Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Chili · 10-05-2004, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vorkosigan

A fourth problem is that yes, people do die for things they know are nonsense, when that nonsense becomes incorporated into and foundational to their social identity. People chose to die for very complex reasons whose entirety is not accessible to their own minds.

Vorkosigan

That's why it is called hell. The Inquisitors proved this many times over and over again for the benefit of generations to come but they won't listen and keep on dying for the wrong cause.

JoeWallack · 10-05-2004, 07:44 AM

Re: "The disciples would not have died for a lie"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evolutionist

Ok, I hear this loads, and it seems on the face of it to be bollocks, it's just a matter of constructing reasons why it's bollocks.

Things that come to mind are:

1) It works equally well for any members of a religion who died for their beliefs (though the argument is usually expressed as dying for things you knew to be a lie- thus excluding people who die for beliefs).

2) Not sure how well backed up the evidence is for any of the disciples being martyred- any people know of any information on this?

Basically, I just want to try and find some information to construct a proper refutation/critique of this common argument- and all the webpages I can find are making the claim- not critiquing it.

JW:
This assertion, "The disciples would not have died for a lie" is a double negative which confuses. Apologists like JP Holding use this confusion to expand/misdirect the assertion to their opponent supposedly not understanding the basic assertion when they are in trouble (which is most of the time).

I believe, with a perfect faith, that we can construct a parallel assertion by removing the double negatives:

The disciples died for the truth.

Skimming (I love that word) through Lord Holdy Butt's (Occam's Razor snapping in two) arguments/debates on the subject I can't find where he simply states his related argument:

Can anyone here post a Clear And Present Dangerous statement by Lord Holdy Butt (Pascal's Wager doused by bucket of milk) concisely presenting the related argument?

In the meantime let's try to Apologize for Lord Holdy Butt (I always do) (Slippery slope in head on collision going the wrong way):

The disciples martyred because the resurrection was true.

Now let's break down the assertions here. Hebrew Hammer time, do, do, dodo, dodo, dodo:

1) The resurrection was historical.

2) The disciples martyred (they looked martyrlous Darling) because of 1).

I tell you the truth, I never believed in any type of Resurrection until I saw John Travolta in Pulp Fiction. In any case, obviously this presentation is a question beggar, having to assume the resurrection was historical in order to prove the resurrection was historical. Let's present the argument again with the double negatives:

1) The resurrection was not historical.

2) The disciples would not have martyred (you don't look martyrlous Darling).

Keep in mind that Apologists are trying to prove the Impossible (Lord Holdy Butt's word - False Diechotomies shot dead) resurrection here. For this argument to fail though, all you need is to provide a Possible reason why disciples would have been martyred even though the resurrection was not Possible. Lots of Possible reasons have been presented:

1) Disciples witnessed a "resurrection" which was not Supernatural.

2) Disciples believed in a resurrection which was not historical.

3) Disciples gave each other the Vulcan Mind Meld making them think their executions were not real.

The bottom line is that when Faith ventures into the Real World to try and present a Logical argument this is the Typology argument you get, trying to prove the Impossible when there are Possible arguments that defeat your argument.

Joseph

MAGIC, n.
An art of converting superstition into coin. There are other arts serving the same high purpose, but the discreet lexicographer does not name them.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors...yguid=68161660

http://hometown.aol.com/abdulreis/myhomepage/index.html

Magdlyn · 10-09-2004, 04:38 AM

bump

g-21-lto · 10-09-2004, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evolutionist

Ok, I hear this loads, and it seems on the face of it to be bollocks, it's just a matter of constructing reasons why it's bollocks.

One thing I thought of is this: even if the disciples *knew* that Jesus wasn't divine, perhaps they believed that the spiritual truths he taught were valid and should be believed by everyone. However they felt they had to change the outward packaging of Christianity to make people convert. They left Jesus' teachings basically the same but made the claim that Jesus was God et cetera. The ends justified the means because Jesus' teachings were so profound/true.

Not saying that's what I think happened, because I don't know. But that *is* a possibility.

Alias · 10-12-2004, 11:53 PM

I'm currently in a discussion on another website with a Christian about martyrdom. He claims that Christians have suffered more than any other religion. Okay fine.

But, he denies that Christians forced Pagans to convert or be executed. Can you tell me some of the more well known incidences in which Pagans were executed for not renouncing their "barbaric ways".

I'm think of Charlemagne executing 4,500 Saxons for refusing to be baptized into the Church.

Any others you can add?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-09-2004, 04:38 AM	#53
Magdlyn Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 2,230	bump

10-12-2004, 11:53 PM	#55
Alias Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Canada Posts: 60	I'm currently in a discussion on another website with a Christian about martyrdom. He claims that Christians have suffered more than any other religion. Okay fine. But, he denies that Christians forced Pagans to convert or be executed. Can you tell me some of the more well known incidences in which Pagans were executed for not renouncing their "barbaric ways". I'm think of Charlemagne executing 4,500 Saxons for refusing to be baptized into the Church. Any others you can add?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.