[269] "The Gospels as Historical Documents," Pt. II, 1909, p. 242.
[270] "Die Abfassungszeit des lukanischen Geschichtswerkes," 1911.
[271] J. Moffatt: "Historical New Testament," p. 414, note 4. It is noticeable that Moffatt now favours the Lukan authorship, "put practically beyond doubt by the exhaustive researches of Hawkins and Harnack" ("Introduction to New Testament," p. 295), while advocating a date later than Josephus' "Antiquities" (pp. 29 f.).
[272] H. Koch: "Die Abfassungszeit des lukanischen Geschichtswerkes," pp. 61, 62.
[273] D. Walker: "The Gift of Tongues," p. 228.
[274] "Paul the Traveller," pp. 307-309. The use of "first" (πρῶτos [prôtos]) is not decisive, for it is used where there are but two objects in the comparison in Acts xii. 10 (and see vii. 12), Hebrews ix. 8 and 15, Apoc. xx. 5, and even I Corinthians xv. 47. identified and Josephus is correct, Luke is guilty of an anachronism in putting an allusion to him into the mouth of Gamaliel; for the Theudas of Josephus falls in the time of Fadus who was procurator under Claudius, about 45 A. D. The following points deserve to be noticed:
[275] III, p. 97; "Acts of the Apostles," p. 112.
[276] III, pp. 101 ff.; E. T., pp. 117 ff.
[277] Dr. Francis L. Patton, in an address.
[278] Compare the statement of J. V. Bartlett: "I am not convinced that there ever was a written 'book of discourses' that has perished" (p. 360).