On the other hand, it seems as though just being "Christians" / "Chrestians" (partisans of this Christus / Chrestus) was indeed the distinguishing characteristic of what "Christians" were, to those who were not. Christians were those who were carrying on about Christ. That is the common denominator understanding of who Christians were.GakuseiDon wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2024 3:38 pm I don't think the pagans before Christianity became mainstream, if they thought about Christianity at all, didn't care one way or the other about the role of Jesus in Christianity. So whether Jesus was the Christ, or was the Christ-to-come, wasn't a concern. They were critical about the Christian view that the whole world was coming to an end, and that they would rise with fleshly bodies, positions at odds with the philosophical thoughts of the time.
What you're describing involves a more-than-passing familiarity with the positions of the Christians, which of course some would have. But it's too particularized and detailed to be a generalization about how "the pagans" "thought" about Christians. It is, as you put it, how they usually would have thought about the topics you mention, if they were introduced to them as part of what Christians believed.
What, then, did people find most objectionable about Christians, in general?
The most salient feature in that regard was their refusal to participate in honoring the gods, with all that entailed.
Jews were often disliked for similar reasons, but the antiquity of their religion gave them excuse. To the extent that they passed as Jews, the people we now call Christian had the same excuse. But as soon as they were called "Christian," they no longer had that excuse. They had become Christians and not Jews, at least in the eyes of others (which is what matters here).
And there was a simple expedient whereby you could know whether someone was a Jew or instead a Christian: you could ask them to curse Christ, something it was said that a Christian would not do.
In this way, "Christ" played a central role in the way Christians were perceived. Not because of any doctrinal content of any kind. But because adherence to "Christ" was the delimiter for who was, and who was not, a "Christian."
It would be a mistake to assume that anyone needed any philosophical or theological justification for disliking Christians. They were deeply upsetting just by existing, recruiting, separating themselves, and refusing to participate in ordinary religious civic life. All you had to know is that they were Christians. And, for that, all you had to know is that they worshipped this "Christ."
