DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Religious Convictions
HTML https://religiousconvictions.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Religious Discussions
*****************************************************
#Post#: 337--------------------------------------------------
Stephen's Speech in Acts
By: Kerry Date: December 9, 2014, 12:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I am of the opinion that someone added the speech later to the
book of Acts in order to "make it more interesting."
Acts7:1 Then said the high priest, Are these things so?
2 And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of
glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in
Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran,
This does not appear to be true.
Genesis 11:31 And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of
Haran his son's son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son
Abram's wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the
Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto
Haran, and dwelt there.
32 And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years: and
Terah died in Haran.
12:1 Now the Lord had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy
country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto
a land that I will shew thee:
2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee,
and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that
curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be
blessed.
4 So Abram departed, as the Lord had spoken unto him; and Lot
went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he
departed out of Haran.
3 And said unto him, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy
kindred, and come into the land which I shall shew thee.
4 Then came he out of the land of the Chaldaeans, and dwelt in
Charran: and from thence, when his father was dead, he removed
him into this land, wherein ye now dwell.
Abraham is mentioned first in chapter 11 and we are told about
the LORD appearing to him in chapter 12. The only way what
Stephen said could be true is if God had appeared to Abraham in
an incident which is not recorded in Genesis.
3 And said unto him, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy
kindred, and come into the land which I shall shew thee.
4 Then came he out of the land of the Chaldaeans, and dwelt in
Charran: and from thence, when his father was dead, he removed
him into this land, wherein ye now dwell.
This is not true. Abraham's father was alive when he left
Haran. Details in the Torah are not always in chronological
order. We are told how old Terah was when he died and where he
died in Genesis 11:32, but that does not mean he died before the
events in chapter 12 occurred. If you consider the mathematics,
you will see Stephen cannot be right. Let's start with this.
Genesis 11:26 And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram,
Nahor, and Haran.
We just saw Abraham was seventy five when he left. That would
make his father 145 when he left, and his father died when he
was 205. We might say that Abraham was not the oldest child and
that Terah was seventy when either Nahor or Haran was born.
This still contradicts the Jewish tradition that Terah was
abandoned because he was an idol maker. Abraham rejected
idolatry. Thus we could say God adopted Abraham. Thus the
emphasis on the "seed" of Abraham. Surely we cannot believe the
seed of Terah, if he was an idolater, would mean much. This may
astound some people since it would seem to make Abraham lacking
in respect for his earthly father; but the Jewish tradition says
if a pagan converts, his earthly parents are no longer his
parents.
5 And he gave him none inheritance in it, no, not so much as to
set his foot on: yet he promised that he would give it to him
for a possession, and to his seed after him, when as yet he had
no child.
6 And God spake on this wise, That his seed should sojourn in a
strange land; and that they should bring them into bondage, and
entreat them evil four hundred years.
7 And the nation to whom they shall be in bondage will I judge,
said God: and after that shall they come forth, and serve me in
this place.
8 And he gave him the covenant of circumcision: and so Abraham
begat Isaac, and circumcised him the eighth day; and Isaac begat
Jacob; and Jacob begat the twelve patriarchs.
9 And the patriarchs, moved with envy, sold Joseph into Egypt:
but God was with him,
10 And delivered him out of all his afflictions, and gave him
favour and wisdom in the sight of Pharaoh king of Egypt; and he
made him governor over Egypt and all his house.
11 Now there came a dearth over all the land of Egypt and
Chanaan, and great affliction: and our fathers found no
sustenance.
12 But when Jacob heard that there was corn in Egypt, he sent
out our fathers first.
13 And at the second time Joseph was made known to his brethren;
and Joseph's kindred was made known unto Pharaoh.
14 Then sent Joseph, and called his father Jacob to him, and all
his kindred, threescore and fifteen souls.
Genesis says there were seventy souls.
Exodus 1:5 And all the souls that came out of the loins of
Jacob were seventy souls: for Joseph was in Egypt already.
The Septuaguint mistranslated this verse for some reason, saying
there were seventy five. Thus we learn that whoever wrote this
or said it read the Greek version but did not know the original
Hebrew. At this point, if Stephen was giving a speech, surely
the High Priest would have interrupted him to tell him he was
mistaken. I think someone would have interrupted him when he
said Abraham waited until his father died to leave Haran.
15 So Jacob went down into Egypt, and died, he, and our fathers,
16 And were carried over into Sychem, and laid in the sepulchre
that Abraham bought for a sum of money of the sons of Emmor the
father of Sychem.
This is also mistaken. Abraham's burial spot was at Hebron.
Genesis 23:19 And after this, Abraham buried Sarah his wife in
the cave of the field of Machpelah before Mamre: the same is
Hebron in the land of Canaan.
25:8 Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died in a good old age,
an old man, and full of years; and was gathered to his people.
9 And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of
Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite,
which is before Mamre;
10 The field which Abraham purchased of the sons of Heth: there
was Abraham buried, and Sarah his wife.
Herod had built a big monument over it; and anyone at the time
living in Israel would know where Abraham and Sarah were buried.
It was a landmark. It still is. Most people who live in Israel
could tell you where it is. They aren't confused about where
Abraham is buried.
It was Jacob, not Abraham, who bought the land mentioned in
Acts.
Genesis 33:18 And Jacob came to Shalem, a city of Shechem, which
is in the land of Canaan, when he came from Padanaram; and
pitched his tent before the city.
19 And he bought a parcel of a field, where he had spread his
tent, at the hand of the children of Hamor, Shechem's father,
for an hundred pieces of money.
These errors tell me that whoever wrote this speech was
unfamiliar with the geography of Israel and its landmarks and
also with the Old Testament. Nor can I write them off as
something Stephen might have said out of human error, not if he
was speaking by divine inspiration. Nor can I believe the High
Priest and the others would have allowed him to say these things
without interrupting him in order to correct him.
Acts 7:17 But when the time of the promise drew nigh, which God
had sworn to Abraham, the people grew and multiplied in Egypt,
18 Till another king arose, which knew not Joseph.
19 The same dealt subtilly with our kindred, and evil entreated
our fathers, so that they cast out their young children, to the
end they might not live.
20 In which time Moses was born, and was exceeding fair, and
nourished up in his father's house three months:
21 And when he was cast out, Pharaoh's daughter took him up, and
nourished him for her own son.
22 And Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and
was mighty in words and in deeds.
23 And when he was full forty years old, it came into his heart
to visit his brethren the children of Israel.
24 And seeing one of them suffer wrong, he defended him, and
avenged him that was oppressed, and smote the Egyptian:
25 For he supposed his brethren would have understood how that
God by his hand would deliver them: but they understood not.
26 And the next day he shewed himself unto them as they strove,
and would have set them at one again, saying, Sirs, ye are
brethren; why do ye wrong one to another?
27 But he that did his neighbour wrong thrust him away, saying,
Who made thee a ruler and a judge over us?
28 Wilt thou kill me, as thou diddest the Egyptian yesterday?
29 Then fled Moses at this saying, and was a stranger in the
land of Madian, where he begat two sons.
30 And when forty years were expired, there appeared to him in
the wilderness of mount Sina an angel of the Lord in a flame of
fire in a bush.
31 When Moses saw it, he wondered at the sight: and as he drew
near to behold it, the voice of the Lord came unto him,
32 Saying, I am the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham, and
the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. Then Moses trembled, and
durst not behold.
This is not correct. The speech omits the mention of Moses'
father but substitutes "fathers."
Exodus 3:6 Moreover he said, I am the God of thy father, the God
of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses
hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.
I checked out the Septuagint to see if it has mistranslated this
-- it is right having it in the singular.
33 Then said the Lord to him, Put off thy shoes from thy feet:
for the place where thou standest is holy ground.
34 I have seen, I have seen the affliction of my people which is
in Egypt, and I have heard their groaning, and am come down to
deliver them. And now come, I will send thee into Egypt.
35 This Moses whom they refused, saying, Who made thee a ruler
and a judge? the same did God send to be a ruler and a deliverer
by the hand of the angel which appeared to him in the bush.
36 He brought them out, after that he had shewed wonders and
signs in the land of Egypt, and in the Red sea, and in the
wilderness forty years.
37 This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A
prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your
brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear.
38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the
angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our
fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:
39 To whom our fathers would not obey, but thrust him from them,
and in their hearts turned back again into Egypt,
40 Saying unto Aaron, Make us gods to go before us: for as for
this Moses, which brought us out of the land of Egypt, we wot
not what is become of him.
41 And they made a calf in those days, and offered sacrifice
unto the idol, and rejoiced in the works of their own hands.
42 Then God turned, and gave them up to worship the host of
heaven; as it is written in the book of the prophets, O ye house
of Israel, have ye offered to me slain beasts and sacrifices by
the space of forty years in the wilderness?
This confuses me. I don't know what to make of it. Israel did
not turn to other gods in those forty years in the wilderness.
They were following the Pillar and mostly obeying Moses. They
did offer sacrifices for forty years. The prophet Amos is
asking, as I read it, if the Israel of his day were even doing
that in a proper manner. If they were also practicing idolatry,
what good would the sacrifices they did give to God do?
Amos 5:22 Though ye offer me burnt offerings and your meat
offerings, I will not accept them: neither will I regard the
peace offerings of your fat beasts.
23 Take thou away from me the noise of thy songs; for I will not
hear the melody of thy viols.
24 But let judgment run down as waters, and righteousness as a
mighty stream.
25 Have ye offered unto me sacrifices and offerings in the
wilderness forty years, O house of Israel?
26 But ye have borne the tabernacle of your Moloch and Chiun
your images, the star of your god, which ye made to yourselves.
27 Therefore will I cause you to go into captivity beyond
Damascus, saith the Lord, whose name is The God of hosts.
43 Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of
your god Remphan, figures which ye made to worship them: and I
will carry you away beyond Babylon.
This cannot apply to the children of Israel who wanted the
golden calf.
44 Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness,
as he had appointed, speaking unto Moses, that he should make it
according to the fashion that he had seen.
45 Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus
into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before
the face of our fathers, unto the days of David;
This is right since Joshua and Jesus are the same name.
46 Who found favour before God, and desired to find a tabernacle
for the God of Jacob.
47 But Solomon built him an house.
48 Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with
hands; as saith the prophet,
49 Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house
will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my
rest?
50 Hath not my hand made all these things?
51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do
always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.
52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and
they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the
Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:
This seems like an anti-Semitic exaggeration. There were
several prophets who were respected.
53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and
have not kept it.
54 When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and
they gnashed on him with their teeth.
55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly
into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the
right hand of God,
56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of
man standing on the right hand of God.
57 Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their
ears, and ran upon him with one accord,
58 And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the
witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose
name was Saul.
I wonder about this. Acts doesn't go as far as to say Saul
helped stoned Stephen, but they say he stood there. We read
later in Acts that Paul says he stood there consenting to his
death. That speech of Paul has problems, making me wonder if
he said those things. Outside Acts, is there any evidence that
Paul did this? Perhaps there is, but I can't think of it.
59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord
Jesus, receive my spirit.
60 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay
not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell
asleep.
I believe Stephen was marytred, but I find this account hard to
believe. The Romans did not permit the Jews to execute anyone.
That is history and it's also shown in how the Jews handed Jesus
over to the Romans asking him to execute Jesus. If the High
Priest was involved in executing anyone, the Romans would have
had executed the High Priest. So we are being asked to believe
that something had changed drastically from the time when the
High Priest wouldn't execute Jesus and the time when the High
Priest and a council were behind the stoning of Stephen. It
looks like an anti-semitic story and a way of attacking Paul to
me. I can believe Paul persecuted Christians; but I find it
hard to believe he would have been in favor of stoning Stephen
since that would have been against both Roman law and the ruling
of the Sanhedrin.
There are so many contradictions in this story, I can't believe
it was part of the original text.
#Post#: 344--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stephen's Speech in Acts
By: Helen Date: December 9, 2014, 4:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
So are we saying here that Terah was not physically dead when
Abraham left Haran...but Terah was spiritually dead to Abraham?
I have never been convinced that Abraham did the right thing in
bringing his father and Lot out of Ur when God called him out!!
It's almost as if he didn't mind leaving and striking out " to a
place he knew not"..but for comforts and sentiments sake he took
them too. I also don't think he was suposed to stay for all
those years in Haran.
I also wonder if Abraham was dragging his feet in even coming
out...as it says Gen 11 "Terah took Abram etc etc..
I think the story is " close enough"...it amazes me that after
all these centuries we have it all as clearly as we do!!
#Post#: 347--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stephen's Speech in Acts
By: Ivor1 Date: December 9, 2014, 9:17 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Faith is a very odd thing , its like trust in someone in fact it
is trust if we cannot have or understand the evidence now at
this moment in time. Past experience will show us a grown faith
from a mustard size seed to a towering tree of faith matured
with time and experience.
However God given faith the "Gift of faith" is slightly
different in that the Holy Spirit puts that in our very bones.
Some of us have waited for 30 years or more for an understanding
to fall into place that caps everything on a certain subject.
DM. Using the Richard Dawkins method of bombarding people with a
huge amount of various questions in one mouthful hoping to
suffocate their ability to respond and therefore establish
victory for the publisher does in fact work well but the victory
is hollow for its not built on reasoning with others but lack of
reasoning on the part of others who in seeing so many questions
put forth begin to sense that if one or two questions are
answered then 10 more questions will be forthcoming in the
revolving door
I will try to answer bitesize on of your first questions or
assumption
You wrote: Abraham is mentioned first in chapter 11 and we are
told about the LORD appearing to him in chapter 12. The only way
what Stephen said could be true is if God had appeared to
Abraham in an incident which is not recorded in Genesis.
and my answer is YES!... the whole experience of Abraham's life
is not recorded in the bible and no Stephen could not have read
it elsewhere..... but simply reading Stephens speech its very
hard to ignore the power of the Holy Spirit storming through
him. The Holy Spirit inspiring Stephen's words is the same Holy
Spirit that knew of all his encounters with Abraham
#Post#: 348--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stephen's Speech in Acts
By: A nonny mouse Date: December 10, 2014, 12:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Ivor1 link=topic=35.msg347#msg347 date=1418181464]
Faith is a very odd thing , its like trust in someone in fact it
is trust if we cannot have or understand the evidence now at
this moment in time. Past experience will show us a grown faith
from a mustard size seed to a towering tree of faith matured
with time and experience.
However God given faith the "Gift of faith" is slightly
different in that the Holy Spirit puts that in our very bones.
Some of us have waited for 30 years or more for an understanding
to fall into place that caps everything on a certain subject.
DM. Using the Richard Dawkins method of bombarding people with a
huge amount of various questions in one mouthful hoping to
suffocate their ability to respond and therefore establish
victory for the publisher does in fact work well but the victory
is hollow for its not built on reasoning with others but lack of
reasoning on the part of others who in seeing so many questions
put forth begin to sense that if one or two questions are
answered then 10 more questions will be forthcoming in the
revolving door
I will try to answer bitesize on of your first questions or
assumption
You wrote: Abraham is mentioned first in chapter 11 and we are
told about the LORD appearing to him in chapter 12. The only way
what Stephen said could be true is if God had appeared to
Abraham in an incident which is not recorded in Genesis.
and my answer is YES!... the whole experience of Abraham's life
is not recorded in the bible and no Stephen could not have read
it elsewhere..... but simply reading Stephens speech its very
hard to ignore the power of the Holy Spirit storming through
him. The Holy Spirit inspiring Stephen's words is the same Holy
Spirit that knew of all his encounters with Abraham
[/quote]
I've known and corresponded with Danger mouse on different
forums for many years and he is what he is.
Motivation is what matters and I can tell you that his
motivation is not to 'win' on the basis of voluminous argument.
I've known you on forums for only a year or two and have yet to
decide whether or not you might try to 'win'.....the only thing
I have learned is that you can sometimes pick up your bat and
ball and go play elsewhere when you don't agree with another's
PoV.
But I'm sure each of you would understand and be fine friends
with me and with each other were we to meet face to face.
As you say "Faith is a very odd thing".
#Post#: 350--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stephen's Speech in Acts
By: Kerry Date: December 10, 2014, 6:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Ivor1 link=topic=35.msg347#msg347 date=1418181464]
Faith is a very odd thing , its like trust in someone in fact it
is trust if we cannot have or understand the evidence now at
this moment in time. Past experience will show us a grown faith
from a mustard size seed to a towering tree of faith matured
with time and experience.
However God given faith the "Gift of faith" is slightly
different in that the Holy Spirit puts that in our very bones.
Some of us have waited for 30 years or more for an understanding
to fall into place that caps everything on a certain
subject.[/quote] I don't know what to make these comments since
I don't see how they fit into the subject, so I'll pass on
making a comment.
[quote]DM. Using the Richard Dawkins method of bombarding people
with a huge amount of various questions in one mouthful hoping
to suffocate their ability to respond and therefore establish
victory for the publisher does in fact work well but the victory
is hollow for its not built on reasoning with others but lack of
reasoning on the part of others who in seeing so many questions
put forth begin to sense that if one or two questions are
answered then 10 more questions will be forthcoming in the
revolving door[/quote]
I hope no one tries to discuss all these things at once. It
took me a long time to research these things myself. The reason
I put them all down was to show why I believe this entire speech
from Stephen is most probably a forgery from a Gentile
unacquainted with both the geography of Israel and with the
Scriptures. I also suspect it was inserted by someone seeking
to portray Paul as worse than he was. My interest in Acts was
first roused by another section of it that conflicts with
Galatians.
Galatians 1:17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were
apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again
unto Damascus.
18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter,
and abode with him fifteen days.
19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's
brother.
How could that be true if Acts was right? Acts portrays Paul
going to Jerusalem directly after his stay in Damascus following
his encounter with Jesus.
Acts 9:22 But Saul increased the more in strength, and
confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this
is very Christ.
23 And after that many days were fulfilled, the Jews took
counsel to kill him:
24 But their laying await was known of Saul. And they watched
the gates day and night to kill him.
25 Then the disciples took him by night, and let him down by the
wall in a basket.
26 And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join
himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and
believed not that he was a disciple.
27 But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and
declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that
he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus
in the name of Jesus.
Both accounts can't be true. The story must have been around
when Paul wrote Galatians since he's refuting it. It seems that
some people were trying to undermine him as an Apostle by saying
he went to the disciples and got their approval, thus
undermining Paul's claim that Jesus himself appointed him an
Apostle. Notice too how Barnanbas is portrayed as the brave
one. Peter and all the others are afraid to meet Paul, but not
Barnabas! I find it hard to think that Peter was afraid to meet
Paul. People were healed by his shadow falling over them?
Ananias and Sapphira fell down dead in his presence? We should
believe then that he was terrified to meet Paul? I doubt that.
So my conclusion, which could be flawed, is that someone
friendly towards Barnabas and unfriendly towards Paul added some
passages to the book of Acts. But alas, now I've chalked up
yet another detail.
[quote]I will try to answer bitesize on of your first questions
or assumption
You wrote: Abraham is mentioned first in chapter 11 and we are
told about the LORD appearing to him in chapter 12. The only way
what Stephen said could be true is if God had appeared to
Abraham in an incident which is not recorded in Genesis.
and my answer is YES!... the whole experience of Abraham's life
is not recorded in the bible and no Stephen could not have read
it elsewhere..... [/quote]This particular question is more
debatable than the others. Another theory is that when Genesis
says Terah was 70 and beget Abram, Nahor, and Haran that we
should not assume that Abraham was the oldest just because he's
named first. Nor should we assume he begat them all at the age
of 70 but rather was 70 when the first was born.
So what is your theory then? That God appeared to Abraham while
he was in Mesopotamia and told him to "Get thee out of thy
country, and from thy kindred, and come into the land which I
shall shew thee." And that he did not obey at once? But
rather he went with his father to Haran and then after some
years and after his father was dead, he left Haran for
Palestine? This does not seem right to me, not if you have
Abraham waiting for his father to die before obeying God.
I follow Genesis. Terah had three sons in Ur of the Chaldees
-- and started having them when 70. He then packed up and
moved his entire family to Haran. It was in Haran that God
told him to leave, not in Mesopotamia as Stephen allegedly said.
Genesis 11:31 And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of
Haran his son's son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son
Abram's wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the
Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto
Haran, and dwelt there.
32 And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years: and
Terah died in Haran.
12:1 Now the Lord had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy
country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto
a land that I will shew thee:
2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee,
and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that
curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be
blessed.
4 So Abram departed, as the Lord had spoken unto him; and Lot
went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he
departed out of Haran.
What throws people is the detail of Terah dying at the age of
205 being placed where it is. The casual reader can read that
and easily believe that he died before Abraham left Haran. But
the math says otherwise; and we also should see that Abraham not
only was willing to sacrifice Isaac and to give up Ishmael, he
was also willing to abandon his earthy father because he was an
idolater. We never read of Terah being named among the
patriarchs. It is not the God of Terah, Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob. Nor is the "seed of Terah" ever mentioned as being
blessed. I believe we should see Abraham as choosing God as
his Father. I also believe what Jesus said applies to Abraham
concerning his father Terah:
Matthew 19:29 And every one that hath forsaken houses, or
brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or
children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an
hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.
[quote]but simply reading Stephens speech its very hard to
ignore the power of the Holy Spirit storming through him. The
Holy Spirit inspiring Stephen's words is the same Holy Spirit
that knew of all his encounters with Abraham[/quote]I've no
doubt the author of this speech intended it to be dramatic and
impressive. That does not necessarily make it inspired in my
opinion.
I hope things will become clearer as we go through the other
points. This particular point is more debatable and open to
interpretation. The other points are more black and white.
There are other passages in the book of Acts that are dubious,
and some involve speeches; but I won't throw them out at you now
since we have more than enough on the table already.
When Josephus wrote his history, he included a speech given
right before everyone at Masada died. How could that be?
Could he have known what was said? Of course not. That's not
how people thought about history then. They would often add
exciting speeches to liven up things. Shakespeare does the same
thing in his historical plays. No one seeing a play by
Shakespeare believes those speeches are really what the people
said. It seems possible to me that someone added speeches in
the book of Acts to add some drama and possibly also passages as
to undermine Paul.
#Post#: 351--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stephen's Speech in Acts
By: Kerry Date: December 10, 2014, 6:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Helen link=topic=35.msg344#msg344 date=1418162961]
So are we saying here that Terah was not physically dead when
Abraham left Haran...but Terah was spiritually dead to
Abraham?[/quote]Yes, that's why his death is reported where it
is. Terah was "dead" to Abraham before he was "dead"
physically.
[quote]I have never been convinced that Abraham did the right
thing in bringing his father and Lot out of Ur when God called
him out!! It's almost as if he didn't mind leaving and striking
out " to a place he knew not"..but for comforts and sentiments
sake he took them too. I also don't think he was suposed to stay
for all those years in Haran.
I also wonder if Abraham was dragging his feet in even coming
out...as it says Gen 11 "Terah took Abram etc
etc..[/quote]Abraham did not bring his father out of Ur. Terah
took them out and went to Haran. God appeared to Abraham in
Haran and told him to leave his father in Haran, and he did. He
didn't drag his feet when God appeared to him in Haran.
[quote]I think the story is " close enough"...it amazes me that
after all these centuries we have it all as clearly as we
do!![/quote]I think people miss the important detail that
Abraham valued obeying God over honoring his earthly father who
was an idolater. It seems to me that Stephen (or whoever wrote
that speech) did not understand how it could be right to abandon
your parents under any circumstances. There may be people too
who think Jesus was impious for talking about leaving "father
and mother" since that would seem to be a contradiction of the
commandment to honor our parents. I argue that Abraham was
adopted by God. God became his Father -- and that is why we
don't read about the "seed of Terah" being blessed.
Compare this question of "seed" to the examples of Ishmael and
Isaac. Were they both his sons? After the flesh perhaps but
they were not both his sons spiritually. God called Isaac
Abraham's "only son."
Genesis 22:2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son
Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah;
and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the
mountains which I will tell thee of.
So I believe Abraham ceased being Terah's son and was adopted by
God. Hence the importance of the "seed of Abraham." To me,
Stephen misses that point and thought Abraham didn't leave until
Terah died.
#Post#: 363--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stephen's Speech in Acts
By: Ivor1 Date: December 10, 2014, 7:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
DM Attacking the bible with a pair of scissors may work for you
and may be worth a try, (go for it)... but save the bits because
you never know what the Holy Spirit may reveal to you at a later
date.
Did Paul "present" himself to the elders and share his faith in
Jerusalem or not before he went for a big wander around? ....to
me its neither here nor there. (sorry to be so casual with
something that means so much to you but we are all different and
rightly so.)
#Post#: 366--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stephen's Speech in Acts
By: Kerry Date: December 10, 2014, 9:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Ivor1 link=topic=35.msg363#msg363 date=1418263118]
DM Attacking the bible with a pair of scissors may work for you
and may be worth a try, (go for it)... but save the bits because
you never know what the Holy Spirit may reveal to you at a later
date.[/quote]
No real answers then. First you said I was using the shotgun
approach. Now after I tell you to take your time please, we find
you unable to answer.
I assure you that when there are contradictory statements in the
Bible, both can't be right. You can stick your head in the
sand and pretend they can both be true; but according to James,
that's being double-minded.
[quote]Did Paul "present" himself to the elders and share his
faith in Jerusalem or not before he went for a big wander
around? ....to me is neither here nor there. (sorry to be so
casual with something that means so much to you but we are all
different and rightly so.)[/quote]I feel sorry for you that you
are so casual about something you say is inspired Scripture.
It's as if you don't care about it. You're more interested in
saying, "It's all true" without even knowing what it means.
How could that be? If you don't know what it means, how could
you know if it's right? The answer: You don't.
Such things are important to me. I happen to agree with what
Paul wrote to Timothy.
2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and
is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for
instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto
all good works.
If a passage is truly inspired Scripture, I want to know what it
means. I want to profit from it.
As for whether Paul went to Jerusalem straight away, I believe I
know. I've considered that. Galatians is right.
First of all, Paul gives us an interesting detail, that he was
in Arabia and did not go to Jerusalem until after three years.
That strikes me as very right since it agrees so well with how
the Apostles went about choosing a replacement for Judas. They
chose someone who had been around with them since the time of
John the Baptist -- that would have been roughly three years.
It also taught me that when Jesus wants to use someone, it takes
time for him to train them. They have to accept his discipline.
People can't become Christians one day and then made Apostles
the next. That also agrees with the early Church practice
where someone could not be made a Bishop overnight. That was
the ideal anyway set forth in Canon two of Nicea which
prohibited the ordination of the recently converted. That tells
me what people back then thought proper -- and although they
sometimes broke that rule, they still knew about it. That rule
is in wonderful agreement with what Paul says about his three
years and with the other historical details about the eleven
Apostles and about the person chosen to replace Judas. When I
see that kind of agreement and it makes sense to me, I think I
have the truth.
While Paul does not tell us what he did in those three years, I
am led to believe he was being a disciple, being disciplined by
Jesus himself, the way the other disciples had been. Thus
Paul was "sent forth" as an Apostle by Jesus himself after this
period of discipline.
If all you want from the Bible is the belief it's true without
understanding it, I guess you can take that attitude. And if
you believe you already know all the truth and couldn't profit
from the Bible by being corrected if you're wrong, I wonder
what you do with 2 Timothy 3:16?
Make no mistake on this point. You do not offend me by being
casual about something I find important. What you do is your
affair. To paraphrase what Jesus said to Peter, "What is that
to me?" I do care about Genesis however. I think Genesis is
right, and I don't like to see it misquoted; and if the speech
of Stephen misquotes it, that annoys me.
People say casually the Bible is all true and without error.
They say they believe it profitable for correction, doctrine,
etc. Then when they read it, they seem unable to remember what
they read. Why is that? To me, it's a very important thing
being taught when Genesis says seventy souls went down into
Egypt. That teaches me something. (If it means nothing to you,
perhaps it's you should ask the Spirit to teach you.) So I
get annoyed when someone alters that to seventy five which isn't
right; and if you believe it was seventy five, you will never
see what I have seen. When I hear people say the Bible is
inerrant, I wonder if they ever read it; and if they have read
it, did they remember what they read? Did they pore over
every word intensely, seeking truth?
I also point out that according to the book of Acts, the people
Stephen was addressing were learned men. If he had said such
things to them, they would have interrupted him and told him he
was wrong. We are also to believe that the Jewish leaders
were afraid to execute Jesus themselves out of fear of offending
the Romans, yet they dared to kill Stephen?
#Post#: 367--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stephen's Speech in Acts
By: Ivor1 Date: December 10, 2014, 9:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
DM wrote: I happen to agree with what Paul wrote to Timothy.
2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and
is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for
instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto
all good works.
Does the 1st word in 2 Tim 3.16 need changing to "Some"?
(scissors)
I'll take it "All" and have what it teaches of the unchangeble
principles of God and what it tells me of Him and what is
required of me to serve Him. I pray for wisdom from it and not
head knowledge. I use it to measure what people say of God and
accept it as God breathed, the fool that I am...for doing so
#Post#: 368--------------------------------------------------
Re: Stephen's Speech in Acts
By: Kerry Date: December 10, 2014, 10:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Ivor1 link=topic=35.msg367#msg367 date=1418269294]
DM wrote: I happen to agree with what Paul wrote to Timothy.
2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and
is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for
instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto
all good works.
Does the 1st word in 2 Tim 3.16 need changing to "Some"?
(scissors)
[/quote]No, I said I agree with it. The question is over what
books are in fact "Scripture"? Do you think Paul meant Timothy
was studying the New Testament when he wrote this:
2 Timothy 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy
scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation
through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
I know what books he meant there since I know which books the
Jews called "Scriptures." That doesn't provide a clue about
what books in the New Testament should be called "Scriptures."
Similarly, Paul's statement in 2 Timothy 3 does not tell us
what other books should be.
You accept most of the books the Catholic Church decided were
Scriptures. Do you accept all of them? I doubt it. If not,
why not? Do you accept the Book of Enoch as Scripture? If you
accept Jude as Scripture, then you should accept Enoch too since
he quotes from it.
Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of
these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his
saints,
I think the honest truth is that you never thought much about
it. People told you all the books in the Bible are all
Scriptures and divinely inspired and you believed what you were
told. My impression of you so far is you like easy answers.
If all of Stephen's speech is "inspired," then God would be the
author of confusion and also inspired Stephen to lie. That
cannot be.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page