How We Know the Book of Acts Isn’t Historical

How We Know the Book of Acts Isn’t Historical ![rw-book-cover](https://img.youtube.com/vi/EuVH6chfkzo/maxresdefault.jpg) 🔗 **Source:** [How We Know the Book of Acts Isn’t Historical](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuVH6chfkzo&t=2s) > [!note]+ Document Notes > tags: #biblical-scholarship #new-testament #acts #septuagint #historical-criticism > author: Dan McClellan > source: YouTube > reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuVH6chfkzo&t=2s > date created: 2024-12-28 18:30 > > # 🏷️ Title: How we know the book of Acts isn't historical >  ## 🧰 Action Inbox - [H1] Research other examples of LXX-dependent passages in Acts — supports broader non-historicity argument #biblical-scholarship - [H2] Compare Hebrew vs Greek versions of other prophetic citations in NT — methodological consistency #textual-criticism - [H3] Investigate audience implications of Greek composition vs Aramaic council — sociolinguistic context #historical-criticism ## 🧭 Table of Contents - [[#📝 Summary]] - [[#📖 Main Content]] - [[#🗒️ Notes]] - [[#📚 References]] - [[#🗣️ Paraphrase]] - [[#📰 Newsletter]] - [[#✅ Action Items]] - [[#🧪 Hypotheses]] - [[#📊 Methodology]] - [[#❓ Questions]] - [[#🔮 Future Research]] - [[#💡 Implications]] - [[#🧠 Learning Styles Assessment]] - [[#📊 Accessibility Assessment]] - [[#🌍 DEIB Assessment]] - [[#✅ Logical Validity]] - [[#🛡️ DARVO Analysis]] - [[#🎯 Conclusion]] ### 🔗 References - [Acts 15:16-17](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2015:16-17&version=ESV) - [Amos 9:11-12](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Amos%209:11-12&version=ESV) ## 📝 Summary - **What happened**: Biblical scholar Dan McClellan analyzes Acts 15's Jerusalem Council narrative, showing James quotes a Greek mistranslation of Amos 9:11-12 - **Why it matters**: Demonstrates Acts contains literary creations rather than historical eyewitness accounts - **Key stakeholders**: Biblical scholars, theologians, anyone studying New Testament historicity - **Risks and tradeoffs**: Challenges traditional views of biblical historicity vs advancing scholarly understanding - **Bottom line**: The dependence on Septuagint mistranslations proves Acts 15 was composed in Greek for Greek audiences, not based on historical Aramaic/Hebrew council proceedings ## 📖 Main Content The Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 presents a critical test case for the historical reliability of Acts. In this narrative, James clinches the debate about Gentile circumcision by quoting Amos 9:11-12, arguing the prophecy supports including uncircumcised Gentiles. However, James's quotation only works in the Greek Septuagint translation, not the original Hebrew text. The Hebrew speaks of Israel possessing "the remnant of Edom" (territorial conquest), while the Greek reads "the remnant of humanity might seek" (universal inclusion). This difference stems from two translation errors: confusing "Edom" (אדום) with "Adam/humanity" (אדם), and "possess" (ירש) with "seek" (דרש). The linguistic context is crucial: a Jerusalem council would likely have been conducted in Aramaic or Hebrew, with participants fluent in both languages who would recognize the Hebrew text's actual meaning. James's reliance on a Greek mistranslation in such a context is historically implausible. This suggests Acts 15 was composed in Greek by someone prioritizing the Septuagint, writing for an audience unfamiliar with Hebrew-Greek textual differences—indicating literary creation rather than historical reporting. ## 🗒️ Notes #### ⏱️ [00:00](https://youtu.be/EuVH6chfkzo?t=0) — [H1] Introduction to Acts 15 historicity problem - Key idea: Acts 15's Jerusalem Council narrative contains evidence of literary rather than historical composition - Evidence: "portions of the book of Acts are not historical but are literary creations" #### ⏱️ [00:25](https://youtu.be/EuVH6chfkzo?t=25) — [H2] Jerusalem Council context and James's decisive role - Key idea: James settles the circumcision debate by quoting Amos 9:11-12 and establishing four rules for Gentiles - Evidence: "James quotes a version of Amos 9:11 and 12 and says, 'So I have determined that all gentile converts need to do is abstain from things polluted by idols'" #### ⏱️ [01:15](https://youtu.be/EuVH6chfkzo?t=75) — [H3] Acts 15:17 quotation supports Gentile inclusion - Key idea: James's quotation makes it seem God intended universal salvation from the start - Evidence: "'So that the remnant of humanity may seek after the Lord all those upon whom my name is called'" #### ⏱️ [01:45](https://youtu.be/EuVH6chfkzo?t=105) — [H1] Hebrew text contradicts the quotation - Key idea: The original Hebrew text of Amos 9:12 says something completely different about possessing Edom - Evidence: "What it's going to say is so that they might possess the remnant of Edom" #### ⏱️ [02:15](https://youtu.be/EuVH6chfkzo?t=135) — [H2] Hebrew context is territorial conquest, not universal inclusion - Key idea: Amos 9 concerns restoring David's kingdom and reconquering lost territories like Edom - Evidence: "This was about restoring to Israel the land of Edom so that they might possess the remnant of Edom" #### ⏱️ [02:45](https://youtu.be/EuVH6chfkzo?t=165) — [H1] Two Hebrew words explain the mistranslation - Key idea: Confusion between similar Hebrew words created the Greek translation error - Evidence: "Edom can be spelled in a way that makes it indistinguishable on text from Adam, which means human, man, or humanity" #### ⏱️ [03:15](https://youtu.be/EuVH6chfkzo?t=195) — [H2] Verb confusion compounds the translation error - Key idea: Confusing "possess" (yash) with "seek" (dash) further distorted the meaning - Evidence: "The verb in Hebrew for possess take possession of is yash which is very very similar to another Hebrew verb dash which doesn't mean to take possession of but to seek" #### ⏱️ [03:45](https://youtu.be/EuVH6chfkzo?t=225) — [H3] Septuagint creates grammatically incomplete sentence - Key idea: The mistranslation changes object to subject and leaves "seek" without an object - Evidence: "You have turned the object of the verb into the subject of the verb and you have left a transitive verb without an object" #### ⏱️ [04:15](https://youtu.be/EuVH6chfkzo?t=255) — [H1] This specific mistranslation exists only in the Septuagint - Key idea: The particular combination of errors that enables James's argument appears only in the Greek translation - Evidence: "This particular combination of misunderstandings when it comes to the word edom and the verb to possess is only found in the Septuagent" #### ⏱️ [04:30](https://youtu.be/EuVH6chfkzo?t=270) — [H1] Language context makes quotation historically implausible - Key idea: A Jerusalem council would not have been conducted in Greek - Evidence: "This would have been most likely in Aramaic, maybe in Hebrew, unlikely to have been held in Greek" #### ⏱️ [05:00](https://youtu.be/EuVH6chfkzo?t=300) — [H2] Participants would have known Hebrew and detected the error - Key idea: Council attendees would have been fluent in Hebrew and recognized the mistranslation - Evidence: "Everyone there would have been native speakers of Aramaic and likely very fluent speakers of Hebrew" #### ⏱️ [05:30](https://youtu.be/EuVH6chfkzo?t=330) — [H1] James's argument only works with Greek mistranslation - Key idea: The theological point James makes depends entirely on the erroneous Greek version - Evidence: "James's point only works in the Greek mistransation" #### ⏱️ [06:00](https://youtu.be/EuVH6chfkzo?t=360) — [H1] Composition was in Greek for Greek-speaking audience - Key idea: The story was written by and for people who prioritized the Septuagint over Hebrew - Evidence: "This was likely composed by and for people who were not aware of the difference between what's in the Septuagent and what's in the Hebrew Bible" #### ⏱️ [06:45](https://youtu.be/EuVH6chfkzo?t=405) — [H1] Conclusion: Literary creation, not historical account - Key idea: The dependence on mistranslation proves Acts 15 is fictional - Evidence: "This is not historical. This is a literary creation. This is a story that someone wrote in Greek that was not based on historical events" ## 📚 References - [Acts 15:16-17 - The Jerusalem Council](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2015:16-17&version=ESV) - [Amos 9:11-12 - Hebrew Text](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Amos%209:11-12&version=ESV) - [Septuagint (LXX) - Ancient Greek Translation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint) ## 🗣️ Paraphrase - Acts 15's Jerusalem Council story depends on James quoting a Greek mistranslation of Amos that wouldn't have been used in a Hebrew/Aramaic-speaking context - The Hebrew text of Amos 9:12 discusses territorial conquest of Edom, while the Greek mistakenly refers to humanity seeking God due to similar-looking Hebrew words - Since James's theological argument only works with the mistranslation, and Hebrew-fluent council participants would have known the correct text, this indicates Acts 15 was composed later in Greek as a literary device ## 📰 Newsletter **New Testament Scholarship Alert: When Translation Errors Reveal Literary Creation** Biblical scholar Dan McClellan demonstrates how textual analysis can distinguish historical accounts from later literary creations in the New Testament. His examination of Acts 15's Jerusalem Council reveals that James's decisive scriptural quotation depends entirely on a Greek mistranslation that wouldn't have been available or credible to the historical participants. This showcases how modern digital tools and comparative textual analysis can illuminate ancient composition processes, offering valuable methodological approaches for anyone studying historical documents or translation challenges. **Key Takeaway**: When source material contains dependencies that don't match the claimed historical context, it often indicates later editorial creation rather than eyewitness reporting. Resources: [Bible Gateway Parallel Versions](https://www.biblegateway.com/), [Academic Biblical Studies](https://www.sbl-site.org/), [Septuagint Online](https://www.academic-bible.com/) ## ✅ Action Items #### DevRel - Education: Develop workshops on textual criticism methodology for understanding source dependencies - Developer experience: Create comparative text analysis tools that highlight translation variations - Community management: Foster discussions about scholarly methodology and evidence evaluation #### Community - Contributors: Support scholars sharing accessible explanations of complex academic findings - Ecosystem: Encourage cross-disciplinary approaches combining linguistics, history, and textual analysis ## 🧪 Hypotheses - Acts contains multiple passages that depend on Septuagint-specific readings rather than Hebrew originals - Greek-speaking Christian communities used Septuagint dependencies to construct theological narratives - Other New Testament books show similar patterns of composition in Greek for Greek audiences - The historical Jerusalem Council (if it occurred) would have produced different decisions based on Hebrew scriptural interpretation ### 📊 Methodology - Comparative textual analysis between Hebrew Masoretic Text, Septuagint, and New Testament quotations - Linguistic analysis of Hebrew word pairs that could create translation confusion - Historical analysis of language use in first-century Palestinian Jewish communities ### ❓ Questions - How many other New Testament passages depend on Septuagint-specific readings? - What does this pattern tell us about the geographic and linguistic context of early Christian literary composition? - How should modern readers distinguish between historical claims and theological narratives in ancient texts? ### 🔮 Future Research - Systematic survey of all Old Testament quotations in the New Testament comparing Hebrew vs Septuagint dependencies - Investigation of similar translation-dependent arguments in other ancient religious literature - Digital humanities tools for automated detection of source-text dependencies ### 💡 Implications - Practice: Scholars must consider source-text dependencies when evaluating historical claims - Education: Teaching critical thinking requires demonstrating methodology, not just conclusions - Funding: Digital humanities tools for textual analysis deserve support for advancing historical understanding ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment Reading level estimate: Grade 14-16 (undergraduate/graduate level) #### 👀 Visual learners - Present: Clear structure with timestamps and examples - Improve: Side-by-side Hebrew/Greek/English text comparisons, linguistic family trees #### 🔊 Aural learners - Present: Video format with clear narration - Improve: Audio transcript with pronunciation guides for Hebrew/Greek terms #### 🗣️ Verbal learners - Present: Detailed explanations, analogies to translation errors - Improve: More contemporary translation examples, technical term glossary #### 🧩 Kinesthetic learners - Present: Step-by-step analysis process - Improve: Interactive text comparison tools, hands-on translation exercises #### 🧠 Logical learners - Present: Clear cause-and-effect reasoning, systematic argument structure - Improve: Decision trees showing logical implications, formal argument diagrams #### 🧑‍🤝‍🧑 Social learners - Present: YouTube discussion format inviting engagement - Improve: Discussion prompts for scholarly communities, peer review opportunities #### 🧘‍♀️ Solitary learners - Present: Complete self-contained argument with sources - Improve: Reflection questions about methodology application, independent research paths #### 🌿 Naturalistic learners - Present: Historical context and cultural environment - Improve: Geographic context of ancient translation centers, manuscript transmission ecology ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment #### Screen reader semantics - Present: Clear heading structure, descriptive link text - Improve: Alt text for any Hebrew/Greek script examples, table headers for text comparisons #### Keyboard navigation - Present: YouTube standard accessibility features - Improve: Transcript navigation by topic, skip links for repeated concepts #### Contrast and readability - Present: Standard YouTube video format - Improve: High-contrast transcript options, adjustable text size for quoted materials #### Text resizing and reflow - Present: Responsive video player - Improve: Reflowable transcript with preserved citations #### Media and captions - Present: Video with transcript provided - Improve: Professional captions with Hebrew/Greek transliterations, downloadable transcript #### Forms and interactions - Present: Standard YouTube comment interface - Improve: Accessible discussion forums for scholarly engagement ### 🌍 DEIB Assessment #### Cultural breadth - Present: Discussion of multiple ancient languages and cultures - Improve: Acknowledge diverse scholarly traditions in biblical criticism #### Inclusive language - Present: Gender-neutral terms for scholars and audiences - Improve: Acknowledge various religious perspectives on these texts #### Neurodiversity support - Present: Clear structure with repeated key concepts - Improve: Content warnings for challenges to traditional religious beliefs #### Representation - Present: Focus on scholarly methodology over personal beliefs - Improve: Highlight diverse voices in biblical scholarship #### Psychological safety - Present: Respectful treatment of religious texts and traditions - Improve: Clear framing as academic analysis, not attack on faith ### ✅ Logical Validity #### Strong reasoning - Deductive strength: If James quotes Greek mistranslation in Hebrew context, then composition is later and Greek - very strong - Inductive strength: Pattern of evidence suggests broader non-historicity - moderate, needs more examples - Causal reasoning: Translation errors cause theological interpretive possibilities - strong - Analogical strength: Comparison to other known literary cre --- ## Full Transcript [00:00] Let's talk about one of the ways we know [00:02] portions of the book of Acts are not [00:04] historical but are literary creations. [00:07] Hey everybody, I'm Dan Mlelen. I'm a [00:09] scholar of the Bible and religion. And [00:12] in Acts 15, we have the narration of [00:15] what's known as the Jerusalem Council. [00:17] This is where Paul and Barnabas and [00:20] Peter and others gather in Jerusalem to [00:23] debate whether or not Gentile converts [00:25] to following Jesus need to be [00:28] circumcised. [00:30] And what really seals the deal is James, [00:34] the brother of Jesus, who quotes a [00:37] version of Amos 9:es 11 and 12 and says, [00:41] "So I have determined that all gentile [00:45] converts need to do is abstain from [00:48] things polluted by idols, from things [00:51] strangled, from blood, and from sexual [00:53] immorality." [00:54] And that closes it up. There's no need [00:57] for circumcision. You just have to [00:59] follow these four rules. [01:02] And the issue is in James's quotation of [01:05] Amos 9 11 and 12. Verse 11 is quoted in [01:10] Acts 15:16. And it is fairly similar. [01:13] It's not exactly the same, but the point [01:16] is in that day I will repair rebuild the [01:21] tabernacle or the house of David and [01:24] we'll repair its ruins and things like [01:26] that. But then Amos 9:12 [01:30] is where we get the most important [01:32] point. And this is quoted in Acts 15:17. [01:36] And this is where James says, "So that [01:40] the remnant of humanity may seek after [01:44] the Lord all those upon whom my name is [01:48] called." And this really makes it seem [01:51] like [01:53] the Lord is going to be sought by all [01:56] nations, including the Gentiles. And so [01:58] this was intended from the start. Amos [02:01] prophesied that there would be a time [02:03] when all of humanity, not just the [02:06] Israelite people, would seek after the [02:09] Lord and would have the Lord's name [02:12] called upon them. Now, the issue is if [02:16] you look up Amos 9:12 in your English [02:19] translation of the Hebrew Bible, it's [02:22] not going to say that. [02:24] What it's going to say is so that they [02:29] might possess the remnant of Edom. [02:33] Because Amos 9 in the context is talking [02:36] about the restoration of the full extent [02:40] of the house of David or the nation of [02:42] Israel [02:44] under David's rule. And Edom was one of [02:47] those nations that had once been [02:51] according to their tradition part of [02:53] Israel. So this was about restoring to [02:56] Israel the land of Edom so that they [03:00] might possess the remnant of Edom. [03:03] Now, how did we get from one to the [03:05] other? Well, in Hebrew, Edom [03:10] can be spelled in a way that makes it [03:13] indistinguishable on text from Adam, [03:17] which means human, man, or humanity. [03:21] And also the verb in Hebrew for possess [03:25] take possession of [03:27] is yash which is very very similar [03:33] to another Hebrew verb dash which [03:37] doesn't mean to take possession of but [03:38] to seek. [03:41] And in the ancient Greek translation of [03:44] the book of Amos, the Septuagent, [03:47] the translator either [03:50] intentionally or unwittingly [03:53] translated this passage as so that the [03:58] remnant of humanity [04:01] might seek. [04:03] And that's it. Because if you [04:06] misunderstand Edom to mean Adam and you [04:08] misunderstand possess to be seek, then [04:12] you have turned the object of the verb [04:15] into the subject of the verb and you [04:18] have left [04:20] a transitive verb without an object. So [04:23] that's why what are they seeking? It [04:25] just doesn't say. So this is a [04:28] mistransation and this particular [04:29] combination of misunderstandings when it [04:31] comes to the word edom and the verb [04:35] to possess is only found in the [04:38] Septuagent, the ancient Greek [04:40] translation. So what does it mean that [04:44] James was quoting from a Greek [04:46] mistransation of this passage at the [04:48] council of Jerusalem where they would [04:50] definitely not have been holding this [04:52] council in Greek? This would have been [04:54] most likely in Aramaic, maybe in Hebrew, [04:59] unlikely to have been held in Greek. [05:01] Even if it were held in Greek, everyone [05:04] there would have been native speakers of [05:06] Aramaic and likely very fluent speakers [05:09] of Hebrew. And they likely would know [05:11] the difference between what's in the [05:13] Hebrew of Anus and what's in the Greek [05:15] of Amos. [05:17] And they would know, hey, James, you're [05:20] quoting in this translation. Try to make [05:22] a point about what the prophet said. So, [05:25] what all this means is that it seems [05:28] very, very likely that James's point [05:32] only works [05:34] in the Greek mistransation. [05:37] And James would very unlikely bring up a [05:41] Greek mistransation [05:43] in that context where they were likely [05:46] speaking Aramaic or Hebrew, but even if [05:47] they weren't would have known that [05:49] that's not what the Hebrew of Amos 9 [05:52] 11-12 actually says, which means that [05:55] this was likely composed in Greek, which [05:58] means it was likely composed by and for [06:01] people who were not aware of the [06:05] difference between the Hebrew and the [06:06] Greek. This was likely composed by and [06:08] for people who prioritized the [06:10] Septuagent [06:12] and were not aware of the differences [06:14] between what's in the Septuagent and [06:16] what's in the Hebrew Bible in many [06:17] places including Amos 9 11-12. [06:21] In other words, this is not historical. [06:25] This is a literary creation. This is a [06:29] story that someone wrote in Greek that [06:32] was not based on historical events. And [06:34] it's not an eyewitness who's just [06:36] writing about it later in Greek. Because [06:38] again, [06:40] James's entire point, the entire reason [06:42] for quoting Amos 9 does not work if [06:45] you're quoting from the Hebrew. It only [06:47] works if you're quoting from this [06:49] specific mistransation, as far as we [06:52] know, only exists in the Greek [06:54] Septuagent. [06:56] And so what this indicates is that this [06:59] story about James quoting Amos 9 to lock [07:02] down the Jerusalem Council is a literary [07:06] creation. It's something that somebody [07:09] made up long after the fact and wrote [07:12] down in Greek to function for an [07:15] audience that spoke Greek, that would be [07:18] consuming this in Greek and that didn't [07:21] know Hebrew or Aramaic well enough to [07:24] know by going and looking in their [07:27] copies of Amos 9:11-12. [07:30] That's not what the prophet was talking [07:32] about. The prophet was talking about [07:34] political restoration of the house of [07:37] David. Basically, the reconquest [07:39] of the Idmans by this time, [07:44] but land that had been a part of the [07:47] house of Israel in centuries past would [07:51] have nothing to do with whether or not [07:53] the gospel should be spread to the [07:54] Gentiles and whether or not they should [07:58] have to undergo circumcision when they [08:00] become followers of Jesus. So this is [08:02] one of the reasons that we can conclude [08:04] pretty safely that at least this part of [08:06] the book of acts is a literary creation [08:09] and is not based on any kind of [08:12] eyewitness accounts of any historical [08:14] event. And there are a number of other [08:17] portions of the book of Acts and of all [08:18] the gospels that have very similar [08:22] issues that make it very very unlikely [08:26] that they are eyewitness accounts or [08:28] even accurate memories passed on from [08:31] others of actual historical events. And [08:34] the fit for this video still spy punk.  📄 **Full text:** ![[Full Document Contents/Articles/How We Know the Book of Acts Isn’t Historical|How We Know the Book of Acts Isn’t Historical, YouTube]] ## Highlights - prophesied that there would be a time when all of humanity, not just the Israelite people, would seek after the Lord and would have the Lord's name called upon them. Now, the issue is if you look up Amos 9:12 in your English translation of the Hebrew Bible, it's not going to say that. What it's going to say is so that they might possess the remnant of Edom. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01kjt90nafga2ymqwn3yjn138c)) - Tags: 👻 ai highlighted