Acts 22: 30 – 23: 35
Divide and Conquer
30 The next day, because he wanted to know for certain why he was accused by the Jews, he released him from his bonds, and commanded the chief priests and all their council to appear, and brought Paul down and set him before them.
23 Then Paul, looking earnestly at the council, said, “Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.” 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.’” 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. 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 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.” 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.” 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.” 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.
I have to admit my humor is sometimes extreme. In truth I do not want to cause harm but on occasion I do like to ‘stir the pot.’ To give you an example of this I was just thinking about my time as a mailman. After leaving active duty in the army I was hired in Trenton, New Jersey as a mailman. I liked the people and the job. Fresh air and a daily variety in work assignments suited me to a T. Sometimes I would deliver parcels. Other days I would deliver express mail. Most of the time though I would be a fill in for the regular carriers who were out sick or on vacation. Trenton had a variety of individual offices located throughout the city and towns assigned to the central post office. So, when I would be assigned to a new station my calling message would be, ‘Good Morning everyone [real loud] Okay please tell me who is mad and not talking to each other so I won’t offend them.’ You see that in a unique way I unified the office. I divided and conquered the social tension. Instead of the carriers not getting along with each other, I managed to get them all to laugh off their useless issues or change their grumbling and dislike with each other to be directed at me.
Divide and rule (or divide and conquer, from Latin divide et impera) in politics and sociology is gaining and maintaining power by breaking up larger concentrations of power into pieces that individually have less power than the one implementing the strategy. The concept refers to a strategy that breaks up existing power structures, and especially prevents smaller power groups from linking up, causing rivalries and fomenting discord among the people.
Whether it is in politics, business, banking, finance, science, religion, race relations, the military, medicine, drugs, etc. the divide and conquer tactic continues to have a massive controlling effect on a deceived populace as they bicker, argue, take sides and fight amongst each other, never joining the dots, never seeing the bigger picture, never realizing how they're being played by distraction.
We are going to see this effect in action today. We get a small glimpse of Paul’s intelligence. After coming before his old buddies of the Pharisees and Sadducees who turn against him he quickly evaluates his situation and implements a good divide and conquer plan which hinders the religious leaders scheme to accuse Paul.
The chief Roman officer did not know quite what to do with Paul. He was not even quite sure of what the accusation against him was. At first it seemed quite clear. He was an Egyptian insurgent, he was a blasphemer, he had taken Greeks into the inner temple, he was all that was bad (or so he had been told). Now having listened to Paul he was not so sure. He had also probably been visited by Jewish leaders who had wanted him to hand him over to them. This was presumably why he as a mere chief captain was able to ‘command’ the appearance of the Sanhedrin. If they wanted him they must justify their request, for Paul was a Roman citizen.
Having described the appearance of the risen Jesus in chapter 22 Paul will now continually proclaim the hope of the resurrection. The word of God is not bound. So his period of detention from his arrest in Jerusalem to his commencement of his journey to Rome is one long proclamation of the resurrection from the dead which is everywhere emphasized.
30 The next day, because he wanted to know for certain why he was accused by the Jews, he released him from his bonds, and commanded the chief priests and all their council to appear, and brought Paul down and set him before them.
So on the next day, wanting to know exactly what charges were being laid against Paul, he gave Paul his freedom within the fortress and commanded the Sanhedrin if they wished to justify Paul being handed over to them to gather to discuss the matter and formulate their charges. Then he brought Paul out and set him before the Council. This chief captain was an object lesson to the Jews. He alone (although he did not know it) was obeying the Law, ‘;-- then you shall enquire, and make search, and ask diligently ---’ (Deuteronomy 13.14). That is what the Jews should have done. It took a Roman to hold them to it.
We need to take note that this was at least the sixth time that the Sanhedrin had been called on to evaluate the claims of Christ. The first occasion was when the official Sanhedrin had met to consider reports about Jesus (John 11.47-53); the second was during Jesus' series of ‘trials’ (Matthew 27.1-2; Mark 15.1; Luke 22.66-71); the third was for the trial of Peter and John (4.5-22); the fourth was for the trial of the Twelve (5.21-40), and the fifth was for Stephen's trial (6.12-7.60). They had had plenty of time to come to a firm and reasonable decision about him. But they had not. They were still divided.
23 Then Paul, looking earnestly at the council, said, “Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.”
Paul began his defense fearlessly and immediately by declaring that he lived before God, and that he sought to do it with a good conscience. He wanted all those who had gathered to know immediately that he was a man who treated his conscience seriously and lived in accordance with it. And that as a Pharisee he had no grounds for thinking that he had failed in his obligations. However, somehow this caused offence. Possibly his method of address was not considered deferential enough, or possibly it was because he was considered to have commenced his defense too hastily. The council may have felt that he was too forward and should wait to be asked. Either of these would partly explain (but not excuse) the next action.
2 And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth.
After Paul’s opening statement the High Priest Ananias, then commanded that he be smacked on the mouth. This was possibly a preemptory reminder of who was in charge. A modern judge would have sternly told him that he must wait until he was called on. Or it may have been in order to suggest that he was not treating the aristocracy with sufficient deference. Normally they would be addressed as, "Rulers of the people and elders of Israel." Or perhaps it was just in order to indicate that he must not be so arrogant in front of these important holy men. Ananias was himself an arrogant man and full of his own self-importance, and by this demonstrated his arrogance and unfitness to be presiding. But prisoners, whether guilty or not, were often treated contemptuously by courts, and we have here another example of the way in which Paul was seen as ‘following in His steps’, for Jesus had been treated in a similar way.
3 Then Paul said to him, “God will strike you, you white washed wall! For you sit to judge me according to the law, and do you command me to be struck contrary to the law?”
I have been sometimes attacked by a person that I had taken my time to try to help. I would probably react the same way Paul does. It is really hard to regain composure when this happens to you.
Paul knew the Law. And he knew that the Law did not allow such treatment to one who was on trial (Leviticus 19.15). So he retaliated verbally with a returning insult (and afterwards admitted that he should not have done so, however justified it might have seemed). He warned the High Priest that he would be answerable to God for his action. A ‘white wall’ is one that has been painted to hide its imperfections so that it can pretend to be what it is not (and was liable to be exposed by judgment (Ezekiel 13.10). He was saying that the man who ordered that he be punched in the mouth was a hypocrite and would face judgment for it.
In the game of life whether it is a court hearing or a competition in sports the key discipline is to maintain control over all situations. When you lose your composure you lose in the long run. Paul was quite rightly pointing out that the judge also came under the eye of the divine judge. But he should have remembered that he was speaking not only to the High Priest but to the whole court, although in fact his words were an unconscious prophecy for Ananias was murdered by terrorists at the beginning of the Jewish war.
4 And those who stood by said, “Do you revile God’s high priest?”
Immediately people present were shocked and asked him if he thought it right to revile God’s High Priest. They could not believe their ears. It was not a question of whether they approved of what the High Priest had said. It was because to revile God’s representative was to be seen as reviling God (Exodus 22.28).
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.’”
This fact also helps us to understand our Lord’s way for our lives. As you look at the news you realize that there are very few honest judges, politicians, and government workers. Yet our Lord instructs us to obey and pray for those who have leadership over us. What you need to do is vote the bum out of office then you can hate him or her. I am only kidding here. You and I both know that we are to love them who are unlovable.
Paul immediately admitted his fault. He informed them that he had not known that this man was the High Priest; otherwise he would not have done it. Scriptures teach the giving of proper respect to the leaders of the people when in office (Exodus 22.28), therefore he regretted it however deserved it might have been. In a similar way today we speak of ‘contempt of court’. We may hold the judge in contempt, but when he is officiating he represents the Law, and must therefore be treated with the respect due to his position, even if not for himself.
This Ananias was an altogether evil person and was in fact noted for his greed and arrogance. Josephus called him ‘the great procurer of money’, partly because of his unscrupulous use of the trading in the Temple for gain, and partly because he was ruthlessly violent in extracting money from people, for example, in using beatings to extort tithes from the common priests' allotment and leaving them destitute. He was an extremely wealthy man and was not above using bribes and violence in order to increase his wealth and obtain what he wanted. Thus his treatment of Paul here was quite in character.
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!”
Here we see that Paul recognized that this group before him was not interested in hearing any truth. They were just a lynch mob. So, in quick insight he does the divide and conquers technique.
Thus when he surveyed the Council and recognized there a number who would in fact agree with his main proposition, the resurrection from the dead, and should have been supporting him with more vigor in his claim that angels spoke to men, that is, if they had been properly following what lay behind what was being said, he decided to draw their attention to this fact.
We must not see this as just a ploy. Paul, who saw these proceedings as having become weighed down by inessentials, was genuinely concerned to establish the truth of the resurrection, and of ‘heavenly beings’ speaking to men, and of his defense of them, especially in the eyes of Claudius Lysias. That was after all what his testimony had been all about. And he would thus want the trial to follow that course. He certainly did not want to finish up condemned on false grounds simply because of the prejudice of the Sadducees reacting against his Pharisaic beliefs. If he was to be condemned let it be for something worthwhile, something that will enable Claudias Lysias to recognize that what he is being charged with is simply a subject on which the Jews themselves were in dispute. For the trial to become a dispute about Jewish teaching would strongly aid his case.
So he points out that what he is really being condemned for is something that is dearly held by a number of them, the hope of the resurrection. For every genuine Pharisee lived his life with only one final aim in view, that he might attain eternal life and the resurrection from the dead.
Paul wanted all to now recognize what is central in his thinking, the resurrection from the dead. This is what his ministry is all about, life from the dead. His trial as it is being conducted here, he points out, should have nothing to do with the trumped up charges that have been previously brought. It is the basic teaching about angels and the resurrection and the afterlife and how they are viewed and whether they are accepted that is the important question. That is the real reason why the High Priest and his set are so strongly against him, and want to condemn him, because of the Sadducee prejudice against the resurrection and against angels, and the Pharisees among them do not seem to be noticing it. Paul felt that it was time that the Pharisees support him on this.
7 And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided. 8 For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection—and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both.
This immediately made the Pharisees wake up and concentrate on the case, and they then began to take up certain points that they had previously let slip by, recognizing the truth in what Paul had drawn their attention to. They may have been skeptical about angels speaking to Paul but they were not skeptical about angels in general. They believed firmly in them. So they now argued that it was not reasonable to dismiss his claims simply on the grounds that angels did not exist. Perhaps angels had spoken to Paul. Who could tell?
This then led to dissension between the two sides as they argued the possibility of angels speaking at all, and whether the resurrection could occur. After all, Paul’s defense, assuming that it was anything like that before the crowds, had included references to angels, and to the resurrection. So the truth or not of these questions was not a side issue, it was important. His case was bound to be dismissed by the Sadducees, who considered such things ridiculous, but surely it should not be viewed like that by the Pharisees? Surely they should give it more careful consideration.
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.”
The result was that instead of universal condemnation Paul now suddenly found that he had some powerful supporters. Some of the Rabbis, recognizing that the truth of what they themselves believed in was at stake here, and was being arrogantly dismissed, now declared that his words about spirits and angels could not just be trivialized. That indeed he may be right. Perhaps an angel or spirit had spoken to him, for such beings did exist. This would certainly strengthen the case that he had put before the crowds and the chief captain.
10 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.
Indeed feelings now began to rise so high (and we really cannot blame Paul because they could not discuss reasonably together) that the chief captain who was observing the proceedings became alarmed and commanded that soldiers take him by force and convey him to the safety of the fortress.
Here he was stuck with this prisoner, who was a Roman citizen and therefore difficult to deal with, and it was apparent that none of his opponents knew what to charge him with. He had to hold him without charge and risk any consequences.
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.”
In fact there was apparently only One person who was satisfied with the way that things were going, and that night the risen Lord stood by Paul, presumably visually, and encouraged him. He told him to be in good heart, for it was God’s purpose that just as he had testified openly about Him in Jerusalem, so he would testify in Rome. He was not to see what was happening as a setback, but as an opportunity. God was in control.
At first sight it might appear to us that Paul’s being in captivity was a hindrance to the spread of the Good News. Think what he could do if he was free, we might say. But we need to recognize that that might not have been so. Paul was now such a marked man, and so intensely hated by many Jews in many cities, that wherever he went his life was in danger. So much so that some followed him around with the aim of killing him. And what was more this then not only meant that his own life was in danger, but that it would also cause problems for his companions and for the churches. He had after all, already been responsible for a number of ‘uprisings’ in a number of cities, which could always flare up once he visited them again. And now that he was such a marked man it would not be easy for him to slip in and out unnoticed. This being so his being directly under the protection of Roman soldiers, with his companions able to visit him freely, gave him the opportunity to think through problems and enabled him to run a kind of Bible School and Correspondence course in complete safety, and at the same time brought great encouragement to the church because they saw how bravely he faced his trial. They would not want to let him down. And it would even support his doctrine. For his doctrine was being substantiated by his life.
We discover here how the hatred that has followed Paul around at the hands of the Jews is continuing to grow. It had begun with the Jews of Asia, and continued with the stirred up crowd. Although the last, left to itself, would soon die down. But there was a core of fanatical Jews in whom the hatred continued and grew. With them it would not die down, and it is of them that we now learn. And gradually that hatred will grow through the controversies of the Sanhedrin, while the High Priest probably never forgave him for publicly calling him a white wall and reminding him of the judgment he faced. Soon the majority of the Sanhedrin will become determined to seek his death. He has become a focal point and they are beginning to believe their own propaganda. And they do so unceasingly until he disappears in a ship towards Rome. Jerusalem has truly rejected both the servant and his Master, and is rejected in turn by Him.
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.
These Jews were so determined to kill Paul that they bound themselves under a curse to do so. They swore that they would neither eat nor drink until they had achieved their purpose. We are not told whether the Asian Jews were involved, but it must seem possible. It was not, however, only them. These men clearly expected to achieve their aim quickly and if they failed would abandon the curse on the grounds of impossibility of accomplishment. But the curse was real nevertheless. In their own eyes they knew that they would lose face before God and men by its failure.
13 Now there were more than forty who had formed this conspiracy.
The size of the conspiracy comes out in that ‘forty’ men were involved. Such a number would be needed in order to keep the attention of the Roman guards who might be expected to escort the prisoner, while the assassination was taking place. And the assassination had to take place in the short time before Paul reached the Sanhedrin. Forty is regularly a number connected with judgment and trial (forty days of rain at the Flood, forty days of Goliath calling on Israel to fight him in the confidence that they would not, forty days of Elijah in the wilderness), and with the giving of the Law (forty days in the mount twice over, without food and drink). Perhaps they (or Luke) saw it as symbolic of their aim, to avenge the breaking of the Law.
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.”
All they needed now was the opportunity. So they went to the chief priests and elders (they avoided the Pharisees) and informed them of their plans. They pointed out that they had put themselves under a curse not to taste anything until Paul was dead. Would the council now ask that Paul be brought before them as before so as to get him out of the fortress. Then as soon as he was out they would attack the guards, fall on him and slay him. The Romans would not be anticipating any such attack in the short journey between the fortress and the Sanhedrin’s meeting place by the Temple. And to the disgrace of the Sanhedrin it agreed.
16 So when Paul’s sister’s son heard of their ambush, he went and entered the barracks and told Paul.
However, God was aware of the plan and ensured that news of the plot reached the ears of Paul’s nephew. Possibly Paul’s sister, as a wealthy woman, was married to a member of the Sanhedrin, or to a member of the High Priest’s family, or someone closely connected, so that her son overheard discussions taking place. Whichever way it was he came to the fortress and informed Paul. Paul would have a certain freedom to see visitors.
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.”
Paul then immediately called one of the centurions to him and asked him to take the boy to the chief captain, as he had some important information to impart. As a Roman citizen his request would be received with respect. They would not want to offend 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.”
So the centurion took Paul’s nephew to the chief captain, and told him how Paul had called him and had requested that the lad be brought as he had important information.
19 Then the commander took him by the hand, went aside, and asked privately, “What is it that you have to tell me?”
The chief captain then took the lad’s hand and led him aside and asked privately what it was he wanted to tell him.
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.”
The boy explained what he had overheard. On the next day the Jews would pretend that they wanted to question Paul, but really it was simply a ruse in order to get Paul out of the fortress. Once he left the fortress they would attack the guards and kill him. All they were now waiting for was the chief captain’s promise that Paul would be forthcoming. No doubt the chief captain questioned the lad about the source of his information, and was satisfied. He would know that the High Priest Ananias was quite likely to be involved in such a plot. It was typical of his methods.
22 So the commander let the young man depart, and commanded him, “Tell no one that you have revealed these things to me.”
So the chief captain let the boy go and told him to tell no one what he knew, or that he had told it to the chief captain. His main concern here was probably with the boy’s safety.
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.”
Then he called two centurions and told them to take a large force and escort Paul to Caesarea to the procurator Felix. This force was to be comprised of two hundred soldiers, seventy cavalry and two hundred ‘light-armed soldiers. This would deprive the fortress of a good proportion of its force for a short while, but the chief captain could not be sure how many men they might have to deal with if anything was suspected and they were attacked. He was quite well aware of the excited state of the populace, which was continually in a state of tension at this time, which could easily be stirred up to assist any attempted attack on a small force. Paul was also to be provided with a horse. They left at 21.00 hours that evening (11 PM). Hopefully no one would suspect the reason for the departure. There was no reason why they should.
Felix, to whom Paul was being taken, was a freedman who had been appointed as procurator, a most unusual situation. Procurators were usually of equestrian rank. His appointment was an act of favoritisms to his brother and he proved to be what he was, and by his behavior in Palestine increased the hatred of Rome. Tacitus says of him that ‘practicing every kind of cruelty and lust he wielded royal power with the instinct of a slave’ (which of course he had been). His method of exacting his will was by violence and crucifixions. He married three times, and each time into royalty. His first wife was the granddaughter of Anthony and Cleopatra, his present and third wife was Drusilla, a very beautiful Jewess and daughter of Agrippa I. She had been married when young to Azizus, king of Emesa, a petty Syrian king, but Felix saw her shortly after her wedding, desired her, and through the services of a magician from Cyprus prevailed on her to desert her husband and marry him in defiance of the Law which both forbade such behavior and forbade her marriage to a pagan. This was typical of the man. Tacitus says, ‘he believed that he could commit all kinds of enormities with impunity’. He was not very reliable.
Under his leadership hostility against Rome increased enormously, resulting in the expansion of the influence of the zealots, and he then reacted viciously against them by hunting them down remorselessly and dealing with them with extreme cruelty. This simply produced a further reaction which resulted in general hatred and contempt and a huge increase in the number of ‘assassins’, men who mingled in crowds with hidden daggers and secretly murdered collaborators, until no one in Jerusalem with political connections could feel safe.
His behavior also resulted in the incident of the Egyptian mentioned previously in chapter 21.38, who was in fact but one of a number who around this time led groups into the wilderness so as to receive the ‘omens of freedom’ and seek to establish the kingdom of God, only to face a vengeful and bloodthirsty Felix with his soldiers. We are told that after the defeat of the Egyptian more and more fanatics arose and ‘incited many to revolt, exhorting them to exert their independence and threatening to kill any who submitted willingly to Roman domination, and to suppress all those who would voluntarily accept servitude. Deploying in gangs throughout the country they looted the houses of the nobles and killed their owners and set villages on fire, so that all Judaea felt the effects of their frenzy’ as the historian Josephus wrote. Thus around this time the country was in turmoil, a turmoil which would never in fact finally cease until it resulted in the Roman invasion and the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. This uneasy situation further explains the large escort.
25 He wrote a letter in the following manner: 26 Claudius Lysias, To the most excellent governor Felix: Greetings.
The chief captain sent with the force that was taking Paul a letter to Felix. ‘The wording confirms the lie about the chief captain’s knowledge that Paul was a Roman before he rescued him. Luke would not have made that up. The chief captain wanted some kudos for himself.
This is a standard opening form giving name of sender, name of recipient and a greeting. Lysias would be his given name. Claudius would be added when he became a Roman citizen during the reign of Claudius. ‘Most excellent’ is a normal way of addressing a high official.
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.
He explains the circumstances of Paul’s rescue, and suggests that he did it because he knew that Paul was a Roman citizen. We note that he leaves out any details that could have sounded unfavorable. He wanted to avert any blame that might be directed at him.
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.
He explains how he was at pains to examine him, even bringing him before their Sanhedrin, but as a result discovered that it simply concerned questions of interpretation of Jewish teaching and that Paul had not been accused of anything which deserved death or bonds. Once again the Paul’s innocence is emphasized.
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.
Then someone had reported to him that there was to be a plot against Paul, which is why he has sent him to Felix, also informing his accusers that they too must go to Felix to lay their charges.
The chief captain had no rights of judgment. Thus as he was uncertain as to whether any blame could lie at Paul’s door, he had sent him to the one who was responsible for judgment, with an explanation of the facts as he knew them.
31 Then the soldiers, as they were commanded, took Paul and brought him by night to Antipatris.
So that night the contingent of soldiers left as commanded and arrived at Antipatris, roughly just past half way to Caesarea. The journey from there would be through less dangerous territory.
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.
We learn that from that point on the full escort was seen as no longer needed and the cavalrymen carried on with Paul, while the infantry returned to the fortress. Once the cavalry reached Caesarea they handed over the letter and Paul as well.
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.
Upon Paul’s arrival Felix then had him brought in and asked what province he came from. Had he named the province of a local king he would have sent him to him. But once he learned that he was from Cilicia he recognized that he must deal with it himself. So he informed Paul that he would hear the case as soon as his accusers arrived. Then he gave orders that he be detained in Herod’s palace, his own headquarters. Paul was being given due respect as a Roman citizen.
