4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. (Acts 9:4-6, KJV 1900)
Here the calling came in the form of a question: “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?” The most familiar “callings” recorded in scripture are those to Noah, Abraham, Jacob (Israel), Moses, Elisha, Samuel, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Jesus’ 12 disciples; Yet, perhaps the most popular—and most pragmatic and prescriptive—for modern and postmodern believers (and even unbelievers) alike who seek to understand their “calling” is the call of Saul of Tarsus “who is also called Paul” (Acts 13:9). [See also commentary on the call of Isaiah https://intersectionoffaithandlearning.com/2025/09/09/send-me-a-commentary-on-calling/%5D
Sermons and writings abound concerning Paul’s persecution of Christians, a great light shining about he and his companions, his becoming blind, his recovering from blindness and of course the Lord’s appearance to Paul “as one born out of due time” (1 Corinthians 15:8). Yet, Paul’s inquiries of the LORD: 1. WHO ART THOU? 2. WHAT WILT THOU HAVE ME TO DO? provides a treasure trove for helping us to plainly understand the concept of “calling” for the believer and unbeliever alike.
First, he inquires “who art thou?” One can hardly follow someone that one is unacquainted with and through simply second hand information; (This happens most often in modern and postmodern society and in the social media age where innuendo, celebrity or some other virtue is ascribed to someone only to learn that quite the opposite is true because one did not seek to learn, know and long deliberate about such personages for one’s self.)
The gospel has been communicated similarly in what might be described as both first-hand, second-hand even third-hand testimony, which has been done for over 2000 years first by eyewitnesses (including Paul) but a host of subsequent believers. (Most of whom had not laid physical eyes upon the Lord.) Yet without respect to how and by whom one has heard of Him, it is a matter of personal, intimate and continuous inquiry to understand who is this Lord who does the “calling.”
Secondly, Paul inquires, “What wilt thou have me to do?” A full reading of Acts chapters 9, 26 and frankly the entire book of Acts—as well as Paul’s letters to the churches—reveal the complete telling of how it was “told” to him. There was the Lord who revealed to Ananias at some distant location what his plans were for Paul (which Ananias certainly shared with Paul upon his first meeting him), there were his discussions and confrontations with Peter and other disciples and finally it was the Lord himself who continually revealed himself to Paul both initially and with further instructions by “appearing” (Acts 26:16) unto him whether by word, vision or revelation (or something other no doubt being consistent with scripture).
Yet is very likely that none of these things would have been revealed to Paul—believers or unbelievers alike—had he not asked perhaps the two most singularly important questions one must ask to learn and discern one’s “calling”: “Who are you Lord?” “And what will you have me to do?”











THE MISTAKES OF BOOKER T. WASHINGTON
“I remember one young man in particular who graduated from Yale University and afterward took a post-graduate course at Harvard, and who began his career by delivering a series of lectures on “The Mistakes of Booker T. Washington.” It was not long, however, before he found that he could not live continuously on my mistakes. Then he discovered that in all his long schooling he had not fitted himself to perform any kind of useful and productive labour. After he had failed in several other directions he appealed to me, and I tried to find something for him to do. It is pretty hard, however, to help a young man who has started wrong.” – Booker T. Washington, (1911) My Larger Education
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. offers the following concerning men and women whose actions are similar to the young man described in Booker T. Washington’s aforementioned passage: “Controversy equalizes fools and wise men in the same way – and the fools know it.” And the founding principal and president of Tuskegee (Institute) University provides several important lessons about both the young man-as well as all men and women of his ilk-who seek to establish their name and reputation on the basis of disparaging the name and reputation of others-particularly those whose accomplishments they will only be brought in close proximity to only upon the basis of “controversy.”
First, Mr. Washington never ever mentions this young man’s name. While this unidentified young man knew full well that persons might give him a hearing-not upon the basis of his own person and accomplishments-but based upon the person and accomplishments of his topic, “The Mistakes of Booker T. Washington,” identifying or responding to this young man provided not a single, solitary benefit to Mr. Washington and Tuskegee.
Second, Mr. Washington understood that the young man’s premises were flawed from the onset, and it is the clearest telltale example of Mr. Washington’s oft-repeated phrase, “Let examples answer.” To be sure, the actions of no man or woman are all “good” or all “bad.” (This is naïve, simplistic and child-like thinking.) Yet, in the face of the clear, overwhelming and documentable evidence that testify to the good that Mr. Washington had done locally, regionally and nationally, this young man titled his lecture series according to what he perceived were the mistakes of Mr. Washington.
Here again, what one consistently reads and hears, one will consistently become. And this young man ought to have taken heed to how and to what he was hearing for it ultimately led to what he had become. (For this young man’s attempt to categorize and confine a man of Booker T. Washington eminence and accomplishments to a series of perceived mistakes that his limited training, limited knowledge and limited life experience identified did nothing but demonstrate his failure to understand the significance of the (2) greatest 9-letter words and the single, most dangerous 9-letter word: 1. “Integrity” 2. “Knowledge” 3. “Ignorance;”)
Finally, we should consider Mr. Washington’s demonstration of another one of his famous aphorisms: “I let no man drag me down so low as to make me hate him.” The very same young man who sought to disparage and defame Mr. Washington later sought him for assistance, and Mr. Washington “tried to find something for him to do.” (This dynamic needs no additional commentary.) Yet what is deserving of additional commentary is that this young man might have spent his time and work writing, lecturing and building his own legacy and life worth reading as opposed to seeking to denigrate another’s whose legacy and life of building Tuskegee (Institute) University spanned 34 years (1881-1915) and remains and is read to this very day.
Share this:
Leave a comment
Filed under Commentary, Uncategorized