Acts 18:2

[arnoldo]

Acts 18:2 states;

And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome:) and came unto them.

And the Roman Historian, Suetonius, gives us the following account in Lives of the Twelve Casesars;

"As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he [ Claudius ] expelled them [the Jews] from Rome".

Without getting into the controversy over the meaning of “Chrestus” how likely is it that;

• The writer of Acts 18:2 and Suetonius are referring to the same event.
  
• The writer of Acts 18:2 wrote an anachronism by identifying that Christians, i.e., Aquila and Priscilla, were living in Rome approximately in the years 49-50

[One Bad Pig]

Acts 18:2 states;



And the Roman Historian, Suetonius, gives us the following account in Lives of the Twelve Casesars;



Without getting into the controversy over the meaning of “Chrestus” how likely is it that;

• The writer of Acts 18:2 and Suetonius are referring to the same event.
  
• The writer of Acts 18:2 wrote an anachronism by identifying that Christians, i.e., Aquila and Priscilla, were living in Rome approximately in the years 49-50

Given that the Jews generally got along well with the Romans (outside of the province of Palestine anyway) before the Jewish War culminating in the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, it's not very likely that they were referring to different events. And since Christians were well-known enough in Rome 15 years later that Nero could blame the great fire of AD 64 on them, it is reasonable to think that there would have been Christians there c. AD 49-50. Stretching the truth by ten years or so wouldn't accomplish anything worthwhile IMO.

[arnoldo]

Given that the Jews generally got along well with the Romans (outside of the province of Palestine anyway) before the Jewish War culminating in the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, it's not very likely that they were referring to different events. And since Christians were well-known enough in Rome 15 years later that Nero could blame the great fire of AD 64 on them, it is reasonable to think that there would have been Christians there c. AD 49-50. Stretching the truth by ten years or so wouldn't accomplish anything worthwhile IMO.

The Roman Historian Tacitus (AD 56 – AD 117) gives us the following account of Nero’s actions.

Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.

However, it could be argued that Tacitus’ account is a forgery or simply not referring to Christians at all.

[Pilgrim]

Except for the fact that it explicitly refers to Christians. One would have to have a serious apriori to grind not to get that.