The Book of Acts is High-Resolution Reportage, Part 2

[Editor’s note: in Part 1 of this two-part series, Jonathan explained this method of historical argument known as “Undesigned Coincidences.” These are lines of evidence that emerge when one part of Scripture explains, resolves, or entails, unplanned detail from elsewhere in Scripture and the the wider historical record. Jonathan focuses on the evidence from four books of Paul – Romans, 1st and 2nd Corinthians, and Galatians – comparing them with narrative details in the book of Acts.]

Paul in Macedonia
Paul indicates that he is writing 2 Corinthians from Macedonia while on route to Corinth (2 Cor 9:1-5). This would place it very shortly following the riot in Ephesus, hence at approximately Acts 20:1. This appears to have been on Paul’s mind in 2 Corinthians 1:8-10: “For we do not want you to be unaware, brothers, of the affliction we experienced in Asia. For we were so utterly burdened beyond our strength that we despaired of life itself. Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death. But that was to make us rely not on ourselves but on God who raises the dead. He delivered us from such a deadly peril, and he will deliver us. On him we have set our hope that he will deliver us again.”

A Door of Opportunity
We have already established that Paul wrote 1 Corinthians from Ephesus. This is indicated by Paul’s statement that “I will stay in Ephesus until Pentecost,” (1 Cor 16:8) together with other clues such as the fact that he sends greetings from Aquila and Priscilla, who are known to have been in Ephesus at this time.[1] We have also previously connected the composition of this letter to Acts 19:22 at the time when he sent Timothy and Erastus through Macedonia while Paul remained behind in Asia Minor.

In 1 Corinthians 16:9, Paul explains that the reason he will remain in Ephesus is that “a wide door for effective work has opened to me.” This corresponds to the narrative in Acts 19:20: “So the word of the Lord continued to increase and prevail mightily.” Moreover, Demetrius the silversmith, in his complaint against Paul to the other workmen, states, “And you see and hear that not only in Ephesus but in almost all of Asia this Paul has persuaded and turned away a great many people, saying that gods made with hands are not gods,” (Acts 19:26).

Many Adversaries
1 Corinthians 16:9 indicates that not only had a wide door for effective work opened for Paul in Ephesus, but that “there are many adversaries.” This again comports with Luke’s statement that “when some became stubborn and continued in unbelief, speaking evil of the Way before the congregation, he withdrew from them and took the disciples with him, reasoning daily in the hall of Tyrannus,” (Acts 19:9).

Priscilla and Aquila
In 1 Corinthians 16:19, Paul writes, “The churches of Asia send you greetings. Aquila and Prisca, together with the church in their house, send you hearty greetings in the Lord.” Since 1 Corinthians was composed in Ephesus (1 Cor 16:8), this indicates that Aquila and Priscilla were in Ephesus with Paul at the time of his writing. In Romans 16:3-5, Paul writes, “Greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus, who risked their necks for my life, to whom not only I give thanks but all the churches of the Gentiles give thanks as well. Greet also the church in their house.” By the time Paul wrote Romans, he evidently believed that Aquila and Priscilla had made it to Rome. The reference to Priscilla and Aquila risking their necks for Paul’s life suggests that Acts and Romans are independent of one another, since there is no account of this episode in Acts.

In Romans 15:25, Paul writes,

At present, however, I am going to Jerusalem bringing aid to the saints. For Macedonia and Achaia have been pleased to make some contribution for the poor among the saints at Jerusalem. For they were pleased to do it, and indeed they owe it to them. For if the Gentiles have come to share in their spiritual blessings, they ought also to be of service to them in material blessings.

Since Paul had apparently finished collecting money for the relief of the saints in Jerusalem (which was still in process at the time of his writing 1 Corinthians), this indicates that Romans must have been written after 1 Corinthians. And Paul’s language suggests that he is about to set off for Jerusalem to take the collection there. Thus, we can infer that, between the composition of 1 Corinthians and completing the collection for the relief of the Jerusalem saints (and the writing of Romans), Priscilla and Aquila left Ephesus and returned to Rome, from which they had previously been expelled by degree of the emperor Claudius (Acts 18:2). We can also surmise that there had to have been sufficient time for Paul to have learned of their arrival in Rome and that they were hosting a house church there.

Turning to Acts, we may surmise that Aquila and Priscilla were in Corinth around 50-51 C.E., when Paul first arrived. Claudius’ expulsion of the Jews from Rome is typically dated to 49 C.E. (Suetonius, Claudius 25). Acts 18:18-19 indicates that they left Corinth with Paul and settled in Ephesus. They were apparently still there during Paul’s third missionary journey (52-55 C.E). This is confirmed by 1 Corinthians 16:19, which was written from Ephesus. The epistle to the Romans was written from Corinth, around 57 C.E., close to the end of Paul’s third journey, just prior to his trip to Jerusalem. By this time, Romans 16:3-4 greets Priscilla and Aquila as being back in Rome. There is a gap of about two years between the writing of 1 Corinthians and Romans. Travel between Ephesus and Rome by sea would only take a few weeks. This means that there would have been ample time for Priscilla and Aquila to leave Ephesus following Paul’s stay there, and relocate to Rome following the death of Claudius (54 C.E.) and establish a church in their home by the time of the composition of Romans. This approximately two-year window between the composition of 1 Corinthians and Romans easily accommodates their return to Rome. McGrew explains, “Acts does not introduce them into the story too late for them to be referred to in the greetings in I Corinthians, and it places them in Ephesus at approximately the right time.”[2] The fact that Acts makes no reference to their return to Rome following the lifting of the decree also supports the independence of Acts and Romans. Further evidence for independence comes from the variant spelling of the name Πρίσκα / Πρίσκιλλα between the Pauline letters and Acts.

Journeying to Jerusalem
In Romans 15:30-32, Paul writes,

I appeal to you, brothers, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God on my behalf, that I may be delivered from the unbelievers in Judea, and that my service for Jerusalem may be acceptable to the saints, so that by God’s will I may come to you with joy and be refreshed in your company.

Compare this to Acts 20:22-24: And now, behold, I am going to Jerusalem, constrained by the Spirit, not knowing what will happen to me there, except that the Holy Spirit testifies to me in every city that imprisonment and afflictions await me. But I do not account my life of any value nor as precious to myself, if only I may finish my course and the ministry that I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God.” Both passages represent a similar state of Pauls mind concerning his upcoming journey to Jerusalem. Paley comments,

Let it be remarked, that it is the same journey to Jerusalem which is spoken of in these two passages; that the epistle was written immediately before St. Paul set forwards upon this journey from Achaia; that the words in the Acts were uttered by him when he had proceeded in that journey as far as Miletus, in Lesser Asia. This being remembered, I observe that the two passages, without any resemblance between them that could induce us to suspect that they were borrowed from one another, represent the state of St. Paul’s mind, with respect to the event of the journey, in terms of substantial agreement. They both express his sense of danger in the approaching visit to Jerusalem: they both express the doubt which dwelt upon his thoughts concerning what might there befall him. [3]

The only difference here is that in Acts Paul is evidently more inclined towards despondency than he is in his epistle to the Romans, in which he retains the hope “that by God’s will I may come to you with joy and be refreshed in your company,” (Rom 15:32). Compare this with Acts 20:23, in which Paul states, a few months after writing his epistle to the Romans, that “the Holy Spirit testifies to me in every city that imprisonment and afflictions await me.” This also points to independence — if Acts was based on Romans (or vice versa), this difference in Paul’s optimism is difficult to account for.

Paul’s Two Visits to Corinth
1 Corinthians 2:1-2 indicates that Paul had already visited Corinth prior to writing the epistle: “And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.” Paul also states his intention to visit Corinth a second time: “But I will come to you soon, if the Lord wills, and I will find out not the talk of these arrogant people but their power,” (1 Cor 4:19). Paley observes,

Now the history relates that Saint Paul did in fact visit Corinth twice; once as recorded at length in the eighteenth, and a second time as mentioned briefly in the twentieth chapter of the Acts. The same history also informs us, (Acts 20:1,) that it was from Ephesus Saint Paul proceeded upon his second journey into Greece. Therefore, as the epistle purports to have been written a short time preceding that journey; and as Saint Paul, the history tells us, had resided more than two years at Ephesus, before he set out upon it, it follows that it must have been from Ephesus, to be consistent with the history, that the epistle was written; and every note of place in the epistle agrees with this supposition.[4]

Given our determination that 1 Corinthians was composed around Acts 19:22 (which is inferred on entirely different grounds), these allusions accord with the book of Acts, since Paul had in fact visited Corinth one time prior to this time (in chapter 18) and would go on to visit Corinth a second time in chapter 20. Moreover, the account in Acts 19:21 indicates that “after these events Paul resolved in the Spirit to pass through Macedonia and Achaia and go to Jerusalem.” This confirms that the intention to go to Achaia (where Corinth was the capital) was on Paul’s mind at the time of writing 1 Corinthians. These observations, once again, confirm the historicity of Acts.

An apparent discrepancy with Acts is created by Paul’s statement that “This is the third time I am coming to you (Τρίτον τοῦτο ἔρχομαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς),” (2 Cor 13:1). If, as I have argued previously, Paul had only visited the Corinthians one time prior to the composition of this letter, the epistle is at odds with the history in Acts. An acceptable rendering of Paul’s language in 2 Corinthians 13:1 is that this was the third time he was prepared or ready to come to them. There are internal clues that suggest the plausibility of this reading. For one thing, Paul discusses a previously aborted visit to Corinth earlier in the epistle: “Because I was sure of this, I wanted to come to you first, so that you might have a second experience of grace. I wanted to visit you on my way to Macedonia, and to come back to you from Macedonia and have you send me on my way to Judea. Was I vacillating when I wanted to do this? Do I make my plans according to the flesh, ready to say ‘Yes, yes’ and ‘No, no’ at the same time?” (2 Cor 1:15-17). Paul also alludes to this issue in 2 Corinthians 2:1-2: “For I made up my mind not to make another painful visit to you. For if I cause you pain, who is there to make me glad but the one whom I have pained?” Apparently Paul had resolved not to come prematurely in a manner that would make the encounter grievous. In view of this cancelled visit, Paul could legitimately assert that this was the “third time” he was coming.

This interpretation is also supported by additional clues. Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 13:2, “as if I were present the second time … if I come again, I will not spare.” This indicates that Paul’s subsequent visit would be only his second appearance in Corinth. Moreover, 2 Corinthians 1:15 refers to giving the Corinthians a “second benefit,” again confirming only a single prior visit. Finally, 2 Corinthians 12:14 employs the parallel phrase, “Behold the third time I am ready to come to you” (Ἰδοὺ τρίτον τοῦτο ἑτοίμως ἔχω ἐλθεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς). This clarifies Paul’s meaning in 2 Corinthians 13:1. Paley contends that this reconciled variation, provides positive evidence of truth — though this is more relevant to the Pauline authorship of 2 Corinthians than it is to the historicity of Acts [13]:

Now, in historical researches, a reconciled inconsistency becomes a positive argument. First, because an impostor generally guards against the appearance of inconsistency; and secondly, because, when apparent inconsistencies are found, it is seldom that any thing but truth renders them capable of reconciliation. The existence of the difficulty proves the want or absence of that caution, which usually accompanies the consciousness of fraud; and the solution proves, that it is not the collusion of fortuitous propositions which we have to deal with, but that a thread of truth winds through the whole, which preserves every circumstance in its place.[5]

A Change of Plans
As discussed previously, Paul explains that he had initially intended to visit Corinth before going through Macedonia (2 Cor 1:15-16) and explains the reason for his change in plan (2 Cor 1:23-2:4). Referring to his earlier rebuke of the incestuous relationship (cf. 1 Cor 5), Paul writes, “For I made up my mind not to make another painful visit to you. For if I cause you pain, who is there to make me glad but the one whom I have pained? And I wrote as I did, so that when I came I might not suffer pain from those who should have made me rejoice, for I felt sure of all of you, that my joy would be the joy of you all. For I wrote to you out of much affliction and anguish of heart and with many tears, not to cause you pain but to let you know the abundant love that I have for you,” (2 Cor 2:1-4). This implies that his decision to delay his visit to Corinth (by going through Macedonia first) was made prior to writing 1 Corinthians. This is further supported by Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 16:5, “I will visit you after passing through Macedonia, for I intend to pass through Macedonia.” Paley comments, “The supplemental sentence, ‘for I do pass through Macedonia,’ imports that there had been some previous communication upon the subject of the journey; and also that there had been some vacillation and indecisiveness in the apostle’s plan: both which we now perceive to have been the case.”[6]

These indications in the Corinthian epistles align with Acts 19:21, in which Paul resolves to pass through Macedonia first before visiting Achaia, and sends Timothy and Erastus ahead into Macedonia. This plan is brought to fruition in Acts 20:1-2. Since, as discussed previously, Timothy was already sent prior to the writing of 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 4:17), this entails that the change of plans must have occurred before Paul wrote this letter. It is striking that Acts mentions Paul’s resolve to pass through Macedonia followed by Achaia, right as he was composing 1 Corinthians, just as one might expect from those indicators in 2 Corinthians. But Acts does not connect Paul’s resolve to the incestuous relationship in Corinth, nor to the writing of 1 Corinthians (nor does it, for that matter, so much as mention Paul writing a letter). This incidental dovetailing between Acts and the Corinthian epistles supports the credibility of Acts.

Working with Our Own Hands
In 1 Corinthians 4:11-12, Paul says that “To the present hour we hunger and thirst, we are poorly dressed and buffeted and homeless, and we labor, working with our own hands.” This indicates that, right up to the present time of his writing (from Ephesus), Paul was working manually to support himself with his own hands. When Acts narrates Paul’s stay in Ephesus (Acts 19), there is no reference to his working with his hands. However, when Paul later addresses the Ephesian elders at Miletus, he reminds them that “You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my necessities and to those who were with me.” Consistent with the epistle, this indicates that Paul did in fact continue his manual labor at Ephesus (the city from which he wrote 1 Corinthians). Observe that Acts confirms Paul’s manual labor in Ephesus indirectly and retrospectively. It is completely unmentioned in the direct narrative of Paul’s time in Ephesus, but is alluded to in Paul’s farewell speech that was delivered later. If the author of Acts used 1 Corinthians as a source, it seems more likely that this detail would have been featured in the main account of Ephesus, rather than obliquely in a later reference. This supports the historicity of Acts.

Corinth as the Limit of Paul’s Progress
In 2 Corinthians 10:14-16, Paul says, “For we are not overextending ourselves, as though we did not reach you. For we were the first to come all the way to you with the gospel of Christ. We do not boast beyond limit in the labors of others. But our hope is that as your faith increases, our area of influence among you may be greatly enlarged, so that we may preach the gospel in lands beyond you…” This implies that Corinth was, up to this point, the boundary of Paul’s travels. The account in Acts 16-18 depicts Paul’s travels as taking him along the Macedonian coast (Amphipolis, Apollonia, Thessalonica, Berea) followed by Athens and finally Corinth, where he remained for a year and a half prior to returning to Asia Minor. Consistent with the epistle, Corinth was indeed Paul’s last stop and therefore the natural boundary of his progress at that time. Paley comments, “He could not have said the same thing, viz. ‘I hope hereafter to visit the regions beyond you,’ in an epistle to the Philippians, or in an epistle to the Thessalonians, inasmuch as he must be deemed to have already visited the regions beyond them, having proceeded from those cities to other parts of Greece. But from Corinth he returned home: every part therefore beyond that city might properly be said, as it is said in the passage before us, to be unvisited. Yet is this propriety the spontaneous effect of truth, and produced without meditation or design.”

Becoming as a Jew to win Jews
In 1 Corinthians 9:20-22, Paul writes, “To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.” That this was Paul’s principle is confirmed by two historical examples recounted in Acts. The first of those (which happened prior to the composition of the epistle) is the circumcision of Timothy: “Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek,” (Acts 16:3). The second of those instances is Paul’s joining in of the purification rites at Jerusalem, an event that took place after the composition of the epistle (Acts 21:23-26).

It seems quite unlikely that the author of Acts fabricated these narratives merely to illustrate the principle Paul developed in the epistle. The agreement between the general description int he letter and the particular events in the history, without signs of contrivance, supports their mutual credibility.

Paul’s Long Stay in Ephesus
1 Corinthians 5:7-8 suggests that the epistle was composed around the feast of Passover: “Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.” The epistle was clearly composed sometime prior to Pentecost (i.e., fifty days after Passover), since Paul indicates that “I will stay in Ephesus until Pentecost…” (1 Cor 16:8). Moreover, Paul indicates that he intends to spend the coming winter with the Corinthians (1 Cor 16:6). These scattered remarks indicate that the letter was written in the springtime, during Paul’s stay in Ephesus. Acts independently places Paul in Ephesus for an extended time (according to Acts 19:10, Paul remained there for “two years”) but does not make any reference to Passover, Pentecost, or Paul’s planning for the upcoming winter. This supports the historicity of Acts.

The Riot in Ephesus
We have already established that Paul composed 2 Corinthians from Macedonia, at a time corresponding to Acts 20:1-2. Thus, 2 Corinthians was written very shortly following the uproar in Ephesus that was instigated by Demetrius the silversmith along with other craftsmen, of which we read in Acts 19:23-41. The riot was instigated by Demetrius’ stated concern that Paul’s message was a threat to their trade in idols. In verses 23-34, we read,

When they heard this they were enraged and were crying out, “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!” 29 So the city was filled with the confusion, and they rushed together into the theater, dragging with them Gaius and Aristarchus, Macedonians who were Paul’s companions in travel. 30 But when Paul wished to go in among the crowd, the disciples would not let him. 31 And even some of the Asiarchs, who were friends of his, sent to him and were urging him not to venture into the theater. 32 Now some cried out one thing, some another, for the assembly was in confusion, and most of them did not know why they had come together. 33 Some of the crowd prompted Alexander, whom the Jews had put forward. And Alexander, motioning with his hand, wanted to make a defense to the crowd. 34 But when they recognized that he was a Jew, for about two hours they all cried out with one voice, “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!”

It appears that the riot presented a credible threat to Paul’s life. The uproar was ultimately quieted by the town clerk (Acts 20:35-41). In Acts 20:1, we read, “After the uproar ceased, Paul sent for the disciples, and after encouraging them, he said farewell and departed for Macedonia.” It is at this point (as we have gleaned previously on entirely independent grounds) that Paul wrote his second epistle to the Corinthians. In 2 Corinthians 1:8-10, Paul writes,

8 For we do not want you to be unaware, brothers, of the affliction we experienced in Asia. For we were so utterly burdened beyond our strength that we despaired of life itself. 9 Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death. But that was to make us rely not on ourselves but on God who raises the dead. 10 He delivered us from such a deadly peril, and he will deliver us. On him we have set our hope that he will deliver us again.

Paley remarks,

Nothing could be more expressive of the circumstances in which the history describes St. Paul to have been, at the time when the epistle purports to be written; or rather, nothing could be more expressive of the sensations arising from these circumstances, than this passage. It is the calm recollection of a mind emerged from the confusion of instant danger.[7]

Thus, once again, 2 Corinthians indirectly confirms the historicity of Acts. This undesigned coincidence is rendered all the more striking by the very strong evidence that Acts is not literarily dependent upon 2 Corinthians (nor vice versa).

Misunderstanding Paul’s Attitude Towards the Law
For reasons discussed previously, we can nail down the composition of Romans to the three-month period that Paul spent in Corinth in Acts 20:3. This is immediately prior to Paul’s visit to Jerusalem (Acts 21). In Acts 21:20-25, Paul is instructed by the leaders in Jerusalem,

You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed. They are all zealous for the law, 21 and they have been told about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or walk according to our customs. 22 What then is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come. 23 Do therefore what we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; 24 take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses, so that they may shave their heads. Thus all will know that there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself also live in observance of the law. 25 But as for the Gentiles who have believed, we have sent a letter with our judgment that they should abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality.

Given that Paul had just written the epistle to the Romans shortly before this episode, it is not difficult to see how various statements in the epistle may have led to this misunderstanding about Paul’s teaching. For instance, “we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law,” (Rom 3:28); “For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace” (Rom 6:14); “But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive…” (Rom 7:6). On circumcision, Paul states that “circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter.” Moreover, his statement in Romans 4:9-12 that Abraham was justified by faith prior to circumcision could easily be heard as saying that circumcision is unnecessary, even for Jews. Given the various textual and thematic parallels between Romans and Galatians, I also deem it likely that the epistle to the Galatians was composed around the same time — a letter that contains many similar statements concerning Paul’s attitude towards the law and circumcision as those found in Romans. Paul’s teaching in those epistles also most likely reflects his preaching at the time.

Paul of the Tribe of Benjamin
A detail supplied only by Acts is that Paul was also known as Saul, which was his Hebrew name (e.g. Acts 9:4, 13:9). Paul’s letters inform us of a detail not mentioned by Acts — that Paul was of the tribe of Benjamin (Rom 11:1; Phil 3:5). This makes a lot of sense of why his Hebrew name is Saul — the first King of Israel, Saul, was the most famous Benjaminite (1 Samuel 9:1-2) and one whom one would expect someone of the tribe of Benjamin to be named after, particularly since naming children after notable tribal ancestors was common in Jewish culture.

Returned Again to Damascus
In Galatians 1:11-17, Paul writes,

11 For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel. 12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. 13 For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it. 14 And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, 16 was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone; 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.

Take note of Paul’s words in verse 17 — “nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.” Paul does not take the time to explain to his readers why Damascus was the place to which he returned from Arabia. It is taken for granted that they already know the connection to Damascus — this is where he went immediately upon his conversion (Acts 9:8). William Paley remarks,

In this quotation from the epistle, I desire it to be remarked how incidentally it appears, that the affair passed at Damascus. In what may be called the direct part of the account, no mention is made of the place of his conversion at all: a casual expression at the end, and an expression brought in for a different purpose, alone fixes it to have been at Damascus; “I returned again to Damascus.” Nothing can be more like simplicity and undesignedness than this is.[8]

This casual connection between Galatians and Acts is all the more striking when we consider that these two sources appear to be independent of one another — that is, the author of Acts did not use Galatians as a source, nor vice versa. I refer readers to the earlier discussion for the argument for this conclusion. The internal evidence of independence between Acts and Galatians, together with the convergence of details relating to Paul’s conversion (particularly the reference to returning to Damascus) suggest that the accounts in Acts concerning Paul’s conversion are in alignment with Paul’s own testimony.

Paul’s Brief Visit to Jerusalem
It is also of note that, in Galatians 1:18-19, Paul indicates that his visit to Jerusalem was quite brief. One wonders why Paul’s visit to Jerusalem was cut short such that he only remained there fifteen days and reportedly saw none of the other apostles besides Cephas (Simon Peter) and James the Lord’s brother. Acts 9:29 indicates that there was an assassination plot against Paul by the Hellenists such that he needed to leave Jerusalem in haste. This explains the account in Galatians in an undesigned way, such that it serves to corroborate the historicity of both accounts. This further supports that the testimony in Acts concerning Paul’s conversion and the events shortly thereafter reflect Paul’s own testimony. We also read in Acts 22:17 Paul’s statement that “When I had returned to Jerusalem and was praying in the temple, I fell into a trance and saw him saying to me, ‘Make haste and get out of Jerusalem quickly, because they will not accept your testimony about me.’” Paley remarks, “Here we have the general terms of one text so explained by a distant text in the same book, as to bring an indeterminate expression into a close conformity with a specification delivered in another book: a species of consistency not, I think, usually found in fabulous relations.”[9]

“I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia.”
A further point, relating to our text in Galatians 1:18-19, is that Paul some verses later indicates that “afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia,” (Gal 1:21). The account in Acts 9 indicates that, when the brothers learned of the plot against Paul’s life, “they brought him down to Caesarea and sent him off to Tarsus,” (v. 30). Paley observes that, “if he took his journey by land, it would carry him through Syria into Cilicia; and he would come, after his visit at Jerusalem, ‘into the regions of Syria and Cilicia,’ in the very order in which he mentions them in the epistle.” [18] Caesarea, of course, was a major port city, and so it is plausible that he made at least part of the journey by sea, before perhaps continuing on land. It is also of note that Paul indicates immediately following this statement in Galatians that “I was still unknown in person to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. They only were hearing it said, ‘He who used to persecute us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy,” (Galatians 1:22-23). Paley observes,

Upon which passage I observe, first, that what is here said of the churches of Judea, is spoken in connection with his journey into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. Secondly, that the passage itself has little significancy, and that the connection is inexplicable, unless St. Paul went through Judea (though probably by a hasty journey) at the time that he came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. Suppose him to have passed by land from Cæsarea to Tarsus, all this, as hath been observed, would be precisely true. [10]

Paul’s Escape from Damascus
Paul’s own account of the plot against his life in Damascus, in 2 Corinthians 11:32-33, dovetails with the account in Acts 9:23-25. Paul writes, “At Damascus, the governor under King Aretas was guarding the city of Damascus in order to seize me, but I was let down in a basket through a window in the wall and escaped his hands.” Compare this with the account in Acts 9:23-25: “When many days had passed, the Jews plotted to kill him, but their plot became known to Saul. They were watching the gates day and night in order to kill him, but his disciples took him by night and let him down through an opening in the wall, lowering him in a basket.” Notice that the account in Acts emphasizes the involvement of the Jews, whereas Paul, in 2 Corinthians, emphasizes the involvement of Aretas IV, the king of the Nabateans (who reigned from 9 B.C. to 40 C.E.). These are not mutually exclusive (presumably, there was a conspiracy involving both parties). Nonetheless, the discrepancy between Acts and 2 Corinthians points to independence, which renders the points of convergence of significant evidential value. Why might Aretas IV be involved in the conspiracy against Paul in Damascus? Aretas IV had significant political influence and authority in the region. Around the time of Paul’s conversion, Aretas IV was ruling Damascus, likely through a governor or ethnarch who was in charge of the Jewish community there. This authority over Damascus was granted to Aretas by the emperor Gaius Caligula. The event in Acts probably occurred around 37 C.E., based on evidence of Nabatean rule in Damascus commencing that year.

Visiting Troas
In 2 Corinthians 2:12-13, Paul writes, “When I came to Troas to preach the gospel of Christ, even though a door was opened for me in the Lord, my spirit was not at rest because I did not find my brother Titus there. So I took leave of them and went on to Macedonia.” This stop at Troas on the outward journey from Ephesus to Macedonia is not mentioned by Acts. However, Acts does record a later return journey where Paul did pass through Troas, found disciples there with whom he gathered to break bread, and preached at length (Acts 20:5-7). The epistle thus indicates that Paul had an “open door” for ministry previously in Troas, even though this visit was cut short due to his not finding Titus there. On the other hand, in the narrative in Acts concerning the return journey, it is revealed that there was in fact a functioning body of disciples in Troas on the later journey, which is consistent with Paul’s statement in his letter concerning his earlier opportunity for ministry there. But if the author of Acts were using 2 Corinthians as a source, he would be more likely to mention the visit to Troas, and the presence of Paul’s contacts there, during the outward trip, rather than on the return trip.

“Once I was Stoned”
As discussed earlier in this article, there is ample reason to think that Acts and 2 Corinthians are independent of one another. Among those lines of evidence is the fact that Paul’s laundry list of sufferings in 2 Corinthians 11 (all of which must have happened to him prior to Acts 20:1-2 when he wrote this epistle) cannot be readily correlated with Acts.

This presents no problem for Acts, for reasons given previously. Yet, strikingly, this account of the persecutions endured by Paul does not contradict Acts at any point, though it very well could have done so. For example, when Paul indicates that he was beaten with rods three times, Acts only reports one beating with rods (which happened in Philippi — Acts 16:22-23). This is consistent with the account in 2 Corinthians. But if Acts had mentioned four beatings with rods, we would have a very real contradiction between Acts and 2 Corinthians. More striking is Paul’s statement that “once I was stoned.” Acts also mentions exactly one time that Paul was stoned (which happened in Lystra in Lycaonia) (Acts 14:19-23). If, however, Acts had mentioned even one further instance of Paul being stoned, there would be an actual contradiction between Acts and the epistle. Consider too that there had been previously an intent to stone Paul in Iconium, though this plot failed: “But the people of the city were divided; some sided with the Jews and some with the apostles. When an attempt was made by both Gentiles and Jews, with their rulers, to mistreat them and to stone them, they learned of it and fled to Lystra and Derbe, cities of Lycaonia, and to the surrounding country, and there they continued to preach the gospel,” (Acts 14:4-7). Had Luke reported that this plot was successful, he would have contradicted 2 Corinthians. Paley remarks, “Truth is necessarily consistent: but it is scarcely possible that independent accounts, not having truth to guide them, should thus advance to the very brink of contradiction without falling into it.”[11]

The Church in Jerusalem
As we have previously discussed, there are strong reasons to think that Acts and Galatians are independent of one another. I shall not repeat those arguments here. In view of this independence, the points of convergence between Acts and Galatians are quite striking. Among those is the fact that both Acts and Galatians indicate a prominent role of James the brother of Jesus, together with Simon Peter and John the son of Zebedee, in the Jerusalem church. Paul mentions that “after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas [i.e., Simon Peter] and remained with him fifteen days. But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother,” (Gal 1:18-19). Moreover, Paul discusses his visit to Jerusalem after fourteen years where he presented the gospel that he had been proclaiming to the gentiles to the leaders in the Jerusalem church, to ensure the gospel he had been preaching was in alignment with theirs. Paul indicates that “when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.” Consistent with this, Acts 15:7,13 indicates the leadership role of Peter and James at the Jerusalem council. In Acts 21:17-18, we read, “When we had come to Jerusalem, the brothers received us gladly. On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present.” This again indicates James’ leadership role in Jerusalem. The leadership role of John is also implied elsewhere. In Acts 3:1-11 and 4:13-22, John appears alongside Peter as one of the main leaders, healing the lame man at the temple and subsequently being arrested and examined by the Sanhedrin.

Barnabas with Paul at Antioch
In Galatians 1:11-13, we read, “But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy.” Thus, Paul incidentally refers to Barnabas’ presence during his time in Antioch. Barnabas’ involvement in Antioch is mentioned very casually, in the context of his being led astray by the behavior of others. Acts indicates that Barnabas was present with Paul in Antioch on two occasions. In Acts 11:22-26, Barnabas is sent by the Jerusalem church to Antioch, where he then seeks out Paul in Tarsus and brings him back to Antioch. In Acts 15:35, Luke says that “Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, teaching and preaching the word of the Lord, with many others also.” Which of these one identifies as the most likely occasion of the confrontation of Peter will depend largely on whether one subscribes to an early or late Galatian theory (I am personally inclined to think that Galatians was written after, rather than before, the Jerusalem council). Either way, the history thus places Barnabas in Antioch in an uncontrived way, which supports the credibility of the account in Acts.

Building Teaching on Authority vs. Argument
The epistle to the Galatians and to the Romans both address the same issue of justification, but Paul’s approach differs depending upon his relationship to the recipients of his letter. He had founded the church in Galatia, and thus appeals to his personal authority. For example, in Galatians 1:6-8, Paul writes,

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.

Moreover, “I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel. For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ,” (Gal 1:11-12). Paul further writes in Galatians 4:11-12,19-20

I am afraid I may have labored over you in vain. Brothers, I entreat you, become as I am, for I also have become as you are…my little children, for whom I am again in the anguish of childbirth until Christ is formed in you! I wish I could be present with you now and change my tone, for I am perplexed about you.

In Galatians 5:2-3, Paul declares, “Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law.” Contrast this with Paul’s approach in his letter to the Romans, a church that Paul had never visited and had no established authority. In this epistle, Paul relies instead on reasoned argument. This contrast fits the historical situation.

Jewish-Instigated Persecution
In multiple texts in his epistle to the Galatians, Paul indicates that the chief persecution against him came at the hands of the Jews. This is implied by the following statements:

Galatians 4:29: But just as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now.

Galatians 5:11: But if I, brothers, still preach circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been removed.

Galatians 6:17: From now on let no one cause me trouble, for I bear on my body the marks of Jesus.

Compare these statements to the following episodes recounted in Acts:

Antioch in Pisidia (Acts 13:50): Jews stir up leading citizens against Paul and Barnabas.

Iconium (Acts 14:1–2): Unbelieving Jews incite Gentiles against them.

Lystra (Acts 14:19): Jews from Antioch and Iconium persuade the crowd to stone Paul.

Thessalonica (Acts 17:4–5): Jews incite a mob and attack Jason’s house.

Berea (Acts 17:13): Jews from Thessalonica follow Paul and stir up more trouble.

Corinth (Acts 18:12): Jews bring Paul before Gallio’s tribunal.

By contrast, persecution that was purely instigated by gentiles occurred on only two occasions, and in both instances this was prompted by economic interests — in particular, the masters of the slave girl in Philippi who had lost profit as a result of Paul’s exorcism (Acts 16:19) and Demetrius and the silversmiths in Ephesus since Paul’s preaching was a threat to their trade in idols.

Addressing the Ephesian Elders
In Acts 20:18-35, Paul delivers his farewell speech to the Ephesian elders:

You yourselves know how I lived among you the whole time from the first day that I set foot in Asia, 19 serving the Lord with all humility and with tears and with trials that happened to me through the plots of the Jews; 20 how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you in public and from house to house, 21 testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. 22 And now, behold, I am going to Jerusalem, constrained by the Spirit, not knowing what will happen to me there, 23 except that the Holy Spirit testifies to me in every city that imprisonment and afflictions await me. 24 But I do not account my life of any value nor as precious to myself, if only I may finish my course and the ministry that I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God. 25 And now, behold, I know that none of you among whom I have gone about proclaiming the kingdom will see my face again. 26 Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all, 27 for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God. 28 Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. 29 I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them. 31 Therefore be alert, remembering that for three years I did not cease night or day to admonish every one with tears. 32 And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified. 33 I coveted no one’s silver or gold or apparel. 34 You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my necessities and to those who were with me. 35 In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’

There are multiple features of this speech that resemble subtle aspects of Paul’s personality and emphases as represented by his letters. This indicates that the same Paul lies behind this speech (as reported by Luke) and the epistles. Lydia McGrew explains,

The speech breathes the personality of the author of the epistles, including both his genuine love and warm-heartedness and what one might less charitably be inclined to call his emotional manipulativeness and self-dramatization. The same Paul who brings the elders of Miletus to tears with his references to his own trials and tears (Acts 20.19) and his prediction of never seeing them again (Acts 20.25, 36–38) is the Paul who attempts, probably successfully, to induce Philemon to free the slave Onesimus by telling him that he “owes him his own life” (Philem vv 17–19). He is the same Paul who says so much about his own trials and distresses in I Corinthians and reminds his readers that he is their spiritual father (I Cor 4.8–14). The same Paul who launches, at this intimate moment of farewell to his dear friends, into a spirited defense of his own blamelessness in financial matters (Acts 20.33–35) is the Paul who harps on this theme repeatedly in the epistles…and who is almost painfully defensive about his apostleship in II Corinthians 11–12. The same Paul who urges the Corinthians to be imitators of himself (I Cor 4.16), who says that the “care of all the churches” comes upon him daily (II Cor 11.28), and who earnestly uses his apostolic authority, his love, and the sheer force of his personality to dissuade the Galatians from yielding to the demand of circumcision (Gal 4.16–20) is the Apostle Paul who tells the elders in Acts 20.29–32 that after his departure they will be assailed by false teachers and should resist, remembering how he himself “admonished them with tears” during his ministry.[12]

The artless similarity of this speech delivered by Paul, recounted in Acts, and Paul’s letters is indicative of the historical credibility of Acts’ recounting of Paul’s address to the Ephesian elders. These parallels are even more striking given the independence of Acts from the epistles (the case for which has been laid out previously).

The Book of Acts as High-Resolution Reportage

In sum, the cumulative force of the incidental agreements between Acts and these four epistles (particularly when one factors in the case for Acts being independent of the letters) strongly supports the conclusion that Acts is high-resolution historical reportage. Taken cumulatively, the undesigned coincidences surveyed provide powerful evidence for the reliability of Acts as an historical account and confirm that its author, Luke, was well informed, close up to the facts, and habitually scrupulous. This profile comports well with Luke’s own claim to have been Paul’s travelling companion for much of his journeys. This, in turn, carries implications for the credibility of Christianity. If Acts can be trusted as an account composed by someone in proximity to Paul, and someone who is habitually scrupulous, then Luke’s testimony concerning Paul’s conversion and miracles most likely represents the testimony of Paul himself. Luke also attests to Paul’s unwavering willingness to suffer toil and hardship, even imprisonment and death, for the sake of the gospel. Moreover, Luke’s proximity to the Jerusalem apostles gives us reason to think that he accurately represents the testimony of the apostles concerning the phenomenology of the appearances of Jesus to the disciples after his death, as well as the adverse circumstances of their public ministry. Thus, our case for the historical credibility of Acts bears in no small measure on the broader case for the truth of the gospel.

References:

[1] Scripture references are to the ESV unless otherwise noted.

[2] Lydia McGrew, Hidden In Plain View: Undesigned Coincidences in the Gospels and Acts (DeWard Publishing Company, 2017), 152-153.

[3] William Paley, Horae Paulinae, or the Truth of the Scripture History of St. Paul Evinced (London: R. Faulder, 1791).

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] McGrew 2017, pg. 157.

Recommended Resources:

The New Testament: Too Embarrassing to Be False by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3, and Mp4)

Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3 and Mp4)

Early Evidence for the Resurrection by Dr. Gary Habermas (DVD), (Mp3) and (Mp4)

The Footsteps of the Apostle Paul (mp4 Download), (DVD) by Dr. Frank Turek

Dr. Jonathan McLatchie is a Christian writer, international speaker, and debater. He holds a Bachelor’s degree (with Honors) in forensic biology, a Masters’s (M.Res) degree in evolutionary biology, a second Master’s degree in medical and molecular bioscience, and a Ph.D. in evolutionary biology. Currently, he is an assistant professor of biology at Sattler College in Boston, Massachusetts. Dr. McLatchie is a contributor to various apologetics websites and is the founder of the Apologetics Academy (Apologetics-Academy.org), a ministry that seeks to equip and train Christians to persuasively defend the faith through regular online webinars, as well as assist Christians who are wrestling with doubts. Dr. McLatchie has participated in more than thirty moderated debates around the world with representatives of atheism, Islam, and other alternative worldview perspectives. He has spoken internationally in Europe, North America, and South Africa promoting an intelligent, reflective, and evidence-based Christian faith.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/3Yfxcac