Why Paul? Why not you?

A topic/question deserving more attention than a passing comment elsewhere: Why did the apostle Paul receive an invitation so unusual to see the risen Lord?

A common complaint shared by they who say ‘there is no God,’ or that the testimony of scripture is not credible, suggests God is somehow unfair in revealing Himself to one and not another. Any merit here with this gripe? The short answer is no, because He in fact reveals Himself to ALL generally, (through creation obviously) but specifically to others for distinct purposes, most of which, you and I would want no part of. (see link below and read some rather dark matter)

A brilliant intellectual, the most fastidious of Torah students. Renowned sitting under the great Reb Gamaliel. A Pharisee. A member of the tribe of Benjamin. Stood by in agreement at the stoning of Stephen. Yet in all this, he would be blinded (would you want that???) and sat for three days contemplating the law in its punishing weight, contrasted against the grace of God. So yeah, quite different than you.

Ever heard of Job? He was called too. Read his life and times, then tell me you missed out on not being harassed by family and friends, a time of intense misery and sickness, and to boot, having the devil chase you down. Or Daniel among lions? Samson with eyes gouged? How many examples do we need that prove we benefit from the trials of others without going through them ourselves? So we see Paul, once Saul from Tarsus, head and shoulders above all others.

He had no clue how low he would go after a personal visit, but let’s admit, he could have said ‘get lost, not interested.’

So chosen yes, for a mission, a purpose no one else would sign up for. Be honest. Would you? Read his own accounting of sleepless nights, without food, shipwreck, beatings, death threats, defending Genesis, Moses, the prophets, all with a view of promoting the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of Adam, and taking the word of God, writing it through his structured personality, without compromise, and in excruciating detail, unfolding the grace of God, which by the way, no mere mortal in his own strength, could possibly deliver, Indeed, he was given a commission others could never execute.

There would be no New Testament without Paul. There would be no understanding of HOW a man such as Saul, could do an about face and now as Paul, not only explain how, but WHY. According to the scriptures. His explanation of a seed planted in the ground is just marvelous in its demurity in proving there is another life yet to be. His mention of the heavens, where birds fly, and how men are the true giants of the earth, speaking of terrestrial and celestial, are sober thoughts for they who appreciate clear and deep thinking.

Paul, when he became an inductee into the grace of God, would live a life envious of none. I would be slow to moan that I wasn’t called this way. Also, in a court of law, no slick attorney could hold a candle against the analytical mind of Paul. From his articulation of creation, the law, redemption, adoption, love, grace, truth telling, nature, and of course common sense, he would clean every dirty clock where even the most ardent of judges must admit ‘here is a man above men,’ so yeah, Paul was chosen because God knew what he would do with the calling. Not very many alive who show fidelity to a cause not their own.

As a sidenote, with Saul/Paul, there was never a drop of ambiguity or caution regarding the very existence of God. And he knew God’s word was good. The exodus was fact. Pharaoh lived. Adam was actual. Abraham had a son, but there was a greater truth behind the sparing of Isaac. Paul said as much in the one of the world’s greatest documents, the book of Romans. Why Paul personally? Romans is reason enough.

The temporary setting aside of Israel and the filling of the Body, indeed, many more things were said as promised through the Lord’s own lips to the others, and Paul unfolded those MANY things. So we can easily see the timely words of ‘Rise and stand upon thy feet, for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose……………’ Read yourself Acts 26- Unfair then? Hmmm.

About ColorStorm

Blending the colorful issues of life with the unapologetic truth of scripture, while adding some gracious ferocity.
This entry was posted in Characters of scripture, Exhortation and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to Why Paul? Why not you?

  1. Amen! God is very gentle with us, very kind. The softest whisper will rock your world. 🙂

    Non believers really have no idea what they are asking.

    Liked by 1 person

    • ColorStorm says:

      Tkx a lot msb/
      Was written primarily in answer to the jokery of they who dare to say our friend Paul was delusional- yeah/ some kind of brain damage. Geezo/

      How low must the sinful condition of man stoop to naysay what is upright and good/

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Ark says:

    Renowned sitting under the great Reb Gamaliel.

    An oft touted claim. I have never seen evidence of this and as far as I am aware no Jewish sources confirm this claim either.
    I may be mistaken of course. Have you a link to confirm?

    Like

  3. Ark says:

    I am only aware of a mention in Acts and this is supposedly Paul speaking.
    I was looking for evidence to support his claim of studying under Gamaliel.

    Like

    • ColorStorm says:

      Ark/
      If I told you I studied chess under the great Karpov/ people not interested may have never heard of him, or, if they did, may not believe me.

      That was the point of Paul’s mentioning him. We no further reason to disbelieve him any more than doubt the rise of Caesar or Pilate. This is what makes scripture credible. The narrative weaves between history and gives the lives of ALL the apostles strength.

      But we are speaking primarily of Paul/ whose writings are enough. He was brilliant in every way, esp. in developing doctrine in Romans, as mentioned, proving Adam and before-

      Like

      • Ark says:

        Acts is generally considered historically unreliable, some scholars/historians believe it is simply fiction, this is why I asked for evidence to support the claim.
        Half the epistles are forgeries es, they ng ending of gMark is interpolation and as stated, Acts is historically unreliable.
        So we can say, no, there is no evidence to support the claim regarding Gamaliel.

        Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Sure thing ark/ Tks for the input.
          Maybe your readers would ‘enjoy’ a genuine and decent reply from your initial question. Might even generate a fresh look into the credibility of that which you consider bs/

          Go ahead and link if u want/ and I’ll watch from the bleachers. lol

          Like

        • Ark says:

          All I asked for is evidence to support the claim.
          If you can’t offer any simply say so.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          I gave you more than enough. Always do. Be honest here and admit there is no weakness in the text, but that you simply do not like what it says.

          Huge difference-

          Like

        • Ark says:

          No, you gave me Acts – bible text.
          It cannot be supported by evidence / the historical record.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          The Fibonacci sequence explains the common designs found in nature. These designs found everywhere point to a matbellius engineer. They are evidence.

          The same sequences are found in scripture. The innate evidence is irrefutable. But tell us, WHAT evidence is necessary for you to finally admit God!’s word- creation and following- that Christ lived- Pail toured- is all good? What evidence will satisfy once and for all?

          Like

        • Ark says:

          You are now being obtuse and I asked if you would avoid this type of waffle when you mentioned you were going to write this post.
          If you will not / cannot provide evidence then simply have the integrity to say you believe based on faith. Period. It isn’t a difficult request.

          Like

        • ColorStorm says:

          Yeah ok neighbor. King Herod never lived. Pontius Pilate was never governor. Tigris and Euphrates were fiction. Solomon never built a temple. The Maccabees were poetry. Saul was not from Tarsus. Luke was not a physician. Gamaliel was not a scholar. Paul was not a Pharisee……………….

          But you want evidence while denying history? Some people choose their own blindness.

          Like

        • Ark says:

          You misunderstand. My fault I suppose.
          The term you are looking for is historical fiction.
          Fictional tales overlaid onto a pastiche that includes certain verifiable historical people and places.
          Such as Herod and Pilate and Jerusalem.
          However, tales of floods, arks, Exodus, virgin births, dead people arising from graves to go walkabout in downtown Jerusalem etc etc are simply fantasy.

          Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s