This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1884 edition. Excerpt: …the Roman Christians, for whom he doubtless related it thus at length.t We really have not a scrap of direct evidence to prove that Luke was able to write a prescription, or even his own name. t Now, of Luke we know no particulars. –Zeller, vol. ii. p. 263. j The style of the Preface is pure Greek. –Olshausen, vol. i. p. 73. There are fewer Hebraisms in the second part of the Acts (that containing the history of St. Paul) than in the rest of the work.–Wirier, Grammar of the New Testament, p. 35. Jerome, quoted by Bishop Wordsworth, Introduction to St. Luke, says that the writer was inter omnes evangelistas Graeci sermonis eruditissimus. (See Note C II., p. 96.) Acts xi, 21 j xii. 24; xix. 17, 20. 5. It was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, for not a hint is breathed of any such vital change or great catastrophe. St. Paul was made a prisoner because, as the Jews said, he had profaned the Temple, –indeed, his life-work J had been to resist Judaism. If the Temple had been swept away, should we not have some hint in the closing verses of the Acts–something to break the calm continuity of the last few chapters? We have but to sail back from Rome to Jerusalem to find everything just in statu quo, –the Temple standing and its services going on as usual. 6. The Acts are a defence of the status of the Gentiles in the Church. Indeed, chapter xv. is said Rom. i. 13; xv. 23. (See Note C., V. and XII., pp. 98, 101.) f Forsan et base olim meminisse juvabit ; though the olim represents no greater lapse of time here than a year or two. J Gal. ii.; v. 11. It must be remembered that the old landmarks, material and moral, were destroyed by…
