Fine detail in the gospels: made up or not?

[Sassy]

What about the noise which the other people with him heard but did not understand? (Assuming they saw the light and heard some kind of sound as reported in Acts 22)

Don't you recognise a wind-up when you see one?

[Maeght]

Don't you recognise a wind-up when you see one?

Discussing such claims isn't necessarily a wind up Sassy. That may be some people's purpose but not all.

[Sebastian Toe]

Or in the correct saying... "Feeling a right tit"... which for many men has been the truth for them.
So how many of the board members who are male can say they have "felt a right tit?"

Back as you were.

...or using the word as defined in this context

BRITISH IMPOLITE a stupid person
Synonyms and related words
Someone who is unintelligent, stupid or silly:fool, buffoon, clown...


...then one can look like one, feel like one, be a complete one.......not necessarily confined to men.

So how many women on this board can fit one or more of the above? 

[Robbie]

Or in the correct saying... "Feeling a right tit"... which for many men has been the truth for them.
So how many of the board members who are male can say they have "felt a right tit?"

Back as you were.

Not the point of this thread I know but it is very funny, I'm in need of a bit of a cheer up today!

(Yes I agree plenty of women have felt a right tit and even a left one, I have done both when checking.)

[Owlswing]

Not the point of this thread I know but it is very funny, I'm in need of a bit of a cheer up today!

(Yes I agree plenty of women have felt a right tit and even a left one, I have done both when checking.)

You don't trust your eyesight when you look down?

[Robbie]

 

[Spud]

Well we only have the word of the author of Acts that there were any eye witnesses. He may have invented them to add weight to the story.

Here's what the author wrote at the beginning of his first book to Theophilus. The missing words here point to reliable testimony:

"Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were e_________s and s______s of the word."

"Therefore, since I myself have c_______y inv_______ed everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an _______ account for you, most excellent Theolhilus, so that you may know the _________ of the things you have been taught".

PS, we could contrast your statement, "the eye witnesses don't really exist."

[Spud]

There isn't really much of a risk with respect to the Acts account of Paul's conversion. We have Paul's account and it is very much more low key than the account in Acts. There is no risk with respect to exaggeration or lying, because we know that the author of Acts is definitely exaggerating or lying. Either that or Paul is deliberately down playing the event, which seems unlikely given that it is Paul.

The reports in Acts seem to be genuine and detailed. For example, the first account of Paul's conversion in Acts 9 could have been given to Luke by Ananias himself, judging from the inclusion of details such as 'Straight Street' (9:11). The second in ch.22 could have come from the commander of the Roman troops in Jerusalem. Luke seems to have been given details such as Paul being bound with two chains (v33) - the source probably was not Paul himself, which would account for variations from Paul's own account in Galatians.

[Shaker]

seem to be genuine

could have been

could have come

seems to have been

probably

And on these gossamer wisps of nothingness are religions built.

[floo]

The reports in Acts seem to be genuine and detailed. For example, the first account of Paul's conversion in Acts 9 could have been given to Luke by Ananias himself, judging from the inclusion of details such as 'Straight Street' (9:11). The second in ch.22 could have come from the commander of the Roman troops in Jerusalem. Luke seems to have been given details such as Paul being bound with two chains (v33) - the source probably was not Paul himself, which would account for variations from Paul's own account in Galatians.

In other words it suits you to believe the less than credible is true.

[Sassy]

...or using the word as defined in this context

BRITISH IMPOLITE a stupid person
Synonyms and related words
Someone who is unintelligent, stupid or silly:fool, buffoon, clown...


...then one can look like one, feel like one, be a complete one.......not necessarily confined to men.

So how many women on this board can fit one or more of the above? 

Would not know not being one of them. Maybe you have heard the saying:- 
It would take one to know one.... but a bigger one to deem they could tell others so.    BACK AS YOU WERE.

[jeremyp]

Here's what the author wrote at the beginning of his first book to Theophilus. The missing words here point to reliable testimony:

"Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were e_________s and s______s of the word."

"Therefore, since I myself have c_______y inv_______ed everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an _______ account for you, most excellent Theolhilus, so that you may know the _________ of the things you have been taught".

PS, we could contrast your statement, "the eye witnesses don't really exist."

Are you claiming that an author writing fiction could not put a similar introduction in? If the author of Acts had really been trying to properly attribute real sources, he would tell us who they are and who he is.

[jeremyp]

The reports in Acts seem to be genuine and detailed. For example, the first account of Paul's conversion in Acts 9 could have been given to Luke by Ananias himself, judging from the inclusion of details such as 'Straight Street' (9:11).

But when it doesn't cohere with the account of the person to whom it happened, we must treat it with scepticism.

The second in ch.22 could have come from the commander of the Roman troops in Jerusalem.

Or it could have been pulled from the arse of the writer.

Luke seems to have been given details such as Paul being bound with two chains (v33) - the source probably was not Paul himself, which would account for variations from Paul's own account in Galatians.

Spud, details can be made up. In fact, people who are lying tend to embellish their accounts with details because people like you naively think that adds authenticity.

[Shaker]

But when it doesn't cohere with the account of the person to whom it happened, we must treat it with scepticism.

Or it could have been pulled from the arse of the writer.
Spud, details can be made up. In fact, people who are lying tend to embellish their accounts with details because people like you naively think that adds authenticity.

If I was Gordon (in fact if I was me ... and I already am me) I would ask, what have you done to exclude to exclude these possibilities.

But nobody ever answers the question so there's no point so I'll go and watch the Hairy Bikers.

[jeremyp]

If I was Gordon (in fact if I was me ... and I already am me) I would ask, what have you done to exclude to exclude these possibilities.

But nobody ever answers the question so there's no point so I'll go and watch the Hairy Bikers.

Just to be clear, is this addressed to me or Spud?

[Shaker]

Just to be clear, is this addressed to me or Spud?

Spud, of course. Apologies. You don't strike me as the "Somebody wrote it down, so what they wrote down is true" type. Apologies for any confusion.

[Spud]

No.

It was a statement allegedly made by Paul and reported by whoever wrote Acts. However, we have a statement about the event made by Paul himself which does not cohere with this account.

Spud makers the assumption that whatever was written in the Bible is true. This is an unwarranted assumption.

Hi jeremy,
Have had a bit of time to look at this again today and have found a statement from Paul in 2 Corinthians 11:32-33 that coheres with a detail added by Luke in his account in Acts 9:24-25.

2 Corinthians 11:32
In Damascus the governor under King Aretas had the city of the Damascenes guarded in order to arrest me. 33But I was lowered in a basket from a window in the wall and slipped through his hands.

The absence of Saul's journey to Arabia in Acts 9 could be because Luke used an independent source for information about Saul's conversion, who didn't know about the journey to Arabia; or simply because Luke has limited space and wants to emphasize the reaction of the Jews in Damascus and Jerusalem to Saul's preaching.

[Robbie]

Hope you enjoy the festive season, Spud; all good wishes to you and yours.

[jeremyp]

Hi jeremy,
Have had a bit of time to look at this again today and have found a statement from Paul in 2 Corinthians 11:32-33 that coheres with a detail added by Luke in his account in Acts 9:24-25.

2 Corinthians 11:32
In Damascus the governor under King Aretas had the city of the Damascenes guarded in order to arrest me. 33But I was lowered in a basket from a window in the wall and slipped through his hands.

That's not talking about the conversion though.

The absence of Saul's journey to Arabia in Acts 9 could be because Luke used an independent source for information about Saul's conversion, who didn't know about the journey to Arabia; or simply because Luke has limited space and wants to emphasize the reaction of the Jews in Damascus and Jerusalem to Saul's preaching.

Yeah, it's all could and perhaps isn't it.

[Spud]

That's not talking about the conversion though.

Sorry - I thought you were referring to not just the conversion event in Acts 9, but what happened after as well. He goes on to say in 2 Cor 12 that he wouldn't boast about himself, and that he could potentially become conceited about the revelations given him. Hence concerning his conversion experience in Gal 1:15 he just says "I was called".

Yeah, it's all could and perhaps isn't it.

Paul also mentions that he persecuted Christians (1 Cor 15:9, Gal 1:9), which agrees with Acts.

[Spud]

Hope you enjoy the festive season, Spud; all good wishes to you and yours.

And to you too, hope Father Christmas brought you something nice 

[Maeght]

Sorry - I thought you were referring to not just the conversion event in Acts 9, but what happened after as well. He goes on to say in 2 Cor 12 that he wouldn't boast about himself, and that he could potentially become conceited about the revelations given him. Hence concerning his conversion experience in Gal 1:15 he just says "I was called".

Well he would say that, wouldn't he?

[Spud]

Well he would say that, wouldn't he?

Yes- however, someone he had told about the experience wouldn't have the same problem and so could go into detail (ie Luke in his second book to Theophilus)

[Maeght]

Yes- however, someone he had told about the experience wouldn't have the same problem and so could go into detail (ie Luke in his second book to Theophilus)

Would still just be reporting what Paul said though wouldn't it?

[floo]

Yes- however, someone he had told about the experience wouldn't have the same problem and so could go into detail (ie Luke in his second book to Theophilus)

But just because Paul wrote it down doesn't mean it is true.