Most People Insist That Two Separate Being Can Never Be One

[Vicki Q]

But - as with hallucinogens - one can be perfectly sincere and still be wrong. A Hindu or a Muslim is just as sincere in their beliefs as you are. You can’t all be right.

If John Hick was onto something with his elephant, we could all kind of be right.
Certainly it wouldn't work for me to rule out God doing things through other religions just as He does through Xianity.
I'm not sure how much “Cross and the Switchblade” type things go on in, say Hinduism, though.
If one experienced something requiring explanation, if taking hallucinogens was the obvious explanation, that would be the go to. Whereas if other explanations were weak, it might make very good sense to believe it was God.

No...(confirmation bias)  

They're pretty powerful witnesses because I trust them. Even granting confirmation bias (which is a double edged sword BTW), their experiences would still be evidence, and if the evidence was tight enough on investigation, potentially very strong evidence indeed.

Yes, Lourdes is very strict...only ‘verified’ 70 miracles.  

Gold standard levels of proof.
A wish to use clear exemplars rather than many 'shades of grey' exemplars, of which many exist.
God not doing a slot machine approach to healing.

In any case, Lourdes was an example of the contemporary experience genre. There are so many more...it's a cumulative thing.

Of COURSE...answers your last paragraph.  

First century Jewish messianic movements absolutely did not survive the death of their Messiah. They couldn't in theory because the theology would be completely contradictory, and we know from what first century historians tell us they didn't in practice.

The disciples avoided C1 Israel politics- Early Christianity specifically and repeatedly denied that sort of thing had a role. 

Fisherman were more like middle class in those days.
I don't see, though, how class in any way explains why the disciples thought the death of their Messiah amounts to a declaration that the Kingdom of God has arrived, the sins of God's people were forgiven, and that God had returned to Jerusalem.

[Vicki Q]

Again, there is no evidence for your claim that the apostles suffered for Jesus. Not even the Bible claims that.

I dislike getting involved in multiple discussions, so I'll one-off just point out...

Paul's rods pain      
Stephen's stoning
Paul's beatings back again
Peter's death
Imprisonments
Apostle beating
We didn't start the fire
It was always burning, since the world's been turning...

(2 Cor 11, Acts 7, Acts 21, John 21 by crucifixion!,  e.g. Acts 12, Acts 5)

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Again, there is no evidence for your claim that the apostles suffered for Jesus. Not even the Bible claims that.

I dislike getting involved in multiple discussions, so I'll one-off just point out...

Paul's rods pain      
Stephen's stoning
Paul's beatings back again
Peter's death
Imprisonments
Apostle beating
We didn't start the fire
It was always burning, since the world's been turning...

(2 Cor 11, Acts 7, Acts 21, John 21 by crucifixion!,  e.g. Acts 12, Acts 5)

Sounds like SSDD for the Roman Empire. Nothing unique about the apostles' experiences.

[Fake Messiah]

Again, there is no evidence for your claim that the apostles suffered for Jesus. Not even the Bible claims that.

I dislike getting involved in multiple discussions, so I'll one-off just point out...

Paul's rods pain      
Stephen's stoning
Paul's beatings back again
Peter's death
Imprisonments
Apostle beating
We didn't start the fire
It was always burning, since the world's been turning...

(2 Cor 11, Acts 7, Acts 21, John 21 by crucifixion!,  e.g. Acts 12, Acts 5)

Nope. Let's take Peter for which you claim that "John 21" says he dies by crucifixion. "John 21" just says that Jesus foretold he will die some torturous death (although not even that, he just says Peter will die old while being carried by someone), but not that he died one.

Indeed, if you look at Wikipedia, for example, it says "According to Christian tradition, Peter was crucified in Rome under Emperor Nero", and Bible did not even say that he went to Rome, that is another "Christian tradition", but not even "Christian tradition" more like "Catholic tradition" because some Christian churches don't think he ever went to Rome.

[Angrboda]

In any case, Lourdes was an example of the contemporary experience genre. There are so many more...it's a cumulative thing.

This is putting the cart before the horse. You can't aggregate evidence prior to demonstrating that they point to a common conclusion. And you can't assume that they point to the same thing without evidence, which is insufficient unless aggregated. Doing so is a form of begging the question and is no more cogent than simply declaring that what you believe is true "because" you believe it.

[arewethereyet]

Again, there is no evidence for your claim that the apostles suffered for Jesus. Not even the Bible claims that.

I dislike getting involved in multiple discussions, so I'll one-off just point out...

Paul's rods pain      
Stephen's stoning
Paul's beatings back again
Peter's death
Imprisonments
Apostle beating
We didn't start the fire
It was always burning, since the world's been turning...

(2 Cor 11, Acts 7, Acts 21, John 21 by crucifixion!,  e.g. Acts 12, Acts 5)

Bold mine
I thought that was Billy Joel 1989

[Anomalocaris]

In any case, Lourdes was an example of the contemporary experience genre. There are so many more...it's a cumulative thing.

This is putting the cart before the horse.  You can't aggregate evidence prior to demonstrating that they point to a common conclusion.  And you can't assume that they point to the same thing without evidence, which is insufficient unless aggregated.  Doing so is a form of begging the question and is no more cogent than simply declaring that what you believe is true "because" you believe it.

she will no doubt proudly embrace any logical fallacy so long as, in her mind, they seem to promise to even just momentarily make the propositions she so dearly wish to embraces seem less on the surface to be less morally and intellectually corrupt than it actually is:

…..They're pretty powerful witnesses because I trust them…..

not because they are actually powerful, but because she believed them

[Anomalocaris]

duplicate

[The Architect Of Fate]

I dislike getting involved in multiple discussions, so I'll one-off just point out...

Paul's rods pain      
Stephen's stoning
Paul's beatings back again
Peter's death
Imprisonments
Apostle beating
We didn't start the fire
It was always burning, since the world's been turning...

(2 Cor 11, Acts 7, Acts 21, John 21 by crucifixion!,  e.g. Acts 12, Acts 5)

None of that proves they died for Jesus it simply proved they died or were tortured. How many thousands of people suffered similar fates at that time does they all die for Jesus? For all we know Paul was tortured for completely unrelated reasons. This really puts a kink in the whole "they would not have willingly died for a lie nonsense apologists loved to peddle even though they can never prove these deaths or tortures were because of Christianity.

[The Architect Of Fate]

That the disciples as a group signed up for a sharply reduced lifetime of pain isn't explainable by politics or economics.

There is little evidence they died for here belief in Christianity and your second statement is simply an assertion plenty of people have been willing to endure truly horrific treatment for both.