Home|Contents

Luke the Historian.


Rex Banks



About Luke, the Third Gospel and Acts

    External and internal evidence leads to the conclusion that the writer of the third Gospel is the Luke named by Paul in three of his letters. (Col. 4:14; 2 Tim. 4:11; Philemon 24) Among other things we learn from these references that Luke is a Gentile (not "from the circumcision") and that he is a "physician". (see below) In this context we note that in Acts 1:19 Luke refers to Aramaic as "their language" suggesting that he does not identify himself with the Jewish people. Interestingly in every reference to Luke he is named in connection with Mark the writer of our second Gospel and "It seems highly probable that in writing his Gospel Luke made use of Mark..." (D.A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo and Leon Morris, An Introduction To The New Testament) It is clear from the method of composition (Lk 1:1-3) that the writer of the third Gospel was not an eyewitness to the events that he narrated described.

    The book of Acts is a companion volume to the third Gospel, both being addressed to one Theophilus. (Lk 1:1; Acts 1:1, 2) In Acts the writer refers back to "the first account" which he composed (the third Gospel) linking the two volumes, and the ending of the Gospel and the beginning of Acts dovetail perfectly. The Gospel of Luke closes with Christ's promise that the Holy Spirit would come upon the apostles in Jerusalem (24:44-49) while Acts opens with Christ's instructions to the apostles not to leave Jerusalem until that promise had been realized. (Acts 1:1:4, 5 cf. 12) The literary style and vocabulary of both are strikingly similar. The Catholic Encyclopaedia has:

    "The style and arrangement of both are so much alike that the supposition that one was written by a forger in imitation of the other is absolutely excluded. The required power of literary analysis was then unknown, and, if it were possible, we know of no writer of that age who had the wonderful skill necessary to produce such an imitation."

    Thus evidence cited in support of Lukan authorship of one volume is also evidence that Luke wrote the other.

    "(T)he ancients universally agree that Luke wrote the third Gospel." (The International Std Bible Encyclopaedia vol 3) Irenaeus wrote that: "Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him." (Against Heresies 3:1:1

    About the middle of the second century the heretic Marcion affirmed Lukan authorship and later that same century Luke is named as author in what is often called the Anti-Marcionite prologue. Justin Martyr (born about 105 A.D.), Tertullian (born about 155 AD.), Clement of Alexandria (born about 150 A.D.) and then a succession of writers testify to the fact that Luke wrote the Gospel which bears his name. Eusebius has:

    "But Luke, who was of Antiochian parentage and a physician by profession, and who was especially intimate with Paul and well acquainted with the rest of the apostles, has left us, in two inspired books, proofs of that spiritual healing art which he learned from them. One of these books is the Gospel, which he testifies that he wrote as those who were from the beginning eye witnesses and ministers of the word delivered unto him, all of whom, as he says, he followed accurately from the first. The other book is the Acts of the Apostles which he composed not from the accounts of others, but from what he had seen himself. And they say that Paul meant to refer to Luke's Gospel wherever, as if speaking of some gospel of his own, he used the words, "according to my Gospel." (Church History 3:4:7,8

    Internal evidence. The writer of the third Gospel and Acts was a companion of Paul. Paul is accompanied by Silas on his second missionary journey (Acts 15:40) and they are joined by Timothy (Acts 16:1-4) before being divinely directed into Macedonia. (Acts 16:9) Upon arriving at Troas:"(T)hey were joined by a fourth companion...(who) was the author of Acts...His joining the others is indicated in the most unobtrusive manner - by sudden switch from the third person to the first person plural, from 'they' to 'we'. There are three sections of Acts in which the story is told in the first person plural and, interestingly enough, each of the three is largely concerned with a journey by sea (F.F. Bruce, Paul Apostle of the Heart Set Free)

    Commenting upon these "we" sections Merrill C. Tenney has:

    "The first generally accepted reference begins with Acts 16:10 at Paul's departure from Troas on his second missionary journey. The writer accompanied him from Troas to Philippi, where the references to the first person plural cease with the discussion of Paul's imprisonment. (16:17; 19-34) Probably the writer was present at Philippi but was not arrested. "The 'we sections' reappear at Paul's return to Macedonia as recorded in Acts 20:6 ff. From this point the 'we sections' remain throughout the book, although the writer does not seem to be in evidence during the imprisonment of Paul in Caesarea. Nevertheless, he accompanied Paul on the voyage to Rome (27:1, 2 ff) and stayed with him until the end of the story." (New Testament Survey)

    Evidently Luke is a Christian when the "we" passages begin since there is no record of his conversion, and likely he was involved in the work of preaching already. ("God called us to preach" [16:10]) Evidently Luke was left behind at Philippi and perhaps his influence is seen in the fact that the church in that city later helps support Paul. (Phil. 4:15, 16) Apparently he and Paul are united when the latter returns to Macedonia 20:6 ff and some have suggested that he was one of the bearers of the second letter to the Corinthians, "the brother whose fame in the things of the gospel has spread through all the churches..." (2 Cor. 8:18)

    The final "we" passage locates the writer of Acts in Rome at the time of Paul's imprisonment, and from Paul's own letters we learn that Luke was with him during his first imprisonment when Colossians and Philemon were written (Col. 4:14; Philemon 24) but not when Philippians was written. (Phil. 2:20) The failure of the writer of Acts to mention Luke as a companion of Paul may also indicate that Luke is the author of these volumes since the Gospels of Matthew Mark and John also fail to name the author. William Hendriksen, (New Testament Commentary on Luke) points out that Titus "another worker and (at times) fellow-traveller (of Paul)...is never mentioned in the book of Acts," but Hendriksen adds that Luke's being a medical doctor (Col. 4:14) lends support to the view that he, rather than Titus is the author of Acts.

    The idea that the language of Luke-Acts is that of a physician has been much debated over recent years. Evidently W.K. Hobart in his The Medical Language of St Luke published in 1882 attempted to prove that the language of Luke-Acts is that of a physician, while H.J. Cadbury (The Style and Literary Method of Luke) later called this thesis "an immense fallacy" and argued that the style of Luke-Acts is simply that of an educated man. Many today take the mediating position that the language of Luke-Acts is consistent with the idea that the writer had a medical interest, and they illustrate this by comparing certain parallel passages in Matthew Mark and Luke, such as the following:

    We might add the fact that the author of Luke "has the physician's interest in the sick and afflicted as shown in the large number of miracles of healing narrated." (International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia)

    As a physician ("a" above) Luke was an educated man, and Greek scholars tell us that the writer of the third Gospel was well educated, possessed literary ability, exhibits a rich vocabulary and has a good command of Koine Greek. Early tradition has it that Luke was a Greek and this may be supported by the fact that in Acts 1:19 Aramaic is described as "their (Jerusalem dwellers) language." Eusebius (Church History 3:4) records a tradition that Luke was from the city of Antioch and certainly he shows an interest in Antioch connections. (e.g. Acts 11:19-27; 13:1; 14:26; 15:22; 18:22) The author of Acts clearly had a good knowledge of the eastern Mediterranean, a fact which has led some to tentatively suggest that he may have worked as a ship's doctor at some time. Tenney says that "the twenty-seventh chapter of Acts gives the best account of ancient shipping that has come down from antiquity."

    When Paul wrote 2nd Timothy during his second imprisonment at Rome, Luke was his companion at Rome. (2 Tim. 4:11) Likely Paul's imprisonment lasted from about 65-67 A.D. and we have no reliable information about Luke's activities after this time. A tradition dating back to Julius Africanus (born about 165 A.D.) states that he died at the age of seventy-four in Bithynia (Boeotia?) and it is also held that he preached in Dalmatia, Gallia (which may be Galatia), Italy, and Macedonia.

    Clearly Luke's Gospel is dated earlier than the book of Acts, and as we shall see when we discuss this later work it contains no reference to events later than 62 A.D. For example nothing in Acts suggests that the Neronian persecution of Christians following the great fire of Rome in 64 A.D. had begun. If the book of Acts was written not long after 62 A.D., Luke's Gospel must have been written earlier than this, and since Luke-Acts are companion volumes it is likely the time between the composition of the two volumes is short. A date about 60-62 A.D. would seem reasonable. Some suggest that Luke may have written this Gospel while Paul was in prison at Caesarea. (Acts 23:23 ff)

    As we have said the Book of Acts is the companion volume to this Gospel. Early writers such as Polycarp, Justin Martyr and Tatian allude to Acts and clearly recognize it as authoritative, while Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian and Irenaeus testify to Lucan authorship. For example:

    "But that this Luke was inseparable from Paul, and was his fellow-labourer in the Gospel, he himself clearly evinces, not as a matter of boasting, but as bound to do so, by the truth itself...And all the remaining facts of his courses with Paul, he recounts...As Luke was present at all these occurrences, he carefully noted them down in writing, so that he cannot be convicted of falsehood or boastfulness, etc." (Irenaeus Against Heresies)



A First Class Historian

Some Specifics



Luke's Use of Proper Titles

    In his very useful little book The New Testament Books: Are They Reliable, F.F. Bruce reminds us that any writer who relates his story to the wider context of world history "is courting trouble if he is not careful; he affords his critical readers so many opportunities for testing his accuracy." Bruce continues:

    "Luke takes this risk, and stands the test admirably. One of the most remarkable tokens of his accuracy is his sure familiarity with the proper titles of all the notable persons who are mentioned in his pages. This was by no means such an easy feat in his days as it is in ours, when it is so simple to consult convenient books of reference. The accuracy of Luke's use of the various titles in the Roman Empire has been compared to the ease and confident way in which an Oxford man in ordinary conversation will refer to the Heads of Oxford colleges by their proper title - the Provost of Oriel, the Master of Balloil, the Rector of Exeter, the President of Magdalen, and so on. A non-Oxonian like the present writer never feels quite at home with the multiplicity of these Oxford titles. But Luke had a further difficulty in that the titles sometimes did not remain the same for any great length of time; a province might pass from senatorial government to administration by a district representative of the emperor, and would then be governed no longer by a proconsul but by an imperial legate (legatus pro praetore)."

    In the following paragraphs we will cite just a few examples of Luke's "sure familiarity with the proper titles of all the notable persons who are mentioned in his pages."

  1. The "proconsul of Cyprus"

    In Acts 13 Luke tells us that in the course of the first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas arrive at the island of Cyprus where they encounter "the proconsul Sergius Paulus, a man of intelligence." (Acts 13:7) Gareth L. Reese says that: "For a long time, sceptics argue that there was a mistake in the Bible where Luke calls Sergius a proconsul." (New Testament History: Acts) According to the critics, at this time the area was goverened by an imperial legate, and Luke should have referred to him as a governor. Reese continues:

    "In the years since the sceptics first assailed the historicity of Luke, coins and inscriptions from the time of Claudius have been found at Curium and Citrium in which the title of Proconsul is given to Cominius Prolus, Julius Corduo, and L. Annus Bassus, who must have been the immediate successors of Sergius Paulus. Still later at Soli, a coin with the inscription 'Paulus the proconsul' was found and Luke's veracity is again affirmed." (ibid)

    (Although the Paulus mentioned on the coin may not be Luke's character.)

    Interestingly "Cyprus was not a senatorial province very long." (I.S.B.E) In fact up until A.D. 22 it had been an imperial province governed by a leate. This is a further indication that Luke had a first-hand knowledge of Roman provincial government of the first century, since it is likely that a second century writer would have erred on this point.

  2. The "politarchs" of Thessalonia

    Luke was charged with having made a similar error in his account of Paul's visit to the city of Thessalonica. In Acts 17:6 Luke uses the term "politarchs" ( politarchoi) in his reference to the city authorities (although different translations render the term "city officials" "city authorities" and suchlike). Donald J. Wiseman and Edwin Yamauchi have:

    "Luke's accuracy is again attested when he speaks of the politarchs of Thessalonica. (Acts 17:6) As this term was not found in any classical author, Luke's use of the word was suspect. But the term has been found in at least 17 inscriptions from the area of Thessalonica." (Archaeology and the Bible: An Introductory Study)

  3. Festus' use of "Lord" with reference to the emperor

    Allegedly Luke makes another error when he says that Festus applies the title of "lord" to the emperor, (Acts 25:26) the contention being that this title was not used for the emperor. However while it appears to be true that Octavian and Tiberius refused to let anyone address them with this title, is also evident that Caligula and Nero not only permitted the use of this term, but even gloried in it. Nero was emperor at this time.

    In this context many other examples of Luke's vindication could be cited. Archaeology has shown that in speaking of the "first men" or "leading men" of Antioch, (Pisidia) Luke was actually using the title given only "to a board of magistrates in Greek cities of the East." (International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia) In recounting Paul's experiences at Ephesus Luke refers to certain friends of the apostle's as "chief officials of Asia," (Asiarchs) and also to the "town clerk," (19:31, 35) terminology appropriate to the area. He notes that magistrates at Philippi are called strategoi or praetors (16:20) and are accompanied by lictors or rhabdouchoi. (16 35) We now know that he is correct to identify Gallio as "proconsul of Achaia, (18:12) to speak of the chief official at Malta as "the first man of the island," (28:7) and so on. Again and again Luke makes incidental references to proper titles which were in use in widely scattered districts, affording his readers ample opportunities for testing his accuracy, and again and again he passes the test.



Luke's References to Specific Historical Events and Personages



    Luke's first-hand knowledge of the events which he describes is also evident from the accuracy with which he describes particular events and individuals from the time of Christ's birth through to the time of Paul's imprisonment in Rome. At various points extra-biblical information has provided us with independant accounts of different events and individuals mentioned by Luke, and for those not blinded by their presuppostions, this information from secular sources has served to enhance the good doctor's reputation as a careful and accurate observer. The following examples simply touch the hem of the garment. The first cases relate to statements in the third Gospel and the rest relate to incidents and characters encountered in Acts.

  1. Lysanias

    "Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judaea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene, in the highpriesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness." (Lk 3:1, 2)

    Under the heading The Gospel of Luke we find the following in the Catholic Encyclopaedia:

    "Gfrorrer, B. Bauer, Hilgenfeld, Keim, and Holtzmann assert that St Luke perpetrated a gross chronological blunder of sixty years by making Lysanias, the son of Ptolemy, who lived 36 B.C., and was put to death by Mark Antony, tetrarch of Abilene when John the Baptist began to preach (iii, 1). Strauss says: 'He [Luke] makes rule, 30 years after the birth of Christ, a certain Lysanias, who had certainly been slain 30 years previous to that birth - a slight error of 60 years'."

    But did the error lie with Luke or with the critics? The article goes on to point out that Josephus (Bel. Jud., II, xii, 8) makes reference to the tetrachy of Lysanias, and that since Lysanias (son of Ptolemy) was king over the whole region, one small portion of it could not be called his tetrarchy or kingdom. We are told that "it must be assumed as certain that at a later date the district of Abilene had been severed from the kingdom of Calchis, and had been governed by a younger Lysanias as tetrarch." What's more:

    "The existence of such a late Lysanias is shown by an inscription found at Abila, containing the statement that a certain Nymphaios, the freedman of Lysanias, built a street and erected a temple in the time of the "August Emperors". Augusti (Sebastoi) in the plural was never used before the death of Augustus, A.D. 14. The first contemporary Sebastoi were Tiberius and his mother Livia, i.e. at a time fifty years after the first Lysanias. An inscription at Heliopolis, in the same region, makes it probable that there were several princes of this name."

    How sad it is that Luke's critics take the position that absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Would it not be better and more honest to suspend judgment when an otherwise reliable writer is thought to have made a mistake?

    Incidently, in November 1990 the ossuary of the high priest Caiaphas (also mentioned in Lk 3;1, 2) was discovered by workers building a water park in the city of Jerusalem. He is also known from the writings of Josephus. Luke also makes reference here and elsewhere to Pontius Pilate and "in 1961, a stone tablet was discovered at Caesarea, bearing the Latin names Pontius Pilate and Tiberius, thus affording archaeological proof of Pilate's historical reality." (The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopaedia of the Bible vol 4)

  2. The Census: Quirinius

    Probably no part of the New Testament has been subject to more hostile criticism than Luke 2:1-5 where we have the following:

    "Now it came to pass in those days, there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be enrolled. This was the first enrollment made when Quirinius was governor of Syria. And all went to enrol themselves, every one to his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David; to enrol himself with Mary, who was betrothed to him, being great with child."

    Predictably hostile critics have taken Luke to task on a variety of points, arguing against the likelihood of a census involving the entire Roman world, ridiculing the notion that Joseph would be obliged to return to his home town, that Mary would be required to accompany him and so on. Allegedly Luke invents the census in order to make it appear that Jesus was born in Bethlehem in fulfillment of Micah 5:2 ff. Many objections, grounded upon the critics' views of what is reasonable and unreasonable are subjective, and require no comment. However one argument which does deserve attention relates to Luke's alleged error with respect to Quirinius. Briefly the problem is this: Josephus speaks of a census conducted under the Syrian Governor Quirinius which dates to 6 A.D. He says:

    "Now (Quirinius) Cyrenius, a Roman senator, and one who had gone through other magistracies, and had passed through them till he had been consul, and one who, on other accounts, was of great dignity, came at this time into Syria, with a few others, being sent by Caesar to he a judge of that nation, and to take an account of their substance." (Antiquities of the Jews 18:1.)

    But Luke associates the census with the time of Christ's birth (Luke 2:1) which, according to Matthew, took place during the reign of Herod the Great. (Matt. 2) However we know that Herod was dead after 4 B.C. and thus (the argument goes) Luke missed the correct date for the census by about a decade.

    Now those of us who are impressed by Luke's work as a historian will not readily concede that he is an error here, and various solutions have been offered by Bible believers. Let's consider a number of facts which I believe contain the key to resolving the apparent difficulty.

    First of all, it is simply not true that the census mentioned in Luke 2 is the same census as the one to which Josephus refers. Luke is fully aware of the census referred to by Josephus and in fact he makes reference to it in Acts 5:37 where he refers to one Judas of Galilee who "rose up in the days of the census." We can be sure that this is the census referred to by Josephus because the latter records that when Quirinius (Cyrenius) came to Judea to "take account of their substance" a Gaulite named Judas "became zealous to draw them to a revolt". (Antiquities of the Jews 18.1.1

    Next, there is good evidence that the emperor ordered, not one census but a succession. William Hendriksen reminds us:

    "That such periodic enrolments actually occurred can no longer be denied. the very papers indicating a registration every fourteen years, have been found; namely those proving that a census must have been taken in the years A.D. 230, 216, 202, 188, 174, 160, 146, 132, 118, 104, 90, 62, 34. There are also indirect references to the censuses of A.D. 48 and 20." (Luke: New Testament Commentary)

    (Interestingly the census papers which have been discovered, were called apograthai, the name used by Luke.) So although we do not have direct evidence of a census at the time of Jesus' birth, there is absolutely no reason to deny that one occurred just as Luke said.

    What of the argument that the census of Luke 2 took place 10 years prior to governorship of Quirinius? Interestingly an inscription called the Lapis Tiburtinus, which records the achievements of a distinguished military man, refers to the fact that this individual was governor of Syria twice. Although the name of this man is missing from the broken monument, many like Ramsey believe that the inscription referred to Quirinius, and that he was governor of Syria at the time of both the first census (Lk 2) and the second census. (Acts 5) This is a very real possibility.

    Here's another possibility and one which in my view has great merit. In the Greek the word translated "governor" is the present active participle of a verb which has the general meaning of "to rule, to lead, to govern." This word can be translated "governor" but it has the more general meaning as well. Luke may be telling us that this was the first census when Quirinius was in a leadership role of some kind in Syria. He need not have been governor, but may have been responsible for the census. In this context a tombstone inscription called Lapis Venetus has been discovered which reads in part: "On command of Quirinius I have carried out the census of Apamea, a city-state of one hundred and seventeen thousand citizens..." So the memorial is that of a military man who was under the authority of Quirinius and who conducted a census under his command. There's more.

    In his Annals, Tacitus has the following:

    "About the same time (Tiberius Caesar) requested the Senate to let the death of Sulpicius Quirinus be celebrated with a public funeral...An indefatigable soldier, he had by his zealous services won the consulship under the Divine Augustus, and subsequently the honours of a triumph for having stormed some fortresses of the Homonadenses in Cilicia. He was also appointed adviser to Gaius Caesar in the government of Armenia, and had likewise paid court to Tiberius, who was then at Rhodes...But people generally had no pleasure in the memory of Quirinus, because of the perils he had brought, as I have related, on Lepida, and the meanness and dangerous power of his last years." (Bk 3:48)

    Now Cilicia was located between Pamphylia and Syria, south of Cappacodia (Bakers Bible Atlas), and since Gaius Caesar died in 4 A.D. and Tiberius left Rhodes in 2 A.D. this Tacitus passage strongly suggests that Quirinius was in a position of power in the area of Syria well before the time of the census to which Josephus refers.

    Finally, the argument that the authorities would not have required families to return to their homes in order to enroll is answered by a papyrus containing an edict of Gaius Vibius Maximus from around the turn of the first century which reads:

    "Because of the approaching census it is necessary that all those residing for any cause away from their homes should at once prepare to return to their own governments in order that they may complete the family registration of the enrollment and that the tilled lands may retain those belonging to them." (as quoted by Josh McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict)




  3. The Famine

    In Acts 11:27, 28 we read:

    "Now at this time some prophets came from Jerusalem to Antioch. And one of them, named Agabus, stood up and began to indicate by the Spirit that there was going to be a great famine all over the world. And this took place in the reign of Claudius Caesar."

    Likely the expression "all over the world" means the whole Roman empire. (cf. Lk 2:1) On the basis of the reference to Judea in v. 29 some commentators limit the expression to Palestine, but this is not the likely meaning here. Unaware of any independent confirmation of this event, and unwilling to give Luke the benefit of the doubt, many critics insisted that this was yet another of the good doctor's inventions. Once again their excessive scepticism was unwarranted.

    Claudius reigned from 4-54 A.D. and during this time at least four famines are known to have occurred, two in Rome (c. 42/43 A.D. and 51 A.D.) another in Greece (50 A.D.) and yet another in Judea. (45 A.D.) In fact Suetonius makes the general comment that during the reign of Claudius: "There was a scarcity of food, which was the result of bad harvests that occurred during a span of several years." (Life of Claudius 18:2) Mention of a specific famine during the time of Claudius is found in Antiquities 20.2.5 where Josephus says concerning a certain royal lady named Helena:

    "Now her coming (to Jerusalem) was of very great advantage to the people of Jerusalem; for whereas a famine did oppress them at that time, and many people died for want of what was necessary to procure food withal, queen Helena sent some of her servants to Alexandria with money to buy a great quantity of corn, and others of them to Cyprus, to bring a cargo of dried figs."

    Now it may not be possible at this date to determine which particular famine Luke has in mind in Acts 11, but in view of all this how foolish it would be to doubt his accuracy on this point.

  4. Luke's Account of Agrippa's Death

    In Acts 12 we find the only reference in the New Testament to Herod Agrippa 1, son of Aristobulus and Bernice and grandson of Herod the Great. Luke tells us that Agrippa "laid hands on some who belonged to the church, in order to mistreat them" (12:1) and that he won favour with the Jews by doing so. (12:3) However Agrippa enjoyed no favour with God, and Luke gives the following account of his sudden death:

    "And on an appointed day Herod, having put on his royal apparel, took his seat on the rostrum and began delivering an address to them. And the people kept crying out, 'The voice of a god and not of a man!' And immediately an angel of the Lord struck him because he did not give God the glory, and he was eaten by worms and died." (Acts 12:21-23)

    Josephus gives the following parallel account of Agrippa's death in Antiquities 19.8.2:

    "Now when Agrippa had reigned three years over all Judea, he came to the city Cesarea, which was formerly called Strato's Tower; and there he exhibited shows in honour of Caesar, upon his being informed that there was a certain festival celebrated to make vows for his safety...On the second day of which shows he put on a garment made wholly of silver, and of a contexture truly wonderful, and came into the theatre early in the morning; at which time the silver of his garment being illuminated by the fresh reflection of the sun's rays upon it, shone out after a surprising manner, and was so resplendent as to spread a horror over those that looked intently upon him; and presently his flatterers cried out, one from one place, and another from another, (though not for his good,) that he was a god; and they added, 'Be thou merciful to us; for although we have hitherto reverenced thee only as a man, yet shall we henceforth own thee as superior to mortal nature.' Upon this the king did neither rebuke them, nor reject their impious flattery...A severe pain also arose in his belly, and began in a most violent manner... Accordingly he was carried into the palace, and the rumour went abroad everywhere, that he would certainly die in a little time...Now the king rested in a high chamber, and as he saw them below lying prostrate on the ground, he could not himself forbear weeping. And when he had been quite worn out by the pain in his belly for five days, he departed this life, being in the fifty-fourth year of his age, and in the seventh year of his reign."

    Josephus was not nearly as good an historian as Luke, but the two accounts are not in conflict in any way.




  5. Claudius' Expulsion of the Jews

    In Acts 18:2 Luke makes passing mention of the fact that two Christian Jews came to Corinth from Italy "because Claudius had commanded all the Jews to leave Rome." In his Life of Claudius Suetonius has the following:

    "He banished from Rome all the Jews, who were continually making disturbances at the instigation of one Chrestus."

    Chrestus of course is Christ. Likely difficulties among the Jews in that city had arisen because of different responses to the preaching of the gospel. Now clearly Suetonius is under the mistaken impression that "Chrestus" was a troublemaker living in Rome at the time, but this does not detract from the value of his testimony.

  6. Gallio proconsul of Achaia

    Luke's reference to Gallio "proconsul of Achaia" (18:12) is interesting on several counts. Gallio (Marcus Annaeus Novatus) was the brother of Seneca and the adopted son of rhetorician Lucius Junius Gallio and by all accounts he was an easy going man with great charm.

    F.F. Bruce refers to an inscription found at Delphi in Central Greece, recording a directive from the Emperor Claudius, and tells us that from this inscription "it can be inferred rather precisely that he entered on his proconsulship in the summer of A.D. 51." (The Book Of Acts, The New International Commentary on the New Testament) This is helpful because it enables us to date Paul's visit to Corinth. Longenecker also makes the following interesting point about the fact that Luke uses the title "proconsul" here:

    "That Luke distinguishes correctly between senatorial and imperial provinces and has the former governed by a proconsul on behalf of the Senate and the latter governed by a propraetor representing the emperor says much for his accuracy, for the status of the provinces changed with the times. Achaia was a senatorial province from 27 B.C. to A.D. 15 and then again from A.D. 44 onwards...It was therefore governed by a proconsul..."

    The point of course is that a writer living long after the events he purports to describe is bound to make mistakes in such incidental references. Luke however never places a foot wrong!

    Incidentally an ancient monument may have preserved a reference to one of the members of the Corinthian church, one Erastus, the city treasurer at Corinth. E.M Blaiklock tells us:

    "A tantalizing block of marble found near the theatre, bears another fragmentary inscription which reads: 'Erastus, for the office of aedile, laid this pavement at his own expense.' Is this Erastus, the city treasurer, who was a foundation member of the Corinthian church?"

    Certainly the time period is right, and the aedile was an elected official in a Roman colony responsible for the upkeep of buildings and other properties.

  7. No Entry - Except For Jews!

    We recall that a riot broke out when certain Jews from Asia accused the apostle Paul of having taken Greeks into the temple at Jerusalem. (Acts 21:28) Luke tells us that these Jews accused Paul of having "defiled this holy place." Of course Paul had done no such thing, and was always very careful not to offend the sensibilities of either Jew or Greek.

    In a beautifully illustrated book entitled Treasures From Bible Times Alan Millard has a picture of a notice engraved upon limestone which Paul would have seen along the wall of the temple building. He tells us that one of these notices was discovered in 1871 and another in 1936, and that the inscription reads as follows:

    "No foreigner may pass the barrier and enclosure surrounding the temple. Anyone who was caught doing so will be himself to blame for his resulting death."

    In his Wars of the Jews Josephus has the following:

    "When you go through these [first] cloisters, unto the second [court of the] temple, there was a partition made of stone all round, whose height was three cubits: its construction was very elegant; upon it stood pillars, at equal distances from one another, declaring the law of purity, some in Greek, and some in Roman letters, that 'no foreigner should go within that sanctuary' for that second [court of the] temple was called 'the Sanctuary,' and was ascended to by fourteen steps from the first court."

    Millard adds that "anyone who disobeyed would almost certainly be lynched," and Luke tells us that Paul experienced this at first-hand.

    These are not the only specific references to historical events and personages by Luke for which extra-biblical confirmation has been found. There's the high priest Ananias, (Acts 23:2; 24:1) whom Josephus describes as "a great hoarder of money" and whose greed was lampooned in the Talmud in the a parody of Ps 24:7 which reads:

    "Lift up your heads, O ye gates; that Yohanan ben Narbai, the disciple of Pinqai may go in and fill his belly with the divine sacrifices." (As quoted by F.F. Bruce, Acts)

    Extra-biblical references to "the Egyptian" who "led four thousand men of the Assassins out into the wilderness," (Acts 21:38) to Felix, Drusilla, Festus, Agrippa, Bernice and others are to be found in Josephus (e.g. Antiquities 20.7) and other writings close to the time. Luke's knowledge of these individuals along with various details of their marital situations, official titles and such like strongly supports his claim to have been a contemporary of the apostle Paul.



Political and Geographical Details



Iconium

  1. An outstanding example of Luke's having triumphed over his captious critics is found in the controversy surrounding a geographical note found in Acts chapters 13 and 14. From Acts 13:51-14:1 we learn that Paul and Barnabas come to the city of Iconium, and then in 14:6 we are told that they fled from this city to the cities of Lystra and Derbe which are identified as cities of Lycaonia. The implication is that Iconium is not in Lycaonia, and for years Luke's critics accused him of error on this point, seemingly with good reason. For example both Cicero and Pliny, who lived close to the apostolic period, speak of Iconium as a Lycaonian city, whereas Luke suggests that it was not part of this area. Allegedly Luke had simply borrowed from a much earlier writer Xenophon, who had made the following comment concerning Cyrus some 400 years earlier:

    "From this place he marched on three stages-twenty parasangs-to Iconium, the last city of Phrygia, where he remained three days. Thence he marched through Lycaonia five stages-thirty parasangs." (Anabasis 1.2.19)

    Luke's critics argued that he had not realized that since Xenophon's day the regional frontier had shifted, and of course they were delighted to have found another blunder in the good doctor's account.

    As it turned out the blunder belonged (once again) to the critics. In fact Ramsey tells us that as he became acquainted with the literary and epigraphic evidence from the period, it was this geographical note which caused him to re-evaluate Luke as an historian. Longenecker tell us:

    "Ramsey...has shown that between A.D. 37 and 72 - and at no other time under the Roman rule - Iconium was on the Phrygian side of the regional border between Phrygia and Lycaonia, not only linguistically but also politically."

    Given the changing political conditions of the area, how easy it would be for a writer living sometime after the first century to make a mistake - but Luke did not do so.

    Luke's geographical note in Acts 14 is simply one example of this author's excellent geopolitical knowledge of the first century circumstances. This knowledge is evident in his description of Philippi as "a leading city of the district, a Roman colony" (16:12) and indeed throughout the entire narrative, undergirding his claim to be part of the world which he describes.




  2. Philippi "the first district"

    Luke was also charged with error in having spoken of Philippi as "the first of the district." (Acts 16: 12) Blaiklock explains:

    "Even Hort marked this as a mistake, since the Greek word meris appeared never to be used for 'region.' The Egyptian papyri, however, revealed that Luke's Greek was better than that of his scholarly editor. The word, it was obvious, was quite commonly used for 'district' in the first century, and especially in Macedonia." (The Archaeology of the New Testament)

  3. Towns and Cities

    With unerring accuracy Luke provides us with details of the customs, beliefs, religious practices, institutions, racial make-up, vocations etc. of the citizens of very diverse towns and cities, often doing so by way of incidental references and off-hand comments. A. N. Sherwin-White says that "Acts takes us on a conducted tour of the Greek and Roman world with detail and narrative so interwoven as to be inseparable," (Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament) and it's not difficult to find examples. Ramsey tells us that archaeological discoveries have shown that at Lystra, the two deities Zeus and Hermes were linked in the local cult, which explains why the superstitious citizens "began calling Barnabas, Zeus, and Paul, Hermes." (Acts 14:12) At Athens Paul's spirit was "being provoked within him as he was beholding the city full of idols," (Acts 17:16) even discovering an altar devoted to "an unknown god." (Acts 16:23) Reese tells us:

    "Pausanias (about 16 A.D.) has 'the Athenians greatly surpassed others in their zeal for religion.' (Pausanias, in Attic 1:24) Lucian wrote, 'on every side there were altars, victims, temples, and festivals.' (Lucian, The literary Promethius p.180) And Petronius says, somewhat in humour, 'It is easier to find a god than a man there'." (Petronius Arbiter, Petronii Arbitri Satyrican XVII)

    The description of Paul's visit to Ephesus in Acts 19 provides another outstanding example of Luke's accuracy and ability to capture the local colour of a particular city. In this one chapter we have a host of details relating to the city, her citizens and local customs, many of which have been confirmed from extra-biblical sources. For example we are told concerning the Ephesians:

    "And not a few of them that practiced magical arts brought their books together and burned them in the sight of all; and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver." (Acts 19:18, 19)

    There is good evidence that the magic arts were the speciality of Ephesus, and the city was full of astrologers and magicians etc. with their charms, spells, incantations, books of divination and so on. Likely the "books" mentioned by Luke included the so-called Ephesian letters to which Clement of Alexandria makes the following reference:

    "And why should I linger over the barbarians, when I can adduce the Greeks as exceedingly addicted to the use of the method of concealment?" Androcydes the Pythagorean says the far-famed so-called Ephesian letters were of the class of symbols (Stromata V.8)

    According to Plutarch: "The magicians compel those who are possessed with a demon to recite and pronounce the Ephesian letters in a certain order by themselves." (Symposiaca VII. 5.4) In his commentary Bruce tell us:

    "The closest parallel to the Ephesian exorcists' misuse of the name of Jesus appears in the Paris magical papyrus, No. 574, where we find an adjuration beginning on line 3018, 'I adjure thee by Jesus the God of the Hebrews'."

    From Acts 19:24, 25 it appears that silversmiths and "workmen of similar trades" made a good living from the manufacture of idols of the goddess Artemis. According to I. S. B. E.

    "The makers of the shrines of Diana formed an exceedingly large class among whom, in Paul's time, was Demetrius. (Acts 19:24) None of the silver shrines have been discovered, but those of marble and of clay have appeared among the ruins of Ephesus. They are exceedingly crude; in a little shell-like bit of clay, a crude clay female figure sits, sometimes with a tambourine in one hand and a cup in the other, or with a lion at her side or beneath her foot." (Diana, Artemis)

    Also:

    "An interesting discovery in the theatre was an inscription of A.D. 103-104, in Greek and Latin, telling how a Roman official, C. Vibius Salutaris, presented a silver image of Artemis and other statues to be set on their pedestals at each meeting of the ecclesia or citizen body in the theatre." (Bruce, New Testament Documents)

    From Acts 19:27 ff it is evident that the goddess Artemis had a temple at Ephesus, and in 1869 J.T. Wood discovered the base of the temple at the bottom of a 20 foot test pit. D.G. Hogarth continued the excavations in 1904 and discovered "a pit full of votive gifts, including jewelry and bronze and ivory statues of Artemis, which date to about 700 B.C." ( Blaiklock) It has been calculated from the remains that the temple was over 340 feet long and 160 feet wide, and that the interior was decorated with gold and silver.

    Based on information supplied by Pliny the Elder (Natural History XXXVI. 95 ff) William Barclay gives the following description of the temple:

    "It was 425 feet long by 220 feet wide by 60 feet high. There were 127 pillars, each the gift of a king. They were all of glittering marble and 36 were marvellously gilt and inlaid. The great altar had been carved by Praxiteles, the greatest of all Greek sculptors. The image of Diana was not beautiful. It was a black, squat, many-breasted figure, signifying fertility; it was so old that no one knew where it had come from or even of what material it was made. The story was that it had fallen from heaven." (Daily Study Bible)

    In Acts 19:35 the town clerk refers to Ephesus as the "guardian" of the temple (the "temple sweeper") and "there is evidence from coins and inscriptions that Ephesus was acknowledged as temple keeper both of the emperor and of Artemis." (F.W. Beare, The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible vol 1)

    Again we have simply touched the hem of the garment, but the point is that in his description of very different cities scattered throughout the Roman world, Luke provides a wealth of details about customs, beliefs, institutions etc, and there is every indication that his account is accurate even in the details. As Ramsey explains:

    "In Ephesus St Paul taught in the school of Tyrannus, in the city of Socrates he discussed moral questions in the market-place. How incongruous it would seem if the methods were transposed! But the narrative never makes a false step amid all the many details as the scene changes from city to city; and that is the conclusive proof that it is a picture of real life."




    Conclusion: "You could not fool Doctor Luke"

    In their book The Changing World of Mormonism, the Jerald and Sandra Tanner record the following comment by Michael Coe, one of the best known authorities on archaeology of the New World:

    "Mormon archaeologists over the years have almost unanimously accepted the Book of Mormon as an accurate, historical account of the New World peoples...Let me now state uncategorically that as far as I know there is not one professionally trained archaeologist, who is not a Mormon, who sees any scientific justification for believing the foregoing to be true, and I would like to state that there are quite a few Mormon archaeologists who join this group..."

    The bare facts of the matter are that nothing, absolutely nothing, has ever shown up in any New World excavation which would suggest to a dispassionate observer that the Book of Mormon, as claimed by Joseph Smith, is a historical document relating to the history of early migrants to our hemisphere (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Summer 1973, pp. 41, 42, 46 and p. 134)

    What a contrast between this verdict upon Book of Mormon archaeology by a leading New World archaeologist and the verdict rendered upon the Book of Acts by specialists in Old world archaeology!

    Hopefully this very brief discussion of Luke's record as an historian will encourage us in our faith and enhance our respect for Paul's travelling companion, the good friend whom he call the 'beloved physician." There is so much more we could have discussed. For example in 1848 James Smith, a skilled sailor who retraced Paul's journey from Jerusalem to Rome, published a book entitled The Voyage and Shipwreck of Saint Paul, in which he showed that Luke's account of the voyage accurately describes ancient sailing methods, wind and weather conditions in the Mediterranean, and employs the correct nautical terminology and so on. He describes Luke's account of the journey as "a narrative of real events, written by one personally engaged in them." In similar vein, those acquainted with Roman law and legal procedures of the first century have remarked upon the fact that the writer of Acts shows great familiarity with Roman provincial jurisdiction of the period.

    We conclude this all-too-brief study of Luke's writings with the following comment from Kenneth S. Wuest:

    "Luke had the historian's mind, a thing native to the educated Greek. Herodotus, the father of Greek history, exhibited the Greek determination to get at the truth no matter how much work it required, when he travelled to central Africa to verify the account of the annual rise and fall of the Nile River. In those days this was a long and difficult journey. Sir William Ramsey said, 'I regard Luke as the greatest historian who has ever lived, save only Thucydides.' Thus we have no doubt but that Luke made a personal investigation of all the facts he had recorded. He interviewed every witness, visited every locality. If Mary was still alive, he, a doctor of medicine investigated the story of the virgin birth by hearing it from Mary's own lips. And as Professor John A. Scott, a great Greek scholar has said, 'You could not fool Doctor Luke'." (Word Studies In The Greek New Testament)

Home|Contents