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