For my darling Asgara, I hope you can truly embrace Jesus somehow, someday, notice I said Jesus and nothing else....your Willowtree.
The important aspect of the apostles death, is the fact that they died alone, horribly, while possessing the ability to escape death by recanting, this tri-fold circumstance is the common denominator in all the sources/accounts/legends/stories/bios of their deaths. This particular evidence is also offered under the challenge for anyone to uncover any source/account/legend/story/ or bio about their deaths that even remotely implies that they did not die alone, horribly, or recanted.
Strewn across N.T. geography are hundreds of sites that claim by tradition, legend, archival records, architecture, inscriptions, of the apostles/disciples presence. There are tens of thousands of books writtten about the apostles/disciples. The entire Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant Church worlds verifies their existence/martyrdom. Scholars who believe in there existence and martyrdom out number the few "oddballs" who don't 500 to 1.
Many differences are argued concerning the details of their lives, journeys, and deaths. But there is no evidence, not a shred of credible evidence in existence that says they did not die for the report of the Resurrection.
The common denominator that history records concerning the apostles/disciples is that they were martyred alone for their Resurrection report.
The sources of scholarship for the entire church world agree in unison that they died alone, horribly, for the Resurrection report.
Non church scholars agree at a rate of 500 to 1. (estimated), the point is that there is no evidence to contradict the checkmate evidence. I define evidence to be "pieces of proof supporting a claimed fact".
If someone arbitrarily says "traditions" are not evidence then this makes you an oddball in contrast to thousands of scholars who say it is. Traditions are based on cores of truth, common denominators among the traditions are then accepted as unverifiable historical FACT.
But if your worldview places you in a state outside a reachable pale of objectively reviewing the evidence, then no amount will convince you. This is why I have refrained from posting the accessible to anyone checkmate evidence.
The claim of fact is made, they died alone, horribly, for the witness of the Resurrection.
Can someone please tell me what evidence exists to refute anything that I have said/evidenced ?
McBirnie's "Search for the Twelve Apostles" was already entered in to evidence, and the urging to simply type "saints name martyrdom" into Google search, and now I add "The Oxford Dictionary of Saints" compiled by David Hugh Farmer.
These three sources are all readily available to most everyone - nothing obscure here. They all evidence the claim that the apostles/disciples died alone, horribly, for the report of the Resurrection
Atheist revisionism/mindset has completely erased the meaning and credibility of religious evidence. TO YOU, the collective sources and evidence for the apostles/disciples martyrdom simply ISN'T evidence. Atheism, in general, is completely brainwashed, diametrically opposed to the validity of theism and their sources. You hold the sacred doctrines and claims of the Church to a scientific standard of evidence. But have no trouble when it comes to science deducing unseen things with the flimsiest of evidence. The amount of phsical evidence, by volume, that exists to claim man evolved from an ape is utterly "meagre".
Previously, in this topic, I argued that my opponents/atheism "is beyond the pale", the boundary of being affected by anything theist. What I am saying is that atheism and theism are too far apart. I don't want to argue about what evidence is, since I KNOW that any church source is automatically more objective than a non church source, and I know you/the room consider church sources/traditions to be laughable - we are too far apart. This isn't an insult - just an honest assessment.
In sum:
Besides the "checkmate evidence/claims" the totality of ALL the evidence is convincing enough to conclude Jesus rose from the dead.
One section of evidence in isolation is not sufficent.
Sources:
Post 1 of my Resurrection topic: http://
EvC Forum: RESURRECTION : THE EVIDENCE (+ Apostolic Martyrdom considerations) -->
EvC Forum: RESURRECTION : THE EVIDENCE (+ Apostolic Martyrdom considerations)
Or get it straight from Dr. Scott himself:
Pastor Melissa Scott presents Dr. Gene Scott - The Official SiteNavigate to media systems and choose any of the Resurrection messages.
Books:
"Who Moved the Stone ? " Frank Morison
"Evidence that Demands a Verdict Vol.1 and Vol.2 " Josh McDowell
"Sherlock's Tryal (intentional misspelling) of the Witnesses" Bishop Sherlock
Jesus Christ : Super Nut or Super Natural ? (6 volumes) Dr. Gene Scott
Once again Asgara, the circumstances of the deaths of the Apostles/disciples is via traditions which historians call unverified historic fact.
Which traditions should be believed and which shouldn't ?
That takes research which looks for corroborating evidence, and the corroborating evidence in this case is the entire body of evidence.
And in the case of traditions, historians also take into account traditions that contradict or evidence against, but in the apostles case there exists none to contradict so this in itself is also evidence in favor of the traditions themselves (commom denominators) being true.
P.S.
Would you please close my Resurrection topic - I am no longer interested in defending it. Would you please close "Philosophy is King" AFTER Quetzal responds to post #90 ?
Thank you,
WT
™ Version 4.2
