Would You Die For A Lie?

[churchcamefirst]

The Disciples were willing to die horrific deaths for Jesus Christ. Correct? Well, why were the terrorists willing to die the way they did on 911? For the same way with their God? They sincerely believed with all of their hearts that if they died that way, by guiding those planes into America to kill others, they would instantly go to heaven to be with their God. They were willing to die for their faith.
Well, the disciples were also willing to die for their faith.
The difference between what the Disciples did and what the terrorists did is that people will die for their Religious beliefs if they sincerely believe their beliefs are true, right?
Right. People will NOT die for their Religious beliefs if they know their beliefs are false. True, nobody is going to die for a lie.
All of Christianity hinges on the Resurrection of Jesus. If he came back from the dead, he is proving that he is the Son of God.
The Disciples were then in a unique position. They just didn’t believe sincerely that Jesus Christ returned from the dead, but they were in a position to know for a fact! They touched Him, they ate with Him, they talked with Him, They knew the truth, and knowing the truth, they were willing to die for Him, do you see the difference?
The fact that the Terrorists were willing to die says nothing about the truth in Islam
The Disciples didn’t just believe Jesus returned from the dead, **they knew it for a fact **and knowing it for a fact, they were willing to die for it.
I looked all throughout history to find anyone knowingly would die for a lie and didn’t find one.
The disciples knew whether Jesus came back or not, but they didn’t just believe it, they knew it! And knowing it they were willing to die for it. Therefore, there willingness to die for it tells us something about the truth of the Resurrection. Unlike someone who just believes in something with no personal evidence, and this is a powerful truth about Christianity.

 

[churchcamefirst]

Any Muslims care to respond?

 

[tGette]

I have been given this argument that the Apostles and early disciples dying for the faith means nothing because there are current day Muslims who die for their faith in the misconstrued idea they have of being a “martyr”.

What you said is right though!

Muslims die for their faith because they do genuinely believe it to be true.

The Apostles died for their faith because they KNEW Jesus rose from the dead (as you stated).

The martyrdom in each case are dichotomies to the very extreme end of each other.

The Apostles did not just die for this belief as a current day Christian would die for their faith, but they died because of actually KNOWING Jesus and KNOWING that HE ROSE FROM THE DEAD!

That is the most amazing turning point in history!

OK…this sounds better in my head and I cannot articulate this argument the way I wanted to.

Also:
If the Apostles were lying, should not the Gospel accounts be identical instead of the slight variations that are there? You figure if they were going to make this stuff up they would have made sure their stories were straight.

 

[churchcamefirst]

I have been given this argument that the Apostles and early disciples dying for the faith means nothing because there are current day Muslims who die for their faith in the misconstrued idea they have of being a “martyr”.

What you said is right though!

Muslims die for their faith because they do genuinely believe it to be true.

The Apostles died for their faith because they KNEW Jesus rose from the dead (as you stated).

The martyrdom in each case are dichotomies to the very extreme end of each other.

The Apostles did not just die for this belief as a current day Christian would die for their faith, but they died because of actually KNOWING Jesus and KNOWING that HE ROSE FROM THE DEAD!

That is the most amazing turning point in history!

OK…this sounds better in my head and I cannot articulate this argument the way I wanted to.

Also:
If the Apostles were lying, should not the Gospel accounts be identical instead of the slight variations that are there? You figure if they were going to make this stuff up they would have made sure their stories were straight.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Protestants who preached against the Catholic Church, preach a lie. So they would die for a lie. They are liars, especially those who preach that the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon.

 

[churchcamefirst]

Protestants who preached against the Catholic Church, preach a lie. So they would die for a lie. They are liars, especially those who preach that the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon.

Now if I said this, they’d be all over me…truth hurts…

 

[cathopologist]

Any Muslims care to respond?

Lying is permitted in Islam. How else could they have gotten away with so many injustices in the Eastern Christian Empire and as far away as Asia? Their specialty - historical revisionism.

 

[ralphinal]

Now if I said this, they’d be all over me…truth hurts…

Actually, what Manny posted is a little different from what you started this thread with. Your initial post was 100% correct and very insightful.

What Manny posted left out the part that you stressed: they do not know or acknowledge that it is a lie

 

[Mirdath]

Alright, now ignore modern martyrs (since, as you say, they’re not equivalent) and explain why Sumayyah bint Khabbab allowed herself to be tortured and martyred, being one of Muhammad’s companions before the Hijra.

Martyrdom isn’t a recent development for Islam.

 

[Patrick_Murebil]

The Disciples were willing to die horrific deaths for Jesus Christ. Correct? Well, why were the terrorists willing to die the way they did on 911? For the same way with their God? They sincerely believed with all of their hearts that if they died that way, by guiding those planes into America to kill others, they would instantly go to heaven to be with their God. They were willing to die for their faith.
Well, the disciples were also willing to die for their faith.
The difference between what the Disciples did and what the terrorists did is that people will die for their Religious beliefs if they sincerely believe their beliefs are true, right?
Right. People will NOT die for their Religious beliefs if they know their beliefs are false. True, nobody is going to die for a lie.
All of Christianity hinges on the Resurrection of Jesus. If he came back from the dead, he is proving that he is the Son of God.
The Disciples were then in a unique position. They just didn’t believe sincerely that Jesus Christ returned from the dead, but they were in a position to know for a fact! They touched Him, they ate with Him, they talked with Him, They knew the truth, and knowing the truth, they were willing to die for Him, do you see the difference?
The fact that the Terrorists were willing to die says nothing about the truth in Islam
The Disciples didn’t just believe Jesus returned from the dead, **they knew it for a fact **and knowing it for a fact, they were willing to die for it.
I looked all throughout history to find anyone knowingly would die for a lie and didn’t find one.
The disciples knew whether Jesus came back or not, but they didn’t just believe it, they knew it! And knowing it they were willing to die for it. Therefore, there willingness to die for it tells us something about the truth of the Resurrection. Unlike someone who just believes in something with no personal evidence, and this is a powerful truth about Christianity.

University of Chicago political science professor Rober Pape has shown that suicide terrorism develops almost always among occupied peoples. And while a suicide terroists’ religious views of martrydom cannot be discarded, they die in defense of their countries, homes, and families, in order to end political occupation by foreigners.

Robert Pape has “created the first comprehensive database of every suicide terrorist attack in the world from 1980 until today. In his book ‘Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism’, Pape provides a groundbreaking demographic profile of modern suicide terrorist attackers–and his findings offer a powerful counterpoint to what we now accept as conventional wisdom on the topic. He also examines the early practitioners of this guerrilla tactic, including the ancient Jewish Zealots, who in A.D. 66 wished to liberate themselves from Roman occupation; the Ismaili Assassins, a Shi’ite Muslim sect in northern Iran in the eleventh and twelfth centuries; World War II’s Japanese kamikaze pilots, three thousand of whom crashed into U.S. naval vessels; and the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, a secular, Marxist-Leninist organization responsible for more suicide terrorist attacks than any other group in history.”

Very enlightening and well worth the read!

God bless all!!!

 

[Mirdath]

Alright, now ignore modern martyrs (since, as you say, they’re not equivalent) and explain why Sumayyah bint Khabbab allowed herself to be tortured and martyred, being one of Muhammad’s companions before the Hijra.

Martyrdom isn’t a recent development for Islam.

Two and a half days, cat got yer tongues?

 

[ralphinal]

Two and a half days, cat got yer tongues?

I had no interest in this line of thought, but I will respond. Another poster on this message board said it best “Jewish and Christian martyrs say I will die for my faith. Muslim Martyrs say you will die for my faith.”

The modern martyr in Islam is a terrorist. One day, it may shift back to one who would rather die than convert

 

[Laurent_LUG]

Protestants who preached against the Catholic Church, preach a lie.

The same counts for everyone who preach
a lie against anyone else or whatever !!
And if you really are prepare to die for a lie ,
I call you a hypnotized nut !!

Salute & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:
– Laurent LUG (.@…), october 9, 2008

 

[tGette]

Alright, now ignore modern martyrs (since, as you say, they’re not equivalent) and explain why Sumayyah bint Khabbab allowed herself to be tortured and martyred, being one of Muhammad’s companions before the Hijra.

Martyrdom isn’t a recent development for Islam.

I would say because she died while with Muhammad, it would be the same as if one of Jesus’ Apostles died for Him before the crucifixion. Or the same as how a Secret Service agent is willing to die for a President.

The point of this thread is that the Apostles were being killed for claiming that Jesus rose from the dead. So either they were really crazy people willing to die for something they made up:
-OR-
They were willing to die because they witnessed a man rise from the dead, a man who claimed to be God. I think rising from the dead substantiates that claim!

 

[Mirdath]

I would say because she died while with Muhammad, it would be the same as if one of Jesus’ Apostles died for Him before the crucifixion. Or the same as how a Secret Service agent is willing to die for a President.

The first example, maybe. The second one, no. I am not aware that Sumayyah was with Muhammad when she was killed – she was a slave, after all, and Muhammad had a lot of business elsewhere.

The point of this thread is that the Apostles were being killed for claiming that Jesus rose from the dead. So either they were really crazy people willing to die for something they made up:
-OR-
They were willing to die because they witnessed a man rise from the dead, a man who claimed to be God. I think rising from the dead substantiates that claim!

Or in even more basic terms: this is a penectomized trilemma (missing its ‘third leg’ ) dropped on the apostles’ shoulders and aimed squarely at Muslims (when pretty much every major religion in existence has had peaceful martyrs, even after the death of the founder – they’re not special and you’re not special). Why is this even worth anyone’s time when you could use your much-vaunted ability to go to the guy who is actually supposed to have made the claim of godhead in the first place is beyond me.

 

[tGette]

The first example, maybe. The second one, no. I am not aware that Sumayyah was with Muhammad when she was killed – she was a slave, after all, and Muhammad had a lot of business elsewhere.

Right…but the motive for dying was dissimilar to that of the Apostle’s. She did…like I said…as a Secret Service person would die for the President or as someone would die for the close relative, for a better example.

Or in even more basic terms: this is a penectomized trilemma (missing its ‘third leg’ ) dropped on the apostles’ shoulders and aimed squarely at Muslims (when pretty much every major religion in existence has had peaceful martyrs, even after the death of the founder – they’re not special and you’re not special). Why is this even worth anyone’s time when you could use your much-vaunted ability to go to the guy who is actually supposed to have made the claim of godhead in the first place is beyond me.

I am going to have to plead ignorance on the word “penectomized”. Though, given the root word, I am not sure I want to know!

I am not sure I quit get your point in this second comment. Could you please expound somehow? I want to make a comment, but I do not want to have misunderstood what you meant. I think I was just thrown off by your new word!

 

[Hajnalcsillag]

Protestants who preached against the Catholic Church, preach a lie. So they would die for a lie. They are liars, especially those who preach that the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon.

Classy.

So we should assume that the whole body of Heaven will be made up of nothing but Roman Catholics, who will have a big ol’ fish fry on the burning bodies of Protestant heathens?

 

[tGette]

Classy.

So we should assume that the whole body of Heaven will be made up of nothing but Roman Catholics, who will have a big ol’ fish fry on the burning bodies of Protestant heathens?

LOL! Of course…we smoke our fish with human flesh! Well…unrepentant non-Catholic flesh!

This is like…the first pillar of Catholic belief! Why do you think so many people love to abstain from meat on Fridays? It is a glimpse of this Heavenly reward!

 

[Mirdath]

Right…but the motive for dying was dissimilar to that of the Apostle’s. She did…like I said…as a Secret Service person would die for the President or as someone would die for the close relative, for a better example.

No, nothing like that. She died because she believed in the truth of Muhammad’s teachings. To compare her to the US Government Accounting Ninja Attack Squad Sunglasses&Earpieces Division (not kidding, the Secret Service is run by the Treasury!) is completely off-base. She died in the same way many saints have, and for the same reasons – not because she was paid to take a bullet.

Yes, she did not witness a resurrection – nor did the apostles. They saw an empty tomb and then met somebody who looked extremely familiar. They were not present to see Jesus get up off the rock and shamble around until the grave-wrappings fell off.

I am not sure I quit get your point in this second comment. Could you please expound somehow? I want to make a comment, but I do not want to have misunderstood what you meant. I think I was just thrown off by your new word!

This is a cheap and useless argument – not only because it is an inefficiently and ineffectively hacked-together bad-and-God-only variant of C S Lewis’ trilemma (on which subject I believe we’ve talked before ), but because it is predicated on the wrong people.

You are Christians, not Apostolians; your apologetics should point to the Christ, and the apostles should be your examples instead of your philosophical idols. You have Jesus, so you say; then do what the apostles did and go to him! Predicating your argument on the rationality and reliability of the average human being is a bad, bad bet.

The argument is not helped either by being specifically targeted at Muslims. Dying for what you don’t know 100% is not specifically a Muslim issue: the same question can be leveled at Protestants (as Mannyfit75 did in the fifth post) or even at every single Catholic who didn’t personally witness the resurrection! Why, then, try to sell it as a problem with Islam, when clearly it’s a problem with Faith itself?

 

[tGette]

No, nothing like that. She died because she believed in the truth of Muhammad’s teachings. To compare her to the US Government Accounting Ninja Attack Squad Sunglasses&Earpieces Division (not kidding, the Secret Service is run by the Treasury!) is completely off-base. She died in the same way many saints have, and for the same reasons – not because she was taking a bullet for her employer.

Yes, she did not witness a resurrection – nor did the apostles. They saw an empty tomb and then met somebody who looked extremely familiar. They were not present to see Jesus get up off the rock and shamble around until the grave-wrappings fell off.

This is a cheap and useless argument – not only because it is an inefficiently and ineffectively hacked-together bad-and-God-only variant of C S Lewis’ trilemma (on which subject I believe we’ve talked before ), but because it is predicated on the wrong people.

You are Christians, not Apostolians; your apologetics should point to the Christ, and the apostles should be your examples instead of your philosophical idols. You have Jesus, so you say; then do what the apostles did and go to him! Predicating your argument on the rationality and reliability of the average human being is a bad, bad bet.

The argument is not helped either by being specifically targeted at Muslims. Dying for what you don’t know 100% is not specifically a Muslim issue: the same question can be leveled at Protestants (as Mannyfit75 did in the fifth post) or even at every single Catholic who didn’t personally witness the resurrection! Why, then, try to sell it as a problem with Islam, when clearly it’s a problem with Faith itself?

You make some great points. Though, I sense a slight hostility coming from you. I am probably way off base, the internet makes it so hard to understand a persons emotions. No body language makes the internet a terrible communication medium in that respect.

I have to apologize…I get rampant with analogies and the secret service one was terrible. In one of my earlier posts I equated a Muslim martyr (non-suicide) on the same plane as a modern Christian martyr.

I am not trying to say Christian martyrs are better than Muslim martyrs, I am trying to say that the Apostles died for different reasons altogether.

I find it interesting that you think the Apostles mistook some guy for Jesus and all because of this we have Christianity? I do not think I ever heard that one before. That is what you meant, right?

The Apostles are our examples and they died because they saw the resurrected Christ. What better example is there than that to live by?

I think part of our problem was a bit of miscommunication on here. Well a huge part of it was me using terrible analogies. I ask of your condolences for my stupidity!