1 Then Paul, looking earnestly at the council, said, “Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.”
1. What council is this?
The great Sanhedrin was the Supreme Court of Israel, consisting of 71 members, presided over by the High-Priest. They met daily in the temple to hold court, except on the Sabbath and other holy days. Technically, they did not have the power to administer capital punishment (Jn 18:31), but in the case of Stephen, for example, this was no deterrent to his stoning (cf. Ac 6:12–14; 7:58–60). Roman governors evidently sometimes ignored such incidents as a matter of political expediency. In Jesus’ case, the men who were trying Him were the same ones who had conspired against Him. MSBN
2 And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth. 3 Then Paul said to him, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! For you sit to judge me according to the law, and do you command me to be struck contrary to the law?” 4 And those who stood by said, “Do you revile God’s high priest?” 5 Then Paul said, “I did not know, brethren, that he was the high priest; for it is written, ‘You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.’ “
2. What about Paul’s constitutional rights to a fair trial by his peers?
Jewish law had a whole series of defendant rights, the presumption of innocence, the right not to testify against yourself , sworn testimony of witnesses, the right to cross examine testimony, but like the trial of Jesus and Stephen, sometimes these rules were conveniently ignored.
Jewish law considered a person innocent until proved guilty, but Ananias had punished Paul before he had been charged much less tried and found guilty. Paul reacted indignantly and uttered a prophecy of Ananias’ judgment that God fulfilled later. A whitewashed wall is one that was frequently inferior on the inside but looked good outwardly.
Paul’s claim to uprightness so incensed Ananias that he ordered a soldier to strike Paul on the mouth. Probably Ananias, who was a Sadducee, had already made up his mind that Paul, who had been a Pharisee, was guilty. An officer of the high priest had also struck Jesus as he testified before the Sanhedrin.
Ananias became high priest in A.D. 47. The Jewish high priesthood was a political appointment during Rome’s occupation of Palestine. Josephus painted Ananias as a despicable person. He seized for his own use tithes that should have gone to the ordinary priests and gave large bribes to Romans and Jews. The emperor summoned him to Rome on charges of being involved in a bloody battle between Jews and Samaritans, but he escaped punishment. He was very wealthy and resorted to violence and even assassination to accomplish his ends. He was also very pro-Roman, and the Jews finally assassinated him in their uprising against Rome in A.D. 66, nine years after Paul stood before him. CN
Under Roman law no man was to be punished until judgment had been handed in. Just because a man is arrested and accused of a certain crime does not grant liberty to those who had arrested him to abuse him. In that day the Roman law actually granted a great deal of justice. However, this incident and the trial of Jesus make us recognize that even the Roman law could be twisted and turned. Justice is dependent upon the one who is executing the law. JVM
This time the Sanhedrin seemed to have its way, though it was obviously not legal, either by Jewish law or Roman law. RD
3. Was Paul being disrespectful to the high priest?
It is quite possible that Paul did not know the high priest, since he had been absent from Jerusalem for many years. Other options for understanding this verse include appeals to poor eyesight for Paul, or that he did not realize the act came at the high priest’s command. ESVN
6 But when Paul perceived that 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; concerning the hope and resurrection of the dead I am being judged!” 7 And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided.
4. Was Paul using the Pharisee/Sadducee “dust up” to his advantage?
Paul recognized that he could not get a fair trial in a court that did not even observe the law it purported to defend, so he changed his tactics. He decided to divide the jury and began his defense again (“Men brethren”). This time he took the offensive.
The issue of the resurrection of the dead was fundamental in Paul’s case. Israel’s national hope of deliverance by her Messiah rested on the resurrection of that Messiah as predicted in the Hebrew Scriptures. By raising the old controversy of whether resurrection is possible, Paul divided his accusers. CN
There were major social, political, and theological differences between the Sadducees and Pharisees. By raising the issue of the resurrection, Paul appealed to the Pharisees for support on perhaps the most important theological difference (see note on v. 8). Since the resurrection of Jesus Christ is also the central theme of Christianity, this was no cynical ploy on Paul’s part to divide the Sanhedrin over a trivial point of theology. MSBN
8 For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection–and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both. 9 Then there arose a loud outcry. And the scribes of the Pharisees’ party arose and protested, saying, “We find no evil in this man; but if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him, let us not fight against God.” 10
5. What was the major issue between the Pharisees and the Sadducees?
The Pharisees believed in angels and spirits and in a future resurrection, though they did not accept Jesus’ resurrection; the Sadducees rejected the very idea of a resurrection as well as belief in angels and spirits. Consistent with this, the Pharisees granted that a spirit or angel might have visited Paul (v. 9), while the Sadducees rejected this possibility altogether. ESVN
The Sadducees accepted only the Pentateuch as divinely inspired Scripture. Since they claimed (wrongly, cf. Mt 22:23–33) that the Pentateuch did not teach that there would be a resurrection, they rejected it. The Pharisees, however, believed in the resurrection and afterlife. Their beliefs were thus closer to Christianity than those of the Sadducees. Significantly, the Scripture records the conversion of Pharisees (15:5; Jn 3:1), but not of Sadducees. MSBN
Now when there arose a great dissension, the commander, fearing lest Paul might be pulled to pieces by them, commanded the soldiers to go down and take him by force from among them, and bring him into the barracks. 11 But the following night the Lord stood by him and said, “Be of good cheer, Paul; for as you have testified for Me in Jerusalem, so you must also bear witness at Rome.”
6. So Paul is going on a Rome vacation?
The Pharisees sided with Paul, and the Sadducees opposed him. Their emotional dispute excluded any possibility of a serious examination of Paul’s conduct or even a clarification of the charges against him. The Pharisees likewise defended Paul’s claim to having received a vision on the Damascus road (22:6-11) or in the temple (22:17-21), but the Sadducees repudiated it. The Roman commander must have thrown up his hands in dismay. For a second time he could not discover what Paul had done and why so many Jews hated him. Pilate had a similar problem with Jesus (John 18:28—19:15). Claudius Lysias decided to take Paul into protective custody in the Fortress.
the Lord stood at his side. The fifth of 6 visions Paul received in Acts (cf. 9:3–6; 16:9, 10; 18:9, 10; 22:17, 18; 27:23, 24), all coming at crucial points in his ministry. you must witness at Rome. Jesus encouraged Paul by telling him that his desire (Ro 1:9–11; 15:23) to visit Rome would be granted. MSBN
12 And when it was day, some of the Jews banded together and bound themselves under an oath, saying that they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul. 13 Now there were more than forty who had formed this conspiracy. 14 They came to the chief priests and elders, and said, “We have bound ourselves under a great oath that we will eat nothing until we have killed Paul. 15 Now you, therefore, together with the council, suggest to the commander that he be brought down to you tomorrow, as though you were going to make further inquiries concerning him; but we are ready to kill him before he comes near.”
7. Why were the Jews so dedicated to killing Paul?
More than 40 men formed a conspiracy and bound themselves by oath not to eat or drink until they had killed Paul. How interesting. Paul joined himself with four men by the taking of a vow. Then there are the more than 40 men who bind themselves in an oath and fast until it is fulfilled. Paul’s kind of religion is vastly different than that of these assassins. If Paul cannot be killed in a way that has the appearance of legality, then they will kill him in a way that completely sets aside justice and the law.
It is important to recognize that this conspiracy could not succeed without the full cooperation of the members of the Sanhedrin (almost certainly including the high priest). And so you have something over 40 men who are willing to do the killing, but they can only kill Paul if the Sanhedrin summons him for another hearing. Then, while Paul is being brought to them, the execution squad can do its work. A number of the members of the Sanhedrin (I doubt that those who were Pharisees were a part of this conspiracy) agreed to inform the commander that they needed to question Paul further, so that he would bring him from the place of his confinement to the Sanhedrin. The assassins who planned to kill Paul assured these Sanhedrin members that they would kill Paul while he was still some distance away (Acts 23:15). I assume this was to give the impression that the Sanhedrin had nothing to do with this plot. RD
This Paul guy was a threat to the entire power base of the Sadducees, their control of the corrupt temple system, and their liberal theology. This whole resurrection story of that dead Nazarene was enough of a scandal and now Paul was spreading this story of a risen Messiah all over Jerusalem. He had to be stopped.
16 So when Paul’s sister’s son heard of their ambush, he went and entered the barracks and told Paul. 17 Then Paul called one of the centurions to him and said, “Take this young man to the commander, for he has something to tell him.” 18 So he took him and brought him to the commander and said, “Paul the prisoner called me to him and asked me to bring this young man to you. He has something to say to you.” 19 Then the commander took him by the hand, went aside and asked privately, “What is it that you have to tell me?”20 And he said, “The Jews have agreed to ask that you bring Paul down to the council tomorrow, as though they were going to inquire more fully about him. 21 But do not yield to them, for more than forty of them lie in wait for him, men who have bound themselves by an oath that they will neither eat nor drink till they have killed him; and now they are ready, waiting for the promise from you.” 22 So the commander let the young man depart, and commanded him, “Tell no one that you have revealed these things to me.” 23 And he called for two centurions, saying, “Prepare two hundred soldiers, seventy horsemen, and two hundred spearmen to go to Caesarea at the third hour of the night; 24 and provide mounts to set Paul on, and bring him safely to Felix the governor.”
8. Who is this kid?
Nothing is known of Paul’s family. They possibly moved to Jerusalem when Paulwas young. he … entered the barracks. As a Roman citizen Paul was probably given generous visitation privileges.
Suddenly we learn that Paul had a sister, and that his sister had a son. And it “just so happened” (a secular euphemism for a clear case of divine intervention) that this nephew overheard the plot to kill Paul, his uncle. This nephew was allowed to visit “Uncle Paul” and tell him what he had heard. Paul called for a centurion and asked that he escort the lad to the commander. Once again the commander meets and exceeds what we would expect of him. Like a grandfather, he takes the lad by the hand and leads him aside to learn what he had to report. The lad told the commander what he had overheard. He listened and then sent the boy away, cautioning him not to tell anyone about what he had just done. He quickly summoned two centurions and instructed them to assemble a sizeable force to escort Paul to Caesarea, where he could stand before Felix the governor. RD
We know nothing more about Paul’s sister than what Luke stated here. She may have lived in Jerusalem, Tarsus, or elsewhere. Obviously her son, Paul’s nephew, sided with his uncle rather than with the assassins. This is the only reference to Paul’s immediate family in the New Testament. Other writers used the Greek word neanian, translated “young man” (v. 17), of persons in their twenties and thirties as well as younger men (cf. 7:58; 20:9). However, verse 19 suggests that he may have been younger than a teenager. Paul could receive visitors in the barracks where he was a prisoner since he was a Roman citizen in protective custody. He could also summon a centurion to do his bidding, which he did here. CN
25 He wrote a letter in the following manner: 26 Claudius Lysias, To the most excellent governor Felix: Greetings. 27 This man was seized by the Jews and was about to be killed by them. Coming with the troops I rescued him, having learned that he was a Roman. 28 And when I wanted to know the reason they accused him, I brought him before their council. 29 I found out that he was accused concerning questions of their law, but had nothing charged against him deserving of death or chains. 30 And when it was told me that the Jews lay in wait for the man, I sent him immediately to you, and also commanded his accusers to state before you the charges against him. Farewell. 31 Then the soldiers, as they were commanded, took Paul and brought him by night to Antipatris. 32 The next day they left the horsemen to go on with him, and returned to the barracks. 33 When they came to Caesarea and had delivered the letter to the governor, they also presented Paul to him. 34 And when the governor had read it, he asked what province he was from. And when he understood that he was from Cilicia, 35 he said, “I will hear you when your accusers also have come.” And he commanded him to be kept in Herod’s Praetorium.
9. Why did Claudius Lysias, the Roman commander go to all this trouble?
The letter itself is far from “inspired.” It was written by a Roman commander who, so far as we know, never came to faith in Jesus. Claudius Lysias is absolutely accurate in his assessment of the situation, so far as it concerns Paul’s guilt or innocence. The controversy surrounding Paul was not about Roman laws; it was about differences among the Jews regarding their religion, particularly concerning their law. Paul was not guilty of any crime, and certainly not guilty of anything deserving of death or imprisonment. Like the Pharisees who were members of the Sanhedrin, the commander found Paul “not guilty.” Do these words, written by Claudius Lysias, not sound a great deal like those spoken by Pilate in regard to the charges against Jesus? RD
The roman military were very disciplined and took their job very seriously. The loss of a prisoner could result in execution of the guards and and demotion of the commander.
The commander also realized that Paul’s enemies in Jerusalem would stop at nothing to see him dead. As long as Paul was in Jerusalem there was a danger of rioting. Consequently Claudius prepared to send him to the Roman provincial capital with a heavy guard under cover of night. The number of soldiers may have been 270 or 470 depending on the meaning of dexiolaboi, “spearmen.” This word may refer to foot soldiers or to led horses.[955]The question is whether there were 200 infantry and 70 cavalry, plus 200 spearmen or 200 extra horses. The third hour of the night was 9:00 p.m. This is the third time Paul left a city secretly at night (cf. 9:25; 17:10). Obviously Claudius Lysias did not want the assassination of a Roman citizen on his record, so he took precautions to protect Paul. Paul’s guards continued to treat him with the respect due a Roman citizen. The commander even provided horses for him to ride on. CN- ESVN………….ESV Study Bible Notes
- MSBN…….MacArthur NASB Study Notes
- NIVSN…..NIV Study Notes.
- JVM ….J Vernon McGee,
- ACC …. Adam Clarke’s Commentary
- BN …..Barnes Notes
- WBC…… Wycliffe Bible Commentary
- CN …… Constables Notes
- IC……….Ironside Commentary
- NET………Net Bible Study Notes.
- JFB…………..Jamieson Fausset Brown Commentary
- VWS……………..Vincent Word Studies
- CMM………….Commentary on Matthew and Mark
- BDB………….. Barclay’s Daily Study Bible (NT)
- Darby………..John Darby’s Synopsis of the OT and NT
- Johnson………Johnson’s Notes on the New Testament.
- NTCMM…………..The New Testament Commentary: Matthew and Mark.
- http://augustine1-defendingthefaith.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please feel free to make civil comment. Divergent views encouraged,