RE: Evidence: The Gathering
September 22, 2015 at 6:15 pm
(This post was last modified: September 22, 2015 at 6:16 pm by Randy Carson.)
(September 21, 2015 at 6:50 pm)pocaracas Wrote:(September 21, 2015 at 4:48 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Notice the date of Tacitus' birth; he would have been about 39 years old at the time that the last living apostle John wrote his gospel in AD 95. The immediate successors of the apostles - people like Clement of Rome, Polycarp of Smyrna, Ignatius of Antioch - were all still alive at the time that Tacitus was in Rome and gathering the data that later formed his two works of history. Clement of Rome, for example, was a disciple of Peter and Paul, and he was in Rome (and pope) until his death in AD 99. So, that's not "three whole generations" from Jesus to Tacitus. Peter taught Clement, and Tacitus was in Rome at the same time that Clement was head of the Church in that city.
Jesus --> Peter --> Clement
Randy, Randy... Do you know how many people, at that time, claimed to have been disciples of the original disciples?
Do you know how many texts were in circulation claiming to have been written by one of those original apostles?
Do you know why they didn't all survive the biblical editing?
For all we know, Clement merely claimed to have gathered info from Peter to boost his credibility with his audience.
Of course, even then, it is relevant in the fact that there were people who were followers of the christ figure all the way in Rome, so that this Clement could have someone to whom pass that message.
The existence of followers of the christian cult in Rome is quite odd at such an early stage of the cult... either there was a sort of mass migration from the middle-east to Europe, or those few christians that did go to Rome on business or leisure had a great rhetoric that convinced the pagans.
Still, it's not much evidence for the existence of the Jesus fellow... just evidence for the existence of followers of the message allegedly brought forth by him.
Now, you may claim that John was still around, but you'll quickly find that the account in the bible attributed to John is widely agreed by the experts to not have been written by the apostle John.... just another phony... which makes one wonder at the accuracy of its contents.
First, Clement was known and mentioned by Paul.
Philippians 4:3
Yes, and I ask you, my true companion, help these women since they have contended at my side in the cause of the gospel, along with Clement and the rest of my co-workers, whose names are in the book of life.
The Church was small in the beginning, poca, and a lot of these guys knew each other personally as a result of all the travelling they did on their missionary journeys.
Second, there were many Jews in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost who were from other parts of the Roman empire to which the Jews had dispersed.
Acts 2:5-12
5 Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6 When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. 7 Utterly amazed, they asked: “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? 8 Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language? 9 Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome 11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs—we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!” 12 Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, “What does this mean?”
Well, what it means is that after these Jews joined the Church, they went back to their homes...and some of them went home to Rome.
This is why Paul's Letter to the Romans is written to a well-established Church..but one he had never previously visited.