From Rending to TendingThe Biblical Paul from Birth to Apostleship

Pastor Nathaniel Biebert Isagogical Paper • South Central Conference • 22 October 2019 


- -ii

The image on the cover is a copy of “The Apostle Paul,” an oil painting done on canvas by the Dutch artist Rembrandt van Rijn (and his workshop?) around 1657. It is housed in the Widener Collection of the National Gallery of Art (NGA) in Washington, D. C. Throughout his life Rembrandt was fascinated by the apostle Paul. This painting depicts Paul sitting at a table (the NGA website says “in his prison cell,” though this is not apparent) pondering the words of the epistle he is about to write on the parchment lying in front of him. A gentle light, with no defined point of origin, draws the viewer’s special attention to Paul’s head, hand, and parchment. The solemn, ponderous expression of his strong features underscores the authenticity of what he is about to write, his earnestness to spread the Christian gospel, and the intensity and depth of his thought. It also bespeaks the sufferings he has endured for Christ’s name (Acts 9:16; 2 Corinthians 11:23-29). Against the wall sits a large sword, a common symbol of this apostle, recalling his description of God’s word as “the sword of the Spirit” in his Epistle to the Ephesians (6:17) and foreshadowing his execution by beheading under Emperor Nero. For some it has also evoked the memory of his violent persecution of Christianity prior to his conversion. By depicting Paul at half length rather than full length, Rembrandt brings the viewer closer to the saint and makes the intensity of his expression more keenly felt.

Dona mihi, Domine Iesu, ne facta formem,

sed ut factis former.

✠ ✠ ✠

O Lord Jesus, let me not shape the facts,

but let me be shaped by them.

hen Jacob called for his sons shortly before his death, he made this pronouncement about the youngest (Gen 49:27):

ף ב ִיְטָר֔ ִּבְנָיִמין֙ ְזֵא֣ד אַכל ַע֑ ֹ֣ ֶקר י ַּבּבֹ֖ל׃ ק ָׁשָלֽ ֶרב ְיַחֵּל֥ ְוָלֶע֖

Benjamin shall rend as a wolf; in the morning he will devour prey. But at evening he will apportion plunder.

Moses immediately follows this by commenting that, on the whole, Jacob made these pronouncements over his sons in blessing. At first glance, you might wonder how the words spoken over Benjamin were a blessing. But look closely at the difference between his activity in the morning and that in the evening. In the morning he is rending and tearing at the prey, devouring it greedily for himself. In the evening, however, he is no longer acting selfishly and greedily; he is divvying up what he has plundered, apportioning it to others for their nourishment and benefit. A bad beginning turns into a good end. The enemy of the sheep has become a shepherd thereof. We can see the fulfillment of these words in one of two ways, as the early Fathers Tertullian (207 AD) and Hippolytus (early 3rd cent.) did. We can either contrast the 1 2first Saul of Benjamin with the second—the Old Testament Saul rending and devouring as a wolf by persecuting David, the great ancestor and type of Christ, the New Testament Saul apportioning what he has plundered by taking the thorough knowledge of the Old Testament he acquired as a Pharisee and using it to feed the Church by proving that Jesus is the Christ and by preaching the freedom of the gospel. Or we can 3see Jacob’s blessing fulfilled in the life of Saul of Tarsus alone. Tertullian says that Jacob “foresaw that Paul would arise out of the tribe of Benjamin, a voracious wolf, devouring his prey in the morning: in other words, in the early period of his life he would devastate the Lord’s sheep, as a persecutor of the churches; but in the evening he would give them nourishment, which means that in his declining years he would educate the fold of Christ, as the teacher of the Gentiles.” 4

Rf. fn. 4 infra.1

Commentary Fragment on Genesis 49:27 in Roberts & Donaldson, eds., Ante-Nicene Fathers (hereafter 2ANF), vol. 5 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1995; reprint of Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1885), p. 168.

Note, however, that the Hebrew word I have translated as “plunder,” ׁשָלָל, parallel to “prey” (עַד), also 3implies that violence and death were inflicted first. In a marvelous way that only God could bring about, the apostle Paul’s apportioning, his gospel proclamation, is all the richer precisely because it came from a man who had wrought such regrettable acts in the past (cf. 1 Tim 1:12-16).

Against Marcion, Bk. V, Ch. 1 in ANF 3:430.4

- -1

W

The Program Commi_ee asked me to write an isagogical overview of the life and ministry of the apostle Paul, with special emphasis on takeaways for our evangelism efforts. But every assignment needs to be made personal, and two factors molded my assignment into the paper in front of you: 1) It was recommended that I read David Valleskey’s book A Portrait of Paul in preparation, and right aaer I was given my assignment, the Summer 2019 issue the Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly came out, which included an article by Glen Thompson titled, “Paul’s Missionary Methods and Ours—100 Years aaer Roland Allen.” These two sources, each in their own way, fulfilled my assignment, and I didn’t want my paper to be redundant or superfluous. 2) I do not 5have the gia of conciseness, and so even an isagogical treatment of the entire life and ministry of Paul would have resulted in a book, not a conference paper. 6 I have therefore made this an isagogical paper on the life and ministry of Paul in the etymological sense of the word. Εἰσάγω means “to lead into, introduce,” and that is exactly what I intend to do with God’s help—to lead you into Paul’s life and ministry, instead of all the way through it. A couple notes at the outset: First, regarding the idea of using Paul’s life and ministry as a model for evangelism, certainly the Holy Spirit inspired Luke the Evangelist to document the life and ministry of Paul in more detail than any other apostle for a reason. However, Professor Glenn Thompson wisely encourages us to take a balanced view of his apostleship:

[W]e must remember that the book of Acts, our greatest source for Paul’s work, is mostly descriptive, not prescriptive, and Paul was also but one of a dozen apostles. There is no intrinsic or biblical reason why his strategy should be more central to the church than that of the army of other missionaries in the early (or later) centuries who spread the gospel across the globe. 7

True, Paul says, “Follow my example,” but he does so aaer stating general biblical, Christian principles, and he immediately follows up with, “…as I follow the example of Christ” (1 Co 11:1; see also 4:16,17). Paul himself more than once drives home the point that the main lessons we should learn from his life and ministry are not those for doing and obeying, but those for believing (e.g. 1 Co 15:10; 1 Tim 1:12-17).

I heartily recommend both of these thought- and discussion-provoking sources, with these caveats: 1) In 5describing the times and context in which Paul lived, Valleskey does not cite primary sources as much as one might like. 2) Thompson himself admits that his “essay undoubtedly is no more unbiased than other attempts to evaluate Pauline mission principles”—an admission that is borne out in his article with a few overstatements and some evaluations that don’t adequately take the question of cause and effect into account. I will address another weakness of most Pauline studies later in the introduction.

Some of you might argue with some validity that this happened anyway, even after I narrowed my 6scope.

Thompson, “Paul’s Missionary Methods and Ours—100 Years after Roland Allen,” in Wisconsin 7Lutheran Quarterly, vol. 116, no. 3 (Summer 2019), p. 188.

- -2

Second, many Pauline studies, perhaps most, have the same ironic weakness: They end up promoting the same Pharisaism the converted Paul so gladly lea behind, by “t[ying] up heavy loads and put[ting] them on men’s shoulders, [without] lia[ing] a finger to move them” (Mt 23:4). That is, they pile up practical insights, and only pile up practical insights, leaving the reader or listener with a thousand to-do’s and an overwhelming burden of guilt that more oaen than not has the effect of paralyzing him into doing nothing (which only in turn increases his guilt even more). If this or any work on Paul truly wishes to be motivational and stimulative, then it must ultimately be about the unconditional gospel of the forgiveness of sins and of victory over death and the devil in Jesus Christ. Only the gospel can and does actually give us the requisite Pauline—or rather, Christ-like—zeal to spread the gospel, and the strength to put all of God’s commands and other practical, Bible-based suggestions and ideas into practice. This is exactly the point that Jeremiah made hundreds of years before Paul when he said that God would write his law on our minds and hearts through the one-sided covenant of forgiveness (Jer 31:31-34). So then, with all this in mind, let’s take a closer look at this wolf as he transitions from the morning to the evening of his life, from devouring to dividing, from tearing to sharing, from rending to tending. Lord Jesus, in our study, let the blessing you bestowed upon Benjamin through his father continue to be of benefit to us. Through our meditation on the early life and work of Benjamin’s great descendant, the apostle Paul, apportion plunder to us, gospel meat on which our souls may feed for eternity. Amen.

Early Life

The man we know as Paul was given the name Saul (ָׁשאּול; Greek: Σαῦλος or Σαούλ) at his circumcision a week aaer he was born (Php 3:5; Lk 1:59,60; 2:21), a name identical in form to the Qal passive participle of ָׁשַאל, meaning “asked, requested.” His parents no doubt gave him this name because his birth was an answer to their prayers, because someone in his family (perhaps his father or grandfather) had that name (cf. Lk 1:59-62), or to remind him of his Benjamite heritage. (For everything bad that one could say about his later life, King Saul was still the tribe of Benjamin’s claim to fame as the first king of Israel.) Though his parents could trace their lineage to Benjamin (Ro 11:1; Php 3:5), Saul was not born in the land that had once been allo_ed to that tribe, but in

- -3

Tarsus of Cilicia (Ac 22:3), “no unimportant city” (21:39). We know li_le else about his 8family except that at some point his father or another paternal ancestor obtained Roman citizenship so that Saul was born a Roman citizen (22:27,28), that Saul had a sister who eventually had a son (23:16), and that Saul’s father and grandfather were Pharisees 9(23:6) who took their religion seriously, as evidenced among other things from the education Saul’s father gave him. We can calculate the year of Saul’s birth with a fair degree of certainty. The physician Luke identifies him as a “young man” (νεανίας) when the witnesses at Stephen’s trial laid their cloaks at his feet (Ac 7:58). Luke later uses this term synonymously with νεανίσκος (20:9,12 [uncial D]; 23:17,18,22). According to the Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria, an older contemporary of Saul, Hippocrates (c. 460–377 BC), the physician, whose writings were no doubt part of Luke’s training and whose influence can still be felt in the medical field today, identified seven ages of a man’s 10life:

Twice in his writings, Jerome relays the curious tradition that Saul was born in a town called Gyscalis (or 8Giscalis) in Judea, but that “when the entire province was devastated at the hand of the Romans,” the family was transferred to Tarsus (J.-P. Migne, ed., Patrologia Latina [hereafter PL] 26:617; 23:615). There are several problems with this tradition: 1) As mentioned, Paul explicitly identifies Tarsus as the city of his birth. 2) We only know of an ancient town in Galilee, not Judea, identified as Gischala by Josephus (Life 43-45; Jewish War II, 575; IV, 84-85) and Gush Halab in the Talmud (Menahoth 85b); it is probably identical to the city Ahlab in the tribe of Asher in the Old Testament (Jdg 1:31). Today the city goes by the Arabic name El Djich. Rf. Victor Guérin, Description Géographique Historique et Archéologique de la Palestine, part 3, vol. 2 (Paris: L’Imprimerie Nationale, 1880), pp. 94-100. There is no record of any city that could be called Giscalis in Benjamin or Judea. 3) The closest possible devastation of (parts of) Judea on record is Herod the Great’s campaign against Jerusalem in 37 BC (Josephus, Antiquities 14,15,1ff). Since Jerome recorded this tradition while living in Bethlehem (388 & 392 AD), having also served as presbyter in Antioch (379), the apostle Paul’s home congregation, it is difficult to dismiss it out of hand entirely. The name Gush Halab means “fat ground,” referring to fertile soil. It is remotely possible that a village by that name also existed in the historical territory of Benjamin, perhaps in the neighborhood of Jericho; precisely its Roman devastation (combined with its small size?) may have prevented its discovery. This devastation may have driven Saul/Paul’s father and grandparents (or grandfather and great-grandparents?) from their home territory to Tarsus in Cilicia (cf. e.g. Josephus, Antiquities 14,15,3). If Saul’s father (or grandfather?) had the same name, this could account for the confusion in the tradition. If, say, Saul’s father was five years old at the time of flight, that would make him about 48-52 years old at the time of his son’s birth (see the subsequent discussion about Saul’s birth year). This is not entirely impossible given the facts that a) there was often an age difference of 10 years or more between husband and wife in those days, and b) Saul had at least one sister (Ac 23:16) and potentially other siblings. If Saul’s father and grandparents did originate from a village near Jerusalem, that might also help to explain how Saul could be brought up in Jerusalem (Ac 22:3) even though his parents seem to have stayed in Tarsus (Ac 9:30; 11:25,26); he may have had family members residing in Jerusalem with whom he could board during his education.

For more on Tarsus, see Valleskey, A Portrait of Paul (Milwaukee: NPH, 2002), pp. 20-22.

The definite article with sister in that verse (ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀδελφῆς Παύλου) might suggest that she was 9his only sister, but other explanations for the definite article are possible.

E.g., in the Hippocratic oath10

- -4

1. Li_le boy (παιδίον, birth to age 7 or loss of baby teeth), 2. boy (παῖς, ages 7 to 14 or puberty), 3. lad (µειράκιον, ages 14 to 21 or the time his chin fills out with hair), 4. young man (νεανίσκος, ages 21 to 28 or when the whole body is fully grown), 5. man (ἀνήρ, ages 28-49), 6. elder (πρεσβύτης, ages 49-56), and 7. senior (γέρων, age 56 to death). 11

If then Luke is speaking with the precision of his training in Acts 7:58, Saul was between 21 and 28 years old at the time of Stephen’s martyrdom. Furthermore, since Saul is then able to lead a persecution that involves prison wardens (Ac 8:3), Caiaphas the high priest (9:1,2), and the Sanhedrin (22:5), and since the Pharisees ordinarily “pa[id] respect to those advanced in age,” we can surmise that he was on the higher end of that age-12range, between 25 and 28. Finally, we can be quite confident that Stephen was stoned sometime between when Pontius Pilate was occupied with the Samaritans and, immediately subsequent, his dismissal from the governorship during the winter of 36 AD—thus likely earlier that year. That puts Saul’s likely birth year between 7 and 11 13AD, making him younger than Jesus by roughly a decade. This birth range also fits 14well with everything else we know about Saul, including his taking along Timothy as a trainee and coworker in 49 AD (he would be roughly age 40) and his beheading under Nero in 67 or early 68 AD (he would be between ages 56 and 60). 15 Saul was “brought up” (ἀνατεθραµµένος) in Jerusalem, to which his parents must have sent him already at a fairly young age so that he could receive an exemplary education, including a thorough Jewish legal training under Rabban Gamaliel (Ac 22:3). Saul may have boarded with relatives there. From the Bible, we know that around 34 16

Quoted in Philo, De Opificio Mundi 105 in F. H. Colson and G. H. Whitaker, tr., Philo in Ten Volumes, 11vol. 1 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981), pp. 84-87.

Flavius Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 18, 1, 3; cf. William Whiston, tr., Josephus: The Complete Works 12(Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1998), p. 572. This fact underscores the extraordinary nature of Paul’s rise through the ranks.

Andrew Steinmann, From Abraham to Paul: A Biblical Chronology (St. Louis: CPH, 2011), pp. 13300,301,321,342.

Ibid., pp. 219-249, esp. p. 249.14

Diogenes Laertius (fl. 3rd cent. AD) says that that the ancient Greek philosopher Pythagoras (c. 570-c. 15495 BC) also provided a division of years, but according to his division νεανίας covers the years 40-60 (boy - 0-20; youth - 20-40; young man - 40-60; old man - 60-80) (Bk. VIII, Ch. 1, §10 in R. D. Hicks, tr., Diogenes Laertius: Lives of Eminent Philosophers, vol. 2 [New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1925], pp. 328,329). A 40-year-old Saul at Stephen’s death definitely does not fit well with everything else we know about him.

Rf. fn. 8.16

- -5

AD, when the apostles were put on trial before the Sanhedrin, Gamaliel was already “honored by all the people” (5:34). During that trial he advised the Sanhedrin to let the apostles go, because “if their purpose or activity [were] of human origin, it [would] fail” on its own, whereas if it were of divine origin, they would “only find [them]selves fighting against God” (5:38-39), and they listened to his advice (5:40). Luke is probably not trying to indicate that Gamaliel was a secret believer; it is rather an apt description, given by the opposition, of exactly what happens in the rest of the book and the rest of world history—humans raging and conspiring against Christianity, but only finding themselves, wi_ingly or not, fighting against God. It also shows the genuineness of Gamaliel’s religious conviction, and that all the genuineness in the world does not necessarily guarantee alignment with the truth. Gamaliel doubtless passed this 17genuineness and zeal on to his student Saul. The rabbinic literature speaks of Gamaliel several times. The Mishnah speaks 18most highly of him when it says, “When Rabban Gamaliel the Elder died, respect for the Torah ceased, and self-restraint and ceremonial purity [טהרה ופרישות] died.” Other 19quotes reveal a man who loved legal precision, good order, and common sense. 20 21 About his childhood, education, and youth, Paul later recalled: “The Jews all know the way I have lived ever since I was a child, from the beginning of my life in my own country, and also in Jerusalem. They have known me for a long time and can testify, if they are willing, that according to the strictest sect of our religion, I lived as a Pharisee” (Ac 26:4,5). In addition to the Scriptures, the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (37-c. 100 AD) gives us a pre_y comprehensive picture of the Pharisees:

[T]he Pharisees, who are considered the most accurate interpreters of the laws…a_ribute everything to Fate and to God; they hold that to act rightly or otherwise rests, indeed, for the most part with men, but that in each action Fate cooperates. 22

We do well to keep this in mind when using the apologetic argument of early Christians being willing to 17die for their faith. By the work of the Spirit through the means of grace, we know that this willingness proceeded from knowledge of the truth, but their willingness to die for their beliefs all by itself is no guarantee of the truth of their beliefs.

One must be careful, however, to ascertain that Gamaliel the Elder is being discussed or cited and not 18Gamaliel II.

Sotah 9:15. (I have the Soncino Talmud on my laptop, but if any of you are interested in accumulating a 19set of the Babylonian and/or Jerusalem Talmuds, I recommend the Schottenstein editions from Artscroll.)

Gittin 4:1-3; Aboth 1:16 (though this latter reference perhaps refers to Gamaliel II).20

Rosh Hashanah 2:5.21

The Jewish War 2, 8, 14 in Thackeray, tr., Josephus in Nine Volumes, vol. 2 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard 22University Press, 1967), p. 385; cf. also Jewish Antiquities 13, 5, 9 and 18, 1, 3 in Whiston, tr., op. cit., pp. 415-416,572.

- -6

[The Pharisees were] a body of Jews with the reputation of excelling the rest of their nation in the observances of religion, and as exact exponents of the laws. 23

[The Pharisaic sect] prid[ed] itself on its adherence to ancestral custom and claim[ed] to observe the laws of which the Deity approves… These men were able to help the king greatly because of their foresight, and yet they were obviously intent upon combating and injuring him. 24

[S]o great is their influence with the masses that even when they speak against a king or high priest, they immediately gain credence. … [Hyrcanus the high priest (r. 134-104 BC) told the Pharisees] that they knew he wished to be righteous and in everything he did tried to please God and them—for the Pharisees profess such beliefs… [T]he Pharisees…passed on to the people certain regulations handed down by former generations and not recorded in the Laws of Moses. 25

[T]hey reduce their standard of living, not yielding to the finer things of life in any way… [W]hatsoever [the people] do about divine worship, prayers, and sacrifices, they perform them according to [the Pharisees’] direction. 26

Paul himself later testified that they were “zealous for God, but their zeal [was] not based on knowledge. …[T]hey did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own” (Ro 10:2,3). They were so conscientious in observing the law, as they understood it, because they were convinced that “souls have an immortal vigor in them, and that [in the aaerlife] there will be rewards or punishments, according as they have lived virtuously or viciously in this life; and the la_er are to be detained in an everlasting prison, but that the former shall have power to revive and live again.” Worse yet, Jesus says that they were zealous to spread this work-27righteousness: “You [scribes and Pharisees] travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are” (Mt 23:15).

The Jewish War 1, 5, 2 in Thackeray, tr., op. cit., p. 53; cf. Josephus’ Life 191 in Thackeray, tr., vol. 1 23(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1961), p. 73.

Jewish Antiquities 17, 2, 4 in Ralph Marcus, tr., Josephus in Nine Volumes, vol. 8 (Cambridge, MA: 24Harvard University Press, 1963), p. 391. Josephus continues by telling how they refused to swear an oath of loyalty to Caesar and to the king’s government.

Ibid. 13, 10, 5 & 6 in Marcus, tr., op. cit., vol. 7 (1961), pp. 375,377.25

Ibid. 18, 1, 3; cf. Whiston, tr. op. cit., p. 572.26

Ibid.27

- -7

Saul also says elsewhere: “I was advancing in Judaism beyond many Jews of my own age and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers” (Gal 1:14). Some 28people check out different churches or religions because they feel they don’t fit in where they are. They can’t find their niche so, rightly or wrongly, they look elsewhere. That was not Saul. Saul fit into Judaism like hand in glove. He was the 4.0 student who was easing right into a successful career. I have li_le doubt that, if Saul had continued down the path he was on, we would find his name in multiple places in the Mishnah today. Since Saul was brought up and trained in Jerusalem, we can’t help but ask: Where was he during Jesus’ ministry? Had he ever seen Jesus’ face before Jesus revealed himself to him aaer his ascension? He was certainly celebrating the Passover in 29Jerusalem when Jesus was betrayed and crucified. Did he witness any of Jesus’ trial? Join in any of the chants? Whether he witnessed any of the events of Good Friday or not, he doubtless heard about them one way or another. Aaer all, Ma_hew and Luke tell us that from noon to 3:00 p.m. that day the sun stopped shining (Mt 27:45; Lk 23:44,45), and that when Jesus died around 3:00 p.m., “the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bo_om” and “the earth shook and the rocks split” (Mt 27:51). In fact, these events were known far outside Jerusalem and Judea. Both Origen (c. 248 AD) and Eusebius (c. 325 AD) cite the Olympiad chronicler Phlegon of Tralles (fl. 2nd 30cent. AD), who wrote:

In the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad [i.e. between September 32 and August 33 AD], a failure of the sun took place, the greatest of those that had been previously known, and it turned night at the sixth hour of the day, so that stars even appeared in the sky. And a great earthquake, having taken place throughout Bithynia, overturned most of Nicaea. 31

Rf. p. 5 supra and the end of fn. 12. A much later tradition about Gamaliel that may be apocryphal says 28that he divided his students into four categories—a) impure fish, representing the sons of poor people who study Scripture and tradition but do not understand them, b) pure fish, representing the sons of rich people who study Scripture and tradition and understand them, c) fish from the Jordan, representing the scribal students who study Scripture and tradition but do not know how to employ them in debate, and d) fish from the Great Sea, representing the scribal students who study Scripture and tradition and do know how to employ them in debate (Aboth Rabbi Nathan 40, compiled between 700 and 900 AD). If this tradition is authentic, Gamaliel would have no doubt classified Saul as a pure fish from the Great Sea.

He does not seem to have spent any considerable time listening to Jesus teach, since he did not 29recognize Jesus’ voice on the road to Damascus (Ac 9:4,5), although Jesus’ apostles did not always immediately recognize their glorified Master after his resurrection either.

Against Celsus, Bk. II, Chs. 14, 33, & 59 in ANF 4:437,445,455.30

Alfred Schoene, ed., Eusebi Chronicorum Libri Duo (Berlin, 1866), 2:148; translation mine. Eusebius 31equated this with the 19th year of Tiberias’ reign, but Jerome later corrected this to Tiberias’ 18th regnal year (2:149), namely from 18 September 32 to 17 September 33 AD. The date would be April 3, 33 AD (Steinmann, op. cit., pp. 280-287). Steinmann does not cite this extra-biblical evidence from Phlegon, but his arguments for this date are in harmony with it, and it in turn strengthens his arguments even more.

- -8

Saul may have also seen the moon rise on Jerusalem’s horizon in eclipse that night—a so-called “blood moon.” The combination of these events and the buzz surrounding 32Jesus’ ministry—not to mention Peter’s sermon on Pentecost, which Saul likely heard—would have forced Saul to reflect on what he saw and heard. But at this time in his life his reflection entrenched him deeper in Judaism instead of drawing him toward the light of Christ.

“In the Morning He Will Devour Prey”

In order to get to the last part of Jacob’s prophecy, we must go through the first part. And Saul certainly did treat the Church as prey to be torn, rent, and devoured in the morning of his life. Looking back on the early period of his life, Paul said that he had become “convinced that [he] ought to do all that was possible to oppose the name of Jesus of Nazareth” (Ac 26:9). In his le_er to the Philippians, he talks about the confidence he had “in the flesh” during that time: He was “circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; …as for legalistic righteousness, faultless” (3:4-6). We don’t know precisely how Paul’s personal development led to this hyper-zealotry, but none of us should be surprised by it. Consider the following facts:

• All humans are conceived in sin (Ps 50:15; Jn 3:3,5,6), and “the mind of the flesh is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law [νόµῳ], for it is not even able to do so” (Ro 8:7). “More deceitful is the heart than all else, and it is incurable. Who can understand it?” (Jer 17:9).

• From Jesus’ ministry and Josephus’ writings, already considered, it is clear that the Jewish religion was largely corrupted by work-righteousness, especially within the sect of the Pharisees (e.g. Lk 7:36-50; 15; 18:9-14; cf. Mt 23:1-4,13-15). 33

• Every human has a God-given conscience that testifies, though imperfectly, to God’s justice and their sinfulness (Ro 2:14,15). Wi_ingly or not, all people seek in one way or another to quiet and still their conscience.

• When work-righteousness is a person’s religion—and it is everyone’s default religion—that search for peace of conscience leads to awful, astonishing acts and

Steinmann, op. cit., pp. 285-287. Steinmann points out that Peter employed Joel 2:28-31 in his 32Pentecost sermon (Ac 2:17-21), which not only refers to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, but also to the sun turning to darkness and the moon to blood “before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord.”

There is a striking parallel between Judaism and the Pharisees in Jesus’ day and Christianity and the 33papists in Martin Luther’s day. Anyone with even a passing acquaintance with Luther’s writings knows that he himself did not miss this parallel; the similarities are what helped to make Luther such an excellent student and interpreter of Paul.

- -9

activity. Consider some of the pagan rituals of human sacrifice. Consider disorders like obsessive-compulsive washing or cu_ing, or all the manifestations of substance abuse. Consider how causes like preventing animal abuse, saving 34the wolves, preserving wilderness, restricting climate change, promoting various diets and dietary supplements, and stopping acts of terrorism—some of which are good causes in and of themselves—are pursued with insane, Saul-like zealotry. And when that work-righteousness infiltrates the visible Christian church, Satan takes a special interest in it and works with singular intensity to foster it. How else can we explain the development of things like purgatory and indulgences in the Christian church—which not only have absolutely no basis in the Scriptures, but are also manifestly contrary to the gospel?

Regarding the last point, can you recall times in your life when work-righteousness infringed upon your own Christian life in a more obvious way, even though you were surrounded by pastors and teachers who condemned it? Pastor James Hein, a WELS pastor, has publicly shared a story from his sophomore year of high school: He said that he one time gave a larger offering during a service than he would have otherwise. As the plate was being passed around, he dug out his wallet and discovered that all he had was a $10 bill; he usually only gave a dollar. But he didn’t want to put nothing in the plate, so he put the larger bill in there. Though initially hesitant, he felt pre_y good about it aaerwards. Later that day he felt even be_er about it, because he went on to play his best basketball game that year. In his mind he connected the dots from point 35A - his larger than usual offering - to point B - his awesome basketball game. So the next time the offering plate came around, guess what he gave again? 36 How many of us did similar things in our youth? We have probably tried to bury the sins we are most embarrassed about from those years, but permit me to ask you to dig one or two of them up temporarily, so that I can also ask: How oaen did we try to make up for our evil deed aaerwards, not just on an earthly level if it was possible (which we learned in the section on the Keys in the Catechism is good to do), but also with God? I remember Professor Deutschlander pu_ing it into perspective for me when he shared an anecdote in class one day. He talked about a guilt-ridden student who came to see him one day. He had done something awful and was despairing of God’s

Some will argue that these are purely chemical imbalances. But although there is a physical aspect to 34much of what ails us, and we do well to consult specialists to help us address that, there is also always a spiritual root cause related to original sin, and complete healing can never take place until not just the body but also the soul is put right.

His high school had chapel services every day, and an offering was gathered each Tuesday.35

He shares this story in a couple blog posts; here is one of them: pastorjameshein.wordpress.com/362014/07/10/5-signs-youre-an-immature-christian/ (accessed 31 August 2019).

- -10

http://pastorjameshein.wordpress.com/2014/07/10/5-signs-youre-an-immature-christian/http://pastorjameshein.wordpress.com/2014/07/10/5-signs-youre-an-immature-christian/

grace. Professor Deutschlander asked him, “Do you think that you were somehow more deserving of God’s grace before you commi_ed this sin?” Yes, and how many of us still do similar things or have similar thoughts? How oaen do I feel myself wanting to engage in one-upmanship with my brothers at circuit meetings and conferences? How oaen do I catch myself only sharing successes when I publicly share with them what’s going on in my life and ministry? How oaen do I complain to my brothers about the practices of others not just out of a bleeding concern for the honor of God’s name and the advancement of God’s kingdom, but because that complaining makes me look be_er by comparison? How oaen do I feel the need to do all this because I feel that God is listening and is evaluating me on the basis of what I share, when actually my status before God has absolutely zilch to do with my works? 37 Saul was a man just like us (cf. Jas 5:17), only he did not yet know the gospel. So we should hardly be surprised if his search for a conscience at peace ultimately led him to acts of violence against Christians—and that in spite of the fact that, as Josephus informs us, “the Pharisees [were] naturally lenient in the ma_er of punishments.” If 38the way to peace with God was only through the act of circumcision, sacrifices at the temple, observance of the Sabbath and of “special days and months and seasons and years” (cf. Gal 4:10), and keeping all the other ceremonial laws—and in order to do that, keeping all the other laws invented by the Jewish rabbis to serve as a hedge of protection around God’s law—then the Christian gospel with its freedom from all such laws was truly the worst evil on earth, a formidable threat to the peace he was striving for and a threat to peace with God for all his fellow Jews. 39 Of course, what Saul missed was that his efforts to keep God’s law were not actually giving him peace. At best, they were holding out the false promise of future peace—a goal which he would not and could not ever a_ain. So there Saul was, watching the cloaks of the witnesses at Stephen’s trial as they pelted him with stones outside the city of Jerusalem (Ac 7:57,58). And instead of being impressed by Stephen’s prayer that the Lord would receive his spirit and that the Lord would not hold this sin against those who murdered him, it angered Saul even more. Clearly the Christians’ deception was truly insidious if it inspired such confidence even in the face of death. They needed to be stopped, and now.

There is probably also a related idea in my sinful heart—that I must not be doing ministry right if I have 37disappointments or frustrations to share. My prayer is that we are not sharing successes because we are only and always experiencing successes and nothing else; that would actually be the better indication that we were not doing ministry right.

Jewish Antiquities 13, 10, 6 in Marcus, tr., op. cit. (rf. fn. 25 supra), p. 375.38

It’s basically the same hostility people feel toward us today when we point out the idolatry in the 39pursuits already mentioned. We are a threat to the only peace they know how to (attempt to) give themselves.

- -11

So he began to tear like a wolf at its prey. His very breath consisted of threats and murder against the Lord’s disciples (Ac 9:1). He went from house to house and dragged off men and women alike and handed them over to prison (Ac 8:3). Paul later said that many of these prisoners were then tried, “and when they were put to death, I cast my vote against them. Many a time I went from one synagogue to another to have them punished, and I tried to force them to blaspheme” (Ac 26:10,11). Saul was a bona fide Inquisitor. There was probably an added sense of urgency to his activity since, as already mentioned, it probably took place during the transition period between prefects in 36 AD. Once the new prefect of Judea arrived, the Roman government would certainly not allow such arbitrary methods of arrest and execution. Once Saul felt he had injected sufficient terror into the Christian community in Jerusalem, he turned his a_ention elsewhere. Paul later said he “even went to foreign cities [plural!] to persecute them” and that his journey to Damascus was only one of those journeys (Ac 26:11,12)—yes, the last one. Saul was heading north to that city aaer obtaining le_ers from Caiaphas the high priest and the Sanhedrin addressed to the Jews in Damascus. These le_ers gave Saul authority to bring the followers of “the Way” in their midst, whether men or women, as prisoners to Jerusalem to be punished (Ac 9:1,2; 22:4,5). He was nearing the city when an event occurred that proved to be the turning point in his life. To get the full details of what happened, we need to compare Luke’s account in Acts 9 (which doubtless originated with Paul) with Paul’s own spoken accounts in Acts 22 and 26. Around noon a bright light from the sky flashed around him, brighter than the noonday sun. It caused both him and all his traveling companions to fall to the ground, and Saul heard a voice say to him in Aramaic, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.” 40

It is worthwhile to consider all the times God repeats the names of individuals in addressing them: 40“Moses! Moses!” (Exodus 3:4); “Samuel! Samuel!” (1 Samuel 3:10); “Martha, Martha” (Luke 10:41); “Jerusalem, Jerusalem” (Matthew 23:37); “Simon, Simon” (Luke 22:31); “My God, my God” (Psalm 22:1; Matthew 27:46).

- -12

Did Saul also see Jesus here? Whenever he later described his connection with Jesus’ opening words, he simply said that he “heard a voice” (Ac 9:4; 22:7; 26:14). He also later said that he could not see aaer his exchange with the Lord was over, “because the brilliance of the light had blinded [him]” (22:11). However, he says that his companions did not see anyone (µηδένα δὲ θεωροῦντες; 9:7), which seems to be said in contrast with himself, and he calls the entire experience a “heavenly vision [οὐράνιος ὀπτασία]” (26:19). Later, when Ananias visited him, Ananias called Jesus “the one who appeared to you on the road [ὁ ὀφθείς σοι ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ]” (9:17). Seemingly more explicit is Acts 9:27, where Barnabas brings Saul to the apostles and tells them “how he [Saul] had seen the Lord on the road [πῶς ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ εἶδεν τὸν κύριον].” Even this is not 41conclusive, however, since the concepts of “vision” and “seeing” can also be more broad and can simply refer to a divine encounter or revelation, regardless of precisely how God’s message is relayed. All of these descriptions do impress upon us the exceptionality and awesomeness of what Saul experienced. 42 There seems to be a contradiction between 9:7, which says that his companions heard the sound/voice but did not see anyone (ἀκούοντες µὲν τῆς φωνῆς µηδένα δὲ θεωροῦντες), and 22:9, which says that they did not hear the sound/voice of the one speaking to him (τὴν δὲ φωνὴν οὐκ ἤκουσαν τοῦ λαλοῦντός µοι). The difference seems to be not in the fact that ἀκούω takes a genitive object in one case and an accusative in the other, but in Paul’s usage of the verb, which the NIV captures well. In the first case, Luke is reporting that even Saul’s companions could testify that someone spoke to Saul, but in the second case, Saul is making clear that only he could actually understand what was being said. The best illustration I can think of, even though it doesn’t match the seriousness and reality of the situation, is that Saul’s companions were similar to viewers of classroom scenes in Peanuts television cartoons. We can hear the teacher speaking, but we can only guess what she is saying on the basis of the responses of the students, who can apparently understand her just fine. But three times in his book, the Holy Spirit through Luke’s recording allows us to understand the voice that spoke to Saul just fine. And while it was a terrifying proclamation of law to Saul, it is a tremendous comfort to us. The first sentence or question—“Why do you persecute me?”—reminds us of the truth that the Church is the mystical body of Christ. “He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me,” Jesus said (Lk 10;16). “Whoever touches you touches the apple of his eye” (Zec 2:8). The second sentence reminds us of God’s universal desire to save. As Paul himself

The text immediately goes on to say, “…and that he had spoken to him,” which seems to make the 41seeing and speaking/hearing separate aspects of Saul’s interaction with the Lord Jesus. However, by that point the speaking and hearing could have been referring to Saul’s time in Arabia (Gal 1:17), which we will cover further on.

We also know that, whether here or later, Saul actually saw Jesus at some point, since this was a 42defining characteristic of the apostles (Ac 1:21,22; 1 Co 9:1). See also p. 21 infra.

- -13

would later say, God has determined the times set for us and the exact places where we would live so that we would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him (Ac 17:26,27). So when we continue to miss him and to fight against him with heart and life, we are kicking against the goads, resisting the direction in which he wishes to lead us, to our own detriment. 43 But there is much more going on here with this second sentence—“It is hard for you to kick against the goads [σκληρόν σοι πρὸς κέντρα λακτίζειν]” (Ac 26:14). This is an exchange between scholars (one of them, of course, infinitely more scholarly than the other); Jesus is using Saul’s excellent education to communicate with him on a deeper level. Jesus is very likely alluding to Euripides’ tragedy The Bacchanals (Βάκχαι), which 44Euripides composed around 406 BC, not long before his death; it was first performed posthumously. It is considered to be not just one of his greatest tragedies, but also one of the greatest ever wri_en, modern or ancient. In it, the god Dionysus (or Bacchus), who was born of Zeus’ relationship with the mortal Semele, has taken human form and visited Thebes, where his mother is buried, in order to persuade the people that he is indeed a god—“[in order that I might] be [a] god manifest to men” —and to incite the 45people to worship him as such. His task is not easy, since his mother’s sisters have spread the lie that she became pregnant by another man as a result of her wantonness. 46One of Dionysus’ fiercest opponents is the current king, Pentheus, who has believed the lies of his mother and aunts. When he hears that his mother and aunts are now participating in Bacchanal rites with other Thebans up in the mountains (having been driven to do so by Dionysus’ own divine influence) and that they have even demonstrated apparently miraculous powers, Pentheus becomes outraged and orders that all his soldiers be mustered against Dionysus’ worshippers. When Dionysus, still disguised as a stranger, warns him to “bear not arms against a god,” Pentheus sternly tells him not to lecture him. To this Dionysus responds:

θύοιµ ̓ ἂν αὐτῲ µᾶλλον ἢ θυµούµενος πρὸς κέντρα λακτίζοιµι θνητὸς ὢν θεῷ.

Johnny Cash set this sentence to music in his gravelly, freight-train voice in his song “When the Man 43Comes Around”—not a fitting song for corporate worship, but a powerful proclamation of God’s impending judgment nonetheless.

Knock, knock. Who’s there? Euripides. Euripides who? Euripides pants, I breaka yo’ face.44

Arthur S. Way, tr., Euripides in Four Volumes, vol. 3 (New York: The MacMillan Co., 1912), pp. 6,7 (esp. 45line 22).

Ibid., pp. 8,9 (lines 26-31).46

- -14

I would prefer to sacrifice to him than angrily kick against the goads, being but a mortal mad at a god. 47

Though Jesus’ incarnation in the womb of Mary was far more glorious an act than any of Zeus’ affairs with mortal women (not to mention that the former is fact, the la_er, fictions), the multiple parallels jump off the page. Most noteworthy is the clear implication that Saul’s activity, including his current trip to Damascus, is a campaign against none other than God himself. It also ends up being similar to when Jesus told 48Nathanael, “I saw you while you were still under the fig tree” (Jn 1:48); he is subtly telling Saul here: “I saw and heard you while you were studying Euripides.” 49 And Saul did not miss the implication that he was campaigning against God. His first question in response to the voice was, “Who are you, Lord?” Clearly this voice was from heaven, from God, and clearly it was accusing him of persecuting him. But how

Ibid., p. 66 (lines 794-95); translation mine; cf. Way’s translation on p. 67:47Better slay victims unto him than kickAgainst the pricks, man raging against God.

Even if Jesus was employing the phrase more generally and not referring to its specific context in 48Euripides’ Bacchae, “kicking against the goads” still had the connotation of futilely resisting a superior power, usually a god—but this was a connotation that could only be used and picked up on if one was familiar with the Greek tragedians. In addition to Euripides’ usage, Aeschylus employs the phrase in two of his tragedies, Agamemnon (458 BC) and Prometheus Bound (after 479 BC), though scholars debate whether the latter was composed by Aeschylus, his son Euphorion, or someone else. In Agamemnon, Aegisthus successfully plots the murder of King Agamemnon of Mycenae. When the elders of Mycenae tell him that he will not escape justice for his act, Aegisthus responds, “Dost thou so speak, that sittest at the lower oar when those upon the higher thwart [rowing bench] control the ship? … Kick not against the pricks [goads] lest thou strike to thy hurt” (Herbert Weir Smyth, tr., Aeschylus in Two Volumes, vol. 2 [New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1926], pp. 142-145 [lines 1617-1624]). It is not entirely clear whether Aegisthus is admonishing the elders to submit to the decree of fate or to his own authority, now that their king is dead, but either way his warning clearly means that they should not futilely resist a superior power. In Prometheus Bound, the Titan Oceanus warns the bound Prometheus not to speak so harshly and sharply against Zeus with these words: “[T]ake me as thy teacher and kick not against the pricks [goads], seeing that a harsh ruler now holds sway [i.e. Zeus] who is accountable to none” (Smyth, tr., Aeschylus in Two Volumes, vol. 1 [New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1922], pp. 244,245 [lines 324-326]). Either understanding—a more specific reference to one of Euripides’ plays with its attendant associations or an idiom taken from the Greek playwrights in general—requires us to view Paul as a man learned in the classics of his day.

Or: “I saw you while you were studying the classics” (rf. preceding fn.). It is interesting that Luke does 49not include this second sentence of Jesus’ opening words in Acts 9 and that Paul also does not include it in Acts 22, in his address to the Jewish crowd. He only includes it in Acts 26, in his address to Governor Porcius Festus and King Herod Agrippa II. It seems that Paul took stock of their more educated background (rf. 26:3,27) and decided to include this detail, which was evidence of both Jesus’ great learning and his own. He wanted to impress upon them that Christianity was not an ignorant, backwoods religion—another example of his becoming all things to all people (1 Co 9:22). Paul was so successful in this that his speech nearly had the opposite effect (Ac 26:24). If Paul included “It is hard for you to kick against the goads” in every retelling of Jesus’ appearance to him on the road to Damascus, either he would have come off as pretentious or its full effect would have gone over the heads of his hearers.

- -15

could that be? Saul was coming to the crushing realization that he had no idea who God was. 50 The answer: “I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting.” When combined with his opening words to Saul, Jesus is clearly revealing himself as God in this declaration. “What shall I do, Lord?” Saul asked. 51 “Get up and stand on your feet and go into the city,” Jesus replied. “There you will be told all that you have been assigned to do.” It is not entirely clear whether the words that follow in Paul’s report in Acts 26 were actually words that Jesus went on to speak right then and there, or if Paul is already incorporating the words that Jesus spoke to him through Ananias three days later in Damascus, since in his Acts 26 retelling he does not mention Ananias’ visit at all. I will proceed under the assumption that these words were spoken by Ananias later and will include them with his address below. At some point, the men traveling with Saul realized that what was happening was not directed at them and they stood up. But they stood there speechless, not knowing what was happening to their leader. Eventually the light stopped shining, the voice stopped speaking, and Saul stood up, but when he opened his eyes he could not see anything. Paul later said that it was the brilliance of the light that had blinded him. His companions led him by the hand into Damascus, where he remained blind and did not eat or drink anything for three days, until Ananias came to see him. At some point, whether right away or in the course of those three days, he was taken to the house of a certain Judas on Straight Street. 52 The question arises here: When exactly did Saul’s conversion take place? Everyone tends automatically to identify this flashing light experience with Saul’s conversion, but is that the best identification? Obviously, Jesus stepped into Saul’s life in an extra-ordinary way, but is it best to assume that he also converted Saul in an extra-ordinary way, basically zapping faith into his heart without means in a sort of Calvinistic conversion? Or is it be_er to assume that, just as Paul himself later says that the gospel is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes (Ro 1:16) and

There is a sobering sermon in this question all by itself. A person can be a learned, reputable, 50respectable member of the visible Christian church and actually be completely outside of it, having no idea who God really is.

This is the first time in his life Saul identifies Jesus as the Lord. 1 Corinthians 12:3 might lead us to say 51that this question therefore marks the point of Saul’s conversion. However, in that passage, the idea is clearly that no one can say “Jesus is Lord” with trust in his or her heart, except by the Holy Spirit. But Philippians 2:10,11 clearly shows that even the condemned can and will acknowledge Jesus as Lord, but in a completely different way than 1 Corinthians 12:3 is talking about. Thus this question by Saul does not decide the conversion question by itself.

This street is still visible on Google Maps in Old Damascus today.52

- -16

that faith comes from hearing the message and that the message is heard through the word about Christ (Ro 10:17), that it was also the message of the gospel of Christ that converted Saul? And if the la_er, then it would seem that Saul was converted sometime aBer his vision, since there was no explicit gospel in Jesus’ words to Saul, unless Acts 26:16b-18 were indeed part of his address and not words spoken to him later through Ananias. We do know that he was already converted before Ananias’ visit, since Jesus himself tells Ananias that Saul is praying to him (Ac 9:11), and it is impossible for anyone but a believer to pray to Jesus in a way that he acknowledges (Pro 15:8,29). We also know that Saul received at least one more vision from the Lord in Damascus before Ananias’ visit (Ac 9:12). Did Jesus or an angel share the gospel in this vision, which converted Saul? Or was it much quieter, much less flashy than that, as the Holy Spirit’s work usually is? Was Saul simply converted through the gospel as he reflected on everything he already knew about Jesus, but had hitherto rejected, aaer Jesus’ bright appearance to him? Did he already know about the Christian message of free forgiveness through Jesus’ death, but now found comfort in it instead of being angered by it? I don’t know the final answer, but I think it is good for us to wrestle with the question, instead of simply assuming that Saul’s companions were leading a converted Christian by the hand into Damascus. 53 But at some point before Ananias’ visit, Saul was indeed converted to the Christian faith. Paul himself would have us stop and think about that (1 Tim 1:12-16):

Christ Jesus our Lord…considered me faithful, appointing to ministry someone who was formerly a blasphemer and a persecutor and an insolent person. But I was shown mercy because I acted without understanding, in unbelief. But the grace of our Lord overflowed with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. Trustworthy is the saying, and worthy of all acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinful people, of whom I am the worst [πρῶτός εἰµι ἐγώ]. But for this reason I was shown mercy, in order that in me, the worst sinner, Christ Jesus might demonstrate the full extent of his patience [τὴν ἅπασαν µακροθυµίαν] as a prototype [πρὸς ὑποτύπωσιν] of those who 54would believe in him to eternal life.

Here Paul clearly says by inspiration of the Holy Spirit that a) he was and still is a sinner, aaer his conversion, even as he gives divine ministerial instructions to Pastor Timothy, b) he still is the worst sinner, c) he is now, by the grace and mercy of Jesus, also

R. C. H. Lenski also makes this point, though he also goes too far in stating dogmatically that the 53gospel’s entrance into his heart “did not occur on the road but in Damascus” (The Interpretation of The Acts of the Apostles [Columbus, OH: The Wartburg Press, 1944], p. 355).

Ἅπας is an “intensive form” of πᾶς (BDAG); see Anne H. Groton, From Alpha to Omega: A Beginning 54Course in Classical Greek, rev. 3rd ed. (Newburyport, MA: Focus Publishing / R. Pullins Co., 2001), p. 149, for the different positions and corresponding meanings of πᾶς.

- -17

someone who believes in Jesus to eternal life, and d) as such, he is a prototype (or more literally, an undertype) for all those who would believe in Jesus to eternal life. A prototype car is the first one produced that shows what the rest of the models are going to be like; the rest are made to fit that mold, so to speak. If something doesn’t look like it should or isn’t working like it’s supposed to and you’re wondering how it should work or what it should look like, you look at the prototype. That means Paul isn’t Worst Sinner by himself. He’s primus inter pares, the first among equals. By definition, you can’t be worse than the worst, but you can tie him. And you do. And I do. Paul was the worst sinner surrounded by a whole tribe of worst sinners known as the Christian Church. 55 And Jesus’ purpose in converting Paul, and Paul’s purpose in sharing these words with us, is to lead us to magnify the grace and mercy of God. He didn’t convert a single one of us because of anything in us, because of what he saw in us or because of what he could get from us; he did it in spite of us, purely out of an eternal and unchanging character in his heart, in view of the selfless, saving work of his Son (grace). He didn’t convert a single one of us because we were such good prospects for his kingdom; he did it because his heart broke at how ignorant and miserable and awful we were (mercy). And he continues daily to forgive our sins and to treat and keep us as his adopted sons for those exact same reasons, and for those reasons alone. And all of that goes for the reasons he appointed us to the public ministry of the gospel too. Simul justus et peccator isn’t a theological proposition or hypothesis; it is a Spirit-communicated fact—a fact without which the glory and grace of God are detestably under-appreciated, and a fact that, when acknowledged, turns our lives into the fi_ing odes of praise God intended them to be. 56 Before moving on to Ananias’ visit, let us note one more tremendously encouraging truth. Remember Stephen the martyr’s prayer? “Lord, do not hold this sin against them” (Ac 7:60). Think also of the many Christians in Jerusalem and those sca_ered elsewhere (Ac 8:1), including those in Damascus, who knew that Saul was on his way there to arrest them (Ac 9:14), who were praying. And what were they praying? Even though their exact words are not revealed to us, they are no mystery. They were praying what all Christians have prayed, especially in times of persecution. It is

Isn’t this precisely the confession Jesus is teaching us to have in his parable of the unmerciful servant 55(Matthew 18:21-35), so that we will be ready to forgive absolutely anyone? If there is truly anyone out there worse than I, then I can’t view and treat my own debt as greater than his.

Those who fight against this way of speaking often have good intentions, wanting to emphasize all the 56times and ways that the inspired writers address us according to the new identity God has imputed and given to us. Indeed, to the extent that we have lost those ways of speaking, shame on us. But the problem isn’t solved by rushing into the opposite ditch. Professor Richard Gurgel beautifully addresses this matter in his paper, “Honest Preaching: Faithfully Proclaiming the Law for the Sake of the Gospel,” available on the Seminary Essay File online. Commenting on 1 Timothy 1:16, he aptly says, “Yes, I know (and so did Paul) that this is not the end of the story. But without that confession, I am living—and preaching—a lie, and I will distort the very gospel I prize into something other than what it is for me—and my people!” (p. 8).

- -18

summed up nicely in Luther’s explanation to the Third Petition of the Lord’s Prayer (paraphrased): “Lord, break and defeat every evil plan and purpose, such as those of the devil, the world, and our own sinful flesh, which try to prevent us from keeping your name holy and le_ing your kingdom come. Convert Saul and the enemies of your Church or, if they stubbornly and impenitently persist in fighting your will and inflicting harm on your church, then” - as the imprecatory psalms teach us to pray - “clothe yourself in power and get them out of the way.” And how did the Lord answer? He actually converted the Church’s greatest enemy—and not only that, but he also turned him into the man that the Christian Church has generally regarded as her greatest ally and advocate. Think about that. Are any of all the horrible enemies that the Church is facing in our country today as bad, yet, as Saul was, outwardly speaking? Not a one. Yet as we seem to be approaching the horizon of an age of more intense Christian persecution in our country, are we praying? Are we praying with trust that, if God wants, he can not only remove the Church’s worst enemies, but even do so by converting them and turning them into our greatest allies and advocates? Aaer all, did he not convert Saul? Just as incredible, has he not converted you and me? Were any of these conversions greater miracles than the potential conversion of any of the Church’s current enemies? “Will not God bring about justice for his chosen ones, who cry out to him day and night? Will he keep pu_ing them off? I tell you, he will see that they get justice, and quickly. However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?” (Luke 18:7,8). The Lord then appeared to the disciple Ananias in a vision and convinced him, in spite of his fear and hesitation, to go and place his hands on Saul to restore his sight. Can you imagine what it was like for Saul to hear the first two words out of Ananias’ mouth? Ananias placed his hands on him and said, “Brother Saul, the Lord—Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here—has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit. Receive your sight” (Ac 9:17). At that very moment, something like fish-scales fell from Saul’s eyes and he was able to see his new 57brother in the faith. Then Ananias said, “The God of our fathers has chosen you to know his will and to see the Righteous One and to hear words from his mouth. You will be his witness to all men of what you have seen and heard” (Ac 22:14,15). The words of Acts 26:16b-18 also probably belong to this speech: “[The Lord Jesus has] appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen of [him] and what [he] will show you. [He] will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. [He

I don’t know what lesson Jesus intended to impart by having Saul’s sight return to him in this strange 57way, other than that it certainly reinforced the supernatural nature of what had happened to him; light doesn’t usually cause blindness by covering a person’s eyes with scales. However, I can’t help but think of the many fish my dad had me “clean” as a little boy by taking a spoon and running it over each fish’s body to scrape off the scales, and then thinking about fn. 28 and the tradition about Gamaliel shared there. Gamaliel may have classified his pupil as a “clean fish” before, but now Saul was a truly clean fish in the net of Jesus’ harvest (cf. also Mt 13:47-50).

- -19

is] sending you to them to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in [him].” Ananias concluded with, “And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name” (Ac 22:16). And that is what Saul did. He also finally took some food and 58regained his physical strength (Ac 9:18b,19). Now Saul truly had the certainty and peace he had been pursuing. He no longer had a “righteousness of [his] own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith” (Php 3:9). Compared to that righteousness, he regarded whatever had been to his credit before as nothing but “a pile of crap [σκύβαλα]” (3:7,8). He realized that God’s law could not establish his righteousness, but only make him conscious of his sin (Ro 3:20). His eyes were opened so that he could go back through the Scriptures he knew so well and see that they were testifying about Jesus (Lk 24:27; Jn 5:39), testifying to the righteousness that God gives as a gia through faith in his blood (Ro 3:21,22,25). While previously always hoping that peace would come on the wings of the morrow, he now knew that in Christ he could never be in a be_er state or be looked upon more favorably by God than he was right now, apart from anything good he had done or anything evil from which he had refrained. We can glean this not just from Paul’s manifold and manifest gospel testimonies in his epistles, but also from the later accusations of his opponents, namely that he was teaching “all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn away from Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or live according to [Jewish] customs” (Ac 21:21), that he was teaching “all people everywhere against [the Jewish] people and [their] law and [the temple]” (21:28; cf. 25:7,8). Though they misunderstood Paul’s teaching, we can deduce from their accusations that Paul was preaching unmitigated grace. Previously his salvation was found in zealously running from one city to the next, from one work to the next, but now, like Luther, he found his salvation in repentance and rest, his strength in quietness and trust (cf. Isa 30:15). The sins he had already been aware of were completely paid for by Christ, as were the sins he had just become aware of—his persecution and murder of Christians. The guilt of the worst sin was not more powerful than God’s grace in Jesus the Christ. The lie of the devil—the lie spoken so oaen to Luther by his opponents—is that such rest and quietness, if emphasized too much or proclaimed and understood too clearly, will spell the death of a living and active Christianity. But there stands the rest of the life and the ministry of Paul as stark and irrefutable evidence to the contrary. “Deal generously with your servant; I will live, and I will obey your word” (Ps 119:17).

This is a good go-to verse when doing an initial evaluation of any Bible translation.58

- -20

Note: Jesus sent Ananias so that Saul could “be filled with the Holy Spirit.” And how was that done? Saul was baptized and had his sins washed away. His saving faith in Jesus was thereby sealed (cf. Titus 3:5).

“At Evening He Will Apportion Plunder”

The timeline in this early part of Paul’s Christian life is not crystal clear. If we 59only read Acts, it would seem that aaer a brief period of introduction and acclimatization, he started preaching in the synagogues of Damascus and continued doing so until his life was in danger, forcing him to leave the city secretly under the cover of darkness and to go to Jerusalem (Ac 9:19-25). But later Paul himself says that aaer God was pleased to reveal his Son in him, he “withdrew to Arabia and later returned to Damascus” (Gal 1:17). Arabia was out in the wilderness south and east of 60Damascus. The only logical explanation for an excursion into such territory is that this was precisely where he was “to see [Jesus] the Righteous One and to hear words from his mouth” (Ac 22:14)—that is, receive the training necessary to preach and teach with the authority of an apostle (Ac 1:21,22; 1 Co 9:1; 2 Co 12:1). It was this unusual preparation, different from the three years’ training with Jesus in the flesh that the other apostles had received, that made Paul an apostle “abnormally born” (1 Co 15:8). So either Paul went into Arabia for his training aaer his brief period of introduction, and the εὐθέως of Acts 9:20 is be_er translated “all of a sudden” than “immediately,” describing the impact of his ministry upon his return to Damascus, or he had a preliminary or provisional period of preaching followed by his period of training in Arabia, and then more extensive preaching in Damascus upon his return. Either way, even Paul, even aaer his extensive training and education in Jerusalem and Jesus’ extra-ordinary intervention in his life, needed seminary training. Jesus does not want men running off half-cocked to serve as public ministers of the gospel. Paul’s own later instructions to Timothy also applied to himself as an apostle: “Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands” (1 Tim 5:22).

I will refer to him as Paul from now on, the name he himself seems to have adopted to distinguish 59between his past life and new life as a Christian. The transition between calling him Saul and Paul occurs very quietly in Acts 13:9 during his first missionary journey. Παῦλος is simply a Hellenization of the Latin Paulus, an adjective meaning “little, small.” It is unclear whether this was a surname that Paul’s family had in connection with their Roman citizenship (Paulus was never used as a praenomen or given name), or if it was a nickname he received, perhaps in view of his small stature or his being the last-born of the family (cf. Ac 14:12; fn. 8 supra), and which he subsequently repurposed to distinguish between the two periods of his life and as a reminder of God’s grace (cf. 1 Co 3:9; Eph 3:8). Either way, this Latin name also put up one less barrier to his gospel ministry to the Gentiles.

The NIV says that Paul “went immediately into Arabia”; this is possibly what happened, but the original 60Greek does not explicitly say that is what happened. The Greek only says what he did not immediately do: He did not immediately consult with flesh and blood or go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before he was.

- -21

- -22

Paul also tells us that he went to Jerusalem “aaer three years” in relation to his conversion, and Acts 9:23-26; 22:16,17; and 26:20 tell us that he made his first trip to 61Jerusalem as a Christian aaer his time in Damascus. If then his conversion took place in 36 AD, his escape from Damascus and trip to Jerusalem took place in 38 AD, which also fits with what Paul tells us in 2 Corinthians 11:32,33 and the historical circumstances. 62This means that Paul spent about two full years, perhaps more, between his seminary training in Arabia and his preaching in Damascus. When he began preaching in earnest in Damascus, he “grew more and more powerful and baffled [συνέχυννεν] the Jews living in Damascus by proving that Jesus is the Christ” (Ac 9:22). To close this introduction to the life and ministry of Paul, let’s stop here and notice a couple things about him at the outset of his ministry. In Paul, as in many places in Scripture, we are confronted with a paradox. On the one hand, when God selected a man to take the message of Christianity and turn the world upside-down with it, he selected a well-educated, intelligent, classically trained man, a man skilled in debate. Paul had Epimenides’ De oraculis 63 64(7th/6th cent. BC; Ac 17:28a; Titus 1:12), Aratus’ Phaenomena (3rd cent. BC; 17:28b), Euripides’ Bacchae (c. 406 BC; Ac 26:14), and Menander’s Thais (late 4th/early 3rd cent. BC; 1 Co 15:33) at the ready off the top of his head, in addition to the Old Testament 65Scriptures. The chief benefit of a classical education is that it aims, first, to produce excellent communicators—not only by providing a thorough training in grammar but also by intense exposure to some of the most beautiful communication mankind has produced

Remember, however, that the Jews used “after” differently than we do. If I say “after three days,” I 61usually mean sometime on the fourth day from the point of temporal reference that I’m using. But in the Jewish way of speaking, “after eight days” means “a week later” (e.g. John 20:26), including the point of temporal reference in the count and meaning anytime on the eighth day. That is also why Jesus could say that he would rise “after three days” in relation to his death on Good Friday (Mark 8:31; 9:31).

Steinmann, op. cit., pp. 301-303.62

It is uncertain whether he received that classical training in Jerusalem (which I do not think unlikely) or 63on his own.

Valleskey points out that the famous Roman statesman, philosopher, and rhetorician Cicero served as 64proconsul in Tarsus from 51-50 BC (op. cit., p. 20). Paul may have studied the six books on rhetoric by this famous one-time resident of his hometown.

It seems that Menander, however, was borrowing from a now-unknown tragedy by Euripides (see 65Socrates Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History, Bk. III, Ch. 16), so it is possible that Paul too was quoting from the original source.

- -23

in their original languages (e.g. Homer’s Iliad, Vergil’s Aeneid) —and second, to teach 66students how to think—not in the sense of indoctrination (which should come from the Scriptures) but in the sense of exercise, conditioning, and organization of the mind. In fact, God stresses the importance of these by the very existence of Paul and his writings. To fully understand Paul’s epistles, you need to have an excellent grasp of grammar, be familiar with the writings of the ancients, and be able to think large thoughts. We already considered how Jesus alluded to Euripides (and perhaps other tragedians) in his first appearance to Paul. Take Paul’s notorious correlative clauses as another example. Remember memorizing Romans 5:12 in grade school or Catechism 67instruction? “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned—” Great passage, but only half a sentence combined with the start of a large digression. If our teachers wanted us to memorize the complete sentence, we would have had to go through 5:19, where he finally got to the “so also.” Paul does the same thing in 1 Timothy 1:3: “Just as I urged you to stay on at Ephesus…” He also digresses there and does not resume his thought until 2:1—18 verses later!—where by that time the context requires him to use “therefore” instead of “so also.” A classical education gives you 68the knowledge of Greek, the grammatical foundation, and the training in the process of thinking to be able to understand these and other large thoughts of Paul, which are ultimately the large thoughts of the Holy Spirit. As the early church historian Socrates Scholasticus put it (c. 439 AD) aaer taking note of Paul’s extra-biblical learning himself: “[T]he doctors [i.e. teachers] of the Church by unhindered usage were accustomed to exercise themselves in the learning of the Greeks…with a view to improve themselves in eloquence and to strengthen and polish their mind, and at the same time to enable them to refute the errors of the heathen.” 69 Paul of course would also urge us to train ourselves in the classics that have appeared since his time, such as the plays of Shakespeare and the novels of Dostoyevsky. But the reason that the ancient classics will always have a place is that

Just as the art of music helps to make divine doctrine, which is otherwise repugnant to our sinful 66nature, more palatable (akin to Mary Poppins’ “spoonful of sugar” helping the medicine to go down; rf. Basil of Caesarea’s Homily on the First Psalm in J.-P. Migne, ed., Patrologia Graeca 29:211-212), so also does exposure to beautiful literature, which promotes and enhances the art of rhetoric.

We could adapt the proverb taken from Vergil’s Aeneid, “Beware of Greeks bearing gifts,” to Paul thus: 67“Beware of Paul entering correlative clauses.” When Paul says, “Just as…”, hold on to your britches, because it could be a long, bumpy ride.

Most translations unfortunately do not capture this.68

Ecclesiastical History, Bk. III, Ch. 16 in Schaff & Wace, eds., Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 69(hereafter NPNF), Second Series, vol. 2 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1995; reprint of Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1890), p. 88. Augustine also thoroughly discusses the benefits of a classical education in On Christian Doctrine, esp. from Bk. II onward (NPNF 1-2:543ff).

- -24

most of what has been judged “classic” since then is simply a rehash and regurgitation of the work of the ancients. Remember, what defines a classic is that it has stood the test of time and its value has been recognized by multiple cultures around the world. Also remember, the doctrine of original sin means that humanity’s capacities and abilities are in decrescendo as time goes on, not crescendo as the evolutionary theory teaches (cf. also Mt 24:10-12; 2 Tim 3:1-5). 70 Let’s also not ignore the fact one of the chief a_acks against Christendom today is that her adherents are just simplistic, ignorant sheeple, followers of fantasies and fairy tales. In the eyes of the world, you can either be smart or you can be a Christian. The more we water down and simplify our theology and preaching and promote the false dichotomy between head and heart, the more we also promote the false dichotomy of Christian faith and intelligence and push the educated community away from the gospel. 71 So on the one hand, God’s selection of Paul and the example of Paul’s life and ministry is a strong encouragement to all of us to never rest in the pursuit of knowledge and to promote and strive for scholarship and excellence. On the other hand, what did Paul later write to the Corinthian Christians (1 Co 2:1-5)?

When I came to you, brothers, I did not come with eloquence or superior wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. I came to you in weakness and fear, and with much trembling. My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, so that your faith might not rest on men’s wisdom, but on God’s power.

My former circuit pastor used to use the illustration of using a copy machine. Take the original, make a 70copy A. Take copy A, make copy B. Take copy B, and so on down to copy Z. Which copy will be best? The original. After that? The earliest copies. We humans living in the third millennium AD are sinful copies of sinful copies of sinful copies. This should stress for us not only the importance of the classics and the writings of Christians who have gone before us, but also that, whatever good we might accomplish, whatever useful contributions we might make in the history of the Christian church, are only due to the grace and power of our triune God.

The argument that a world filled with Christian scholars would have the negative effect of pushing away 71those who are less educated is invalid. Comedian Brian Regan has told reporters that the reason he adopted “clean” comedy is because he discovered that when he included bad language in his routine, the more low-brow members of his audience enjoyed it, but the high-brow members complained about the language. When he avoided bad language, the low-brow members still laughed and the high-brow members also enjoyed it. Clean comedy allowed him to reach the broadest possible audience. True scholarship has the same effect, because true scholarship isn’t about pretentiousness, but about having the clearest understanding of a subject and the ability to communicate it in the clearest and most beautiful possible way. A true scholar, when confronted with a less educated audience, will inhale deeply but exhale lightly. But if he is engaging a more educated audience, he is able to inhale and exhale deeply.

- -25

Paul studied the classics in part to improve himself in eloquence, but that did not actually make him eloquent (perhaps more eloquent than he would have been otherwise, but not eloquent). His presentation was not the stuff of radio or television programming— Good grief, his preaching once lulled a young man to sleep and killed him (Ac 20:7-12)! For his greatest missionary, God chose a well-educated man and made good use of his education, but still in such a way so as to make it unmistakable both to that missionary and to us where his power and success came from. “We have this treasure in jars of clay to show that this all-surpassing power is from God and not from us” (2 Co 4:7). The force and success of his argumentation came not from the trappings of his argumentation—slick manners, polished speech, or relatable personality—but from the Spirit-inspired content of the argumentation itself. The power of successful mission work—and that success is to be judged by God’s standards, not our own—is all in the means of grace. Martin Luther captured this point beautifully in a sermon on John 4 that he delivered on September 11, 1540:

[I] hear the sermon just fine, but who is speaking? The pastor? Not so. You are not hearing the pastor. The voice may be his, but the message that he delivers or speaks is being spoken by my God. … But since we don’t apply any respect to the divine Word and don’t seek out anything of our own proper glory either, we therefore don’t listen to the Word, and no one is listened to with any interest unless he has a good, clear voice. When you get to that point, you have already become half a Jacob, when you pay more a_ention to the pastor than you do to God, and when you do not see the person God has sent [die person GoKes] but merely gape to see if the person is learned and skilled and has an interesting style or good diction. For the man who speaks poorly is speaking God’s word just as much as the man who can speak well. When a father speaks God’s word, God is speaking just as much as he is, and when your neighbor speaks God’s word, it is no less the Word than the angel Gabriel spoke. Whether a schoolboy speaks it or the angel Gabriel pronounces it, the Word is no different; it’s just that the one can present it be_er than the other. The dishes may be dissimilar; some are silver, others are tin or earthen vessels enameled with clay. But one and the same food is served in silver and tin, etc., and wild game that is well seasoned and prepared tastes just as good from a wooden bowl as it does from a silver one. 72

Brothers, in the example of Paul we have both a powerful spur that drives us on to keep ge_ing be_er at what we do, and a rich comfort and solace for even the least skilled and most faltering among us that when God’s word is faithfully preached, God’s kingdom will continue to advance and the glorious miracles of his Word will continue to be performed. Familiarity with God’s word is the greatest skill any of us can possess, the beginning of all wisdom and the power of God to penetrate to the deepest recesses of our heart and soul and to transfer sinful humans from the bowels of hell to the

Dr. Martin Luthers Werke: kritische Gesamtausgabe, vol. 47 (Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 721912), pp. 229-230.

- -26

heights of heaven. Even the most stumbling and bumbling of us equipped with a true knowledge of God’s word is more knowledgable than the wisest secular expert and is more effective in his speech than the smoothest-talking politician. When we get to think too highly of this or that methodology or the latest popular, practical advice or any other secular wisdom or wisdom derived from other church bodies that is not rooted in the Scriptures, we do well to remind ourselves: “How did I come to be a Christian? Where did I get the zeal to become a pastor and an agent of God to advance the kingdom of his Son?” Were all of our pastors and professors reincarnations of Demosthenes? Dynamic super-preachers? Were any of them? Yet here we are. By the grace of God alone. Through the power of his means of grace alone. To the glory of Jesus Christ alone. Just like Paul, that wolf of Benjamin who had devoured prey in the morning, but was now apportioning plunder—plunder we are still eating, food off of which our souls will live into eternity.

Praise for the light from heaven And for the voice of awe; Praise for the glorious vision The persecutor saw. O Lord, for Paul’s conversion We bless your name this day. Come, shine within our darkness, And guide us in the Way.

Then let us praise the Father And worship God the Son And sing to God the Spirit, Eternal Three in One, Till all the ransomed number Who stand before the throne Ascribe all power and glory And praise to God alone. Amen. - Christian Worship 552:6,3, alt.

✠ S. D. G. ✠

Maps Credit

Hurlbut, Jesse L. Bible Atlas: A Manual of Biblical Geography and History, rev. ed. Chicago: Rand, McNally & Company, 1910. Pages 112 & 114.

- -27