Question: Do non-christians agree that the cause of death of the writer of consider the lilies happened?

<P0-S0> In this verse Jesus presents the example of the lilies, who also do no labour. <P0-S1> Two verses earlier at Matthew 6: 26 Jesus told his followers not to worry about food, because even the birds are provided for by God. <P0-S2> Spin in this verse is a reference to spinning thread, a labour - intensive but necessary part of making clothing. <P0-S3> Spinning was traditionally women's work, something made explicit in Luke's version of this verse. <P0-S4> This then is one of the few pieces of evidence that Jesus' message is meant equally for women as for men. <SEP> <P1-S0> Most Christians believe Jesus enables people to be reconciled to God. <P1-S1> The Nicene Creed asserts that Jesus will judge the living and the dead either before or after their bodily resurrection, an event tied to the Second Coming of Jesus in Christian eschatology. <P1-S2> The great majority of Christians worship Jesus as the incarnation of God the Son, the second of three persons of the Trinity. <P1-S3> A minority of Christian denominations reject Trinitarianism, wholly or partly, as non-scriptural. <P1-S4> Christian doctrines include the beliefs that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit, was born of a virgin named Mary, performed miracles, founded the Christian Church, died by crucifixion as a sacrifice to achieve atonement for sin, rose from the dead, and ascended into Heaven, from where he will return. <P1-S5> The birth of Jesus is celebrated annually on December 25 (or various dates in January by some eastern churches) as Christmas. <P1-S6> His crucifixion is honored on Good Friday and his resurrection on Easter. <P1-S7> The widely used calendar era "AD", from the Latin "anno Domini" ("in the year of the Lord"), and the equivalent alternative "CE", are based on the approximate birthdate of Jesus. <SEP> <P2-S0> The baptism of Jesus and his crucifixion are considered to be two historically certain facts about Jesus. <P2-S1> James Dunn states that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent" and "rank so high on the 'almost impossible to doubt or deny' scale of historical facts" that they are often the starting points for the study of the historical Jesus. <P2-S2> John Dominic Crossan states that the crucifixion of Jesus is as certain as any historical fact can be. <P2-S3> Bart Ehrman states that the crucifixion of Jesus on the orders of Pontius Pilate is the most certain element about him. <P2-S4> Eddy and Boyd state that it is now "firmly established" that there is non-Christian confirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus. <P2-S5> Craig Blomberg states that most scholars in the third quest for the historical Jesus consider the crucifixion indisputable. <P2-S6> Christopher M. Tuckett states that, although the exact reasons for the death of Jesus are hard to determine, one of the indisputable facts about him is that he was crucified. <SEP> <P3-S0> most early greeks did not even consider 1 to be a number, so they could not consider it to be a prime. <P3-S1> by the middle ages and renaissance many mathematicians included 1 as the first prime number. <P3-S2> in the mid-18th century christian goldbach listed 1 as the first prime in his famous correspondence with leonhard euler -- who did not agree. <P3-S3> in the 19th century many mathematicians still considered the number 1 to be a prime. <P3-S4> for example, derrick norman lehmer's list of primes up to 10,006,721, reprinted as late as 1956, started with 1 as its first prime. <P3-S5> henri lebesgue is said to be the last professional mathematician to call 1 prime. <P3-S6> by the early 20th century, mathematicians began to accept that 1 is not a prime number, but rather forms its own special category as a "unit". <SEP> <P4-S0> about the creation-evolution controversy, popper wrote that he considered it "a somewhat sensational clash between a brilliant scientific hypothesis concerning the history of the various species of animals and plants on earth, and an older metaphysical theory which, incidentally, happened to be part of an established religious belief" with a footnote to the effect that "[he] agree[s] with professor c.e. <P4-S1> raven when, in his science, religion, and the future, 1943, he calls this conflict "a storm in a victorian tea-cup"; though the force of this remark is perhaps a little impaired by the attention he pays to the vapours still emerging from the cup—to the great systems of evolutionist philosophy, produced by bergson, whitehead, smuts, and others."