Assignment on Jesus Tradition in Paul and Pauline Circle

Topic: The conversion of Paul and how it influences his theology

Submitted to: Rev. V.L. Krosschhuanmawia.
Submitted by: Lalrinhlua, Roll No- 7, BD IV.

1. Introduction

The event of Conversion of Paul is without doubt the most important that has taken
place in the history of Christianity since Pentecost. The different accounts are subtly adapted
to their varying circumstances. In this paper the conversion of Paul and how his conversion
touched and changed his theology/view will be assumed.

2. Paul’s Conversion:

The event commonly called ‘Paul’s Conversion’ is described briefly by Paul himself
in Galatians 1, and there are three detailed accounts of it in Acts 9, 22 and 26. Some scholars
have suggested that there are problems in the fact that sometimes the event has more that of a
calling to a conversion experience and in others more that of a calling to mission. Thus, G.
Ludemann (Early Christianity, pp. 115-116) has argued that the event has more the character
of a conversion in Acts 9 and of a missionary call in Acts 22 and 26 as well as in Galatians.
This leads to the suggestion that it is Like who has turned the story into one of a conversion
in Acts 9 and underemphasized the “ call” elements which surface in Acts 22 and 26.

However, this analysis is mistaken. Already in Acts 9 Luke is preparing the way for
the mission to the Gentiles, and Acts 9:15 clearly incorporates this point (pace Ludemann).
Further, the alleged distinction between a conversion and a missionary calling is false. The
missionary calling must presuppose a conversion, and the combination of the two events in
one is perfectly natural: conversion is implicit in Galatians 1.

Clearly there is much more detail in the accounts in Acts. Yet there is nothing in Acts
which contradicts the summary in Galatians. The basic fact in all the accounts is that Paul
saw Jesus and came to recognize him as the Son of God.1

2.1. The Event of Conversion:

In the early month of C.E. 35 Paul was on his way to Damascus to suppress the
Christian fugitives who he believed had violated the Jewish Law. On his journey from
Jerusalem to Damascus, which takes a full week on foot or horseback, the distance being

1
I.H. Marshall “Acts of the Apostle” (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992), 91-92.

1
about 140 miles; as he was passing, in his solitude of his own thoughts, through Samaria,
Galilee, and across Mount Hermon, he had ample time for reflection, and we may well
imagine how shining face of the martyr Stephen as he stood like a holy angel before the
Sanhedrin, and as in the last moment he prayed for his murderers, was haunting him like a
ghost and warning him to stop his mad career.2 However, a far higher vision than this earthly
paradise was in store for Saul as he approached the city.3 A supernatural light from heaven,
brighter than the Syrian sun, suddenly flashed around him at midday, and Jesus of Nazareth,
whom he persecuted in his humble disciples, appeared to him in his glory as the exalted
Messiah, asking him in the Hebrew tongue: “Shaul, Shaul, why persecutes thou Me?” It was
a question both of rebuke and of love, and it melted his heart. He fell prostrate to the ground.
He saw and heard, he trembled and obeyed, he believed and rejoiced. 4

As he rose from the earth he saw no man. Like a helpless child, blinded by the
dazzling light, he was led to Damascus, and after three days of blindness and fasting he was
cured and baptized not by Peter or James or John, but by one of the humble disciples,
Ananias of Damascus whom was instructed by divine revelation about Saul at the house of
Judas on the Street Called Straight. Ananias is initially reluctant, having heard about Saul’s
persecution, but obeys the divine command: whom he had come to destroy. The haughty,
self-righteous, intolerant, raging Pharisee was changed into a humble, penitent, grateful,
loving servant of Jesus. He threw away self-righteousness, learning, influence, power,
prospects, and east in his lot with a small, despised sect at the risk of his life. If there ever
was an honest, unselfish, radical, and effective change of conviction and conduct, it was that
of Saul of Tarsus. He became, by a creative act of the Holy Spirit, a “new creature in Christ
Jesus.”5

2.2. Three accounts of Paul’s conversion:

Firstly in Acts 9:7 we saw that Paul’s companions heard the voice of the risen Christ,
but saw no person. They may have seen the bright light. In 22:9 Paul’s says they ‘saw the
light but did not hear the voice of one who was speaking to me’. What they heard was
presumably a sound, but not an intelligible voice. The account in chapter 26 does not refer to
the companions either seeing or hearing. Secondly, in Acts 9:4 and 22:7 the only person

2
Philip Schaff, “History of the Christian Church” (Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 2006),
299-230. Here after cited as Philip Schaff, “History of the Christian Church”…
3
Wilfred Knox, “St. Paul” (London: Thomas Nelson & Sons Ltd., 1932), 37.
4
Philip Schaff, “History of the Christian Church”…, 297.
5
Philip Schaff, “History of the Christian Church”…, 298.

2
mentioned as falling to the ground is Paul, the central figure in the drama. But this need not
include the possibility that the others fell to the ground as in 26:14. Thirdly in Acts 9:6 and
22:10 Paul is told to go on to Damascus, where he will be told what to do. In 26:16 his
commission to be an apostle is given at the time of the vision. Possibly Paul did not wish to
bore Agrippa with the details of his story and so compressed it into this form.6

These distinctions are not of great importance and can easily be explained by the
different purpose of the narrative in each case. Indeed the fact that these variations in
emphasis have been preserved by Luke gives us greater confidence in him as a credible
historian. If he had invented the story, he would have been more likely to have made sure that
each account of it was identical with the others in form and language.7

3. Saul the Pharisee to Paul the Christian:

There was no bond of unity between the sudden and radical transformation of Saul the
Pharisee to Paul the Christian. It was the same person with the same end in view, but in
opposite directions. We must remember that he was not a worldly, indifferent, cold blooded
man, but an intensely religious man. While persecuting the church, he was “blameless” as
touching the righteousness of the law. He resembled the rich youth who had observed the
commandments, yet lacked the one thing needful, and of whom Mark says that Jesus “loved
him.”

He was not converted from infidelity to faith, but from a lower faith to a purer faith,
from the religion of Christ, from the theology of the Law of Moses to the religion of Christ,
from the theology of the law to the theology of the gospel. How shall a sinner be justified
before the tribunal of a Holy God? That was with him the question of questions before as
well as after his conversion; not scholastic question merely, but even far more a moral and
religious question. For righteousness, to the Hebrew mind, is conformity to the will of God as
expressed in his revealed law, and implies life eternal as its reward. His honest and earnest
pursuit of righteousness is the connecting link between the two periods of Paul’s life.

First he labored to secure it by works of the law, then by obedience of faith. What he
had sought in vain by his fanatical zeal for the traditions of Judaism, he found gratuitously
and at once by trust in the cross of Christ: pardon and peace with God. By the discipline of

6
John Drane, “Paul” (Sutherland: Lion Publishing, 1976), 27. Here after cited as John Drane, “Paul”...
7
John Drane, “Paul”..., 30.

3
the Mosaic Law as a tutor was led beyond its restraints and prepared for manhood and
freedom. Through the law he died to the law that he might live unto God. His old self, with
its lusts, was crucified with Christ, so that henceforth he lived no longer himself, but Christ
lived in him. He was mystically identified with his Savior and had no separate existence from
him.8 The whole of Christianity, the whole of life, was summed up to him in the one word:
Christ. He determined to know nothing save Jesus Christ and Him crucified for our sins, and
risen again for our justification.

4. Justification by Faith:

The experience of justification by faith, free pardon and acceptance by Christ were the
strongest stimulus to gratitude and consecration to Paul. His greatest sin persecution like
Peter’s denial was overruled for his own good: the remembrance of it kept him humble,
guarded him against temptation, and intensified his zeal and devotion. “I am the least of the
apostle,” he said in unfeigned humility, “that am not to meet to be called an apostle, because I
persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am; and his grace which
was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all: yet not I,
but the grace of God which was with me.” This confession contains, in epitome, the whole
meaning of his life and work.

The idea of Justification by the free grace of God in Christ through a living faith
which makes Christ and his merits our own and leads to consecration and holiness, is the
central idea of Paul’s Epistles.9 His whole theology, doctrinal, ethical, and practical, lies, like
a germ, in his conversion; but it was actually developed by a sharp conflict with Judaizing
teachers, who continued to trust in the law for righteousness and salvation, and thus virtually
frustrated the grace of God and made Christ’s death unnecessary and fruitless.

5. Paul’s Confession:

Paul terms his own experience of conversion a “revelation” (Gal 2:2) or an

“appearance” of the risen Lord (I Cor 9:1; 15:8). These two expressions are as explicit as
Paul comes to describing what he experienced. He does not refer to Damascus in describing
the event even though it is mention in Galatians 1:17 nor he gives details that would pinpoint
the circumstances and timing of it. The Greek work for revelation (apokalysis, meaning

8
Philip Schaff, “History of the Christian Church”…, 301-302.
9
Philip Schaff, “History of the Christian Church”…, 302-303.

4
unveiling) and appearance (ophthe, which means to be seen, to appear) do not give us the
kind of historical data that your question seeks. Both convey a sense of the risen Lord making
personal contact with Paul in a manner beyond human perception. In the First Corithians Paul
insists that he is no less a recipient of a call from the risen Lord than other followers, some of
whom also received post-resurrectional appearances (c.f. I Corth 15:3-11). In other words,
Paul’s own account does not yield much specific historical information on his conversion, but
it does assert that God revealed his Son to him, and this is what is important to Paul.10

Paul broke radically with Judaism and opposed the Pharisaical notion of legal
righteousness at every step and with all his might, he was far from opposing the Old
Testament or the Jewish people. Herein he shows great wisdom and moderation, and his
infinite superiority over Marcion and other ultra- and pseudo- Pauline reformers. He now
expounded the Scriptures as a direct preparation for the gospel, the law as a schoolmaster
leading in Christ, Abraham as the father of the faithful. And as to his countrymen after the
flesh, he loved them more than ever before. Filled with the amazing love of Christ who had
pardoned him, “chief of sinners,” he was ready for the greatest possible sacrifice if thereby he
might save them. His startling language in the ninth chapter of the Romans is not rhetorical
exaggeration, but the genuine expression of that heroic self-denial and devotion which
animated Moses, and which culminated in the sacrifice of the eternal Son of God on the cross
of Calvary.11

6. Significance of Paul’s conversion:

The conversion of Paul marks not only the turning point in his personal history, but
also an important epoch in the history of the apostolic church, and consequently in the history
of mankind. It was the most fruitful event since the miracle of Pentecost, and secured the
universal victory of Christianity. The transformation of the most dangerous persecutor into
the most successful promoter of Christianity is nothing less than a miracle of divine grace. It
rest on the greater miracle of the resurrection of Christ. Both are inseparably connected;
without the resurrection the conversion would have been impossible, and on the other hand
the conversion of such a man and with such results is one of the strongest proofs of the
resurrection.12

10
Ronald D. Witherup, “Paul” (New York: Paulist Press, 2003), 19.
11
Philip Schaff, “History of the Christian Church”…, 303.
12
Philip Schaff, “History of the Christian Church”…, 296.

5
 Paul is important to Christianity for both historical and theological reasons. Paul is
one of the earliest witnesser of Christian faith and hence holds a significant importance in the
eye of historical perspective. Moreover, he can be labelled as the first Christain Theologian
because his letters express basic elements to Christian faith that no theological system
thereafter could afford to surpass.

7. Conclusion:

Paul’s conversion did not make a morally good man out of a morally bad man; he had
not been a morally bad man. That it was not without influence on his way of living may
appear in due course, but its primary effect was his understanding of God and of his own
relation with God. If Jesus was now alive, having been dead, it was because God had raised
him from death. If God had raised him from death he must have been not a false prophet
leading Israel astray but the bearer of the truth that God himself affirmed; the Messiah,
perhaps, though Paul has little interest in Jesus as Davidic king, much in the fulfillment of
prophecy and in the crucifixion and resurrection as the final suffering and vindication by
which God’s kingdom would be established. Negatively, Jesus was the end of the Law as the
means by which man might be related to God; positively, he was the beginning of the
realization of the eschatological hope of Israel. There was much in these propositions for a
theologian to get his teeth into.

Paul’s conversion was at the same time his call to the apostleship, not indeed to place
among the Twelve for the vacancy of Judas was filled, but to the independent apostleship of
the gentiles. Then followed as uninterrupted activity of more than a quarter of a century,
which for the interest and for permanent and ever-growing usefulness has no parallel in the
annals of history, and affords an unanswerable proof of the sincerity of his conversion and the
truth of Christianity. Therefore, Paul is not the rock from which the church is built but rather
like Moses who strikes the rock into life.

6
Bibliography:

Bowden, John. “Conversion,” Encyclopedia of Christianity, edited by Martyn Percy. New

York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 2005.

Drane, John. “Paul.” Sutherland: Lion Publishing, 1976.

Knox, Wilfred. “St. Paul.” London: Thomas Nelson & Sons Ltd., 1932.

Marshall, I.H. “Acts of the Apostle.” Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992.

Roetzel, Calvin. “Paul The Man and the Myth.” Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999.
Schaff, Philip. “History of the Christian Church.” Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers,
Inc., 2006.

Wiles, Virginia. Making Sense of Paul: A Basic Interpretation to Pauline Theology.

Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 2000.
Witherup, Ronald D. “Paul.” New York: Paulist Press, 2003.