Thursday, July 7, 2016

We're On a Mission From God

The story of Paul’s first missionary journey is presented in Acts 13 and 14. Some scholars question its historicity since Paul’s Letter to the Galatians seems to rule it out. Others point to a verse (2 Tim 3:11) that references sufferings Paul endured “in Antioch, Iconium, and Lystra” and those are three towns on the itinerary of the first missionary journey. It is widely held that 2 Timothy is not an authentic Pauline letter, but it may be an independent witness to the Lukan source that underlies Acts 13-14.

The mission begins in Syria when the Holy Spirit spoke to the five “prophets and teachers” leading the Antiochene church and Barnabas and Saul were commissioned to go forth and proclaim the word (13:1-3). The other three men are otherwise unknown, but the mention that Manaen was brought up with Herod Antipas indicates that Christianity was not just a religion of the lower classes.

Conflict in Cyprus

The first stop is Cyprus, Barnabas’ homeland (13:4-12). From Antioch, it was a day’s walk to the port city of Seleucia where they were able to take a cargo ship – no passenger ships in the 1st century CE – to Salamis on the eastern shore of Cyprus. They walked the length of the island, proclaiming the word in the synagogues as they went, eventually arriving on the western shore at the capital of Paphos (100 miles from Salamis).

In Paphos the apostles encountered a Jewish magician named Bar-Jesus who was in service to the Roman proconsul Sergius Paulus. Saul (who, Luke finally tells us, was also known as Paul) admonished Bar-Jesus. As a result, the magician became blind and the proconsul became a believer. The whole story is reminiscent of the conflict between Peter and Simon Magus in 8:5-25.

There are a couple more items of interest in this passage. First, Sergius Paulus was the proconsul of Cyprus between 46-48 CE, so that gives us a rough idea of when the first missionary journey could have taken place. Second, from this point on Luke will refer to Saul as Paul. Unlike Simon who was given the name Peter (Aramaic Kephas, meaning “rock”) by Jesus, the names “Saul” and “Paul” were given to him at birth. “Saul” would have been his Hebrew name and “Paul” his Roman name. (John Mark would be another example of a double name.) It makes sense that Paul would go by his Roman name in his interactions with the Gentile world.

Inciting a Crowd

With the Cyprus part of their mission concluded, Paul and his companions began the next leg (13:13-52). They sailed to Perga on the southern shore of Asia Minor where John Mark left them to return to Jerusalem. Barnabas and Paul continued on the dangerous 100-mile overland route to the mountainous region where Pisidian Antioch lay. It was called “Pisidian” because it was close to the border of the district of Pisidia (and to distinguish it from a dozen other cities named Antioch).

According to Acts, Paul gave a lengthy speech in the synagogue and won over a following, but that success aroused jealousy in the local Jewish population who eventually had the apostles expelled from the district. They shook the dust of the town off their feet in protest, just as Jesus instructed the disciples (cf. Lk 9:5; 10:11), and moved on to Iconium where the sequence of success and rejection repeated itself (14:1-7).

After fleeing Iconium under threat of stoning, Barnabas and Paul travelled 25 miles to the Roman town of Lystra (14:8-20). It was the first town they visited that did not already have an established Jewish community so they preached in the agora (the public open space). Paul saw a man there who was lame from birth and healed him. The Gentile crowd reacted by calling the apostles Zeus and Hermes and wanted to offer sacrifices to them. (Luke explains that Paul was called Hermes because he did most of the speaking, Hermes being the messenger of the gods.)

Barnabas and Paul tried without success to dissuade the crowd from treating them as deities when Jews from Pisidian Antioch and Iconium arrived and turned the crowd against the apostles. Paul was stoned and left for dead outside the town, but his disciples formed a circle around him and Paul recovered. The next day the apostles left for Derbe but Acts reports nothing of the visit there.

“The priest of Zeus…brought oxen and garlands to the gates; he and the crowds wanted to offer sacrifice.” Paul and Barnabas in Lystra (1678) by Johann Heiss

Everybody Must Get Stoned

The entire Lystra episode bears tell-tale signs of Luke’s reworking. Paul’s healing of the crippled man is a parallel to an earlier healing story involving Peter (3:1-10), but in his letters Paul never refers to having performed healings. Jews stalking the apostles from town to town in order to turn the local pagan populace against them stretches credulity. The Jewish antagonism is part of the Lukan program to show that hostile rejection of the Christian message on the part of the Jewish population forced the apostles to turn to the Gentiles.

That said, in 2 Cor 11:24-25 Paul speaks of his sufferings as am apostle: five floggings (Jewish punishment), three beatings with rods (Roman punishment), one stoning. Stoning usually ended in death, but I wonder if the reference to Paul’s disciples forming a circle around him may have been an intervention to stop a stoning in progress.

[Side note: The RSV (1952) translates 2 Cor 11:25a, “Three times I have been beaten with rods; once I was stoned.” In the NRSV (1989) this verse was translated, “Three times I was beaten with rods. Once I received a stoning.” In the 37 years between these two translations, the term “stoned” developed a different connotation in the US English vocabulary and the NRSV translators didn’t want readers thinking Paul got high on anything other than the Holy Spirit.]

Acts 14:21-28 reports that Barnabas and Paul retraced their steps before sailing back to Syrian Antioch. It would have been shorter and quicker to continue along the road towards Tarsus from which they could then book passage home to Antioch. Does it make sense to return to cities that had rejected and almost killed one of them? The route of the return journey suggests that Luke exaggerated the rejection and downplayed the successes. After all, even in Lystra where Paul was stoned he had won over disciples who formed a protective circle around him.

Paul’s first missionary journey was the shortest of the three in terms of distance travelled. Scholars estimate that he and Barnabas were away for two years. The actual travel time by ship and foot was about two months; most of the time was spent in residence in the cities on their itinerary.
Clouds on the Horizon

When the apostles gave an account of the outcome of their mission to the Antiochene church, they said God “had opened a door of faith for the Gentiles.” Gentiles were a tremendous opportunity for the new faith, but also posed a problem. It was one thing to win over Gentile God-fearers, but quite another to convert pagan Gentiles to Christianity. What about dietary laws and the rest of the Mosaic law? Do the new Gentile converts also need to be circumcised like all Jews? Those were the questions that pre-occupied the minds of the leaders in Jerusalem. The future of the Christian faith would depend on the decisions they were about to make.

Thursday, June 30, 2016

The Cradle of Christianity

Jerusalem was certainly the birthplace of Christianity, but Antioch was its cradle. In the first century CE Antioch was the third greatest city in the Roman Empire (after Rome and Alexandria) and the capital of the province of Syria, with a population of over two-hundred thousand. From Ignatius bishop of Antioch in the second century to John Chrysostom in the fourth century, it was the home for great theologians and bishops. The city was predominantly Greek-speaking but had a large Jewish population. It is obvious why the apostles considered Antioch prime territory for evangelization.

They’ll Know We are Christians

One of the prominent figures in the early Antiochene church was Barnabas and his story is told in Acts 11:19-30. Because of persecutions following the death of Stephen, believers fled Jerusalem for Phoenicia (modern-day Lebanon), Cyprus, and Antioch. Although the initial inclination was only to teach the word to Jews, in Antioch the Hellenist believers proclaimed Jesus to the Greeks as well and converted many.

Once the Jerusalem leaders heard of this, they sent Barnabas to investigate and perhaps take control of the situation. There are no chronological markers to indicate when this happened, but it is plausible that it was concurrent with Philip’s mission to the Samaritans and Peter’s conversion of the house of Cornelius. However, Peter was one of the Twelve and Philip one of the Seven, so both of those missions were somewhat under the auspices of the Jerusalem church. Whatever was happening in Antioch was completely unsanctioned.

After assessing the situation, Barnabas decided to build upon what had already taken root there. He travelled to Tarsus (about 100 miles from Antioch, as the crow flies) and brought Saul back to Antioch with him where they spent the next year teaching and preaching. This tells us that Barnabas is bringing both the Antiochene church and Saul under control of Jerusalem. No longer is Saul acting as an independent agent; he now has a mandate from the mother church through Barnabas.

Almost as an aside, the last part of v. 26 announces that “in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians.” Up to this point in Acts, the followers of Jesus have been referred to as believers, disciples, brothers, or members of “the Way.” It seems like a minor historical footnote, but the implication is that the followers of Christ in Antioch had become so numerous and so different in practice from the Jewish population that they had to be identified by a different name. “Christian” was a name they were called, not a name they gave themselves.

Relief Mission

Vv. 27-29 tell of the wandering prophet Agabus who announced a coming famine in Jerusalem. Luke tells us the famine took place during the reign of the Emperor Claudius and the historian Josephus does report there was a famine sometime in the years 46-48 CE. (We’ll see Agabus again in 21:10-14 when he predicts Paul will be handed over to the Romans.) Agabus’ prophecy encouraged the prosperous Antiochene church to take up a collection to send to the poor believers in Judea.

Luke states that this relief mission was carried out by Barnabas and Saul (v. 29). But in his letters Paul seems to preclude it. As we saw, he did report visiting Jerusalem to confer with Peter for a couple of weeks three years after his conversion. After this, Paul says he “went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia” and it was fourteen years until he returned to attend the “Council of Jerusalem” described in Acts 15.

Some biblical scholars accept the historicity of a famine relief mission but think Saul’s involvement was a creation of Luke. As with the census at the birth of Jesus and Saul’s journey to Damascus, Luke appears to be using the relief mission as an excuse to get Barnabas and Saul to Jerusalem so they can return with John Mark.

Herod’s Persecution

We first hear of John Mark in Acts 12:1-19, a passage recounting persecutions under “King Herod” This is not the same “King Herod” who had John the Baptist beheaded in the gospels. That was Herod Antipas. This “King Herod” is Herod Agrippa I who assumed control over Judea in 41 CE. It’s not coincidental that persecution of Christians picks up again when Judea is no longer under direct Roman control.

According to Luke, Agrippa ordered the execution of James son of Zebedee, brother of John, and one of the Twelve. Agrippa then had Peter arrested, double-chained, and guarded by four squads of soldiers but to no avail because an angel of the Lord sprang him out of prison. What follows is an amusing scene as Peter goes to the house of Mary, the mother of John Mark, to announce his freedom. The maid answering the door was so shocked when she heard Peter’s voice that she ran to tell everyone inside and forgot to open the door, leaving Peter still knocking at the door.

“Wait, don’t leave me out here!” The maid Rhoda runs away without opening the gate for Peter in this Sunday School lesson (from www.BibleFunForKids.com by Debbie Jackson).

John Mark

Concluding the account of the Herodian persecution is the report of the death of Agrippa (12:20-23) and the Jewish historian Josephus helps us date this to 44 CE. Mention of the successful completion of the famine relief mission (12:25) awkwardly ends the chapter. The verse is very intrusive in its current location but it flows perfectly if read immediately after 11:30.

Luke purposefully interrupted his story in order to mention Peter’s visit to the house of Mary, the mother of John, also known as Mark. Why? One reason is to link Peter to Mark. When Peter escapes from prison, he immediately goes to the safe house of Mark’s family where he knows believers will be gathered in prayer. This suggests Mark’s family were prominent members of the Jerusalem community. Later tradition will associate Mark more closely with Peter.

In 13:5 we are told that on their first mission in Cyprus, Barnabas and Saul have John Mark with them as their assistant. But once they departed Cyprus, John Mark left them to return to Jerusalem (13:13). This didn’t sit well with Paul. When Paul later proposed (15:36-40) checking up on the cities they visited on their first mission, Barnabas wanted to take Mark along but Paul considered him a deserter. So they parted ways, Barnabas taking Mark with him to Cyprus and Paul choosing Silas to accompany him to Asia Minor.

Why is Barnabas so keen on taking Mark along with him? Scholars disagree as to whether or not Colossians is an authentic Pauline letter but in Col 4:10, we are told that Mark is the cousin of Barnabas. That would certainly explain why Barnabas chose Mark over Paul. But Mark eventually returned to Paul’s good graces for he is mentioned in the authentic Pauline letter to Philemon as one of Paul’s fellow workers (v. 24).

We think of figures like Barnabas and Paul as great saints and heroes of the Church. That does not make them exempt from human foibles like playing favorites and bearing grudges. What is important is that they rise above it.

Wednesday, June 22, 2016

The Gentile Pentecost

How is Acts of the Apostles like the television series The Walking Dead? In terms of story-telling, both are sprawling tales with a vast cast of characters. When those characters become separated due to a traumatic event, the narrative thread splits to follow individual characters as they cope with new challenges.

Following Multiple Storylines

In the middle of the fourth season of The Walking Dead, the main cast of characters are separated into five groups when their home comes under attack. For the rest of the season, each episode focused on one of the five groups struggling to reunite with their friends and find a safe haven in the zombie apocalypse.

In Acts, the shattering event that drives the characters apart is the persecution of the Jerusalem church first mentioned in Acts 8:1. The rest of Acts 8 focused on the evangelist Philip in Samaria and Judea. Acts 9:1-31 rewound back to the persecution with Saul pursuing Christians to Damascus and his conversion there. He eventually returns to Jerusalem to meet with Peter, and in 9:32-43 we follow Peter healing the paralyzed Aeneas and raising Tabitha from the dead, miracles reminiscent of those Jesus performed in Luke’s gospel. Although this passage appears after Saul’s return to Jerusalem, due to the story-telling technique, the events may have occurred during the three years Saul was in Damascus.

Peter’s two miracles are merely a prelude to the more important story of the baptism of the centurion Cornelius and his family in 10:1-11-18. The story is recounted in five acts:
  1. Cornelius has a vision of an angel who instructs him to send his servants to Joppa to find Peter (10:1-8); 
  2. Peter has a vision instructing him to eat clean and unclean animals (10:9-16);
  3. Peter greets the messengers from Cornelius and invites them to spend the night (10:17-23a);
  4. Peter sets off to Cornelius’ house in Caesarea. Finally understanding his vision, Peter begins to proclaim the gospel to the Gentiles and they receive the Holy Spirit. Peter then has them baptized. (10:23b-48);
  5. Peter is asked to give an account of his actions (11:1-18).
The vision of Peter and the conversion of Saul are both pivotal events for Luke because he narrates each three separate times. Another similar feature is the “double vision” of the convert and his sponsor (Cornelius and Peter, Saul and Ananias) which is more common in Greek than Jewish literature. Luke wants to be clear to his readers that these foundational events were under divine direction.

God-Fearers

Cornelius is described as a “God-fearing man” (10:2), a term referring to non-Jews sympathetic to Judaism. The God-fearers agreed with Jewish ethical principles and attended synagogue services, but did not submit to circumcision or observe the Torah in its entirety. In modern parlance, I suppose you could call them “Jew-curious.” But Cornelius was more than that. In v. 22, he is also called “upright,” meaning that he actually followed Mosaic law.

In addition to circumcision, one of the religious practices that dissuaded God-fearers from conversion to Judaism was the dietary restrictions. Certain food items – like pork – were forbidden to Jews. Peter explains in 10:28a that it was actually unlawful for a Jew to associate with or visit a Gentile. This rule was probably adopted to eliminate the possibility of the Jew unintentionally bringing ritual impurity upon himself through contact with a Gentile.

Peter’s Vision, engraving from the Dutch theology text History of the Old and New Testament by David Martin (1639-1721)
In this context, we can understand Peter’s vision of “all kinds” of animals and the instruction that God has declared them all to be clean (kosher). Scholars are divided on whether Peter’s vision is an integral part of the Cornelius story or something Luke took from a separate strand of tradition – for example, a dispute story about whether Christians are allowed to eat non-kosher foods – and introduced into the Cornelius narrative. In 10:28b Peter interprets the vision of various animals as an allegory for people: “God has shown me that I should not call anyone profane or unclean.”

After Peter arrives at Cornelius’ house, he delivers a missionary speech. After a brief introduction (vv. 34-36), he launches into the Christian kerygma (vv. 37-41), before reaching his conclusion (vv. 42-43). Kerygma is a Greek word used to refer to the initial and essential proclamation of the gospel message. You can think of it as “the gospel in a nutshell.” Luke usually writes Greek that indicates he is cultured and educated, but portions of this passage are written in a “miserable Greek” that is not at all his style. This indicates to biblical scholars that Luke is incorporating very old material. Some scholars believe that apostolic preaching such as this eventually developed into the synoptic gospels.

The Gentile Problem

At this point in Acts, we have seen the word of Jesus spread among Jews (both Hebrew and Hellenists), Samaritans, and Gentile converts to Judaism like the Ethiopian eunuch. Being a follower of Jesus was seen as just a different way of being Jewish, certainly not a separate religion. It just didn’t make sense that one could be a believer in Christ without also being Jewish.

Cornelius presents an interesting case. He’s a Gentile God-fearer who follows Mosaic law and attends synagogue, but he isn’t circumcised and therefore not Jewish. Fortunately for Peter, God takes the initiative and sends the Holy Spirit upon Cornelius and his relatives and friends who have gathered in his household. Seeing the Gentiles “speaking in tongues and extolling God,” Peter decides there is no reason not to baptize them with water as well.

Word of what happened in Cornelius’ house got out and the next time Peter was in Jerusalem, he was confronted by the “circumcised believers” and asked to explain why he visited and ate with the uncircumcised. The term “circumcised believers” is apparently being used to describe Jewish Christians, in distinction from Gentile Christians like Cornelius who would be “uncircumcised believers.” Interestingly, the Jewish Christians seem to be more concerned about Peter visiting Gentiles than with him baptizing them as Christians. For the time being, they are satisfied with Peter’s explanation of the divine initiative in pouring out the Holy Spirit upon the Gentiles. Soon, however, the church will have to decide on expectations for the newly baptized Gentiles.

The thought that Peter’s fraternization with Gentiles was considered scandalous among the Jewish Christians tells us that there was no episode in Jesus’ public ministry that could be referenced as justification for such a ministry. The church had no blueprint for how to address questions such as: Do Gentiles need to be circumcised to become followers of Jesus? Do Gentile Christians need to follow Jewish dietary restrictions? Without clear statements from Jesus to lead them, the early church had to rely on insights gained through the Holy Spirit to guide them on what Christ wanted for his church.

Thursday, June 16, 2016

Basket Case

[This is the conclusion of my article on Paul’s early career that I began last week. I strongly suggest that you first read that article, if you have not already done so, before continuing with this article.]

Fixing Pauline Chronology

Paul’s mention in Galatians 1:11-24 that “after three years” he traveled to Jerusalem to “visit Cephas” (that is, Peter) is a key piece of information that helps biblical scholars fix the time of Paul’s conversion. The common opinion is that the “three years” are in reference to his conversion and not to his return to Damascus from his sojourn in Arabia. So if we can narrow down the year Paul left Damascus, it would give us an idea of the date of his conversion.

In citing his sufferings as an apostle in 2 Corinthians, Paul refers to a time he escaped Damascus in a basket (11:32-33). This can only be the incident Luke narrates in Acts 9:23-25. Paul tells us this happened when Damascus was under the authority of an ethnarch (sheik of an ethnic group) appointed by King Aretas. Prior to the death of the emperor Tiberius (March 37 CE), Damascus was under Roman rule. Since the Nabatean king Aretas died in 39/40 CE, Paul’s attempted arrest and escape could only have occurred between 37 and 40 CE. Therefore, Paul’s conversion would have been 34-37 CE.

Saint Paul Escapes from Damascus [painting based on a 14th century mosaic in Sicily]. In boasting of the events that show his weakness, Paul mentions his humiliating escape from Damascus by basket. He may be contrasting himself with the honor that would be given to the first Roman soldier to scale the walls of a city under siege.

The confluence of Paul’s visit to Arabia (Nabatea) and his subsequent flight from the Nabatean ethnarch in Damascus has led many scholars to wonder if Paul got into some trouble in Arabia that required him to flee to the safety of Damascus. According to this theory, after Damascus fell under Nabatean authority, Paul learned of a plot to arrest him and had to flee once more, this time by means of a basket from the city’s wall. If this hypothesis is correct, it would place Paul leaving Damascus shortly after the Nabateans gained control, perhaps late 37 or early 38 CE. This would narrow down the year of Paul’s conversion to 34 or 35 CE.

Saul in Jerusalem


34-35 CE is prior to the recall of Pontius Pilate in late 36 CE. Previously, we speculated that the stoning of Stephen and persecution of the Jerusalem church would have been most likely during the period between the departure of Pilate and the arrival of his successor, Marcellus. But Acts places Saul at the stoning of Stephen and leading the persecution of the Christians in Jerusalem, events that could have only happened before his conversion.

The dating of these two events can be reconciled if we consider that Paul may not have had anything to do with persecuting Christians in Jerusalem. His placement at the scene of Stephen’s execution and subsequent spearheading of a program of persecution may have been dramatic license by Luke. It gives the reader of Acts a narrative thread to follow: from the reconstitution of the Twelve apostles, to the Seven they commission, to the stoning of Stephen – one of the Seven – at the feet of Saul.

As we saw last week, Luke’s explanation of why Saul left Jerusalem for Damascus has issues of historicity. One is reminded of the thoroughly implausible census that Luke provides as the reason for Joseph and Mary to travel from Nazareth to Jerusalem. If Luke wanted to situate Saul in Jerusalem to play up his role as arch-persecutor of the church but it was well-known that his conversion occurred in Damascus, Luke needed to come up with a reason for Saul to travel from Jerusalem to Damascus. A mission from the Sanhedrin to extradite Christians from Damascus to Jerusalem was Luke’s solution.

Paul in Jerusalem

Both Acts and Paul are in agreement that, after leaving Damascus, he travelled to Jerusalem. Acts gives no reason for the visit. Paul says it was to “visit Cephas” (that is, Peter) and he only stayed fifteen days, seeing no other apostle except James the brother of Jesus. The phrase “visit Cephas” could also be translated as “get information from Cephas” and Paul may be intentionally vague here. His visit to Peter was hardly a social call. Undoubtedly, Paul wanted to learn about the historical Jesus to better inform his preaching.

Acts tells us that Saul was treated with suspicion on his arrival in Jerusalem and Barnabas had to introduce him to the apostles. It seems unlikely that three years after his conversion and ministry Paul’s intentions would still be doubted. We previously saw Barnabas in Acts 4:36-37 where he served as a positive example for selling his field and donating the proceeds to the Christian community. We learned in that passage that Barnabas was a native of Cyprus. Like Paul, he was a diaspora Jew and would later become Paul’s travelling companion on his early missionary journeys.

Although Luke reports that Saul angered the local Jewish populace for preaching in Jerusalem, Paul’s itinerary doesn’t allow for that. He insists in Gal 1:22 that he did not do any evangelizing in Judea (“I was still unknown by sight to the churches of Judea”) although they had heard of how he had formerly persecuted Christians. Paul seems to be going out of his way to stress that he has always been an apostle operating in Gentile territory.

Concluding Comments

Paul is the rare biblical character who provides us first-hand information about himself in his letters. Not only that, but we have additional information on his life from Acts, although as we have seen, that information does not always dovetail with what Paul tells us. Just like many people telling their story, Paul casts himself in the best possible light. Like many writers, Luke employs dramatic license in telling Paul’s story. Critical scholars cannot take either account completely at face value. Even so, we know more about Paul and his life than we do about any other character in either the Old or New Testament.

Tuesday, June 7, 2016

Better Call Saul

In Acts 9:1-31 Luke presents us with the story of Saul’s conversion. Paul also discusses his calling and his travels on a few occasions in his letters, giving us the rare opportunity to compare Luke’s account with Paul’s own.

Luke’s Version of Saul’s Conversion

Luke actually presents three versions of Saul’s conversion, one in third-person narration in Acts 9 and the twice more (22:1-16; 26:9-18) in the form of Paul’s speeches. There are some minor differences in all three accounts, but the basic core is the same: Saul was traveling to Damascus with letters of authority from the Sanhedrin to round up Christians there and return them to Jerusalem. As he approached the city, he was struck by a blinding light and heard the voice of Jesus say, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”

Saul was left blind by the incident for three days until he was healed and baptized by a Damascene disciple named Ananias. Saul began to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues and debated the Jews there. “After some time had passed” (v. 23), Saul became aware of a plot by the Jews to kill him and escaped the city by being lowered from the city wall in a basket.

Arriving in Jerusalem, Saul sought out the Christian community there, but no one wanted to have anything to do with him. Barnabas intervened and brought him to the apostles. Saul began preaching the name of Jesus and arguing with the Jewish Hellenists until they, too, sought to kill him. Learning of the plot, the disciples hustled Saul off to Caesarea where he could take a ship back to his hometown of Tarsus. He would remain there until Barnabas found him and brought him to Anitoch (11:25-26).
Was Paul a pedestrian or an equestrian? If you are Catholic, you probably think he got knocked off his horse, but if you are Protestant, you probably think he was just knocked off his feet. Prior to the Renaissance, images featured Paul on foot. The Catholic imagination was fueled by visual images such as this one, but Protestants were influenced by the text of Scripture. (The Conversion of St. Paul [1767] by Nicolas Bernard Lépicié)

The Road to Damascus

Before we contrast Luke’s account with Paul’s, there’s some inconsistency with what we have read so far in Acts. According to Acts, the early Christian community lived largely at peace in Jerusalem until Saul led a program of persecution that caused all but the apostles to flee to Samaria and the Judean countryside. After being sidelined with the mission of Philip the evangelist, we return to the main narrative to find Saul still on the warpath and seeking to persecute Christian disciples in Damascus.

Damascus is 140 miles from Jerusalem and it would have taken Saul about a week to walk there. If Saul wanted to expand his area of operation, there were Christians much closer at hand in Judea, Samaria and Galilee. Traveling all the way to Damascus doesn’t make much sense unless he was attempting to extradite Christians who had escaped from Jerusalem. But, as explained elsewhere, the Jewish Sanhedrin had no authority outside the city of Jerusalem. At most, the letters Saul obtained from the Sanhedrin could only have served as proof he was not acting on his own initiative.

When Saul finally arrived in Damascus, he found a Christian community who took him in and, he immediately began proclaiming Jesus as the Son of God in the synagogues. Presumably he would have been catechized by the local Christians in some form before he began preaching. Although Saul’s reputation as a persecutor of the Jerusalem Christians preceded him, it doesn’t sound like the Damascene Christians had fled his persecution. One gets the impression from all this the Christian community in Damascus was well-settled long before Saul’s arrival.

Bottom line: Luke’s version of events seems somewhat contrived.

Paul’s Account

How does Luke’s version square with what Paul describes in his letters? Although Paul speaks several times of his vision of the risen Christ which called him from life as a persecutor of the church to become an apostle to the Gentiles, he never provides any details of the experience.

However, Paul gives an account of his early career in Gal 1:11-24. He is eager to assert that the gospel he received was unmediated by any human authority (vv. 16-17). After his call, he did not confer with any local disciples or the apostles in Jerusalem. Instead, he “went away at once” to Arabia and only afterwards returned to Damascus. From this we can infer that his conversion experience occurred in Damascus, matching what we are told in Acts.

Paul’s account doesn’t leave any room for the role Ananias played in healing and baptizing him. Given the importance of baptism as an initiation into the Christian community, it seems certain that Paul would have been baptized at some point, so we have to take his insistence that he “did not confer with any human being” with a grain of salt. Having already learned enough of the basics of the faith through his arguments with Hellenist Christians, perhaps Paul did not feel the need to be formally catechized but he must have had some contact with the local Christian community in Damascus before starting his ministry.

Into Arabia

More interesting is Luke’s failure to mention Paul’s sojourn in Arabia. “Arabia” is generally understood as the Nabatean Kingdom, across the Jordan from Israel. Paul never explains what he was doing there or how long he was there before returning to Damascus, so it is easy to see why Luke would have left that out, even if he had known about it.

Why go to Nabatea at all? For prayer and reflection prior to beginning his ministry? Perhaps. Did he seek to start a ministry there? Then why not begin in Damascus? If, as I suspect, the historical Paul had been engaged in persecuting Christians in and around Damascus rather than Jerusalem, he may have thought he would get a more open-minded hearing in a region where he didn’t carry as much baggage.

Most likely, things didn’t go well in Nabatea and Paul returned to Damascus where he must have known he would receive a chilly reception from both the Christian and Jewish communities. But Paul apparently considered it preferable to remaining in Nabatea. And, as we’ll see next week, once Nabatea gained some control over Damascus, Paul was threatened with arrest and had to flee once more. His first effort as an evangelist in Nabatea must really have turned out badly.

If all this supposition is close to the truth, it is little wonder Paul doesn’t say anything more about his journey into Arabia.

[To be continued next week.]



Wednesday, June 1, 2016

The Adventures of Philip

Most of what we know about Philip the evangelist, one of the Seven, comes from two incidents in Acts 8. In the first (8:4-25), Philip preaches in Samaria and encounters Simon the magician. In the second story (8:26-40), Philip baptizes an Ethiopian eunuch he meets on the road from Jerusalem to Gaza.

Appointment in Samaria

According to Luke in Acts of the Apostles, Saul led a wave of persecution in Jerusalem that caused the Christian community to scatter to the winds. As a result, Philip relocated to Samaria and followed the model of Jesus with a ministry of preaching combined with exorcisms and healings.

Samaria was the area we know today as the West Bank. Once part of the heartland of Israel, it was resettled by various peoples after Israel’s defeat at the hands of the Assyrians and Babylonians. The Samaritans accepted only the first five books of the Bible, the Pentateuch, and did not acknowledge the Temple in Jerusalem as the only place of worship. Upon the return of the exiles from Babylon, the Jews considered the Samaritans as heretics and worse than pagans. For the Jews of Jesus’ day, there was no such thing as a “good” Samaritan, such was the hostility between the two.

Therefore it is with some surprise that (1) Philip traveled to Samaria and (2) was accepted there. At the time, the Samaritans were enamored of a certain magician named Simon who they referred to as “the Great Power of God.” Better known in later Christian tradition as Simon Magus (“magician”), he was converted by Philip’s message, submitted to baptism, and became a follower of Philip.

The success of Philip’s mission drew the attention of the apostles in Jerusalem, so Peter and John were sent to investigate. Since the Samaritans had only been baptized, Peter and John laid hands on them to confer the Holy Spirit. Presumably, at this point the Samaritans began to demonstrate charismatic gifts such as speaking in tongues. Seeing this, Simon Magus offered the apostles money to give him a share of their power. Peter berated him, essentially saying, “To hell with you and your money!” (v. 20). Unlike the story of Ananias and Sapphira, however, Peter gave Simon the opportunity to repent and Simon asked Peter to pray for him.

Who was Simon Magus?

For such a minor character, the amount of legends surrounding Simon Magus are quite surprising. The term “Great Power” (v. 10) used to refer to Simon is found among later gnostic texts. Gnosticism was a popular movement in the 2nd century that believed in a strong dichotomy between spiritual (= good) and material (= evil) existence and salvation relied on a special knowledge (gnosis) that was only granted to a select few. The early church considered Gnosticism a heresy and identified Simon Magus as the first gnostic. In other church traditions, Simon was considered a charlatan and opponent of the apostles.

Fall of Simon Magus (1461-62) by Benozzo Gozzoli. The apocryphal Acts of Peter tells the story of a contest between St. Peter and Simon Magus in Rome. Simon uses his magic to levitate (seen in the background) and Peter (on right) prays to God that he be struck down (where he lays at Peter’s feet).

Certainly Luke’s intent is to subordinate the person of Simon Magus to apostolic authority. Since Simon is described as a sorcerer with a substantial Samaritan following, there could be a polemical purpose to the story, especially if Simonians were still active at the time Luke wrote Acts (80-85 CE). In a similar fashion, the NT sought to subordinate John the Baptist to Jesus to the point of trying to obscure Jesus’ baptism by John.

As a side note, the term “simony” (buying an ecclesiastical office or grace) comes from this episode.

The Ethiopian Eunuch

After Peter and John arrive in Samaria, we hear nothing more of Philip and his ministry there. We’re told in v. 25 that Peter and John eventually returned to Jerusalem, proclaiming the good news to the Samaritans as they went along. Apparently Philip went along with them, because when he is next mentioned in v. 26, he is told by an angel of the Lord to go down the road from Jerusalem to Gaza, one of the five ancient Philistine cities.

Along the road, he encountered a eunuch who was treasurer to the Candace (the queen of the Ethiopians). Luke tells us that the eunuch was returning to his country after worshipping in Jerusalem. Running alongside the eunuch’s carriage, Philip heard him reading Isaiah 53:7-8 and offered to explain it to him. Believing in the message of Jesus, the eunuch stopped his carriage beside some water and asked to be baptized. Immediately after the baptism, Philip was snatched away by the Spirit of the Lord and he found himself in Azotus (Ashdod), another of the five ancient Philistine cities. He continued travelling north along the Mediterranean coast until he arrived in Caesarea where Paul later finds him in Acts 21:8.

Many have seen correspondences between this story and the Emmaus narrative. Both have as their core the narrative of travelers (two disciples; eunuch) overtaken by a stranger (risen Christ; Philip) who interprets Scripture for them. A request from the traveler leads to a sacramental outcome (Eucharist; baptism). Upon conclusion of the sacrament, the stranger disappears from the traveler’s presence.

Another side note: v. 37 is missing in the oldest texts and appears to be a baptismal formula that was incorporated into the text within a hundred years or so of the writing of Acts.

Evangelizing Beyond Jews

In both the episode of the Ethiopian eunuch and the preceding passage, we see the good news of Jesus being preached for the first time to people other than mainstream Jews. While not considered Jews, the Samaritans weren’t Gentiles, either. They did accept the Torah and some traditional Jewish practices like circumcision. Baptizing Samaritans into the Christian community didn’t run into the same objections that would come with Peter’s baptism of Cornelius and his family in Acts 10.

The Ethiopian eunuch is either a Jew or a convert to Judaism. Deuteronomy 23:2 (23:1 in some English versions) seems to preclude the possibility of a eunuch entering “the assembly of the Lord” but in the later understanding reflected in Isaiah 56:3-5, “eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths…and hold fast to my covenant” will be given an everlasting name. Luke portrays the Ethiopian treasurer as that kind of eunuch.

In these two stories, Luke is showing how the first Christian evangelists are quick to welcome those who would be considered on the outskirts of mainstream Judaism or who would be rejected altogether. He is setting the stage for the next big leap in Acts 10 when Peter baptizes Gentiles for the first time. But, before we can get to that momentous event, we have to backtrack a bit in Acts 9 and report the story of Saul’s conversion.

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Persecution Complex

The commissioning of the Seven serves as an introduction to the martyrdom of Stephen which, in turn, serves as an introduction to Saul and the greater persecution of the church in Jerusalem. The persecution is the motivation behind the mission of Philip to Samaria and his baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch.

Escalating Persecution

This is not the first time Luke records harassment of the early Christians. In Acts 4:1-22, Peter and John were imprisoned overnight and hauled before the Sanhedrin to explain why they had been healing in the name of Jesus and preaching the resurrection of the dead. They were eventually released without punishment but warned not speak or teach in the name of Jesus again.

Further persecution of the apostles was reported in 5:17-42 when they disobeyed the Sanhedrin’s gag order. Initially imprisoned, they were freed by an angel of the Lord and went back to preaching in the Temple. Re-arrested, the Sanhedrin was convinced by the words of council-member Gamaliel to release the apostles, which they did after first having them flogged.

But when Stephen debated with foreign Jews in their synagogue, he was charged with blasphemy and brought before the Sanhedrin where false witnesses testified that Stephen also spoke against the Temple and the Law of Moses (6:8-15). The high priest asked Stephen what he had to say about the charges against him and he responded with the lengthy speech in 7:2-53.

At the end of his monologue (7:54-8:1a), Stephen described a vision of Jesus sitting at God’s right hand which was enough to send the mob over the edge. Dispensing with any legal procedure, the mob dragged Stephen out of the city and stoned him to death. The “witnesses” (that is, those doing the stoning) laid their cloaks “at the feet of a young man named Saul” who, we are told, approved of Stephen’s execution.

Saul at the Stoning of Stephen. Artist unknown.

According to Luke, Stephen’s death marked the start of a major period of persecution of the church in Jerusalem (8:1b-4) and Saul was the chief enforcer, pulling people from their homes and imprisoning them. All but the apostles fled Jerusalem for the relative safety of the Judean countryside and Samaria. And, wherever they went, they preached the Christian message. Thus the stage is set for recounting Philip’s mission in Acts 8 and Saul’s conversion in Acts 9.

How Reliable is Acts?

Biblical scholars have issues with the historicity of events as reported by Luke. We’ve seen how, in his Gospel, Luke is not averse to rewriting his source material – whether it be Mark or Q – to give a smoother narrative flow. Unlike Luke’s Gospel where we have Matthew or Mark to compare against, when it comes to Acts, we don’t have an alternate source except for occasional remarks in Paul’s letters. So we have to look for doublets and internal contradictions to get an idea where Luke may be blending his source material with his own composition.

According to the gospels, Jesus was considered such a threat to the Roman and Jewish authorities that he had to be crucified. Yet his disciples are allowed to live in Jerusalem largely unmolested. They are first given a warning and later flogged. But it is not until Stephen begins debating with Hellenist Jews that Christian lives are put in danger. Something more than simply preaching the message of Jesus made the Christian presence in Jerusalem intolerable.

After the lynching of Stephen, Luke says all but the apostles fled Jerusalem due to persecution led by Saul. Judging from the rest of Acts, though, it seems it was mostly the Hellenists who fled Jerusalem while the Hebrews stayed behind. Based on the charges against Stephen, a disparaging attitude towards the Temple and the Law of Moses is what made the presence of the Hellenist Christians intolerable to the non-Christian Jews. Eventually, the friction between the Hellenist Christians like Paul and the Hebrew Christians like James will lead to a crisis over how to initiate Gentiles into the Church.

Introducing Saul

Saul, of course, is better known as St. Paul. Luke places him at the scene of Stephen’s execution and states he was a “young man” which could mean anything from 20 to 40 years of age. Luke also states that cloaks were piled at the feet of Saul, which sounds reminiscent of how money donated to the Church would be laid at the feet of the apostles. There was some symbolic significance for this act that has been lost to us.

Elsewhere in Acts, Luke states that Paul studied the Law in Jerusalem under Gamaliel (22:3) and voted to execute Christians at their trials. There are some doubts about this. In his letters Paul is proud of his education as a Pharisee yet never mentions he was taught by Gamaliel, the leading Pharisee of his time. If he spent years in Jerusalem studying Judaism, he took no notice of events around Passover 30 CE because he never mentions in his letters a personal connection with the Jesus of the public ministry.

Could Saul really have had a free hand to drag Christians out of their homes and imprison them? Some biblical scholars think something like this could only have happened in the period between the administrations of Pontius Pilate and Marcellus (late 36 to early 37 CE). Luke claims Saul had the authority to do this either from the high priest or the Sanhedrin, but this is dubious. Acts 9:1-2 states Saul had letters allowing him to arrest Christians in Damascus but neither the high priest nor the Sanhedrin had authority outside the city of Jerusalem. Many scholars believe that Luke is exaggerating Saul’s role as the great persecutor of the church in order to better serve as a contrast with his conversion to the great apostle.

The biggest takeaway from this brief episode in Acts is that it was the pressure of persecution that propelled the early church outwards from Jerusalem to the countryside of Judea and Samaria. It wasn’t something that Jesus planned from the start. Just as with the creation of the Seven, the apostles were making it up as they went along, responding to situations as they arose. In the next chapter of Acts, we will follow the mission of Philip, one of the Seven, as he preached in Samaria and the countryside of Judea.