"Acts" is usually attributed to whoever wrote "Luke" ( almost certainly not anyone named "Luke.") The epistles are written by different authors and pseudoepigraphically given names which make them seem important.
And, no. I would not call that a safe assumption.
The recently discovered Gabriel Revelation Stone suggests that the whole idea of a dead messiah coming back to life in 3 days was already known at the end of the first century BC.
At some point it is necessary to understand that the temple controlled religious life in the country on an official basis. But unofficially there could have been any number of oddball beliefs in the countryside operating below the radar, so to speak.
It's a complex issue.
Quote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudepigraph
And, no. I would not call that a safe assumption.
The recently discovered Gabriel Revelation Stone suggests that the whole idea of a dead messiah coming back to life in 3 days was already known at the end of the first century BC.
At some point it is necessary to understand that the temple controlled religious life in the country on an official basis. But unofficially there could have been any number of oddball beliefs in the countryside operating below the radar, so to speak.
It's a complex issue.
