I find interesting this argument 1, for his implications on all the other arguments:
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
Argument 1
A - Consequently, to get rid of the report,
B - ...... Nero fastened the guilt and
C - ............ inflicted the most exquisite tortures on
D - ....................... a class hated for their abominations,
E - ................................ called Chrestians by the populace.
E’ - ............................... Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme
..................................... penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our
..................................... procurators, Pontius Pilatus,
D’ - ...................... and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment,
............................ again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even
............................ in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world
............................ find their centre and become popular.
C’ - .............. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon
................... their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the
................... crime of firing the city as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was
................... added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and
................... perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt,
................... to serve as a nightly illumination when daylight had expired.
B’ - ..... Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus
........... while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car.
A’ - Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose
.... a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good but rather to glut
.... the cruelty of one man that they were being destroyed.
Can the chiasm be destroyed by the presence of "Christus" in opposition to the original ChrEstiani? I mean, if the chiasm expected by KK is the following:
A
B
C
D
E
E'
D'
C'
B'
A'
But in
E we have ''Chr
estiani'' while in
E' we have ''Chr
istus''. This fact emphasizes the contrast between
E and
E', and (surprisingly? Strangely?) no explanation is given about the reason of a Chr
Ist founder of Chr
Estiani.