Arrowman

1- Peter - crucified
2- Andrew - crucified
3- Matthew - the sword
4- John - natural
5- James, son of Alphaeus - crucified
6- Philip - crucified
7- Simon - crucified
8- Thaddaeus - killed by arrows
9- James, brother of Jesus - stoned (the old-fashioned kind)
10- Thomas - spear thrust
11- Bartholomew - crucified
12- James, son of Zebedee - the sword

The argument is the same old - why would these men die for a lie? And the responses of course have been heard before.

The main claim in support of the credibility of this list is that these were men who allegedly knew Christ first hand, and witnessed the Resurrection first hand. In other words, they died not just for a belief (a la David Koresh etc) but for something they knew to be true because they had witnessed it.

But as a layperson in terms of biblical scholarship, what occurs to me is this:

1. This list relies on the accounts given in the New Testament. We don't even know for sure that these men did die in the manner given. Do we?

2. It is also assumed that each man "died for something he knew to be Truth" - or conversely, that he had an opportunity to renounce his faith and save his life. But how do we know this? Is it not possible that some or all of these men were simply murdered for their faith (or politics, or whatever) and their adherence to that faith in the face of death was never a factor?

Is it not possible (rhetorical question; I know it is) that each man screamed for his life and renounced his faith, but the (biased) chroniclers of events chose simply to not record that fact?

To what extent are these deaths detailed in the NT, or in extra-biblical sources? How well supported is the claim that these men did indeed die in the manner given, and that they had any opportunity to renounce their faith to save their lives?

I'd be interested in the comments and insights of the biblical scholars here.

hezekiah jones

13-Judas: Fell "headlong" after hanging himself. Quite the parlor trick.

MortalWombat

Not quite. The only martyrdoms mentioned in the New Testament, both in the book of Acts, are of Stephen, who wasn't an eyewitness to Jesus but a convert, and James brother of John, of which nothing is mentioned about why he was killed or if recanting would have saved him.

All the other martyrdom stories are later legends.

Arrowman

Thanks MortalWombat - I knew there was something fishy about that list; I just couldn't recall all that bloodshed being the the NT.

Arrowman

Oh, PS - for those who might be interested, the fathforum thread in question is here:

<a href="http://www.faithforum.org/challenge/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2088" target="_blank">http://www.faithforum.org/challenge/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2088</a>

Be warned; Faithwalker is not known for brevity and coherence.

Steven Carr

Which idiot told you that these deaths were in the New Testament?

Nobody has ever been able to name a Christian who died in the Colosseum.

Nobody has ever been able to name a Christian who was killed for preaching a resurrection.

lpetrich

The Roman authorities' objection was that the early Xians had refused to worship the official gods of the Empire.

Steven Carr

But none of the alleged eyewitnesses would have been caught by that. That came later.

Robin Lane Fox's 'Pagans and Christians' is a good book on the subject.

Tercel

??? Lots of Christians have been killed for preaching the resurrection.
Perhaps you are restricting this to those who have claimed to have seen the resurrection?
In which case that's easy:
James, Jesus' brother.

To answer the original question in this thread:
Peter and Paul were almost certainly both killed for their faith in Rome.

The others are far more doubtful. All we have as regards them as far as I know are later semi-legends by Church historians about what fabulous deaths these martyrs died which seem to get more fabulous as time goes on. However given the general persecution of Christians and lack of the least hint of any recantations by major Christian figures (and more than enough writings survive that we could be sure of knowing if such had happened), it seems reasonable to suppose that many of these alleged martyrdoms probably do have a basis in fact - if not quite as fanciful as some of the accounts make out.

More well-evidenced are martyrdoms like that of Polycarp (a Bishop c130AD and disciple of John). While not a claimed eyewitness of the resurrection, he's one who learnt from those who were so he probably counts somewhat towards the relevant argument here.

Steven Carr

And you will never, ever, ever produce any evidence for this.

Nor can you produce evidence showing that in the first 2 centuries a Christian was killed for proclaiming a resurrection.

And this is not certain. And, for their faith covers a lot of ground, while the original poster questioned whether they were killed for the resurrection.

As Paul made plain in Galatians, some Christians were persecuted for proclaiming their faith in non-circumcision.

Produce any evidence that Polycarp was killed for proclaiming a resurrection.

(And then we can discuss the second-hand, hearsay claim that he was a disciple of the Apostle John)

And your bizarre argument from silence (We would have known if Bartholomew had recanted) is one of the worst arguments put forward on this board.

The apostles disappear from Acts rapidly, never to be heard of again. Why would Christian writers blazon their apostasy for all the world to see?