Re: [Fwd: Re: Contradictions in Acts?]

From: Edgar M. Krentz (
Date: Thu Apr 30 1998 - 19:40:21 EDT

THIS DOES NOT BELONG ON B-GREEK. You are into a theological discussion,
which some of us feel belongs on private corresondence or another
discussion group. I say this without passing judgment on the validity of
your views.
>David McKay wrote:
>> A new Christian is perplexed by apparent contradictions in the accounts
>>>of the conversion of Saul.
>Different facts in the accounts do not mean a contradiction. We do not
>have to easily bow to those who want to assume "a priori" that the
>Scriptures contradict. Both accounts can be complimentary of each other
>and still highlight different facets.
>The genitive FWNHS can indeed be used to refer to a "sound" verses a
>specific "voice" (accusative) and translators render it so in other
>places that have no theological implications.
>This is similar with the witnesses seeing the "light" (22:9) and yet not
>"seeing the person (9:7)."
>The phrases "stood speechless" (9:7 and "fallen to the ground," (26:14)
>if taken idiomatically can mean exactly the same thing. If taken
>literally they can still be reconciled without the witnesses
>contradicting themselves: 1.) The majority could have fell down with
>some remaining dazed while standing. 2.) Those in the immediate vicinity
>of Paul and thus in his personal view fell down, while some to an
>outside viewer were still standing. etc. etc. etc.
>These variations of eyewitness only confirm that the Bible is not a
>fabricated story; each witness saw and recorded his personal viewpoint.
>While some hyper-critics claim these variations as "contradictions" in
>most cases they can be reasonably reconciled.
>Some apparent inconsistencies in the Bible are difficult to reconcile.
>But we should not assume that they are difinite contradictions. Often it
>is merely a case of lack of complete information. The Bible does not try
>to give us every detail about every event mentioned.
>This is no different than what we accord each other in our writings. As
>a rule we assume no writer contradicts himself and we read into his
>words what he is trying to say rather than critically pick at every
>grammatical miscue.
>Actually, the Bible is a miracle of condensation. It contains enough
>information to enable us to recognize it as more than merely a human
>work. In comparison to any other writings the outstanding unity of the
>Bible demonstrates without any doubt its divine origin.

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Edgar Krentz
Professor of New Testament
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
Telephone: (773) 256-0752
Home access is functioning well again; go back to using it.
Home: [Tel: 773-947-8105]
GHRASKW AEI MAQWN. I grow older, learning all the time.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:37 EDT