"But [Carlstadt's] most remarkable position [in 1520]...[was] the word of Paul is not to be put on a level with Christ." Beard Luther (1899)


A Joomla! Template for the Rest of Us




Please enter your questions, and we will get back to you as soon as possible. As an anti-spam measure, we ask that you re-type the code you see in the box below, prior to clicking "Send Message"

Fabrication of Acts 9 Verses 5-6 


Robert Nguyen Cramer -- a conservative evangelical -- in his Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles (2004) at this link explains the false origin of Acts 9:5-6: 


Act 9:5-6 - omit KJV wording:


It is hard for thee to kick against the pricksAnd he trembling and astonished, said, Lord, what wilt though have me to do? and the Lord said unto him, - (based on a needed correction of the KJV's Greek text). 

This passage was neither in the original Greek text of

Acts nor in early Greek manuscripts. It originated in

Jerome's Latin Vulgate version of the Bible. Bruce M.

Metzger (Textual Commentary on the Greek New

Testament, Second Edition [TCGNT], NY: United Bible

Societies, 1994, pp. 317-318) comments:  

The spurious passage came into the Textus Receptus when Erasmus translated it from the Latin Vulgate into Greek and inserted it in his first edition of the Greek New Testament (Basel, 1516).  


Almost 100 years later, the errant passage was included in the KJV, because Erasmus' Greek New Testament (the so-called Textus Receptus) was the basis for the Greek text from which the KJV's New Testament was translated. 


Lesson Learned about Canonicity.


The so-called Church of the late 300s when the Vulgate was produced was not beyond adding words to the book of Acts via the Vulgate Latin translation. Some of these same words appear in the authentic version of Acts 26 about "kick against the pricks." But the rest is all invention.


What else does this teach?

No one would tamper with a book of the Bible by adding words unless one did not think it is part of INSPIRED canon. Hence it reflects no one thought then that the book of Acts was inspired. A minor change here or there to bring passages in greater conformity with one another is no big deal in a non-Holy writ. 

Confirming this is that Jerome -- the editor / translator of the Vulgate -- added the several books of the Apocrypha which many pre-Christ Jews admired. Jerome said he did so only for edification purposes. He was not ascribing any attribute of inspiration. Thus, we should infer his nimble pen altering Acts signfies he could not possibly regard Acts as inspired either but would connect it to the NT as educational.

How could Jerome think Luke, the author, is not inspired? Because Luke says at the outset of the two part work -- Acts-Luke, that he is simply relying upon what he thinks are reliable witnesses. See Luke 1:1 and compare Acts 1:1.