Marcion and Acts (for Andrew Criddle).

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
andrewcriddle
Posts: 1733
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Marcion and Acts (for Andrew Criddle).

Post by andrewcriddle » Fri May 10, 2019 12:08 pm

perseusomega9 wrote:
Fri May 10, 2019 7:38 am
andrewcriddle wrote:
Thu May 09, 2019 10:17 am
There are several specific bits of information like knowing that Gallio had served as proconsul of Achaia and approximately when.
Wasn't that public knowledge, as in there was a very public monument to that effect?

In principle the evidence was accessible. One would have to discover the inscription at Delphi (not an obvious place to look if you were a second century Christian researching Christian history) and know enough of the history of the Roman Emperors to interpret it correctly. In practice it is something a mid 2nd century Christian would be unlikely to know about in the absence of relevant written Christian sources.

Andrew Criddle

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 10742
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Marcion and Acts (for Andrew Criddle).

Post by Secret Alias » Fri May 10, 2019 5:29 pm

But this is like the arguments against Clement's Letter to Theodore. If you want to believe that the letter is authentic you maximize what is plausible. If you want to deny authenticity you minimize what's possible. Not sure we know how available information was in antiquity let alone modernity.
“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

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 6471
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Marcion and Acts (for Andrew Criddle).

Post by Ben C. Smith » Fri May 10, 2019 5:45 pm

andrewcriddle wrote:
Thu May 09, 2019 10:17 am
There are several specific bits of information like knowing that Gallio had served as proconsul of Achaia and approximately when.

There is also an awareness of social and legal issues in the 1st century which had changed in the 2nd century.

In Acts Roman citizenship outside Italy is rare, is a yes no issue (you either are one or not) and gives protection against being whipped by the authorities. In the time of Hadrian Roman citizenship is more common and we have the beginnings of the division between honestiores (citizens 1st class) and humiliorte.es (citizens 2nd class). Only the top grade of citizenship protected you from harsh treatment by the authorities.

There are more examples of Acts familiarity with the 1st century but I would need to look them up.

Andrew Criddle

Edited to Add

Acts has clearly undergone editing as shown by the differences between the Alexandrian and Western texts. This editing may well be mid 2nd century and might in principle have been influenced by anti-Marcionite concerns. However we are talking here about editing an already existing narrative, not putting together different sources.

Specific verses in Acts might well be Anti-Marcionite. What I reject is the idea that the basic narrative of Acts, in which Paul Peter and the Jerusalem leaders are all very much on the same side, was produced in response to Marcion.
Thanks, Andrew.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3242
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Marcion and Acts (for Andrew Criddle).

Post by Bernard Muller » Fri May 10, 2019 7:22 pm

Because it appears to use Josephus' Antiquities
Despite some appearances, the author of Like did not know Josephus' Antiquities.
If "Luke" had 'Antiquities' when writing the gospel, most of the historical mistakes (and different spellings) would have been avoided: http://historical-jesus.info/appa.html then "find" on Did "Luke" know about Josephus' Antiquities

About the authorship of Acts and the "we" passages: Remarks about the three "we" passages in 'Acts: http://historical-jesus.info/appa.html then "find" on Remarks about the three "we" passages

About the dating of Acts: http://historical-jesus.info/63.html

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

John2
Posts: 2740
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Marcion and Acts (for Andrew Criddle).

Post by John2 » Fri May 10, 2019 8:15 pm

Bernard Muller wrote:
Fri May 10, 2019 7:22 pm
Because it appears to use Josephus' Antiquities
Despite some appearances, the author of Like did not know Josephus' Antiquities.
If "Luke" had 'Antiquities' when writing the gospel, most of the historical mistakes (and different spellings) would have been avoided: http://historical-jesus.info/appa.html then "find" on Did "Luke" know about Josephus' Antiquities

About the authorship of Acts and the "we" passages: Remarks about the three "we" passages in 'Acts: http://historical-jesus.info/appa.html then "find" on Remarks about the three "we" passages

About the dating of Acts: http://historical-jesus.info/63.html

Cordially, Bernard
Well, I may not buy the argument (I guess I'm just comfortable with Mason), but I could live with a statement linked to in one of your links, that "If Luke did not use the Antiquities of Josephus, a date in the 80s is permissible." That would just mean (from my point of view) that Epaphroditus wrote Acts a decade sooner than I'm supposing.
Show me something built to last.

Post Reply