Those People

Paul stands up and addresses this mixed crowd with a teaching that boggles the mind. In typical fashion for the record of Acts, Paul begins by outlining the narrative history of the Jewish people in a way that sets up the point he’s trying to make.

Paul doesn’t sugarcoat the history of his fellow Jews: he talks about their history as a stubborn people led out of Egypt — about how God had to endure their conduct and help them find their inheritance. He sums up the history of the judges and Saul as their first king, alluding to the frustrating story that lay behind Saul’s rule. He mentions the pinnacle of Jewish history (particularly as seen from the first century) by speaking of the reign of David as a king who was after God’s own heart.

From this history, Paul connects Jesus directly to David and the work of John the Baptist. He speaks of the anointed calling of both and alludes to the fact that Jesus is Messiah. He then points out how Judaism’s leadership (the Judeans) did not recognize Jesus and made the foolish mistake of putting him to death. He speaks of the resurrection and the coming of the Kingdom.

Paul then goes back to recap the amazing story surrounding the resurrection by teaching through a series of brilliant remez quotations — which happen to function as a sermon in and of themselves — before ending the sermon with a direct and challenging application: it is the job of the Jewish people to carry on this story and be about the ministry of the forgiveness of sin. He warns that if they miss this calling, they would be the foolish scoffers spoken of in the Psalms.

Paul’s message is directly aimed at the Jews in attendance. While Paul recognizes all those in attendance, his first “sermon” that day was a sermon for the Jewish audience. He spoke of the Jewish story and how Jesus fit into the grand narrative of God. He continually referenced the “we” of the Jewish people throughout the telling of this story. “It is to US,” Paul said, “that this message has been sent.” Paul’s point is that this is THEIR story. It’s the calling of the Jewish people to carry this story well.

Paul is certainly not “playing it safe” for his first public teaching. Paul is a fiery preacher on his first day. As Jewish teacher, trained under Gamaliel, he is directly confronting the Jewish audience. He isn’t trying to hedge his bets. He refers to their background as a stubborn people, he critiques their leadership as being blind to the purposes of God, and he even closes the sermon with a thunderbolt challenge not to be a scoffing fool. Paul isn’t concerned with making or keeping friends.

Now, how do you suppose the people respond to this message that day in Pisidian Antioch?

Did you say, “They loved it! They welcomed it with open arms!”?

Of course you didn’t. Because you’ve likely been taught your whole life that those stupid Jews hated the gospel and everything from Jesus and rejected Paul everywhere he went. But, unfortunately, you have been taught all wrong. Have a look at Acts 13:

As they went out, the people begged that these things might be told them the next Sabbath. And after the meeting of the synagogue broke up, many Jews and devout converts to Judaism followed Paul and Barnabas, who, as they spoke with them, urged them to continue in the grace of God.

Wait. What?

Let’s recap. Paul spoke a challenging word that day, he spoke very directly about the crucifixion of Jesus, and he taught at length on this teaching about the resurrection.

And the people begged them to come back and teach them more.

Brothers and sisters, the Jewish assembly didn’t have a single problem with the message of Jesus and what so many of us would call the “gospel.”

In fact, if you were to begin scouring the book of Acts, you would find the rejection of the Jews to the early followers of Jesus is hardly EVER connected to the story of Jesus, the crucifixion, or the resurrection.

So what will they get upset about? Let’s keep reading.

The next Sabbath almost the whole city gathered to hear the word of the Lord. But when the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy and began to contradict what was spoken by Paul, reviling him. And Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly, saying, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken first to you. Since you thrust it aside and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles. For so the Lord has commanded us, saying,

“ ‘I have made you a light for the Gentiles,    that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.’ ”

And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed. And the word of the Lord was spreading throughout the whole region. But the Jews incited the devout women of high standing and the leading men of the city, stirred up persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and drove them out of their district. But they shook off the dust from their feet against them and went to Iconium. And the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit.

It was difficult for this group of religious God-worshippers to accept the fact that all of “those people” might be allowed into the family of God. While the debate was open between Shammai and Hillel regarding the place of justification in the life of the theosabes, what no rabbi had suggested was that a Gentile could ever be a full-fledged child of God. While the argument is initially intriguing to them, when they see the synagogue fill up the next week with unclean Gentiles, they cannot continue.

So Paul and Barnabas confront their brothers about the very message they spoke the week prior. This is their message to carry into the world! This is what God has always been up to! But since they don’t want to be a part of God’s great project (“…since you judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life…”), Paul and Barnabas must now turn their attention to the good news they are there to proclaim. If the people of God are going to reject their calling, then Paul and Barnabas will fulfill it.

And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord.

I worry that if we miss this part of the story, we are missing THE great backdrop to the New Testament. This is what the gospel does to the world of Asia and Asia Minor. It brings all those on the outside, inside. This is found all over the New Testament! This is the story!

“If you let yourself become circumcised, the gospel is of no use to you…”

“You are no longer strangers and foreigners, but citizens and fellow members of God’s household…”

“…and now those of you who were far off have been brought near.”

I fear we may have missed the point. And somewhere along the way, we have exchanged the good news and the truth of the New Testament narrative for a message about heaven and hell and escaping a world doomed to destruction.

But the story has never been about that. The story has always been about a God who is redeeming this world. The story (a very Jewish story, by the way) has always been about a community of folks — a kingdom of priests — confronting the world and showing them God is, in fact, for them, and they do have a place at His table.

God’s story has always been an invitation to trust — to trust the story that there is Sabbath rest available to all.

Available to ALL.

You see, things don’t change much over the course of 2,000 years. There are still groups of people and entire institutions who claim to speak for God and are certain they have finally figured out who gets to be in and who is out. They seem to believe, contrary to the teachings of the very Jesus they claim to worship, that they have stumbled across the guest list to the great wedding banquet and they know who’s getting in and who’s staying out.

There are even people who talk about the gospel being for all people. Until your synagogue is full of a bunch of people who don’t look like you. Or until a handful of “those people” come and sit in the front row of your church.

You know who “those people” are.

It’s their economic status, skin color, sexual orientation, political affiliation, or dress code. Or a myriad of other things even less significant and humiliating to admit.

Quite frankly, they just aren’t like us.

And to hear God is inviting all people to the table to be his kids… Well, that just doesn’t sit well with us.

But it’s the gospel we’re called to carry into the world around us. It’s the announcement of a better Kingdom.

But it’s what He’s been doing since the dawn of creation. It’s the story He’s been telling the whole time. And I believe He’s hoping, with tears in His eyes, that we will be humble enough to accept it.

The Theosabes

Barnabas and Paul arrive in Pisidian Antioch and follow their typical script. They immediately find their Jewish brethren and join them in fellowship and worship at the local synagogue. After the normal synagogue service, visiting guests are invited to share a word of encouragement with the people gathered there. This is a basic gesture, especially for visiting teachers — let alone the fact that Paul is a student of one of the most renowned Jewish teachers of their day. I’m sure people couldn’t wait to hear from Paul.

And hear from Paul, they do.

We are told Paul stood up and motioned with his hand for the assembly’s attention. One thing to notice is this thirteenth chapter of Acts seems to signify the arrival of Paul as a teacher. Prior to the story of Pisidian Antioch, Luke is very intentional to say “Barnabas and Saul/Paul,” which would signify Barnabas is the leader (by putting his name first). After this story, it will become, for the rest of the book of Acts (with one exception), “Paul and Barnabas.”

This story appears to be a defining moment for Paul. It seems the church in Antioch sent Paul out with Barnabas as his teacher, and it is in this story where the roles switch. Barnabas will give Paul the nod, Paul will seize the moment, and Barnabas will become the student. Incredible humility.

Paul stands up and begins his presentation, “Men of Israel and you Gentiles who worship God…”

Now wait a minute. We have to unpack a lot of context in this brief address.

We need to expound on the rabbinical climate of Asia Minor in the first century. Decades before the ministry of Jesus, the Jewish world in Asia Minor was having to figure out what they did with the Gentiles in their synagogues who wanted to worship the God of Israel. While this was not a problem in the world of Judea and Jerusalem, the rest of the Roman world was a different story. We are told by modern scholars that the population of Asia Minor was somewhere close to 20% Jewish.

That’s significant — one out of every five people.

Folks knew about the Jews; people in Asia Minor had exposure to the Jewish faith. And some of them really liked it. They learned to love the God of Israel and to love His words. They came to synagogue and tried to find a place of worship. And the Jews had to figure out what to do with that.

Is it acceptable for a Gentile to worship the God of Israel? All Jews were in agreement. “Of course.”

But one rabbi said, “Hey Gentiles, we are glad you are here. We love that you love the God of Israel. But it won’t do you any good unless you convert, take on circumcision (and the rest of the law that it represents), and become Jewish.” If you're thinking that such a position sounds a lot like Shammai, then you’re dead on.

But the other rabbi — indeed, a guy by the name of Hillel — said, “Gentiles, we are thrilled you are here and we love that you love the God of Israel. You are welcome to worship God and you can even find justification. If Abraham was justified by faith before he was circumcised, so can you!” Now, Hillel would have remained quite steadfast that these Gentiles were not Jews; they were not brothers in the family of God, but they were welcome to be distant cousins.

This is all well and good, but what does this have to do with the story of Pisidian Antioch? Well, Pisidian Antioch sits on the edge of the region known as Galatia. While almost all of Asia and Asia Minor was very Hillel driven (which makes sense; a Jewish world finding its place within a Roman context would like to lean toward inclusion), the region of Galatia was very definitely Shammai country. As we mentioned in the last post, Galatia was very rugged, primitive, “off-the-beaten-path,” backwoods territory. The Jewish population that settled there purposefully did so NOT to assimilate into a Roman context. There are six quotes from Galatian rabbis in the Mishnah and all six of them are Shammai quotations.

So this argument created three different people groups referenced in the land of Asia Minor within a Jewish context. There are people the Jews would call “brothers”; this indicated they were fellow ethnic Jews. They also spoke of “children of Abraham”; this was a designation given to proselytes — converts who were not born Jewish but had decided to take on circumcision and follow the law and become completely Jewish. Then there was a group of people who were called in the Greek theosabes; it’s a term we translate “God-fearer” or “God-fearing Gentiles.”

The Jewish argument was swirling about the theosabes. What do we do with the God-fearing Gentile? Everybody agreed about the “brothers” and the “children of Abraham,” but what do we do about the theosabes? It’s impossible to know which direction the synagogue in Pisidian Antioch leaned, but it’s safe to say the cultural argument was a tense one.

We also know that, whatever their position, Paul references the presence of all three groups more than once. When Paul stands up and says, “Men of Israel (Jews) and you Gentiles who worship God (theosabes),” that tells you that you have a little bit of everybody in the room.

Paul will later address all three groups directly. If Acts 13:26 is translated correctly (as it used to be in the 1984 edition of the NIV), it will read, “Brothers, children of Abraham, and you God-fearing Gentiles…”

Brothers (group one), children of Abraham (group two), and you God-fearing Gentiles (group three).

Paul has some good news that’s going to stir the pot. What will their reaction be? I think we may be surprised.

Saul to Paul

Barnabas and Saul arrive at Cyprus. It seems clear that they are taking the standard route to Asia (see the map below), the likely place to begin this first missionary journey. Cyprus is the island that sits just west off of the Mediterranean coast from Antioch and is the logical stop for all ships sailing west.

When Barnabas and Saul get to Cyprus (we are told John is with them, as well), they begin proclaiming this message of a new Kingdom in the synagogues of the region. We are not given the impression they have a negative experience at all or find any trouble being received by their Jewish brothers (more on this later). Eventually, they meet a Jewish sorcerer (if you’re scratching your head, you should be — those two do not go together and is a direct violation of Torah) who happens to work for the Roman proconsul, named Sergius Paulus. You could think of proconsul as the “Secretary of State” of the Roman world. (At the least, it refers to that major region, but most have argued the position is imperial, not just regional.)

Saul boldly confronts the sinful and deceptive lifestyle of this false prophet who is immediately engulfed in darkness and blindness. Upon seeing this encounter, Sergius Paulus believes in the Lord and finds himself amazed at the teaching. What I find so interesting in this story is that Saul changes his name to Paul. Why would he do that?

If you immediately made the connection to Sergius, you are astute. It seems that Saul changes his name to that of his first convert.

However, if you also thought deeper than that, you are even more astute. Paul changes his own name. This is something that almost never happens in Scripture. (Naomi, in the story of Ruth, tells her friend to call her “Marah,” which means bitter.) A name change is always initiated by a figure of authority who has the right to change your name (God, a rabbi, your parents, etc.), but Paul formally changes his own name.

This name change signifies something significant in the consciousness of Paul. What is it? I think the next story may clue us in.

After this encounter John leaves their company while Barnabas and Paul head to Pisidian Antioch. This is where unfamiliarity with the geography of Asia and Asia Minor will have us miss the point in the story completely. The original readers would be shaking their heads as to why they end up in Antioch of Pisidia. It doesn’t make any sense.

They were clearly heading west to Asia; now they are headed due north into the middle of nowhere in Asia Minor. It’s a drastic change of route. They would have to sail north to reach the coast, and upon reaching the coast they would depart on a week-long hike. This hike would be through a region that does not even have a road to walk on. They would have hiked through the wilderness and they probably could have counted the people they met on the way with their two hands.

What are they doing?

It will also help to know a few details about Antioch of Pisidia. The city was one of many Antiochs that were planted by Rome throughout the tribal region of Asia Minor. Rome always struggled to conquer the primitive tribal regions since they had no imperial structure. These strong barbaric fighters were such a nuisance to the Romans that they formed treaties to solicit their help in the region rather than conquer them. In order to influence the region with progressive thought and the values of Hellenism, the Romans planted these cities that put Rome on steroids.

The cities were designed to put Rome on display, in all of her military might. Pisidian Antioch was unique because it was known as a miniature Rome. Built on seven small hills, the city had most of the same installations as its capital counterpart. In the archaeological ruins of Pisidian Antioch, we have found multiple references to one name of particular interest: Proconsul Sergius Paulus.

Sergius Paulus was a resident of Pisidian Antioch. According to one of the inscriptions, he was the one who paid for the installation of the main city gate — which is an impressive structure. Why Barnabas and Paul ran into Sergius on Cyprus is unclear. Was he traveling through? Was he on an assignment? Vacation? We don’t know, but their next stop after his conversion will be his hometown.

It makes the reader wonder if Paul’s excitement after experiencing his first encounter with a convert — coupled with the fact that it is such a high-profile leader — affected his mission strategy. Was he convinced he could go straight to the top of Rome? Was his goal to speak directly to the family of Caesar himself? It is impossible to know for sure, but there is certainly a lot of evidence in Paul’s writings that will lend credence to this theory.

He will tell the Christians in Rome more than once how he cannot wait to visit Rome, and how it has been a goal of his to get to Rome ever since his calling. More than once in the book of Acts, we will see Paul try to go to Rome and have his mind resolutely set on standing before Caesar.

Of course, God has other plans — as He often does.

But we’re getting ahead of ourselves. Barnabas and Paul have quite the interaction in Pisidian Antioch, and it is one that will shape the contours of the New Testament.

Jerusalem to Antioch

Of course, if Peter isn’t prepared for this world-altering shift in understanding, the rest of this Jewish movement isn’t ready for it either. Peter’s interactions and behavior with a Gentile, the rumors of his inclusion of such an outsider without first making him a covenantal part of the story, has set off the Church at large.

Peter has to defend his actions and very clearly tell the story. It’s clear that the discussions are not easy, and on some level it’s comforting to know that even the early church had problems. They had problems with doctrines and traditions, they had problems communicating with each other, and they had problems finding a place of agreement. Fortunately, the early church does model for us how to navigate these difficulties and find a place of resolution (more on that later in Acts), but they are certainly as human as we are.

After people tell the story of both his vision and his experience, coupled with his ability to speak as the ringleader of Jesus’s disciples and the movement as a whole, the people there accept the testimony of Peter and have enough humility to be able to rejoice in this plan of God that they previously misunderstood.

Depending on how you read the second half of Acts 11, you may get a more realistic picture. We are told the Church begins to move and scatter from the region of Judea and Samaria and reach into the world of Asia and Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). The disciples send some leaders north to Antioch in order to provide leadership to this spreading movement as it finds a home in a very Greco-Roman — and largely Gentile — world.

It does become clear that the Church finds a new “center for operations” in Antioch. What is unclear is whether or not there is a tension between the church in the Diaspora and the church in Judea, and how deep that tension runs. I find in most of the conversations we have for basic Bible study, we aren’t even aware of the tensions between New Testament worldviews, but the issue is profoundly significant. Most New Testament scholars are going to identify a deep rift in worldviews between the Jewish church in Jerusalem (the “Judeans”) and the expanding church of Asia and Asia Minor.

Some liberal scholars will even go are far as to say there is a major schism that is never repaired. According to these scholars, the “Jewish Church” of Judea, led by James, does not survive and falls out of existence; the church that remains is the Gentile church that will be largely Roman in nature, shedding it’s Judaism and the Law and moving into a new day and the Christian faith we know so well. But I believe this ignores the biblical Text, and modern scholarship is telling us quite clearly that the church of Asia and Asia Minor was much more Jewish than we anticipated.

However, an attempt to act like there is no tension between the church in Jerusalem and the church in Antioch would be just as ignorant. There are details living within the New Testament writings (which we will certainly look at) that clearly show how these pesky Gentiles make this Jewish-Jesus faith quite difficult, and not everybody agrees on how to deal with it. To understand this context is to understand not just a piece of the New Testament, but the New Testament conversation as a whole. But more on that later…

Peter’s experience with Cornelius is really rocking the boat, and the waters aren’t going to calm down anytime soon.

Unknown by Peter at this point is that God is preparing a special prophet for this new frontier. While people are aware of Saul’s life-changing experience, we will see later (from the book of Galatians) that Saul has been spending significant time working through his own version of “the Gospel.” God is training him and teaching him how to take this announcement of a new Kingdom into a world radically different from the Jewish world of Judea.

When the church moves to Antioch, they send Barnabas to help lead the efforts. Barnabas encourages the believers and helps lay some foundations, but then immediately sets off to find Saul, whom he brings to operational headquarters. The church sends out Barnabas and Saul on their first “mission” to check on the growing movement, spread the gospel, and start planting some healthy faith communities throughout the region.

They set sail for Asia and arrive at their first stop, only to have their plans changed…

Unclean Sheets

In my opinion, the next story in the book of Acts is one of the most misunderstood, misapplied, and critical stories of the book. In order to set up the context for the story, we may find it helpful to remind ourselves of the Jewish nature of the story. I find that far too many Christian readers will see what they call the “Old Testament” as a Jewish story and the “New Testament” as a story predominantly of Gentiles. While we’ve worked very hard to preserve the Jewishness of Jesus in our walk through the gospel accounts, it is even more difficult for us to maintain a Jewish perspective through the record of Acts. I mean, the whole book is a record of the Gentile church, right?

Not exactly.

It would serve us well to stop and realize or remind ourselves that up to this point, the entire story has been Jewish. While there has been plenty of Gentile interaction in the New Testament (this isn’t unique to the New Testament; Gentiles are all over the Tanakh as well), this interaction has always fit within a Jewish worldview and a Jewish context. The story of the Ascension is a story of a Jewish rabbi and his talmidim; the story of Pentecost is a Jewish story of Shavuot (yes, when you stop to consider it, Pentecost was a story about Jews, not Gentiles). The stories about the believers sharing their possessions, breaking bread, and praying together are stories about Jewish believers. The problem with the widows, the stoning of Stephen, and the life-change of Saul is all Jewish.

The story of Cornelius presents the first encounter with a Gentile not being assumed as a Jewish convert, and a Jewish apostle confronted in his worldview about how to interact with a fellowship of the goyim (the Hebrew word for “Gentiles”).

The story begins with a man named Cornelius who lives in Caesarea — which happens to be a VERY Roman city that doesn’t share the values of the Jewish world of Judea and Samaria — and has a love for the God of Israel and a heart of righteousness that gives to the marginalized and shows hospitality. After an incredible God-encounter, he sends for Peter, who happens to be down the road at Joppa.

As the messengers head out for Joppa, we are told about Peter, who is having an encounter of his own. He goes up to the roof of the home to catch a nap and has a vision of a sheet coming down with all kinds of animals. The passage specifically mentions that there are unclean animals included (reptiles and four-footed animals of “all kinds”). A voice speaks to Peter and directs him to kill and eat. Peter objects on the grounds that eating unclean animals is against the Law and he has never done this in all his life. The voice tells Peter not to call unclean what God has made clean.

It’s at this point where biblical interpretation starts to go off the rails for many of us. I have heard numerous times that this is where God decides all food is now clean, and kosher law doesn’t exist anymore. But such an interpretation completely ignores the details of the passage and demonstrates horrific Biblical exegesis.

First, God has not made unclean animals clean; God has very clearly called them unclean. This is why Peter is so confused by the vision. Three times the vision repeats itself and each time Peter insists on being obedient. The reasoning for Peter is clear: “I will not eat something unclean.” The voice says not to call unclean what is clean. Peter’s logic says, “That’s just fine, but that lizard IS unclean and I’m not to eat it.”

Second, we cannot forget the context of the vision. Peter is being prepared by God for a world-shaking encounter with Cornelius; Peter’s world is about to be blown up. To understand the cultural context, we have to understand what was called Jewish halakhah, or the oral traditions and teachings about how to walk out God’s commands. When God gave you Torah, He gave you 613 commands to follow; the problem has always been trying to figure out HOW to follow those 613 commands correctly. In order to help in this process, the Jewish world was working on a canonized oral tradition. This oral tradition stated that since you were trying to avoid contact with unclean things, a Jew should not eat with a Gentile. They are unfamiliar with kosher law and do things all the time that make themselves unclean.

What was often overlooked is the difference between God’s written law and the oral law (halakhah or traditions). To this day, the Jewish faith will see the oral law with similar authority (in fact, in some ultra-Orthodox circles, with MORE authority) as the written law. The Talmud teaches that when Moses came down the mountain with the written law, he also came down the mountain with the oral law. Whether they believe this to be literally true or not is beside the point; the application is that you cannot have written law without oral law.

I think this observation is true on principle and often poorly applied. As we’ve tried to show through the life of Jesus, he often questioned the oral traditions and critiqued them, while always upholding Torah to the letter. Peter finds himself in a world that has declared kosher law, by extension, means the Gentiles are unclean. You can search your Torah as long as you like — God never said such a thing. Nevertheless, at the point of the vision, Peter is very confused, but his encounter with Cornelius is going to fill in the blanks.

People often act like interpreting this passage is an arbitrary and ambiguous thing, but Peter interprets the vision for us! He tells the people in Acts 10 that they are well aware of the Jewish traditions, but he has recently been shown that PEOPLE are not unclean. To be clear, the vision of Peter has nothing to do with food; the vision is about people. The food issue for Peter is quite black and white; certain foods are clean, certain foods are unclean. But God is telling Peter that people are not unclean and he needs to see them as such.

Now, I know some astute readers are thinking, “Hey! Wait a minute! Are you telling me I should be eating kosher?” Wait on that specific answer, but the question itself is brilliant, because that question is what so much of the New Testament is about.

Certainly, the world of the apostles began to shake that day, as God starts to chip away at their assumptions and blow apart old wineskins so He could restore a world He has always been trying to reach. He had told Abraham at the beginning of the story He was looking for a partner to bless all nations. The story of the conquest put His people at the crossroads of the earth so they could bring shalom to chaos in the midst of the nations. The prophets spoke again and again of God’s people being a light to the nations and a hope for the goyim.

Sometimes, our oral traditions and our interpretations get in the way of what God is trying to do. When He blows apart our parameters and our insulators, our whole world begins to shake. But a shaking world of religious uncertainty is often the beginning of a revolution of redemption and the liberation of captives.

Conversion? Repentance? Or...?

The next chapter tells the stunning story of Saul’s transformation. If you remember, we were introduced to Saul in the story of Stephen as he held the coats and oversaw the execution. We are reminded of his intense pursuit of the church in the next chapter as the movement was scattered because of the persecution he was leading.

And then, all of a sudden, Jesus enters Saul’s story and everything radically changes. Saul is on his way to Damascus with letters in hand from the high priest himself to find and arrest any of Jesus’s followers. (Please note, the letters are intended for “synagogues”; apparently this early church is still very much Jewish and a part of the world of Judaism.) As he gets closer to Damascus, a bright light sends him to the ground as he hears the voice of Jesus asking why Saul is trying to persecute him. When Saul asks who is speaking to him, Jesus responds that it is he whom Saul is persecuting.

I find it interesting to note that Jesus claims — twice — it is he whom Saul is persecuting. He doesn’t say, “Hey Saul! Why are you persecuting my followers?” But Jesus claims Saul is actually persecuting Jesus. I find that to be quite the commentary on what it means to partner with God and be a part of the “body of Christ.” But I digress.

Saul is struck blind and sent to the house of Ananias (who isn’t too pleased with the idea of helping out the man who is notorious for trying to destroy them) and he regains his sight. He also enters into a time of deep commitment and training. After all, Saul — who has been trained by Gamaliel the Elder — has a lot to learn (and unlearn) in his Judaism. This isn’t a statement we should read past. Saul was the disciple of one of the greatest names of first-century Judaism. Saul’s pedigree is incredible; it’s the equivalent of being a Ph.D. from Harvard. Saul would be able to walk into any Jewish setting and demand respect simply by being a student of Gamaliel’s. 

But in this Jesus reality, much of what he has learned is still incomplete.

Now, I want to end this post with a question. I want to pose a question I don’t intend to resolve until the end of our time in Acts.

The subtitle in most Bibles for this section is going to read: “The Conversion of Saul”

Is that an accurate subtitle? Is Saul “converted”? On some level, this is a matter of semantics and what we mean technically by “conversion.” But if we mean that Saul changes religious affiliation, I would like to ask you to reconsider. You see, this is why semantics matter, because I believe most of us as Jesus followers tend to take a similar stance toward Judaism.

God worked through Judaism in the Old Testament, then God sent Jesus and God changed stories. He abandoned Judaism and started at square one. If Jews want to be saved, they have to accept Jesus as the Messiah and be converted. They need to switch teams from an old abandoned Judaism to “the new thing” God is doing in Jesus.

Right?

But this betrays the story we have been studying. I have been trying to show that this story of God is one narrative from front to back. God doesn’t change game plans; Jesus is the fulfillment and the demonstration of the game plan that has been true all along. And while we aren’t in the book of Romans yet, I think the position we typically hold in the evangelical community runs directly contrary to the teaching of Romans 11. We have been grafted into the Jewish story. We have been grafted into their tree. God didn’t plant a brand new tree and invite everybody to jump on board. No, God pruned and continued to cultivate the original tree and grafted Gentiles into that.

While I will admit that Saul was certainly misguided in his persecution of Christians, his intentions come from a zealous pursuit of the God of the Bible. The same Jewish God Jesus came to show us.

So I will ask again, was this a conversion?

Or was this a repentance? Was Saul following the right story and simply had some wires crossed? Once he realized his error, did he switch teams or simply start following the same God and the same faith with a new understanding of what God was up to in the world?

Or was this something else entirely?

We will talk much more about Saul and his education. We’ll talk much more about this new “Christian” faith and how it fits into Judaism in the time to come. For now, I simply want to let that question upset the apple cart before we move on.