St. Paul and the Shroud by Lennox Manton Collegamento pro Sindone Internet – June 2003 © All rights reserved It seems best to begin at the beginning! Acts firstly starts with the appointment of Matthias as an Apostle to take the place of Judas, and then follows on with a description of their activities in Jerusalem in spreading the Gospel and doing good works (Acts 1-4); as a result the Sanhedrin rounds them up but eventually lets them go with a warning (Acts 4:21). However, they still persevered in attracting many converts who sold up their possessions to give to the Church, which is where Barnabas, a Levite of Cyprus who sold up his land there to join the Apostles, is first mentioned. The subsequent activities of the Apostles again lead them to be brought before the Sanhedrin who wish to put them to death, but they are reprieved by the intervention of Rabbi Gamaliel. Many more converts join the Church and Stephen is chosen to further proclaim the Gospel, which he fervently does to the extent that he is denounced by the Libertines [thought to have been at some time Roman political or military prisoners who had subsequently become freedmen and with their own Synagogue; they were Stephen’s chief accusers]. This resulted in the stoning of Stephen and the first mention of Paul in Acts who consented unto his death and subsequently made ‘havoc of the Church’ (Acts 8:1,3). It is not clear as to whether Paul was in Jerusalem at the time of the Crucifixion but apparently not, only coming onto the scene during the post Crucifixion activities of the Apostles which seem to have been very assertive. Acts 9:1 begins with Luke’s account of Paul’s conversion on the Damascus road which could have taken place around A.D. 34-35, the Crucifixion having taken place around A.D. 31. The exact circumstances of his conversion appear not to have been resolved, apart from Theological causes. I feel that some medical phenomena was certainly involved as he was left with a temporary blindness that could well have been of an hysterical nature in that it was relieved by Ananias in Damascus. In those days the journey from Jerusalem to Damascus was not easy and could have been strenuous. Did he walk, or ride a donkey? Verse 8 suggests that he was waking, but this could have been on the last stage after his blindness when he was led by the hand. However he journeyed, it was a long way by caravan taking some six days or so. I drove the route he could have taken in 1940 from Jerusalem through Samaria and Nazareth, Galilee, lake Hula, [that the Israelis have now drained and in so doing have completely upset the ecology], and under Mount Hermon to Damascus. Paul gives a second account in Acts 22:5-13, that follows the first account up to verse 17, which seems to be out of context. Acts 9:20 states that Paul immediately took the Gospel to the Damascene Jews to the extent that they, expecting him to denounce the Apostolic teaching, found him now proclaiming it, and decided to liquidate him, which resulted in Ananias organising his escape over the wall by night in a basket. Only in Paul’s letter to the Galatians does he mention the fact, in 1:17, that he did not go up to Jerusalem but went into Arabia and then returned to Damascus, and it was then after three years that he went up to Jerusalem to see the Apostles (verse 18); this would seem to indicate that he spent some three years in Arabia and Damascus following his conversion and having his sight restored by Ananias. Paul also in his second letter to the Corinthians mentions that it was the troops of Aretas who sought to apprehend him (11:32-33) [the only time Aretas is mentioned in the N.T.] and this no doubt at the instigation of the Damascene Jews. The Aretas he mentions, and only on this occasion, was Aretas IV the king of Petra, the then capital of Arabia Petrea where there was a very civilized and sophisticated culture. Daily caravans plied between Petra and Damascus bringing exotic goods from the far East via the gulf of Aquaba , the Queen of Sheba’s route when Solomon went to 1 welcome her with ‘all the powders of a merchant’. The caravans left at dawn to arrive at dusk at the next caravanserai, for protection at night. Paul would have picked up one of these outside the walls of Damascus, and spent the two years in Petra, out of the way of the Sanhedrin. After his conversion in no way could he have possibly gone back to Jerusalem to face the wrath of the Sanhedrin, and there was no where else safe enough for him to go. This course of events, however, does not fit in with theological thought that maintains Paul went into Arabia after he had recovered from his blindness and weakness, to then come back to Damascus after two years had elapsed in Arabia, and to then preach the Gospel to the Jews who sought to kill him. It was then when he escaped to go to the Apostles in Jerusalem to seek to become one of them. To me this is not the logical way. After two years away in Arabia, Paul’s original visit would have been history to the Damascene Jews. The discrepancy in the first account in Acts, where Arabia is not mentioned, lies between verses 25 and 26 in Acts 9. Verses 26 onwards is the description of Paul’s movements following his return to Damascus after two years in Arabia, to then leave for Jerusalem and go with Barnabas to the Apostles to be accepted on the recommendation of Barnabas to be counted as one of themselves. It didn’t work out. In Acts 9:29 he is recorded as having been ‘so bold in the name of Jesus’ in his preaching to the Judean churches that the Apostles had to get him out of Jerusalem and down to Caesarea where they saw to it that he took the boat home to Tarsus. This is the background to the first question that has been suggested. When on his was to Damascus to effect the Sanhedrin persecutions, was a sight of the Shroud at that time in any way a catalyst that could have brought about his conversion? If the Shroud was being transported at that time on the Damascus road the question is, by whom, why, where to, and to whom in Damascus. None of the Apostles were on that journey and it is not likely, in the face of the then tension that pertained with the Sanhedrin, that the Apostles would have entrusted it to a third party. The answer is that it was not on the Damascus road. The question then arises, did Paul see it in Jerusalem? Paul’s visit to the Apostles with Barnabas must be the same visit as described by Paul in Galatians 1:17. In verses 15-16 he refers to his conversion on the Damascus road, in 17 he states that he did not go up to Jerusalem to them which were Apostles before me, but went into Arabia, to then return to Damascus and after three years [the time spent in Arabia and Damascus] to go back to Jerusalem to see Peter and abide with him fifteen days. Of the other Apostles only James the brother of Jesus was present. However he does say that he returned to Tarsus after having preached to the Churches in Judea, who had heard that it was he who had persecuted them in the past. This is Paul’s version of the visit that Luke has recorded in Acts 9. Did the Apostles show the Shroud to Paul on the occasion of this visit.? At this juncture in Paul’s career it is not likely. In spite of the recommendations of Barnabas and Paul’s apparent change of heart is it likely that the Apostles, if they then still had it in their keeping and not being assured of Paul’s integrity, would have taken the risk. Of Paul’s activities during the next twelve to fourteen years nothing has been recorded. Did he remain in Tarsus for any length of time? It could have been difficult for the family being, as they were, dedicated Pharisees of the house of Benjamin, and it is not likely that he would have remained quiet during these years. There are a number of legends and traditions still in the Cappadocian valleys that relate to Paul having been in the region: they are quite credible in view of the district being very remote and difficult of access and an ideal location for early Christian Anchorites who certainly migrated there. When Barnabas was instructed by the Apostles to go and help the Church in Antioch he asked for the help of Paul. Acts 11: 25-26, ‘Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus to seek Saul. And when he had found him he brought him unto Antioch,’ which suggests that Paul was not, at that time, in Tarsus, but possibly in Cappadocia that was not that far distant. After having spent a year in organising the Church in Antioch Paul and Barnabas had a visit from Agabus telling them of famine in Jerusalem and asking for donations to help the Judean churches; donations that were taken to Jerusalem by 2 Paul and Barnabas.