Chicago Lawyer Argues that 'Book of Acts' is a Legal Brief
	CHICAGO, Ill. (EP) - If you've ever wondered why the Bible's Book of Acts contains so many references to legal proceedings, Chicago attorney John Mauck has the answer. A nationally known civil rights litigator, Mauck's new book Paul on Trial argues convincingly that Acts is a legal brief, written by Luke to defend the Apostle Paul, who was imprisoned and eventually executed by the tyrannical Roman Emperor Nero.     Mauck first began seeing Acts as a legal document four years ago during a detailed group Bible study of the book. "The fellow who was teaching pointed out certain legal aspects of what Luke was talking about in the text," he says. "He would mention these along with other factors, but I would seize on the legal points because I was able to add to them and apply them. I decided this was a legal brief, but that idea seemed so far out that I decided to research this and see what other people said."     Mauck spent two years researching his theory, using the resources of a local seminary library, and discovered that this same theory had been raised in the past, only to be shot down by other scholars.     "Historically, many of the scholars have discussed the idea that Acts is a legal brief and have dumped all over it," says Mauck. "They've disparaged the thought. When I would read these comments in some of the academic journals or books on Acts they were very intimidating. They made me research all the further, but it began to encourage me because I began to realize that every reason they gave didn't stand up."     He continues, "For instance, there's a scholar who said no Roman official would have ever waded through this ecclesiastical rubbish to get to a few relevant verses on legal apology. That intimidated me when I read that. But I began to see this is not ecclesiastical rubbish - it has legal relevance and it falls in place."     One breakthrough was learning how tightly Rome controlled the religious lives of its citizens. The charges Paul faced probably included spreading an unauthorized religion, since Judaism was the only religion permitted in the Roman Empire apart from Rome's own religion of emperor worship and a pantheon of gods. Mauck says Acts argues that Christianity was not a new illegal religion, but merely the fulfillment of Judaism.     "My practice mostly involves civil rights cases involving churches and zoning matters," says Mauck. "I'm arguing church-state cases all the time, and this particular area of legal practice alerted me to the arguments about how far Rome could regulate religion. My research opened up when I realized that Rome had only two legal religions, and that the Roman Empire reached deeply into people's lives as far as what they could believe and practice."     Mauck's findings were initially dismissed by many as ridiculous. But his completed work has won endorsements from a variety of Christian leaders: Dr. Erwin Lutzer, pastor of Moody Church; David Brickner, executive director of Jews for Jesus; and Dr. Donald A. Hagner, the George Eldon Ladd Professor of New Testament at Fuller Theological Seminary. Noted Christian apologist Josh McDowell called Paul on Trial, "an epic legal treatment of the Book of Acts that can have profound repercussions to the church" and added, "every believer needs to be exposed to the powerful arguments of Luke to defend the faith."     If the Book of Acts was written as a legal document, that suggests that its claims are well-documented and could have been verified at the time of its writing. The Emperor had an office of investigators charged with researching specific facts for upcoming trials. Mauck argues that "Theophilus," to whom the book is addressed, was a pre-trial investigator for Nero. The Gospel of Luke, also addressed to Theophilus, was probably also written as background reading in anticipation of a trial.     "For the Christian, I think it's a great encouragement to know that this was written with the understanding that it would be thoroughly investigated by the Roman government," explains Mauck. "It would be investigated by people who had the capacity and experience to investigate everything in the book, and it would be cross-examined by Paul's accusers. They would have every incentive to point out if there were inaccuracies or lies in terms of Luke's account, either in Luke or in Acts. It tells us that these books - Luke and Acts - were historically accurate and verifiable at the time they were written. Luke and Acts are 28 percent of the New Testament, and that key segment of the New Testament was at the highest level of verifiability of any document written at the time."     While some scholars have assumed that the books of the New Testament were written many decades after the life of Christ, seeing Luke and Acts as pre-trial documents means they would have been written by 62 A.D. Mauck notes, "I don't think this idea will bother people with a high view of Scripture, but I do eventually expect some flack from people who take a more liberal view of Scripture. If Acts was written by 62 A.D., that challenges a lot of liberal theology."     Mauck says nothing in his thesis challenges the idea of Acts as a divinely inspired book - even though we're not used to thinking of legal documents as inspired. "It's a little disquieting to some," he admits, "but I've resolved it by realizing that our Scriptures contain poems, hymns, letters to individuals, family histories - many different types of documents have gone into our Scriptures. They're all not like the book of Revelation, where God says 'Stand still - I'm going to show you what will happen.' There are personal letters from one Christian to another, but we've looked back at them and decided they're inspired. Many books, when written, had a specific purpose, but later generations saw a broader application."     So far Mauck has been pleased by the response to Paul on Trial, which was released in early April. "The most surprising thing to me is that once it was near final draft and I was having scholars read it, there was virtual unanimity of approval," he says. "There are a couple of rounds that you go through this. I've had scholars read it and I've had Christian leaders read it, but until it goes through the academic gauntlet we don't know if it will stand up. People will have to analyze it and pick it apart. But so far I've gotten much more support than I expected for so radical a thesis."
	All site contents Copyright © 2002 St. Louis MetroVoice
	St. Louis MetroVoice • PO Box 220010 • St. Louis, MO 63122 314/965-5757 • Fax 314/965-5757 Email: stlmv@aol.com • Web site: www.metrovoice.net