When they had tied him up with thongs, Paul asked the centurion who stood by, “Is it lawful for you to scourge a man who is a Roman, and not found guilty?”
When the centurion heard it, he went to the commanding officer and told him, “Watch what you are about to do, for this man is a Roman!”
The commanding officer came and asked him, “Tell me, are you a Roman?” He said, “Yes.”
The commanding officer answered, “I bought my citizenship for a great price.” Paul said, “But I was born a Roman.”
Immediately those who were about to examine him departed from him, and the commanding officer also was afraid when he realized that he was a Roman, because he had bound him. But on the next day, desiring to know the truth about why he was accused by the Jews, he freed him from the bonds, and commanded the chief priests and all the council to come together, and brought Paul down and set him before them.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain On vv25, 26, 28 25. Is it lawful? He allegeth first the privilege…
25. Is it lawful? He allegeth first the privilege of the city, then he defendeth himself by common law. And though there were more weight in the second point, (to wit, that it is not lawful to scourge a man before his cause is heard) yet should he have prevailed nothing, unless the centurion had been more moved with the honor of the Roman empire. For nothing was then more heinous than to do any thing which was contrary to the liberty of the people of Rome. Valerius’ law, the law of Porcius, and of Sempronius, and such like, did forbid that no man should do any violence to the body of the city of Rome without the commandment of the people. The privilege was so (sure and) holy, that they thought it to be not only a deadly offense, but also such an offense as could not be purged, that a citizen of Rome should be beaten.
Therefore, Paul escaped rather by the privilege than by common equity, yet did he not doubt in a good cause to bear off the injury which was prepared for him, with this buckler of the city. But we must know that he did so allege the right and privilege of the city, that the chief captain was brought to believe him, because his words should not have been credited unless he had used some proof. Moreover, it was no hard matter for a man, who was well known, to bring forth witnesses. We alleged a cause in the sixteenth chapter, why he suffered himself to be scourged at Philippos, [Philippi] which he now preventeth by his own declaration; to wit, because he should not have been heard in a tumult raised among the common people (Acts 16:37). But because he hath now to deal with the soldiers of Rome, who did behave themselves more moderately and gravely, he useth the opportunity.
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv25, 29 There is no cause why we may not use…
There is no cause why we may not use those lawful means which God giveth us, to repel, or put away an injury.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv25–30 25 And as they bound him with thongs, Paul…
25 And as they bound him with thongs, Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned?
Ver. 25. A man that is a Roman] A citizen of Rome might neither be bound nor beaten. {See Trapp on "Act 16:37"} Paul by this freedom escaped whipping; we by that which Christ hath purchased us, not for gold or silver, but his own blood, 1Pe 1:19, escape the pain of eternal torment.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv25–30 They bound him with thongs; they who were to…
They bound him with thongs; they who were to be scourged were bound to a post or column (amongst the Jews) of a cubit and a half high, inclining downwards upon it; and these thongs were such wherewith they bound Paul to this column or pillar; and with such also they intended to scourge him.
Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned? that is, it is not lawful to scourge a Roman; much less, uncondemned: See Poole on "Act 16:37". This latter, the laws of no nation that was civilized did ever allow.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv25–28 Then the chief captain came, and said unto him,....…
Then the chief captain came, and said unto him,.... To Paul:
tell me, art thou a Roman? he had told him before that he was a Jew of Tarsus, and which was true, and had said nothing of his being a Roman; wherefore the chief captain desires that he would tell him the whole truth of the matter, whether he was a Roman or not:
Read full note →
he said yea; that he was one.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv25, 26, 28 And as they - The soldiers ordered by the…
And as they - The soldiers ordered by the tribune, were binding him with thongs - A freeman of Rome might be bound with a chain and beaten with a staff: but he might not be bound with thongs, neither scourged, or beaten with rods: Paul said to the centurion - The captain, who stood by to see the orders of the tribune executed.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv25, 28, 29, 30 Verse 25. And as they bound him, &c.] They…
Verse 25. And as they bound him, &c.] They were going to tie him to a post, that they might scourge him.
Is it lawful, &c.] The Roman law absolutely forbade the binding of a Roman citizen. See Clarke on Ac 16:37.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv25, 30 Act 22:25-29. And as they — The soldiers ordered…
Act 22:25-29. And as they — The soldiers ordered by the tribune; were binding him with thongs — In order to their scourging him; Paul said unto the centurion that stood by — To see the tribune’s orders executed; Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned? — A freeman of Rome might be bound with a chain, and beaten with a staff; but he might not be bound with thongs, neither scourged nor beaten with rods. The centurion told the chief captain, saying, Take heed what thou doest — Greek, Ορα τι μελλεις ποιειν, consider what thou art about to do; for this man is a Roman — Yea, and there was a stronger reason to stop proceedings, and to consider, for this man was a servant of God. Paul said, I was free born — Not, as some have supposed, because he was born at Tarsus; for, as Dr. Lardner has unanswerably proved, that was not a Roman colony, or what the Romans called municipium, a free town, or a place where all the natives were free of Rome by birth. But, it is probable, either his father, or some of his ancestors, had been made free of Rome for some military service. We learn hence, that we are under no obligations, as Christians, to give up our civil privileges (which we ought to receive and prize as the gifts of God) to every insolent invader. In a thousand circumstances, gratitude to God and duty to men will oblige us to insist upon them, and engage us to strive to transmit them improved to posterity. Then straightway they — Who had bound him, and were about to examine him by scourging; departed from him — Not daring to proceed; and the chief captain — Whom we may justly suppose to have had considerable influence at Rome; also was afraid, because — Though he had not scourged him, yet he had bound him — In order to his being scourged; which was a breach of privilege, for which he might have been accused by Paul to his superiors.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv25, 28, 29, 30 Bound him with thongs - With cords, preparatory to…
Bound him with thongs - With cords, preparatory to scourging.
Is it lawful ... - It was directly contrary to the Roman law to bind and scourge a Roman citizen. See the notes on Act 16:36-37.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv25, 28, 29 A Roman. That is, a Roman citizen, a freeman…
A Roman. That is, a Roman citizen, a freeman of Rome. (Witham) --- The apostle, on this occasion, not to injure the faith of some weak Christians, who might be scandalized at his public disgrace, prevents the scourging, which on another occasion he patiently submitted to. By the thongs he was probably bound to a pillar; (Tirinus) or being tied hand and foot, was stretched on the ground, with his face downwards. This was frequently done among the Romans. (Calmet) --- See also Gretser de cruce, lib. i. chap. 10; who declares that it was the Roman custom to bind to a stake or pillar, such as were condemned to be flogged.
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v30 Act_22:30– Act_23:11
C.—PAUL IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE GREAT COUNCIL; HE MAKES HIS DEFENCE; THE COMFORTING PROMISE WHICH THE LORD GIVES HIM
Act_22:30– Act_23:11
Read full note →
[Act_22:30]. On the morrow, because he would have known [But on the following day, wishing to know] the certainty wherefore [of that of which] he was accused of [by] the Jews, he loosed him from his bands [he released him15], and commanded the chief priests and all their [the] council to appear [assemble], and brought Paul down, and set him before them.
[Act_23:1.] And Paul, earnestly beholding the council, said, Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until [I have walked before God with all good conscience unto] this day. 2And [But] the high priest Ananias commanded them that stood by him to smite him on the mouth. 3Then said Paul unto him, God shall [will, μέλλει] smite thee, thou whited wall: for sittest thou [wall: thou sittest] to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law [me, in violation of the law, to be Smitten]? 4And [But] they that stood by said, Revilest thou God’s high priest? 5Then said Paul [And (τε) Paul said], I wist [knew] not, brethren, that he was [is, ἐστὶν] the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people. 6But when Paul perceived [But as Paul knew] that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee [a son of Pharisees1]: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question [for the sake of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am judged!]. 7And [But] when he had so said [said this, τοῦτο], there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and Sadducees: and the multitude was divided. 8For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, [and] neither2 angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess 9 both. 9And [But] there arose a great cry: and the scribes3 that were of the Pharisees’ part [cry: and scribes4 of the party of the Pharisees] arose, and strove [contended], saying, We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God [man: but if a spirit hath spoken to him, or an angel?4]. 10And when [But as] there arose a great dissension, the chief captain [the tribune], fearing lest Paul should have been [might be] pulled in pieces of [by] them, commanded the soldiers to go [that the soldiers should come] down, and to take him by force [and snatch him] from among them, and to [om. to] bring him into the castle [barracks]. 11And [But in] the night following the Lord stood by [came to] him, and said, Be of good cheer, Paul [om. Paul]:5for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Act_22:30. On the morrow.—Τὸ ἀσφαλές, i.e., that which is certain or sure; Lysias wished to obtain information on which he could rely; the words: τὸ τί … Ἰουδαίων, are in apposition with the former [“referring epexegetically to τὸ ἀσφαλές.” (Meyer).—Tr.]. Lysias did not investigate the facts themselves, but wished to ascertain the precise charge which the Jews brought, against Paul. He had hitherto learned nothing that was definite; he had only perceived that the Jews were excessively excited, and spoke of Paul with the utmost exasperation. The hierarchical authority of the Jews could, as he hoped, enable him to accomplish his design. His command that a meeting of the Sanhedrin should be held, demonstrates that the independence of the Jews, even in matters referring to the internal concerns of their religion, had been seriously impaired. The word συνελθεῖν implies that the members assembled in the ordinary council-room, whereas the reading ἐλθεῖν, which is not well attested [note 1, appended to the text—Tr.], assumes that they were required to meet at the abode of the Roman. Besides, καταγαγών (with which compare καταβάν, Act_23:10), indicates a locality in the city itself, and not one in the interior of the tower of Antonia, which commanded the city. From the word ἔλυσεν it appears that, although Lysias had at first felt some alarm, because he had illegally fettered a Roman citizen, he had, nevertheless, not freed Paul from his bonds, until he presented him to the Sanhedrin. [“Although he had been alarmed, he determined, in a spirit of defiance, to exhibit no signs of weakness to the Jews, by the immediate release of the prisoner.—Καταγαγών, i.e., brought him down from the tower to the council-room of the Sanhedrin.”(Meyer).—Tr.].
Act_23:1. And Paul, earnestly beholding the council.—The apostle was now placed before the Sanhedrin, like the Redeemer himself, in the night which preceded his crucifixion, and like the first apostles, Act_4:7 ff; Act_5:27 ff. Ἀτενίσας, i.e., he steadfastly surveyed the assembly before him, with a calm and undaunted spirit. The address, ἄνδρ. ἀδελφοι, without πατέρες (as in Act_22:1), demonstrates that he felt himself to be the equal of the persons before him. He commences the proceedings himself, for he had not been cited by the assembly, but had been placed before them by the Roman commandant. Hence they waited until the latter made his own statement; the apostle, on his part, speaks with great composure. He testifies that he had a good conscience, inasmuch as he had always fulfilled his duty to God in every respect; πάσῃ συνειδήσει ἀγαθῇ, in every respect, in every case, with a good conscience. Πολιτεύομαι (which is equivalent to rempublicam gero, fungor magistratu in repub.) here implies: “I have performed my office with a good conscience τῷ θεῷ;” the latter is dativus commodi, namely, “for God.” [“I have lived unto God, i. e., for his service and glory; See Rom_14:8; Gal_2:19.” (Hackett).—Tr.]. The usus loquendi furnishes no authority whatever for taking πολιτεύομαι in an entirely abstract sense, as if it were equivalent to vitam instituere, or, se gerere.
Act_23:2-3. a. The high priest Ananias.—He is also mentioned by Josephus (Antiq. xx. 5. 2; 6. 2 f.). He was the son of Nebedæus, and was appointed high priest by Herod, the king of Chalcis, in the year A. D. Acts 48: he probably retained his high office till towards the year 60, when Ismael, the son of Phabi, was made the high priest, shortly before the departure of the procurator Felix (Jos. Ant. xx. 8. 8).—Ananias was sent to Rome, in the year A. D. 52, by Quadratus, the governor of Syria, in order to defend himself before the emperor Claudius, in reference to certain acts of violence of which the Samaritans accused the Jews (Jos. Ant. xx. 6. 2). This circumstance led interpreters, at an earlier period, to believe that Ananias had, on that occasion, been deposed, and that, when Paul appeared before him, he was only temporarily administering the office, or, possibly, merely retained the honorary title of an ex-high priest (Eichhorn; Kuinoel). But Ananias pleaded his cause with entire success when he was in Rome, and then returned to Jerusalem, where he was, no doubt, allowed to retain his office without interruption. This is the opinion, among other recent writers, of Winer (Realwört.), Wieseler (Chronol. d. apost. Zeitalters, 1848, p. 76 f. note), Meyer (Com.), and Ewald (Ap. Zeitalter, p. 500). Thus, other historical records establish the fact that Ananias was at that time unquestionably the ruling high priest—a fact indicated by the designation ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς, Act_23:2; Act_23:4.
b. Commanded them that stood by him, etc.—[Τοῖς παρεστ. αὐτῷ, those who stood at his (the high priest’s) side—servants, or officers of the court; comp. Luk_19:24. (Meyer).—Tr.]. Scarcely had Paul uttered the first words, when the high priest, to whom they seemed to betray audacity or hypocrisy, commanded those who stood by (probably officers of justice), to smite him on the mouth. But Paul replied to him with righteous indignation, and announced a divine retribution for that blow. [“Observe the position, (at the beginning of the reply) of the word τύπτειν, which, in a higher sense, returns to the high priest the blow that had just been received. It is an arbitrary assumption (Baumg.), that the command of the high priest was not executed.” (Meyer).—Tr.]. The words τύπτειν σὲ μελλει, do not constitute an imprecation, as Kuinoel supposes. [“Shall smite, literally, is (or is about) to smite, the first verb denoting simple futurity … the idea of a (human) curse or imprecation is at variance with the very form of the original.” (Alex.).—Tr.]. The expression τοῖχε κεκονιαμένε exposes the hypocrisy of Ananias; it contrasts the external splendor of the paint or lime on the surface of the wall with the interior parts, which consist of filthy clay. [“A whited wall is a familiar figure for a fair outside, behind which, or within which, all is foul and filthy. Our Saviour uses the still stronger image of a whited sepulchre, Mat_23:27.” (Alex.).—Tr.]. Great prominence is given to the inconsistency of the high priest, who professes to judge according to the rule of the Mosaic law, and yet personally violates it, by illegally subjecting Paul to ill treatment. Καὶ σύ, i.e., Thou too, as well as the rest, whereas, thou, as a judge, art specially bound to observe the law with strictness and conscientiousness. [“Κάθῃ, for κάθησαι” (Winer § 14. 4).—Tr.]—That prophetical announcement was fulfilled ten years afterwards, when Ananias, as one of the leaders of the loyal imperial party, was murdered, at the beginning of the Jewish war, by the insurgents [the sicarii]; Jos. Jewish War, ii. 17. 9.
Act_23:4-5. Revilest thou, etc.?—To the charge that when Paul addressed such abusive language to the high priest of God, he offered an insult to the holy God himself, he replied, (for the purpose of justifying his course,) that he knew not that the person so addressed was the high priest. This answer has received various artificial interpretations, and its meaning has often been distorted. In some of these cases, the words “that he is the high priest” (ὄτι ἐστὶν ἀρχ.), in others “I knew not” (οὐκ ᾔδειν), have served as the basis of the explanation. The former have, by a forced interpretation, been represented as meaning that the apostle denied that Ananias was really the high priest, either because he had procured the office by money (Grotius), or because he really was not at that time the true high priest (Lightfoot). The meaning of the other words, in which Paul speaks of his want of knowledge of the fact, has also been perverted by commentators, as if Paul intended to say: ‘I did not reflect that he is the high priest’ (Wetstein, Olshausen, Ewald). According to this view, Paul really retracts his words, as having been too hastily uttered, or, he means by οὐκ ᾔδειν: ‘I do not admit that it is so’ (Augustine), or “I could not know—could not think that he is the high priest, since he has acted in a manner so unpriestly, and so entirely unworthy of a high priest” (Calvin, Meyer, Baumgarten). [Calvin says: Ego Augustino subscribens non dubito quin hæc ironica sit excusatio, etc.—Tr.]. The cause which has led to these far-fetched explanations, was the apparent impossibility of believing that the words, if taken in their plain and direct sense, conveyed the truth, namely, that the apostle actually did not know that he who had given that unbecoming command, was in truth the high priest in office. There have, however, been interpreters, who adhere to the literal sense of the words—for instance, Chrysostom; Beza. They appeal to the fact that the apostle had long been absent from Jerusalem, and hence could not personally know the high priest. If Ananias had been invested with the office at the time when Paul proceeded with the letters of the “high priest” (Act_9:1-2) to Damascus, in order to persecute the Christians, it would be inconceivable that Paul should not now know the same man. But it has already been fully demonstrated that Ananias did not obtain the office until the year 48, whereas the latest date that can possibly be fixed as that of Paul’s conversion, is the year 40 or 41. [See Exeg. note on Act_9:2.—Tr.]. Besides, the high priest could not be recognized by his apparel, when he was not engaged in performing his official duties in the temple. It is also quite possible that Ananias was not, at that moment, the presiding officer of the meeting, for the whole occurred, not at a regular session of the Sanhedrin, but at one which had been unexpectedly appointed by the Roman tribune. Or, if Ananias even did act as the presiding officer, Paul could not know from that circumstance that he was also the high priest, for the latter was not always or necessarily the nasi (president of the Sanhedrin). [“It should be remembered that the intricacy and confusion on these points—the many High Priests who had been successively put up and down by Roman intervention, etc.—is not necessarily the fault of the historian, but arises from the actual irregularities existing at this crisis of the Jewish history, etc.” (Alex.).—Tr.].—Paul refers, in this connection, to a commandment of God (Exo_22:28 [quoted verbatim from the LXX. Exo_22:27.—Tr.]), as one which he well knew and also revered—but without retracting his words [“The quotation—is simply tantamount to saying, ‘I know the law that you refer to, but I am not guilty of its violation.’ ” (Alex.).—Tr.]
Act_23:6. I am a Pharisee.—At this point the apostle quickly changes the course which he had hitherto pursued; a calm defence, such as he had begun in Act_23:1, found no favorable hearing. [“He had seen enough to be convinced that there was no prospect before this tribunal of a fair inquiry and a just decision.” (Conyb. and H. II. 270).—Tr.]. The method which he now adopted in defending himself, and by which at least one party in the assembly before him might be won for his cause—the cause of Christian truth—was that of openly declaring that he was himself a Pharisee, and that his faith was allied to the Pharisaic doctrine. [“Paul’s declaration that he was still a Pharisee, is as little untrue, as it was when he made it in Php_3:5. He describes himself as a Jew, who, as such, belonged to no other religious society than that of the Pharisees, and who, especially with regard to the doctrine of the resurrection, adhered to the creed of the Pharisees (in opposition to the whole system of Sadduceeism), after its truth had been so fully established in the Person of Christ Himself. His opposition to the doctrine of righteousness by the law, to the hypocrisy, etc., of the Pharisees, and his anti-Pharisaic labors, did not refer to the sect per se, but to its moral and other errors. As a Jew, he continued to be a Pharisee, and, as such, was an orthodox Jew, in opposition to the Naturalism of the Sadducees.” (Meyer).—Tr.].—When he calls himself “a son of Pharisees,” he refers to his father and ancestors, and implies that he was not the first of his family who adopted Pharisaic views and sentiments, but had already received them by inheritance. [A son of Pharisees, see note 2, appended to the text.—Tr.]. He adds, that he was in reality placed before the tribunal for the sake of the hope and resurrection. The words περὶ ἐλπίδος καὶ ἀναστάσεως νεκρῶν, are commonly explained as an hendiadys, equivalent to “hope of the resurrection;” this is the opinion of Bengel, Meyer, Baumgarten. But a better and more complete sense may be obtained by taking each of the terms separately, thus: ‘for the sake of the hope,’ that is, the hope of redemption—of the Messianic promise given to Israel, ‘and for the sake of a resurrection of the dead.’ The latter words may then be directly referred to the resurrection of Jesus, whereas, if they are inseparably connected with ἐλπὶς, the future resurrection only can have been meant; and yet the resurrection of Jesus was, no doubt, the subject which primarily presented itself to the mind of the apostle.
Act_23:7-9. And when he had so said.—The multitude [“the whole mass or body of the Sanhedrin itself, as distinguished from the parties into which it was divided” (Alex.).—Tr.] had previously united in assailing Paul; but it was now divided (ἐσχίσθη), so that the Pharisees and the Sadducees contended with each other. The contention grew louder and more violent (κραυγὴ μεγάλη, Act_23:9; πολλή στάσις, Act_23:10), insomuch that the Roman tribune, who was alarmed by the danger which threatened his prisoner, ordered the soldiers to conduct the latter away. Here Luke explains the difference between the doctrinal views of the Pharisees and those of the Sadducees, for the purpose of enabling his readers to comprehend the cause of the difficulty which had arisen between men, who had previously acted in concert. The latter denied, on the one hand, the resurrection, and, on the other, the existence of an angel or spirit. (The reading μηδὲ—μήτε should be retained, for critical reasons. [But see note 3, appended to the text, above.—Tr.]. The former, μηδὲ, introduces a second class of conceptions, generically different from the preceding (ἀνάστασιν); the latter, μήτε, connects with it objects that are similar, in so far as πνεῦμα, an incorporeal spirit, and ἄγγελος are, essentially, homogeneous). The Pharisees, on the contrary, confess both. (Ἀμφότερα, i.e., in so far as the resurrection of the body, on the one hand, and the existence of a pure spirit, e. g., angels or departed souls, on the other, constitute two distinct categories). [On μηδὲ—μήτε in this passage, see Winer: Gram. N. T. § 55. 6.—Alford, who differs from Lechler, says: “The former μήτε has been altered to μηδὲ to suit τὰ ἀμφότερα, because with ἀναστ. μήτε ἄγγ. μήτε πν. three things are mentioned;—whereas, if μηδέ is read, the two last are coupled, and form only one. But τὰ ἀμφ. is used of both things, the one being the resurrection, the other, the doctrine of spiritual existences; the two specified classes of the latter being combined generically.”—On the doctrines of the two sects, see Jos. Ant. xvii. 1. 4. Bel. Jud. ii. 8. 14.—Tr.]. Indeed, several scribes [see note 4, appended to the text, above.—Tr.] of the Pharisaic party, espoused the cause of Paul. This party consisted both of learned, and of unlearned men; the former were the speakers. They spoke of Paul, personally, in favorable terms, as a man who could not be charged with any offence, and, moreover, expressed the opinion that it was quite possible that he had received a revelation. The sentence: εἰ - - ἄγγελος, terminates abruptly, [μὴ θεομαχῶμεν being cancelled by recent editors; see note 5 appended to the text, above.—Tr.]; it either states, affirmatively, the condition, without adding the apodosis, or it is a question, the reply to which the opponents are expected to furnish. [“The question is an aposiopesis (comp. Joh_6:62; Rom_9:22,) implying, but not expressly saying, that if such are the facts, they are very serious.” (Meyer).—“Undoubtedly, a designed aposiopesis. A significant gesture or look towards the Sadducees expressed what was left unsaid.” (Hackett). Winer (Gram. § 64 II.) does not decide whether the words were pronounced affirmatively or interrogatively, and adds that it is doubtful whether an aposiopesis is here to be assumed, or whether the sentence was simply left unfinished on account of a sudden interruption, comp. Act_23:10.—“The sentence was left incomplete or unheard in the uproar.” (Conyb. and H. II. 271). In all these cases the words μὴ θεομ. are assumed to be a later addition.—Tr.]. There can be no doubt that the words: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, refer to Paul’s statement in Act_22:6 ff. respecting the appearance of Jesus, except that the Pharisees conceived of the appearance of an angel, or the manifestation of a spirit, in their own way.
Act_23:10. And when there arose a great dissension.—The excitement continued to increase, until at length the tribune became apprehensive that Paul would be pulled in pieces by the parties (διασπασθῇ implies that while some took hold of him in order to protect him, others seized him in wrath, and thus he was dragged to and fro.). Hence he ordered that the military force which he commanded (στράτευμα) should descend from the tower, secure the person of the prisoner, employing even violent measures, if the assembly resisted, and re-conduct him to the barracks. The commander, who did not desire to wound the feelings of the hierarchy, had, doubtless, directed the soldiery to remain in the tower, and had come to the meeting attended only by an orderly officer.
Act_23:11. And the night following.—The revelation of Jesus Christ was probably made through the medium of a vision in a dream. Paul saw the Lord standing by him, and heard his cheering words of promise.—Εἰς Ἱερουσαλήμ—εἰς ̔Ρώμην, i.e., he was directed to go to both cities, and address his testimony to (εἰς) both—the one being the religious, the other, the political capital of the world, at that time.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. When the apostle declares that he has a good conscience, he does not so much refer personally to himself as an individual, as rather to his calling as an apostle of the Gentiles. He was bound more solemnly than ever, when he stood in the presence of the highest court of the hierarchy of Israel, not to be ashamed of his office; and he did, openly and gladly, acknowledge it. He appealed to God (τῷ θεῷ)—to that divine grace and that divine approbation, which were decisive, even though men should sternly condemn his conduct. He had, no doubt, chiefly those years of his life in view, which followed his conversion; still, his testimony does not refer exclusively to that period; he says in substance that, as a Christian, he served God as sincerely and zealously, as at any previous period.
2. The distinction between the office and the person who is invested with it, was placed by Paul in a very clear light, both when he so quickly addressed Ananias, on being subjected to such ill treatment, Act_23:3, and when he justified the words which he had uttered, Act_23:5. The office required the president and every member of the court to observe the law with the strictest conscientiousness; but here the person, the office-bearer, most grossly violated the law, Act_23:3. His personal act unquestionably justified any one who refused to recognize him as the holder of such a sacred office. This is the decision of the Holy Ghost, who applies the standard of right and truth to the person, however exalted his position may be, and recognizes no man as infallible, whether found in cathedra, or in the midst of a general church council.
3. The declaration of the apostle, Act_23:6, that he was a Pharisee, is frequently represented as having been dictated by worldly wisdom, as it enabled him to divide the assembly, and to derive personal advantage from party interests. Divide et impera. But it was assuredly not his object to secure himself and his personal interests; he was influenced solely by a regard for the sacred cause of the truth, and for the honor of Christ. He availed himself Of the party distinctions existing between the Pharisees and Sadducees, simply as the means of obtaining a hearing for the truth, to which the minds of all had hitherto been entirely closed. And he gained this object by declaring that he was himself a Pharisee, and was brought before the tribunal on account of a doctrine which constituted the centre of gravity in the Pharisaic system. He pursues here the same course which he adopted when he combated paganism [see the author’s Exeg. notes, and Doct. views, Act_17:16-34.—Tr.]; he selects those principles which are allied to Christianity—Israel’s hope of a Messiah, and faith in the resurrection of the dead. The result, indeed, shows that the Pharisees approached more nearly to the truth, than their opponents.
4. How far was Paul justified in saying that he had not merely been, but that he still was, a Pharisee? It has been supposed by some that his language involved an untruth. But when we reflect on the relation in which he stood to the whole system of the Sadducees (and it is precisely in view of their adverse positions that he speaks), it is evident that he could, with entire truth, assert that he had not changed, that he still was a Pharisee, that he held strict views of that holiness and righteousness which availed before God, and that, as to the hope of Israel and the resurrection, he was a firm believer; indeed, the richest blessing which existence could afford him, was the fulfilment of that earnest hope which the devout Pharisee entertained. And with respect to the points in which he differed from the Pharisees, he says to them, as he had once said to the pagan Athenians: “That which ye seek, but do not understand, I have; I know it; I declare it unto you.” In this sense the remark may be appropriately repeated, which Bengel makes in another connection, on Act_23:1 : [In pristino statu, quanquam in errore versabatur, conscientiæ fuerat obsecutus, neque quicquam commiserat, cur in foro externo reus fieret.] Nunc, quum bona vetera non abjecit, sed meliora accepit, ex præsenti statu lux in pristinum sese refundebat.
5. The revelation of Christ, Act_23:11, alike comforted and strengthened Paul. Even while he is involved in very great danger, a most brilliant prospect is opened before him. It had long ago appeared to him to be the highest object of life, to be permitted to preach the Gospel in Rome, Act_19:21; and that permission was now granted.—All the purposes of the Redeemer in reference to him, as revealed at the period of his conversion, through Ananias, were rapidly approaching their fulfilment, although under the sign of the cross, seeing that he would be required to suffer much for the sake of the name of Jesus (Act_9:15-16).
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
Act_23:1. And Paul, earnestly beholding the council.—Such a glance Solomon had already cast on places of judgment, where ungodly men and wickedness prevail, Ecc_3:16; and such expressive glances are mentioned in the history of the life of our blessed Saviour, Luk_20:17; Mar_3:5; Mar_11:11. Paul’s heart was, no doubt, deeply affected as he surveyed the scene before him; he thought of the fall of his brethren according to the flesh, whose Great Council was governed by such principles; he thought, too, on his own election and calling, by which he had been delivered from the bonds of darkness, and in consequence of which he would never again be obliged to apply for letters and a commission (Act_9:3) to such a council. (Rieger).—I have lived [walked] in all good conscience before God until this day.—Those who are rebuked by their own conscience, do not usually lift up their eyes, as Paul here does, but cast them down. (Starke).—A good conscience before God, proceeds, I. From true faith in Christ, by which the remission of sins is obtained; II. From the assurance of divine grace and eternal life; III. From the renewal of the Holy Ghost, unto a new life and walk; IV. From the faithful performance of the duties of our calling, (id.).—It is true that many appeal to their good conscience, because no man can actually look into it; many, too, mistake a sleeping for a good conscience. (id.).
Act_23:2. To smite him on the mouth.—In this mode of suffering, too, Paul was an image of the suffering Jesus, who, in the days of his sorrow, was smitten on the cheek because he witnessed a good confession (1Ti_6:13) before the high priest (Joh_18:22). (Ap. Past.).—How many shameful blows on the face devout believers still receive, partly, by beingreviled, partly, by not being allowed to speak the truth, and to rebuke the wicked ways of the world! Job_16:10; 1Ki_22:24; Act_5:28. (Starke).
Act_23:3. God shall smite thee, thou whited wall.—Here was one of those whited sepulchres mentioned by the Lord Himself, Mat_23:27.—We have here a striking instance of an unconverted teacher. Ananias held the sacred office of high priest, and, perhaps, when viewed externally, his gray hair and white priestly garments, gave him even a venerable appearance; but internally, his heart was full of rage and deadly hatred, of injustice and tyranny. Our sacred offices, ecclesiastical titles, and priestly dignities, are nothing else than a white lime which conceals the internal uncleanness of the carnal heart. But no attempt at concealment is of avail before God, and even in the presence of men the loose lime sometimes fails to adhere. (Ap. Past.).—No doubt when Paul’s conduct is compared with the calmness, gentleness, and self-denial of Jesus (Joh_18:23), his warmth of temper becomes evident. Still, we ought not to be too rigid in forming a judgment respecting the apostle. It is true that in our excessively refined age, the servants of Christ cannot commit a greater sin than when they exhibit impetuosity; the remark is at once made that they should have been more circumspect. This may be true; but then, let it be considered that they have exposed themselves to every danger, and, weak as they are, chose their position at the front of the army. It is surely better to be unskilful advocates of the Lord, than, through excessive caution, to resign the whole work to others. It may be also remarked, that if Luther, for instance, had been in Paul’s place, he would have spoken with far more severity. (Williger).
Act_23:5. I wist not that he was the high priest.—It ought to be observed that it was quite possible that, amid the tumult, Paul should not have known or recognized the person of the high priest; for, at that time, the office had been exposed to such vicissitudes, that it could not always be known who was really invested with it. Hence Paul might have regarded. Ananias as a Jewish elder and judge, without actually knowing that he was at that time the presiding high priest. However, even if it should be assumed that Paul did know him, his words could not have been intended to imply more than that, while he revered the office, he rebuked the person who so unworthily administered it. (Ap. Past.).—It would, however, be an abuse to quote the conduct of Paul for the purpose of justifying violent human passions, or the maxims of a false political wisdom, Tit_1:7. (Starke).—If St. Paul in this manner assails the priest, who was appointed by the law of Moses, why should I hesitate to assail these painted bishops and masks that come from the pope, without any authority derived from God or from men? (Luther).
Act_23:6. I am a Pharisee, etc.—Here Paul stands as a sheep in the midst of wolves; he is, therefore, wise as a serpent, Mat_10:16. (Starke).—And yet, he did not renounce the harmlessness of the dove. He still belonged to the Pharisees, not only on account of his education and earlier life, but also on account of his present position as a believer, in so far as, in contradistinction from the frivolity of the Sadducees, he maintained, with the Pharisees, the authority of the divine law, and believed in the resurrection. This was the common ground occupied by them and by him, and he desired to guide them still further, until he had conducted them to the Gospel.—The hope of the fathers, fulfilled by the appearance of Christ; and, the resurrection of the dead, sealed by the resurrection of Christ—the two fundamental themes of the preaching of Paul. (Ap. Past.).
Act_23:7. And the multitude was divided.—Here again we see the wisdom of God, in patiently permitting so many forms of religion to exist. If the whole world were of one mind, the truth would soon be crushed. But now, while one sect contends with another, divine truth finds an opportunity to speak. (Ap. Past.).
Act_23:9. We find no evil in this man.—Human passions were violently inflamed; nevertheless the wisdom of God accomplished its great design. He rules in the midst of his enemies [Psa_110:2.]. Some—says Paul (Php_1:16; Php_1:18),—preach Christ, who are influenced by hostile feelings; still, if Christ is preached, whatever the motive may be, I will rejoice. (Ap. Past.).
Act_23:10. And when there arose a great dissension, the chief captain, fearing, etc.—When the people of God are in great distress, He can always send them guardian angels, even though these should be heathen soldiers. (Starke).—It may easily be conceived how great a stumbling-block this division was to the heathen officer. (Rieger).—And still, in our day, when Christians, in their religious disputes, pull one another in pieces, their conduct must give offence to heathens.
Act_23:11. And the night following, the Lord stood by him.—The danger was great, but the comfort, too, was great. (Starke).—The consolatory words of the Lord, must, on this occasion, have been of special value to the apostle. He may, himself, have felt but little satisfied with the witness which he had borne in Jerusalem, partly, on account of the result, and partly, on account of the manner of his defence. Such thoughts and doubts, to which, more than to any other cause, the sleepless nights of a servant of God are due, were dispelled by the words of the Lord: ‘Be of good cheer; I am satisfied with thy testimony; thou hast done what thou couldst do; the result did not depend on thee; thou hast not interfered with my ways and purposes; thy witness in Jerusalem is at an end; now go to Rome.’ (Williger).—The rest of the book, after Acts 23., is occupied with the apostolical testimony which Paul bore in Rome. Now if the defenders of the primacy of Peter could have found all these statements, or even only the half of them, made in reference to Peter, what a great stress they would lay on the circumstance! (Bengel).
On the whole section, Act_23:1-11.
The enemies of the Gospel, condemning themselves: I. By the injustice of which they are guilty, Act_23:2 ff.; II. By their internal disputes, Act_23:6 ff. (Lisco).
The hope of the resurrection, the crown of Christianity: I. The force of Paul’s defence depends on the truth of the doctrine of the resurrection; II. That doctrine is sustained by the sure foundation of divine truth. (id.).
The excited feeling which Paul displayed before the council: I. The cause, Act_23:1-2; II. The manner in which he controlled it, Act_23:3-5. (id.).
The true mode of combining the simplicity of the children of God with the wisdom of the children of this world: I. The simplicity of the children of God, by a candid confession of our infirmities, Act_23:3-5; II. The wisdom of the children of this world, by availing ourselves of those circumstances by which our object may be gained, Act_23:6-10. (id.).
The comfort of a good conscience, Act_23:1; I. The source from which it proceeds; (a) justification by faith; (b) earnestness in following holiness [Heb_12:14]; II. The support which it affords: (a) it enables us to labor with diligence; (b) it enables us to suffer with hope and joy.
Paul’s defence before the council, or, The true spirit of a witness: a spirit, I. Of manly courage, Act_23:1-3; II. Of childlike humility, Act_23:4-5; III. Of calmness and prudence, Act_23:6; and, at the same time, IV. Of candor and simplicity, Act_23:6, (for Paul speaks nothing but the truth).
Even when a servant of God exhibits nothing but carnal zeal, he shows what manner of spirit he is of [Luk_9:55]: I. By the cause which provokes his zeal (it is iniquity that arouses him, and justice and truth for which he is zealous). II. By the manner in which that zeal manifests itself (even in anger, he forgets neither his own dignity, nor his reverence for God). III. By the victory which he gains over it (he confesses it, when his composure is restored, and firmly controls it.—Parallel cases in Luther’s life and writings).
Jesus and Paul before the Great Council, or, The Master and the disciple before unjust Judges: I. The points of resemblance between them; (a) both are undeservedly exposed to shame, (Act_23:2, and comp. Joh_18:22); (b) both maintain the dignity which heaven had bestowed (Act_23:3, and Joh_18:23). II. The points in which the Master is above the disciple; (a) the holy self-consciousness of Jesus (Joh_18:20-21), is more than Paul’s good conscience (Act_23:1); (b) the gentle reply of Jesus (Joh_18:23), is more heavenly than Paul’s human vehemence (Act_23:3).
The best advocates of a servant of God before the tribunal of an unjust world: I. The comfort of a good conscience in his own breast, Act_23:1; II. The curse of a bad cause in the ranks of his enemies, Act_23:3; Act_23:6-9; III. The sympathy of unprejudiced and honest men of the world, Act_23:10; IV. The gracious testimony of a righteous Judge, in heaven, Act_23:11.
The call from heaven: ‘Be of good cheer, Paul!’, a source of comfort for all the faithful servants of Christ: I. It consoles them when the world unjustly condemns. II. It indemnifies them, when their office exposes them to reproach; III. It soothes them when their own conscience is troubled; IV. It endows them with strength for future contests (‘Thou must bear witness also at Rome.’).
[Act_23:8. Faith in the invisible world: I. The invisible world; (a) the future judgment; (b) the eternal happiness of the redeemed; (c) the eternal misery of the impenitent. II. The grounds of our faith in it; (a) reason sustains it; (b) the word of God establishes it; (c) the resurrection of Christ confirms and illustrates it. III. The influence of that faith; (a) on the mind and heart; (b) on the conscience; (c) on the outward walk. —Tr.].
Footnotes:
[15]Act_22:30. (Acts 22). [D. is deficient from ὁι μέλλοντες, Act_22:29, to the end of the book.—Tr.] Ἀπὸ τῶν δεσμῶν, after ἔλυσεν αὐτὸν [of text. rec., with G. H.] is obviously a later addition; for the four oldest uncial manuscripts [A. B. C. E., also Cod. Sin., Vulg.] do not exhibit it.—Further, the same four manuscripts [A. B. C. E., with Cod. Sin., Vulg. (convenire)] exhibit the reading συνελθεῖν, whereas the others [G. H.] have the reading ἐλθεῖν [of text. rec.]. The latter is also a later correction, as it was supposed that the Jewish authorities had been directed to proceed to the quarters of the Roman commander. [See the Exeg. note.—In the same verse, ὅλον before τὸ συνέδ., of text. rec., with G. H., is changed into πᾶν by recent editors, on the authority of A. B. C. E., Cod. Sin., Vulg. (omne).—Αὐτῶν, after συνέδ., of text. rec. with G. H., is dropped by the same, on the same authority.—Tr.]
[1]Ch. 23, Act_23:6. The reading, υἱὸς Φαρισαίων, is found in the uncial manuscripts A. B. C. [also, Cod. Sin.], in seven minuscules, the Syr. and Vulg.; also in Tert.; the reading [of text. rec., found in E. G. H.], Φαρισαίου, is, without doubt, a correction, as it was assumed that Paul referred solely to his father. Griesbach preferred the plural form; it has been very properly adopted by Lach. and Tisch. [also Born. and Alf., while Scholz retains the singular.—Tr.]
[2]Act_23:8. [The text. rec. reads: μηδὲ ἄγγελον, μήτε πνεῦμα. with G. H., some minuscules and fathers; Lach., Tisch., and Alf., change μηδὲ, before ἄγγ. into μήτε, on the authority of A. B. C. E (also Cod. Sin.)., some minuscules, etc. See the Exeg. note on the passage.—Tr.]
[3]Act_23:9. a. The reading of the two latest uncial manuscripts, G. H., and of five minuscules, namely, γραμματεῖς, without the article, seems to be genuine. Two uncial manuscripts [B. C (also Cod. Sin.).] read: τινες τῶν γραμματέων; in two others [A. E., and Vulg. (quidam Pharisæorum)] the reading is: τινες τῶν Φαρισαίων. All such alterations were probably intended to explain or improve the original words [which, according to Lechler’s translation, he assumes to have been those found in text. rec., excepting οἱ, which occurs in none of the uncials. This is the reading preferred by Tisch.; Lach. reads simply: τινὲς τῶν Φαρ. Alf. makes no change in the text rec. Meyer concludes with Born. that the genuine reading is probably the following: τινὲς τ. γραμματέων του μέρ. τῶν Φαρ.—Tr.]
[4]Act_23:9. b. The concluding words: μὴ θεομαχῶμεν, after ἄγγελος, [of text. rec., with C (second correction).G. H.] are wanting in the four most important manuscripts, of the first class [A. B. C (original). E., also Cod. Sin.], in three minuscules, and five of the oldest versions; they should, in accordance with the opinion of Erasmus, Griesb., and most of the recent critics, be cancelled, as being simply a gloss derived from Act_5:39.
[5]Act_23:11. Παῦλε after θάρσει, is, according to external evidence, undoubtedly spurious. [It is found in C (second correction). G. H., but not in A. B. C (original). E., Cod. Sin., Vulg., etc.—Tr.]
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv25, 27, 28, 29, 30 Paul said to the centurion that stood by--to superintend…
Paul said to the centurion that stood by--to superintend the torture and receive the confession expected to be wrung from him.
Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, &c.--See on Act 16:37.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv25, 28, 29, 30 25. Bound him with thongs—Rather, stretched him forward (to…
25. Bound him with thongs—Rather, stretched him forward (to the whipping-post) for the thongs with which the lashes were to be inflicted upon the bare back. (See our note on Joh_19:1.)
Is it lawful—(See note on Act_16:37.) The centurion shrinks back appalled at Paul’s momentous claim of citizenship, and departs to warn the committed chiliarch. 27.
Read full note →
Yea—(Note Act_16:38.)
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv25, 26, 28, 29, 30 25. And as they bound him with thongs] Rev.…
25. And as they bound him with thongs] Rev. Ver. “And when they had tied him up with the thongs.” This gives more of the force of the verb in the Greek which implies the stretching of the prisoner forward, so that he may be in a position to receive the blows. Some have translated “for the thongs,” but the word rendered “thongs” is one which is always used for straps employed for straining or binding tight, and rarely, if ever, for the implement by which the chastisement is inflicted.
the centurion that stood by] He was superintending the work of fastening the prisoner to the whipping-post, which was done by the common soldiers.
Read full note →
a man that is a Roman] It was an offence punishable with the severest penalties for a man to claim to be a Roman citizen, if he were not one. The peril of such an assertion, if it were not true, convinces the centurion at once, and though we are not told so expressly we may feel sure that the operation of “tying up” was stopped.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv25–30 (25) And as they bound him with thongs.—The words…
(25) And as they bound him with thongs.—The words have sometimes been rendered, “they stretched him forward for the straps”—i.e., put him into the attitude which was required for the use of the scourge; and grammatically the words admit this sense. The Authorised version is, however, it is believed, right. The Greek word for “thong” is always used in the New Testament in connection with the idea of tying (Mar_1:7; Luk_3:16; Joh_1:27). It appears here to be expressly distinguished from the “scourges” of Act_22:24, and in Act_22:29 we find that St. Paul had actually been bound. He was, i.e., according to Roman custom, stripped to the waist, and tied with leathern thongs, as our Lord had been, to the column or whipping-post which was used within the fortress for this mode of torture. In both instances, it will be noted, the order for the punishment came from a Roman officer.
Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman . . .?—Stress is laid on both points. It was unlawful to scourge a Roman citizen in any case; it was an aggravation so to torture him, as slaves were tortured, only as a means of inquiry. On the whole question of the rights of Roman citizens, and St. Paul’s claim to those rights, see Note on Act_16:37.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv25–30 When they had tied him up with the thongs…
When they had tied him up with the thongs for as they bound him with thongs, A.V. When they had tied him up, etc. This does not seem to be a right rendering. Proteinw can only mean "to stretch out before," or "expose to the action," of anything, when taken in a literal sense; iJmav, again, more naturally means the "thong" or lash of a whip or scourge than a thong to bind a man with; indeed, it is thought to be etymologically connected with mastix, Meyer, therefore, rightly understands the passage to mean when they had stretched him on the stake ready to receive the scourging. Is it lawful, etc.? Paul now pleads his privileges as a Roman citizen, just in time to stop the outrage, remembering, no doubt, the terror inspired in the Philippian magistrates when they found they had beaten with rods an uncondemned Roman citizen. (see Act_16:38) Uncondemned (ajkatakritouv); Act_16:37. Only found in these two passages in the New Testament, andnowhere else.
Times to suffer, and times to get relief from suffering.
Read full note →
This subject is suggested by the fact that, although the apostle"s plea of his Roman birthright would have always stood him in good stead, he only used it occasionally; from which fact we may assume that he sometimes felt it was his duty to submit to suffering, and that, at other times, he equally felt it his duty to resist suffering. Probably a careful estimate of the circumstances connected with each case led to his decisions. Here we may see that no special testimony could be made by his patient enduring of suffering, seeing that he was among strangers, who knew nothing of him or his mission, so he felt at liberty to secure relief from indignity and pain, and appealed for his rights as a Roman citizen. The apostle spoke as they were preparing to scourge him. According to the Roman custom, he was stripped to the waist, and tied with leather thongs to the column, or whipping-post, which was used within the fortress for this kind of torture. "It was unlawful to scourge a Roman citizen in any case; it was an aggravation so to torture him as slaves were tortured only as a means of inquiry". (see Act_16:37) Remember the familiar passage, Ecc_3:1-8.
I CHRIST"S CALL TO SUFFER. Of St. Paul Christ had said, "I will show him how great things he must suffer for my Name"s sake" So to his early disciples Christ spoke of persecution and suffering as part of his disciples" necessary lot. Compare his teachings in the sermon on the mount Mat_5:10-12) with Joh_15:18-21.
1. As a historical fact, the earlier apostles found, suffering attend on fulfilling Christ"s mission; and the Apostle Paul had a life full of peril and of pain.
2. As a fact of present observation, suffering is very largely the Christian"s lot. It comes partly by reason of his conflict with evil in himself and in the world, and partly as a Divine arrangement for his moral testing and training.
3. As a doctrine of the Divine Word, suffering is
(1) a means of sanctifying to the believer," Tribulation worketh patience," etc.;
(2) a means of witnessing to the world the power of God"s sustaining grace and the beauty of the Christian virtues. God has such witnesses in his great sufferers, in every age and in every sphere of life.
II CHRIST"S CALL TO AVOID SUFFERING. See his instructions as given to the apostles and the "seventy," when he sent them on their trial mission. If persecuted in one city, they were to flee to another. Nay, in this avoidance of suffering, our Lord set us his own example; for, on more than one occasion he went away from a neighborhood which had become perilous, and escaped from those who would cast him from the hill-top. So St. Paul, in connection with our text, felt justified in avoiding and resisting suffering. The practical difficulty we find is to know when we should bear and when we should resist; and the following suggestions may be fully illustrated:
1. When we can recognize an immediate good in our sufferings, either a blessing of men or the glory of God, we should be prepared cheerfully to bear.
2. When the suffering plainly comes in the orderings of God"s providence, we ought to bear it.
3. When we find that we can, by patient suffering, make a needed witness for the Christian truth or the Christian spirit, we should be willing to suffer.
4. When we find ourselves among strangers and enemies we may use our influence to avoid suffering.
5. And when our suffering plainly comes from the mere willfulness or the pure ignorance of men, we do right to resist. It may also be urged that we must always follow along the line of "conscience" and "duty," whatever consequences may follow. Therefore the "three Hebrew youths" dare not shrink from the fiery furnace, nor Daniel from the den of lions. Impress that we have an inward leading of God"s Spirit, even as St. Paul had; and that, if we will follow the lead in all simplicity, we shall be able to decide, in the circumstances of life that arise, whether it is our duty to suffer or to avoid suffering. Whether we bear or whether we refuse to bear, we must seek to glorify Christ, and do all things as part of our loving life-service rendered to him. R.T.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
William B. Godbey 1900 · Public Domain On vv25–28 25. “And when they were extending him forth to…
25. “And when they were extending him forth to the scourgers,” i. e., the soldiers were shoving him forward to receive this awful and murderous flagellation, designed to coerce the desired confession, Paul said to the centurion standing by, “Is it lawful to cowhide a man, i. e., a Roman and uncondemned?”
William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
F. W. Grant 1903 · Public Domain On v30 Subdivision 3. (Act 22:30; Act 23:1-35.)
Subdivision 3. (Act 22:30; Act 23:1-35.)
Before the Special People of God.
Read full note →
Paul still awaits his trial before the supreme court of Israel, which should have been, and was professedly, the spiritual court, before the heads of the people set apart from all others as the special people of God. The place and title had been indeed long forfeited, but not the responsibility of being what the claim implied. The trial becomes in fact that of themselves in this character. As a trial of Paul, it has no result, but breaks up in confusion: its own trial is all the more perfect; its incompetence is absolute. The people have already manifested themselves; and they are what their leaders have made them; not irresponsible on that account, but most guilty in yielding themselves to such leadership. We have here the head, Ananias; the body, disunited on every essential point. In contrast with all this we have lastly the judgment of the Lord Himself, who owns His faithful servant in his witness to Him. After this he has to be once more saved by the Gentile power from a conspiracy against his life; which at the same time shifts the scene to Caesarea, and brings him before the tribunal of the world.
1.(1) The court of Israel sits at the bidding of the Roman commander: a significant sign of where they were before God. Lysias, unable to gather the cause of so much frenzy and confusion, summons the Sanhedrin, that the charge against Paul may be made clear. The latter, with his eyes fixed upon his judges, affirms his having lived in all good conscience before God until that day. Conscience is not the standard by which man is to be judged; nor does the apostle mean therefore to affirm this. It is simply his uprightness of which he is speaking; and indeed especially in those later and Christian days, in which alone they would care to question it. There was no accusing voice within, from which he would seek escape, which he had (or had had) to silence. He did not come as a criminal to throw himself upon their mercy, but as one pledged to the truth, to maintain it. His unblenching look was fixed upon his judges as he said this, confirming his bold words.
But the anger of the high priest is roused at once, and he commands those standing by him to smite Paul on the mouth. It was the only answer he could give, and showed, perhaps, the sting of his own conscience, which the apostle embodied for him then, and which he was accustomed to treat only as an enemy. Paul at once announces his judgment from God: "God is about to judge thee, whited wall: for sittest thou to judge me according to law, and in breach of law commandest me to be smitten?" This is not an imprecation, as is plain; it is the announcement of judgment on the part of God, and was fulfilled at the outbreak of the troubles which began the last Jewish war. Paul is here passed from the place of the accused altogether, into that of judge; and he was not one to take so solemn a place without realizing what he was doing. The high priests of this time were in fact a sorrowful indication of the condition of the people, as they were also their official representatives. Paul knew not in this case that the "whited wall," -the painted hypocrite to whom he addressed himself, -was the high priest; and he apologizes when he learns the fact; although with the text he quotes he puts the man whom they call "God’s high priest" upon no higher ground than "a ruler of Thy people." It has been said, and rightly, surely, that the Holy Spirit could not say, "I knew not;" yet the Spirit doubtless was in the judgment pronounced; and the indignation shown by Paul had so much justification that, remembering his own words at another time, "Be angry and sin not," and realizing that there is a necessary anger at iniquity, which is sinless, one hesitates to say whether he had passed the limit.
Of much more importance it seems than to decide as to the apostle, it is to realize that the Spirit must have used the very lack of knowledge on Paul’s part to lay bare the iniquity that was upon the head of Israel’s priesthood now, and the doom that was impending. If a shadow that priesthood was at any time, now it was but the shadow of a shadow. Out of these forms all semblance of life had departed; and they must by the law of nature vanish away.
(2) There follows the further testimony of a house divided against itself, and that in the most important matters. Moreover that which was most contrary to God -which indeed destroyed the very foundations -was in the ascendancy, not indeed in regard to the number of its followers, who were few, but nevertheless possessed at this time of the chief places. The comfortless doctrine of the Sadducees which denied all future life for man could never appeal to the masses, but remained as the justification of those too rich and well satisfied with the present to trouble about the future. It was the unbelief of immortality; not a faith, but a blight of faith. Between Sadducee and Pharisee the friction was necessarily of the extremest kind, although they might band together for a common purpose, which was then sure to be of the most evil character.
None knew better than Paul this essential opposition. With the Pharisees also he had a link, in all this doctrine which the Sadducee wholly denied. Of this he now avails himself: was it to throw confusion merely among those who were alike in hostility to the Name which was all his glory? or had he the hope, slight as it might be, of working upon the more orthodox by an appeal to the truth they had? All that could be spoken of as "the hope," and which connected itself more fully for the Christian than even for the Pharisee with the resurrection of the dead, separated both from the chief men in the council there. As between these, Paul’s claim to be a Pharisee would certainly be justified; that he would have made it in any other connection one can hardly believe. But we are bound to impute, and with such an one as the apostle, the highest motive possible for what he did. He is clearly not at his highest. Yet he might have discerned that here there was no opportunity for his great theme, which must have been well known to these his judges, even if they had not been amongst the crowd that listened to him from the castle stairs; and he might have realized that now the suggestion of the link between Pharisaism and Christianity was the best seed he could sow on soil like that before him. In fact there seems a certain success in it. Could they have been ignorant how much they were admitting when they allowed that perhaps a spirit or an angel might have spoken to Paul? We cannot follow this to any after results, but that does not justify us in declaring that there were none, or in thinking even that this was not all that could be done upon this occasion in testimony to Christ. Certainly we have no right to suppose that that devoted love to his people which had made him in face of all assurances as to the result put himself thus into their hands, had failed him now that he was there, and that he was merely trying to throw his foes into disorder as a means of escape for himself: he as to whom the Spirit in every city bore witness that bonds and afflictions awaited him.
But the effect, as far as we are given to trace it, seems to be more to expose the condition of things in Israel than to alter anything. The very men who here are ready apparently to go far in admission of the divine claim of Christianity would soon repent their hasty speech. The council, having exhibited its incapacity for righteous judgment, breaks up in mere confusion; Paul being once more saved out of their hands by those who are thus allowed to show their true title over them. Israel itself it is that is under judgment, and that in the chief seat of wisdom and authority.
(3) The apostle has accomplished nothing by his earnest self-devotion; he is manifestly out of his place, and the power realized in his labors among the Gentiles is not with him here. All the more, now that this has been fully manifest, does he find the divine arm thrown round him, and himself get the ministry that he needs to sustain him in this failure of cherished hopes. "The night following, the Lord stood by him, and said, Be of good courage; for as thou hast borne full witness at Jerusalem of the things concerning me, so must thou bear witness also at Rome."
How beautiful the strong expression, "full witness!" It might have seemed that he had not had opportunity for this. And how much cause of exercise and sad questioning might there be in regard to this! That which he had been warned of had taken place; the warning which he had not heeded. Whatever might have been the motive, how vain to run contrary to the dictates of a Wisdom which was at the same time the perfection of Love! Yet He at least could sympathize with His servant’s sorrow who had wept His own tears over Jerusalem, and had to say too, as he was saying, "I have labored in vain, I have spent my strength for nought and in vain." And the Lord gives him too in his sorrow to have part also in His consolation, "yet surely my judgment is with the Lord, and My work with My God." It might seem as if the Lord were even thinking of such reflections as we would be apt to make upon the disappointed and sorrow-stricken laborer, and were throwing around him the shield of
His acceptance. He who has done worthily at Jerusalem shall have committed to him the same testimony at Rome! How well He knows that this is Paul’s blessedness to bear witness for Him! How He assures him of strength that shall be with him to carry him through; and that all the might of the world is powerless against him! Blessed be God that this remains in its comfort abidingly for those to whom the world will have the same Marah-spring to offer, which the "Tree" alone can sweeten.
So he goes back to his old call as the apostle of the Gentiles, if he be now "an ambassador in chains." Rome! what treatment will the proud city of the world give to an ambassador in chains?
2. The council is not, however, the Jews’ last answer to the gospel of God’s grace. Their moral state comes out still more in the conspiracy which follows to lie in wait for Paul and kill him. The forty or more pledge themselves to it by a religious vow, and then communicate their plan to the chief priests and elders, without a thought, evidently of opposition on their part, nor that they will do aught but help on their design. And plainly they are not mistaken, although we hear nothing more about it, as God in His providential care for His servant causes the whole to fall to the ground. At the right moment Paul’s sister’s son, of whom we have not heard before, comes forward to declare what has come to his knowledge; and Lysias, now thoroughly aroused, sends off his prisoner, well protected by an escort, to the governor at Caesarea. That he seeks to make capital out of his zeal on behalf of a Roman citizen, stretching the truth considerably in order to do so, scarcely calls for remark, so thoroughly is it the way of the world at all times. By this act Paul is transferred from the Jews, tribunal to that of the Gentiles, though the Jews are still his accusers to the end. If Jerusalem can no more put to death the prophets herself, she will use the hands of others as far as she can influence them. We are now to see Paul therefore at Caesar’s judgment seat.
F. W. Grant, The Numerical Bible (4th ed., 1903) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. W. McGarvey 1914 · Public Domain On vv25–30 25-29. When Paul was led within the castle, the…
25-29. When Paul was led within the castle, the executioner made immediate preparation for his cruel work. (25) " And as he was bending him forward with the straps Paul said to the centurion, who was standing by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man who is a Roman, and uncondemned? (26) When the centurion heard this, he went and told the chiliarch, saying, Take heed what you are about to do, for this man is a Roman. (27) Then the chiliarch came and said to him, Tell me, are you a Roman? And he said, Yes. (28) And the chiliarch answered, With a great sum I obtained this citizenship. And Paul said, But I was born so. (29) Then they who were about to examine him immediately departed from him; and the chiliarch was alarmed, when he knew that he was a Roman, and that he had bound him. " Previous to applying the scourge, the victim was bent forward upon a reclining post, to which he was bound by straps. It was this binding which caused the alarm of the chiliarch, and not the binding of his arms with chains. The latter was legal, and hence Paul remained so bound, but the former was illegal. It was just at the critical moment, when he was bent forward upon the post, and the straps were being adjusted, that the quiet assertion of citizenship caused his release, and struck terror into the heart of the officer. Notwithstanding this exemption was extended only to a favored few, we can but admire the majesty of a law, which in a remote province, and within the walls of a prison, suddenly released a prisoner from the whipping-post, by the simple declaration, "I am a Roman citizen."
J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On vv28–29 freedom citizenship.
freedom citizenship.
was free born am a Roman born, i.e. of a father who had obtained citizenship.
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On v29 Arrangements for a decent hearing:
Arrangements for a decent hearing:
v. 29. Then straightway they departed from him which should have examined him; and the chief captain also was afraid after he knew that he was a Roman, and because he had bound him.
Read full note →
v. 30. On the morrow, because he would have known the certainty wherefore he was accused of the Jews, he loosed him from his bands, and commanded the chief priests and all their Council to appear, and brought Paul down, and set him before them.
The declaration of Paul that he was a free-born Roman citizen had its immediate effect. Those that were to put the question to him with torture stepped back immediately, with alacrity, for the torture was illegal in the case of a Roman citizen, although it might be employed in the case of slaves and foreigners. Even the chiliarch felt rather uncomfortable with fear, since he had now found out that Paul was a Roman citizen, and because he had bound him. If Paul had been of a vindictive nature, he might have caused the tribune some difficulty, but revenge did not enter his thoughts, since his object had been gained. But the commander now acted more carefully. It was still his firm resolve to find out the real reason why Paul was being accused by the Jews, what the trouble really was about. So he had Paul freed from his bonds, and commanded that the high priests and the entire Synedrion come together, the hearing probably taking place in their own council-chamber or at some place in the city outside of the Tower of Antonia, most likely in the Court of the Gentiles, where the Romans were permitted to appear, since he led Paul down from the hill and placed him in front of them. Thus the prophecy of Agabus had been fulfilled, and Paul was in the hands of the Gentiles, delivered there by the hands of his own countrymen.
Summary.Paul’s speech to the Jews, first listened to in interested silence, is interrupted by shouts of anger, after which Paul saves himself from a scourging at the hands of the soldiers by declaring his Roman citizenship.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv25, 27, 30 General Information:
General Information:
Here the word "they" refers to the soldiers.
Read full note →
the thongs
These were strips of leather or animal hide.
Is it lawful for you to scourge a man who is a Roman and who has not been put on trial?
Paul uses this question to make the centurion check the validity of having his soldiers whip Paul. AT: "It is not lawful for you to whip a man who is a Roman and who was not given his legal right to a trial!" (See: Rhetorical Question)
What are you about to do?
This question is used to urge the commander to reconsider his plan to whip Paul. AT: "You should not do this!" (See: Rhetorical Question)
translationWords
Paul
centurion
lawful
Rome
citizen
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv25, 28 22:25-29 Paul claimed his status as a Roman citizen…
22:25-29 Paul claimed his status as a Roman citizen at this critical time when he was about to be tortured to make him confess his supposed crime. Roman citizenship was a valuable asset, and claiming it falsely was a capital offense. Its principal benefits were the prohibition of scourging and the right to appeal to the emperor (25:11). The commander was frightened at having nearly violated Roman law (cp. 16:35-39).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.