A Common Objection to the Apologetic Value of the Apostles’ Martyrdoms
Others Have Died for Their Beliefs
1. Objection
One of the most common responses to the deaths of the apostles is the claim that others have died for their beliefs. For instance, on September 11, 2001, nineteen radical Muslims hijacked four planes and, killing themselves in the process, attacked and killed thousands of people. Is this evidence, then, for the truth of Islam?
2. Response
This objection misses a key difference between the deaths of the apostles and modern martyrs. We hesitate even to use the term “martyr” to refer to Muslim terrorists (or any terrorists, for that matter). Christian martyrs accept suffering and death at the hands of others, whereas Muslim terrorists intentionally take the lives of others. Islamic terrorists expect their suffering to be brief—an instant annihilation, in some cases. And they expect to cause even further injury and suffering to those who do not actually die immediately. Modern martyrs die for what they sincerely believe is true, but their knowledge comes secondhand from others. For instance, Muslim terrorists who attacked the Twin Towers on 9/11 were not eyewitnesses of any miracles by Mohammed. In fact, they were not eyewitnesses of any events of the life of Mohammed. Rather, they lived over thirteen centuries later. No doubt the Muslim radicals acted out of sincere belief, but their convictions were received secondhand at best from others. They did not know Mohammed personally, see him fulfill any prophecy, or witness him doing any miracles such as walking on water, healing the blind, or rising from the dead. There is a massive difference between willingly dying for the sake of the religious ideas accepted from the testimony of others (Muslim radicals) and willingly dying for the proclamation of a faith based upon one’s own eyewitness account (apostles). The deaths of the nineteen terrorists provide no more evidence for the truth of Islam than my death would provide for the truth of Christianity. My martyrdom would show I really believed it, but nothing more.
In contrast to the beliefs of Buddhist monks and Muslim radicals and any other modern martyrs, including Christians, the beliefs of the apostles was not received secondhand, but from personal experience with the risen Jesus (Acts 1:21, 22; 1 Cor. 15:5–8). They proclaimed what they had seen and heard with their own eyes and ears, not stories received from others (Acts 1:3; 2:22–24). Peter not only claims that he was an eyewitness but that the events took place in public and that his audience had full knowledge of them. The events were not done secretly in a corner. Buddhist monks and Muslim terrorists are certainly willing to suffer and die for a faith they received secondhand, but the apostles were willing to suffer and die for what they had seen with their own eyes. If Jesus had not risen from the grave and appeared to his apostles, they alone would have known the falsity of his claims [that he would be resurrected]. In other words, if the resurrection did not happen, the apostles would have willingly suffered and died for something they knew was false. While people die for what they believe is true, it is a stretch to think all the apostles were willing to suffer and die for a claim they knew was false. The suffering and deaths of the apostles testify to the sincerity of their beliefs that they had seen the risen Jesus.” (McDowell, FOTA, 260).
The willingness of the apostles to suffer and die for their faith does not prove the resurrection is true. But it does show the depth of the apostles’ convictions. They were not liars. They did not invent the resurrection stories. As Blaise Pascal once said, “I only believe histories whose witnesses are ready to be put to death.” (Pascal, Pensees, 249) The apostles proclaimed the risen Jesus to skeptical and antagonistic audiences with full knowledge they would likely suffer and die for their beliefs. All the apostles suffered and were “ready to be put to death,” and we have good reason to believe some of them actually faced execution. There is no evidence they ever waivered. Their convictions were not based on secondhand testimony, but personal experience with the risen Jesus, whom they truly believed was the risen Messiah, banking their lives on it. It is difficult to imagine what more a group of ancient witnesses could have done to show greater depth of sincerity and commitment to the truth.
Josh McDowell, Sean McDowell. Evidence That Demands a Verdict: Life-Changing Truth for a Skeptical World.
