eeding generations. We can only
explain the relation between Acts and the Pauline Epistles by the
theory that the author of Acts was sufficiently intimate with the
apostle to be able to write his book without feeling the necessity of
enriching it by references to those Epistles. The theory, then, fits
with the theory which is suggested to us by the "we sections." The
only remaining question is whether this companion was, or was not, St.
Luke. {107} He was evidently with St. Paul at Rome, and this makes it
impossible to attribute the authorship of Acts to Titus, as there is no
hint in the New Testament of Titus being there. Nor was the author
Silas, for Silas was not with St. Paul on the third missionary journey,
while the author of Acts was. Acts xx. 5, 6 seems to prove that the
book was not written by Timothy. No one seems so likely to have been
the author as St. Luke. For the writer of Acts xxvii. 1-xxviii. 16
evidently accompanied St. Paul to Rome, and we learn from Col. iv. 14
and Philem. 24 that St. Luke was with the apostle during his first
imprisonment in that city. We may therefore say that every line of
evidence points to the truth of the ancient tradition that St. Luke
wrote Acts.

The sources of information employed by St. Luke can sometimes be
determined with a high degree of probability. Where he did not draw
upon his own recollections he could often rely upon those of St. Paul.
The apostle was, as we should expect, in the habit of narrating his own
experiences (cf. 2 Cor. i. 8-10; xii. 9; Gal. i. 11-ii. 14; Phil. iii.
3-7; Rom. xv. 16-32). Acts xxi. 19; xiv. 27; xv. 3, 12, 26, show how
St. Paul related his travels. Acts i.-v. probably incorporates an
early Jewish Christian document, and contains features which
unmistakably point to the truthfulness of the record. A good deal of
information was probably obtained from John Mark: it was to the house
of Mark's mother that St. Peter made his way after his escape from
prison recorded in ch. xii. As St. Mark was with St. Luke and St. Paul
at Rome, and acted as St. Peter's interpreter, St. Luke had the
opportunity of learning from him many facts concerning St. Peter. St.
Barnabas also perhaps furnished some details concerning the history of
the early Church at Jerusalem. Some of the converts who fled from
Judaea to Antioch (xi. 19) were probably men who witnessed the wonders
of the Day of Pentecost. And if St. Luke was a Christian of Antioch,
as