Differences Between The Accounts
An apparent contradiction in the details of the account of Paul's revelatory vision given in Acts has been the subject of much debate. Specifically, the experience of Paul's travelling companions as told in Acts Acts and Acts has raised questions about the historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles, and generated debate about the best translations of the relevant passages. The two passages each describe the experience of Paul's travelling companions during the revelation, with Acts 9:7 (the author's description of the event) stating that Paul's travelling companions heard the voice that spoke to him; and Acts 22:9 (the author's quotation of Paul's own words) traditionally stating they did not.
Biblical translations of Acts 9:7 generally state that Paul's companions did, indeed, hear the voice (or sound) that spoke to him:
And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. —Acts 9:7, King James Version (KJV) The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, for they heard the voice but could see no one. —Acts 9:7, New American Bible (NAB) The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone. —Acts 9:7, New International Version (NIV)By contrast, Catholic translations and older Protestant translations preserve the apparent contradiction in Acts 22:9, while many modern Protestant translations such as the New International Version (NIV) do not:
And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me. —Acts 22:9, King James Version (KJV) My companions saw the light but did not hear the voice of the one who spoke to me. —Acts 22:9, New American Bible (NAB) My companions saw the light, but they did not understand the voice of him who was speaking to me. —Acts 22:9, New International Version (NIV)Read more about this topic: Conversion Of Paul The Apostle
Famous quotes containing the words differences and/or accounts:
“Quintilian [educational writer in Rome about A.D. 100] hoped that teachers would be sensitive to individual differences of temperament and ability. . . . Beating, he thought, was usually unnecessary. A teacher who had made the effort to understand his pupil’s individual needs and character could probably dispense with it: “I will content myself with saying that children are helpless and easily victimized, and that therefore no one should be given unlimited power over them.””
—C. John Sommerville (20th century)
“Good friends settle their accounts speedily.”
—Chinese proverb.