The historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles, the primary source for the Apostolic Age, is a major issue for biblical scholars and historians of Early Christianity. Conservative scholars view the book of Acts as being extremely accurate and corroborated by archaeology, while skeptics view the work as being inaccurate and in conflict with the Pauline epistles.
| Property | Value |
| dbpedia-owl:thumbnail
| |
| dbpprop:abstract
|
- The historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles, the primary source for the Apostolic Age, is a major issue for biblical scholars and historians of Early Christianity. Conservative scholars view the book of Acts as being extremely accurate and corroborated by archaeology, while skeptics view the work as being inaccurate and in conflict with the Pauline epistles. Acts portrays Paul as more inline with Jewish Christianity, while the Pauline epistles record more conflict, such as the Incident at Antioch. See also Paul of Tarsus and Judaism.
|
| dbpprop:bibleverseNbProperty
| |
| dbpprop:reference
| |
| dbpprop:relatedInstance
| |
| dbpprop:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
| rdfs:comment
|
- The historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles, the primary source for the Apostolic Age, is a major issue for biblical scholars and historians of Early Christianity. Conservative scholars view the book of Acts as being extremely accurate and corroborated by archaeology, while skeptics view the work as being inaccurate and in conflict with the Pauline epistles.
|
| rdfs:label
|
- Historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles
|
| skos:subject
| |
| foaf:depiction
| |
| foaf:page
| |
| is dbpprop:redirect
of | |