The opening verse of the Acts, suggests that in that narrative intends to give a record

of the things "that Jesus" continued "to do and teach" after His ascension. While Peter

and Paul, Barnabas and Philip may be the active agents, they are but agents, the true

Actor and Teacher throughout the record being Christ Himself.

We must remember that the record called "The Acts of the Apostles", did not exist as

we have it until the items recorded were past history. If the fact that Paul founded the

churches of Galatia is a part of the acts of the apostles, does it not follow that the epistle

to the Galatians is an integral part of the acts? True, Luke does not mention the epistles,

but he had no need to, for they were contemporaneous with and supplementary to the

history he wrote. Seeing that Paul's visit to Thessalonica is recorded in Acts 17: and

his visit to Corinth in Acts 18:, it is not gain but loss to segregate the epistles to the

Thessalonians or the Corinthians, and not allow them full place in the Acts. To assert

that Paul in one set of his acts could teach one thing, and in the epistles written during the

same period and to the same churches, another, is manifestly inaccurate, and therefore

unacceptable to lovers of Truth. For us there is but one deciding voice in all these

matters, and that is the actual testimony of the Scriptures themselves. Accordingly we set

out below references to the Acts made by the apostle in his epistles, and by their

testimony we shall abide.

When the time comes for examination of the chronology of the epistles written during

the Acts, we shall put forward evidence that goes to show that Galatians was written first.

As however that evidence has yet to be adduced, we will follow the order of the epistles

in the A.V. and commence with Romans, though every student knows it was written last

of this series of epistles.