One of the most superficially compelling arguments of Christian apologists revolves around the violent, torturous deaths of many of the apostles. The argument protests that these people would not have died for a lie.
While this argument plays upon emotions, it does not play upon reason. For, you see, if we want to see proof that people CAN and DO die for a lie, we need look no further back than September 11, 2001, when 19 evil men boarded 4 planes to go out and die for what most rational people would perceive to be a lie.
The trick in persuading people to die for a lie lies in persuading them that the lie is truth. That's all it took for Jim Jones to persuade his followers to die in Guyana, all it took for Applewhite to persuade his followers to die in the desert, all it took for Hitler to persuade his followers to die for the Third Reich. In short, not only is the "they wouldn't die for a lie" argument a fallacy, it's a potentially DEADLY fallacy, as one who is drawn to its compelling emotional appeal will be easily swayed into seeing themselves as a martyr for their religion's particular interpretation of faith.
Arguments for faith in Christianity must be more compelling than the easily disprovable emotional appeals often presented by its apologists. Opponents can and will dissect these arguments with ease, severely jeopardizing the credibility of the apologist.