1
Introduction / Accusation #1
This series was inspired by Newsweek’s 12-23-2014 article: “The Bible: So Misunderstood It's a Sin”
2
Introduction
“THE BIBLE: SO MISUNDERSTOOD IT'S A SIN”
Five accusations of Biblical credibility:
3
Uncertainty over “which books belong in the Bible”
“Error-plagued manuscripts”
“Humanly added sections”
“Bad English translations”
“Numerous internal contradictions”
Etc.
Introduction
“No television preacher has ever read the Bible. Neither has any evangelical politician. Neither has the pope. Neither have I. And neither have you. At best, we’ve all read a bad translation—a translation of translations of translations of hand-copied copies of copies of copies of copies, and on and on, hundreds of times.”
Newsweek: “The Bible: So Misunderstood It’s a Sin”
4
Introduction
Regarding those who persecute us for doing what is right, Peter said‌
1 Peter 3.14-15 (ESV) Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, ALWAYS being PREPARED to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame.
5
Introduction
Is it fair to say: “When people attack the Bible’ credibility, this has a direct impact on our hope of salvation through Jesus Christ”?
6
Introduction
God will compare our lives to His Word to determine our eternal destinations… John 12.47-48 [ESV] If anyone hears My words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world… …The one who rejects Me and does not receive My words has a Judge; THE WORD that I have spoken will judge him on the last day.
Revelation 20.12 [Here’s what will happen ‘on the last day’…] And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened [records of men’s deeds?]. Then another book was opened [see J12.48], which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done.
James 1.21 [Put away all evil and in its place]…receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls.
7
Introduction
When people attack/question our faith in Christ, or the basis of our faith system which leads us to Christ, it’s a good thing for us to “be prepared” to give an honest, educated answer.
8
Introduction
Science’s “scientific method” for finding truth The Scientific Method proposes that to obtain truth, to factually support a hypothesis, one must: “…ask questions about nature, pose hypotheses to answer the questions, and test the hypotheses with actual evidence; and [one must] be a skeptic, suspicious of poorly documented or contrived answers to your hypothetical questions." Simply put, it’s using actual evidence only to prove conclusions.
9
Introduction Science’s “Scientific Method”
“TEST everything; HOLD FAST what is good.” (1 Thessalonians 5.21)
10
The Bible’s “Scientific Method”
“THE BIBLE: SO MISUNDERSTOOD IT'S A SIN”
Five accusations of Biblical credibility:
11
Uncertainty over “which books belong in the Bible”
“Error-plagued manuscripts”
“Humanly added sections”
“Bad English translations”
“Numerous internal contradictions”
Etc.
Introduction
12
Accusation #1
“About 400 years passed between the writing of the first Christian manuscripts and their compilation into the New Testament. (That’s the same amount of time between the arrival of the Pilgrims on the Mayflower and today.) …when the books that would become the New Testament were chosen. There were no printing presses beforehand or until 1,000 years later. There were no vacuum-sealed technologies to preserve paper for centuries. Dried clay broke, papyrus and parchment crumbled away, primitive inks faded.”
Newsweek: “The Bible: So Misunderstood It’s a Sin”
13
Accusation #1
The impression is left that Christians were clueless for the better part of 400 years (about which books belonged in the NT), at which time they decided to have a big meeting to guess about which books belonged, and which books didn’t.
14
Accusation #1
Per the majority of scholars, the first credible list of New Testament books accepted by early Christians is the 'Muratorian Fragment' (or ‘Muratorian Canon’), a Latin fragment scholars consider to have been translated from a Greek MS dating to ~AD 170.
15
Accusation #1
THE WORD ‘CANON’… …is used by scholars to refer to ‘the set of books that are inspired by God’—in other words, ‘canonical’ book s are those that belong in the Bible.
16
Accusation #1
.
Muratorian Fragment (last page) (written in Lain ~AD 650, translating an AD 170 Greek MS) Public domain via Wikimedia Commons
17
Accusation #1
Translation of Muratorian Fragment (1) http://www.bible-researcher.com/muratorian.html
. . . (2) The third book of the Gospel is that according to Luke…The fourth of the Gospels is that of John, [one] of the disciples…John so consistently (28) mentions these particular points also in his Epistles…Moreover, the acts of all the apostles (35) were written in one book. For 'most excellent Theophilus‘ Luke compiled (36) the individual events that took place in his presence (37) as he plainly shows by omitting the martyrdom of Peter (38) as well as the departure of Paul from the city [of Rome] (39) when he journeyed to Spain. As for the Epistles of (40-41) Paul… [Some say Paul’s writings don’t belong in NT canon because Paul contradicted Jesus: M5. 17 =“I have not come to abolish [the law & prophets]” καταλύω=dissolve, destroy, demolish E2.15=JC gave us peace “by abolishing the law” καταργέω=‘deactivated, unemployed’, Cl2.14] The Law of Moses is not like a building that was demolished to make way for new construction. Rather, it’s more like an valuable old building that’s been converted to a museum which could be to provide visitors with historical perspective on why the city around it was built. …they themselves make clear to those desiring to understand, which ones [they are], from what place, or for what reason they were sent. (42) First of all, to the Corinthians, prohibiting their heretical schisms; (43) next, to the Galatians, against circumcision; (44-46) then to the Romans he wrote at length, explaining the order (or, plan) of the Scriptures, and also that Christ is their principle (or, main theme). It is necessary (47) for us to discuss these one by one, since the blessed (48) apostle Paul himself…writes by name to only seven churches in the following sequence: To the Corinthians (51) first, to the Ephesians second, to the Philippians third, (52) to the Colossians fourth, to the Galatians fifth, (53) to the Thessalonians sixth, to the Romans (54-5) seventh [LAST NOT FIRST!!]. It is true that he writes once more to the Corinthians and to the Thessalonians for the sake of admonition, (56-7) yet it is clearly recognizable that there is one Church spread throughout the whole extent of the earth.
18
Accusation #1
Translation of Muratorian Fragment (2) http://www.bible-researcher.com/muratorian.html
. . . For John also in the (58) Apocalypse, though he writes to seven churches, (59-60) nevertheless speaks to all. [Paul also wrote] out of affection and love one to Philemon, one to Titus, and two to Timothy; and these are held sacred (62-63) in the esteem of the Church catholic [“universal, widespread”] for the regulation of ecclesiastical discipline. There is current also [an epistle] to (64) the Laodiceans, [see Cl4.16] [and] another to the Alexandrians, [both] forged in Paul's (65) name to [further] the heresy of Marcion, and several others (66) which cannot be received into the catholic Church (67) for it is not fitting that gall be mixed with honey. (68)
Moreover, the epistle of Jude and two (bearing the name of) John are counted (or, used) in the catholic [Church]; and [the book of] Wisdom, [an RC book of the Apocrypha?] (70) written by the friends of Solomon in his honor. (71) We receive only the apocalypses of John and Peter [written ~AD 150—not that this is NOT 2 Peter], (72) though some of us are not willing that the latter be read in church. (73) But Hermas wrote the Shepherd (74) very recently, in our times, [i.e., too late to be an authentic NT book] in the city of Rome… (77) …it cannot be read publicly to the people in church either among (79) the Prophets, whose number is complete, [8] or among (80) the Apostles, for it is after [their] time. (81) But we accept nothing whatever of Arsinous or Valentinus or Miltiades, (82) who also composed (83) a new book of psalms for Marcion, (84-5) together with Basilides, the Asian founder of the Cataphrygians . . .
19
Accusation #1
Muratorian Fragment Books mentioned or implied Matthew (implied) Mark (implied) Luke (2) John Acts
NOTE: Not mentioned: Hebrews, James, 1&2 Peter, and 3 John, but remember that the fragment abruptly ends before his writing was completed.
Romans 1 & 2 Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Colossians 1&2 Thessalonians
1&2 Timothy Titus Philemon
CONCLUSION: These books were likely well established in the universal church, since the gospel is described as having “spread throughout the whole extent of the earth” by the time of his writing (~AD 170). Additionally, it’s entirely possible that many Christians could have met John as young adults and still been alive as late as AD 150 (if born in AD 75 they would be 75 years old in AD 150), and could have known the MF’s author. Therefore, claims that early Christians “didn’t know” what books were canonical until AD 400 are historically inaccurate.
1 & 2 John Jude
Revelation
20
Accusation #1
The Muratorian Fragment is such a valuable document that some canonical NT books Were questioned mainly because THEY WEREN’T IN THIS LIST… …Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, and 3 John.
21
Accusation #1
The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls helps us to understand how Jews and Jewish Christians organized their collections of religious writings. “There were three types of books: copies of Holy Scripture (what we now call the Old Testament), commentaries on Scripture, and theological writings. For Christians, the first Scriptures they thrived on were the Law and the Prophets. These were copied and distributed since they provided the sources for one vital ingredient of the Christian message: the suffering and redemption of Jesus the Messiah had been predicted many centuries earlier. How We Got Our Bible--Did You Know?—ChristianHistoryInstitute.org https://www.christianhistoryinstitute.org/uploaded/50cf818b08dfb0.02275142.pdf
22
Accusation #1
A few decades after Eusebius, the Codex Vaticanus, a Greek volume of both Old and New Testaments, contained the complete New Testament as we have it today; but only slightly later, Codex Sinaiticus still included the Letter of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. Later still, toward the end of the fourth century, the Codex Alexandrinus excluded the Shepherd and Barnabas, but had the two letters of Clement instead. In other words, even major, official codices, expensive to make and therefore produced with at least regional authority, continued to show a certain degree of freedom of choice beyond the agreed core of the 27 writings. It was an individual who finally helped clarify things [Athanasius]. (How We Got Our Bible--Did You Know?—ChristianHistoryInstitute.org)
23
Accusation #1
In 367, Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, used the opportunity of his annual Easter Festal Letter (a letter to all the churches and monasteries under his jurisdiction) to explain what the Old Testament and New Testament should consist of. In terms of the New Testament, he listed the same 27 texts we have today, and he wrote, “These are the ‘springs of salvation,’ so that anyone who is thirsty may be satisfied with the messages contained in them. Only in them is the teaching of true religion proclaimed as the ‘Good News.’ Let no one add to these or take anything away from them.” Athanasius then says that the Shepherd of Hermas and the Teaching of the Apostles (the Didache) are “indeed not included in the canon.” He does say, however, that they are helpful reading for new converts. Athanasius’s list did not settle the matter everywhere. In the West, variations remained possible, and as we have seen, a codex like Alexandrinus could, decades after the Festal Letter, happily include two letters the bishop did not even mention. But by the early 400s, the consensus of tradition was more or less established. In a letter in 414, Jerome appears to accept the New Testament books listed by Athanasius—a list that corresponds to today’s New Testament. But Jerome thinks the Letter of Barnabas should also be included, since the author was the companion of Paul and an apostle. But, and this is important, while agreeing to differ, Jerome accepted what had come to be the consensus. In other words, Jerome confirms that by the beginning of the fifth century, the canon of the New Testament had achieved a kind of solemn, unshakable status; it could not be altered, even if one had different opinions. Since Jerome’s time, the canon of our New Testament has been approved by history, tradition, and worship. In spite of some scholarly attempts to exclude or add some books, these 27 books have remained a non-negotiable nucleus of Christianity worldwide. How We Got Our Bible--D id You Know? https://www.christianhistoryinstitute.org/uploaded/50cf818b08dfb0.02275142.pdf)
24
Accusation #1
25
How We Got Our Bible: Did You Know? (p 31)
“The only books about which there was any substantial doubt [“disputed”—eg, disputed call in sports; doesn’t mean the conclusion is unclear] after the middle of the second century were some of those which come at the end of our New Testament. Origen (185-254) mentions the FOUR GOSPELS, THE ACTS, THE THIRTEEN PAULINES, 1 PETER, 1 JOHN AND REVELATION as acknowledged by all; he says that Hebrews, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, James and Jude, with the 'Epistle of Barnabas,' the Shepherd of Hermas, the Didache [Διδαχή], and the 'Gospel according to the Hebrews,' were disputed by some. Eusebius (c. 265-340) mentions as generally acknowledged all the books of our New Testament except JAMES, JUDE, 2 PETER, 2 AND 3 JOHN, WHICH WERE DISPUTED BY SOME, BUT RECOGNISED BY THE MAJORITY. Athanasius in 367 lays down the twenty-seven books of our New Testament as alone canonical; shortly afterwards Jerome and Augustine followed his example in the West. The process farther east took a little longer; it was not until c. 508 that 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude and Revelation were included in a version of the Syriac Bible in addition to the other twenty two books.”
The Canon of the New Testament -- By F. F. Bruce
26
Accusation #1
Books of the “Apocrypha” 1 Esdras 2 Esdras
Tobit Judith Rest of Esther
NOTE: The Biblical apocrypha (Greek=apókruphos="hidden") refers to a collection of ancient books that cropped up in some editions of the Bible. These books were usually placed in a completely separate section between the Old and New Testaments, or as an appendix after the New Testament. Chronologically, they belong between the Old Testament and New Testaments.
Wisdom (of Solomon) Ecclesiasticus
THOSE WHO’VE EXAMINED IT SAY THE FOLLOWING…
Baruch
Not “accepted” until the RCC’s Council of Trent [AD 1546] None lay claim to “being inspired” Not considered canonical during the first 4 centuries of “church” Contain fabulous statements contradictory to itself Contradicts the actual Bible (prayers for the dead; sinless perfection; “the birth of a daughter is a loss”; seems to support immoral practices such as lying, suicide, assassination, magical incantation), etc. Josephus considered them uninspired, reflecting Jewish thought at the time of Jesus Occasionally quoted by early writers, but not accepted as canonical Jerome vigorously resisted including the Apocrypha in his Latin Vulgate Version (400 AD) Not in earliest Septuagints—appended by Alexandrian Jews
Epistle of Jeremy Prayer of Azariah Story of Susanna Bel and the Dragon
Prayer of Manasseh 1 Maccabees 2 Maccabees
27
Accusation #1
Please notice that, (except for James), almost all the “disputed” books were the latest inspired Christian books to be written…
28
Accusation #1
29
With the exception of James (attacked mainly on internal evidence and it's absence from the MF)… Wouldn't we naturally expect the ones written latest … …to be the ones truncated from the MF, …to be the ones last to be circulated, …to be the ones with therefore the least number of EARLY copies, …the ones most likely to be hampered by persecution from distribution,** …and therefore the ones quoted from the least? …And while this doesn’t prove they belong, shouldn’t these facts be somewhat expected?
30
Accusation #1
How the distribution of inspired writings apparently worked in the early church… 1 Thess 5.27 [AD 51, ESV] I put you [the church at Thessalonica, 1Th1.1] under oath before the Lord to have this letter read to ALL the [non-Thessalonican?] brothers. [At the very least, one could argue that since this information was this important, why wouldn’t it also be important to other churches? Obviously, this is what early Christians concluded about all the inspired writings, hence the numerous copies which make the Bible easily the most “well-attested” book of antiquity.]
Colossians 4.16 [AD 61, ESV] And when this letter has been read among you, have it also read in the church of the Laodiceans; [“of”=ἐκ=out of, from, by, away from=like ‘exit’; not to be confused with pros=for, to (see p46 on Ephesus)]
and see that you also read the letter FROM Laodicea. FOR EXAMPLE, CONSIDER JESUS’ WORDS IN…
Revelation 3.14 [ESV] And TO the angel of the church in Laodicea write… [“καὶ τῷ ἀγγέλῳ τῆς ἐν Λαοδικείᾳ ἐκκλησίας γράψον”… Please note that ἐκ is not used in this ACTUAL letter to Laodicea. I found no place where ἐκ was used when writers were identifying to whom a letter was addressed. While this doesn’t conclusively prove ἐκ should never be used, its use in C4.16 seems odd. “Pros” would seem much more appropriate (for, to), as is used in P46 at top of the letter to Ephesus by the copyist.]
Several ancient texts claiming to be the missing "Epistle to the Laodiceans" were apparently mentioned by early writers, but most of them haven’t been found. However, early Christian scholars considered them (as do modern scholars) to be attempts to supply a forged copy of a lost document. I FIND IT HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT THE EARLY CHURCH WOULD NOT HAVE COPIED AND SHARED AN INSPIRED LETTER; RATHER, IT SEEMS MORE LIKELY THAT THIS “LETTER” WAS PROBABLY A REGIONAL ORIGINAL THAT PAUL WANTED SHARED. One such “unconvincing” copy exists only in Latin: the oldest copy is in the Fulda MS. written for Victor of Capua in 546. http://wesley.nnu.edu/sermons-essays-books/noncanonical-literature/noncanonical-literature-writings/epistle-to-the-laodiceans/
31
Accusation Introduction#1
Now, let’s take a closer look at the Greek on Revelation 3.14…Note that when referring to the Laodicean letter “TO” rather than “FROM”, which is what we would expect in normal language.
32
Accusation #1
Revelation 3.14
33
(Greek interlinear)
Accusation Introduction#1
It’s much more likely that Paul (in Col. 4.16) wasn’t referring to a letter he wrote to Laodicea, but rather a letter that had been shared with the Laodiceans from a regional church to which Paul had previously written. The nearest existing letters of Paul were likely his letter to Ephesus (~100-150m, easily accessible from Laodicea) or to the Galatians (slightly further than Ephesus, also easily accessible). THE FOLLOWING MAPS HELP ILLUSTRATE THIS POINT…
34
Accusation #1
35
Accusation #1
Smyrna
Near Laodicea and Hierapolis
Iconium
Ephesus
36
Introduction / Accusation #1
Eusebius of Caesarea
(~AD 260–340)
~130 years after Muratorian List “SOME” CHURCHES DISPUTED… James
DOES THIS SOUND FAMILIAR?
Jude* 2 Peter
EUSEBIUS:
2 John*
“some texts are still under debate in some churches—the letters of James and Jude, the second letter of Peter, the second and third letters of John, and Revelation…” But he did not share such doubts himself.
3 John (only 14 verses) Revelation*
*already established in Muratorian list
NOTE: [Eusebius] is adamant that the Shepherd of Hermas, the Apocalypse of Peter [not to be confused with 2 Peter], the Acts of Paul (~ad 160), the Letter of Barnabas and the Didache are “not genuine,” that is, not of truly apostolic origin. www.ChristianHistoryInstitute.org
37
Accusation #1
If men reject—on so-called “scholarly grounds”—just one book of the Bible… …They can also on the same grounds cast doubt the Bible itself. THEREFORE, THERE’S NO ROOM FOR DOUBT REGARDING THE CANONICITY OF ANY BOOK OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
38
Accusation #1
Our study will focus on those not listed in the MF as “accepted”: Hebrews, 3 John, James, and 2 Peter.
OF THESE, JAMES AND 2 PETER ARE EASILY THE MOST SIGNIFICANT.
39
Accusation #1
So, here are the “Big 5” disputed books of the New Testament:
Hebrews 3 John Revelation James* 2 Peter* *By far the most disputed books of the NT
40
Accusation #1
HEBREWS
41
Accusation #1
42
Furthermore, early MSS clearly includes Hebrews in this collection of Paul’s writings, with Hebrews sandwiched between Romans and 1 Corinthians..
Papyrus 46 (~AD 175-225) Hebrews 10-8-? Creative Commons 3.0
43
Accusation #1
Translation of P46, folio 31, recto side Hebrews 10.8-20
Papyrus 46 (~AD 175-225) Hebrews 10.8-20 TRANSLATION
44
Accusation #1
Why would Hebrews have been included in early Christian manuscripts along with Paul’s writings if Hebrews didn’t even belong in the New Testament?
45
Accusation #1
3 JOHN
46
Accusation #1
47
3 John
--No new doctrine in this 14 verse letter, the shortest of the Bible...it is therefore the one probably of least concern . --Internal evidence appears to be the strongest evidence prior to ad 367—very similar to 1 & 2 John --Remember that "not just anything" was nonchalantly accepted in NT canon...it obviously had to have been known about and discussed well before its appearance in 367. --Its lack of being quoted from prior is probably due to reasons listed previously.
48
Introduction Accusation #1
REVELATION
49
Accusation #1
Revelation --The Muratorian Canon (200 AD) includes Revelation. --Justin Martyr (150 AD) refers to (not directly quoting) Revelation 20: "And further, there was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him, that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place." (Justin Martyr, Dialogue 81.4) --Hippolytus (170-235) accepted Revelation as scripture
50
Introduction Accusation #1
JAMES
51
Accusation #1
52
James—why it belongs… --The earliest quote about James from early Christian writers appears to be Origen (225 AD), in his Commentary on Matthew 17.30: "...the letter bearing the name of James.“
--Origen quotes numerous times from the Book of James in his Commentary on John. --Evidence suggests that the Churches in Jerusalem and Antioch considered James canonical. --The Alexandrian Church conclusively included James in the canon (along with some of the Catholic Epistles). -- Even some who disagree with James’ message admit it belongs in the canon…they argue that it should be viewed much like Acts, a mere historical document
53
Introduction Accusation #1
James—why some want it excluded… Mainly based on the “internal evidences” against it. James contradicts Paul's writings on “justification by faith” by suggesting “justification by works” (G2.15-21: “a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ” contradicts Ja2.14-24: “You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone”). (Once again, we see a failure to understand that the LOM is being discussed). Romans 6:14 is what sets Christianity apart from Judaism: “...you are not under law, but under grace." James speaks of “law” as though we are still under one. (HE FAILS TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE NOT UNDER THE LOM BUT ARE INDEED under a covenant to Grace to God, the terms of which are found in the Law of JC (1C9.21) which contains the terms for receiving God's grace." Also compare Ja1.25 ‘perfect law’ <> H8.7 ‘if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another’…PERFECT THINGS DON’T HAVE THINGS WRONG WITH THEM! JAMES IS OBVIOUSLY SPEAKING OF THE LAW OF CHRIST (1C9.21). "James is the only book that seems to belittle faith, the most important issue of all (the gospel message itself)." "[James was] addressed to the Jewish people, rather than to the Church." [HOW ABOUT BOTH? See Ja2.1; The 20 non-James epistles speaks of grace 5x, believe/faith 11x, and Jesus 13x. James speaks of grace 2x, believe/faith 19x, and Jesus 2x. From this perspective, James is clearly not in step with the message of grace that is found in the other epistles. "...note that 17 of the 19 references to faith in the book of James present faith in a negative light. The references to faith in all other epistles is always positive.“ 54
Introduction Accusation #1
James—why some want it excluded…(continued) [THE WRITER MAKING THE ABOVE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST JAMES CONCLUDES THIS]: "The book of James is canonical, but unfortunately it is simply misplaced. Its early writing makes it more of a historical narrative, like the book of Acts, instead of a doctrinal book, like Romans...We should read the books of James and Hebrews as we do Genesis through John; i.e., we learn God’s truths and principles from them, but usually not applications that we can apply to our daily lives today." “[Of the 142 references to “law” in all the epistles…] Only 18…refer to it in a positive light, and in an Old Testament context. Of these 18 references to the law, six are in the book of James, and twelve are in Hebrews. James is the only book that seems to belittle faith, the most important issue of all (the gospel message itself).”
55
Introduction Accusation #1
2 PETER
56
Accusation #1
57
Arguments against 2 Peter…
58
Slow acceptance into the New Testament canon
Quoted less than any other book by early Christian writers
Wasn’t listed in the Muratorian Fragment
Was it borrowed from Jude?
1 & 2 Peter weren’t written by the same person
The doctrines of 1 & 2 Peter “don’t match”
Contradictions between 1 & 2 Peter
Introduction
Timeline of Persecutions in the Early Church 35
Stephen martyred; Paul converted
42
Apostle James beheaded by Herod Agrippa
49
Jews expelled from Rome
64
Nero launches persecution
65? Peter and Paul executed (it was more likely that Peter was alive when he wrote 1 & 2 Peter! [AD `67-68]) 80s
Domitian develops emperor worship
95
Domitian executes or exiles several family members on charges of "atheism"
107 Simeon, cousin of Jesus and bishop of Jerusalem, killed for political (anti-Semitic) reasons 110 Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, martyred in Rome http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1990/issue27/2726.html
60
Introduction Accusation #1
CONCLUSION: The first attack is invalid.
61
Accusation #1