An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists, by the Rules of Evidence Administered in Courts of Justice: With an Account of the Trial of JesusGreenleaf, Simon
Religion
An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists, by the Rules of Evidence Administered in Courts of Justice: With an Account of the Trial of Jesus
Greenleaf, Simon
Apologetics; Authority -- Religious aspects; Bible. Gospels -- Evidences, authority, etc.; Jesus Christ -- Trial
§ 45. “Had the evangelists been false historians,” says Dr. Chalmers,
“they would not have committed themselves upon so many particulars. They
would not have furnished the vigilant inquirers of that period with such
an effectual instrument for bringing them into discredit with the people;
nor foolishly supplied, in every page of their narrative, so many
materials for a cross-examination, which would infallibly have disgraced
them. Now, we of this age can institute the same cross-examination. We can
compare the evangelical writers with contemporary authors, and verify a
number of circumstances in the history, and government, and peculiar
economy of the Jewish people. We therefore have it in our power to
institute a cross-examination upon the writers of the New Testament; and
the freedom and frequency of their allusions to these circumstances supply
us with ample materials for it. The fact, that they are borne out in their
minute and incidental allusions by the testimony of other historians,
gives a strong weight of what has been called circumstantial evidence in
their favour. As a specimen of the argument, let us confine our
observations to the history of our Saviour’s trial, and execution, and
burial. They brought him to Pontius Pilate. We know both from Tacitus and
Josephus, that he was at that time governor of Judea. A sentence from him
was necessary before they could proceed to the execution of Jesus; and we
know that the power of life and death was usually vested in the Roman
governor. Our Saviour was treated with derision; and this we know to have
been a customary practice at that time, previous to the execution of
criminals, and during the time of it. Pilate scourged Jesus before he gave
him up to be crucified. We know from ancient authors, that this was a very
usual practice among the Romans. The accounts of an execution generally
run in this form: he was stripped, whipped, and beheaded or executed.
According to the evangelists, his accusation was written on the top of the
cross; and we learn from Suetonius and others, that the crime of the
person to be executed was affixed to the instrument of his punishment.
According to the evangelists, this accusation was written in three
different languages; and we know from Josephus that it was quite common in
Jerusalem to have all public advertisements written in this manner.
According to the evangelists, Jesus had to bear his cross; and we know
from other sources of information, that this was the constant practice of
these times. According to the evangelists, the body of Jesus was given up
to be buried at the request of friends. We know that, unless the criminal
was infamous, this was the law or the custom with all Roman
governors.”(69)
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account