Well, after breaking 2000 comments on the previous thread, I think it’s time to move to a new one. Feel free to continue the conversation here.
Also, I want to make a note about future posts. The tone on this blog for the last month or so has been decidedly different than what it used to be. While that’s definitely made things interesting, I’d like to move back to a tone more in line with the way things used to be. So going forward, I want the comments on all new posts to remain civil. We can all make our points, and I expect to see a wide range of opinions. But I don’t want to get into name-calling and bashing when we can’t all agree on particular issues. Let’s try to stay focused on the points and not get side-tracked with personal stuff. Let’s also keep each comment substantive so we don’t rack up so many comments in such a short period of time that it’s hard for everyone to keep track.
If you don’t feel like you can participate within those guidelines, then feel free to continue posting within this thread (and any future “Kathy” threads, if they’re needed), because I won’t be enforcing any guidelines here. But if you want to comment on any other posts, you’ll need to abide by the rules I just laid out. Otherwise, your comment will be subject to deletion, and after a warning, you might find yourself banned from at least that thread, if not the entire blog.
If there are any questions, let me know.
Thanks
Finding Truth 
@Kathy
Once again, an example of what you are expecting people to accept without evidence to back any such claims.
I find it ironic that here, you are appealing to what you consider is ”MORE likely” yet will steadfastly reject such a notion when the term MORE likely is applied to whether Yeshua walked on water for instance, or was born of a virgin or suddenly de-materialized and went up to Heaven.
Or how about the Resurrection of the dead saints at the time of the Crucifixion? Is it MORE likely that this happened or is it ‘MORE likely’ simply fiction? A narartive tool?
If you wish for us to apply this method of deduction then it is only fair that you apply it to every aspect of your faith/religion.
So, take the ‘MORE likely’ phrase and then it in sentences that include: Garden of Eden, Noah’s Ark, The Exodus,Moses and the Red(Reed Sea).Virgin Birth, Resurrection.
Can you do this, Kathy?
LikeLike
@Kathy
It is also worth noting that once Christianity was made the state religion by Theodosius the persecutions really started to take shape, including the persecution of Roman religions.
And of course the internecine fighting against all sorts of heresies began.
Christians have a rather unsavory, brutal history Kathy. ( some of it isn’t that hot these days either, to be honest) Perhaps you ought to familiarize yourself with it ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodosius_I#Nicene_Christianity_becomes_the_state_religion
LikeLike
Robert Ingersoll
http://www.cynical-c.com/2008/08/08/daily-dose-of-ingersoll-299/
LikeLike
“You’ve posted no reason here to not believe that Jesus’ disciples weren’t martyred.” – I have!
I don’t think you have time to post, you need to be studying Hinduism —
LikeLike
Speaking of the Virgin Birth, and Ark was, it just occurred to me that Jesus popped his own mother’s hymen, and that just has ALL KINDS of Oedipal ramifications!
LikeLike
“Martyrdom, as a rule, establishes the sincerity of the martyr — never the correctness of his thought. Things are true or false in themselves. Truth cannot be affected by opinions; it cannot be changed, established, or affected by martyrdom. An error cannot be believed sincerely enough to make it a truth.” that’s what I said, maybe not so eloquently —
LikeLike
And what is your conclusion, Ruth? And did you post the evidence that supports that conclusion? Can you elaborate?
Yes, I did post the evidence. Did you even read the post that had the links in it. It gave a summation of each one of the Apostles for which I posted and the source was linked to it. I’m not sure why you asked for that and didn’t even read it.
I already gave you my conclusion. I’m skeptical that all these apostles were martyred. I have no proof that they were or weren’t and there are certainly conflicting traditions about this. Tradition can most assuredly be exaggerated. If you read the comments I made surely you can understand how a person might come to that conclusion. It would be quite biased of me to just accept tradition because that is what I want to be true.
The point I was trying to make in all of that is that it is possible to look at this evidence and not be compelled by the martyrdom of the apostles to believe and not be intellectually dishonest. My point was not to convince you that martyrdom didn’t happen or that you shouldn’t be compelled by it. It was to show you why not everyone might be and why your instance that it be compelling evidence to everyone else is…well…just odd given that you clearly haven’t done much research into it.
It is clear that no matter how much research a person has done, unless they come to the same conclusions you have, you will assume they are the ones who are biased and dishonest. With that I have no further interest in discussing this with you because this doesn’t appear to be much of a discussion anyway. It appears that you intend to made declarations about what is and is not compelling evidence and call anyone who doesn’t a liar. As far as I’m concerned that is a fail on your part.
LikeLike
*“…anyone who doesn’t a liar.”
anyone who doesn’t agree a liar.
LikeLike
Kathy, could I get you to take a short break from your studies of Hinduism, just long enough to tell you a quick story? You can go right back, I wouldn’t want to break your concentration for long. This is a story about a man who may sound familliar to you:
Even before he was born, it was known that he would be someone special. A supernatural being informed his mother that the child she was to conceive would not be a mere mortal but would be divine. He was born miraculously, and he became an unusually precocious young man. As an adult he left home and went on an itinerant preaching ministry, urging his listeners to live, not for the material things of this world, but for what is spiritual. He gathered a number of disciples around him, who became convinced that his teachings were divinely inspired, in no small part because he himself was divine. He proved it to them by doing many miracles, healing the sick, casting out demons, and raising the dead. But at the end of his life he roused opposition, and his enemies delivered him over to the Roman authorities for judgment. Still, after he left this world, he returned to meet his followers in order to convince them that he was not really dead but lived on in the heavenly realm. Later some of his followers wrote books about him.
The man I just described was Apollonius of Tyana, born about 3 BCE.
By far the most detailed source is the Life of Apollonius of Tyana, a lengthy, novelistic biography written by the sophist Philostratus at the request of empress Julia Domna. She died in 217 CE, and he completed it after her death, probably in the 220s or 230s CE.
Philostratus describes Apollonius as a wandering teacher of philosophy and miracle worker who was mainly active in Greece and Asia Minor but also traveled to Italy, Spain and North Africa and even to Mesopotamia, India, and Ethiopia.
Philostratus implies on one occasion that Apollonius had extra-sensory perception (Book VIII, Chapter XXVI). When emperor Domitian was murdered on September 18, 96 AD, Apollonius was said to have witnessed the event in Ephesus “about midday” on the day it happened in Rome, and told those present “Take heart, gentlemen, for the tyrant has been slain this day…”. Both Philostratus and renowned historian Cassius Dio report this incident, probably on the basis of an oral tradition. Both state that the philosopher welcomed the deed as a praiseworthy tyrannicide.
In particular, Philostratus tells lengthy stories of Apollonius entering the city of Rome in disregard of Emperor Nero’s ban on philosophers, and later on being summoned, as a defendant, to the court of Domitian, where he defied the Emperor in blunt terms. He had allegedly been accused of conspiring against the Emperor, performing human sacrifice, and predicting a plague by means of magic. Philostratus implies that upon his death, Apollonius of Tyana underwent heavenly assumption.
There are those who believe that Jesus was a fictional character, whose life was based on that of Appalonius of Tyana, after all, he shared many things in common with Yeshua:
• Birth miraculously announced by a supernatural being
• Was the son of a god and a mortal woman
• Religiously precocious as a child
• Asserted to be a native speaker of Aramaic
• Associated with wise men or magi
• Renounced wealth
• Followed abstinence and asceticism
• Wore long hair and robe
• Discussed eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven
• Was unmarried and childless
• Was anointed with oil
• Went to Jerusalem
• Spoke in metaphors
• Saw and predicted the future
• Performed miracles
• Healed the sick
• Cast out evil spirits
• Raised the daughter of a Roman official from the dead
• Spoke authoritatively to temple priests
• Converted people to himself
• Believed to be a “savior” from heaven
• Worshipped as a god
• Accused of being a magician
• Brought before a king, whose righteousness he challenged
• Condemned by Roman authorities
• Imprisoned
• Descended into the underworld
• Was assumed into heaven
• Appeared posthumously to a detractor as a brilliant light
Ok, back to your Hinduism studies – sorry to interrupt —
LikeLike
She didn’t read mine either, Ruth, because it didn’t say what she wanted to hear, yet she calls herself objective. I spent over two hours reading the site she offered (and later denied offering) and doing outside research (which obviously she had NEVER done!), attempting to verify the claims made by her site. I listed the fates of many of the disciples, but as it approached midnight, decided to call it quits and not finish the list until after I saw her reaction to the ones I DID list, and upon seeing none whatsoever, decided that not going further was a wise choice, as it would never have been read.
Clearly, someone, at some time, left her the impression that she was good at debating, and because it was what she wanted to hear, she believed them. I suspect it was a cruel joke. The truth is, she has no grasp of even the most basic principles of debate – you listen to your opponent’s evidence, then refute it with what you hope is stronger evidence of your own, rather than scream “LIBERAL LIAR!” while sticking your fingers in your ears and singing “Jesus Loves Me.”
But she’ll grow up. I hope.
LikeLike
“She didn’t read mine either, Ruth, because it didn’t say what she wanted to hear, yet she calls herself objective.”
She kept saying the reason she wasn’t bothering to read what we were giving her was because she didn’t want to waste her time on “liberal atheist propaganda”. Every source I provided was a Christian resource. While it doesn’t disprove that the apostles were martyred, it doesn’t lend credibility to the claims either. So an objective person might conclude we don’t have enough evidence to say what happened. To say that “tradition tells us” is the equivalent of “legend has it” in my mind. I didn’t have any hope of swaying her from her belief that they were martyred, but I did hope that she might be able to see that another might come to a skeptical conclusion on the matter without being dishonest.
I never said I didn’t believe that any of the apostles were martyred. In fact they might all have been, but they might just have well have died accidental deaths, or of old age in their beds. The evidence we do have just isn’t convincing either way to me.
LikeLike
” I didn’t have any hope of swaying her from her belief that they were martyred, but I did hope that she might be able to see that another might come to a skeptical conclusion on the matter without being dishonest.”
I also hoped that she might see that her case for insisting that the apostles martyrdom be compelling evidence to everyone else might not be as strong as she had once thought it to be.
LikeLike
In considering the possibility that the Gospel writers, whomever they may have been, either created a fictional Yeshua, or embellished a rather hum-drum, yet tragic life story of an actual Yeshua, with details from the life of Appalonius, one, at some point, must face the question from someone, of Why – why would they do this?
Does it occur to anyone as a bit strange that – assuming that in his own time, Yeshua was considered by his followers to have been divine, the actual son of a god, that no one wrote about him for 45 years after his alleged death? And does it strike anyone as a bit coincidental, that the first of these biographies appeared shortly after the Roman destruction of the Jewish temple in 72 CE? It had been 600 years since this landmark, this gathering place for all of Israel’s holy, had been torn down by the Babylonians. The destruction of the “Holy” Temple HAD to have been a traumatic event in the lives of the Jews of the time. Possibly the Jesus character was invented to give the people hope. But why not use Appalonius, whose life must have been known by some at the time? Because Appalonius was a Greek, and the Messiah needed to be a Jew, with Appalonius’ characteristics.
Yeah, I know – it’s a stretch – but something to think about. Most importantly, and not so far-fetched, is the timing of the destruction of the temple and the publication of the Gospel of Mark entirely coincidental? I don’t think so.
LikeLike
She simply doesn’t want to hear anything that doesn’t agree with her preconceived notions, and that is the very antithesis of objectivity.
LikeLike
For any interested in the bizarre, who might wish to know more about our Kathy’s mindset, I’ve been pointed to an interesting and somewhat alarming article, some of which we’ve just recently seen manifesting itself in the SCOTUS/Hobby Lobby decision:
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_christian_fascists_are_growing_stronger_20100607
LikeLike
Ark said:
“@Kathy
Which do you think is MORE likely… based on the undisputed history of the persecution of Christians, especially in the beginning, it’s MORE likely that they WERE martyred.
Once again, an example of what you are expecting people to accept without evidence to back any such claims.
I find it ironic that here, you are appealing to what you consider is ”MORE likely” yet will steadfastly reject such a notion when the term MORE likely is applied to whether Yeshua walked on water for instance, or was born of a virgin or suddenly de-materialized and went up to Heaven.”
Yes, those things are much less likely.. that’s why they’re called “miracles”. And I “steadfastly” reject the odds argument for these miracles BECAUSE of the other evidence that goes along with it. What evidence do you have that the disciples WEREN’T martyred? I’ve asked this.. this indicates objectivity.. I want to know what evidence there is.. or even a reasonable argument to counter MY very REASONABLE point that they were most likely martyred. I haven’t read all the comments here yet but I’ll bet that no one has supplied any evidence to the contrary.
In asking me to apply the “most likely” argument to the miracles.. you overlook/ aka ignore the FACT that our very existence isn’t only less likely, it’s IMPOSSIBLE according to the very science atheists choose as their “god”.
You are trying to claim that I lack fairness and objectivity with my more likely argument when, surprise, it is you and all atheists who ultimately ignore the most UNLIKELY event of all… your existence.
It is YOU who lacks consistency and reason… not me.
LikeLike
Ark cont..
“Once again, an example of what you are expecting people to accept without evidence to back any such claims.”
There is massive evidence for my beliefs. I’m guessing you meant empirical proof?
Do you have empirical proof that love exists Ark? Yet you rely on it every day.
You have no proof for lots of things you choose to believe and insist as truth.. like.. the atheist claim that God doesn’t exist. You have not only no proof of this.. you don’t even have any EVIDENCE!
Again, more proof that YOU lack objectivity.
LikeLike
“What evidence do you have that the disciples WEREN’T martyred?” – I gave you that for a full half-dozen of them, you ignored it – THIS indicates YOUR objectivity..
LikeLike
Ark cont..
“@Kathy
It is also worth noting that once Christianity was made the state religion by Theodosius the persecutions really started to take shape, including the persecution of Roman religions.”
Um.. so?? What is your point exactly??
“Christians have a rather unsavory, brutal history Kathy. ( some of it isn’t that hot these days either, to be honest) Perhaps you ought to familiarize yourself with it ?”
Again,.. what exactly is your point here??
If people DON’T follow Christ’s teachings.. then they DON’T represent Christianity.
LikeLike
I’ve asked for your proof from day 1, that your god exists, I’ve gotten nearly 3 weeks worth of crickets.
LikeLike
Arch said:
““You’ve posted no reason here to not believe that Jesus’ disciples weren’t martyred.” – I have!
I don’t think you have time to post, you need to be studying Hinduism – ”
No, you haven’t Arch.
And as to your homework assignment… have YOU learned all about Hinduism?
Surely you have since you’ve rejected it.. and also since that would make you a giant
hypocrite.. so, why don’t you just give me a crash course here.. in your own words please..
Again, as I’ve already stated, I know ENOUGH about Hinduism to tell me it’s a false religion.. it lacks CREDENTIALS.. it doesn’t come close to having the corroborative evidence that Christianity has.. all we have to do is use our brains Arch.. it can prevent you from wasting a lot of time and effort… try it! 🙂
LikeLike
Ruth, you said:
“Yes, I did post the evidence. Did you even read the post that had the links in it. It gave a summation of each one of the Apostles for which I posted and the source was linked to it. I’m not sure why you asked for that and didn’t even read it.”
Ruth, I asked for an explanation in your words.. not links of which you gave samples that did NOT in any way provide a valid argument that the disciples weren’t martyred.
After reading your comment I STILL don’t know what exactly is your reasons for not believing the disciples were martyred. Especially when I pointed out AGAIN.. how it’s much more likely and REASONABLE to believe that they were martyred.. given the history of Christianity that is undisputed/ documented.
I can see how you might question the way some of them died since there are conflicting stores of SOME of them.. but that again, doesn’t prove that they weren’t martyred.. which again is the most likely outcome for all of Jesus’ disciples.. who, if it weren’t for them, Christianity wouldn’t be the largest faith today.. it would have died out like all the others before it.. and after it.. all those that didn’t kill people for not following it, that is..
“I already gave you my conclusion. I’m skeptical that all these apostles were martyred.”
Skeptical of HOW they were martyred would be an objective belief.. but I don’t think that is true of them being martyred… you’ve given no evidence to support this.
” I have no proof that they were or weren’t and there are certainly conflicting traditions about this. Tradition can most assuredly be exaggerated.”
Yes it can.. so? Again, how does that prove they weren’t martyred?
“It would be quite biased of me to just accept tradition because that is what I want to be true.”
It’s biased to dismiss their martyrdom without evidence to the contrary. You/ we HAVE evidence that they were martyred.. even if SOME of it is conflicting.. this is often the NORM of events that happened so long ago. Again, you’ve given no reason to believe that the disciples WEREN’T martyred.. only how SOME of them were martyred.
LikeLike
“No, you haven’t Arch.” – that’s a bald-faced lie, Kathy, you even mentioned what I had written about Josephus in one of your own comments, but by your words, “some old historian,” it was clear you hadn’t read the comment. I would at least check, if I were you, before you lie.
“why don’t you just give me a crash course here.. in your own words please..” – because I’m not doing your work for you.
“I know ENOUGH about Hinduism to tell me it’s a false religion.. it lacks CREDENTIALS.. it doesn’t come close to having the corroborative evidence that Christianity has.. all we have to do is use our brains” – you know even less about Hinduism than you do Christianity, and you’ve adequately proven that that’s not much – I can’t imagine that someone so underequipped as you clearly are, would advise someone to “use our brains.”
LikeLike
Arch, re: Apollonius Tyana …
So, where is this religion today? Where are the followers of this “deity”?
You seemed to have overlooked this KEY aspect of your point.
And the dates are very close to Jesus’ life.. it seems clear who copied who. His biography
was written AFTER the Gospels.
LikeLike
Ruth, cont..
“” I didn’t have any hope of swaying her from her belief that they were martyred, but I did hope that she might be able to see that another might come to a skeptical conclusion on the matter without being dishonest.”
I also hoped that she might see that her case for insisting that the apostles martyrdom be compelling evidence to everyone else might not be as strong as she had once thought it to be.”
And I hope that YOU might see that you aren’t applying objectivity. My question, I believe, proves that you aren’t. Logic and common sense says that they most likely WERE martyred.. and also that their martyrdom was a powerful component of the spread of the faith of Christianity. “you get what you pay for”… this couldn’t be more true with Christian martyrdom.. it’s the MOST expensive testimony.. and it is the MOST powerful testimony.. again, it’s WHY the faith is so strong today. Not all Christians were martyred.. but thousands if not millions risked their lives for the faith.
Your and Nate’s attempts to diminish this powerful testimony shows your lack of objectivity.. aka honesty.
You may genuinely believe your arguments.. but that won’t excuse you.. it just means you are deliberately ignoring the truth on a deeper level.
LikeLike