From: kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu (Dr Nancy's Sweetie)
Subject: Historical Legal Proof (was "to Michael Kline")
Organization: Rowan College of New Jersey
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 01:44:33 GMT


Dave Somebody (aka ng910@TWINS.PNL.GOV) writes:

> [I]f you honestly have respect for the legal system, then I suggest that
> you pick up and read "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" by Josh McDowell -
> He is now a Christian, but he started writing in order to disprove
> Christianity on the Basis of what is called Historical Legal Proof.  This
> is the same criteria used to prove any legal issue and any historical fact.

I generally try to avoid stomping on anybody else's recommendations, but this
is a special case.  Josh McDowell's books are not particularly good.  Insofar
as it is possible to decipher them into arguments (much of what he writes is
extended quotes that contain neither reasoning or evidence), they are often
riddled with errors.

It is not that there are no good arguments to make: it's that Mr McDowell
surrounds what few decent things can be said with lots of garbage.  It's not
entirely his fault: he's using bad arguments written by OTHER people, such as
CS Lewis's famous "Lord, Liar, Lunatic" trilemma, and Mr McDowell is just
passing these arguments along without working out the errors first.

His books can serve real uses.  There are ridiculous criticisms of
Christianity, and some of Mr McDowell's books address and refute them.  But
that's about it; when he tries to argue history based on legal proceedings, he
just goes off into Outer Space and never returns.

Additionally, nobody actually believes this business of proving history by
legal methods anyway.  Consider: we have court records which include sworn
testimony by eyewitnesses about vampires, witches, and numerous other kinds of
beings that nobody believes in anymore.  How many Christia readers believe in
vampires?  the amount of evidence for vampires is much greater than all
first-century references to Christ combined.  The Gospels were written by men
whose names are in question, who were not known to be sworn in any sense, and
only two of whom could have been eyewitnesses -- not a single sentence from
the Gospels would be admissable evidence in court.  However, the legal
proceedings of trials about witches or vampires are known sworn testimony from
identified eyewitnesses, and such proceedings are completely admissable in
court.  If you take seriously Mr McDowell's arguments, then you cannot
consistently refuse to believe in vampires.


I am a Christian, and I believe that the Gospels are accurate accounts of the
life of Christ -- but attempts to use historical or legal analysis on the
Bible is misguided at best, and usually ignores OTHER things which can be
proved by `Legal Historical Proof'.

I frankly find most instances rather embarrassing.  Josh McDowell should find
a different hobby, or at least start writing better books.

 --

For people who want to bone up on recognising errors in arguments, I recommend
the following books:

  _ Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric _, by Howard Kahane
  _ Witch Hunt _, by Bob and Gretchen Passantino
  _ Scripture Twisting _, by James Sire

I do not endorse everything in these books; in some cases, the authors seem to
make exactly the mistakes they are showing us how to spot.  (Indeed, Mr Kahane
states that his book may have errors he missed and recommends that the reader
look for them.)  But these books do teach basic elements of clear thinking and
analysing arguments, and almost everyone can learn something from the examples
provided.


Darren F Provine / kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu
"The evidence (including confession) upon which certain women were convicted
 of witchcraft and executed was without a flaw; it is still unimpeachable.
 The judges' decisions based on it were sound in logic and in law.  Nothing in
 any existing court was ever more thoroughly proved than the charges of
 witchcraft and sorcery for which so many suffered death.  If there were no
 witches, human testimony and human reason are alike destitute of value."
                                                          -- Ambrose Bierce
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU