Acts doesn't know Pilate

[Giuseppe]

Which is the evidence that Acts knew about the story that Jesus was killed by order of Pilate? Zero.

Not only this. We know as a Fact that the death of Stephan was modelled on the death of Jesus.

But Stephan was stoned directly by the Jews, without no appeal to a Roman governor to kill him. This is impossible if the principal apology for the Roman nature of the crucifixion of Jesus (in the eyes of the more childish proto-catholic apologist even in the our days!) was that "the Jews couldn't kill no people without the assent of Romans".

But the paradox is that even so we are sure 100% that Stephan was modelled on a previous GOSPEL Jesus, see for example the his words about to forgive his enemies so similar to the words of Jesus on the cross.

So the more simple explanation is that the author of Acts knew surely about a Jesus crucified on the earth, but he didn't know nothing about the role of Pilate in that crucifixion. Only Jews crucified Jesus, for him.

[Giuseppe]

Even the Christian interpolator of "called Christ" in Ant. 20:200 seemed to recognize and to like this fact: that only by profiting of the absence of the Roman, a Jewish execution of a Christian could be plausible in the eyes of Christian readers of the his time.

[Martin Klatt]

{:)}

[andrewcriddle]

See:

Acts 4:27

for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel,

Acts 3:13

The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified his servant Jesus, whom you delivered over and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he had decided to release him.

Andrew Criddle

[Giuseppe]

I correct my view above, then.