Temple curtain

The problem with Christians like Faithful is, they can't support the authenticity of their own bible. They keep going on about we have historical evidence that Jesus was crucified which is undeniable, even Bart Erhman being an atheist believes it happened, why then do you Muslims reject it. Yes, sure Bart Erhman does "agree" crucifixion did happen 2000 years ago in Rome/middle east however, he openly denies Jesus was raised after three days. He said there is no historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus.

In fact, one must take into consideration all the evidences of Jesus's crucifixion stems from the New Testament.  Each historian relies what the NT say's regarding the crucifixion of Jesus thus, using the NT as their historical source. This, however, is not sufficient as evidence as the New Testament itself is unreliable. We have no 1st century historians who witnessed Jesus hanging on the cross. Please note historians like "Josephus and Tacitus" were not witnesses' and any writings attributed to them were forgeries.

So, the questions remains, what historical evidence do Christians have regarding the crucifixion or resurrection of Jesus from independent sources from the 1st century without any acknowledgement of the New Testament writings?  We can take it a step further. Can Christians show us any ancient New Testament manuscripts which mentions the crucifixion narrative from the 1st or 2nd century? We have writings found in ancient text from the 3rd century however, none from the 1st or 2nd century how ironic?

Now if their fundamental belief cannot be supported by evidence, which supposedly happened in front of hundreds of people including the Jewish and Rome authority, why then don't we have anything writings from them? how about the events during the crucifixion like the temple curtain tearing in half? Why haven't no Jews written of this spectacular event considering the temple curtain was a part of sacred structure the veil served as the barrier to the Holy of Holies. The Holy of Holies was said to be where God's presence rested and it housed the Ark of the Covenant. We have more information of the temple curtain i.e. t's size, width, fabric then we have of the crucifixion records, how ironic.

We have no record prior to the crucifixion of Jesus, such as, the trial of Sanhedrin or Pilate.

In the nineteenth century an eminent scholar, Rabbi Wise, searched the records of Pilate’s court, still extant, for evidence of this trial. He found nothing.  We have no record from history of a place called Arimathea so, who was this man from Arimathea when the place never existed?

Earthquake tearing through the Jerusalem and ancient saints walking hold no historical evidence. Not a shred or writing from outside sources which speak of such a horrific event. Talmud has not writings then all the NT and apocrypha books put together yet not a single shred of writing covering this stupendous event.

Mark the "earliest" writer out of the four chosen books stops at chapter 16 verse 8. the resurrection narrative is missing. It's only the later writers added this nonsense to spice up their version. We can go on and go with these problems, the question is, what do Christians have to say about all this? Are they willing to accept these problems or just continue blindly like all is good?

Rather than putting Christians in the corner with all those difficult questions as stated above, lets focus on just the one. Let's ask Christians to show us historical evidence on the tearing of the temple

There is no historical evidence that the temple veil tore in half. What's fascinating is, that we have Judaic source to show how thick the veil was, proving this event was another blunder made up by the unknown writers.

Rabban Simon b. Gamaliel says in the name of R. Simon, the High-priest’s substitute, “The thickness of the veil [of the Temple] was a hand-breadth. It was woven of seventy-two cords, each cord consisting of twenty-four strands. Its length was forty cubits, by twenty in width. It was made by eighty-two myriads of damsels, and two such veils were made every year. It took three hundred priests to immerse and cleanse it [if it becomes unclean].” (Jacob ben Solomon, Agadat En Yaakov, pp. 208 )

Note, Gamaliel was supposed to be the teacher of Paul Acts 22:3. He also broad description given on how large the veil was. Now if Christians say this was supernatural, why didn't the Jewish rabbis, scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees record such an event? Surely many people must have witnessed the torn curtain, did they all forget to make mention of such an epic event?

Titus, who insulted and blasphemed God on High. 9What did Titus do when he conquered the Temple? He took a prostitute with his hand, and entered the Holy of Holies with her. He then spread out a Torah scroll underneath him and committed a sin, i.e., engaged in sexual intercourse, on it. Afterward he took a sword and cut into the curtain separating between the Sanctuary and the Holy of Holies. (Talmud Gittin 56b)

 -------

 The Talmud records Titus (Roman emperor) conquered the Temple, took a prostitute engaged in sexual intercourse on top of the torah scroll, took a sword & cut the temple curtains.

 Titus, who insulted and blasphemed God on High. What did Titus do when he conquered the Temple? He took a prostitute with his hand, and entered the Holy of Holies with her. He then spread out a Torah scroll underneath him and committed a sin, i.e., engaged in sexual intercourse, on it. Afterward he took a sword and cut into the curtain separating between the Sanctuary and the Holy of Holies. (Talmud Gittin 56b)

 yet no mention of the temple veil tearing in half according to the bible, Luke 23:45. Imagine that. not a shred of historical record to prove the temple veil tore in half. Talmud has no embarrassment to record the veil being cut in half by Titus. the question remains why didn't the Talmud record the veil tearing during the alleged crucifixion? Because it never happened. 

Please show us evidence of this "historical event".     

----------------

Another made up story

 

How did Jesus’ escape being caught and trialled by the roman authorities, after causing mass disturbance to the temple?

According to the gospel, Jesus not only vandalised the market in the temple by overturning tables and benches. According to John, Jesus made a whip out of cord and drove out the money changers and even animals.

 This would be impossible for Jesus to do without getting arrested and charged. The temple was always heavily guarded by roman soldiers (Josephus, The Jewish War, p. 323) 

 As money from the trading inside the temple was revenue to the roman authorities taken as tax. Also, Pontius Pilate said, he found no basis to charge Jesus? What even after he caused mayhem/disruption inside the temple in front of a crowd?

 Why didn't the Roman soldiers arrest Jesus and put him on trial? After all, causing disorder and vandalising property which belonged to the roman authorities, would be a capital offence, so what happened?

 Are you saying, the romans and Jews forget such a big incident and didn't think it was good enough to bring it up during the trial of Sanhedrin or Pontius Pilate?

Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah.  In this work, Edersheim states

The Veils before the Most Holy Place were 40 cubits (60 feet) long, and 20 (30 feet) wide, of the thickness of the palm of the hand, and wrought in 72 squares, which were joined together; and these Veils were so heavy, that, in the exaggerated language of the time, it needed 300 priests to manipulate each.  If the Veil was at all such as is described in the Talmud, it could not have been rent in twain by a mere earthquake or the fall of the lintel, although its composition in squares fastened together might explain, how the rent might be as described in the Gospel. (online reference)

Edersheim does not specifically document the statement about the veil’s thickness, but in the context refers to Talmudic sources.  Continuing searches brought up Maurice Henry Harris, Hebraic Literature: Translations from the Talmud, Midrashim and Kabbala (M. Walter Dunne, 1901).  In this work, we find:

Three hundred priests were told off [sic; the idea is that they were designated] to draw the veil (of the Temple) aside; for it is taught that Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel declared in the name of Rabbi Shimon the Sagan (or high priest’s substitute), that the thickness of the veil was a handbreadth. It was woven of seventy-two cords, and each cord consisted of twenty-four strands. It was forty cubits long and twenty wide. Eighty-two myriads of damsels worked at it, and two such veils were made every year. When it became soiled, it took three hundred priests to immerse and cleanse it.     Chullin (Harris, pp. 195-96)

This quotation references a passage from the Mishnah, the early codification of Judaism’s “oral law” — explanations of the Torah.  Here is the passage from Herbert Danby’s translation of the Mishnah:

Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says in the name of R. Simeon son of the Prefect: The veil was one handbreadth thick and was woven on [a loom having] seventy-two rods, and over each rod were twenty-four threads.  Its length was forty cubits and its breadth twenty cubits; it was made by eighty-two young girls, and they used to make two in every year; and three hundred priests immersed it. (p. 161, bracketed material is part of the original quote, not my addition.)

 A curtain so thick and wide cannot tear like paper. This a pure nonsense. No wonder the Jews had a problem with this pathetic story.