The Persecuted Apostle

How far are Christians prepared to go when faced with the prospect of persecution?  This question is somewhat provoking when considering today’s enforcement of mandated totalitarian controls, under the guise of tolerance and kindness. The last five or six generations have lived in relative peace, and the Western church has suffered little or nothing for its faith. Suppose the question of our response to persecution was posed. In that case, I imagine most Christians might say yes, they are prepared to suffer persecution and pain as a consequence of standing up for their faith and moral injustice. However, based on the recent response to political overreach, I seriously question whether this would happen.

Today, we share a relationship with God that’s interpreted and supported through the lens of a written record. We have a Bible to begin with. We have God's entire plan for humanity from Genesis to Revelation. However, most of those in the Apostle Paul’s generation never had the luxury of seeing, let alone studying, any written discourse about their religion. Most couldn’t read or write, and those in the Priesthood largely determined the extent to which the crowds could understand. Even after the ecclesia came to be known as the Church, the new covenant remained an oral tradition, aside from a few letters that reached certain sections of the Church. Consider then the character of the early church, how their resolve was prepared to stand in the face of persecution and die if necessary, despite their limited understanding.

Paul was a Pharisee from the tribe of Benjamin. From an early age, he was trained in the law and traditions of the Jews, and he was thoroughly committed to guarding these traditions on behalf of his predecessors. In itself, this doesn’t suggest Paul loved God, but it does explain the strength of his will, his passion, and his drive for status and success. Therefore, he instinctively viewed this new “religious sect” as a threat to the traditions he sought to protect. This passion typified Paul’s life, and he rose to some prominence since he commanded an audience with the high priests and ruling council. He was given authority to arrest, imprison, and kill these “followers of the way”. In Acts 22:3, he describes himself as zealous, and indeed, we find in Gal 1:13 how he had advanced beyond many others of his age. Paul was a learned man with a strongly motivated and focused personality, which, before his conversion, made him a natural leader but also a feared adversary, who appeared somewhat heartless to the extent that he watched and approved the murder of Stephen (Acts 8:1).

This limited view of Paul's life appears so completely different from the benevolent Apostle we find later. However, the same characteristics which enabled him to persecute Christians were now being used to confront the Gentiles. We still see the same focused, committed, and driven man, who was now prepared to be persecuted and die if necessary for what he believed.

Paul never needed or required others to direct him (Gal 1:16-17). He knew what he had to do, and from the time of his conversion, he began preaching Jesus as Messiah. While Paul respected authority, he was never controlled or dictated by it. His jurisdiction was seated on a personal revelation of God through Jesus Christ, which was so profound that his life was consumed by the task of completing the race he was called to run. Much like Jesus, he polarised the Jews into hating him or loving him, so much so that only one consumed by the spirit of God could have withstood the physical and mental abuse he suffered throughout his life.

Paul appears educated, intelligent, and gifted, with the ability to construct a sound and reasonable argument to attest that Jesus Christ was the Messiah. But many saw his appearance in public as a contradiction to his letters, which they described as “weighty and forceful”. But in person, he was “unimpressive”. However, the intolerance of the Jews may have been more about using his physical appearance to ridicule the weight of his argument. His ability to debate was such that those who opposed him could not refute the authority of his reasoning. Perhaps his oratory skills didn’t resonate with the eloquence of trained religious teachers or temple Priests, but through his letters, he could illuminate the gospel message with halting authority.

Paul was not always on amicable terms with his friends, which at times led to sharp disagreements, and they went their separate ways. I imagine that Paul’s personality may not have been easy to live with at times. He was strong-willed and didn’t tolerate being let down or distracted in any way (Acts 15).

How might Paul be received by the Church today? He was prepared to communicate his message with impartiality and with a tenor that would appear harsh in today’s environment of woke submission. Today’s church would find his discourse to Elymas (Acts 13:9) judgmental, aggressive, and certainly not speaking in love. His letters suggest that many did not receive his message well. Yet his message was an inspired exercise in apologetic discourse that never failed to resonate something of deep significance. He was wise (Acts 16:3), cunning (Acts 16:37), shrewd (Acts 17:22), focused (Acts 21:24), and always prepared to suffer the consequences. He was prepared to be “all things to all people” so that the message of salvation would be understood.

Therefore, given a state of persecution, how many Christians today would be like Paul? Yes, God uses our given strengths and weaknesses to carry out his sovereign plan for mankind, but no Christian is excused from persecution. One could argue that if we’re not being persecuted, we’re not being perfected. Paul had all the failings and flaws of the human condition, some of which God refused to remove. He appears as strong, resolute, determined, and focused, which invariably brings confrontation. He was uncompromising where the Gospel was concerned and wasn’t afraid to confront error, whoever it came from, even the Apostle Peter. He doesn’t appear concerned for himself, but rather that the message is transferred and received correctly. At times, he does express his emotions, particularly when speaking about his qualification as an Apostle, but even then, he appears somewhat embarrassed at having to do so. He conveys respect and love for all those who helped and provided for him throughout his missionary life.

I imagine the Jews would have found Paul very confronting and dogmatic because of his constant challenge to their religious authority. However, throughout his letters, the inspired word emphasises a prophetic message that conveys God’s purpose and love to all humanity. This love is not his own but comes deep and direct from the throne of God. It combines not only God’s love but also God’s judgment to turn the hearts of the Gentiles to God. I suspect if Paul were alive today, the church would not accept him. It would find him too aggressive and uncompromising. He would be labelled as argumentative and judgmental, a fundamentalist, without the required degree of woke apathetic virtue signalling to be acceptable. The church might react much like the religious leaders of Paul’s time, and this begs the question, what does "speak everything in love” really mean, and what is this love we are speaking about? What does this love look like in the context of standing up for righteousness and truth in the face of persecution? I would say we’ve become a generation that does very little of serious consequence, a generation that sings a dirge, and gathers together those who sing the same song. Full of teachers with silver tongues, who say what itching ears want to hear. We might consider the likes of Paul and ask, are we running the race to win the prize, or have we squandered our talent, such that it might be given to those who invested it well?