Skeptics and critics of the Bible often level the charge that the Bible is “full” of contractions. An example of this kind of charge involves the accounts of Paul’s conversion as found in Acts. In Acts 9 and 22 Luke recorded Paul’s testimonies of his conversion. What is very interesting about these accounts is that Luke faithfully recorded an apparent contradiction found in them (as read in some English Bibles). The first observation that must be recognized is Luke’s faithfulness to his source. It is impressive that Luke did not “clean up” this apparent contradiction! One would assume that if either of these accounts were a fabricated story, then Luke would have avoided any kind of contradiction, but he did not. And as will become obvious, there is no real contradiction at all. Consequently, one should assume that Luke has accurately summarized Paul’s description of his conversion in Acts 9, while in Acts 22 Luke actually quoted Paul’s own words. Regardless, we should not excuse the differences in these testimonies as simply the result of Paul’s summarizing his testimonies to different audiences. Such a solution marginalizes the doctrine of inerrancy. That being said, in Acts 9 Luke only recorded a summary of Paul’s conversion, he did not record an actual verbal description given by Paul. This second observation, while minor, will be addressed below. The passages in question are translated below in the following manner:
Acts 9.7: “The men who traveled with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one” (NASB95).
Acts 22.9: “And those who were with me saw the light, to be sure, but did not understand the voice of the One who was speaking to me.” (NASB).
What first must be explained is that the words in italics parallel one another in the original Greek. Consequently, one could level the charge that a contradiction has occurred. However, just because the words in both verses are the same does not demand that they must have the same exact meaning every time they occur. This fluidity of nuance is common in both Greek and English when dealing with words that often have multiple meanings. Consequently, charging that a contradiction has occurred is tenuous at best. An absolute contradiction would have been if Luke had only recorded the following:
Acts 9.7: “The men who traveled with him stood speechless, hearing the sound but seeing no one.”
Acts 22.9: “And those who were with me saw the light, but they heard no sound. (full stop)”
But this is not what Luke wrote. At this point the possible meanings of the Greek word “ακουω” must be addressed. This word maybe translated with 3 basic meanings, they are: “to hear,” “to listen,” and “to understand.” An excellent verse for understanding the nuances of this word can be found in Matthew 13.13, which may be translated:
“. . . and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.” (NASB)
In this verse the words “hearing” and “hear” are both the same, which again is “ακουω.” Clearly Matthew meant something more than “hearing they do not hear.” It is impossible to be both hearing and not hearing at the same time. Consequently, this verse can be best translated with the following variations: “. . . hearing they did not hear or gain insight,” or “. . . hearing they did not listen or gain insight,” or finally “. . . hearing they did not understand or gain insight.” All the emphasized words are the same exact word in Greek, which as explained is “ακουω.” Therefore, it is obvious that in different contexts it has differing nuances, even when used in the same verse; consequently, at times it should be interpreted differently. More importantly, in Acts 22 Luke recorded additional data provided by Paul which should influence how we should understand what Paul meant.
In Acts 22.9, Luke recorded Paul as testifying that those who were with him did not “hear the sound of the one speaking to me.” The word in italics in Greek is “φωνη,” which can be translated as “sound, noise,” or “voice.” This word is used in Acts 9.7 to refer to the “noise” that was heard by those who were present with Paul, as well as in Acts 22.9 to refer to the “voice” that those who were present with Paul but did not understand “the voice of the One who was speaking to me.” It should be observed that Luke documented Paul’s explanation that there was a voice speaking to him. The issue at hand is did those with Paul not “hear” that voice or did they simply not “understand” it. In Acts 9.7 we are told that they “heard” the sound of the voice; consequently, in Acts 22.9 we should understand Paul to mean that they did not “understand” the sound of the one speaking to Paul.
Nevertheless, the great debate is this, could these witnesses have possibly heard the sound of the Lord speaking to Paul but did not understand that someone was speaking to Paul? The answer is emphatically yes! Moreover, there is an excellent example of this same type of event occurring in John 12.27-30. In this passage some of those who were with Jesus “heard” (i.e., ακουω) a “noise” (i.e., φωνη) but did not understand that it was God who was speaking to Jesus. They heard the sound of God’s voice but they did not comprehend the fact that it was God speaking directly to Jesus! This raises the question, why did Paul’s companions not understand that someone was speaking to him? The answer might be because of the language of the speaker! In Acts 26.14 Paul provided additional data concerning the event, stating that the voice spoke in a “Hebrew dialect.” First, we know nothing about Paul’s traveling companions; consequently there is nothing that demands that they were Greek speaking Jews that also understood Aramaic. Moreover, it is more probably that Jesus actually spoke to Paul in Hebrew rather than Aramaic (Paul being a well-educated Pharisee would have been proficient in the Hebrew Scriptures as well as the Septuagint). Consequently, it appears that Paul’s traveling companions heard the sound of someone speaking to Paul, but they did not understand what was said because they did not understand the language of the one who was speaking! Observing this phenomenon raises this question, have translations such as the NIV provided an accurate interpretation of the passages in question? The NIV (1985) translates these passages in the following manner:
Acts 9.7: “. . . they heard the sound but did not see anyone.”
Acts 22.9: “. . . but they did not understand the voice of him who was speaking to me” (which is similarly confirmed by the NASB95 as well)
The exegetical evidence confirms that in this case the NIV has correctly translated the words in these passages to fit their particular contexts. Obviously some would disagree, but regardless of their objections there is adequate information to reject the charge that an absolute contradiction has occurred with respect to the descriptions of Paul’s conversion accounts found in Acts 9 and Acts 22.
Doc.
Copyright © 2014 Monte Shanks