Blog

Many try to say today that the bible writers invented history or played fast and loose with the facts.  But how does this claim stand when checked out by archaeology?

One book that especially lends itself to archaeological verification is the Acts of the Apostles, believed by most scholars to be authored by Luke, the author of the third Gospel. Sir William Ramsay, who was one of the greatest archaeologists to have ever lived, began a study of the book of Acts as a skeptic, believing it was written in the second century and not historical. As he studied he uncovered evidence that indicated otherwise, and he had a complete reversal in his thinking about Luke’s accuracy: “Luke’s history is unsurpassed in respect of its trustworthiness.”[1] Ramsay also stated of Luke: “This author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians.”[2]

Josh McDowell lists evidences for Luke’s accuracy compiled by Roman historian Colin Hemer, a noted Roman historian: “Specialized details, which would not be known except to a contemporary researcher. . .details include exact titles of officials, identification of army units. . .correlation of dates of known kings and governors within the chronology of the narrative. . .‘undesigned coincidences’ between Acts and the Pauline Epistles. . .off-hand geographical references that bespeak familiarity with common knowledge.”[3]

McDowell notes that many times historians thought Luke was in error on some points, only to be proven wrong by an archaeological discovery. For example:

• Luke spoke of Philippi as a “part” or “district” of Macedonia. It was believed he erred because the Greek word meris did not mean “district.” Archaeological evidence unearthed showed, however, that “district” was the exact meaning of the Greek word meris that Luke had used.
• Luke referred to Lysanias the Tetrarch of Abilene in his Gospel. Because the only known Lysanias to historians was killed in 36 B.C., Luke was thought to be in error. Then an inscription was found bearing the name of Lysanias the Tetrarch and dated between 14 and 29 A.D., just at the right time period.
• Luke was thought to be wrong about the census taken at the time of Christ, because critics said there was no evidence of a census and that the governor called Quirinius was in power too late, 6 A.D., to be in his position at the time of Christ. They also stated that it was not required for the people to return to their birth homes. But archaeology showed that in fact these censuses were done regularly and that one was indeed taken at the time of Christ and, furthermore, that Quirinius was governor (or at least an administrator of some type, see footnote #5 below) a second time, in 7 B.C. They also found evidence on a papyrus document showing that during the censuses people were required to return to their own homes and countries.[4][5]
• Luke referred to the Philippian officials as praetors, when some scholars thought the titles should be duumvirs, but archaeological finds showed that in fact praetors was the right title for the Roman magistrates of the colony.
• Luke used the title politarchs for the Thessalonian officials, but since this title was not found in the classical literature Luke was again assumed to be wrong. Then several inscriptions were found that used the title politarchs, and five of them referred to Thessalonica.[6]

There are many more examples of these findings, where Luke was right and the critics were wrong.  Everywhere we can check the Bible’s history, it proves reliable.  The above excerpt was taken from The Bible Can Be Proven, Chapter 6 entitled “The Shovel doesn’t Lie.”