What about the martyrs?

Question:: 
I know that most of the characters in the New Testament can not be historically verified, but as far as I know, there are at least two that are. 1) Peter and 2) Paul. Both of these characters claimed to have direct contact with Christ. Both of these characters happend to be killed for what they believed in. It would seem to me, that if these people made up their religion, then they would not die for it. These are two of the people who would know without a doubt whether Christianity was true or false, and they both died for it. How can it be that they would die for a lie?
Atheist Answer: 

People die for lies all of the time. We got a bunch of them in Iraq right now dying for them.

Did the martyrs on 9-11 validate the existence of Mohammad?

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Furthermore, think of the

Furthermore, think of the people who die for their cult leaders, such as David Koresh, or the Heaven's Gate guy. Those people also had direct contact with their cult leader, who they regarded as a true prophet. Does the fact that cult followers often die for their leaders validate that cult's beliefs?

If you ask most christians

If you ask most christians if they believe that Mormons are christian they will emphatically say no. That's because most have heard about Joseph Smith and the golden tablets, his magic hat, and so many other fantastical stories about the origins of the LDS church. But Mormons consider him to be a martyr since he was murdered by an angry mob for his gospel. Just as you describe Peter and Paul, Joseph Smith was the one allegedly visited by angels and who translated the tablets and died for what he believed in, right? Or maybe he was nothing but a con man who was killed by people who saw through his lies. The other poster stated it well: people die for lies all the time.

what do you all think about

what do you all think about the persecution of religous in countries like vietnam (i.e. today's martyrs for religion?) some of the things being done to them are absolutely horrible, and they're just being persecuted by another type of dogma (communism). just curious as to people'ls opinions on this.

Seriously?

That's your atheistic answer? People die for lies all the time? Wow....well thought out.

Do atheist's believe in absolutes?

Martyrs aren't necessarily

Martyrs aren't necessarily religious. The word has several definitions, one of them being 'a person who is put to death or endures great suffering on behalf of any belief, principle, or cause: a martyr to the cause of social justice.' In response to the original question, Peter and Paul died for what they believed in, regardless of the veracity of their faith. Or perhaps they died because they went against the social norms of the times. We simply have no way of knowing since most of the information available regarding their lives is hearsay and by definition tainted. Peter and Paul were followers of Jesus, a radical and controversial figure at the time (if in fact, he existed). Followers of radical figures die for them all the time. Jonestown, the Brach Davidians, even the Kamikazi pilots in World War 2 all died or were killed based on their willingness (which admittedly in some cases is questionable) to give thier life for a belief in a person, leader, or religion. You don't have to be religious to be martyred, only dedicated to a cause. But dedication to a cause or willingness to die for it does not make it true.

To the other point the OP was trying to make as to both Peter and Paul knowing 'without a doubt whether Christianity was true or false', how can we really be sure what they knew? Was Christianity near the end of the first century exactly as it is today? There's plenty of historical evidence that it was not. Not even close. The Nicene Creed (the first attempt at defining a unified dogma for the Christian faith) didn't come about until 325, some 250 years after Peter's death. Chances are the 'faith' that Peter and Paul died for wasn't the same 'faith' we're talking about today. As for them knowing whether or not God exists, given the social and technological climate of the times, I'm quite certain that they were as confident that their god existed as the Romans were confident in the existence of Jupiter, Athena, Cupid, Venus, and the rest of the pantheon.

Do you as an atheist believe

Do you as an atheist believe in absolutes?

Why is it that you are so

Why is it that you are so adamantly opposed to Christ and the Christian faith? What are you afraid of? Are you willing to be wrong about God not existing? Is it worth eternal damnation? To spend eternity separated from God isn't something that I'd shoot for.

Do you have faith in anything or anyone?

As an atheist, I don't

As an atheist, I don't believe in alot of things, including absolutes when it comes to abstract concepts like 'good' and 'evil', unseen and unseeable omnipotent beings, and the Tooth Fairy. Who ever said I was opposed to Christ and the Christian faith? I don't believe in god or gods, I don't believe that Jesus Christ was the son of god or that he died for my sins on a cross (or really that he lived at all). I don't believe in or condone most of the things done in the name of religion. These would include persecution and murder of people that hold different beliefs, wholesale brainwashing of children, and the supression of any scientific advancement because it shatters yet another misconception about the universe as described in a 2000 year old book.

What am I afraid of? I'm afraid of a bigoted theocracy led by power-hungry morons that already have millions of blind sheep followers. Is that likely? Hope not, but hey, you asked.

Am I willing to be wrong about the existence of god? I wouldn't be an atheist otherwise. It is possible that I'm wrong about the existence of God, and equally possible that I'm wrong about the existence of Santa Clause. But there is a possibility, however infinitessimal that possibility is, that I'm wrong.

What you're using here is called Pascal's Wager, and trust me my friend, it's a dead horse that's been beaten so much it's nothing more than gelatinous horse goo by now. But, to answer you, I do not believe in god, heaven, or hell so threatening me with eternal damnation is equivalent to me threatening to have Santa Clause smack you in the noggin with a Menorah until you believe in the Easter Bunny. There can be no worth assigned to something that doesn't exist, therefore there is no risk involved.

I'm happy that you're not willing to spend eternity separated from god, but since I don't share your beliefs, I am perfectly willing to decompose safe in the knowedge that I won't be able to care whether or not I'm communing with the Abrahamic god, or with the worms.

I certainly have faith in many things, and many people. I have faith in the love of my children, in the general decency of human beings, in the sun rising tomorrow, and even in the loyalty of my dog. But having faith doesn't mean that the sun won't rise tomorrow, that my kids won't decide that I'm unworthy of their love, or that my dog won't decide to bite me. Faith is not an absolute, sorry to say. It's an abstract mental construct that simply says "I firmly believe that..." followed by whatever you have faith in.

Let me ask you then, what are you afraid of? Why to atheists frighten you, disgust you, or annoy you? Are you so insecure in your faith that someone offering a contrary or conflicting point of view is that much of a threat to you?

Bro, I never said I was

Bro, I never said I was afraid of anything. But now that you ask, I'm not a huge fan of clowns...something about 'em.

Atheists have never frightened me, disgusted me, or annoyed me. And no - you are no threat to me in any way. I'm secure in who I am and WHOSE I am. It does break my heart to hear how hardened you are about the whole thing though. It's sad. And clarify something for me please, just trying to figure out what it is that you were saying - you said that there was a chance you were wrong. An "infinitessimal" chance. Then you said "There can be no worth assigned to something that doesn't exist" right? How do you know God doesn't exist when you said to me that you could be wrong?

And to say you don't believe in absolutes and then make an absolute statement that God doesn't exist also confuses me. Sorry, I'm trying to make sense of it all.

Trust me, I'm not trying to prove you wrong and win you over - that'd be great though = but all I'm doing is hear what it is that drives atheists to oppose Christ and faith in His.

And the bible isn't 2000

And the bible isn't 2000 years old. Some of it is believed to be older and some of is proven to be much newer, like 1900 years. But the actual Bible, or "book" itself is relatively new. The printing press ring a bell? Just a heads up

I also love how you guys

I also love how you guys compare Jesus Christ to the tooth fairy and santa claus...I mean, they are pretty much the same right? One is God Almighty and the other two are....

........one of the most ridiculous points ever.

Sorry it's taken me a while

Sorry it's taken me a while to get back here. Stupid 'real life'. :) Anyway, to answer your questions bmyles:

you said that there was a chance you were wrong. An "infinitessimal" chance. Then you said "There can be no worth assigned to something that doesn't exist" right? How do you know God doesn't exist when you said to me that you could be wrong?

This is where it gets difficult for some people to understand. As an atheist, I do not believe in the existence of a god or gods for the simple reason that there is no empirical evidence to support the existence such a being or beings. If such evidence were to arise, I would be forced to reconsider my position. However, there are just too many logical fallacies and contradictions in theistic belief systems which lead me to the conclusion that if (and a very big if it is) there is some sort of higher being, god, gods, flying spaghetti monster, it would be nothing at all like the Judeo/Christian god and the chances of such a being existing are so small that they're almost zero. So close to zero, in fact, that it is easier to say it is zero. Most atheists share the position that if incontrovertable, scientific evidence of a god or gods were uncovered, we would no longer be atheists.

And to say you don't believe in absolutes and then make an absolute statement that God doesn't exist also confuses me. Sorry, I'm trying to make sense of it all.

No need to apologize, this is an open discussion. I do no believe in absolutes, but usually for the sake of clarity, choose to express ideas and concepts in a more concrete manner (i.e. god does not exist vs. the chances of god existing are so small as to be almost zero). I'm sorry if this caused some confusion.

but all I'm doing is hear what it is that drives atheists to oppose Christ and faith in His.

I don't actively oppose Christ, Bhudda, Mohammed, or Thor. What I do oppose are some of the things done in the name of religion. I oppose the divisive nature of organized religion, and the arrogance inherent in thinking 'my god is better than your god'. I oppose the supression of science, women, and critical thinking. I'm not attributing these things to you personally, or to Christianity in particular, but to all religions. I think that organized religion is based on power, and as such should not be a source for morality. I think it's based on lies propegated and continued by people that want to control other people. I think organized religion is granted far too much leeway in modern society and that it is dangerous for us as a planet to continue with a "no questions asked" policy when it comes to religious belief systems. Those are the things I'm opposed to, not mythical or allegorical figures, historical figures, or imaginary gods. You as a person have a right to your beliefs, as I have a right to not believe them. The only time there's a problem is when one person tries to force their beliefs on another person without that person's consent or under threat of violence (and for the record, I fell that condemning a person to eternal suffering for believing something different is a threat of violence).

And the bible isn't 2000 years old. Some of it is believed to be older and some of is proven to be much newer, like 1900 years. But the actual Bible, or "book" itself is relatively new. The printing press ring a bell? Just a heads up

Thanks for the heads up. If we're going to get technical here, you are entirely correct. In fact, the bible I have is even newer than that. However, the oral traditions that the stories in the bible are based on are much older than 2000 years, and bibles were produced before the invention of the printing press. In fact, from an artistic and historic point of view, the ancient bibles are stunningly beautiful. So, for the sake of simplicity, let's just say that the content of the bible is centuries old and leave it at that.

I also love how you guys compare Jesus Christ to the tooth fairy and santa claus...I mean, they are pretty much the same right? One is God Almighty and the other two are....

........one of the most ridiculous points ever.

The problem with analogies is that perception varies greatly between individuals. You most likely find that comparison vulgar or offensive because I'm comparing something that you strongly believe in to something you do not believe exists. The analogy is valid, however, from the standpoint that you cannot prove the existence of Santa Clause, the Tooth Fairy, or the Mystical Eyebrow Elf any more than you can prove the existence of Thor, Yaweh, Poseidon, Odin, or any other god you choose. For you, one is God Almighty and the others are imaginary. For an atheist, they are all imaginary.

Hope this helped.

~M

Real quick, just so you know

Real quick, just so you know where I was saying. I have never and will never condemn anyone to hell - I don't have the power. The truth is, and yes I say it is truth because I believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, there is life after death. All humans will end up in eternity. There's heaven. And there's hell. The only way to heaven is through salvation given by Christ through believing in your heart and confessing with your mouth that He is Lord. If you go a lifetime without a personal relationship with Him, your eternity cannot and will not be in heaven with Him. What does that leave? Hell. So I don't and most Christians don't do the condemning my friend. The Bible speaks to it, therefore - we believe it through faith.

From your perspective, how do you explain testimonies of people who flat-lined on a hospital bed only to be revived minutes later who can vividly describe what happened to them and what they destination would have been had they not been revived? People don't remember just darkness - but countless stories of people who either experienced a descending into a dark, hell-like place or people experiencing from what the Bible talks about - Heaven.

And, do you, or aetheists in general, believe in evolution then?

I do not recall anywhere in

I do not recall anywhere in the Bible where it mentions Paul having direct contact with "Christ", as far as I remember it was supposedly in "visions" and dreams that he saw "Christ".

Non sequitur at the end?

On the receiving end, there isn't a lot of difference between being condemned directly and being DECLARED condemned on behalf of a separate agent, especially if you don't believe that the other agent exists. However you look at it you are attempting to foster fear in us by pronouncing your religion's sentence on atheists such as we. Positioning yourself as only a messenger just comes across as an attempt to dodge responsibility for your proselytising method.

Near-death experiences are the dream creations of brains in an extreme state of stress. Brains which usually have had images of a mythical afterlife described to them all their lives. Of course the dreams are going to tend towards these non-existent but frequently imagined places. Not hard to accept the possibility, especially when you consider that EVERY religion's afterlife has appeared to people having these experiences.

I accept evolution as scientific fact on the evidence. What does that have to do with the above?
- LX