APPENDIX T – ARE PAUL’S CONVERSION
STORIES CONTRADICTORY?
On his personal blog, agnostic, skeptic, and leading textual critic Bart Ehrman writes, “the three accounts differ in numerous contradictory details.” He lists these alleged “contradictions.”[1]
“In one account Paul’s companions don’t hear
the voice but they see the light; in another they don’t see anyone but they
hear the voice.”
- Acts 9:7: “And the men which journeyed
with him stood speechless, hearing
a voice, but seeing no man.”
- Acts 22:9: “And they that were with me saw
indeed the light, and were
afraid; but they heard not
the voice of him that spake to me.”
This is a question of properly interpreting the texts. Compare 9:4 and 9:7, where Paul heard and understood what was said, while the companions merely heard. The difference is in hearing a sound (ακουοντες) versus hearing with understanding (ηκουσαν). The men who traveled with Paul heard the sound of the voice but did not understand what the voice said. Compare John 12:29.
“In one account they all fall to the ground
from the epiphanic blast, in another they remain standing.”
- Acts 9:7 “And the men which journeyed
with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.”
- Acts 26:14 “And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and
saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it
is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.”
Here critics literalize an idiom. The phrase “stood speechless” is an idiomatic expression describing a situation when someone is so shocked and surprised that they are dumbfounded, unable to speak. This idiom is not about posture (i.e. standing versus falling) but rather about an effect of one frozen in the awe of the moment.
“In one account Paul is told to go on to
Damascus where a disciple of Jesus will provide him with his marching orders,
in another he is not told to go but is given his instructions from Jesus
himself on the spot.”
- Acts 9:6 “And the Lord said unto
him, Arise, and go into the
city, and it shall be told
thee what thou must do.”
- Acts 22:10 “And I said, What shall I do,
Lord? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed
for thee to do.”
- Acts 26:16ff “But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared
unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of
these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will
appear unto thee…”
This is a matter of omission, not contradiction. The fuller understanding is that Jesus told Paul of his broad calling, and then sent him to Ananias in Damascus. Ananias affirms the message of Jesus to Paul, but also gives him immediate instructions, such as “arise, and be baptized.”
In The Evidential Value of the Acts of the Apostles, J. S. Howson emphasizes that in the speeches of Acts 22 and Acts 26, Paul is before two very different audiences, and that his defenses both times harmonize with the audience and occasion – explaining why he would include and omit certain things (in relation to the two speeches, as well as in relation to Luke’s Acts 9 account).[2] Rather than detract, the alleged “contradictions” support the reliability of Luke’s history. By inspiration, Luke dutifully and accurately records the speeches made by Paul in Jerusalem and Cæsarea. He does not modify the three records of Paul’s conversion to try to conform them into one slick presentation to satisfy critics.
[2] Howson, Evidential Value, pp. 104-115.
No comments:
Post a Comment