Expositor's Bible Commentary Commentary Acts 9

The account of Saul’s conversion opens with the picture of him “still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord’s disciples” (cf. 8:3). Even after the death of Stephen and the expulsion of the Hellenistic Christians from Jerusalem, Saul felt it was necessary to continue the persecution in places outside the Sanhedrin’s jurisdiction.

The past generation of commentators, particularly those of the English- speaking world, often read into such passages as Ro 7:14–25, Galatians 1:13–14, Php 3:4–6 and the portrayals of Ac 9, 22, and 26 a mental and spiritual struggle on the part of Saul that was, either consciously or unconsciously, fighting fervently against the logic of the early Christians’ preaching, the dynamic quality of their lives, and their fortitude under oppression. Therefore his “breathing out murderous threats” was taken as his attempt to slay externally the dragons of doubt he could not silence within his own heart. But the day of the psychological interpretation of Paul’s conversion experience appears to be over, and deservedly so. Indeed, Luke connects historically the martyrdom of Stephen, the persecution of the Hellenistic Jewish Christians, and the conversion of Saul. But the argument for a logical connection is not as certain.

It is, of course, impossible to speak with certainty about what was going on in Saul’s subconscious mind at the time, for psychoanalysis two millennia later is hardly a fruitful exercise. His own references as a Christian to this earlier time in his life do not require us to view him as struggling with uncertainty, doubt, and guilt before becoming a Christian. They rather suggest that humanly speaking, he was immune to the Christian proclamation and immensely satisfied with his own ancestral faith. While he looked forward to the full realization of the hope of Israel, Paul seems from his reminiscences of those earlier days to have been thoroughly satisfied with the revelation of God that was given through Moses and to have counted it his chief delight to worship God through those revealed forms. Nor need we suppose that the logic of the early Christian preachers greatly affected Paul. His later references to “the offense of the cross” show that for him the cross was the great stumbling block to any acknowledgment of Jesus of Nazareth as Israel’s Messiah—a stumbling block no amount of logic or verbal gymnastics could remove (cf. 1 Corinthians 1:23; Galatians 5:11).

It is probable that Saul took up his brutal task of persecution with full knowledge of the earnestness of his opponents, the stamina of the martyrs, and the agony he would necessarily cause. Fanaticism was not so foreign to Palestine in his day as to leave him unaware of these things, and it is quite possible that he was prepared for the emotional strain involved in persecuting those he believed to be dangerous schismatics within Israel.

More important, however, in days when the rabbis viewed the keeping of the Mosaic law as the vitally important prerequisite for the coming of the Messianic Age, Paul could validate his actions against the Christians by reference to such godly precedents as (1) Moses’ slaying of the immoral Israelites at Baal Peor (cf. Numbers 25:1–5); (2) Phinehas’s slaying of the Israelite man and Midianite woman in the plains of Moab (cf. Numbers 25:6–15); and (3) the actions of the Maccabees and the Hasidim in rooting out apostasy among the people. With such precedents and parallels, coupled with the rising tide of messianic expectation within Israel, Saul could very well have felt justified in mounting a further persecution against the Christians. Probably he felt that the nation must be faithful in its obedience to the law and kept from schism or going astray if their messianic hopes were to be fulfilled. In his task, he doubtless expected to receive God’s commendation.

The Sadducean high priests of Jerusalem were, it seems, recognized by Rome as the titular rulers of their people in most internal matters; and evidently they retained the right of extradition in strictly religious situations. Therefore Saul, seeking the return of Jewish Christians, went to the high priest and asked him for written permission to take any Christian men and women as prisoners to Jerusalem (cf. 22:5; 26:12).

Damascus was a large and thriving commercial center at the foot of the Anti- Lebanon mountain range. Since 64 B. C. it had been part of the Roman province of Syria and was granted certain civic rights by Rome as one of the ten cities of eastern Syria and the Transjordan called the Decapolis (cf. Mark 5:20; 7:31). It had a large Jewish population. It was to this city that Saul went with the authority of the Jewish Sanhedrin, seeking to return to Jerusalem Christians who had fled the city—chiefly the Hellenistic Jewish Christians—in order to contain the spread of Christianity. While we have spoken repeatedly of the early believers in Jesus as Christians, the term “Christian” was first coined at Antioch of Syria . Before then and during the early existence of the church, those who accepted Jesus’ messiahship and claimed him as their Lord called themselves those of “the way” (see also 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14, 22), while their opponents spoke of them as members of “the sect of the Nazarenes” (cf. 24:5, 14; 28:22). The origin of “the Way” (GK 3847) as a term for Christians is uncertain, though it surely had something to do with the early believers’ consciousness of walking in the true path of God’s salvation and moving forward to accomplish his purposes. In the vignette of 9:1–30, it is synonymous with such self-designations as “the disciples of the Lord” (vv.2, 10, 19), “saints” (v.13), “all who call on your [Jesus’] name” (v.14), and “brothers” (vv.17, 30).

The account of Saul’s conversion opens with the picture of him “still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord’s disciples” (cf. 8:3). Even after the death of Stephen and the expulsion of the Hellenistic Christians from Jerusalem, Saul felt it was necessary to continue the persecution in places outside the Sanhedrin’s jurisdiction.

The past generation of commentators, particularly those of the English- speaking world, often read into such passages as Ro 7:14–25, Galatians 1:13–14, Php 3:4–6 and the portrayals of Ac 9, 22, and 26 a mental and spiritual struggle on the part of Saul that was, either consciously or unconsciously, fighting fervently against the logic of the early Christians’ preaching, the dynamic quality of their lives, and their fortitude under oppression. Therefore his “breathing out murderous threats” was taken as his attempt to slay externally the dragons of doubt he could not silence within his own heart. But the day of the psychological interpretation of Paul’s conversion experience appears to be over, and deservedly so. Indeed, Luke connects historically the martyrdom of Stephen, the persecution of the Hellenistic Jewish Christians, and the conversion of Saul. But the argument for a logical connection is not as certain.

It is, of course, impossible to speak with certainty about what was going on in Saul’s subconscious mind at the time, for psychoanalysis two millennia later is hardly a fruitful exercise. His own references as a Christian to this earlier time in his life do not require us to view him as struggling with uncertainty, doubt, and guilt before becoming a Christian. They rather suggest that humanly speaking, he was immune to the Christian proclamation and immensely satisfied with his own ancestral faith. While he looked forward to the full realization of the hope of Israel, Paul seems from his reminiscences of those earlier days to have been thoroughly satisfied with the revelation of God that was given through Moses and to have counted it his chief delight to worship God through those revealed forms. Nor need we suppose that the logic of the early Christian preachers greatly affected Paul. His later references to “the offense of the cross” show that for him the cross was the great stumbling block to any acknowledgment of Jesus of Nazareth as Israel’s Messiah—a stumbling block no amount of logic or verbal gymnastics could remove (cf. 1 Corinthians 1:23; Galatians 5:11).

It is probable that Saul took up his brutal task of persecution with full knowledge of the earnestness of his opponents, the stamina of the martyrs, and the agony he would necessarily cause. Fanaticism was not so foreign to Palestine in his day as to leave him unaware of these things, and it is quite possible that he was prepared for the emotional strain involved in persecuting those he believed to be dangerous schismatics within Israel.

More important, however, in days when the rabbis viewed the keeping of the Mosaic law as the vitally important prerequisite for the coming of the Messianic Age, Paul could validate his actions against the Christians by reference to such godly precedents as (1) Moses’ slaying of the immoral Israelites at Baal Peor (cf. Numbers 25:1–5); (2) Phinehas’s slaying of the Israelite man and Midianite woman in the plains of Moab (cf. Numbers 25:6–15); and (3) the actions of the Maccabees and the Hasidim in rooting out apostasy among the people. With such precedents and parallels, coupled with the rising tide of messianic expectation within Israel, Saul could very well have felt justified in mounting a further persecution against the Christians. Probably he felt that the nation must be faithful in its obedience to the law and kept from schism or going astray if their messianic hopes were to be fulfilled. In his task, he doubtless expected to receive God’s commendation.

The Sadducean high priests of Jerusalem were, it seems, recognized by Rome as the titular rulers of their people in most internal matters; and evidently they retained the right of extradition in strictly religious situations. Therefore Saul, seeking the return of Jewish Christians, went to the high priest and asked him for written permission to take any Christian men and women as prisoners to Jerusalem (cf. 22:5; 26:12).

Damascus was a large and thriving commercial center at the foot of the Anti- Lebanon mountain range. Since 64 B. C. it had been part of the Roman province of Syria and was granted certain civic rights by Rome as one of the ten cities of eastern Syria and the Transjordan called the Decapolis (cf. Mark 5:20; 7:31). It had a large Jewish population. It was to this city that Saul went with the authority of the Jewish Sanhedrin, seeking to return to Jerusalem Christians who had fled the city—chiefly the Hellenistic Jewish Christians—in order to contain the spread of Christianity. While we have spoken repeatedly of the early believers in Jesus as Christians, the term “Christian” was first coined at Antioch of Syria . Before then and during the early existence of the church, those who accepted Jesus’ messiahship and claimed him as their Lord called themselves those of “the way” (see also 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14, 22), while their opponents spoke of them as members of “the sect of the Nazarenes” (cf. 24:5, 14; 28:22). The origin of “the Way” (GK 3847) as a term for Christians is uncertain, though it surely had something to do with the early believers’ consciousness of walking in the true path of God’s salvation and moving forward to accomplish his purposes. In the vignette of 9:1–30, it is synonymous with such self-designations as “the disciples of the Lord” (vv.2, 10, 19), “saints” (v.13), “all who call on your [Jesus’] name” (v.14), and “brothers” (vv.17, 30).

As he approached Damascus, Saul saw a light from heaven and heard a voice from heaven. In 9:3 the light is described as simply “a light from heaven,” while both 22:6 and 26:13 emphasize its brightness. Likewise, in 9:4 Luke reports that Saul heard the voice and in v.7 that his companions also heard the voice, whereas both 22:9 and 26:14 state that only Saul heard the voice. Since the Greek noun used here (GK 5889) means both “sound” in the sense of any tone or voice and “articulated speech” in the sense of language, undoubtedly while the whole group traveling to Damascus heard the sound from heaven, only Saul understood the spoken words. As Saul fell to the ground, the voice from heaven intoned his name in solemn repetition: “Saul, Saul.” It was common in antiquity for a person in a formal setting to be addressed by the repetition of his name (cf. Genesis 22:11; 46:2; Exodus 3:4; et al.). Saul understood the voice to be a message from God himself, for to the rabbis to hear a voice from heaven connoted a rebuke or a word of instruction from God. Therefore when the voice went on to ask the question “Why do you persecute me?” Saul was without doubt thoroughly confused. He was not persecuting God! Rather, he was defending God and his laws! Some have translated Saul’s reply in v.5 as “Who are you, sir?” since the Greek title kyrios (GK 3261) was used in the ancient world not only as an ascription of worshipful acclaim but also as a form of polite address and since the context indicates that Saul did not know whom he was speaking to. But he did know that he had been struck down by a light from heaven and had been addressed by a voice from heaven, both of which signaled the divine presence. So his use of the term “Lord” was probably meant in a worshipful manner— even though he was thoroughly confused as to how he could be rebuked by God for doing his will and service. Unable even to articulate his confusion, though realizing the need for some response in the presence of the divine, he cries out in stumbling fashion, “Who are you, Lord?” In what must have been for Saul almost total disbelief, he hears the following reply: “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.” Then in a manner that throws him entirely upon the guidance of Jesus, apart from anything he could do or work out for himself, the voice continues: “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.” Such a confrontation and such a rebuke must have been traumatic for Saul. Time would be needed to heal his emotions and work out the implications of his experience, and both Acts and Paul’s later Christian letters reveal something of the process of development throughout the rest of his life. But in this supreme revelational encounter, Saul received a new perspective on divine redemption, a new agenda for his life, and the embryonic elements of his new Christian theology. Once Saul had been encountered by Christ on the Damascus road, a number of realizations must have begun to press in upon his consciousness—each of which was to receive further explication in his thought and life as time went on. First, Saul began to understand that despite his zeal and his sense of doing God’s will, his previous life and activities in Judaism lay under God’s rebuke. A voice from heaven had corrected him, and there was nothing more to be said. Second, Saul could not escape the fact that the Jesus whose followers he had been persecuting was alive, exalted, and in some manner to be associated with God the Father, whom Israel worshiped. He, therefore, had to revise his whole estimate of the life, teaching, and death of the Nazarene because God had beyond any question vindicated him. Thus he came to agree with the Christians that Jesus’ death on the cross, rather than discrediting him as an impostor, fulfilled prophecy and was really God’s provision for the sin of humankind and that Jesus’ resurrection confirmed him as being the nation’s Messiah and the world’s Lord. Third, Saul came to appreciate that if Jesus is the nation’s Messiah and the fulfillment of Israel’s ancient hope, then traditional eschatology, rather than merely dwelling on the future, must be restructured to emphasize the realized and inaugurated factors associated with Jesus of Nazareth and focus on the personal and transcendent dimensions instead of just the historical. Fourth, in the question “Why do you persecute me?” Saul came to realize something of the organic and indissoluble unity that exists between Christ and his own. For although he believed he was only persecuting the followers of Jesus, the heavenly interpretation of his action was that he was persecuting the risen Christ himself. Fifth (though hardly final), Saul came to understand that he had a mission to carry out for Christ. Its details, to be sure, were first given in general terms by Ananias of Damascus (vv.15–16) and only later set forth more fully by various visions and providential circumstances (cf. comments on chs. 13–28). But though it was not till later that Saul understood that his mission involved the equality of both Jews and Gentiles before God and the legitimacy of a direct approach to the Gentile world, it was his constant habit to relate his Gentile commission firmly and directly to his encounter with Christ on the Damascus road.

As he approached Damascus, Saul saw a light from heaven and heard a voice from heaven. In 9:3 the light is described as simply “a light from heaven,” while both 22:6 and 26:13 emphasize its brightness. Likewise, in 9:4 Luke reports that Saul heard the voice and in v.7 that his companions also heard the voice, whereas both 22:9 and 26:14 state that only Saul heard the voice. Since the Greek noun used here (GK 5889) means both “sound” in the sense of any tone or voice and “articulated speech” in the sense of language, undoubtedly while the whole group traveling to Damascus heard the sound from heaven, only Saul understood the spoken words. As Saul fell to the ground, the voice from heaven intoned his name in solemn repetition: “Saul, Saul.” It was common in antiquity for a person in a formal setting to be addressed by the repetition of his name (cf. Genesis 22:11; 46:2; Exodus 3:4; et al.). Saul understood the voice to be a message from God himself, for to the rabbis to hear a voice from heaven connoted a rebuke or a word of instruction from God. Therefore when the voice went on to ask the question “Why do you persecute me?” Saul was without doubt thoroughly confused. He was not persecuting God! Rather, he was defending God and his laws! Some have translated Saul’s reply in v.5 as “Who are you, sir?” since the Greek title kyrios (GK 3261) was used in the ancient world not only as an ascription of worshipful acclaim but also as a form of polite address and since the context indicates that Saul did not know whom he was speaking to. But he did know that he had been struck down by a light from heaven and had been addressed by a voice from heaven, both of which signaled the divine presence. So his use of the term “Lord” was probably meant in a worshipful manner— even though he was thoroughly confused as to how he could be rebuked by God for doing his will and service. Unable even to articulate his confusion, though realizing the need for some response in the presence of the divine, he cries out in stumbling fashion, “Who are you, Lord?” In what must have been for Saul almost total disbelief, he hears the following reply: “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.” Then in a manner that throws him entirely upon the guidance of Jesus, apart from anything he could do or work out for himself, the voice continues: “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.” Such a confrontation and such a rebuke must have been traumatic for Saul. Time would be needed to heal his emotions and work out the implications of his experience, and both Acts and Paul’s later Christian letters reveal something of the process of development throughout the rest of his life. But in this supreme revelational encounter, Saul received a new perspective on divine redemption, a new agenda for his life, and the embryonic elements of his new Christian theology. Once Saul had been encountered by Christ on the Damascus road, a number of realizations must have begun to press in upon his consciousness—each of which was to receive further explication in his thought and life as time went on. First, Saul began to understand that despite his zeal and his sense of doing God’s will, his previous life and activities in Judaism lay under God’s rebuke. A voice from heaven had corrected him, and there was nothing more to be said. Second, Saul could not escape the fact that the Jesus whose followers he had been persecuting was alive, exalted, and in some manner to be associated with God the Father, whom Israel worshiped. He, therefore, had to revise his whole estimate of the life, teaching, and death of the Nazarene because God had beyond any question vindicated him. Thus he came to agree with the Christians that Jesus’ death on the cross, rather than discrediting him as an impostor, fulfilled prophecy and was really God’s provision for the sin of humankind and that Jesus’ resurrection confirmed him as being the nation’s Messiah and the world’s Lord. Third, Saul came to appreciate that if Jesus is the nation’s Messiah and the fulfillment of Israel’s ancient hope, then traditional eschatology, rather than merely dwelling on the future, must be restructured to emphasize the realized and inaugurated factors associated with Jesus of Nazareth and focus on the personal and transcendent dimensions instead of just the historical. Fourth, in the question “Why do you persecute me?” Saul came to realize something of the organic and indissoluble unity that exists between Christ and his own. For although he believed he was only persecuting the followers of Jesus, the heavenly interpretation of his action was that he was persecuting the risen Christ himself. Fifth (though hardly final), Saul came to understand that he had a mission to carry out for Christ. Its details, to be sure, were first given in general terms by Ananias of Damascus (vv.15–16) and only later set forth more fully by various visions and providential circumstances (cf. comments on chs. 13–28). But though it was not till later that Saul understood that his mission involved the equality of both Jews and Gentiles before God and the legitimacy of a direct approach to the Gentile world, it was his constant habit to relate his Gentile commission firmly and directly to his encounter with Christ on the Damascus road.

As he approached Damascus, Saul saw a light from heaven and heard a voice from heaven. In 9:3 the light is described as simply “a light from heaven,” while both 22:6 and 26:13 emphasize its brightness. Likewise, in 9:4 Luke reports that Saul heard the voice and in v.7 that his companions also heard the voice, whereas both 22:9 and 26:14 state that only Saul heard the voice. Since the Greek noun used here (GK 5889) means both “sound” in the sense of any tone or voice and “articulated speech” in the sense of language, undoubtedly while the whole group traveling to Damascus heard the sound from heaven, only Saul understood the spoken words. As Saul fell to the ground, the voice from heaven intoned his name in solemn repetition: “Saul, Saul.” It was common in antiquity for a person in a formal setting to be addressed by the repetition of his name (cf. Genesis 22:11; 46:2; Exodus 3:4; et al.). Saul understood the voice to be a message from God himself, for to the rabbis to hear a voice from heaven connoted a rebuke or a word of instruction from God. Therefore when the voice went on to ask the question “Why do you persecute me?” Saul was without doubt thoroughly confused. He was not persecuting God! Rather, he was defending God and his laws! Some have translated Saul’s reply in v.5 as “Who are you, sir?” since the Greek title kyrios (GK 3261) was used in the ancient world not only as an ascription of worshipful acclaim but also as a form of polite address and since the context indicates that Saul did not know whom he was speaking to. But he did know that he had been struck down by a light from heaven and had been addressed by a voice from heaven, both of which signaled the divine presence. So his use of the term “Lord” was probably meant in a worshipful manner— even though he was thoroughly confused as to how he could be rebuked by God for doing his will and service. Unable even to articulate his confusion, though realizing the need for some response in the presence of the divine, he cries out in stumbling fashion, “Who are you, Lord?” In what must have been for Saul almost total disbelief, he hears the following reply: “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.” Then in a manner that throws him entirely upon the guidance of Jesus, apart from anything he could do or work out for himself, the voice continues: “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.” Such a confrontation and such a rebuke must have been traumatic for Saul. Time would be needed to heal his emotions and work out the implications of his experience, and both Acts and Paul’s later Christian letters reveal something of the process of development throughout the rest of his life. But in this supreme revelational encounter, Saul received a new perspective on divine redemption, a new agenda for his life, and the embryonic elements of his new Christian theology. Once Saul had been encountered by Christ on the Damascus road, a number of realizations must have begun to press in upon his consciousness—each of which was to receive further explication in his thought and life as time went on. First, Saul began to understand that despite his zeal and his sense of doing God’s will, his previous life and activities in Judaism lay under God’s rebuke. A voice from heaven had corrected him, and there was nothing more to be said. Second, Saul could not escape the fact that the Jesus whose followers he had been persecuting was alive, exalted, and in some manner to be associated with God the Father, whom Israel worshiped. He, therefore, had to revise his whole estimate of the life, teaching, and death of the Nazarene because God had beyond any question vindicated him. Thus he came to agree with the Christians that Jesus’ death on the cross, rather than discrediting him as an impostor, fulfilled prophecy and was really God’s provision for the sin of humankind and that Jesus’ resurrection confirmed him as being the nation’s Messiah and the world’s Lord. Third, Saul came to appreciate that if Jesus is the nation’s Messiah and the fulfillment of Israel’s ancient hope, then traditional eschatology, rather than merely dwelling on the future, must be restructured to emphasize the realized and inaugurated factors associated with Jesus of Nazareth and focus on the personal and transcendent dimensions instead of just the historical. Fourth, in the question “Why do you persecute me?” Saul came to realize something of the organic and indissoluble unity that exists between Christ and his own. For although he believed he was only persecuting the followers of Jesus, the heavenly interpretation of his action was that he was persecuting the risen Christ himself. Fifth (though hardly final), Saul came to understand that he had a mission to carry out for Christ. Its details, to be sure, were first given in general terms by Ananias of Damascus (vv.15–16) and only later set forth more fully by various visions and providential circumstances (cf. comments on chs. 13–28). But though it was not till later that Saul understood that his mission involved the equality of both Jews and Gentiles before God and the legitimacy of a direct approach to the Gentile world, it was his constant habit to relate his Gentile commission firmly and directly to his encounter with Christ on the Damascus road.