Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, August 13, 2013 Read – Acts 22:6-16 Having established Paul’s impeccable credentials and demonstrated how Paul sought to identify with his hearers, Luke moves on to the second main element of Paul’s defense speech, a presentation of the basic issue. Paul begins by appealing to his own experience. He tells the story of his encounter with Jesus on the Damascus Road. We have heard this report before (Acts 9:1-19), and we will hear it one more time (Acts 26:12-18). Repeating it three times is Luke’s way of adding emphasis to this experience. He wants us to remember the event and know that it is crucial to his story. The three accounts are essentially the same, though there are some minor differences. In the first account Paul’s companions hear a voice but see nothing. Here they see the light but hear nothing. In the first account, Ananias has a much larger role in the story than here, and he will completely disappear in the third telling of the Damascus Road encounter. These minor differences can easily be explained as we think about Luke’s purpose in each telling of the story. In the first story it is important to Luke that he distinguishes between the resurrection appearance of Jesus to the Apostles and elders of Jerusalem and the appearance of Jesus to Paul on the Damascus Road. The Apostles and elders saw Jesus physically in the 40 days between the resurrection and ascension – that experience was, for Luke, not repeatable. His point in the first telling of the story is that nobody, including Paul, saw anyone. By now Luke has made his point about the authenticating role of the Apostles and he does not need to worry about that. In this second telling of the story, the emphasis is more on hearing than seeing. Paul asks, “What am I to do, Lord?” and receives a longer answer in terms of what will happen in Damascus when Paul encounters Ananias. Consequently, Luke places emphasis on only Paul hearing – those who are with him do not hear. In the third telling of the story, Luke does not mention whether Paul’s companions either hear or see. And Ananias disappears completely. Paul receives his commission directly from Jesus and not through Ananias, which matches much closer with Paul’s own claim in his letter to the Galatians (Galatians 1:1, 11-12). It is interesting that Paul never mentions his Damascus Road encounter in any of his letters. Perhaps Paul’s reason for doing that was to turn attention away from himself and toward Jesus. It is one thing for someone else to talk about your experience than it is for you to do so. It is also interesting that Luke is comfortable about simply dropping Ananias out of the story by the third telling and matching the story more closely with Paul’s own story. Once again the answer is likely found in Luke’s use of the story and his disregard for historical accuracy. Luke is a good storyteller who makes the most out of his material. Paul’s appeal to his own experience is not enough to make the case. While Paul’s experience is important, it is not Paul’s experience that is the main issue. Luke will move on now provide corroborating evidence – the third element of a good defense speech.