The fact of the expulsion is confirmed by that passage in the Acts of
the Apostles in which the meeting of Paul and Aquila at Corinth is
mentioned (Acts xviii. 1, 2): “[Paul] found a certain Jew born in
Pontus, lately come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, (because that
Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome).” The testimony is
late,[339] but it will be noticed that Aquila is an Asiatic by birth,
and so very likely had no legal right of residence at Rome in any
circumstances.
Finally, expulsion “from Rome” may have meant only exclusion from the
_pomoerium_, the sacral limit of the city that followed an imaginary
line not at all coincident with its real walls. To escape from the
operation of the decree, it would merely have been necessary to cross
the Tiber, where as a matter of fact the Jews generally lived, since the
Transtiberine region was not included in the _pomoerium_. In general,
expulsion from the city specified that the expelled person might not
come within the first milestone, but in view of the difficulties
presented by the assumption of a real expulsion, this supposition may
also be considered.
Mention has already been made of the special association of Claudius’
successor, Nero, with the Jews. The success that attended their efforts
at propaganda during that emperor’s reign is evidenced by the fact that
Poppaea Sabina became a semi-proselyte. And during Nero’s reign occurs
an event of special importance to the Jews of Rome, the first Christian
persecution.
In the reign of Nero, possibly in that of Claudius, there was brought to
the various Jewish congregations of the Roman world, seemingly not
beyond that, the “good news,” εὐαγγέλιον, that a certain
Jesus, of Nazareth in Galilee, was the long-promised Messiah. To most,
perhaps, the facts cited of his life indicated only that he was one of
the “many swindlers,” γόητες ἄνθρωποι, like those whom
Felix captured and put to death (Jos. Ant. XX. viii. 5). But some
believed. If we are to credit the Acts of the Apostles, this belief at
once produced a bitter conflict between those who did so believe,
afterwards called Christians, and those who did not.[340] But the Acts
in the form in which it has come down to us represents a recension of
much later date, made when the enmity between Jew and Christian was real
and indubitable.
It may be that in certain places those Jews who accepted the evangel
almost at once formed congregations of their own, synagogues or
ecclesiae (the terms are practically synonymous),[341] different from
the synagogues of those who rejected it. But there were from the
beginning differences of degree in its acceptance, and even in the
existing recension of the Acts there is good evidence that its
acceptance or rejection did not immediately and everywhere produce a
schism.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account