Nov 29, 2013 8:21 PM GMT
Dr. Ehrman and Blog Posters and Blog Readers
What do you think of this? Dr. Ehrman, this does not sit well with you speaking more highly of the Letters of Paul over Luke’s Acts of the Apostles.
Plutarch wrote Pyrrhus, The Fool of Hope after the early churches had begun using Paul’s epistles as their “gospel.” Luke wrote about this Fool of Hope to alert “Theophilus” to the truth about Paul, knowing that some would eventually see the parallel he had drawn between Pyrrhus and Paul.
Who was Pyrrhus to the Greeks? Pyrrhus, The Fool of Hope, was a story Plutarch wrote and titled at about the same time Luke’s gospel was being penned. It includes the following:
“Pyrrhus also sent some agents, who pretended to be Macedonians. These spies spread the suggestion that now the time had come to be liberated from the harsh rule of Demetrius by joining Pyrrhus, who was a gracious friend of soldiers.”
“And so without fighting, Pyrrhus became King of Macedonia…”
Another piece of information about Pyrrhus is of great importance, and it’s probably the reason his name was expunged from early biblical texts: According to the Legend of Troy as told by Homer, Pyrrhus was one of the soldiers who participated in the Trojan horse saga. And that is the best-known legacy from the legend of Troy
Paul also refers to himself as “a fool” at 2 Corinthians 11:16-29: “I repeat, let no one think that I am a fool; but if you do, then accept me as a fool…
Luke has Paul say, Acts 23:6: “. . . I am on trial concerning the HOPE of the resurrection of the dead.”
Luke put quite a lot of effort into connecting Paul to Pyrrhus, the “fool of hope” who was in fact an infiltrator.
More than any other of the coded messages, it seems that Luke wanted to convey the message that learning about Pyrrhus will reveal the truth about Paul.
Luke couldn’t write a story called Paul: The Spy Who Pretended to be Jesus’ Apostle Who Infiltrated the Movement and Destroyed It from Within. That story would have been censored by the Orthodox Church leaders supporting Paul. So he did the next best thing. He associated Paul with Pyrrhus in such a way that the connection could not be missed. No wonder the name Pyrrhus was removed from some of the translations of the Bible. Any fool could pick up on the message because virtually everyone knew that Pyrrhus hid inside the Trojan Horse! It was fortunate that some earlier texts were salvaged, saved, and passed on through time.
The name Pyrrhus appears in just one place in the Bible: Acts 20:4. However, as already stated, those who trust in the King James Version would not know the name was ever used in scripture:
King James Version: “And there accompanied him into Asia Sopater of Berea…” (The name Pyrrhus was removed.)
Darby Translation: “And there accompanied him as far as Asia, Sopater [son] of Pyrrhus, a Berean…”
New Revised Standard Version: “He was accompanied by Sopater son of Pyrrhus from Beroea…”
Latin Vulgate: “comitatus est autem eum Sopater Pyrii Beroensis…” (Filius is the Latin word for son. It is missing from the Latin Vulgate’s version of Acts 20:4; therefore, Jerome’s translation from the original Greek did not identify Sopater as “son of” Pyrii; that designation is an assumption.)
The original Latin Vulgate was commissioned in 382 by Pope Damasus I. The modern version is not the original version created by Jerome; it is the result of combining a variety of sources that include Jerome. It is, however, one of the earliest sources for the original texts. Therefore, it seems safe to conclude that Luke’s original story included the name, Sopater Pyrrhus Beroea.
Luke’s use of the key words from Plutarch’s story of Pyrrhus suggests a purpose. Luke’s primary purpose in his work was to use allegory to tell a story that was being suppressed. To place Pyrrhus with Beroea, Macedonia, Troas (aka Troy) and Demetrius leads directly to Plutarch’s Pyrrhus, men from Beroea, Macedonia, and Troy. The key words in Plutarch’s works, however, are omitted from Acts: “Agents,” “pretenders,” “spies,” and “disguise.” Philo’s Rule for Allegory #19 applies: The important allegorical information is to be found in the “noteworthy omissions.”
What Luke transmitted via allegory was: “And so, without fighting, Paul became the leader of the new religion.”
(Philo’s Rules can be found at http://www.thenazareneway.com/Philo‘s%20Rules%20for%20Allegory.htm.)
By infiltrating, claiming conversion, and assigning himself the title, Apostle, Paul (who never revealed his birth name was Saul) changed the doctrine and set out to destroy all evidence of the Nazarene sect that produced Jesus the Nazarene.
http://www.thenazareneway.com/The%20Gospel%20of%20Paul.htm
What do you think of this? Dr. Ehrman, this does not sit well with you speaking more highly of the Letters of Paul over Luke’s Acts of the Apostles.
Plutarch wrote Pyrrhus, The Fool of Hope after the early churches had begun using Paul’s epistles as their “gospel.” Luke wrote about this Fool of Hope to alert “Theophilus” to the truth about Paul, knowing that some would eventually see the parallel he had drawn between Pyrrhus and Paul.
Who was Pyrrhus to the Greeks? Pyrrhus, The Fool of Hope, was a story Plutarch wrote and titled at about the same time Luke’s gospel was being penned. It includes the following:
“Pyrrhus also sent some agents, who pretended to be Macedonians. These spies spread the suggestion that now the time had come to be liberated from the harsh rule of Demetrius by joining Pyrrhus, who was a gracious friend of soldiers.”
“And so without fighting, Pyrrhus became King of Macedonia…”
Another piece of information about Pyrrhus is of great importance, and it’s probably the reason his name was expunged from early biblical texts: According to the Legend of Troy as told by Homer, Pyrrhus was one of the soldiers who participated in the Trojan horse saga. And that is the best-known legacy from the legend of Troy
Paul also refers to himself as “a fool” at 2 Corinthians 11:16-29: “I repeat, let no one think that I am a fool; but if you do, then accept me as a fool…
Luke has Paul say, Acts 23:6: “. . . I am on trial concerning the HOPE of the resurrection of the dead.”
Luke put quite a lot of effort into connecting Paul to Pyrrhus, the “fool of hope” who was in fact an infiltrator.
More than any other of the coded messages, it seems that Luke wanted to convey the message that learning about Pyrrhus will reveal the truth about Paul.
Luke couldn’t write a story called Paul: The Spy Who Pretended to be Jesus’ Apostle Who Infiltrated the Movement and Destroyed It from Within. That story would have been censored by the Orthodox Church leaders supporting Paul. So he did the next best thing. He associated Paul with Pyrrhus in such a way that the connection could not be missed. No wonder the name Pyrrhus was removed from some of the translations of the Bible. Any fool could pick up on the message because virtually everyone knew that Pyrrhus hid inside the Trojan Horse! It was fortunate that some earlier texts were salvaged, saved, and passed on through time.
The name Pyrrhus appears in just one place in the Bible: Acts 20:4. However, as already stated, those who trust in the King James Version would not know the name was ever used in scripture:
King James Version: “And there accompanied him into Asia Sopater of Berea…” (The name Pyrrhus was removed.)
Darby Translation: “And there accompanied him as far as Asia, Sopater [son] of Pyrrhus, a Berean…”
New Revised Standard Version: “He was accompanied by Sopater son of Pyrrhus from Beroea…”
Latin Vulgate: “comitatus est autem eum Sopater Pyrii Beroensis…” (Filius is the Latin word for son. It is missing from the Latin Vulgate’s version of Acts 20:4; therefore, Jerome’s translation from the original Greek did not identify Sopater as “son of” Pyrii; that designation is an assumption.)
The original Latin Vulgate was commissioned in 382 by Pope Damasus I. The modern version is not the original version created by Jerome; it is the result of combining a variety of sources that include Jerome. It is, however, one of the earliest sources for the original texts. Therefore, it seems safe to conclude that Luke’s original story included the name, Sopater Pyrrhus Beroea.
Luke’s use of the key words from Plutarch’s story of Pyrrhus suggests a purpose. Luke’s primary purpose in his work was to use allegory to tell a story that was being suppressed. To place Pyrrhus with Beroea, Macedonia, Troas (aka Troy) and Demetrius leads directly to Plutarch’s Pyrrhus, men from Beroea, Macedonia, and Troy. The key words in Plutarch’s works, however, are omitted from Acts: “Agents,” “pretenders,” “spies,” and “disguise.” Philo’s Rule for Allegory #19 applies: The important allegorical information is to be found in the “noteworthy omissions.”
What Luke transmitted via allegory was: “And so, without fighting, Paul became the leader of the new religion.”
(Philo’s Rules can be found at http://www.thenazareneway.com/Philo‘s%20Rules%20for%20Allegory.htm.)
By infiltrating, claiming conversion, and assigning himself the title, Apostle, Paul (who never revealed his birth name was Saul) changed the doctrine and set out to destroy all evidence of the Nazarene sect that produced Jesus the Nazarene.
http://www.thenazareneway.com/The%20Gospel%20of%20Paul.htm
