How Paul got his gospel on the Damascus Road

In his letter to the Galatians Paul claims an apostolate not through man but ‘through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised him from the dead’ (1:1).  He further says he ‘did not confer with flesh and blood’ regarding the Gospel he preached until three years after his conversion (1:16-19).  How is such independence possible?  Where did his Gospel come from?

I think the ‘miracle’ of Paul’s independent acquisition of a gospel and an apostolate has only one supernatural element: his very brief encounter with the spirit of Jesus Christ on the Damascus road (Acts 9:3-6).  Because once he has accepted the spiritual reality of that encounter, I think he might easily have inferred from it the truth of all four pillars of what he calls his gospel.

Inference 1 – The Resurrection:  If Jesus, who was crucified and buried at Jerusalem, has appeared to him in the spirit near Damascus, Saul could with great confidence infer the truth of the resurrection – that God himself must have raised this Jesus from the dead.

Inference 2 – The Christ:  If this Jesus whom the God of Israel raised from the dead identifies himself with those whom Saul is persecuting – who proclaim him messiah – then it must be inferred that Jesus is in fact he whom Saul had been so furiously denying – the Christ, God’s anointed.

Inference 3 – The Cross:  If it is manifest from 1 & 2 that the mortal destruction of God’s anointed was accomplished on the cross in the process of punishing one who was judged worthy of death in accordance with the law, the need of a rationale for preaching ‘Christ crucified’ becomes apparent.  We should also expect to see a development of a theology of sacrifice which combines the idea of a divinely sponsored Law which had ‘made him to be sin’ with the idea of a divinely willed death of one ‘who was without sin.’  This gets complicated, but for Paul creates the possibility of reconciliation and peace between man and God.

Inference 4 – Grace, the free gift:  If God’s anointed was crucified under the Law, then the effect of its paradoxical result (reconciliation of God and man) must be intended by God to take the place of the Law.  The inference from this is the end of the Law with respect to justification, and a new dispensation of grace in which all who otherwise were destined to condemnation either under the law or outside the law now have justification by faith in the free gift of the God who raised Jesus from the dead.

I do not mean that Paul perceived all the details of his gospel in the twinkling of an eye.  I only argue that there is no reason to doubt that he apprehended it in its broad outlines immediately and independently of Ananias or Cephas or any other evangelist – in that moment of truth in which he recognized and accepted the identity of the one who came to him so suddenly on the way to Damascus.


4 thoughts on “How Paul got his gospel on the Damascus Road

  1. Couple of other points John I think. First, since Paul is an admitted Pharisee and a Christian basher, I’m assuming he knew a fair amount of what Jesus was preaching and teaching. How did this impact his theology of the cross?

    And second, Paul points out in I think more than one letter, that what he is preaching came directly from Christ. Some places he says, this is my own thinking only. Doesn’t this perhaps suggest that he received more than the simple “vision” of Christ, and put the rest together?

    Just thoughts. Please correct me where I need correction!

    • Sherry, on your first point, I’m not seeing a lot of material from the four gospels in his letters (although this is a study which is still in progress).

      And I’m inclined to think he saw Jesus mostly as a law-breaker and presumed Messiah until his ‘experience’ on the way to Damascus. I’ve got a post getting ready on that.

      Second point, what do you think about Galatians 1:16-19? (the take-off point for this post).

      I’m not ready to say he took any direct dictation of theology from the spirit of Jesus on the way to Damascus. And so I can still argue that Saul required no help to make the ‘four inferences’ I list (though, as I say, not as to details).

      Thanks for writing, and for the link from your blog!

  2. Pingback: Driving Off the Cliff « A Feather Adrift

  3. Pingback: Resources for Galatians 1:16 - 19

Your thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s