In the book of Acts, the Saul is introduced rather dramatically. After Stephen delivers a prophetic speech in Acts 7, he is seized by an angry crowd, taken outside the city and stoned. This is not a legal action, it is a lynching! Saul “approved” of this execution (Acts 8:1). Whether Saul was a “legal representative” of the Sanhedrin is unclear, but the verb can be used for legal approval (1 Mac 1:57). Saul is described as “ravaging the church” (λυμαίνω, Acts 8:3), a word which is used of violent actions in war (Josephus, JW 4.534). What was it about Stephen’s speech that pushed Saul to such a violent response?
It is important to observe that Stephen was speaking to Diaspora Jews living in Jerusalem, in the Synagogue of the Freedmen (Acts 6:8-10). He is not in the Temple speaking Aramaic to the crowds worshiping there. Stephen himself is a Hellenistic Jew attempting to prove that Jesus is the Messiah in a Hellenistic place of worship. While we cannot know this for certain, it is not unlikely that Saul was worshiping in this Greek-speaking Synagogue because he was from Tarsus (Cilicia is specifically mentioned in Acts 6:9). Stephen’s powerful argument that Israel rejected the Messiah and the Holy Spirit of the New Covenant (Acts 7:51-53) pushed the crowd to attack Stephen, Saul may have been the ranking Jewish leader who participated.
Some scholars explain this violent reaction by taking later issues and importing them into Acts 7. For example, some have argued the Jewish Christians were admitting Gentiles without circumcision. This seems unlikely, since there is no reference at all to Gentile mission by the Jerusalem Church until Acts 10. God-fearers were accepted into the synagogue without circumcision, so it is unlikely this would be a problem for Paul, if it had occurred.
Similarly, some argue Gentile believers were breaking food laws. This is unlikely for the same reasons as the first, there is no evidence of Gentile converts in the pre-Pauline period. This is an issue in Galatians, but that is perhaps 15 years after the stoning of Stephen and concerned Jews and Gentiles eating together.
A more likely motivation is the possible political / social problems caused by the preaching of a crucified messiah / savior. How would this play before the Gentiles, especially the Romans? Could this be an accusation against Rome, and a possible rally-point for anti-Roman activity? The problem here once again is the lack of evidence for preaching anything to Gentile / Roman audiences. The early apostolic mission was confined to the temple area and the city of Jerusalem in general.
It is probably best to see Saul opposing the Apostolic teaching as heretical. That Jesus was the Messiah was absurd, since he was crucified, “hung on a tree,” and therefore a curse, not salvation. Saul’s motivation is to correct this false teaching within Judaism, using the synagogue punishment system itself. He likely sees himself as a reformer, working for the high priest, with the goal of dealing sharply with the followers of a condemned Rabbi.
12 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 10, 2013 at 3:52 pm
Mike
Replace the words ‘Judaism, synagogue and high priest’ in the last paragraph with ‘Islam, mosque and iman’ and you get a modern day equivalent that is very similar.
February 10, 2013 at 4:14 pm
Phillip J. Long
Wow….thanks Mike, you are probably right. I was thinking less provocatively than that, in some churches shifting too far away from the proper confession is enough to light some fireworks. (Imagine an Anglican re-defining Justification, for example!)
February 10, 2013 at 7:13 pm
jbefus
I also think that the reason Paul saw himself as the reformer in persecuting Jewish Christians. As it says in Philippians 3:4-6, he grew up with so much confidence in who he was as a Pharisee. He was ‘faultless’ when it came to legalistic righteousness. He was also very zealous for what he believed in persecuting the church. So when he saw Jesus’ disciples proclaiming that Jesus is the Messiah, even though He had been crucified, was an abomination to him. Growing up as a Jew under the schooling of Pharisees, Paul would have believed that the Messiah would come in splendor and establish his kingdom. However, Jesus came in the form of a servant and suffered on the cross at the hands of men. In Stephen’s speech, he condemns them for they betrayed and murdered the Righteous One (Acts 7:52). This obviously rubbed Paul the wrong way. He very staunchly believed that Jesus was a false teacher and now the disciples were leading people astray. So out of his “all-out” belief, his only choice was to persecute the Jewish Christians.
February 10, 2013 at 10:36 pm
John Caprari
As a staunch Grace Bible College student, I firmly agree with Josh regarding why Saul responded the way he had. There’s no doubt that Stephen’s motives were to, for lack of a better term, call out the Sanhedrin and even more specifically Israel as a whole. Their disobedience and unfaithfulness towards God throughout their history is evident. Stephen’s proclamation of Israel’s offense and intentional rejection of the Messiah and the Holy Spirit is what provokes Saul and other Jews. Both Philippians 3:4-6 and Galatians 1:14 state the extent of how Jewish Saul was. He was a Hebrew born of Hebrews. This suggests that his upbringing had emphasis on Mosaic law and Jewish traditions. And his zeal did not get left behind in his youth, “I was advancing in Judaism beyond many Jews of my own age and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers” (Galatians 1:14). Saul was brought up a Pharisee and studied under a Sadducee who was well honored and respected who also belonged to the Sanhedrin. Saul wasn’t messing around when it came to Judaism. Being Jewish was his life. And he had great passion for his religion. So when this Jesus movement starts happening and completely contradicts what he and other Jews are stating there is obviously going to be conflict. And after each event started piling up, Saul started persecuting the church and using violence to stop the spread of Jesus as Messiah. “…the proclamation of the earliest followers of Jesus was regarded as so utterly despicable and mistaken that Paul became convinced that aggressive measures needed to be taken in order to stop the activities of these people” (Schnabel 44). As Josh mentioned earlier, as a Pharisee, Jesus is not what Saul and many others expected in a Messiah. Therefore, Peter and the apostles were way off track and he was going to do anything in his power to stop what was happening and preserve Judaism.
February 11, 2013 at 9:00 am
nick_mascorro
There is no doubt that Saul persecuted and hated Christians, but the possible reasons for Saul’s persecution of Christians are many but only a few have some validity behind them. One of reasons that lack substantial value is that Saul persecuted the church because of, “Possible political/social problems caused by the preaching of a crucified savior.” People believe this to be a reason why persecution against Christians took place because the Roman government felt threatened by Christians that they may cause an anti-Roman revolution. This argument however lacks evidence because the early preaching from the Apostles generally only took place in the temple in Jerusalem (Long). The possibility that I similarly to the post find to be the most valid is Saul persecuted these Christians because he seen their preaching as something that was heretic. This would make the most sense because Saul grew up a devoted Jew whose family belonged to the Second Temple Period Judaism (Schnabel, 41), which would explain his devotion to the traditional Jewish ways. His devotion to his Jewish principles would explain why he believed these Apostles to be heretical because they were preaching of a saving messiah. Instead, Saul would reject these teachings and would have devotion to the Jewish law and reject Jesus as the Messiah (Schnabel, 43). Saul in turn seen himself as a defender of the Jewish faith and traditions, he tried to protect these Jewish traditions at all cost (Acts 9:2).
February 11, 2013 at 10:47 am
arenberg93
We have talked a lot about what the Jews and the Pharisees must have been feeling after the apostles started to preach. They had finally gotten rid of the man (Jesus) who had been calling them out and challenging their way of life. Now, a group of people have come back and started to declare once again the message of this Jesus. I can only imagine that this angered the Pharisees further as they had believed they had solved this problem. So Saul, as a young and zealous follower of the law wanted to dispose of this problem forever. One of the ideas that i have had is that, what if Saul wanted to prove himself? He is still at this Jr. Pharisee status, and he wanted to show his zeal and commitment to law. Is there a better way to do this than to wipe out a heretical group that is giving the Sanhedrin problems? Maybe this is why he was so adamant about wiping them out. As we look in Exodus we see a situation where Pharaoh’s heart was hardened. It is also possible that God hardened Paul’s heart towards the gospel message creating this hatred. So in his conversion, we see a massive story of redemption that God would use to reach the known world. for whatever reason, God used Saul for some incredible things, and this persecution that he oversaw was crucial to demonstrating the love and salvation that is in Christ Jesus.
February 11, 2013 at 1:08 pm
Bob de Jong
When you read Acts 7, you will see that the members of the Sanhedrin became incensed when Stephen said ““Look, I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”
Obviously, for any Jew this is a great blasphemy, since the first principle of Judaism is that God is One; no other being is divine, with Him in heaven.
February 11, 2013 at 3:50 pm
Phillip J. Long
You are right Bob, although I am not sure that Stephen’s “blasphemy” represents what all of the followers of Jesus were saying or doing. They are preaching that Jesus is Messiah, that God raised him from the dead. Saul sees these things as “punishable” teachings.
February 11, 2013 at 2:07 pm
danpierpont
I believe that the reason Saul so whole heartily persecuted the church was because he was so confident in his faith. Knowing his faith and being so confident to a level of not letting any one mess with your beliefs that he was willing to take the steps that he thought to be necessary. Saul was so perfect and faultless by the standards of the law, and when Stephen started preaching that we are not saved by the lay, or rather justified, he was angry because he thought himself to be faultless and had lived his life persecuting people that disobeyed the law.
Later in this story of Saul we are on the road to Damascus. Saul is traveling to do some more persecuting of the church. He hears a voice that calls his name, and in our text book it says, “Paul’s response to the voice is Lord…” What does he mean by this word. I believe that this is important. Maybe Saul was just honestly blind to the fact the the Messiah had come, being so caught up in the law that he didn’t realize that he along with many other Pharisees had just killed the messiah. Maybe the rad to Damascus was a wake up call to get back on the right track.
February 11, 2013 at 3:52 pm
Phillip J. Long
Good, Dan. You are making the connection to Saul’s particular practice of Judaism. That has to be a factor – but it seems to me that he could back up his confidence! He was really, with respect to the Law, blameless. How is believing that Jesus is the Messiah, or even that Jesus raised from the dead blasphemous?
February 11, 2013 at 5:00 pm
anthonybeaulieu
I think that Saul was a legal representative because no one ever questioned his authority of giving the “ok” or approval of the killing of Jews and in the first case that we read about, Stephen. As Saul says in his letters, he was filled with zeal against the church and against the Christian Jews. I think that Saul was already filled with hatred towards them before Stephen’s speech, but his speech was what pushed him over the edge and took action to kill anyone that spoke the way that Stephen did. If someone was teaching something false about what you believe to be true, you would be filled with the same frustration and zeal that Saul felt. He is trying to shut up those that are going against the High Priest and that’s another reason why Stephen was killed because he spoke directly to them for the sin murder that they committed. Saul took pride in his high posistion as a Pharisee. Anything that went against what they believed to be true was something worth killing for. Especially with the amount of converts that the early church was having, would be enough to cause Saul to want to go on a killing spree. I don’t doubt that another valid reason for this zeal was because of the political and social problems that they were causing.
February 11, 2013 at 11:13 pm
steveroemer
Acts 9:1-2 starts the story off by giving us a brief look at how Saul looked at followers of Jesus Christ. It says, “Meanwhile, Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord’s disciples. He went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, so that if he found any there who belonged to the Way, whether men or women, he might take them as prisoners to Jerusalem.”
Just within these two short verses we see the anger Paul had for these Christ Followers. He wanted to find any person that was declaring that Jesus was the Messiah and drag them into the street, beat them, throw them into prison, and even kill them. Why did he have this hatred for the followers of Jesus? First of all, Paul was a Pharisee and Jesus never had anything good to say about the Pharisees. Another reason I think Paul was so mad right now is because of everything that just happened with Stephen the martyr. I can imagine that for Paul it felt pretty good to put out a leading influential follower of Jesus Christ the way Stephen was murdered. I am sure that Paul felt like a king when he gave the orders to have Stephen Killed and then when the people were putting their cloaks down in front of him. Simply put, Paul wanted to destroy the Church. Schnabel says, “When Paul asserts that he wanted to “destroy” the church, he probably means that he wanted to make it impossible for followers of Jesus to exist within the institution of the synagogue” (44). He also says, “Jews who rejected the claims of the Jewish believers in Jesus were convinced that faith in Jesus as Messiah and in the atoning efficacy of his death on the cross was an attack on the foundation of Torah obedience as the basis of Israel’s salvation that Yahweh had revealed to Moses” (44-45). When you start feeling attacked, especially your religion, people get very edgy and do irrational things that they feel are justified like in Paul’s case.