Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Campion

Then explain how Peter could be the Bishop of Rome from 42 to 67 AD and still appear before Herod in 44 AD according to those Acts of the Apostles that Jerome had in his hands at the time. Did he not trust Luke? Who did he consider more trustworthy: Luke or Eusebius or his own imagination?


1,197 posted on 10/24/2006 11:38:32 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1192 | View Replies ]


To: Uncle Chip
Then explain how Peter could be the Bishop of Rome from 42 to 67 AD and still appear before Herod in 44 AD according to those Acts of the Apostles that Jerome had in his hands at the time. Did he not trust Luke? Who did he consider more trustworthy: Luke or Eusebius or his own imagination?

This is an example of being an uncharitable interpreter. Luke does not use the term "44 AD". Nor does Luke say anything that requires us to think that Peter appeared before Herod in 44 AD. Peter's imprisonment under Herod (and release by the angel) is thought to have occurred in 42 AD.

-A8

1,200 posted on 10/24/2006 11:51:36 AM PDT by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1197 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson