The Hellenist Messianic Jews were scattered abroad going into regions of Samaria and Judea (Acts 8:1) and then to more distant lands such as Phoenicia, Cyprus, Cyrene and Antioch (Acts 11:19-20). Paul pursued them to 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, letters had to have been sent out from Jerusalem to those synagogues outside Judea to beware of this Messianic sect that had so little regard for the Temple, meaning the name of God (cf. Acts 28:21). Secondly, it would have to be known by those in Jerusalem that wanted Messianic Jews had traveled to such cities. Otherwise it would be like looking for the proverbial needle in a haystack. Therefore, news had to have been brought back to Jerusalem such cities alerting the high priest that these Messianic Jews had come there and were spreading the Gospel in their synagogues (Acts 26:11), before someone such as Saul would journey there.[1]
Some time must be presumed to have elapsed to allow for such communication. Acts 9:1 shows Paul seeking letters of extradition from the high priest. If Stephen was stoned in 34 Ad about the time of the fall Holy Days, then a reasonable period for word to be brought back from Damascus to the Jerusalem authorities concerning the Messianic believers there would be the next celebration of a major Jewish Holy Day season. This would be in the spring during the Passover of 35 AD. At the time of this particular Passover Caiaphas, the high priest, was removed from his office by Vitellius, the new Roman governor of Syria, and Jonathan, the son of Annas, was placed in that position. Later, Paul would refer to Jonathan who reigned as high priest a second time during the time of Felix’s tenure (see Acts 22:5). The reason for Paul’s mentioning the high priest at that time was that he could verify that he had been sent by him to incarcerate believers at Damascus and bring them to Jerusalem for punishment.
Therefore, Acts 9:1 denotes the passage of time of about six months from the time of Stephen’s stoning. If this is logically sound, then we can also point to 35 AD as the year of Paul conversion backward from the Jerusalem Council which most scholars believe occurred in 49 AD. This was the visit Paul himself referred to in Galatians 2:1 his second visit after his meeting Jesus. Fourteen years after 35 AD would bring us to the time of the Jerusalem Council.
Additionally, we can reasonably point to the 35 AD date by calculating a pattern Paul seems to use in his ministry. He seems to spend about 3 years working in a given area founding churches in a given locale in Jesus name. We know he spent three years in Damascus with excursions into Arabia (Galatians 1:15-18). If Paul returned to Jerusalem in 38 AD, but had to leave for Cilicia not long afterward, we can reasonably assume he spent another three years evangelizing Tarsus and surrounding communities, because Barnabas sought him out for the work at Antioch about the time Claudius Caesar became Emperor in 41 AD (Acts 11:25-28). Luke tells us that he an Barnabas taught the new gentile believers for a full year (Acts 11:26), but this doesn’t mean they wouldn’t spend another two years preaching Christ in the surrounding communities of Phoenicia, Samaria and Galilee (Acts 26:20), thus, reasonably keeping within his three year plan. Then in the spring of 44 AD Paul and Barnabas went on the evangelistic labor for another three years in Galatia before returning to Antioch about the spring of 47 AD where Luke says they spent a good while (Acts 14:26-28).
If they spent another three years here before leaving to check on the churches in Galatia (Acts 15:35-36), this would bring them to the spring of 50 AD. This is a full year after the Jerusalem Council of 49 AD. If this is logically sound according to the pattern Paul seems to use throughout his ministry, then this also points to 35 AD as the year of Paul’s vision of Jesus and becoming a believer. Therefore, it is my opinion that Paul persecuted the Church for about six months—from the autumn of 34 AD to the spring of 35 AD.
__________________________________________
[1] This post is a revision both in the time I presume Paul persecuted believers and in the manner in which I calculated that time. I came to realize my previous post had too many errors in it to permit it to remain published, so I revised it as best as I understand the truth.
Smoodock's Blog 
24 responses to “How Long Did Paul Persecute Believers?”
I have several studies that concern the “abomination of desolation”, but Paul simply doesn’t fit that term. The “abomination” concerns idolatry and the “desolation” means the “abomination” brought “desolation” to Jerusalem and the Temple. Some of those studies are: The Abomination of Desolation; Abomination that Makes Desolate; Jesus’ Coming and Paul; and Jerusalem Surrounded by Armies.There are more, and you can find some by putting “abomination of desolation” in my search tab on the right of my studies, just under my picture.
I am uncertain how the days were shortened. However, I believe it has to do with the Jewish War with Rome (66 AD to 70 AD). If the days weren’t shortened, it may be that the Jews of the Diaspora would have entered the war and created trouble for Rome all over the Empire. The Jews in the Holy Land had hoped the Jews of the Diaspora would do just that. It would have created havoc for Rome and draw attention elsewhere. Because the Diaspora Jews didn’t enter the war, Rome didn’t seek to punish them, and this saved Jewish Christians as well.
I think it was in this context that Jewish “flesh” was saved. The Romans could have perused Jews all over the Empire and killed them like the Nazi’s tried to do, but that didn’t happen, because in some manner the days were shortened.
Hope this helps, and Lord bless you, Bill.
Thanks friend. Yes, I see strong’s number for “stand” is g2476, which has several meanings to include abide, continue, establish, set up. What is your best source for Greek reference? Sometimes I wonder how the KJV translators all seemed to come to the same conclusions for words. Like Matt 5:32 has “logos”, g3056, which means a saying or report of prostitution, yet the translation says “cause.” It’s found again in the betrothal chapter of Deut 22, which would totally establish Jesus’ point that divorce is only available as an option during betrothal. Sometimes, the translators throw us off track.
Nonetheless, I appreciate your insights. I read all the scriptures you referenced in “The Great Persecution” blog you wrote in the Acts – A second look…Chapter 8. If Saul accomplished all that death and binding and persecution throughout all the synagogues, and was dealing with Damascus at the same time, in a 6 month time frame, he was certainly a busy hit man. The Rev 12 reference you used was in the next blog in Acts 8, called “Who were scattered abroad.” I will keep reading through the blogs regarding ch 8 and 9, because I just noticed there is more, including “the Wrath of Saul.”
Thanks for your ministry. When I learned that “Futurism” was a political response by the RCC to the Reformers, I had to wipe the board of those ideas I grew up hearing. Your insights have been a helpful transition away from those traditions of men. Your help with the history lessons of the Roman empire and the Jewish nation have also brought alive much of what I considered boring in my school days. My heartfelt “Thanks.”
Blessings to you!
Hi Bill. I appreciate your kind words of encouragement. Thank you.
I don’t have a goto reference for Greek. I utilize several books, including Strongs, Thayer’s, Word Study Dictionary by Zodhiates; Greek-English Lexicon of the NT by Walter Bauer, and Analytical Greek Lexicon by Wigram. Sometimes I use only one or two, but other times I use all of them when the sense simply doesn’t seem to fit the context.
All in all, I believe the translators do an excellent job, certainly better than a guy like me. Nevertheless, we’re all human and we make mistakes. I find most mistakes are made when one’s studies are guided by the studies or traditions of other men. We all have that problem to one degree or another; certainly we shouldn’t disagree for the purpose of disagreeing. The key, of course, is finding where the Spirit is leading, anyway that’s the plan. :-)
Where did you find out that “Futurism” was a political response by the RCC? I don’t remember hearing that. Do you know its context?
Lord bless you, Bill.
//Where did you find out that “Futurism” was a political response by the RCC? I don’t remember hearing that. Do you know its context?//
Believe it or not, Clarence Larkin talks about it in his notes of pg 5 of Dispensational Truth, if you have a copy in your library. In case you don’t, though, here are the notes from a webpage…
http://www.preservedwords.com/disptruth/chap2-pv.htm
Scroll down to the paragraph that begins “The Preterist School.”
I’d be interested to know your thoughts.
B
Thanks Bill. I believe I have that book, but I can’t find it at this time, but I did check out the link.
I hesitate to label the Pope the Antichrist or the False Prophet or anything like this. I know its history, and it isn’t good, especially when one comes to the Inquisition. Nevertheless, the Church of Rome had it beginning in Christianity. I believe Clement wrote his first epistle from there, just after Peter and Paul were martyred. I see corruption and a lot of evil men running that church later. Nevertheless, Western Christianity (Protestantism) came out of her, and this should testify that Christianity was never dead, no matter how it may look from the outside. I believe that is true even today.
I have deep differences with that church, but I see many of its people loving Christ. They receive him as their Savior. The believe he died for their sins; they believe he rose from the dead to give them life, and they have faith in that. I cannot reject them as brethren no matter what else they believe. That is the fundamentals of Gospel according to Paul (Romans 10:9-10). The light may be dim, but I don’t see the gates of hell prevailing over her (cf. Matthew 16:18).
We may be in different camps on this issue, Bill, but I hope that won’t change our friendship.
Lord bless you in your studies.