<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Martyrdom does not establish truth</title>
	<atom:link href="http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/</link>
	<description>Reasonable Thoughts on Religion, Science, Skepticism, and Atheism</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:47:03 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Rosemary Lyndall Wemm</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-62943</link>
		<dc:creator>Rosemary Lyndall Wemm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 07:10:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-62943</guid>
		<description>@Mark.

People die for all kinds of delusions.  The brain is very good at being fooled.  Even if Jesus and the 12 apostles actually existed and one of the heavily contradictory stories of the events after the crucifixation of Jesus is accurate this is no indication that the man Jesus actually did rise from the dead.  The Bible also recounts the story of Lazarus rising from the dead after three days of  &quot;death&quot;.  These people could not tell the difference between coma, unconsciouness.  They also bought the story about epileptics being &quot;cured&quot; by casting out the indwelling devils which were then thrown into a herd of startled animals.  They were ignorant uneducated fishermen who had abandoned their family responsiblities to follow an itinerant preacher who lived like a hobo and who, like them, was illiterate.  

In this day and age they would probably believe that they had been abducted by aliens or been one of the &quot;witnesses&quot; to Joseph Smith&#039;s golden tablets.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Mark.</p>
<p>People die for all kinds of delusions.  The brain is very good at being fooled.  Even if Jesus and the 12 apostles actually existed and one of the heavily contradictory stories of the events after the crucifixation of Jesus is accurate this is no indication that the man Jesus actually did rise from the dead.  The Bible also recounts the story of Lazarus rising from the dead after three days of  &#8220;death&#8221;.  These people could not tell the difference between coma, unconsciouness.  They also bought the story about epileptics being &#8220;cured&#8221; by casting out the indwelling devils which were then thrown into a herd of startled animals.  They were ignorant uneducated fishermen who had abandoned their family responsiblities to follow an itinerant preacher who lived like a hobo and who, like them, was illiterate.  </p>
<p>In this day and age they would probably believe that they had been abducted by aliens or been one of the &#8220;witnesses&#8221; to Joseph Smith&#8217;s golden tablets.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rosemary Lyndall Wemm</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-62942</link>
		<dc:creator>Rosemary Lyndall Wemm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 06:50:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-62942</guid>
		<description>@Brent.

Although it is central to the Christianity that developed in later centuries, it is doubtful if the first Christian&#039;s believed that their Master had risen from the dead.  The first New Testament gospel to be written (Mark) ended with the death of Jesus. Apparently the gospel writer thought that he had written down all the things that really mattered.  The story of the magical resurrection of Jesus and its aftermath was not added until much later, probably to make the narrative conform to the others and improve its chances of being included in the biblical Canon as the committee-designated &quot;inspired word of god&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Brent.</p>
<p>Although it is central to the Christianity that developed in later centuries, it is doubtful if the first Christian&#8217;s believed that their Master had risen from the dead.  The first New Testament gospel to be written (Mark) ended with the death of Jesus. Apparently the gospel writer thought that he had written down all the things that really mattered.  The story of the magical resurrection of Jesus and its aftermath was not added until much later, probably to make the narrative conform to the others and improve its chances of being included in the biblical Canon as the committee-designated &#8220;inspired word of god&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lowrack</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-62809</link>
		<dc:creator>Lowrack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2009 10:07:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-62809</guid>
		<description>Jeff, it&#039;s really ironic that you ended your comment with the words&quot;real study and thoughtful inquiry&quot;. I&#039;d like you to consider those words carefully for a moment. You don&#039;t seem to be employing either of them in your evaluation of biblical scripture. The Bible is absolutely fraught with mistakes, contradictions, omissions and mistranslations. If that weren&#039;t bad enough, virtually every bit of &quot;evidence&quot; in the Bible is extremely specious. This was obvious to me even when I was a practicing christian studying the Bible to prepare myself for possible ministry.
There is no evidence that I&#039;m aware of that independently corroborates any of the most foundational claims of christianity. A book claiming there were &quot;hundreds of eyewitnesses&quot; doesn&#039;t have any particular veracity. And did you say &quot;precisely fulfilling hundreds of prophecies&quot;? You must be joking....
You need to set the bar for truth a lot higher than that. Evidence is not just a word to toss around in order to lend credence to ridiculous claims. It actually means something. The first step to identifying it is to understand what it means. The next step is to use it honestly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff, it&#8217;s really ironic that you ended your comment with the words&#8221;real study and thoughtful inquiry&#8221;. I&#8217;d like you to consider those words carefully for a moment. You don&#8217;t seem to be employing either of them in your evaluation of biblical scripture. The Bible is absolutely fraught with mistakes, contradictions, omissions and mistranslations. If that weren&#8217;t bad enough, virtually every bit of &#8220;evidence&#8221; in the Bible is extremely specious. This was obvious to me even when I was a practicing christian studying the Bible to prepare myself for possible ministry.<br />
There is no evidence that I&#8217;m aware of that independently corroborates any of the most foundational claims of christianity. A book claiming there were &#8220;hundreds of eyewitnesses&#8221; doesn&#8217;t have any particular veracity. And did you say &#8220;precisely fulfilling hundreds of prophecies&#8221;? You must be joking&#8230;.<br />
You need to set the bar for truth a lot higher than that. Evidence is not just a word to toss around in order to lend credence to ridiculous claims. It actually means something. The first step to identifying it is to understand what it means. The next step is to use it honestly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lowrack</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-62805</link>
		<dc:creator>Lowrack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2009 08:27:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-62805</guid>
		<description>No, I think the person who has misunderstood how most christians use this argument is you. You seem to have a somewhat deeper understanding of this argument, but you fall into the same logical trap as everyone else who uses it. The apostles are not factually known to have been in a position to verify the claims about Jesus. This is a matter of growing dispute. Nothing was written about Jesus in his lifetime. It was decades later that the first writing about him were recorded, and what made it into the Bible is nothing more than hearsay. Hearsay is not evidence. 
And whether or not first-century Jews gave up one belief for another is also not a matter of any usefulness in determining the veracity of christianity&#039;s claims. People change beliefs about things all the time. It doesn&#039;t invalidate their old beliefs, nor does it make their new ones valid. The validity of a claim is not related to the sincerity of belief the claimant possesses. If it were, everyone would be right about everything.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, I think the person who has misunderstood how most christians use this argument is you. You seem to have a somewhat deeper understanding of this argument, but you fall into the same logical trap as everyone else who uses it. The apostles are not factually known to have been in a position to verify the claims about Jesus. This is a matter of growing dispute. Nothing was written about Jesus in his lifetime. It was decades later that the first writing about him were recorded, and what made it into the Bible is nothing more than hearsay. Hearsay is not evidence.<br />
And whether or not first-century Jews gave up one belief for another is also not a matter of any usefulness in determining the veracity of christianity&#8217;s claims. People change beliefs about things all the time. It doesn&#8217;t invalidate their old beliefs, nor does it make their new ones valid. The validity of a claim is not related to the sincerity of belief the claimant possesses. If it were, everyone would be right about everything.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Custador</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-62703</link>
		<dc:creator>Custador</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2009 12:40:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-62703</guid>
		<description>Guess I should have read on one post before I replied to Brent :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Guess I should have read on one post before I replied to Brent :-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Custador</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-62702</link>
		<dc:creator>Custador</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2009 12:39:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-62702</guid>
		<description>Not really a solid truth. Accounts of them dying for that reason were not written until hundreds of years later, so we cannot say for certain that it even happened.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not really a solid truth. Accounts of them dying for that reason were not written until hundreds of years later, so we cannot say for certain that it even happened.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Ellis</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-62700</link>
		<dc:creator>David Ellis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2009 12:29:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-62700</guid>
		<description>&lt;b&gt;
I think you have misunderstood the argument as it is used by some Christians. The only thing the argument was intended by most to prove was that the apostles sincerely believed what they died for.
&lt;/b&gt;

Except it doesn&#039;t even do that.  Has no Christian ever heard of Joseph Smith?  He was martyred for his religion which was almost certainly a fraud he was perpetrating (presumably because there are quite a lot of perks associated with leading a religion).  When a mob is lynching or a political leader executing a man who claims to be in contact with the Divine but who is really a fraud they don&#039;t generally give him the opportunity to recant and, if he does, send him on his merry way.  They just kill him.

Too many in this discussion (including Ingersoll in the quote) have mistakenly assumed that martyrdom is evidence of sincerity but not truth....in fact, its neither.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b><br />
I think you have misunderstood the argument as it is used by some Christians. The only thing the argument was intended by most to prove was that the apostles sincerely believed what they died for.<br />
</b></p>
<p>Except it doesn&#8217;t even do that.  Has no Christian ever heard of Joseph Smith?  He was martyred for his religion which was almost certainly a fraud he was perpetrating (presumably because there are quite a lot of perks associated with leading a religion).  When a mob is lynching or a political leader executing a man who claims to be in contact with the Divine but who is really a fraud they don&#8217;t generally give him the opportunity to recant and, if he does, send him on his merry way.  They just kill him.</p>
<p>Too many in this discussion (including Ingersoll in the quote) have mistakenly assumed that martyrdom is evidence of sincerity but not truth&#8230;.in fact, its neither.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tabbie</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-45362</link>
		<dc:creator>Tabbie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jun 2009 14:56:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-45362</guid>
		<description>Your logic is lame and flawed, Trav. If that is your best argument, I wonder why you bothered to post it. Pot. Kettle. Black.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your logic is lame and flawed, Trav. If that is your best argument, I wonder why you bothered to post it. Pot. Kettle. Black.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wazza</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-45359</link>
		<dc:creator>wazza</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jun 2009 14:51:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-45359</guid>
		<description>it&#039;s not an argument against martyrdom; there are martyrs to freethought, too. What it is an argument against is the use of martyrs as &quot;proof&quot; of the faith they believed in. It doesn&#039;t matter whether their martyrdom occurred or not, or whether they really did it for their beliefs or not; what matters here is whether there is real truth in the reasons for their martyrdom, not perceived truth.

I don&#039;t believe cosmic plurality because Giordano Bruno died at the stake for promoting the idea; I believe it because it&#039;s statistically unlikely that only one world in the whole universe has life. Trying to prove the existence of god because people died for their faith is like trying to prove cosmic plurality or heliocentricity by saying that it&#039;s true because Bruno died for it; conversely, the falsehood of the existence of god says nothing about the faith or lack thereof of the martyrs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>it&#8217;s not an argument against martyrdom; there are martyrs to freethought, too. What it is an argument against is the use of martyrs as &#8220;proof&#8221; of the faith they believed in. It doesn&#8217;t matter whether their martyrdom occurred or not, or whether they really did it for their beliefs or not; what matters here is whether there is real truth in the reasons for their martyrdom, not perceived truth.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t believe cosmic plurality because Giordano Bruno died at the stake for promoting the idea; I believe it because it&#8217;s statistically unlikely that only one world in the whole universe has life. Trying to prove the existence of god because people died for their faith is like trying to prove cosmic plurality or heliocentricity by saying that it&#8217;s true because Bruno died for it; conversely, the falsehood of the existence of god says nothing about the faith or lack thereof of the martyrs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Trav</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-45358</link>
		<dc:creator>Trav</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jun 2009 14:34:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-45358</guid>
		<description>That Robert Green Ingersoll quote attacks such a poor strawman that I&#039;m surprised you&#039;d ever post it. If this short post is the best argument against martyrdom, then the early christian martyrs just got more credibility in my mind, not less.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That Robert Green Ingersoll quote attacks such a poor strawman that I&#8217;m surprised you&#8217;d ever post it. If this short post is the best argument against martyrdom, then the early christian martyrs just got more credibility in my mind, not less.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Hitchcock</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-45256</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Hitchcock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2009 18:52:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-45256</guid>
		<description>There is nothing in mathematics that directly contradicts the idea of a personal God. There is plenty in physics and cosmology that contradicts the Biblical interpretation of creation. There is a massive amount in biology that supports evolution - hence the life sciences having the smallest percentage - less that 5 according to Nature magazine&#039;s survey - of proffessed believers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is nothing in mathematics that directly contradicts the idea of a personal God. There is plenty in physics and cosmology that contradicts the Biblical interpretation of creation. There is a massive amount in biology that supports evolution &#8211; hence the life sciences having the smallest percentage &#8211; less that 5 according to Nature magazine&#8217;s survey &#8211; of proffessed believers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rosemary Lyndall Wemm</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-45255</link>
		<dc:creator>Rosemary Lyndall Wemm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2009 18:38:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-45255</guid>
		<description>@Jeff
You said: 
&lt;i&gt;Belief in God is faith grounded in evidence. Christianity is based on an historically verifiable event, which is the resurrection of the Lord Jesus.&lt;/i&gt;

I don&#039;t recall reading any convincing evidence for this event in your posts.  It&#039;s all based on hearsay removed a thousand fold from the supposed event.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Jeff<br />
You said:<br />
<i>Belief in God is faith grounded in evidence. Christianity is based on an historically verifiable event, which is the resurrection of the Lord Jesus.</i></p>
<p>I don&#8217;t recall reading any convincing evidence for this event in your posts.  It&#8217;s all based on hearsay removed a thousand fold from the supposed event.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Hitchcock</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-45253</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Hitchcock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2009 18:36:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-45253</guid>
		<description>So Islam is true because people are prepared to strap bombs to themselves or fly planes into skyscrapers because of their beliefs?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So Islam is true because people are prepared to strap bombs to themselves or fly planes into skyscrapers because of their beliefs?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rosemary Lyndall Wemm</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-45251</link>
		<dc:creator>Rosemary Lyndall Wemm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2009 18:28:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-45251</guid>
		<description>@Jeff.

There is no solid evidence for eye witnesses to the central Christian claims.  The best evidence comes from a persecuting Jew who never met Jesus until he &quot;saw&quot; him during what appears to be a fit of temporal lobe epilepsy on the road to Damascus.  He was the only person in the entourage who saw the vision or heard the voice.  Ergo, it was an hallucination stemming from the things already in his mind.

The earliest gospel writers were several generations removed from anyone who could have witnessed the events first hand.  Even so, eye witness accounts are extremely unreliable testimony and frequently come apart during cross-examination or the production of CSI-type evidence which disconfirms what the witnesses were convinced that they saw.

The best evidence the Bible can provide is extremely weak.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Jeff.</p>
<p>There is no solid evidence for eye witnesses to the central Christian claims.  The best evidence comes from a persecuting Jew who never met Jesus until he &#8220;saw&#8221; him during what appears to be a fit of temporal lobe epilepsy on the road to Damascus.  He was the only person in the entourage who saw the vision or heard the voice.  Ergo, it was an hallucination stemming from the things already in his mind.</p>
<p>The earliest gospel writers were several generations removed from anyone who could have witnessed the events first hand.  Even so, eye witness accounts are extremely unreliable testimony and frequently come apart during cross-examination or the production of CSI-type evidence which disconfirms what the witnesses were convinced that they saw.</p>
<p>The best evidence the Bible can provide is extremely weak.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rosemary Lyndall Wemm</title>
		<link>http://unreasonablefaith.com/2008/08/15/martyrdom-does-not-establish-truth/#comment-45250</link>
		<dc:creator>Rosemary Lyndall Wemm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2009 18:18:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unreasonablefaith.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-45250</guid>
		<description>@Mark.

There is no solid evidence that the Apostles were killed (if they were) because they believed that Jesus had risen from the dead.  

The earliest copy of the first written gospel, Mark, does not include a resurrection story. It ends with Jesus despairingly asking his version of god why he had forsaken him.  

There is reasonable doubt that Jesus was actually dead when he was removed from the cross.  Pilate was very surprised to learn that Jesus had died much earlier than is usually expected in cases of crucifixion.  In those days of primitive &quot;medicine&quot; there was no way to clearly differentiate coma from death. It is possible that an unconscious, but not medically dead, body was removed from the instrument of torture and buried in cave.  If someone came to embalm him several days later it would be a terrific shock to find out he was not quite dead.  He may have been able to move around a little before the serious nature of his wounds resulted in his actual death.  Urban myths arise from less fantastic happenings in this day and age. In that day and age the culture would have provided all the material for supernatural embroidering of the such events.

In other words, there are other plausible explanations. 
1.The apostles may not have believed that Jesus was resurrected but tried to continue spreading his ideas, which got them killed like their Master before them.
2. The apostles were not killed for their beliefs, but for some other reason.
3. The apostles died natural deaths and the tales of their martyrdom are urban myths.
4. The apostles did believe that Jesus had been resurrected, but for poor reasons. They were simple folk, after all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Mark.</p>
<p>There is no solid evidence that the Apostles were killed (if they were) because they believed that Jesus had risen from the dead.  </p>
<p>The earliest copy of the first written gospel, Mark, does not include a resurrection story. It ends with Jesus despairingly asking his version of god why he had forsaken him.  </p>
<p>There is reasonable doubt that Jesus was actually dead when he was removed from the cross.  Pilate was very surprised to learn that Jesus had died much earlier than is usually expected in cases of crucifixion.  In those days of primitive &#8220;medicine&#8221; there was no way to clearly differentiate coma from death. It is possible that an unconscious, but not medically dead, body was removed from the instrument of torture and buried in cave.  If someone came to embalm him several days later it would be a terrific shock to find out he was not quite dead.  He may have been able to move around a little before the serious nature of his wounds resulted in his actual death.  Urban myths arise from less fantastic happenings in this day and age. In that day and age the culture would have provided all the material for supernatural embroidering of the such events.</p>
<p>In other words, there are other plausible explanations.<br />
1.The apostles may not have believed that Jesus was resurrected but tried to continue spreading his ideas, which got them killed like their Master before them.<br />
2. The apostles were not killed for their beliefs, but for some other reason.<br />
3. The apostles died natural deaths and the tales of their martyrdom are urban myths.<br />
4. The apostles did believe that Jesus had been resurrected, but for poor reasons. They were simple folk, after all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
