even at times to eloquence (Hug, Einleit. ii, 285), al- though he may have seemed to the Greeks "rude in speech" (2 Cor. xi, 6), and a better Pauline system of rhetoric could easiij' be derived from his works than Baur suggests (Halle, 1782, ii, 8 ; see Kirchmaier, De P. Eliiquentia [Vitel). 1695] ; Baden, De Eoquent. Paidi [Havn. 1786] ; Tzschirner, Ohservat. Pauli epis- tol. scripiotis ingeniuni concernentes [Viteb. 1800], iii, 4 ; Hofl'mann, ]>e sti'o Pavli [Tubing. 1757]). I'aul not only talked (jlreek in the ordinary intercourse of life, but was able to make extemporaneous speeches in Greek (Acts xxi, 37; xvii, 22 sq.). Nor can there be any doubt of the acquaintance of the apostle with Latin, and his ability to speak it (see Ehrhardt, De Lutinitate Pauli [Silus. 1755], ii, 4). But perhaps his idiomatic facility in the Greek had failed him, and led to his employment of an amanuensis. Extravagant claims have often been made on the apostle's behalf as to his classical education, based upon slender evidence. This evidence consists (1) of a few supposed references, in the discourse alluded to by Dr. Bentle}', to certain dogmas of the Greek philosophers ; but even suppos- ing the apostle to have had these in his eye., it will not follow that he must have studied the writings in which these dogmas were unfolded and defended, be- cause he might have learned enough of them to guide him to such references, as by the supposition he makes in that discourse, from those controversial encounters with " the philosophers of the Epicureans and of the Stoics" which we are told he had in the market-place of Athens, previous to the delivery of his oration on the Areopagus ; (2) of three quotations made by him from Greek poets : one from the Phtsnomena (ver. 5) of his countryman Aratus (Acts xvii, 28), one from a lost pla}' of Menander (1 Cor. xv, 33), and one from Epimenides (Tit. i, 12), all of which, however, bear the general character of gnomes or proverbs, and might consequently find their way to the apostle merely as a part of the current coin of popular conversation, with- out his having once visited the treasurj' whence they were originall}' drawn ; and (3) of certain similarities of idea and expression between some passages of the apostle and some that are found in classic authors (Home, Introd. iv, 34.3) ; but none of which are of such a nature as to necessitate the conclusion that the coin- cidence is more than purely accidental. See Educa- tion.
5. On the conversion of Paul there are various views (see Lyttleton, Observ. on the Convers. of Paul [Lond. 1747], and ]Li\mb\, Coviment. iv, 329 sq.). The older view, and the prevailing one still in England and America, which interprets the accounts literally, and supposes a visible manifestation of Jesus, is brought forward by Miller {De Je-u a Paullo Viso [Gott. 1778]). But the prevailing current of German opinion, under rationalistic influence, has for a long time been to ex- plain away the supernatural elements in this narra- tive, either bj' referring them to the imagination of Paul and his followers, working on natural events (see Ammon, De repentina Sauli ad doctr. Chrisii con- rerslme [Erl. 1792]. also in his Opusc. Theol. 1 sq. ; Eichhorn, Bibliolh. der bibl. Lit. vi sq. ; Greiling, in Henke "s Mus. iii, 226 sq. ; Schulz, in Heinrich's Peitr. z. Beford. d. theol. Wiss. i, 47 sq. ; Bengel, Observ. de Pauli ad rem Christ, conver. [Tubing. 1819], ii, 4 [this work takes, however, a middle course, and shows more than usual regard for the narrative] ; Planck, Gesch. der crsten Periode d. Christen, ii, 90 sq. But Neander [i, 116] and Olshausen [on Acts ix, 1] return partiallj' to tiie old view), or reject the narrative en- tirely as a relation of actual facts (so Bretschneider, Handb. der Dogmatik, i, 325 sq., who considers all as a vision; Baur, p. 63 sq., who makes the account a fa- ble, framed out of Paul's internal experience, by his defenders, as an offset to I'eter's vision. Acts x, 11).
The apologetic bearing of Saul's conversion, accord- ing to the obvious meaning of the Scripture narrative,
PAUL
819
PAUL
upon the question of the supernatural orij^in of Chris- tian it}- is too obvious not to have rendered the subject a fiehi of fierce debate among the contending parties. The Christian Church, as a whole, has ever appealed to this reinarliable event as furnishing irresistible evi- dence of the truth of the crowning miracle of the Gos- pel, the resurrection of our Lord. Upon tliis one fact, the "conversion and apostleship of raul," a well- known author (Lj^ttleton) has consented to lay the whole stress of the argument. Was Paul an impostor, or an enthusiast, or deceived by others ? Let us weigh the probabilities. This is not the case of a rude Gali- hean peasant, whose untutored perceptions might be supposed incapable of distinguishing between natural and miraculous phenomena; but of a man of acute and discriminating intellect, well versed in Jewish learn- ing, and not unacquainted with classic lore ; and so far from being predisposed towards the Christian cause, or even, like his master Gamaliel, content to remain neutral, or to leave the event to a higher power, ani- mated bj' sentiments of the bitterest hostility to Christ and to Christ's followers. His most cherished associ- ations, his temporal prospects, alike pointed to his con- tinuance in the Jewish faith. His subsequent course furnishes no evidence of any change of mind. His convictions and his zeal know no abatement, and at length he seals his ministry with a martyr's death. If we examine his extant letters, we find in them not a trace of the credulous or the enthusiastic or the fanatical temperament, which might explain the phe- nomenon. According to the ordinary motives of hu- man action, Paul's conversion is, if the facts were not as stated, unaccountat)le.