Correct Word Usage By Luke

Why is Archaeological Evidence Important?

Archaeological evidence is important in a very similar way as Non-Biblical Sources are important. They are both looking at ancient historical items that help us corroborate what the bible says. Although they could be categorized in the same topic, we felt they deserved seperate categories since when people think of archaelology they tend to think of digging for precious clay or rock inscriptions or large physical items; that attest to past events we've passed down over generations. Usually people aren't thinking of documents outside of the bible that attest to Jesus, his followers, and the Bible. 

We should find archaelogical evidence important because it can show us how different historical people in the bible, did in fact exist, among other things. It attests to the historical reliabilty of everything that is in the bible. This is especially useful for people when people deny the events in the bible as real historical events. 

Luke's Correct Word Useage

Luke has often been accused by some scholars in biblical studies throughout time as being innacurate and unreliable. However, time and time again, we have seen more evidence come over time proving that Luke was trustworthy, and so is the bible. Which is why we think it is an important practice in biblical studies to not adhere to ungodly views of the bible or christianity, and instead wait and see, and have faith that God will eventually reveal the evidence we were needing to find in a certain area that caused us doubts. 

Here are some examples of accusations of Luke's unreliableness, and the evidence we have eventually found to defend against these claims:

Luke refers to Philippi as a “part” or “district” of Macedonia. He uses the Greek word  Meris (μερίς) which is translated as “part” or “district”. Hort believed that Luke was wrong in his usage and thought that Meris meant portion, and not a district. Excavations have shown that the word Meris was used to describe the divisions of the district.

Some Scholars have argued that when Luke referred to the Philippian rulers as Praetors, he was incorrect. According to those scholars, two duumuirs would have ruled the town. However, Luke was right. Findings have shown that the title of praetor was employed by the magistrates of a Roman Colony.

Luke’s choice of the word proconsul as the title of Gallio (Acts 18:12), which has also been argued with, is correct. The evidence from the Delphi inscription which states in part: “Lucius Junius Gallio, my friend, and the proconsul of Achaia…”.