# Apostles atheists?



## BANDERSNATCH (Jul 20, 2015)

Was discussing this with my buddy Snooker yesterday and thought I'd get your opinion on it.    Hopefully I can type out exactly what my thoughts are clearly enough for you to understand and respond.

IMO, the apostles had to be atheists unless they were convinced that Jesus had risen from the dead.   (we know they did for their faith because their deaths are recorded by secular writers) Why?    Because if Jesus did not rise from the dead, they knew it, but died for what they knew to be a lie.   Many have died for a lie, but died believing it was true.   Now, if the apostles did not witness the resurrection, then what did they gain from preaching Christ' resurrection?    They would have had to believe that a) God would just forgive their crazy preaching and faith which went against orthodox Judaism or b) they were atheists who could care less what happened when they died.    

I guess to sum up would be to ask....   In your opinion, what did the apostles gain from faith in Christ if they knew He didn't rise from the dead?


----------



## JB0704 (Jul 20, 2015)

The actions of the early church is decent evidence of their convictions.  I think to be considered an apostle, one had to witness the resurected body?  Either they made it up to be part of the crowd, or they saw it, or they got a big enough kick out of things to be willing to die for the joke.

I've touched on this subject a long time ago in here, and it got little traction.  Interesting to see if it is investigated now.......


----------



## WaltL1 (Jul 20, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> Was discussing this with my buddy Snooker yesterday and thought I'd get your opinion on it.    Hopefully I can type out exactly what my thoughts are clearly enough for you to understand and respond.
> 
> IMO, the apostles had to be atheists unless they were convinced that Jesus had risen from the dead.   (we know they did for their faith because their deaths are recorded by secular writers) Why?    Because if Jesus did not rise from the dead, they knew it, but died for what they knew to be a lie.   Many have died for a lie, but died believing it was true.   Now, if the apostles did not witness the resurrection, then what did they gain from preaching Christ' resurrection?    They would have had to believe that a) God would just forgive their crazy preaching and faith which went against orthodox Judaism or b) they were atheists who could care less what happened when they died.
> 
> I guess to sum up would be to ask....   In your opinion, what did the apostles gain from faith in Christ if they knew He didn't rise from the dead?


From my understanding they were appointed as apostles PRIOR to Jesus's crucifixtion.
So they were already on board without believing in Jesus's resurrection.
Noone actually witnessed a resurrection. What was witnessed was an empty tomb.
Who and when Jesus supposedly appeared to after that point is widely debated/contested.


> In your opinion, what did the apostles gain from faith in Christ if they knew He didn't rise from the dead?


They didnt KNOW if Christ did or didnt rise from the dead.
So they probably believed they stood to gain what all of you believe you stand to gain by having faith.


> IMO, the apostles had to be atheists


The Romans agreed with you.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Jul 20, 2015)

lol     seeing someone walking around after they were killed is "witness to a resurrection".    

They 'knew' he was dead.   They saw him die, as is recorded in history.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jul 20, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> lol     seeing someone walking around after they were killed is "witness to a resurrection".
> 
> They 'knew' he was dead.   They saw him die, as is recorded in history.





> seeing someone walking around after they were killed is "witness to a resurrection".


Do some research on that part.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Jul 20, 2015)

Actually, even though it is common sense that seeing someone alive after they were dead is evidence of a resurrection, it is irrelevant to my question....

Why would the apostles die for what they knew was not true?   Even if Jesus hadn't risen, why would they die for something that was just bringing them persecution?


----------



## WaltL1 (Jul 20, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> Actually, even though it is common sense that seeing someone alive after they were dead is evidence of a resurrection, it is irrelevant to my question....
> 
> Why would the apostles die for what they knew was not true?   Even if Jesus hadn't risen, why would they die for something that was just bringing them persecution?





> Actually, even though it is common sense that seeing someone alive after they were dead is evidence of a resurrection, it is irrelevant to my question....


If thats as far as it takes to satisfy you then yes I would agree it was irrelevent.


> Why would the apostles die for what they knew was not true?


They probably wouldnt.
Same as people wouldnt go to church if they knew God wasnt real.
Probably irelevant too but there is alot of opposing information as to the apostles supposed "persecution".

Why would some people swear by Ford even though one has broken down on them?
Why would those chicks kill for Charles Manson even though they knew it was murder?
Why would you eat chocolate cake even though its fattening?
That people do things doesnt prove its right or real or correct or smart or dumb or true or false.............


----------



## bullethead (Jul 20, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> Actually, even though it is common sense that seeing someone alive after they were dead is evidence of a resurrection, it is irrelevant to my question....
> 
> Why would the apostles die for what they knew was not true?   Even if Jesus hadn't risen, why would they die for something that was just bringing them persecution?



What do you mean by "die for what they knew was not true"?
Everybody dies.
Christians die every minute but  many do not die because they are Christians.
The deaths of these apostles vary greatly. Some died multiple times according to secular stories. 
And remember you are using stories in the bible to use as your baseline to get all of information about these apostles.  These stories were written long after the events and not by any of the apostles. 
Did they die for a lie?  The stories are written to lead you to believe they did not. ....but that is the grounds for a good story.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Jul 21, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Everybody dies.
> Christians die every minute but  many do not die because they are Christians.



There's the Bullethead-logic I remember!   lol     Since everyone dies, it's impossible to die for a cause!   lol    Had hoped you had got smarter over the last year, Bullet.  

Numerous non-religious sources record the deaths of the apostles.   Would you like to know one?    

Most biblical scholars date all the books of the NT before 70AD....none outside the 1st century.    You must be holding on to what you read in some of those weird, Jesus-never-existed websites!   lol


Well, so far the consensus is that no one would die for what they know to be a lie.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jul 21, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> There's the Bullethead-logic I remember!   lol     Since everyone dies, it's impossible to die for a cause!   lol    Had hoped you had got smarter over the last year, Bullet.
> 
> Numerous non-religious sources record the deaths of the apostles.   Would you like to know one?
> 
> ...


Does that prove something other than some people are willing to die for what they believe to be true?


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Jul 21, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> There's the Bullethead-logic I remember!   lol     Since everyone dies, it's impossible to die for a cause!   lol    Had hoped you had got smarter over the last year, Bullet.
> 
> Numerous non-religious sources record the deaths of the apostles.   Would you like to know one?
> 
> ...



I disagree, but only philosophically. I can't point to an example.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Jul 21, 2015)

be hard to find someone willing to die for a known lie....would probably have to be someone who was already suicidal.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Jul 21, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> be hard to find someone willing to die for a known lie....would probably have to be someone who was already suicidal.



Depends on the lie and the circumstances. I don't think being suicidal is a requirement. I don't know if you have kids, but, if it came to it, you'd die to defend them, I'd imagine.


----------



## bullethead (Jul 21, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> There's the Bullethead-logic I remember!   lol     Since everyone dies, it's impossible to die for a cause!   lol    Had hoped you had got smarter over the last year, Bullet.
> 
> Numerous non-religious sources record the deaths of the apostles.   Would you like to know one?
> 
> ...


The bullethead logic is only outdone by bandys lack of research.
If you bothered to check your non -religious sources you will find out that some of the apostles died numerous times in different ways. 
I had told you that above but in your usual fashion you seem to skip the facts that do not go along with your  point.
Do us a favor and list these non-religious sources. I am sure you had to read them in order to gather your concrete info. Don't be afraid to list the ones that show how an apostle died different ways by different methods and in different countries. Those accomplishments are greater than the resurrection.

Nowhere did I say it was impossible to die for a cause. Many people die/died for what they thought was true. But that doesn't make what they thought was true actually true.

Check if most of "most" biblical scholars actually think the disciples wrote most of the NT.
You can try to insert things about 70ad as if I said that....but I didn't.


----------



## bullethead (Jul 21, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> be hard to find someone willing to die for a known lie....would probably have to be someone who was already suicidal.


Bandy who dies for the truth? Probably someone equally suicidal.

These biblical stories have zero credible witnesses.
The disciples saw an empty tomb.
Jesus walked with two men who didn't recognize him until sometime later when they were eating with him and then he vanishes??? Others are in his presence but do not know it is him until much later???

I mean he's dead for all of 3 days so I can see how his bestest buddies on the entire planet, who by the way just so happen to think he is the son of god, just cannot place their finger on who this stranger looks like.  
Almost as if someone in the group was so beside them self with grief, because there was no way he thought ol JC could go belly up, that he made up a story about seeing him after hearing the tomb was empty and like most events in a world where paranormal and godlike activities ruled the roost...it took off as a way to keep the mysteries of Jesus rolling even though he was dead. 40 years later...chuck a couple embellishments in there for good measure and almost 2000 years later someone on GON is beside them self thinking that No Way would an ancient story fib a little and that a few followers had to be onto the truth because they got killed 6 ways from Sunday a few times over.


----------



## bullethead (Jul 21, 2015)

Good Old Paul died for a vision. Carry on...nothing mental to see here....


----------



## bullethead (Jul 21, 2015)

â€œWhat harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church â€¦ a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them.â€�

â€“ Martin Luther (Cited by his secretary, in a letter in Max Lenz, ed., Briefwechsel Landgraf Phillips des Grossmüthigen von Hessen mit Bucer, vol. I.)


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Jul 22, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Bandy who dies for the truth? Probably someone equally suicidal.
> 
> These biblical stories have zero credible witnesses.
> The disciples saw an empty tomb.
> Jesus walked with two men who didn't recognize him until sometime later when they were eating with him and then he vanishes??? Others are in his presence but do not know it is him until much later???



Who would you consider a crebible witness?   lol   Let me guess....   No one?        Do you believe that the disciples saw an empty tomb?  or are you just using that for debate?  lol    BTW, no one in history has ever questioned if the tomb was empty....only WHY it was empty.   Do you believe two men were walking to Emmaus and talked with some stranger?   or are you just using it for debate?   lol    Seems like you are picking and choosing what you want to believe from the Gospels  

You constantly throw mistruths and fact twisting out here.   For example, your "Codex Sinaiticus" thread; presented as 'evidence' that the resurrection was fabricated later.   lol    That copy of Mark's gospel had the resurrection in it...  "he is risen", "he goes before you into Galilee", etc.    Why present things like that when it is so weak?   Is that the kind of stuff your faith stands on?   

If you want an early document, check out I Corinthians...written just a few years after Jesus' crucifixion.    In it you have the creed, and Jesus' resurrection and appearance is laid out, and Paul even claims that Jesus appeared to him.     35AD i believe   

Lots of unanswered questions with your position.   makes little sense...

I'll add your response as one for the apostles being atheists.


----------



## 660griz (Jul 22, 2015)

"The Case of the Empty Egyptian Tomb: Where Are the Mummies?"

No one assumes they rose from the dead. Probably just looted.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Jul 22, 2015)

660griz said:


> "The Case of the Empty Egyptian Tomb: Where Are the Mummies?"
> 
> No one assumes they rose from the dead. Probably just looted.



empty several days after they placed them in there?


----------



## 660griz (Jul 22, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> empty several days after they placed them in there?



Don't know. Didn't know looters had a time window.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Jul 22, 2015)

660griz said:


> Don't know. Didn't know looters had a time window.



Jesus' tomb would have only had His body.


----------



## 660griz (Jul 22, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> Jesus' tomb would have only had His body.



O.k. Not sure what the point is about only one body but...

What does that have to do with looting?

You saying that looters wouldn't have looted the body of just one man...so soon after his death?


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Jul 22, 2015)

660griz said:


> O.k. Not sure what the point is about only one body but...
> 
> What does that have to do with looting?
> 
> You saying that looters wouldn't have looted the body of just one man...so soon after his death?




bodies of dead people were placed in tombs long enough for them to rot down to the bones, then the bones were placed in boxes.   Jesus' body would not have been adorned with jewels.   Plus, according to historical documents, he was stripped before being crucified.


----------



## bullethead (Jul 22, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> Who would you consider a crebible witness?   lol   Let me guess....   No one?        Do you believe that the disciples saw an empty tomb?  or are you just using that for debate?  lol    BTW, no one in history has ever questioned if the tomb was empty....only WHY it was empty.   Do you believe two men were walking to Emmaus and talked with some stranger?   or are you just using it for debate?   lol    Seems like you are picking and choosing what you want to believe from the Gospels
> 
> You constantly throw mistruths and fact twisting out here.   For example, your "Codex Sinaiticus" thread; presented as 'evidence' that the resurrection was fabricated later.   lol    That copy of Mark's gospel had the resurrection in it...  "he is risen", "he goes before you into Galilee", etc.    Why present things like that when it is so weak?   Is that the kind of stuff your faith stands on?
> 
> ...



All this babbling(talk about not making sense) and you still have not addressed the multiple deaths of some apostles by various ways in different countries.

For your future reference...I do not pick and choose what I want to believe out of the Gospels, I just use certain things to show the inconsistency and outright nonsense.

The story says the tomb was empty.  The body could have been moved by the authorities to avoid having the site as a shrine or gathering place for what they believed were troublemakers. So when family and or followers saw an empty tomb the paranormal stories started to fly.
And No I do not believe anybody walked with a resurrected Jesus and did not recognize him until later. More embellishments. 
And if you know your history about Roman Soldiers or care to look into it. They do not leave just 2 guards to guard things. The guards do not report to the local Pharisees if there is a problem. And the punishment for falling asleep while in duty was death. Those hand picked guards in those days did not fall asleep.  The writers of those Gospel stories did not know anything about Roman Military customs.
The stories are at the very least embellished if not totally fabricated.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Jul 22, 2015)

bullethead said:


> All this babbling(talk about not making sense) and you still have not addressed the multiple deaths of some apostles by various ways in different countries.



I'll start another thread to address that, as I don't want to derail this thread.   This thread is to discuss what reasons the NT writers would have had to die for their cause...

As JB predicted....this thread wouldn't get much traction since it doesn't make sense that they would die for Jesus had they not witnessed Him alive after He was killed.   No gain on the play for them...


----------



## bullethead (Jul 22, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> I'll start another thread to address that, as I don't want to derail this thread.   This thread is to discuss what reasons the NT writers would have had to die for their cause...
> 
> As JB predicted....this thread wouldn't get much traction since it doesn't make sense that they would die for Jesus had they not witnessed Him alive after He was killed.   No gain on the play for them...



Yeah no Jim Jones followers drank  the koolaide for a lie either......

Research the different religious movements that were going on at the time the events of the NT took place and you may (but probably not) get an insight into what reasons people had to gain.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Jul 22, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Yeah no Jim Jones followers drank  the koolaide for a lie either......
> 
> Research the different religious movements that were going on at the time the events of the NT took place and you may (but probably not) get an insight into what reasons people had to gain.



LOL    they were forced to drink         You crack me up, Bullet.


----------



## bullethead (Jul 22, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> LOL    they were forced to drink         You crack me up, Bullet.


No kidding......WHO did the forcing and forced the enforcers?


----------



## WaltL1 (Jul 22, 2015)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> I'll start another thread to address that, as I don't want to derail this thread.   This thread is to discuss what reasons the NT writers would have had to die for their cause...
> 
> As JB predicted....this thread wouldn't get much traction since it doesn't make sense that they would die for Jesus had they not witnessed Him alive after He was killed.   No gain on the play for them...


JB also said -


> Interesting to see if it is investigated now.......


So far all suggestions to investigate have been met by you with LOL and your insistence that they wouldnt have done it if they didnt KNOW it was true.
In fact you said -


> Actually, even though it is common sense that seeing someone alive after they were dead is evidence of a resurrection, it is irrelevant to my question


Add in your feeble attempts to put Bullet in his place when he is just using information that is available to anyone who actually cares to investigate and you will come up with another possible reason this thread isnt gaining any traction.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jul 23, 2015)

bullethead said:


> If you bothered to check your non -religious sources you will find out that some of the apostles died numerous times in different ways.



Naw.  They all died the same way........Believing.


----------



## bullethead (Jul 23, 2015)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Naw.  They all died the same way........Believing.


Well,  the stories have you believing that anyway.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jul 23, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Well,  the stories have you believing that anyway.



Believing _and_ Blessed.  Goes hand in hand like corn bread and blackeyed peas.  You wanna try some?


----------



## bullethead (Jul 23, 2015)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Believing _and_ Blessed.  Goes hand in hand like corn bread and blackeyed peas.  You wanna try some?


Yes


----------



## 660griz (Jul 24, 2015)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Believing _and_ Blessed.  Goes hand in hand like corn bread and blackeyed peas.  You wanna try some?



Been there, done that. 
The final product is the same.


----------



## ambush80 (Jul 24, 2015)

660griz said:


> Been there, done that.
> The final product is the same.



You are what you don't poop.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Jul 27, 2015)

People are still dying for causes they believe in. Causes that directly contradict other's causes. A lot of them having nothing but faith in that cause - no special glimpse at it's objective truth. I don't think this topic gets anyone anywhere.


----------



## bullethead (Aug 2, 2015)

Are these people dying for a lie too?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/muslims-c-africa-forced-abandon-religion-amnesty-230832041.html

"Some "have been forcibly converted to Christianity on the threat of death," the report added."


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Apr 4, 2016)

More than likely.   The point is that people die for lies, but they believe them to be true.    The apostles, IMO, either believed wholeheartedly that Christ had risen or they were purposely propagating a lie without fear of their punishment after death.    

BTW, being 'forced' to become a Christian doesn't make one a Christian, since the requirement is "believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead"  Romans 10:9,10

Bandy




bullethead said:


> Are these people dying for a lie too?
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/muslims-c-africa-forced-abandon-religion-amnesty-230832041.html
> 
> "Some "have been forcibly converted to Christianity on the threat of death," the report added."


----------



## bullethead (Apr 4, 2016)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> More than likely.   The point is that people die for lies, but they believe them to be true.    The apostles, IMO, either believed wholeheartedly that Christ had risen or they were purposely propagating a lie without fear of their punishment after death.
> 
> BTW, being 'forced' to become a Christian doesn't make one a Christian, since the requirement is "believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead"  Romans 10:9,10
> 
> Bandy


The bean counters still add the forced ones to the roster. 
With the way beliefs bounce all over the place very few are on the same page and they all have the notion that individually they do something differently to make themself stand apart from the next person so they are more "true" or more "right".
It is not enough just to say I believe Jesus was raised from the dead by god. 41,000 different denominations are good evidence of that and within each individuals break it down on why they are more special than the next.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Apr 4, 2016)

bullethead said:


> The bean counters still add the forced ones to the roster.



God doesn't.



bullethead said:


> With the way beliefs bounce all over the place very few are on the same page and they all have the notion that individually they do something differently to make themself stand apart from the next person so they are more "true" or more "right".
> It is not enough just to say I believe Jesus was raised from the dead by god. 41,000 different denominations are good evidence of that and within each individuals break it down on why they are more special than the next.



LOL    All Christian churches are founded John 3:16.    I know MANY christians from many different denominations and every one of them are Christians because of faith in Christ and His resurrection.   Doesn't matter what else they believe       Doesn't matter if I think the sabbath is Saturday or Sunday, if I believe Mary was sinless.   doesn't matter if I believe christians should be circumcised.    Faith is all that matters, no matter what you think denominations.    


As the bible says, "Confess with your mouth....believe in your heart...you will be saved".   Not, "confess Christ because I'm pointing a gun at you".    lol    confessing out of fear of death does not a christian make.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 4, 2016)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> God doesn't.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Makes a guy like me wonder why a Christian would need to point a gun at a non Christian and tell them to believe in the first place.

To the rest of it, if the bible really meant anything there would be no need for these discussions.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 4, 2016)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> I disagree, but only philosophically. I can't point to an example.



I can.  Christ.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 5, 2016)

BANDERSNATCH, people to this day willingly die for Jesus. They never met him, they die for the stories written about him.
The answer you asked in the other thread may not be a simple either/or. The apostles may have died for being followers of the man Jesus and their early works were to keep his memory alive, hence the embellished stories later.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Apr 5, 2016)

bullethead said:


> BANDERSNATCH, people to this day willingly die for Jesus. They never met him, they die for the stories written about him.
> The answer you asked in the other thread may not be a simple either/or. The apostles may have died for being followers of the man Jesus and their early works were to keep his memory alive, hence the embellished stories later.



BANDERSNATCH in uppercase!  Are you upset with me!?  

So, what religion would you say the Apostles proclaimed?   it was one worth dying for...


----------



## bullethead (Apr 5, 2016)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> BANDERSNATCH in uppercase!  Are you upset with me!?
> 
> So, what religion would you say the Apostles proclaimed?   it was one worth dying for...


It was capitalized due to the auto spellchecker on my phone.
The apostles were Jews.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 5, 2016)

The OT foretold of a messiah, the apostles and Jesus were jews, and the apostles did not quit being Jews because they believed their scripture came true.  There was no OT to the Jews of that day. It was scripture.  None of the NT  was written yet. "Christians" had not been coined yet.

Honest, you really should research the history of those times.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Apr 5, 2016)

bullethead said:


> The OT foretold of a messiah, the apostles and Jesus were jews, and the apostles did not quit being Jews because they believed their scripture came true.  There was no OT to the Jews of that day. It was scripture.  None of the NT  was written yet. "Christians" had not been coined yet.
> 
> Honest, you really should research the history of those times.



agree with everything you just stated...    I think the point is being missed....and I really am trying to make it simple


----------



## bullethead (Apr 5, 2016)

Read up: http://www.fogwhistle.ca/acts/expelled.html


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Apr 5, 2016)

bullethead said:


> Read up: http://www.fogwhistle.ca/acts/expelled.html



lol    you know I don't read cut-and-paste, Bullet!


----------



## bullethead (Apr 5, 2016)

Bandy, what I suggest you do is search for all of the other people in those times that claimed to be messiahs throughout jewish history. In each case they all had followers, in essense their own apostles.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Apr 5, 2016)

bullethead said:


> Bandy, what I suggest you do is search for all of the other people in those times that claimed to be messiahs throughout jewish history. In each case they all had followers, in essense their own apostles.



is that what that link is about?   lol   I knew that already!   Even the bible mentions several in Acts.    They were mostly military if my memory serves me right


----------



## bullethead (Apr 5, 2016)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> lol    you know I don't read cut-and-paste, Bullet!



Oh I know, that is why these questions of yours continue to pop up. If you took the time to do some reading there would be no need to ask the questions you do. 
You ask the questions but really do not want the answers.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Apr 5, 2016)

bullethead said:


> Oh I know, that is why these questions of yours continue to pop up. If you took the time to do some reading there would be no need to ask the questions you do.
> You ask the questions but really do not want the answers.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 5, 2016)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> is that what that link is about?   lol   I knew that already!   Even the bible mentions several in Acts.    They were mostly military if my memory serves me right



You can jump to conclusions or you can read the link and see what it is actually about.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 5, 2016)

So did the followers of other messiahs die for lies?


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Apr 5, 2016)

bullethead said:


> So did the followers of other messiahs die for lies?



no doubt they did!    but dying in battle and dying for a suffering messiah are two different things         The Jews (as i'm sure you know) were expecting a conquering Messiah, and many - as your link probably points out - thought the conquering messiah had come.    Why would all  those other messiahs just fade away, but the Suffering Messiah turn the world upside down?    The Resurrection.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 5, 2016)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> no doubt they did!    but dying in battle and dying for a suffering messiah are two different things         The Jews (as i'm sure you know) were expecting a conquering Messiah, and many - as your link probably points out - thought the conquering messiah had come.    Why would all  those other messiahs just fade away, but the Suffering Messiah turn the world upside down?    The Resurrection.


Why would anyone else worship anyone else worldwide if the resurrection was so compelling ?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 5, 2016)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> no doubt they did!    but dying in battle and dying for a suffering messiah are two different things         The Jews (as i'm sure you know) were expecting a conquering Messiah, and many - as your link probably points out - thought the conquering messiah had come.    Why would all  those other messiahs just fade away, but the Suffering Messiah turn the world upside down?    The Resurrection.


How was the Messiah suffering when they decided to die for him?
And again, I will bring up Which apostles actually died in martyrdom? Since some died multiple times and in different countries for those multiple deaths how accurate are your sources?
Last I remember you were going to start another thread about that last July yet never have?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 6, 2016)

Would the Apostles Die for a Lie?



I frequently have occasion to debate conservative believers on topics such as the historical existence of Jesus, the reliability of the gospels, and the reality of the resurrection. My concern in this column will be to address some of the major issues that come up like clockwork in debate after debate. You may have wondered about these questions, or they may have been posed to you in similar exchanges. The first I want to take up is the claim that Jesus must have risen from the dead as the gospels report, or else we would have to imagine the apostles of Jesus giving their very lives for the sake of what they knew was a fiction, and this is just too much to believe. That would be taking a joke, or a hoax, farther than any sane person would be willing to do! Conversely, since they were gladly martyred for (which means, literally, “witnessing to”) their faith, isn’t this strong evidence that their testimony was true, that Jesus did rise from the dead?

The psychological point is not a bad one, though one must keep in mind the very great power of “cognitive dissonance.” History has shown there is pretty much no extreme people will not go to in defending that which they have a great stake in. If you had spent decades defending the proposition that Jesus rose from the dead, even if you had originally merely surmised or guessed it, even had you made it up, you might well give your life than back down from the claim, to save face, because otherwise your life would be revealed as one big joke, and some people simply cannot live that down. The second-century writer Lucian of Samosata tells us that Proteus Peregrinus, a charlatan prophet, immolated himself because he could not resist such a grandstanding opportunity. Also, remember Joseph Smith; non-Mormons believe he had concocted the whole Mormon religion, yet he was willing to die for it. Does that make it true?

But let’s go back a step. In fact we do not know that the earliest preachers of Christianity were martyred for their faith. The New Testament does not tell us for sure. Acts 12:2 doesn’t tell us whether James had the chance to recant before being axed, and John 21:18 is so vague that verse 19 has to tell the reader that v. 18 somehow refers to Peter’s death, perhaps a reinterpretation. Our earliest “information” comes from unreliable second- and third century documents, starting with the anonymous but so-called First Epistle of Clement, which says, vaguely, that Peter and Paul “witnessed” to their faith in Rome (apparently implying their martyrdom) because of “jealousy.” This in turn seems to be a reference to the Apocryphal Acts of Paul, Peter, Andrew and others, which have the apostles martyred at the instigation of jealous pagan husbands whose wives, having been converted to Christianity, would no longer sleep with them. These Acts abound in legends, such as Paul baptizing a talking lion. Tertullian (late second century) says the Apostle John survived being boiled in oil. Thus we have no real reason to believe the earliest preachers, whoever they may have been, were martyred for their faith.

In fact, it is an open question among New Testament scholars whether the earliest Christian preaching even involved any resurrection. The early Q Document, apparently used by both Matthew and Luke, seems to have had no mention of either the saving death or the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe the resurrection, as I think (see my book Deconstructing Jesus), was a subsequent embellishment of the Jesus story.

Finally, while we are usually safe in assuming that your average martyr, heroically giving his or her life for a cause, sincerely believes in that cause, we still have to ask whether sincerity is the same thing as being right. Plenty of people are sincerely mistaken. 



 By Robert M. Price


----------



## bullethead (Apr 6, 2016)

Bandy, can you provide a breakdown of which disciples actually witnessed the resurrection, which died from martyrdom and how they died, and which died from natural causes?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 6, 2016)

By Taylor Carr
To examine the martyrdom of the disciples, it is instrumental to know how the disciples died and for what reason they died. The bible only reports the deaths of two disciples: James the son of Zebedee (Acts 12:1-3) and Judas Iscariot (Matthew 27:5, Acts 1:18). Of course, Judas could hardly be claimed as a witness, not only because he betrayed Jesus, but because he died before the resurrection, according to the New Testament. The passage on James also gives us no indication about the circumstances of James’ death, simply stating that Herod decided to round up some of the church members and put them to death, among which was James. We are not told if James was given an opportunity to recant, and the verses explain that Herod’s decision was made more as a political move of appeasement of the Jews, rather than a direct assault on Christian beliefs.

We have to look outside the bible for the familiar stories of the early Christian martyrs, which come primarily from the 2nd and 3rd century authors Hippolytus and Eusebius. The chart to the right depicts the deaths of the apostles, as given in Hippolytus2 and Eusebius.3 Written over a hundred years after the disciples met their various ends, these accounts can only be chalked up to tradition, and the authors unfortunately did not disclose their sources. However, Hippolytus reports natural deaths for four of the twelve disciples (John, Matthew, Thaddeus, and Simon the Zealot), which means that, along with Judas/Matthias, nearly half of the disciples were not martyred under any tradition.
When we turn to the gospels with this information, we see that Matthew and John died of natural causes, and Mark and Luke were not among the twelve disciples or among those who witnessed the resurrection. Thus, even if we presume traditional authorship of the four gospels, none of the authors could have died for what they knew to be a lie. Matthew and John didn’t die martyrs at all and Mark and Luke, even if they had died for their faith, were not present at the tomb or the ascension and so would not likely have known their beliefs to be misplaced. Paul, who purportedly authored almost half the New Testament, was also not present during the resurrection, only seeing Jesus in a vision sometime later. There is no evidence the Christian scriptures were written by martyrs who would’ve known if they had bought into a lie.

Although it should not need to be said, the deaths of the other apostles are even less significant given that we don’t have any testimony from them. Traditions of martyrdom for figures like Thomas and Philip don’t come until approximately 100-150 years after their deaths. This should be enough to raise suspicion as to the authenticity of such martyrdom legends, and it is also worth noting that people have been made into martyrs after the fact by their followers, when they may have been killed without any chance to recant their faith. The sticky issue at the core of martyrdom is not just how someone met their death, but how they thought of going to their death.

Here is the chart talked about above:
	1. Peter: crucified upside down under the reign of Nero
2. Andrew: crucified in Achaia
3. John: died a natural death at Ephesus
4. James: beheaded by Herod in Judea
5. Philip: crucified upside down in the reign of Domitian
6. Bartholomew: crucified upside down in India
7. Matthew: died a natural death in Parthia
8. Thomas: killed by a spear in India
9. James son of Alphaeus: stoned to death in Jerusalem
10. Thaddeus/Jude: died a natural death at Berytus
11. Simon the Zealot: died a natural death in Jerusalem
12. Judas Iscariot: death by suicide (Matt. 27:3-10) or falling (Acts 1:18)
12. Matthias (Judas’ successor): died a natural death in Jerusalem


----------



## bullethead (Apr 6, 2016)

II. Who Would’ve Known?

Once one has sifted through the various deaths of the apostles, the question should be asked: would they have known if they were following a lie? As already mentioned, it is quite unlikely that the authors of the New Testament – even as they are seen in conservative scholarship – would have known if Jesus’ resurrection never happened, since most of them were not around for the tomb or the ascension. Christian apologists sometimes like to argue that the disciples must have known because they witnessed Christ’s miracles. Yet this is not a convincing argument, as it presumes an inerrant historical accuracy of the gospels and the occurrence of extraordinary, supernatural events that have never been demonstrated to happen in our world. Additionally, the bible itself reports that some doubted the miracles, and even Jesus’ own disciples still had their doubts after seeing their risen savior (Matthew 28:16-17).

The ‘die for a lie’ argument is typically peddled by apologists as a response to the suggestion that the disciples stole Jesus’ body from the tomb to make it look as if he had risen from the dead. I will not be defending the stolen-body theory here, since it is not a view I accept, and in any other context, ‘die for a lie’ is lost in a sea of possibilities. Perhaps Jesus misled his disciples, maybe even performing some impressive magic tricks. As the bible portrays it, Jesus’ followers were very devoted to him even before they understood his teachings. Perhaps the disciples misunderstood Jesus’ teachings and conferred divinity and supernatural abilities on him when he had claimed no such thing for himself. Or perhaps what we have was embellished as the story developed – maybe the miracles, empty tomb, and ascension are later additions [see: He is Risen? Resurrection Discrepancies].

In considering who would’ve known the faith was a lie, two important details come to light. First, it is not at all obvious or easy to determine who among the disciples could have known if they were following a lie. The possible combinations of deception on the part of one individual, or multiple individuals, are difficult to assess with certainty, but still likely. Without having access to the disciples’ minds (the New Testament gives us the minds of men who were not martyred witnesses to the resurrection, you will recall), there is no sure way of knowing what they experienced, what they thought of it, and so forth. Secondly, people who invest themselves deeply into a faith or person can be notoriously defiant of facts that contradict what they wish to believe.

In an essay titled, “When Prophecy Fails and Faith Persists”, social psychologist Lorne L. Dawson explains the various ways in which religious groups deal with prophetic failure.4 If the group is large enough and willing to retain a sense of community, there is a great chance of stemming off disappointment. If the leaders act quickly to provide some rationalization or explanation of the failure, labeling it as a “test of faith”, elaborating that the event really did happen on a spiritual and unseen level, or chalking it up to human error, there is an even stronger chance that the group will survive. Quoting two other social psychologists, Dawson writes that, “Beliefs may withstand the pressure of disconfirming events not because of the effectiveness of dissonance-reducing strategies, but because disconfirming evidence may simply go unacknowledged”. In other words, deeply invested believers may be known to count the hits and just ignore the misses.

The implications of such a study for the ‘die for a lie’ argument are tremendous. It may be that, even if their beliefs had been exposed as false, the disciples may not have seen it that way. Not merely with cults, but with any group intensely dedicated to a belief or person, there is a tendency to rationalize discrepancies and reconcile cognitive dissonance. Thus, an expected messiah who dies prematurely might become a triumphantly raised immortal being.

III. Closing Words

Did the disciples die for a lie? As a non-Christian, I would say that the few who may have actually been martyred did die for beliefs that are false. However, I do not think the disciples died for what they knew was a lie. They were no different from others who have died for strong convictions, and they most likely believed it was for a good and true cause that they were to meet their death. There is no evidence of a miraculous strength under persecution that is exclusive to Christians, though, nor is there any reason to think that the disciples’ willingness to die for their beliefs makes their beliefs any more plausible than the martyrs of Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, or any other group.



Sources:
1. Josh McDowell, More Than a Carpenter (Tyndale, 1977), p. 67.
2. Hippolytus, “On the Twelve Apostles of Christ,” Ante-Nicean Fathers, Vol. 5.
3. Eusebius, Church History, Books 2, 3 & 5.
4. Lorne L. Dawson, When Prophecy Fails and Faith Persists, Nova Religio (1999), Retrieved May 15, 2011.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Apr 6, 2016)

bullethead said:


> Would the Apostles Die for a Lie?
> 
> Maybe the resurrection, as I think (see my book Deconstructing Jesus), was a subsequent embellishment of the Jesus story.
> 
> By Robert M. Price



obviously this guy is clueless about the widely accepted dating of I Corinthians at between 50-60AD, possibly earlier.    In it Paul lays out the Christian Creed, including the resurrection.         So, let's all agree that the resurrection wasn't some later 'embellishment'...   

Do you agree that the I  Corinthians had a reference to the resurrection?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 6, 2016)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> obviously this guy is clueless about the widely accepted dating of I Corinthians at between 50-60AD, possibly earlier.    In it Paul lays out the Christian Creed, including the resurrection.         So, let's all agree that the resurrection wasn't some later 'embellishment'...
> 
> 
> Do you agree that the I  Corinthians had a reference to the resurrection?


Can you post reference?
I'll agree that the earliest copies we have are from the 4th century and I have no idea what was added to them after the church purged all the earlier ones. The small surviving postage sized remnants don't tell us anything about a resurrection.

Bandy, is your bible also clueless?
Your own scripture records the deaths of TWO apostles.
And only a couple out of the 12 was written to have seen the resurrection.
The many that died of natural causes certainly were not martyrs.
A few who were killed(some a few times in different countries) that did not witness the resurrection certainly did not witness anything to die for.
Paul saw bright light and heard a voice...no resurrection. 
Judas killed himself so he was no witness or martyr.

What are you basing this "would they die for a lie" argument off of?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 6, 2016)

Paul contradicts the Gospels:

'For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than 500 brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.' 1 Corinthians 15:3-9

There are several problems with this passage.

(1). There was no “third day” prophecy in the Old Testament. [1]

(2). There is no evidence that five-hundred people saw Jesus [2]

(3). Paul says Jesus first appeared to Peter, yet the Gospels say Jesus first appeared to women!  (Matt 28:1)

(4). Peter disbelieved that Jesus was alive (resurrected).

(5). Paul implies that Judas did not hang himself, he was still alive (contradicts Matt. 27:5).

(6). Paul describes the body of Jesus to be spiritual (1Cor 15:42). Yet the Gospels say Jesus was physical.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 6, 2016)

2400 years old, authentic, it HAS to be proof!
https://www.yahoo.com/news/curse-tablets-discovered-2-400-old-grave-164933065.html


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Apr 7, 2016)

Bullet, I'm not going to get drawn in to your characteristic C&P (cut-and-paste) marathon.   Right before I left work yesterday, you posted the one long C&P about the 'resurrection embellishment'...   I said, "Okay, I'll read this one and reply"....and soon as I reply I see that you had posted a string of other C&Ps!!     Does any of your other buddies on here do that, or is it just you?  Doesn't seem like it.   It really does seem like a logical 'appeal to authority' fallacy.  

I'll leave off with this...   Simple research will show that I Corinthians is mid-1st Century.   Every copy that exists of I Corinthians has the creed and resurrection proclamation.   Do with it what you want, but keep the mid-1st century date in mind when you keep preaching or C&Ping that the resurrection story was a later embellishment.    

The historical fact of Jesus being killed during Passover (when a lamb was offered for sins) week just days after entering Jerusalem should be a huge sign to most.    Maybe it was just coincidence?    

anyway, I'll give you the last word and/or huge multi-post C&P about the apostles being atheists, since this is your house...


----------



## 660griz (Apr 7, 2016)

There is some evidence Jesus did not die on the cross.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Apr 7, 2016)

660griz said:


> There is some evidence Jesus did not die on the cross.




am i missing something in the picture, Griz?


----------



## 660griz (Apr 7, 2016)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> am i missing something in the picture, Griz?



In a depiction of stage fourteen of the cross, which is normally the body of Christ being carried to the tomb, Saunière showed the moon as already risen, thus Passover had already begun. 

No Jew would handle a dead body after the beginning of Passover. 

Either Saunière was showing that: 

a. The body is not dead 

b. They were taking the body out of the tomb and not in


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Apr 7, 2016)

660griz said:


> In a depiction of stage fourteen of the cross, which is normally the body of Christ being carried to the tomb, Saunière showed the moon as already risen, thus Passover had already begun.
> 
> No Jew would handle a dead body after the beginning of Passover.
> 
> ...



you've got to be kidding?


----------



## 660griz (Apr 7, 2016)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> you've got to be kidding?



Hey, did you hear the one about a woman being created from a rib?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 7, 2016)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> Bullet, I'm not going to get drawn in to your characteristic C&P (cut-and-paste) marathon.   Right before I left work yesterday, you posted the one long C&P about the 'resurrection embellishment'...   I said, "Okay, I'll read this one and reply"....and soon as I reply I see that you had posted a string of other C&Ps!!     Does any of your other buddies on here do that, or is it just you?  Doesn't seem like it.   It really does seem like a logical 'appeal to authority' fallacy.
> 
> I'll leave off with this...   Simple research will show that I Corinthians is mid-1st Century.   Every copy that exists of I Corinthians has the creed and resurrection proclamation.   Do with it what you want, but keep the mid-1st century date in mind when you keep preaching or C&Ping that the resurrection story was a later embellishment.
> 
> ...


Truth is that I couldn't care less about what you think about cut and pastes.
Instead of me BeeEsing my way along stating my beliefs I post information,  right from the source. I not only show the work but I try to show the author and link.
I am not a religious scholar, former priest or have had any formal studies regarding religion. But I do try to research everything I talk about, and then back it up with people who have done more work than I have on the subject. It allows me to show anyone that is interested to review it themselves if they wish. If not, it doesn't bother me in the least. But I will continue to back up my personal thoughts  and conclusions with articles.
You do not take my word, and then when I provide additional sources you don't want to read that either.
I do not do anything different than you (or anyone else) who slaps down scripture verses. Last I checked, that is the original copy/paste.

Now, instead of constantly sidestepping these apostles questions, let's hear how they all died for a lie. 
I have established with my personal thoughts, then backed up by others who have done more in depth research, that according to the bible only a few apostles actually witnessed a resurrection. 
 Some apostles died of natural causes. HOW DID THEY DIE FOR A LIE?
Some apostles were certainly killed, but if they were ones who did not see a resurrection,  HOW DID THEY DIE FOR A LIE?
Judas, an original disciple,killed himself. HOW DID HE DIE FOR A LIE?
Paul, he saw a bright light and heard a voice. HOW DID HE DIE FOR A LIE?
No cotemporary source until the (sorry correction), 2nd and 3rd century mentions anything about how the apostles died. You say any writings written after 100 ad are not a valid source for biblical accuracy, so how are you going to take the word of some 4th century authors that talk about the deaths of apostles and also tell us that some died multiple times and multiple ways in different countries? Plus, in no 2nd or 3rd century contemporary story does anyone mention whether or not the apostle had a chance to recant their beliefs in order to be spared.

Bandy, address the questions that you have avoided since last july.

When you finally address those questions, then you can post EXACTLY what 1 Corinthians says about the resurrection and we will discuss that in more detail.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 8, 2016)

Friday Bandy bump


----------



## bullethead (Apr 8, 2016)

I think we will call the "die for a lie" argument BUSTED.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Apr 11, 2016)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> anyway, I'll give you the last word and/or huge multi-post C&P about the apostles being atheists, since this is your house...



See.....here's where I said you could have the last word.  

Easier to give you the last word than let things degrade, IMO.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 11, 2016)

BANDERSNATCH said:


> See.....here's where I said you could have the last word.
> 
> Easier to give you the last word than let things degrade, IMO.


Saw it, noted it, hoped you had more so I could learn something that I didn't know.


----------

