Why be good?

[Randy Carson]

I'm no scholar of the subject, so... I'm going to cherry-pick what someone else has written (these guys also seem to be christian):

You have confused the "Babylon" of 1 Peter 5:13 with the discussion of "Babylon" in the book of Revelation. Notice that the authors of the passage you quoted make the distinction (and I'm adding two bits for clarification):

Although evidence for the identification of Babylon with Rome [in Revelation] may initially appear convincing, upon careful examination it becomes clear that Babylon cannot mean Rome. Those who propose that Babylon be understood as a code name for Rome often point to evidence of such use in early extra-biblical writings: 1Pe. 5:13 as well) Rome is called Babylon.]” However, such evidence is inconclusive because these other writings date much later than the book of Revelation:

IOW, poca, Peter used "Babylon" to mean Rome in his letter, but John was NOT referring to Rome in Revelation.

Mistakes like this are easy to make when you're not actually familiar with the source material.

---

Simon of Cyrene was the man forced to carry Jesus' cross because Jesus had been beaten so badly by the Roman soldiers that He did not have the strength to do so. Mark mentions it here:

Mark 15:21
A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross.

Why would Mark throw in such an insignificant detail? Because the audience for whom his gospel was written (he wrote from Rome, remember) KNEW RUFUS PERSONALLY.

So, what we can gather from Mark and Paul is that as a result of his encounter with Jesus, Simon eventually became a Christian as did his wife and son, Rufus.

And when does Paul mention Rufus? In his letter to which church? The Church in Rome where Rufus was living - a church, by the way, which Paul did not know personally at the time of his writing that epistle.

So, we see that Mark and Paul, independently of one another, mention Rufus' name in their respective writings. This is an example of the internal evidence that points to the historical reliability of the New Testament.

There are other examples, of course.

hmm...
Let me see if I got this straight...
Rufus was in Jerusalem to help out J.C. carry his cross.
He then moved out to Rome (with Peter?) where he lived out his life as a believer and was someone other romans could resort to as someone who could verify the account given to them by Paul (written, at least, 30 years after the events that Rufus witnessed as, at least, a teenager).

How could Paul know Rufus?
How was Rufus still alive at the time of Paul's writing?

No, poca.

Simon of Cyrene, Rufus' father, was forced to carry the cross of Jesus in Jerusalem. By the time Mark and Paul mention Rufus, Rufus and his mother are living in Rome.