Recently I’ve heard it argued that the conversion of Paul was a false conversion because it resembles the experiences of Mohammed and Joseph Smith. Aside from this being a ridiculous argument because it could just as easily be argued that the experiences of Mohammed and Joseph Smith were modeled after the conversion experience of Paul, there is a profound purpose for the conversion experience of Paul happening the way that it did. I wanted to go into that profound purpose a little bit with you today.
The story of Paul’s conversion takes place in Acts 8-9. In the account we come to a place where Paul is traveling from Caesarea to Damascus. Presumably he would be traveling on the Kings road, which would have been the main road through the region which has been being used for centuries. At this time (and still today, really) people tended to use the same ways to get places. Trade routes have remained the same for thousands of years. Paul was on his way to Damascus (as a representative of the religious establishment of Israel) to bring curses and accusations against the followers of Jesus, and to bring persecution upon them. As Paul neared Damascus a bright light shone and either made Paul fall back and onto the ground or, if he was traveling on a horse, his horse would’ve reared up and made him fall off, onto the ground. Either way, there was something in the road which stopped him in his tracks.
What stopped Paul in his tracks? We’re told that Jesus, so bright and sunshiny that the traveling companions could hear Him but not see Him, was standing in the road before them, and He had an important word for Paul which would lead him to stop his accusations and persecution going forward (among other far greater changes in the life of Paul).
So, what’s the significance of this story, outside of the obvious, you might ask?
We have to remember that directly before the conversion story of Paul in Luke’s narrative (Acts 8-9) we’re walked through the history of Israel (courtesy of Stephen’s address before the Sanhedrin) where we’re told of Israel not recognizing their savior but then coming to their senses at a later time, over and and over again. We’re walked through a redemption narrative that spans almost the entirety of the 7th chapter of Acts. Remember, Luke is writing this book and making choices as he goes as to what to include and what to leave out. So what’s the significance of telling this narrative, directly after Stephen’s address on redemption and second opportunities?
Let me tell you a story of another guy who was traveling along the King’s road and would have been passing by Damascus on his way to Moab. This man had been asked to curse and persecute Israel and he really struggled over whether he wanted to be a part of it, or not, but eventually he decided that he would go see what he could do about persecuting Israel. Along the road from Pethor (the probable sight being about 250 miles north of Damascus) down to Moab this man had a supernatural encounter with the Angel of the LORD. I don’t really have the time of the space here to make the argument but it is viewed by the majority of Christian scholars that an appearance of the Angel of the LORD is an appearance of the preincarnate Christ. So, in this story we have a preincarnate Jesus stepping out in front of a man traveling along the King’s road, potentially near Damascus. The story goes on to tell us that the Angel of the LORD is stopping the traveler because He wants to stop him from his intended purpose of persecuting the people of the LORD. Our protagonist seems to heed the warning but goes on to curse the people of Israel the only way he can figure out how to.
This story, of course, is the story of Balaam when he traveled to Moab and cursed the Israelites (Numbers 22-24).
In light of this, should we view it as significant that right after Luke tells us of Stephen's address where he shows Israel’s reversals over their history, we have a story where a man who was meant to persecute the people of the LORD is traveling and meets a terrifying appearance of the Angel of the LORD who stops him from his intended purpose?
Of course we should!
Is it possible that Luke is using the story of Paul’s conversion as a living example of Stephen’s words in the chapters directly before?
If that's not what's going on here, that would be a pretty big coincidence...
No comments:
Post a Comment