/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

Give me a TLDR of the link. What is your specific question that you can't figure out or answer.

>>646528

Cathars weren't martyred, they were exterminated and rightly so.

t. Babdis

>>646529

>Martyrdom, as a rule, establishes the sincerity of the martyr — never the correctness of his thought.

We basicly argue about whether Christianity is true or not and then I say "well if Jesus isn't the Son of God, why did Apostles die for a crucified son of a woodworker that reformed the old traditions (and people usually prefer traditions". then he comes with that argument and I have nothing to say.

>>646534

Heathen martyrs didn't eat and drink with their God and saw him in flesh.

The crucifixion is the most historically sound event in history. It has better documentation than the existence of most ancient philosophers.

The m*slims and j*ws have hundreds and thousands of years, respectively, from their alleged revelation to scripture. The Bible had people who had their very feet washed by Jesus write it.

There's a movie and a book called A Case For Christ, you should watch it.

>>646528

Apostles (not just one person) died for what they saw and touched can you say the same about those other martyrs?

>Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

>>646536

Well as every atheist he denies historical sources for resurrection of Christ.

>the Bible is the best source we have, a graeco-roman biography

<it has bias

>Historians Tacitus and Josephus wrote of Christ

<they didn't mention resurrection though

I will watch the film, thanks for recommendation

>>646534

When we talk about usual stories of Christians getting martyred, yes, its nothing that proves truth.

What DOES prove however is the martyrdom of the apostles in context of the resurrection. In other words, with all the torment that they have suffered, at least one of them HAD to be broken, if resurrection didn't happen. While people like Mani were martyred, they were basing their thoughts on their individual judgment and mind, just as Christian martyrs who didnt saw resurrection themselves. However, when we see apostles, we see that their faith was based on the objective reality that they saw and not on their personal opinions or ideology. Especially when when we see, that they had absolutely no reason to make this up even, because basically this was what led to their deaths

“I know the resurrection is a fact, and Watergate proved it to me. How? Because 12 men testified they had seen Jesus raised from the dead, then they proclaimed that truth for 40 years, never once denying it. Every one was beaten, tortured, stoned and put in prison. They would not have endured that if it weren't true. Watergate embroiled 12 of the most powerful men in the world-and they couldn't keep a lie for three weeks. You're telling me 12 apostles could keep a lie for 40 years? Absolutely impossible.”

― Charles W. Colson

>>646540

Unfortunately for him, theres not the Bible that mentions it, but numerous apocrypha also. Not talking about records about the apostles that's even larger, such as Didache.

>>646543

*theres not only the Bible

>>646528

The reason for which the apostles were martyred was of a completely different sort as the reasons for which later heretics died.

The apostles all died for a set of physical experiences of a physically risen Christ which is difficult to explain unless He did arise, while the later heretics died for purely intellectual conclusions which is easy to understand how they could be self deceived.

>[Insert General Ideology] martyrdom is not unique.

So? The point of the martyrdom argument is that the First-Century Christians would not suffer so much pain and shame for claiming something they know to be a lie or with anything less than certain epistemic or legal evidence.

Later on, heretics died after Christianity establish some niche popularity as well as being influenced by various dualistic religions and philosophies that attacked anything physical, so death was seen in itself as a good thing.

tl;dr We're not arguing that Christianity is unique because of martyrdom. We're arguing that it could not survive martyrdom, plus all the other trials and scrutinizes in the First-Century AD, unless it was, as it is, true.

Just the read the article. The guy clearly was never taught basic apologetic stuff, and possibly proper theology. Also, the argument in the article is essential what we have just explained is a straw-man: "Well, other religious adherents do it." Not the issue. Missing the point.

>>646533

Cathars were early Baptists according to your "Trail of Blood."

>>646533

when did jesus tell us to exterminate unbelievers?

>>646742

Jesus didnt, but the circumstances did. You DONT want to know how shitty it would be if Cathars would be successful…

>>646528

>>646528

The reason why their martyrdom is unique is not that it happened but WHY it happened to begin with. The 1st Century Christian martyrs were all innocent to the death like Christ. They committed no crime nor were involved in secret scandals worth torturing, imprisoning, and executing for. They preached the simple message of the Messiah being Jesus of Nazareth, how he was executed innocently, and how he rose back to life in three days. That was their only crime.

What is so threatening about that simple message that it had to be stopped? What was so threatening in that book(the Bible) that it had to be burned for centuries? What was so threatening about these martyrs for talking about a man that rose back from the dead that it was worth spilling so much blood for to silence?

The blood of those martyrs is what gave that message and that book so much value and credibility. If Satan just backed off and let the public discredit them themselves than this would not had blown up as it did today.

>>646990

Satan is the biggest brainlet in history bar none, don't expect too much of him

>>646998

Lucifer obviously learned from his actions though, as instead of killing christians today he discredits them with numerous (((versions))) that would make God a liar if they were true and with things like evolution and the (((fake jews))) who bring a bad name to the biblical jews by reason of people falsely believing (((them))) to be biblical jews.

It's simple. Non-witnesses can't be "martyrs".