rationalskepticism.org

MS2 wrote:

Leucius Charinus wrote:

MS2 wrote:

Leucius Charinus wrote:

Moss basically rejects (5 out of 9) most of the purported persecutions as can be perceived in the following list in which the asterisk * denotes the persecutions that she believes may have been "historical"....

As I said, Moss is not an authority that in any way supports your views. It is disingenuous to suggest that she does.

I don't.

Yes you do. In your OP (http://www.rationalskepticism.org/chris ... l#p2243795) you state without any ambiguity that her thesis leads to your conclusion. You give a summary of her views and then say

Hence the aptness of the term "false flag" [literary] operation undertaken by the political entity of the church organisation sometime after it emerged victorious in its conflict with the heretics after Nicaea.

You are reading too much into things. Moss rejects 5/9 of the persecutions. I agree with her and focus on the 4 she thinks are historical. That is all. The 5 persecutions that Moss rejects I refer to as "literary false flags" - events which did not take place.

I have never claimed Moss supports my claim under investigation - namely that none of these 9 persecutions may have been historical events. I just used Moss to demonstrate a starting point of departure. That should have been clear.

You think that Christianity did not exist until it was invented by Constantine and his cronies and consequently the persecutions must be pure inventions involving people who did not exist.

I think that the latest possible date [terminus ad quem] for the appearance of the Christian "Good News" was the 4th century, and that the stories of the persecutions were developed later.

You'd better clarify. Is it now your view that 'the Christian "Good News"' might have appeared before the 4th century and might not have been the invention of Constantine?

As an amateur historian who understands that most of not all of ancient history is "hypothetical" and involves likelihoods rather than certitudes my view is that the origins of Christianity fall somewhere between the earliest possible date and the latest possible date for the authorship of the Greek New Testament.

Because everyone seems to be investigating the earliest possible date I thought someone should investigate the latest possible date. That's all. Between the two must rest the historical truth.