FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-30-2006, 05:21 AM   #1
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Beautiful Downtown Tacoma
Posts: 370
Default Ending of Acts

It maybe just me, but has there been any speculation of Acts having a missing ending? It seems to me that the ending is, well, kind of abrupt?
JoyJuice is offline  
Old 07-30-2006, 11:04 AM   #2
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
Default

From Peter Kirby's fabulous website:

Quote:
So we come upon the third question of higher criticism, the date of Luke-Acts. It is sometimes put forward that the Gospel of Luke may be as early as 62 CE because Acts does not narrate the martyrdom of Paul. The ending of Acts is an old problem that has prompted many theories. Luke Timothy Johnson writes (The Acts of the Apostles, pp. 474-476):
As early as the Muratorian Canon (late second century), an explanation for Luke's incompleteness at this part of the story seemed caled for, and the compiler of that canonical list explained that Luke did not tell of the martyrdom of Peter or Paul's subsequent journey to the West, because he wanted to relate only those things that had occurred in his presence! Other "explanations" of greater or lesser probability have not been lacking: that Luke finished this volume before Paul's case came to its conclusion--and necessarily, if it was intended to present his case! Alternatively, that Luke died before he could finish this volume, or before he could undertake still a third volume that he contemplated. This last theory has recently taken on new life in the proposal that the Pastoral Letters are written by Luke as the third volume of Luke-Acts.
Amaleq13 is offline  
Old 07-30-2006, 12:47 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: California
Posts: 748
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaleq13
From Peter Kirby's fabulous website:
What evidence is there that any of these people were martyred?
Roland is offline  
Old 07-31-2006, 10:47 AM   #4
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 4,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland
What evidence is there that any of these people were martyred?
John 21 appears to refer to a tradition of Peter's martyrdom. 2 Timothy appears to refer to a tradition of Paul's martyrdom. I Clement regards both Peter and Paul as martyrs.

IE they seem to have been widely regarded as martyrs by 100 CE or slightly after, which is less than 50 years after their deaths.

Andrew Criddle
andrewcriddle is offline  
Old 07-31-2006, 03:44 PM   #5
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 412
Default

The abrupt ending of Acts tells me two things. 1) If the Bible is a made up book intended to tell the false story of a false Messiah and His followers then Acts being an unfinished work makes no logical sense. 2) It tells me that the book of acts is still a work in progress continuing to this very day. Acts will end when Christ's church ends.
Nuwanda is offline  
Old 07-31-2006, 04:26 PM   #6
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Acts does not end abruptly. It ends when Paul goes through his adventures and gets to Rome and starts preaching to the Romans, which completes "Luke's" pattern of the Gospel of Luke when Jesus starts in Galilee and ends in Jerusalem, and Acts, where Paul starts in Jerusalem and ends in Rome. As a literary creation, it is complete.
Toto is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:40 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.