Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
A hint on the author of the Acts
#1
Reading Acts it is clear that author of the Acts was in the upper chamber.
Acts 20:8 - And there were many lamps burning in the chamber where we were assembled.
Reply
#2
I have a better Hint....It was Luke, The Apostle Paul's companion, who also wrote the 1st part of his two part book to Theophilus... <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->
Reply
#3
Maybe... can you give solid proof?
Reply
#4
Hello to you!

I am a bit new to these forums, as this is my first post.
Please forgive me my naivety, but I have been under the impression that Luke wrote both his gospel and Acts as a two part volume. I do not read any languages other than english so I am strictly going by an english translation.

From what I can see, using Murdock's translation, I see in Luke 1:1-4:
01 SINCE many have been disposed to write narratives of those events, of which we have full assurance,
02 as they delivered them to us, who from the first were eye-witnesses and ministers of the word;
03 it seemed proper for me also, as I had examined them all accurately, to write out the whole, methodically, for thee, excellent Theophilus:
04 that thou mayest know the truth of the statements, which thou hast been taught.

And from the book of Acts 1:1-2:
01 THE former book have I written, O Theophilus concerning all the things which our Lord Jesus Messiah began to do and teach,
02 until the day when he was taken up, after he had instructed those legates whom he had chosen by the Holy Spirit.

Now again, I do not speak/read/write languages other than english, so I am no "scholar" but I am simply taking the text at face value. Also using a translation of the Peshitta/Peshitto (I do believe in Aramaic primacy) and the books of Luke and Acts are not being called into question as genuine as far as I am aware. In my opinion I see no reason to think Acts was written by anyone other than Luke.

Edit:

I decided to look up alternate theories and sure enough I found one: Did Luke the Physician write the Book of ACTS?
http://articles.faithwriters.com/reprint...icle=11902
Is this what you are referring to? From the authors article, he suggests that Titus is the author, if not AN author of Acts. Is this perhaps what you are referring to?

I refuse to be too dogmatic about this and am interested in what other info you may have and what others here seem to think.
Reply
#5
Shlama (hello) PM Saunders and
welcome to the forum.
English is my second language and sometimes I may sound weird...lol.
The word "theophilos" can be either name or "the one who loves God" and it
is hard to tell since first manuscripts did not have capital letters or separations between words.
The word is Greek but it may be a well adopted expression among other nations as well.

Personally, I am tired from opinions and theories just like we were fed with opinions
that NT was written in Greek for some forces wanted to impose this opinion but since this
opinion (theory) did not have a solid base but a fake one, so this theory just collapsed.

So, the theory that Luke wrote the Acts is just an opinion.

So far, I do not see a proof that Luke was author of Acts but the fact that interests is that the author was traveling with Paul. And this is solid point to start with.
Reply
#6
IPOstapyuk Wrote:Shlama (hello) PM Saunders and
welcome to the forum.
English is my second language and sometimes I may sound weird...lol.
The word "theophilos" can be either name or "the one who loves God" and it
is hard to tell since first manuscripts did not have capital letters or separations between words.
The word is Greek but it may be a well adopted expression among other nations as well.

Personally, I am tired from opinions and theories just like we were fed with opinions
that NT was written in Greek for some forces wanted to impose this opinion but since this
opinion (theory) did not have a solid base but a fake one, so this theory just collapsed.

So, the theory that Luke wrote the Acts is just an opinion.

So far, I do not see a proof that Luke was author of Acts but the fact that interests is
that the author was traveling with Paul. And this is solid point to start with.

No brother, the theory is actually Church tradition and not an opinion. All the orthodox churches affirm that Luke wrote both volumes attributed to him.

You are entitled to your opinion but I would rather put my trust in the church.
Reply
#7
IPOstapyuk Wrote:Shlama (hello) PM Saunders and
welcome to the forum.
English is my second language and sometimes I may sound weird...lol.
The word "theophilos" can be either name or "the one who loves God" and it
is hard to tell since first manuscripts did not have capital letters or separations between words.
The word is Greek but it may be a well adopted expression among other nations as well.

Personally, I am tired from opinions and theories just like we were fed with opinions
that NT was written in Greek for some forces wanted to impose this opinion but since this
opinion (theory) did not have a solid base but a fake one, so this theory just collapsed.

So, the theory that Luke wrote the Acts is just an opinion.

So far, I do not see a proof that Luke was author of Acts but the fact that interests is that the author was traveling with Paul. And this is solid point to start with.
Well it's based on the wording of the first verses of Acts.
Acts mentions a previous work, which describes all of Yeshu's words and deeds. And it is addressed to the same person.
The use of wording and idiom, also is the same.
So the author is the same.
Reply
#8
Well said.
Reply
#9
Hi IPO,

There is no "solid proof". It has been passed down from the earliest times and has never been disputed with any facts. There is never a hint in any ancient Church writter that it was not Luke, the companion of the Apostle Paul, who wrote both the Gospel and Acts.

And to be brutally honest, there is very little solid proof, if at all that anyone named as writting any books of the Bible actually wrote them themselves. We go on what we are told, which has been passed down from the 1st generations.

If one day (I hope so) that the Original letters of The Apostle Paul are found, then we can look and see, that the Apostle Paul signed in his own hand, at the end of some of them...this he said he did. This meaning that his scribe wrote down what he was dictating, but in that place he took the page and wrote upon it himself....It would be fantastic to find just one of these Autographs...But we must settle with the copies, and trust that God has presurved His Holy Word through the ages. Which I believe He has, in the Aramaic Eastern Peshitta Manuscripts. The Khabouris and Mingana being great examples.

Again, there is no possible way to prove it beyond any doubt. But its what is said there that really matters, no matter whom God chose to write it down.

Shlama,
Chuck
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)