answersLogoWhite

0

A:

In his Epistle to the Romans, at verse 15:24, Paul says that he that he would stop over in Rome on his way to Spain. He also hoped to visit Rome to spread the gospel there (verse 1:15). Indeed, the Muratorian Fragment states that Paul travelled from Rome to Spain, and Clement of Rome, writing about 96 CE (1 Clement), says that Paul lastly preached in the far reaches of the west (Spain), and Paul would surely have stopped over in Rome before proceeding to Spain. From these sources, it would appear that Paul made a commitment to visit Rome for the reasons stated, and kept that promise before travelling on to Spain.

Acts of the Apostles, on the other hand, says that Paul was taken as a prisoner to Rome and spent to whole years there, under house arrest. This voyage seems to be a little early for the tradition that Nero had Paul executed in Rome in 65 CE, since it seems unlikely that Paul would have been tried, acquitted of the charges against him, freed and then later arrested and executed. However, the historicity of the execution tradition is not what is in question, but whether Paul went to Rome of his own free will or under arrest.

The voyage and shipwreck described in Acts have been doubted by many theologians, including Hans Joachim Schoeps, who says (Das Judenchristentum) that Acts energetically cultivates the creation of legends and reshapes persons and events according to its own standards and that it has been believed much too readily. This does not mean that the account in Acts is proven to be wrong, but it is quite unlikely to have happened. Thus, we fall back on the reasons given by Paul himself.

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago

What else can I help you with?