M
minichibi
Guest
Let me guess…
that well-respected source is mentioned in a book called “Year of the Passover”, by “John Hagan”? 
Luke's statistical improbabilities and the Theudas - Gamaliel problem?
- Status
that well-respected source is mentioned in a book called “Year of the Passover”, by “John Hagan”?
P
patrick457
Guest
Shhh…don’t say that out loud.Let me guess…
F
farpinho
Guest
:coffeeread:Let me guess…
S
steve53
Guest
Right author, wrong book.
If Peter and John were speaking up on the Temple outer courtyard (paved and about 15 acres, which surrounded the inner Temple sanctuary- also 15 acres or so), it would be easy to see them gather a crowd of 5 thousand. They would have been up on the cloister steps which overlooks the tiled open courtyard. It could have been during a minor festival as well.
Even today the temple mount easily accommodates a hundred thousand worshipers every week for some Muslim ritual.
If Peter and John were speaking up on the Temple outer courtyard (paved and about 15 acres, which surrounded the inner Temple sanctuary- also 15 acres or so), it would be easy to see them gather a crowd of 5 thousand. They would have been up on the cloister steps which overlooks the tiled open courtyard. It could have been during a minor festival as well.
Even today the temple mount easily accommodates a hundred thousand worshipers every week for some Muslim ritual.
M
minichibi
Guest
I see… mustbe “Fires of Rome”, then. By the way, do you read other authors as well?
S
steve53
Guest
Most of the early Christian stuff out there falls apart quickly. The Jesus Seminarians are a prime example. These scholars know Greek and Latin and the early writings and all the rest, but don’t understand critical analysis. The assumption that Luke stole from Josephus is a good example. Believe that, and Luke had to be written after the first century.
I would recommend reading Josephus straight up. War of the Jews is thrilling. That book is actually the last section of Antiquities of the Jews.
Tacitus is a good read as well.
F
farpinho
Guest
I usually tend to stick with the early date to Luke due to the internal documental evidence. It is expected that the book of Acts wouldn’t end abruptly as it did had the book been written after Josephus published his work. We can’t conclude Luke borrowed from Josephus simply because there are few documents from that time that survived over time, it’s possible both borrowed from a common source/tradition. What’s the argument favorable to the idea that Luke and Paul were with Josephus in Rome in 63 AD? The second letter to Timothy, perhaps? The authorship of the letter is being disputed, but if it’s authentic it’s quite likely both were in Rome in the 60’s, but what about Peter? What document serves as an evidence that Peter was in Rome that time? And the fact they had contact with Josephus is just speculation… 
S
steve53
Guest
Well, in the end, it is ALL speculation.I usually tend to stick with the early date to Luke due to the internal documental evidence. It is expected that the book of Acts wouldn’t end abruptly as it did had the book been written after Josephus published his work. We can’t conclude Luke borrowed from Josephus simply because there are few documents from that time that survived over time, it’s possible both borrowed from a common source/tradition. What’s the argument favorable to the idea that Luke and Paul were with Josephus in Rome in 63 AD? The second letter to Timothy, perhaps? The authorship of the letter is being disputed, but if it’s authentic it’s quite likely both were in Rome in the 60’s, but what about Peter? What document serves as an evidence that Peter was in Rome that time? And the fact they had contact with Josephus is just speculation…
Acts ends in A.D. 63 in Rome. From Josephus’ autobiography, he was in Rome in A.D. 63. From Josephus, the High Priest Ismael quit the office early in A.D. 62 and went to Rome to Poppea’s Salon. Eusebius states that Peter was in Rome at the time, and both he and Paul were executed in A.D. 64.
- Status