Recently, Larry Hurtado poked another bear by asking whether Paul was converted or called. It’s a question that’s been approached from many angles and much recent scholarship wants to see Paul was simply called. His prophetic language in Galatians 1 does support this idea (ὁ ἀφορίσας με ἐκ κοιλίας μητρός μου καὶ καλέσας διὰ τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ, 1:15). Also in support is the modern definition of “conversion,” which is that of a switch from one religion to another, or from being irreligious to being religious. Since Christianity did not emerge as a separate religion until later than Paul’s day, it is difficult to say he was “converted” on the Damascus road.
I think, however, to ask whether he was “converted,” is misleading. The use of the modern sociological term is anachronistic, and does not do justice to Paul’s own language. Yes, he does use language of prophetic calling, but that does not override the language he uses elsewhere.
When we look at Paul’s own language to describe his pre- and post-Damascus road experience, we get images of how he would describe himself. He was zealous for the law, but when he discovered Christ’s true identity, he counted it all rubbish (Phil 3:4-7). He calls his former self a “persecutor of the church” (3:6), and whatever righteousness he had, he considered it his own, having come from the law, not having come from Christ through faith (3:9). It is difficult to see this language and believe that Paul only believed that he was “called” and not somehow “saved” (to use his own language) or granted a new kind of righteousness, a saving righteousness.
Stronger language may be found in 2 Cor 4:1-6. If recent scholars are correct to see in these verses allusions to Paul’s own Damascus road experience, then it becomes even more difficult to see Paul as simply “called.” If he is alluding to himself, then prior to Christ’s revelation to him, he was blinded by Satan; he was veiled; he was perishing; he was an unbeliever; he could not see the light of the gospel. It took God to shine a light into his heart (from heaven) the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of (the risen) Jesus Christ. Strong words indeed for his former self!
Perhaps the answer to the question is that Paul was both converted and called–in that order. Or if we want to avoid the word “converted,” then let’s use Paul’s own language. He was saved, through which process he was called. That is, he was saved for an explicit purpose, his calling to preach the gospel to the gentiles; but he couldn’t preach that gospel until he believed it himself. He needed God to remove the veil that Satan was keeping over his spiritual eyes.
It is unfortunate that many Pauline theologies exclude Ephesians from its analysis because of its doubted Pauline authorship. Paul’s own experience with spiritual blindness and the drastic salvation from that blindness brought about by God’s power gives him existential experience with spiritual warfare. So when he writes about it in Ephesians 6, he’s writing from personal experience. His commands to the Ephesians are not theoretical or simply theological, they are practical pastoral advice from one who has been through the battle himself. Those who only see Paul as having been “called” and not also saved from malevolent spiritual blindness miss out on a side of Paul that gives his writings a deeper dimension, even if it makes some of us Westerners a little uncomfortable.
