Anachronistic Acts (?

)
The Date of Composition of the Acts of the Apostles

Katrina Boisvert 1017537 Relig 415 April 7, 2009 Willi Braun

The history of early Christianity has been clouded by the depiction found in the Acts of the Apostles. The book presents Christianitys beginnings as a cohesive narrative, representing a period of purity, failing to acknowledge the various distinct groups of Jesus followers. This picture of homogeneous beginnings lacks verisimilitude; differing beliefs and interpretations can be seen when comparing the Gospels with the Pauline Epistles, between which sits the book of Acts. With this in mind the most efficient way to better understand Acts would be to establish an approximate date of composition. This information could then be used to more clearly characterize the context of the author and his readership, yielding insights into purpose and theological questions. Scholars, however, are divided as to the date of composition for the text and can be loosely categorized within three camps: an early date prior to the 70s, an intermediate date of approximately 85 CE, and a late, or second century date. Making assumptions about the date of compositions a priori based on the time in which the narrative takes place would be definitely an injustice. Thus an investigation begins. This investigation will proceed in three stages. The initial stage will outline the methodology engaged to collect and characterize evidence. The second stage will consist of presenting evidence while the third stage will assemble the evidence to attempt to determine the most likely date of composition for the Acts of the Apostles.

In order to consider the possible date of composition of any work it is important to outline the pattern and method of that investigation. Ultimately the evidence can be categorized initially as direct and indirect. Further categorization is necessary, however. Direct evidence is that which is present in the text itself. First there is the possibility of

paleographic evidence, dating based on the handwriting of the scribe. This can safely place the work within a twenty-five year period. However, in looking for the date of composition of a document the possibility of copying can remove the paleographic evidence from the date of composition. Secondly we can look at any use of external citation, the use of material from the text by another whose date is determinable. This can include explicit, or verifiable, quotations or inter-textual usage whereby similar phrases or terms are utilized. Finally, using any specific internal data, events or individuals mentioned, can provide the earliest possible date for the final redaction through the latest datable data provided within the text. Indirect evidence is not as explicit as the aforementioned direct evidence categories. Determining source material can provide an earliest possible date. When was the source material available? Datable trends and movements can help provide a framework for dating the composition of a text, or portions thereof. This can include references to institutions or matters of ideology that can be dated to a specific period, including anachronisms and differing interpretations of material. Finally, the investigator must look beyond content of the text to its construction and composition. Language reflects changes in maturity, stability, and institutionalization. By comparing vocabulary used and the style of composition it is possible to further narrow down the date of composition. The categories expressed above will guide our investigation1.

The first step, then, is to look at the paleography of the copies that we have of the text. This can provide a terminus ad quem, the latest possible date for the composition being established by the date it was copied. This, however interesting, does not assist the goals
1

These categories are dependent upon Pervo, Dating Acts, p. 13-14.

of this investigation, mainly due to the extremely late date of our earliest copies. Other evidence is far better suited to assisting the inquiry.

Thus we progress in our adventure of discovery by delving into the category of external citation. Through this we can establish a terminus ad quem by looking at authors who first use Acts, and use it explicitly. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons in Gaul, c. 130 c. 200 CE, is Acts earliest most certain witness. In Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching2, written sometime around 180, he quotes the text explicitly. For example in chapter 24 Irenaeus specifically quotes a passage from Acts 7.3, and said to him, Leave your country and your relatives and go to the land that I will show you3, as well as from Acts 7.49, Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What kind of house will you build for me, says the Lord, or what is the place of my rest? 4. Although Irenaeus knew the text of Acts, as demonstrated by the quotations, the title of the work was not that by which it is now known. Therefore, it can be assumed that the text of Acts was disseminated sometime prior to 180 CE although the name of the document was yet to be established. Clement of Alexandria, writing in the period shortly following Irenaeus, cites and quotes from the work, using the title known to us, Acts of the Apostles. This can be seen in Book One of Stromata where Clement writes, Paul mentions in the Acts of the Apostles5. Thus, it can be determined that the name assigned to the work was known, at least to some communities, in the form by which it is regarded today, by the late
2

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/irenaeus/demonstr.preaching_the_demonstration_of_the_apostolic_pre aching.html accessed April 10, 2009. 3 http://bible.oremus.org/ accessed April 5, 2009. 4 http://bible.oremus.org/ accessed April 5, 2009. 5 http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/clement-stromata-book1.html accessed April 10, 2009.

second century and that the work was known to such separated communities as Alexandria and Lyons.

The next category of evidence can be categorized as inter-textual usage whereby the use of Acts is not explicit but probable nonetheless. Initially we must look at the unity of Luke-Acts, an expression referring to the single authorship of both canonical texts. Scholars refer to the books as a single work, but was this how ancient readers would have experienced the text? Probably not. However, as they were written by a single author, valuable insight into the date of composition of Acts can be harvested from the third Gospel. Proponents for an early date cite the lack of reference to the destruction of Jerusalem as primary evidence for it having been written prior to 70 CE, however there are passages from Luke (19:43-44, 21:20) that could very well refer to that event. If so than a dating of prior to the destruction is impossible. Dependence upon Acts can be seen in the Acts of Peter, Acts of Paul, and the Epistle of the Apostles which can all be dated sometime after 150 CE indicating that dissemination of the text had been widespread by 160 CE, but possibly earlier. In addition, a phrase is shared between Acts and the Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians. The possible dating of this epistle from the Bishop of Smyrna in Asia Minor is disputed placing the composition of it as early as 110, or as late as 1356. The phrase in question is translated, with some variation, as having eased the pangs/labour of death/Hades which is strikingly similar to the phrase located in Acts 2.24. This indicates that either Polycarp knew Acts or this phrase was common for the period indicating that the authors shared a similar context. The usage, however, is not a
6

Bart Ehrman, The New Testament and Other Early Christian Writings. (Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press, 2004). p. 348.

clear indication of Polycarps knowledge and use of Acts. From the evidence garnered from the inter-textual usage investigated above it can be determined that the text of Acts was known by at least 150 CE, perhaps decades earlier in some areas.

The next category of our investigation, attempting to establish a date of composition for the Acts of the Apostles, relates to the specific internal data possessed within the work. This information could provide a date for composition by looking at the last datable event held within the text. In the case of Acts the last datable event is held within Acts 25. 1-12 where Paul appeals to Caesar, seeking to be tried by the emperors tribunal. In this passage Festus is now Procurator of Judea, having succeeded Felix, mentioned in chapter 24, verse 27. This event can be successfully dated to approximately 57 to 59 CE. This evidence provides dates that precede the dating suggested by most scholars. Therefore it demonstrates not the date of composition but the carefulness with which the author wrote Acts. He attempts synchronicity by specifically mentioning datable events.

The next stage of our investigation will focus on indirect evidence including sources, datable trends and movements, as well as vocabulary and style. The question of sources for Acts includes explicit, extant sources that are obviously used by the author and can be accessed by modern scholars. In this category we have the Septuagint (LXX), the Greek text of the Old Testament utilized by Greek-speaking Jews of the Diaspora as well as Greek-speaking Gentile Jesus movements. We can also look to hypothetical, extant sources that could have possibly been used by the author and are presently available for

modern scholars as well. In this regard it would be prudent to look to the letters of Paul and the works of Josephus. Due to the contradictions found between Acts and the Pauline corpus most scholars have determined that the author could not have known the letters. This however, deserves revisiting. It is possible that the purpose of Acts was, in some way, to appropriate the identity of Paul from another Christian group deemed unsatisfactory by the author of Acts. Some scholars, namely Knox and Tyson, have suggested that the group in question was the Marcionites whose theology included a rejection of the Jewish scriptures. These features combined with the focus on Jerusalem and the Jewish-ness of Paul makes this argument compelling. Thus, we shall delve into the possibility of the author of Acts knowledge, and use of, the Pauline letters, primarily through textual evidence. In Marcion and Luke-Acts Tyson lists several similarities between Acts 15 and Galatians 2, both detailing the meeting between Paul and the Jerusalem leaders, that are highly suggestive: Both refer to proclamation to Gentiles as gospel (Gal 2:7; Acts 15:7), Both speak of a division of responsibility (Gal 2:7; Acts 15:7), Both speak of divine selection of Paul and Peter (Gal 2:7-8; Acts 15:7), Both speak of divine impartiality (Gal 2:6; Acts 15:9), Both speak about the reception of the Holy Spirit (Gal 3:2-5; Acts 15:8), Both refer to the law as yoke (Gal 5:1; Acts 15:10), Both speak of the inability to observe Torah (Gal 2:14; Acts 15:10), Both express the same view about the law and gospel (Gal 2:16; Acts 15:10-11), Both assert the importance of faith (Gal 2:16; Acts 15:9),

Both assert the importance of grace (Gal 2:9; 1:6, 15; Acts 15:11)7. These similarities, albeit only concerning a chapter from each work, indicate some level of knowledge. The missionary activity of Paul in Acts and in the letters contains a similar itinerary, suggesting knowledge of the letters or a letter-based oral tradition. Pervo, in Dating Acts, finds 86/87 places where there are resonances between the text of Acts and the content of several letters, including Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians. The inclusion of Ephesians and Colossians in the above list suggests that the author of Acts knew the Paul who had been filtered through the deutero-Pauline school8 and therefore was far enough removed from the historical Paul to not be able to distinguish genuine letters from the pseudo-Pauline letters. This leads one to believe that the text could not have been written until after a Pauline corpus was in circulation, sometime after 100 CE, and that the author could not have been a close companion of Paul. Another possible source is Josephus. Pervo provides two instances where the author of Acts appears to be utilizing the works of Josephus in the construction of his narrative. Acts 5. 36-37 refers to the rebellions of Theudas and Judas in incorrect historical order, which is in opposition to the relative synchronicity that the author provides within the majority of his narrative. Interestingly Josephus also presents these characters in the same order, albeit for his own narrative purposes, in book 20 of Antiquities. Also, the author of Acts, in his other work, the Gospel of Luke, refers to the census of Quirinius as a watershed in history, indicating a new period in Jewish and human history with the birth of Jesus. Josephus also refers to this event as a watershed but in relation to the rebellion of Judas against Rome whose
7 8

Tyson, p. 18-19. Bolded text is Tysons. Pervo, p. 20.

consequence was the destruction of Jerusalem in book 20 of Antiquities. These two instances allow Pervo to conclude, the prominence given to the Roman census of 6 CE and the order of Theudas-Judas, Luke happens to share with Josephus not simply historical data but the results of historical interpretation. In this case two is not a company; it is a crowd, too much of a good thing to refuse9. Since Josephus Antiquities can be dated to 93/94 CE it can be concluded that the author of Acts could not have constructed his narrative prior to that date, supplying a terminus a quo situated later than the last decade of the first century of the common era.

The next stage of this investigation draws attention to datable trends and movements that can be identified within the narrative of Acts. Firstly, the notion of an ecclesiastical hierarchy as displayed in Acts is drawn into question. The framework provided in Acts was common by 100 to 120, and later, but is anachronistic to the period in which the narrative is placed. The main question is in regards to the shift from itinerant leaders, like Paul, to resident leadership of the individual Christ-follower communities. In 1 Corinthians 16 Paul urges the people of the church in Corinth to put themselves at the service of those who were the first converts, the house of Stephanas, who have devoted themselves to the service of the saints (1 Cor 16. 1510). These individuals would form the resident leadership in Pauls absence. The letter to the Ephesians, although not of Pauls authorship, can also provide insight into the development of a hierarchy of leadership. In chapter four, verse 11 the author states, that some would be apostles, some
9 10

Pervo, p. 159. http://bible.oremus.org/ accessed April 5, 2009.

prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers11. This mentioning of roles, foundational leadership, within the spread of the gospel from a letter dated most probably between 80 and 100 are quite different than what emerges from Acts, the Didache, and the Pastorals. Acts designates leadership at the residential level as elders (see 11.30, 14.23, 15.22). This language does not signify a newly appointed leadership but would instead refer to those who had been house leaders for a longer period of time. The Didache, dated to around 100, states, And so, elect for yourselves bishops and deacons who are worthy of the Lord12. Here we have an emergence of bishops and deacons establishing a hierarchy of leadership. The Pastorals offer three designations of leadership, episkopoi (bishop), diakonoi (deacon), and presbyteroi (presbyter). This evolution of ecclesiastical leadership places the composition of the Acts narrative in generations following that of the eyewitnesses, perhaps congruent with the Didache and Pastorals.

Secondly, in regards to trends and movements that can be dated, at least approximately, we encounter the author of Acts portrayal of the synagogue. In the Diaspora the synagogue did not describe a place, a structure, but the meeting of Jews. These meetings would be where reading, studying, and instruction of the Torah would take place. Generally the meetings would take place within a believers home. The author of Acts is a careful researcher and writer and therefore he utilizes this form of the synagogue most often throughout the work. However, in chapter 18, verse 7 the synagogue is referred to
11 12

http://bible.oremus.org/ accessed April 5, 2009. Ehrman, p. 324.

as a structure; Then he left the synagogue and went to the house of a man named Titius Justus, a worshiper of God; his house was next door to the synagogue.13 This is an anachronism where we can see later forms of synagogal worship, attendance on the Sabbath and during festivals, adopted after the destruction of Jerusalem, read back into the times of the Apostles. This development is similar to that of the Christian gatherings; synagoge is to rabbinical Judaism as ekklesia is to Christianity. This apparent anachronism must place the writing of Acts in the post-70 era, and quite possibly later.

In addition to the issue of the synagogue is that of baptism as described and used in the Acts of the Apostles. Baptism, as a ritual cleansing, was a common practice in both Jewish and Greco-roman contexts, however it develops a different connotation for Christians with a focus on purification, forgiveness of sins, and repentance. The Gospel of Mark, in chapter one, verse 4 refers to a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins14. There is no reference to baptism in the name of anyone at this point in the tradition. In Luke-Acts there are no references to baptism in the name of Jesus for his followers however, in Acts 2:38 Peter promulgates the practice, the formula, and the benefits of this rite without any hint that this has not been a customary procedure15. This evidence can point towards a conclusion that for the audience of Acts this rite would come as no surprise as it was already customary, assuming a readership that understands the ritual context associated with baptism. Other cavalier remarks towards, and in
13 14

http://bible.oremus.org/ accessed April 5, 2009. http://bible.oremus.org/ accessed April 5, 2009. 15 Pervo, Richard. The Mystery of Acts. (Sonoma: Polebridge Press, 2008) p. 120.

reference to, baptism support this understanding and point towards a Gentile Christian readership. The Didache is the most clear extant source for the rite of baptism and, as already mentioned, was most likely composed around 100. That document refers to baptism, in chapter 7, as follows: But with respect to baptism, baptize as follows. Having said all these things in advance, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, in running water. But if you do not have running water, baptize in some other water. And if you cannot use cold water, use warm. But if you have neither, pour water on the head three times in the name of the Father and Son and Holy Spirit16. Thus, the tradition of baptism as represented in the Didache is congruent with that presented in Acts suggesting similar traditions. This evidence, then, allows for a date around the turn of the second century.

In addition to the aforementioned anachronisms are some frustrating details found within the Acts narrative that are equally anachronistic. The speech put into the mouth of the first-century Pharisee Gamaliel in Acts 5:33-39 mentions the rebellions, or detractions from the Way, of Theudas and Judas. According to Josephus, the movement of Theudas occurred in 44-46 CE, after Gamaliel makes his speech. Unless there was an earlier Theudas, this statement places doubt on the historicity of Acts. Other issues are associated with a perceived lack of knowledge that the author of Acts has with the geography of Palestine. Acts 9:31 describes the church throughout Judea, Galilee, and
16

Ehrman, p. 322.

Samaria17 suggesting that Galilee is attached directly to Judea, which is incorrect. Another such instance of discrepancy is where, in Acts 23:31, where the narrative indicates that the soldiers, according to their instructions, took Paul and brought him during the night to Antipatris18 from Jerusalem. This journey has a distance of approximately forty-five miles and could not be made overnight. These anachronisms suggest that the author of Acts was far removed from the content he was writing.

Although there are several anachronisms present in the narrative of Acts there are synchronistic elements. For example the author is correct in his use of the titles of officials, administrative divisions, and the function of town assemblies.19 The use of proconsul in reference to the governors of senatorial provinces, Sergius Paulus of Cyprus (Acts13:7-8) and Gallio of Achaea (Acts 18:12), is correct. Also, when the author of Acts refers to Phillipi as a city of the first district of Macedonia (Acts 16:12), he is also correct as unlike other provinces, Macedonia was divided into four administrative districts20. The description of the function of town assemblies in the administration of a citys business found in Acts 19:29-41 is congruent with the role found in the first century. These synchronicities demonstrate the careful construction of the Acts narrative. This thoroughness makes the anachronisms mentioned above far more telling.

17 18

http://bible.oremus.org/ accessed April 7, 2009. http://bible.oremus.org/ accessed April 7, 2009. 19 This information is paraphrased from Charles Talbert. Reading Luke-Acts in Its Mediterranean Milieu. (Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 2003) p. 198-199. 20 Talbert, p. 198.

The next stage in our survey of evidence regarding the date of composition of the Acts of the Apostles looks to the vocabulary and style found within the text itself. In regard to style it appears as though the author is imitating the style found in the Septuagint, making the narrative far below the standards expected by historians, but accepted by theologians. Of primary interest in the study of vocabulary in Acts is the authors use of the term Christian. In Acts 11:26 (it was in Antioch that the disciples were first called Christians.21) and 26:28 (Agrippa said to Paul, Are you so quickly persuading me to become a Christian?22) the term is used. This presents an historical problem, lending credence to doubt of a first-century dating of Acts. The first non-Christ believing reference to Christian comes from a letter from Pliny the Younger writing to the Emperor Trajan during his term as Governor of Bithynia-Pontus (111-113 CE). The author of Acts use of this term is inconsistent with a first-century dating thus placing its composition in the second century.

Having completed our survey of the evidence in regards to the possible date of composition of the Acts of the Apostles it is necessary to determine what that possible dating could be. The evidence gathered suggests an early second-century context for the book. Figure 1, below, is a graphic representation of the above evidence with the y-axis denoting the dates and the x-axis represents the various strands of evidence presented, these will be described below the figure.

21 22

http://bible.oremus.org/ accessed April 7, 2009. http://bible.oremus.org/ accessed April 7, 2009.


Figure1

(1) the use of Acts by Irenaeus (2) the use of Acts by Clement (3) the use of Acts by the apogryphal Acts (4) internal data, last datable event (5) the dissemination of a Pauline corpus

(6) Josephus (7) Notions of hierarchy (8) The dating of the Didache (9) Possible shift in meaning of the synagogue (10) The use of the term Christian

If a best-fit line were applied to the points on figure 1, that line would be placed within the first two decades of the second century. Evidence for an early date, contemporary with the events described within the narrative is limited and is nullified by the investigation above. The intermediate dating option, of approximately 85 CE, is primarily a false consensus. By reiteration this theory has been perpetuated. Through further investigation more evidence can be gathered, giving scholars, and the general public, a clearer picture of the history of the advent of Christianity.

Some would say that the date of the Acts of the Apostles is secondary to its purpose and theology. However, these factors can be made more translucent, eliminating guesswork and mystery, through the establishment of a date of composition. Context is revealing and can make aspects of the work unambiguous and lucid, furthering its theological abilities. Without a greater body of evidence, or a time machine, the date of Acts might remain forever shadowed in doubt. This survey has, however, offered the early second century as the backdrop for the authorship of Acts. In this context the trials and tribulations of the emerging church, at that time, can be seen to affect the purpose and intention of the author, giving varied interpretations on the Acts of the Apostles. With a clearer view, a clearer theology can be achieved.

Bibliography Ehrman, Bart. The New Testament and Other Early Christian Writings. Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press, 2004. Pervo, Richard. The Mystery of Acts. Sonoma: Polebridge Press, 2008. Pervo, Richard. Dating Acts. Sonoma: Polebridge Press, 2006. Talbert, Charles. Reading Luke-Acts in Its Mediterranean Milieu. Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 2003. Tyson, Joseph. Marcion and Luke-Acts. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2006. Horrell, David. Leadership Patterns and the Development of Ideology in Early Christianity Sociology of Religion, Vol. 58, No. 4 (Winter, 1997), pp. 323-341. Kee, Howard Clark. Defining the first-century CE synagogue: Problems and Progress. New Testament Studies, Oct95, Vol. 41 Issue 4, p. 481-501. Alexander, Loveday. Community and Canon: Reflections on the Ecclesiology of Acts Einheit der Kirche im Neuen Testament dritte europische orthodox-westliche Exegetenkonferenz in Sankt Petersburg, 24-31. August 2005 Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, Mohr Siebeck, 2008. pp. 45-78. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/irenaeus/demonstr.preaching_the_demonstration_of_the_aposto lic_preaching.html http://bible.oremus.org/ http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/clement-stromata-book1.html