Paul's "persecution" of the early Christians?

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Paul claims to have persecuted the early Church, but, to me, his claim seems rather dubious.  After all, Paul was not a Roman official or a member of the legions, and given Roman federalism, it seems unthinkable to me that Paul, a mere Roman citizen, could harass Roman subjects?  It seems that not only the Roman authorities, but the local ones under Roman governorship, would object, strongly, to such behavior.  Some will cite 2 Corinthians 11:24 where he states, "Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one.", but this claim is also odd, given Paul's Roman citizenship.

It seems to me that the story of Paul's persecution of the early Church was invented, and was (and is) pure myth.

You were being told that Paul was a Roman citizen, you didn't listen. There was a difference in being a Roman citizen and a Roman subject. Roman citizens had many rights, Roman subjects had few to none. The Romans were having enough trouble with the Jews at the time to worry about a man persecuting his own people, to them this amounted to help rather than a problem. Jesus being a Roman subject was by manipulation able to be arrested by non-Roman citizens and tried and found guilty outside a Roman court. Pilate himself found it easier to allow the Jews to fight among themselves because it distracted them from rebellion against the Roman Empire.

GC

So where was Paul's birth certificate to prove that he was in a fact a Roman?  He was an Egyptian terrorist when he wasn't killing animals in the arenas and chasing down religious heretics.

[Godscreated]

You were being told that Paul was a Roman citizen, you didn't listen. There was a difference in being a Roman citizen and a Roman subject. Roman citizens had many rights, Roman subjects had few to none. The Romans were having enough trouble with the Jews at the time to worry about a man persecuting his own people, to them this amounted to help rather than a problem. Jesus being a Roman subject was by manipulation able to be arrested by non-Roman citizens and tried and found guilty outside a Roman court. Pilate himself found it easier to allow the Jews to fight among themselves because it distracted them from rebellion against the Roman Empire.

GC

So where was Paul's birth certificate to prove that he was in a fact a Roman?  He was an Egyptian terrorist when he wasn't killing animals in the arenas and chasing down religious heretics.

 You're still as stupid as you have been, so do not expect me to reply to any of your post, bye.

GC

---

You were being told that Paul was a Roman citizen, you didn't listen. There was a difference in being a Roman citizen and a Roman subject. Roman citizens had many rights, Roman subjects had few to none. The Romans were having enough trouble with the Jews at the time to worry about a man persecuting his own people, to them this amounted to help rather than a problem. Jesus being a Roman subject was by manipulation able to be arrested by non-Roman citizens and tried and found guilty outside a Roman court. Pilate himself found it easier to allow the Jews to fight among themselves because it distracted them from rebellion against the Roman Empire.

GC

What a bunch of crap. 1) Pilate did NOT allow the Jews to fight amongst themselves.  2)Who arrested Jesus in the Temple?  The Romans!

1) Really and where did you get that bit of info from.  2)The Temple guards arrested Jesus in the garden and the priest took Jesus to Pilate to be tried and found guilty, yet Pilate found no wrong in Him. Jesus actually allowed himself to be arrested and the guards knew this because the first time He told them He was Jesus they fell to the ground because of the power of His word. They also witnessed Jesus heal the ear of the servant of the priest, this servant had his ear sliced off by Peter, this puts to rest that God never cured an amputee.
Get things straight before you try to argue a point.

GC

[Succubus]

They also witnessed Jesus heal the ear of the servant of the priest, this servant had his ear sliced off by Peter, this puts to rest that God never cured an amputee.
Get things straight before you try to argue a point.

GC

I don't think you have a handle on what that meme is about.

[vorlon13]

The ear bone is connected to the head bone ?

[Jehanne]

So where was Paul's birth certificate to prove that he was in a fact a Roman?  He was an Egyptian terrorist when he wasn't killing animals in the arenas and chasing down religious heretics.

 You're still as stupid as you have been, so do not expect me to reply to any of your post, bye.

GC

---

What a bunch of crap. 1) Pilate did NOT allow the Jews to fight amongst themselves.  2)Who arrested Jesus in the Temple?  The Romans!

1) Really and where did you get that bit of info from.  2)The Temple guards arrested Jesus in the garden and the priest took Jesus to Pilate to be tried and found guilty, yet Pilate found no wrong in Him. Jesus actually allowed himself to be arrested and the guards knew this because the first time He told them He was Jesus they fell to the ground because of the power of His word. They also witnessed Jesus heal the ear of the servant of the priest, this servant had his ear sliced off by Peter, this puts to rest that God never cured an amputee.
Get things straight before you try to argue a point.

GC

It's just story telling. If Jesus truly had healed someone's severed ear, people would have fled from him in terror. They would NOT have arrested him!

[Drich]

LOL< was he, by whom?

It's just absurd to claim that a Roman citizen could persecute a Roman subject.  Even in colonial America, people were hanged for such offenses.

---

You were being told that Paul was a Roman citizen, you didn't listen. There was a difference in being a Roman citizen and a Roman subject. Roman citizens had many rights, Roman subjects had few to none. The Romans were having enough trouble with the Jews at the time to worry about a man persecuting his own people, to them this amounted to help rather than a problem. Jesus being a Roman subject was by manipulation able to be arrested by non-Roman citizens and tried and found guilty outside a Roman court. Pilate himself found it easier to allow the Jews to fight among themselves because it distracted them from rebellion against the Roman Empire.

GC

What a bunch of crap.  Pilate did NOT allow the Jews to fight amongst themselves.  Who arrested Jesus in the Temple?  The Romans!

Pilate had little control over the Jews which is why he was recalled shortly after the death of Christ for mis managing Jerusalem.

---

LOL< was he, by whom?

by the temple leadership and those in the government looking to squash "the way." The same people who commissioned Paul upon His request.

---

LOL< was he, by whom?

It's just absurd to claim that a Roman citizen could persecute a Roman subject.  Even in colonial America, people were hanged for such offenses.

---

Seriously? in all of History you can't thik ofone instance where a 'subject' of the state can be treated as a non human/with out regard to their basic rights? Where a citizen of a state could beat or even kill a subject without any reprisal?

What about the slaves colonial America used? what about the indians? What if an 'uppity slave' claimed to be the son of God and he hadn't yet but the fear would be he turn on the government once he emassed enough slaves to ? (which he was doing) Do you think Washington would have given two squirt about some preacher who kills that slave or his followers in order to keep the peace among the citizens of the country?

---

Rome isn't exactly famous for treating jewish zealots causing trouble in their provinces with gratitude.

Exactly!

---

Jerusalem (as well as ever other roman held territory was a state of Rome.) laws in that state concerning the destruction of Christians was not against any Roman 'constitutional law.'

What "laws" might those be, dickhead?  Please cite them so we can all learn what you alone seem to know.

Do you ever know what you are talking about?

your question indicates you are unable to follow the analogy given. Maybe have one of your buddies follow the conversation a little better. You are too far behind for me to go back and help without the topic going off the rails

---

Rome isn't exactly famous for treating jewish zealots causing trouble in their provinces with gratitude.

The Romans arrested and often executed ANYONE who was causing trouble within the Empire; the local authorities were free to do the same, as long as they were obedient to Rome (hence, federalism).  If Paul did arrest individuals on his own, such would have been an affront to both the local authorities as well as their Roman overlords, but if he was only making such outlandish claims as part of his story, then the Romans and local governors may have written him off as just being a crank, at least for awhile.  But, as his stories spread, they may have taken him to task over it; as such, he may have been arrested, tried and executed, not for his religious beliefs, but for having spread political and false rumors throughout the Empire.

Paul did not arrest people on his own he was given authority via the temple/herod in an effort to reel in disodent factions already under the subjugation of Rome.

---

Paul was apart of the official roman effort to stop the spread of this rebellious faction tht had the jews all up in a tizzy.

[Jehanne]

No evidence outside of "Paul" (or, "Pauls") exists to support the earliest one's claim that he persecuted anyone, along with his claim that he was publicly flogged (twice) by "the Jews". You can't have it both ways -- if Paul was doing official work by and for Rome, he could not have been punished by the local rulers, but if he was acting on his own, then the Romans would have punished him.

It just doesn't add up, but if you see him as a delusional epileptic with a personality disorder who was given to flights of fancy and religious extremes, then, yes, things begin to make sense. He could lie all he wanted, and no one would give a damn until those lies spread to the point where they were starting to cause the official rulers problems, and that's what probably got the (early) Paul arrested and then executed.

[The Grand Nudger]

Again, pauls arrest and execution is legendary paul, and even within the context of legendary paul it wasn't his "going around spreading stories that caused trouble" that got him executed.  That would be nero, deflecting blame for a fire.    That little chestnut, however, is probably a myth. It rests on a single line from tacitus...with no source, not attested to by contemporaries even though they report on the same events.

It's a russian nesting doll of bullshit.

[Minimalist]

The ear bone is connected to the head bone ?

G-C's head bone is connected to his asshole.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Where's Paul's birth certificate?