From: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!CAD:tektronix!tekmdp!dadla!dadla-b!hutch Newsgroups: net.religion Title: Re: Biblical contradictions Article-I.D.: dadla-b.372 Posted: Wed Mar 9 11:34:33 1983 Received: Thu Mar 10 05:12:36 1983 References: ihuxk.285 (here we go again) I am not Larry West, but I will comment on the cases JDJ brings up. To the best of my knowledge, the book of Acts was not an attempt to synthesize a complete and conflict-free history, but rather a history of what was said and done by the apostles after Jesus' ascension to Heaven. (No flames on that topic, please, I am establishing context here, not religious dogma) As such, there will be places where the differences between one telling and another will occur. The first case, where Paul describes an event to two different audiences which were separated both by time and culture, has to be read in the Greek to determine whether the apparent contradiction was introduced by the translation. I have not done this myself, but I was informed by a minister-in-training that the wording between the two passages ID (rats - no editor) IS important. The reconstructed event was described by this person as, Paul and at least two companions were travelling, on their way to persecute a new Christian community. A blinding light appeared around them, and the two companions heard a voice, but did not UNDERSTAND the words (translated as "did not hear"). Paul saw a vision of Jesus, whom he had seen before His execution. The companions did not see the vision. They did see the bright light. The apparent conflict between the two versions of the death of Judas is also a similar case, although I don't personally know how it was resolved. It is important to remember that the accounts of eyewitnesses and the variations introduced by rumors could be at work here, and it is necessary to determine what the source of any contradiction is, BEFORE assuming that it renders the entirety of a document suspect. Incidentally, regarding the other books mentioned in JDJ's article, I suspect the reason that they were excluded from scripture is that reliable sources for them were either unavailable, or considered not relevant to the Christian doctrine, or perhaps they were not considered to be scripture but merely important records. Our friendly Jewish scholars out there might be better able to reply about some of them, since they have a different body of holy writings to draw from. Hutch ... decvax!tektronix!tekmdp!dadla!hutch