Acts 23 · The Lantern

Paul looked directly at the Sanhedrin and said, “Brothers, I have conducted myself before God in all good conscience to this day.”

"And Paul, earnestly beholding the council, said, Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day." It shows his boldness, and how it awed them. What he means is this: I am not conscious to myself of having wronged you at all, or of having done anything worthy of these bonds.

"And Paul looking upon the council, said," etc. When Paul had said right in front of the council: "Men, brethren, I have conversed with all good conscience before God until this present day," the high priest Ananias commanded the men who stood by him to strike Paul's mouth, on the grounds that it had been blaspheming.

Paul speaks now not to the people and not to the crowd, "looking intently at the Sanhedrin," that "he had lived with a perfectly good conscience," that is, he is not conscious of being guilty before them in any of his actions, nor deserving of these chains.

At this, the high priest Ananias ordered those standing near Paul to strike him on the mouth.

"Know ye not that we are to judge angels? " Again, of how open censure (does) the free expression (find utterance), how manifest the edge of the spiritual sword, (in words like these): "Ye are already enriched! ye are already satiated!

We read in the Acts of the Apostles that someone, ordered by Ananias the high priest, struck Paul because he said, "God will strike you, oh whitewashed wall." And even to this day, the Ebionites, under orders from their illegitimate high priest, strike the apostle of Jesus Christ with their calumnies, and Paul says to such a high priest of the Word, "God will strike you," and s…

They are the words of boldness, rather than of anger; he did not choose to appear in a contemptible light to the tribune. For suppose the tribune himself had spared to scourge him, only as he was about to be delivered up to the Jews, his being beaten by their servants would have more emboldened him: this is why Paul does not attack the servant, but the person who gave the order…

Then Paul said to him, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! You sit here to judge me according to the law, yet you yourself violate the law by commanding that I be struck.”

Of course, those who do not understand him think that [Paul] uttered a reproach when he had been slapped by order of the high priest, for, with seeming insolence, he then said, "God will strike you, you whitewashed wall." But those who understand him take this as a prophecy.

God will strike you, whitewashed wall. He did not say this disturbed in mind, but indeed he spoke prophetically, because that figurative priesthood, which was composed in the likeness of a whitewashed wall, was to be struck and destroyed when the true priesthood of Christ had come, with the apostles preaching the Gospel. And that is why he said: God will strike you.

"You sit to judge according to the law, and, contrary to the law, you order me to be struck." That is, transgressing the law, becoming guilty of lawlessness; as if to say: "Being worthy of very many punishments." "You whitewashed wall!" He calls him this because although Ananias assumed the bright appearance of a man who supposedly defends the law and judges according to the la…

But those standing nearby said, “How dare you insult the high priest of God!”

But with respect to what you have said, that priests should be lowly, because both the Lord and His apostles were lowly; both all the brethren and Gentiles also well know and love my humility; and you also knew and loved it while you were still in the Church, and were in communion with me.

"And they that stood by said, Revilest thou God's high priest? Then said Paul, I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people." Because "I knew not that he was high priest." Some say, Why then does he defend himself as if it was matter of accusation, and adds, "Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of…

But when [Paul] was asked, "Do you revile the high priest?" then he marvelously complied with the requirements of humility, for he replied, "Brothers, I did not know that he was the high priest; for it is written, 'You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.' " The mildness of this prompt reply shows how calmly he had spoken what he seemed to have uttered in anger, for…

“Brothers,” Paul replied, “I was not aware that he was the high priest, for it is written: ‘Do not speak evil about the ruler of your people.’”

For since it is written, "Neither shall revilers inherit the kingdom of God," and again the Lord says in His Gospel, "Whosoever shall say to his brother, Thou fool; and whosoever shall say, Raca, shall be in danger of the Gehenna of fire," how can they evade the rebuke of the Lord the avenger, who heap up such expressions, not only on their brethren, but also on the priests, to…

I did not know, brothers, that he was the high priest. For although he truly knew that this was not the high priest in the new testament, nonetheless teaching others, and thus urging those who are in power to behave more modestly, he also wanted to temper himself here.

"You revile the high priest of God? Paul said: I did not know, brothers, that he was the high priest." How then did he say: "You sit to judge according to the law?" Yes, Paul pretends not to know, but this was not harmful but beneficial for the listeners.

Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and others Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, “Brothers, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee. It is because of my hope in the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial.”

You find Paul confessing his faith before the chief priests, under the shelter of the chief captain, among the Sadducees and the Pharisees: "Men and brethren," he says, "I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee; of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am now called in question by you," -referring, of course, to the nation's hope; in order to avoid, in his present condition, as…

Again he speaks in a human manner, and does not everywhere enjoy the benefit of grace. And at this time and after these things he wished to divide the multitude which was of one mind against him. And in this place he does not lie: since by his ancestors he was a Pharisee. [CHRYSOSTOM]

Again he speaks in a human manner: "I am a Pharisee," but everywhere he is rich in grace. He does not deceive here either, because by his ancestors he is "a son of a Pharisee." And since the Jews did not want to say what they were accusing him of, he considers himself compelled to state it himself: "for the hope of the resurrection of the dead I am being judged," and he justifi…

As soon as he had said this, a dispute broke out between the Pharisees and Sadducees, and the assembly was divided.

For the Sadducees say that there is neither a resurrection, nor angels, nor spirits, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all.

Of the Sadducees I am silent, who, springing from the root of this error, had the hardihood to adjoin to this heresy the denial likewise of the resurrection of the flesh.

The Sadducees, being arrogant, perhaps do not even know God. Therefore, they do not wish to believe in a resurrection. But the Pharisees confess both. And indeed there are three. How then does he say, "both"? Either because he calls spirit and angel one, or because the word does not speak only of two, which is what "both" chiefly signifies, but also of three.

The Sadducees, being senseless, perhaps did not even know God, and therefore do not believe that there will be a resurrection. "The Pharisees acknowledge both." However, the Sadducees do not acknowledge three things (the resurrection, the existence of an Angel, and the existence of a Spirit). How then does the writer say "both"?

A great clamor arose, and some scribes from the party of the Pharisees got up and contended sharply, “We find nothing wrong with this man. What if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?”

"What if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?" These words are obscure or something is missing for the completion of the sentence, which would be, "If a spirit or an angel has told to him what to say in order to avoid dangers, he is being deceptive." Otherwise, what the Pharisees say must be understood in the sense, "Look!

"If a spirit spoke to him." The statement can be understood in two ways. For something is lacking to complete the sense so that it may be read therefore: If a spirit or an angel spoke to him, it is unclear, he says; or as the phrase must be taken from the Pharisees: If a spirit spoke to him or an angel, instead of "Behold, I speak about the resurrection," it is evident that the…

Something is lacking here for the completeness of the thought. The Spirit, it is said, or an Angel suggested to him the content of his speech — it is unknown.

The dispute grew so violent that the commander was afraid they would tear Paul to pieces. He ordered the soldiers to go down and remove him by force and bring him into the barracks.

"And when there arose a great dissension, the tribune, fearing lest Paul should have been pulled in pieces of them, commanded the soldiers to go down, and to take him by force from among them, and to bring him into the castle." The tribune is afraid of his being pulled in pieces, now that he has said that he is a Roman: and the matter was not without danger.

"And when there arose a great dissension, the tribune fearing lest Paul should be pulled in pieces. "When a great dissension arose between Pharisees and Sadducees, the tribune, fearing lest Paul should be pulled in pieces by the Sadducees, ordered him to be taken back to the castle.

"The commander, fearing." He was afraid lest they tear Paul apart, since he had said that he was a Roman, and the matter was not far from danger. Finally the soldiers snatch him away, I think, as their own property.

The following night the Lord stood near Paul and said, “Take courage! As you have testified about Me in Jerusalem, so also you must testify in Rome.”

When daylight came, the Jews formed a conspiracy and bound themselves with an oath not to eat or drink until they had killed Paul.

"And when it was day, certain of the Jews banded together, and bound themselves under a curse, saying that they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul. And they were more than forty which had made this conspiracy." "They bound themselves under a curse," it says. See how vehement and revengeful they are in their malice!

"bound themselves," that is, they declared themselves outside of faith in God, unless they did the things they boasted of. If then they lied about the promise, as indeed they lied, they are accursed; or if it even happened that they murdered, again as murderers they would have bound themselves, whether God, although the priests pretended otherwise. [AMMONIUS]

And they bound themselves by an oath, saying that they would neither eat nor drink until they had killed Paul. While the Lord says: Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness (Matt. 5), these contrariwise hunger for iniquity, and thirst so greatly for blood that they even renounce food for their body until satisfied by his death.

More than forty of them were involved in this plot.

They went to the chief priests and elders and said, “We have bound ourselves with a solemn oath not to eat anything until we have killed Paul.

Now then, you and the Sanhedrin petition the commander to bring him down to you on the pretext of examining his case more carefully. We are ready to kill him on the way.”

But when the son of Paul’s sister heard about the plot, he went into the barracks and told Paul.

Then Paul called one of the centurions and said, “Take this young man to the commander; he has something to tell him.”

So the centurion took him to the commander and said, “Paul the prisoner sent and asked me to bring this young man to you. He has something to tell you.”

The commander took the young man by the hand, drew him aside, and asked, “What do you need to tell me?”

He answered, “The Jews have agreed to ask you to bring Paul to the Sanhedrin tomorrow on the pretext of acquiring more information about him.

Do not let them persuade you, because more than forty men are waiting to ambush him. They have bound themselves with an oath not to eat or drink until they have killed him; they are ready now, awaiting your consent.”

So the commander dismissed the young man and instructed him, “Do not tell anyone that you have reported this to me.”

Then he called two of his centurions and said, “Prepare two hundred soldiers, seventy horsemen, and two hundred spearmen to go to Caesarea in the third hour of the night.

Provide mounts for Paul to take him safely to Governor Felix.”

And he wrote the following letter:

Claudius Lysias, To His Excellency, Governor Felix: Greetings.

This man was seized by the Jews, and they were about to kill him when I came with my troops to rescue him. For I had learned that he is a Roman citizen,

and since I wanted to understand their charges against him, I brought him down to their Sanhedrin.

I found that the accusation involved questions about their own law, but there was no charge worthy of death or imprisonment.

When I was informed that there was a plot against the man, I sent him to you at once. I also instructed his accusers to present their case against him before you.

So the soldiers followed their orders and brought Paul by night to Antipatris.

The next day they returned to the barracks and let the horsemen go on with him.

When the horsemen arrived in Caesarea, they delivered the letter to the governor and presented Paul to him.

The governor read the letter and asked what province Paul was from. Learning that he was from Cilicia,

he said, “I will hear your case when your accusers arrive.” Then he ordered that Paul be kept under guard in Herod’s Praetorium.

Acts23