The Twelve Disciples created by the Jerusalem Church

[outhouse]

. This is still not evidence that Christians were generally given lashes or the rod.

.

One more time.


If you read Candida's book she explains quite clearly that IN CONTEXT punishment in these times for even small infractions was torture and death.

They did not have a police force that went out and arrested people brought them in for justice where they received a fair trial and then let go.

IN CONTEXT Pauls community who co-wrote these text, were not going to highlight all the terrible things he did. IN CONTEXT they were acknowledging/addressing traditions of the terrible things Paul did that were probably known in some of these communities. They provided us with a soft version that takes Paul from being a murderer and simply holding coats for the rock throwers

[outhouse]

You keep stating things as if they are historical facts and I keep stating they are not facts, but opinions.

.

Factually false. You keep interpreting poorly showing a lack of comprehensive ability here.

If I was going to say that I would do so quite clearly. It seems you don't understand what historicity is.


It is a fact however that Christians were persecuted. Paul has historicity of persecuting Christians even if we cannot provide details of such.




SO I ASK YOU, why would Paul persecute this early movement? WHO paid him?

[outhouse]

Historicity has to be argued. And I am asking you to make the case.
.

Two separate traditions.

One Pauls community states he did so, and its not something likely to be made up.

Acts who probably had no knowledge of Pauline literature, also makes the case.



It is on you to prove this as a fictional account, and so far no one can that isn't laughable.

[Michael BG]

Do you know you are quoting the Pulpit Commentary published in 1880 for use by Christian ministers as an aid in writing their sermons?

Did you know their opinion still remains a valid one?

This is still not evidence that Christians were generally given lashes or the rod.

One more time.

If you read Candida's book she explains quite clearly that IN CONTEXT punishment in these times for even small infractions was torture and death.

It would help if you quoted Candida Moss because you have already stated:

By the way Candida says almost nothing here because of the lack of evidence, she focusses on later traditions in 2nd and 3rd century, and in context admits the historical cores we already knew about.

I don’t understand how both of your statements can be true.

You keep stating things as if they are historical facts and I keep stating they are not facts, but opinions.

Factually false. You keep interpreting poorly showing a lack of comprehensive ability here.

I assume you have resorted to insulting me, because you can’t debate me!
It would help if you would post where I have misinterpreted what you wrote.
It would be good manners to apologise for your original posts if they can be misinterpreted rather than attack the reader for their comprehensive abilities, but maybe this isn’t the “done thing” on the internet.

Historicity has to be argued. And I am asking you to make the case.

Two separate traditions.

One Pauls community states he did so, and its not something likely to be made up.

Acts who probably had no knowledge of Pauline literature, also makes the case.

It is on you to prove this as a fictional account, and so far no one can that isn't laughable.

I don’t understand what point you are making about two traditions or what it has to do with what I am trying to get you to debate.
I will remind you what the topic is:

I hold very little historicity to this Jerusalem sect other then then they were Hellenist like those of the Diaspora

And knowing early on they were hunted down possibly being seen as a threat to the temple, they kept their practice on the down low.

The second post I think was your argument to support the first one. So I asked

And what evidence do you have for this and is it reliable?

It seemed to me such a simple question. I thought that anyone who had spent some time thinking about the issues would be able to let others know what evidence there is for their belief. So I don’t understand your pain!

And I clearly have no idea why you think I should be providing a counter case for a position where you still haven’t presented your case.

It is nowadays recognised that most Christians were not persecuted in the first 300 years CE.

I have asked you to discuss the historicity of 2 Cor 11:24-25. I have suggested that if Paul wrote these verses then it is only evidence that in 16 years Paul was punished for doing something, but it is not evidence that other Christians were punished or went in fear of their lives. I don’t understand why you don’t understand that there just is no reliable evidence that even the majority of Christians suffered for their faith before 64 CE.

If you can’t present your case I don’t understand why you just can’t admit it.

[Adam]

Dear Michael BG:
Once again, I come not to praise outhouse, but to keep him unburied.
I have noted a few days ago that he states what he thinks without attribution. All the more could he assume that any bad or too perspicacious things he says about you would not need extensive foot-noting, that your own self-inspection should confirm his opinion. He does not seem to understand human psychology (that few people can see, much less admit, any shortcomings).
Peter Kirby does run a very fair ship here in inclement weather. He inherited the detritus of the old Biblical Criticism and History sub-forum of the Atheist website, Freethought and Raionalism Discussion Board. There Jeff Gibson (real name of a real scholar) ruled (whenever he demeaned himself to be with us) with his vicious attacks on all and sundry. Those whose abilities, knowledge, and resources were not up to his standards indulged in the most slanderous insults and profanity, notably Sheshbazzar. Various dolts and insane people who had been banned everyone else (I have only been banned TWO other websites) monopolized most threads. It's good here. See this thread about various banned people here.
http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/view ... ?f=5&t=601
There is also a LIST of precisely who has been banned, but I have forgotten how to find it. Probably Search on "Banned"?
http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/view ... ned#p37098
Gives new bans in the last eight months.
Finally found the list, going back to the start here with that notorious crank "DeWitness" who had another name with four numbers attached over on FTDB.
http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/view ... ?f=8&t=268
He wasn't wrong about everything, but you know what they say about a broken clock.....

[Michael BG]

Dear Michael BG:
Once again, I come not to praise outhouse, but to keep him unburied.

I have no wish to bury outhouse or curtail his postings.
It seems very odd that in another thread he requested Secret Alias to post his evidence, but seems surprised that anyone should require the same of him. (Secret Alias did in fact post his evidence and I think it was pulled apart.)

In another thread when I asked Maryhelena to provide evidence she posted “It's ideas that interest me not how anyone came to these ideas.” Which to me means she is not as concerned as I am at examining the evidence and assessing it. And that’s fine.

[outhouse]

I don’t understand how both of your statements can be true.

Exactly!

You don't understand.

She talks about the context of punishment of this time period.

While also realizing there is little evidence for details of exactly what Paul did, when and why. BUT that does not mean we do not understand the cultural anthropology of first century daily life

[outhouse]

It is nowadays recognised that most Christians were not persecuted in the first 300 years CE.

.

Provide credible sources.

Because even the most critical scholars claim persecution as a certainty.

[outhouse]

If you can’t present your case I don’t understand why you just can’t admit it.
.

All the evidence is on my side.

I have posted some and you ignore it.


I have posted that Pauls and Acts are two separate accounts. If you cannot refute these two accounts and you factually have not, then it is you who is left wanting here.

[outhouse]

I don’t understand what point you are making about two traditions or what it has to do with what I am trying to get you to debate.
I will remind you what the topic is:

I will remind you Pauls community and Acts describe first century persecution and of sect members being hunted down.