Christian Martyrs - Voice of the Martyrs

[1952YOU1320TUBE1952]

Hearsay,HISTORY IS WRITEN BY THYE POWERFUL.

[punk2003]

Don't drink the fruit punch.

[yashupal1]

soon JESUS soon....amen

[tallliza]

@tallliza CONTINUED...but because he wrote over two hundred years after the events, one would do well to be cautious in assuming that we know without question how these disciples died

[greeny202a]

WOW this guy has just committed suicide! How many muslims have killed themselves because they believe their bullshit?

[stofferd]

OK but is there proof for the martyrdom of the eyewitnesses to the resurrection of Christ? Other than the bible I mean. I don't mean any offence by that, but obviously there are historical records for someone roughly matching Jesus' description. Are there other records of the martyrdom?

[lamare3253]

I dont know about John drying miserably, I would have to say he probably had the biggest smile on his face in hie life! This life is a prison and to die is eternal freedom

[oksana1980italy]

Actor spoke of the Great Feats of the Holy Christian Martyrs, and put a foot on the leg. Where is the respect for the Great Feat of the Holy Martyrs. West completely lost interest in religion. West people transformed Christianity into a routine. Prepare to meet the antichrist (the jewish messiah) ???

[MenechemShaul]

Wonderful posting! Absolute truth!

[mythinktube]

wow this guy has heard logical and rational reasoning and yet he's still beyond help...

[MenechemShaul]

@mythinktube He has received the heart! Yeshua is King and he did rise from the dead!

[RebekahC1987]

who are different than me. The Bible says to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. I just hope you leave Christians alone. People hurt people. People cliam Christianity who are no where near Christ like. Look at what the Natives call pale faces. They hurt the Native people. But they where not true Christians. They where greedy and sought personal gain. To be a Christian means selfless and helping others like Christ did.

[RebekahC1987]

Hey I need to check myspace and facebook. I have alot of friends on there. I should be back online tomoro afternoon. We can talk some more then. I just want to check this mail because its getting late. I need to go to bed.

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987 I'm sorry I offended you. I really am. I feel bad about that. And I promise not to call you names anymore. I shouldn't have spoken to you like that. I've been writing an Atheism book for about two years now, and this is why I go on youtube a lot, and why I don't refer to other faiths.

What's more, I have friends who are gay. They can't marry in CA because other people "believe" God has an opinion about it. I can't sit back and let "beliefs" stand in for facts. It's not right.

[RebekahC1987]

@stefatrop I accept the apology. Thats all overwith. My brother is homosexual. I love him to death and he is very involoved with my duaghter's life. I suppport the Bible entirely, Steven knows this. That doesn't mean he isn't my brother or that I don't love him. I had gotten pregnant with a child by a wiccan man before I knew God. We got walked out on. Bad things happen. Its just life. It makes us better and stronger. I know Who I serve and stand behind Him. I still have plenty of friends...

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987

This is the issue;

1) You BELIEVE your faith is true, so you tell others that what you believe is a FACT (not MERELY a belief, but a FACT).

2) You came to KNOW the Bible is a fact (and not MERELY a belief), through BELIEF & what you regard as EVIDENCE.

3) You understand that all the other religions in the world believe THEIR faiths are true as well, and tell others that what THEY believe is a fact (not MERELY a belief, but a FACT).

(cont.)

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987

4) You understand that all the other religions in the world came to know their faiths are a fact (and not MERELY a belief) through BELIEF and what THEY regard as EVIDENCE.

What I'm saying to you is;

The very precise reasons you have for thinking your belief is a FACT and not MERELY a belief, are the same reasons all the other faiths in the world think their faiths are a FACT and not MERELY a belief.

This is why I say believing something doesn't entitle you to call it a fact.

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987 In summary, 5) Thinking one is in the possession of "The One True Faith" because it occurs to the believer as A) a FACT for which there is EVIDENCE for the BELIEF, B) that this evidence is unique to one's own faith, C) and that this makes one's own faith the only TRUE or LEGITiMATE one... IS A UNIVERSAL CHARACTERISTIC OF RELIGION. This is why I'll say it again; Believing something does not entitle you to call it a fact. It's a belief.

[RebekahC1987]

@stefatrop The conversation has been a good thing for me. It encouraged me to do some reasearch. I did that search and I am only more persuaded in the Lord Jesus Christ. Like I said though just make sure next time in any situation. If you have a difference talk it out. In this case it worked out for so much better. Its been nice having this chat. I stand by the Bible and God. Again, you are you're own person. You get to make you're own chioce.

[RebekahC1987]

@RebekahC1987 Just as you try to inform people you think God doesn't exist. I will keep telling them I know He does. Because I looked into the Bible and outside sources. It is all true. The best thing to do now is you go you're way. I will go mine. Again, I apreciated the talk. Now I am encouraged to dig deeper. Bye.

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987 I don't inform people God doesn't exist. You guys don't listen. I inform people their REASONS for belief are INADEQUATE. Big difference.

I don't have believe there's no god, higher power, creator, etc. What I articulate is how your REASONS for belief aren't sufficient.

I've just countered your assertions, you've decided not to respond to my points, yet you think you're in the possession of a fact.

You insult Faith by asserting the Bible is a fact without legitimate arguments.

[RebekahC1987]

@stefatrop Actually I gave facts to back up everything you asked for. My arguement was not illegitimate. You said their where no documents other that the Bible that confermed Jesus right? I gave you a list of documents with dates that where written around that time. I have answered all you're questions. But I feel like you have you're decision made. I have my decision made. We could go on like this forever. I just feel like I have other things I need to do.Thats why I said lets go serperate ways

[XRRep]

@RebekahC1987 i conmend you, it is only God the trinity that can open peoples spritual eyes. Have you ever tried to just give the good person test to people? instead of getting into big debates.

[RebekahC1987]

@XRRep Its not my responsibility to test people. Thats God's responsibilities. Of course the Bible says by there fruits you shall know them. But personally I am not here for debates. I give people the information and let them make there own chioce. Its there own eternal soul. I can't choose for them. I just give them the information.

[XRRep]

@RebekahC1987 do you know what the good perdon test is?

[XRRep]

@RebekahC1987 do you know what the good person test is?

[RebekahC1987]

I am just inviting you to look for yourself. You said no one talked about Christ outside the Bible during that time. Thats wrong, google it. Look up these people and what they had to say. It gives a list of others who talk about Christ.

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987 I never said "no one talked about Christ outside the Bible". I never said those words. I'm fully aware of most of the sources you mentioned, and have known about them for twenty years.

I asked YOU to provide extra-Biblical evidence that is PROOF of Christianity.

None of those sources you cited prove anything except that they had HEARD of Jesus and had heard of Christianity.

[RebekahC1987]

-- PLINIUS SECUNDUS (Pliny the Younger) , -- CORNELIUS TACITUS, -- GAIUS SUETONIUS TRANQUILLAS, -- THE TALMUD

Thier is also a list full of other people who talked about Christ in writings.

[RebekahC1987]

Like I siad haven't been following God a real long time. Thier is still much to learn but its not a story. Its an historical fact. I want to invite you to talk with someone. I think he can help you way more than I can. He is more learned. His name is Bill Sturm. You can find him if you have a facebook. He is wearing a green shirt. I am getting off here and on facebook though. Thank you for the conversation.

[RebekahC1987]

I did some researching with google and looked up other ducuments that reference with the Bible around that time. Thank you for the challange. It has helped me grow as a Christian and realise I have alot more studing to do. I never knew thier was so much information out there. Again, thanks it helped alot.

[RebekahC1987]

The Christian has substantially superior criteria for affirming the New Testament documents than he does for any other ancient writing. It is good evidence on which to base the trust in the reliability of the New Testament.

[RebekahC1987]

On the other hand, if the critics acknowledge the historicity and writings of those other individuals, then they must also retain the historicity and writings of the New Testament authors; after all, the evidence for the New Testament's reliability is far greater than the others.

[RebekahC1987]

I think the evidence with the dates and all the facts that conclude it you are just dismissing. I mean I have only been following God over a year now. I don't know honestly who wrote every book in the Bible but I do know it is the Word of God.

[RebekahC1987]

In other words, those who wrote the documents knew that if they were inaccurate, plenty of people would have pointed it out. But, we have absolutely no ancient documents contemporary with the First Century that contest the New Testament texts

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987 Look at it this way;

If you consider all the people who Jesus affected; healing them, performing miracles for them, saving them, imparting wisdom to them,

AND, the people who SAW Jesus perform these amazing feats on OTHER people,

and the RELATIVES who heard about Jesus and SAW what he did for their friends and loved ones,

How come there aren't tons of writings from that era of people- INDEPENDENTLY of the Bible- writing down what they saw?

There are NO writings of this kind!

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987 Pt. II

There are no writing independent of The Bible talking about Jesus' amazing impact on their lives, because Christianity rose up as a result of the STORIES that started coming up over the years.

And you can't contradict a STORY.

If I told you a story I made up about Jesus, and suppose Jesus never came to your town, or you never met him during his ministry, why would you write his miracles DIDN'T happen? The stories developed over time, who would monitor this and contradict it?

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987 Pt. III

Stories, by their nature, can't be contradicted. What's more, as the stories gained momentum, people just accepted them as fact.

Don't you ever wonder why NO ONE'S names are ever used in the Gospels? It's just a "man" or a "centurion" or a "priest" or a "woman".

This proves they're stories, AND that they can't be contradicted.

If names were used, people could go back and verify.

Don't believe a "woman at a well" was healed?

Why not?Women everywhere,who's to say she wasn't?

[RebekahC1987]

@stefatrop Plenty of Bible names are used. Abramham and the offering up of his son. Then God provided a scarifice. Look at David and Goliath. The rich man and Lazerious. Forgive me if I mispell here. But thier are plenty of names given. I gave you what you said did not exist. Its out there you just need to look for it. All of these people oputside Biblical accounts gave account.

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987 This is more rambling about something I never said. I never, ever, ever said anything close to "Christ isn't mentioned outside the Bible."

You're responding to someone else's post.

I've known he's been mentioned outside the Bible for about two decades.

[RebekahC1987]

If Jesus was crucified in 30 A.D., then that means that the entire New Testament was completed within 70 years. This is important because it means there were plenty of people around when the New Testament documents were penned who could have contested the writings.

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987 Who would have contested it? Seventy years later, who would have bothered?

Suppose a man was killed forty years ago, and buried somewhere in the desert. If I write down forty years later that he crawled out of his grave and went up into the sky, who would argue it? Who would say it didn't happen?

People who weren't there couldn't argue it.

Plus, I'm only circulating the story among other people who believe what I believe, and we're all getting old and dying. Who COULD argue it?

[RebekahC1987]

Tacitus circa 100 A.D. 1100 A.D. 1000 yrs 20 ----

Aristotle 384-322 B.C. 1100 A.D. 1400 49 ----

[RebekahC1987]

Sophocles 496-406 B.C. 1000 A.D. 1400 yrs 193 ----

Homer (Iliad) 900 B.C. 400 B.C. 500 yrs 643 95%

New

Testament 1st Cent. A.D. (50-100 A.D. 2nd Cent. A.D.

(c. 130 A.D. f.) less than 100 years 5600

Suetonius 75-160 A.D. 950 A.D. 800 yrs 8 ----

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987 None of these references prove Jesus resurrection or the validity of Christianity.

They only show that these people had HEARD OF Jesus, had HEARD of Christianity, had HEARD OF Christians and their stories.

I'VE heard of all of these things. It doesn't mean I'm extra-Biblical evidence for the resurrection.

[RebekahC1987]

Demosthenes 4th Cent. B.C. 1100 A.D. 800 yrs 8 ----

Herodotus 480-425 B.C. 900 A.D. 1300 yrs 8 ----

[RebekahC1987]

two copies of Isaiah discovered in Qumran Cave 1 near the Dead Sea in 1947 were a thousand years earlier than the oldest dated manuscript previously known (A.D. 980), they proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text.

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987 You're going to have to be more specific. A full Bible manuscript from a thousand years before A.D. 980? That would be a complete Bible, including the New Testament from 20 B.C.(1000 years before A.D. 980, and twenty years before Jesus was born?). This is impossible. So I assume you mean something else.

You can't mean this, so please rephrase this post.

[RebekahC1987]

16 But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;

17 Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,

[RebekahC1987]

14 And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

15 And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987 The Book of Acts, which you refer to here, wasn't written by Paul. So these four verses, stated as though Paul said it, were written by someone else. In fact, Acts is generally attributed to the author of Luke, though we don't know who wrote Luke.

So Acts is an anonymous book, written about Paul's conversion; it too is a STORY that the unknown author heard.

Paul doesn't write Acts,

Paul doesn't contribute to Acts,

We don't know who wrote Acts,

All this is a STORY the writer HEARD.

[GARYWERSLEY]

You talk about 9-11 religeous fundamentalists. Are they also martyrs or was their martyrdom in vain? where are those martyrs now?

How can a God of love expect martyrdom from believers? is martyrdom a virtue?

Did not Jesus say, ' If you are persecuted in my name in one city, move to another?'

[Stefatropolis]

Niles makes a tremendous omission in his argument. He only considers the following two possible scenarios;

1) Early Christian "witnesses" died because they actually SAW and EXPERIENCED Jesus' resurrection, or,

2) They wouldn't have died for a LIE.

The third possiblity is incredibly simple and obvious;

3) The died because they BELIEVED Jesus resurrected. For instance, someone might have simply taken Jesus' body. Stories start circulating about a resurrection, and the disciples BELIEVE it. Simple.

[DurzaGaiden]

@Stefatropolis The third one IS simple, which is why the Roman government foresaw such a possibility. They stationed several guards outside of Jesus' tomb to prevent said possibility from occurring.

[stefatrop]

@DurzaGaiden You're not thinking.

If the Romans were genuinely concerned about and "foresaw such a possiblity", they wouldn't have given the body to followers to bury.

All the Gospels say is that guards were placed outside. This is probably a story to make it appear that the Resurrection couldn't have been a trick.

Since even the Gospels say the body of Jesus was given to them to bury, what probably happened was just an embellished story surrounding a tomb with a missing body: Resurrection!

[RebekahC1987]

@stefatrop See thats impossible to being as I believe it was Mary saw Jesus as well. So if this was a hoax and Jesus was actually burried how could He have been whitenessed of after His resurrection. It seems you are so keen on trying to disprove Christianity when it proofs itself. Not only through the Scripture but other historical accounted documents it seems.

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987

No, there were stories that Mary saw Jesus, and there were stories that there were witnesses who saw the resurrection.

Consider this; all it would take for someone to write any of the four Gospels would be to go around listening to and writing down "Jesus Stories". One person tells a story about Mary seeing Jesus, another person shares a story about the disciples seeing him.

These stories grow and solidify over the thirty years or so since Jesus' death, and they're put in theBible

[RebekahC1987]

@stefatrop No, they where all accounts. Saul even heard from Jesus. Sual before had been a persecutor. Can I ask you a question now? I would like an honest polite responce. Why is it you go from Christian page to Christian page disputting the gospel? At the same time you don't go to a buddist page or hinduism or satanism? Why do you attack Christianity?

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987 I will answer that. But first I'll respond to your posts.

Acts, which you wrote four verses from, weren't written by Paul. They were probably written by the person who wrote Luke. The title "Luke" never appears on that Gospel. Later Church leaders attributed it to Luke, but there's no connection. Suffice it to know the word "Luke" or "According to Luke" don't appear on it.

This person wrote Acts, and tells the STORY they heard about Paul.

Just a STORY THEY HEARD.

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987 Name any "historical accounted documents" other than scripture that proves Christianity. Name one. And I'll respond to it.

[stefatrop]

@DurzaGaiden

Imagine if 2000 years ago I started a religion, and you had me crucified. And in keeping with the Gospels, you anticipate that a resurrection "rumor" might get around.

Would you,

1) Give my body to my followers to bury? Of course not.

2) Station your soldiers outside my tomb to defend it? No, you'd keep the body and bury it in a safe place.

3) Just station guards outside of the tomb; not look inside? No, you'd look inside to see if my body was ACTUALLY there.

You're not thinking.

[RebekahC1987]

@stefatrop One problem with this theory of you'res. Jesus was seen after His ressurection. How do you explain this away? It was many people who saw Him. One stuck his hand into Jesus' side.

[stefatrop]

@RebekahC1987

No, there were stories that Jesus was seen after his resurrection. Stories circulated that Jesus was seen, and eventually these stories got written down.

Whoever wrote the Gospels WROTE that he heard one of the disciples stuck his hand into Jesus' side.

They're stories.

[Brucev7]

@Stefatropolis Might near impossible to take the body because the Roman guards would have been executed.

[stefatrop]

@Brucev7 You're not considering other possibilities;

1) There were no Roman guards, just stories circulated ABOUT Roman guards. The Gospel writers relayed such stories to justify the claim that the resurrection definitely happened, and that it couldn't have been a trick. Just a story.

2) In no Gospel account do the Romans bury Jesus. His body is buried (maybe NEVER ever placed in the tomb) by followers, & guards were allegedly placed outside. Romans never confirmed Jesus was inside.

THINK!

[Brucev7]

@stefatrop then your completely changing everything and no God. But now your going all over the place. Where else do you do this? The Qur'an? History books? Science books?

[stefatrop]

@Brucev7 I'll give you a pass this time, but what do you mean I'm "changing everything"?

I'm providing you with a completely rational explanation as to how the resurrection STORIES came about.

These are STORIES. You understand that, right? The Gospel writers are committing to writing the STORIES about Jesus & the resurrection that they HEARD.

As STORIES I've explained how insufficient the "Roman guard" concept is.

What does your comment mean?

[Brucev7]

@stefatrop What do you mean by stories?

[stefatrop]

@Brucev7 The earliest manuscripts of the Gospels have no names upon them. The words "Matthew" "Mark" "Luke" and "John" don't appear.

Church leaders later attributed the Gospels to various people; Matt and John to disciples, Mark and Luke to followers of Paul (who never met Jesus).

They were finally written down decades after Jesus lived.

The stories aren't written as though the authors experienced them firsthand.

The names are never recorded who experienced Jesus' miracles.

They're stories.

[Brucev7]

@stefatrop The autographs were written only a short time after Christ's death. Especially when compared to other ancient writings and other non-canonized books or manuscripts. But once again, you are changing. The Bible was written by men but given or inspired by God. You need to get the book, "How to Read the Bible for all it's Worth by Dr. Fee and Stuart to help you understand how the manuscripts were translated. This is called Hermeneutics.

[saintsfan989]

i see how you guys bring up the fact that these followers were supposedly tortured for their beliefs but what about all the people who were unjustifiably killed because they dare questioned the word of your loving god

[jasason10]

That has got to be one of the worst examples of evidence that I have ever heard of.......But thanks for the laugh anyway.

[10mwolf]

Look up any ancient history book and will talk about the persacution of the early church. A church that started immedialy after Jesus' death and in the same town He was killed in. If they early church began BECAUSE of the resurection, and the ressurection didn't happen all they had to do was get Jesus' body and the christian church would have been killed before it ever started!

[Yeshuajesus]

Jesus our joy to the world.

[AtarahDerek]

Yep, the martyrs of yesterday and today, and indeed the continued existence of a church that began as an insignificant sect within Judaism with men who at first cowered behind locked doors, is the best proof that Jesus conquered the grave and is alive today. Every effect has its cause. To believe that Jesus did not rise from the dead is to believe in a greater miracle than the resurrection--that the church, an effect, exists without a cause.

[jenglis9]

To be brief, Christianity survived because of the conversion of one man, Constantine. As emperor, when he converts, the empire converts with him, no choice. If he never had, Christianity may have survived, but would never have become a world power. It was imperialism that allowed it to grow.

Also, on martyrs, if you claim such proof for Christianity, you must do the same for all martyrs of all religions. But I know you won't do that.

[davidgcdeuce]

What do we have to do for martyrs of all religions? No malice intended, just a serious question

[davidgcdeuce]

Christianity often stagnates when it becomes cultural. The Chinese Christian movement seems to contradict you. Why does this type of debate consistently end in oversimplification and emotion? Are we examining our cases? do we rest on our laurels? Both? Neither? Okay, I'm now I'm getting a little heated. I'll leave it at that and hope this conversation goes well

[AtarahDerek]

The word "martyr" means "witness." The first martyrs witnessed the resurrected Jesus, and gave their lives for this testimony. No one who "witnessed" the beginnings of Islam died as a martyr, including Mohammed himself. Yet all of Jesus' disciples suffered unspeakable torture for their faith.

[jenglis9]

martyrdom doesn't validate a religion as dead soldiers don't validate a war

[AtarahDerek]

Martyrdom does validate the integrity of the witness. If a man is so adamant about having seen the risen Christ that he is willing to suffer for it, you can only conclude that he was completely honest in his testimony. That leaves two options: Either the martyr in question was a lunatic, or he was telling the truth. And there were enough witnesses to Jesus' resurrection to negate the former possibility. They couldn't all be hallucinating. Certainly not doubting Thomas or the cowardly Peter.

[jenglis9]

People martyr themselves DAILY.

I agree the particular martyrs themselves thought they were doing the right thing and following truth, but by the number of martyrs worldwide through history of all the various religions, we must agree MOST died on a false premise.

So, how do the Christian martyrs differ?

[AtarahDerek]

They were eye witnesses. Did I not just say that? Other martyrs give their lives for those who lived in comfort while they spread their teaching. Christians have a heritage of suffering. And Christ Himself suffered and promised we would as well. Yet He taught us to love and forgive our enemy, which Mohammed and Joseph Smith did not do.

Since you agree that the martyrs have integrity, why do you not agree that they also have eyes and ears?

[jenglis9]

I want you to prove that there were eye witnesses, something you cannot do.

when youhear that there were eyewitnesses, you believe because you are credulous. When the converts of paul also heard that there were eyewitnesses, they also believed because they were credulous. There is not one scrap of evidence for the resurrection outside the Bible.

Just because it says 5000 saw him, it doesn't mean that it happened. It is embellishment. This should be obvious to those who think thoughtfully.

[jenglis9]

And no, I did not agree that the martyrs have integrity based on their death. I said they most certainly THOUGHT they were right, yet were wrong. In fact, if someone is willing to die for such little evidence, and such poor preachments, then I feel the opposite. They are the suicide bombers of today, except without even the reasons that a bomber has of sending a message. It is "turn the other cheek" to the worst degree, taking death without a fight.

[jenglis9]

NON RESISTANCE TO EVIL IS EVIL PERSONIFIED!

I ask, if the government started a campaign to kill all christians, would you disagree, or take your death like a good martyr?

I, a Christian apostate, would be on the front lines not allowing this evil to happen.

In your Christian view, we should not fight, and should allow these Christians to die. We should turn the side of our head when one side is shot

Do you see how this Christian pacifism and Martyr worship is evil yet?

[XRRep]

@jenglis9 have to correct you, 500 men plus there wives saw Yeshua the messiah

Have you been converted yet?

Well when you do get saved your going to have to delete all your posts.

God does the saving and one day if your lucky, God willing. 

[jenglis9]

@XRRep this is clearly something you cannot know. You read one man's account that 500 men "and their wives" saw Jesus. Were you there that day? How do you know this happened at all? Is there any shred of evidence YOU have for this event, other than your ecstatic emotional state.

And for the record, I'd appreciate less condescension from a "Christian" man like yourself. I need no conversion as I am an apostate. I was an evangelical for years, and have a degree in religion.

[XRRep]

@jenglis9 for the fear of God keeps true born again evangelical christians telling the truth, thats why the bible can be trusted. if your apostate you truly never were a christian born again, saved by God.

[jenglis9]

@XRRep . Youre a remarkably ignorant fool. Or at least your comments surely are. The end.

[XRRep]

@jenglis9 well i am a loser thats for sure, but a ignorant fool. I forgive you. i am going to comment on your Constantine view aswell.

[ransom4many09]

@jenglis9-Christian Martyrs differ in that they do not blow themselves or others up-

[jenglis9]

The bible martyrs never had the chance as there were no explosives, although they do fantasize about the cataclysmic end of the world as told in revelation. Yet it is interesting to see as soon as they get power from Constantine, inquisitions start and others die instead of themselves.

But we do see similar acts to suicide bombings as they bomb abortion clinics, eachother (Ireland), and preach the acceptance of poverty to millions (mother teresa) which hurts many more than one bomb would.

[ransom4many09]

@jenglis9 you are the one who said "DAILY" in all caps speaking of present day Christian Martyrs, I assumed. Inquisitions were not inspired of Christ and His teachings-but by Rome and her heresy. Those who bomb abortion clinics are also not following Christ but some weird fanatical inner drive. Not all who say" Lord Lord" actually follow Christ. Many do ungodly things and stamp the name of Jesus on the end of it.

[JeshuaLivingWord]

i knew about Jesus' diciples as martyrs, but not of Mohammed not having martyrs in the beginning. Thanks.

God bless

[XRRep]

@jenglis9 pt 1 wow ..Constantine was a wolf on sheep clothing. The Catholic church is just that, Catholic. confession to a priest that wants to be called the Holly Father is blastphemy.there jesus is one of the many male pegan gods. They do not even do communion properly. i was married to a catholic, its a pegan religion. Jesus b-day date is not mentioned in the bible. dec21 to 25 is the pegan dates for the sun worshipers winter. Jesus is in the begining ....... John ch 1 verse1

[johny260]

@XRRep I think your attitude problem is why you WERE married to a Catholic. And the fact that a Catholic would marry you when you look down on people like you do, proves my point that most women are insane.

[XRRep]

@johny260 this is a Bot, your account shows you have not been logged on for 2 weeks. and as of this post the time was 22 hours ago that your account posted to me.

[XRRep]

@jenglis9 pt 2 Jesus did not want his fleshly birth day known, becouse he allways has been. He just wanted christains to know and believe that He stoped existing in the flesh for 3 days was put in a tomb(buried) came back into this flesh(rose up) and 40 days later went up to heaven, sounds like something only God can do.

[jenglis9]

@XRRep. Babble on friend. Say something that would interest me. I dont care if its an insult. At least don't be boring.

[jenglis9]

Christianity survived by being attached to imperialist Rome through Constantine. When this happened they became THE power. Otherwise it would have petered out like countless other cults

[AtarahDerek]

When Christianity was outlawed, the church grew and was unbelievably strong. But when it became the official religion of Rome, that's when it started to "peter out." You'll notice that all the stories of heroes of the Christian faith between the times of Constantine and the Crusades come from countries other than Rome. The church in Rome was stagnant, and that's what nearly killed it.

Today, Christianity is growing in China by 10,000 new members a day. Church growth is illegal in China.

[jenglis9]

terrible explanation... all your "evidence" of these martyrs is inside the Bible - it goes back to "the bible is true because the bible says its true". These are NOT historical claims. All martyrdom of the earliest apostles is a matter of belief.

[antonianouf55]

your wrong. The New Testament writings have been proven to be historically accurate. it is rather your opinion that you cant back up by facts.

[jenglis9]

where is the historical evidence outside the bible for the martyrdom of stephen? Of Peter? Of Paul? Even the death of Jesus himself is remarkably void to a large degree from early historical writing, although it makes a very small appearance. All claims from within the Bible are flawed due to the composition of the books as "faith documents" not historical biographies... quick example of faulty history - what happened to Judas? The Bible doesn't agree with itself, therefore at least one is wrong

[antonianouf55]

you wont find any self respected historian that will agree with what you just said

[jenglis9]

Bart Ehrmann, John Dominic Crossan, Jack Miles, Charles Templeton, Christopher Hitchens, Walter Kaufmann...... historians, theologians, apostates, journalists, teachers - all these men support me, not to mention ALL universities teach what I have said. Sir, you have been schooled. Don't let hard rules of a religion cloud your free mind. You can still belive in Jesus and know the facts about scripture.

[brichards247]

You can't believe the in the Jesus of the Bible and disagree with the scripture. In the Bible, Jesus is referred to as the Word and it is either perfect or its not. Its either truth or a lie. We are brought up today to believe that everything is gray. Unless its evolution then that is just fact/theory/fact.

[jenglis9]

Actually one CAN believe in Jesus and reject certain sections of scripture. For instance, the original communities that received the gospels, take a "Markan" community for example, received the gospel of Mark and none others. Same with a community receiving a letter of Paul, a community at Corinth for example. These communities believed in the Jesus their OWN scripture referred to, and would therefore have rejcted certain aspects of other books, if not the books in their entirety.

[truthREIGNSforever]

The Bible was written historical with an evangelical mindset. Just look at how specific it was in each case. Matthew started off with the account of a geneology. It was undeniabely a historic account. Take a look at some ancient documents such as greek history or jewish history; they all agree for the most part on what the Bible says, they are ignorant of some parts because it condtradicted with their belief. There isnt a single condtradiction in the Bible and can you plz show me where, if not?

[jenglis9]

Absolutely, I will try to keep the list short.

- different accounts of Judas' guilt, the field that was bought, and his manner of death (gospels vs. Acts)

- letters of Paul vs. Acts

- gospel of John vs the synoptics - especially the events of Jesus' arrest

- moment of Jesus' death - Matthew says the dead came out of tombs and walked around the city - strangely void from other accounts

- genesis 1 vs. genesis 2

- Pauline Christianity vs. Jewish Christianity aka Paul vs Peter James and John

[truthREIGNSforever]

If it's alright, could I possibly get your email because I don't think talking about this stuff on a youtube video reply is the best place if you know what I mean, lol. In alot of those cases, I don't exactly know what contradicts so you might have to be a bit more specific, and I could look closer at the more specific ones

[AtarahDerek]

1. Jesus' birth and death are mathematically recorded in the night sky.

2. The suffering and death of the martyrs proves their INTEGRITY. And yet you who have likely never suffered more than an appendectomy accuse them of lying.  Yet the church still exists despite its beginnings.

3. The Bible agrees with itself to the point where it makes the claim that if one part of it is a lie, the whole thing is; but if one part of the Bible is true, then the whole Bible is true.

[jenglis9]

I'm stunned by each of these points... truly stunned. I will remark no more as your points do not deserve enough respect to be refuted.

The End.

[davidgcdeuce]

I'd have to agree with Jenglis on that one. That made no sense.

[davidgcdeuce]

Jesus answered his critics with the wisdom of the Holy Spirit. You should do the same. While it's good to have an answer for every question, let's keep some verses in mind: do not cast your pearls before swine; do not answer a fool in his folly

[AtarahDerek]

@ davidgcdeuce: Point taken.  Well said.

[kev3d]

First of all, the claim that "ALL" of his followers gave their lives (for their faith), is not true. Only a few martyrdom stories are covered in the New Testament and some, like Paul was not an eyewitness. Most of the martyrdom stories come centuries later and are often in conflict with other legends. Even then, it is impossible to know that they died for reasons of faith and people die all the time for false religions, like Heaven's Gate.

[kev3d]

Specifically, the heaven's gate cult voluntarily died for a comet appearing in modern times, a comet that every scientist KNEW had no alien space craft riding in its wake. This was not dying for some thousand year old mystery cult, this was "eyewitnesses" dying for something they "knew". Even if the apostles died in such a fashion, it could not be said that they were not simply delusional as millions have been ever since.

[KatieScarletRed]

Being a former atheist I can appreciate Randall maybe more than some.He talks about difficult subjects,he is vilified by scientists and told that his belief in God also means he believes in fairies and spaghetti monsters.He has definitely opened my mind and cleared things up.

[2000christian]

I am so glad I have seen this. It is one thing I could never understand, why so many dismiss the witness of those who gave their life because of what they witnessed. Finally someone with some common sense, and a good natural use of words 100% rating

[reflect7]

I just added a bunch of evidence and testimony in the right column to support this piece. Most comes from scripture and Foxe's Book of Martyrs.

[reflect7]

Click on "More Info" to see the bulk of the text.

[pang00lin]

Where is the evidence that:

1. The apostles, early Church, etc were 'eyewitnesses to Jesus' death and resurrection, and

2. that they were martyred?

[waynne12345]

google it;-)

[pang00lin]

No, see I have, and that's why I ask. Not just googled it, but read up as well. I'd be interested to learn more about this subject. Please enlighten me.

[SummerSunshine1988]

God is alive and well!

[aerycksmusic]

It's been awhile since I checked our videos, and this is a winner. Just a point to note, Jesus Christ laid down (or gave his life) whereas those early disciples and followers were murdered for believing in what they had witnessed.

[Dejavu12321]

This guy forgot to mention that many died for Christ after what they witnessed when he arose who didn't believe in him before hand. This also correlates with many other records than just the Bible.

[FightingChristian]

A true Christian martyr is someone who dies peacefully for our lord and saviour Jesus Chris. The fake ones are the ones who CLAIM to be good but failed by strapping a bomb on their chest.

There no such thing as a Christian suicide bomber

Amen

[filorps]

The proof they they died for the truth was that they died for it? Same circular reasoning you always hear from apologists.

I'm sure it had nothing to do with the Jewish rebellion against the Roman empire... or the persecution against the fledgling Christian religion for 400 years till Constatine...

(Martyrdom and persecution has happen in all religions and/or against all religions. Doesn't make any of them true.)

[FillTheirVoid]

This isn't absolute proof, however it is a very persuasive and good argument. It had nothing to do with "believing it was true." They either knew it was true, or knew it was a lie. It's highly unlikely than men who were raised their entire lives being told and believing that lying is a sin that can cause them to be thrown into hell, would then make one up and die for it.

Actually, the martyrdom of the apostles and authors of the Bible had very little to do with rome or constantine.

[filorps]

You leave out the options that they knew it was true , but were mistaken or that they were fictional characters. Gotta cover all the bases here.

historical note:

Of course the martyrdoms had little to do with Constantine, he embraced Christianity.

[FillTheirVoid]

It's very difficult to be mistaken about something as tremendous as what they were claiming. I sincerely doubt they were fictional characters.

Like I said, this doesn't necessarily prove anything beyond a shadow of a doubt. However it is strong testimony, at least to me personally it speaks volumes.

[jackshirack2]

Well done mate, lets so say God is real, Jesus was the Messiah, every religion but christianity is wrong. What are you going to do now ? Wait around untill you're dead to live an eternity of perfect existence? What's the point in having faith in God when you 1. Can't prove he exists (beyond all reasonable doubt) and 2. Don't know the mind of God (supposing there is one)

[sketch683]

check out our videos

[almanzor2006]

Amen! Probably the guy was still atheist afterwards, prooving that they are not looking for answers just to justify their sin.

[castb4u]

":)

[HumbleVoice]

Well said!

[eddbolt]

Yeah - randal - this is much clearer than your original "resurection of jesus christ" video.

Very well done indeed sir.

I showed a lot of people your original one and I look forwards to using this one when the next oppertunity pops up.

God bless

[Chuichupachichi]

Also noted, is the stark contrast in the behavior of the apostles. When confronted by would be, fatal persecution before the resurrection. They denied Christ, preserving their lives. But when confronted after witnessing the resurrection, they no longer denied him. Knowing it would cost them their lives.

[creolecp]

Thanks Randall,Awesome!! people often contrast the modern day extremist with the first church, its unfortunate they dismiss the logic and reason and historical proof of it all.

[risprott]

Another superb video randall.

Richard

[sincitypreacher]

Brother, I agree that the horrible deaths of the eye witnesses of the resurrection is the most convincing proof of its TRUTH.

[JonathanMcLatchie]

Another well-reasoned video. One thing which I personally find hard going getting my head around is how any thinking person who reads the Bible and investigates the historicity thereof (there are such scholars in modern academia) can possibly deny the authenticity of the Biblical claims. It's madness. The historical evidence for Biblical authority is so much more compelling today than in past centuries that I am inclined to invoke the Pascal's Wager on this one with increased effect.

[TheEdge012]

Let me guess...

Even that was not good enough for your challenger, right?

Awesome video Randall!

[reflect7]

Thanks guys!

Yes, unfortunately, personal passion and presupposition usually squash the compelling evidence. But, they think the exact same thing about me...

I'll keep trying... Thanks again for your tremendous support and insight -- R

[ProdigalSonMuzik]

Fantastic Video! I have this same discussion all the time in chatrooms. Nonbelievers claim we do not use Logig and only Blind Faith. This sure seems logical to me.