The Great Sir William Ramsey

[ConsequentAtheist]

Forgive me if this is common knowledge, but ... Who was this guy? How sound were his credentials in Archaeology? How did he become so enamoured by Luke? Upon what is the 2nd Centure CE dating of Luke based?

Thanks.

[ConsequentAtheist]

I really hate 'bumping' my own thread, but I'm really curious about this. I'm drawing a blank in the alt.archaeology group as well. So many folks laud this guy as good evidence for NT legitimacy, I would have thought his credentials would have been well documented. No? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

[Kosh]

Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt:
<strong>Forgive me if this is common knowledge, but ... Who was this guy? How sound were his credentials in Archaeology? How did he become so enamoured by Luke? Upon what is the 2nd Centure CE dating of Luke based?

Thanks.</strong>

Hmmm. Is he the same one that discovered the
element Helium (among others)?

[SanDiegoAtheist]

Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt:
<strong>I really hate 'bumping' my own thread, but I'm really curious about this. I'm drawing a blank in the alt.archaeology group as well. So many folks laud this guy as good evidence for NT legitimacy, I would have thought his credentials would have been well documented. No? :confused: </strong>

Well, I was taught physics by his granddaughter.

While he was certainly a very well respected physical scientist of his time (late 1800s) and a Nobel prize winner in Chemistry in 1904 for the discovery of the noble gasses, to my knowledge, he had no credentials in any archeaological discipline.

A typical Creationist appeal to an impressive, but completely irrelevent authority - kind of like me appealing to Stephen Hawkings for the latest Egyptology findings.
Cheers,

The San Diego Sci Guy

[ConsequentAtheist]

Note that there is a chemist Sir Ramsay (1904 Nobel Laureate in Chemistry) and an archaeologist Sir Ramsey, e.g.,
Sir William Ramsey, St. Paul the Traveller and Roman Citizen (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House reprint; 1949 from 1894 lectures). Intent on discrediting Luke's writings, in the last century this hostile scholar traveled across the Mediterranean to that end. But he was astonished to discover that his archaeological findings confirmed the full accuracy of the customs, locations, and the governing titles (e.g. "magistrates" Acts 16:35; "proconsul" Acts 18:12) Luke had mentioned. These varied widely from region to region. Ramsey concluded, "Great historians are the rarest of writers...[I regard Luke] among the historians of the first rank" (pp. 3-4).

Perhaps we've doscovered a remarkable gas and gospel guy, but I really have no reason to believe that they were the same person.

[Vorkosigan]

Ramsay is the archaeologist. He is widely known.

See this page for a brief bio:
<a href="http://www.hendrickson.com/html/product/30599.trade.html?category=all" target="_blank">http://www.hendrickson.com/html/product/30599.trade.html?category=all</a>

Michael

[Steven Carr]

Sir William Ramsay was a 19th-Century archaeologist.

He studied Divinity at Oxford, but never took the degree. He writes how he studied as a young man for his exams on the 39 Articles of Faith of the Church of England. (If I remember rightly, only believing members of the Church of England were allowed to attend Oxford or Cambridge University at that time)

He drew inspiration from the Bible, which he described as 'life-giving', and wrote how he studied Galatians for inspiration. He was also inspired by his mother's love for Paul. It seems fundamentalism ran in the family.

Naturally, he is often described by Christian apologists as a former atheist who converted to Christianity after studying the evidence.

[Pandora]

These sites might be useful:

<a href="http://www.sevenchurches.org/W.%20M.htm" target="_blank">http://www.sevenchurches.org/W.%20M.htm</a>
<a href="http://webminister.com/ramsay/rbi002.shtml" target="_blank">http://webminister.com/ramsay/rbi002.shtml</a>

[AIA]

Sir William Ramsay (1851-1939) is generally considered one of the greatest archaeologists to have ever lived. He held to the Tubingen theory which caused him to conclude that the book of Acts was produced in the mid second century A.D. When doing topographical studies in Asia Minor he was forced to examine the writings of Luke. When confronted by the evidence that his own research produced he was forced to change his opinion and reject the Tubingen theory and accept a first century date of the writing. His excavations uncovered many items in the first century society of Asia Minor that validated what Luke had written in the book of Acts. Sir William Ramsay was also a prolific author. I found the following books of his at the Los Angeles Library.


St. Paul the traveller and the Roman citizen

Studies in the history and art of the eastern provinces of the Roman empire

The cities and bishoprics of Phrygia; being an essay of the local history of Phrygia from
the earliest times to the Turkish conquest

The church in the Roman empire before A.D. 170

Impressions of Turkey during twelve years' wanderings

The letters to the seven churches of Asia and their place in the plan of the Apocalypse

The cities of St. Paul, their influence on this life and thought

Pauline and other studies in early Christian history

Luke the physician

The teaching of Paul in terms of the present day

The bearing of recent discovery on the trustworthiness of the New Testament

Asianic elements in Greek civilisation

The historical geography of Asia Minor

A historical commentary on St. Paul's epistle to the Galatians

The cities of St. Paul, their influence on his life and thought : the cities of Eastern Asia Minor

The education of Christ : hillside reveries

[AIA]

Well, if nobody has a response, I will continue...

Sir William Ramsay was educated at the universities of Aberdeen (M.A., 1871), Oxford (B.A., 1876), and Gottingen. He was an Oxford University traveling scholar (1880-82), research fellow of Exeter College, Oxford (1882-87), and fellow of Lincon College, Oxford, and professor of classical art and archeology in the University of Oxford (1885-86). Since 1886 he has been professor of humanity in the University of Aberdeen, where he was also Wilson fellow in 1901-05. He was elected honorary fellow of Exeter College in 1896 and of Lincon College in the following year, and was lecturer in Mansfield College, Oxford in 1891 and 1895, Levering lecturer at Johns Hopkins in 1894, Morgan lecturer at Auburn Theological Seminary in 1894, lecturer in University of Cambridge in 1906, and lecturer at the Southwestern Theological Seminary in 1910. In 1880-91, 1898 and 1901-05 he traveled extensively in Asiatic Turkey, and received the gold medal of Pope Leo XIII in 1893, the Victoria gold medal of the Royal Geographical Society, and the L.W. Drexel gold medal for archeological exploration, University of Pennsylvania.

Source : New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Vol IX, P.888.


Steven Carr made the following statement about Sir William Ramsay in his post dated 4-11-02 :

“It seems fundamentalism ran in the family.”

Actually, the exact opposite is true. Liberal ideologies ran in his family, this is why he originally accepted the Tubingen theory which was essentially an attempt to assign late dates to the manuscripts of the Bible. A fundamentalist would never accept a second century dating of any manuscript of the Bible.


Steven Carr further stated :

“Naturally, he is often described by Christian apologists as a former atheist who converted to Christianity after studying the evidence.”

I do not know of anyone who has mistakenly referred to Sir William Ramsay as a former atheist. Perhaps you are thinking of Sir Frederic Kenyon who was a famous archeologist and a hostile critic of the Bible who was converted to Christianity on the basis of his archeological findings.


Sir William Ramsay’s findings did not change him from an atheist to a Christian but from a liberal (Tubingen advocate) to a conservative. His findings not only changed his opinion about a late dating of the Book of Acts but also served to substantiate that many of the statements that St. Luke made were scientifically correct. This was significant because many critics claimed that St. Luke had inaccurately reported archeological facts. For example, many critics claimed that St. Luke wrongly implied that Lystra and Derbe were in Lycaonia and Iconium was not (See Acts 14:6). They based their belief on the writings of Romans such as Cicero who indicated that Iconium was in Lycaonia. Thus, the critics said that the Book of Acts was unreliable. However, in 1910, Sir William Ramsay unearthed a monument that showed that Iconium was a Phrygian city thus disproving the critics. This discovery was later confirmed by Joseph Free in "Archaeology and Bible History", published in 1969.

Furthermore, St. Luke named thirty-two countries, fifty-four cities, and nine islands without making a single error. Such accuracy revealed the exactness of St. Luke's work. Discoveries like this caused Sir William Ramsey to conclude on page eight of St. Paul the Traveler and the Roman Citizen "...I found myself often brought into contact with the Book of Acts as an authority for topography, antiquities, and society of Asia Minor. It was gradually borne in upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvelous truth".

A bibliography of his work including the full text of some of his works is available at :
<a href="http://www.webminister.com/ramsay/home.htm" target="_blank">http://www.webminister.com/ramsay/home.htm</a>

[Peter Kirby]

My guess is that Joseph Free is the source of this pericope, maybe on p. 317 of _Archaeology and Bible History_. Can anyone check his book to test this hypothesis?

best,
Peter Kirby

A case in source criticism, Originally posted by AIA:
<strong>For example, many critics claimed that St. Luke wrongly implied that Lystra and Derbe were in Lycaonia and Iconium was not (See Acts 14:6). They based their belief on the writings of Romans such as Cicero who indicated that Iconium was in Lycaonia. Thus, the critics said that the Book of Acts was unreliable. However, in 1910, Sir William Ramsay unearthed a monument that showed that Iconium was a Phrygian city thus disproving the critics. This discovery was later confirmed by Joseph Free in "Archaeology and Bible History", published in 1969.</strong>

<a href="http://www.talkbible.com/truth_about___.htm" target="_blank">http://www.talkbible.com/truth_about___.htm</a>
[23] ”Archaeologists at first believed Luke’s implication wrong that Lystra and Derbe were in Lycaonia and Iconium was not. (Acts 14:6). They based their belief on the writings of Romans such as Cicero who indicated that Iconium was in Lycaonia. Thus, archaeologists said the Book of Acts was unreliable. However, in 1910, Sir William Ramsay found a monument that showed that Iconium was a Phrygian city. Later discoveries confirm this.”
[23]Joseph Free, p. 317.

<a href="http://home.houston.rr.com/apologia/sec5p5.htm" target="_blank">http://home.houston.rr.com/apologia/sec5p5.htm</a>
Archaeologists at first believed Luke’s implication to be wrong, that Lystra and Derbe were in Lycaonia, and Iconium was not. They based their belief on the writings of Romans such as Cicero who indicated that Iconium was in Lycaonia. Thus, archaeologists said the book of Acts was unreliable

In 1910, Sir William Ramsay found a monument that showed that Iconium was indeed a Phrygian city. This has been confirmed by later discoveries.

<a href="http://www.ccel.org/contrib/exec_outlines/ca/ca_05.htm" target="_blank">http://www.ccel.org/contrib/exec_outlines/ca/ca_05.htm</a>
A. ARCHAEOLOGISTS AT FIRST BELIEVED LUKE'S IMPLICATION TO BE WRONG...
1. That Lystra and Derbe were in Lycaonia and Iconium was not
2. They based their belief on the writings of Romans such as
Cicero
3. Who indicated that Iconium was in Lycaonia
4. Thus, archaeologists said the book of Acts was unreliable!

B. BUT IN 1910, SIR WILLIAM RAMSAY FOUND A MONUMENT...
1. Which showed that Iconium was indeed a Phrygian city
2. Later discoveries continued to confirm this!

<a href="http://freespace.virgin.net/m.puddy/resources/apologetics/5.html" target="_blank">http://freespace.virgin.net/m.puddy/resources/apologetics/5.html</a>
ARCHAEOLOGISTS AT FIRST BELIEVED LUKE'S IMPLICATION TO BE WRONG...
That Lystra and Derbe were in Lycaonia and Iconium was not
They based their belief on the writings of Romans such as Cicero
Who indicated that Iconium was in Lycaonia
Thus, archaeologists said the book of Acts was unreliable!


BUT IN 1910, SIR WILLIAM RAMSAY FOUND A MONUMENT...
Which showed that Iconium was indeed a Phrygian city
Later discoveries continued to confirm this!

<a href="http://engr.uark.edu/~rlb/evidence/arch.htm" target="_blank">http://engr.uark.edu/~rlb/evidence/arch.htm</a>
Archaeologists at first believed Luke's implication wrong that Lystra and Derbe were in Lycaonia and Iconium was not (Acts 14:6). They based their belief on the writings of Romans such as Cicero who indicated that Iconium was in Lycaonia. Thus, archaeologists said the Book of Acts was unreliable. However, in 1910, Sir William Ramsay found a monument that showed that Iconium was a Phrygian city. Later discoveries confirm this.

[Steven Carr]

Originally posted by AIA:
Well, if nobody has a response, I will continue...

Steven Carr further stated :

“Naturally, he is often described by Christian apologists as a former atheist who converted to Christianity after studying the evidence.”

I do not know of anyone who has mistakenly referred to Sir William Ramsay as a former atheist.

D.James Kennedy