Chapter 23

1 As Paul pleadeth his cause, 2 Ananias commandeth them to smite him. 7 Dissension among his accusers. 11 God encourageth him. 14 The Jews’ laying wait for Paul 20 is declared unto the chief captain. 27 He sendeth him to Felix the governor.

1. Earnestly beholding. Gr. atenizoµ, “to fix one’s eyes upon,” “to look steadfastly at,” “to behold earnestly” (see Acts 1:10; 7:55; Luke 4:20; 22:56; see on Acts 13:9). Luke often uses the word to describe the expression on the face of one about to speak earnestly. It is used appropriately of Paul’s expression as the apostle gazes intently upon the highest Jewish assembly for the first time in a quarter of a century. There had no doubt been many changes in personnel during the years, but some faces Paul may have recognized (see ch. 23:5; see on ch. 23:5).

Men and brethren. See on ch. 1:16.

In all good conscience. This would be a very inclusive claim for any man to make. For Paul to make such a claim after years of disputing with Judaizers and their victims makes evident his own convictions with respect to his course of action. His conduct had been altogether in keeping with the will of God and with the law and the prophets (see chs. 24:14; 28:17). If Paul was right, his accusers were obviously wrong. Paul often refers to the conscience (Acts 24:16; Rom. 2:15; 13:5; 1 Cor. 10:25; 1 Tim. 1:5; 2 Tim. 1:3).

2. Ananias. A son of one Nebedaeus, appointed to the high priesthood by Herod, king of Chalcis (Josephus Antiquities xx. 5. 2).

Smite him. Paul’s declaration was equivalent to charging the Sanhedrin with hypocrisy. If Paul’s conduct was conscientious theirs obviously was not. Compare 1 Kings 22:24; Matt. 26:67; Luke 22:63, 64.

3. God shall smite. Some have thought that Paul spoke hastily, and that v. 5 was intended to be an apology. Under provocation Jesus remained silent (Matt. 26:63; 1 Peter 2:23). It is possible, however, that Paul spoke by inspiration, and, without realizing that it was the high priest to whom he spoke (see v. 5), foretold his fate. Ananias was assassinated (Josephus War ii. 17. 6, 9) in a.d. 66, seven or eight years later, probably by the Sicarii (see Vol. V, pp. 70, 73; see on ch. 21:38). Compare Jer. 28:15–17.

Thou whited wall. That is, thou hypocrite (cf. Matt. 23:27). Like a whitewashed wall, this holder of a high office of justice might wear the outer trappings of his rank, but he was not the righteous or judicious person such a leader should have been.

Sittest thou? In Greek the pronoun is emphatic: “and dost thou sit?” That is, How can you, a whited wall of hypocrisy, sit in judgment upon others?

After the law. That is, according to the law, meaning Jewish law.

Contrary to the law. Beating was permitted by Jewish law, but only after right judicial procedure resulting in the conviction of the accused (Deut. 25:1, 2; cf. John 7:51). As a former member of the Sanhedrin (see AA 112, 410) Paul knew the law and proper judicial procedure, and asserted his right to enjoy due process of law. Compare Vol. V, p. 539.

4. God’s high priest. As the highest religious and civil official of the Jews, the high priest was supposedly God’s representative. In the OT judges were sometimes called Хelohim, literally “gods” (see Vol. I, p. 171; see on Ps. 82:1).

5. I wist not. That is, I did not know (cf. ch. 3:17). Paul’s statement has been variously explained: (1) that because of defective eyesight (see on ch. 9:8, 18) he did not recognize Ananias as the high priest, (2) that he did not realize that it was the high priest who gave the command to smite him, (3) that he was speaking ironically, as if incredulous that the high priest could have given such an order, and thus indirectly challenging Ananias’ right to the position he occupied, (4) that he “did not consider” before speaking, though he knew that the speaker was Ananias, the high priest. Of these the first explanation seems most probable. The second, perhaps also suggesting a limitation in Paul’s vision, also seems possible. The last two seem out of keeping with Paul’s character, and with the seriousness of the situation that now confronted him.

Not speak evil. Paul cites Ex. 22:28, where the Heb. Хelohim, “gods,” is used to refer to human judges (see on Acts 23:4). Paul doubtless quoted the passage in Hebrew, while Luke reproduces it from the LXX. Paul’s sincerity at this point cannot be questioned. Heralds of the gospel are to recognize and give due honor to those in authority even when they abuse their authority.

6. When Paul perceived. Having once been a member of the Sanhedrin, Paul of course knew that some were Sadducees and some Pharisees. Perhaps, also, he may have recognized particular persons as belonging to one party or the other.

I am a Pharisee. Concerning the Pharisees see Vol. V, pp. 51, 52; see on ch. 5:34. In the Greek the pronoun “I” is emphatic. As a Christian, Paul still claims to be a Pharisee. Nicodemus, a Pharisee, was a follower of the Lord (John 3:1; AA 104, 105). Under the preaching of the apostles many Pharisees had been converted (see Acts 15:5). Some Bible students have suggested that the majority of converts from Judaism to Christianity were Pharisees. Because of certain similarities between the teachings of Jesus and those of the Pharisees, some have even considered Jesus a Pharisee. Both Christians and Pharisees acknowledged the authority of the Inspired Word, both stressed righteousness and separation from the world, both believed in the resurrection and a future life. It was primarily concerning the method of attaining righteousness that Christians differed from Pharisees (see on Matt. 5:20; Mark 7:5–13; Luke 18:9–14; Gal. 2:16–21). Paul could thus honestly say, “I am a Pharisee,” without meaning that he necessarily agreed with all the beliefs and practices of this sect.

7. A dissension. It is significant that Paul should have made this declaration so early in the hearing. He knew that he had no hope of a fair hearing before the Sanhedrin, and no doubt intended to reveal its incompetence to pass judgment on him. Therefore he brought the trial to a close by setting his judges against one another (v. 7). The subject chosen—the resurrection—was basic to Christianity (see 1 Cor. 15:12–23) and almost certain to produce the desired result (see on Matt. 22:23–33).

Divided. Gr. schizoХ, “to rend,” “to cleave asunder,” “to split [into factions].” The English word “schism” is from the Gr. schisma, the noun cognate to schizo.

8. The Sadducees. Concerning the Sadducees see Vol. V, p. 52; see on ch. 4:1. They acknowledged the authority of the writings of Moses, but had reservations when it came to the prophets, and rejected the literary portions of the OT and tradition altogether. They considered angels as only manifestations of celestial glory, and denied the reality of a future life. It has been said that the Pharisees were the Jewish counterpart of the Stoics, and the Sadducees, of the Epicureans; within broad limits this is true (see on ch. 17:18).

9. Cry. Gr. kraugeµ, “an outcry,” “a clamor.” The sedate and learned members of the Sanhedrin proved to be as excitable and irrational as the fickle and illiterate mob (see ch. 22:22, 23).

The scribes. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the reading “some of the scribes.” Not all the scribes of the Pharisees participated.

Strove. Gr. diamachomai, “to contend fiercely.”

No evil. Compare the decision of Pilate with respect to the Lord (John 18:38; 19:4, 6). In each instance the supreme court of Judaism blindly sought the destruction of a just man.

A spirit or an angel. The Sadducees believed in neither. Perhaps reference is here made to the vision on the way to Damascus (ch. 22:6–10) or the trance in the Temple (vs. 17–21). Paul’s witness had not been in vain. The attitude of the Pharisees here is reminiscent of that of Gamaliel upon an earlier occasion (ch. 5:33–40).

Let us not fight against God. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the omission of these words. They may have been borrowed from a similar passage in ch. 5:39.

10. The chief captain. It would seem that Lysias, who was concerned not only with public order but with the safety of a Roman citizen, was present (cf. ch. 22:30).

Pulled in pieces. Evidently a physical struggle had broken out between Sadducees and Pharisees, on the one hand to get possession of, and on the other to protect, the person of Paul.

Commanded the soldiers. Judging by Lysias’rank of chiliarchos (see on ch. 22:24; cf. on John 18:12; Acts 21:31, 32), the garrison may have consisted of about 1,000 men, which was the maximum strength of a military cohort of auxiliaries. Such a body of troops was commanded by a chiliarchos. See on chs. 21:31; 27:1. For his own safety Paul was escorted to the Tower of Antonia (see on ch. 22:24).

11. The Lord stood by him. This Being was apparently Christ Himself (cf. chs. 9:5, 6; 22:17–21). The outlook was dark indeed, and Paul doubtless remembered the servile acquiescence of Pilate to the wishes of the Jews in the case of Christ. Divine assurance at this juncture would mean much to Paul and give him courage for the trials of the next few years.

Be of good cheer. No doubt as Paul reflected upon the events of the past two days he must have begun to question the wisdom of his fixed purpose to visit Jerusalem (ch. 20:24) in the face of repeated warnings of what was to happen to him there (vs. 22, 23), of his consenting to participate with other Jewish Christians in ritual purification (ch. 21:20–28), and of his conduct before the Sanhedrin (ch. 23:1–10). His thoughts must also have turned to the future. Was his work for Christ ended? Was his desire to witness to the gospel in Rome to be thwarted (Acts 19:21; Rom. 1:13)? As he poured out his heart in prayer the Lord appeared personally, with comfort and assurance.

Also at Rome. Paul already had purposed to visit Rome (see ch. 19:21).

12. Certain of the Jews. Important textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for reading simply “the Jews.” According to v. 13 there were about 40 of them. They were apparently in deadly earnest, and certain that their plot would succeed. Compare the murder committed by Mattathias, the old priest of Modin, at the time of the Maccabean revolt (1 Macc. 2:24; Josephus Antiquities xii. 6. 2 [268–278]), and the attempt to assassinate Herod the Great when he built an amphitheater and introduced gladiatorial games into Jerusalem (Josephus Antiquities xv. 8. 3).

Bound themselves under a curse. Gr. anathematizoµ, “to anathematize,” “to declare accursed,” “to bind under a curse [if an oath is not fulfilled].” These men invited upon themselves the most severe divine penalties if they failed to achieve their objective. Compare the Hebrew charam (see on 1 Sam. 15:3).

Neither eat nor drink. By such a vow the would-be assassins demonstrated both their fanaticism and their determination to kill Paul quickly.

13. More than forty. The size of this fanatical group meant that Paul’s life was in extreme jeopardy.

14. The chief priests. Neither the conspirators nor “the chief priests” would seem to have been Pharisees (see on vs. 6–9), but they were all fanatics. The leaders of the nation were ready to cooperate with anyone, however unscrupulous, in order to secure their objectives.

15. The council. That is, the Sanhedrin. It seemed necessary to resort to a plot such as this because: (1) The Sanhedrin could not inflict the death penalty (see on John 18:31; Acts 7:58). (2) Even if it could have done so it might have had little or no jurisdiction over Paul as a Roman citizen. (3) Even if it had had jurisdiction, the influence of the Pharisees would now probably have made it impossible to secure a verdict against Paul.

To morrow. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the omission of this word.

As though. This clause reads literally, “as though you would examine matters concerning him more accurately.”

We. Emphatic in the Greek.

Ready to kill him. They would see that Paul never reached the council chamber, and thus, presumably, no suspicion of complicity would attach to any members of the council. His assassination would be attributed to fanatics. Perhaps indeed these 40 plotters were fanatical “daggermen,” or Sicarii (see on ch. 21:38). Here, as in his Gospel, Luke makes evident that the Jews and not the Romans were chiefly responsible for difficulties that arose over the proclamation of the gospel (see Luke 23:2, 4, 14, 22). Josephus records a similar Jewish plot against Herod (Antiquities xv. 8. 1–4), and there were plots against Christ (John 7:19; 8:40; 10:39).

Philo justified the assassination of apostates: “It is well that all who have a zeal for virtue should be permitted to exact the penalties offhand and with no delay, without bringing the offender before jury or council or any kind of magistrate at all, and give full scope to the feelings which possess them, that hatred of evil and love of God which urges them to inflict punishment without mercy on the impious. They should think that the occasion has made them councilors, jurymen, high sheriffs, members of assembly, accusers, witnesses, laws, people, everything in fact, so that without fear or hindrance they may champion religion in full security” (The Special Laws i. 9. 55; Loeb ed., vol. 7, p. 131).

16. Paul’s sister’s son. This is the only reference to relatives of Paul in Jerusalem. He did have relatives in Rome (Rom. 16:7, 11), and apparently in Corinth (v. 21). It has been suggested that Paul’s nephew was studying in Jerusalem, as Paul had done before him (see on Acts 22:3). There is no evidence that either the sister or the nephew was a Christian.

He went. Literally, “having come near,” possibly “having been present.” Some have suggested that this applies to Paul’s nephew’shearing the plot rather than to his reporting it to Paul. Possibly he was present when the plot was laid, or accidentally overheard it.

Entered into the castle. Being detained as much for his own protection as for anything else, the apostle was apparently privileged to receive his friends. Roman law provided for three kinds of custody: (1) confinement of ordinary men in the public jail, (2) assignment of men of high rank to the personal custody of a magistrate or senator, who became responsible for their appearance on the day of trial, and (3) military custody, the accused being placed in charge of a soldier who was held responsible with his life for the prisoner’s safekeeping, and whose left hand normally was secured by a chain to the prisoner’s right. Paul was now under military custody (see on v. 18).

17. Paul called. His faith in God and in His guidance (see on v. 11) did not require him to sit idle. He recognized divine providence in the message brought by his nephew, and found it consistent with his own faith to take steps to avert the threatening danger.

Young man. Gr. neanias (see on ch. 20:9).

18. The prisoner. Gr. desmios, “[one] in bonds,” “a captive,” “a prisoner.” The word does not necessarily mean that Paul was bound with chains, though ordinarily a prisoner in military custody would have been bound to his attending soldier (see on chs. 21:33; 23:16).

Prayed. That is, asked.

19. Took him by the hand. To hear the message of the nephew more privately and to encourage him to speak freely. He had come to Lysias as an emissary of a Roman citizen under accusation. Evidently the “chief captain” thought better of Paul than he did of Paul’s accusers (see vs. 26–33). The Romans routinely treated Paul with greater fairness and consideration than did the Jews.

Privately. This may be understood as referring to the asking rather than to the taking aside.

20. The Jews. Because its leaders were party to the plot, the nation as such was involved in it.

21. With an oath. Or, “under a curse” (see on vs. 12–14).

Looking for a promise. That is, awaiting Lysias’ consent to send Paul down to the place where the Jews purposed to examine Paul (cf. v. 15).

22. So the chief captain. Because Paul was a Roman citizen, because it appeared that the Jews had unjustly accused him, because the Jewish leaders were divided among themselves, and because they were apparently bent on circumventing Lysias’ attempts to guarantee Paul a fair hearing, the “chief captain” was increasingly favorable to Paul and the more determined to protect him.

Tell no man. If the Jews should learn that Lysias knew of their plot, his efforts to protect Paul might yet be thwarted. Also, for his own sake, the informer should say nothing.

Shewed. Or, “made known.”

23. Two hundred soldiers. These infantrymen were assigned to protect Paul, 100 for each of the centurions who had been summoned.

To C¶sarea. The seat of Roman government in Palestine and the usual residence of the procurator, or governor (see on chs. 8:40; 10:1). The distance by road was about 63 mi.

Spearmen. Gr. dexiolaboi, literally, “holders by the right [hand].” The Latin Vulgate translates dexiolaboi as lancearii, “lancers.” The meaning “spearmen,” or “lancers,” is inferred from the fact that a spear is commonly held in the right hand. So large a force—470 men—assigned to protect a single prisoner from violence is evidence of a turbulent state of affairs in Judea, of the strength of the garrison in Jerusalem, and of the importance Lysias apparently attached to the safeguarding of Paul’s person. Lysias realized that the Jews would go to any length to accomplish their objective. There must also have been many angels at hand, sent by the Lord of hosts (cf. 2 Kings 6:17; Dan. 6:22; Matt. 26:53).

Third hour. About 9:00 or 10:00 p.m. (see on chs. 2:15; 3:1).

The night. In order to make it impossible for bystanders to identify Paul as being among them.

24. Provide them beasts. Note that the word “them” is supplied by the translators. These beasts were not for the whole company, but for Paul and perhaps the officers. His status as a Roman citizen and as a protected prisoner gave him privileges that would not have been accorded either an ordinary Jew or a common prisoner. Doubtless such transportation was a luxury Paul had not often enjoyed on his journeys.

Bring him safe. The safety of a prisoner who claimed Roman citizenship, the lives of the centurions and the soldiers, and the ability of Roman arms to keep order were all at stake in this transfer of Paul from Jerusalem to Caesarea.

Felix. See Vol. V, pp. 70, 234. Felix’ term of office extended from about a.d. 52 to about a.d. 60. Tacitus (Annals xii. 54; Loeb ed., vol. 3, p. 393) says of Felix that he “considered that with such influences behind him all malefactions would be venial” because his brother was a favorite of the emperor Claudius. Suetonius (Lives of the Caesars v. 28) describes Felix as the husband of three wives, whom he married in succession. One of these was Drusilla, daughter of Herod Agrippa I, and thus a descendant of both Herod the Great and the Maccabees (see The Herods; Acts 24:24). Despite incipient revolt by the Jews against Rome, Felix was able to preserve a measure of order in Judea (cf. ch. 24:1) notwithstanding his maladministration (Tacitus Annals xii. 54).

Governor. Gr. heµgemoµn, “procurator” (see on Matt. 27:2).

25. A letter. In ch. 21:15, 18 Luke includes himself among Paul’s companions at Jerusalem (see Vol. V, p. 663). The letter probably was written in Latin, the language of official intercourse, in which case the version Luke here gives is a Greek translation.

After this manner. Literally, “having this form,” that is, to the following effect. Luke’s reproduction of the letter is probably not a verbatim copy, but closely resembles the original. It gives the substance.

26. Excellent. This and the word “greeting” reflect good Greek literary usage of the day (see on Luke 1:3; cf. Acts 1:1; 15:23; James 1:1).

27. Man. Gr. aneµr, “man” as distinct from woman. This may imply a degree of respect, perhaps in view of the fact that Paul had proved to be a Roman citizen.

Taken. Gr. sullambanoµ, “to take,” “to seize” (cf. Matt. 26:55; Acts 12:3).

Should have been killed. Literally, “was about to be killed.” The letter omits the details of the religious controversy that prompted the attack upon Paul, perhaps because of the ignorance of Lysias concerning such matters and because he knew this would be stated before Felix (see v. 30).

Rescued him. That is, when Paul was first attacked (ch. 21:32).

Having understood. Or, “having learned,” “having been informed.” Lysias so phrased his account as to give Felix the idea that he had rescued Paul because he already knew him to be a Roman. This was, of course, contrary to fact (see ch. 22:25–29).

28. Would have known. Literally, “desiring to know.” Lysias had intended to secure the desired information by scourging (see ch. 22:24), a fate from which his claim to Roman citizenship (v. 25) saved Paul.

29. Questions of their law. These included Temple regulations (see on ch. 21:28) and theological questions (ch. 23:6). These matters would seem of little consequence to Lysias (cf. ch. 18:15), except as they might lead to a disturbance of the peace.

His charge. Roman law made no provision for such affairs. The lenient treatment Paul enjoyed in Caesarea and later at Rome was no doubt due in part to Lysias’ favorable report.

30. The Jews. Important textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for the omission of these words. The statement would then read, “It was shown me that there would be a plot against the man.”

Straightway. Or, “at once.” By sending the prisoner promptly to Felix, Lysias implies a compliment both to the governor’s superior position and to his wider knowledge of Jewish customs.

Farewell. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) between omitting and retaining this word.

31. Brought him by night. That is, they left Jerusalem at night and were well on their way to Caesarea by daybreak (see on v. 23).

Antipatris. Identified with modern Ras elРФAin. This town was built by Herod the Great upon the site of Chaphar Saba (south of the modern Kefr Saba) according to Josephus (Antiquities xvi. 5. 2.), and named after his father Antipater (see Vol. V, p. 38). Antipatris means “belonging to Antipater.” The town was beautifully located in the Plain of Sharon, wooded and well watered. It was on the Roman road from Jerusalem to Caesarea (see Palestine During the Ministry of Jesus). For an older city on the same site, possibly the Aphek of OT times, see Josephus War i. 4. 7; ii. 19. 1; iv. 8. 1; cf. 1 Macc. 7:31; Palestine In Biblical Times.

32. On the morrow. Antipatris lay some 39 mi. from Jerusalem. Leaving early in the evening (see on v. 23) and traveling with foot soldiers, Paul’s company would reach Antipatris sometime the following day.

They left. Considering that Paul was now out of danger, the foot soldiers returned to Jerusalem.

The castle. That is, the Tower of Antonia in Jerusalem (see ch. 21:34), where the garrison was quartered. The Jerusalem garrison must have been of considerable size to spare so large a detachment of soldiers in such troublesome times as these (see Vol. V, pp. 70, 71).

33. Delivered the epistle. The commander of the detachment turned over to the governor the letter, the prisoner, and the problem. His mission was completed without incident.

34. The governor. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the reading “he.”

Cilicia. See on chs. 6:9; 15:41. At this time both Cilicia and Palestine were probably attached to the Roman province of Syria.

35. I will hear thee. Literally, “I will hear thee through,” that is, I will give you a full hearing. Felix accepted jurisdiction of the case. The accusers did not reach Caesarea until five more days had passed (ch. 24:1).

Judgment hall. Gr. praitoµrion (see on Matt. 27:27), from the Latin praetorium. These words were applied to the tent of a commanding officer, to the barracks of the imperial guard at Rome, and as here, to the palace of a provincial governor of the Roman Empire.

Ellen G. White comments

1–9AA 411

1–35AA 411–418

10 AA 412

11–15AA 413

16–22AA 414

23–31AA 415

35 AA 416