To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

between Napoleon Bonaparte and Simon Greenleaf, one of the principle founders of Harvard Law School, on the nature of Jesus Christ...

Bonaparte said "I know men and I tell you that Jesus Christ is no mere man. Between Him and every other person in the world there is no possible term of comparison. Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, and I have founded empires. But on what did we rest the creation of our genius? Upon force. Jesus Christ founded His empire upon love; and at this hour millions of men would die for Him."

Simon Greenleaf said "The doctrines and precepts of Jesus are in strict accordance with the attributes of God, agreeably to the most exalted idea which we can form of them, either from reason or from revelation. They are strikingly adapted to the capacity of mankind, and yet are delivered with a simplicity and majesty wholly divine. He spake as never man spake. He spake with authority; yet addressed himself to the reason and the understanding of men; and he spake with wisdom, which men could neither gainsay nor resist. In his private life, he exhibits a character not merely of strict justice, but of flowing benignity. He is temperate, without austerity; his meekness and humility are signal; his patience is invincible; truth and sincerity illustrate his whole conduct; every one of his virtues is regulated by consummate prudence; and he both wins the love of his friends, and extorts the wonder and admiration of his enemies. He is represented in very variety of situation in life, from the height of worldly grandeur, amid the acclamations of an admiring multitude, to the deepest abyss of human degradation and woe, apparently deserted of God and man. Yet everywhere he is the same; displaying a character of unearthly perfection, symmetrical in all its proportions, and encircled with splendor more than human."(an excerpt from "Testimony of the Evangelists" a careful examination of the witness of the Gospels by a Harvard Law Professor...Greenleaf's other well-known work, a Treatise on the Law of Evidence, is considered a classic of American jurisprudence.)

http://www.bibleteacher.org/sgtestimony.htm

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

Buddha >>>>>>>>> Jesus when it comes to the stuff you're talking about.

Why aren't you a Buddhist?

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

I think I'm getting it, Splendour. You believe that we base our opinions on the arguments of people who are "important" or "scientific," and thus you're searching out "important" and "scientific" Christians in order to influence us. The idea that we form our opinions based on the facts and the arguments, rather than the people who make them, hasn't fully occurred to you.

Well, that's the reality. It doesn't matter who said what, for the most part. In the sense that it does matter, it's the proportions of scientists and other figures who support Christianity that matter, not the individuals. So you are getting nowhere.

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think I'm getting it, Splendour. You believe that we base our opinions on the arguments of people who are "important" or "scientific," and thus you're searching out "important" and "scientific" Christians in order to influence us. The idea that we form our opinions based on the facts and the arguments, rather than the people who make them, hasn't fully occurred to you.

Well, that's the reality. It doesn't matter who said what, for the most part. In the sense that it does matter, it's the proportions of scientists and other figures who support Christianity that matter, not the individuals. So you are getting nowhere.

[/ QUOTE ]

This one time Darwin said "Pull my finger."

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think I'm getting it, Splendour. You believe that we base our opinions on the arguments of people who are "important" or "scientific," and thus you're searching out "important" and "scientific" Christians in order to influence us. The idea that we form our opinions based on the facts and the arguments, rather than the people who make them, hasn't fully occurred to you.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you consider the basis for the general theistic search , that would be the required mindset. "X said ..."
The appeal to Authority is a fundamental.

luckyme

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

Actually Madnak I think its more important to widen the search...to look at sources in addition to science...Science is in flux a lot of the time and the bible was written in an inspired sweeping vein that was more concerned with capturing moral philosophy and the interrelationships between man and man and between man and God and frequently it speaks in down to earth universal terms instead of overly analytical ones (one of the reasons for so many parables...also parables are remembered more easily than dissertations)...science seems almost incidental in the bible...Many Christians actually regard the bible as a manual for "right living" and for their ultimate plan of salvation...sort of like the owner's manual to a new automobile...We rely on it...like in a legal sense where rely means "depend on" for our critical decisions or for critical advice ...

I would also be aware of "groupthink" in an internet forum...people with like minds tend to cluster together and that will narrow your scope also...

People have free will to think things over...but there's always that element of peer pressure...To believe or not is a personal choice...

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

I dont know what I am supposed to find interesting in this. Surely the idea of a god is either right or wrong. What someone said years ago (however much we should or should not respect them) isnt going to mean much - the idea of a personal god who participates in the world in some way is either a coherent idea or it isnt. If god exists, well these two people agreed at some level about jesus. If god doesnt exist, they still agreed.

I've asked you a couple of direct questions which I havent yet seen you answer, perhaps you will answer this one. Can you say why you are posting here?

The most common reason people post on SMP is to discuss ideas and hear arguments for and against them - if you are trying to save souls or just preach that's all fine, but if you would clearly state that then I can at least stop bothering to respond with an argument. If on the other hand, you are interested in putting forth ideas and then debating them. Perhaps you could make some statement as to what you think the agreement of these two people means?

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I dont know what I am supposed to find interesting in this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bunny, get a grip. Napolean liked broccoli, Ronald Reagan like broccoli. hmmmmm... interesting... broccoli is therefore good for you.
It's called 'broadening the search'. You put aside logic and evidence and just find stuff that is 'interesting'.

luckyme

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I dont know what I am supposed to find interesting in this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bunny, get a grip. Napolean liked broccoli, Ronald Reagan like broccoli. hmmmmm... interesting... broccoli is therefore good for you.
It's called 'broadening the search'. You put aside logic and evidence and just find stuff that is 'interesting'.

luckyme

[/ QUOTE ]
Well I was hoping to make the point that it would help to hear some input from the OP as to why it was interesting. I'm curious as to why Splendour is posting here - at this stage I'm leaning towards "I must try and save these atheists by preaching the good word to them." However, I've been wrong before, so was looking for a clue from him... [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I dont know what I am supposed to find interesting in this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bunny, get a grip. Napolean liked broccoli, Ronald Reagan like broccoli. hmmmmm... interesting... broccoli is therefore good for you.
It's called 'broadening the search'. You put aside logic and evidence and just find stuff that is 'interesting'.

luckyme

[/ QUOTE ]
Well I was hoping to make the point that it would help to hear some input from the OP as to why it was interesting. I'm curious as to why Splendour is posting here - at this stage I'm leaning towards "I must try and save these atheists by preaching the good word to them." However, I've been wrong before, so was looking for a clue from him... [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

he doesn't have one to give out.

luckyme

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

Well, you never know. Besides, someone in my position benefits from drawing fire from both sides..

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

Bunny sometimes I try to support faith, sometimes I post something interesting that may or may not be an eye opener to people...I never think the people posting in here are the only ones paying attention to what I have to say...sometimes the smartest people are the quiet ones...Like that old proverb: A shallow river is noisy but a still river runs deep...and maybe they are looking at things from different angles...you never know til you study it for a while whether the new angle is valid or not...and not everything is immediately explainable or has only 1 answer...sometimes you have to play connect the dots or turn something upside down and inside out to understand it better... [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

Ok I still dont understand. I presume this thread is an example of "...something interesting that may or may not be an eye opener to people" Can you say why you find it interesting? It seems to me to be irrelevant to resolving any religious question.

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ok I still dont understand. I presume this thread is an example of "...something interesting that may or may not be an eye opener to people" Can you say why you find it interesting? It seems to me to be irrelevant to resolving any religious question.

[/ QUOTE ]

transport yourself back to middleschool days and you discover 'lincoln has 7 letters, kennedy has 7 letters...." hmmmmm...interesting...wow... just imagine...

that's the 'interesting' that's caught splendors attention.

luckyme

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

That's what it seems like to me too. One last try though...

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

If you have the patience bunny....read the link in my original post...It has an incredibly detailed summary of how evidence would be assessed on the 4 Gospels...It is quite a lengthy document, but very educational...by a lawyer assessing the evidence from a tribunal perspective....

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
by a lawyer assessing the evidence from a tribunal perspective....

[/ QUOTE ]

I send him some challenges on a couple points but so far no answer. Perhaps you could get him on this forum to face them.

luckyme

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
This one time Darwin said "Pull my finger."

[/ QUOTE ]

Rub it in, why dontcha...

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Bonaparte said "I know men and I tell you that Jesus Christ is no mere man. Between Him and every other person in the world there is no possible term of comparison. Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, and I have founded empires. But on what did we rest the creation of our genius? Upon force. Jesus Christ founded His empire upon love; and at this hour millions of men would die for Him."

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree completely with Napolean here.
EXCEPT alexander. Alexander would have killed jesus so fast and then conquered china before breakfast.
[ QUOTE ]
He spake as never man spake.

[/ QUOTE ]
Simon Greenleaf can get me a motivational speech from Jesus? Hell yeah!

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

Do you mean that if I read the link I will see why it's interesting?

Personally, I'm unlikely to put the effort in if someone who has read it is unable to tell me in a paragraph why it's interesting. I'm not expecting a summary of the link, in fact I'd prefer not to hear you paraphrase what someone else said - what I struggle to see is why it would matter that this guy says something similar to napoleon (and I doubt he addresses that topic in the link).

EDIT: OK I read the link and found it poor apologetics. Also, it didnt really have anything to do with what napoleon said. The weakest was the part where he essentially said:

"We know the 4 gospel writers didnt collude because there are so many discrepancies in their accounts. Yet we should accept their testimony, since they all say the same thing."

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Jesus Christ founded His empire upon love

[/ QUOTE ]
While the principle teachings of Jesus are based on love and other good ideals the people who established the Christian empire did it by running the streets red with the blood of those who opposed their theology. Just like every other empire.

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Jesus Christ founded His empire upon love

[/ QUOTE ]
While the principle teachings of Jesus are based on love and other good ideals the people who established the Christian empire did it by running the streets red with the blood of those who opposed their theology. Just like every other empire.

[/ QUOTE ]

This certainly doesn't refute any theist assertion. Just confirms the divide between the mortal and the divine.

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

bunny, you seem to be mixing up and misinterpreting the significance of the link I posted...the link is from an early 19th Century legal authority who is speaking in very old fashioned English about how the evidence of the 4 Gospels would be interpreted and considered in a court of law in his day...since he was a recognized authority on legal evidence and wrote a treatise on it maybe he knows a thing or two about evidence/testimony that the average layman would not know....He essentially is expressing his evaluation (legal opinion) of the testimony of the 4 Disciples who rendered the 4 Gospels....

I can't and won't do the work for all of you...I'm only indicating some sources to consider...Trying to help widen your lens...

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
since he was a recognized authority on legal evidence and wrote a treatise on it maybe he knows a thing or two about evidence/testimony that the average layman would not know....He essentially is expressing his evaluation (legal opinion) of the testimony of the 4 Disciples who rendered the 4 Gospels....

I can't and won't do the work for all of you...I'm only indicating some sources to consider...Trying to help widen your lens...

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

If you consider the basis for the general theistic search , that would be the required mindset. "X said ..."
The appeal to Authority is a fundamental.

luckyme

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, at least I got something interesting after following all this religious stuff here. I didn't realize that the appeal to authorities is so important for the Christian mind-set.

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

The appeal to authority is not limited to Christians...it is a universal mindset....That ought to be obvious to anybody that thinks about it for a while...I don't know of any discipline: medicine, law, history, science that doesn't have its authorities...

Here's a definition:
authority
One entry found for authority.


Main Entry: au·thor·i·ty
Pronunciation: &-'thär-&-tE, o-, -'thor-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
Etymology: Middle English auctorite, from Anglo-French auctorité, from Latin auctoritat-, auctoritas opinion, decision, power, from auctor
1 a (1) : a citation (as from a book or file) used in defense or support (2) : the source from which the citation is drawn b (1) : a conclusive statement or set of statements (as an official decision of a court) (2) : a decision taken as a precedent (3) : TESTIMONY c : an individual cited or appealed to as an expert
2 a : power to influence or command thought, opinion, or behavior b : freedom granted by one in authority : RIGHT
3 a : persons in command; specifically : GOVERNMENT b : a governmental agency or corporation to administer a revenue-producing public enterprise <the transit authority>
4 a : GROUNDS, WARRANT <had excellent authority for believing the claim> b : convincing force <lent authority to the performance>
synonym see INFLUENCE, POWER

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

Are you high school? And this is a serious question.

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

No not high school...

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
No not high school...

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah. So Elementary school, then. Glad we cleared that up.

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
bunny, you seem to be mixing up and misinterpreting the significance of the link I posted...the link is from an early 19th Century legal authority who is speaking in very old fashioned English about how the evidence of the 4 Gospels would be interpreted and considered in a court of law in his day...since he was a recognized authority on legal evidence and wrote a treatise on it maybe he knows a thing or two about evidence/testimony that the average layman would not know....He essentially is expressing his evaluation (legal opinion) of the testimony of the 4 Disciples who rendered the 4 Gospels....

I can't and won't do the work for all of you...I'm only indicating some sources to consider...Trying to help widen your lens...

[/ QUOTE ]
Well thanks for the patronising explanation of my error. I will point out that your original thread wasnt to do with evaluating evidence. It was about "an interesting agreement between Napoleon Bonaparte and Simon Greenleaf, one of the principle founders of Harvard Law School, on the nature of Jesus Christ..." I've asked you a number of times any such agreement would be interesting, to which you eventually replied that I should read the link. So I did. It didnt explain why it was interesting and I still dont understand why anyone would think it was.

I also made a criticism of one argument in the link you posted which you didnt bother responding to - shall I write to the author?

You dont really understand why I post on SMP - I'm all for a wide sampling of views. I do expect people to provide some explanation of why they think as they do. What they think is not particularly interesting, no matter who they are.

I wont bother you any more with difficult questions - it must be very frustrating to watch me mix up and misinterpret the significance of all the links you post. Not quite sure how that leads to your policy of not explaining any of them and, when questioned, of merely suggesting I read them. Still, it's for my own good, hey?

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
bunny, you seem to be mixing up and misinterpreting the significance of the link I posted...the link is from an early 19th Century legal authority who is speaking in very old fashioned English about how the evidence of the 4 Gospels would be interpreted and considered in a court of law in his day...since he was a recognized authority on legal evidence and wrote a treatise on it maybe he knows a thing or two about evidence/testimony that the average layman would not know....He essentially is expressing his evaluation (legal opinion) of the testimony of the 4 Disciples who rendered the 4 Gospels....

I can't and won't do the work for all of you...I'm only indicating some sources to consider...Trying to help widen your lens...

[/ QUOTE ]

The four disciples you speak of did not author the gospels. They were written by unknown authors successively beginning about AD 70.

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

Napoleon is one of the most aggressive leaders of a state ever. And he also spoke pretty well of Islam when he was in the whole Cairo mess.

Here are some other quotes from Napoleon on religion:

-"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet."
- "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich"
- "All religions have been made by men. "
- "If I had to choose a religion, the sun as the universal giver of life would be my god. "

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

Have to disagree with you JustinA...if you think 12 guys left family, friends, professions to live and travel night and day for 2 to 3 years with Jesus then left the Gospel accounts to someone else then that is just not logical or even probable...Not to mention dying in his name...

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

Never said Napoleon was a nice guy but many do believe he was a genius...And he did do at least one good thing in letting the Jews out of the ghettoes...

Also the quote I cited originally was from his St. Helena period...maybe losing everything changed his outlook...

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

Well, I'm not quite sure what you want. The Jesus as described in the bible seems like a nice enough guy with some good ideas. Maybe a few dents in the armour here and there, but for his times certainly quite the liberal. Not many would dispute that.

What most would debate is his historical existence, his claimed miracles, if he was the son of god or if he was divine.

Plus I don't buy into the whole 'love conquers all' message, there is alot more to the world and relationships to people than that.

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

What most would debate is his historical existence, his claimed miracles, if he was the son of god or if he was divine. -Wow some really big questions here tame_deuces...

Check out a copy of The Case for Christ...I think it answers most if not all of these questions...Strobel is an Ivy league educated attorney who went into investigative journalism...He was instrumental in uncovering the Ford Pinto cover-up...He later researched all these questions you have about Christ from a skeptic's position...

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
What most would debate is his historical existence, his claimed miracles, if he was the son of god or if he was divine. -Wow some really big questions here tame_deuces...

Check out a copy of The Case for Christ...I think it answers most if not all of these questions...Strobel is an Ivy league educated attorney who went into investigative journalism...He was instrumental in uncovering the Ford Pinto cover-up...He later researched all these questions you have about Christ from a skeptic's position...

[/ QUOTE ]

ugh...I am continually amazed by how many Christians recommend The Case for Christ...that book is seriously terrible..Whether you are a Christian or not, you should see that...it is thoroughly destroyed all over teh internets

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

Yes, I have debated it quite abit actually. I come from a christian home and though we children learned little of religion untill we turned 15, after that I got quite used to bible meetings and similar, even if I tended to be the sole atheist. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Anyways the conclusions I came to was that if we look at it from a theist's point of view, then the worship of jesus, the cross and the bible are in direct violations of the first two commandments:

1.You shall have no other gods before me. (jesus)
2 You shall not make for yourself an idol. (cross/bible)

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Have to disagree with you JustinA...if you think 12 guys left family, friends, professions to live and travel night and day for 2 to 3 years with Jesus then left the Gospel accounts to someone else then that is just not logical or even probable...Not to mention dying in his name...

[/ QUOTE ]

The disciples didn't have a choice but to "leave it to someone else". Most of them were long dead by the time the Gospels were written. This is pre-supposing that the disciples existed in the first place.

You really are an embarassment to your faith. You can't even get the basic facts right.

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Have to disagree with you JustinA...if you think 12 guys left family, friends, professions to live and travel night and day for 2 to 3 years with Jesus then left the Gospel accounts to someone else then that is just not logical or even probable...Not to mention dying in his name...



[/ QUOTE ]

Splendour,

JustinA didn’t just throw out the 70AD date at random. The Gospel of Mark, which is chronologically the first gospel written, talks about the destruction of the Jewish Temple, which took place in 70 AD. Hence, the writer of Mark wrote his account sometime after 70 AD. By the time the Gospel of John was written, the Apostles of Jesus would have been long dead.

Re: To Theists: An Interesting Agreement ...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Have to disagree with you JustinA...if you think 12 guys left family, friends, professions to live and travel night and day for 2 to 3 years with Jesus then left the Gospel accounts to someone else then that is just not logical or even probable...Not to mention dying in his name...

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not a matter of opinion.