False Explanations.
Various attempts have been made by ancient heretics and modern rationalists to explain
Paul’s conversion in a purely natural way, but they have utterly failed, and by their failure they
indirectly confirm the true view as given by the apostle himself and as held in all ages by the
Christian church.^384- The Theory of Fraud.—The heretical and malignant faction of the Judaizers was disposed
to attribute Paul’s conversion to selfish motives, or to the influence of evil spirits.
The Ebionites spread the lie that Paul was of heathen parents, fell in love with the daughter
of the high priest in Jerusalem, became a proselyte and submitted to circumcision in order to secure
her, but failing in his purpose, he took revenge and attacked the circumcision, the sabbath, and the
whole Mosaic law.^385
In the pseudo-Clementine Homilies, which represent a speculative form of the Judaizing
heresy, Paul is assailed under the disguise of Simon Magus, the arch-heretic, who struggled
antinomian heathenism into the church. The manifestation of Christ was either a manifestation of
his wrath, or a deliberate lie.^386 - The Rationalistic Theory of Thunder and Lightning.—It attributes the conversion to
physical causes, namely, a violent storm and the delirium of a burning Syrian fever, in which Paul
superstitiously mistook the thunder for the voice of God and the lightning for a heavenly vision.^387
(^384) Comp. the section on the Resurrection of Christ, pp. 172 sqq.
(^385) Reported by Epiphanius, Haer XXX. 16 (ed. Oehler, tom. I. 268 sq.).
(^386) In the Clem. Hom., XVII., ch. 19 (p. 351, ed. Dressel), Simon Peter says to Simon Magus: "If, then, our Jesus appeared to
you in a vision (δι ̓ ὁράματος ὁφθείς made himself known to you, and conversed with you, it is as one who is enraged with an
adversary (ὡς ἀντικειμένῳ ὀργιζόμενος). And this is the reason why it was through visions and dreams (δι ̓ ὁραμάτων καὶ
ἐνυπνίων), or through revelations that, were from without (ἢ καὶ δι ̓ ἀποκαλύψεων ἔζωθεν οὐσῶν) that He spoke to you. But
can any one be rendered fit for instruction through apparitions? (δι ̓ ὀτασίαν) .... And how are we to believe your word, when
you tell us that He appeared to you? And how did He appear to you, when you entertain opinions contrary to His teaching? But
if you have seen and were taught by Him, and became His apostle for a single hour, proclaim His utterances, interpret His sayings,
love His apostles, contend not with me who companied with Him. For you stand now in direct opposition to me, who am a firm
rock, the foundation of the church (στερεὰν πέτραν, θεμέλιον ἐκκλησίας, comp. Matt. 16:18). If you were not opposed to me,
you would not accuse me, and revile the truth proclaimed by me, in order that I may not be believed when I state what I myself
have heard with my own ears from the Lord, as if I were evidently a person that was condemned and had not stood the test
[according to the true reading restored by Lagarde, ἀδοκίμου ὄντος instead of ἐυδοκιμοῦντος,’in good repute’]. But if you say
that I am ’condemned’ (εἰ κατεγνωσμένον με λέγεις, comp. Gal. 2:11), you bring an accusation against God, who revealed the
Christ to me, and you inveigh against Him who pronounced me blessed on account of the revelation (Matt. 16:17). But if you
really wish to be a co-worker, in the cause of truth, learn first of all from us what we have learned from Him, and, becoming a
disciple of the truth, become a fellow-worker with me."
The allusions to Paul’s Christ-vision and his collision with Peter at Antioch are unmistakable, and form the chief
argument for Baur’s identification of Simon Magus with Paul. But it is perhaps only an incidental sneer. Simon represents all
anti-Jewish heresies, as Peter represents all truths.
(^387) This theory was proposed by the so-called "vulgar" or deistic rationalists (as distinct from the more recent speculative or
pantheistic rationalists), and has been revived and rhetorically embellished by Renan in Les Apôtres (ch. X., pp. 175 sqq.). "Every
step to Damascus," says the distinguished French Academicien, "excited in Paul bitter repentance; the shameful task of the
hangman was intolerable to him; he felt as if he was kicking against the goads; the fatigue of travel added to his depression; a
malignant fever suddenly seized him; the blood rushed to the head; the mind was filled with a picture of midnight darkness
broken by lightning flashes; it is probable that one of those sudden storms of Mount Hermon broke out which are unequalled
for vehemence, and to the Jew the thunder was the voice of God, the lightning the fire of God. Certain it is that by a fearful
stroke the persecutor was thrown on the ground and deprived of his senses; in his feverish delirium he mistook the lightning for
a heavenly vision, the voice of thunder for a voice from heaven; inflamed eyes, the beginning of ophthalmia, aided the delusion.
Vehement natures suddenly pass from one extreme to another; moments decide for the whole life; dogmatism is the only thing
which remains. So Paul changed the object of his fanaticism; by his boldness, his energy, his determination he saved Christianity,
A.D. 1-100.