Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 12-12-2008, 01:49 AM

The Mystery of Acts: Unraveling Its Story (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Richard Pervo

From Polebridge Press

Quote:

The author of Acts unwittingly committed a near-perfect crime: He told his story so well that all rival accounts vanished with but the faintest of traces. And thus future generations were left with no documents that recount the history of the early Christian tradition—because Acts is not history. According to Richard Pervo, “Acts is a beautiful house that readers may happily admire, but it is not a home in which the historian can responsibly live.” Luke did not even aspire to write history but rather told his story to defend the gentile communities of his day as the legitimate heirs of Israelite religion. In The Mystery of Acts, Pervo explores the problem of history in Acts by asking, and answering, the fundamental questions:

• Who wrote Acts?
• Where was Acts written?
• When was Acts written?
• Why was Acts written?
• How was Acts written?

The result is a veritable tour-de-force that enlightens, entertains, and brings Acts to life.

Roger Pearse · 12-12-2008, 05:08 AM

These sorts of books don't appeal to me, I have to say. I always end up thinking that it must be considerably easier to write books like this than to go out and translate some of the 50% of ancient literature currently unavailable in English. After all, people can check fairly readily whether the translations are accurate.

Jeffrey Gibson · 12-12-2008, 05:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

These sorts of books don't appeal to me, I have to say. I always end up thinking that it must be considerably easier to write books like this than to go out and translate some of the 50% of ancient literature currently unavailable in English. After all, people can check fairly readily whether the translations are accurate.

But Richard is one of the foremost scholars on Acts today. Fortress Press has just published his commentary on the book in their Hermeneia Series (or via: amazon.co.uk).

No slouch, this guy. His earlier explorations of the connections between Acts and the Ancient novels (or via: amazon.co.uk), and his investigations (with Michael Parsons) on the unity of Luke and Acts (or via: amazon.co.uk) are joys to read.

Besides that, Richard has done his share of translating ancient literature that his previously been unavailable (e.g., the Acts of Titus).

Jeffrey

the_cave · 12-12-2008, 07:40 AM

I very much look forward to this book, though I suspect he will make at least a few controversial claims

Darklighter · 12-12-2008, 12:32 PM

Sounds interesting... I look forward to reading it.

I've often thought about how the supernatural miracles in Acts could have easily been mere "urban legends" that people assumed were true. In the fundamentalist community that I grew up in I was always amazed at some of the "supernatural" stories (demon antics, angelic protection, divine intervention, Smurfs jumping out of TV sets a la Poltergeist, etc...) that floated around and how many people actually believed them. Were we living in a less enlighted time period (like the 1st century) no one would have any qualms about writing these stories down and presenting them as fact. After all what motive would our bretheren have to make such things up?

Roger Pearse · 12-13-2008, 03:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

These sorts of books don't appeal to me, I have to say. I always end up thinking that it must be considerably easier to write books like this than to go out and translate some of the 50% of ancient literature currently unavailable in English. After all, people can check fairly readily whether the translations are accurate.

But Richard is one of the foremost scholars on Acts today....

Still doesn't seem like a good use of time to me.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

mountainman · 12-13-2008, 04:20 AM

interview with the author

Quote:

12. Who would you rank as your favourite Luke-Acts (whoops, sorry, Luke/Acts) scholar?

In one sense would say H. J. Cadbury, striking out his caution. Best would be a combination of Cadbury, Haenchen, dropping his sarcasm, and the Venerable Bede. The last understood that Luke was a poet, the second that he was a theologian, albeit not systematic, the first that he was a writer. All three are necessary, but the greatest of these is the poet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Besides that, Richard has done his share of translating ancient literature that his previously been unavailable (e.g., the Acts of Titus).

How is it possible to get a copy of his translation (of the Acts of Titus)?

Roger Pearse · 12-13-2008, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

interview with the author

Quote:

12. Who would you rank as your favourite Luke-Acts (whoops, sorry, Luke/Acts) scholar?

In one sense would say H. J. Cadbury, striking out his caution. Best would be a combination of Cadbury, Haenchen, dropping his sarcasm, and the Venerable Bede. The last understood that Luke was a poet, the second that he was a theologian, albeit not systematic, the first that he was a writer. All three are necessary, but the greatest of these is the poet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Besides that, Richard has done his share of translating ancient literature that his previously been unavailable (e.g., the Acts of Titus).

How is it possible to get a copy of his translation (of the Acts of Titus)?

By being nice to people who have that access and not ***ing them off, probably.

Failing which, do an ILL.

Jeffrey Gibson · 12-13-2008, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

How is it possible to get a copy of his translation (of the Acts of Titus)?

By admitting four things:

1. That you've not read in their entirety the works of Grillmeier, Gwatkin, Greg & Groh, Harnack R. Williams A.M.H. Jones, J.N.D. Kelly, R. Hanson, Barnes & D. H. Williams, E. Ferguson, T.A. Kopecek, J. T. Lienhard, M. Simonett, A Louth on Constnatine, Nicea, and the Arian controversy, or A.D. Lee's "Constantine and Traditional Religion" The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Constantine

2. That you have not taken the time to read all of what the following supporters of Arius had to say regarding what Arius and Arianism and the Arian controversy was all about

* Alexander, bishop of Alexandria
* Hosius, bishop of Cordoba
* Eustathius, bishop of Antioch
* Cyrus, bishop of Beroe
* Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria
* Paul, bishop of Constantinople
* Julius, bishop of Rome
* Asclepas, bishop of Gaza.
* Lucius, bishop of Adrianople
* Maximus, bishop of Jerusalem
* Paulinus, bishop of Treves
* Dionysius, bishop of Alba
* Eusebius, bishop of Vercelli
* Angelius, (Novatian) bishop of Constantinople.[97]
* Gregory of Nazianzus
* Gregory of Elvira
* Lucifer, bishop of Cagliari
* Hilary, bishop of Poitiers
* Servatius, bishop of Tongeren.

3. That contrary to your claim, Constantine did not engage in "wholesale empire-wide destruction" of "pagan" temples and shrines, and

4. That you've dodged my questions about these items.

Once you do this, I'll be happy to send you Pervo's translation of the Acts of Titus.

avi · 12-13-2008, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by "JeffreyGibson

Once you do this, I'll be happy to send you Pervo's translation of the Acts of Titus.

May I inquire whether the docs exist in jpeg format, or any other internet accessible media, or only as printed documents?
:notworthy:

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-12-2008, 05:08 AM	#2
Roger Pearse Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: N/A Posts: 4,370	These sorts of books don't appeal to me, I have to say. I always end up thinking that it must be considerably easier to write books like this than to go out and translate some of the 50% of ancient literature currently unavailable in English. After all, people can check fairly readily whether the translations are accurate.

12-12-2008, 07:40 AM	#4
the_cave Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Earth Posts: 1,443	I very much look forward to this book, though I suspect he will make at least a few controversial claims

12-12-2008, 12:32 PM	#5
Darklighter Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Pale Blue Dot Posts: 463	Sounds interesting... I look forward to reading it. I've often thought about how the supernatural miracles in Acts could have easily been mere "urban legends" that people assumed were true. In the fundamentalist community that I grew up in I was always amazed at some of the "supernatural" stories (demon antics, angelic protection, divine intervention, Smurfs jumping out of TV sets a la Poltergeist, etc...) that floated around and how many people actually believed them. Were we living in a less enlighted time period (like the 1st century) no one would have any qualms about writing these stories down and presenting them as fact. After all what motive would our bretheren have to make such things up?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.