Mr. Jaggers

It would be difficult to credit the Bible generally (and the gospels in particular) as proof of anything. It is, at best, anecdotal evidence, viz. stories whose authorship cannot be authenticated and which cannot be corroborated except by other hearsay evidence; and although there are references in the Scriptures of persons, places and events whose existence can be corroborated by other historical records, it is hard to credit the story of Jesus in the gospels as anything more than fable. The four gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) cannot be authenticated; and even if they could, they cannot be proved contemporaneous accounts of a percipient witness to the events described or even recorded recollection. They were most likely popular stories handed down by verbal tradition and miscellaneous writings of the early Christian sects, which were later collected and revised under the auspices of the Church (not all of the gospels were approved), and eventually translated into Latin by St. Jerome in the 4th Century A.D. The English Bible is even more attenuated, being translated by William Tyndale, who used the Hebrew and Greek texts and not the Latin Vulgate; which translation was later revised (and edited) as the King James Version. To argue over which version of the Scriptures is correct is merely to beg the question.

For the same reason, it is questionable that these texts can even be relied upon as an historical record. For example, we know a great deal more about Pontius Pilate than we do about Jesus. Pilate was a Roman aristocrat, a knight of the equestrian class, and appointed Procurator of Judea as representative of the Emperor Tiberius. The historical references to Jesus, on the other hand, are sketchy at best. Philo of Alexandria, who was contemporaneous with Jesus and Paul, does not mention Christ or the Christians; and the brief account of Flavius Josephus in the Testamonium Flavianum (C.E. 93) appears to have been added by a later hand. Even the reference by Tacitus is second-hand hearsay (probably from his friend and correspondent Pliny the Younger, who was Governor of Bithynia, and would have had access to the historical records and reports of the region). See Annals, 15.53.

Here argument fails, for argument is not evidence. In this respect, the Bible is no more relevant than other ancient literary works, e.g., Homer, in proving historical fact. Questions of this sort require one to assume as true what may not be susceptible of proof; which presumptions invariably result in irrational arguments that get nowhere. The Scriptures are just not intended to be subject to such critical examination. You can argue it forever, but it will bring you no closer to the truth of the matter.

Solo

Not that I am an expert on Voltaire but I seem to recall an unfortunate affair that he had with a Jewish merchant by the name of Abraham Hirschel over some valuables held by Voltaire in escrow in which lying under oath was alleged. See here:

http://oll.libertyfund.org/Texts/Com...t05_Chap4.html

Perhaps, that was the reference. Of course, Voltaire, being larger than life had a rumour-mill going all of his life.

Jiri