'we' and Acts, and Paul's existence
-
- Posts: 18362
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: 'we' and Acts, and Paul's existence
How does it make sense that what Joseph saw was a Hebrew translation of our Acts with all its anomalies (including the 'we' sections) transformed to agree with heresy. More likely is the idea that our text is a manipulated version of a Hebrew original.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Re: 'we' and Acts, and Paul's existence
Thanks. Unfortunately we don't have that Hebrew document, unless it is in the some respects the same as the various translations of Acts that we do have. Heresies existed long after 80AD so who is to say which came first? Did you address what you were saying about Luke, Paul, John, and Mark and the we passages compared to the first few verses of Luke?
- neilgodfrey
- Posts: 6161
- Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm
Re: 'we' and Acts, and Paul's existence
If I may suggest my own little explanation for the "we passages" in Acts --- I have not reviewed this for some years but fwiw here goes:
The "we passages" are the narrator's device for vicariously involving his Roman audience in a spiritual emulation of Aeneas's founding of the Roman race.
Note they all occur on the collective voyage from Troy to Rome. The first foray is to the Roman colony, a little Rome, Philippi; thence from Troy to Jerusalem that becomes the potential trap for Paul's destiny as Carthage had for Aeneas; and from Jerusalem to Rome itself via the sea adventure and the trek in Italy to Rome itself.
In support of the general possibility of the idea I appeal to works by Bonz and especially MacDonald who have argued at varying levels of detail for the possibility that Acts did indeed attempt to emulate the story of the Aeneid or the legendary founding of Rome. Bonz makes no reference to the we passages and I don't know (yet) if MacDonald does, either. But it strikes me that if this is what the author was doing -- recreating a spiritual version of a new spiritual Rome as the "HQ" to replace Jerusalem as the centre of God's people -- then it does appear that the we-passages could serve to involve the the Roman readership in this vicarious identification.
The "we passages" are the narrator's device for vicariously involving his Roman audience in a spiritual emulation of Aeneas's founding of the Roman race.
Note they all occur on the collective voyage from Troy to Rome. The first foray is to the Roman colony, a little Rome, Philippi; thence from Troy to Jerusalem that becomes the potential trap for Paul's destiny as Carthage had for Aeneas; and from Jerusalem to Rome itself via the sea adventure and the trek in Italy to Rome itself.
In support of the general possibility of the idea I appeal to works by Bonz and especially MacDonald who have argued at varying levels of detail for the possibility that Acts did indeed attempt to emulate the story of the Aeneid or the legendary founding of Rome. Bonz makes no reference to the we passages and I don't know (yet) if MacDonald does, either. But it strikes me that if this is what the author was doing -- recreating a spiritual version of a new spiritual Rome as the "HQ" to replace Jerusalem as the centre of God's people -- then it does appear that the we-passages could serve to involve the the Roman readership in this vicarious identification.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
-
- Posts: 18362
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: 'we' and Acts, and Paul's existence
And the gospel was written after 70 CE so what's your point?Heresies existed long after 80AD
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Re: 'we' and Acts, and Paul's existence
EDIT: removed prior remarks. Interesting perspective. It seems odd to me that the we passages are where they are but they way in which they are presented to me could have been much more dramatic if that was the effect the author was going for. As such, I think it is more likely that it reflects the author's actual participation. No other explanation seems to make much sense to me.neilgodfrey wrote:If I may suggest my own little explanation for the "we passages" in Acts --- I have not reviewed this for some years but fwiw here goes:
The "we passages" are the narrator's device for vicariously involving his Roman audience in a spiritual emulation of Aeneas's founding of the Roman race.
Note they all occur on the collective voyage from Troy to Rome. The first foray is to the Roman colony, a little Rome, Philippi; thence from Troy to Jerusalem that becomes the potential trap for Paul's destiny as Carthage had for Aeneas; and from Jerusalem to Rome itself via the sea adventure and the trek in Italy to Rome itself.
In support of the general possibility of the idea I appeal to works by Bonz and especially MacDonald who have argued at varying levels of detail for the possibility that Acts did indeed attempt to emulate the story of the Aeneid or the legendary founding of Rome. Bonz makes no reference to the we passages and I don't know (yet) if MacDonald does, either. But it strikes me that if this is what the author was doing -- recreating a spiritual version of a new spiritual Rome as the "HQ" to replace Jerusalem as the centre of God's people -- then it does appear that the we-passages could serve to involve the the Roman readership in this vicarious identification.
Last edited by TedM on Sun May 17, 2015 4:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: 'we' and Acts, and Paul's existence
It simply appears to me that you are looking pretty hard to discredit Acts. I'll grant you that it is possible that a source 300 years later certainly may have had a closer handle on the truth than we do today, but your reconstruction seems to want to toss out the very large amount of data in Acts that we do have to work with today.Secret Alias wrote:And the gospel was written after 70 CE so what's your point?Heresies existed long after 80AD
-
- Posts: 18362
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: 'we' and Acts, and Paul's existence
Why is it 'discrediting' Acts to say it like it is.It simply appears to me that you are looking pretty hard to discredit Acts.
1. There was an original Hebrew text of Acts that no longer exists
2. The surviving text is layered (like most ancient texts) the layering likely occurring when the Hebrew text was rendered into Greek and later.
3. The mention of Luke appears to be the most recent layer and it is likely related to the 'we' layer
4. Previous to the incorporation of Luke, Mark-John was likely identified as the original source of the material and proof that the Church was unified (i.e. Mark-John is witness of both Peter and Paul).
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Re: 'we' and Acts, and Paul's existence
Ok, I am not aware of much evidence for any of the points you have provided, but as I said in another post I haven't really studied the text other than having read it a number of times. Thanks for sharing.
-
- Posts: 18362
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: 'we' and Acts, and Paul's existence
Also studies of Acts like FF Bruce (hardly a radical revisionist) argues that there are many examples of the author changing his sources for instance in the transition between chapters 5 and 6.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
-
- Posts: 18362
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: 'we' and Acts, and Paul's existence
The question isn't whether some of the information in Acts dates back to the first century. It might well. I don't know. But Acts isn't what it claims to be.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote