The Use of the Scriptures in Acts

“The Use of the Scriptures in Acts” is a worthy study in and of itself. Acts is part of the entire “oracles of God” (1 Peter 4:11). Our study will discuss the following: 1) What is the meaning of the term Scripture? 2) The Acts of the Apostles as Scripture. 3) The use (purpose) of the Acts of the Apostles as Scripture.

It is always important to define the terms of one’s study and follow the principle set forth by Marsh, “Define your terms and then keep to the terms defined” (1). By the term “use,” Webster defines as: “1a: the act or practice of using something . . . d: the method or manner of using something . . . 2a (1): habitual or customary practice . . . 7: a part of a sermon on which a doctrine is applied to life” (2523).

The phrase “the Scriptures in Acts” is used in the sense of Old Testament references, the apostolic letter written by “the apostles and elders and brethren” (Acts 15:23-29). It also refers to the oral teaching in Acts.

What is the Meaning of the Term Scripture?
Scripture (graphe) simply means writing when “used by the Greek authors; but in the N.T. it always refers to the Holy Scriptures” (Parkhurst 112). The term Scripture is descriptive of our understanding the Bible as the word of God. Sometimes the Bible is referred to as 1) Scripture (singular) in Acts 8:32, 35; Galatians 3:8, 22; and 2 Timothy 3:16, and 2) Scriptures (plural) in John 5:39 and 1 Corinthians 15:3-4.

The Bible uses various terms, in part or in whole, in referring to itself; i.e., “the oracles of God” (Romans 3:2; 1 Peter 4:11); the “word” (Matthew 4:4); “the truth” (John 8:32; 17:17); the “Law” (John 10:34; 12:34; 15:25; 1 Corinthians 14:21 et al.).

To help distinguish between the writings of God and the writings of mere man, inspiration, at times, adds the word Holy before Scriptures as in, “Which He had promised afore by His prophets in the holy scriptures” (Romans 1:2, emp. added) and “And from a child you have known the holy scriptures” (2 Timothy 3:15, emp. added). Holy (hagios) carries the meaning of “religious awe, to venerate, sacred” (Abbott-Smith 5).

The Holy Scriptures are given man “by inspiration of God” (2 Timothy 3:16); therefore, are considered as separate and distinct from the writings of men. The source of the Scripture is God thereby making the Scriptures holy as they come from God who is holy (1 Peter 1:16). They are the very words of God because they originate from the Holy Spirit/God (1 Corinthians 2:13; 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:21). They are not the words of men (1 Corinthians 2:13; 1 Thessalonians 2:13).

The above is important. The Bible is the word of God and nothing less! What an individual believes the Bible teaches is determined by what an individual believes is the Bible’s source. This is all-important, as we can know Christ and Christianity only from the Bible. This principle is true. Consider the implications of the words of Friedman:

 People have been reading the Bible for nearly two thousand years. . . . They have regarded it as divinely dictated, revealed, or inspired, or as a human creation. They have acquired more copies of it than any other book. It is quoted (and misquoted) more often than other books. . . . It is at the heart of Christianity and Judaism. . . .
People read it, study it, admire it, disdain it, write about it, argue about it, and love it. People have lived by it and died for it. And we do not know who wrote it. . . . It is a strange fact that we have never known with certainty who produced the book that has played such a central role in our civilization. (15, emp. added)

 Consider further the following comment by James D. Smart, late Professor of Biblical Interpretation, at Union Theological Seminary, New York. Smart, who was a theological liberal and who did not believe in verbal, plenary inspiration, laments that the Bible is read, preached, and studied so little by Christians; it has resulted in the Bible becoming a closed book for many.

 But what meets our eyes is the puzzling and embarrassing phenomenon that the century in which the investigation of the Bible has been prosecuted more scientifically, more vigorously, and with an international cooperation of scholars, has witnessed a steady recession of the Bible from the preaching of the church and from the consciousness of the Christian people. (31, emp. added)

 Really? Wonder why? Have neither Friedman nor Smart taken seriously the Bible’s claim that it is the Holy Scriptures? God has always expected man to read and understand the Bible. He warns, “He who answers a matter before he hears it, it is folly and shame to him” (Proverbs 18:13). Isaiah predicted men would hear but not understand, “Hearing you will hear and shall not understand . . . .

For the [their] hearts . . . have grown dull. . . . Lest they should understand with their heart” (Isaiah 6:9-10). Jesus asked, “Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word” (John 8:43). Jesus warned, “Take heed how you hear” (Luke 8:18, emp. added); “Take heed what you hear” (Mark 4:24, emp. added); and “He who has ears to hear, let him hear” (Matthew 13:9). Philip asked the eunuch, “Do you understand what you are reading?” (Acts 8:30). Paul affirmed man’s ability (cf. John 7:17), “When you read, you may understand” (Ephesians 3:4).

If Friedman, Smart, and others understood the source, authority, and inerrancy of the Bible, they would quickly believe and teach other than what they affirm in the above quotes. Society would be a different society. Scholarship supposedly opened the Scriptures to where the Scriptures can be understood correctly; however, modern scholarship has done more to close the Scriptures, as the very word of God, than to open them! It is important to understand that right doctrine produces valid living or experiences; whereas, wrong doctrine produces deceptive living or experiences. Jividen states it this way: “A person’s view of the Scriptures, more than any other thing, determines his faith and practice” (12).

The Acts of the Apostles as Scripture
The Acts of the Apostles is one of the longest books in the New Testament containing 1,003 verses as compared to 1,157 verses in the Gospel of Luke, its companion volume, and 1,071 verses in the Gospel of Matthew. Witherington claims, “Acts has 18,374 words” (qtd. in Bock 6). While various suggestions have been given for the theme of Acts, we suggest the theme, “Jesus, the Lord of all for a Gospel sent to and for all.”

In examining Acts as Scripture; i.e., the inspired word of God (2 Timothy 3:16), we look briefly at the follow areas.

Old Testament Quotations in the Acts of the Apostles
Old Testament quotations in the New Testament are abundant and Acts contains its fair share. The quotations from the Greek Old Testament, or Septuagint (LXX), will vary in count according to how the lists are compiled, as is evident from the following. Angus lists the LXX “quotations” in the New Testament as follows: 1) “direct quotations” number 263 and 2) “less direct” quotations as 376, totaling 639 (249). In Acts, he lists 31 direct quotations and 21 references from the LXX, totaling 52 (249). Aebi lists 21 quotations of prophecy from the LXX fulfilled in Acts (38). Archer and Chirichigno list in Acts, 35 direct quotations from the LXX (xx). The United Bible Societies fourth revised edition of The Greek New Testament lists 40 quotations in Acts (Aland et al. 889).

Many Old Testament quotations used in the New Testament are not always quoted literally as seen in Angus above. The Greek Old Testament “was virtually the only form of the Old Testament in the hands of Jewish believers outside of Palestine, and it was certainly the only available form for Gentile converts to the Jewish faith or Christian faith” (Archer and Chirichigno ix).

Because of the occasional inexactness of the LXX quotations, it “often seems contrary to their original import and purpose” (Aebi 1). However, Aebi correctly argues that the LXX “has been transmitted to us in substantially its original form” and results in “the infallible authority of the Scriptures” (6). Some scholars wrongly conclude the New Testament authors were faulty and errant resulting in an uninspired and untrustworthy New Testament. If the Bible is the very word of God, and it is, it is both inspired and inerrant when translated correctly. Jesus said the apostles would be guided “into all truth” by the Holy Spirit (John 16:13). The following quote argues for the New Testament writers being divinely guided: “Christ’s chosen spokesmen were like Him guided to expound the Old Testament Scriptures ‘with authority, and not as the scribes’” (Archer and Chirichigno xii).

Inspiration of the Old Testament included both oral and written words of God’s servants. “These are the words which you shall speak to the children of Israel. So Moses . . . laid before them all these words which the LORD commanded him” (Exodus 19:6-7). God said to Moses, “Write this for a memorial in the book and recount it in the hearing of Joshua” (Exodus 17:14). “The Spirit of the LORD spoke by me, and His word was on my tongue” (2 Samuel 23:2). The Holy Spirit gave the divine message by placing it in the mouth and on the pens of His spokesmen. In the Old Testament various expressions such as, “[T]he mouth of the LORD has spoken” (Isaiah 1:18); “I have put My words in your mouth” (Jeremiah 1:9); “[Y]ou shall speak My words to them” (Ezekiel 2:7); etc., clearly show the inspiration of the speakers and writers. Pache claims “3,808 times” these and like phrases are used in the Old Testament declaring they convey the express words of God (81).

The Apostolic Letter to the Gentiles
Acts 15:23-29 is the earliest inspired New Testament writing. Once Gentiles entered the church (Acts 10), a problem arose with some Christians in Jerusalem. Peter’s rehearsal of Cornelius’ conversion was met with the charge, “You went in to uncircumcised men and ate with them” (Acts 11:4). These Judaizing Christians later came to Antioch teaching, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved” (Acts 15:1). The apostles and elders in Jerusalem met to resolve the matter. The four speeches in this meeting showed “the will of God so clear that the opposition was totally silenced, and the only remaining question was, how best to carry out the proposal submitted by James” (McGarvey 68).

The apostolic letter written in the name of “the apostles and elders, with the whole church” (15:22, 23) was inspired by the Holy Spirit, “For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit” (15:28). It is called an “epistle” (KJV) and “letter” (15:30, NKJV). It was sent to “the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia” (15:23), with worthy witnesses on their behalf (15:22, 32). The letter was inspired and authoritative. Luke included the letter when he penned Acts. It resolved the problem before it destroyed the affected churches. The brief letter when written was Scripture, and was as binding initially as when Luke included it in his inspired history of the early church. It is as binding today as then. It is Scripture.

Oral Teachings in the Acts of the Apostles
The Bible teaches that when Peter, Paul, and others spoke orally their words were inspired. This involves verbal (word) and plenary (all) inspiration.

Inspiration (theopneustos) does not mean, “breathed into by God . . . but that it is breathed out by God ” (Warfield 133, emp. added). Peter wrote that “Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:21). This is a classic text on the inspiration of the Old Testament, but in principle it is applicable to all New Testament writers.

The text summarizes as follows: First, “men spoke” refers to human language at a particular time and place. It does not refer to writing and writing instruments, but to their words. On the day of Pentecost following the baptism of the Holy Spirit on the apostles, it was the Holy Spirit who “gave them [apostles] utterance” (Acts 2:4).

Second, the men who spoke did not speak from the standpoint of man, but from the standpoint “of God” or “from God” (ASV); i.e., the divine message has its source with God, not man, and being from Him making the product God’s word and not their word. Paul writes, “These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches” (1 Corinthians 2:13).

Third, the men were “moved by the Holy Spirit” was the method by which God made known His divine message. The Holy Spirit “moved,” “carried” (Moffatt), or “impelled” (NEB) them. Paul wrote “according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you” (2 Peter 3:15). These writings were called “the other Scriptures” (2 Peter 3:16).

In that the writers of the New Testament wrote by inspiration or guidance of the Holy Spirit, the question is HOW did the apostles receive the divine message from the Holy Spirit? The answer is the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Jesus gives five purposes for the baptism of the Holy Spirit upon the apostles in revealing His will. (There are other purposes of Holy Spirit baptism.)

 “[T]he Holy Spirit . . . will teach you all things” (John 14:26, emp. added).

“[T]he Holy Spirit . . . [will] bring to your remembrance all things that I have said to you” (John 14:26, emp. added).

“[T]he Spirit of truth . . . will testify of Me. And you also will bear witness” (John 15:26-27, emp. added).

“[T]he Spirit of truth . . . will guide you into all truth” (John 16:13, emp. added).

“[T]he Spirit of truth . . . will tell you of things to come” (John 16:13, emp. added).

The baptism of the Holy Spirit fell upon the apostles on the first Pentecost following the resurrection of Jesus (Acts 2:1ff.). The five purposes of Holy Spirit baptism on the apostles empowered and enabled them both to speak and to write the divine message resulting in an inspired, inerrant, and trustworthy message. This is why Paul writes, “These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches” (1 Corinthians 2:13, emp. added) and “All Scripture . . . is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16).

While the apostles were baptized with the Holy Spirit, HOW do we account for an inspired message and writings of those not apostles; e.g. Mark, Luke, James, and Jude? The answer is simple. The apostles laid their hands on them imparting the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit (cf. Acts 8:14-24; 1 Timothy 4:14; 1:8; 2 Timothy 1:6). Maier writes of the purpose of inspiration as follows:

The purpose of inspiration is to vouchsafe the reliability of statements that come from God (2 Pe 1:21) and to assure that they endure for the future (cf. Isa 40:8; Mt 5:18; 24:35). An inspiration that extends only to the concrete person and not to the message permits the message to sink into oblivion. The ‘absolute’ would then have disappeared. (111)

The speaker and author, Luke, used Old Testament quotations to show that Jesus fulfilled the Messianic prophecies of God’s scheme of redemption. Luke included the inspired “Apostolic Letter” (Acts 15:23-29) in his inspired book. The baptism of the Holy Spirit on the apostles (Acts 2) and the laying on of their hands to impart miraculous gifts to the non-apostles (Acts 8) resulted in both the oral and written texts as the inspired word of God, the Scriptures. The divine message was inspired, authoritative, inerrant, and trustworthy in all areas. Acts is the only inspired history of the Lord’s church.

The Use (Purpose) of the Acts of the Apostles as Scripture
What is the use (purpose) of Acts as Scripture? J. W. Roberts, the late Professor of Bible and Greek, Abilene Christian University, writes, “The Book of Acts is the capstone of the New Testament. . . .

[I]t caps the arch formed by the four Gospels on the one side and the epistles on the other. . . . [W]ithout it we would be completely in the dark as to beginning and development of the early church” (173). In speaking of Acts 2, James D. Bales, the late Professor of Christian Doctrine, Harding University, writes:

Acts two is one of the most significant chapters in the Bible. It relates to much that had gone before and it bears some relationship to all that follows after. . . . It not only marks the fulfillment, or the beginning of the fulfillment, of many prophecies but it also marks the beginning of the reign of Jesus as Lord and Christ at God’s right hand. Thus it marks the time of the establishment of the church. (4)

In this section of the use or purpose of Acts as Scripture, we will briefly examine the following. Acts 1) shows God’s redemptive work to all mankind, 2) is the only inspired history of the establishment and beginning of the church, and 3) is accurate and trustworthy.

God’s Redemptive Work to All Mankind
We list, from our understanding, the primary purpose of Acts was to set forth God’s scheme of redemption to all mankind. Not only are there listed various conversions to Jesus, thereby giving a divine pattern of how to become a Christian, but Acts sets forth Jesus as, “Prince and Savior” (Acts 5:31; 13:23). God’s redemptive work began in Jerusalem and spread throughout “all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8). Acts 1:8 repeats the Great Commission of Matthew 28:18-20; Mark 16:15-16; and Luke 24:46-48. Ferguson describes Jesus’ redemptive work as:

The redemptive work of Jesus is the source of the church and its ministry. . . . Not only Jesus’ death and resurrection but also [H]is total earthly ministry formed part of [H]is mission of salvation. . . . Jesus’ mission was redemptive. His atoning death was a unique and unrepeatable work for human salvation. Jesus’ sacrificial death, therefore, was a ministry that the church cannot continue. . . . Jesus’ redemptive sufferings were complete and cannot be added to. (281-82)

The Only Inspired History of the Church
Through the centuries, men have written histories of the church, but none is inspired. Acts gives us Luke’s inspired work showing the establishment of the church, as predicted by Jesus (Matthew 16:18), in Jerusalem on the first Pentecost following the resurrection of Christ (Acts 2) and continuing to the imperial city of Rome (Acts 28).

Acts is accurate and trustworthy. Acts is an inspired, accurate history of God’s people—Christians—and the spread of Christianity. Many scholars challenge the historical value of the book. Haenchen, a typical liberal, gives an extensive survey of the historical and critical research of Acts concluding that Luke did not write an accurate history and was attempting only to edify the church (14-50). “Acts takes us on a conducted tour of the GraecoRoman world. The detail is so interwoven with the narrative of the mission as to be inseparable. . . . For Acts the conformation of historicity is overwhelming” (Sherwin-White 122, 189). Several men have demonstrated the historicity of Acts, in various ways, as well as its companion volume, the Gospel of Luke.

Lord George Lyttleton (1709-1773) was a voluminous author and statesman. He was also an infidel and by his own admission, he had a superficial view of Christianity and the Scriptures. Initially, Lyttleton desired to help the philosophical community to overthrow Christianity and the trustworthiness of the Bible. Persuaded that Christianity was not true and the Bible not trustworthy, Lyttleton researched the accounts of Paul’s conversion in Acts. His study resulted in believing the accuracy of Paul’s conversion as recorded in Acts and that Paul had seen the risen Christ. Consequently, following his yearlong study he converted from infidelity to a believer in God, Christianity, and the Bible.

His argument is simple. Lyttleton knew that men became imposters by desiring to advance themselves with fanciful stories and to satisfy other personal passions. He believed that the story of Christianity and the conversion of the apostle Paul were no different. But he discovered otherwise. His work remains a valuable resource in the field of Christian Evidences, especially in the conversion of Paul. Both Dr. Johnson and John Leland gave high testimony to the benefit of Lyttleton’s work. Dr. Johnson characterized his work on the apostle as “a treatise to which infidelity has never been able to fabricate a special answer” (qtd. in Jackson 100). John Leland, in his work titled, Deistical Writers, said Lyttleton’s work was “a demonstration sufficient to prove Christianity to be a divine revelation” (qtd. in Schaff 1378). Lyttleton acknowledges difficulties in study and encourages the student as follows:

Some difficulties occur in that revelation which human reason can hardly clear; but as the truth of it stands upon evidence so strong and convincing that it cannot be denied without much greater difficulties than those that attend the belief of it, as I have before endeavored to prove. . . .
If the external evidence be convincingly strong, and there is no internal proof of its falsehood . . . then surely no difficulties ought to prevent our giving full assent and belief to it. . . . [I]t is no less our duty to acquiesce with humility, and believe that to be right which we know is above us, and belonging to a wisdom superior to ours. (121-22, 123)

William Paley (1743-1805) in defense of the historicity of Acts approached the topic from the “undesigned coincidences” between Acts and Paul’s Epistles. He argued for the complete harmony between the two (169-247).

Luke was a medical doctor (Colossians 4:14) and used various known medical terms in both of his volumes. William Kirk Hobart lists 161 Greek medical words in the Gospel of Luke and 106 Greek medical words verifying the medical accuracy of Luke’s writings. These words were appropriate medical terms known in his time. Hobart’s conclusion is:

[A]cquainted with the language of the Greek Medical Schools. . . . [T]he prevailing tinge of medication diction in the third Gospel and in Acts of the Apostles tends also to establish the integrity of these writings as we have
them. . . . [They] show the hand of a medical author continuously from the first verse of the Gospel to the last verse of the Acts of the Apostles. (xxix, xxxvi)

Acts 27 describes Paul’s famous shipwreck at the isle of Melita or Malta. James Smith, both a yachtsman with over 30 years experience and a geologist, researched the voyage and shipwreck of Paul. Residing a winter in Malta allowed him “personal examination of the location” (xi). Smith discusses the navigation, soundings, maps, geography, museums, libraries, etc. to write his work. He concludes that Acts 27 is consistent in all areas and it could not be written “in all its parts, unless from actual observation” (xix).

Sir William Ramsay, “probably the greatest authority on the life of St. Paul, and the writings of St. Luke, in modern times” (W. Smith 144), was trained in the German higher criticism school in the mid-1800s. A skeptic concerning Acts as a product of the first century and Luke as its author, Ramsay was determined to confirm his beliefs further. His research led him to demonstrate Luke’s fastidious accuracy in Roman and Greek nomenclature, geography, archaeology, antiquities, etc. Consequently, Ramsay converted from skepticism to a believer because of the accuracy and the historicity of Acts. He wrote several outstanding volumes resulting from his years of research and still worthy of consulting. Ramsay not only lectured at various European universities, but also at Harvard University, John Hopkins University, and Union Seminary in New York. These lectures are printed in his book, St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen. In 1894, Ramsay delivered these as the Morgan Lectures and again in 1895 as the Mansfield College Lectures. Some one hundred sixteen years ago, he related the following story of his conversion from skepticism to a firm belief in the accuracy and historicity of Acts.

I may fairly claim to have entered on this investigation without any prejudice in favour of the conclusion which I shall now attempt to justify to the reader. On the contrary, I began with a mind unfavourable to it, for the ingenuity and apparent completeness of the Tubingen theory had at one time quite convinced me. It did not lie then in my line of life to investigate the subject minutely; but more recently I found myself often brought in contact with the book of Acts as an authority for the topography, antiquities, and society of Asia Minor. It was gradually borne in upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvellous truth. In fact, beginning with the fixed idea that the work was essentially a second-century composition, and never relying on its evidence as trustworthy for first-century conditions, I gradually came to find it a useful ally in some obscure and difficult investigations. (7-8)

Concluding Thoughts
Acts is Scripture. Acts is useful. We have desired to set forth with clarity that Acts is inspired and inerrant (trustworthy). The purposes of Acts are numerous; we have discussed only three areas. First, Acts sets forth God’s redemption available to and for man. Second, Acts is the only inspired history of the establishment and spread of Christianity from the first Pentecost following the resurrection of Jesus to the end of Paul’s ministry, ca. AD 66. Third, Acts is accurate and trustworthy. On this latter point, we have given evidence from the writings of several men, some whose research resulted in their conversion from infidelity and skepticism to believers in God and Christianity.

Luke penned both the Gospel and Acts to his friend Theophilus (Luke 1:3; Acts 1:1). It is our position that Luke’s carefulness in writing the gospel continues in his writing of Acts. Such is the argument of many scholars, “The majority view is, in fact, that Luke 1:1-4 is a preface to both gospel and Acts as two parts of a single work” (Higgins 79). Pugh states the preface to Luke’s gospel argues for “the claim of the Christian religion rests not upon events which affected merely a private few, but many. . . . NO OTHER RELIGION HAS THIS EVIDENCE OF HISTORICAL PUBLICITY AS DOES CHRISTIANITY” (27). We ask why? “The reason? Its ultimate greatness and endurance is realized in the fact that it is Scripture (cf. 1 Timothy 5:18; Luke 10:7)” (25).

Scott made an excellent statement with which to close that serves to substantiate “The Use of the Scriptures in Acts.” “Christianity is a religion of fact; that it rests upon incontrovertible facts—facts attested by the very best and most reliable historic testimony in existence” (xvi).

No wonder Luke said to his friend, “I . . . after carefully going over the whole story from the beginning, have decided to write an ordered account for you, Theophilus, so that your Excellency may learn how well founded the teaching is that you have received” (Luke 1:3-4, Jerusalem Bible). Amen!

 Works Cited:
Abbott-Smith, G. A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament. 1921. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1950.

Aebi, Charles J. “The Application of Old Testament Prophecies Cited in Acts.” MA thesis. Abilene Christian College. May 1959.

Aland, Barbara, Kurt Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini, and Bruce M. Metzger, eds. The Greek New Testament. 1966. Stuttgart, Germany: United Bible Societies, 1993.

Angus, Joseph. The Bible Handbook. 1853. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1959.

Archer, Gleason L. and Gregory C. Chirichigno. Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament: A Complete Survey. Chicago: Moody, 1983.

Bales, James D. The Hub of the Bible or Acts Two Analyzed. Rosemead: Old Paths, 1960.

Bock, Darrell L. Acts: Baker’s Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007.

Ferguson, Everett. The Church of Christ: A Biblical Ecclesiology for Today. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.

Friedman, Richard Elliott. Who Wrote the Bible? New York: Summit, 1987.

Haenchen, Ernst. The Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1971.

Higgins, A. J. B. “The preface to Luke and the Kerygma in Acts.” Apostolic History and the Gospel: Biblical and Historical Essays Presented to F. F. Bruce. Eds. W. Ward Gasque and Ralph P. Martin. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970.

Hobart, William Kirk. The Medical Language of St. Luke. 1882. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1954.

Jackson, Samuel Macauley, ed. The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge. Vol. 7. 1950. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1959. 13 vols.

Jividen, Jimmy. Inspiration and Authority of the Scriptures. Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 2005.

Lyttleton, Lord. Observations on the Conversion and Apostleship of St. Paul in a Letter to Gilbert West. 1747. London: Rivington, 1799.

Maier, Gerhard. Biblical Hermeneutics. Trans. Robert W. Yarbrough. Wheaton: Crossway, 1994.

Marsh, F. E. The Structural Principles of the Bible or How to Study the Word of God. 1969. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1973.

McGarvey, James W. New Commentary on Acts of Apostles. 1892. Cincinnati: Standard, n.d.

Pache, René. The Inspiration and Authority of Scripture. Translated by Helen I. Needham. Chicago: Moody, 1969.

Paley, William. “Horae Paulinae: or, the Truth of the Scripture History of St. Paul Evinced.” The Works of William Paley. Edinburgh: Brown and Nelson, 1833.

Parkhurst, John. A Greek and English Lexicon to the New Testament. London: Longman, 1845.

Pugh, Charles C. III. Things Most Surely Believed. New Martinsville: Threefold, 2002.

Ramsay, William. St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen. 1896. New York: Putnam’s Sons, 1906.

Roberts, J. W. “The Study of the Acts of the Apostles Yesterday and Today.” Restoration Quarterly. 4:4 (1960).

Schaff, Philip, ed. A Religious Encyclopaedia: or Dictionary of Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal, and Practical Theology. Vol. 2. 1882. New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1891, 4 vols.

Scott, Laurence W. Hand-Book of Christian Evidence or Facts Against Infidelity. 1880. Cincinnati: F. L. Rowe, 1914.

Sherwin-White, A. N. Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament. The Sarum Lectures 1960-1961. 1963. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978.

Smart, James D. The Strange Silence of the Bible in the Church. London: SCM, 1970.

Smith, James. The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul: With the Dissertations on the Sources of the writings of St. Luke, and the Ships and Navigation of the Antients. London: Longman, Brown, Green, 1848.

Smith, Wilbur M. Therefore Stand: A Plea for a Vigorous Apologetic in the Present Crisis of Evangelical Christianity. Boston: W. A. Wilde, 1945.

Warfield, Benjamin Breckinridge. The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible. London: Marshall Morgan & Scott, 1959.

Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged. Vol. 3. 1961. Chicago: Encylcopaedia Britannica, Inc., 1986. 3 vols.