• We also have some good idea that a lot of his followers were prosecuted and killed, and never recanted in the process, which might incline you to believe in the radical truth that they lived by.

    Man, I can’t get trial transcripts for cases that happened 2 years ago, and you’re getting them for trials that happened 2,000 years ago?

    • Lovstuhagen@hilariouschaos.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      The very earliest stuff obviously doesn’t have that, and we rely on church history because it wasn’t like even the most interesting thing a Roman governor did that week to kill some random churchmen who created conflict among Jews, nor do we have much preserved about mobs killing these guys other than in the original Christian communal sources.

      But really, if you start from the premise that everything Christians ever write about thesmelves is pure propaganda without an iota of truth in it, that creates a non-serious standard with which to evaluate things.

      Is it really absurd to think that Protomartyr Stephen was killed by a mob of Jews for preaching a radically different religion to them in a time of great political upheaval? Isn’t this exactly what we think of Christians at later times - that they’d just turn on a guy and kill him for being a heretic? Why is it so unbelievable that it once happened to a Christian? Why is it so troublesome that the only people who bothered to write about these martyrs and preserve their memory were the people who were victims in the course of this?

      Obviously, you can say that it’s propaganda and lies, and maybe some of it was. But we know it’s absolutely historic that Christians wre officially persecuted later on. it is also par for the course that they would be less formally persecuted prior to that. it also amkes sense that Christians, like every other group, try to preserve a communal memory.