Quote:
According to the nt, after the crucifixion the disciples were dejected. Peter had denied that he had even known Jesus at his trial. After the resurrection though when they met the risen Jesus, the apostles were so happy, changed and dedicated their lives toward the spreading of the gospel under terrible circumstances and most died as martyrs.


There are at least seven points I need to make on this absurd "well, if this happened, then it MUST be true" rhetoric:

1) As others have said (excluding myself) and SCHOLARS have written and stated, the earliest gospel was written down about 50 years after the fact. And even the gospels that made it into the xian canon do not agree either in historical accuracy, polemic presentation and even in their chronicaling the facts. In fact, the Gospel of Mark is an almost terse account and ironically was the first gospel written. According to Biblical scholars, the subsequent gospel writers (including the writers of other gospels that were not included in the canon) used Mark as the basis of their stories. There is some evidence that perhaps an earlier work (named the "Q" gospel) may have been used by the writer of Mark for that gospel. The irony we're all faced with is that if Mark was the standard of the Gospel story, why do the other gospels differ so greatly with what I will quantify as "embellishments" (since some of the events aren't even recorded in Mark)? If the transmission cannot be relied upon why should the faith?
2) You present that the apostles (actually disciples) were so happy with this "risen Jeesus", why did it NOT stop them from their inner squabbling even after jeesus' supposed resurrection? In John's gospel this became paramount between Peter and John right in the presence of the supposed risen jeesus. If they were so happy, why then was there the need for your Jeesus to addres the issue of John being alive when Jeesus was said to return? Another more disturbing question needs to be answered for which you and your ilk seem to side-step: If Jeesus really resurrected why then didn't he present himself to the Roman authorities as validity of the claims that he made both to Rome and to the Jewish religious sanhedrin? If he could no longer be killed and "o death where is thy sting", he should not have feared any reprisal. Why didn't he appear? and don't give me the "400 other people saw him" line. NONE of their supposed accounts are recorded in any other place than the gospel of Matthew. If he truly was resurrected he could have saved millions of innocent lives to come had he just put the matter to rest once and for all. But he didn't and he wouldn't or couldn't and so humanity is in the mess it's in now... IF he truly were what you say he was.
3) You contend that the apostles were so happy and therefore were as you put it changed, however, as your book of Acts asserts and even the vehemently antisemitic books of John and Revelelation never miss the opportunity to tell the Jewish people "you who killed the Christ". So much for being changed. It would stand to reason that if your "savior" truly did resurrect then there could not be a murder charge if the victim was not longer dead. In addition, since the gospels and epistles and nay, even the xians themselves could not accurately report the facts as they relate to history, how on earth is anyone supposed to believe the facts as they relate to JUDAISM AND THE ETERNAL REVELATION OF G-D?
4) Again, another question I raise with regards to your understanding of the gospels and even the NT that you so vehemently and without restraint, courtesy or even logic seem to posit as the final word (as you're prone to do): If your disciples were so changed, why is it that they sought to identify themselves as Jews and challenged every segment of the Jewish nation? If they were so changed, why could they not and why do they not simply go along their merry way apart from Judaism and apart from the Jewish People? Why is there this need from first the apostles and then every subsequent follower and theologian from Justin Martry to Augustine and Jerome to Jerry fawell and Pat Robertson to convert Jews? Simply because a band of half-baked, ignorant, illiterate diciples made some claims about a dead insurrectionist? Could it be that the persecution didn't come from within(the Jewish segments) it came from Rome who pretty much watched this group of insurrectionists (after all they were there when jeesus had a fit in the Temple and stated he'd destroy it and the four Roman garrisons stationed around the parimeter.. only to be conveniently "re-interpreted" meaning his body not the Temple). But Rome would NEVER be charged with the deed it had done.

5) You state that the disciples became "super evangelists". Maybe it would do you very well to study church history and the accounts of the disciples before you make such a blanket statement. I'm not going to repost my previous info on the church and the disciples, especially that charleton Paul. The original 12 could not go anywhere! They were part of a subjugated people. None of Jews in Israel had Roman citizenship. It was never afforded to them. While Jewish pilgrims with means would come to Jerusalem for the Feasts (and about 70% of the world's Jewish population lived OUTSIDE of Israel) very few were Roman citizens and even of the few that managed to procure it had it revoked by the Romans themselves during their pogroms against the Jews. Those in Israel were in the throes of incredible oppression and subjugation and travel was a luxury many could not even dream about much less do. As such, none of the original disciples ever made it past Jerusalem (this despite legend that Peter did make it Rome with Paul, which I really think is just that a legend given their animosity towards one another).

However, Paul had Roman citizenship, procured by his father (who was Greek NOT Jewish) and Paul was a Greek, not a Jew. Paul came to Jerusalem to perhaps study, but it's an amazing commentary that he ended up being a Temple Guard according to the Acts of the Apostles. He was sent on a mission (under Roman auspices), had an epilleptic fit on the Road to Damascus and then changed and saw a golden opportunity to bail out and go abroad and never have to face responsibility. He avoided his Herodian/Saduccean bosses.. he would avoid his new "boss" James and he would even avoid dying with the others by calling on his true nature to save his own skin. Yes, it was Paul who became the "super evangelist" and racked up "frequent sailing miles" all in creating not xtianity, but Paulism. It was he who perverted the message of this jeesus (if he ever had a message as we don't have anything written by him) and re-packaged this with a little bit of Paganism, a little bit of Mitrasism and renamed the god to try to flavor it with a hint of Judaism. It would never sell with Jews but it did sell with the gentiles. Paul tried to deceive the Jews and he says so in his letters. However, the Jews were not born yesterday and pretty much saw him for what he was.

All that being said, the question I need to ask is this: Now, if this message was to be so true and so glorious, why did paul feel he had to be a polemic "shape shifter" as he was? And why then, if he felt his message was so right, did he fail to appear before the church council in jerusalem but rather took a hike to Macedonia for 14 years? Is this the action of one who's message is true? Or maybe, just maybe it was at odds with what the disciples (the ones that actually knew this jeesus) knew and believed? By distancing himself with those "jewish ignorants" he could re-affirm to the Greeks and ROMANS, that he was one of them and he was NOT Jewish and he despised Judaism. This way, he could save his skin and HIS Message.

6) While we're on the topics of martyrs... You seem to think that the gospels are so historically correct. According to the Gospel accounts, people blythly go on with their lives, uninterrupted, in the galilee.. there's no oppression, no subjugation.. the Romans are guileless, hapless oafs (like Pilate) or supersticious and "open hearted" converts-to-be (like the roman Centurions in the gospels) and the real enemy is that "damned" Jewish Sanhedrin and their "legalistic" view of the Torah; who are so blind, deaf and stupid that they "obstruct" others from seeing "the christ". And so infused with their own infighting that they can't even begin to "see" the handwriting on the wall. NO no, the Romans aren't butchering people, they aren't forcing those who cannot pay their bone-crushing taxes into selling their children as slaves (or WORSE!! the sex trade); no rebellion brewing in the Galil against the Roman oppression and the hijacking of the Temple and its coffers. There are not thousands of Jews being crucified in a single week-- in fact, if you were to believe the Gospels as well, gospel, you would think that only Jeesus and two other men were crucified on that Friday and even then the romans were begrudgingly forced into doing the deed by those "damned Jews"! The gospel says so! It MUST be true!

The REAL truth is that more Jews have died at the hands of Rome and later the xian entity than xians did. Thousands were crucified because they willingly and with all the faith they had defied Rome for the sake of G-d. If you think that only xtians are true martyrs, you're nuts! And being a martyr doesn't necessarily make the message held by that martyr universally true. However, the fact that there were and are people who would die rather than submit to that which they know is false, or in the case of Jewish history were MADE martyrs as a result of the regimes exterminating millions, doesn't make THEIR message any less "truthful" than yours! I'll address this in a separate section to follow.

7) On the topic of the early martyrs. Let me give you a history lesson since you obviously are white washing the story even your NT gives. And I'll just cut to the chase. While the other disciples were killed by Rome for their ongoing insistance that their dead leader wasa Messiah and a king (a violation of Roman law since Csesar was god and king) , Paul uses his roman citizenship to in essense "punk out" of dying a true martyrs death.

And in my mind, he's both a coward and a hypocrite. While the others were trying to hold together their faith and their existence despite Roman oppression, Paul uses his ROMAN citzenship to get passage to Macedonia and the greek cities. His timing again tells us of his intention. Rather than face James (who actualy knew this jeesus) and give an accounting not only of his polemic and religious treatise but also to answer for the charges he levels at PETER, Paul punks out and goes on a 14 year sail the world tour to further his message. He makes both xian AND Jewish enemies and don't think for a minute Rome wasn't interested in this guard who went AWOL. He was in a ROMAN position in the Temple precincts. While not a Roman Centurian (as only romans could serve), nevertheless, IF the Acts are to be believed as sacrosanct, Paul would most certainly have incurred the wrath of his Herodian/Saduccean/Roman bosses. Paul eventually returns, thinking 14 years have been enough and people would have forgotten him. But he has 14 years worth of letters in which he professes to be a "servant of Christ" "crucified with Christ" "Suffering with Christ" yet what does he do when arrives in Jerusalem? He punks out! Rather than truly being crucified with Peter and the others and in essense being 'crucified with christ", Paul evokes his roman citizenship and appeals to ROME! so much for being the true disciple. You talk about Judas betraying Jeesus.. Paul betrays the entire church by flaking out and saving his own skin. This while the crosses are lifted of thousands of Jewish martyrs, of whom are those of the Jerusalem church (even though many would suffer such equally horrible deaths such as being flayed alive, being shot through with arrows, etc)!

G-d forbid paul identifies with their ACTUAL suffering. He'd rather suffer with them in Literary terms, NOT LITERAL terms. For two and a half years he is placed under house arrest in Rome, being provided for, having a secretary, having people visit him where he can lament how much of a "martyr" he is. Meanwhile Jerusalem is languishing and soon to be destroyed in a matter of fewer than 8 years. Paul would be beheaded, not for the gospel but ironically for the same crime the others had been killed for. However Paul dies as a Roman! So much for identifying with the disciples of Christ.


Which now brings me to the SECOND half of my diatribe against you. You seem to think that only xtians are martyrs and that only they have the truth. You have denigraded Judaism numerous times and quite frankly, I have come to become increasingly nauseated with this. Despite the rules that are enforced in this forum, you have nonetheless never missed an opportunity to make potshots at Judaism and even the rabbis in this form by trying to have the last word. Nor have you answered any direct questioning from either the moderators or from the participants. This grandstanding post that you have just spewed out only underscores this intent.. I will not let it go unnoticed.



Quote:
Of course there are martyrs in other religions... islam, buddhism etc. But those convictions were based upon indoctrination i.e brainwashing, while the apostles ALL were changed by the direct risen Jesus - in person, not a teaching or philosophy. How could have that been a lie that they ALL were changed, that they became super evangelizes that all should believe in Jesus?


So you think that Judaism is "indoctrination"? So you think we're all "brainwashed"? Answer please this question. YES OR NO.

The early xitans couldn't even agree WHAT Jeesus was let alone WHO he was!!! Good god, Dougg, do some history! Xtianity wasn't a unified entity until late 500 CE, but more than this, you really side with the victimizers don't you? If they believed that Jeeus was risen PHYSICALLY, why then the polemic against the Jews as murderers of Christ (must I actually post them) and why then the retribution for 2000 years? Who makes the final arbitration of whom was brainwashed? YOU?? the next generation of xians??? And don't give me this "they really weren't xtian" line, because that's a cop out and a trap door to avoid the argument.

Do you think that the Jews that were exterminated by the Crusades, the Inquisition, by the Pogroms and later the Nazis were 'brainwashed"? So what you are saying is that if the victims were "brainwashed" then because of this the Nazis were right in their assessment and beliefs that Jews were not human and not worthy of life? The Jews were truthfully "brainwashed" into believing that they were truly human and more to the point, German as well? Were they "brainwashed" by believing that in serving in all segments of German populace (or any populace that the Nazis invaded) and even serving in the respective armies they should be considered Germans as well? That dear god, they were human? You're saying nothing of the victimizers who make martyrs. Marytrs don't just commit suicide you know.


Do you think that the Jews who were massacred by Arab terrorists and thus made martyrs were brainwashed into believing that the land of Israel was truthfully theirs and that they have a claim to this and right to exist? Were they wrong to think so and the Muslims are correct that the JEws are as Hamas has stated "rats and vermin which need to be purged from Palestine in order for there to be true peace in the Middle East"?


Were the 3000 lost in the Twin Towers "brainwashed" as well? That the two planes commandeered by hijackers were righteous in their pursuits and holy in their slamming them into the Towers; thus making martyrs of those poor people. Or do you only think of "martyr" in a xiological religious sense????

Why is that you think that those who MAKE martyrs of ANY people (including Americans, Jews, Buddahists etc) are actually right? By your saying that those who are martyred for their faith are deluded, thus siding with the perpetrators, be they xian crusaders, Nazi stormtroopers or Muslim extremists. The issue isn't whether the message of the martyr is true, it is rather why should such people have to be made martyrs in the first place!! The REAL question is why do others think that they are so right that rather than just say "very well, live out your own life but far from me" they truly believe that they have to kill those with a dissenting view. Why is it that "truth" cannot be evident in another group?? Why is that YOU think YOUR truth is the Paragon and why do YOU think that it is justified others must die to validate your truth???

The fact is you don't want to admit that it doesn't care how many tiems you protest, it doesn't even matter how many polemics you present, you cannot accept the fact that Jews (and others) have the same right to exist and to BELIEVE what they believe. And rather than face the fact that xtianity has made more martyrs than saints, you turn it around and now blaspheme the very memory of our martyrs who were killed for no other reason than they were Jews (or americans or Israelis)-- you state they were 'brainwashed". they weren't brainwashed, dougg.. they were EXTERMINATED based on who they WERE, not merely what they believed!

You ask how could YOUR gospel be a lie and yet have people die for it? Oh come on, dougg, do you really think we're that stupid. Shouldn't Jonestown be a perfect example of this innane question. they believed they were true.. look at Waco. Throughout history there hvae been wackos and flakes who have died for far less. And yet the message is still promulgated.

No, you want to extol xtianity on the bodies of the victims it has made. You ignore history, logic, polemic and even JEWISH history for your own self-serving means. It doesn't matter what you and your cohorts suggest as truth. History has shown us otherwise. Nothing had changed after Jman's death. Israel wasn't saved, Jews (including innocent children of whom your Jeezer was supposed to be of such tender heartedness towards) were still raped, slaughtered, butchered and exterminated, Jerusalem fell and the Jews were sent into exile by Rome. The human condition has gotten WORSE since the jman. Another religion came on the scene and it too claims that it is the revelation of G-d. And why should we believe your message if Islam came later? Oh yeah, they're "brainwashed". And still you want to tout your Jman was the JEWISH Messiah (nevermind he never met the JEWISH criteria as outlined in the Torah).

600,000 people stood at Sinai and heard G-d, versus 12 men and 400 so called "witnesses". 20 Million sanctified the name of G-d in the last 2000 years, including my own native american ancestors; many of whom were given NO choice but were simply butchered. Don't preach to me about "blindness" or "brainwashed", seeing how convenient it is to ignore the gospel and the Manifest Destiny based ON the gospel that gave license to the extermination. Damn skippy I'm angry. I'm angry at the bigots like you who dare to call all the martrys made by your religion "blind' and "deceived" or worse "brainwashed". Never call into question those that kill to make the martyrs.. no, blame the victims.

AGain, the onus is on you to prove the claims you make. But you just revert to the "blind", "deaf" "hardened heart" and now "brainwashed" schtick

Does your rhetoric and schtick and nay IGNORANCE and ARROGANCE know no end?