The Acts of the Apostles

THE SOURCES AND THEIR VALUE 189
conversion of St. Paul interpolated from a
separate source.
Chaps, ix. 31—xi. 18. Continuation of A.
Chap. xi. 19-30. Continuation of the Jerusalem-
Antiochean source.
Chap. xii. 1—23. Continuation of A.
Chaps, xii. 25-xv. 35. Continuation of the Jeru-
salem-Antiochean source.^
This analysis of sources first makes it possible to
enter upon a thoroughly scientific criticism of the
traditions of the first half of the Acts, in so far as
such criticism is at all possible ; for almost the only
information which here presents itself for comparison
is afforded by the epistles of St. Paul, though after
all this is not so scanty as is sometimes supposed
(vide infra). It is, however, more important for us
to keep in view the fact that these traditions were
actually compiled by St. Luke, the companion of St.
Paul, and in face of this fact not to throw to the
winds the general axioms of historical criticism.
Taking first the body of tradition which we have
called A, we have already pointed out the logical
sequence and the trustworthiness of the narrative in
the passage iii. 1—v. 16 so far as the leading features are
concerned. Also on pages 154/*. attention has been
drawn to the fact that even the story of Ananias and
Sapphira in its main outline need not be a fable of late
invention. Of course what is given us even here is
* No notice is here taken of the few passages which have been
touched up by St. Luke, or which have been transferred from one
body of tradition to another in order to bind these together ; we at
once are lost in uncertainty if we try to explain every detail.