Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The name "Acts of the Apostles" was first used by Irenaeus in the late 2nd century. It is not known whether this was an existing name for the book or one invented by Irenaeus; it does seem clear that it was not given by the author, as the word práxeis (deeds, acts) only appears once in the text (Acts 19:18) and there it refers not to the apostles but to deeds confessed by their followers.
Hengel believes Acts was written early [43] by Luke as a partial eyewitness, [44] praising Luke's knowledge of Palestine, [45] and of Jewish customs in Acts 1:12. [46] With regard to Acts 1:15–26 , Lüdemann is skeptical with regard to the appointment of Matthias, but not with regard to his historical existence. [ 47 ]
Acts 20 is the twentieth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles in the Christian New Testament of the Bible. It records the third missionary journey of Paul the Apostle . The narrator and his companions ("we") play an active part in the developments in this chapter. [ 1 ]
The Gospel of Luke, together with Acts (see Luke-Acts) was c. 85–90, considered the most literate and artistic of the gospels. Finally, the Gospel of John was written, portraying Jesus as the incarnation of the divine Word, who primarily taught about himself as a savior. All four gospels originally circulated anonymously, and they were ...
The circumcision controversy in early Christianity played an important role in Christian theology. [1] [2] [3] [4]The circumcision of Jesus is celebrated as a feast day in the liturgical calendar of many Christian denominations, while the teachings of the Apostle Paul asserted that physical circumcision was unnecessary for the salvation of Gentiles and their membership in the New Covenant.
Marcion and Luke-Acts: A defining struggle. University of South Carolina Press. ISBN 978-1-57003-650-7. A case in favor of the view that the canonical Luke-Acts duo is a response to Marcion. Tyson also recounts the history of scholarly studies on Marcion up to 2006.
If Paul's first visit was the one recorded in Acts 9, then Paul would have made an extra visit to Jerusalem against his statement in Galatians 1:17–24, [16] or it is possible the epistle to the Galatians was written before the council in Jerusalem (which clarifies why Paul does not mention it) and this visit is the "private" one mentioned in ...
The Acts text does not explicitly state why the tribune arrests Paul aside from asking "who he was and what he had done" (Acts 21.33); consequently, it appears Paul is detained for investigation as reflected later in Paul's interrogation in the Antonian barracks because he was a cause of instigation among the Jews (Acts 22.23-24).