Hello Philo,

BACKGROUND

The Gospels are “exceptionally” Jewish in character. And as suggested by me earlier in places adopted a Greek writing style. Given the location and the period in history this not surprising. Albeit, Jesus’ use of chreiai perhaps could indicate a certain philosophical persuasion. The Jewish folk lived in a region on the greater page in history with many of its Greek traditions destroyed in the after-mouth of the decline of the legacies of Alexander the Great. Yet, the Jews maintained their beliefs in the Law, to different degrees of observation. They also saw their race as exclusive. The Romans saw them as antisocial, into the first century , yet respected the ancient nature of their religion, because the Romans in some ways conservative and in many ways superstitious about offending any God.

However, like in the Middle East today, various individuals amongst the Jews, belonged to different sects. The Zealots, as you know, might have been seen to be terrorists (into today’s language) by the Romans. So, Romans came down hard twice in 1st and 2nd century history: Destroying of the Second Temple and the Roman-Jewish Wars. The difference between the 1st and 2nd century reactions by the Romans was in the 1st a response to antisocial behaviour. In the 2nd century more to do with Christianised Jews not wishing to participate in celebration (New Year, The Anniversary Foundation of Roman) and ceremony (blessing buildings and soldiers going to war which the Christianised Jews saw as idolatry. Jewish resentment at occupation and the rebellious response to the occupation went through both centuries.

Gibbon:After the Jesus church (not his words) had fifteen ethnically Jewish Bishops of Jerusalem, Hadrian expelled all the Jews from Mount Sion and made it a colony called Aelia Capitolina. Some exiles settled in Pella.

Being exiled from the Holy City was a problem, because as you allude to above, the early Jesus people, did retain the Jewish practice of every adult mail being required three times a year to visit the Holy City. A problem, if the Romans wont let you in.

Philo,

Some exiled Jesus people (Nazarenes) elected a Latin, Gentile Bishop called Marcus, who became the key for the some Christian Jews to re-enter Aelia Capitolina. Some of the Pella population refused to follow a Gentile bishop and stayed in Pella. From Pella, the non-Nazarenes spread to Boerea (Aleppo) Syria. Afterwhich, there was still further fragmentation, eventually leading to the Ebionites and Gnostics.

The history above, I would suggest would cover the period 60AD-c.120AD. During this time, even before the creation of Aelia Capitolia, there would have been writings, perhaps even from Antioch, Alexandria, Ephesus, Corinth and even Roman, the destruction of the Second Temple drove some ethic Jews away from Jerusalem. So, I agree there would have been c.60-c.120 writings.

After the Pella schism, various churches seemed have gone their different ways, with writings supporting various positions, starting with a Jewish base. Some did not stay tethered. Some Gnostics for example rejected “with profane derision” (Gibbon) the idea of God working for six days and the speaking serpent from the OT. Some did. Justin the Martyr would accept even Jewish ceremony provided it was seen to be “necessary”.

So, I agree with you there were Jewish based feeder stories and Christianised Jews and very early writings. More importantly, I am sure history would support you.

**However, the feeders split , split and split again, over the subsequent 250 odd years and went in all directions.**

When the Council of Nicea was performing its deliberations it did so from political motives, not forensic. Consequently, I find in hard to believe the Bible is infallible. That there cannot be incorrect insertions nor import omissions. (Space)


TBC

Philo, my friend, you have made my point, in so much as Constantine’s advisors would not have known much of the above history. Further, if that is accepted, similarly, people forming churches in 60AD-120AD, would have been dealing with fragments of knowledge from 35AD-50AD pre-church house sects. Those writers, two to three and more generations removed from the Crucifixion, faced a similar problem as Nicea, owing to the fragmented nature of the Jesus house-sects.

Kind regards.