to outhouse,
Because there is no evidence that was the origin of anything.
Evidence exists in Acts 2:5, 9-11a, 41b (as a clue for Hellenist Jews (not companions of Jesus) making up most of the Church of Jerusalem from its very beginning: everything else in this passage is fiction). That clue is confirmed in Acts 8:1:
And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they [The "Grecians"]
were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles. (the Greek dispersion)
Acts 11:19-20
Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only.
And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus.
Gal 1:17a
Neither went I [Paul, right after his conversion]
up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me;
So don't say there is no evidence. Just say you don't accept that evidence.
All evidence points to many centers in many places.
Yes, but after the Greek dispersion from Jerusalem.
Realty is we have a supposed crucifixion in 33CE ish and our first literary reports are those of Paul hunting in the Diaspora. NOT Galilee.
First, I am fairly certain the crucifixion occurred in 28 CE:
http://historical-jesus.info/appa.html and
http://historical-jesus.info/appb.html
No Paul was hunting somewhere else before, Jerusalem (Acts 8:1-3):
And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.
And devout men carried Stephen to his burial, and made great lamentation over him.
As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison.
Who said Galilee? Are you saying Jesus converted people in Galilee to Christianity? So they could be persecuted later by Paul?
Galilee was the origin of the Aramaic movement, and it did not magically move to Jerusalem.
The Aramaic movement was never Christian and there is no evidence it started in Galilee. Actually, according to Jesus' alleged prophecies, it became rather dead for a while among his own companions, but then resurfaced in Jerusalem after the Greek dispersion. How to explain the appearance of some of Jesus' brothers and disciples in Jerusalem?
My theory is those were invited to join the Hellenist proto-Christian community as permanent guests. That was done in order to bring eyewitnesses among this community for reason of legitimacy. For these Galileans, there were risks, but for pious poor Jews, living in Jerusalem near the temple, and having their basic need provided for free (sparing them from hard labor at home in Galilee) was very tempting.
So no magic had to be involved.
So if their influence was very limited by your own words, they were not the leaders or origins of the movement. AS the movement ONLY grew in Hellenism.
EXACTLY, that's what I have been saying all along. But, as you accepted before, there were some Hellenist Jews in Jerusalem then, enabling proto-Christianity to start from some of them.
When these Galileans got in control of the remnant of the church of Jerusalem after the Greek dispersion, their influence was very limited because they were not Christians. So Christianity developed in different ways at different locations because there was not a Christian center in Jerusalem. But at first, for a while, this Christian center might have been in Antioch (according to Acts). However soon after, Paul went on his own and developed with others his own brand of Christianity for Gentiles (with some success). Competitors of Paul might have done the same thing in different christological directions.
Cordially, Bernard
