If you’ve not already done so, I invite you to listen to or read Part 1–Paul, the Man Beneath the Apostle, before moving in to this installment.

Apparent Biblical Contradictions and Controversies

Before we address the person of Paul straight-on today, I would like to first address this nagging problem of biblical contradictions and controversies.
I contend that most apparent biblical contradictions and controversies, especially those that are related to Paul’s teachings and writings, are actually based on expression.

Yes, expression. I’m talking about the way something is expressed in our Bibles.

Here’s a news flash: We don’t have the original manuscripts of any of the books of the bible.  Those manuscripts are long lost to antiquity. What we do have are copies of copies of copies that we trust are faithful to those original, long-lost manuscripts.

The problems associated with humans copying manuscripts by hand hundreds, if not thousands of times over the course of centuries, is multi-faceted.

First, there’s the problem of conveying ancient, archaic words, principles and expressions from a completely foreign ancient culture into our modern English language.

Secondly, let us not overlook the often hidden cultural, societal, historic and religious elements the writers did not include in their writings.

Paul’s 13-epistles is a classic example of this.

Case in Point—Women to be Silent?

Case in point: Paul writes:

“But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence” (I Tim. 2:12; KJV).

This one passage I contend has caused a great deal of misogynistic foolishness in the Body of Messiah for 2,000-years.

I have to ask you: was Paul simply stating a Truth He personally received from Yeshua and the Holy Spirit? Was Paul writing in response to his personal views towards women of Faith in the Body of Messiah? Or was Paul addressing some immediate, unmentioned situation ongoing in the Body of Messiah involving women?

The answer is not immediately found in our bibles. Because the answer is not there, do we then continue quashing the obvious contributions women are supposed to make in the Body of Messiah? Is Paul’s apparent band against women’s leadership in the Body consistent with what we know from Master’s teachings and even from Paul’s other writings?

Yahoshua’s Gospel freed us from the bondage of cultural and religious rules and laws.

Paul wrote:

“There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither bond nor free; there is NEITHER MALE NOR FEMALE; for ye are all ONE in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28; KJV).

Spiritual Felonies Committed

We commit spiritual felonies when we don’t do our due diligence and flesh out the thing in question.

Crowned as the wisest man to have ever been born of a woman, Solomon wrote:

“It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter” (Prov. 25:2; KJV).

Torah instructs:

“The secret things belong unto the LORD (YHVH) our God, but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children forever that we may do all the words of this law” (Deu. 29:29; KJV).

Nevertheless, Paul leaves us pertinent clues as to why he wrote what he wrote regarding women operating in the Body. And we will certainly tackle this passage in future installments of this series.

Some of Paul’s Writings Are Hard to Understand

When it comes to difficulties understanding apparent controversial and difficult passages of scripture, the problem does not rest with the writer. The problem, instead, rests with us.

The writer did what he was supposed to do. He wrote as the Holy Spirit inspired him to write. Each writer, despite being guided by the Holy Spirit, possessed a different writing style. Most of the time, the writer expressed his inspired content in such a matter that his readers could easily understand. Not only did his readers understand 1st-century Near East way of speaking and writing, they also had knowledge of what was going on around them. They likely knew of the situation(s) that led the writer to put “pen to paper.”

Paul was somewhat of a different animal. A lot of what he wrote his readers understood. Some of what  his readers did not understand.

This is evidenced by Peter who described some of Paul’s work as “hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction as they do the other Scriptures” (II Pet. 3:16; ESV).

A Matter of Paul’s Writing Style

Peter recognized that Paul was not trying to put forth some error-ridden doctrine in his writings. He recognized that the style and content of Paul’s writings was in many places difficult for some folks to understand.

Peter placed the responsibility for distortions of Paul’s teachings at the feet of the ones he described as “uneducated and unbalanced.” Otherwise, Peter in no way gives us any indication that he personally had a problem with Paul and his work.

Peter recognized that Paul’s challenging and difficult writings was the result of the way Paul articulated them.

Missing Information

Paul also leaves a lot of clarifying information out of his texts. When we come across any challenging or apparent contradictory passages, it is imperative that we learn as much of the full background story to that text as possible. Otherwise, we’re left trying to fill in the blanks on our own. Most readers end up filling in the missing information with their own knowledge base, personal experiences, and imaginations.

Don’t Read The Bible! (Without Help!)

I contend it is dangerous for the unlearned of our Faith to pick up the Bible and just start reading it. New converts must first seek guidance from the Holy Spirit and from those who are firmly grounded and matured in the Faith.

Yes, it sounds entirely counter-intuitive. However, I hope this statement is taken in proper context.

The point is that just plainly reading scripture without proper preparation may lead one to stumble and not accurately grasp what they are reading.

The disciple of Yeshua Messiah must possess a proper biblical mindset. That mindset must consist of a Hebraic—Messiah-centric worldview. One must have access to sound biblical resources (eg., lexicons; concordances; biblical archaeological publications; etc.) that have not been influenced by denominational doctrines. It is imperative the disciple have access to as many sound bible translations as possible. Access to a trustworthy, spiritually mature, biblically grounded brother or sister in the Faith must not be overlooked. Last but not least, the guidance of the Holy Spirit is without question vitally important.

Phillip and the Ethiopian Eunuch

Case in point: the story of the Ethiopian Eunuch and the Apostle Phillip.

Luke records an incident where the Holy Spirit leads the Apostle Phillip to a most unlikely, but divinely appointed meeting with an Ethiopian Hebrew. The event is recorded in Acts 8. We find in verse 27 that this gentleman was leaving out from Jerusalem, heading somewhere. Luke mentions that this official had just finished worshiping in Jerusalem. So it sounds pretty reasonable to conclude that this gentleman was an Ethiopian Jew.

As this story goes, the Apostle Phillip finds this Ethiopian official reading Isaiah 53. Recall that this is the Isaiah prophecy of the “Suffering Messiah.”

The Ethiopian official was having a difficult time understanding Isaiah’s prophecy.

The first-century CE Jewish concept of the coming Messiah was one of conqueror and undisputed kingship with unchallenged authority, might and power. Many Jews who looked for the appearing of Messiah were certain that He would handily overthrow the Romans and restore Israel to her one-time Davidic and Solomonic glory.

Thus, when this Ethiopian Jew read Isaiah 53, he was confused.

The Holy Spirit prompted Phillip to approach the Ethiopian official. Phillip asked him if he understood what he was reading (verse 30). The official replied: “How can I [ie., understand what I’m reading here in Isaiah] except someone should guide me” (verse 31)?

And of course, the rest is history. Phillip explains the meaning of that prophecy to the Ethiopian and baptizes him in a nearby body of water.

Difficulties Understanding Paul’s Writings

A great many of us who come to Faith find ourselves completely lost when it comes to understanding the Word of God. One of many reasons is that the vast majority of people of Faith don’t have a true appreciation of what it is they’re reading. Additionally, most believers don’t even attempt to read their Bibles. And this just adds to the problem we’ve been discussing here.

There is an epidemic of Biblical illiteracy in both Christian and Messianic Communities.

One cannot, for the most part, just pick up the Bible and read and understand it using their 21st-century Western mindset and experiences. Without proper understanding, it is impossible, especially when reading some of Paul’s writings, to accurately grasp what it was Paul was trying to get across to his readers.

It’s not just the fact that some of Paul’s writings are difficult to understand. It’s much more than that. It’s a whole host of things, some of which we just discussed.

Nevertheless, we’ll get into more of those impediments to understanding Paul as we move further along in this series.

Laying the Groundwork for Understanding Paul the Man

Let us now begin to look at those things that made Paul into the man beneath the apostleship.

Understand, if we simply dive into his writings without a firm understanding of who he was as a person, we run the inevitable risk of not understanding where he’s coming from in some of his writings. We cannot ignore his pre-conversion life nor the 1st-century CE socio-economic-cultural world of the Near East he operated in.

Like most things, it behooves us to trace as much of Paul’s life as we possibly can, back to its natural beginning. In so doing, we begin setting the table in preparation for the meal ahead—a blessed and spiritually sensible comprehension of his writings.

Starting From the Beginning

I have found that we understand Paul and his writings better  through careful analysis of existing research resources and records. First century Near East worldviews, existing social, political, cultural and religious consideration shaped and influenced Paul the man.

Why should we concern ourselves with this? 

Paul and the Willfully Ignorant

 A vast number of Faithful people feel they know all they need to know about the bible. They are secure in all that they’ve been taught by their institutions. To the orthodox Christian, nothing more need be said on the subject of Paul and his writings:

• Women need to be silent in the Church.
• The law has been done away with.
• Because you’re saved by grace, you need not concern yourself with anything in the old testament.

On the flip side, if you’re a Messianic, all you need to concern yourself with is keeping Torah. Nothing else.

It doesn’t matter what Jesus said; nor what Paul said…

Ignorance Breeds Ignorance

Ignorance all-to-often breeds ignorance. Religion often has the effect of hard wiring its adherents into foolish, erroneous beliefs. Sadly, no degree of reasoning is going to open the minds and eyes, nor alter the understanding of the religious. These religious falsehoods were drilled and seared into their minds for years (in most cases) by unlearned souls. The ignorant choose to believe what the unlearned—the willfully ignorant–have taught them. They are not interested in Truth that comes only from the pages of their bible.

Thus, they remain willfully, and in some cases, irreparably ignorant. Unfortunately, these are not above taking as many souls with them down the road towards destruction as they possibly can.

Of such individuals, the Apostle Peter wrote:

“My dear friends, this is the second letter I have written to you, trying to awaken in you by my reminders an unclouded understanding. Remember what was said in the past by the holy prophets and the command of the Lord (Master) and Saviour given by your apostles. First of all, do not forget that in the final days there will come sarcastic scoffers whose life is ruled by their passions. ‘What has happened to the promise of His coming?’ they will say, ‘since our Fathers died everything has gone on just as it has since the beginning of creation!’ They deliberately ignore the fact that long ago there were the heavens and the earth, formed out of water and through water by the Word of God…” (2 Peter 3:1-5; NJB).

Being Convinced In Each Person’s Mind

I am not intent on convincing anyone to see Paul’s writings and teachings as I, or anyone else I reference, sees them. My intentions are to lay before every listener and reader that which Father has given me on the subject of Paul. I trust that the information and the Spirit will speak to each soul where they are in their respective walks. Ultimately, every soul must be convinced in their own minds what is true.

Paul wrote the following:

“One person considers some days more holy than others, while someone else regards them as being all alike. What is important is for each to be fully convinced in his own mind” (Rom. 14:5; CJB).

Will we not find the answers to every question. All we can do is do the best we can with the resources Father has made available to us  (2 Tim. 2:15).

If we fail to use reason, scriptural context, a pure and willing heart and mind that is in-sync with that of Messiah’s, we run the risk of heading down that road to destruction that Peter alluded to (2 Pet.3:16). And nobody’s got use or time for that.

So let’s now take a look at Paul’s upbringing.

Paul’s Upbringing

Much of the information we know of pre-conversion Paul actually comes from Paul’s own testimony of himself.

Here’s what we know of Paul’s upbringing.

Paul Was a Biological Hebrew–Of the Tribe of Benjamin–Not Judah

He was a biological Hebrew. He was of the tribe of Benjamin (Phil. 3:4b,5—”…If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more: circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin-a Hebrew of Hebrews—in other words, both his parents were of Hebrew descent…” NASB).

Paul was Born and Raised in Tarsus of Cilicia

Despite being born a Benjaminite/a Hebrew, his actual birthplace was Tarsus. Tarsus was a predominantly Gentile city in Cilicia—(Acts 21:39—”said Paul, ‘I am a Jew and a citizen of the well-known city of Tarsus in Cilicia…” NJB).

Tarsus of the first-century C.E. Near East was and remains a historic town in south-central Turkey. It has a history going back some 6,000 years. In Paul’s day, it was an important stop for traders and a regional cross-roads for several civilizations. It was the capital of Cilicia and is famously known as the location for the first meeting between Mark Anthony and Cleopatra (reference Wikipedia).

According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, Tarsus had a very lengthy period of prosperity that extended from the 5th-century BCE to the 7th-century CE (an amazing millennia and a quarter).

Commerce for the region was based primarily on its agriculture. Tarsus’ soil was known to be quite fertile, making Tarsus—agriculturally speaking–a “bread-basket” to that region of the Roman Empire.

Geographically speaking, Tarsus was well situated in Turkey, possessing a “commanding position at the southern end of the Cilician Gates, which is the only major pass in the Taurus Mountains” as well as an “excellent harbor in Rhegma.”

Bottom line: Tarsus prospered from trade.

Tarsus was also known for excellence in Greek literary scholarship. This is a reasonable conclusion given Tarsus’ geographic location and by it being a major cross-roads and trading hub in the Mediterranean. It is thus presumed that Paul acquired at least a significant portion of his knowledge of Greek literature and philosophy while growing up in that region.

Tarsus clearly was not some “backwater” town in the middle of nowhere Turkey. It was a socially and culturally thriving, vibrant, and moderately affluent city. It was a well known hub of the Roman Empire.

Paul and His Roman Citizenship

Having been born and raised in Tarsus of Cilicia, Paul possessed Roman citizenship from birth (Act. 22:27, 28—”So the tribune came and asked him (Paul), ‘Tell me, are you a Roman citizen?’ Paul answered ‘yes.’ To this the tribune replied, ‘It cost me a large sum to acquire this citizenship.’ ‘But I was born to it,’ said Paul. NJB).

Why was Roman citizenship relevant to someone like the Apostle Paul?

According to Wikipedia: a male Roman citizen enjoyed a wide range of privileges and protections. Some of those privileges included:

• Certain voting rights; the right to stand for civil or public office.
• The right to make legal contracts and to hold property as a Roman citizen.
• The right to have a lawful marriage with a Roman citizen.
• Immunity from certain taxes and other legal obligations.
• The right to sue in certain courts.
• The right to appear before a proper court and to defend one’s self.
• The right to appeal decisions made by certain magistrates and lower court decisions.
• And if accused of treason, the right to be tried in Rome.
• And if sentenced to death, no Roman citizen could be executed on a cross.

As we can see from this list of privileges, the significance of Roman citizenship to the Apostle Paul was certainly obvious. Because of these citizenship protections and privileges, Paul was afforded the opportunity to continue his apostolic/evangelistic work even in the midst of persecution by Roman and Jewish authorities.

Paul’s Religious Training

Paul received formal, advanced religious training, apart from the home and synagogal training that all Jewish children received. The apostle himself reveals that he received his advanced formal pharisaic training and education in Jerusalem. That formal education and training took place at the Hillel School. The school was headed by Gamaliel (Act. 22:3).

According to JewishEncyclopedia.com, Gamaliel was considered a nasi (ie., Hebrew for “prince” of the Sanhedrin). More precisely, he is considered by some Jewish scholars as the first president of the Great Sanhedrin of Jerusalem. What is generally agreed upon in Jewish academia is that he authored a number of authoritative literary works that addressed issues such as tithing and the Jewish Calendar.

According to Luke, Gamaliel was a high-ranking Pharisee and a “doctor of the law.” He seemed to have been much honored by the people. Luke writes of Gamaliel: “But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the Law, respected by all the people, stood up in the Council…they took his advice” (Act. 5:34, 39; NASB).

Thus Paul was formally educated under a strict Jewish educational system while a child growing up in Tarsus. He then went on to Jerusalem, most likely in his adolescence, for advanced religious training. Paul describes his training regimen accordingly:

“So then! All Jews know how I lived my life from my youth on, both in my own country (ie., Tarsus of Cillicia) and in Yerushalayim (ie., under the tutelage of Gamaliel). They have known me for a long time; and if they are willing, they can testify that I have followed the strictest party in our religion—that is, I have lived as a Parush—that is, a Pharisee” (Act. 26:4, 5; CJB).

Paul’s dad was a Pharisee, which follows the common Hebrew/Jewish custom of the son assuming the profession(s) of their father (Act. 23:6—”I (Paul speaking) am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question” KJV).

What was the old saying? “Like father, like son?”

Paul a Tent-Maker?

I want to also quickly add to this discussion what little we know about Paul’s secular vocation. It is presumed by some scholars that Paul acquired the skill of goat-hair tent-making in Tarsus from his biological father. Consider the following:

Act. 18:3—”After these things he (Paul) left Athens and went to Corinth. And he found a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, having recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had commanded all the Jews to leave Rome. He came to them, and because he was of the same trade, he stayed with them and they were working, for by trade they were tent-makers” NASB).

The important thing to take away from any discussion of Paul’s presumed vocation is simply that Paul possessed a trade that is presumed to have been tent-making. That vocation at some point in his life and ministry provided him much needed income.

The other thing to keep in mind here when it comes to discussions about the Hebrew concept of vocations and professions. It was customary for Hebrew fathers to pass down to their sons the family’s generational profession. We know that two of Yeshua’s 12-disciples owned and operated a family fishing business. In fact, Master twice called the brothers—Peter and Andrew–out from the fishing business to work the Gospel (Mat. 4:18; Joh. 21:3-17).

Paul the Wealthy Apostle?

Fausset’s Bible Dictionary interestingly suggests that Paul came from money. At least one popular Hebrew Roots teacher has suggested that the “Rich Young Ruler” who came to Yeshua, seeking to become one of His disciples but was rejected by Master because he could not give up his wealth, was none other than Paul of Tarsus (Matt. 19:16-30; Mar. 10).  An interesting hypothesis, but certainly not substantiated by any writer of the New Testament.

Nevertheless, according to Jewish custom, each child was compelled to learn the family trade from their father, regardless the family’s financial status. In Paul’s case, his father was a pharisee, thus he became a pharisee. It’s likely that he adopted the tent-making vocation from his father as well.

Paul Well Qualified to be the Apostle to the Gentiles

So when you add it all up, the combination of Greek and Jewish scholarly excellence and the dynamic socio-economic environment that Paul was immersed in, made him an exceptional candidate to be the defacto-”Apostle to the Gentiles.”

It goes without saying that Paul was more than qualified and intellectually capable of debating the most hardcore Jewish and Greek philosophers of his time (Acts 17:18-28; I Cor. 15:33; Titus 1:12).

It should be mentioned that it appears that Paul did not rely upon his undisputed intellect and communication skills. He didn’t have to. In fact, he said himself that:

Messiah sent him to “preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words (ie., logos; speech linked to intellectual concerns) , lest the cross of Messiah should be made of none effect.” And that his “speech and preaching was not with enticing words (ie., again, logos) of man’s wisdom, but in the demonstration of the Spirit and of power” (I Cor. 1:17; 2:4; KJV).

Nevertheless, when Paul needed to access his intellect, he used it. We saw this particularly played out during the many sessions where he engaged attendees of local synagogues during his missionary journeys throughout the Roman Empire; his sessions with the Bereans (Acts 17:10) and the legal defense he provided for himself in the presence of Governor Felix (Act. 24), Porcius Festus (Act. 25), Herod Agrippa (Act. 26) and so forth.

Paul the Pharisee Against Messianics

We’ve already established that Paul was a trained Pharisee. He said it himself:

“Brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. It is with respect to the hope and the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial” (Act. 23:6).

We learn from Paul’s own pen that he wholly embraced his profession as a Pharisee. So much so that he became the Sanhedrin’s henchman against the burgeoning Messianic Jewish movement that had ignited throughout Judea.

In certifying his apostleship to the Messianic Assembly of Believers in Galatia, Paul wrote:

“For you have heard about my former way of life in traditional Judaism—how I did my best to persecute God’s Messianic Community and destroy it; and how, since I was more of a zealot for the traditions handed down by my forefathers than most Jews my age, I advanced in (traditional) Judaism more rapidly than they did” (Gal. 1:13, 14; CJB).

Paul would have been considered a zealous Jew, especially being a member of the Great Jerusalem Sanhedrin. He was not a zealot in the sense of him being a part of the violent Jewish element that waged guerrilla warfare against the Romans operating in Palestine in the first century CE.

Interestingly, we find that Paul took an opposite approach from that of Gamaliel in his dealings with the converted Jews of the Way Faith. Gamaliel counseled toleration and a “wait and see approach” as it related to the Council’s dealings with them (Act. 5:34-39). Yet Paul took what Fausset’s Bible Dictionary described as an “ardent” and persecutorial approach against the perceived opponents of Judaism (i.e., Messianic Jews) (Phil. 3:6).

Paul’s worldview and attitude towards the Messianic Jews of Palestine prior to his conversion was one of “you’re either with us or against us” and he was not above resorting to violence to ferret out those whom he deemed were against the Jewish Faith.

Let us not forget that Paul and some of his zealous religious cohorts instigated the Stephen execution affair (Act. 6:9, 7:58; Deut. 17:7).

Paul’s persecution of Palestine’s Messianic Jews did not end with the martyrdom of Stephen. Luke records that the group, led by Paul, “made havoc of (elumaineto, ravaged as a wild beast) and hauling men and women committed them to prison” (Act. 8:3).

Paul—A Man of Ambition and Zeal

By the time Paul was well established as a member of the Sanhedrin and was persecuting Palestinian Messianic Jews, he would likely have been somewhere in his mid to late 30’s.

Paul was no doubt well known among his peers and the Jewish community at large, especially in and around Jerusalem proper. Given his high intolerance of any who were not strictly strict followers of Judaism, he was certainly feared as well (Act. 9:26),

At this point in Paul’s life, we find a man who was making a name for himself. He was both revered and infamous.  Wherever he would go, both before and after his conversion, his reputation proceeded him. At least, in the worlds of Judaism and Christianity.

Paul’s Personality

What can we say about Paul on a human, personal level?

Most scholars agree that Paul appears to have been arrogant and haughty. He appears to have been a grump. The apostle was most likely an intellectual bore as well.

It is these less than desirable traits that make Paul such a difficult person to love in many cases.

It is easy for us to sit back in our easy chairs and criticize Paul for his disposition. No doubt Paul’s disposition was one of religious zeal that sought to protect Judaism at all costs. The actions of the members of the Sanhedrin along with Paul and his cohort were actually in response to fear. Pre-conversion Paul and his ilk feared that their religion was once again in danger of being destroyed. This time the threat was from the Romans, through the perceived irresponsible behavior of the Messianics.

The Jewish Religious System of Paul’s Pre-Conversion Days

We must never forget that the religious system of Paul’s day found themselves in a rather tenuous position. It would take very little for their Roman occupiers to turn on their nation. The Messianics of the region were putting forth a great deal of chatter about the return of Yeshua their conquering Messiah. To Messianics,

Yeshua’s imminent return would result in the re-establishment of Israel to her former glory. In the process of establishing His eternal kingdom in Jerusalem, Israel’s Roman occupiers would be easily toppled. If the Romans got too much ear of this outrageous Messianic fervor, there’d be hell to pay and Israel would be destroyed. It makes sense then that the Sanhedrin felt compelled to act against The Way—The Christians.

There were financial considerations that the Jewish religious establishment wished to keep intact as well. Business was good on the Temple Mount and those dang Christians were threatening to mess with their scratch—their funds.

Suffice to say: the passages where Paul comes across as arrogant, haughty and not so nice, tend to be those passages where Paul feels compelled or forced to defend his apostolic credentials and the validity of his ministry.

Given the often dual composite of his followers–Greeks and Jews–he would have to certify his credentials to those highly critical Jews of the assemblies. He would then have to allay the fears of the Gentiles that he wasn’t trying to pull a fast one on them by snookering them into joining just another crazy Jewish sect.

You’ll recall that Gamaliel early on had urged the Sanhedrin not to act against the growing Way Movement, citing that “if this counsel or this work is of man, it will come to nothing, but if it is of Yehovah, you cannot overthrow it! You may even find yourselves fighting against Yehovah” (Act. 5:38, 39; Rood’s Chronology).

Indeed, Gamaliel was a very wise gentleman.

Paul Forced to Act Against the Palestinian Messianics

Much to the Council’s chagrin, the Way Movement continued to proliferate in the region. The leaders of the Way Movement such as Stephen were beginning to amass great influence in the regions. They were boldly declaring the teachings of Yeshua Messiah to an ever growing number of Palestinian Jews.

Paul, being an influential and zealous member of the counsel was seeing this all play out before his very eyes. What rubbed salt in the wound for him over this whole thing was the boldness in which members of The Way movement declared Faith in their risen savior and Messiah. Killing Stephen would not be  enough.

Thus, after the stoning of Stephen, Paul gathered a posse and began wreaking havoc on the Assembly of Messianic Believers in Jerusalem. That persecution decimated a great deal of the Jerusalem Assembly (reference Act. 8:1-4). Paul’s success in Jerusalem no doubt was the driving force behind his infamous petitioning of the High Priest in Jerusalem for letters to the synagogues in Damascus. The High Priest granted Paul authority to arrest and extradite to Jerusalem Messianic Jews (Act. 9:1,2).

The Pre-Conversion Zeal of Paul

Paul’s religious zeal was a grossly misplaced zeal for his religion, Judaism (ie., the oral law and traditions of the sages). This misplaced zeal for his religion led to a willful striving against the Holy Spirit (Act. 9:5)—Paul’s own testimony and words. Of his own deeds during that misguided, tumultuous period of his life, Paul described: “I was had mercy upon because I did it ignorantly in unbelief” (I Tim. 1:12-16; KJV). 

So we are continuing to build our composite of the man Paul. In addition to his seeming arrogance, his boorish intellect, and foul disposition, we have a very zealous and ambitious gentleman who was a “take names and kick-behind,” “take-charge,” “in your face” kind of dude. When you start to filter some of Paul’s more controversial writings, especially those that hint at his less than desirable personal characteristics (ie., arrogance, ambition, grumpiness, etc.) into this composite, then we can start to see what kind of person he had become leading up to and even beyond his conversion to Faith.

 

Paul’s Physical Attributes

We don’t have any solid information as it relates to Paul’s personal appearance. Not that it really matters. Nevertheless, the human side of us always wonders what these great men of the bible looked like physically.

I did come across a physical description of him in the spurious Book of “The Acts of St. Paul and Thecla.” Having read about 3/4 of this book, I found it’s authenticity to be highly questionable. There were numerous direct references to Catholic-based doctrines and practices (eg., the making of the sign of the cross by certain characters featured in the text as well as constant references to the Trinity).

Despite the likely spurious nature of the book, I feel it is not beyond the realm of possibility that some of its content contains at the very least a few morsels of truth. Who knows how the writer of this text arrived at a physical description of Paul? It’s quite possible that at the time this book was written (some scholars believe it to have been written sometime in the second half of the second-century CE) that details of Paul’s physical features had been passed down by knowledgeable individuals connected to 1st and 2nd-century Christianity.

Or maybe the author of this book simply made it up. We just don’t know.

Regardless, it doesn’t hurt to consider information from any and all available sources. Granted, it behooves us to cautiously take the information contained in such sources with a “grain of salt,” so to speak.

The passage in questions reads as such:

“At length they [Onesiphorus, his wife Lectra and sons Simmia and Zeno of Iconium] saw a man coming (namely Paul), of a low stature, bald on the head; with crooked thighs, handsome legs, hollow-eyes; and a crooked nose; full of grace, for sometimes he appeared as a man, sometimes he had the countenance of an angel. And Paul saw Onesiphorus, and was glad” (The Acts of St. Paul and Thecla 1: 7).

Given this questionable account, it’s quite possible that Paul was not a physically imposing individual and was probably not an attractive fella, at least not by today’s standards of male attractiveness.

Why should any of this matter you ask?

When we consider that humans are naturally drawn to physically attractive, dynamic and even charismatic individuals, Paul’s effectiveness as the apostle to the Gentiles (so to speak) could have been influenced by his physical appearance, but we know it wasn’t.

Recall the story of King Saul, who was chosen by the people of Israel (but rejected by Yehovah) in great part because of his physical appearance (I Sam. 9:2). Saul came to the throne of Israel with a lot of inherent personal and spiritual deficiencies that led him and the nation of Israel into many difficult situations and problems throughout the tenure of his kingship. Saul was not selected because he was the best man for the job, because he certainly was not. He was put in office by the people because he was easy on the eyes and the people liked him. In other words, he fit the suit.

Elements of Paul’s Personality That Guaranteed His Success

If Paul were indeed not the looker that The Acts of St. Paul and Thecla suggests, then Paul’s success in terms of effectively delivering the Gospel to the Gentile nations—and not too few Jews as well—would depend upon his delivery of the Word of Truth; it would depend upon a demonstration of the Ruach (ie., the Spirit) of power; it would depend upon Paul’s ability to effectively reason and convince those who would otherwise reject the Gospel message for whatever reason.

Bringing it all Together

Thus, all the stuff—the things related to Paul’s pre-conversion life—the influences, his upbringing, his experiences, etc., would essentially come fully into play in his evangelistic and apostolic work. His success would then not be based upon a dynamic, charismatic physical appearance, but upon the power of the Holy Spirit operating in his life and all the elements of his pre-conversion life that made him the man he was.

The Death of Paul

Regarding the end of Paul’s life, his death is believed by some to have occurred sometime after the Great Fire of Rome (c. 64 C.E.), during the reign of Nero. However, there is varied discussion regarding the actual circumstances surrounding Paul’s death.

I Clement (95-96 C.E.), Dionysius of Corinth and Eusebius all contend that Paul and Peter were martyred in close proximity if not at the same time in Rome. Ignatius (c. 110 C.E.) contends that Paul was martyred. The apocryphal writing of “Acts of Paul” (c. 160 C.E.) asserts that Roman Emperor Nero condemned Paul to death by decapitation. Tertullian (c. 200 C.E.), Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 320 C.E.), Lactantius (c. 318 C.E.), Jerome (c. 392 C.E.) and John Chrysostrom (c. 349-407 C.E.) all agree with the account of decapitation given in the Acts of Paul.

Part 3 of Series

Next installment, I want to pick-up here where we’re leaving off, and bring our biographical composite of Paul to a conclusion.