Quodlibeta

I am watching an argument with Vernon Robbins, the professor who came up with that idea that the 'we' passages in Acts are simply a literary convention and do not mean the author was actually there. Up against him are two e-friends who seem to be winning hands down. The trouble is that Robbins is a post modern literary critic who does not seem to have much attachment to traditional history. For him it is axiomatic that 'all history is fiction' or at least narrative. Also his langauge is that of a professor stuck in an ivory tower. It remains to be seen if a connection can be made between my friends' concerns for history and Robbins for literature.