(March 9, 2015 at 9:52 pm)watchamadoodle Wrote: @DeistPaladin, was the book of Acts included along with Luke in the canon of Marcion? I know that many people think Luke and Acts were a single book. Apparently the apologists were very thorough in their criticism of Marcion's Gospel of the Lord, so we should know if it included both Luke and Acts. If Acts was not part of Marcion's canon, isn't that suspicious?
What if, instead of Marcion editing Luke to create his Gospel of the Lord, somebody edited Marcion's gospel to create Luke and then invented Acts to go with it? And Paul's epistles might have received the same treatment?
Well, certainly the whole Nativity scene was not part of Marcion's Luke, as the higher-god-Jesus would certainly not have been born or had parents.
Really, that's a point of Christianity that makes no sense anyway. If Jesus was God-incarnate, or a piece of God as Christians say, does that mean Mary had to change God's diapers? Did she and Joseph fight over who's turn it was to wake up and feed God in the middle of the night because God's crying again? The whole idea of a god-baby makes no sense.
But I digress.
I reject the notion that Luke and Acts had the same author. Luke says in his Gospel that the ascension of Jesus happened on the day of his resurrection. Acts says the ascension happened 40 days later. You'd think if they were the same author they'd have gotten such an important detail straight.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
