corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Corpus-Paul
List archive
- From: Richard Fellows <rfellows AT shaw.ca>
- To: Corpus-Paul <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: [Corpus-Paul] How reliable is Acts?
- Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 18:31:43 -0800
Steve Black wrote:
<<I'm curious what is the "evidence" that you are thinking of that
"does not permit us to dismiss Acts (presumably as a source of reliable
history?) lightly"?>>
Thanks for the question, Steve. You are quite right to ask about the
evidence. All too often on the C-P list people simply state their opinions
without supporting them with evidence.
It amazes me that the question of the reliability or otherwise of Acts is
so rarely discussed. Colin Hemer made a very interesting observation when he
wrote:
"Indeed, opinion about the book of Acts has become polarized, and often
between those who differ profoundly on the matter of historicity, but this
aspect of their disagreement is often implicit rather than explicit. It is
integrated into differences of assumption and approach whose thrusts are aimed
elsewhere. Many writers seem simply to assume that the question has been
answered, one way or the other. Some even contend that the question is
illegitimate, although again there is an answer implicit in such a
contention."
My own view is that Acts is mostly historically accurate in the later
period (say from Acts 16), and that we do not have enough data to answer the
question for the earlier period with any precision. I'll make some
points below which I think explain why I think this. I'll focus on issues of
itinerary and chronology. We can discuss other aspects another time.
1. There is good agreement between Acts and the letters on the places
visited by Paul. Acts tells us that Paul stayed in Antioch, and that
he established churches in Galatia, Philippi, Thessalonica, and Corinth.
Acts also tells us that he spent time in Ephesus and planned to visit Jerusalem
and Rome. All this agrees with the letters.
2. Where we can check the sequence, Acts is correct. The sequence
Philippi-Thessalonica-Corinth is confirmed in the letters, as is the later
sequence Ephesus-Macedonia-Greece-Jerusalem.
3. The personal names in Acts correspond impressively with those in the
letters. The names James, John, Peter, Barnabas, Silas-Silvanus, Timothy, Jason,
Aristarchus, Apollos, Sopater/Sosipater, Prisca/Priscilla, Aquila,
Crispus-Sosthenes, Erastus, and probably Gaius are people mentioned by both Paul
and Acts. In most of these cases Paul confirms chronological or geographical
information given in Acts. For example, Paul confirms that Prisca and Aquila
stayed in Ephesus and were known to the Corinthians. In some cases Paul provides
information on an individual's status within the church, and this
information agrees with Acts. Consider Barnabas and Timothy.
Acts mentions all of the prominent companions of Paul. The most prominent
omission is perhaps Luke-Lucius (Philemon 24, Rom 16:21), and he may have been
the author of Acts!
4. The Gallio inscription lends some support to Luke's chronology for this
period.
5. Acts 19:22 tells us that Paul sent Timothy from Ephesus to Macedonia
with one other person. I believe that Paul gives us the same information (1 Cor
4:17; 16:10; 2 Cor 1:1; 12:18) about Timothy (who was also called Titus).
6. As I have recently argued, the work of rival missionaries can
probably be detected in Acts 16:3 and 16:6-8, and these 'sightings' line up well
with those of Gal 2:4, 12. I also think that Acts 16:3 ties in nicely with
Gal 2:4-5 (the accusations of spying being provoked by the fact that the 'false
brothers' had leaked the information that Titus-Timothy's father had been a
Greek).
So, for these reasons, and others, any hypothesis that is
contrary to the account in Acts needs to be backed up with very
strong arguments. One cannot dismiss Acts lightly.
What do others think, and why?
Richard.
|
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Timothy/Titus and circumcision
, (continued)
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Timothy/Titus and circumcision, Stephen C. Carlson, 01/08/2004
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Timothy/Titus and circumcision, Dieter Mitternacht, 01/08/2004
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Timothy/Titus and circumcision, Richard Fellows, 01/12/2004
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Timothy/Titus and circumcision, Mark D. Nanos, 01/12/2004
- [Corpus-Paul] The journey and identity of the influencers in Galatians, Richard Fellows, 01/13/2004
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] The journey and identity of the influencers in Galatians, Mark D. Nanos, 01/13/2004
- [Corpus-Paul] Galatians Commentary (Greek), Steve Black, 01/13/2004
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Galatians Commentary (Greek), Frank W. Hughes, 01/14/2004
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Galatians Commentary (Greek), Zeba Crook, 01/14/2004
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul preach in synagogues?, Steve Black, 01/07/2004
- [Corpus-Paul] How reliable is Acts?, Richard Fellows, 01/18/2004
- [Corpus-Paul] Answer for Martin Eldred, Loren Rosson, 01/04/2004
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Questions for Paul,
Don Garlington, 01/04/2004
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Questions for Paul,
Loren Rosson, 01/04/2004
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Questions for Paul, Don Garlington, 01/04/2004
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Questions for Paul,
Loren Rosson, 01/04/2004
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Questions for Paul, Jeffrey B. Gibson, 01/03/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.