Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: Re: Pauline authorship of the Pastorals

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "David C. Hindley" <DHindley AT compuserve.com>
  • To: corpus-paul
  • Subject: Re: Re: Pauline authorship of the Pastorals
  • Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 22:23:11


On 05/02/99, ""Stevan Davies" <miser17 AT epix.net>" wrote:

> > On 04/30/99, ""Stevan Davies" <miser17 AT epix.net>" wrote:
> >
> > > [snip] I get the impression that Acts is often dated
> > > to the end of the first century, but it's rarely clear why this should
> > > be.
>
> Dave Hindley
> > I would imagine the main reason is that it its dedication to Theophilus
> > resembles those made by Josephus to his patron Epaphroditus in the
> > Antiquities, his Autobiography, etc., all dated to around 95 CE. This is
> > strengthened by the fact that the account purports to be an historical
> > account, but appears to have the intent of augmenting Josephus'
> > Antiquities
> > by placing early Christian figures within Josephus' historical framework
> > (which otherwise makes no mention of them).
>
> This is the first I've heard of either of these arguments. The first
> is surely flawed unless we have reason to believe that Josephus,
> and only Josephus, wrote a dedication of this sort. The second
> just sounds crazy... but I could be convinced to the contrary
> if you'd be kind enough to provide additional argumentation.
>
> Steve Davies
> College Misericordia

Steve,

I have certainly run across several stray references to the hypothesis that
Acts was influenced by Josephus' Antiquities. Unfortunately, I have been
scanning my library to locate some of these without much success. The best
I can do for the moment is Robert Eisler (_Messiah Jesus_) who refers to F.
C. Burkitt _Gospel History and its Transmission_, Holtzmann (1873), Adolph
Hausrath, Keim and Karl Clemen as advocates, and refers to discussions of
the issue in two well known works of his age (circa 1931). I can assure you
that I did not conjure this out of thin air.

As for the second, "crazy" is a relative term. <g> If some can seriously
suggest that Acts is based on a legal brief, for instance, then I am
confident I can just as seriously offer the suggestion that Acts was ment
to give Christians of the early 1st century some sense of historical
closure. That is, it offered a firm link to the world everyone else knew.
Where Pagan and Jewish histories did not make any reference to early
Christian developments, the Gospels and Acts helped fill that void.

That does not mean that the author of Acts was not well informed about the
cities, provinces and states of the empire, or that he did not have access
to sources concerning, or know traditions about, Paul or the early
Christian movement. These he did have and did know. I only said that a
proposed relationship between Acts and Josephus' Antiquities and/or Life
have been used to suggest a date of composition after 95 CE, and that this
appeared to be correct in my view.

Regards,

Dave Hindley, BA
Cleveland, OH, USA
DHindley AT compuserve.com




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page