Paul before the council

Acts 23:1-10 Paul before the council

Verse 1: “Men and brethren” – Paul places himself in an equality with the council. Contrast Peter’s address in Acts 4:8 “Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel.” Then Paul asserts his “good conscience before God.” Cf. 2 Timothy 1:3 “…God, whom I serve from my forefathers with pure conscience…” The Matthew Henry Commentary, on verse 1, points out that Paul appeared before the council (1) with a good courage; and (2) with a good conscience. 

Verse 2: This statement enrages Ananias, who “commanded them that stood by him to smite [Paul] on the mouth.” Ananias prescribed a punishment before hearing the matter and rendering a just sentence. Paul’s rebuke may have stopped the action, but brought on a debate in the council. Compare John 18:20-23, where an officer struck Jesus regarding his answer to the high priest. According to several undocumented sources, Jewish oral law of the rabbis stated, “He who strikes the cheek of an Israelite, strikes, as it were, the glory of God.”

Verse 3: Though Paul will later speak deferentially of the high priest (v. 5), he rightly charges that the law has been violated by the priest’s command. The law of Moses began with a presumption of the fair rendering of righteous judgment, according to the proof of guilt or innocence (Leviticus 19:15). Paul’s “God shall smite thee” recognizes that God applies ultimate just judgment (cf. Romans 12:19). Josephus describes Ananias as one who hoarded wealth and stole tithes intended for the ordinary priests (Cf. Josephus, Antiquities, Book XX.5.2).

Verse 4: “Revilest thou God’s high priest?” That is, by calling him a “whited wall.” A “whited wall” means one who is a misrepresentation, maintains a façade, is full of hypocrisy. The concept may also be seen in Matthew 23:27, the “whited sepulchres” appeared beautiful outward, but that did not change what was within – dead men’s bones.

Verse 5: Paul avers that he did not recognize that the speaker who rendered rash judgment was the high priest and affirmed the law in regard to speaking evil of rulers: “it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people” – compare Exodus 22:28. This may have two underlying reasons for Paul not knowing the outburst was made by the high priest. (1) Paul’s poor eyesight, and/or (2) Ananias not acting like a high priest; that is, “I didn’t realize this is the high priest, because he is not acting like one.” The latter may be more likely.

Verse 6: Paul’s perception and reaction. At this point, or perhaps earlier, Paul perceived that the council was theologically divided and that he could use that division in his favor. He points to his place in the Jewish spectrum: “I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee.” He points to his theology: “of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.” This was a calculated move, but not an insincere one. Paul’s primary focus in preaching the gospel was the resurrection of Jesus Christ and the hope of salvation through him (“we have testified of God that he raised up Christ”).

Verse 7: The cry of Paul exacerbated the division of the two sects. leading into a heated controversy and dissension.

Verse 8: The theological focus of the Sadducees held “that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit.” The Pharisees held all of these points the Sadducees denied. This is an explanation by Luke, of the significance of Paul’s cry in regard to the division between Pharisees and Sadducees (see also Matthew 22:23ff; Mark 12:18; Luke 20:27). There was a distinct theological divide over spiritual religion and the resurrection of the dead. 

Verse 9: The scribes of the Pharisees rendered in Paul’s favor, saying, “We find no evil in this man.” Bypassing the resurrection, they focus on spirits and angels – if they have spoken to him, “let us not fight against God.” In this last part they echo the words of Gamaliel in Acts 5:39, “but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.”

“let us not fight against God” Many modern English translations do not include this last phrase.[1] It (μη θεομαχωμεν/let us not fight against God) is in Codices Mutinensis (H), Angelicus (L), and Porphyrianus (P) – all 9th century Majority Texts family.

---

[1] Critical text translations without the μη θεομαχωμεν context make ει δε πνευμα ελαλησεν αυτω η αγγελος (But whether a spirit or an angel spoke to him) into a question, “What if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?”