- What he sees (9:3)
Other passages tell us it was about noon, or midday (22:6, 26:13). The sun was at its brightest, but it was pale to this light. There is no question that the light suggests a glorious epiphany and a supernatural event. No natural phenomenon is taking place. It is nothing less than a revelation of the exalted resurrected Christ (9:17, 27, 22:14; 26:16, 1 Cor. 9:1, 15:8). The light is a manifestation of Christ’s glory. Brilliant light is a common feature of theophanies in the Bible (Ex. 19:16; 2 Sam. 22:13, 15; Psa. 77:18; 97:4; Ezek. 1:4, 13, 14).[2] Stam correctly calls it a “divine intervention” that “was immediate and direct.”[3] This event revealed to Paul the Son of God (Gal. 1:16; cf. 2 Cor. 12:1, 7; Gal. 1:12; 2:2), through a personal appearance (1 Cor. 15:8; 15:5-7; Luke 24:34; Acts 9:17; 13:31; 26:21), which was visible to him (1 Cor. 9:1; Acts 9:27).
2. What he hears (9:4-6)
As the spotlight of God’s glory shines around him, Saul “fell to the ground and heard a voice…” (9:4). The combination of light with a voice indicates that a divine revelation was taking place (Ex. 3:2, 4-5; Matt. 17:2, 5).[4] The first words that he hears are “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” (9:4). Saul probably understood this as a rebuke, since in Rabbinic thought a voice from heaven was understood as either instruction or a rebuke.[5] Clearly the phrase is not an instruction. Rebuke is certainly in tune with the repeating of the name, which indicates confrontation. Saul was completely confused. The voice indicates a personal persecution against the speaker. Saul the zealot of Judaism thought of himself as doing God’s work, not persecuting God. In his mind he was defending God and the law. The question shows God’s solidarity with his people. To persecute them was to persecute Him.
In his confusion and bewilderment, Saul replies—“Who are You, Lord?” (9:5). Some debate has come by use of the term Lord. Some have taken it in the sense of sir, since the word kurie / kyrios can be used in the sense of respect, not worship. In this sense, it is used as an honorary title, equivalent to mister.[6] It is also used of God, indicating Lord in the sense of deity. Thus, some seem to take it in its full Christological sense. It is hard to determine which is meant here. The answer, “I am Jesus whom you are persecuting” indicates there was not a full recognition of whom Saul was dealing with in his mind. More enlightenment was needed and given. Thus, Lord could not be a full Christological confession. This is evident by the question—“Who are you?” But it seems in the light of its supernatural aspects to indicate more than an honorary title of respect. It certainly indicates he knew he was in the presence of a superior being.
The KJV has the words “it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks” as part of the text (9:5). Also missing is part of verse 6 that is found in the KJV, “And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” (9:6). The words are not in the Greek text, except for the Textus Receptus. No doubt it was added when Erasmus, translating the Vulgate back into Greek, who added them to the Greek text of 1516.[7] They are not found in the Majority Text and Greek other texts. The words in verse 6 are not found in any manuscript except the Latin Vulgate. The phrases are omitted from most modern Bible versions. It is a clear case of scribal assimilation from other texts (Acts 26:14; 22:10) into this text to make the parallels uniform.[8]
While this text in Acts does not give a hint that the risen Jesus was actually seen, it is provided by addition information in Acts and the Epistles (Acts 9:17, 27; 1 Cor. 9:1l, 15:8; Gal. 1:16). It is interesting that the response of the Lord is to give only his earthly name—Jesus. This is done to link the vision with the historical Jesus, which emphasizes He is now alive and exalted. Along with the identification, Saul is told to rise and enter the city for additional instruction. The word must designates a divine necessity. He had a divine appointment, although he is not told immediately with whom.
The conversion of Saul is similar to the prophetic call of the prophets. His conversion exhibits “the marks of the prophetic inauguration.”[9] The Damascus Road encounter functions as Paul’s prophetic call as the apostle of the church, not just his salvation experience. Instantly he has a new vocation. Paul adopts prophetic language in Galatians 1:15-16 to describe his calling.[10] He, like Isaiah and Jeremiah, were called from their mother’s womb (Isa. 49:1; Jer. 1:5a). Acts 26:16-17 indicates rejection by their own people (Ezek. 3:1-9), and future revelations (Jer. 1:5-10; Ezek. 2:1-7). Paul’s very conversion experience echoes the experience of the prophets, being called by a visionary experience (Isa. 1:1, 6:1-13; Ezek 1:1, 8:4; Obad. 1; Hab. 2:2). Paul is a prophetic figure as well as an apostle.
3. What he does (9:7-9)
While Saul was having this vision, the men who were traveling with him were witnesses to the event. We are told they “stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one” (9:7). There is a seemingly conflict between this and Acts 22:9, which the KJV says they “heard not the voice.” The Greek word can mean both sound and voice. There is an ongoing debate about the syntax of the passage. Robertson says “it is perfectly proper to appeal to the distinction in the [Greek] cases in the apparent contradiction” saying the “accusative case accents to intellectual apprehension of the sound, while the genitive calls attention to the sound of the voice without accenting the sense.”[11] However, Wallace shows a lot of exceptions to this, saying the “appeal to different cases probably ought not [to] form any part of the solution.”[12] Regardless of the syntax debate, it seems that the solution it proposes that they heard the sound but not the voice is reasonable. We see in the case of Jesus and the voice from heaven in John 12:29 that the crowd could not distinguish an articulate voice. This seems to be the case here and many modern verses reflect this view by translating Acts 22:9—“did not understand the voice” (NASB, NIV). They heard the sound of the voice, but did not understand the words. In addition, they did not see the person of the vision, simply the light (glory of God). The words of the voice were understood by Paul, as the vision of the person of Jesus was seen by him (cf. 1 Cor. 15:8). This upholds that the call and commission was personal, not a group event.
Upon getting up, “though his eyes were open, he could see nothing” (Acts 9:8) and had to be led to the city. Some see this as being the source of Paul’s eye problems (cf. Gal. 4:13-15; 6:11).[13] “He who had intended to enter Damascus like an avenging fury was led by the hand into that city, blind and helpless as a child,” observes Barclay.[14] This act of blindness has been seen in different ways: shock,[15] evidence of the prophetic call,[16] and judgment.[17] All three elements may be true in this experience. As Stam observes, “What mingled feelings of sorrow and joy, remorse and gratitude, shame and glory must have surged within Saul’s breast as he contemplated what he had just seen and heard!”[18] Believers in moments of crisis often are faced with these types of feelings, and in a sense may never completely get over them. There is evidence Paul experienced lingering shame and guilt and sense of unworthiness (cf. 1 Cor. 15:9). However, He was be able to put them behind him and look forward to a new goal of pressing toward the high calling of God. How? Only one way—by the empowering grace of God!
However, this blindness was temporary, for “he was three days without sight, and neither ate nor drank” (9:9). Some see significance of this as being Saul’s personal crucifixion with Christ, the darkness as his tomb experience, and on third day, he rises and is filled with the Holy Spirit.[19] There may be a parallel here, but the significance should not be overdone. There can be no question that during this time he did not eat or drink. Although the word fasting is not used in the text, certainly it was what happened. Fasting has two functions in the Old Testament: that of repentance (cf. Neh. 1:4; Jer. 14:12; Joel 1:14; Jonah 3:7-8) and/or a preparation for receiving revelation (cf. Ex. 34:28; Duet. 9:9, Dan. 9:1-3). Bruce’s suggestion that the lack of eating and drinking was the result of shock[20] seems unlikely for two main reasons: First, because this fasting is associated with prayer (cf. 9:11). Paul began as a man of prayer which continued throughout his ministry (cf. 16:25; 20:36; 22:17). Second, it is during this time, Saul received a vision concerning Ananias (cf. 9:12). Saul as a Pharisee would have been familiar with the fasting practice in the times of crisis, as well as a religious exercise in connection with prayer and revelation.
[1] Knowling, ACTS, 231.
[2] Peterson, ACTS, 303.
[3] Stam, ACTS, 2:26.
[4] Harrison, ACTS, 158.
[5] Longenecker, ACTS, 370.
[6] Zodhiates, COMPLETE WORD STUDY, 900.
[7] Utley, ACTS, 122.
[8] Peterson, fn. 23, 304., Bruce, ACTS, fn 9, 10, 11, 282,
[9] Ralston, Timothy J., ‘The Theological Significance of Paul’s Conversion,” BIBLIOTHECA SACRA, April 1990, 201.
[10] Evans, C.A., “Paul as Prophet,” DICTIONARY OF PAUL AND HIS LETTERS, 763.
[11] Robertson, GRAMMAR, 506.
[12] Wallace, GREEK: BEYOND THE BASICS, 133-134. Also see Peterson, fn 27, 305; Harrison, 161.
[13] Utley, 122.
[14] Barclay, ACTS, 73.
[15] Bruce, ACTS, 185.
[16] Bock, ACTS, 359
[17] Peterson, 305.
[18] Stam, ACTS, 2:35.
[19] Harrison, ACTS, 161.
[20] Bruce, 185.
No comments:
Post a Comment