Hard look at Acts (5) Chronology of Paul

While conservative Christian scholars have relied heavily on the book of Acts in the reconstruction of Paul's journeys, other academics have rejected the historicity/reliability of Acts, and preferred to rely upon Paul's letters alone.   The problem with the second approach is that there is very little in Paul's letters to establish dates with, or even to put them in order.

A Chronology based on Acts

A basic modern approach using Acts is given by Gerd Luedemann in "A Chronology of Paul", Colloquy on NT Studies, Ed. Bruce Corley, SBTS (Mercer U., 1983) p. 289 fwd.

'The Conventional View:

'The conventional view...may be broadly described as ...ingenious combination of ...Acts with info in [Paul's] letters.  ...One proceeds on the basis of the sole absolute datum ...the Gallio inscription.  Since Gallio held office in A.D. 51-52, Acts 18:12 is taken as a sure indication that Paul stood trial before Gallio in this year.  Further confirmation is then derived from 18:2, which mentions the arrival of Priscilla and Aquilla from Rome after the expulsion of the Jews (the year is assumed, on the basis of Orosius, to be A.D. 49).  Since these two dates confirm one another, it is held that Luke's report of Paul's 1st Cor. Mission in Acts 18 is historically accurate.  With the date of the mission on European soil relatively set, other dates are reckoned both before and after this period.  

After the stay in Corinth Paul traveled to Ephesus, then on to Palestine, and then back to Ephesus (Acts 18:18ff.).  There Paul wrote the Corinthian letters and later traveled back to Jerusalem (by way of Macedonia) to deliver the [money] collection.  In Jerusalem, Paul was arrested and was eventually taken to rome to meet his death as a martyr. 

Before the stay in Corinth, Paul had worked as a missionary in Philippi, Thessalonica, and Athens (and agreement of 1st Thess. with Acts 17ff.).  Prior to this mission, Paul had traveled as a delegate of the Antioch congregation, to Jerusalem for the conference (Acts 15:2ff.).  One determines this date of the conference, 14 - 17 years after Paul's conversion, on the basis of Gal 1ff.  Confirmation of this view is then found in the reference to the ensuing conflict between Paul and Barnabas in both Acts and Gal. 2:13. 

For 11 - 14 years prior to the Jerusalem conference, Paul had worked, as a missionary of the Antioch congregation, in Syria and Cilicia (a combin. of Gal 1:21 and Acts 13ff.). 

I wish to emphasize at this point that if this veiw were correct, then all of Paul's letters would have been composed within about 5 years of one another.  They would all have been written by a man who had already been a Christian for about 19 years and who was a veteran missionary.  Accordingly, one should expect the letters to be quite homogeneous; little room would be left for any theory regarding a development in Paul's thought reflected in the letters.  The historian's exposition could rather proceed from the old theological principle, "scriptura ipsius interpres".  (i.e., "Scripture is [self]-explanatory")

 Luedemann goes on in his article to develop a "non-conventional view" (i.e., a chronology that rejects the historicity and usefulness of Acts.  But that does not concern us here.  We remain grateful for Luedemann's concise description of the 'conventional view'.

Nazaroo

Lachmann (3) - The "Illiad Theory" and Acts

F.N. Peloubet, in The Teacher's commentary on the Acts (1903, Oxford) deals with Lachmann's multiple author theory in passing, in the context of the composition of Acts.
Peloubet (Introduction, xxxv fwd) states:

"VI. THE SOURCES OF ACTS.   As Luke expressly says in the preface to his Gospel that he derived his information from the records of eye-witnesses, with which he was perfectly familiar, the same is doubtless true of his treatise on the Acts of the Apostles. ...
...there is no reason for thinking, a priori, that the speeches cannot be historical. . . . The speeches of the leading apostles would impress themselves on the growing community, and would be remembered as the words of the Lord were remembered.
...
There are some interesting comparisons of the discussion of the composite nature of the Acts with other literature in  A. H. Strong's The Great Poets and their Theology. 

"The German Lachmann resolved the Iliad into sixteen distinct and clearly defined layers.  Paley has compared the Iliad and the Odyssey to pictures of stained glass made up by an artistic combination of handsome bits of older windows which fortune and time had shivered." 

The combatants [textual critics] are more and more arraying themselves on the side of the traditional view that both poems are by the same author, and that this author is Homer. But Homer himself may have taken many years for the elaboration of his poems, revising and improving them as he repeated them again and again, so that during those years versions of various degrees of perfection may have been set in circulation.  

Goethe in one of his letters to Schiller cites different versions of his own poems, in connection with the theory we have been considering. He had at various times amended and enlarged them; but he did not on that account prove that there was a second Goethe, or many Goethes. "

What all this tells us is that subsequent critics and investigators  cioming after Lachmann have found that all such naive theories of 'many detectable layers' and 'multiple authors' are at best precarious conjectures and near-worthless.   Even, and perhaps especially, reconstructed 'genealogies', based on the alleged identification of various 'interpolations' and layers are simply academic fantasies, their proliferation and variations providing the best evidence of their spuriousness.

Nazaroo

Hard Look at Acts (4): Dating the Synoptic Gospels

I think James was killed around 62 A.D.

That having been said, the letter of James could have been written anytime between 40 and 60 A.D., but I tend to date it early because it is simple and primitive in its Christology and Theology, and it is addressed to the Twelve Tribes of Israel in the Diaspora.

Additionally, Matthew seems to use James liberally in composing the Sermon on the Mount, which is a blend of Luke's Sermon on the Plain and James, as well as other collected sayings of Jesus, now removed from their original historical context:

Quote:

I didn't see the Gospels on there, when were they written?

If early traditions are correct, then Matthew would have first published a collection of Jesus' sayings in Hebrew or Aramaic in the early 30s or 40s, from Jerusalem, and this would have circulated among Christians as far as Galilee, Samaria, Syria (Antioch) and even Asia Minor and Egypt (Alexandria).

Peter would have had access to this, and would have assisted Mark to write the first near-complete Gospel (either Mark or Ur-Mark), probably sometime before Paul came to Rome (50s?).

Luke seems to have used Mark as a base, and combined it with Matthew's sayings collection, as well as eyewitness accounts from other early Apostolic church members, sometime before 60 A.D. (Luke was written before Acts, c. 60-62 A.D.).

Luke block-copies Mark

Matthew block-copies Mark

Mark may have been revised after the composition of Luke, since Luke omits one large section of our current version of Mark, (the Great Lukan Omission, Mark 6:45-8:25).

Our Greek Matthew seems to have been composed on the same general idea as Luke (combining Mark with other sayings material). However, Matthew clearly uses the version of Mark now containing the Lukan Omission section.

Matthew was apparently composed sometime after controversies between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians had been worked out, as he has carefully combined Luke's Sermon on the Plain and the letter of James to produce his opus "Sermont on the Mount", a large and organized collection of many of Jesus' sayings, now blended with James' teaching and lacking most of the original contexts, which are given in Luke and Mark etc.

Matthew is also the only Gospel to use the word "Church" (ekklesia), and was probably written just after Luke, possibly in the 60s, after the Church had finally split with the Jewish community; but apparently before the destruction of Jerusalem.

For more info on the Synoptic Problem, go to our website here, for good diagrams etc:

Hard Look at Acts (3): Josephus - the Murder of James 62 A.D.

Here is the key excerpt from Josephus, courtesy of James Tabor's site:

---

Josephus on the Death of James brother of Jesus, in 62 C.E.
Josephus, Antiquities
Book 20: chapter 9

CONCERNING ALBINUS UNDER WHOSE PROCURATORSHIP JAMES WAS SLAIN; AS ALSO WHAT EDIFICES WERE BUILT BY AGRIPPA.
 

"1. AND now Caesar, upon hearing the death of Festus, sent Albinus into Judea, as procurator. But the king deprived Joseph of the high priesthood, and bestowed the succession to that dignity on the son of Ananus, who was also himself called Ananus.

Now the report goes that this eldest Ananus proved a most fortunate man; for he had five sons who had all performed the office of a high priest to God, and who had himself enjoyed that dignity a long time formerly, which had never happened to any other of our high priests.

But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the Sadducees, who are very rigid in judging offenders, above all the rest of the Jews, as we have already observed; when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity [to exercise his authority]. Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the king [Agrippa], desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done was not to be justified; nay, some of them went also to meet Albinus, as he was upon his journey from Alexandria, and informed him that it was not lawful for Ananus to assemble a sanhedrin without his consent. (24) Whereupon Albinus complied with what they said, and wrote in anger to Ananus, and threatened that he would bring him to punishment for what he had done; on which king Agrippa took the [office of] high priesthood from him, when he had ruled but three months, and made Jesus, son of Damneus, high priest."

Our interest here for the moment is the fact that James' death is not recorded in the Book of Acts, (just as the sack of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple is not recorded), and this suggests not only that Acts was written before 70 A.D., but actually before 62 A.D., since it is hardly conceivable that Luke would have left out the death of James or the destruction of the Jerusalem Church, had he written after that time.

Nazaroo

A Hard Look at the Book of Acts (2) Roman Background

Here's a brief Roman chronology for the same period as the book of Acts, taken from H. Scullard, From the Gracchi to Nero (5th ed. 1982):

30 A.D.  Publications  of the History of Velleius Paterculus
31 Tiberius, consul v, with Sejanus. Gaius recieves toga virilius.   Sejanus put to death. Marco appointed Praetorian Prefect
33 Death of Agrippaina on island of Pandateria. Gaius quaestor. Financial difficulties in Rome. Possible date for the Crucifixion of Christ.

34  Palestinian Tetrarchy of Philip incorporated into Syria
36 Pontius Pilate sent to Rome by L. Vitellius govenor of Syria
37 Death of Tiberius Caesar (16 march)  Accession of Gaius ('Caligula') he is consul with Claudius. Commagene re-established as a client kingdom
38 Death  and deification of Drusilla. Jewish disturbances in Alexandria. Polemo II receives Pontus and Cotys Armenia Minor
39 Gaius goes to the Rhine. Julia and Agrippina exiled
40  Gaius expedition to the Channel, returns to Rome. Ptolemy of Mauretania murdered in Rome, revolt  in Mauretania. Jewish embassy from Alexandria to Rome.  Agrippa I receives kingdom of Antipas. Judaea restless
41  Gaius murdered (24 Jan) Claudius made emperor. The Chauci defeated. Claudius settles Alexandrian trouble. Agrippa I receives Judaea and Samaria. Exile of Seneca to Corsica
42 Revolt of Scribonianus in Dalmatia: his suicide. Mauretania organized as two provinces
43 Expedition to Britain.   Lycia  made an imperial province
44 Claudius' triumph over Britain.  Achaea and Maccedonia transferred to Senate. Death of Herod Agrippa I.   Judaea reverts to provincial status
46 Thrace made a province
47 Triumph of Aulus Plautius for conquest of Britain. Claudius and L. Vitellius censors. Ludi Saeculares. Corbulo campaigns against Frisii. Ostorius Scapula in Britain
48 Messalina killed
49 Seneca recalled from Corsica and made praetor  and Nero's tutor
50 Claudius adopts Nero as Guardian for Britannicus.  Agrippa II rules in Chalcis
51 Burrus made Praetorian prefect, Vespasian consul. Caratactus defeated in Wales Vologeses king of Parthia (or in52) Gallio proconsul in Achaea (51-52) 
53 Nero  marries  Octavia . Parthians occupy Armenia and Tiridates recovers the throne
54 Death of Claudius. Accession of Nero. Caldius deified
55 Britannicus poisoned. Pallus dismissed . Corbulo goes to the East
56 Praefecti  aerarii replace quaestores aerrarii
57 Nero orders senators and knights to take part in Games
58 Nero refuses  perpetual consulship. Corbulo captures  Artaxata
59 Nero Murders Agrippina: establishes Greek Games. Cobulo takes Tigranocerta
60 Neronia establishes Corulo settles Armenia governor of Syria.  Festus succeeds Felix as governor of Judaea
61 Revolt  of Boudicca and Iceni in Britain
62 Death  of Burras. Tigellinus  made  Praetorian Prefect.  Seneca disgraced. Nero divorces  Octavia and marries Poppaea. Octavia murdered. Paetus surrenders to the Parthians at Rhandeia
64 Great fire at Rome.  Persecution of the Christians. Domus Aurea begun. Mission to Ethiopia. Cottian Alps  made a province (64-65) Pontus incorporated into  Galatia
65 Conspiracy  of Piso. Suicides of Seneca ans Lucan. Death of Poppaea.  Musonius Rufus exiled
66 Nero crowns Tiridates king of Armenia in Rome and goes to Greece. Thrasea Paetus condemned. Conspiracy of Vinicius  at  Beneventum. Nero marries Statilia Messalina. Temple of Janus  closed. Suicide of Petronius Rebellion in Palestine.
67 Nero at Corinthian canal. Corbulo ordered to commit suicide.  Vespasian in command in Judaea: Josephus surrenders to him
68 Nero returns  to Italy. Death of Nero (6 June) Galba, accepted  by Senate and Praetorians, enters Rome (autumn) Verginius Rufus opposes Vindex's rebellion in Gaul.  Defeat and death of Vindex. Vespasian attacks Jerusalem
69  After the death of Galba and brief reigns of Otho and Vitellius, Vespasian becomes emperor  and reaches Rome in summer of 70
70  Jerusalem sieged and burned by Titus, temple destroyed.

A Hard Look at the Book of Acts

Before going further with our notes on Revelation, we want to make a short excursion to cover the Book of Acts and Paul's letters. 
The following chart will be helpful for placing the key NT writings on a chronological time-chart, and give keys to the backgrounds of various letters by Paul:

Timeline for Acts/Paul:  Click to Enlarge full size

 

The diagram is for the most part self-explanatory.

Nazaroo