'Drich Wrote:If "c" were true and Acts/luke was written decades later than why doesn't the book include the final imprisionment and death of Paul by the romans?Lest someone think that Drich made a point, I will observe there are are an almost infinite number of answers to his question.
1. In the first place, Paul's death is nowhere recorded in that perfect never-wrong book that Drich sets such store by. It's just a story told by Ignatius ca 110 CE, at least 45 years after the supposed date of Paul's death.
2. Acts ends rather abruptly. Paul went on preaching for two years in Rome. For all you know 17 pages fell off the end of the book and were never found.
3. Maybe the author did not want to include the story of Paul's death.
4. Maybe the author did not even know any details of Paul's death. If he was writing far away from Rome, it's not like he could email the Roman Christians to get further information.
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people — House
