Jump to content

Talk:Acts of the Apostles

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by WalkerThrough (talk | contribs) at 01:03, 30 September 2011 (Source of Acts: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconChristianity: Charismatic B‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Charismatic Christianity.
WikiProject iconBible B‑class Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconReligious texts (defunct)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.

Footnote #7 leads to a source that no longer exists (as of 8/7/2010 when I tried it). The link is to http://www.apologeticsinfo.org/papers/actsarcheology.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.135.110.114 (talk) 02:48, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 15:57, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Plot summary overlong?

It seems to me that the plot summary of this book is somewhat overlong and inaccurate. Would anyone care to condense it? 165.118.1.51 (talk) 07:23, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps specifics would be useful. Exactly what section to you mean and what inaccuracies do you see? JodyB talk 11:19, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Manuscripts section paragraph up for deletion

The following text is in the Manuscripts sections:

It is believed that the material in the Western text which isn't in the Alexandrian text reflects later theological developments within Christianity. For examples, the Western text features a greater hostility to Judaism and a more positive attitude towards Gentile Christianity. Some also note that the Western text attempts to minimize the emphasis Acts places on the role of women in the early Christian church.

Considering it is uncited and was tagged with a "need reference" comment in December 2009, my suggestion is that the paragraph be deleted as "one person's opinion" and not even a really good one (as the "greater hostility to Judaism is highly questionable). Ckruschke (talk) 14:46, 29 March 2011 (UTC)Ckruschke[reply]

Sources

In the paragraph entitled "Manuscripts", it says that the "Textus Receptus... first...to be printed". This is not true. The article on the Complutensian Bible notes that it contained the first printed Greek New Testament. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.35.101 (talk) 15:15, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Complutensian Polyglot Bible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.35.101 (talk) 15:18, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source of Acts

Hi, could you explain why you have removed very important and relevant sourced statements on the sources section? Here is what was removed: According to the Bible, the ultimate source of all scripture, including Acts, is God Himself. We are told in 2 Timothy 3:16: "All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God...." Therefore, Christians believe that Luke was inspired by the Holy Spirit to write God's very words.[1] This does not violate any policy. You are removing the Christian view of the source of Acts with a RS. This is the Christian view as explicitly mentioned here and sourced. Man, people really don't follow WP policy unless they agree with it. Major bias! WalkerThrough (talk) 01:03, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Grudem, Wayne (1994). Systematic Theology. Leicester, England: IV Press. pp. 62, 73–78, 1168, 1203–1207.