SAUL was a well-educated, rigid, Pharisee. At the death of Stephen he was a young man at whose feet the witnesses laid down their clothes (Acts 7:58). He was a native of Tarsus, but educated in Jerusalem under the learned Gamaliel. He was taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the Jews. He made progress in Judaism beyond those of his own age (Gal. 1:14). He was zealous toward God, and exceedingly zealous of the traditions of his forefathers. As a Pharisee he differed in doctrine from the Sadducees in that he believed in spirit, angel, and resurrection (Acts 23:6-8). The conduct of the Pharisees abounded in ceremony and punctiliousness (Matt. 23); and Saul was of the strictest sect of the Pharisees. If any man might think himself safe because of his human connection, training, profession, and earnest integrity, Saul might. If good intentions were sufficient to secure salvation, then Saul of Tarsus was as safe as ever man could be. If thinking that he was right would serve as a substitute for being right, Saul had nothing to fear. We know nothing of Saul as an egotistic boaster; his whole nature recoiled from that. Yet from his stand-point, and with his clear vision, he could say, "If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless" (Phil. 3:4-6). With all his learning, piety, and zeal for God,

His opposition to the cause of Christ was of the most virulent nature. He consented to, and approved of, the death of Stephen. After Stephen's death Saul "made havoc of the church, entering into every house, and, haling men and women, committed them to prison" (Acts 8:3). He continued "breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord." He "persecuted this way unto the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women." His self-accusations before Agrippa contain several severe charges. (1) "I verily thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth." (2) "Many of the saints did I shut up in prison." (3) "When they were put to death, I gave my voice against them." (4) "I punished them oft in every synagogue." (5) I "compelled them to blaspheme." (6) I was "exceedingly mad against them." (7) "I persecuted them even unto strange cities." Even when writing an epistle to some extent in self-defence, he could not exclude the memory of his acrimonious and successful persecution - "Beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it" (Gal. 1:13). He deemed himself the least of the apostles, and unworthy to be called an apostle, because he had persecuted the church of God (1 Cor. 15:9). Still later, in writing solemn injunctions to Timothy, he brings in the thought that he "was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious" (1 Tim. 1:13). It is difficult to estimate the crushing devastation produced by the untiring energy of such a religious zealot. In his persecuting zeal he besought the aid of the High Priest. He thereby became armed with an ecclesiastical commission to harass the Nazarenes even in the far off city of Damascus. He obtained inquisitorial authority to bring Christian men and women as prisoners from there to Jerusalem, a distance of 136 miles, to be punished.

is the oldest city in the world. "Its fame begins with the earliest patriarchs, and continues to modern times." It is one of the most important cities in Syria. "It lies on the eastern base of Anti-Libanus, in a well-watered, fertile plain, the beauty of which led the Orientals to call it one of the four terrestrial paradises." All who visit Damascus admire its charming beauty. It has been called "the eye of the East," and has been spoken of as resembling "an island of Paradise, in the green enclosure of its beautiful gardens." Julian describes it as "the great and sacred Damascus, surpassing every city both in the beauty of its temples and the magnitude of its shrines, as well as the timeliness of its seasons, the limpidness of its fountains, the volume of its waters, and the richness of its soil." "The desert is a fortification round Damascus. The river is its life. It is drawn out into watercourses, and spread in all directions. For miles around it is a wilderness of gardens, - gardens with roses among the tangled shrubberies, and with fruit on the branches overhead. Everywhere among the trees the murmur of unseen rivulets is heard. Even in the city, which is in the midst of the garden, the clear rushing of the current is a perpetual refreshment. Every dwelling has its fountain; and at night, when the sun has set behind Mount Lebanon, the lights of the city are seen flashing on the waters." The antiquity of the city is proved by Gen. 14:15; 15:2: and the fame of its rivers comes down to us from the days of Naaman (2 Kings 5:12). As Saul approached that paradisical city he was suddenly stopped on his mad career by

A heavenly light shone out with intense splendour, surpassing the brilliancy of an eastern sun at noon. It was overpowering; Saul and his companions fell prostrate to the earth. And out from the awful splendour there came, in the sacred language of the Hebrews, the searching question, "Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me?" Saul was confounded. Was he not doing God's service? Had he not taken that long weary journey in order to suppress the enemies of God? This vision could be nothing else than from heaven. The speaker in the midst of the shining glory must at least be one of God's messengers. Saul was in ignorance. He knew not that he was persecuting any heavenly being, or any one of whom God approved. "Who are thou, Lord?" was a question from one in total ignorance of the relationship existing between the Nazarenes, Jesus of Nazareth, and Jehovah. Who can imagine the effect produced upon Saul by the terrible flash of illumination that entered the mind of the poor, humiliated persecutor, as the Lord answered, "I am Jesus whom thou persecutest"? If Saul had been zealous even to madness, he was nevertheless honest. True to the honesty of his noble nature, when light dawned he welcomed it, even if it laid bare the hideousness of his work, and the lamentable blundering of his judgment. "What shall I do, Lord?" is an everlasting monument to the greatness of soul of him who was to become the great apostle of the Gentiles. He was prepared to turn round on all his previous life now that he saw that he had been wrong. But notwithstanding the presence of the great Teacher, and the manifested eagerness of Saul to learn, he had

The Lord Jesus gave Saul his apostolic commission without delay, and without human intervention. "I have appeared unto thee," said Christ to His chosen apostle, "for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou has seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them who are sanctified by faith that is in me." But for anything of his own immediate duty as an anxious inquirer, Saul was directed to go into Damascus, and there it would be told him what he must do; and he had three days to wait for the needful instruction. Doubtless it was a kind Providence that gave him time to think. Christianity is not to be accepted without counting the cost. The issues involved were tremendous. Saul was on the verge of a new career, and it was a career that would be a contradiction to his previous life. It was needful calmly to review the past, and deliberately to decide respecting the future. It must have been a time of dreadful mental conflict and of weary suspense. Saul had not yet the enlivening joys of a new convert. He had not reached that stage. He was an anxious inquirer, not a convert; and his anxiety was acutely painful. Saul was not the man to do anything or be anything by halves. For three days he neither ate nor drank. Anguish which enforces abstinence for three days is of no ordinary kind. Never was anxious inquirer in more distracting circumstances, and never did anxious inquirer so realise the importance of knowing and doing the right. In his extremity he prayed. What else could be do? There was yet no record of the way of salvation. He could not study what was not in his possession. In his circumstances the only thing to do was to pray, and await the divine relevation. Prayer, always natural to anxious ones, was especially natural to Saul. The business of the instructor is to answer the prayer of the inquirer by giving the teaching for which he has been longing and praying. God set in motion the means of bringing to Saul the knowledge of the way of salvation, assigning as a reason for the sending of Ananias, that Saul was praying - "for, behold, he prayeth."

'To call on' is not so specific as the commands to inquirers which we have already examined - to believe, to repent, and to be immersed. There is more flexibility, if not ambiguity, in the injunction to call on the name of the Lord than in these other commands. But seeing that the verb translated 'to call on' occurs thirty-two times in the New Testament, twenty-one of which are in the book we are studying, the Acts of Apostles, there ought to be no insurmountable difficulty in arriving at the meaning.

1. It may denote prayer, as when "they stoned Stephen, calling upon the Lord, and saying Lord Jesus, receive my spirit" (chap. 7:59).

2. It may denote being called by a name, as Christians are called by the worthy name of Christ (James 2:7), having had that name called upon them (see margin of Revised Version).

3. To be 'surnamed' is the meaning given in eleven occurrences of the verb we are considering (Luke 22:3; Acts 1:23, etc.) The giving of Christian as a name to a disciple of Christ is not surnaming in our modern sense; and yet it comes so near thereto that both things are represented by one Greek word, and may be joined together as at least illustrations of each other in our own language. To surname means literally to name over and above. To be called Christians, because we are followers of Christ, is to have His name added to any other name by which we are called. It is in accordance with the etymological meaning to say that we are surnamed Christians.

4. To 'appeal' is the translation in six instances (Acts 25:11,12, etc.) It is Paul's appeal to the Roman emperor in all six cases.

What, then, is the meaning in the command to Saul recorded in Acts 22:16? Was he told to pray to the Lord, appeal to the Lord, or be called by His name? These three things are not mutually exclusive. To pray at baptism does not preclude appealing, but rather includes it. The one who earnestly prays, appeals to God, reasons with Him. Nor does the praying appeal exclude assuming the divine name, and so being called by it. On the contrary, it is to be expected that he who earnestly appeals to God in prayer, either has already had the divine name called upon him or is wishful to have it. And each of these three has Scripture sanction. Prayer at baptism has the best of all authority, the example of the Lord. "Jesus also being baptised, and praying, the heaven was opened" (Luke 3:21). The Lord Jesus is also an example of special appeal to God, as seen in His prayer reported in John 17. And being called by the name of the Lord is warranted by baptism into the divine name, as well as by the direct assertion of disciples being called by the honourable name. As these three things are in no way contradictory, but harmonious, and even supplemental of each other; as they have each Scripture authority; and as they are each represented by one word, epikaleomai, may we not think of a combination of them in connection with baptism?

But who is the Lord whose name is called upon? Is it the Lord - the Jehovah - of the Old Testament, or is it the Lord Jesus Christ? The Revised Version gives a decisive answer in saying, "Arise, and be baptised, and wash away thy sins, calling on His name." His name! Whose name? Saul had seen the Righteous One; he had heard a voice from His mouth; he was to be a witness for Him; and in being baptised he was to call on His name. That the name of the Lord Jesus is meant, is put beyond reasonable doubt by the Revised Version. To pray to the Lord Jesus is what Stephen had done with his last breath. It is natural to appeal to Him to fulfil His own promise that he who believes and is baptised shall be saved. All authority has been given to Him, He has been exalted to give repentance and remission of sins, and He has promised forgiveness to every baptised believer. With humble, unwavering confidence the believing candidate can appeal to Jesus; and the baptismal formula, as it is uttered by the baptiser, calls the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit upon the baptised one; or in the shorter phraseology of Acts 8:16, the believer is baptised into the name of the Lord Jesus. Prayer to Jesus does not preclude prayer to the Father in the name of Jesus Christ. All that is here argued for is that prayer to the Saviour is equally legitimate, being both Scriptural and appropriate, especially at baptism.

These three things - praying to the Lord Jesus, appealing to Him, and being called by His name - were natural accompaniments, if not essential ingredients, of baptism from the day of Pentecost onward. This understood, the assertion of Acts 2:21, that "whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved," finds special application and appropriateness. It is not the mere cry of an alarmed soul that is meant. It is the intelligent utterance of a believer who is resolved to follow the Lord Christ, and who desires to accept His name and His yoke in His own appointment. To the same effect is Paul's reasoning. "How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in Him, of whom they have not heard? and how shall they preach, except they be sent?" (Rom. 10:14-15.) And the preaching which Paul had in view was New Testament preaching - the preaching of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Looking back over the examples of conversion that have been examined, we conclude that in order to enjoy the Scripture assurance of forgiveness, inquirers should read and search the Scriptures until they have faith in Christ; that their faith should be of such a nature as to lead them to resolve to forsake sin and obey Christ; that this believing resolve should lead to a speaking to the Lord Jesus in prayer, an appealing to Him to accomplish all His promises and purposes, and an assuming of His name in immersion in water, thereby promising to wear that name until death.

1. Paul before Agrippa speaks of himself and co-travellers as having "all fallen to the earth" (chap. 26:14); whereas Luke asserts that "the men who journeyed with Saul stood speechless" (9:7). How could they be fallen to the earth, and yet standing?

It is impossible that the same men could do the two things at once; but there is no difficulty in understanding that they did them in succession. When the blaze of light flashed across their pathway they all fell to the earth; but the men with Saul immediately arose, and stood in dumb amazement, while Saul remained in humble prostration, hearing what the Lord said. By the time that Jesus spoke, Saul's companions were standing; Saul himself did not arise until the close, or near the close, of the Lord's communication to him.

There is another way of satisfactorily solving this difficulty. 'Stood' is equal to 'came to a stand' - halted. Two examples of the same Greek verb from the same historian will be both illustration and evidence. On one occasion Jesus met a funeral procession. He touched the bier, and the bearers stood still (Luke 7:14). It is not standing in contrast to falling that is meant, but standing in contrast to walking. Acts 8:38 is another example. "He commanded the chariot to stand still." It is standing as distinguished from moving. So with Saul's companions. There is no need to think of more being implied, in the assertion that they stood, than that their progress was arrested. Instead of continuing to move forward, they stood. One assertion is that they halted; the other one that they fell to the earth. The latter is additional to the former.

2. Luke affirms that the men heard a voice (9: 7); but he narrates that Paul on the castle stairs in Jerusalem declared that "they heard not the voice of him that spake (32:9). How could they hear and not hear?

There is nothing more common than to hear and not hear. It happens whenever we hear some one speaking, but do not know what he says. We hear the sound - the voice: but, because of indistinct utterance, or distance from the speaker, or our ignorance of the language spoken, it communicates no intelligence to us. We hear, and we do not hear. Saul's companions heard a voice of some one speaking, but they knew not what was said. That may have been because they did not understand Hebrew; Jesus spoke to Paul in the Hebrew language (26:14).

1. "Was not Saul converted when the Lord appeared to him on the road to Damascus?"

It will not be asserted that he was a convert until he was forgiven. But his sins were still unforgiven when, in Damascus, Ananias said to him, "Arise, and be baptised, and wash away thy sins." That he was unforgiven, unsaved, and unhappy, accounts for him being without food and drink for three days after the Lord had appeared to him. He was pardoned, saved, and became a Christian when he was immersed.

2. "Was not Saul miraculously converted?"

It is difficult to find a conversion in the Acts of the Apostles without a miracle; but the miracle by itself never produced conversion. In Saul's case the miracle was more striking than in some others, but, otherwise, Saul's conversion was in no way exceptional. On the day of Pentecost there was miraculous speaking; in Samaria there was miraculous healing; to the eunuch there was a miraculous appearing and disappearing of Philip; and to Saul there was the miraculous appearance of the Lord. But in all four cases there was teaching added. The miracles arrested attention, or confirmed the teaching. To distinguish Saul's conversion from others by calling it miraculous is as false in fact as it is misleading to inquirers.