Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Nobody Dies for a Lie

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by psstein View Post
    I've never thought the "nobody dies for a lie" to be a persuasive apologetic. In truth, we only have first century data about what happened to Peter, Paul, and James. The grisly martyrdom stories are significantly removed from the apostles' lifetime.
    I've only seen it used as a rebuttal to the idea that the apostles made everything up about the resurrection.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by psstein View Post
      I've never thought the "nobody dies for a lie" to be a persuasive apologetic. In truth, we only have first century data about what happened to Peter, Paul, and James. The grisly martyrdom stories are significantly removed from the apostles' lifetime.
      Yes, I know. That, however,, does not seem to register with those who use the "nobody dies for a lie" argument to support their christian beliefs.
      The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

      I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
        I've only seen it used as a rebuttal to the idea that the apostles made everything up about the resurrection.
        It really is a common argument, even if not phrased in that exact way. There's the very famous quote from Chuck Colson comparing his experiences in Watergate with all 12 apostles (I can only assume he replaces Judas with Matthias) not breaking for 40 years.

        I remember Nick reviewed Sean McDowell's book awhile back where he concluded that we really don't know what actually happened with the majority of the apostles.
        "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

        Comment


        • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
          Check the discussion of the lifespan numbers there AND in the linked paper.
          I did read the blog post, and it does not specify whether it is including infant deaths in it or not. And since blog posts are apparently a sufficient source, this one states the low averages that people cite does include those, therefore making people seem to live shorter than they would actually live to be once they got out of infancy. It also cites sources. Based on this and some other sources I checked out, it seems that once we remove infant mortality from the equation, the average lifespan was about a decade longer than the "35-40 years" you claimed it was.

          As for the linked paper, I will be happy to read it if you will send me the $42.50 I have to pay in order to get access to it.

          This is true, but doesn't change the later evaluation I made based on lifespan rather life expectancy.
          Lifespan is generally synonymous with life expectancy, so I'm not sure what distinction you are drawing.

          Most of the articles I read indicated that the conjecture was made by assuming lifespans and life expectancy would not be significantly longer in the ANE than they were in the 1700s, when we begin to have better data. I consider that a reasonable assumption. But even if we use the lifespan number, those numbers and the date, plus the starting age of a credible "witness" to the life of Jesus (at least 10 years old), plus the far flung state of the Christian community, makes it extremely unlikely that very many eyewitnesses were alive for the writing of the gospels or Acts. Paul's letters, perhaps, and most likely none for John and Acts.
          I find a notable issue in your analysis. Your argument is that there would have been a lack of eyewitnesses available at the date of writing. Why are we limiting ourselves to that specific time? Is there any reason to believe that the author of Luke/Acts may not have gotten his accounts from witnesses in years prior to full composition of the Gospel or Acts?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
            I did read the blog post, and it does not specify whether it is including infant deaths in it or not. And since blog posts are apparently a sufficient source, this one states the low averages that people cite does include those, therefore making people seem to live shorter than they would actually live to be once they got out of infancy. It also cites sources. Based on this and some other sources I checked out, it seems that once we remove infant mortality from the equation, the average lifespan was about a decade longer than the "35-40 years" you claimed it was.

            As for the linked paper, I will be happy to read it if you will send me the $42.50 I have to pay in order to get access to it.
            I will leave the latter to you, but you might note my later post actually re-examined the entire timing issue with an assumption of a 70-year lifespan, which is not just ten years more, but 30-35 years more, and still concluded that the probability of a significant number of witnesses when these texts were written (setting aside the Epistles) is minimal.

            Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
            Lifespan is generally synonymous with life expectancy, so I'm not sure what distinction you are drawing.
            The texts I have read use "life expectancy" as an average, and "life span" as a maximum.

            Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
            I find a notable issue in your analysis. Your argument is that there would have been a lack of eyewitnesses available at the date of writing. Why are we limiting ourselves to that specific time? Is there any reason to believe that the author of Luke/Acts may not have gotten his accounts from witnesses in years prior to full composition of the Gospel or Acts?
            So that would suggest that the author is not an eyewitness, as often claimed. So we are into the "operator" problem, and we would have an author who cannot validate when they are writing beyond "they told me so."
            The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

            I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
              I would be interested in knowing if if the life expectancy of 35-40 years for the people living in the first century Mediterranean that you've referenced is the average life expectancy (which would have been influenced by the high rate of infant and child mortality) or the age to which an average person, having survived childhood could expect to live. Because if what you're talking about is the average life expectancy it's not really that strong of an argument against the claim that there were still eyewitnesses living when the documents of the NT were written down, given that a person who managed to survive infancy and childhood would have a considerably higher life expectancy than the average.
              Yep, once you made it out of childhood in a world before modern medicine, you were more likely to live to an old age.
              "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
              GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

              Comment


              • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                I will leave the latter to you, but you might note my later post actually re-examined the entire timing issue with an assumption of a 70-year lifespan, which is not just ten years more, but 30-35 years more, and still concluded that the probability of a significant number of witnesses when these texts were written (setting aside the Epistles) is minimal.
                If I recall correctly, your proposition for the dates were Mark in the 70's, Luke and Matthew in the 80's, and Acts and John in the 90's. If we accept those dates (and the dating of the New Testament is an argument in and of itself), I would expect there would still be a decent number of eyewitnesses for the events described except for perhaps John, though the author according to tradition was one of the last eyewitnesses to be living at that point. (as for Acts, it describes the post-resurrection ministry, meaning its late date of composition is compensated for by the fact the events described occurred later)

                So that would suggest that the author is not an eyewitness, as often claimed. So we are into the "operator" problem, and we would have an author who cannot validate when they are writing beyond "they told me so."
                Wait, often claimed? When has anyone claimed that the author of Luke and Acts was an eyewitness to Jesus's ministry? The very opening of the Gospel of Luke indicates he wasn't. I was under the impression the question posted for Luke/Acts was that there wouldn't have been eyewitnesses around at the time of its writing, hence my pointing out the possibility of eyewitness testimony being given in years before its actual composition.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
                  Yep, once you made it out of childhood in a world before modern medicine, you were more likely to live to an old age.
                  Not as much for the wimmenfolk who still had high mortality rates while giving birth. Even when you factor in wars the evidence suggests that back then men tended to live longer than women.

                  I'm always still in trouble again

                  "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                  "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                  "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                    No - that's not the translation. I said exactly what I meant to say.
                    I know you did - and what you said had nothing at all to do with the question. So obviously, you also intended not to answer.
                    "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                    "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                    My Personal Blog

                    My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                    Quill Sword

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                      Teal, if you have read any of the other exchanges I've had with Sparko, you would no that I seldom argue "there is no evidence," and I have not done so here either. We have stories about the martyrdom of the apostles in Acts and references in some of the epistles. Those are clearly evidence that the early apostles died for their faith. My position is that this is inadequate evidence to support the proposition, "Jesus lived and died exactly as described in the gospels," which I believe is the position being put forward here. I don't find it to "not be evidence." I find it to be "inadequate evidence" to support the claim.



                      Apparently, at some point, I must have irritated you in some way. It's the only thing that makes sense given the nature of your recent exchanges with me. Whatever it is, if I was being inappropriate, I apologize. Beyond that, I'm not sure what else to say.
                      What irritates me is that you consistently ignore the conversation - you act as if you didn't say things you clearly did or as if previous posts didn't exist. YOU stated it as "Evidence, maybe" - the clear implication being that it might not be evidence. YOU did NOT give any caveat AT ALL about reliability or veracity until several pages later when you had evidently lost track of the conversation.

                      I take the time to quote the posts I'm responding to so there's really no excuse for this - you simply aren't reading the post before responding then failing to acknowledge the correction for whatever you misread/misunderstood/took off on a tangent and wasting several additional posts just to get you to address the original point. Here, it was probably an overstatement - had you just paid attention you could have either retracted, conceded, clarified, or corrected to your actual point - and that would have ended the problem.
                      "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                      "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                      My Personal Blog

                      My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                      Quill Sword

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by seer View Post
                        And what James is this Roy?
                        If you don't know which James you were referring to, how is anyone else supposed to?
                        We know that Paul met James the Lord's brother in Jerusalem Galatians 1:18-20. Unless you don't believe that Christ's brother was an eyewitness.
                        Does Luke say he was an eyewitness? You're the one who asked whether or not James was an eyewitness, but you not only haven't provided an answer, you've dishonestly dodged your own question.
                        Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                        MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                        MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                        seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                          All the accounts agree - in fact, the degree to which they agree is highly indicative of authenticity.
                          All the accounts agree on many things, often to the extent of being word-for-word identical, which suggests copying, not authenticity - but they disagree regarding the resurrection and what happened afterwards. The earliest account doesn't include it - although later copies of that account have had it added. Later accounts that do include it differ.
                          Your procedure here, as MM points out, results in the dismissal of most of ancient and a good bit of world history.
                          No it doesn't. The same standards are applied to all historical knowledge. If you're going to go with MM's misunderstanding rather than reading what I actually wrote, I can't see any point continuing.
                          The accounts themselves read nothing like myth - ever hear a Hercules story where he runs out on his friends when a fight starts?
                          No, but there are stories where Ares and Indra do.
                          The events were written of both in living (e.g. people still alive to verify) and written (pesky Roman officials and their darned record keeping) memory - even though we don't have the extant records, people of the First Century did - and certainly Theophilus would have had access to the people and documents that would have verified Luke's account...
                          You know who Theophilus was? Do tell.
                          Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                          MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                          MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                          seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
                            I find a notable issue in your analysis. Your argument is that there would have been a lack of eyewitnesses available at the date of writing. Why are we limiting ourselves to that specific time?
                            Because the argument being presented is that if the gospels were false, they would have been refuted by talking to eyewitnesses. This argument requires that there were still eyewitnesses available after the gospels were written.
                            Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                            MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                            MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                            seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                              That was one link - the easier one to read. Because it was a blog, I also linked a peer-reviewed paper.





                              As you wish...
                              So I take that as your way of admitting I am right.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
                                Yep, once you made it out of childhood in a world before modern medicine, you were more likely to live to an old age.
                                In the 1960s, the most common age at death in the UK switched from 0 to 82.
                                Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                                MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                                MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                                seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                175 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                132 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                426 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
                                406 responses
                                2,510 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Working...
                                X