Susan2

I think that you have made an interesting point. I don't see a flaw in your thinking thus far. Perhaps if there is one, someone will be so kind as to point it out.

Based on Matthew 5:28 one could ask, are Islamists practicing Christians? And if Islamists are Christians, are Christians Islamists? And of course if Jews are Christians are they Islamists as well?

Amaleq13

As you suspect, there is none. The argument is a logically flawed word game.

There is no "evidence" except a deliberate but logically flawed conflation of these different concepts.

He is pretending not to understand the difference between "arguably qualifying" for a term and "actually being called" by a term.

One can make the equally absurd argument that all individuals throughout history who have provided security for a city were called "police officers".


You are wasting your time trying to extract a rational defense of this idiotic notion.

aa5874

But, no-one has put forward your absurd argument about police officers.

It is true and can be shown, even today, that people who believe in Christ are called Christians. Whether or not Christ was human only, God and man or spiritual/phantom, belief in Christ is all that is needed to consider yourself or by others to be Christian.

Marcion was a Christian and his Christ was a phantom.

Cerinthus was a Christian and his Christ was only human.

The so-called heretics as found in the writings of Irenaeus were Christians or deemed themselves along with their followers to be Christians, even though these so-called heretics believed in numerous versions of Christ, from human only to a phantom.

It is both absurd and idiotic to think that Jews who believed in Christ, and also believed they were anointed with the oil of God, christ, could not be, or was not even possible, to be called Christians by others.

Simon Barchocheba, the Jew was called Christ or the Messiah.

The so-called Jesus, the Jew was called Christ or the Messiah.

What was the name of their followers?

Christians.

Tyro

Of course they could have been. Noone is arguing that they could not have been. That is not the question here. The question is if they actually were called christiani (or rather chrestiani). And we have no evidence supporting this. Or do you? Can you find any reference to christiani which has to be about ordinary Jews?

According to which source was Simon called christos?

Do you have any evidence at all of Simon ben Kosiba's followers ever being called christiani, by anyone?!

Amaleq13

You ask this of someone who claims he doesn't recognize an analogy?

You are wasting your time trying to engage in a rational discussion with someone either incapable or unwilling to do so.

But it is your head, so do what you wish. :banghead:

aa5874

Unless there are direct evidence or references, most theories or conclusions are formulated through deduction.

You will not find a direct reference that states Paul was the first to write about Jesus in the NT or church writings. The theory was developped by deduction.

You will not find a direct reference that states gMark was written before gMatthew. This theory was also formulated by deduction.

Now, I have deduced that Jews were called Christians by others, that is, Jews were called Christians, very likely, by the Greeks and Romans.

The passage in Tacitus Annals 15.44, where certain persons were called Christians BY the populace appears to me to be a reference to Jews and NOT Jesus believers, since Jesus of the NT did not exist BEFORE Nero and the stories of Jesus were written after the death of Nero.

It is very important to notice that Tacitus wrote that these persons were called Christian BY the populace.

It would appear to me that the word "christian" was initially used, not to identify a religion, but used to identify or in reference to Jews.

So, unless it can be shown that Jesus did exist before Nero or that the Jesus story was known during the time of Nero, all mention of the word "christian" is very likely to be in reference to Jews, the anointed ones, and those who believed in the physical Christ or Messiah, like Simon Barcocheba.



The word Messiah when transliterated to Greek is the same as Christ.

John 1:41 - Simon bar cochba, the Jew, was called Messiah by the Jews and Christ in the Greek language.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Kokhba_revolt

I will show you Tertullian and Psalms again and you may be able to deduce the origin of the word christian and who were the anointed ones, the christians.

Apology 3Psalms 105:15 -
I have deduced Jews were called christians by others long before the Jesus stories were written.


The Jews, the anoined ones,( "anointing being the origin of the word christian"), believed in a physical Christ long before the Jesus Christ story was fabricated that was God and man, a fictitious character.

show_no_mercy

This is ironic, coming from someone who goes on and on about "authentic" Jewish names. "Paul" is a Latin name.

Tyro

Still, your "decuction" is unsubstantiated. The word christiani derives from anointed, yes, but if the Jews actually had been called christiani or chrestiani there would have been any traces of this. No such traces exists. No mention of the word Chrestianus is made before this Jucundus inscription, made before 37 CE, so you cannot prove or even make a plausible case based upon no evidence at all. Where in the Old Testament are the Jews as a people called the annointed people, and is this translated as christiani in the Septuagint? I guess never and not.

Suetonius calls the christiani a new superstition (Nero 16:2), which is not consistent with your theory, that christiani refers to the Jews. Judaism was NOT a NEW religion, but an old one. The term chrestiani/christiani were not used regarding Simon Bar Kochba's followers, according to any source available. Your "deduction" conflicts with available evidence, and is apparently false.

aa5874

Once you admit that the word christiani is derived from anointing [b] then you are actually contradicting yourself when you say my deduction is unsubstantiated.

My deduction is in fact substantiated.

It is true and can be shown that Jews were called anointed before 37 CE. Jews were referered to as anointed since the writings of Hebrew Scripture or the book called Leviticus.

It is true and can be shown that Jews believed in Christ or the Messiah before 37 CE. Jews believed in Christ or the Messiah since, at least, Hebrew Scriptures were written or the book called Daniel.

It is true and can be shown that people who believe in Christ were called Christians.

It can be deduced that Jews were called Christians.


But, Tacitus did not call "the Christians" a new religion. According to Tacitus, the Christians were hated for their abominations and that Judaea was the first source of the evil.

It can be deduced that Christians were from Judaea, the first source of the evil.

Jews were first called Christians.

Tacitus' Annal 15.44 Suetonius Twelve Caesars-Nero You have failed to show that Jews could not have been called Christians at some time before or during the time of Nero.

Now, even today, and in the recent past, Christians have started new mischeivous superstitions. David Koresh and Jim Jones believed to be Christians are good examples.

Tyro

"Once you admit that the word christiani is derived from anointing then you are actually contradicting yourself when you say my deduction is unsubstantiated."

No, I do not. It is one thing to say that something is possible - another to say that it is plausible or substantiated. There is no evidence at all that Jews were called christiani before 37 CE.

"Jews were referered to as anointed since the writings of Hebrew Scripture or the book called Leviticus." - that the Jews (or rather their profets) were called anointed (χριστῶν) in Psalms 105:15, does not prove that any outsider called these people christiani. They perhaps considered themselves anointed by God, but why would that make them called christiani? What I call myself is one thing - what others call me another.

"It is true and can be shown that Jews believed in Christ or the Messiah before 37 CE." - which Messiah did the mainstream Jews believe in? That they believed that a Messiah was _yet to come_ does NOT mean that they were a Messiah worshipping group and thus called "messiahans".

"It is true and can be shown that people who believe in Christ were called Christians." - It can only be shown that _a certain group_ believing in _a certain Christ_ - Christ Jesus - has been called Christians in ancient times. Do you have any evidence at all of another group, believing in a Messiah, being called christiani? E.g. the followers of Judas of Galilee were called zealots, and not christiani or chrestiani.

"According to Tacitus, the Christians were hated for their abominations and that Judaea was the first source of the evil."

The Chrestiani derived from Judaea - so what? Not only Jews lived there, and even if the Chrestiani was a subgroup of the Jews, that does NOT mean that the Jews generally were called Chrestiani, only that this particular group of Jews was. Mormons are based in Salt Lake City - that does NOT mean that EVERYONE in Salt Lake City is a Mormon. That is false deduction.

"Jews were first called Christians."

Repeating this will not make it true, since it is unsubstantiated. Suetonius says the Christiani were given to "a new and mischievous superstition", not that only a part of the Christiani was (which would have been the case if the Christiani were the Jews). And both Suetonius and Tacitus speak of Jews, and never use the word Chrestiani or Christiani about them.

"You have failed to show that Jews could not have been called Christians at some time before or during the time of Nero."

I have never said that they COULD not have. Once again you think the burden of proof is on anyone else than you. This is false. You claim Jews were called Christians before Nero - prove it. I say we have no evidence in support of such a notion, and you have shown nothing else. The word Christianus or Chrestianus is not known before ~37 CE, so if Jews would have been called so, this would be unknown for all ancient writers and inscriptionists, which is totally improbable. You cannot "deduce" something from nothing. Until you have shown any evidence at all, I will believe that the Jews have never been called Christians or Chrestians. That certain Christians were Jews is another question. That certain americans are liberals doesn't make every american ever existing, a liberal.