The Arrogance of Both Science and Religion

joelr said:

The Jesus Movement was a legitimate sect of Judaism? It fulfilled the savior prophecy, it gave the Jews a much needed savior demi-god, it got rid of the temple sacrifice, it updated the old messages of Moses and the OT?

It's religious fiction which is very popular to write and it just happened to take off. This is exactly how all religions go. Right place right time.
Why would you assume Mark was writing this myth and all of the followers would automatically be persecuted or treated any different than any other sect of Jew? There were several groups as we know. The Jesus Movement also was able to get the Hillelite philosophy put forward and was an appealing movement.

Creating a well crafted myth that then people turn into a religion would be the ultimate achievement for a literary religious myth writer. They would not be like "oh no everyone is going to persecute us and throw us to lions!"....
Before ANY persecution started the scriptures had been written.

Many of the Gnostic Gospels are dated late into the 2nd century. So that PROVES that people were still writing Christian scripture that late. So it obviously still seemed like a great idea.

By what logic would you even ask that question? Why would you write "illogical" after asking a question that would require knowledge of the future for the gospel writers? The Jews were allowed to practice their religion and it was simply very diverse. The JM was one of many and was attempting to advance the religion. They also wanted a savior god as many religions had one who beats sin and death and gets you into the afterlife.

Then as we know Christian apologists started in with "well Jesus is just more of the same pretty much, but he is the BEST ONE!"

I don't know what you mean by poverty? They started evangelizing and churches were being set up in different areas.
If you read the letters in Gnostic Gospels by 1st century Bishop Ireaneus, who was pushing for an organized power structure, this wasn't about poverty? He was gaining power and control of large groups of people? That is not what poverty is? He was gaining political and material control as well as the power of interpreting gods word. He won by the way.
If you are referencing stories in scripture, well those are stories.

The hippie-like Gnostics who seemed cool and open-minded were crushed by a power hungry group. Read the book you will be shocked. Within the gospels are letters from the Bishop.

Click to expand...

Augustus said:

There's a lot of misconception about things like this.

The destruction of pagan culture is vastly overstated, a handful of temples were destroyed, but modern archaeological studies have shown it was rare. Temples declined over time as they required money, and this declined as the state stopped funding them, and private citizens converted.

A lot of the stories about their destruction are from Christian hagiographies and so should be taken with a bucketful of salt as they weren't written to be objective histories but to create a pious mythos and aren't supported by the archaeological record.

No doubt some texts were destroyed, but again the destruction wasn't systematic hence the surviving 'pagan' Greek philosophy. Again most was lost organically as they require people to be willing to spend a large amount of money to keep and preserve them. This is the same reason why the vast majority of all ancient texts have been lost to history.

It's true that there were edicts passed that outlawed the things you mention, but it's not like there was an FBI to enforce them. An edict simply reflected a statement by the Emperor, but they were often not enforced to any significant degree by local rulers. People often overestimate the degree of centralised control over such a large Empire in a time before modern transportation and communication technologies.

Click to expand...

BilliardsBall said:

You are showing a bias that clouds your judgment, if you said, "well, yeah, there's a lot of verified facts in Acts" instead of "Even if the gospels did contain more historical details" and so on, you'd be what I would call open minded.

Click to expand...

BilliardsBall said:

Still not understanding, I'll rephrase--you can continually claim my claims of money miracles are hearsay, that is, anecdotes not verified to your satisfaction from outside parties, using forensic evidence.

But guess where I just came from? The bank.

In the same way, you can X and Y about Jesus--I know Him and He gives anyone who asks eternal life IMHO--you can take that "to the bank"!

Click to expand...

BilliardsBall said:

You wrote many interesting things, now perhaps you will answer a persistent question, "Why the big conspiracy by NT Jewish writer to get BOTH Jewish and Roman persecution, even to the point of martyrdom?"

Click to expand...

1. The traditional idea of the "Age of Martyrdom", when Christians suffered persecution from the Roman authorities and lived in fear of being thrown to the lions, is largely fictional.
2. There was never sustained, targeted persecution of Christians by Imperial Roman authorities.
3. Official persecution of Christians by order of the Roman Emperor lasted for at most twelve years of the first three hundred of the Church's history.
4. Most of the stories of individual martyrs are pure invention,
5. Even the oldest and most historically accurate stories of martyrs and their sufferings have been altered and re-written by later editors, so that it is impossible to know for sure what any of the martyrs actually thought, did or said.

BilliardsBall said:

I've written a lot of nonfiction and some fiction. I've never written fiction that could cause me to be excommunicated from my family and killed by the government. Explain.

Click to expand...

joelr said:

I don't care what you want to call me. You know exactly what I mean. There are historical details in the gospels. There are historical details in the Qu'ran, there are far more scientific details in the Qu'ran.
In another more recent religion there are even more historical details in the much more extensive writings of the Bahai faith.

Writing in acts of miracles among historical details is already completely commonplace to all religions. But throwing in a bunch of tired old miracles that has already been the same miracles every demi-god in every culture had been doing is such a huge confirmation of pure mythology.

I really don't get your point here. Yes, there are historical details in all myths and religions, yet we know the supernatural parts about gods and such are not true. In all the thousands of myths. We already know this. But somehow you want the fact that your religion's historical details to mean the supernatural stories are true? While all other religions are just myths added to historical details?
And you think I have some sort of clouded judgment?

In 2000 years if someone finds the Roswell story they will marvel at the historical details. It has actual military personnel, actual military bases, the correct army squad, actual morticians, actual physical metal, this goes on and on. But it's not real.

Click to expand...

joelr said:

Great then you have a bank record of an increase in funds from unknown origin that just appeared into your bank with no deposit?
Otherwise if the money was from some earthly source then your just attributing any incoming to "ThankYou Jesus!" and it's just delusional.
Why don't you ask Jesus for 100K to materialize into your bank, send me the check and when it clears we might have something. Otherwise take this ridiculous line of confirmation bias to some non-science thread.

Click to expand...

joelr said:

Seems like you could just study some history?
First of all you are going by what stories say. All stories contain those elements? Every hero's journey contains persecution, this is essential to the myth. Since they are updating the OT there is sure to be old persecution updated to the NT as well.

So we have to turn to what scholars and historians think was going on at the time. For one Judaism was not like it's presented in the stories, as I pointed out it was very diverse.

Some scholarly treatments of why the writers included persecution in the stories is on the persecution in Christianity Wiki page with sources.

Purpose of persecution

If Luke-Acts is not an accurate catalog of every Christian persecution during the first century, scholars have offered a variety of interpretative frameworks to understand what motivated the author of the books and how the author uses persecution to argue their claims. These interpretations include:

Persecution used to contrast Jews and Christians
S. G. Wilson has argued that Luke-Acts was composed to portray Christianity as a more peaceable form of Judaism to the books' (in part) Roman audience. He points to Luke-Acts' deep reverence for and reliance on Jewish scripture to legitimate Jesus and the mission of the church (cf. Luke 3:4-6, Acts2:17-21) as evidence for the author's continued connection to Jewish heritage, even as the author sees as Christianity's future goal to spread to the Gentiles. Wilson argues that in Acts, Jews repeatedly stir up trouble for both Christians and Roman authorities , and the accused Christians are repeatedly found innocent by the Roman authorities, often by showing how they uphold both Roman and Jewish law and are therefore morally superior to their accusers.


Persecution as a rhetorical weapon against critics'
Kelhoffer spends part of his book Persecution, Persuasion and Power arguing that persecution in Luke-Acts is used by the author to accomplish three things: question the legitimacy of the accusers, (2) confirm the legitimacy of the faithful accused, and derive legitimacy for the author's Gentile audience who might be suffering their own persecution. For example, in the story of Stephen's martyrdom, Stephen links his accusers to those who resisted Moses (Acts 7:51-53), and his death is paralleled with Jesus' (Acts 7:59-60). Acts 28:25-28 also provides strong encouragement and validation for Gentiles readers, while Acts 9:4-5 makes a direct link between the persecuted and Jesus, which further indicts any critics or persecutors of Christianity. Kelhoffer sees the author of Luke-Acts as turning the dishonor of persecution into an honor, placing those who suffer "on account of the Son of Man" (Luke 6:22 NSRV) in the legacy of Old Testament and Israelite salvation history

Persecution as a tool for example and encouragement
Robert Maddox interprets Paul's experiences in Luke-Acts as the model example for its audience, not only as a devout believer but also as one who suffers repeated persecution. Passages like Luke 12:4-7 and Acts 14:22 are read by Maddox as warning Christians of the hardships they will face. Evidence for the deep value early Christians put on persecution may also be found in Acts 5:41 and Acts 8:1-4 (which states that even as Christians were persecuted, they spread the word).[12] Additionally, in Luke 6:26, 40, Jesus speaks of coming hardship not just for himself, but for his followers. Touching on a theme that will be later explored more fully by Stephen in his final speech in Acts (7:1-53), Jesus and his followers are likened to the Jewish prophets of old, who were rejected by the Israelites despite being sent by God. Therefore, to follow Jesus is to suffer greatly as he will later in Luke. Through his crucifixion Jesus becomes the most important and potent example of suffering for which every Christian must prepare; those who do will be justly rewarded (Luke 6:22-23)

Persecution of Christians in the New Testament - Wikipedia



There is also stuff like this which I do not know if it's peer-reviewed? But it shows the gospels were borowing ideas of martyrdom

The Myth of Persecution: How Early Christians Invented a Story of Martyrdom is a 2013 book by Candida Moss, a professor of New Testament and Early Christianity at the University of Notre Dame. Moss's thesis is that: -

1. The traditional idea of the "Age of Martyrdom", when Christians suffered persecution from the Roman authorities and lived in fear of being thrown to the lions, is largely fictional.
2. There was never sustained, targeted persecution of Christians by Imperial Roman authorities.
3. Official persecution of Christians by order of the Roman Emperor lasted for at most twelve years of the first three hundred of the Church's history.
4. Most of the stories of individual martyrs are pure invention,
5. Even the oldest and most historically accurate stories of martyrs and their sufferings have been altered and re-written by later editors, so that it is impossible to know for sure what any of the martyrs actually thought, did or said.

Martyrdom before Christianity
The book explains the origin of the Greek word "martyr" and how it came to be used by Christians as signifying someone who had witnessed for Christ with their life.[1]:26–27 Moss states that the Christian tradition held that martyrdom did not exist in previous eras. She goes on to argue that there were examples of martyrs among earlier Jews, Greeks and Romans, they were just not called by that term.[1]:52 Citing the deaths of Socrates and the aged Jewish teacher Eleazar, Moss maintains that they heavily influenced Christian martyrdom narratives, to the extent that "Christians adapted their ideas about martyrdom and sometimes even the stories themselves" (italics in original) "from both ancient Jewish and pagan writers."[1]:80

Historicity
It is a central thesis of the book that the ancient writings on martyrs and martyrdom are not reliable accounts of the events described. Moss characterizes most of the extant sources, such as the Acts of the Martyrs, as "elaborate, ornate, entertaining, and far from the truth".[1]:87 Moss also finds similarities between the events related and those of ancient Greek romance novels.[1]:77–78 In her book, Moss examined the oldest and generally agreed to be most authentic of the martyrdom accounts: the Martyrdom of Polycarp, the Acts of Ptolemaeus and Lucius, the account of the trial and death of Justin Martyr and companions, the Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs, the story of Perpetua and Felicity, and the Persecution in Lyon involving the bishop Pothinus, Blandina and several others. She claims that one cannot rely on these primary sources as accurate historical accounts because they have been altered and re-written by subsequent generations of Christians.
The Myth of Persecution - Wikipedia

Click to expand...

joelr said:

First writing controversial fiction doesn't make it true? And religious people do all sorts of dangerous things in the name of religion. Even drink poison Kool Aid so their spirit can go on a ufo.

But the gospel authors are anonymous? They were not killed or anything else, they were not known?
We don't know who they were, what they did with the gospels, how they presented them, none of that information is available. You are making huge assumptions here. Like I pointed out in a post Trajan said to "LEAVE THE CHRISTIANS ALONE"?

The Jesus Movement, like I already pointed out was a faction of Judaism. So you don't get kicked out for participating in a current sect? There were times of peace for Christians as well concerning Rome.

"The story of Christianity’s rise to prominence is a remarkable one, but the traditional story of its progression from a tiny, persecuted religion to the established religion in the medieval West needs some debunking.

Although in the first few centuries AD Christians were prosecuted and punished, often with death, there were also periods when they were more secure. Secondly, the rise of Christianity to imperial-sponsored dominance in the fourth and fifth centuries, although surprising, was not without precedent, and its spread hardly as inexorable as contemporary Christians portrayed it."
BBC - History - Ancient History in depth: Christianity and the Roman Empire


and like Richard Carrier pointed out generally Rome did not care about Jewish or any other religious sects, as long as they followed Roman Law. Stories of persecution are blown up.
Creating a unified Jewish religion that incorporated the prophecy, a Jewish version of a savior deity and updated temple worship (no temple) and sin-forgiving powers that last forever rather than be renewed each year was probably a big deal for people attempting to re-define the religion.
The church destroyed all non-canon scripture, writings, everything, there is a literal black period where all information was destroyed so the (almost) only source of information is the Roman version of the Bible. There exist no letters from anyone saying this or that is wrong but the religion was very diverse and there were many many sects and there would have been huge amounts of historical data and people talking back and forth about who was correct. It's all gone.
The canon it's responding to, the Marcionite Canon is 100% unknown and gone forever, yet it was first. The church was smart and knew controlling information was key.

This is why the Gnostic gospels find provided so much information and hints that all that stuff once existed and was blacked out by the church.

Click to expand...

joelr said:

The Myth of Persecution: How Early Christians Invented a Story of Martyrdom is a 2013 book by Candida Moss, a professor of New Testament and Early Christianity at the University of Notre Dame. Moss's thesis is that: -

1. The traditional idea of the "Age of Martyrdom", when Christians suffered persecution from the Roman authorities and lived in fear of being thrown to the lions, is largely fictional.
2. There was never sustained, targeted persecution of Christians by Imperial Roman authorities.
3. Official persecution of Christians by order of the Roman Emperor lasted for at most twelve years of the first three hundred of the Church's history.
4. Most of the stories of individual martyrs are pure invention,
5. Even the oldest and most historically accurate stories of martyrs and their sufferings have been altered and re-written by later editors, so that it is impossible to know for sure what any of the martyrs actually thought, did or said.

Click to expand...

joelr said:

I don't care what you want to call me. You know exactly what I mean. There are historical details in the gospels. There are historical details in the Qu'ran, there are far more scientific details in the Qu'ran.
In another more recent religion there are even more historical details in the much more extensive writings of the Bahai faith.

Writing in acts of miracles among historical details is already completely commonplace to all religions. But throwing in a bunch of tired old miracles that has already been the same miracles every demi-god in every culture had been doing is such a huge confirmation of pure mythology.

I really don't get your point here. Yes, there are historical details in all myths and religions, yet we know the supernatural parts about gods and such are not true. In all the thousands of myths. We already know this. But somehow you want the fact that your religion's historical details to mean the supernatural stories are true? While all other religions are just myths added to historical details?
And you think I have some sort of clouded judgment?

In 2000 years if someone finds the Roswell story they will marvel at the historical details. It has actual military personnel, actual military bases, the correct army squad, actual morticians, actual physical metal, this goes on and on. But it's not real.

Click to expand...

BilliardsBall said:

Archaeology has verified thousands of Bible nouns. The Qur'an has far less and has obvious issues besides.

But arguing which book is best is not salvation.

Click to expand...

BilliardsBall said:

I thought you beyond "God does X but unless God does Y when I demand it..."?

I tithe and God turns 90% into far more power for living and helping others than the 100%. I have many times given amounts like $2 or $2000 and seen then come in to the penny.

I understand both fiscal planning and when coincidences reach the level of statistical significance.

Put another way, while you now choose to scoff--wish you wouldn't--rather than demand $100K to materialize, I do what the Bible proscribes--tithe and give beyond a tithe--and see God come through not once or twice, but hundreds of times, for decades.

Have we parsed confirmation bias and statistical significance yet?

Click to expand...

BilliardsBall said:

You've provided many possible reasons for Bible writers to expect and even pursue persecution.

But it's not just persecution, it's martyrdom, and in modern cases, people who found martyrdom weren't being "morally superior" and etc. as above. Would you risk your life to show me your superior morality? I think not.

Click to expand...

BilliardsBall said:

I hear what you are saying re: Carrier--that "generally Rome did not care about Jewish or any other religious sects, as long as they followed Roman Law. Stories of persecution are blown up," but Rome crucified tens of thousands of Jews--something I knew as a young Jew. The Christians were persistently considered seditionists. Paul spent years in prison for simply teaching eternal life in the Name of Jesus.

Think about this before you are so flippant about it, please. At the risk of invoking Godwin, if you next tell me "the Holocaust didn't do that much and is overblown," I will feel nauseous.

Click to expand...

BilliardsBall said:

1) There are clear contradictions to science and history in the Qu'ran

Click to expand...

BilliardsBall said:

2) The Bible has had thousands--not hundreds--of nouns in its text verified via archaeology

Click to expand...

BilliardsBall said:

3) The Qu'ran could be a one-person conspiracy--you'd have to explain why 40 Bible authors were historically accurate co-conspirators to promulgate myths, especially since in both testaments, prophets faced near-continual persecution, even martyrdom

Whether the scriptures of other religions are true or false has no bearing upon the Bible's validity or lack thereof. The fact that 10 of 11 contestants failed to win a race could hardly be taken as a plausible argument that therefore no one could have won. That there is counterfeit money in abundance does not suggest for even a moment that real money doesn't exist. In fact, it argues for its existence, because otherwise counterfeiting would have no purpose. That billions of people are willing to accept the sacred writings of various religions as having been inspired by God shows a deep hunger within mankind for divine revelation that has always existed in all ages, in all races and cultures, and in all places.

Click to expand...

joelr said:

Both have historical data and the Qu'ran has more science. Doesn't make the myths true, we have covered this in full.
The Qu'ran may have obvious issues but when talking about both books it's weird to just single out the one as having issues?
Because you seem to have a filter on what facts you will acknowledge you might have missed them but we have covered several serious issues with the Bible as a historical and true book. All facts point to man-made religious myth copied from pagan and OT themes. The writing style, the mythic tropes, the amount of Greek copied from Mark (90% in Matthew).
Even the God has very sketchy origins:
Yahweh - Wikipedia

It reads exactly like if Yahweh was a mythical god plucked from a pantheon of Egyptian gods and eventually made one true god. It actually says this in the Torah but that isn't the topic.

Archeology says the field can never prove any religion as real. In fact archeology has made Judaism much more questionable showing most of the early OT events like Exodus never happened, many of the cities were just small mud-towns and greatly exaggerated, Yahweh had a goddess Ashera and many other things that really show the religions as simply mythical fiction.
William Denver is the worlds most prolific biblical archeologist. If you are interested in what archeology actually has to say an interview with him on Nova is printed here:
Archeology of the Hebrew Bible

Archeology of the Hebrew Bible
William Dever, Professor Emeritus at the University of Arizona, has investigated the archeology of the ancient Near East for more than 30 years and authored almost as many books on the subject. In the following interview, Dever describes some of the most significant archeological finds related to the Hebrew Bible, including his own hot-button discovery that the Israelites' God was linked to a female goddess called Asherah.

NOVA: Have biblical archeologists traditionally tried to find evidence that events in the Bible really happened?
William Dever: From the beginnings of what we call biblical archeology, perhaps 150 years ago, scholars, mostly western scholars, have attempted to use archeological data to prove the Bible. And for a long time it was thought to work. [William Foxwell] Albright, the great father of our discipline, often spoke of the "archeological revolution." Well, the revolution has come but not in the way that Albright thought. The truth of the matter today is that archeology raises more questions about the historicity of the Hebrew Bible and even the New Testament than it provides answers, and that's very disturbing to some people.
But perhaps we were asking the wrong questions. I have always thought that if we resurrected someone from the past, one of the biblical writers, they would be amused, because for them it would have made no difference. I think they would have said, faith is faith is faith—take your proofs and go with them.

The fact is that archeology can never prove any of the theological suppositions of the Bible. Archeologists can often tell you what happened and when and where and how and even why. No archeologists can tell anyone what it means, and most of us don't try.
We want to make the Bible history. Many people think it has to be history or nothing. But there is no word for history in the Hebrew Bible. In other words, what did the biblical writers think they were doing? Writing objective history? No. That's a modern discipline. They were telling stories. They wanted you to know what these purported events mean.

The Bible is didactic literature; it wants to teach, not just to describe. We try to make the Bible something it is not, and that's doing an injustice to the biblical writers. They were good historians, and they could tell it the way it was when they wanted to, but their objective was always something far beyond that.

Click to expand...

joelr said:

Yes we parsed confirmation bias and statistical significance and moved right into delusional.

I already posted links to people who lost everything tithing. There are website explaining what to do when tithing doesn't work for Christians, there is a church who online offers a money-back option for tithing who have lost all resources. They actually did have to compensate a few people.
There is an article here documenting a case of a home owner losing her house rather than stop tithing.
https://www.getrichslowly.org/could-tithing-lead-some-americans-to-lose-their-homes/
It never came back either.

So confirmation bias, yes of course it is? It it doesn't always work and you have clear evidence that it doesn't yet you still write a post as if it always does, that is confirmation bis and it's also delusional.

Beyond that a secular person could practice giving away 10% of income and have the same results you do. There are probably sound and logical explanations and it also is painfully obvious you do not see evidence that contradicts your beliefs.
That is a fact. So of course you are viewing this with massive bias?
To enter evidence of supernatural agency when there is no way to confirm or actually trace where any monies are going or coming from is ludicrus.
And tithing does not work for many people. There are obviously situations where people have connections and places who when they pass along 10% of their income to they will see excellent returns. While others do not and do not see return.
It's all chance. There is no god involved.

You can tithe to any mythical deity, Thor, Zues and if it works out then claim he's real? Coincidences would not make Thor a real demi-god and they do not make the Christian version real either.

Click to expand...

joelr said:

Again martyrdom is the gospels are just fictional stories. You can't use fiction as instances of what really happened?
In the context of history martyrdom was a Jewish concept first and the 2nd important fact is that you still haven't seemed to read the information about early Judaism and it's diverse sects including the Jesus movement.

This article explains Jewish martyrdom and it's scnchronization into Christianity but the last paragraph is the most relevant and points out this assumes (like the church likes to teach) that Judaism and Christianity were separate religions. This was not true, no one would become a martyr for writing a gospel on the Pharisees and it's the same for the Jesus Movement sect. It WAS a Jewish movement?
The stories helped to sepa

"Religious martyrdom is considered one of the more significant contributions of Second Temple Judaism to western civilization. It is believed that the concept of voluntary death for God developed out of the conflict between King Antiochus Epiphanes IV and the Jewish people. 1 Maccabees and 2 Maccabees recount numerous martyrdoms suffered by Jews resisting the Hellenizing of their Seleucid overlords, being executed for such crimes as observing the Sabbath, circumcising their children or refusing to eat pork or meat sacrificed to foreign gods. With few exceptions, this assumption has lasted from the early Christian period to this day, accepted both by Jews and Christians.

According to Daniel Boyarin, there are "two major theses with regard to the origins of Christian martyrology, which [can be referred to] as the Frend thesis and the Bowersock thesis". Boyarin characterizes W.H.C. Frend's view of martyrdom as having originated in "Judaism" and Christian martyrdom as a continuation of that practice. Frend argues that the Christian concept of martyrdom can only be understood as springing from Jewish roots. Frend characterizes Judaism as "a religion of martyrdom” and that it was this “Jewish psychology of martyrdom” that inspired Christian martyrdom. Frend writes, "In the first two centuries C.E. there was a living pagan tradition of self-sacrifice for a cause, a preparedness if necessary to defy an unjust ruler, that existed alongside the developing Christian concept of martyrdom inherited from Judaism."[5]

In contrast to Frend's hypothesis, Boyarin describes G.W. Bowersock's view of Christian martyrology as being completely unrelated to the Jewish practice, being instead "a practice that grew up in an entirely Roman cultural environment and then was borrowed by Jews". Bowersock argues that the Christian tradition of martyrdom came from the urban culture of the Roman Empire, especially in Asia Minor:

Martyrdom was ... solidly anchored in the civic life of the Graeco-Roman world of the Roman empire. It ran its course in the great urban spaces of the agora and the amphitheater, the principal settings for public discourse and for public spectacle. It depended upon the urban rituals of the imperial cult and the interrogation protocols of local and provincial magistrates. The prisons and brothels of the cities gave further opportunities for the display of the martyr’s faith.[6]

Boyarin points out that, despite their apparent opposition to each other, both of these arguments are based on the assumption that Judaism and Christianity were already two separate and distinct religions. He challenges that assumption and argues that "making of martyrdom was at least in part, part and parcel of the process of the making of Judaism and Christianity as distinct entities"



Beyond that you should read the theology section, martyrdom was written in as a tenant of faith:

"Tertullian, one of the 2nd century Church Fathers wrote that "the blood of martyrs is the seed of the Church", implying that the martyrs' willing sacrifice of their lives leads to the conversion of others.

"Martyrdom for the faith ...became a central feature in the Christian experience."[11] “Notions of persecution by the "world," ...run deep in the Christian tradition. For evangelicals who read the New Testament as an inerrant history of the primitive church, the understanding that to be a Christian is to be persecuted is obvious, if not inescapable”[


Jesus Christ was the first martyr in Christian tradition.

The lives of the martyrs became a source of inspiration for some Christians, and their relics were honored.



This was part of the movement. People were moved to risk their lives because it was part of the narrative.
Does that mean it's real? Of course not? People take on all sorts of political, religious, gang affiliated, national narratives that tell then it's noble to die for your cause. In the religious arena they hear word of mouth and that's good enough.
2000 years ago people just assumed some cult had the correct supernatural forces behind it, probably all of them did to different degrees they thought.
So hooking up with some movement was the thing to do. People willingly died worshipping, praying, and associating with THOUSANDS of religions. People do that all throughout history. And ALL of them are not actually real. In your case you think one is, but the point is it does not demonstrate proof of anything except more of the same human behavior.

Click to expand...