Toto

Which of your posts above?

Which fellow Jews ?

sotto voce

The Enlightenment put an end to the absurd superstitions of the medieval 'church', but it had little effect on belief in the supernatural. There was a widespread increase of belief in spiritualism among Western intelligentsia in the 19th and early 20th centuries, that continues generally. Belief in the locally supernatural has certainly not been put out of question, let alone extinguished, by modern science. So many today believe that spirits and demons exist. Demons, if they exist, would obviously prefer that not to be believed.

So are highly educated Christians lying? To allege that they fail to apply rationality to matters of faith would be insulting to their intelligence or morals, and would invite similar allegations of the motives of skeptics, who may be supposed to oppose morality.

TedM

Sorry, this one:

Diogenes the Cynic

I would say they're lying to themselves at least.

Toto

I see no evidence that Jews knew or cared anything about Christianity in 100 AD. There is no real evidence that Christianity existed. If it did, it was confined to underground house churches that did not make their presence known.

No evidence that this happened, outside of the historical fiction known as the Book of Acts - and even that does not confirm any large number of churches. The churches were underground house churches as far as the story goes.

No evidence that this happened.

Fiction.

I don't see any real evidence from Jewish sources.

Why do you think they knew or cared who Jesus was in the beginning?

If you uncritically accept church writings as historical truth, you can make a case for this, but it will not stand up to any sort of inquiry.

outhouse

agreed

it was a small movement as paul took it to the romans/gentiles almost 20 years after death.




there would be no evidence at all of these houses and preaching at dinner tables as paul tried to convert god-fearers from synagogues.

tanya

This is just urban myth.

Which Jew, Torah observant, is going to commit blasphemy by repudiating a lifetime of indoctrination in belief in a single deity, YHWH, and then precipitously accept the preposterous notion of God requiring a son, to assume human dimensions, and limitations to "save" the human species, regardless of whether or not the infidels, heathen, criminals, and atheists would be then be saved equally enjoying eternal life in heaven, alongside God's chosen people?

This would not have been simple dilution. Such a transformation represents complete repudiation of the essence of Judaism.

Of course no Jew will fall for such rubbish. Forced conversion, enslavement, and abduction/rape/murder to a few can offer substantial reinforcement to the lucky ones who escaped such torture. The Jews accepted Christianity, post Nicea, but not because of "Paul", or his supposed epistles.

TedM

The epistles mean nothing to you apparently...



I guess it depends on who defines 'evidence'.



I guess because I think the epistles given an account that is highly consistent and makes sense: Around AD 30 Christianity was strong enough among the Jews that their religious leaders were persecuting them. Persecution from others is a recurring theme.

'any sort' is a relative term.

I gotta drop this. we are getting nowhere.

TedM

I have read that there is reason to believe that the original Jewish Christians didn't worship Jesus as divine, but saw him as prophet. Nonetheless they believed he had be resurrected--and perhaps the Messiah. Paul's letters also make clear that many of the Jewish Christians were highly opposed to Gentile salvation through faith.

However, Paul, a Jewish Pharisee, had Jewish converts according to his epistles, likely due to the eloquence of his well-developed theology of Jesus as sacrificial lamb whose resurrection broke the curse of sin: death. His deep knowledge of scriptures appears to have convinced some Jews, but was more favorably received by the Gentiles, who didn't have to worry about keeping the Law.

sotto voce

Verse references?