How Long Did Paul Persecute the Church?

In Acts 8:1 we are told that Saul (Paul) consented to Stephen’s death. This may indicate that he was a member of the Sanhedrin and was perhaps the prosecuting attorney. However, I’ll pursue this possibility in another blog. For now I wish to focus upon the length of his mission to afflict the Messianic believers. It is worthy of note that the Apostles were not persecuted. Why was this? The only logical answer, as far as I am concerned, is that it was only that branch of the church to which Stephen belonged that was persecuted. The Grecian or Hellenistic Messianic believers had separated under good terms from the main Palestinian Messianic believers (Acts 6:1-6).

It was at that time that a large bloc of the priesthood who believed in Jesus joined themselves to the Apostles (Acts 6:7), implying that while the Hellenistic Messianic Jews were joined to the Apostles, these priests considered the body ceremonially unclean, probably due to the iffy traditions of the Hellenistic believers. Some may not have retained kosher eating habits, and most likely all were not as picky concerning the washing traditions of the fathers—the Oral Law—as the Apostles probably were. Remember Peter’s ministry (and therefore that of all the Apostles) was to the Jews, particularly those who lived in Judea and Galilee. It would be difficult to minister to a society who considered you unclean and wouldn’t keep company with you. Therefore, those Apostles who did not ordinarily practice the Oral Law (cp. Mark 7:1-5) most likely submitted themselves to it in order to reach their Jewish brethren who were considering Jesus, and wondering if he were the Messiah.

Therefore, Paul most likely pursued only those who believed as Stephen. It was not, therefore, that Jesus’ resurrection per se that was the offence, because, remember, Paul was a Pharisee who believed in the resurrection. It was Stephen’s message that the Temple was not needed for men to walk with God that was so troubling. For religious Jews, the idea that the Temple was not needed was the same as saying the name of God, which was perceived to be upon the Temple, was not needed and this amounted to blasphemy. All who held to this idea, and preached it had to be punished.

The church was scattered abroad going into regions of Samaria and Judea (Acts 8:1) and to more distant lands, such as Phenice, Cyprus, Cyrene and Antioch (Acts 11:19-20). Paul pursued them wherever it became known they were (Acts 26:11). In order for Paul to pursue the Hellenistic Messianic Jews to foreign cities, two things are implied. First, it would have to be known by those in Jerusalem that the Messianic Jews had traveled to such cities. Otherwise it would be like looking for the proverbial needle in a haystack. News had to be brought back to Jerusalem from the foreign city that the Messianic Jews had come to their synagogue. Secondly, letters had to have been sent out to those synagogues outside of Palestine by the High Priest to beware of this sect that had so little regard for the Temple, meaning the name of God (cp. Acts 28:21). Therefore, when the Scripture says Paul went to foreign cities (Acts 26:11), it must be understood that those cities had been alerted by Jerusalem to be on the lookout for this sect, and secondly, the synagogue leaders recognized the Messianic believers and sent word back to Jerusalem so that the proper authorities might bring them there for judgment.

Understanding this will place Acts 9:1 in its proper perspective. Paul would need no such letters from the High Priest if letters had already been sent out. That letters had already been sent out is evident by Paul’s knowledge that there were such believers in Damascus, and the Jewish leaders there sent word back to Jerusalem saying so. Therefore, the only reason why Paul would need new letters from the High Priest would be if a change in the High Priesthood had been made. If Stephen was stoned in 34 CE, Caiaphas would have been the reigning High Priest. The fact that Acts 9:1 shows Paul seeking new letters implies Caiaphas was no longer in authority there. At the time of the Passover in 36 CE Caiaphas had been removed from his office by Vitellius, the new Roman governor of Syria, and Jonathan, the son of Annas, was placed in that position. Now, Paul needed new letters, if he wished to go to Damascus and bring back the Messianic believers living there for punishment in Jerusalem. If the new High Priest did not consider them a threat, Paul would have no authority to imprison them or bring them to Jerusalem for judgment. Therefore, Acts 9:1 denotes the passage of time of at least a year and a half since the time of Stephen’s stoning. No doubt Paul would have sought immediate approval for his mission and obtained the needed letters and started out for Damascus but met the Lord on the way. Paul, therefore, persecuted the church from the fall of 34 CE to the spring of 36 CE or 1 ½ years.

Another reference that would point to this timeframe is Acts 9:31. Unless one wishes to say that Paul was on a private mission and was solely responsible for the entire persecution of the Messianic Jews, one must look for another reason for the church’s peace that occurred about the time of Paul leaving Jerusalem for Tarsus. If it is accurate to conclude Paul was converted in the year 36 CE we can use this date to unveil the reason for this mysterious peace that occurred about the time Paul was visiting Peter in Jerusalem, but had to flee to Tarsus for his life. Paul says in his letter to the Galatians that he did not go up to Jerusalem until three years after his conversion (Galatians 1:18). Knowing this and adding it to 36 CE would bring us to 39 CE.

By 38 CE Caius Caesar had become mad. He sent Petronius to Syria with orders to set up a statue of himself, i.e. Caius Caesar, in the Temple at Jerusalem. Intending to carry out Caius’ orders in the spring of 39 CE, Petronius wintered at Ptolemias, a city in Galilee on the coast of the Mediterranean, just north of Caesarea. Tens of thousands of Jews came there to mourn before Petronius, begging him not to do such a thing. The Roman governor was moved by their pleas and delayed executing his orders and sent word back to Caesar saying that the Emperor would suffer much loss in revenue, if he carried out his command, because the locals had left their fields in mourning, neither planting nor harvesting.

The nation was at the brink of war with Rome, and this, not Paul’s conversion, was the reason for the church’s peace in Acts 9:31. The whole nation was in the state of shock and dismay, on the brink of war with Rome. The Temple officials had much more horrendous matters to attend to than what they perceived the Hellenistic Messianic Jews to be, who were at that time fleeing for their lives to distant cities around the empire. Therefore, we can now date Acts 9:31 to 39 CE when Petronius, the new Roman governor at Syria awaited word from Caesar in reply to his most recent letter to him. By the time Petronius received this letter, Caius had been assassinated (January, 40 CE) and Petronius’ orders were moot.
Technorati Tags: Paul, Jesus, Stephen, High Priest, Temple, persecution, Caiaphas, Jonathan,