Take the 2-minute tour ×
Christianity Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In the first chapter of Galatians, paul said,

17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.

After he his encounter, he should have gone to Rome or Jerusalem but he went to Arabia. Does mount Sinai has any importance since law was given on it so may be he went there?

share|improve this question
1  
It's possible that Paul was using Arabia simply to mean "a land of Arabs" as opposed to Jewish people, rather than what we now call Arabia/Saudi Arabia/the Arabian Peninsula. I'm not sure how to verify how the word Arabia was used in the first century though. –  Andrew Leach Jun 25 at 7:12
1  
N.T. Wright offers some interesting speculation that Paul was following the example of Elijah: ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Paul_Arabia_Elijah.pdf –  Mark Edward Jun 25 at 21:09

2 Answers 2

Galatians 1:15-18 (ESV)

But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone; nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and remained with him fifteen days.

It is not clear why Paul went to Arabia. Even Luke did not mention this in Acts. We can find this account only in his letter to Galatians. We may conclude that Paul stayed sometime in Damascus after the conversion, preaching to the Jews and then went to Arabia, and after three years only Paul went to Jerusalem to speak with the Apostles face to face.

Some scholars believe that Paul went to Arabia to receive revelations from Jesus Christ.

From the reading of the text in Acts 9:26-28 one would get the impression that Saul went directly from his escape at Damascus to Jerusalem. By his own admission he clarified the fact in his letter to the Galatians (1:16-17) that he “conferred not with flesh and blood” nor consulted with the Apostles in Jerusalem; but the Lord’s choice for him was to go to Arabia to be trained in the school of the Spirit in order that he might receive greater revelations concerning the mysteries of the Gospel of the glorified Christ. (source)

Some scholars believe that Paul went to Arabia to preach the Gospel and this action proves that Paul received his revelations concerning the Gospel from Christ himself.

Paul thus wrote to tell them that after his conversion, he preached among the Gentiles for an extended amount of time before ever meeting with another apostle. Paul did not hurry off to Jerusalem to get instruction and approval from the Twelve. In defense of his apostolic credentials to the churches of Galatia, Paul mentioned his delayed journey to Jerusalem in order to emphasize (among other things) his genuine apostleship, whose message and authority came from Almighty God, and not from the twelve apostles, or any other person. (source)

Some again believe that Paul needed solitude because his life suddenly turned upside down.

Another point to consider is Paul’s world was turned upside-down in a moment’s time. Wasn’t he human, just like the rest of us? Wouldn’t he need to withdraw for awhile in solitude to more or less come to grips with the powerful upheaval that had disturbed the certainty of his righteous stand in the Law? Wouldn’t he have needed some inner clarity? Up to this point in his life, he had served the Law, and through the Law, he was convinced that the new Messianic Jews taught blasphemy when preaching that the Temple sacrifices had become obsolete in Christ. (source)

share|improve this answer
    
or May be Just like Jesus he went into wilderness to be tested, The Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians: An Introduction and Commentary state that in OT prophets recieved their commision in wilderness. could that be the case? –  shakAttack Jun 25 at 20:00

First, given the low value that Paul places on the Law generally, as reflected in his various epistles, it id soubtful that Mt. Sinai figured much in his itinerary. Second, if memory serve me correctly, Mt. Sinai is in the Sinai, not Arabia.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.