(ProQuest: ... denotes non-US-ASCII text omitted.)In his speech before King Herod Agrippa II, narrates, for the third time in Acts, the story of his call or conversion (26:12-18). When dealing with this account, modern critical commentators typically concern themselves with its relationship the two other reports of the apostle's vision (Acts 9:1-9, 22:6-11), with the Greek proverb that lies behind hurts for kick against the goads (26:14), and with questions about the historicity of attendant events (e.g., How could Luke have known what Festus and Agrippa said each other in private?). Exegetes also, if only in passing, often call attention several reminiscences of the LXX. Acts 26:16 ( ... on your [NRSV]) agrees exactly with Ezek 2:1.1 Acts 26:18 ( ... , to open their eyes so that they may turn from [NRSV]) echoes Isa 42:7 ( ... to open the eyes that are blind, bring out ... from the prison those who sit in darkness [NRSV]) and 16 ( ... will turn the before them into [NRSV]).2 And Acts 26:17 ( ... will rescue from your people and from the Gentiles-to whom I am sending you [NRSV]) alludes Jer 1:8 (... am with deliver you [NRSV]) and 19 ( ... ).3The use of Isaiah is readily explicable. In Acts, is like the servant of Deutero-Isaiah: he is light the nations (Isa 42:6).4 As and Barnabas declare in Acts 13:46-47: We are now turning the gentiles. so the Lord has commanded us, saying, 'I have set be a light for the gentiles, so that may bring salvation the ends of the earth' (cf. Isa 49:6). The allusion Jer 1 similarly makes sense. Jeremiah, like Isaiah's servant, was also appointed be prophet the nations (Jer 1:5), and his prophetic mission brought him persecution, making for another parallel with (cf. esp. Acts 26:17). What, however, might be the motivation for cutting and pasting a phrase from Ezekiel? That is the topic of this essay.I. PREVIOUS WORKMost of the secondary literature is not very helpful here. Many exegetes fail even note the parallel with Ezekiel.5 An equal number cite it without offering comment.6 A few observe that Luke here adds biblical language or color;7 oth- ers-more helpfully-that his use of Ezekiel's call depict Paul's call makes the latter a prophet like the former.8 There is also, however, the view that the perfect word-for-word correlation between Acts 26:16 and Ezek 2:1 is simply a coincidence.9 In this case, the parallel is a phantom. It means nothing.The interesting discussions of the relationship between Acts 26:12-18 and Ezekiel known me appear not in the commentaries but in an article by Gilles Quispel and in Alan Segal's monograph the Convert.10 Unfortunately, their proposals, while suggestive, remain brief and undeveloped. Perhaps it is understandable that their work is not yet reflected in the commentary tradition.According Quispel, story of on the Damascus Road contains some very clear allusions the visionary experience of Ezekiel11 While Quispel does not cite chapter and verse, he clearly has Acts 26 in mind when he goes on write, Paul fell earth and heard a voice saying stand upon his feet because he is be sent ... exactly as Ezekiel did To this he adds one more parallel: whereas Ezekiel was dumbfounded, was blinded after his vision12 Quispel then draws his conclusion: For those familiar with the meaning and purpose of such hints in ancient literature, there cannot be the slightest doubt that the author of Acts is paralleling the vocation of Ezekiel and the vocation of St. Paul. As the kabod appeared the prophet in Babylonia in 593 B.C., so the kabod appeared Saul near Damascus in A.D. 32.13Segal-whose debt Quispel in this connection is unclear14-is like-minded. In his judgment, the most provocative parallel Luke's account of Paul's conversion is the commissioning of the prophet Ezekiel. …