CRITICAL REMARKS
Acts 9:27. Barnabas (Acts 4:36) appears here as the patron of Saul, whom he takes by the hand (not literally, but metaphorically), and introduces to the apostles.
Acts 9:28-29, should read: And he was with them going in and going out—i.e., publicly and privately,—at Jerusalem preaching boldly in the name of the Lord. Saul stayed in Jerusalem not more than fifteen days (Galatians 1:18).
Acts 9:29. Grecians, or Greek-speaking Jews.—These were addressed by Saul probably because he himself was a foreign Jew, or because they may have been present in large numbers in the metropolis attending a feast, but chiefly (might it not be?) because they belonged to the synagogues or synagogue which murdered Stephen (Acts 6:9). They went about to kill him—Compare Acts 22:17-21, in which the motive for his withdrawing from Jerusalem is represented not as the murderous designs of the Jews, but a vision in the temple. But the two accounts are by no means inconsistent.
Acts 9:30. Cæsarea.—See on Acts 8:40. Tarsus.—Upon the monuments of Shalmanezer II., about the middle of the ninth century B.C., Tarzi (Schrader). The capital of Cilicia (Acts 21:39). Founded, according to tradition, by Sennacherib (705–681 B.C.). After the fall of the Assyrian empire it became, under Persian supremacy, the seat of the Syennesian princes of Cilicia. In Alexander’s time it was the residence of a Persian satrap, and in that of the Diadochi, an important place of the Seleucidæ. Under the old Cæsars Cilicia was conjoined with Syria; but Hadrian restored it to the dignity of an independent province with Tarsus as its chief town. In the time of Saul Tarsus was the seat of one of the most celebrated schools of philosophy and philology. “Strabo, a contemporary of Saul’s, names a whole series of famous teachers out of Tarsus, who all belonged to the first half of the first Christian century, and says: ‘So great zeal for philosophy, and for the circle of all other sciences, have the inhabitants of this town that they have surpassed even Athens and Alexandria, and, indeed, every other place where schools of philosophy and learning exist’ ” (Langhans, Biblische Geschichte und Literatur, ii. 704).
HOMILETICAL ANALYSIS.—Acts 9:26-30
Saul’s First Visit to Jerusalem; or, his Discipleship confirmed
I. Saul’s object in visiting Jerusalem (Acts 9:26).—
1. To associate himself with the disciples there, and thus obtain recognition of his standing as a member of the Church. The instinct which impels a disciple to seek after the communion of saints is healthy as well as right; that which leads a believer to dissociate himself from other believers, and to cultivate piety apart, is as unsound as it is wrong, and as hurtful to the individual himself as it is contrary to the mind of Christ (Luke 22:32) and the teaching of Christ’s apostles (Colossians 3:16; Hebrews 10:25; James 5:16; 1 John 1:7).
2. To make the acquaintance of Peter (Galatians 1:18). Though implying a recognition of Peter’s tacitly allowed supremacy in the Church at Jerusalem, this cannot be cited as an acknowledgment of his primacy, since on a second visit fourteen years later (Galatians 2:1) Saul (then called Paul) recognises James (the Lord’s brother), Cephas, and John equally with Peter as pillars in the Church (Galatians 2:9).
II. Saul’s reception by the disciples at Jerusalem.—
1. His sincerity was suspected. Not by one or two of the more timid of the community, but by all. Not by the ordinary membership, but by its leaders, or at least by Peter and James, since the rest of the apostles appear to have at this time been absent from Jerusalem (Galatians 1:19). Nor was their suspicion of him unreasonable. His conversion, of which they had doubtless heard, must have seemed to them beforehand unlikely. Then its miraculous and sudden character must have struck them at least as a reason for caution in accepting it as genuine. And if the larger portion of the three years passed since that occurrence had been spent in retirement in Arabia, their lack of trustworthy information about his manner of life in the interval must be held as having justified their want of forwardness in taking him to their bosoms. “The sudden appearance of Voltaire in a circle of Christians, claiming to be one of them, would have been something like this return of Saul to Jerusalem as a professed disciple” (Hackett).
2. His conversion was attested.
(1) To whom? To the apostles, or rather to Peter and James, the latter of whom Luke includes among the apostles, using the term in a less strict way than that in which it is commonly employed. Either, as above suggested, the other apostles were absent from Jerusalem, or Saul attended no public meeting of the disciples.
(2) By Whom? Barnabas, the Levite of Cyprus, who may have been a former acquaintance of Saul’s—a not unlikely supposition, since Saul’s early occupation as a tent-maker may have brought him into trade relations with the Cyprus farmer, and who apparently had personal knowledge obtained in some way not stated, both of Saul’s conversion and of his evangelistic labours at Damascus.
(3) How? By declaring how Christ had appeared to him in the way to Damascus, and by certifying that he had preached boldly in Christ’s name at Damascus. No one in Jerusalem could have spoken a more powerful word for Saul than the Brother of Consolation, and none could have spoken a better word than that uttered by him.
III. Saul’s evangelistic activity in Jerusalem.—
1. The nature of it.
(1) Preaching boldly—not defiantly or vehemently, but confidently and courageously—in the name of the Lord Jesus; and all who preach in or about Christ’s name should, and might, exhibit the same mental and spiritual characteristics.
(2) Disputing against the Grecian Jews, the party with whom Stephen had argued, and at whose hands he met his death (Acts 6:9-12), and who were probably most zealous in opposing him.
2. The continuance of it. Only fifteen days (Galatians 1:18), the exercise of his ministry having been—not abandoned for want of success or forsaken through weariness, or love of novelty, but—cut short by the murderous designs of his hearers. Whether these listened to him longer than they did to Stephen cannot be told.
IV. Saul’s precipitate flight from Jerusalem.—
1. Dictated by prudence. “A prudent man foreseeth the evil and hideth himself” (Proverbs 22:3). No man is required to make a martyr of himself even for religion, unless he cannot avoid doing so without sin.
2. Approved by Christ. This must be inferred from Christ’s own dictum (Matthew 10:23). What applied to the Twelve held good of the thirteenth apostle.
3. Assisted by his friends. His brethren in the faith, realising how valuable a coadjutor had been sent them, “took steps” to have him conveyed to Cæsarea (see on Acts 8:40 “Critical Remarks”), and sent forth to Tarsus, his native city (see “Critical Remarks”).
4. Rejoiced in by the whole Church of Christ since. What would the Church not have lost had Saul been cut off in the beginning of his glorious career? A heavier blow to Christianity would his fall then have been than his conversion was to Judaism!
Learn.—
1. That sudden and more especially violent conversions are always more or less open to suspicion.
2. That there are times when the services of a Christian brother are invaluable.
3. That the soundest evidence of sincerity in religion is patient and courageous perseverance in well doing.
4. That Christianity can hold the field against all opponents.
5. That Christ’s servants can hardly expect to be better treated than their Master.
HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Acts 9:8-23. The Progress of Saul’s Conversion.
I. The first impression.—The deep feeling of spiritual inability (Acts 9:8).
II. The first signs of life.—“Behold he prayeth” (Acts 9:11).
III. The first testimony.—That Christ is the Son of God (Acts 9:20).
IV. The first experience.—The cross for the sake of Christ (Acts 9:23).—Jasper in Lange.
Acts 9:27. What the Name of Jesus is to a Preacher.
I. His theme.
II. His authority.
III. His power.
IV. His aim.
V. His protection.
VI. His reward.
Acts 9:29. “They went about to slay him.”—What the Church and the world would have lost had this plot succeeded.
I. The Church would have lost—
1. The brightest example of Christianity.
2. The greatest missionary.
3. The most eloquent preacher. And—
4. The most influential writer that has ever appeared within her borders.
II. The world would have lost—
1. Its foremost pioneer of civilisation.
2. Its noblest philanthropist.
3. Its most gifted teacher.
4. Its most influential personality.
Acts 9:20-30. The Marks of True Conversion.
I. Joyful confession of Christ (Acts 9:20).
II. Willing endurance of the world’s enmity (Acts 9:23).
III. Humble intercourse with believers (Acts 9:26).
IV. Godly conduct in the service of the Lord (Acts 9:28)—Leonhard and Spiegel in Lange).
Acts 9:26-30. The Qualifications, Work, and Reward of a True Minister, as exemplified in the case of Paul.
I. His qualifications.—Declared not by Paul himself, but by Barnabas.
1. A personal interview with Christ. Paul had seen the Lord in the way; and the man who has not had personal dealings in his own soul with Jesus Christ may be an eloquent and even thoughtful lecturer on religion as he understands it, but is not a true minister.
2. A direct message from Christ. Christ had spoken to Paul, and therefore Paul had somewhat to communicate to the world. The true business of the preacher is to communicate not his own but Christ’s thoughts to his fellow-men.
3. A proved fitness to speak for Christ. Paul had shown himself to possess this by his experiment at Damascus; and Christian Churches are specially cautioned against making those bishops, presbyters, or preachers who are not “apt to teach” (1 Timothy 3:2).
II. His work.—
1. Generally and chiefly to preach, to proclaim the main facts and doctrines of the Gospel of Christ.
2. Particularly and specially to confirm and defend the Gospel against all objectors and objections. In other words, he should be both an evangelist and an apologist.
III. His reward.—Not his ultimate and final, but his present and immediate recompense.
1. The opposition of the world. Here typified by the hostility of the Jews, who first attempted to silence and then to murder Paul.
2. The sympathy of his brethren. If at first regarded with suspicion, the true minister will eventually secure the kindly regards and hearty co-operation first of the Barnabases and then of the Peters, and lastly, of the Johns and Jameses, etc., among the brethren.
3. The protection of God. The Almighty arm will be his shield and buckler till his work is done. No weapon forged against him will prosper. The devices of his enemies will be outwitted and their counsels turned to folly.
Acts 9:19-30. Saul Preaching Christ.
I. For this work he had long preparation.—Were the Book of Acts our only source of information, we should conclude that the beginning of Paul’s work as a preacher followed close upon the end of his career as a persecutor. The interval between his persecuting and his preaching would seem to have been only the three days of his blindness at Damascus. We should then be obliged to explain, as best we might, how he so suddenly gained his wonderful insight into Christian truth in its relations to Judaism. We should have to seek, and should seek in vain, a reasonable explanation of the great revolution in his moral sentiments. The work of the Spirit in regeneration may be instantaneous, but the readjustments of character and convictions are always slow and progressive. Happily, we have another resource. In the Epistle to the Galatians Paul wrote: “But when it pleased God to reveal His Son in me that I might preach Him among the heathen, immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood … but I went into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.” His preaching was preceded, we may believe, by three years of study and reflection in the solitude of Arabia. St. Paul is not, therefore, to be cited as an instance of a man one day ignorant of Christian truth, and the next day, by means entirely supernatural, the wisest exponent of it. The world, in its love of the wonderful, is too ready to believe in such men. His knowledge of Christ and of Christian truth was in part a revelation, but in part also the result of patient thought and of piety prolonged through studious years. God never works needless miracles. Every view of Christian truth and duty which Paul attained had a long history behind it, stretching back through those years of meditation in Arabia.
II. His conviction that Jesus is the Son of God was reached in the face of the greatest obstacles.—As a Pharisee burning with zeal for the law and its traditions, he looked upon Christ as a dangerous innovator, and upon Christian doctrine as heretical and revolutionary. Salvation by the law-method he advocated with all his heart. That there was any other righteousness than obedience to a ceremonial law he did not for a moment imagine or allow. The sincerity of his intensely religious nature made it the more improbable that his convictions would ever be changed. The sect of the Nazarenes was unnoticed or despised. To him, as to them, the cross was a stumbling-block. No natural bias in favour of Christian truth, then, no motive of self-interest, no social influence, drew him into the number of Christ’s disciples. No greater or more improbable change in character and purpose is conceivable than that by which Saul the inquisitor, hurrying men and women to prison and persecuting to the death believers in the Christian way, became the apostle of the cross, “determined to know nothing save Jesus Christ and Him crucified.” How, then, were these obstacles removed? His own explanation always was, “Christ was seen by me also.… It pleased God to reveal His Son in me.” In this glorious revelation lay the power which revolutionised his moral sentiments, levelled all obstacles, and brought him to an undying faith in the crucified and risen Son of God.
III. The value of Paul’s testimony that Jesus is the son of God is further enhanced by the motive which prompted him to give it.—Human testimony is to be measured by the motive to its utterance. And it might be said that he was an impostor, bearing witness to a lie, and setting up claims which he knew to be false. But, whenever men have reflected that imposture always reacts upon him who tries it, that false claims demoralise him who makes them, and have seen in St. Paul’s life, not a spiritual declension, but a steady progress in holiness, they have been both unable and unwilling to call him an impostor. Besides, the motive to imposture is wanting. Review the list of selfish motives which impel men to make false claims, and not one of them can be applied to him. It was not pride of intellect; for, with supreme self-denial, Paul resolved to count as nothing all other learning than the knowledge of Christ and of His cross. The love of Christ constrained Him. This was the motive. The grateful desire to make some return for Christ’s love to him impelled Paul to labour, to preach, to suffer, “in His name.”
IV. The spiritual power of St. Paul’s life greatly augments the value of his testimony.—Never was there a more powerful life. Or, if we were to admit that St. Paul’s power rested in his natural gifts; if we were to enumerate the elements of a strong character—sobriety, sagacity, impartial judgment, courage, hopefulness, and whatever things enter into a powerful personality—and were to find in these a sufficient cause for his pre-eminence as a religious leader—we might then attach no greater value to his testimony than to that of any other wise and truthful man. But the fact is otherwise. Exalt his natural gifts as we will; say that his own personal powers made him “a greater preacher than Chrysostom, a greater reformer than Luther, a greater theologian than Thomas Aquinas”—it yet remains entirely true that the imperishable power of St. Paul’s life was derived from Christ. He was consciously dependent. “I can do all things through Christ which strengthened me.”
V. His testimony is comprehensive.—“In the synagogues he proclaimed Jesus, that He is the Son of God.” A review of the ministry of St. Paul is fruitful of practical lessons.
1. He has set before us the superiority of the Christian religion to morality.
2. He has shown us that men may exalt the character of Christ.
3. His ministry rebukes all half-hearted service of the Master.—Monday Club Sermons.
Saul Preaching Christ.
I. There is a public confession of Christ, an unofficial preaching of Him, incumbent upon every one who is converted by His grace.—Saul is a noble example of this generous testimony for Christ. “Immediately” (R.V.) “he proclaimed Jesus in the synagogues that He is the Son of God.” Notice in reference to this confession—First, it was prompt. “Immediately” he entered upon it. There was no unnecessary hesitation, no dalliance with duty, no waiting upon frames and feelings. Love, gratitude, joy, a desire to retrieve the wrongs of the past, a yearning to direct others to the fountain at which his thirst had been assuaged. Second, it was brave. He did not simply enter his name upon the roll of the disciples. He did not content himself with speaking privately to such of his former acquaintances or associates as he might chance to meet. In the face of friend and foe he made public confession of Jesus his Lord. Third, it was uncompromising. He did not undertake to strike a balance between his own convictions and the prejudices of his hearers, as so many faint-hearted confessors now do. He “proclaimed Jesus that He is the Son of God.”
II. A higher and official preaching of Christ is incumbent upon those, and those only, who are duly called, qualified, and commissioned to enter upon it.—This is the preaching which Saul did after his return from Arabia to Damascus. A study of his course in reference to it throws much light upon the prerequisites to the gospel ministry.
1. It must be preceded by a Divine call. None may enter upon it without such vocation. The call of Saul of Tarsus was in many respects extraordinary.
2. It must be preceded by thorough preparation.
3. It must be preceded by orderly commission. Saul was commissioned of God to preach.
III. The matter, the manner, and the effects of preaching Christ are the same in all ages.—They are strikingly illustrated in the passage which we study to-day.
1. The matter or substance of all gospel preaching is the same. Saul sounds here the key-note of his whole after-ministry.
2. The manner of all true gospel preaching is the same. Saul’s ministry at Damascus and in Jerusalem affords, in these respects, a faithful representation of his methods everywhere, and an instructive example of the manner in which the minister or teacher should hold forth Christ as the Son of God and the Saviour of the world. Saul’s preaching was scriptural. He confounded the Jews by proving from the Old-Testament Scriptures that Jesus was Christ. Saul’s preaching was fearless. He preached “boldly” both in Damascus and in Jerusalem. He did not shun to declare the whole counsel of God. Saul’s preaching was humble. He “preached in the name of the Lord Jesus.” He assumed no authority and asserted no superiority of his own.
3. The effects of all gospel preaching are the same. The Apostle found in Damascus and at Jerusalem what he did everywhere else: “To the one we are the savour of death unto death, and to the other the savour of life unto life.” Finally, the fruits of faithful teaching are gathered after the teacher is gone. Saul has been “brought down to Cæsarea, and sent away to Tarsus,” but the Church of God remains; and this Church, for which he has laboured and prayed, and which sorely misses him now that he has gone, nevertheless “has peace, being edified, and walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, is multiplied.”—T. D. Witherspoon, D.D.