Martyrdom 2

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

CARTER

Once again, I am amused (and saddened) at the total inability of those on
the list to accept basic historical information. For those of you lurkers
who do not want to sift through a long series of posts which score high in
the verbiage department but have little substance contained within, I have
summarized the entirety of the main skeptical arguments for you:

1.  "Yes, we want extra-biblical (hearsay) evidence to prove the historical
validity of the martyrdom accounts."

2.  "Uh, ok, you've given us extra-biblical evidence, but it's all hearsay!"

3.  "Well, [insert person] actually believed in Jesus, therefore (logical
fallacy) he made up his historical report, and it is not admissible."

4.  "If the account was not witnessed PERSONALLY, even if it was written
within
a few YEARS of the event, (Ex. Clement(s)), it should not be considered as
evidence."

(We can toss out all ancient historians on this matter to even further our
ignorance!)

5.  "We demand someone who was "disinterested" in the apostles to write an
interested account of their death."

6.  "Conflicting accounts means we can't be sure of anything!"

7.  "If any historian agrees that the majority of the apostles were
martyred (which is pretty much ALL OF THEM, BTW), I will simply disagree
with them, ask them to "trot out" pictures and video's of the occurance,
and when they cannot, we will do a little jig and declare that we have
shown that they were not martyred, or at least, we can wallow in our
ignorance without a sense of guilt."

Sorry guys, this was one of the most pathetic attempts to disprove the
martyrdom accounts I have ever seen in my life. You'll notice, pretty much
every shred of evidence given from early and contemporary sources simply
_supports_ my thesis. Adding in hyper-critical questions does not dissolve
the potency of the evidence. 

(NOTE: BTW Crea, information 2000 years ago was not passed along by email
or CD or video. People had to rely upon oral tradition (since it was an
oral based society) for communication and transmission of history (for the
most part). But by God, we can't trust anything that is passed down through
tradition right?) 

In Christ,
-Jason

• Previous message: Spirit possession and "the Historical Jesus"
• Next message: Martyrdom 2
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]