Acts and the Bacchae repost of Luke as Historian
box191@iland.net box191@iland.net
Wed, 27 May 1998 23:53:03 (00896331183, 3.0.5.16.19980527235303.18d7a900@205.242.230.4)
At 10:46 PM 5/27/98 -0700, Helen the Fool Willis wrote:
>This is a repost of a post made by Pat Spears a few months ago on Luke as a
>historian.
Why the hell did you post this, Fool? I assume
you obtain permission from Pat Spears as the
laws of the United States require?
>I don't speak Greek, so it is not really my place to judge how
>good this analysis is.
Then why the hell did you post this?
>Just about every city had a Greek theater at this time
>in history and there is a very good chance Euripides being by that time a
>classic
What time, Fool? You took this so far out of context
it's even incoherent. That's a good trick making other
Fools seem incoherent. BTW, Fool, there's no such thing
as a "Greek theater" and there never had been. You can't
speak proper English.
>was performed often so the borrowing of lines by Luke or whoever
>wrote Acts may not have been conscious,
Well, Fool, I know you imagine all sorts of insane
things but I doubt that anyone will believe that
Luke was unconscious when he wrote, while that's
quite believable in your case since your mind never
came back from going out to lunch. And who could
blame it?
>but I think that Pat makes a good
>argument that it did occur.
You don't have any idea what an augment is, Fool,
since you don't know the first thing about logic
which is required to offer an argument and judge
an argument.
>The lifting of whole scenes is a more serious
>matter. By the way, I think there was another post on this issue which if I
>get a chance I will try to find.
If these are by someone else, Fool, what gives YOU
the right to post them? Did the Supreme Court reveal
to you that you are not subject to the US Copyright
Act of 1974? You think you can steal anything you
wish? Of course, you have no morals, do you?
>> Sir William Ramsay, who spent over 30 years checking out the
>> archaeology involved in the books of Luke and Acts, stated "Luke is a
>> historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact
>> trustworthy...this author should be placed along with the very greatest
>> of historians."
Not bad.
>Anyone who has kept up with NT studies over the last century can only laugh
>when they hear such as statement.
Only a Fool would laugh at Sir William.
>For example, concerning Paul, George Wells
>quotes A. J. Mattill
One Fool quoting another Fool quoting a Fool.
FALLACY OF TRIPLE APPEAL TO AUTHORITY.
>Joachim Jeremias states in his book "Jerusalem":
FALLACY OF APPEAL TO AUTHORITY.
>Luke also apparently plagiarizes from the play
>of Euripedes called the Bacchae. The famous 'conversion' of Paul is a good
>example. In ACTS, it is said that Paul hears the voice of Jesus say:
>
>"Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you, this kicking
>against the goads [pros kentra laktizein]" (ACTS 26:15).
>
>In the Bacchae, which is approximately five hundred years older than ACTS,
>the situation is parallel. Dionysis, the persected God, says to King
>Pentheus, his persecutor:
>
>"You disregard my words of warning... and kick against the goads [pros
>kentra laktizoimi]" (line 794).
>
>It is highly probable that 'Luke' has 'borrowed' this from the Bacchae,
>because 'Luke' retains the plural form of the noun 'kentra,' which, while
>maintaining the meter in the Bacchae, seems out of place in ACTS.
This is one of the silliest things I've seen by a
supposed "scholar". Pros kentra laktizein is how
people expressed themselves. A goad is a sharp
pointed stick used to prod an ox or donkey. I
suspect every adult speaker of Greek used this
expression. What odd logic.
<snipped all the argumentum ad nauseam>
Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt.
--Julius Caesar
A gullible Fool will believe anything they wish.
Dick Jones