Talk:Christian martyrs
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I read The Christ Conspiracy by Acharya S. In her introduction, she mentioned that early Christian martyrs were less than tradition reports.
Question: From 34 A.D. to 135 A.D., Christian martyrdom did not consist of Christians being fed to the lions in the Coliseum? They were not singled out, a wider category of people were made sport of?
About This Article In G.P. Baker's Constantine the Great and the Christian Revolution, Christians suffered under Galerius. The author makes the point that a few Christians who had the character to make a stand against the oppression, did suffer torture while others were average people who thought life had other matters which required attention. Most people went back to their lives after being allowed release on the condition of recanting their faith. The few who chose not to bend found their life's purpose to stand against religious oppresion.
Baker reports that governors enforced the edicts against Christians with imprisonment and torture but killing Christians was not prevalent. He mentions the Fourth Edict that made the penalthy of being Christian death but the few, dozens, or hundreds are not determined. Can someone comment on this.
I'll look up crucifixion in Wikipedia next time. I think there is no doubt that there have been mass punishment by crucifixion conducted by the Ancient Romans. This may have been done in Ancient Palestine, perhaps 70 AD and 135 AD. Were more Hebrews killed in 70 AD and 135 AD than Christians at any time?
The Hebrew revolts, in my historical recollection, were blatant whereas the Christian threat at anytime and particularly identified by Galerius was more of a cultural phenomenon of a growing religion.
Baker says while the Roman military preferred Mithraism, the commercial class preferred Christianity.
Contents |
[edit] Rewrite
This article needs a major rewrite. Martyrdom referes to a specific religious concept in Christian traditions, but 'martyrs' cannot be presented in list if the article is going to comply with NPOV. Rather one needs to assert the Christian concept of martyrdom in general, differences between different Christian denomination in regards to Martyrdom concepts and if someone is listed as a 'martyr' then it should be clear exactly who claims martydom for that specific person. The people who executed Jan Hus hardly saw themselves as anything less than Christians. --Soman 16:00, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Also, there are martyrs for other religions or beliefs (e.g. Socrates). Does the term refer specifically to Christians, or to anyone who is unjustly executed for their beliefs? --StuartGathman (talk) 03:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Removal of image
User:Mamalujo has repeatedly removed the Image Image:Bethlehem-fatahchristianmartyr.JPG, claiming that it doesn't represent Christian martyrhood. At a closer look, the image contains biblical references, a passage from the Book of John, images of the Church of the Nativity and the explicit usage of the word 'martyr'. Wikipedia doesn't belong to any particular community or religious group, and its not the function of this article to judge who is and who isn't a Christian martyr (and for this sake, a through rewrite is needed). Rather the purpose has to be to present which role the concept of martyrdom plays within Christianity. Images, illustrating porttrayal of this concept are essential. I would not say that this particular image is universally typical for Christian concepts of martyrdom, but it is interesting as as it represent as discourse of introducing religious themes in the context of modern political conflict. Whether he person in question really is martyr or not is a secondary discussion at best. --Soman 21:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- You write "the purpose has to be to present which role the concept of martyrdom plays within Christianity." The problem is that this image does not present the role which martydom plays within Christianity. Most likely, it is an attempt by Hamas or the like to get Christians to sign on to a radical Muslim view of martyrdom. It should be noted that NO Christian denominatation whatsoever would recognize the individual as a martyr or an example of martyrdom. Indeed, the image seems to be nothing more than POV pushing and misrepresentation. You say "Images, illustrating porttrayal of this concept are essential." The problem is that the image does not portray the concept. Not only is it not "universally typical", it is not typical in any way. Mamalujo 21:46, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry not Hamas, but Fatah. A Christian martyr is someone who dies for the faith. This guy either died for Fatah (a secular organization dominated by Muslims) or for the cause of a Palistinian state. Neither cause constitutes, by any stretch of the imagination, dying for Christianity, no matter what Fatah says. Mamalujo 22:10, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, Palestinian Christians would disagree with you. That is, if the Christian population of Bethlehem counts as Christians that is. --Soman 22:45, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- Palestinian Christians (what few are left in Palestine) are mostly Orthodox and Catholic. When they recognize your guy as a saint, I'll quit arguing. Mamalujo 22:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- And Fatah membership in Bethlehem is largely Christian. See [1], the candidatures of the pro-Fatah United Bethlehem Bloc had 8 Christian and 7 Muslim candidates in 2005. --Soman 23:06, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- So what? That doesn't mean the schmuck in the poster is a Christian martyr.Mamalujo 17:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- Palestinian Christians (what few are left in Palestine) are mostly Orthodox and Catholic. When they recognize your guy as a saint, I'll quit arguing. Mamalujo 22:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, Palestinian Christians would disagree with you. That is, if the Christian population of Bethlehem counts as Christians that is. --Soman 22:45, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- Throughout the history of the church there have been those who wanted to use the notion of martyrdom for their own political ends. This does not make them martyrs. Martyrdom is specifically the imitation of Christ, who allowed himself to be killed, offering no resistance, "like a lamb lead to the slaughter," and loving those who persecuted him, praying for them that they be forgiven for killing him (as also in the case of Stephen). He didn't go to his death wielding an AK-47. From the Christian perspective (and the article is about Christian martyrs), armed resistance is the opposite of martyrdom. MishaPan 15:01, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- During the arrest of Jesus, when Peter struck off the ear of the High Priest's servant, Christ told him to "put away your sword," warning him (and us) that "those who live by the sword shall die by the sword." The man in this picture is NOT a Christian martyr. Soman, you write that "the purpose [of this Wikipedia aricle] has to be to present which role the concept of martyrdom plays within Christianity." I agree with your statement; and by that standard, the photograph in question does NOT present the role the concept of martyrdom plays within Christianity--the photograph represents the exact opposite of the concept of martyrdom within Christianity. Please, PLEASE, stop putting this picture back in the article! MishaPan 21:01, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- I removed the image because, first, it doesn't say exactly who the person is or the circumstances of his death. Second, simply risking or losing your own life as you're killing others who happen to hold a different religious belief doesn't qualify as the dictionary definition of "martyr". Third, in the Christian tradition or martyrdom, this man would have to lay down his weapon and suffer pain and/or death at the hands of those who seek to kill him for his religious beliefs alone. He can't be called a Christian martyr just because he called himself a Christian and was a random casuality of a battle in which he was willing combatant. --JJLatWiki 17:04, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting argument, and you actually make sense. For future reference, please sign your posts, JJLatWiki. Also, I have noticed you have taken a personal interest in my presence on Wikipedia. Watching my edits can be entertaining, but lets not go down the path of "WikiStalking", shall we? Padishah5000 19:00, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
- I apologize. One of the very few times I have failed to sign my posts. It will probably happen again, but I try. I wasn't following you though. I followed the image from Fatah. I noticed it on this page several months ago and didn't really think anything of it until I recognized the same image on the Fatah page. You and I share a couple areas of interest, so we are bound to bump into each other on occasion. In a former life, I specialized in middle-east military intelligence, especially aviation and especially Iran and Iraq, which is where you and I first became acquainted and will probably see the most of each other. I did recognize your user name on the edit and it almost kept me from making my first edit to this article to avoid the stalking accusation, but I could not resist. I assure you that I rarely follow the edit habits of other editors. It's only out of interest in seeing what I may be missing on Wikipedia. --JJLatWiki 20:11, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
The image uses Christian imagery, quotes the Bible, and even uses the word martyr. It is no doubt that Fatah considers this person to be a Christian martyr. Whether some of the editors here disagree with that viewpoint doesn't matter. So how about the picture being displayed, along with the text "The organization Fatah considers some of its members to be Christian martyrs". No editor here has the right to decide who is a Christian martyr and who isn't. Only reliable sources, properly attributed can call people Christian martyrs. This poster is sure as heck a reliable source.--Mostargue 19:29, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- First of all, Fatah is a political organization and could be considered a reliable source for information regarding Fatah. It is not neutral and certainly not scholarly on matters of religion or especially Christian traditions. Therefore, Fatah is not a reliable source for this entry. Fatah could publish a book about how this man is made entirely of tortilla chips, if their claim is clearly wrong, it does not require an entry in the tortilla chip article simply because Fatah made the claim. History decides who is called a Christian martyr, not Fatah. --JJLatWiki 18:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Second, because "shaheed" is used as a loose synonym for "martyr", it is more of an Arab tradition to call one a martyr simply for being killed while fighting and killing in the name of your chosen religion. Shaheed can be interpreted to mean one who died or was killed while fighting for religion. In the Christian tradition, martyrs are those put to death or forced to suffer for their religion, not because they were an enemy combatant. There is a clear distinction. --JJLatWiki 18:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Third, we have no idea of the circumstances of this man's death. From the picture, I would guess that he was engaged in a violent fight in support of his cause. I'm not judging the value of his cause or how he chose to fight for it. I'm simply saying that in the Christian tradition, he can not be called a "Christian martyr". In some traditions, he might be a martyr for his cause, and his cause happened to relate to Christianity. But a martyr who is Christian is not the same as a Christian martyr. --JJLatWiki 18:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- One: According to Fatah's Christian tradition, he is a Christian martyr. If you ask any Palestinians, he is a Christian martyr. Just because it does not fit with your western Christianity does not mean that it does not warrant mention in the article. The title of the article is "Christian martyrs", not "Christian martyrs as identified by western scholars". If someone calls person A a Christian martyr then we can place it here. It's that simple.
-
- Two: The crusaders were also called martyrs fordham.edu. Again, I find it offensive that you pretend that Christianity is monolithic.
-
- Third:"Wanted by Israel. Killed by a Border Police undercover unit that chased him while he was driving a car in which two friends, both wanted, were passengers. One of the friends was killed, and the other was arrested."
-
- --Mostargue 22:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I disagree. According to Arab tradition, he is a martyr. And you agree with Fatah's claim that since he called himself a Christian, he is automatically a Christian martyr. But who is Fatah? Is Fatah a political organization or is Fatah a university? How and when did Fatah become a reliable source for the pronouncement of Christian martyrs? With your assertion that, "If someone calls person A a Christian martyr then we can place it here", I think you have set the standard incredibly low for the status. By that standard, you must now include David Letterman on this list because I hearby call David Letterman a Christian martyr. I, being a someone, have called David Letterman, person A, a Christian martyr. Does he qualify for this article? --JJLatWiki 23:54, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- As far as ancient uses of martyrs, the text doesn't call them "Christian martyrs". And maybe I'm misreading some of the text, but it seems that the Jews were called martyrs first. But please stop with your defensiveness. I didn't mean to offend anyone. I'm not a Christian and I'm only stating my opinion. The dictionary and historical accounts of Christian martyrs suggest that a Christian martyr is put to death, a Christian martyr isn't just killed by a stray bullet. Otherwise this article would have to be renamed, "Famous Christian martyrs" to differentiate from the millions of other soldiers who died fighting for Christian leaders whom you would call Christian martyrs. --JJLatWiki 23:54, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
-
That's exactly the problem with the term "martyr". It's just like "terrorist". Who decides whether someone is a terrorist? Wikipedia should not call people martyrs, we should properly attribute sources to organizations who decide whether or not someone is a martyr. Please don't patronize. Whether or not Fatah is a scholarly source simply does not matter. They are a notable organization, they make the claim, therefore their claim is presented on Wikipedia. Just because YOU disagree with their claim does not mean that it is not permitted to be in article. You can call David Letterman a Christian martyr, good for you. You aren't a notable person according to Wikipedia standards. Now, if George Bush said David Letterman was a Christian martyr, then it should be listed here.
If you don't accept that, how about the story of Roland? [3]--Mostargue 03:04, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- "we should properly attribute sources to organizations who decide whether or not someone is a martyr"? Fatah is such an organization? Even if that's accepted, a Christian martyr is different. Not better or less than other martyrs, but different. But I don't accept that Fatah is an organization with an accepted history in deciding whether or not someone is a martyr, much less a Christian martyr. For the same reason, nor would I accept David Letterman being listed as a Christian martyr just because George Bush called him so. Notability doesn't confer authority. There are many people, groups, scholars, and philosophers who call Saint Stephen and Joan of Arc "Christian martyrs". Who, beside Fatah, has called this man a Christian martyr? And is this the first person Fatah has proclaimed to be a Christian martyr? --JJLatWiki 04:25, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] John the Evangelist
I noticed that John the Evangelist was listed among Eary Christian Martyrs. I think rather the point is that he was the only one of the original twelve Apostles who was not martyred. MishaPan 15:01, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Anne Boleyn?
I don't think that Anne Boleyn can really be classified as a Protestant martyr. Without doubt, the question of who would be Henry VIII's wife (all six of them) was always steeped in the Protestant/Catholic conflict of Tudor England. But Henry did not kill Anne because she was a Protestant, he killed her because he found it expedient to be married to someone else. Anne did not see herself as dying for the Protestant cause, at least from what we know of her writings or statements at the time. The Wikipedia article about Anne Boleyn says, "She was a devout Christian in the new tradition of Renaissance Humanism (calling her a Protestant would be an overstatement)." Nor do I know of any Protestant denomination that has oficially enrolled her as a martyr (I could be wrong about this, and am interested in any info. others may have). MishaPan 16:57, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Name change from Christian Martyrs to Martyrdom in Christianity
The recent name change was done without any discussion. I'm wondering the articles editors' thoughts are about the change. Why was it done? Is it an improvement? Should it be changed back? Mamalujo 20:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
I think that the list should be sepetrated into groups so that we have a clear understanding of who was with who so that there would be no confusion. For example, if one reads "Fox's Book of Martyrs" the people within the first three chapters can be easily identified, where as the rest of the book is so lacking in detail, you cannot even be sure if those people were real and if those events actually happened. Another example that I would bring up is that a number of those "martyrs" often gave contradictory and heretical teachings. "Getting back to "Fox's Book of Martyrs" one of those martyrs was a group called the Albigenses. They denied that Jesus came in the flesh. They also advocated suicide. They are clear violations of what it says in the bible. --209.244.30.237 15:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Joseph Smith
I'm thinking about adding a section about Joseph Smith, Jr. in representation of the Latter Day Saint movement, but do you guys think he qualifies as a martyr? He was specifically targeted for his religious beliefs and was killed by a mob along with his brother, and the LDS Church as well as other Mormon groups venerate his death and that of his brother as the ultimate sacrifice. In my opinion, they're pretty much the only specific martyrs Mormonism has, if you don't include the pioneers who died during thoe Mormon Exodus. What do you guys think? If so, would that qualify as a "Protestant Martyr"? Mormonism is a Restorationist movement...thanks for your input! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.163.54.220 (talk) 14:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
- That's a good question. He was apparently jailed for treason, he was a very disliked person by both non-Mormons, and many Mormons, as mayor, he authorized the destruction of a newspaper press to silence his detractors, he authorized martial law in response to warrants against him from outside his town. I don't know if he was killed for his belief in Christianity, per se. I don't even know if he was killed for his beliefs in general. How he chose to pursue his beliefs had an extreme effect on all the people in his community. Some might say that he was killed because he just rubbed people the wrong way, and he was a large contributor to the animosity that ultimately resulted in his death. Maybe he is a Mormon martyr, but I don't think he's a Christian martyr. If he's a martyr, then he's a martyr who happens to be Christian. In my opinion, anyway. --JJLatWiki 21:43, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
- The question of whether he is a martyr is secondary to the question of whether he is aChristian martyr. The fact of the matter, with all due respect to the virtuous Mormon faithful, is that most Christian churches do not consider LDS to be Christian. The Catholic Church, for example, requires LDS converts to be baptised, where they would not require that of a Baptist, Anglican or Methodist convert. Most other Christian Churches maintain the same requirement of Mormon converts. Likewise, Mormons have maintained that all of Christianity is wrong and in complete apostasy. This quote regarding a survey of Christian clergy is telling: "In the year 2000, Scott Gordon and Dennis Egget of The Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR) -- a LDS positive group -- sent a survey to 430 Christian clergy who led non-Mormon congregations. They received 95 responses, which is what one would expect from a survey of this type. They found that only 6% of Christian clergy classified the LDS church as Christian." So although LDS may consider itself a Christian church, particularly so today, other Christians do no consider them so. As such, it would seem appropriate, if he is considered a martyr by the Mormon leadership, to have Smith in a separate article on Mormon martyrs. Mamalujo 18:43, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Martyrs of the 1st century
The lists for the other periods are sound history so far as I can tell, but the listing of Apostolic Age martyrs is frankly a mess. Late, late legend is slushed together with 1st and early 2nd century sources without any hint of the gulf in reliability. Of the 15 martyrs listed, only Stephen, James the Great, James the Just, Peter and Paul actually have any halfway decent source for their death by persecution. Everybody else, the support is a joke -- documents from the 6th century or "Acts" like those of Thomas that are clearly fiction and no respectable historian attempting to reconstruct the 1st century Christian world ever uses. I think the rest should be deleted, but maybe somebody would like to keep them but distinguishing their martyrdom as legendary. I'm not clear if there's a reason why an actual attested martyr from a 1st century document, Antipas (Revelation 2:13), is not included -- not an apostle or something? 69.237.197.37 14:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Deleting "without seeking his own death or any harm to others"
In the first line I'm deleting "without seeking his own death or any harm to others" because it's biased, inaccurate, and misleading. It also amke martyrdom seem somehow noble or desirable, which is objectionable adn offensive. Many examples can be found to demonstrate this is not always the case - for example the Christians who deliberately courted their own deaths by smashing up pagan temples in Roman-era Spain..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Obiskatobis (talk • contribs) 15:45, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
- Personally, I like the American Heritage Dictionary definition, "One who chooses to suffer death rather than renounce religious principles." By that standard, smashing temples of non-christian origin to draw wrath is tough to justify. --JJLatWiki 16:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] list
maybe i'm overlooking, but what is this list based upon? Are we (editors) deciding who's a martyr and who's not? Interesting detail: between 1950 and 2000 less martyrs are named then between 2000 and today... Hard to imagine, not? Currently the list doesn't seem to be NPOV to me with that respect. Is it maybe wiser to stick with "recognized martyrs" or something? 23:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)