Expert scholarly opinion upholds the view that the writer of Acts h firsthand knowledge of the Roman empire in the period 41-62 A.D. he uses correct titles for different kinds of Roman officials and local officials of that period. There are references to people and matters of that period. Most importantly, he presents a very favourable view of the Roman, who appears in the narrative; he is anxious to show that the Roman authorities have no quarrel with the new faith which he presents as n being contrary to Roman law. Such an outlook could not have beer: presented at the end of the first century A.D. Probably by A.D. 90 serious tensions had developed between the Christians and the Roman government, and by the early second century it had become a very serious offence to profess the Christian faith, an offence punishable by death Luke wrote, not only when a state of peace-the Pax Romana-was being maintained in the empire, but when Christians were not persecuted. The writer has a thorough grasp of the geography of the part of the empire which he describes in Acts.

If we look at the gospel with Acts, we find that in the two-volume work he has accurate information from his sources about the Roman background from the beginning of the century. He mentions three emperors (Augustus, Tiberius and Claudius) as well as three procurators of Judaea (Pontius Pilate, Felix and Festus). He is correctly informed about the Herods and the areas they governed for their Roman masters.

We shall first look at some references from the gospel of Luke, before turning to Acts.