THE KING’S BUSINESS
460
was to blame, woefully to blame, for re garding Jesus as an impostor though he was conscientious in his opinion. There was abundant evidence that Jesus had risen from the dead, and that He was the Son of God, and if Paul had given the evidence the consideration it had a right to demand, he would have known that Jesus was the Son of God. Saul was to blame for his own ignorance. The fact that a man is thoroughly conscientious in an error does not justify him in his error. He may be, as Saul was, altogether to blame for his conscientious unbelief. Paul, or rath'er Saul as he was called then, had taken up •with a wrong idea upon a great and funda mental question and had not thought it through as he ought. There are many today in Saul’s position. They sincerely and honestly believe that Jesus is not divine, but still they are inexcusable; for there is abundant proof that Jesus is divine and they have never given this abundant proof the consideration that it deserves, and that they owe to it, and their sincere unbelief and its awful consequences are their own fault. Saul’s sincere unbelief, a n i the awful treatment of Christ and Christians that arose from it were abominable sins and not merely grave misfortunes (1 Tim. 1:13-15). How mad Paul was in his con scientious opposition to the Son of God! He arrested the faithful followers of Jesus everywhere. He thoroughly gave himself up to this fiendish work. He punished them, and furthermore, consented to and gloated over their death. There is no other haté in the human heart so bitter as hate to the holy Son of God even today. Friday, May 4 . Acfs 26 : 12 - 14 . As inexcusable as Saul was in his sin, God had mercy even upon this mad perse cutor. Jesus met him. Saul saw Jesus and hate was turned to devotion. We have already studied the conversion of Saul of Tarsus in our studies on the 9th and 22nd chapters of the Acts and we will not go into details again here. The three accounts should be read in comparison with one
imprisoned was Pharisaic truth. The Pharisees stood for th e ' truth of the resurrection and it was for that truth that Paul stood and also suffered. It is true that Paul was making a new application of this truth, viz., that a certain individual named Jesus had actually risen from the dead. The resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is the fundamental fact and the fundamental doctrine of Christianity; not merely that there is to be in some vague future day a resurrection of the dead, but that a certain definite historical individual, Jesus of Nazareth, has been raised already. The whole Gospel is wrapped up in the fact of the resurrection, of Jesus, (cf. Rom. 10:9-10), Paul turned suddenly upon Agrippa with a searching and startling question: “Why is it judged incredible with you, that God doth raise the dead?” Yes, why is it judged incredible? Many consider it incredible today, but why do they consider it incredible? Cannot the God who originally brought us into being bring us back again though we die, and even though we crumble into dust? There is neither logic, nor science, nor philosophy, nor reason in the opposition so common to the doctrine of the resurrection, and fur thermore the resurrection of Jesus Christ is a clearly and thoroughly established historic fact. The resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is the best proven fact of ancient history. The proof of the resur rection of Jesus Christ is so overwhelming that no candid seeker after the truth can sit down and thoroughly sift the evidence and come to any other conclusion than that Jesus Christ rose from the dead in the way that is recorded in the four Gospels. Thursday, May 3 .. Matt. 26 : 9 - 11 . Paul, or rather Saul as he was called, in earlier days, had , been thoroughly conscientious in his opposition to Jesus. He ‘really regarded’ Jesus as an infamous impostor. “Well then,” someone may say, “Paul was not to blame, but to be com mended for his opposition to Jesus and His followers/’' but that does not follow. Saul
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs