1. How does ACTS 6:5-15 describe Stephen?
2. Read the charges Stephen made against the Jewish leaders in verses Acts 7:51-53. What do you think he meant by the following terms?
• Stiff-necked
• Uncircumcised hearts
• Uncircumcised ears
3. The Bible mentions Saul for the first time in ACTS 7:58. How is he first introduced in Scripture?
4. Why do you think Stephen did not want the sins of his executioners held against them?
5. How does ACTS 8:1 prove Saul was no innocent bystander?
6. Compare and contrast Saul and Stephen. *
Read ACTS 9:1-9, 17-19; 26:9-18.
7. Compare ACTS 9:1 to ACTS 26:9. How could these verses support the statement: “A person can be sincere in his beliefs yet be sincerely wrong”?
8. Why was Saul going to Damascus that eventful day? *
9. How did Saul describe the light from heaven?
10. What conclusions can you draw from Christ’s words “persecute me”?
11. Why did Christ appear to Saul? List every reason given.
12. What might be several reasons why Christ struck Saul blind? Think in terms of physical reasons, spiritual reasons, and even emotional impact.
Read ACTS 9:10-31
13. The Lord told Ananias he would find Saul at a certain house praying. What do you think Saul may have been praying about?
14. In a word, how would you describe Ananias’ initial response to God’s instruction?
15. What was Saul’s first action after he regained his sight?
16. Saul began preaching in Damascus. What was his message?
Class 2: Question 6. Compare and contrast Saul and Stephen
The following is an excerpt from John Pollock's biography on Paul, The Apostle: A Life of Paul. Note that it is written as a biography not a textual study.
“Stephen and Paul were probably about the same age – the Greek word translated “young man,” denotes a male between youth and forty. Stephen’s birthplace is unknown, for Jews from Egypt and elsewhere used the same synagogue as Cilicians, but he spoke Greek as fluently as Aramaic. Both men were quick thinkers, powerful minds, able controversialists. No tradition remains of Stephen’s physique, but though Paul is believed to have been short, he held himself well enough to stand out in a crowd. His face was rather oval with beetling eyebrows, and fleshy from good living. He had a black beard, since Jews scored the Roman taste for shaving, and his clue-fringed robe and the amulet strapped to a turban-like headdress displayed his pride in being a Pharisee. As he strode about the Temple courts, he disclosed arrogance inevitable in a man whose ancestors and actions made him feel important. He carried out faithfully the unending cycle of ritual cleansings of platters and cups and of his own person. He kept the weekly fasts – between sunrise and sunset—and said the daily prayers in exact progression and number. He knew what was due to him: respectful greetings, high precedence, a prominent seat in the synagogue. Deep down in his character lay a vein of compassion, but he believed that a good man should keep away from bad men. Paul would have approved the Pharisee who, on seeing Jesus allow a prostitute to wash His feet with her tears…, took it as proof that the man could be no prophet...
Stephen, on the other hand, spent much of his time in doling food and necessities to widows. In the two years since the execution of Jesus, the holy city had become pervaded with those who believed that He had risen from the dead. Most were nondescript and poor. Many lived in communal groups and all of them shared their resources. When Greek-speaking disciples complained that widows were being neglected, Stephen and six others were chose to undertake routine daily distribution of food.
Paul was disturbed that a man of Stephen’s academic caliber should demean himself in social concerns; and irked that, while his own affairs absorbed him, Stephen should go around bringing happiness. Men respected but feared Paul; the respected Stephen and loved him. When Stephen preached, Paul could not fail to discern the gulf between them: Stephen always turned the Scriptures in the direction of Jesus as the Deliverer or Messiah … and proved his point by citing the evidence of eyewitnesses that, incredible as it seemed, a corpse had come to life again and climbed out of the grave…
Paul considered Stephen’s arguments nonsense. The Christ had not come yet. And the way to God was fixed forever: a man must belong to God’s chosen people the Jews, and try to obey the Law… Paul felt no personal concern, knowing his own goodness, but he recognized Stephen’s contentions as dangerous. Gamaliel had advised toleration; Simon Peter and other disciples of Jesus worshiped at the Temple and continued to obey the Law. But Paul saw, as Stephen saw, that the old and the new were incompatible; man was saved either by the Temple sacrifices and obeying the Law, or by faith in Jesus. The old must destroy the new or be destroyed.”
Pollock, John. The Apostle: A Life of Paul. pp. 20-22
“Stephen and Paul were probably about the same age – the Greek word translated “young man,” denotes a male between youth and forty. Stephen’s birthplace is unknown, for Jews from Egypt and elsewhere used the same synagogue as Cilicians, but he spoke Greek as fluently as Aramaic. Both men were quick thinkers, powerful minds, able controversialists. No tradition remains of Stephen’s physique, but though Paul is believed to have been short, he held himself well enough to stand out in a crowd. His face was rather oval with beetling eyebrows, and fleshy from good living. He had a black beard, since Jews scored the Roman taste for shaving, and his clue-fringed robe and the amulet strapped to a turban-like headdress displayed his pride in being a Pharisee. As he strode about the Temple courts, he disclosed arrogance inevitable in a man whose ancestors and actions made him feel important. He carried out faithfully the unending cycle of ritual cleansings of platters and cups and of his own person. He kept the weekly fasts – between sunrise and sunset—and said the daily prayers in exact progression and number. He knew what was due to him: respectful greetings, high precedence, a prominent seat in the synagogue. Deep down in his character lay a vein of compassion, but he believed that a good man should keep away from bad men. Paul would have approved the Pharisee who, on seeing Jesus allow a prostitute to wash His feet with her tears…, took it as proof that the man could be no prophet...
Stephen, on the other hand, spent much of his time in doling food and necessities to widows. In the two years since the execution of Jesus, the holy city had become pervaded with those who believed that He had risen from the dead. Most were nondescript and poor. Many lived in communal groups and all of them shared their resources. When Greek-speaking disciples complained that widows were being neglected, Stephen and six others were chose to undertake routine daily distribution of food.
Paul was disturbed that a man of Stephen’s academic caliber should demean himself in social concerns; and irked that, while his own affairs absorbed him, Stephen should go around bringing happiness. Men respected but feared Paul; the respected Stephen and loved him. When Stephen preached, Paul could not fail to discern the gulf between them: Stephen always turned the Scriptures in the direction of Jesus as the Deliverer or Messiah … and proved his point by citing the evidence of eyewitnesses that, incredible as it seemed, a corpse had come to life again and climbed out of the grave…
Paul considered Stephen’s arguments nonsense. The Christ had not come yet. And the way to God was fixed forever: a man must belong to God’s chosen people the Jews, and try to obey the Law… Paul felt no personal concern, knowing his own goodness, but he recognized Stephen’s contentions as dangerous. Gamaliel had advised toleration; Simon Peter and other disciples of Jesus worshiped at the Temple and continued to obey the Law. But Paul saw, as Stephen saw, that the old and the new were incompatible; man was saved either by the Temple sacrifices and obeying the Law, or by faith in Jesus. The old must destroy the new or be destroyed.”
Pollock, John. The Apostle: A Life of Paul. pp. 20-22
Class 2 Question 8. Why was Saul going to Damascus?
By Acts 9, Saul's blood is boiling. He's on a murderous rampage toward Damascus. The scene opens as "Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest, and asked for letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, both men and women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem" (Acts 9:1-2)
Why Damascus? Saul had determined to go to the farthest extreme in his mission to apprehend followers of the Way. Over one hundred miles north of Jerusalem, the journey to Damascus was no small undertaking. To Saul the trip would pay off in spades, though. According to Josephus, at one point in history ten thousand Jews were massacred in Damascus - hard evidence that at certain times a significant number of Jewish people lived in the city. Saul was certain that many Jewish turncoats had fled to seek refuge in far away Damascus. He devised an aggressive plan to capture these infidels and drag them to court.
Reference: Paul: A Man of Grace and Grit
Why Damascus? Saul had determined to go to the farthest extreme in his mission to apprehend followers of the Way. Over one hundred miles north of Jerusalem, the journey to Damascus was no small undertaking. To Saul the trip would pay off in spades, though. According to Josephus, at one point in history ten thousand Jews were massacred in Damascus - hard evidence that at certain times a significant number of Jewish people lived in the city. Saul was certain that many Jewish turncoats had fled to seek refuge in far away Damascus. He devised an aggressive plan to capture these infidels and drag them to court.
Reference: Paul: A Man of Grace and Grit
Class 1 Questions: Background
1. What did Paul mean when he said he was “set apart from birth” in GAL 1:15?
2. As a son of a Pharisee, Saul was certainly reared as closely to the letter of the law as possible. The apostle described his home life in very few words in PHIL 3:5. In what ways did he specifically describe his heritage.
3. What are a few ways the ancient Hebrew home emphasized Scripture in the life of a young boy? *
4. How would you describe Saul’s training in Jerusalem? *
5. MATTHEW 23 is an entire chapter addressed to the teachers of the law and Pharisees. Read the chapter and compile a list of specific ways Jesus described the same people Saul encountered during his training in Jerusalem. Note both the verse and description.
6. After the day of Pentecost, recorded in ACTS 2, what was Jerusalem like (ACTS 3-5)?
7. How did Gamaliel respond to the apostles’ activity (ACTS 5:33-38)?
2. As a son of a Pharisee, Saul was certainly reared as closely to the letter of the law as possible. The apostle described his home life in very few words in PHIL 3:5. In what ways did he specifically describe his heritage.
3. What are a few ways the ancient Hebrew home emphasized Scripture in the life of a young boy? *
4. How would you describe Saul’s training in Jerusalem? *
5. MATTHEW 23 is an entire chapter addressed to the teachers of the law and Pharisees. Read the chapter and compile a list of specific ways Jesus described the same people Saul encountered during his training in Jerusalem. Note both the verse and description.
6. After the day of Pentecost, recorded in ACTS 2, what was Jerusalem like (ACTS 3-5)?
7. How did Gamaliel respond to the apostles’ activity (ACTS 5:33-38)?
Class 1: Question 3. What are a few ways the ancient Hebrew home emphasized Scripture in the life of a young boy?
In Philippians 3:5 Paul described himself as “a Hebrew of Hebrews.” A Jew would have known exactly what he meant. Virtually nothing but Jewish influence touched him in his early childhood. Unlike the typical family today, the father assumed primary responsibility for training the child. The Code of Jewish Law states, “It is the duty of every father to train his children in the practice of all the precepts, whether Biblical or Rabbinical…It is also incumbent upon the father to guard his children against any forbidden act” (Code, IV, p. 47). As a Pharisee, Saul’s father would have assumed his responsibility with great sobriety. We may have to fight the temptation to automatically attach a negative connotation to the term Pharisee. Read F.B. Meyer’s description:“The word Pharisee is a synonym for religious pride and hypocrisy; but we must never forget that in those old Jewish days the Pharisee represented some of the noblest traditions of the Hebrew people. Amid the prevailing indifference the Pharisees stood for a strict religious life…Amid the lax morals of the time, which infected Jerusalem almost as much as Rome, the Pharisee was austere in his ideals, and holy in life.” *
Some gave the Pharisees a bad name, just as some Christians give Christianity a bad name. Saul’s father was not likely one of them, although a number of scholars wonder if he might have been excessively strict, based on the apostle’s words in Ephesians 4:6.
Jewish parents considered children the utmost blessing from God and loved them dearly. The ancient historian Josephus said of the Jew, “We lay greater stress on the training of the children than on anything else, and regard observance of the Law and a corresponding godly life as the most important of all duties.” Although young Saul grew up in a very strict home, he likely enjoyed the utmost devotion of his father to his godly upbringing.
The rabbinic laws taught father to begin teaching their children the ways of God from the earliest understanding. As little more than a toddler, Saul learned to say the Schmone-Ezre – the primary prayers of the Jews – morning, noon, and night. He learned to prayer before and after every meal. He actively participated in the traditional feasts as soon as he could talk. A child of normal intelligence read Scriptures by five years of age. At six years old Saul began his education at the school of a rabbi. These schools were ordinarily attached to the community synagogue. The Jewish population was large enough to have at least one active synagogue in Tarsus. Lessons were tedious and teachers were strict, but Jewish children were rarely caught roaming the streets.
Soon after his sixth birthday, Paul would have memorized Deuteronomy 6:4-9, the words on the tiny scroll inside the Mesusah on the doorway of his home. Far more impressively, he also memorized Psalms 113-118! Imagine all six Psalms being seared into you as a child. Being a Hebrew wasn’t just a religion. Judaism wasn’t even just a way of life. Being Hebrew defined who you were, how you thought, what you felt. By the time Saul was 10 years old. He would have known the intricacies of the oral law. Young Saul’s mind was thoroughly stretched with constant memorization. He had little choice but to “meditate on the law both day and night” just to prepare for the following days lessons.
The years between 10 and 13 are transforming for any boy, but a particular metamorphosis took place in a Jewish boy’s life. By age 13, for all practical purposes, he was considered a man. Once he reached this gateway he was considered a son of the law. He assumed all the religious responsibilities of the adult Jew. He started wearing phylacteries, called tefflin, during weekday morning prayers. Phylacteries were two black leather cubes with long leather straps. The cubes held certain passages from the Torah written on strips of parchment. Saul wore one of the cubes on the left arm facing his heart wound exactly seven times. The other cube was worn in the center of his forehead.
The Code of Jewish Law prescribed that a Jewish man (13 years or older) was to put on the tefflin at the first moment in the morning when enough daylight shone to recognize a neighbor at a distance of four cubits (Code, I, p. 27). Saul would have performed this ritual in complete silence. If interrupted for even a moment, he would have to start all over, repeating the appropriate benedictions. A Jewish man got up every morning remembering to whom he belonged; the binding tefflin a physical reminder of his binding relationship to God. The law of the Lord was Saul’s life. *
* Excerpts from To Live Is Christ and The Life of Paul
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)