Why Did They Die?

[PandaPirate]

I was confined to riding in a car with my mother during my visit to Chicago for the holidays. Usually she's got a contemporary rock station on (thank ramen noodles). But this one day she's listening to a sermon on atheism. I'm like, "Oh, just fucking great. Now I have to endure this. Maybe they'll say something that makes sense."

 

So the guy launches into this big story about how a reknowned atheist gave a big speech and all these logical arguments that made sense and after his speech everyone in the audience was quiet. Then a preacher stood up and said, "HE IS RISEN!!" and the audience stood up in tandem and started shouting, "HE IS RISEN!"

 

This is supposed to be some sort of proof? WTF is wrong with these people?

 

Then he goes on to ask why people willingly gave their life rather than deny Christianity if it weren't true. And that is a good question. Can someone enlighten me?

[Mythra]

This argument is based on several assumptions. One is that the book of Acts is an accurate depiction of the early history of the church. And, there are a great many New Testament scholars who don't think it is. They think Acts paints a picture that those who were advancing the faith wanted to paint. And it's highly likely that Acts wasn't even written until sometime in the second century.

 

Basically, there is no evidence, outside of the NT - that there even were twelve disciples.

 

And the accounts of the disciples' martyrdom come hundreds of years after they supposedly happened, placing their martyrdom into the realm of christian legend, not fact.

 

And there are contradictory accounts, at least one of them very early.

 

from HIPPOLYTUS (late 2nd century C.E.):

 

John, again, in Asia, was banished by Domitian the king to the isle of Patmos, in which also he wrote his Gospel and saw the apocalyptic vision; and in Trajan's time he fell asleep at Ephesus, where his remains were sought for, but could not be found.

 

And Matthew wrote the Gospel in the Hebrew tongue, and published it at Jerusalem, and fell asleep at Hierees, a town of Parthia.

 

Jude, who is also called Lebbaeus, preached to the people of Edessa, and to all Mesopotamia, and fell asleep at Berytus, and was buried there.

 

Simon the Zealot, the son of Clopas, who is also called Jude, became bishop of Jerusalem after James the Just, and fell asleep and was buried there at the age of 120 years.

 

And Matthias, who was one of the seventy, was numbered along with the eleven apostles, and preached in Jerusalem, and fell asleep and was buried there.

 

Naturally, most of this is legend, unless you believe that Simon the Zealot lived for 120 years, but not even the early Christians wildest legends say that all the disciples were martyred.

 

And, take a look at this: when the English historian Edwin Gibbon was writing "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", (in the 18th century) he took a look at the legends of the martyrdom of the disciples, and considered it so unreliable (historically speaking) that he declined to put the accounts into his great work.

 

Here is what he had to say on the subject:

 

"In this general view of the persecution which was first authorised by the edicts of Diocletian, I have purposely refrained from describing the particular sufferings and deaths of the Christian martyrs. It would have been an easy task. From the history of Eusebius, from the declamations of Lactantius, to collect a long series of horrid and disgusting pictures ...[snip] But I cannot determine what I ought to transcribe, till I am satisfied how much I ought to believe. The gravest of the ecclesiastical historians, Eusebius himself, indirectly confesses that he has related whatever might redound to the glory, and that he has suppressed all that could tend to the disgrace, of religion. Such an acknowledgement will naturally excite a suspicion that a writer who has so openly violated one of the fundamental laws of history has not paid a very strict regard to the observance of the other; and the suspicion will derive additional credit from the character of Eusebius, which was less tinctured with credulity, and more practised in the arts of courts, than that of almost any of his contemporaries." Vol 1, Chp 16, pg. 232.

 

Such is the fair deduction from two remarkable passages in Eusebius, l. viii. c. 2, and de Martyr. Palestin. c. 12. The prudence of the historian has exposed his own character to censure and suspicion. It was well known that he himself had been thrown into prison; and it was suggested that he had purchased his deliverance by some dishonorable compliance. The reproach was urged in his lifetime, and even in his presence, at the council of Tyre. See Tillemont, Memoires Ecclesiastiques, tom. viii. part i. p. 67 (same reference as above, pg. 736)

 

So, when the christians make the "why would the disciples die for a lie" claim - ask them how they know they did. It's christian legend. Not fact. Not even close.

 

Now, when we get to the second and third century, it is believed that there were christian martyrs for their faith. But, at that point, the WHO WOULD DIE FOR A LIE argument is gone. By that time, the argument becomes WHO WOULD DIE FOR THEIR RELIGION.

 

And history has shown countless times - people who were willing to die for their religion. All different religions.

 

Even in our times, I can think of plenty. Heaven's Gate. David Koresh & Co. Jim Jones & Co. the list is endless of people who were so brainwashed that they died for their faith.

[SWIM]

Man, Mythra that was one hell of a reply! I don't think I ever learned so much reading one post before, that's interesting stuff. It is amazing to me that people die for a faith the have pretty much zero real evidence is *real*, yet they kill and die for it.

[Ouroboros]

One thing that suddenly strike me, consider how eager Christians are today to ban, burn and censor movies and books that don't agree with their religion, how much wouldn't the same kind of zealots back in those days work their butts off to suppress truth.

[PandaPirate]

The truth is in there somewhere and as I said in another thread, it's all starting to make sense after watching THIS

[Thurisaz]

This is supposed to be some sort of proof? WTF is wrong with these people?

 

I don't know for sure how many brain cells the average human brain has. I think I've read about the average being some 10 or even 100 billion.

I do know for sure, however, how many of them are active in the average fundie brain. A maximum of 5.

 

That's what's wrong with them. For lack of an official definition I'll just call it "willful braindeath".

 

Then he goes on to ask why people willingly gave their life rather than deny Christianity if it weren't true. And that is a good question. Can someone enlighten me?

 

Next time someone tries to offer that as "proof" to you, ask her whether the fact that not too long ago millions of Germans were willing to sacrifice their own lives for nazi crap means that hitler then must've been right. Be prepared to take snapshots of the DUH! faces you'll see.

[Mythra]

The trick that christian apologists use, is to get you to concede their model of historicity, and then try to make your argument from there. And, you can't allow that to happen. Or, before you know it, the argument will come down to "well, how many angels do YOU think it would have taken to roll away the stone" ?

 

Don't let em do it. Mark's gospel is essentially a work of fiction.

 

So, when a christian demands that you account for the deaths of the twelve apostles - demand first for proof of the lives of the twelve apostles. And the only proof is in the New Testament, a compilation that was clearly written to advance an agenda.

 

Here is a pretty good article about the twelve disciples, the ambuiguity concerning them in the gospels, and some solar / astrological information as well:

 

http://www.americanatheist.org/aut97/T2/twelve.html

 

So, some of these arguments are about as pointless as arguing about the type of arrows that Robin Hood used, and trying to figure out why his men were so merry.

[soor]

And history has shown countless times - people who were willing to die for their religion. All different religions.

 

Even in our times, I can think of plenty. Heaven's Gate. David Koresh & Co. Jim Jones & Co. the list is endless of people who were so brainwashed that they died for their faith.

 

 

and lets not forget the idiots who strap bombs to themselves and kill men, women and children all in the name of Allah and to preserve their oppressive religion and of course thinking they are going to get 72 virgins. 72 virgins who comes up with that crap

[PandaPirate]

Great replies everyone! Thanks!

[mwc]

So the guy launches into this big story about how a reknowned atheist gave a big speech and all these logical arguments that made sense and after his speech everyone in the audience was quiet. Then a preacher stood up and said, "HE IS RISEN!!" and the audience stood up in tandem and started shouting, "HE IS RISEN!"

 

This is supposed to be some sort of proof? WTF is wrong with these people?

I think it's proof that atheists probably shouldn't give their speeches in churches on Easter morning.

 

 

mwc

[mwc]

Basically, there is no evidence, outside of the NT - that there even were twelve disciples.

Heretic. There were lots of disciples. 12 original apostles (one "betrayer" who'd have been better of not being born), one replacement and a "gentile" Apostle Paul. 14 total apostles but only 12 get "honored" in the foundations of the New Jerusalem in Revelation. I wonder which those are?

 

And the accounts of the disciples' martyrdom come hundreds of years after they supposedly happened, placing their martyrdom into the realm of christian legend, not fact.

I was hoping you'd mention the martyrdom of Peter since it's just so famous. It comes from the non-canonical Acts of Peter if my memory is working alright. So the book isn't good enough for use in the bible and it isn't even apocrypha but the death of Peter it contains? That's dead on accurate of course. But the reason he's placed upside-down? That's not from the book but just the stuff of legend. He's put upside down, again from memory, because Adam was put into this world that way and so in that position he can see things clearly. Not quite the same as the whole not being worthy of being hung up like jesus was that everyone knows.

 

mwc