Acts 13:9: Why does Saul suddenly become “Paul” in the narrative with no recorded explanation or formal name change?

I. Context of Acts 13:9

Acts 13:9 introduces a pivotal moment: “Then Saul, who was also called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked directly at Elymas.” Up to this point, the text consistently calls him “Saul,” especially when recounting his conversion (Acts 9:1–22) and his early ministry activities. Suddenly, without a formal announcement or ceremony, the narrative shifts to calling him “Paul.” This seemingly abrupt transition invites questions about why Scripture provides no official explanation for the change.

II. Cultural and Historical Background

In the first-century Mediterranean world, it was not unusual for a Jew living under Roman rule to possess both a Hebrew name and a Greco-Roman name. Many Jewish individuals were also Roman citizens, either from birth or via legal processes, and would adopt a Roman name comfortable for use among Gentiles. Archaeological records from Tarsus in Cilicia—Paul’s hometown—reflect a bustling city strongly influenced by Hellenistic and Roman culture. Historical works like those of Josephus show examples of Jews with dual names, underscoring that carrying two names was quite common, especially for those with extensive interaction in Greek-speaking regions.

III. Saul’s Hebrew Roots and Paul’s Roman Identity

“Saul” (Hebrew: שָׁאוּל, Sha’ul) naturally connected him to his Jewish heritage and even to Israel’s first king (1 Samuel 9:1–2). This name underscored that he was an Israelite “of the tribe of Benjamin” (Philippians 3:5). Meanwhile, “Paul” (Greek: Παῦλος, Paulos) was commonplace in Latin-speaking areas of the Roman Empire and would have been more recognizable to Gentile audiences.

Roman citizenship carried significant privileges, and Paul’s ability to traverse diverse regions, address Gentile congregations, and appeal to Caesar when necessary (Acts 25:11) may have been enhanced by using a name that resonated with non-Jewish populations. This duality in names reflects his unique role as an apostle to the Gentiles (cf. Romans 11:13).

IV. Scriptural Patterns of Name Changes

Scripture does record some formal name changes, such as Abram to Abraham (Genesis 17:5) and Sarai to Sarah (Genesis 17:15). Those examples are explicitly noted as part of God’s covenant dealings. In the case of “Saul” becoming “Paul,” however, there is no similar divine pronouncement.

Luke, the writer of Acts, places the name shift in the specific context of Saul’s confrontation with Elymas (Acts 13:8–12). From that point forward, especially as the gospel spreads to Gentile regions, Luke predominantly uses “Paul,” aligning with the apostle’s mission to the broader Roman world.

V. Theological Considerations

Some have suggested a symbolic element, noting that “Paul” (meaning “small” or “little”) might emphasize humility. While such an interpretation may be personally edifying, Scripture does not explicitly make that connection. In contrast to biblical accounts where God Himself declares a new name with known theological significance, Acts 13:9 only states “who was also called Paul,” implying that both names already belonged to him.

Moreover, Paul’s unique calling was to preach the risen Christ to Jews and Gentiles alike (cf. Galatians 1:15–16). His shift to the name “Paul” aligns with his increasing focus on reaching non-Jewish communities. Although the text never states he abandoned his Hebrew name, the emphasis on “Paul” in Acts underscores the transition in audience and emphasizes the inclusive scope of the gospel.

VI. Dual Names in Manuscript Evidence

New Testament manuscripts—such as the early papyri (e.g., P45, P46)—consistently preserve this transition from “Saul” to “Paul” with no variant suggesting different individuals or an accidental scribal error. The seamless consistency across manuscripts attests to the reliability of the biblical text. This stands as a testament to the overall steadfast nature of Scripture, as likewise illustrated by the wealth of manuscript evidence verifying the trustworthiness of the biblical record in other areas (Luke 1:1–4, 2 Timothy 3:16).

VII. Reliability of Luke’s Account

Luke’s detailed account in Acts demonstrates both geographical and historical accuracy. Excavations in places like Antioch of Pisidia, Lystra, and other cities Paul visited show the authenticity of Luke’s descriptions of local customs and municipal titles (see Acts 13:14; 14:6–23). Such archaeological discoveries support the overall historicity of Acts. As the text consistently moves from calling him “Saul” among Jewish circles to “Paul” in Gentile contexts, it indicates that Luke was preserving a real-life naming practice rather than inventing a literary device.

VIII. Practical and Missional Implications

Paul’s readiness to be “all things to all men, so that by all possible means I might save some” (1 Corinthians 9:22) shines through. In Hebrew settings, he was known as Saul, identifying with the Jewish community and showing respect for his heritage and his scholarly background under Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). In Hellenistic or Roman settings, “Paul” became the more fitting name for discussions with Gentile converts, philosophers, and government officials.

This approach underscores the principle of cultural sensitivity without compromising the truth of the gospel. Paul deployed both his Hebrew identity and Roman privileges in service of proclaiming Christ’s resurrection as the ultimate evidence of salvation, as he frequently declared (1 Corinthians 15:3–8). His name usage, therefore, also demonstrates strategic adaptability for God’s mission.

IX. No Formal Ceremony or Announcement

Scripture offers no formal pronouncement of “Saul, from hence forth you shall be called Paul,” distinguishing this from earlier Old Testament name-change narratives. Instead, Acts 13:9 simply reveals that he was “also called Paul.” Scholars with extensive knowledge of ancient naming customs (referencing Josephus and other classical sources) generally concur that the two names were used interchangeably prior to the pivotal moment with Elymas, and that Luke’s narrative abruptly designates him “Paul” as his missionary endeavors expand.

X. Encouragement from the Transition

For modern believers, the shift from “Saul” to “Paul” embodies a broader lesson that gospel workers serve in contexts where names, languages, and cultures differ. Followers of Christ can remain faithful to Scripture’s authority while engaging the world in ways that honor both divine truth and human context.

This transition also highlights the reliability of Scripture’s historical narrative: there is no contradiction, only an acknowledgment of the apostle’s identity among diverse audiences. From a larger perspective, it exemplifies God’s sovereign orchestration—using both the Hebrew background and Roman privileges of the apostle to spread Christ’s saving message.

XI. Conclusion

Saul’s sudden identification as “Paul” in Acts 13:9 is not the result of a formal name-change decree but the outworking of a two-name reality typical of Jews in the Roman Empire. His dual identity as a Hebrew of Hebrews and a Roman citizen equipped him uniquely to minister across cultural lines. Archaeological, historical, and manuscript evidence harmoniously affirms that the transition is historically credible and theologically coherent.

Though the biblical text never explicitly says “his name was changed,” the readiness of Scripture to shift from “Saul” to “Paul” demonstrates a gospel-centered adaptability. Far from a contradiction, this narrative feature underscores the seamless, authentic, and intentional nature of God’s Word. Just as Paul tirelessly proclaimed the risen Christ to Jews and Gentiles alike, the record of his two names points us to trust not only in the textual reliability of Scripture but also in the sovereignty of God who guides His servants to share the message of eternal salvation through Christ.