Saul the Persecutor

Saul the Persecutor

Ever after it became one of the greatest regrets of Paul’s life that he had become the outstanding persecutor of the early Church (I Corinthians 15:9; Acts 26:10; 22:4) Even so, he consoled himself from time to time with the declaration that “I did it ignorantly in unbelief” (1 Timothy 1:13) Now not a little of the regret experienced by Paul would have arisen from the fact that he had been very adept and effective in his direction of the persecuting forces in these early days. He frankly admits, without any show of egotism, to having made havoc of the Church (Galatians 1:13; Acts 9:13)

Scripture is likewise silent regarding the exact time Paul; then Saul, took up his role as persecutor of the Church. Surface indications in the Scriptures seem to point to the fact that the persecution of Paul came about as a result of what might be termed “the means of natural evolution”. That is, when mob law, exhibited in all its violence, killed Stephen because he was charged with being a blasphemer against Moses and the Temple(Acts 6:14), Paul did not allow the religious frenzy of the mob to cool, placing himself at the head of the mob as its leader. It would naturally follow, if this were true, that the first cases of persecution centered on anyone who dared to sympathize with Stephen; later on any suspected of being a disciple of Jesus.

As the persecution spread, and Saul was well on his way to becoming the feared leader of a first century Gestapo force vested with frightening powers, much evil was accomplished. Acts 8:3 reports that this force “laid waste the Church…entering every house”; Acts 26:10 that they shut “up many of the saints in prison”; Acts 26:11 that they “punished some in the synagogues” and compelled the more unstable souls to blaspheme; and, again, in Acts 26:10 that some were hauled before the Sanhedrin where the formal sentence of death was voted upon them. Just to what extent the Sanhedrin co-operated with the Roman government regarding their death sentences is not revealed.

Manifestly, Acts 9:1 gives the perfect description of Paul’s position as the arch-persecutor at this time; “yet (suggesting a continued activity) breathing out threatening and slaughter against the Disciples of the Lord”. So strong was this “breathing out threatening and slaughter” within the depths of his soul that it drove him to persecute the saints “even unto foreign cities” (Acts 26:11) In this same in Acts he makes the sad admission that, in these days, he had become “exceedingly mad against them”.

It was his desire to persecute “them even unto foreign cities” that led him to seek permission from the Jewish authorities to search out those who were saints living in Damascus. He had heard of Christians being at Damascus and he set out bent upon bringing his drastic persecutions upon the saints who were at Damascus.

Students, seeking for some explanation and understanding of Paul’s actions in relation to these first saints have lingered long in their thoughts over Acts 6:9. With persistence these students ask, “Was Paul one of those who Luke refers to in this passage?” The question is asked mostly because there is a reference made to the province of Cilicia from whence Paul came. If, therefore, Paul were one of these referred to in this passage, it might supply several answers regarding Paul’s attitude and persecution at this time. Chiefly, that no one despises like a man who has been thoroughly “bested” in an argument. Thus it is not at all beyond the realm of possibility that Paul’s persecution could have served as an outlet for his desire for revenge.

However, concerning Paul’s motives we are not certain. Certain it is, nevertheless, that this Paul, exhibiting himself in his role of persecution expert, becomes the supreme example in Holy Writ that conscience is not always; and never by itself, a safe guide to spiritual things. Because Paul strictly followed the dictates of his own conscience he became a murderer and persecutor. The terror and evil that he wrought cannot be completely overshadowed through the glorious working of Him who brought forth good out of this terrible evil. Yet it must be understood that it was because of this very persecution that Paul received an intensity of humility and a willingness to serve even the least of the brethren of those whom he had dreadfully abused and; what is more, zeal to redeem lost time by the use of whatever time was left at his disposal.

The Conversion of Saul the Persecutor

What, especially, is the intended meaning contained in the statement of Acts 9:5, “it is hard for thee to kick out against the pricks (goad)”? Is it the intention of Scripture to declare that Paul was being torn asunder by some mental conflict as he made his journey to Damascus? If so, in the very midst of his conflicting thoughts he was brought to face with the eternal destiny of his soul. As has been written, “the wolf leaped forward in anticipation of his prey, but the Good Shepherd had heard the cries of the trembling sheep and went forth to face the wolf on their behalf”.

In distance Damascus represents a journey from Jerusalem of some one hundred and sixty miles. This would mean, in Paul’s day of slow and of times tortuous travel, a journey of at least six days. A look at any map will immediately reveal that a considerable portion of this long and tiresome journey lay across a sweltering and forbidding desert country. It hardly need be noted that Paul would have had plenty of time for reflection during this time, long days in which there would be little to distract his mind.

In view of this circumstance the suggestion has been brought forth that, during this period of enforced leisure, the Spirit of God began mightily to deal with Saul the persecutor to such an extent that serious doubts began to form in his mind regarding the rightness of his recent actions. It this be not so, how else can Acts 9:5 be explained?

Concerning Acts 9:5 the figure of speech used by Christ was borrowed from a custom prevalent even today in Eastern countries. The ox-driver wields a long pole on the end of which is attached a piece of sharpened iron which, by means of prodding the animal, he urges his charges to either go on, stand still, or change their course. When, as often came to pass, the animal became somewhat stubborn and chose to kick against this goad, he became injured and, as well, usually infuriated because of the wounds which he had inflicted upon himself.

By the usage of this language the Lord conveyed to Paul the vivid picture of a man wounded and tortured because of the cries and torment of his own conscience. Even in the strict and unyielding Pharisee from Tarsus there had arisen something that rebelled against the course of inhumanity he had marked out for himself and upon which he now embarked. At some point in his thoughts he must have entertained the frightening suggestion that he was even fighting against God; at any rate not showing the spirit of his teacher Gamaliel (Acts 5:34-39)

It must be remembered that Paul had witnessed strange incidents since the day of Pentecost. If he had sat with the Sanhedrin that condemned Stephen, he, with all the others, “looking steadfastly on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel”. The appearance of Stephen, to say nothing of his assurance and serenity, would have moved Paul deeply. Nor could he easily escape the words of Stephen who exclaimed in joy, “I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing on the right hand of God”. Even the subsequent shouting of the angry mob could not erase these memories in the quietness of the desert journey. And what king of men were these “followers of the way” who, when they departed from the presence of the Sanhedrin, rejoiced and proclaimed loudly their happiness in being counted worthy to suffer shame for the One whom they declared was resurrected (Acts 5:41; also 6:15; 7:54-56)?

As the clamoring of his conscience became more incessant it might have even been that he regretted having gone to the High Priest, to this one who had authority over the Jews outside of Jerusalem as well as those within the Holy City, to secure the letter which gave him permission; may have even commanded him, to bring both men and women bound to Jerusalem when he discovered that they were “of this Way”. Paul had heard there were saints in Damascus. In Romans 16:7 he writes, of “Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the Apostles, who also were in Christ before me”, and his “threatening and slaughter” anger drove him to desire their punishment also. Now, however, his conscience troubled him concerning his future itinerary.

Another consideration is that it may be that Paul had, in the beginning, desired to go to Damascus to complete his destruction upon those who had fled Jerusalem. Acts 8:4 is revealing in its statement that “they that were scattered abroad went everywhere preaching the Gospel”, the inference surely being that some of the saints had migrated from Jerusalem to Damascus to get out of the jurisdiction of Saul of Tarsus. In his eagerness to press his cause there had been little time for the workings of conscience. Suddenly a Voice spoke in the noonday hour; the Voice was addressed to him.

Acts 9:3-6:26:19; and I Corinthians 9:1; 15:3-8 imply that as Paul heard the voice of Jesus speaking to him he also saw Him face to face. Regardless of personal interpretations, of which there have been many, Paul’s subsequent reporting of this incident in his life forbids those who desire a true exegesis of this passage from thinking of it as just a vision of Jesus that he saw. In a definite declaration Paul ranks this experience as the last of the post-resurrection appearances of the risen Saviour to his Disciples, placing this appearance of Christ to him as being on the identical basis as His appearance to Peter, to James, to the Eleven, and to the Five Hundred.

Paul designated himself as an Apostle, being most adamant in his assertion, declaring in I Corinthians 9:1, “am I not an Apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?” Evidently one of the proofs of being an Apostle was having seen Jesus Christ face to face in His resurrection body and having talked with Him thusly. Those, therefore, that desire to rob Paul of an actual face to face meeting with the Lord also destroy his chief claim to Apostleship!

It is to be admitted, however, that he could not have looked at any length upon the person of the risen Saviour. Almost immediately he was blinded by the great light which was evidently none other than the glory in which the humanity of Christ is now enveloped in His heavenly state. Whatever change came about after He left His Disciples on Mount Olivet (Acts 1:11) and took up His office work at the right hand “of the Majesty in high” is not fully revealed (Revelation 1:12-18), but it was sufficient to make it impossible, without bodily harm, to look upon His person (see also Acts 26:13; Revelation 21:23)

Having heard the Voice calling to him, and looking for a brief moment upon the resurrected Person of the Lord, blindness came upon him and, for the remainder of the interview; he heard and answered in the state of physical blindness. And it was a most interesting and revealing conversation. The Lord makes the pointed indictment that Paul is persecuting Him; “why persecutest thou Me?” (Acts 9:4) When Paul, obviously stalling for time, weakly responded with “who art thou”, the Lord answered him using the name which Paul hated, “I am Jesus”. His answer to Paul was not that He was the Messiah, or the Christ, simply Jesus of Nazareth. Paul had asked Him, “who art thou, Lord?” -- the Lord apparently implying nothing more than the civil “sir” of ordinary, everyday speech --, and His answer was of such a nature as to leave him “trembling and astonished” (Acts 9:5-6; 22:8)

In view of his condition described as “trembling and astonished”, is it to be understood that Paul was converted here on the road to Damascus or was he to experience this great blessing later in Damascus while residing at the house of Judas? Surely his condition of “trembling and astonished” would at least reveal that he was definitely convicted of his sins at this moment. For even today, “trembling and astonishment” are known to be customary signs of a convicted soul. But Paul demands that he experienced more than conviction on the road to Damascus. in Acts 26:19, where he retells his experience during this noon-day hour, he unquestionably reveals that he considered this meeting with Christ as the moment of his conversion. His basis for so arguing was that he had received a heavenly vision and, from that moment henceforth, he had never been “disobedient to the heavenly vision” there received. Also, the notation cannot be overlooked, as recorded in Acts 9:6, that Paul wholly submitted himself at this time to the Lord, declaring humbly, “what wilt thou have me to do”?

Why, therefore, if Paul experienced his conversion on the Damascus road, was he permitted to remain for a season; three days to be exact, in a state of physical blindness (Acts 9:9)? The easiest and most obvious answer to this would be that if afforded him an excellent opportunity to withdraw himself from the physical world so that the proper mental readjustment could be attained. We must remember that Paul, in matters pertaining to the Church, had no Bible as we today and that his readjustment from a “Pharisee of the Pharisees” to that of a follower of the lowly carpenter of Nazareth involved a stupendous mental adjustment.

It has been written that something of this man’s soul, its conflict and groping after truth at this time, is illustrated in his physical condition at this time “what a change was there! Instead of the proud Pharisee riding through the streets with the pomp of an inquisitor, a stricken man, groping, clinging to the hand of his guide, arrives at the house of entertainment amidst the consternation of those who receive him and, getting hastily to a room where he can ask them to leave him alone, sinks down there in the darkness”. Yet, however dark and unbearable the physical infirmity, however dark without, all was bright and glorious within as he sat there in physical blindness he was too absorbed with the thoughts of his newly discovered Friend to even eat or drink; so quickly, so thick and fast, did thoughts crowd in upon him.

While Paul thus sat engrossed with his new found faith, God was working on his behalf in another section of the city (Acts 9:10-16) It appears to be the intention of Luke to impress upon us that this Ananias was a personage of some considerable importance in the Christian community of Damascus. To this leading Saint in the congregation at Damascus God gave His reasons for having singled out Paul he was to be a “chosen vessel”. But God did not make this revelation until after Ananias had protested loudly at the thought of going to Paul and laying his hands upon him in accordance with the Divine directive. The evil reputation of Paul had preceded him to Damascus; the saint Ananias may well have been fully aware of his journey and the reasons for that journey.

We are given, consequently, in this story of Paul and Ananias, one of the important workings of the Christian religion in action regardless of how evil an individual may have been, regardless of what a person may have done to us or to the cause we represent, regardless of their actions before conversion, after their conversion they are to be definitely forgiven and instantly accepted as our brother, becoming a brother-in-the-faith in the fullest and strictest sense of the word. Fulfilling this commandment of the Christian faith, Ananias greeted Saul with, “brother Saul”.

Paul, in answer to his prayer, had been prepared for the coming of Ananias, having seen him coming in a vision (Acts 9:11-12) In his vision it appears that Paul had only seen Ananias coming in and laying his hands upon him that he might receive again his sight, but he was also to experience the even greater blessing of being filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17-18) In answer to Paul’s prayer the laying on of Ananias’ hand produced the result wherein “immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized and when he had received meat, he was strengthened; then was Saul certain days with the Disciples which were at Damascus”.

The First Steps of the New Convert and His Spiritual Re-Education

Concerning that period of time which immediately followed his conversion, those trying and difficult days of re-adjustment, Paul explains in Galatians 1:11-20. Immediately following his conversion Paul appears to have become torn between two clashing impulses. On the one hand, as any man who has been suddenly and truly converted, there was the strong and vehement desire to make known to those all about him exactly what had happened. History has well proved that such testimony is outstandingly impressive and necessary to the continuance and success of the Christian Church. Moreover, such testimony lays bare a soul that is receiving its first glimpses of the wondrous realities of the world which was heretofore unseen. So vivid and compelling are these new convert testaments that they invariably produce an irresistible sense of the reality of spiritual things.

Now the language of the book of Acts is that Paul “straightway preached Christ in the synagogues”. This statement gives support for the belief that he yielded at once to the impulse to give his personal testimony. However, a considerable amount of discussion has gone forth as to whether he actually entered into this ministry at once or delayed it until “many days” hence; for his writings uncover the truth that there was another powerful impulse surging through his being, calling for his attention at this time. It was the all-consuming desire to retreat into the solitude of some desert region and there think out the meaning and issues of that which had now befallen him. In all fairness it is necessary to state that there is some uncertainty as to which of these impulses he obeyed first.

In regard to his impulse to withdraw himself to the desert, the “many days” of Acts 9:23 are taken by many to be the period of three years which he spent in Arabia, and of which three years he speaks in Galatians 1:17. But we must be extremely careful to notice that Paul does not unconditionally state that he spent three years in the desert country of Arabia; only the veiled indifference. Thus, having no definite statement to guide us, it is difficult to determine an exact time that Paul spent in Arabia. But it does seem logical and permissible to suggest that between Acts 9:19 and Acts 9:23, the “many days” sojourn in Arabia was accomplished.

We have to conclude, therefore, that although it is not possible to establish the exact time or place at which Paul left for and resided in Arabia, still we do definitely known that he did spend a period of time there in solitude. Having possessed oneself of this knowledge, the question naturally arises, “what actually transpired in the Arabian desert”? To fully answer this question it is necessary to carefully notice what Ananias’ statements to Paul had been

(1) “for thou shalt be a witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard?” (Acts 22:14; 26:16-18; Ephesians 3:8);

(2) “for I will show him how many great things he must suffer for My name’s sake” (Acts 9:16; II Corinthians 11:23-33)

Essentially Paul was given an identical calling and commission to that of the eleven Disciples which is recorded in Matthew 28:18-20.

These eleven Disciples had not been taught by man, but by teachings from the mouth of the Savior; likewise Paul was not taught by man, not given by man the truths he preached. According to his statement in Galatians 1:12, Paul also received his message and commission through a revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ to him. This avowal on the part of Paul can mean only one thing The Gospel truths which he preached in every town and city he visited were imparted to him directly by the Lord himself there in the Arabian Desert; that this period of time spent in Arabia accomplished for him what he called “the revelation of Jesus Christ”.

Therefore, there occurred in his Arabian experience those things which prepared him to become that vessel through which God could “reveal His Son in me” (Galatians 1:16) Doubtless the “many things” spoken of in John 16:12 (I Corinthians 2:8-12) were given to Paul at this time. Some have thought the II Corinthians 12:1-5 is Paul’s revelation of this desert experience, but there are some very difficult questions which make this improbable. II Corinthians 12:1-5 more than likely took place outside the city limits of Philippi and the Arabian Desert site, though the exact location has never been determined, is suggested by various scholars as being that portion of the Arabian Desert which includes Mount Sinai.

While in this self-enforced solitude we know that the doctrines which are contained in the thirteen Pauline Epistles, which we now have in written form, constituted the greater portion of what Paul received in Arabia“by the revelation of Jesus Christ”. We note, therefore, that the “revelation of Jesus Christ” to Paul, which he received in his desert rendezvous, included these three main considerations

(1) The utter failure of man’s own righteousness. Paul indicts first the Gentile races all of whom had miserably worshipped the creature instead of the Creator (Romans 1 – 3:20) His condemnation of the Gentiles in their failure is couched in some of the harshest language in the Scriptures. The Apostle did not, however, exempt the Jewish nation from an equal condemnation. He freely admitted to the advantage that the Jew had secured in Spiritual considerations, but he was very firm in his declaration that they were guilty of seeking to establish their own righteousness with the result that “blindness in part is happened unto Israel” (Romans 10 – 11; especially note 10:13)

(2) The absolute and unchanging righteousness of God. Over against the failure of both the Gentiles and the Jews Paul places the righteousness of God; which righteousness, according to Paul, was the sum and issue of the earthly mission and ministry of Christ. That is, the desire of God to confer upon ungodly men, as a free gift of grace, that spiritual righteousness which is indispensable to his blessedness, but which man has by himself completely failed to attain – God’s righteousness (II Corinthians 5:21; Romans 1:17; 3:22-23; 5:17-18)

Paul’s further contention was that only the receiving of this righteousness of God, which was only dispensed through Jesus Christ, justified a man to stand unafraid in the presence of God (Romans 5:1; Galatians 2:16; Hebrews 4:16)

Finally, it was the bold declaration of the Apostle that this righteousness of God was available for all men everywhere. Jew or Gentile, though the spiritual priority was “to the Jew first”, would in no wise be denied this righteousness, providing, of course, that the necessary requirements were obeyed repentance, confession, saving faith, etc.

(3) The sinfulness of the Old Adam; the new nature of the New Adam. Paul blames man’s failure in his search for self-righteousness upon the existence of what he calls “the old man” in each individual, the Old Adam. He is very firm in his contention that from Adam all men everywhere have received a sad, double heritage (a) A debt of sin-guilt. (b) A carnal (sinful, fleshy, lustful) nature which is thoroughly and completely incapable of any righteousness (Romans 7:14-25) The purpose of God in salvation, therefore, is to cleanse away the guilt produced by the Old Adam and then, in a second act of grace, eradicate the “roots of the Old Adam” from the cleaned vessel.

From Christ, Paul hastens to inform us, man receives cleansing from the guilt of the Old Adam; the Second Adam, as Paul calls Christ, at the same time installing a new nature; a new heart; a new spirit, within the cleansed vessel. This new nature is classified by Paul as “the righteousness of God in Him” (II Corinthians 5:21; see also II Corinthians 5:17; compare Romans 8:35-39) Concerning the eradication of the roots of this evil nature, Paul pictured the need for a special filling and purging of the Holy Spirit which would “preserve the body, soul, and spirit blameless unto the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thessalonians 5:23)

This, therefore, was primarily the sum and substance of the truths received by Paul as he made his lonely vigil in the Arabian Desert. Like unto many of his predecessors Moses who spent forty years in the wilderness of Midian; Elijah who spent forty days in the wilderness at Mount Herob; Jesus Christ who spent forty days in the wilderness; and many, many others, Paul separated himself wholly unto God in the silent stretches of wilderness quietness and God prepared the separated vessel.

At whatever time Paul did preach in the synagogue at Damascus the main subject of his messages was Christ. Acts 9:20 pointedly notes that the theme of his preaching was “that he is the Son of God”. In this connection it is interesting to notice that Peter, in that portion of the message he delivered on the day of Pentecost, though he does not in any wise deny the Deity of Christ, saying, “God hath made that same Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Jesus Christ , gives special prominence and emphasis to His Messiahship. Not so Paul! He placed the emphasis on His Deity. Reading Peter’s sermon (Acts 2:25-30 especially) it is noted that he charged those who listened with having crucified the Son of David. Paul, conversely, in his writings (I Corinthians 2:8) made his charge that the Jews had crucified the Lord of Glory. This vital difference between Peter and Paul, although both were spiritually correct in their statements, reveals the growth in truth in the early Church and is important evidence that Paul may well have spoken in Damascus after his Arabian sojourn, having received there the added doctrinal approach.

In his preaching stint in Damascus Paul established and developed a method of approach to Gospel preaching and teaching which he used for the greater portion of his ministry. That is, upon entering any city he first entered the Jewish synagogue and there proclaimed his message. It is not necessary, however, to conclude that this method of approach closed Paul off to only his fellow countrymen. Research has come up with the discovery that the synagogues were not solely halls of prayer for the circumcised Jews, with a strict ban against all outsiders, but at the hours of assembly the marble benches along the walls were often occupied by numerous persons who had come to be known as “those fearing God”. Primarily these God-fearing souls were pagans who had become disgusted with the idols and their licentious worship and had become attracted and interested by the monotheism (single God worship) of the Jews. Consequently, what an opportunity was afforded Paul in these various synagogues to teach both Jew and Pagans “that he is the Son of God”.

Almost without exception the preaching of Paul created a considerable stir. His preaching in Damascus created much amazement; the listeners found it most difficult to understand how this man, who had come to Damascus for the explicit purpose of binding Christians and returning them to Jerusalem for punishment, who had laid waste and made havoc of the Church in Jerusalem, could now be preaching “that He is the Son of God”. Had it not been the he “increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ”, he might have been permitted an indefinite stay in the city of Damascus (Acts 9:21-25)

But so intense did the objection to his preaching become that not only did the infuriated Jews “take counsel to kill him”, but stationed men at the city gates day and night to kill him if he fled the city. Paul, whether by Divine guidance or human instrumentality, became aware of this plot against his life and, seeking the assistance of the faithful at Damascus, was let down the city wall in a basket sometime during the night hours. In an ironic turn-about by those for whom he had come “breathing out threatenings and slaughter” saving him from those who sought the life of the former persecutor.

Leaving Damascus in the darkness of the night, Paul retraced the journey to Jerusalem. Galatians 1:18 gives the impression that Paul was in Jerusalem at this particular time for a period of at least fifteen days, during which time he spent the greater portion with Peter (see also Galatians 1:12, 16-19) The purpose behind Paul’s desire to spend this time with the Apostle Peter is not too clear, but it is probable that not having “conferred with flesh and blood” to receive his doctrinal foundation and understanding, he now desired to confer with Peter that he might secure a historical background of Christ’s life and ministry. That there is some truth in this conjecture is also seen in the fact that the only other Disciple which Paul saw at Jerusalem was James, the Lord’s brother.

With Paul, the permission to fellowship with the saints at Jerusalem was tantamount to giving him permission to preach. As he “was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem” (Acts 9:28) the urge to preach and testify came upon him “and he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians”. Whether these Grecians were the same as those mentioned in Acts 6:1, who murmured against the Hebrews “because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration”, is questionable. In any event the group of Grecians with whom Paul disputed became so incensed that “they went about to slay him” (Acts 9:29) His messages in Jerusalem were evoking the same result as those he had delivered in Damascus.

Knowledge of the Grecians murderous intentions came to the ears of the brethren at Jerusalem, “which when (they) knew, they brought him down to Caesarea, and sent him forth to Tarsus” (Acts 9:30) Thus began what is commonly designated “the silent years at Tarsus”. For the next seven or eight years, following his hurried exit from Jerusalem, scarcely anything is heard of Paul. What, if anything was the reason for this further inactivity, this enforced delay?

The most important conjecture; and it must remain that, is that it was during this period of time that there took place within the early Church a revolution, one of the most momentous in the spiritual history of mankind, wherein the Gentiles were admitted to equal fellowship and privileges with the Jews in the Church of Jesus Christ. Acts 9:15 states in part that Paul was especially called “to bear My name before the Gentiles”. Therefore, this revolution within the Church, which is pictured and described in Acts 9:32 to 11:18, was a vital, definite and necessary preliminary to the chosen work of Paul. Hence, the tenor of the above passage from Acts is that God purposely placed Paul “on the shelf” until such time as He had prepared the stage for the entrance of Paul upon His chosen program.

Ephesians 3:1 is Paul’s own statement the he ever considered himself a “prisoner of the Lord Jesus Christ”. As a prisoner of Christ he had left Jerusalem at the command of Christ (Acts 22:17-21), being evidently led of the Holy Spirit to make the journey to Tarsus. By way of summary we can therefore make the suggestion that God had the following two-fold purpose in mind

(1) The further training and equipment of Paul for service.

(2) The final presentation of a Church about which could be centered a needed missionary work to the Gentiles.

Since, apparently, Paul required some further training at the hand of the Lord; of what would this training have consisted? Again there can only be a conjecture of sorts, but it is probable that, having been chosen as an Apostle with a message especially for the Gentile unbelievers, it is not beyond the realm of reason that God returned Paul to his home city for a period of “inactivity” so as to re-acquaint him with Gentile religions, customs, methods of thought, and the like. What better place for this training would there be than Tarsus? Tarsus, the cross-road of the world! It cannot be overlooked that Paul, despite his conversion and the subsequent time spent in the solitude of the desert, was at this time relatively fresh from the Pharisaical schools at Jerusalem and that most, if not all, of this tainted teaching had to be washed from his soul.

Even so, we cannot truthfully accuse Paul of complete inactivity while he sojourned in the city of Tarsus. Acts 15:41 indicates that when Paul first went through Cilicia on a missionary journey he “confirmed the Churches”. The suggestion is, and strongly so, that Paul had been occupied during his time in Tarsus with preaching. This would mean that Paul, to some extent at least, had assumed some responsibility in the establishment of these Churches. Under these circumstances Paul would have been in training of sorts in his preaching to and establishment of these Churches. When he made his subsequent missionary journey he, who built upon no other man’s foundation, confirmed in the faith the Churches already established by means of his ministry.

And what of the establishment of a Church about which could be centered the missionary work to the unbelieving Gentiles? With Paul temporarily out of the picture, God immediately begins the movement of the Church toward this goal by causing Peter to “break the shell of Judaism”. This feat Peter accomplished in his preaching, under Divine compulsion, to the household of the Gentile Cornelius with the startling result (to Peter and his comrades) that “the Holy Ghost fell (also) on them”. In this striking manner the household of Cornelius, though they were Gentiles, were converted and brought forth into the fold of the Church (Acts 10:44-48)

Notice, however, that God did not let the matter rest with the conversion of the household of Cornelius. He caused His action through Peter to be so disturbing to the Church Council at Jerusalem that they questioned seriously the propriety of Peter’s action and demanded a full explanation. Then, in face of Peter’s argument and full explanation, the Church Council was forced into the position of recognizing the Gentiles as those whom God “also did grant repentance unto life”.

This action, insofar as the earthly machinery and organization of the Church is involved, made Peter’s action, and God’s revelation, official and accepted procedure (Acts 11:18) In truth, from Chapters 8 through 12, in this book of Acts, the decided tendency of each incident and activity of the believers points toward the establishment of a “general Gospel” which was free from Jewish limitations. In this period of gradual change-over, God furthers His program of Gentile evangelism through the establishment of one important Church outside the “Jerusalem scope of influence”. While Paul is spending his days at Tarsus, the Syrian city of Antioch is caused to become the second great center of Christian faith and practice. This city of Antioch was subsequently to become the home-center of missionary activity to the Gentiles.

The rather obvious conclusion that many draw from this change-over from Jerusalem to Antioch is that because of Jerusalem’s generally strict Judaism and decided opinions against Gentile participation in the Church with the same privileges as the Jewish members, God found it required to establish this second center from which He could send missionaries to the Gentiles (see especially Acts 11:19-21) In support of this reasoning notice that, as a result of the conversion of Gentiles here at Antioch and the consequent establishment of the first Gentile Church, the Council at Jerusalem, despite their previous sanction in the case of Peter, became somewhat frightened at the turn of events and sent Barnabas to Antioch to investigate. But God had seen to it that the proper man was chosen to come to Antioch to investigate the program there, so that His program would not suffer interference and undue hindrance. Barnabas “was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and faith” and the result was that “much people were added unto the Lord” in the city of Antioch. Nonetheless Jerusalem did not easily lay aside its fear of Antioch and Gentile believers in general; even Paul, years later, had to face them and force the issue on behalf of Gentile believers.

Barnabas does not appear to have departed immediately on a return journey to Jerusalem. Rather, apparently realizing that he must have some type of assistance to carry on the work at Antioch, actually, to assist him for we notice that he had become the leader of the work in Antioch, he goes himself, undoubtedly under the leadership of the Holy Spirit, to Tarsus to seek out Paul to become his assistant. Having found Paul without too much difficulty, he immediately returned to the work in Antioch (Acts 11:25-26)

Thus did God set the stage. The moment was exactly right for the re-appearance of Paul on the scene; the appearance of Paul to become the renowned Apostle to the Gentiles, cast in the role of the Church’s first true missionary. The story is but another proof that, in His own way and in His own time, God works all things out to His glory and according to His plan and purpose.

Paul Finds His Work

Paul, notwithstanding, did not immediately embark upon his missionary career. For the first year he was called upon to occupy himself as the chief assistant to Barnabas. It was probably during this year at Antioch that the name “Christian” was first applied to the followers of Christ. Acts 11:26 notes that, “the Disciples were called Christians first in Antioch”. The literal interpretation of this sentence would more properly be “were called after their business”. The new name may have come about because this Church at Antioch was composed largely of Gentile believers and, in their efforts to distinguish their new religious experience and practice from that of Judaism, of which they were then thought to be a sect, they coined the expression “Christian”. If this be true, it represented the first endeavor in the early Church to completely divorce itself from Judaism and the synagogue. Notwithstanding, there is a considerable volume of Christian scholarship who are convinced that this name “Christian” was applied to these early believers in mockery; a nickname, a derision applied to the believers to ridicule them.

Sometime during this year at Antioch a prophet by the name of Agabus, one of several prophets who had come down from Jerusalem to Antioch (Acts 11:27), arose during one of the meetings and prophesied concerning a disastrous famine that was imminent. The immediate response of the saints at Antioch was to take up a collection for the poor saints at Jerusalem and make the decision to send it to them “by the hands of Barnabas and Saul”.

In this story in Acts 11:27-30, the record of the Church’s first missionary collection we have established for all time God’s desire and requirement in matters pertaining to missionary giving. But the story also reveals that two new orders of believers had by now arisen in the ministry of the Church. The first of these is designated as “prophet”. It appears that this office was that of a preacher or Apostolic assistant, the duty of the individual being to assist the Apostles in the interpretation of God’s will to the general body of believers. The second office was that of “elder”. The most feasible explanation of this office is that it had to do with the organizational functions of the Church. Elders were individuals, called presbyters on occasion. Their chief duty seems to have consisted in local Church management. Some even think that the office of “elder” superseded that of the “deacons” mentioned in Acts 6. Such a conclusion could probably be interpreted to mean that eventually the office of “deacon” and that of “elder” came to be one and the same thing. The word “elder” being supplanted for “deacon” to designate the individual was thought of as being well founded and stable because of their years of age and or their length of Christian beliefs.

Thus, whether we speak of missionary giving, or the filling of responsible office, it is the teaching of Christianity from its inception that the strong ones are continually called upon to support and care for the weak; whether this imply financial or spiritual assistance.

The Church at Antioch had sent two, Barnabas and Paul, to Jerusalem to deliver their missionary giving to care for needy saints, but three return; two men and a boy Barnabas, Paul, and John Mark (Acts 12:25) Shortly after the arrival of these three from Jerusalem, “as they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them”.

We have already discovered how the Holy Spirit had led the witnessing, by advancing stages, into a direct preaching and teaching of the Gentiles. On His part a definite plan had been slowly unfolding and the history of the early Church organizes itself as a record of that plan. The chief part that the Disciples had to play in this historic movement was to yield to the call and impulse of the Spirit. Now, as the plan of the Spirit reaches full development, He reveals the next step and sets the Disciples definitely to work to realize it in His power. His command was the brief “separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them”.

Hence, the turning point of Church history revolves around Acts 13:1-3.