Would there have been Paul (who wrote most of the New Testament) if not for Stephen?

[Minyi]

Happy new month, everyone!

Many Christians don’t realise this but the person who masterminded the martyrdom of Stephen is Paul (nee Saul), see Acts 8:1.

Now, do you think there would have been an Apostle Paul who ended up writing more than two-third of the New Testament if Brother Stephen didn’t say that prayer in Acts 7:60?

 

[@Akinwumigentle]

Yes, there would have been a Paul. Here's why: Paul was not the only one at the scene of Stephen's murder. He wasn't even the one who killed Stephen directly . He only aided those who did. My point here is that none of the culprit of the murder did exploit like Paul or even got converted to the best of our knowledge based on scripture. Yet, Stephen's prayer was offered to all at the scene. Read Acts 7:60 and notice that he said " Lord lay not this sin to their charge"
Another point that supports this view is found in Galatians 1:15. Paul asserted that he was separated from his mother womb to do what he did by the grace of God.
In conclusion, while Stephen's prayer may have been instrumental to his conversion, Paul's exploit cannot be based solely on it.

 

[Minyi]

That’s debatable. You need to take Acts 8:1 into consideration. He supervised the stoning of Stephen, meaning that much of the prayer was on him.

Saying that every other member of the mob should have benefited from Stephen’s prayer like Saul is like comparing the responsibilities upon a mere labourer with the foreman’s. Thanks for your deep insights though.