Peter Kirby

CNN, in their online timeline for their "After Jesus" special, notes the period from AD 100-312 as, "Christianity begins to thrive, but Christians continue to be persecuted."

Is there nothing that can be said about Christianity in the second and third century, besides that "it grew it grew" and that there were some persecutions?

Of course this would be an opportune time for a crank to suggest that indeed the answer is 'yes, nothing can be said'...so let me rephrase it...since a great deal can be said about the second and third Christian centuries, why aren't we saying it? Why isn't it a topic of a great deal of discussion?

And if we were to make it a topic of discussion, what would we discuss about it?

--
Peter Kirby

Malachi151

Here is a discussion:

This was a time when Christians killed and persecuted each other more than they were persecuted by non-Christians. Who Jesus was was being hashed out, doctrines were being developed, and local turf wars against "heretics" were being waged.

As the economy of the Roman Empire declined, the ranks of the poor and uneducated grew, and the military became increasingly desperate for recruits, which is when Christians began to move into the Roman army, where they began to gain political power, setting the stage for their being catered to by future Emperors. Their willingness to die because they beleive that they would be resurrected made them some of the favorite troops of the military leaders.

Peter Kirby

Aren't you talking about the fourth century?

--
Peter Kirby

Malachi151

Nope, not that those things didn't continue into the 4th, but the economic decline of the Roman Empire started in the 3rd century, which saw several demographic shifts take place, as well as expansions in military campaigns.

I think that Carrier has an article about this in the Infidels archive. I think that the economic decline and the shifts in the military took place prior to Constantine, such that when he was in power there was already a growing Christian presence in the military.

mountainman

Perhaps the first ecclesiastical chronologist made a mistake?



1) The lineage of the tribe of neopythagorean philosophers
2) The lineage of the tribe of neoplatonists philosophers
3) The literature and books of Apollonius of Tyana.
4) The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus
5) The lineage of the tribe of stoic philosophers
6) The rise and fall of the Second Sophistic.
7) An index of christian contact with the empire (100-300)
(and of course, the converse)

The lineage of the purported "tribe of christians"
seems dramatically quiet between Josephus and
Eusebius.




Pete Brown
Authors of Antiquity

GakuseiDon

In the Second Century CE:
1. Apologists like Justin Martyr and Tertullian trying to show Christianity as being more presentable to the mainstream by saying "Hey! We're just like you!"
2. In addition to the above, attempts to present Christianity more as a school of philosophy rather than a mystery cult
3. Beginnings of trying to define orthodoxy by defining what was "unorthodox"

Peter Kirby

I was primarily intrigued by your comment that Christians were killing each other more than non-Christians were. Wouldn't that be against the law? And how many cases are there anyway of Christian-on-Christian violence before Constantine?

--
Peter Kirby

Malachi151

Okay, that one was a stretch, sorry, I got carried away

From my reading of the info though, there was a lot of intersect persecutions going on by the 2nd and 3rd centuries already. How many of these ended up in death I have no idea.

mountainman

Various scholars have calibrated the statistics.
The numbers are really quite small and insignificant.
They are quite likely also entirely fictional.



Pete

lpetrich

What persecutions, Malachi151?

Early Xians would get into extremely nasty disputes over what was the One True Religion. Ignatius of Antioch in his letter to the Ephesians called those who rejected Jesus Christ's human career "mad dogs" and "wild beasts in human form," and Celsus and other pagan critics noted Xians' taste for such disputes.

But I've yet to see any evidence of nastiness beyond that in pre-Constantine Xianity.