The "Acts of Paul"

Acts 8:1,3 - http://bible.oremus.org/?ql=174167034
Galatians 1:13-24 - http://bible.oremus.org/?ql=174172767
Acts 9:26-27 - http://bible.oremus.org/?ql=174168502
Galatians 2:1-14 - http://bible.oremus.org/?ql=174169266

5. The New Testament as History, Introduction to New Testament (RLST 152) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQaOlxhg8xg

Acts 7:58 - first mention of Saul as present at stoning of Stephen in Jerusalem
Acts 8:1,3 - Saul introduced as intense persecutor of Jerusalem church
Acts 9:1-6 - Saul leaves Jerusalem, accosted on road to Damascus
Acts 9:8-9 - brought blind into Damascus, stayed for three days while blind
Acts 9:19-20 - after having sight restored, stayed for several days with other disciples and IMMEDIATELY began to proclaim Jesus in synagogues
Acts 9:22 - became increasingly more powerful in Damascus
Acts 9:23-28 - after some time, and murder attempt by Jews, goes with Barnabas back to Jerusalem
Acts 9:29-30 - after another murder attempt by Hellenists", brought to Caesarea, then Tarsus
Acts 11:25-26 - Saul brought by Barnabas to Antioch of Syria, spend a year there
Acts 11:29-30 - Due to famine, Barnabas and Saul sent on relief mission to elders in Jerusalem
Acts 12:25 - After completing their mission, Barnabas and Saul return to Antioch, along with John Mark
Acts 13:1-3 - Beginning of first missionary journey: Cyprus
Acts 13:5 - Salamis
Acts 13:6 - Paphos; encounter "a certain magician, a Jewish false prophet, named Bar-Jesus"
Acts 13:9 - switches from use of Saul to Paul
Acts 13:13 - Perga; John Mark leaves for Jerusalem
Acts 13:14 - Antioch in Pisidia, went into synagogue on Sabbath
Acts 13:50-51 - after persecution in Antioch on next Sabbath, went to Iconium
Acts 14:1 - Paul and Barnabas go to Jewish synagogue in Iconium
Acts 14:5-6 - after attempted stoning, to Lystra and Derbe
Acts 14:19-20 - Jews come from Antioch and Iconium to stone Paul at Lystra; the next day, to Derbe
Acts 14:21 - returned to Lystra, Iconium, Antioch
Acts 14:25 - Perga, Attalia
Acts 14:26,28 - back to Antioch of Syria - end of first missionary journey; stayed with the disciples "for some time"
Acts 15:1-2 - Paul and Barnabas appointed to go to Jerusalem, to discuss with apostles and elders regarding circumcision
Acts 15:30 - back to Antioch of Syria
Acts 15:32-33,35 - Judas, Silas leave Antioch "after some time", Paul and Barnabas remain
Acts 15:36-40 - "After some days", Paul and Barnabas disagree over taking John Mark on next journey. Paul chooses Silas. v.34 inserted into some manuscripts to explain his presence in Antioch.

Galatians 1:13-17 - originally in Damascus. revelatory experience. "I did not confer with any human being... I went away at once into Arabia, and afterwards I returned to Damascus." Acts 9:1-9 claims that Paul went immediately to Damascus after conversion
Galatians 1:18-19 - after spending three years in Damascus, he stayed with Cephas in Jerusalem for 15 days. Paul claimed to have seen only Peter and James in Jerusalem. Acts 9:26-27 claims the following: Saul attempted to join Jerusalem disciples, presented by Barnabas to apostles. Acts 11:30 claims that Saul sent relief to the elders in Jerusalem
Galatians 1:20- In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie!
Galatians 1:21 - went to Syria and Cilicia: capital cities Antioch and Tarsus
Galatians 1:22-23 - Paul claimed to be unknown by sight in Judea - again, conta Acts 9:26-27. Galatians 1:13 - Paul claimed to be violently persecuting the church of God - where? asserting Jerusalem is superimposing Acts onto Paul's account
Galatians 2:1 - after fourteen years, he returned again to Jerusalem, with Barnabus and Titus
Galatians 2:2 - he went up in response to a revelation. Acts 15:2 - Paul and Barnabas were APPOINTED to go to Jerusalem
Galatians 2:6 - the leaders of the Jerusalem church contributed nothing to Paul's gospel - again, contra Acts 9:26-27
Galatians 2:7 - Peter entrusted with the gospel for the circumcised, Paul for the uncircumcised. Acts 15:7 - has Peter claim that that the Gentiles would hear the gospel through him
Galatians 2:13 - Barnabas led astray by the "hypocrisy" of Cephas: refusing to eat with Gentiles - no mention of such disagreement in Acts 15:36-39.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• acts
• galatians
• christianity
• bible
• scripture
• new
• testament
• biblical
• inerrancy
• contradictions
• discrepancies
• apostles
• disciples
• peter
• james
• john
• barnabas
• mark
• paul
• epistle

[OCaoimhghin]

Very nice summary of the problems reconciling Paul's own account with Luke's. While Paul is not without interest in his own self-promotion, it seems clear that Luke is doing with Paul what he and the other Evangelists did with Jesus - tell the story to serve his theological interests.

[violentlygraceful]

@OCaoimhghin It's true that Paul shouldn't necessarily be taken at face value, either, he being the master rhetor of early Christian tradition, after all. Nice parallel, I agree. Additionally, it seems that I've already received good explanations. ;)

[DeDona1]

Good video. It just affirms for me that the bible is very confusing and don't see how God can rely on timid corruptible men to bring a message of salvation

[GWNow]

I watched the whole video from the Yale Professor. I would like to make one comment, If I might? At 29:50 The Professor states "You could find really really brilliant fundamentalist that can harmonize all of this." Thats what is would take to make Paul's journey and life make sense "God". Well, If it's possible in any way then why are we saying that it's not. God is wiser and more knowledgeable then the brilliant.

[milkman5547]

@AnglicanApologist72 Troll: Someone who posts off-topic or inflammatory messages. Twit: A person who believes denial and repetition constitute a valid response in a discussion.

[milkman5547]

@AnglicanApologist72 Your right I should have said arrogant twit.

[milkman5547]

@AnglicanApologist72 Believe that if you want, you have no authority to tell people if it's a big deal or not. You have no argument either, just a fantasy you made up to account for the text's short comings. And of course you like everyone else are entitled to your opinion, even if you are an arrogant moron.

[milkman5547]

@AnglicanApologist72 I give up. You can't even answer a simple question. Any book that has major omissions in it's accounts of an event as important as Paul's conversion is not in any way historical or reliable. The fact is what is actually on the pages are two completely different accounts (A and /A) of the same event. Only a moron could miss that. No one is obligated to believe your BS excuse for why that is and no one needs your approval to declare the text gives different accounts.

[milkman5547]

@AnglicanApologist72 Why would I need to show that? The text says nothing about Paul in Arabia. You need to show the writer of Acts knew Paul went to Arabia and considered it so unimportant he didn't even need to mention it. Unless you can do that your just engaging in pure speculation and we have two different accounts in the text as to what Paul did after his encounter on the road. Where exactly does Paul say he went to Damascus before Arabia? I can't find that.

[milkman5547]

@AnglicanApologist72 Friend: He went to France for three years then to England. You: I went immediately to Germany then to France. Is a more accurate analogy IMO. While it's true your friend never said you didn't go to Germany there is no reason to assume he ever knew you where there at all. That is the conflict.

[milkman5547]

@AnglicanApologist72 The text was cited in the video, why would it need to be repeated? Don't you know what it says? OH, That's right you don't, you can't find the obvious conflict highlighted in the video. Frankly I think quoting an old storybooks is boring. Given that Acts never mentions Paul going to Arabia at all your analogy fails miserably. To continue is useless unless you can demonstrate some difference between your claims and my flying monkey claim.