Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 22:17

And it came to pass, that, when I was come again to Jerusalem, even while I prayed in the temple, I was in a trance;

17. when I was come again to Jerusalem ] Rev. Ver. “had returned.” This refers to that visit of the Apostle recorded in Act 9:26 seqq. We learn from Gal 1:18 that three years had elapsed between the conversion of Saul and this visit to Jerusalem, which period is supposed to have been consumed in Arabia (cp. Gal 1:17). The preaching of Saul at Jerusalem we are told in the Acts roused the anger of the Greek-speaking Jews, and that in consequence of their attempts against Saul the Christian congregation sent him away first to Csarea and then to Tarsus.

even while I prayed in the temple ] It is worthy of note how often in this address St Paul incidentally expresses himself in such wise as to conciliate the crowd. His visit to the temple for the purpose of prayer was at once a proof that he was not likely to despise Jewish ordinances and religious observances.

I was in a trance ] Better (with Rev. Ver.), “I fell into a trance.” This was the occasion of one of those “visions and revelations of the Lord” of which St Paul speaks to the Corinthians (2Co 12:1) and with which, from his conversion onwards, he was many times instructed and comforted.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

When I was come again to Jerusalem – That is, three years after his conversion. See Gal 1:17-18.

While I prayed in the temple – Paul, like other converts to Christianity from among the Jews, would naturally continue to offer his devotions in the temple. We meet with repeated instances of their continuing to comply with the customs of the Jewish people.

I was in a trance – Greek: ecstasy. See the notes on Act 10:10. It is possible that he may here refer to what he elsewhere mentions 2Co 12:1-5 as visions and revelations of the Lord. In that place he mentions his being caught up to the third heaven 2Co 12:2 and into paradise, where he heard words which it was not lawful (marg. possible) for a man to utter, 2Co 12:4. It is not certain, however, that he alludes in this place to that remarkable occurrence. The narrative would rather imply that the Lord Jesus appeared to him in the temple in a remarkable manner, in a vision, and gave him a special command to go to the Gentiles. Paul had now stated the evidence of his conversion, which appears to have been satisfactory to them – at least they made no objection to his statement; he had shown, by his being in the temple, his respect for their institutions; and he now proceeds to show that in his other conduct he had been directed by the same high authority by which he had been called into the ministry, and that the command had been given to him in their own temple and in their own city.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Act 22:17-21

And it came to pass that while I prayed in the temple, I was in a trance.

A common thing reaching the wonderful

Here is–

I. A common thing–a man praying. Prayer is an instinct of the soul. Danger seldom fails to rouse this instinct even in the most depraved (Psa 107:13). Volney, in a storm at sea, a striking example of this. All worthless prayer may be divided into two classes, prayer addressed–

1. To the wrong god.

2. To the right God in a wrong way.

The universal tendency of man to pray implies the souls innate belief in some of the leading facts of theology, such as the Being, Personality, Presence, and entreatability of God.

II. A common thing reaching the wonderful. The trance is the state in which a man has passed out of the usual order of his life, beyond the usual limits of consciousness and volition. To an ecstasy in Paul we owe the starting point of the Church, the command which bade him depart far hence unto the Gentiles. It is supposed by some that it is to this trance Paul refers (2Co 12:1-5) when he speaks of being caught up to the third heaven. Conclusion: Learn–

1. The sublime possibilities of the human soul. By a mysterious power of abstraction it can shut out the external universe, and transport itself into a world where there are scenes too grand for description and communications surpassing utterance. Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, John, as well as Paul, were often transported to these supernal states.

2. The incomparable worth of true prayer. Prayer is the road into the celestial (Dan 9:21-23; Act 10:9). (D. Thomas, D. D.)

And saw Him saying unto me, Make haste and get thee quickly out of Jerusalem.

Pauls vision in the temple

I. The place: The temple. This shows the catholicity of the new convert.

II. The season: While he was praying. There seems to be a natural, invisible, indissoluble connection between the offering of a prayer to God and the reception of spiritual blessings from God. The Bible teaches this by–

1. Doctrines.

2. Practice.

III. The form. We may become acquainted with the world of spirits by–

1. Consciousness.

2. Testimony.

IV. The subject. Christs command to Paul suggests–

1. That He claims authority over the ministry.

2. His special providence over His own agencies and ministers. (Caleb Morris.)

Paul sent to the Gentiles

This passage has an interest and a solemnity of a peculiar kind. This interview is not previously recorded, and but for the special circumstances that now arose it might never have been mentioned at all.

2. Paul introduced it because he wished to convince his former co-religionists that just as he had become a Christian preacher because he could not help himself, so when his heart was set upon labouring among his people, he was obliged to undertake what otherwise he would have utterly shrunk back from. Which of them, if they had been in his position, could have dared to say, No? Observe–

I. The rejection of the gospel preparing the way for the withdrawal of it (verses 17, 18).

1. The narrative refers to Pauls first visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. He must have returned with very strange and mingled feelings. He left the Holy City the proud champion of Judaism; he came back to it the humble disciple of Christ. He left it with a heart full of hatred to the faith of Christ; he came back ready to lay down his life in defence of it. And yet, as by a kind of instinct, he betook himself to the old place of prayer; and it was fitted to impress his Jewish hearers in his favour that it was there that he received the charge that had given its colour and direction to all his afterlife.

2. I can fancy his Jewish hearers saying, We can so far understand your own change of view and feeling, but what connection is there between that and your making common cause with the Gentiles? I did it, says Paul, by express revelation. He said to me, Hasten and go quickly out of Jerusalem, for they will not receive thy testimony about Me.

3. Much might have been said in favour of his remaining. Were conversions not as important at Jerusalem as in Asia Minor and Europe? Should charity not begin at home? Was it not time enough to think of converting the heathen abroad when they had got all the people converted at home? Such considerations must have had weight then, as they have with some now.

4. But not only was there a perishing world outside, needing if not waiting for the good news, and who therefore had a right to the one remedy for its deadly ailment; there was another reason. The Jewish people had enjoyed their opportunity. If it could be said in Isaiahs time, surely much more then, What can I do for My vineyard more that I have not done in it? But they would not have Christ nor His gospel. And now that a new witness was raised up, the charge to him is, Dont stay here. Jerusalem has had its day. It was a terrible message. No wonder that Paul, who loved his people so intensely, was loath to obey it, and humbly argues against it.

5. And yet it is in keeping with what has been elsewhere and at other times. The light has shone brightly for a time among a people, and when they rejected or extinguished it, they were left in the darkness which themselves had chosen. Africa is witness to this, as are those lands in which Paul himself once held up the lamp of truth. It seems to be Gods way to give the opportunity, and if it is not improved to withdraw it. So it was, in more recent times, in France, Hungary, Bohemia, Italy, and Spain.

6. Our own country and Germany seem now to be on their trial. The light of Reformation truth has shone in both; yet what multitudes in both lands are rejecting Christ, and abandoning themselves to carelessness and unbelief and open sin! And, as Hosea said, Yea, woe also unto them, when I depart from them! there may be something analogous to this in our own case. But, short of this, there are some who think that there has been such an expenditure of effort in some parts of the home field , often with very little in the way of result, that, without neglecting home, the stream of effort might now be legitimately diverted to the great harvest field abroad.

7. Are there not some who have had every advantage of a spiritual kind that could well be? And they have put off the great decision, or they have resisted, and made it next to impossible to venture on any further advances to them. It may be that they have had their day, and that the Divine word regarding them is, Make haste, and get thee quickly away, for they will not receive thy testimony concerning Me.

II. The Divine call overriding our own views of duty (verses 19, 20). Paul could not silently acquiesce in this word. He thought that what had convinced him would convince others. How could they resist the force of such evidence as he had to bring? Did they not know his intense and inextinguishable hatred of the name and people of Christ? What did he need to do but just to present himself, as himself the best argument he could use? But there was one who knew human nature better than he. As He had once said to Ezekiel, so He now says to Paul, But the house of Israel will not hearken unto thee, for they will not hearken unto Me. An analogous ease is familiar to everyone. When Melanchthon had the truth opened up to him he thought he could not fail to commend it to others, but soon he had to make the confession that old Adam was too strong for young Melanchthon!

III. The imperative claims of the heathen world on the Church of God (verse 21).

1. Paul stands at the head of the whole Christian army. Such a man would, of course, be set apart to the work which the Master regarded as most important. Just as in a great warfare our best general would be despatched to occupy what was the key to the whole position, so wherever we find Paul, there, we may conclude, the Churchs great battle is to be fought, the Churchs great work is to be done. Now, to human eye, such a man seemed supremely desirable at Jerusalem. Reason would say, Above everything, make sure that the Church is strong at the centre. The best you can do for the extremities is to do the best that can be done for the heart. Do not, on any account, let Paul go. Anything will do for the outposts; anyone will do for a missionary. But the very form in which the charge is given is enough to show that the Churchs greatest and most pressing work is the making known of Christ among the heathen; and so from that point Pauls life was unceasingly devoted to this end.

2. That was the great work of the Church then, and it is the great work now. Every reason might have been urged for keeping Paul in Jerusalem then that could have been pleaded for retaining him in Christendom now. Say what you will about the needs and claims of home, the fact is undeniable that there are comparatively few at home who have not the opportunity of knowing Christ, while three-fourths of the world are as ignorant of Christ as they were then; and the inevitable inference is that the Lord, who left the sheep that were safe in the fold and went out after that which was lost, is saying to His Church now, Depart, for I will send thee far hence unto the heathen.

3. Has the Church been acting upon that conviction? What of the vast empire of China? What of India? How much have we given of thought, or heart, or trouble, or time, or means, or prayer, to the work that lies nearest to the heart of Christ? How many of us sympathise with a young Christian lady who, when a friend remarked that it was a far way to go to Japan, replied, Yes, very far, if it was only to make money; but not too far to tell the heathen about Jesus! (J. H. Wilson.)

Promptness

Promptness in doing is as important in Gods service as patience in enduring. The sooner a duty is attended to, a danger is turned from, or an error is corrected, the better. If we are in the wrong place, we ought to make haste and get out of it. If we are engaged in a bad business, we ought to make haste and quit it. If we are pursuing an improper or an unwise course of conduct, we ought to make haste and do differently. If we are indulging a habit which we should not wish fastened upon us permanently, we ought to make haste and break away from it. If we have wronged another, we ought to make haste and repair the injury. If we have wounded anothers feelings, we ought to make haste and express regret for our conduct. We cannot be too prompt in meeting every responsibility which is upon us for the time being. We need never fear that it would have been better for us to bare delayed doing right. (H. C. Trumbull, D. D.)

Depart, for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles.—

The mission of Paul

Note that–

I. When God has any great work to accomplish, he will not want proper means to execute it. The call of the Gentiles had been the purport of many a prophecy. The era was now arrived when it should be realised; and while the apostles, influenced by Jewish prejudice, neglected this enterprise, God raised up Paul. Men may often project gigantic enterprises, but want the means of executing them. Nay, man may not only be incompetent to provide the means, but be incapable of contriving them, or even of imagining what they should be. But Gods understanding and ability are infinite. If He contemplate the end, He can also command the means. He can construct the lever which shall move the world.

II. God often fits instruments prospectively for His purpose. Wisdom largely consists in improving means already prepared, and few men know how to do that effectually; but God can provide the means beforehand, and adapt them, with the most consummate skill, to the end in view. He had been previously fitting Paul by his training at the feet of Gamaliel, by his proficiency in the Greek tongue, and by his acquaintance with the learning of the heathen world. So was it in the cases of Moses, David, etc., and so it is still; and as that diamond is ripening silently in its bed, under the agency of the hidden processes of nature, which is afterwards to shine in the diadem of the prince and brighten the splendours of empire, so the servants of God are often, unconsciously to themselves, preparing for a destination which neither they nor their friends had before contemplated.

III. God never suffers the powers which He has conferred upon any of His servants to remain long unused. Men, if left to themselves, may suffer their talents to rust, their energies to slumber, and may not perceive when they ought to start in the career of usefulness. But when the time is come that God hath set, then the instrument He has prepared shall be introduced. No sooner, accordingly, was Paul converted than he cries out, What shall I do? So when Cornelius and his household had been prepared, Peter is sent for, and is found ready; and the vision of the man of Macedonia caused Paul to gather that the Lord had called him to preach the gospel in that unthought of region.

IV. It belongs to God to fix the scene of the ministry of each of His servants. He prescribed to Paul, when He said unto him, Depart, whither he should go in general: and in the course of his travels the great Master always guided the steps of this His missionary. And to Him this prerogative still belongs; and surely it well becomes a servant of God to consult His mind and will, and to submit with alacrity to the heavenly destination in such matters. Woe to him if he consults with secular and selfish interests! Should he, like Jonah, decline any service to which God calls him, he shall find that God can follow him.

V. The region to which a minister of God is destined may be greatly remote. Most frequently He allows His servants to labour in their own country. Thus the eleven apostles continued to minister in Judaea, while Paul went forth to the Gentiles. Nor in vain. His servant obeyed, and was blessed. So Abram, being called of God to follow Him to a land unknown, by faith went out, not knowing whither he went, and God prospered him greatly.

VI. With the Divine commission in his hand, no minister of the Lord Jesus need fear to go wherever his great Master shall send him. Far be it for us to make light of the difficulties connected with a mission of this character. Still the Lord is everywhere with His servants, and he who trusts Him shall not want support, even in a strange land, and amid an unknown people.

VII. The work to which God calls His servants everywhere, at home and abroad, is great and honourable–glorifying to Himself and beneficial to man (Act 26:16-18). Think upon–

1. The character of the work: it is highly intellectual and spiritual, holy and heavenly.

2. The subject of it. Should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ.

3. The object of it–to save perishing souls.

4. The issue of it. It leads to an acceptance the most honourable, to a commendation the most enrapturing, to rewards the most glorious.

VIII. Through Divine mercy, the success of such missionaries will be proportioned to the difficulty of the enterprise and the dignity of the work. When Paul began his course no instrument could appear more inadequate, no attempt more unpromising. Yet what mighty success attended the ministry of the devoted apostle! Conclusion: Learn–

1. The great and universal rule of Christian obedience. It is to comply in all things with the Divine will.

2. The glory of Divine grace as a practical principle. You see in the example of Paul what it will prompt a man to undertake and to achieve.

3. The best sphere of duty–that which God assigns, be it abroad or at home.

4. The blessed consequences of simple devotedness in a servant of God. (J. Mitchell, D. D.)

Call to the work of foreign missions

I. The work of foreign missions is not a distinct part of the general work of the Church. The commission under which the Church acts has equal reference to all parts of the field. The work of the missionary is therefore not different from the work of a minister. A man who enlists for a soldier goes wherever he is sent.

II. A call to the work of missions therefore can only be analogous to the question whether a minister is to be settled in one place rather than another. How is a man to decide this point? The question assumes that–

1. The Lord has a purpose in regard to the location of His ministers.

(1) This is inferred from–

(a) The doctrine of providence, which teaches that Gods purpose extends to all things, and that He overrules all things to the accomplishment of His purpose. The place of our birth, our education, profession, and field of labour are all included in His plan.

(b) The doctrine of Christs headship and guidance of His Church by His Spirit, by which He dispenses gifts to each one according to His will, and leads His people in the way in which they should go.

(2) It follows from His peculiar relation to ministers. They are stars in His hand, and He assigns to each his sphere. They are His ambassadors, and He sends each on his own mission. They are His labourers, etc. We find, therefore, that He sent Jonah to Nineveh, Paul to the heathen, Peter to the circumcision.

2. He makes that purpose known.

(1) This must be inferred from the nature of the case. We are rational creatures and are governed by rational means. If God has a design for us to accomplish He must therefore make it known.

(2) As a matter of experience we find that God does make known His purpose. He did so in the case of prophets and apostles, and does so in the case of ordinary ministers. It is not to be inferred, however, that this is always done in such a way as to preclude our investigation, nor so as to prevent mistake. A man may mistake and go counter to Gods will, and the consequences are disastrous. We ought therefore to give the matter careful consideration.

3. How does God reveal His will to ministers as to where they shall labour?

(1) By inward dealings.

(a) He furnishes them with gifts requisite to some special field of labour.

(b) He addresses their understandings, presenting the wants of different parts of the field; the facilities for usefulness; the demand for labourers.

(c) He addresses their conscience.

(d) He addresses their hearts, awakens an interest in particular portions of the field , and infuses into them a desire for the work.

(2) By outward dispensations.

(a) He removes obstacles out of the way, such as want of health, obligations to parents, etc.

(b) He sends messages to them by friends.

(c) He stirs up the Church to call them here or there.

III. The duty of candidates for the ministry.

1. To feel that they are bound to go wherever God calls them–that it is not for them to choose.

2. To feel perfectly submissive and say, What shall I do, Lord?

3. To investigate the subject, and use all the means to come to an intelligent decision.

IV. The blessedness of mission work, because–

1. Its results are so glorious.

2. It is so peculiarly unearthly.

3. The promises are so abundant to those who forsake houses, lands, friends, etc., for Christs sake. (C. Hodge, D. D.)

The Christian missionary

I. By whom he is sent? Who speaks in the text?

II. Whither is he sent? Far hence.

III. To whom is he sent? The Gentiles.

IV. For what end is he sent? His errand is not one of–

1. Science.

2. Politics.

3. Civilisation.

4. But to spread the gospel.

V. With what encouragement is he sent? The Lord commands; that is sufficient. (R. Wardlaw, D. D.)

Gods mercy independent of sects or Churches

Ah! there was no prejudice against having the Gentiles made–what? Jews: but to have the Jewish God given to the Gentiles without the instrumentality of the Jews; to have their God distributed outside of themselves by another instrumentality; to have other people enjoy the same right in Jehovah that they did, standing on the same level–this was what they could not endure. To carry the Jews God out from Judaea, and make Him a God of the Romans, and of the Greeks, and of the Scythians, and of the Parthians, and of the Assyrians–that was what offended them. National gods, in old times, were very valuable property. It used to be supposed that the gods of a nation were very much to it what armies and navies are to a nation nowadays. It was supposed that they defended it; that they took care of it; that they hated other nations that were its adversaries. The idea that Jehovah was a national God, and that He was the God of the Jews, who did not wish their enemies to participate in His power or in His protection, runs through all Jewish history. If one should come into your house, and take all your pictures, and books, and furniture, and provisions, and distribute them along the whole street, you would doubtless raise some objection; if one should come to my table, and receive hospitality at my hands, and then take all my property, and scatter it up and down the street, I should not like it; and men felt very much so about their religion in those old times. It was a part of their national household goods. The Jews idea was that God was their special property: and to give the world the same right in Him that they had, was just so much to defraud them. The Jews were peculiarly susceptible to these ideas of appropriation, because, for the sake of their faith, and in order to defend the name of Jehovah against idolatry, they had suffered much persecution, and undergone many hardships. Men appropriate truth to themselves; they make it personal, as if they owned it, as if it belonged to them; and so the Jews felt that, as they had defended Jehovah, doubtless He must be grateful to them; that as they had suffered for Him, they had a right to parcel Him out; that He ought to be a gift from them; and to use Jehovah as the property of all mankind was to level the Jew to the plane of other men. This would be humiliation and disgrace to them, since they felt themselves to be ineffably superior to the rest of the world; and they would not bear the degradation if they could help it. From the outbreak of religious intolerance and religious cruelty recorded in the text we may learn several lessons.

1. First, it is possible to hold religion in a malignant spirit. So long as religion is understood to be an external system of ceremonies, laws, usages, ordinances; so long as it consists of a series of beliefs; so long as it is an objective thing, embodied in usages and institutions, or in philosophical creeds; so long as it appeals to the outward senses–it is quite possible to cherish it at the same time with those feelings which belong to the bigoted partisan. Unfortunately, that which we have seen among the Jews we have never ceased to see among men who have held the great institutions of Christianity or institutions that have purported to be Christian–that they held them in rancour, pride, and selfishness, and defended them with bitterness. Christ was the loving, atoning Saviour. And what has been the history of the Church that represented His disinterested suffering, the bounty of His love, and His benignity to His enemies? The long record of Church history has been a record almost unvarying of arrogance, and pride, and violence, and persecution. Men have received the religion of Jesus Christ just as the Jews received the religion of the Old Testament, to hold it in carnal bonds with most malignant human passions. Is the same spirit existing now which broke out in this tumult among the Jews? Do men hold religion in the same malignant way that they did? Is there the same jealousy in respect to the partition of the benefits of Christ that there was in respects to the diffusion of the knowledge of Jehovah? What has been the history of the sects? and what is today the feeling of the sects? Is the Roman Catholic Church unwilling that all the world shall have all the benefits of the mediation of the Lord Jesus Christ? Oh, no. The Roman Catholic Church stands saying to all the world, Come into our Church, and under our regulations, and you shall have the Saviour. But you cannot have the Saviour outside of our Church. Come to us and you shall have Him, but you cannot have Him and leave us out. Are the derivative Churches, are the hierarchical Churches, are the Protestant Churches, in spirit, different from the Roman Catholics? Are good men, learned men, wise men, unwilling that Christ should be preached among the Gentiles–that is, among Dissenters? Oh, no. Is the Episcopal Church unwilling that the truth of Jesus should be made known to outsiders? Oh, no. It is more than desirous that they should all have the bounty and blessing that is in Christ; but then they must have it in the true Church. They must have it in the line of apostolicity. Well, let us take the great Calvinistic Presbyterian Church. May anyone have Christs atoning mercy and the hope of everlasting life? Yes, if he believes in the absolute sovereignty of God; in original sin, with enough of actual transgression added to it; in regeneration; in the efficacious compassion and suffering and death of Christ; in Divine penalty, and in the eternity of future punishment. Come into our creed, says that Church, and you shall have the mercy and blessing of God. It is the Jewish state of mind over again. It is the same spirit which they manifested who shook their raiment, and threw dust in the air, and clenched their hands, and gnashed their teeth, and cried out against Paul, and demanded that he should be torn in pieces. In this regard, human nature is pretty much the same all the way through. There is everywhere the same conceit, the same arrogance, the same exclusiveness. What we have is right–of that there is no mistake. And for those who are outside our ecclesiastical connection, and are not of our way of believing, there is nothing but darkness. What, then, is the truth? God, as He has taught both in the Old Testament and in the New, is God over all, blessed forever; and all men, from the rising of the sun until the going down of the same, have childrens rights in God as their Father. All men have a right to take part and lot in Him, and to hope in Him. God is the God of all the earth. He belongs to no sect, to no party. He has given to no class the right to appropriate Him. There is not a creature on the face of the earth that is not dear to God. There is not a man so imperfect, or so full of infirmity, that God does not care for him and sustain him; and the best men living are pensioners on Divine grace and bounty: If God takes the worthiest of His creatures, out of the fulness of His own graciousness, and not on account of their desert, can He not take the others also, out of that same graciousness? And does He not take them? The whole tide of the Divine thought through the world is a thought of goodness; the whole heartbeat of God along the earth is a heartbeat of mercy; and that thought, that heartbeat, is for all mankind. God is working for them; He is shaping His providences for their benefit, and that just as much when He chastises them as when He gives them pleasure. He is preparing them for something better than this life. Well, then, do I understand, you will say, that an unconverted man is as good as a converted man? No, I do not say that at all. But if you were to ask me, Who owns the sun? I should say, Nobody owns it; it belongs to the globe, and everybody has a right to it. Here are men who are surrounded by ten thousand climatic influences which may be turned to good account; but they never reap ample harvests. Why? Because they do not know how to make use of those influences in cultivating the soil. Those who do, sow their seed and reap abundant harvests. There is a vast difference in the results of these mens farming; and yet, the sun stands offering as much to one as to another. Now, it is with Gods mercy as it is with the sunlight. What does the sunlight bless? It blesses industry, integrity, knowledge. It is ready to bless everybody who will partake of its bounty. The right to it is not conferred by magistrate, legislature, or government. Sunlight is everybodys; and yet everybody does not get good out of it. It is shame to some; it is torment to others; it is rebuke to others; and it is blessing, endless and fathomless, to yet others. Whether it is beneficial to a person or not depends upon how he uses it. Gods love, and mercy, and bounty are universal, and men appropriating them find them personally useful; but rejected and excluded, they find them no good. Two men are walking in a garden. One walks in the alleys, and everywhere sweet and pleasant shade falls upon him; the fragrance of the orange greets him on every side; he enjoys all the beauty of prodigal luxuriance; he is surrounded by blossoming flowers and ripening fruits; and to him it is a garden of grand delights. The other man lies drunk under the shade of a tree. There are the same fruits, the same flowers, the same fragrance for him that there is for the other man, only he is not in a condition to appropriate them. One goes out of the garden full of gladness, and laden with its treasures. The other has no more of the garden than if he had never seen it. It is the nature of the men, and not any partiality in the garden, that makes the difference. We are prepared, then, to answer some questions. May an unconverted man pray to God? This is a question which has disturbed many persons. Some think that when they are Christians they have a right to pray, but not till then. But why may not anyone pray to God? And does a man need to go through a technical experience inside a church before he has a right to pray to God? There is no man that wants to pray who has not a right to pray. Take heart, then, sinning, wicked, desponding man! If there is nobody else that cares for you, God cares for you. If every tongue is out against you; if all manner of prejudices hedge up your way; if the Church has surrounded you with obstacles, God thinks of you, and will help you. You have an interest in the heart of Jesus; and if God be for you, who can be against you? Therefore, take courage. You are not a churchman? You are not much educated in matters of religion? Ah, but you know something of sin! You desire to be released from its grasp. A sinner no right in God! Think a moment. Has he not a right to a Saviour? May he not partake of Divine goodness? Especially has he not a right to invoke Gods blessing? It is because God is what He is that all men have rights in Him. It once used to be said that men had no rights which God was bound to respect. A better thought has come over the Christian community. Men have rights. God gave them, and they are at liberty to exercise them. Has not a child rights, because his parent is his superior, and has authority over him? The law says Yes; public sentiment says Yes; and the voice of Nature says Yes. And because a man is formed subordinate to God, and under His authority, has he not rights of mercy, of justice, of love, and of truth? May we hope, then, that the dissolute and the wicked shall have mercy? There is not a man who lives who has not a right to food, and, through food, to strength, and, through strength, to executive efficiency. Men also have the right to joy–manly joy. Yet, you say to me, May a man have joy, though he be an old glutton, swollen with superabundance of blood? Why, yes; but not as a glutton. If he will become temperate, and purge away his humours, and restrain himself to due moderation, he may. If I am cold, and wish to protect myself against the weather, I can, if I will seek the proper shelter. If I am shivering on the north side of a rock, I can get warm if I have a mind to, but not so long as I remain on the north side. There are infinite mercies of God toward men; and all are wicked, for there is not a man on earth who is righteous, perfectly so, not one. Every man is imperfect in this mortal state. Nevertheless, the bounty of God is proffered to each. And it is received and enjoyed by all who take it as it is to be taken. The condition of Divine favour, of pardon, and of salvation, is not that you shall be inside of any Church; is not that you shall be Jew or Christian in the sectarian sense; is not that you shall be in the Roman, or Episcopal, or Presbyterian, or Baptist, or Methodist, or Congregational, or Lutheran, or Unitarian, or Universalist, or any other Church. What you want is simple personal sympathy With God, who is above all Churches, and who is offered to men without any regard to Churches. It is true that a man may be more likely to come into an intelligent knowledge of God, and His requirements and promises, in the sanctuary than out of it. The help which we receive from God is a gift springing out of the infinite resources of His love. But there are external and incidental helps. Churches are helps–not masters; servants–not despots. You are free. God is the God of all the earth; He is the God of every human being; and nothing separates between you and God but–what? Your creed? No. Your ordinances? No. Your pride and selfishness? Do these turn God sour? No. Nothing separates between you and God but your own will. Here I stand, holding out a handful of gold; but can a man receive that gold unless he comes and puts out his hand and takes it? No. Still the hand is open and held out to him. So long as men clench their fists they cannot take it, but if they will open their hands and make the necessary movement they can. Much of Gods bounty, and forgiveness, and help, and succour, will come upon you, at any rate, through the incidental influence of Divine providence; but the personal mercies of God, the sweetness of His grace, the effluence of His love–these may be yours, they may succour you, restore you, strengthen you, inspire you, and build you up in time for eternity, if you will; but it all lies with you. (H. W. Beecher.)

Distant missions

God always has a place for His children. If they are not wanted in one sphere, they are in another. Their place may be far hence, far from the sphere which they long to fill, far from their present circle of companionship; in quite another profession and line of service from that which they have felt sure they were intended for; but wherever it is, it is the only place for them to be in. The far-off place which God chooses is better than any place nearer which is the disciples preference. God sometimes comes to a teacher in his class, to a superintendent at the head of his school, to a pastor in a delightful field of labour, to a father or a mother in a pleasant home, to a student in the middle of his college career, to a business man in a work for which he seems eminently fitted, and says to the surprised hearer, I will send thee forth far hence. When God speaks that word, no child of His may hold back from a prompt and hearty acquiescence. The only proper response to such an announcement is, Even so, Father, for so it seems good in Thy sight. (H. C. Trumbull, D. D.)

The answer of the Lord to the but of His servants

1. Even the sincere servants of God have often a but against the commands of the Lord: it may arise from fear as with Jonah, or from modesty as with Moses and Jeremiah, or from conscientiousness as with Peter, or from compassion as with Abraham toward Sodom, and Paul toward the Jews.

2. Yet in spite of these buts, the Lord remains firm to His command, Depart; and at length obtains the glory. He has done all things well. (K. Gerok.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 17. When I was come again to Jerusalem] It is likely that he refers to the first journey to Jerusalem, about three years after his conversion, Ac 9:25-26, and Ga 1:18.

I was in a trance] This circumstance is not mentioned any where else, unless it be that to which himself refers in 2Co 12:2-4, when he conceived himself transported to the third heaven; and, if the case be the same, the appearance of Jesus Christ to him, and the command given, are circumstances related only in this place.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

This was probably about three years after his conversion, as Gal 1:18, and was one of the visions and revelations he makes mention of, 2Co 12:1.

A trance; a rapture and ecstasy, as Act 10:10.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

17-21. it came to pass, &c.Thisthrilling dialogue between the glorified Redeemer and his chosenvessel is nowhere else related.

when I was come again toJerusalemon the occasion mentioned in Ac9:26-29.

while I prayed in thetempleHe thus calls their attention to the fact that after hisconversion he kept up his connection with the temple as before.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

And it came to pass, that when I was come again to Jerusalem,…. Which was three years after his conversion; for he did not immediately return to Jerusalem, but went into Arabia; and when he returned to Damascus, which was three years after he came to Jerusalem; see Ga 1:17

even while I prayed in the temple; the temple was an house of prayer; hither persons resorted for that purpose; and as the apostle had been used to it, he continued this custom, and during the time of prayer he fell into an ecstasy:

I was in a trance: and knew not whether he was in the body, or out of the body: whether this was the time he refers to in 2Co 12:2 is not certain, though probable.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

When I had returned ( ),

while I prayed ( ),

I fell ( ). Note dative with as in verse 6, genitive (genitive absolute with ), accusative of general reference with , and with no effort at uniformity, precisely as in Acts 15:22; Acts 15:23 which see. The participle is especially liable to such examples of anacolutha (Robertson, Grammar, p. 439).

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

I was in a trance [ ] . Rev., more correctly, I fell into a trance; the verb meaning to become, rather than the simple to be. On trance, see note on astonishment, Mr 5:42; and compare note on Act 10:10.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

THE LORD REPEATEDLY WARNED PAUL OF DANGERS IN. JERUSALEM V. 17-24

1) “And it came to pass,” (egeneto de moi) “Then it happened to me,” it occurred or came to be to me.

2) “That when I was come again to Jerusalem,” (hupostrepsanti eis lerousalem) “When I had returned into Jerusalem,” for the first time after my conversion, Act 9:26-30. From Gal 1:18, it is indicated that this first visit to Jerusalem was at least three years after his conversion, which period of time was spent in Arabia, Gal 1:17.

3) “Even while I prayed in the temple,” (kai proseuchamenou mou en to heirou) “Even as I was praying in the temple,” indicating that after his conversion he kept up his connection with the temple, a hint that he did not despise the temple, or hold it in contempt, Act 11:30.

4) “I was in a trance; (genesthai me en ekstasei) “I came to be in a trance,” a state of ecstasy, perhaps as referred to in Act 9:9. This first visit lasted some 15 days, during which time it appears that this otherwise unrecounted vision came to him; Gal 1:18.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

−

17. And it came to pass. This had not been the last conclusion, − (513) if Paul had not been cut off [stopped short] with their outrageous outcries. Notwithstanding, his drift and purpose doth plainly appear by the former text, [context] for he beginneth to intreat of his ministry, that he may show that he departed not from the Jews of his own accord, as if he withdrew him of malice from taking pains with them; but he was drawn unto the Gentiles contrary to his expectation and purpose. For he came purposely to Jerusalem, that he might impart with his own nation that grace which was committed to him. But when the Lord cutteth off his hope which he had to do good, he driveth him thence. But there was a double offense which Paul goeth about to cure. For they both thought that the covenant of God was profaned if the Gentiles should be admitted into the Church together with them, and nothing did grieve the proud nation so much as that others should be preferred before them, or so much as made equal with them. Therefore Paul’s defense consisteth in this, that he was ready, so much as in him lay, to do them the best service he could; but he was afterward enforced by the commandment of God to go to the Gentiles, because he would not have him to be idle at Jerusalem. Whereas Erasmus translateth it, That I was carried without myself, is in Greek word for word, That I was in a trance; whereby he meant to purchase credit to the oracle. Also the circumstance of the time and place doth confirm the same, in that the Lord appeared to him as he prayed in the temple; which was an excellent preparation to hear the voice of God, Concerning the manner of seeing, − (514) read that which we touched about the end of the seventh chapter. −

(513) −

“

Clausula,” clause or sentence.

(514) −

“

De modo visionis,” as to the manner of the vision.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

CRITICAL REMARKS

Act. 22:17. Begins the third portion of the defence. When I was come again to Jerusalem.This visit to the Metropolis, which occurred at least three years after his conversion (Act. 9:26), and lasted fifteen days (Gal. 1:18), is connected with the story of his conversion (overleaping all that happened in the interval), to show why he turned to the Gentiles with his gospel, rather than to the Jews. The trance into which he fell, while praying in the temple, resembles Peters in the house of the Joppa tanner (Act. 10:10).

Act. 22:18. In the trance he saw himi.e., Christ, the righteous One (Act. 22:14). This vision not the same as that referred to in 2Co. 12:2. Quickly.Perhaps accounts for the fifteen days of Gal. 1:18. That this vision is not mentioned in the epistle need not militate against its credibility. Thy testimony.Better, testimony of or from thee concerning me.

Act. 22:19. The reply of Paul cannot be explained after the analogy of Exo. 3:11, but must be understood as stating either why it was natural that the Jews should not listen to him (Ewald), or why he should remain in Jerusalembecause the knowledge his countrymen had of his previous notorious character would convince them of the sincerity of his conversion (Lechler, Wendt, Bethge), and cause his words to carry greater weight (Hackett, Alford, Plumptre), or because he wished to undo the mischief he had formerly wrought (Alford). Another view sees in the reference to Pauls earlier career a reason why his mission should be carried on at a distance from the theatre of his former deeds (Holtzmann). Thy martyr should be thy witness.

Act. 22:21. I will send thee far hence to the Gentiles.The school of Baur and Holtzmann finds in this supernatural authorisation of Pauls Gentile mission an artificial (but why artificial?) parallel to that of Peter in Act. 11:5-17. That both were divinely authorised presents no difficulty to those who accept the historic verity of the narrative.

HOMILETICAL ANALYSIS.Act. 22:17-21

Pauls Adoption of a Gentile Mission; or, His Interview with Christ in Jerusalem

I. The circumstances connected with Christs appearing to the apostle.

1. The place where this occurred.

(1) Not in Damascus, which lay outside the Holy Land, but in Jerusalem, its metropolis and centre.
(2) Not in some obscure supper room while associating with the disciples, but in the temple itself, out of which they, his hearers and he, had just come, and on which they both looked with reverence.
(3) Not in the court of the Gentiles while engaged in denouncing the temple worship, in which they supposed he was now constantly occupie!, but in the court of the women, while praying like themselves in accordance with its accustomed ritual. All circumstances calculated to gain the favour of his hearers, or at least disarm their hostility.
2. The time when this occurrence. After his return to Jerusalem, which took place three years subsequent to the day of his leaving it for Damascus (Act. 9:26). This visit is that referred to in Gal. 1:18 as having continued only fifteen days. The present narrative supplies the reason of its speedy termination. Thus both history and epistle indirectly confirm each other.

3. The manner in which this occurred. Paul having fallen into a trance or ecstasy, as Peter in similar circumstances had done in Joppa (Act. 10:10), while thus withdrawn from the contemplation of things seen and temporal, with his souls eye open to the unseen and the eternal, he beheld again the same glorified form which he had seen before Damascus gate, and recognised it as that of his exalted Lord.

II. The instruction given to the apostle by Christ, whom he beheld.

1. The tenor of it. To depart from Jerusalem with all speed. The order, which was clear, short, and peremptory, must withal have been surprising and painful to Paul, who intensely loved his countrymen and desired their salvation (Rom. 9:1-3; Rom. 10:1), and who doubtless had heard that Christ Himself once commanded His disciples to begin at Jerusalem (Luk. 24:47).

2. The reason of it. Because his countrymen would not receive from him testimony concerning Christ. This, too, must have sounded sad in Pauls earsthat his countrymen would not accept testimony concerning Christ from any one, and certainly not from him. It seemed like an intimation beforehand that Israels heart was hardened and Israels doom sealed. Yet his experience in Jerusalem (Act. 9:29) must have begun to prepare him for some such announcement. Only love is slow to convince that its holy purpose to bless others will prove ineffectual.

III. The objection offered by Paul to Christs instruction. The exact thought which lay in the apostles mind is difficult to determine (see Critical Remarks); but, accepting what appears the more probable interpretation, we may understand Paul as attempting to show cause why he should be allowed to remain in Jerusalem.

1. The knowledge which the inhabitants of the Holy City possessed of his previous character as a persecutor would (he believed) dispose them to credit the sincerity of his conversion, and lead them to hear what he had to state in justification of his tergiversation, which would secure him the opportunity of testifying concerning the transcendent fact of Christs resurrection.

2. The part he had previously taken in persecuting the disciplesas witness his conduct in connection with the murder of Stephenseemed (in his eyes) to establish a claim for Jerusalem that he should remain within its precincts and endeavour at least to undo the mischief he had done.

IV. The dismissal intimated by Christ to the apostle.

1. Peremptory. Depart! Talk no more of remaining. My counsel is fixed. Outside Jerusalem is henceforth to be the sphere of thy labour. Whether My grace shall ever reach Jerusalem or not, thou art not to be the channel through which it is to flow.

2. Deliberate. Christ had other work prepared for His servant. I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles. What a reminiscence this must have called up in Pauls soul (Act. 22:15; Act. 9:15)! And what a vista it must have opened up before his spirit!of wanderings, and labours, and sufferings!

Learn.

1. That heaven is never far from praying souls. Prayer a sort of window through which the soul looks into the unseen, and the unseen shines in upon the soul.
2. That Christ knows who will and who will not receive Gods testimony concerning Him.
3. That Christs ministers are not so good judges of the spheres of labour best suited for them as Christ is.
4. That the evil wrought by Christs people before conversion can never be entirely undone.
5. That men in Gods sight are chargeable with the evil they consent to, no less than with that they commit.

HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS

Act. 22:1-21. Pauls Sketch of His own Life.Or how a servant of God looks back upon the course of his own life.

I. With grateful remembrance of human benefactors (Act. 22:3).

II. With penitent confession of his own erroneous ways (Act. 22:4-5).

III. With humble praise of the Divine gracious dealings (Act. 22:6-16).

IV. With clear consciousness of the life-call allotted to him (Act. 22:18-21.)Gerok.

Pauls First Apology; or, his speech to his countrymen from the castle stairs.

I. What Paul says about himself.

1. Rehearses the character of his early years.

(1) Claims to have been a good Jew, by birth, education, personal belief, and outward devotion (Act. 22:30; compare Php. 3:5).

(2) Confesses to have been a zealous persecutor. Reminds them of his commission and mission to Damascus (Act. 22:4-5; compare Php. 3:6).

2. Tells the story of his conversion.

(1) Narrating where it happened, near Damascus; when it happened, at midday; how it happenedby the appearance of Jesus Christ (Act. 22:6; Act. 22:8).

(2) Citing, as proof that it happened, the experience of his fellow-travellers (Act. 22:9) and the action of Ananias (Act. 22:12); and

(3) mentioning, as the result of its happening, his call to be an apostle, and his submission to baptism (Act. 22:15-16).

3. Explains the origin of his Gentile mission.

(1) Stating when, where, and from whom, that mission had been received (Act. 22:17-18);

(2) declaring his original reluctance to enter upon it (Act. 22:19-20); and

(3) intimating that it had been practically thrust upon him by the hand of Heaven (Act. 22:21). A noble confession: that his whole pre-Christian life, though learned, religious, and active, had been wrong; that it had been changed by a higher power rather than by any effort of his own; and that his Christian life had begun and was being directed by Jesus Christ. A difficult confession: for any man, but especially for an intellectually and religiously proud Pharisee, such as Paul was. A courageous confession: to be made in face of a hostile multitude and by a man who was at the moment under arrest for a supposed crime. A good confession; such as must have brought comfort to Pauls own heart and secured for him the approbation and support of his Master.

II. What Paul testifies about Christ.

1. His heavenly glory and power. Pauls hearers imagined that Jesus of Nazareth was dead: Paul told them He was alive. They fancied Jesus had been overwhelmed with shame; he assured them Jesus was crowned with celestial glory. They conceived Jesus had been rendered for ever powerless; he reminded them that Jesus was invested with resistless power. They supposed Jesus had been only a man; he announced to them that Jesus was God.

2. His fellowship with His persecuted disciples upon the earth. How contemptuously Pauls hearers looked upon the followers of that way. Paul had formerly done the same. Now he understood and intimated to his hearers that Christ and His disciples stood in closest intimacy with one anotherso much so that what was done to them He regarded as done to Himself.

3. His grace to poor sinners of the human race. Even to the worst; to himself, for example. Christ showed this in the days of His flesh by pardoning such transgressors as the woman of the city and the dying robber; after His resurrection, by commanding the eleven to begin at Jerusalem; subsequent to His ascension by converting Paul and employing him as an apostle.

4. His world-wide plan of salvation. Christ had no idea of restricting His gospel to Palestine or the Jews. Nor is it His mind to-day that the good news of Heavens mercy should be published alone in Britain or in Christendom. His desire is that the gospel should be preached among all nations and to every creature under heaven.

Act. 22:17. Paul in the Temple at Jerusalem.

I. What he did.Prayed. The temple a house of prayer for all nations (Isa. 56:7; Mat. 21:13; Mar. 11:1; Luk. 19:46).

II. What he saw.Christ. Who is

(1) always present in His own house (Psa. 132:13-14; Mat. 18:20), and

(2) ever near to the praying soul (Mat. 28:20).

III. What he heard.Voices from the risen Christ

(1) warning him of danger (Act. 22:18);

(2) instructing him as to the reasons of his peril (Act. 22:18); and

(3) pointing out to him the path of duty.

Act. 22:19-20. Great Crimes Remembered.

I. For their forgiveness.
II. For self-humiliation.

III. For a stimulus to holy living.
IV. For attempts at their undoing.

Act. 22:20. Stephen thy Martyr or Witness.Christian martyrs are

I. Christs servants, who go upon His errands to the world.

II. Christs witnesses, who proclaim His gospel to mankind.

III. Christs friends, in whom He takes a special interest.

IV. Christs property, whom therefore He cannot afford to lose. Note: It is hardly likely that the sense in which we understand the word martyrviz., one who dies for his religion, belonged as yet to the Greek term or . It would therefore be more strictly accurate to render here the blood of thy witness Stephen. But there is little doubt that, very early indeed in the Christian story, the to us well-known sense of the beautiful word martyr became attached to it. Possibly the transition from the general sense of witness to the specific meaning of martyr is traceable to its use in such passages as this and Rev. 2:13; Rev. 11:3; Rev. 17:6.Spence.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

(17) When I was come again to Jerusalem.This probably refers to the visit of Act. 9:26, and Gal. 1:17-18. The objection that the mission far hence to the Gentiles must refer to the subsequent visit of Act. 11:30, has little or no force. When the Apostle went to Tarsus and preached the gospel to the Greeks at Antioch (Act. 11:26), there was a sufficient fulfilment of the promise, I will send thee . . . What was indicated in the vision was that he was to have another field of work than Jerusalem and the Church of the Circumcision. It may be noted as one of the visions or revelations of the Lord referred to in 2Co. 12:1.

Even while I prayed in the temple.Better, and as I was praying. The fact is brought forward as showing that then, as now, he had been not a blasphemer of the Temple, but a devout worshipper in it, and so formed an important part of the Apostles apologia to the charge that had been brought against him.

I was in a trance.On the word and the state of consciousness it implies, see Note on Act. 10:10.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

“And it came about, that, when I had returned to Jerusalem, and while I prayed in the temple, I fell into a trance, and saw him saying to me, ‘Make haste, and get you quickly out of Jerusalem, because they will not receive of your testimony concerning me.’ ”

He then omits all mention of his activities in Damascus and Arabia, and hurries on to the fact that he returned to Jerusalem, to praying in the Temple. He wants them to see that he was a faithful Jerusalemite even then. His experience did not mean that he had ceased to be a Jew, or that he had forsaken the old places and ideas. No, the fact was that it had made him a better Jew. And he had wanted to serve God in Jerusalem. But he was too honest to stop there. Had he done so things might have quietened down a little. But he knew that it would not be long before the question of his activities among the Gentiles again cropped up, so he wanted the true situation to be known. And he also wanted to challenge this crowd about their own view of Jesus. Humanly speaking it may have been a mistake (it depends on what you think he should have been after). But Paul was not in human hands.

So he went on to describe how while he was in the Temple he had fallen into a trance. Like Isaiah of old he had seen the Lord (Isaiah 6). And there he had heard the voice of the Lord. It was the Lord Himself Who had warned him to leave Jerusalem in haste because Jerusalem would not receive his testimony. Just as God had warned Isaiah of old that the people would not hear, so God had warned him that hearing they would not understand, and seeing they would not perceive. But whereas Isaiah had been told to go on preaching to the Jews, and only later learned that the message was also to go out to the Gentiles, it was to be different with Paul. He was to fulfil what Isaiah had looked forward to. He had come to the Jew first, and the Jews had not heard him. So now he was to go to the Gentiles.

As we know at the time when he was preaching in Jerusalem certain Hellenistic Jews were at that time plotting to kill him as they had Stephen (Act 9:29). But he does not mention that. He simply wants them to see that he did not desert Jerusalem in line with his own purposes, or without trying to serve the Jews. He did it because he received a message from the God of Israel in the Temple of the God of Israel as to what he should do. Like Isaiah of old he did what he was told.

We may note that Peter also went to the Gentiles as a result of a trance in which God spoke to him (Act 10:10; Act 11:5). In both cases they responded to the direct command of God.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Lord’s direct command to Paul:

v. 17. And it came to pass that, when I was come again to Jerusalem, even while I prayed in the Temple, I was in a trance;

v. 18. and saw Him saying unto me, Make haste and get thee quickly out of Jerusalem; for they will not receive thy testimony concerning Me.

v. 19. And I said, Lord, they know that I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue them that believed on Thee;

v. 20. and when the blood of Thy martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by, and consenting unto his death, and kept the raiment of them that slew him.

v. 21. And He said unto me, Depart; for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles.

Paul had intended his last words to win a favorable consideration of his cause, by showing tile Jews that he, who had been a persecutor like themselves, had been changed to a believer and advocate of Jesus of Nazareth by miraculous evidence from heaven. He now wanted to present evidence that his mission among the Gentiles had been determined in the same way, by a direct revelation from heaven, which he, as they well knew, would not have dared to disobey. It had been when he returned to Jerusalem, on his first visit after his conversion, while he was offering prayer in the Temple, that he fell into a trance, was seized with supernatural ecstasy, in which he saw the Lord bidding him hurry and go out of Jerusalem with all speed, since the Jews would not accept his witness concerning the Savior. This account supplements that of chap. 9:29-30, since in that passage the actual personal danger is mentioned, which is here represented as being the Lord’s motive for sending him forth. “May not St. Luke be describing the occurrence in relation to the Jews and the Church, and St. Paul in relation to his own private personal history, St. Luke giving us the outward impulse, St. Paul the inner motive, so that the two causes, the one natural, the other supernatural, are mentioned side by side?” Paul, as he relates, had at that time contradicted the Lord, giving as his reason that the Jews would surely receive the testimony from him of whom they knew that he had made it a practice to throw into prison and to beat the believers in Him in every synagogue; also, that they were familiar with the fact of his having been present and gladly assenting, and even assuming the position of guardian of the witnesses’ clothes, when they shed the blood of Stephen, His witness. But that argument had availed him nothing over against the will of the Lord, for the latter had merely insisted with greater emphasis: Go, will send thee afar to the Gentiles. Before a different audience, and at a different time, this vindication of Paul might have proved acceptable, for they could not gainsay one single argument. But the statement that Paul was sent away from them because they were obstinate and hard-hearted, and that, in his case at least, the Gentiles were preferred to the Jews, that his mission was primarily to the despised heathen, was too much for this audience. It has ever been thus that the full, uncompromising truth of the Word of God, even if additional evidence from history was offered, has been received partly with skepticism, partly with open enmity. The heart of natural man is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Act 22:17-18 . With this the history in Act 9:26 is to be completed.

] a transition to the genitive absolute, independent of the case of the substantive. See Bernhardy, p. 474; Khner, 681; Stallb. ad Plat. Rep . p. 518 A.

] see on Act 10:10 . The opposite: , Act 12:11 . Regarding the non-identity of this ecstasy with 2Co 13:2 ff., see in loc .

. . . . ] is most naturally to be attached to . ., as is quite usual (very often in John). Winer, p. 130 [E. T. 172], connects it with . Observe the order: thy witness of me .

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

XVIII

SAUL FROM HIS CONVERSION TO HIS ORDINATION

See list of references below.

The theme of this section is the history of Saul from his conversion and call to the apostleship, up to his ordination as an apostle to the Gentiles; that is, it extends from Act 9 over certain parts of Acts up to chapter 13, but not all of the intervening chapters of Acts. The scriptures are Act 9:17-30 ; Act 11:25-30 ; Act 22:17-21 ; Gal 1:5-24 ; Act 15:23-41 ; 2Co 11:23-27 ; 2Co 11:32-33 ; 2Co 12:1-4 ; Act 26:20 , which you have to study very carefully in order to understand this section. The time covered by this period is at least nine years, probably ten years, of which we have very scanty history. We have to get a great part of our history from indirect references, and therefore it takes a vast deal of study to make a connected history of this period.

Two scriptures must here be reconciled, Act 9:19-26 and Gal 1:15-18 . The particular points conflicting are that Luke in Act 9 seems to say that immediately, or straightway, after his conversion Saul commenced to preach at Damascus, and the Galatian passage says that straightway after his conversion he went into Arabia and remained there a long time before he returned to Damascus. The precise question involved in the account is, Did Paul commence to preach “straightway” after his conversion, as Luke seems to represent it, or did he wait nearly three years after his conversion before he began to preach? Luke’s account in Act 9 seems on its face to be a continuous story from Damascus back to Jerusalem, without a note of time, except two expressions: “And he was certain days with the disciples that were at Damascus,” and then a little lower down he uses the expression, “when many days were fulfilled.” Luke’s account says nothing about Saul’s leaving Damascus, his long absence and return there. In a very few words only he tells the story of three years. With his account only before us, we would naturally infer that Saul began to preach in Damascus “straightway” after his conversion, but we would also infer that this preaching was continuous there after he commenced, until he escaped for his life to go to Jerusalem. But the Galatian account shows that he left Damascus straightway after his conversion, went into Arabia, returned to Damascus, and then took up his ministry there, and, after three years, went to Jerusalem. This account places the whole of his Damascus ministry after his return there.

The issue, however, is not merely between Luke’s “straightway” and the Galatian “straightway,” though this is sharp, but so to insert the Galatian account in the Acts account as not to mar either one of the accounts, and yet to intelligently combine the two into one harmonious story. In Hackett on Acts, “American Commentary,” we find the argument and the arrangement supporting the view that Paul commenced to preach in Damascus before he went into Arabia, and in chapter II of Farrar’s Life of Paul we find the unanswerable argument showing that Paul did not commence to preach until after his return from Arabia, and that his whole ministry at Damascus was after that time, and then was continued until he escaped and went to Jerusalem.

The Hackett view, though the argument is strong and plausible in some directions, breaks down in adjustment of the accounts, marring both of them, and failing utterly in the combination to make one intelligent, harmonious story. The author, therefore, dissents strongly from the Hackett view and supports strongly that of Farrar. In other words, we put in several verses of the letter to the Galatians right after Act 9:19 .

Let us take Act 9 , commencing with Act 9:17 : “And Ananias departed, and entered into the house; and laying his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, who appeared unto thee in the way which thou earnest, hath sent me, that thou mayest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit. And straightway there fell from his eyes as it were scales, and he received his sight; and he arose and was baptized; and he took food and was strengthened. And he was certain days with the disciples that were at Damascus.” And Gal 1:15 reading right along: “But when it was the good pleasure of God, who separated me, even from my mother’s womb, and called me through his grace, to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the Gentiles; straightway I conferred not with flesh and blood; neither went I up to Jerusalem to them that were apostles before me: but I went away into Arabia; and again I returned unto Damascus.” All of that must follow Act 9:19 . Then we go back and read, beginning at Act 9:20 : “And straightway in the synagogues he proclaimed Jesus, that he is the Son of God,” that is, straightway after he returned from Arabia. Then read to Act 9:25 , and turn back to Gal 1:18 : “Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas.” Then go with Act 9:26 : “And when he was come to Jerusalem, he essayed to join himself to the disciples.” The following is a harmony of these scriptures:

It is intensely important that you have this harmony of all these scriptures. You divide all of this into four parts just like the Broadus method in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. I have in four parallel columns made the harmony complete in the passages mentioned, showing how far to read, and then taking up the one that supplies, so that one can read the entire story without a break. In column 1 of this harmony read Act 9:17-19 ; in column 2, Gal 1:15-17 ; returning to column 1 read Act 9:20-25 and 2Co 11:32-33 ; then in column 2, Gal 1:18 (except the last clause); then back to column I and read Act 9:26-27 ; in column 2, Gal 1:18 (last clause) and Gal 1:19-20 ; then back to column I, read Act 9:28-29 (except last clause); then in column 3 read Act 22:17-21 ; in column 1, Act 9:29 (last clause) to Act 9:31 ; in column 2, Gal 1:21-24 ; in column 4, Act 11:25-30 ; Act 12:25 . This is the harmonious story of Paul. Then read for purposes of investigation, Act 15:23-41 in order to get the information about his Cilician work, also read 2Co 11:23-27 to find out what part of the sufferings there enumerated took place in Cicilia. Then read 2Co 12:1-4 , as this pertains to Cilicia. Then read Act 26:20 and ask the question, When did he do this preaching in Judea, and was it during his Cilician tour? This gives all the scriptures. Carefully read it over in the order in which the scriptures are given. It makes the most perfect story that I have ever read. It does not mar any one of the four separate cases. It does combine into one harmonious story and gives us an excellent harmony of these scriptures.

The value of this harmony is very evident. This arrangement mars no one of the several accounts of the story, but does combine them into one harmonious story, and provides an explanation for Luke’s “certain days,” “many days,” the Galatian “three years,” Luke’s “straightway,” and the Galatian “straightway.”

With this harmony before us, we can see why Luke is so very brief on the account of Paul in Act 9 . His plan is to tell the story of the Jerusalem church up to the end of Act 12 . All matters apart from that are briefly noted, and only as they connect with Jerusalem, the center. But from Act 13 he makes Antioch the center, and we are told of his arrest, and later on he shifts back to Jerusalem, and then back to Rome, and thus winds up the history. Remember the centers: First center, Jerusalem; second center, Antioch; third center, Jerusalem, and fourth center, Rome.

Saul did not commence preaching at Damascus immediately after his conversion because he had nothing to preach. He had not yet received the gospel. A man cannot by sudden wrench turn from propagating the Pharisee persecution to propagating the gospel of Jesus Christ. He must have the gospel first, and must receive it direct from the Lord. After you take up the New Testament passages showing how he received the gospel, you will see that he did not receive it while at Damascus. Indeed, we have the most positive proof that he did not receive it there.

But why did he go into Arabia, where in Arabia, and how long there? Being willing to accept Christ as his Saviour, he needs time for adjustment. He needs retirement. He needs, like every preacher needs after conversion, his preparation to preach and to know what to preach. He went into Arabia for this purpose, and, of course, Arabia here means the Sinaitic Peninsula, or Mount Sinai. Up to his conversion he had been preaching Moses and the law given on Mount Sinai. Now he goes into Arabia to Mount Sinai, the very place where God gave the law to Moses, to study the law and the gospel, and comes back to us, having received of the Lord the gospel as explained in Galatians.

There are some analogous cases. The other apostles had to have three years of preparation, and under the same teacher, Jesus. They would have done very poor preaching if they had started immediately after their conversion. Jesus kept them right there, and trained them for three years. Now Paul commences with the three years’ training, and he goes to Arabia and receives the three years’ preparation under the same teacher, the Lord Jesus Christ himself. He not only knows the facts of the gospel as we know them from Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, but as one that was there right at the time, and he gets it firsthand from the Lord Jesus Christ himself telling him all the important facts bearing upon the remaining of the incarnation of Jesus, where he came from in coming to the earth, how much he stooped, what the coming signified, of his death, his burial, his resurrection, his ascension. We get the harmony of the gospel by studying the books, but he did not get it as we do, but by direct revelation from the Lord Jesus Christ. He introduces a statement concerning the revelation that he received, and he is careful to tell the Corinthian church how that Christ died, was buried, and rose again in three days. It took three years and a half in the analogous cases of other apostles.

Elijah went into Arabia and into this very mountain when he was perplexed; and there came an earthquake, and God was not in the earthquake; and there came a fire, and God was not in the fire, but there came a still, small voice showing Elijah what he must do. Take the case of Moses when the revelation was made to him that he was to deliver Israel out of the hands of the Egyptians. God told him the methods and the means and sent him into the same Sinaitic Peninsula. He stayed there forty years in study and preparation, and then delivered Israel.

John the Baptist remained in the wilderness thirty years in order to preach six months. Neither did Jesus open his mouth to preach a sermon until after his baptism, and was led into the wilderness and tempted of the devil, and then came back and immediately commenced to preach. More hurtful mistakes are made by unprepared people taking hold of the Scriptures than in any other way. A certain colonel, when asked by a zealous young preacher, “Well, colonel, what do you think of my sermon,” answered, “Zealous, but weak.”

We have only to read Gal 4 to see the significance of Sinai and Jerusalem, which shows the revolutions which took place in his mind while he was in Arabia. If the apostle Paul had not gone into Arabia, but had been sent to Judea under the old covenant, which is Jerusalem, as Jerusalem now is, the Christian world would have been a Jewish sect. You have only to read to see how certain of the apostles clung to the forms and customs of the Jewish law and claimed that one could not be a Christian without becoming a Jew and being circumcised. What would have been the effect if God had not selected this great life and revealed to him the ministry of the gospel that had been rejected by the Jews and given to the Gentiles, so that foreigners and aliens might become citizens and saints? For a more elaborate discussion of this subject see the author’s sermon on the Arabian visit.

Just before the ministry at Damascus he went into Arabia and returned. He was in Arabia over two, perhaps three years. As he stayed about three years before he went back to Jerusalem, his ministry was not very long in Damascus. The record says, “straightway in the synagogues he proclaimed Jesus,” etc. What kind of sermons did they have? The Jews over at Damascus that were still holding to the Mosaic law could not yet understand this revolutionary preaching, and right there at Damascus, he received one of the five Jewish scourgings that are mentioned in 2 Corinthians, which gives a list of the number of times he received the forty stripes save one, and the number of times beaten with the Roman rods, and the number of times scourged with the Jewish scourge. Finding the scourging was not sufficient, they laid a plot against him. They conspired and set a watch at every gate all around the city to kill him. The walls at Damascus have houses built on them, as you can see to this day. They put him in a basket and from a window in the upper story they letrbim down by the wall. Aretas was king of Damascus at this time) and he stationed soldiers at every gate to keep watch, and while they were watching the gates, Paul escaped from the window in an upper story, as given in the thrilling account of 2Co 11:32-33 . Also Luke gives the account, saying that the brethren let him down in a basket by the wall. Now he being let down, started to Jerusalem. Three years have elapsed since he left there, a persecutor, and he returns now a preacher of the Lord Jesus Christ. That presents this connected account.

But why did he want to go to Jerusalem to see Peter? Commentaries say he wanted to get information from Peter; Catholics say that Peter was Pope. Whatever he wanted to get, I think he derived nothing from Peter. When he came there they expressed distrust of him. If he had commenced to preach at Damascus “straightway” after his conversion, in three years’ time some notice would have gotten to Jerusalem, and there would not have been this distrust when he got there. Only one had heard of this change and his beginning to preach, and that was Barnabas, of the Jewish church. When Barnabas related Paul’s experience, they received him and he went in and out among them. But he was there only two weeks.

He commenced immediately to preach to the Grecians, and it stirred up the people as it did at Damascus, and they were so intensely stirred that they laid a plan to kill him. So he left, and there are two reasons for his leaving. When the brethren saw the Jews were about to kill him, they sent him to Caesarea and over to Tarsus. That is one of the reasons for his leaving. Paul gives an entirely different reason. He says, “And it came to pass when I was come again to Jerusalem, even while I prayed in the Temple, I was in a trance, and Jesus came unto me saying, Make haste and get thee quickly out of Jerusalem, for they will not receive thy testimony concerning me. Get thee far hence and preach to the Gentiles,” and he, therefore, went.

Here was the Cilician ministry, its sufferings and its revelations. He was over there five years, and some of the sufferings enumerated in 1 Corinthians II are bound to have occurred in that period; some of the shipwrecks, some of the scourges, some of these stonings. In 2Co 12 he says, “I knew a man in Christ, fourteen years ago,” so if you drop back fourteen years you find yourself there with Paul in Cilicia. In 2Co 12:1-4 we find the revelations that occurred there. One of the revelations there was that marvelous revelation that he received (2Co 12:4 ): “How that he was caught up into Paradise.” Here the question arises, Was it in this tour that he preached on the coasts of Judea? In Acts he seems to say that he preached at Damascus first and then at Jerusalem, and in Cilicia, and on the coasts of Judea. We have no history of his preaching on the Judean coasts beyond his statement, and if he did not preach on the coasts of Judea at that time, when do we find a period in his life before that where he could have preached on the Judean coasts? On his way to the Jerusalem conference. Therefore, he says, “While I was in Cilicia, and the five years I was at Tarsus, and just a little way from Tarsus on the Judean coasts.”

Let us consider the Antioch ministry. The record says Barnabas had gone to Tarsus in order to find Saul and bring him back with him, and that Barnabas and Saul preached a year at Antioch. A great many were brought into the church. It was the first time in the world where Jew and Gentile were in the same church together, socially, eating and drinking with each other. But Paul now makes his second visit to Jerusalem. The last of chapter II tells us that Agabus, one of the prophets, foretold a drought in Judea, and Paul and Barnabas took a collection over to them. Later, when Paul is making his last visit to Jerusalem, Agabus meets him and gives that remarkable prophecy which we find in Act 21 , about what would happen to Paul if he went to Jerusalem, he having received the revelation from the Holy Spirit. But the condition of Jerusalem when he arrived was awful. Herod, as we find in Act 12 , was persecuting the church, and had killed James and imprisoned Peter. Paul comes just at that time. On his return to Antioch he finds a new companion, Mark.

The Romanists place here Peter’s first visit to Rome. They take two passages of scripture, one Act 2 , where Peter visits all parts, and they say when he left Jerusalem this time he went to Rome, and got back to Jerusalem in time for that big council in Act 15 . So far as Bible history goes, there is not a bit of testimony that Peter ever saw Rome. I think he did, but we do not get it from the Bible.

Here arises another question, Did the shock of our Lord’s appearance to Saul on the way to Damascus, likely injure him physically in a permanent way, and permanently affect his sensibilities? My opinion is that it did. He was never a strong man after that. His eyes always gave him trouble. Though the scales fell from his eyes, and he was not entirely blind, his eyes were weak, and he had to grope his way in walking. There are two pictures of Paul which greatly contrast his physical appearance. Raphael gives us a famous cartoon of Paul at Athens, and one of the most famous pictures of the great apostle. We find a copy of it in most Bible illustrations, certainly in any Roman Catholic Bible. Another picture is by the artist, Albrecht Durer. It is called a medallion, a carved picture, and it presents a little, ugly, weak, bald-headed, blear-eyed Jew. Durer’s picture is the one that fits Paul’s account of himself, and not Raphael’s.

I here commend, in addition to Conybeare and Howson’s Life of Paul and Farrar’s History , Lightfoot on Galatians.

QUESTIONS 1. What is the theme of this section?

2. What is the scriptures?

3. What is the time covered by this period?

4. What two scriptures must here be reconciled?

5. What is the problem here?

6. What is the Hackett view of it?

7. What is the real solution of it?

8. Show how the scriptures are made to fit this scheme.

9. How may we show the harmony of these scriptures?

10. What is the value of this harmony?

11. Why did not Saul commence preaching at Damascus immediately after his conversion?

12.Why did he go into Arabia, where in Arabia, & how long there?

13. What are the analogous cases cited?

14.What was the added value of this preparation to Saul?

15.What sermon commended in this connection & have you read it?

16. Describe the ministry at Damascus.

17. Why did he want to go to Jerusalem to see Peter?

18. Explain the distrust there & its bearing on preceding question.

19. How long was he there?

20. What of his ministry while there?

21. What two reasons for his leaving?

22. How long was the Cilician ministry, and what its sufferings and its revelations?

23. Was it in this tour that be preached on the coasts of Judea?

24. Describe the Antioch ministry, and how long was it?

25. What carried Paul on his second visit to Jerusalem, and when does Agabus again appear in this history?

26. What was the condition of Jerusalem when he arrived?

27. Where do the Romanists place Peter’s first visit to Rome?

28. On Paul’s return to Antioch, what new companion had he?

29. Did the shock of our Lord’s appearance, to Saul on the way to Damascus likely injure him physically in a permanent way, and permanently affect his sensibilities?

30. What two pictures of Paul greatly contrast his physical appearance, and which is most likely true to nature?

31. What special authority on this period, in addition to Conybeare and Howson, and Farrar’s History, commended?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

17 And it came to pass, that, when I was come again to Jerusalem, even while I prayed in the temple, I was in a trance;

Ver. 17. Even while I prayed ] Then especially God’s people are rapped and ravished. See Trapp on “ Act 10:10 “

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

17. ] viz. as related ch. Act 9:26-30 , where nothing of this vision, or its having been the cause of his leaving Jerusalem, is hinted.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Act 22:17 . . .: refers to the first visit of St. Paul to Jerusalem after his Conversion, Lightfoot, Galatians , pp. 84, 93, 125. Ramsay, St. Paul , p. 60, refers it to the second visit, (1) because the reason for Paul’s departure from Jerusalem is given differently here and in Act 9:29 . But may not St. Luke be describing the occurrence in relation to the Jews and the Church, and St. Paul in relation to his own private personal history, St. Luke giving us the outward impulse, St. Paul the inner motive (Hackett), so that two causes, the one natural, the other supernatural, are mentioned side by side? cf. Act 13:2-4 (so Lightfoot, Felten, Lumby). (2) Ramsay’s second reason is that Paul does not go at once to the Gentiles, but spends many years of quiet work in Cilicia and Antioch, and so the command of the vision in Act 22:20-21 is not suitable to the first visit. But the command to go to the Gentiles dates from the Apostle’s Conversion, quite apart from the vision in the Temple, cf. Act 9:15 , Act 26:17 , and the same commission is plainly implied in Act 22:15 ; the words of the command may well express the ultimate and not the immediate issue of the Apostle’s labours. On . , Luke seventeen times, Acts twenty-one, and . followed by infinitive, see Hawkins, Hor Synoptic , p. 30, and Plummer’s St. Luke , p. 45. For the reading in Act 12:25 , . ., and its bearing on the present passage see Ramsay, St. Paul , pp. 63, 64, and also above, Act 11:29 , Act 12:25 . : there was a special reason for the mention of the fact before St. Paul’s present audience; it showed that the Temple was still for him the place of prayer and worship, and it should have shown the Jews that he who thus prayed in the Temple could not so have profaned it, Lewin, St. Paul , ii., p. 146. , Act 10:10 . For the construction see Burton, p. 175, Simcox, Language of the N.T. , p. 58, Blass, Gram. , p. 247.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Acts

ROME PROTECTS PAUL

Act 22:17 – Act 22:30 .

The threatened storm soon burst on Paul in Jerusalem. On the third day after his arrival he began the ceremonial recommended by the elders to prove his adherence to the law. Before the seven days during which it lasted were over the riot broke out, and he was saved from death only by the military tribune hurrying down to the Temple and dragging him from the mob.

The tribune’s only care was to stamp out a riot, and whether the victim was ‘that Egyptian’ or not, to prevent his being murdered. He knew nothing, and cared as little, about the grounds of the tumult, but he was not going to let a crowd of turbulent Jews take the law into their own hands, and flout the majesty of Roman justice. So he lets the nearly murdered man say his say and keeps the mob off him. It was a strange scene-below, the howling zealots; above, on the stairs, the Christian apologists guarded from his countrymen by a detachment of legionaries; and the assembly presided over by a Roman tribune.

It is very characteristic of Paul that he thought that his own conversion was the best argument that he could use with his fellow-Israelites. So he tells his story, and this section strikes into his speech at the point where he is coming to very thin ice indeed, and is about to vindicate his work among the Gentiles by declaring that it was done in obedience to a command from heaven. We need not discuss the date of the trance, whether it was in his first visit to Jerusalem after his conversion or, as Ramsay strongly argues, is to be put at the visit mentioned in Act 11:30 and Act 12:25 .

We note the delicate, conciliatory skill with which he brings out that his conversion had not made him less a devout worshipper in the Temple, by specifying it as the scene of the trance, and prayer as his occupation then. The mention of the Temple also invested the vision with sanctity.

Very noticeable too is the avoidance of the name of Jesus, which would have stirred passion in the crowd. We may also observe that the first words of our Lord, as given by Paul, did not tell him whither he was to go, but simply bade him leave Jerusalem. The full announcement of the mission to the Gentiles was delayed both by Jesus to Paul and by Paul to his brethren. He was to ‘get quickly out of Jerusalem’; that was tragic enough. He was to give up working for his own people, whom he loved so well. And the reason was their rooted incredulity and their hatred of him. Other preachers might do something with them, but Paul could not. ‘They will not receive testimony of thee .’

But the Apostle’s heart clung to his nation, and not even his Lord’s command was accepted without remonstrance. His patriotism led him to the verge of disobedience, and encouraged him to put in his ‘But, Lord,’ with boldness that was all but presumption. He ventures to suggest a reason why the Jews would , as he thinks, receive his testimony. They knew what he had been, and they must bethink themselves that there must be something real and mighty in the power which had turned his whole way of thinking and living right round, and made him love all that he had hated, and count all that he had prized ‘but dung.’ The remonstrance is like Moses’, like Jeremiah’s, like that of many a Christian set to work that goes against the grain, and called to relinquish what he would fain do, and do what he would rather leave undone.

But Jesus does not take His servants’ remonstrances amiss, if only they will make them frankly to Him, and not keep muttering them under their breath to themselves. Let us say all that is in our hearts. He will listen, and clear away hesitations, and show us our path, and make us willing to walk in it. Jesus did not discuss the matter with Paul, but reiterated the command, and made it more pointed and clear; and then Paul stopped objecting and yielded his will, as we should do. ‘When he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, The will of the Lord be done.’ The Apostle had kept from the obnoxious word as long as he could, but it had to come, and he tells the enraged listeners at last, without circumlocution, that he is the Apostle of the Gentiles, that Jesus has made him so against his will, and that therefore he must do the work appointed him, though his heart-strings crack with seeming to be cold to Israel.

The burst of fury, expressed in gestures which anybody who has ever seen two Easterns quarrelling can understand, looks fitter for a madhouse than an audience of men in their senses. They yelled and tore their garments and their beards, no doubt, and clutched handfuls of dust and tossed it in the air, like Shimei cursing David. What a picture of frenzied hate! And what was it all for? Because Gentiles were to be allowed to share in Israel’s privileges. And what were the privileges which they thus jealously monopolised? The favour and protection of the God who, as their own prophets had taught them, was the God of the whole earth, and revealed Him to Israel that Israel might reveal Him to the world.

The less they entered into the true possession of their heritage, the more savagely they resented sharing it with the nations. The more their prerogative became a mere outward thing, the more they snarled at any one who proposed to participate in it. To seek to keep religious blessings to one’s self is a conclusive proof that they are not really possessed. If we have them we shall long to impart them. Formal religionists always dislike missionary enterprise.

The tribune no doubt had been standing silently watching, in his strong, contemptuous Roman way, the paroxysm of rage sweeping over his troublesome charge. Of course he did not understand a word that the culprit had been saying, and could not make out what had produced the outburst. He felt that there was something here that he had not fathomed, and that he must get to the bottom of. It was useless to lay hold of any of these shrieking maniacs and try to get a reasonable word out of them. So he determined to see what he could make of the orator, who had already astonished him by traces of superior education, and was evidently no mere vulgar firebrand or sedition-monger. He might have tried gentler means of extracting the truth than scourging, but that process of ‘examination,’ as it is flatteringly called, was common, and has not been antiquated for so many centuries that we need wonder at this Roman officer using it.

Paul submitted, and was already tied up to some whipping-post, in an attitude which would expose his back to the lash, when he quietly dropped, to the inferior officer detailed to superintend the flogging, the question which fell like a bombshell. Possibly the Apostle had not known what the soldiers were ordered to do with him till he was tied up. We cannot tell why he did not plead his citizenship sooner. But we may remember that at Philippi he did not plead it at all till after the scourging. Why he delayed so long in the present instance, and why he at last spoke the magic words, ‘I am a Roman citizen,’ we cannot say. But we may gather the two lessons that Christ’s servants are often wise in submitting silently to wrongs, and that they are within their rights in availing themselves of legal defences against illegal treatment. Whether silence or protest is the more expedient must be determined in each case by conscience, guided by the sought-for guidance of the enlightening Spirit. The determining consideration should be, Which course will best glorify my Master?

The information brought the tribune in haste to the place where the Apostle was still tied up. The tables were turned indeed. His brief answer, ‘Yea,’ was accepted at once, for to claim the sacred name of Roman falsely would have been too dangerous, and no doubt Paul’s bearing impressed the tribune with a conviction of his truthfulness. A hint of contempt and doubt lies in his remark that he had paid dearly for the franchise, which remark implies, ‘Where did a poor man like you get the money then?’ A shameful trade in selling citizens’ rights was carried on in the degraded days of the Empire by underlings at court, and no doubt the tribune had procured his citizenship in that way. Paul’s answer explains that he was born free, and so was above his questioner.

That discovery put an end to all thought of scourging. Paul was at once liberated, and the tribune, terrified that he might be reported, seeks to repair his error and changes his tactics, retaining Paul for safety in the castle, and summoning the Sanhedrim, to try to find out more of this strange affair through them. The great council of the nation had sunk low indeed when it had to obey the call of a Roman soldier.

Thus once more, as so continually in the Acts, Rome is friendly to the Christian teachers and saves them from Jewish fury. To point out that early protection and benevolent sufferance is one purpose of the whole book. The days of Roman persecution had not yet come. The Empire was favourable to Christianity, not only because its officials were too proud to take interest in petty squabbles between two sects of Jews about their absurd superstitions, but reasons of political wisdom combined with supercilious indifference to bring about this attitude.

The strong hand of Rome, too, if it crushed national independence, also suppressed violence, kept men from flying at each other’s throats, spread peace over wide lands, and made the journeyings of Paul and the planting of the early Christian Churches possible. It was a God-appointed, though an imperfect, and in some aspects, mischievous unity, and prepared the way for that higher form of unity realised in the Church which finally shattered the coarser Empire which had at first sheltered it. The Caesars were doing God’s work when they were following their own lust of empire. They were yoked to Christ’s chariot, though unwitting and unwilling. To them, as truly as to Cyrus, might the divine voice have said, ‘I girded thee, though thou hast not known Me.’

Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Act 22:17-21

17″It happened when I returned to Jerusalem and was praying in the temple, that I fell into a trance, 18and I saw Him saying to me, ‘Make haste, and get out of Jerusalem quickly, because they will not accept your testimony about Me.’ 19And I said, ‘Lord, they themselves understand that in one synagogue after another I used to imprison and beat those who believed in You. 20And when the blood of Your witness Stephen was being shed, I also was standing by approving, and watching out for the coats of those who were slaying him.’ 21And He said to me, ‘Go! For I will send you far away to the Gentiles.'”

Act 22:17-21 This is another example of Paul’s special visions (cf. Act 18:9-10; Act 23:11; Act 27:23-24). In this context it fits the prophecy of Act 22:14.

Act 22:17 “when I returned to Jerusalem” In Paul’s testimony in both Acts 9 and here, it seems to imply that he returned to Jerusalem soon after his conversion, but Gal 1:11-24 reveal a long period (up to three years) before Paul returned.

“fell into a trance” See note at Act 10:10.

Act 22:18 Jesus speaks two aorist active imperatives to Paul: “make haste” and “get out.” Jesus’ warning is illustrated in the Hellenistic Jews’ plot to kill Paul, recorded in Act 9:29.

Act 22:19 “Lord” The grammatical antecedent to this could be either “the God of our fathers” (Act 22:14) or “the Righteous One” (Act 22:14). The Jewish mob would have understood YHWH, but any believers present there would have understood Jesus. The transference is common in OT quotes used of Jesus in the NT. It is the ambiguity of “triune monotheism” (see Special Topics at Act 2:32; Act 2:39)!

“I used to imprison and beat” These are periphrastic imperfect actives, which denotes continued action in the past. See full note at Act 22:4.

“those who believed in You” See the related Special Topics at Act 2:40; Act 3:16; Act 6:5.

Act 22:20 See note at Act 7:58-59; Act 8:1. Paul describes his previous grievous acts by using three periphrastic imperfect participles.

1. He was standing there with the mob.

2. He was consenting to the stoning.

3. He was holding the cloaks of those stoning Stephen.

Stephen’s sermon and death had a profound influence on Paul.

Act 22:21 “I will send you far away to the Gentiles” This is an obvious reference to Paul’s missionary journeys and ultimately, witness before Roman governmental officials in Palestine and also in Rome before Caesar (cf. Act 23:11). He knew this statement would inflame the crowd!

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

was come again = returned. See Act 9:26. Gal 1:18. App-180.

prayed = was praying. Greek. proseuchomai. App-134.

temple. Greek. hieron. See Mat 23:16. A point to weigh with his hearers.

trance. Greek. ekstasis. See note on Act 10:10.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

17.] viz. as related ch. Act 9:26-30, where nothing of this vision, or its having been the cause of his leaving Jerusalem, is hinted.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Act 22:17. , when I was returned or come again) The first return of Paul is mentioned in ch. Act 9:26. The Genitive succeeds to this Dative, , to which the Latin Ablative corresponds, orante me; for these words have more connection with the trance, than the have.- , in the temple) He shows that he pays all lawful honour to the temple.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Saved for Further Service

Act 22:17-30

To the story of his conversion, as given in Act 9:1-43, the Apostle here adds a detailed account of that memorable interview in the Temple, when he questioned the advisability of the Lords command that he should leave Jerusalem, and received his final and irrevocable commission to go to the Gentiles. It is a great privilege to be permitted to overhear this dialogue! How close and intimate is the disciples relationship with his Lord! God allowed Abraham, Moses, and Jeremiah to reason with Him. He does not crush down our intelligence. It is His own word, Come, let us reason together. But there is a point beyond which we may not go, when we must accept without question the final instructions of our Captain.

A free-born Roman was Paul. More than once he had asserted his rights as a Roman citizen, as at Philippi. There are various social and political advantages which we can turn to account in our service of the gospel, but they cannot carry us very far, and ultimately we are better off if we step out upon the unwonted waters, simply because Jesus says, Come!

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

when I was

i.e. probably on his first visit to Jerusalem after his conversion.

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

when: Act 9:26-28, Gal 1:18

while: Act 10:9, Act 10:10, 2Co 12:1-4, Rev 1:10

Reciprocal: Num 12:6 – in a vision Num 24:4 – saw Act 11:5 – in a Act 16:9 – a vision Act 23:9 – if Act 26:16 – in the Act 26:20 – and at 2Co 12:2 – above Eph 3:3 – by

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

7

Act 22:17. Come again to Jerusalem was three years later (Gal 1:17-18).

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Act 22:17. And it came to pass, that, when I was come again to Jerusalem. We know that after his conversion and meeting with Ananias, he did not return to Jerusalem, but after a short interval went into Arabia (Gal 1:17),a period spent probably for the most part in preparation for his great work. Subsequently, when he went up to the Holy City, in the temple there, he received, while in a trance, the positive direction which determined him to devote himself to preaching the cross of Christ afar off among the isles of the Gentiles.

Paul dwells especially on the fact of this second voice of the Divine Wisdom, ordering him to devote his lifes work to the Gentiles, coming to him when praying in the temple of Jerusalem. He would show the people who charged him with being a traitor to the chosen race, that his becoming a Christian had neither made him forget Jerusalem nor the glorious House on Mount Zion.

I was in a trance, or ecstasy. This apparently was no uncommon state of mind and body for those persons who were chosen to make known in a special way the will of God. For good instances of this miraculously suspended action of the normal working of the senses, see Num 24:4, the vision of Balaam: He hath said, which heard the words of God, which saw the vision of the Almighty, falling into a trance, but having his eyes open; and 2Co 12:3, the vision of Paul, where he speaks of himself as, Whether in the body, or out of the body, he could not tell: and that then he was caught up into Paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it was not lawful for a man to utter. See, too, among other places, for the vision of John on the Lords day, Rev 1:10. There is no probability that this vision in the temple was identical with the one above referred to in 2Co 12:3, where a vision of heaven was vouchsafed to him. Here a direct and positive command was given him. St. Paul had many similar revelations in the course of his life.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

St. Paul, having thus declared to the Jews his wonderful manner of conversion, proceeds next to acquaint them how desirous he was to have preached to the Jews rather than to the Gentiles, if the will of God had seen fit: but it proved otherwise; for, as he was praying in the temple, he had a vision, in which he was commanded to hasten out of the city, because his former zeal in opposing the gospel would hinder his present preaching of it from being successful. Against this he humbly argued, that his former zeal against Christianity might he hoped, be an argument to persuade the Jews, his countrymen, to embrace Christianity. But this argument did not prevail for his staying at Jerusalem; but he was commanded to depart from thence, to preach the gospel to the despised Gentiles, who had not such strong expectations against him, but would with more readiness embrace his doctrine.

Learn hence, 1. That carnal reasonings are very apt to arise in the hearts of God’s own servants, and cause them to object something against their obedience to the divine commands. Here the apostle objects, that according to his reason he saw greater probability of doing good by his ministry among the Jews than he could hope for among the Gentiles, who would be afraid of him, as Ananias was; but Christ repeats his command, Depart, and get thee hence, for I will send thee to the Gentiles. And now the apostle doth no longer dispute, but dispatch.

This teaches us, 2. To lay by all our carnal reasonings and vain pretences, when once the call and command of God is clear, and no longer cavil, but comply; no longer object, but instantly obey. We may safely follow God blindfold, when once we have assurance that he goes before us, and obey every command without hesitation or limitation.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Act 22:17-21. When I was come again to Jerusalem From Damascus; and prayed in the temple By this he shows that he still paid the temple its due honour, as the house of prayer; I was in a trance Or ecstasy. Perhaps he might continue standing all the while, with an intenseness of countenance which, if it were observed by any near him, might be imputed to the fixedness of his mind in his devotions; or, if he fell down, it might be looked upon as an epileptic fit. And saw him Jesus; saying to me, Get thee quickly out of Jerusalem Because of the snares that will be laid for thee, and in order to preach where people will hear: for they will not In Jerusalem; receive thy testimony But, on the contrary, will rather attempt thy destruction. And Presuming to expostulate with Christ himself on this occasion; I said, Lord, they know that I imprisoned, &c. They know that I was once of their mind; that I was as bitter an enemy to thy disciples as any of them; that I excited the civil power against them; and imprisoned them And also raised the spiritual power against them; and beat them in every synagogue Particularly in Stephens case, they know that, when he was stoned, I was standing by Was aiding and abetting; and consenting to his death and In token thereof, kept the raiment of them that slew him That is, Lord, my former zeal against those that believed in thee is so well known to them all, by so many remarkable instances shown among them, that sure they must be convinced it is upon some certain and irresistible grounds of persuasion that I am now become a preacher of that faith I formerly destroyed and persecuted with so great zeal. And he said Overruling my plea by a renewal of his charge; Depart Reason no further on this subject, but go thy way immediately, according to my direction; for I will send thee far hence Into distant countries; unto the Gentiles And thou shalt preach my gospel, and publish the glad tidings of salvation, with much greater encouragement and success among them. It is not easy for a servant of Christ, who is himself deeply impressed with divine truths, to imagine to what a degree men are capable of hardening their hearts against them. He is often ready to think, with Paul, it is impossible for any to resist such evidence. But experience makes him wiser, and shows that wilful unbelief is proof against all truth and reason.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

17-21. After this brief account of his course of persecution and his conversion, he advances to the events which occurred upon his return to Jerusalem, and which led to that peculiar ministry that had excited the hatred of his hearers. (17) “And it came to pass, when I returned to Jerusalem, and was praying in the temple, that I was in a trance, (18) and saw him saying to me, Make haste, and depart quickly out of Jerusalem, for they will not receive your testimony concerning me. (19) And I said, Lord, they know that I was imprisoning and beating in every synagogue those who believe on thee, (20) and when the blood of thy witness, Stephen, was shed, I myself was standing by, and consenting to his death, and guarding the raiment of those who slew him. (21) And he said to me, Depart, for I will send you far hence to the Gentiles.”

By allowing Paul to speak, Lysias expected to learn something about the charges against him, supposing that he would address himself immediately and strictly to a defense. What must have been his surprise, then, to hear him, after asking the people to hear his defense, proceed with a narrative, the bearing of which upon the case was so obscure? It must be confessed that the speech afforded very little of the light that he was seeking; and even to men who are better prepared to understand it than he, it is still a source of astonishment. Here is a man in the hands of a heathen soldiery, with a prison-door opening behind him, and before him a mob thirsting for his blood, whom to appease would save him from prison, and, perhaps, from death, yet appearing to be utterly oblivious to the danger which surrounded him, and though permitted to speak, making not the slightest effort to obtain release. He could most truthfully have denied bringing Greeks into the temple, or speaking improperly of the people, the law, or that holy place; but he was so far elevated above all selfish considerations, that he desired no vindication of himself not involving a vindication of the cause he was pleading. He saw before him a deluded multitude rushing blindly to destruction, and though they were thirsting for his own blood, he pitied them, and resolved to give them light. Under the smart of the bruises they had inflicted on him, and amid their wild outcries, he remembered when he once took part in similar mobs, and the blood of Stephen rose up before his vision. This enabled him to excuse their rage, and, as the vision of Christ glorified, which he had witnessed on the road to Damascus, had changed him from a persecutor to a disciple, he resolved to try its effect upon them. He did not altogether miscalculate its power; for they listened to the whole account of his conversion with profound attention. The narrative demonstrated the divine authority of Jesus, and enabled Paul to assume, as a basis for his further argument, that it was proper to do whatever he might command. He then proceeds to account for his going to the Gentiles. It was not my own choice, for I desired to stay in Jerusalem. But the Lord commanded me in a vision to leave the city. I even remonstrated against his decision, when he peremptorily commanded, “Depart, for I will send you far hence to the Gentiles.”

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

17. It came to pass unto me returning into Jerusalem, and I praying in the temple, that I was in an ecstacy:

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

Paul next related his mission from God and included some new things that Luke did not record in chapter 9. Evidently Ananias gave Paul God’s commission to go to the Gentiles (Act 9:15-16). In Jerusalem God confirmed this mission to Paul by special revelation as he was praying in the temple following his return from Damascus (Act 9:26-29; Gal 1:18-19). This took place in the third year after his conversion. The fact that Paul was praying in the temple when God gave him direction would have positively impressed this Jewish crowd further.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)