I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (41 page)

1. the natural crossing between correctly named ports (Acts 13:4-5)

2. the proper port (Perga) along the direct destination of a ship crossing from Cyprus (13:13)

3. the proper location of Lycaonia (14:6)

4. the unusual but correct declension of the name Lystra (14:6)

5. the correct language spoken in Lystra—Lycaonian (14:11)

6. two gods known to be so associated—Zeus and Hermes (14:12)

7. the proper port, Attalia, which returning travelers would use (14:25)

8. the correct order of approach to Derbe and then Lystra from the Cilician Gates (16:1; cf. 15:41)

9. the proper form of the name Troas (16:8)

10. the place of a conspicuous sailors’ landmark, Samothrace (16:11)

11. the proper description of Philippi as a Roman colony (16:12)

12. the right location for the river (Gangites) near Philippi (16:13)

13. the proper association of Thyatira as a center of dyeing (16:14)

14. correct designations for the magistrates of the colony (16:22)

15. the proper locations (Amphipolis and Apollonia) where travelers would spend successive nights on this journey (17:1)

16. the presence of a synagogue in Thessalonica (17:1)

17. the proper term (“politarchs”) used of the magistrates there (17:6)

18. the correct implication that sea travel is the most convenient way of reaching Athens, with the favoring east winds of summer sailing (17:14-15)

19. the abundant presence of images in Athens (17:16)

20. the reference to a synagogue in Athens (17:17)

21. the depiction of the Athenian life of philosophical debate in the Agora (17:17)

22. the use of the correct Athenian slang word for Paul (
sper-mologos,
17:18) as well as for the court (
Areios pagos,
17:19)

23. the proper characterization of the Athenian character (17:21)

24. an altar to an “unknown god” (17:23)

25. the proper reaction of Greek philosophers, who denied the bodily resurrection (17:32)

26.
Areopagites
as the correct title for a member of the court (17:34)

27. a Corinthian synagogue (18:4)

28. the correct designation of Gallio as proconsul, resident in Corinth (18:12)

29. the
bema
(judgment seat), which overlooks Corinth’s
forum
(18:16ff.)

30. the name Tyrannus as attested from Ephesus in first-century inscriptions (19:9)

31. well-known shrines and images of Artemis (19:24)

32. the well-attested “great goddess Artemis” (19:27)

33. that the Ephesian theater was the meeting place of the city (19:29)

34. the correct title
grammateus
for the chief executive magistrate in Ephesus (19:35)

35. the proper title of honor
neokoros,
authorized by the Romans (19:35)

36. the correct name to designate the goddess (19:37)

37. the proper term for those holding court (19:38)

38. use of plural
anthupatoi,
perhaps a remarkable reference to the fact that
two
men were conjointly exercising the functions of proconsul at this time (19:38)

39. the “regular” assembly, as the precise phrase is attested elsewhere (19:39)

40. use of precise ethnic designation,
beroiaios
(20:4)

41. employment of the ethnic term
Asianos
(20:4)

42. the implied recognition of the strategic importance assigned to this city of Troas (20:7ff.)

43. the danger of the coastal trip in this location (20:13) 44. the correct sequence of places (20:14-15)

45. the correct name of the city as a neuter plural (
Patara
) (21:1)

46. the appropriate route passing across the open sea south of Cyprus favored by persistent northwest winds (21:3)

47. the suitable distance between these cities (21:8)

48. a characteristically Jewish act of piety (21:24)

49. the Jewish law regarding Gentile use of the temple area (21:28) (Archaeological discoveries and quotations from Josephus confirm that Gentiles could be executed for entering the temple area. One inscription reads: “Let no Gentile enter within the balustrade and enclosure surrounding the sanctuary. Whoever is caught will be personally responsible for his consequent death.”
²

50. the permanent stationing of a Roman cohort (
chiliarch
) at Antonia to suppress any disturbance at festival times (21:31)

51. the flight of steps used by the guards (21:31, 35)

52. the common way to obtain Roman citizenship at this time (22:28)

53. the tribune being impressed with Roman rather than Tarsian citizenship (22:29)

54. Ananias being high priest at this time (23:2)

55. Felix being governor at this time (23:34)

56. the natural stopping point on the way to Caesarea (23:31)

57. whose jurisdiction Cilicia was in at the time (23:34)

58. the provincial penal procedure of the time (24:1-9)

59. the name Porcius Festus, which agrees precisely with that given by Josephus (24:27)

60. the right of appeal for Roman citizens (25:11)

61. the correct legal formula (25:18)

62. the characteristic form of reference to the emperor at the time (25:26)

63. the best shipping lanes at the time (27:5)

64. the common bonding of Cilicia and Pamphylia (27:4)

65. the principal port to find a ship sailing to Italy (27:5-6)

66. the slow passage to Cnidus, in the face of the typical northwest wind (27:7)

67. the right route to sail, in view of the winds (27:7)

68. the locations of Fair Havens and the neighboring site of Lasea (27:8)

69. Fair Havens as a poorly sheltered roadstead (27:12)

70. a noted tendency of a south wind in these climes to back suddenly to a violent northeaster, the well-known
gregale
(27:13)

71. the nature of a square-rigged ancient ship, having no option but to be driven before a gale (27:15)

72. the precise place and name of this island (27:16)

73. the appropriate maneuvers for the safety of the ship in its particular plight (27:16)

74. the fourteenth night—a remarkable calculation, based inevitably on a compounding of estimates and probabilities, confirmed in the judgment of experienced Mediterranean navigators (27:27)

75. the proper term of the time for the Adriatic (27:27)

76. the precise term (
Bolisantes
) for taking soundings, and the correct depth of the water near Malta (27:28)

77. a position that suits the probable line of approach of a ship released to run before an easterly wind (27:39)

78. the severe liability on guards who permitted a prisoner to escape (27:42)

79. the local people and superstitions of the day (28:4-6)

80. the proper title
protos t
Ó
s n
Ó
sou
(28:7)

81. Rhegium as a refuge to await a southerly wind to carry them through the strait (28:13)

82. Appii Forum and Tres Tabernae as correctly placed stopping places on the Appian Way (28:15)

83. appropriate means of custody with Roman soldiers (28:16)

84. the conditions of imprisonment, living “at his own expense” (8:30-31)

Is there any doubt that Luke was an eyewitness to these events or at least had access to reliable eyewitness testimony? What more could he have done to prove his authenticity as a historian?

Roman historian A. N. Sherwin-White says, “For Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming. . . . Any attempt to reject its basic historicity must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for granted.”
³
Classical scholar and archaeologist William M. Ramsay began his investigation into Acts with great skepticism, but his discoveries helped change his mind. He wrote:

I began with a mind unfavorable to it [Acts]. . . . It did not lie then in my line of life to investigate the subject minutely; but more recently I found myself often brought into contact with the book of Acts as an authority for the topography, antiquities, and society of Asia Minor. It was gradually borne in upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvelous truth.
⁴

Indeed, Luke’s accuracy in Acts is truly amazing.

Now, here’s where skeptics get very uncomfortable. Luke reports a total of 35 miracles in the same book in which he records all 84 of these historically confirmed details.
⁵
Several miracles of Paul are recorded in the second half of Acts. For example, Luke records that Paul: temporarily blinded a sorcerer (13:11); cured a man who was crippled from birth (14:8); exorcized an evil spirit from a possessed girl (16:18); “performed many miracles” that convinced many in the city of Ephesus to turn from sorcery to Jesus (19:11-20); raised a man from the dead who had died after falling out of a window during Paul’s long-winded lecture (20:9-10); healed Publius’s father of dysentery, and healed numerous others who were sick on Malta (28:8-9). All of these miracles are included in the same historical narrative that has been confirmed as authentic on 84 points. And the miracle accounts show no signs of embellishment or extravagance—they are told with the same levelheaded efficiency as the rest of the historical narrative.

Now, why would Luke be so accurate with trivial details like wind directions, water depths, and peculiar town names, but not be accurate when it comes to important events like miracles? In light of the fact that Luke has proven accurate with so many trivial details, it is nothing but pure anti-supernatural bias to say he’s not telling the truth about the miracles he records. As we have seen, such a bias is illegitimate. This is a theistic world where miracles are possible. So it makes much more sense to believe Luke’s miracle accounts than to discount them. In other words, Luke’s credentials as a historian have been proven on so many points that it takes more faith
not
to believe his miracle accounts than to believe them.

Is Luke’s Gospel “Gospel?”

What about the Gospel of Luke? First, we need to recognize that Acts and the Gospel of Luke are closely related books. How do we know? First, both documents contain the same Greek vocabulary and literary style. But more important, Luke addresses both documents to “most excellent Theophilus.” He was probably some kind of Roman official because “most excellent” is the same title Paul used to address the Roman governors Felix and Festus.
⁶

Regardless of the true identity of Theophilus, the main point is that Luke reveals that Acts is a continuation of his Gospel. His opening says, “In my
former book,
Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach until the day he was taken up to heaven . . .” (Acts 1:1). Luke uses the remainder of Acts to tell Theophilus what happened after Christ’s ascension. And as we have seen, he did so with amazing precision.

Should we expect the same degree of accuracy from Luke’s Gospel? Why not? In fact, Luke says as much when he writes, “Since I myself have
carefully
investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus” (Luke 1:3). Judging from his meticulous work in Acts, Luke certainly is a careful historian who should be trusted. As New Testament scholar Craig Blomberg observes, “A historian who has been found trustworthy where he or she can be tested should be given the benefit of the doubt in cases where no tests are available.”
⁷
Since Luke has been tested on 84 points and has earned a perfect score, there’s every reason to believe his Gospel is “gospel” as well.

But we don’t need to rely solely on his work in Acts to confirm Luke’s Gospel. There are several details in Luke’s Gospel that have been verified independently. For example, Luke names eleven historically confirmed leaders in the first three chapters of his Gospel alone (twelve if you include Jesus). These include Herod the Great, (1:5), Caesar Augustus (2:1), and Quirinius (2:2). He then writes this at the beginning of chapter 3:

In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar—when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene—during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the desert. He went into all the country around the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.

Does this sound like Luke is making up a story? Of course not. If he were, there would be no way he would put historical crosshairs on the events he’s describing by naming these prominent leaders and their dates. As Bible scholar F. F. Bruce observes, “A writer who thus 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. Luke takes this risk, and stands the test admirably.”
⁸
Indeed, all eleven of the historical figures Luke names in the first three chapters of his Gospel—including John the Baptist (son of Zechariah)—have been confirmed by non-Christian writers and/or archaeology. For example, John the Baptist is mentioned by Josephus (
Antiquities
18:5.2), and an inscription dating from A.D. 14 to 29 bears the name of Lysanias.

Another historically accurate detail can be found in Luke 22:44. That’s where Luke records that Jesus was in agony and sweat drops of blood the night before his crucifixion. Apparently, Jesus was experiencing a rare stress-induced condition we know today as hematohidrosis. That’s when tiny blood vessels rupture due to extreme stress, thus allowing blood to mix with sweat. Since Luke probably didn’t know of this medical condition 2,000 years ago, he could not have recorded it unless he had access to someone who saw it.

Details like this led William Ramsay (mentioned above) to say, “Luke’s history is unsurpassed in respect of its trustworthiness,” and “Luke is an historian of the first rank. . . . [He] should be placed along with the very greatest of historians.”
⁹
The bottom line is that Luke can be trusted. Since he has been confirmed independently on so many testable points, there’s every reason to believe he’s telling the truth elsewhere.