Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Response to Robins (Part 2)

Expand Messages
  • laymantwo <laymantwo@yahoo.com>
    Professor, Thanks again for interacting with us on this issue. It appears that the distinction you now draw is the number of stops in each voyage? I am sorry,
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 20, 2003
      Professor,

      Thanks again for interacting with us on this issue.

      It appears that the distinction you now draw is the number of stops
      in each voyage? I am sorry, but I do not believe all my questions
      have been answered.

      Acts 13 is not just a simple direct trip from one harbor to another
      harbor. It is a sea-voyage to a harbor (Paphos v. 6) on an Island
      with another voyage to another harbor thereafter (Perga v. 13).
      Thereafter they specifically move inland to minister. Moreoever,
      earlier you had attempted to distinguish the the first-person plural
      sea trips from the third-person sea trips by whether it was
      accompanied by miracles or signs/portents. Acts 13 certainly fits
      that bill.

      Also, Acts 16 better fits the former category of a direct trip. The
      route is similar in kind, although perhaps shorter, than that in Acts
      13. From Troas (v. 11) to Macedonia (v. 12). Then there is a
      significant inland ministry (v. 16:13-17:13). Although it is true
      that Paul is specially called to Macedeonia, it is also true that in
      Acts 13 Paul is specially called to the missionary activities that
      followed.

      And I do not understand how the sea-trips from Bera to Ephesus (at
      least, because the trip goes on to Caesarea) fails to be a "series of
      harbor to harbor stops toward a particular destination that lies
      inand." (17:10-18:18)

      Furthermore, earlier you said that trips to placse where Paul had
      already been would not count as sea-adventures. If that is the case,
      why do the trips from Philippi to Troas (20:6) and from Assos on
      eventually to Caeasrea (v. 20:13-21:8) use the first-person plural?

      If you have the time to answer this question, I am curious what you
      consider the best historical example[s] -- other than Acts -- that
      contains and distinguish a "trip from one harbor to another specific
      harbor" (using the third-person) from a "series of harbor to harbor
      stops toward a particular destination that lies inland."

      Frankly, if Acts 27 was the only "we-passage" in Acts I might find
      your theory more persuasive. But it is not.

      Chris Price, Esq.
      Los Angeles, CA

      > --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "Vernon K. Robbins" <relvkr@L...>
      > wrote:
      > > Dear Chris (Layman),
      > > The answer to all your questions and queries turns out to be
      > very simple.
      > > Simply read my last two responses to Brian Trafford. All third
      > person sea
      > > travel (Acts 13-14, 17) recounts direct "trips" from one harbor to
      > another
      > > specific harbor for the purpose of an extended inland mission. All
      > first
      > > person plural sea travel (Acts 16, 20-21, 26-28) contains "a
      series
      > of harbor
      > > to harbor stops toward a particular destination that lies inland."
      > > Thank you for noticing one more third person instance of sea
      travel
      > (17:14-15).
      > > Once again, it is recounted simply as a straight "trip" from one
      > place to
      > > another, rather than a "series of harbor to harbor stops"
      > characteristic of a
      > > sea "voyage." In contrast, all first person plural accounts
      present
      > "a series
      > > of harbor to harbor stops, sometimes seeking safety under the lee
      of
      > an island"
      > > while voyaging to a particular destination that lies inland.
      > >
      > > Vernon Robbins, Emory University
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.