Luke lied? Really?
Also, Acts 9:10-17 10 Now there was a disciple at Damascus named Ananias. The Lord said to him in a vision, “Ananias.” And he said, “Here I am, Lord.”
11 And the Lord said to him, “Rise and go to the street called Straight, and at the house of Judas look for a man of Tarsus named Saul, for behold, he is praying, 12 and he has seen in a vision a man named Ananias come in and lay his hands on him so that he might regain his sight.”
13 But Ananias answered, “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to your saints at Jerusalem. 14 And here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who call on your name.”
15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel. 16 For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.”
17 So Ananias departed and entered the house. And laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus who appeared to you on the road by which you came has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.”
“Luke lied? Really?”
There’s a difference between direct and indirect evidence. Divine revelation that isn’t witnessed by more than one person is indirect evidence.
We have an intermediary here, Paul, that is between us and Christ. Whereas the other events in the Gospel, we can go to all the witnesses and get the information from them.
There’s nothing wrong with indirect evidence. It’s just not direct evidence. Which is what I was referring to in the first place, and am now clarifying.