So, were all these people liars, lunatics, or something else?

Question

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_martyrs

Oh yeah and I'm level 7 now *happy dance*

Shin - I just read that story, I LOVED it, LOL! =] (I'm currently researching Catholic Saints).

Answer 1

Nope, they weren't any of those things...what they were, though, is faithful and courageous...very, very, faithful and very, very courageous.

Snout, being put to death by authorities for witnessing about, and refusing to renounce, Christ is quite different than actually planning your death and planning to take others with you (suicide bombers). I don't see how you can compare the two.

Congratulations, Wife!

Answer 2

Something else, I think.

Evidence that strong belief can overcome the natural imperative to self preservation.

The 9-11 hijackers had this. The weren't mad. Nor were they stupid or uneducated or driven to desperation through poverty. They were absolutely sincere in their beliefs. They certainly weren't "cowards" as Bush asserted. They had simply embraced belief in the logic of martyrdom. They are a clear example of why it is fallacious to assume that just because someone is prepared to die for a belief, that belief must necessarily be true, or worth dying (or suffering or killing) for.

"... the idea that suffering and martyrdom for one's faith are the very meaning of the happenings of history, for a double reason: (a) they represent a causal necessity in the great fight between the divine and the satanic order. The great Adversary does not allow a pure realization of God's plan, at least not in this present aeon or world period. (b) Such suffering, however, serves at the same time a very great purpose: it ushers in the new aeon. Death becomes victory, martyrdom is an expiating sacrifice, and Satan will be overcome only by such nonresistant suffering."

This quote from the article you linked could just as easily have been cut and pasted from an Al Qaeda training manual.

That's not to say that self sacrifice is necesarily a bad thing: in small ways and even in larger rational ways it is the foundation of altruism, of morality, of everyday human love.

But preparedness to make such gestures on behalf of a belief does not make that belief true.

Alarm bells should ring when teachers cite martyrs as evidence of the truth of a belief, especially after September 11 2001.

Answer 3

What an astonishing strawman you build right here. one thank you to construct a faux argument is to declare that yet somebody else argument grew to become into designed in line with a minimum of a few thing that it grew to become into not in any respect designed to handle. and that's what you do right here. yet interestingly you're basically responding to specific Christians who use Lewis' argument for purposes it grew to become into not in any respect meant for. Lewis made this argument against a definite form of unbelief. It grew to become into mentioned in line with people who believed Christ existed and that He grew to become into certainly a non secular logician and instructor of robust ethics (the myth of the solid Samaritan is composed of innovations) yet who reject the claims that he's God's unique Son or that he's God interior the flesh. the entire factor of his argument is which you would be able to certainly call him a lunatic or a liar.. you may additionally declare he did not exist! Lewis' argument isn't meant to handle those in any respect! it quite is meant to handle the declare that He existed as a solid instructor in basic terms. the factor is that if Jesus existed and mentioned the flaws appropriate interior the Gospel debts, then He could desire to not be basically a solid instructor, or possibly a solid instructor in any respect. a normal solid instructor would not make the claims Christ made approximately Himself, for in the event that they did, they might now not be a solid instructor. they may well be the two a madman or a liar. In yet another classic spin on Lewis' factor, a student of Lewis summed it up with an addition: "He grew to become into the two a Liar, a Lunatic, a myth or he's Lord... He won't be able to be basically a solid instructor." Get it? So in a tragic and setting up way, Lewis' argument relatively has a similar opinion with a number of what you're saying.

Answer 4

i don't doubt that there were sincere martyrs, but the evidence from my perspective points to jesus as the creation of galilean rebels. rebels die for their cause all the time.

i'll also say that it's sad that we have to be put in the position of defending our faith when most faithful people act from a genuine desire to find the truth. the origins of an honestly persued faith are inconsequetial, it's the search for truth that matters.

so i guess my answer is c] something else.

Answer 5

Of the ones I've read, I think I like St Lawrence the best. they roasted him on a grill and he said to them: "I think I'm done on this side. You can turn me over now."

yay for Level 7. 7th heaven? XD

Answer 6

Some may have been liars and lunatics and something else. But they were all blessed by God for their stand of faith, which is rewarded by means of which you still have to learn. I pray that God is merciful to you, so that you may learn.

Answer 7

A combination of the above.

Answer 8

Joseph Smith also died for his beliefs :)

Congrats on level 7!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Joseph_Smith,_Jr.

Answer 9

Fanatic!

Answer 10

Christians of course.

The papacy martyred the saints for 1,260 years and is the harlot.