The Martyrdom Argument for the Resurrection Examined

[Jagella]

A popular argument apologists often make for the truth of the resurrection of Jesus Christ goes like the following:

• Premise 1: People will not die for what they know is a lie.
  Premise 2: Many of the closest followers of Jesus including his disciples who were in a position to know if he rose from the dead were martyred for their belief in his resurrection.
  Conclusion: The disciples and many of the other closest followers of Jesus who were martyred for their belief in his resurrection could not have known the resurrection story to be a lie.

This is a valid argument because its conclusion logically follows from its premises (if its two premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true). However, to know if this argument is sound, it must not only be valid, but its premises must also be true. If this argument is not sound, then its conclusion is not proved true, and there is a definite possibility that the disciples either lied about the resurrection of Jesus or at least knew the story of the resurrection to be a lie.

We then need to take a look at the premises of this argument to see if they are correct. So...

Question for Debate: Is it true that people won't die for what they know is a lie, and did the disciples really die merely because they believed in the resurrection?

I think there obviously is some truth to Premise 1. Most people will avoid death whether they know something to be either true or false. However, when people face execution, they in most cases will end up dying whether they want to or not. So even if a person is facing execution for what she knows is a lie, she will probably die anyway. The early Christian martyrs, if there were any, may well have been executed even if they denied the resurrection, their denials never recorded.

Premise 2 is even more problematical than Premise 1. I know of no examples of any Christian being executed for merely believing Jesus rose from the dead. I see no reason why would anybody care what they believed.

[Zzyzx]

.

Question for Debate: Is it true that people won't die for what they know is a lie, and did the disciples really die merely because they believed in the resurrection?

In discussing willingness of Apostles to be martyred for their beliefs, it might be useful to know details about their deaths.

Here, from a Catholic source, is an overview of Apostles manner of death.

https://www.catholic.com/qa/were-all-tw ... s-martyred

Notice the LACK of factual information and the prevalence of "tradition holds that (over and over), reportedly, scripture conveys, believed to have been, Pope stated".

Evidently church officials believed or wanted to believe that at least ten Apostles were martyred. However, there is little or no verifiable evidence (beyond 'they believed') of their cause of death -- much less that it involved resurrection beliefs (for which there seems to be NO evidence presented).

Martyrdom 'for the faith' may seem heroic and affirming, but may be less than truthful or accurate.

[Jagella]

Here, from a Catholic source, is an overview of Apostles manner of death.

https://www.catholic.com/qa/were-all-tw ... s-martyred

Notice the LACK of factual information and the prevalence of "tradition holds that (over and over), reportedly, scripture conveys, believed to have been, Pope stated".

Evidently church officials believed or wanted to believe that at least ten Apostles were martyred. However, there is little or no verifiable evidence (beyond 'they believed') of their cause of death -- much less that it involved resurrection beliefs (for which there seems to be NO evidence presented).

I'm hardly surprised at how weak the evidence for this early-Christian martyrdom is, but even if we knew the apostles were martyred, we still face the problem regarding the circumstances of their executions. Some apologists claim they died for their belief in the resurrection. This claim appears to be dubious at best.

So let me urge the Christians here: please don't be too quick to believe apologists! Do some fact checking to see if they're telling the truth.

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to Jagella in post #3]
Foxes Book of Martyrs written by John Day in1563
is the earliest source for the martyred disciples.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxe%27 ... of_Martyrs

[TRANSPONDER]

Here, from a Catholic source, is an overview of Apostles manner of death.

https://www.catholic.com/qa/were-all-tw ... s-martyred

Notice the LACK of factual information and the prevalence of "tradition holds that (over and over), reportedly, scripture conveys, believed to have been, Pope stated".

Evidently church officials believed or wanted to believe that at least ten Apostles were martyred. However, there is little or no verifiable evidence (beyond 'they believed') of their cause of death -- much less that it involved resurrection beliefs (for which there seems to be NO evidence presented).

I'm hardly surprised at how weak the evidence for this early-Christian martyrdom is, but even if we knew the apostles were martyred, we still face the problem regarding the circumstances of their executions. Some apologists claim they died for their belief in the resurrection. This claim appears to be dubious at best.

So let me urge the Christians here: please don't be too quick to believe apologists! Do some fact checking to see if they're telling the truth.

Yes, good point. The claims that the disciples died from anything other than old age (the last one saying "There's still time left; Jesus'll be here before I taste death") are contestable, and the one account of a martyrdom of a disciple (James, son of Zebedee) being topped in Acts I wouldn't trust at all.

But - correct; even if they had all died for what they believed, that wouldn't show that what they believed was true. Just ask any Martyr for the Jihad.

True, the apologetic is intended to show that their faith in the resurrection was strong because they'd seen it, so the Gospel resurrection - stories must be true.

I say that the contradictions (also with I Cor) shows that it isn't true, so whether faith the disciples died for was just what they believed, not what they knew. That's if they really died for anything other than running out of life.

[The Nice Centurion]

But - correct; even if they had all died for what they believed, that wouldn't show that what they believed was true. Just ask any Martyr for the Jihad.

I suspect that any Martyr for the Jihad would tell you that what he or she believes is true!

True, the apologetic is intended to show that their faith in the resurrection was strong because they'd seen it, so the Gospel resurrection - stories must be true.

Appeal to Emotion among other things.

I say that the contradictions (also with I Cor) shows that it isn't true, so whether faith the disciples died for was just what they believed, not what they knew. That's if they really died for anything other than running out of life.

Or they never died at all, as some christians believe. Christ promised to return in their lifetime , so to not prove him liar they have no choice but still strolling around!

[TRANSPONDER]

But - correct; even if they had all died for what they believed, that wouldn't show that what they believed was true. Just ask any Martyr for the Jihad.

I suspect that any Martyr for the Jihad would tell you that what he or she believes is true!

True, the apologetic is intended to show that their faith in the resurrection was strong because they'd seen it, so the Gospel resurrection - stories must be true.

Appeal to Emotion among other things.

I say that the contradictions (also with I Cor) shows that it isn't true, so whether faith the disciples died for was just what they believed, not what they knew. That's if they really died for anything other than running out of life.

Or they never died at all, as some christians believe. Christ promised to return in their lifetime , so to not prove him liar they have no choice but still strolling around!

Appeal to emotion aside, I thinks it's a valid argument (I should know) that someone will fight (and even die) for what they are convinced is true. The problem is that we don't really know whether the disciples died for anything in particular or, if the did, what it was. Someone mentioned colouring Paul with the gospel story. It's absolutely seeing the disciples (and I think Paul tells us that he knew some of them) through the tinted spectacles of the Gospels.