How credible is the account of Paul miraculously healing many people on Malta in Acts 28:8–9 without any contemporary corroboration?

Historical Context of Acts 28:8–9

In the Berean Standard Bible, Acts 28:8–9 describes how Paul healed the father of Publius and subsequently many other people on the island of Malta: “The father of Publius was sick in bed, suffering from fever and dysentery. Paul went in to see him and, after praying and placing his hands on him, he healed him. After this had happened, the rest of the sick on the island came and were cured.” According to the broader chapter context (Acts 28:1–10), Paul was shipwrecked on Malta around A.D. 60. The people on the island showed him and his companions extraordinary kindness, and their response following the healings indicates that these events made a significant impression on them.

By the time Acts was written, Luke had already established himself as a careful recorder of historical detail. He references government officials, ports, and precise geographical locations throughout the book of Acts, and external sources have corroborated these details, giving credence to his reliability as a historian even though not all events he documented have multiple contemporary sources.

Literary and Manuscript Reliability

The book of Acts is part of the same manuscript tradition as Luke’s Gospel, and both demonstrate a high level of consistency in early manuscript copies. Papyrus fragments such as P75 and Codex Vaticanus exhibit remarkable agreement with each other on Luke–Acts, supporting the textual stability of the account. Despite the lack of external non-biblical writings specifically mentioning the Malta healings, there is no textual evidence of tampering in Acts 28:8–9, no contradictory manuscript readings, and no significant textual variants that would cast doubt on the historicity of these events.

Similar reliability patterns appear in other sections of Acts, especially where Luke’s history overlaps with external records, such as the references to Gallio (Acts 18:12–17) and specific local officials (cf. Acts 13:7, 16:14, 16:22). Where details can be tested independently, Luke is consistently vindicated, suggesting that he is likewise trustworthy in other parts of his writing.

Cultural and Medical Considerations

Luke mentions fever and dysentery afflicting Publius’s father. Medical historians have noted that parts of the Mediterranean at the time were prone to diseases caused by unsanitary water and food sources. While Luke was trained in medicine (Colossians 4:14 states he was a physician), the biblical account does not portray him administering any treatments to Publius’s father; instead, Paul prays and lays hands on him. In the absence of technical medical steps, the passage indicates a divine miracle rather than a routine physician’s intervention.

Furthermore, the broader community of Malta was also healed. This collective experience of numerous individuals increases the likelihood that at least some eyewitnesses would have passed along the story. Although we do not have a separate contemporary source, an island-wide event would be challenging to fabricate without protest or correction from those living on Malta.

Archaeological and Geographic References

Luke persuasively identifies Malta (Acts 28:1) as the location where Paul was shipwrecked. The reference to Publius being “the chief man of the island” (28:7) aligns with known administrative positions used by the Romans for local leadership in their provinces. Archaeologists and historians have noted that Malta was under Roman administration, and the usage of such an official title is consistent with Luke’s historical detail.

While no direct inscriptions have surfaced explicitly describing Paul’s healings, various archaeological findings in Malta, such as ancient Christian markings and references to early Christian worship, attest to the island’s adoption of Christianity at an early date. The presence of early Christian devotion on Malta would be expected if Paul’s ministry there had a dramatic impact, as recorded.

Analyzing the Need for Contemporary Corroboration

Lack of immediate secular corroboration for a miraculous event should be weighed against how documentation worked in antiquity. The majority of first-century events were not widely recorded, and only a portion of what was written has survived. Most written material from that era, especially concerning small or remote communities, is lost.

Even for major historical figures, continuous contemporary documentation can be surprisingly sparse. For example, many well-known Roman events depend on just a few ancient sources. In light of this reality, the absence of an independent record about Paul’s healings on Malta is not unexpected.

Moreover, Luke’s intent in Acts was to depict the ongoing power of God working through the apostles. He provides a coherent narrative connecting numerous miracles (including healings, exorcisms, and supernatural deliverances) from Acts 2 through Acts 28. This broader continuity supports the consistency of Paul’s miracles with the rest of the apostolic testimony.

Interplay with Scriptural Consistency

From Genesis to Revelation, miraculous healings appear as a testament to divine intervention and the validating power behind God’s messengers. Elijah and Elisha’s miracles in the Old Testament (1 Kings 17:17–24; 2 Kings 4:32–37) foreshadow the miracles of Jesus in the Gospels (Matthew 8:14–17; John 9) and the apostles in Acts (Acts 3:6–8; 5:15–16; 9:32–35). The account in Acts 28 aligns with this unified biblical testimony: miracles further the gospel message and display God’s compassion.

The overarching harmony of miracle narratives across diverse biblical books and authors strengthens the likelihood that Luke is simply continuing the same account of divine power rather than inventing a new or isolated miracle account.

Philosophical and Behavioral Perspective

Miracles are foundational to the transformative nature of Christian faith. Throughout Acts, individuals who experience or witness extraordinary events frequently undergo radical changes in belief and behavior. The people of Malta respond with hospitality and consideration for Paul and his companions, which is a plausible human reaction to witnessing supernatural healing. Such behavioral change is consistent with how Scripture depicts heart responses to divine intervention.

The presence of suffering and disease also intensifies the significance of miraculous healings. While skeptics may question why evidence of every miracle cannot be confirmed by external means, Scripture consistently points to miracles as revelations of God’s mercy and authority. Their credibility often depends upon eyewitness accounts and the unwavering faith communities that emerge in response—phenomena well documented in church history.

Conclusion and Credibility Assessment

The account of Paul’s miraculous healings on Malta in Acts 28:8–9 retains credibility despite the lack of a separate contemporary source for several reasons:

1. Luke’s proven historical accuracy elsewhere in Acts supports trust in his reliability.

2. The textual evidence of Acts is stable, with no indication of later embellishment.

3. The cultural and administrative details in Acts 28 align with known historical facts about Malta.

4. The consistency of miracles throughout Scripture, and in Paul’s ministry specifically, reinforces the coherence of this episode.

In light of these intersecting lines of support—from manuscript integrity and historical reliability to archeological and scriptural coherence—the Malta healings recorded by Luke can be regarded as a credible testimony within the broader biblical narrative.