1 We cannot discuss the authenticity of these Epistles in this place, nor is it very important that we should do so. Nor can we pause to consider whether they were written in Rome, as a majority of critics think, or elsewhere. {40} and Aristarchus, Mark the cousin of Barnabas, Justus and others are likewise his [------].(1) There is no evidence, in fact, that Paul was acquainted with Luke earlier than during his imprisonment in Rome, and he seems markedly excluded from the Apostle's work and company by such passages as 2 Cor. i. 19.(2) The simple theory that Luke wrote the Acts supplies all the rest of the tradition of the Fathers, as we have seen in the case of Irenaeus, and to this mere tradition we are confined in the total absence of more ancient testimony. The traditional view, which long continued to prevail undisturbed, and has been widely held up to our own day,(3) represents Luke as the author of the Acts, and, in {41} the passages where the first person is employed, considers that he indicates himself as an actor and eye-witness. These passages, where [------] is introduced, present a curious problem which has largely occupied the attention of critics, and it has been the point most firmly disputed in the long controversy regarding, the authorship of the Acts. Into this literary labyrinth we must not be tempted to enter beyond a very short way; for, however interesting the question may be in itself, we are left so completely to conjecture that no result is possible which can materially affect our inquiry, and we shall only refer to it sufficiently to illustrate the uncertainty which prevails regarding the authorship. We shall, however, supply abundant references for those who care more minutely to pursue the subject. After the narrative of the Acts has, through fifteen chapters, proceeded uninterruptedly in the third person, an abrupt change to the first person plural occurs in the sixteenth chapter.(1) Paul, and at least Timothy, are represented as going through Phrygia and Galatia, and at length "they came down to Troas," where a vision appears to Paul beseeching him to come over into Macedonia. Then, xvi. 10, proceeds: "And after he saw the vision, immediately we endeavoured [------] to go forth into Macedonia, concluding that God had called us [------] to preach the Gospel unto them." After verse 17, the direct form of narrative is as suddenly dropped as it was taken up, and does not reappear until xx. 5, when, without explanation, it is resumed and continued for ten verses. It is then again abandoned, and recommenced in xxi. 1-18, and xxvii. 1, xxviii. 16. 1 It is unnecessary to discuss whether xiv. 22 belongs to the [------] sections or not. {42}