The Narrow Path Ministries

I often find that people who criticize the validity of the gospel accounts use the following argument to make their case: If fifty people claim they saw a pink elephant tap dancing, would you believe them? If not, why do you believe a group of people claiming to see miracles two thousand years ago?

The answer that I usually give is that I would believe the pink elephant group if they were all willing to die a gruesome death for their testimony. This answer usually satisfies the critic but I now wonder who much historically reliable data we have to show that the early apostles did, in fact, sign their testimony in blood. In Scripture we have the marterdom of Steven recorded as well as James the brother of John. Hebrews 11 also records some of this. But what do we have as far as non-biblical evidence to show that the early eyewitnesses were killed for the gospel message. I've read detailed accounts about how most of the apostles were killed but what is the source for these? I'm curous.

Where are the historical scholars? Help a brother out here. Are the church fathers the sole source of this information? For example, we have Paul getting martyred during the reign of Nero but the book of Acts ends with him on house arrest. Peter is said to have been crucified but the Scriptues only give us a vague reference as to how he will die. Can someone provide me with some historical references? Thank you, my friends.

Hi JCDV.

I have a book at home called "The Drama of the Lost Disciples" by George F. Jowett which discusses where Jesus' disciples went and how they died, but it doesn't give a lot of footnotes with references to primary sources. But I myself don't have time to look into this right now for you, or I'd give you a better answer.

Sorry...

Damon

Got this after a couple minutes of google searching:

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.htm#_ftn541

This tradition, that Paul suffered martyrdom in Rome, is early and universal, and disputed by no counter-tradition and may be accepted as the one certain historical fact known about Paul outside of the New Testament accounts. Clement (Ad. Cor. chap. 5) is the first to mention the death of Paul, and seems to imply, though he does not directly state, that his death took place in Rome during the persecution of Nero. Caius (quoted below, §7), a writer of the first quarter of the third century, is another witness to his death in Rome, as is also Dionysius of Corinth (quoted below, §8) of the second century. Origen (quoted by Euseb. III. 1) states that he was martyred in Rome under Nero. Tertullian (at the end of the second century), in his De præscriptione Hær. chap. 36, is still more distinct, recording that Paul was beheaded in Rome. Eusebius and Jerome accept this tradition unhesitatingly, and we may do likewise. As a Roman citizen, we should expect him to meet death by the sword.

The tradition that Peter suffered martyrdom in Rome is as old and as universal as that in regard to Paul, but owing to a great amount of falsehood which became mixed with the original tradition by the end of the second century the whole has been rejected as untrue by some modern critics, who go so far as to deny that Peter was ever at Rome. (See especially Lipsius’ Die Quellen der römischen Petrus-Sage, Kiel, 1872; a summary of his view is given by Jackson in the Presbyterian Quarterly and Princeton Review, 1876, p. 265 sq. In Lipsius’ latest work upon this subject, Die Acta Pauli und Petri, 1887, he makes important concessions.) The tradition is, however, too strong to be set aside, and there is absolutely no trace of any conflicting tradition. We may therefore assume it as overwhelmingly probable that Peter was in Rome and suffered martyrdom there. His martyrdom is plainly referred to in John xxi. 10, though the place of it is not given. The first extra-biblical witness to it is Clement of Rome. He also leaves the place of the martyrdom unspecified (Ad Cor. 5), but he evidently assumes the place as well known, and indeed it is impossible that the early Church could have known of the death of Peter and Paul without knowing where they died, and there is in neither case a single opposing tradition. Ignatius (Ad Rom. chap. 4) connects Paul and Peter in an especial way with the Roman Church, which seems plainly to imply that Peter had been in Rome. Phlegon (supposed to be the Emperor Hadrian writing under the name of a favorite slave) is said by Origen (Contra Celsum, II. 14) to have confused Jesus and Peter in his Chronicles. This is very significant as implying that Peter must have been well known in Rome. Dionysius, quoted below, distinctly states that Peter labored in Rome, and Caius is a witness for it. So Irenæus, Clement, Tertullian, and later Fathers without a dissenting voice. The first to mention Peter’s death by crucifixion (unless John xxi. 18 be supposed to imply it) is Tertullian (De Præscrip. Hær. chap. 36), but he mentions it as a fact already known, and tradition since his time is so unanimous in regard to it that we may consider it in the highest degree probable. On the tradition reported by Origen, that Peter was crucified head downward, see below, Bk. III. chap. 1, where Origen is quoted by Eusebius.

I copied and pasted this from Gary Habermas' website. Among other things it lists a non-Christian early source for the martyrdom of James.

Question: It is said that the disciples willingly died for their beliefs that Jesus Christ was alive. What is the historical evidence that they indeed did become martyrs? Who says they died for their faith?

Answer: We don't have early historical evidence for the deaths of several of the disciples. But four key apostles--Peter, Paul, James the brother of Jesus, and John--are most important in terms of their immense influence in the early church and their strong testimony for Jesus' resurrection. We have very early, first century data for the deaths of the first three of these apostles. Clement of Rome (Corinthians 5) reports the deaths of Paul and Peter. Josephus, of course, is a non-Christian and reports James' martyrdom (Antiquities 20:9:1). On this topic, then, Christianity is on very firm grounds. However, besides these early first century reports, I think all we need to argue is that Jesus' disciples were willing to die for their faith, which virtually no one will dispute. This shows that they at least believed that their message was true.