Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - [Corpus-Paul] How reliable is Acts?

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • 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.
 



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page