They are not Christians!

[tabibito]

It was known as "the way".

"Christian" was coined in Antioch, if report is to be believed, no later than 48CE, more likely 45-46CE. At this time, I can't see any reason to question the date, but so far it's only a preliminary assessment of the proposition.

[Cow Poke]

"Christian" was coined in Antioch, if report is to be believed, no later than 48CE, more likely 45-46CE. At this time, I can't see any reason to question the date, but so far it's only a preliminary assessment of the proposition.

EGGzackly --- they were, indeed, Christ Followers, but they had not yet been labeled "Christians" til, as you say.

Scripture Verse: Acts 24:14-15 {NASB}

But I confess this to you, that in accordance with the Way, which they call a sect, I do serve the God of our fathers, believing everything that is in accordance with the Law and is written in the Prophets, having a hope in God, which these men cherish themselves, that there shall certainly be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.

© Copyright Original Source

[rogue06]

If a Damascene Jew was a follower of a Galilean Jewish charismatic [extremely unlikely] that Damascene Jew would, like that Galilean Jewish charismatic have practised Judaism and would have no need of having his sins washed away by a ritual lustration. Ritual purity is another matter.

If you had a Jew from Tarsus who was a follower of Jesus... If you had a Jew from Cyprus who was a follower of Jesus... If you had Jews from cities like Rome and Corinth who were followers of Jesus... If you had an Ethiopian eunuch who was a follower of Jesus...

Why would you find a Jew from Damascus being a follower of Jesus too hard to swallow?

[eider]

As a matter of interest, have you read Hugh Schonfield's The Passover Plot? It remains an interesting read.

No Hypatia. I will seek out a review on that book.

[eider]

Observant Jews observed the festivals regardless of status. Just like they followed the Sabbath.

Wonderful! And how can you show that Galilean Jews were so observant? They tended to be rebellious, as did other Northern Jews.

You keep exposing a nasty elitist and classist attitude, but then again, you are British where such things still thrive.

Personal insult. Ignored.

[eider]

"That's not how I review the gospels..."

I know. You've already admitted that your method for interpreting scripture is so hilariously slapdash that you can reach literally any conclusion you want. Is there a passage of scripture that directly refutes your beliefs? No problem, just toss it out and pretend it doesn't exist! It's a thoroughly irrational approach.

Absolutely! Prophesies fulfilled (Wow!) and miracles without natural possibilities and back to life claims ......... so rational for you, eh? I'm so irrational!
I acknowledge that folks have beliefs and faiths, but when they trash everybody else's then that's a good guide for me.

With all this in mind I'll be watching how you respond to bible quotes in future...

[eider]

It was known as "the way".

Was Jesus referring to 'The Way of the old laws'..... the keeping of the laws, especially the poor laws imo.
That got adjusted in to a Christian idea of 'the way'?

[tabibito]

Absolutely! Prophesies fulfilled (Wow!)

Interesting point there. A prophecy spoken wasn't the least bit impressive. When it was fulfilled, it became impressive.

and miracles without natural possibilities

That's kind of the definition of a miracle.

and back to life claims

The possibility of which is demonstrated by fulfilled prophecy, miracles, and healing.

[eider]

As a matter of interest, have you read Hugh Schonfield's The Passover Plot? It remains an interesting read.

I just had a quick look at a summary of his ideas, and I don't take notice of resurrection ideas.

Wiki:- The culmination of his plan was to be his death (the crucifixion), his resurrection and his reign as the true kingly and priestly messiah,

[Cow Poke]

Was Jesus referring to 'The Way of the old laws'.....

No, He was quite specific on that in one of His numerous "I Am" statements....

Scripture Verse: John 14:6 - KJV

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

© Copyright Original Source

[eider]

Nazareth ....early 1st century

There was a fairly large community living upon Nazareth Hill and around it in the early 1st century. Archeology results report that only a few lamps and remains of one possible 1st century building could be found on Nazareth, although evidence of remains from earlier and later times have been found.

Topography: The whole area around Nazareth is a series of valleys and hills, and humans have always focused their communities upon high ground for safety and security. There are about 30-50 hummocks and hills around this whole area which could provide security to ancient communities, but I do not have any archeology reports about these.

One person, Rene Salm, has taken the archeological evidence and used it to propose that Nazareth did not exist as a community in the early 1st century, that the hill was never known by that name anyway, and that if there was no Nazareth then there was no Jesus. Obviously one short paragraph cannot define his whole book, but I don't support it at all
.
Herod the Great had built up the city of Sepphoris, known as Zippori (bird) at that time. Sepphoris stands upon a hilltop 270 feet above sea-level and the wide plain beneath is far below sea level. It was one of the greatest cities in Galilee and it's most splendid buildings covered an area of several acres. I expect that a suburban population sprawled around this centre. Sepphoris was at the hub of a considerable number of much smaller settlements, all sited upon hilltops or hummocks, and these may all have been service communities supplying handworkers (2nd order), Labourers (3rd order) and hauliers (4th order) for its own and their own needs. There is evidence that only a very few landholding peasant-farmers lived in these communities, on these hilltops. Certainly Nazareth could only have supported a few farming families.

In 4BC Herod the Great died and several brigands took opportunity to run wild in Galilee. Judas BarEzekiah, son of the infamous brigand, took Sepphoris with his 'gang', recruited or killed the population and then settled in to hold out against any opposing force. The Syrian Legate Varus was forced to act and sent Legions and a cohort (one?) to recapture this city. Sepphoris was retaken, its population of women and children all sold into slavery to help pay for the expidition's huge costs, and all males over 15 yrs forced to raze Sepphoris to the ground before being impaled or crucified at the site (or marched to Jerusalem for same punishment??). Since there would have been an abundance of spare timber after razing Sepphoris I expect that the executions took place around the city.

The Roman forces would have needed to forage far and wide around Sepphoris, and I don't expect that they paid for produce taken from lowly Galilean peasants who would have been treated very inhumanely. I have read a story that Mary was a temple virgin in the Hellenised city and that a Roman soldier, Patronus, either took her for a partner or raped her (Supported by Celcus).

Varus then handed control of Galilee to Herod's son the Tetrarch Antipas, and Roman forces left the area. I don't think that there were any Roman forces in Galillee after, say, 2BC. Prince Antipas resolved to rebuild Sepphoris into a beautiful new city, to be his seat in Galilee. He would have needed thousands of handworkers, labourers and hauliers to complete this work, and thousands of 2nd, 3rd and 4th order peasants would have been attracted to the area at this time. Such people would have brought their families with them and needed to leave them in safety when they went into Sepphoris to work.

Every hilltop in the region not already inhabited would have been taken over, and settlements, towns and city sites like modern-day Simonias, Yafia, Nazareth, Traditional Cana, Khirbet Cana and several other hills surrounding Sepphoris would have been inhabited. There would not have been enough space for all those families, and high ground is more secure than the nearby plain.

I am not surprised that so few early 1st century buildings have been found around Nazareth. This modern Arab city is now heavily developed, but even if it was possible to research the whole area I would not expect to read that much had been discovered.

As already mentioned, displaced peasants were itinerrant, moving family and home to where work existed for them. Where possible, buildings could be erected with mud or clay bricks, and I can imagine women and children molding bricks and leaving them in sunshine to harden. But such work takes time, and many of the peasants of Galilee relied upon tents. Goatskin has the most amazing properties as a warm, water resistant covering and is still used by some itinerant families in the Middle East today.

Even the boatmen of Galilee lake used awnings and tents and when Simon and others witnessed the transfiguration on Mount Hermon (?) they offered to erect tents for Moses and Abraham. Indeed, tentmaking was a common enough trade back then around the whole of the Mid-East.

Where mud or clay bricks could be fashioned, such as in shoreline towns like Capernaum, then they would have been used, but Galilean peasants had neither time nor money to transport thousands of bricks to new dwelling areas then needing to lift them up many hundreds of feet to hilltops. Nor did they have the skills to cut stones or the money to pay for these. Nazareth and all the other local hilltop communities were tented settlements with the odd important building in existence.

Nothing much from the flourishing bustling community of early 1st century Nazareth will be found, but I believe that it existed at that time, just like all the other hilltop communities surrounding Sepphoris. Claims by such as Rene Salm are very weak.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

If you had a Jew from Tarsus who was a follower of Jesus... If you had a Jew from Cyprus who was a follower of Jesus... If you had Jews from cities like Rome and Corinth who were followers of Jesus... If you had an Ethiopian eunuch who was a follower of Jesus...

Why would you find a Jew from Damascus being a follower of Jesus too hard to swallow?

In the early 50s CE?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

It was known as "the way".

Given the generally accepted dates for Acts that is a somewhat later term. .

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

It is a conspiracy theory, based on the idea that the New Testament authors were charlatans.

More puerility. Are you totally unable to write in a serious manner?

Probably not. And if they are the earliest, it is not by an appreciable margin.

All pure speculation on your part..

Of course he didn't - the claim that baptism saves is cited as providing evidence that he didn't.

Which makes one wonder why Jesus performed no baptisms.

Add to that, investigation of the basis for the claims.

You would have to provide some attested historical evidence in support of the notion that 1 Peter was written by a Galilean Aramaic speaking Jew.

as seen through a distorting lens.

In a critical and dispassionate manner which for you will always be "a distorting lens" because it does not unquestioningly accept these texts as entirely veracious accounts of actual events.

[tabibito]

More puerility. Are you totally unable to write in a serious manner?

I'm dealing with an interlocutor who doesn't demonstrate the ability to understand anything more substantial than puerility.

All pure speculation on your part.

Indeed - but less speculative than the unfounded assumptions that you accept as fact.

Which makes one wonder why Jesus performed no baptisms.

No information is provided. I'll leave you to speculate, mostly because you seem to consider that you are the only one with the right to speculate.

You would have to provide some attested historical evidence in support of the notion that 1 Peter was written by a Galilean Aramaic speaking Jew.

I feel no more bound to do so than you feel bound to provide substantiation for your claims that the gospels were written at a late date, or that Peter remained a fisherman even when he was in Rome, and could not possibly have learned any additional languages during his lifetime.

In a critical and dispassionate manner which for you will always be "a distorting lens" because it does not unquestioningly accept these texts as entirely veracious accounts of actual events.

Given your refusal to provide substantiation for your own opinions, I will reserve the right to continue to do so.