The Fate Of Jesus Followers

hello, all. I was sent a newsletter from a Christian organization which stated that many of Jesus followers suffered violent deaths. Is there any evidence that this was how these men died?Specifically, the letter states: Faith & BeliefEdited by Phat, : spellcheck

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

There are several questions that I have concerning this topic:

Do we have any evidence that these men died in the ways described?

​

In other words, did the deaths of Jesus followers become legendary stories such as the myth of Paul Bunyon, or did these men actually die violent deaths? I was unable to find a source for the information sent to me, but most Christians would accept these fates as truthful.

​

I believe that Foxes Book of Martyrs is one of the common sources for these stories, but I don't know how accurate Foxes sources were.

If I remember correctly Stephen's death is described in Acts.The death of James (the Brother of Jesus) is mentioned in Josephus but he only refers to stoning. If there's a source earlier than Hegesippus for the more detailed story (where he is thrown from the top of the temple, stoned and clubbed) I don't know of it. Hegesippus wrote around 100 years after the events - so I strongly suspect that the story has been sensationalised.The others are increasingly dubious although it is lkely that Peter and Paul were martyred in some way.

All I had found several years ago was mainly "tradition." There may be works out there that have more information, but everyone that I could find discussing this had nothing. Edited by Asgara, : No reason given.

Phat, your analysis is spot on in my opinion. Although we see Muslims and others (various mercenaries ie. Nazi Germany) willing to die for a lie. In those cases, we have the 'pawns' being led and propagandized by the leaders of the 'true belief' they professed. Leaders who knew first hand what was true, and what was sensationalized. So it is quite telling, and a different animal.In the case of the Apostle's, we have leaders who were willing to die as a proof for the 'pawns'. And as with the Muslims and other fascists, the Apostles knew first hand what was true, and what was sensationalized. They were the first to scatter and run in fear, at the arrest and crucifiction of Christ.What gave them the courage to trust Christ was without question the resurection. What else could enable human kind to lay down their lives and forgive their persecutors and executioners?Billy Graham was once speaking with former German Chancellor Konrad Andenaeur:

quote:

---

"... In the middle of their conversation, Adenaeur paused and asked Billy Graham this question: “Mr.Graham, do you really believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead?” Billy Graham somewhat taken aback by the question said, “Sir, if I did not believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, I would have no gospel left to preach.” And he said Conrad Adeneur paused, walked over to the end of the room, looked out of the window, at the post-war ruins and said, “Mr. Graham, outside of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, I know of no other hope for mankind.”( Oops, something lost )

---

Would a little sarcasm be welcome here if in fun... and in truth?I don't have any reason to doubt that these stories of martyrdom are true. Excepting the fact that human beings would never treat each other in such a manner. We are 'good' (which is coincidentely only one 'o' in difference from the word God).I mean if someone believes something, and wants to share it with others, what is that to me? Especially since there is ultimately no truth.It seems very suspicious that so many are upset, to a high degree, that such a doctrine as this exists. And it is even more suspicious that they find it so unreliable.A lack of trust, suggests a protection of truth. And if it is really important. If it is the most important! If it is really true... then some would go to extreme lengths to protect it.And that being said, if these stories are accurate (and I certainly believe so) then the persecutors of such individuals are as zealous in their faith as the prophets they attempt to silence and kill.Both prove with actions that they hold to their ideal as to what is ultimately important in the question of life. One holds that this life is not the only life, and will give it, to prove to the other that he means it, and that it is worth finding for oneself. The other holds that their power in the now, is ultimately what matters, and any threat to that is the worst sin.Keep up the good work Phat.----------------------------------------------------"Some people probably think of the Resurrection as a desperate last moment expedient to save the Hero from a situation which had got out of the Author's control."
(C.S. Lewis Miracles)

Those were not Phat's words, Rob. Oh really? Go tell that to a good portion of the men who died during of the First World War, for example. Christianity has been no different at many points in its history.

I was thinking of starting a thread on this but you beat me to it.As well as the manner of their death I think the other important aspect to consider should be the reason for their death, i.e. did they really die defending their faith.I'm not aware of any historical accounts describing the deaths of any of the apostles, apart from that of John who IIRC Ireneaus claims he died in Ephesus at an old age.

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the bug and some days you'll be the windscreen."

can you tell us how you know :A) how they died
B) that they died for their belief. show us these stories then. Tell us who and when wrote them and why we shouldn't doubt their truthfulnesseagerly awaiting...

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the bug and some days you'll be the windscreen."

Yes. The narrative (Acts 6-7) is to my knowledge the only one in the NT detailing a Christian martyrdom.Interestingly, Stephen was not one of the twelve disciples of Jesus.___

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

but even there he just gets a walk on bit part. The stoning is more to set up the big scene of Paul's conversion which is the climax of the play.The others are pretty much just tradition. We really don't have much of a clue about either the missions or deaths of the various Apostles.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

According to this logic, I must accept that Jim Jones was really the Messiah, considering the fact that he had eight hundred or so people willing to kill their children and then themselves for him.

---

Place yourself on the map at http://www.frappr.com/evc

​

The thread about this map can be found here.

Legend, thank you for your robust challenge.I said: I didn't say that I had proof or solid documentation. I offered a reasonable argument that is accepted within the church, and with admittedly minimal solid documentation.You are free to doubt those stories. I can understand your skepticism, and as long as it does not rise to the point of cynicism, I totally respect it as healthy and wise. In fact, in such a mad world of charlatan after charlatan, of peace and truth, even cynicism is understandable, but it is dangerous. And I don't have to remind you it is unwise.It's easy to doubt. I doubted for years. It's the best way to join in the laughter and not be the target of it. I didnt' convert untill age 34. And I hated being laughed at more than anything else. When people laughed at me, I secretly wanted to kill them. It's a telling point... that some of us are that insecure on the inside.I don't think your that insecure, but I was.Cynical doubt is nothing new. The crowd surrounding the crucifiction of Christ Himself said: Frankly, the reason I believe those stories, is because I too have seen the risen Lord. That's the new birth! And I can't prove that to you either. Feel free to doubt that especially. I don't hold it against you. I confess far less of a track record of character and integrity as I believe most of the believers before me possessed.But it's funny... because you can meet Him yourself if you just admit the possibility (as unusual as it may be). Reality is always unusual to such usual men.Open your mind and admit that prejudice blinds you, and that you're a sinful and angry man who wants justice for charlatans. When your eye's are opened you'll find as I did, that I was the charlatan. It's not as though you have to buy into all of this stuff and become suddenly pious! God will prove Himself to you. He will lead you into all truth if you only admit that it is possible and ask Him into your life! That's the mustard seed Jesus spoke of. No cliff to jump off.It's not complicated Legend... You say, "Dear God, if your really there, I admit that I am a sinner. You know all things, and I don't deserve to even speak with you. But I will give my whole life in exchange for meeting the creator of the universe. Anything you ask of me I will do, since once I've seen you... how can I not repent in dust and ashes?"God has hidden all of reality behind our ability to swallow our pride and ask Him to help.And here's the point... After seeing Him, I am more than comfortable (as were the early Apostles) with being mistreated and made a fool of for declaring this as truth, and some day (even here in America) may well indeed happily die for telling others the truth."If God were a Kantian, who would not have us till we came to Him from the purest and best motives, who could be saved?"
(C.S. Lewis The Problem of Pain)Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

Above we see the third and fourth sentences of your post. You candidly and forthrightly admit you have no evidence for what you say.You should have ended there. Everything that follows is off-topic sermonizing. You clearly have no intention of ever providing documentation.Assume a brevity, sir, when you have nothing to say.------'If homilies were alfalfa, each intended to supply enough nutrients to feed a starving rodent for half a day, whose hamster could be saved?'- B.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain in the Derrire______Edited by Archer Opterix, : Added citation.Edited by Archer Opterix, : Typo

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Archer, in defense of Rob, he is in a Faith/Belief forum.I do agree that brevity makes for more concise topics and easier to follow threads, however.Perhaps the question that we should be asking ourselves is this:Should Church Tradition be regarded as reasonably reliable evidence?Not all legends are myths.