Monday, July 22, 2013

The Last Red Flag

We now check the 7th and last of our atheist critic's "red flags":

7)…100% FACT: no on duty judge, jury, prosecutor, defense attorney, or court would accept what we have of the gospels as evidence for anyone in the bible …RED FLAG!!!!

Whether judges or juries would do this is frankly irrelevant. It is what historians would do with them, and on that account, historians as a whole (apart from fringe crackpots) do accept the Gospels as evidence for Jesus, Peter, and others. Of course not all accept various aspects of what the Gospels report, but our critic here is dealing only in bare "existence" issues.

I should also note that in legal terms, I have stated elsewhere that the Gospels would be accepted in legal terms as the equivalent to a "friend of the court" brief.

The critic's last two complaints may be taken together as they say the same thing in essence:

Bonus 100% FACT: the Jewish Dead Sea Scrolls (written before, during, and after 4 BCE to 30 AD) knows nothing of the NT Jesus or his disciples (the NT Jesus simply don’t exist in them) …RED FLAG!!!!

Bonus 100% FACT: 4 BCE to 30 AD, worldwide, (far as what we have in our hands) is void of the NT Jesus …RED FLAG!!!!

A couple of points here. First of all, no one expects Jesus to be mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The materials found therein are either Old Testament documents, or documents related to the DSS community, such as their secondary canon materials and their community rules. Expecting Jesus to appear in these is just short of the absurdity it would be to expect him to be mentioned in Columella's work on agriculture.

Second, our critic has this rather insane idea that historical testimomy to a person is worthless unless it was written while that person was alive, which is why he cites "4 BCE to 30 AD" as a range. Of course that would render a fair chunk of history, even that written by relible historians by Tacitus, out of bounds.

That ends our look at this critic's fantasies. The Ticker may have irregular posts the next two weeks as I have some minor home repairs to deal with.

Nick Peters has his take.

1 comment:

  1. So according to this "expert" Mt Vesuvius didn't erupt because the only textual record we have of it came many years later? (Pliny the younger discussing how his uncle, Pliny the elder, died if I recall correctly)

    He strikes me as the delicate sort, perhaps a little prone to the vapours, panicking over such insignificant issues. Perhaps one should get him a nice hot cup of tea and a biscuit, pad his pillows, and keep his windows drawn lest he be exposed to anything more stressful than children's cartoons.