Acts 21:20 myriads of anointed christians (page 3)

greendawn

Are there any valid reasons for us to believe that the book of acts and the gospel of Luke are unreliable, untrustworthy, and full of fabricatons? Why could there not be say 30 000 Jewish Christians after 20 years of preaching among the 2.5 million Jews of Palestine?

serendipity

Hi hereticult, welcome to the forum!

Narkissos

Are there any valid reasons for us to believe that the book of acts and the gospel of Luke are unreliable, untrustworthy, and full of fabricatons?

To me, yes, a lot of them. Literary analysis shows that Luke's main source is not a historical record but the Gospel of Mark, which the Lukan author freely and consistently modifies for theological and literary reasons. The whole book of Acts is frequently at odds with the Pauline letters as to the real issues and stances of the different segments of "early christianity". When non-Christian history is referred to there are big anachronisms (e.g. Herod and Quirinius in Luke 2, Gamaliel, Judas and Theudas in Acts 5).

Why could there not be say 30 000 Jewish Christians after 20 years of preaching among the 2.5 million Jews of Palestine?

The figures of course (if taken literally, which is exegetically debatable, see my previous point on hyperbole) are not impossible; iow they are not the most unlikely part of the story. But as they belong to an account which otherwise (imo) has all the marks of pseudo-history they hardly count as historical data.

hereticult

Narkissos your argument is taken from the scholarly/scientific/historic point of view and surely is correct!

Nonetheless it is interesting to see, how the Watchtower Society, that claims that the Bible is the pure error free Word of God and that the New World Translation is the most accurate bible translation ever made, makes use of "artistic freedom" when translating bible passages that have dogmatic implications.

The word myriads for example is well known by all Jehovahs Witnesses. There exists even a song in the song-book that makes use of this term "myriads myriads of ...". So there is no reason to translate myriads with thousands because every Jehovahs Witness understand what myriads mean. In addition in other parts of the NWT they do not translate myriads with thousands but leave it there.

So why do they handle this topic inconsequently. From my experience I can say that nothing is happening by chance at the org but they have strong motives for their choices.

Narkissos

hereticult,

This was just a side remark from me. Of course I can see the logic and validity of your argument ad JWs, since they hold Acts to be historical.

And it may well be that the NWTranslators took advantage of a common (and usually candid) translator's liberty to sweep an embarrassing expression (from their perspective) under the carpet.

Not very far though, cf. the footnote to Acts 21:20 in the current NWT:

Lit., "myriads; tens of thousands."

hereticult

Yes indeed, As I mentioned already in my first posting , the NWT hides "myriads" in the footnote.

Bye the way, is you nickname from greek origin?

Narkissos

As I mentioned already in my first posting , the NWT hides "myriads" in the footnote.

Oops, sorry I had missed it.

Bye the way, is you nickname from greek origin?

Yes, Narkissos = Narcissus / Narciss, from the Greek myth (somewhat relayed and coloured to me through Hermann Hesse's Narziss und Goldmund). But I'm French.