Dating Paul's Conversion c.36 C.E.

[outhouse]

I do not think that Judeans resident in the Diaspora were disposed to be too strict, as inscriptions record many many cases where synagogues and Judeans of the Diaspora got along very cozily with pagan patrons, even letting them equate the Judean god with some local god. Of course the local Judeans did not really think that, but they were willing to let the local pagans think so for the sake of getting along.



DCH

Agree whole hearted with your reply/s

I don't even apply such to Judean residents. Herods temple IMHO opened up Monotheism to the Roman Empire and its residents. It created and is responsible for generating more Proselytes then anyone had ever seen before in such a short period. This temple brought in gentiles by the hundreds of thousands to the point, in Hellenistic circles they were considering each other Jews simply for swearing off pagan deities [jewish encyclopedia]

Hellenistic Judaism rose, More then the previous oppressors adherence to monotheism, but because of the temple, and with Christianity, this movement was short lived and within a few hundred years, Christianity absorbed it all in whole, gone. Im sure fall of the temple played a large role, but either way, Hellenist often preferred Proselyte status over full on cultural adherence to laws and customs.

I do not see a progression of Christianity from Hellenistic Judeans of the Diaspora, I feel the gentiles and proselytes are "more" responsible. Real Jews or Judeans would not be as easily swayed to blasphemous claims of a messiah or parallels to Emperors divinity as "son of god" as to where the Hellenistic Proselytes had no problem "carving up" traditions they were already refusing in full.

[DCHindley]

Its safe to say the temple was always on shaky ground and the violence of a single martyr could easily start unrest in the tense crowds during these drunken Passovers.

I would say that such a "possibility" would have a Roman blessing

What, exactly, makes you think that the Passover celebration in Jerusalem was one that featured drunkenness? I never picked up on that, if evidence of it exists.

So, you think that all the Romans needed was an excuse to clamp down in an even more oppressive manner than before?

It almost sounds like you see the Romans as the Psychlos in L Ron Hubbard's Battlefield Earth, sending in "gas troops" to subdue smaller cultures and worlds in wars of conquest that take 15 minutes, all for the sake of the gold they can cart back to their home world.

Aside from the fact that ancient economies were not completely reducible to easily transported mediums of currency like gold (and that would be in turn be exceptionally expensive and/ risky to transport any distance), as almost all of the taxes were collected as payments "in kind," I do not see the empire as inherently oppressive at all. Even so, any society where all power over wealth is concentrated in 2% of the population will have inequalities. If they carry away any booty, it is surplus stored as gold, but this was just a fraction of what they had influence over.

DCH

[outhouse]

What, exactly, makes you think that the Passover celebration in Jerusalem was one that featured drunkenness? I never picked up on that, if evidence of it exists.

Reading what we have from regarding all we know from these traditions, alcohol was required, and these were drunken BBQ's with god, where often this was the only time of year some of these people ate meat.

I do not see the empire as inherently oppressive at all

The only reason the temple was allowed to stand, was for its revenue collection. there is a great reason the temple did not even stand 50 years after completion.