 |  |
CHRONOLOGY
ACTS
EPISTLES
81
OF
AND
the outbreak of the persecution under Nero he would have become involved, and would have been apprehended, this
time to seal his testimony with his blood.
We have therefore the following approximate dates:
Acts 1,2
A.D.
29
The date of the Crucifixion and of
Pentecost.
Acts 3-11
Acts 12
A.D.
44
The date of Herod's death.
Acts 13-20
Acts 21
A.D.
56
or
The date of Paul's arrest at
Acts 22-27
A.D. 58
Jerusalem.
A.D. 59
Acts 28
or
The date of Paul's arrival at
A.D. 61
Rome.
A.D. 61
Acts 28
or
The date of the conclusion of
A.D. 63
the `two years'.
One or two details will suffice to fill in the spaces. Aquila and Priscilla were banished from Rome by the edict
of Claudius, who reigned A.D. 41-54, and these dates are the extreme boundaries of Aquila's visit to Corinth.
Tacitus tells us that in A.D. 52 the Jews were commanded to leave Rome. Suetonius says, `Judaeos impulsore
Chresto assidue tumultuantes Roma expulit'. Chrestos is by some considered as a reading for Christos. If Aquila
*,
reached Corinth at the beginning of February A.D. 52, Paul would have arrived a little later in the year. Acts 18:11
tells us that the apostle remained in Corinth for one year and six months; hence his departure from Corinth would be
August, A.D. 53.
Luke passes on to tell us of an incident that occurred `certain days' (Acts 18:18, A.V. `a good while') before
Paul left Corinth, `when Gallio was the deputy (proconsul) of Achaia'. Incidentally we remark the exactness of
Luke's language. Achaia had been proconsular under Augustus, but had changed to an Imperial Province under
Tiberius (Tacit. Ann. 1:76). It was restored again by Claudius to the Senate, became proconsular after A.D. 44, and
became free under Nero. Luke never makes a mistake amid all these political changes. He had indeed `perfect
understanding from above'. We have suggested that Paul left Corinth August, A.D. 53, so if we deduct the `certain
days' of verse 18, we can say that the Gallio incident was about midsummer of that year.
Claudius had appointed Marcus Ann -us Novatus to be proconsul of Achaia, this man having been adopted by
the rhetorician Lucius Junius Ann -us Gallio, by which name he was known. Gallio's brother was the famous stoic,
Seneca. Now Seneca had been banished, but had been recalled in A.D. 49, and in A.D. 53 he was in the height of his
popularity. Gallio was not in Achaia in A.D. 54 (Dion. ix: 35); hence A.D. 53 is the latest date in which Paul could
have been brought before him, and eighteen months before this would bring us to the year 52.
Upon leaving Corinth, Paul sailed to Syria, intending to arrive at Jerusalem for the feast (Acts 18:21) which
would be Tabernacles, September 16th, A.D. 53. After the visit to Jerusalem alluded to in verse 22, the apostle went
down to Antioch and from thence `he went over all the country of Galatia and Phrygia in order'. This would bring
us to the spring of A.D. 54. Paul now passed to Ephesus (Acts 19:1) and remained there for the space of three years
(Acts 20:31). As he had promised to return after the feast, he doubtless arrived at Ephesus in the spring of A.D. 54.
It will be seen that a whole series of events revolves around this approximate date, and helps us to feel that we are
not very far from the truth. Another incidental note is introduced by the reference of Paul to Aretas.
The Reign of Aretas at Damascus
*
Much evidence as to this and other details has been omitted as too bulky and non-essential.