countjulian

Bede and I are having a discussion on the persecution of paganism in Late Antiquity by the Christians, and has repeatedly brought up the subject of Christian martyrs during our discussion. I am thus creating this thread to create a list of authentic Christian martyrs from, say, 100-312 A.D. Bede, I left my comments in the last about this subject, your move.

andrewcriddle

A complete list is a big undertaking.

However some early probably reliable accounts of martyrdoms would be the accounts of the deaths of Polycarp, Justin Martyr, the Martyrs of Lyons, the Scilitan Martyrs, Perpetua, Cyprian, Fructuousus, Marian and James, Maximilian, Marcellus, Felix (of Thibiuca), Pionius, Montanus and Lucius, Phileas and Philoromus, Procopius. (For Ignatius we have letters written as he was taken to death but only a late legendary account of his death).

Many of these should be 'X and companions'.

The above Only includes cases where there is a contemporary record of death and/or events leading up to death.

There are many other cases starting with Pope Telesphorus c 137 CE where we know the person died for their faith but lack a reliable account of the circumstances.

Andrew Criddle

countjulian

Bump.

I really want to get into this, but I havn't hte time right now. Anyone else want to start? Remember, keep the primary sources handy.

pachomius2000

Does martyrdom give worth to the faith or faith gives worth to the martyrdom?

Here is a psychological phenomenon with human behavior and motivation, throwing good money after bad.

And it is the fallacy of what I call suffering as proof: because people go to hell for something convinces unthinking minds that it is worthwhile, of value or true or a fact.

Religion is good but don't ever adopt the fallacy that the more you suffer for it the more true it is or valuable or beneficial.

There are three justifications for voluntary suffering, one is fallacious, namely:

1. Suffering for staying alive and well, in which you suffer in order not to suffer worse and longer. Good reason to suffer.

2. Suffering to prove to somebody his or her worth to you, and win his or her acceptance of your worth in return. Good reason to suffer.

3. Suffering to convince yourself that some dubious worth is real, genuine, true, factual worth, when you can't see any except for the suffering you have put in for it, and still want to continue to further make it a worth. Sucker's reason to suffer.

So, CJ and Bede et alii here, keep that in mind as you draw up a listing of early martyrs for the Christian faith.


About finding martyrs of the early church, look up the Bollandists.


Pachomius

Johnny Skeptic

There were Christian martyrs, but many Christians grossly exaggerate their numbers. Rodney Stark says this in 'The Rise of Christianity,' and he quotes two experts sources that back up his assertion. Even the 'Catholic Encyclopedia' admits that a number of Roman Catholic writers grossly exaggerated the numbers of Christian martyrs.

Consider the following:

Elaine Pagels: For nearly 2,000 years, Christian tradition has preserved and revered orthodox writings that denounce the Gnostics, while suppressing and virtually destroying the Gnostic writings themselves. Now, for the first time, certain texts discovered at Nag Hammadi reveal the other side of the coin: how Gnostics denounced the orthodox. The 'Second Treatise of the Great Seth' polemicizes against orthodox Christianity, contrasting it with the 'true church' of the Gnostics. Speaking for those he calls the sons of light, the author says: '...we were hated and persecuted, not only by those who are ignorant (pagans), but also by those think they are advancing the name of Christ, since they were unknowingly empty, not knowing who they are, like dumb animals.'"

Larry Taylor: How does this apply to the story of Jesus? Simply that all of the early critics are dead. Skeptical opinions were banned. Christian opinions, other than those of the establishment, were banned. Books were destroyed, and later, heretics were burned.

Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia 2002:

By the 3rd century Gnosticism began to succumb to orthodox Christian opposition and persecution. Partly in reaction to the Gnostic heresy, the church strengthened its organization by centralizing authority in the office of bishop, which made its effort to suppress the poorly organized Gnostics more effective.

In his book titled 'The Religious Quests of the Graeco-Roman World,' Christian author S. Angus, Ph.D., D.Lit., D.D., says the following:

No one could have dreamed that the Christians, who had themselves suffered so much from persecution and protested so vehemently against the injustice and futility of persecution, would so quickly have turned persecutors and surpassed their Pagan predecessors in fanatical savagery and efficiency, utterly oblivious of the Beatitude of the Divine Master (Matt. V. 10, 44, 45). It became ominous for subsequent history that the first General Council of the Church was signalized by bitter excommunications and banishments. Christians, having acquired the art of disposing of hostile criticism by searching out and burning the objectionable books of their Pagan adversaries, learned to apply the same method to the works of such groups of Christians as were not in power or in favour for the time; when this method proved unsatisfactory, they found it expedient to burn their bodies. The chained skeleton found in the Mithraic chapel at Sarrebourg testified to the drastic means employed by Christians in making the truth conquer otherwise than by the methods and exemplified by the Founder. The stripping and torture to death with oyster-shells in a Christian church and the subsequent mangling of limb from limb of Hypatia, the noblest representative of Neo-Platonism of her day, by the violent Nitrian monks and servitors of a Christian bishop, and probably with his connivance, were symptomatic and prophetic of the intolerance and fanaticism which Christianity was to direct throughout the centuries upon its disobedient members and troublesome minorities until the day - yet to dawn - when a purer, more convincing because more spiritual, Christianity gains "the consent of happier generation, the applause of less superstitious ages."

End of quotes

The largest colonial empire in history by far under a single religion was conquered by Christian nations by means of persecution, murder and theft of property. The victors often warred among themselves for the spoils of victory. Few Christians would favor the United States embarking upon colonial conquests at this time, but if every Christian who is alive today had been transported at birth back to 1650 A.D., when colonial conquests were widely accepted by Christians, and had been raised by Christian parents who favored colonial conquests, there should be no doubt whatsoever that the majority of them would have favored colonial conquests. For about 90% of the time since Christianity was founded, the vast majority of Christians favored slavery and the persecution of women.

Considering the preceding evidence of persecution BY Christians, I find the topic of Christian martyrs to be quite strange. In addition, a person can die for a lie just as well as they can die for the truth, i.e. Muslims and Japanese kamikaze pilots.

countjulian

Jeese, you guys are almost as bad as Bede et al. You guys give skeptics a bad name. Look, the deaths of martyrs (both Christian and pagan) have absolutely nothing to do with the metaphysical claimes of Christianity. Even if 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 Christian martyrs were killed in the first part of of the 1st centruy, it would not be mean a thing. Cakm down. I asked for a list, not the reasons. That is for another thread. It is the same problem I had with Bede on the other thread. Can we please ge oo topic?

John A. Broussard

A list like this would be meaningless for a variety of reasons:

Original documents are virtually non-existent.

Christians to a great extent happened to be slaves, prisoners of war, criminals, etc. Their executions (where they occurred) could have been for any of a variety of reasons having little or nothing to do with their religious beliefs.

Martyrdom is a splendid way to find recruits (present Iraqi terrorists are a good example), so the number and quality of the martyrdom were bound to have been embellished.

Similarly, since martyrdom was early on regarded as as sure sign of salvation, friends and relatives might easily be persuaded that someone run over accidentally by a chariot was indeed a martyr.

Similarly, being killed in battle might well be construed as being martyrdom.

Defining martyrdom is a whole can of worms in itself. Were Dave Koresh's followers martyred? How about the Jim Jones "martyrs?"

Which of course brings up the circumcelliones who sought out martyrdom at sword point. You either killed them or they'd kill you. Is that really martyrdom?

And, we already know of growing internecine struggles among the early Christians. Do those killings count as martyrs?

Undoubtedly--on the other side--there were obscure martyrs overlooked by the early Christians, which further messes up the stats.

My conclusion? This is pretty much an exercise in futility unless many, many caveats are included.