Acts 22:6-16

CRITICAL REMARKS

Acts 22:6 begins the second part of the defence (Acts 22:6). Was come nigh should be was drawing near. The narration is the same as in Acts 9:3 and Acts 26:13, with a few points of difference. One of these is the note of time—about noon—“through which the miracle is more realistically expressed, and the matter of fact placed beyond suspicion of being an evening delusion” (Holtzmann). Another is the adjective great (ἱκανόν) appended to the noun light φῶς, which equally excluded the idea of deception.

Acts 22:7. The use of the word ground (ἔδαφος) (occurring only here), meaning the “base” or “bottom” of a thing, for “the earth” (γῆν) (Acts 9:4) may suggest the idea that he was travelling in a caravan or riding on horseback.

Acts 22:8. Of Nazareth, or, the Nazarene, is an addition to Luke’s account (Acts 9:5).

Acts 22:9. And were afraid (see Acts 9:2) is omitted by the best MSS.

Acts 22:10. What shall I do, Lord?—Does not occur in Luke’s narration, according to best texts (Acts 9:5), or in Paul’s speech before Agrippa (Acts 26:16). Yet this need occasion no difficulty.

Acts 22:11. The cause of his blindness, not stated in the earlier report, is here set down as the glory of that light, which was “above the brightness of the sun” (Acts 26:13), a point likely to be noted by Paul rather than by Luke.

Acts 22:12. Ananias a devout man.—The proper reading is εὐλαβής (Lachmann, Westcott and Hort), rather than εὐσεβής (Griesbach, Hackett), the former signifying “cautious,” “prudent,” “circumspect,” “according to the Law,” the latter “full of holy fear and reverence.” The former occurs only in Luke’s writings and in the Hebrews; the latter is used of Cornelius (Acts 10:2; Acts 10:7). (See Cremer’s Lexicon of New Testament Greek, pp. 394, 548). Luke calls Ananias a disciple (Acts 9:10).

Acts 22:13. I looked up upon him.—The verb signifies not merely to look up (Meyer, Wendt), but, as in Acts 9:12; Acts 9:17, to recover sight (Holtzmann). The clause might be translated, I received sight and looked up on or unto him,

Acts 22:14. The God of our fathers.—Another conciliatory touch! That just, or, the righteous, One.—Compare Acts 3:14, Acts 7:52; 1 Peter 3:18; 1 John 2:1.

Acts 22:15 declares the reason why God had revealed Himself to Paul. Compare Acts 9:15, and see Galatians 1:16. All men takes the place of “the Gentiles and kings” in Luke’s account (Acts 9:15)—probably dictated by caution. A touch which a late writer, composing an imaginary speech, would most likely have failed to insert.

Acts 22:16. For the name of the Lord the oldest authorities read His name.

HOMILETICAL ANALYSIS.—Acts 22:6

The Story of Paul’s Conversion; or before and in Damascus

I. Before Damascus; or, the interview with Jesus of Nazareth.—

1. The circumstantiality of the narration. Different from that of Luke (Acts 9:1), the account given by Paul himself bears the stamp of having proceeded from an eyewitness.

(1) Points of resemblance between Paul’s account and Luke’s may be noted, such as these: the fact that Jesus of Nazareth appeared to the apostle, who recognised Him by His voice (Acts 22:8; Acts 9:4), and by His form (Acts 22:14; Acts 9:7); the locality in which this interview took place—viz., nigh unto Damascus (Acts 22:6; Acts 9:3); the manner in which this manifestation of the risen Christ occurred—suddenly, by the flashing forth of a light from heaven, which struck the apostle to the ground and filled his companions with terror (Acts 22:7; Acts 22:9; Acts 9:4; Acts 9:7); the words addressed by Christ to Paul, with those of Paul to Christ—“Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me?” “Who art Thou, Lord?” “I am Jesus, whom thou persecutest.… Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do” (Acts 22:7; Acts 22:10; Acts 9:4); the effect of the interview upon Paul, rendering him blind and requiring him to be led by the hands of his companions into Damascus (Acts 22:11; Acts 9:8).

(2) Points of difference between the two accounts are observable, such as the note of time—“about noon” (Acts 22:6); the splendour of the light—“great” (Acts 22:6); the characterisation of Jesus as “of Nazareth” (Acts 22:8); the statements that while the companions of Paul saw the light they heard not the voice (Acts 22:9), and that what blinded Paul was “the glory of that light” (Acts 22:11); with the omission of Luke’s addendum that Paul was three days without sight, and did neither eat nor drink (Acts 9:9). The differences—all of which are immaterial—are obviously such—both in details added and those omitted—as might naturally arise between two reports of which one was given by an eyewitness and the other by a historian.

2. The credibility of the narration.

(1) The only conceivable grounds on which this can be challenged are: the supernatural character of the incident related; the excitable character of the apostle, which caused him, it may be contended, to impose upon himself, and to say he had beheld as external objects what were only illusions of the mind; the varying accounts of the incidents contained in the Acts; and the fact (if it is a fact) that Paul never mentions this incident in his epistles. But the first of these reasons is irrelevant, as it begs the question in debate. The second is only true to this extent, that Paul, by his own confession, had visions and revelations: that Paul was subject to illusions or delusions is not borne out by anything in his character or history. The third may he conceded without admitting that these variations invalidate the substance in which all the three accounts agree. The fourth can hardly be maintained in the face of 1 Corinthians 9:1; 1 Corinthians 15:8; Galatians 1:16; Galatians 1:24; 1 Timothy 1:13; but even should Paul have preserved absolute silence in his epistles as to the interview with Christ before Damascus, that silence would not justify an inference that no such interview had occurred.

(2) The arguments which serve to uphold the credibility of the narrative are such as these: the certainty that Paul was converted from Pharisaism to a belief in Jesus Christ, as was attested by the ferocity with which the Jews persecuted him to the end of his career—which conversion must have been brought about by some adequate cause; the constancy with which Paul asserted that his conversion was due to having seen the Lord Jesus Christ—which constancy is inexplicable on the hypothesis that Paul was the victim of a diseased imagination; the belief which was entertained by Paul’s Christian contemporaries that Christ had appeared to him (Acts 22:14); and the difficulty of discovering any motive for Paul’s preaching that Christ had risen if it was not a fact that Christ had appeared to him—the more so as his conversion to Christianity involved him in unparalleled labours and sufferings.

II. In Damascus; or, the interview with Ananias.—Here also Paul’s account differs from that of Luke in subordinate details, while agreeing with that of Luke in substance.

1. The omissions from the previous narrative.

(1) The residence of Paul in Damascus—with one Judas in the street called Straight (Acts 9:13).

(2) The occupation of Paul while in Judas’s house—praying, with the vision granted him of Ananias coming to him and placing hands upon his closed eyes (Acts 9:11).

(3) The designation of Ananias as a certain disciple (Acts 9:10).

(4) The appearance of the Lord to Ananias in a vision (Acts 9:10).

(5) The commission given to Ananias by the risen Lord (Acts 22:11), with the answer returned by Ananias (Acts 9:13), and the Lord’s response to him (Acts 9:15).

(6) The statement that Ananias put his hands on Saul’s eyes (Acts 9:17).

(7) The mention of scales as having fallen from Paul’s eyes when his sight was restored (Acts 9:18). Not one of these points was of special interest to the audience Paul addressed from the castle stairs, or of any use for the purpose for which Paul addressed them.

2. The additions to the previous narrative.

(1) The character of Ananias, as a devout man according to the Law, and well reported of by all the Jews who dwelt in Damascus (Acts 22:12). This was signally calculated to conciliate Paul’s hearers.

(2) The invitation to Paul to arise and be baptised (Acts 22:16). The fact that this invitation proceeded from Ananias was also fitted to disarm the hostility of Paul’s enraged countrymen.

3. The variations in the two narratives. These appear chiefly in the address of Ananias to Paul (Acts 22:13; Acts 9:17). In particular, the substitution of “the God of our fathers “as the real author of his conversion, instead of “the Lord, even Jesus,” was a highly politic stroke in the circumstances in which Paul then stood. So also was the supplanting of the term “Gentiles” by that of “all men.” Otherwise the two addresses substantially agree. In none of these omissions, additions, or variations, lie sufficient ground for impeaching the veracity of Paul’s account.

Learn—

1. That two reports of the same event may differ in details, and yet be both correct.
2. That Paul’s conversion indirectly confirms the truth of Christ’s resurrection.
3. That Paul regarded his Gentile mission as a vocation specially assigned to him from the first.
4. That “the instruments which are to be specially useful in the Church must be ordained in heaven.”

HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS

Acts 22:6. Great Lights which Shone around Paul.

I. Light upon the person of Jesus.—Henceforth Paul knew him to be the Lord of Glory.

II. Light upon the character of the disciples.—Henceforth Paul recognised them as intimately bound with and under the protection of Jesus.

III. Light upon the wickedness of his own past career.—Henceforth Paul saw that in persecuting the adherents of that way he had been persecuting the risen Redeemer.

IV. Light upon his future work in the world.—Henceforth Paul understood he was to witness for Christ unto all men.

Acts 22:7. Christ’s Question to Saul.—“Saul, Saul! why persecutest thou Me?”

I. What it implied.—

1. The continued existence of Jesus Christ.
2. The cognisance by Christ of what was taking place upon the earth.
3. The right of Jesus Christ to interfere with men’s actions and bring men themselves to His bar.

II. What it suggested.—

1. That Christ was one with His followers upon earth, so that what affected them, in the same manner affected Him.
2. That the infliction of pains and penalties on men for their religious opinions was persecution.
3. That such persecution, as directed against Christ’s followers, was without justification or excuse.

Acts 22:9. Fighting Against God.

I. The fighting described.—How?

1. By resisting His will and persisting in sin contrary to better knowledge and inner conviction (Exodus 5:2).

2. By rejecting His word, and relying upon good works or some other human contrivance for peace of mind and rest of soul (Acts 4:2).

3. By refusing His way, and by murmuring against the dispensations of His providence (Romans 8:28). Let us nevermore strive against God in this way (Isaiah 55:8).

4. By renouncing His work; or, backsliding from His service (Jeremiah 8:5).

5. By reviling His Spirit, or sinning against the Holy Ghost. Not only resisting His pleadings (Acts 7:51), but actually reviling His works or strivings within (Matthew 12:31).

II. The folly denounced—Why? Why is it folly, or why should we “not fight against God”?

1. Because of God’s relation to man. Man were “nothing at all” if God were not his “all and in all.” Therefore:

(1) As his Creator. Can it be wise for man to strive against his Master and Maker?

(2) As his Benfactor. Shall the force of an army be spent against the base of its supplies? (James 1:17).

(3) As his Redeemer. How can a redeemed soul rebel against its Redeemer?

2. Because of man’s relation to God.

(1) As a sinner. It is rash presumption, for it raises still higher the wall of separation from God.

(2) As a son. It is rank ingratitute, for the heavenly Father is the best friend to the children of men.

(3) As a servant. It is infatuation; as well might the clay expect to prevail against the potter, the moth against the mountain, or the lamp against the sun.

(4) As a subject. It is ripe destruction (Job 9:4; Isaiah 45:9; Isaiah 27:4).—J. G. Boughter.

Acts 22:10. What shall I do, Lord?—A question for all.

I. For the sinner.—What shall I do, Lord, when thou risest up to judgment and callest me to account for my transgressions? Answer: “Only acknowledge thine iniquity and return unto Me.”

II. For the anxious.—What shall I do, Lord, when my soul is rent and torn by a consciousness of guilt and sin? Answer: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.”

III. For the pardoned.—What shall I do, Lord, seeing Thou in Thy mercy hast redeemed and forgiven me? Answer: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind.” Thou shalt “glorify God in thy body and thy spirit, which are His.” Thou shalt “go and work to-day in My vineyard.”

IV. For the afflicted—What shall I do, Lord, when tossed about and tempted? Answer: Thou shalt “flee unto Me to hide thee.”

V. For the dying.—What shall I do, Lord, when my strength faileth; when my “earthly house of this tabernacle” is being dissolved; when I am summoned to appear before Thy judgment-seat? Answer: “Thou shalt put thy trust in Me.”

Acts 22:11. The Blinding Glory.

I. The light.—It is not common light, nor does it operate in a common way.

1. It is light. A light; the light.

2. It is a great light. It was beyond the brightness of the sun. Noon was to it as midnight.

3. It was a sudden light. It did not slowly dawn. It blazed suddenly, but it remained till God’s purpose was served.

4. It was a spacious light. Not like a star or sun, but a body or globe of light compassing them round about, as on the transfiguration hill (Acts 9:3; Acts 22:6; Acts 26:13).

5. It was a light from heaven. It was from above, not from beneath. The history of that light is the Christology of Scripture. No doubt this visible, physical light is connected with a higher and more spiritual light. The light which patriarchs saw, and Paul saw, was but a symbol of something more glorious—the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

II. Its effects.—The narrative presents several different results in the case of Saul.

1. It blinds. Paul is struck blind. Blinded by light! The light of heaven!

2. It illuminates. It does not blind in order to destroy the vision. It blinds in order to give clearer eyesight.

3. It prostrates. Saul is stricken to the ground. The vision is overwhelming. Man cannot stand before it.

4. It bewilders. It was here in the case of Saul worse than darkness, in the bewilderment produced. He needs now a guide.

5. It guides. We do not see this here, but in Saul’s after-history. This is his lamp. From this outward operation on men we learn the inward. For, doubtless, there were both these co-operating in the case of Paul. The first effect of the light of the gospel is often to blind and to strike down. The second is to enlighten, and to lift up, and to heal. It is with Divine light that our dark souls must come into contact. Till this takes place we are still unrenewed; still Sauls, not Pauls. The “Lamb” is the light thereof.—H. Bonar, D.D.

The Glory of That Light.

I. Its supernatural origin. A light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun.

II. Its essential character.—The dwelling place of Jehovah, the material symbol of His presence.

III. Its mysterious effects.—

1. Eclipsing all natural lights.
2. Blinding all ordinary vision.
3. Imparting inward illumination.

IV. Its permanent duration.—Disappearing from the sky, but never withdrawing from the soul—shining in and on unto eternal day.

Acts 22:13. The Miracle in the House of Judas.—Or, the restoration of Paul’s sight, a type of the spiritual miracle of soul-illumination which takes place in the hour of conversion.

I. It proceeded upon one who was antecedently blind.—This goes without saying. So does the inward miracle of soul-illumination. Men’s souls are naturally darkened.

II. It was wrought by the forth putting of Divine energy.—The command of Ananias was really the command of Christ. Only a Divine power can illuminate the darkened souls of men.

III. It came upon him as a free gift from Jesus Christ.—“Brother Saul! receive thy sight.” So is inward soul-illumination all of grace.

IV. It was followed by instantaneous results.—In that hour Paul received his sight and looked up. So when God speaks the soul sees—not until.

Acts 22:12. Soul-Ministry—

I. Should be entrusted only to good men. Like Ananias.
II. Can only rightly be performed by sympathetic hearts, who address their patients as “brothers.”
III. Should always aim at the translation of such a one in darkness into God’s marvellous light. So Ananias spoke to Saul: “Receive thy sight.”
IV. Will not fail if undertaken in humble reliance on Christ’s grace. Paul received his sight and looked up.

Acts 22:14. The Qualifications and Work of the Christian Minister.

I. His qualifications.—

1. A knowledge of God’s will.—In particular so far as it relates to the salvation of sinful men.

2. A sight of the Righteous One. I.e., a personal acquaintance with Jesus Christ, in His character and saving offices.

3. The hearing of a voice from Christ’s mouth; i.e., the consciousness of an inward call from Christ as well as a distinct message put into his mouth by Him.

II. His work.—

1. Its nature—to be a witness for Christ.

2. Its limitation. “Of what thou hast seen and heard.”

3. Its sphere. “Unto all men.”

The Righteous One.

I. Descriptive of the character of Christ.—See Acts 3:14; Acts 7:52; 1 Peter 3:18; 1 John 2:1.

II. Suggestive of the work of Christ.—Which was twofold.

1. To bring in an everlasting righteousness (Daniel 9:24; Romans 3:22; 1 Corinthians 1:30; 2 Corinthians 5:21).

2. To make men inwardly righteous (Romans 8:4; Ephesians 5:9; Philippians 1:11).

III. Prophetic of the people of Christ.—Who shall eventually be all righteous (Isaiah 60:21; 1 Peter 3:12; 1 John 3:7; Revelation 22:11).

Voices From the Mouth of Christ.

I. A voice for the unbelieving world.—“Why persecutest thou Me?” (Acts 22:7) All unbelief is a virtual persecution of Christ.

II. A voice for the awakened sinner.—“Come unto Me and I will give you rest” (Matthew 11:28).

III. A voice for the rejoicing believer.—“Ye shall be a witness for Me” (Acts 1:8).

Acts 22:16. The Washing Away of Sin.

I. Effected by faith.—By arising and believing.

II. Grounded on the work of Christ.—Calling on His name.

III. Symbolised in baptism.—“Be baptised, and wash away thy sins.”

Calling on the Name of the Lord.

I. The significance of the name of the Lord.—Points to—

1. The personal existence of Jesus Christ.
2. The character of Jesus Christ as revealed in the gospel.
3. The work of Jesus Christ as expressed in His names—Lord, Jesus, Christ.

II. The import of calling on that name.—Implies—

1. Belief in the personal existence of Jesus Christ.
2. Trust in His character as a Divinely exalted Saviour.
3. Reliance on His redeeming work as an all-sufficient ground of acceptance.

III. The result of calling on the Lord’s name.—Salvation.

1. Certain.
2. Full.
3. Free.
4. Final.