What do you think?
Rate this book
An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists, by the Rules of Evidence administered in Courts of Justice
This book was converted from its physical edition to the digital format by a community of volunteers. You may find it for free on the web. Purchase of the Kindle edition includes wireless delivery.
474 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1846
76 people are currently reading
282 people want to read
About the author
Simon Greenleaf
62 books7 followersGreenleaf is an important figure in the development of that Christian school of thought known as legal or juridical apologetics. His principal work of legal scholarship is A Treatise on the Law of Evidence (3 vols., 1842–1853).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
March 13, 2012
Simon Greenleaf, one of the principle founders of the Harvard Law School, originally set out to disprove the biblical testimony concerning the resurrection of Jesus Christ. He was certain that a careful examination of the internal witness of the Gospels would dispel all the myths at the heart of Christianity. But this legal scholar came to the conclusion that the witnesses were reliable, and that the resurrection did in fact happen.
A very good book written in a very different style, style used by legal experts.
A very good book written in a very different style, style used by legal experts.
August 3, 2017
Do you like reading legal documents? No? Me either, which is why I'm giving this only two stars.
November 29, 2017
some great info. very much enjoyed it, especially the first part where he examines the gospel according to principles of law.
also lots of great info at the end on how the trial of Jesus was anything but according to Jewish law
also lots of great info at the end on how the trial of Jesus was anything but according to Jewish law
July 16, 2025
Simon Greenleaf wrote "An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists, by the Rules of Evidence Administered in Courts of Justice. With an Account of the Trial of Jesus" in 1846. He was Royall Professor of Law in Harvard University.
To his fellow lawyers, he writes "Our profession leads us to explore the mazes of falsehood, to detect its artifices, to pierce its thickest veils, to follow and explore its sophistries, to compare the statements of different witnesses with severity, to discover truth and separate it from error". Accordingly, he hopes to examine the veracity of the gospels from a legal perspective.
The main body of this work is a diatessaron, a continuous narrative of the four gospels in four columns to prove their harmony or agreement. A diatessaron is, in fact, also known as a harmony of the gospels.
This entails considerable reordering of the texts so that the corresponding sections can be viewed relatively side by side. The first three gospels; Matthew, Mark, and Luke have much in common, but the ordering, wording, and other particulars vary. These are the synoptics.
John's gospel is more ethereal in nature and frequently there are no corresponding synoptic texts listed alongside. His gospel is complementary to the synoptics, yielding a more complete picture of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.
This reordering of the texts allows one to see more readily the apparent contradictions which are bound to appear in four separate accounts. Notes are given by various scholars attempting to remove the difficulties. Dr. Greenleaf argues through example that if the discrepancies destroy believability, many historians lose theirs.
Preliminary observations are made before the harmony. It is observed that there is very strong evidence that the gospel texts as existed in Greenleaf's day differ very little from the original writings. Other ancient texts are regarded as genuine with much less supporting evidence. S.P. Tregelles demonstrates this convincingly in "A Lecture on the Historical Evidence of the Authorship and Transmission of the Books of the New Testament".
Dr. Greenleaf next observes that historical events are not amenable to the kinds of proof one finds in mathematics. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is what is hoped for.
He next points out that the evangelists are subjected to the most severe scrutiny, not applied to secular writers and not the standard in courts of law.
Nonetheless, there is an absence of guardedness in the gospels which would not appear in fictional accounts. Luke, for example, is extravagant in detailing historic settings, as if daring the historian or archaeologist to find error. But those contemporary writings and works of art which have come down to us invariably confirm the gospel accounts.
At times, the gospels include material which can be termed embarrassing, material which would never be included if the accounts were fictional. Mary Magdalene and other women are among the first to see the risen Christ. Women were held in low esteem in this historic setting. A fictional account would never have included them. Also, the apostles, such as Thomas, were slow to believe that Christ was risen.
Next, Dr. Greenleaf turns his attention to the gospel writers. Of these, it was said "two, Peter (or Mark) and John were too unlearned to forge the story of his life; and two, Matthew and Luke, were too learned to be deceived by imposture". (It is thought that Mark's gospel came largely from the direction of Peter.)
Attention is also given to arguments against the miraculous from Spinoza, Hume, and Laplace.
Finally, there is an appendix dealing with topics such as the genealogies of Matthew and Luke, the post-resurrection appearances, and the trial of Jesus.
This trial was conducted in a very underhanded and deceitful way and violated Jewish law in many ways. But as the fame of Jesus spread, so did alarm among Jewish and Roman leaders that their authority was diminishing.
But through all this, Jesus was strangely silent, "like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is dumb". Is53:7. It had been foreordained that "Jesus should die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad". Jn.11:51-52
I wholeheartedly recommend this learned and great work.
To his fellow lawyers, he writes "Our profession leads us to explore the mazes of falsehood, to detect its artifices, to pierce its thickest veils, to follow and explore its sophistries, to compare the statements of different witnesses with severity, to discover truth and separate it from error". Accordingly, he hopes to examine the veracity of the gospels from a legal perspective.
The main body of this work is a diatessaron, a continuous narrative of the four gospels in four columns to prove their harmony or agreement. A diatessaron is, in fact, also known as a harmony of the gospels.
This entails considerable reordering of the texts so that the corresponding sections can be viewed relatively side by side. The first three gospels; Matthew, Mark, and Luke have much in common, but the ordering, wording, and other particulars vary. These are the synoptics.
John's gospel is more ethereal in nature and frequently there are no corresponding synoptic texts listed alongside. His gospel is complementary to the synoptics, yielding a more complete picture of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.
This reordering of the texts allows one to see more readily the apparent contradictions which are bound to appear in four separate accounts. Notes are given by various scholars attempting to remove the difficulties. Dr. Greenleaf argues through example that if the discrepancies destroy believability, many historians lose theirs.
Preliminary observations are made before the harmony. It is observed that there is very strong evidence that the gospel texts as existed in Greenleaf's day differ very little from the original writings. Other ancient texts are regarded as genuine with much less supporting evidence. S.P. Tregelles demonstrates this convincingly in "A Lecture on the Historical Evidence of the Authorship and Transmission of the Books of the New Testament".
Dr. Greenleaf next observes that historical events are not amenable to the kinds of proof one finds in mathematics. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is what is hoped for.
He next points out that the evangelists are subjected to the most severe scrutiny, not applied to secular writers and not the standard in courts of law.
Nonetheless, there is an absence of guardedness in the gospels which would not appear in fictional accounts. Luke, for example, is extravagant in detailing historic settings, as if daring the historian or archaeologist to find error. But those contemporary writings and works of art which have come down to us invariably confirm the gospel accounts.
At times, the gospels include material which can be termed embarrassing, material which would never be included if the accounts were fictional. Mary Magdalene and other women are among the first to see the risen Christ. Women were held in low esteem in this historic setting. A fictional account would never have included them. Also, the apostles, such as Thomas, were slow to believe that Christ was risen.
Next, Dr. Greenleaf turns his attention to the gospel writers. Of these, it was said "two, Peter (or Mark) and John were too unlearned to forge the story of his life; and two, Matthew and Luke, were too learned to be deceived by imposture". (It is thought that Mark's gospel came largely from the direction of Peter.)
Attention is also given to arguments against the miraculous from Spinoza, Hume, and Laplace.
Finally, there is an appendix dealing with topics such as the genealogies of Matthew and Luke, the post-resurrection appearances, and the trial of Jesus.
This trial was conducted in a very underhanded and deceitful way and violated Jewish law in many ways. But as the fame of Jesus spread, so did alarm among Jewish and Roman leaders that their authority was diminishing.
But through all this, Jesus was strangely silent, "like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is dumb". Is53:7. It had been foreordained that "Jesus should die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad". Jn.11:51-52
I wholeheartedly recommend this learned and great work.
December 19, 2017
“The Testimony of the Evangelists” by Simon Greenleaf is an excellent book laying out three different aspects of the Christian belief with the perspective of those who are practiced in the legal field. This is a book written by believing lawyers and academics who seek to examine and prove the truthfulness of the Scriptures. There are three topics that are discussed in this book: the credibility of the Gospels and their authors, the justice of Jesus’s trial, and a view at Greek manuscripts. The first section, which is written by Simon Greenleaf, is insightful and encouraging as Greenleaf looks at the merit and writings of the Gospels and analyzes them as a court would analyze a witness’s testimony. This is an incredible part of the book as Greenleaf goes into detail in analyzing and defending the Gospel writer’s merit and testimonies. The second section centers on Jesus’s trial and whether or not it was legally just. This section also includes the opinion of a Jewish scholar by the name of Joseph Salvador, and a refutation of Salvador’s opinions by a M. Dupin. This section is just as insightful and thought-provoking as the first section, and also offers a Jewish perspective on Christ’s trial and a refutation of that perspective. The final section, the smallest of the three, briefly examines the oldest manuscripts that the Bible is based off of. While this section is informative, it does not seem to serve too great of a purpose besides informing the reader of Biblical manuscripts. This section is weak in my opinion compared to the other two.
“Testimony of the Evangelists” is a powerful work of academic literature. While functioning as an academic essay, it also allows the believer to glean Gospel truths from its pages which are encouraging and uplifting. The perspective of a lawyer examining the veracity of the Gospel writers and Christ’s trial is impactful and enlightening to say the least. This book is an incredibly powerful work that shows the truth of God’s Word and the unjustness done to Christ in the trial that sentenced Him to death. Simon Greenleaf has outdone himself.
“Testimony of the Evangelists” is a powerful work of academic literature. While functioning as an academic essay, it also allows the believer to glean Gospel truths from its pages which are encouraging and uplifting. The perspective of a lawyer examining the veracity of the Gospel writers and Christ’s trial is impactful and enlightening to say the least. This book is an incredibly powerful work that shows the truth of God’s Word and the unjustness done to Christ in the trial that sentenced Him to death. Simon Greenleaf has outdone himself.
October 30, 2020
The Testimony Of The Evangelists
A good book to pair with this reading might be - The Case For Christ, Lee Strobel
Simon Greenleaf was prolific in Harvard Law, and during his time there he was challenged by a student of his to examine the eye-witness testimonies of the Gospels. Determined to prove their inconsistency, he garnered evidence to support that the authors of their respective Gospels were consistent and truthful as eye-witness accounts of the same events. What is an example of someone setting out to dismiss the resurrection account later becomes indebted to the faith he first set out to disprove.
He starts by addressing to the members of the Law profession in the hope that certain prejudices and biases, as often as can be helped, are left behind when doing a purposeful examination of the Gospels. It should therefore be a section that seems reasonable to the reasonable man in the requests and observations made about the requirements of Law, such as that Simon Greenleaf compares a problem in mathematics that can be solved with absolute demonstrative evidence, whereas to the question of human affairs, "nothing more than moral evidence can be required, for this is the best evidence which, from the nature of the case, is attainable... When we have this degree of evidence, it is unreasonable to require more. A juror would violate his oath, if he should refuse to acquit or condemn a person... where this measure of proof was adduced." p.28-29. Further to this point, Dr. Greenleaf repeatedly brings to attention the municipal laws.
A good book to pair with this reading might be - The Case For Christ, Lee Strobel
Simon Greenleaf was prolific in Harvard Law, and during his time there he was challenged by a student of his to examine the eye-witness testimonies of the Gospels. Determined to prove their inconsistency, he garnered evidence to support that the authors of their respective Gospels were consistent and truthful as eye-witness accounts of the same events. What is an example of someone setting out to dismiss the resurrection account later becomes indebted to the faith he first set out to disprove.
He starts by addressing to the members of the Law profession in the hope that certain prejudices and biases, as often as can be helped, are left behind when doing a purposeful examination of the Gospels. It should therefore be a section that seems reasonable to the reasonable man in the requests and observations made about the requirements of Law, such as that Simon Greenleaf compares a problem in mathematics that can be solved with absolute demonstrative evidence, whereas to the question of human affairs, "nothing more than moral evidence can be required, for this is the best evidence which, from the nature of the case, is attainable... When we have this degree of evidence, it is unreasonable to require more. A juror would violate his oath, if he should refuse to acquit or condemn a person... where this measure of proof was adduced." p.28-29. Further to this point, Dr. Greenleaf repeatedly brings to attention the municipal laws.
October 12, 2021
Like reading legal briefs? Me neither. This book is such a tedious, dry read, after 20 minutes it makes me want to read the inside of my eyelids. It takes a lot of mental concentration and fortitude to get even halfway through this book. Bottom line: Do the eyewitness accounts of Matthew, Mark, John, and the second-hand accounts of witnesses recorded in Luke stand up to the legal inquiry, criteria, and requirements set forth in our justice system? Yes, they do. Did Jesus get a fair trial? No, He didn't.
August 13, 2018
An excellent book on how legal processes can help proof the reliability of scripture such as: witness accounts, multiple attestation, the burden of proof and much more.
Dr D. James Kennedy recommended it, so I picked it up. I highly recommend it to anyone that wants to know more about the reliability of scripture.
Dr D. James Kennedy recommended it, so I picked it up. I highly recommend it to anyone that wants to know more about the reliability of scripture.
July 22, 2020
Some good info but the book is nearly 200 years old and a little out of date...since the publication of this classic, many more ancient manuscripts have been found and better study on these issues has also elucidated students of the veracity of the 4 Gospels.
March 6, 2024
Wow. An impeccable legal analysis of the reliability of the gospel writers. “It is for the objector to show them spurious; for on him, by the plainest rules of law, lies the burden of proof.”
November 24, 2018
This short little book is great but one must slow down a bit while reading it as it was written in the late 1800's. The publishers have made some attempts to minimally update the English, making it more readable. The author of this book, Simon Greenleaf, was for long the highest authority of evidence for the U.S. Supreme Court. He was the supreme expert one could say. In this work he shows clearly and decisively that upon fair and unbiased examination, the 4 Gospels can be taken as established truth-telling witnesses who can be relied upon beyond reasonable doubt. There are a few points in here I hadn't seen elsewhere. Something else that struck me about it was his reference to refutations of Hume and others. What frustrates me about this is in school we don't usually hear about the refutations of Hume, Spinosa and other skeptics, by theologians and experts from long ago. It's almost as if nobody wants us to know considerable refutations have been made. Finally what's also lovely about this work is that it shows how deeply men of the 18th century wrestled with such questions of reliability. It seems that the practice of Christian apologetics was in full force for it's day - even if it looks as though there was considerable effort to suppress it's successes.
January 1, 2017
As the title of this book suggests, it uses juridical principles to analyze the Gospel. Although I have not read the Gospel, it seems like Greenleaf analyzed it thoroughly.
June 21, 2018
Worth the work to read.
19th-century style is always hard to wade through, but I'm glad I did. This is a good analysis from the guy who wrote the book on evidence. Literally.
19th-century style is always hard to wade through, but I'm glad I did. This is a good analysis from the guy who wrote the book on evidence. Literally.
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews