Who is the author of the Book of Acts? Introduction The Book of Acts, often called “The Acts of the Apostles,” is the second volume of a carefully crafted two-part work that begins with the Gospel of Luke and continues with the narrative of the early church. Since antiquity, the vast majority of Christian tradition has identified Luke—physician, historian, and companion of the Apostle Paul—as the author. This entry examines the internal evidence of Acts itself, early church testimony, and supporting historical details that confirm Luke’s authorship. Early Christian Tradition From the earliest centuries of the church, believers widely recognized Luke as the writer of both the Gospel bearing his name and the Book of Acts. The Muratorian Fragment (late 2nd century AD), one of the oldest surviving lists of New Testament books, attributes these works to Luke. Church Fathers such as Irenaeus (late 2nd century AD) explicitly identified Luke as Paul’s companion who wrote both volumes. Early historians like Eusebius (4th century AD) also referred to Acts as Luke’s second volume, noting the narrative continuity between Luke’s Gospel and Acts (“In my former book, O Theophilus…”—Acts 1:1). This continuity, well-known to the early church, solidified the understanding that one author penned both works. Internal Evidence Several passages within Acts provide clues about authorship and point to Luke: 1. “We” Sections: Acts occasionally shifts from third-person plural accounts (“they”) to first-person plural (“we”), suggesting that the author was present for certain events. Examples include Acts 16:10 (“After Paul had seen the vision, we got ready at once…”), where the writer inserts himself directly into the narrative. These instances indicate an eyewitness who journeyed with Paul—a detail consistent with Luke, whom Paul calls “our beloved physician” (Colossians 4:14). 2. Continuity with the Gospel of Luke: The Book of Acts opens with a direct reference to a “former book,” the Gospel of Luke. Acts 1:1 states: “In my former book, O Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach.” This reference naturally links Acts with the Gospel that begins, “Since many have undertaken to compile a narrative… it seemed good to me also…” (Luke 1:1–3). Both volumes are dedicated to the same individual, Theophilus, strengthening the case for a single author. 3. Stylistic and Linguistic Parallels: Scholars have long pointed out that the style of Greek, theological language, and detailed focus on historical context in Acts mirrors that of the Gospel of Luke. Both works share an interest in precise geographic references, medical terminology, and well-defined chronological markers, all pointing to Luke’s profession and meticulous nature. 4. Medical Language and Perspective: Luke’s background as a physician aligns with the distinctive healing narratives and attention to physical conditions described in the Gospel of Luke and Acts. Medical terminology and the detail with which illnesses are described (Luke 8:43–44; Acts 28:8–9) lend weight to the view that the writer of both works had professional familiarity with health matters. Historical and Archaeological Corroboration Historical and archaeological data confirm many details recorded in Acts, providing a context in which Luke’s authorship—and his firsthand knowledge—becomes more plausible: 1. Titles of Officials: In Acts 17:6, the term “politarchs” is used for city rulers in Thessalonica. Though unknown outside of Scripture for centuries, inscriptions uncovered by archaeologists in Thessaloniki revealed this exact term, authenticating Luke’s precision. 2. Accurate Travel Routes and Geography: Luke meticulously records towns, travel routes, and local landmarks that align with what historians and archaeologists have discovered about Roman travel networks. Sir William Ramsay, a renowned archaeologist, was initially skeptical but eventually lauded Luke as a first-rate historian after seeing how well Acts fits the known geography of Asia Minor, Macedonia, and beyond. 3. Corroborating Inscriptions: Excavations in Corinth and other regions verify named individuals and local details recorded in Acts (e.g., the Erastus inscription in Corinth corresponding to Romans 16:23). Such accuracy suggests a writer personally familiar with the events and locales rather than someone relying solely on secondhand stories. Scriptural References Although the Book of Acts does not internally name its author, references within Scripture strengthen Luke’s claim: • Acts 1:1: “In my former book, O Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach.” • Colossians 4:14: “Our dear friend Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas send you greetings.” • Luke 1:3–4: “Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account… so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.” These references, taken alongside the earliest external church testimony, offer a unified witness to Luke as the author. Conclusion Combining the testimony of the early church with the internal textual clues and confirmed historical details, the author of the Book of Acts is Luke. Both volumes—Luke and Acts—share the same dedication, literary style, and commitment to precise historical detail. Luke’s perspective as a companion of Paul and a careful historian fits the accounts of Acts seamlessly. These truthful claims rest on strong manuscript tradition and are bolstered by the archaeological and historical evidence that continually validate the events and descriptions found in Acts. |
    |