Keener on Act’s Historicity, something covered in his @bakeracademic commentary

From here, a link to check out, yo.

Post By Joel L. Watts (10,125 Posts)

Joel L. Watts holds a Masters of Arts from United Theological Seminary with a focus in literary and rhetorical criticism of the New Testament. He is currently a Ph.D. student at the University of the Free State, analyzing Paul’s model of atonement in Galatians. He is the author of Mimetic Criticism of the Gospel of Mark: Introduction and Commentary (Wipf and Stock, 2013), a co-editor and contributor to From Fear to Faith: Stories of Hitting Spiritual Walls (Energion, 2013), and Praying in God's Theater, Meditations on the Book of Revelation (Wipf and Stock, 2014).

Website: → Unsettled Christianity

Connect

2 thoughts on “Keener on Act’s Historicity, something covered in his @bakeracademic commentary

  1. In the commentary does he actually list the ancient sources that he alludes to in presentation? For instance, Acts matches other historical works, so in my mind I am thinking, “what works from that time and region do we have?” Do we have enough novels from that time and region to say they are all romance novels? Does he cite scholars outside the faith tradition? I want to believe much of what he says, however, I have been burned in the past with “christian” scholars cherry picking data to make the Bible seem more historical. I do appreciate about what he said about the difference between modern and classical history. Again, though, how do we know that? I have to take his word on it.

  2. Seriously?

    Isn’t it amazing a work written long after Paul’s letters would portray Paul in almost exactly the same way? And that the small differences fit how another person’s perception and memory would necessarily differ from the original? Amazing.

Leave a Reply, Please!