and was buried there. And James the son of Alphaeus, when preaching in Jerusalem, was stoned to death by the Jews, and was buried there beside the temple. Jude who is also called Lebbaeus, preached to the people of Edessa, and to all Mesopotamia and fell asleep at Berytus, and was buried there. Simon the Zealot, the son of Clopas, who is also called Jude, became bishop of Jerusalem after James the Just, and fell asleep and was buried there. And Matthias who was one of the seventy, was numbered along with the eleven apostles, and preached in Jerusalem, and fell asleep and was buried there. And Paul entered into the apostleship a year after the assumption of Christ; and beginning at Jerusalem, he advanced as far as Illyricum, and Italy and Spain preaching the Gospel for thirty five years. And in the time of Nero he was beheaded at Rome, and was buried there.” Hippolytus - Cyprian, Novatian, Appendix [ECF 1.5.0.2.3.0]

. Celsus - a critic of Christianity wrote strongly against the resurrection but admitted that the tomb was empty and that no body was found anywhere. He was forced to propose magic or deception i.e., lies. This type of claim shows that critics like Celsus had to respond to the reality of the empty tomb and the bodily resurrection of Jesus.

. Pliny the Younger, . Suetonius, Tactus, and Celsus were all enemies of Christianity yet attested to the historicity of Jesus.

“Nero fastened the guilt of the burning of Rome and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus. Tacitus - Annals 15.44

. Shepherd of Hermas (Parable 9, section 28); (Vision 3, section 1) . Melito of Sardis
. Hegesipius . Polycrates - (To Victor of Rome) are early Christian authors attesting to the life, death and resurrection of Jesus.

Modern:
. “That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be.” John Dominic Crossan - Founder of the Jesus Seminar - In (“Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography”) San Francisco, Harper Collins, 1991 - 145,154, 196, 201

. Rudolf Bultmann - (“What Really Happened to Jesus - A Historical Approach to the Resurrection.”) John Bowden Trans. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1995 - 80

. Paula Frederickson - Historian - In an interview with Peter Jennings for “The Search for Jesus,” American Broadcasting Company, 2000.

The amount of evidence that we have concerning Jesus is actually very impressive. We can start with approximately nine traditional authors of the New Testament. Another twenty early Christian authors, and four heretical writings mention Jesus within 150 years of His death on the cross. Moreover, nine secular, non-Christian sources mention Jesus within the 150 years of His death: Josephus, the Jewish historian; Tacitus, the Roman historian; Pliny the Younger, a politician of Rome; Phlegon, a freed slave who wrote histories; Lucian, the Greek satirist; Celsus, a Roman philosopher; and the historians Suetonius and Thallus, as well as the prisoner Mara Bar-Serapion. In all, at least forty-two authors, nine of them secular mention Jesus within 150 years of his death. Why am I telling you this? Let me make a comparison.

Julius Caesar, was one of Rome’s most prominent figures. Caesar is well known for his military conquests. After his Gallic Wars, he made the famous statement, “I came, I saw, I conquered.” Only five sources report his military conquests: writings by Caesar himself, Cicero, Livy, the Salona Decree and Appian. If he made such a great impact on Roman society why didn’t more writers of antiquity mention his great accomplishments? Yet no one questions whether Julius made a tremendous impact on the Roman Empire. Yet within 150 years of his death, more non-Christian authors alone comment on Jesus than all of the sources who mentions Julius Caesar’s great military conquests within 150 years after his death.

One more example. Tiberius Caesar was the Roman emperor at the time of Jesus’ ministry and execution. Tiberius is mentioned by ten sources within 150 years of his death: Tacitus, Suetonius, Velleius Paterculus, Plutarch, Pliny the Elder, Strabo, Seneca, Valerius Maximus, Josephus and Luke. Compare that to Jesus’ forty-two sources in the same length of time. That’s more than four times the number of total sources who mention the Roman emperor during roughly the same period. If we only considered the number of secular non-Christian sources who mention Jesus and Tiberius within 150 years of their lives, we arrive at a tie of nine each.

I’ve mentioned that the vast majority of historical scholars, be they merely secular, atheist or Christian attest to the life, death and resurrection “sightings” of Jesus. These scholars attest to the empty tomb, the conversion of the sceptics Paul and James, the dramatic change in the disciples and of course the rise of the Christian church based solely on the belief that Jesus rose from the dead. As there are not very many historical scholars who specialise in this area I will list them here. Glank, Blinzler, Bode, von Campenhausen, Delorme, Dhanis, Grundmann, Hengel, Lehmann, Leon-Dufour, Kremer, Lichtenstein, Manek, Martini, Mussner, Nauck, Rengstorff, Strobel, Stuhlmacher, Trilling, Vogtle and Wilckens. There are sixteen additional prominent scholars who are not evangelical who attest to the historicity of the above: Benoit, Brown, Clark, Dunn, Ellis, Gundry, Hooke, Jeremias, Klappert, Ladd, Lane, Marshall, Moule, Perry, Robinson, and Schnackenburg.
These forty-five prominent scholars believe that there was an empty tomb, that the disciple truly believed they saw the resurrected Jesus, that that belief caused such a dramatic change in Jesus’ followers that they endured hardship, persecution and many suffered execution for that belief, that the sceptics Paul and James were changed by an encounter with what they believed to be the resurrected Jesus. In the world today, more than one hundred historical scholars who specialise in this areas believe these premises versus thirty-five who do not.

9 comments:

Còmhradh said...

Lucian of Samosata - b 125 CE - not an eyewitness.

Tacitus - b 56 CE - not an eyewitness. Also, put in a period where a comma existed before: "Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular." It should also be noted that the veracity of Tacitus' work is in doubt. Not a good source.

Josephus - b 37 CE - not an eyewitness. Josephus' writings concerning Jesus are the subject of a lot of doubt and are not considered a legitimate source due to many discrepencies due to later writings concerning his works (take Origen, for example).

Mara Bar Serapion, quoting a letter written sometime between 73CE and 300CE - not even close to eyewitness.

The Babylonia Talmud - an oral tradition compiled in Babylon in the 5th Century CE that mentions some guy named Yeshua (Joshua) being crucified? Wow. Crucifixion was a not uncommon form of execution, and Yeshua was a not uncommon name.

-----

[a host of non-eyewitness accounts]

"All these non-Biblical sources affirm the disciples’ willingness to suffer and die for their claims that Jesus rose from the dead."

So? Again, you make a leap that one's willingness to suffer and die for their faith automatically validates that faith.

Guru Arjan Dev willingly went to torture and death rather than renounce his Sikh faith. Does that validate Sikhism in your eyes?

Sumayyah bint Khabbab was tortured to death for her faith that Mohammad was the prophet of Allah. Does that validate Islam in your eyes?

-----

"The amount of evidence that we have concerning Jesus is actually very impressive."

And all circumstantial, non-eyewitness accounts. The source material itself (the New Testament) is filled with contradictions and historical inaccuracies. My point is that there is no direct proof that your Jesus existed, and even if there was some guy named Yeshua running around preaching c30 CE (which there likely was, probably more than one), there is not one single scrap of evidence anywhere on this planet, nor was there ever, that he was in any way imbued with any sort of magical power. There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that he rose from the dead or performed any miracles. Everything that you have provided here is speculation based on a presupposed conclusion. Even if this guy did exist and preached all of the words attributed to him, none of the evidence above supports his resurrection and ascension into heaven as the only possible reason for the actions of his disciples afterward.

So, I'm still waiting for that proof.

feeno said...

Hail Comhradh

Atheists try to argue that Jesus wasn't a historical figure. Then when it's proven by non-canonical sources to be more likely than not that he did exist, they want to then claim, that these writings were either forged or can't be trusted.
For a long time they (Atheists) have tried to debunk Jesus. when it fails they then go on to try to debunk Josephus, Pliny, Mara Bar Serapian, etc.

You are right that none of these
writers were eye witnesses. There writings only prove that there was a guy called Jesus who lived under the reign of Tiberius who was crucified under Pontious
Pilate who performed amazing feats who had a loyal following of ethical people who partook in things like the Lord's supper and helped the poor and he was crucified for Jewish apostasy(claiming he was God) and that many of his followers gave up their life for the belief that this Christ character was in fact God and conquered death. The significance of the early church
martyrs is simply that they died for what they actually saw, a dead Jesus one day, then later a live Jesus. What changed doubting people like Peter or even Jesus' own brothers, I can tell you: a dead dude came back from the grave.

Dear Atheist friends and Comrades, I will concede that these stories prove nothing. I'm sorry we will never have enough proof for you. However there is enough evidence there to at least warrant reasonable consideration.

Peace and hair grease, feeno

feeno said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Còmhradh said...

"There writings only prove that there was a guy called Jesus who lived under the reign of Tiberius who was crucified under Pontious Pilate"

Their writings suggest that tales from the era support this. I'm not doubting the kernel of truth. It's not hard to accept zealots promising freedom from an oppressive occupier cropping up all with some frequency, and that at least one of them would be name Yeshua. It'd be like the odds that one of our Presidents would be named John.

"who performed amazing feats who had a loyal following of ethical people who partook in things like the Lord's supper and helped the poor and he was crucified for Jewish apostasy"

No, the sources prove none of that.

"However there is enough evidence there to at least warrant reasonable consideration."

You want a reasonable consideration of unreasonable claims? Why should we just limit ourselves to your unreasonable claims? Why shouldn't we give reasonable consideration to every mythology?

Here's my question for this particular line of reasoning: You have a nugget of historical fact that you are using to prop up your entire mythology, demanding that since that one fact is true, the rest of them are as well. What makes yours so special? Why should we hold your religion as truth based on this, and not likewise hold every other religion with a similar nugget of fact at its core as truth?

feeno said...

Hail Comhradh

I actually am not going to disagree with you, first of all you have one sexy leg. Reminds me of my Catholic school days. But I didn't become a Christian based on historical writings and teachings.

I was a Christian a long time before I even bothered myself with this stuff.
I always thought of Atheists like Big foot sightings, yeah, there might be a couple of them out
there, but am not sure?

I guess I led a sheltered life, I dunno. It wasn't until I was corrupted by the computer that I learned there was real live people out there who didn't believe in God. Kinda shocking for a sensitive little guy like me. So as I started hearing about these arguments, I somehow became an apologist as I have been teaching myself the issues at hand.

I certainly have pre-suppositions about the reasons I believe like I do, but I really haven't heard any good arguments against the existence of God. And when something does come up that would have me question my faith, I find an answer through that computer again that clears my doubts.

I'm not saying that these stories are proof, I'm saying these stories provide some evidence. There's a difference.

If you want to deny God, there is probably enough evidence for you to make that argument. If you decide to believe in God, don't feel bad, there is plenty of evidence to support that as well.

Peace out brown trout, feeno

Thesauros said...

"So? Again, you make a leap that one's willingness to suffer and die for their faith automatically validates that faith."

Hmm, I can’t tell if you simply can’t get it or if you’re misconstruing the point for your audience. This has to do with YOU and other atheists saying the disciples died for THEIR lie that Jesus rose from the dead when in fact, according to you, He did not. The issue is NOT faith but whether or not these people were willing to die for a lie - not someone else’s lie that they unfortunately believed but their lie.
===============

“And all circumstantial, non-eyewitness accounts.”

The atheist final solution. You said there was not a shred of evidence that Jesus ever lived, as He is described in the Bible. I left out the 27 independent documents written by nine different authors from antiquity that were gathered into what is now known as the New Testament because atheists dismiss those out of hand. Why? Because they’re in the Bible, as though that makes some sort of difference. Then when I give you evidence that He lived as described you say it has to be eyewitness accounts alhough you a priori reject any that we have.

Other atheists I’ve encountered say, “Well, eyewitness accounts aren’t reliable.” When I give accounts that were drawn from eyewitnesses, I get, “Well, that’s hearsay. That doesn’t count either.”

Atheist’s conclusion?

. Any evidence that confirms the historicity of the Biblical Jesus is not allowed.

. There isn’t any other evidence to confirm the historicity of the Biblical Jesus

. Therefore the Biblical Jesus did not exist.

Còmhradh said...

"first of all you have one sexy leg."

Thanks, but that's actually Ewan MacGregor. But I have been known to turn the ladies' heads when I'm sporting the kilt.

Còmhradh said...

"This has to do with YOU and other atheists saying the disciples died for THEIR lie that Jesus rose from the dead when in fact, according to you, He did not."

You're the one calling it a lie, I'm calling it a belief. While I don't deny that someone probably died for believing things that were not true. That doesn't make them a lie. People do it all the time. Sometimes they die because they adhere to the wrong religion. Sometimes they die because they're fighting to keep the world safe from Communism,

"The issue is NOT faith but whether or not these people were willing to die for a lie - not someone else’s lie that they unfortunately believed but their lie."

Actually, that's not the issue, because as I explained, it's not a lie, it's a belief. Not many people are willing to die for their own lies, but they're usually more than willing to die for someone else's lies that they wholeheartedly believe (see: nearly every war causualty throughout history).

--------

"“And all circumstantial, non-eyewitness accounts.”
The atheist final solution."

Try not to Godwin yourself.

"You said there was not a shred of evidence that Jesus ever lived, as He is described in the Bible."

And you haven't provided any.

"I left out the 27 independent documents written by nine different authors from antiquity that were gathered into what is now known as the New Testament because atheists dismiss those out of hand. Why? Because they’re in the Bible, as though that makes some sort of difference."

None of them are eyewitness accounts, either. And they're collected in a tome that claims it is correct because it claims it is correct.

"Then when I give you evidence that He lived as described you say it has to be eyewitness accounts alhough you a priori reject any that we have."

That's because you don't have any! And the stories that you do have of the event have historical inaccuracies! I reject them because they're unreliable at best, contradictory, easily shown to be inaccurate, and chock full of mythology that is easily found in earlier texts. Are you really so unversed as to believe that your religion has a monopoly on the virgin birth of a savior who dies for his people?

--------

"When I give accounts that were drawn from eyewitnesses"

I am still waiting for those accounts.

--------

". Any evidence that confirms the historicity of the Biblical Jesus is not allowed."

None has been presented.

". There isn’t any other evidence to confirm the historicity of the Biblical Jesus"

None that isn't reliable.

". Therefore the Biblical Jesus did not exist."

Exactly. Because the Jesus as described in the Bible existing is as likely as any other magical creature from myth and legend existing. Accepting claims of dubious reliability and accepting as fact unsubstantiated and fantastic claims will validate any religion. So, again... why is yours so special?

failedatheist said...

It still shocks me that we have a group of people, that being the atheists or brights..whatever they call themselves nowadays that claim to be the intellectuals of the world yet there intellectual dishonesty is exposed for what it is when it comes to subjects like this. As a former atheist myself I could've never got to this conclusion from the evidence, I mean even Richard Dawkins has changed his tune and now readily admits Jesus was a historical figure (See his recent debate with John Lennox).

I honestly find it difficult to respect someone intellectually who can't even admit Jesus existed and was crucified under Pilate in Jerusalem. Good post by the way.