Acts 21:37–23:11

Original Meaning

Paul Uses His Roman Citizenship (22:22–29)

PAUL’S STATEMENT IN 22:21 that the Lord had decided to send him to the Gentiles served as a trigger for another outburst from the Jewish crowd. They shouted for his death, threw off their cloaks, and flung dust into the air (22:22–23). The latter two actions expressed both their frustration and their horror at blasphemy, possibly through their connecting the word “Gentiles” with Paul’s alleged desecration of the temple. The crowd was too unruly for anything constructive to take place, so the commander had him taken into the barracks in order to give him third-degree treatment—questioning through torture with hope of getting at the bottom of the wrong that Paul had committed about which the Jews were so angry (22:24).

The planned flogging was probably the Roman brutal scourging with a whip that had thongs weighted with rough pieces of bone or metal. It could cause great harm and even leave people crippled for life. As Paul was about to be flogged, he told the centurion that he was a Roman citizen. Though Roman citizens who had been convicted of some crime could have scourging decreed as a punishment, they were exempt from it as a method of inquiry before trial.8 The commander was therefore saved from breaking the law any further, for he was wrong to even order the flogging. Thus, his alarm (22:29) was understandable. He talked of the bribe that he had had to pay to acquire Roman citizenship (22:28),9 while Paul said he had inherited his citizenship through birth.

Bridging Contexts

THE REACTION OF Paul and of the Jews to God’s revelation. On the Damascus road, Paul was blinded by a bright light (22:11). But he responded to that light, and not only was his blindness taken away (v. 13), he was also transformed by the revelation (v. 14). He was now to witness of what he had seen and heard (v. 15). Jewish tradition valued the light of God and viewed Israel as its guardians and agents, who were to give it to the Gentiles (Isa. 42:6; 49:6). This tradition Paul shared with his Jewish audience (Acts 22:3).

Yet as John later explains, “The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it” (John 1:5). In other words, Jesus “came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God” (1:11–12). The Jewish mob belonged to the majority of God’s people who were rejecting the light; Paul belonged to the minority who received him and carried on the tradition of bearing the light. But when he as God’s servant told them about God’s command to take the light to the Gentiles, as promised in the Scriptures,19 they cried, “Rid the earth of him! He’s not fit to live!” (Acts 22:22).

Paul also shared a common commitment to the biblical tradition with the Pharisees in the Sanhedrin. This tradition, however, had now become traditionalism.20 When they were now confronted with a necessary implication of their tradition—the resurrection of Jesus as the forerunner of the resurrection for which they hoped—they rejected it and persecuted any who accepted it. Too much of their comfortable traditionalism had to be given up if they were to accept the truth that their tradition implied. This incident shows how a theologically orthodox people can become so comfortable in their orthodoxy that they become hardened to change. The conservatism of the Jews had become a dead traditionalism, which persecuted the agents of change whom God sent their way.

Paul’s three visions. This passage gives us three visions of Paul. (1) He saw the risen Lord, which resulted in his conversion and which he considered as a resurrection appearance (22:6–10).21 On the place of visions in the conversion process, we can say that a vision is one of many ways that God can use to confront people. It has happened enough times in the Bible and in history (see 10:1–33) to be listed as one of the ways God reveals himself to people.

(2) Three years after his conversion (cf. Gal. 1:18), God warned Paul of the dangers of staying in Jerusalem and told him to leave (22:18). In this vision God gave Paul direction for his life. This vision has similarities with the one Peter received (10:9–16). In both the subject was in prayer when God spoke in a vision.22 Prayer attunes us to God and makes us receptive to his voice. While Paul was in this attitude of prayer, God warned him about the dangers of something he was eager to do. His “heart’s desire and prayer to God for the Israelites [was] that they may be saved” (Rom. 10:1). Paul felt positive that he would be the one to fulfill this ambition, that because of his background he was eminently qualified for the job (22:19–20). But God did not see it in that way. Paul was mistaken, for what he thought might give him openings for the gospel would not do so. This vision shows us that we must be open to God and place our ambitions before him so that he may direct us in the way that is best for us.

(3) The third vision encouraged Paul (23:11)—a feature that occurs several times in Acts. At times of special need, God appears to his servants in some supernatural way and gives them a glimpse of himself that encourages them to persevere in the task they have been given (4:31; 18:9–10; 27:23). We can call this the comfort of the God of all comfort (cf. 2 Cor. 1:3–4). God knows when we need special help to overcome discouragement and to persevere in a difficult call. And at just the right time he sends us that comfort. The comfort Paul received was in the form of an affirmation of the sovereignty of God. This time of uncertainty eventually resulted in Paul’s fulfilling one of his greatest ambitions: to preach the gospel in Rome.23

Paul’s use of his Roman citizenship. We have reflected much on the call to suffer in this commentary because it is such an important theme in Acts. The apostles, including Paul, were happy to suffer for the sake of Christ (5:41; 21:13). Before Paul arrived in Jerusalem, he was given ample warning from God that he would be persecuted, and he came prepared to suffer (20:23–24; 21:4, 10–13). But he was not a masochist who took on suffering unnecessarily. He indicated he was willing to die in Jerusalem (21:13), but when the Romans tried to give him a scourging to get him to talk, he appealed to his citizenship to stop the process (22:25).24

To Paul, a ruler “is God’s servant to do you good” (Rom. 13:4). If a ruler does not do that, then we can urge him to do so. Besides as representatives of a just God, we as believers are committed to combating injustice on earth. Sometimes we may even need to fight injustice against ourselves. The Bible does give us guidelines here. For example, Paul says it is better to be wronged or cheated than to go to secular courts against another believer (1 Cor. 6:6–7). But as a general rule, we can appeal to the law for our protection if we are attacked or persecuted in a way that clearly violates the law of the land.

Contemporary Significance

TRADITION, TRADITIONALISM, AND the light. The traditionalism of the Jews resulted in their rejecting the great truth that their tradition implied. Though some Pharisees (15:5) and “a large number of priests” (6:7) did accept the message of Jesus’ resurrection, many refused to do so, and they even persecuted those who did. In the same way, throughout the history of the church, traditionalists have persecuted those from within their tradition who have launched out into a new direction that was permitted and indeed implied by their tradition.

When Martin Luther, for example, began to proclaim what the Bible clearly taught, he was branded a heretic by the very church that in theory accepted the Bible as one of its two main sources of authority (the other being tradition). At the Diet of Worms (1521), the Catholic scholar Johann Eck asked Luther whether he wished to retract what he had taught. Luther’s famous reply was as follows:

Since your serene majesty and your lordships seek a simple answer, I will give it in this manner, neither horned nor toothed: unless I am convinced by the testimony of the Scriptures or by clear reason . . . I am bound by the Scriptures I have quoted, and my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and will not retract anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience.25

As a result, Luther was excommunicated. For his safety his friend, the elector of Saxony, Frederick the Wise, staged a kidnapping and hid him in a castle in Wartburg.

Similarly, when some younger scholars of the fundamentalist movement began to open themselves to certain truths and academic disciplines compatible with the fundamentals of the faith, they were brutally attacked by traditionalists within the fundamentalist camp. Some of them (e.g., E. J. Carnell) were deeply hurt and permanently bruised by these attacks.26 When a South African friend of mine with an effective evangelistic ministry included some of the political implications of the gospel in his preaching in the 1980s, other evangelicals branded him as having abandoned the gospel. In other words, those who respond in obedience to the light may find that others who consider themselves as guardians of the light oppose them.

Personal ambition and God’s warning. On several occasions God had to curb Paul’s personal ambitions with his guidance. When he wanted to go to Asia, his efforts were thwarted until it was God’s time (16:6–10; 19:1). Acts 22:17–21 reflects God’s curbing of Paul’s ambition to be the witness par excellence to the Jews. The apostle honestly thought that his background would give him such credibility that he would be a powerful witness to his people. But this was not going to be so, and God knew it. Thus, God directed him to leave Jerusalem.

This does not mean that ambition is wrong. Paul also had a great ambition to go to Rome (Rom. 1:10–15; 15:22–32), and the Lord fed that ambition in a vision by telling him, “Take courage! As you have testified about me in Jerusalem, so you must also testify in Rome” (23:11). It is good to dream great dreams, but we must place all these dreams at the altar of God and bow to his sovereignty, believing that he knows what is best for us. And we should also be conscious of the fact that when it comes to our ambitions, it is easy for fleshly desire to cloud godly ambition. Since it is difficult for us to distinguish between these two, we must look to God to send obstacles along the way that alert us to dangers.

We should note too that the other Christians in Jerusalem had a part to play in Paul’s leaving Jerusalem (see 9:29–30). In other words, the Christian community can be agents of God’s warning regarding our ambitions. We usually resent these blocks that come our way and seemingly hinder us from achieving our goals. But we need to discipline ourselves to accept the perspectives of other believers as gifts sent by God, who in his sovereignty knows what is best.

Recently we have heard many sad stories of capable Christian leaders whose uncontrolled ambitions led them to break Christian principles and to end up with shameful failure. Many such people have testified later that their ambition led to their downfall and that they did not have frank advisors who could have helped them avoid the pitfalls.27 This is why the Bible advises us to seek advice regarding our plans (Prov. 11:14; 15:22; 20:18).

This does not mean that we should give up our visions whenever hindrances develop. Paul’s plans to go to Asia Minor and Rome were often hindered, but he finally got to both places. Believers also tried to stop Paul from going to Jerusalem at this time, but he strongly felt the Spirit was directing him to go. A key ingredient of faithfulness is a willingness to persevere amidst discouragements. Most, if not all, people who have achieved great things for God have done so by persevering through circumstances that would have caused others to give up.

Often our visions are fulfilled by others, and our role may be to motivate them. We can then back this work with our prayers, rejoice when we see it happening, and help wherever we can. Long after Paul’s vision of the Lord in the temple, for example, he agreed that Peter had the call to go to the Jews while his own call was to go to the Gentiles (Gal. 2:7–8). Yet Paul never lost his burden for the Jews (Rom. 9:1–4), and he kept praying for their conversion (10:1). Wherever he went he started by witnessing to them. Although God took him away from ministry in Jerusalem, when he heard about a need there, he took immediate steps to do something about it. This was what had brought him to Jerusalem on this visit—to bring gifts from the Gentile churches for the Jewish Christians. We conclude this discussion with the wise words of Proverbs 16:9: “In his heart a man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps.”

No unnecessary suffering. Even though Paul was willing to suffer death for Christ’s sake, he did not take on unnecessary suffering (21:13). Some second-century Christians are said to have gloried in suffering so much that they desired it in unhealthy ways.28 New Testament Christians did not give in to such excessive morbidity. Today too we can challenge people through the law to ensure our own rights and protection as long as we do not dishonor God. Especially when Christians are being illegally ill-treated because of their principles, it may be good for them (and for society in general) if they protest the way they are being treated.

I do not think God intends a battered wife to bear her pain silently when she is being physically abused and treated as a subhuman by her husband. A child must be encouraged to protest sexual abuse that he or she may be facing. Workers who are underpaid should appeal to their employers to be fair. Furthermore, if the Bible leaves room for us to speak up on behalf of ourselves for our protection, how much more important it is for us to speak up for others who are being dehumanized or treated unjustly.

Because of the sinfulness of the human race, in spite of all the advances in labor rights in the world, there are still situations where laborers are badly exploited. Christians ought to speak up on their behalf and try to secure their legitimate rights. These are results of Christians getting close to people. They see needs and realize that as Christians they can and must do something. The early Methodist movement rightly got involved in encouraging the labor movement. Christian laborers began to talk in their small groups about their troubles, and their fellow Christians realized they had to do something to alleviate those sufferings.29

Original Meaning

Paul Before the Sanhedrin (22:30–23:11)

THE COMMANDER STILL had to get to the bottom of the case. As it obviously concerned a religious issue, he decided to order the Sanhedrin to look into the matter (22:30). Longenecker explains that “as a Roman military commander, he had no right to participate in the Sanhedrin’s deliberations. But as the Roman official charged with keeping peace with Jerusalem, he could order the Sanhedrin to meet to determine the cause of the riot.”10 When Luke says that Paul was “released” (22:30), he probably meant that he was released from confinement to appear before the Sanhedrin.11

Paul’s first statement to the Sanhedrin proclaimed that he had fulfilled his “duty to God in all good conscience” (23:1). This is consistent with what he said elsewhere (24:16; Phil. 3:6). He was not talking about fulfilling requirements for salvation through a life of obedience. He clearly argued that no one can do that (Rom. 2–3). Rather, by Jewish standards of measuring faithfulness relative to conscience, he had lived a blameless and exemplary life.12

The high priest Ananias orders that Paul be struck on the mouth for this statement (23:2). Paul responds with a typically human reaction to this slap. He calls the high priest a hypocrite and says that God will strike him too, for he had violated the law in commanding this (23:3). It was a miscarriage of justice to strike a person before being convicted, and in this case he had not even been properly charged. Paul’s comment about Ananias proves to be prophetic, for within ten years the high priest had to flee to Herod’s palace, his house was burned, and he was eventually killed.13 He was known as a greedy, corrupt, and violent man.14

When Paul was told that he had spoken these strong words to the high priest, he made a godly retraction of his typically human reaction (23:5). Why did he not recognize the high priest? Sir William Ramsay’s suggestion that this was because the meeting was run like a Roman assembly, presided over by the commander, is now generally rejected.15 The explanation I heard in my youth was that Paul suffered from poor eyesight, perhaps because of the blinding that took place on the road to Damascus (as evidence, Gal. 4:13–15 is often cited, where Paul said that the Galatians would have given their eyes to him). Longenecker is probably nearer the truth: Since this was not a regular meeting of the Sanhedrin, the high priest was likely not in his usual seat or wearing his robes of office. Also, because Paul had visited Jerusalem only sporadically during the previous twenty years and Ananias had become high priest in A.D. 48, about ten years before these incidents, Paul would not have recognized him.16

As Paul’s first line of reasoning was not going to work, he adopted a new line. The issue at stake here was the resurrection of the dead, which the Pharisees accepted but the Sadducees rejected. Was this simply a crafty ploy used by Paul to divide the group? Certainly there is wisdom, possibly even shrewdness, here. But he was also using a strategy that pointed to the heart of the Christian gospel, which was indeed a fulfillment of Pharisaism, so much so that a real Pharisee should actually become a Christian. He even calls himself a Pharisee here (23:6).

Bruce’s paraphrase of verse 6b helps us understand his point: “The charge on which I am now being examined concerns the national hope, which depends for its fulfillment on the resurrection of the dead.”17 Paul agreed with the Pharisees that the Jews’ national hope depended on a future resurrection. Here he is saying that the first stage of this resurrection has been fulfilled with the resurrection of Jesus. Paul clearly presented the connection between the resurrection of Christ and the hope of the Jews in his speech to Agrippa (26:8, 23)18 and in 1 Corinthians 15:16–28.

Paul’s statement results in total confusion in the Sanhedrin, some siding with Paul and others against him. Some even consider the possibility that an angel or a spirit revealed Paul’s message to him (23:9). The commander has to intervene and take Paul away from the scene. The next night the Lord stands near Paul and encourages him by telling him that he is going to testify in Rome (23:11). Amidst all of the confusion of these days, the apostle receives assurance that God is working out his purposes, and that one of Paul’s great dreams is going to be fulfilled—he will go to Rome.