Did Paul's conversion happen on the road to Damascus as the Bible says?

Answer 1

A:Based on Paul's account of his various travels in the Epistle to the Galatians, his conversion must have taken place in the early 30s of the first century, or even earlier. Acts of the Apostles says that Paul's conversion was the result of a miraculous event that took place on the road to Damascus, so again, this would have to be no later than the early thirties. Paul's own account seems to be somewhat at variance with the story of the road to Damascus, and Acts also seems to place Paul's conversion quite a few years later than Paul does. The account in Acts appears to be based on the ancient play of Euripedes called the Bacchaeand therfore is probably not really historical.

Answer 2

A:Almost certainly not. First of all, Paul never mentions this episode and gives an entirely different itinerary than does Acts of the Apostles. Paul says that when God revealed Jesus in him, he went to Arabia, and only later to Damascus; moreover he says that he received the gospel from no man, but by revelation. Acts says that after Paul's dramatic encounter with the spiritual Jesus, he was taken blind and helpless to Damascus where he was taught the gospel.

A particular problem with the version in Acts of the Apostles is thatthe voice of Jesus saying(Acts 25:14)

, "

It hurts you to kick against the goad [or 'pricks']" is a quotation from the ancient play known as

Bacchae

by Euripides. The scene has parallels to the play and quite improbably has Jesus quote a Greek proverb to Paul while speaking Aramaic ("in the Hebrew language"). Confirming this link, the story of Paul being released while in prison also seems to be sourced from this well-known Greek play.

There are many discrepancies between Acts and Paul's epistles. It appears that Acts was actually written, around the end of the first century, in order to reduce the importance of Paul's role in establishing Christianity and to promote Peter's role. If Paul was taken, blind and helpless, to receive the gospel from second-level disciples, he could hardly have been the greatest Christian apostle, as he was probably regarded prior to Acts of the Apostles. Throughout Acts, there is a subtle comparison between the two great apostles, with Peter always appearing the more worthy apostle.