Ben C Smith

It is not unconventional as epic. It fits epic quite nicely, I think. Importantly, the introduction is pure epic, invoking the goddess to sing.

Ben.

jakejonesiv

Hi Gamera,

Just to be clear, Andrews comments are well put because they are qualified. "The prophetic daughters of Philip could on your premises have been genuine characters in the Jerusalem church used fictionally by the author of Acts to add local colour."

There is no postive assertion that they were real.
The "used fictionally" by the author of Acts is the most insightful part of Andrew's suggestion.

Jake

Ted Hoffman

And pushing Andrew's comments further, the entire Acts could have been written to add color to an otherwise dry and drab literary landscape that comprised Paul's letters on one side and the gospels one the other.
The story goes that one day, as a disgusted Luke sat in his study in the blazing afternoon heat, wondering why a grown man, Theophilus, would strut around dishonourably in a shawl and nothing else, obsessing over whether Christians carried meat to synagogues and why Christians wanted political power. Couldnt he see the women giggling at his plumbing? he thought angrily as his mind drifted back to the texts he had been examining.
Then like a seductive woman, the idea occured to him.
In his mind, he (Luke) saw a gaping chasm that yawned hungrily for someone to erect Petrine Christianity like a flagship, a totem pole even. A lighthouse that would help readers connect these two traditions - the gospels and the Pauline epistles.

Luke looked (no pun intended) at the gap between the two Christological paradigms and saw that it was bad. He felt compelled to act. Yes, he had to act, he thought as he sat up. A cold wind wafted in, and the idea began to take shape in his mind. It yawned and stretched in his mind and started moving freely around. This was better than explaining to a semi-naked man pedantic issues like meat-carrying habits of Christians, Luke thought. So he summoned his literary prowess, tucked his acute sense of history in his armpit, fixed an Petrine-colored eye on the Pauline letters and threw a tin of textual glue on his back, mopped his brow and set about doing his life's greatest work: erecting an apostolic chain of authority. The Acts of the Apostles.

Ted Hoffman

I think its deceptive fiction because of the nature of the subject and the attempt at harmonizing it with otherwise trusted texts. Two points and questions for Ben.

1. In Acts 26:10, Paul admits that he persecuted and imprisoned Christians(saints) in Jerusalem. Acts 7:58 says that Paul was present at Stephen's stoning [just outside] Jerusalem.
But in Galatians 1:22 Paul says that he was unknown by face to the churches of Judea.

Ben, do you believe that Paul wore a mask while he persecuted Christians or how is it the case that the Christians in Judea could not recognize him per his own testimony in Galatians?

2. Luke presents Paul as posessing the Pharisaic zeal even after his conversion to a Christian (Acts 26). Yet Paul's letter's indicate to us that he abandoned his Pharisaic zeal (Phil 3). Who is telling us the truth here?
I will quote Gunther Bornkamm in my review of Paul:

(p. xviii).

My view is that Acts is deceptive fiction that employed conventional modes of storytelling like the "we" passages and tropes Vork mentioned earlier.

Ben C Smith

I think Paul uses the phrase churches of Judea precisely in order to make the church in Jerusalem an exception. In Galatians 1.18 he has already admitted that he visited Jerusalem, including Cephas and James. But he was still unknown to the (other) churches in Judea at that time.

I am not sure I understand this one. I see Paul in Acts 26.5-7 rhetorically identifying his own beliefs with those of the Pharisees in order to place himself firmly within mainstream Judaism. Where does he say that he is actually still a Pharisee? And any reading of the epistles that would deny that Paul was still a zealous man is, to my mind, quite misguided.

But please understand. I do not point these things out to defend the historicity of Acts on these points. I am undecided as yet how good the historical bits are in that book. I just do not think it was written as a fictional work in the sense that conventional fiction would seem to imply. (I am open to almost anything in Acts being poorly transmitted history, or even a fictional touch of the kind some ancient historians were wont to employ.)

I do not regard the we passages as conventional, at least not in the way usually suggested. When Michael calls Acts conventional fiction, I get the impression he is saying that the ancients would have immediately recognized it as fiction, and that the author himself wanted it to be read as fiction. Any book that uses conventions from one genre precisely because it belongs to that genre, yet passes itself off as belonging to a different genre, I would call unconventional.

Ben.

spin

Doh!

Ted Hoffman

So, the word "other" was excluded? Is that your harmonization?
You are presuming that he'd already met Cephas and James before that visit?

Neither I nor Bornkamm argue that Acts says that Paul is still a Pharisee.
We talk about Pharisaic zeal. Not about whether of not Paul was a zealous man. Of course he was a zealous Christian after his conversion.

Ben C Smith

I think you misread me, though I do not see exactly what you think I said. Paul says he met Cephas and James in Jerusalem, then that he was still unknown to the churches in Judea. That seems to make Jerusalem an exception to what Paul means by churches in Judea. If this observation clears up a seeming discrepancy between Acts and Paul, fine. If it creates a new discrepancy, fine. I do not give a rip either way from a philosophical point of view.

Okay, then, please lay out the two passages you see as being in conflict. I assure you, if they are in conflict, I will say so. I know of several slips in Acts compared to the Pauline epistles. I just have not found what you are talking about here yet.

Ben.

Ted Hoffman

Ben, if you cant understand Bornkamm's argument as I quote him in this post, it is unlikely that I can clarify it any better to you.