Paul's Trance - What It Says About Paul

Paul in Acts 22:17 speaks in Greek of experiencing "ecstasy"

in which his Jesus speaks to him. This is translated as a
"trance" in English. Paul explains his Jesus spoke to Paul
while he was praying at the Temple of Jerusalem. This was a
few days or a couple of weeks after the Damascus-road
encounter. Paul's Jesus in this "ecstasy" -- this trance -- tells
Paul not to try to see the 12 apostles, as Paul was planning to
do to tell them of the amazing wonder of "Jesus" appearance
to him outside Damascus. Instead, Paul's Jesus tells Paul to
leave Jerusalem immediately because the 12 will not believe
Paul truly met the real Jesus. (Why was "this" Jesus worried?
Could he not speak to the 12 just as he supposedly had done
with Paul? But we digress.)
What is a trance? In Greek, it is the word "ekstasis." Our
English word "ecstasy" derives from it. In Greek, it literally
means to "stand outside oneself." ("Ecstasy," Wikipedia.) Its
Greek meaning is explained in the CTI Textbook for
psychology students entitled Hallucinations: A Practical
Guide to Treatment and Management (2016):
Esstasy (or ekstasis) from the Ancient Greek ek-stasis, is a
subjective experience of total involvement of the subject, with
an object of his or her awareness. Because total involvement
with an object of our interest is not our ordinary experience
since we are ordinarily aware also of other objects, the ecstasy
is an example of altered state of consciousness
characterized by diminished awareness of other objects or
total lack of awareness of surroundings and everything
around the object. [Link.]
An ecstasy in its Greek meaning fits the modern clinical
definition of hallucination. This is because it is a subjective
experience without external stimuli. In our scientific era, it
would be dismissed as self-communication that has no divine
or demonic source. But we are Christians, and we believe
divine communication is possible. But would God speak by
an ectasy -- a trance? The answer is NO! Only the pagan
prophets and diveners of false gods did so.
Before Paul, A Trance Is How Pagan gods Alone
Communicated
But in Paul's era, an ecstasy was the way pagans received
inspired messages - by ecstasias -- from both gods and
friendly demons. However, it was NOT the means God
Yahweh used to speak with Hebrew prophets. In Aaron
Milavec's work The Didache: Faith, Hope, & Life of the
Earliest Christian Communities, 50-70 C.E. (2003), he
explains:
"In the ancient world, pagan prophets spoke in ecstasy --
thereby signaling that a god had taken over the faculties of his
/ her messengers. Contemporary studies of the Hebrew
prophets have not yielded any agreement as to whether
ecstasy was a normal part of the observable behavior of the
prophets. R. Wilson: 324.)."
The 2016 textbook on Halluctionations quoted above
explains the meaning of hallucination in our modern view,
although such term 'hallucination' did not exist in Paul's era:
A hallucination, in the broadest sense of the word, is a
perception in the absence of a stimulus. In a stricter sense,
hallucinations as defined as perceptions in a conscious and
awake state in the absence of external stimuli which have
qualities of real perception, in that they are vivid,
substantial, and located in external objective space. The latter
definition distinguishes hallucinations from related
phenomena of dreaming, which does not involve
wakefulness; illusion, which involves distorted or
misinterpreted real perception; imagery, which does not
miimic real perception and is under voluntary control; and
pseudohallucination, which does not mimic real perception,
but is not under voluntary control. [Link.]
Hence, Paul experienced what modern science would say was
an hallucination, but in Paul's era is how pagan gods -- not
Yahweh -- spoke "inspired" messages to their pagan followers.
Sabine-Baring Gould in A Study of St. Paul, His Character &
Opinions(1897) at 118 wrote about this ecstasy that Paul's
experienced as follows:
"At this point, just before starting for Antioch, Paul fell
into an ecstasy, and in this condition received a mysterious
communication from on high."
The ecstasy-trance came at the Temple of Jerusalem when
Paul ran there to share with the 12 the amazing appearance of
"Jesus" to Paul outside Damascus. Baring-Gould explains:
Paul fell into a trance, while praying in the Temple. He saw
Christ who said: 'Make haste and get quickly out of
Jerusalem, for they will not receive your testimony
concerning me." These words certainly intimate mistrust
as to the fidelty of facts in Paul's statement relative to his
commission received in a vision." Id., at 122.
That is Paul's Jesus predicted Paul's version of facts about
"Jesus'" appearance to Paul, if delivered to the 12, would be
rejected by the 12. Rather than Paul's Jesus telling that he,
Jesus, would appear again to the 12 with Paul, or some other
means of endorsement, Paul's Jesus tells him to run and "make
haste" to leave without ever seeing the 12 for the mere fear the
12 won't believe Paul met the true Jesus.
Please realize the apostles at Jerusalem and Bishop James
were at a gate daily at the Jerusalem Temple. Paul was merely
a few yards from them when told to, in effect, run away by
Paul's Jesus.
Then Baring Gould says Paul's varying account before
Agrippa and others about the Damascus-road experience
involved inconsistencies that Paul's Jesus' prediction would
have to come true -- the twelve would never trust Paul's
words alone. We read on page 122:

Baring Gould then says Paul lets us know things never

changed with the 12 -- they never approved Paul. For Paul
admits he did not receive any acknowledgment from men of
his apostleship, including the 12 - Paul insisting his approval
only came from Christ - page 124:

Trace Evidence of Continuing Non-Acceptance of Paul

Further, in Romans 15, Paul speaks of persecution by those
who are "disobedient" in Judea, and his seeking to bring a cash
gift to Jerusalem, yet seeks prayer from the Romans that his
"ministration" (cash gift) will be "acceptable to those in
Jerusalem." Paul writes:
30 Now I beseech you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ,
and by the love of the Spirit, that ye strive together with me
in your prayers to God for me;
31 that I may be delivered from them that are disobedient
in Judaea, and that my ministration which I have for
Jerusalem may be acceptable to the saints; (Romans 15:30-
31, ASV.)
Hence, evidently, Paul was anticipating opposition from the
leadership in Judea. They might not accept the gift to the
Jerusalem church he was bringing from the Gentile churches.
Please note, Paul is not talking about bringing an offering for
the poor at the Temple which is always beyond rejection. It
simply goes into the poor box, and no one can say no to the
offering. Instead, Paul was specifically talking about an
offering to the Jerusalem church and its leaders. Paul
anticipated some controversial issue might prevent its
acceptance, which would never be an issue if the money were
intended as a Temple offering.
And Paul's fear proved to be a valid one. It was Apostle
John's direction that missionaries from Jerusalem should give
charity to the "strangers" (Gentiles), but do as earlier
missionaries did among the "strangers" (Gentiles). They took
no money from the Gentiles. "For the name's sake [God's
sake], they [i.e., earlier missionaries] went forth, taking
nothing from the Gentiles."(3 John 1:5, 7 KJV.) John was
urging the last crop of missionaries to the Gentiles to follow
that same practice.
Implicitly, at the earlier time of Paul's Gentile Offering,
Apostle John would have not accepted Paul's offering to the
Jerusalem Church as a body. For to do so would be contrary to
the principles of those sent out from Jerusalem to evangelize
Gentiles. Apostle John evidently was concerned to obey Jesus'
commands to "take nothing" from those to whom you preach
and teach. (Matt 10:8-10). A missionary was only supported
by seeking a home of a worthy person to stay in at each town
you preach within. This will be your sole means of support.
See Matt 10:10. Otherwise, you can become beholden to
mammon (Matt 6:24), and make the paying Gentiles your new
master in preference over the Lord you must serve with
unswerving dedication and loyalty. Paul thus correctly
anticipated "disobedience" at Jerusalem to Paul's gospel that
included taking money from Gentile believers for preaching
and teaching to them. See 1 Tim. 5:17-18.
When Paul arrived with the gift from the Gentiles, Paul no
doubt was shocked by its rejection by the Jerusalem church.
Paul did not know the missionary principles of Jesus upon
which Apostle John and the other 11 apostles relied. How
could Paul not know?
Because Paul boasted late in his career of having
been"imparted nothing by" the 12 apostles (Gal. 2:6) -- relying
instead upon the unspeakable"revelations" from his Jesus (2
Cor. 2:1-16). Paul began his journey with the Gentile offering
hopeful that the 12 would accept the Gentile offering.
However, Paul did not know that Apostle John and the others
among the 12 would have a valid reason to reject the Gentile
offering. The 12 in rejecting it would simply be obeying Matt
10:10 And Jesus’ two masters and mammon warning. The
twelve knew that the elders who preach and teach are not
entitled to a "double honor" of payment for their services from
the Gentile congregants, unlike what Paul taught in 1 Tim.
5:17-18. The church's leaders cannot grow in wealth by taking
offerings from anyone. Had they accepted the Gentile offering
from Paul, it would have been approving a wrong practice of
collection from the Gentiles employed by Paul.
Hence, the 12 were duty-bound, by the words of Christ, to
reject the Gentile offering that Paul laid at their feet.
No doubt the manner to tell Paul "no" was done politely. The
money could have then gone instead to the Temple as an
offering for the poor. In such case, there is then no self-
aggrandizement of the church at Jerusalem. This is likely what
happened to the Gentile offering which Paul brought. But this
is not what Paul intended from the beginning. Paul was
intending to score points using someone else's money, only to
learn that the 12 apostles would not accept it. Ironically, the
very reason for doing so was that, as Jesus warned, it might
make the 12 beholden to Paul or the Gentiles whom he served.
The apostles wisely and properly refused, reflected by 3 John
1:5,7.
Is A Trance Mentioned in Hebrew Equivalent in OT?
In the Original Testament, Balaam - the true prophet who later
turns into a false prophet - had an experience which was
translated in the Septuagint as "ecstasy". However, the
"ecstasy" terminology is not supported in the original Hebrew,
so says Faussett Brown, citing Numbers 24:4, and 16. Here is
an excerpt from the Faussett-Brown dictionary entry on
"Trance" that explains this translation background of the
Hebrew relating to Balaam :
Greek ekstasis (Numbers 24:4; Numbers 24:16). Balaam
"fell" (into a trance is not in the Hebrew) overpowered
by the divine inspiration, as Saul (1 Samuel 19:24) "lay
down naked (stripped of his outer royal robes) all that day
and all that night." God's word in Balaam's and Saul's cases
acted on an alien will and therefore overpowered the bodily
energies by which that will ordinarily worked. Luke, the
physician and therefore one likely to understand the
phenomena, alone used the term.
...Paul in trance received his commission, "depart far hence
unto the Gentiles."
The KJV follows the Septuagint error in Numbers 24:4 and
Numbers 24:16, inserting "trance" to explain Balaam's
experience. But the NIV properly corrects it both times to
merely say "sees a vision... falls prostrate and whose eyes are
opened." (See Num 24:4 both KJV & NIV; Numbers 24:16
both KJV and NIV.) This was exactly what Faussett-Brown
said was a necessary correction to these passages in Numbers.
Why is Saul's experience discussed under "trance" for no
translation uses that word under 1 Sam. 19:24? It appears
Saul's experience is mentioned by Faussett-Brown to show
that possibly Saul's nakedness reflected a lack of
consciousness while prophesying outloud. But (a) this is not
called a "trance" even in the Septuagint, and (b) Saul was
conscious when prophesying out loud, and hence not in an
ecstasy which is only about the receiving a message in one's
mind while disengaged from the world, including speaking to
others. See 1 Sam. 19:24 at Bible.hub.
Impact on How To Read Acts 10.
Given this background, then notice Peter in Acts 10 has a
"trance" too -- subsequent to Paul's trance (even though Paul
discloses it later - in Acts 22), and look at the type of content
the message reputedly had -- supposedly undoing God's Law
on food laws -- the distinction of whether something is clean
or unclean. Faussett-Brown says:
Acts 10:10, Peter in trance received the vision abolishing
distinctions of clean and unclean,.... (link.)
Be aware that Peter later concludes that even though the
message appeared to mean what Faussett-Brown says, it could
not and did not mean this. Peter next hears from the "Holy
Spirit" -- not a trance any more -- a message that redirects
Peter away from the literal words spoken in the trance to a
wholly different goal - to visit with Cornelius:
17 Now while Peter was much perplexed in himself what the
vision which he had seen might mean, behold, the men that
were sent by Cornelius, having made inquiry for Simon’s
house, stood before the gate, 18 and called and asked whether
Simon, who was surnamed Peter, were lodging there. 19 And
while Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto
him, Behold, three men seek thee. 20 But arise, and get thee
down, and go with them, nothing doubting: for I have sent
them. 21 And Peter went down to the men, and said, Behold, I
am he whom ye seek: what is the cause wherefore ye are
come? 22 And they said, Cornelius a centurion, a righteous
man and one that feareth God, and well reported of by all the
nation of the Jews, was warned of God by a holy angel to send
for thee into his house, and to hear words from thee. 23 So he
called them in and lodged them. (Acts 10:17-23 ASV.)
Notice the Holy Spirit never confirms the content of the
trance. After this direct message from the Holy Spirit, Peter
surmizes independent from any blunt message from the Holy
Spirit that the prior message in a trance really meant to be
directed at accepting Gentiles, and not regard them as
"unclean" as was a tradition -- not a Law. God thereby
intervened to protect Peter from what was a false message in a
"trance" -- as ecstasy is never a means of communication that
the true God ever uses.
What is interesting is God does so without telling Peter the
trance was false; the Holy Spirit merely directs Peter to
contemplate a different meaning to the message other than a
literal one. Perhaps God is testing us once more to read
carefully this account, and to recognize Peter's trance message
reflected "apostasy" if it was meant literally -- proof of a false
prophecy in Deut 13:1-5. God did not want to make your
personal test too easy. You have to read this passage carefully,
and see there is (1) an apostate trance message about the food
laws; and (2) a non-apostate Holy Spirit message that is lawful
about Gentiles not being unclean -- as tradition, but not the
Law, said otherwise.