You shouldn't talk about the pre 2nd century dating of Acts like thatBernard Muller wrote: ↑Wed Jan 06, 2021 4:31 pm
All I can see are wild theories, assumptions, speculations, opinions, no supporting evidence. All trash for me.
Cordially, Bernard
Recommendation for critical analysis of Acts of the Apostles?
-
- Posts: 1030
- Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:19 am
Re: Recommendation for critical analysis of Acts of the Apostles?
-
- Posts: 3964
- Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
- Contact:
Re: Recommendation for critical analysis of Acts of the Apostles?
to perseusomega9,
So what do you mean by pre 2nd century dating? Are you referring to my dating around 80-90?
If so, did you bother to read my web page on my dating of Acts? If so, what do you think is trashy?
Cordially, Bernard
I was commenting on the Acts Seminar unevidenced theories (posted earlier) leading, among other things, to an early 2nd century dating.You shouldn't talk about the pre 2nd century dating of Acts like thatAll I can see are wild theories, assumptions, speculations, opinions, no supporting evidence. All trash for me.
Cordially, Bernard
So what do you mean by pre 2nd century dating? Are you referring to my dating around 80-90?
If so, did you bother to read my web page on my dating of Acts? If so, what do you think is trashy?
Cordially, Bernard
-
- Posts: 1030
- Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:19 am
Re: Recommendation for critical analysis of Acts of the Apostles?
Any dating scheme that puts Acts in the 1st century is trash.
-
- Posts: 3964
- Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
- Contact:
Re: Recommendation for critical analysis of Acts of the Apostles?
to perseusomega9,
Cordially, Bernard
WHY?Any dating scheme that puts Acts in the 1st century is trash.
Cordially, Bernard
Re: Recommendation for critical analysis of Acts of the Apostles?
For one because its clear that Josephus AJ has been used, which is circa 95 CE. For another, the clear effort to smooth over conflicts between Paul and Peter and to try and harmonize around Catholic ideas is a 2nd century thing. For another Acts is pretty strongly anti-Jewish, another 2nd century feature. Honestly I think Acts could even be post-Third Jewish-Roman War, in the time of Hadrian. But, I also think its likely hat Acts uses 1st century sources as well, the epistles of Paul for starters.
-
- Posts: 2100
- Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am
Re: Recommendation for critical analysis of Acts of the Apostles?
Attention Shoppers --
I made a hash of things, confusing and misstating Bernard's Position on whether Acts authors had awareness of Josephus' Antiquities.. and War.... Prolly RGPrice's as well. I hereby repent in full sackcloth and ashes. I REALLY apologize. I leave the Post intact, however. I still believe that Acts is mostly about the star-struck 12th Legion and Mucianus.
Josephus, War..., 2, 19, 1:
AND now Gallus, seeing nothing more that looked towards an innovation in Galilee, returned with his army to Cesarea: but Cestius removed with his whole army, and marched to Antipatris; and when he was informed that there was a great body of Jewish forces gotten together in a certain tower called Aphek, he sent a party before to fight them; but this party dispersed the Jews by affrighting them before it came to a battle: so they came, and finding their camp deserted, they burnt it, as well as the villages that lay about it. But when Cestius had marched from Antipatris to Lydda, he found the city empty of its men, for the whole multitude were gone up to Jerusalem to the feast of tabernacles; yet did he destroy fifty of those that showed themselves, and burnt the city, and so marched forwards; and ascending by Betboron, he pitched his camp at a certain place called Gabao, fifty furlongs distant from Jerusalem..."
Acts 9: 32 - 35 (RSV):
[32] Now as Peter went here and there among them all, he came down also to the saints that lived at Lydda.
[33] There he found a man named Aene'as, who had been bedridden for eight years and was paralyzed.
[34] And Peter said to him, "Aene'as, Jesus Christ heals you; rise and make your bed." And immediately he rose.
[35] And all the residents of Lydda and Sharon saw him, and they turned to the Lord.
1. "Peter" is a fiction here. He was not alive at this time, at the Destruction of Jerusalem, but it would easy to get bogged down here. Trust me: Peter is at this time a fiction.
2. "The man named Aeneas" is a cipher for the 12th Legion, which, 8 years prior to the Destruction of Jerusalem, was humiliated by the Parthians, losing their Eagles with many taken into slavery. They were "paralyzed" when attacked and would not even leave their tents to defend themselves.
3. You may follow the events of Cestius and the 12th by playing Match'em Up with descriptions in War... and events in Acts.
This begins in Acts 1: 20 (RSV):
[20] For it is written in the book of Psalms, `Let his habitation become desolate,
and let there be no one to live in it';
and `His office let another take.'
Cestius "hangs himself" and also has his guts spilled out at Beth Horon (That is, Cestius appears as Judas. What is new here is that, on this view, there is no contradiction in descriptions of "Judas"), since he did not follow Roman Protocol for "Baggage" to be carried in the middle of the Troop Movement. This allowed the Jewish fighters to split the Legion. The Jewish Fighters held the high terrain at Beth Horon and this allowed them to destroy much of the 12th Legion.
CW
I made a hash of things, confusing and misstating Bernard's Position on whether Acts authors had awareness of Josephus' Antiquities.. and War.... Prolly RGPrice's as well. I hereby repent in full sackcloth and ashes. I REALLY apologize. I leave the Post intact, however. I still believe that Acts is mostly about the star-struck 12th Legion and Mucianus.
Josephus, War..., 2, 19, 1:
AND now Gallus, seeing nothing more that looked towards an innovation in Galilee, returned with his army to Cesarea: but Cestius removed with his whole army, and marched to Antipatris; and when he was informed that there was a great body of Jewish forces gotten together in a certain tower called Aphek, he sent a party before to fight them; but this party dispersed the Jews by affrighting them before it came to a battle: so they came, and finding their camp deserted, they burnt it, as well as the villages that lay about it. But when Cestius had marched from Antipatris to Lydda, he found the city empty of its men, for the whole multitude were gone up to Jerusalem to the feast of tabernacles; yet did he destroy fifty of those that showed themselves, and burnt the city, and so marched forwards; and ascending by Betboron, he pitched his camp at a certain place called Gabao, fifty furlongs distant from Jerusalem..."
Acts 9: 32 - 35 (RSV):
[32] Now as Peter went here and there among them all, he came down also to the saints that lived at Lydda.
[33] There he found a man named Aene'as, who had been bedridden for eight years and was paralyzed.
[34] And Peter said to him, "Aene'as, Jesus Christ heals you; rise and make your bed." And immediately he rose.
[35] And all the residents of Lydda and Sharon saw him, and they turned to the Lord.
1. "Peter" is a fiction here. He was not alive at this time, at the Destruction of Jerusalem, but it would easy to get bogged down here. Trust me: Peter is at this time a fiction.
2. "The man named Aeneas" is a cipher for the 12th Legion, which, 8 years prior to the Destruction of Jerusalem, was humiliated by the Parthians, losing their Eagles with many taken into slavery. They were "paralyzed" when attacked and would not even leave their tents to defend themselves.
3. You may follow the events of Cestius and the 12th by playing Match'em Up with descriptions in War... and events in Acts.
This begins in Acts 1: 20 (RSV):
[20] For it is written in the book of Psalms, `Let his habitation become desolate,
and let there be no one to live in it';
and `His office let another take.'
Cestius "hangs himself" and also has his guts spilled out at Beth Horon (That is, Cestius appears as Judas. What is new here is that, on this view, there is no contradiction in descriptions of "Judas"), since he did not follow Roman Protocol for "Baggage" to be carried in the middle of the Troop Movement. This allowed the Jewish fighters to split the Legion. The Jewish Fighters held the high terrain at Beth Horon and this allowed them to destroy much of the 12th Legion.
CW
Last edited by Charles Wilson on Thu Jan 07, 2021 6:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 3964
- Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
- Contact:
Re: Recommendation for critical analysis of Acts of the Apostles?
to rgprice,
I dated gLuke, gJohn and Barnabas epistle (all of them fairly anti-Jewish) to the end of the 1st century. So Acts would not be out of place at that time period.
Dating of gLuke & gJohn: http://historical-jesus.info/62.html
Dating of Barnabas epistle: http://historical-jesus.info/gospels.html#barnabas
I don't think the author of Acts would want to show conflict between Paul & Peter, regardless when Acts was written. That would be very detrimental to Christian beliefs then.
Cordially, Bernard
NO, Acts used Josephus' Wars but not Antiquity: http://historical-jesus.info/58.htmlFor one because its clear that Josephus AJ has been used, which is circa 95 CE. For another, the clear effort to smooth over conflicts between Paul and Peter and to try and harmonize around Catholic ideas is a 2nd century thing. For another Acts is pretty strongly anti-Jewish, another 2nd century feature. Honestly I think Acts could even be post-Third Jewish-Roman War, in the time of Hadrian. But, I also think its likely hat Acts uses 1st century sources as well, the epistles of Paul for starters.
I dated gLuke, gJohn and Barnabas epistle (all of them fairly anti-Jewish) to the end of the 1st century. So Acts would not be out of place at that time period.
Dating of gLuke & gJohn: http://historical-jesus.info/62.html
Dating of Barnabas epistle: http://historical-jesus.info/gospels.html#barnabas
I don't think the author of Acts would want to show conflict between Paul & Peter, regardless when Acts was written. That would be very detrimental to Christian beliefs then.
Cordially, Bernard
-
- Posts: 2100
- Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am
Re: Recommendation for critical analysis of Acts of the Apostles?
NOTE: Corrected!
My deepest apologies, Bernard.
Within 24 hours I managed to reverse something plainly written.
I will endeavor to correct the Post as soon as I can.
CW
My deepest apologies, Bernard.
Within 24 hours I managed to reverse something plainly written.
I will endeavor to correct the Post as soon as I can.
CW
-
- Posts: 2817
- Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am
Re: Recommendation for critical analysis of Acts of the Apostles?
A post-Trajan date for Acts has problems about the authors knowledge of 1st century Roman society. See e.g. Sherwin White Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testamentrgprice wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 3:01 pm For one because its clear that Josephus AJ has been used, which is circa 95 CE. For another, the clear effort to smooth over conflicts between Paul and Peter and to try and harmonize around Catholic ideas is a 2nd century thing. For another Acts is pretty strongly anti-Jewish, another 2nd century feature. Honestly I think Acts could even be post-Third Jewish-Roman War, in the time of Hadrian. But, I also think its likely hat Acts uses 1st century sources as well, the epistles of Paul for starters.
Andrew Criddle