Biblion Bible Commentary
Read the introduction to Acts · About this commentary
Before the council: the hope of the resurrection
Acts 22:30-23:11
30 But on the next day, desiring to know the truth about why he was accused by the Jews, he freed him from the bonds and commanded the chief priests and all the council to come together, and brought Paul down and set him before them. · WEB
Paul splits the court by naming the one doctrine that divides it, and is told that night that he will testify at Rome.
The tribune, still trying to find out what the charge is, convenes the council and sets Paul before it. It is an unusual proceeding — a Roman officer assembling a Jewish court to inform himself — and it goes badly at once.
Brothers, I have lived before God in all good conscience until today. The high priest orders him struck on the mouth, and Paul's reply is the least controlled thing he says in the book: God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! Do you sit to judge me according to the law, and command me to be struck contrary to the law?
The charge is legally exact. Striking an unconvicted defendant is precisely what the law he is being tried under forbids, and the image of a whitewashed wall is the prophets' figure for a structure made presentable and not made sound.
What follows has been read two ways for a long time. Told that he has insulted the high priest, Paul says I didn't know, brothers, that he was high priest, and quotes the command against speaking evil of a ruler. Some read this as a plain statement of fact — he had been away for years, the office changed hands often, and in an irregular hearing the presiding man may not have been robed. Others hear irony, that he refused to recognize such conduct as high-priestly. The text does not adjudicate, and what it does record is that he submitted to the written word the moment it was quoted at him, and did so without withdrawing the substance.
Then the move that ends the hearing. When Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out... I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. Concerning the hope and resurrection of the dead I am being judged.
This is often read as a diversion, and it is not simply that. It is true in every clause. He was a Pharisee; his father was; and the resurrection is what he had been preaching in every city for twenty years, and is what a Roman governor will shortly identify as the whole dispute. Paul is not changing the subject. He is stating it, and stating it in the form that shows the court cannot agree on it either.
The writer explains for readers who would not know: the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, nor angel, nor spirit; but the Pharisees confess all of these. The men prosecuting a case about a man raised from the dead were divided on whether such a thing could occur.
The result is uproar, and a sentence from the Pharisaic scribes that is nearly a verdict: We find no evil in this man. It is the first of five findings of innocence that will be pronounced over Paul in six chapters, and this one comes from the court itself.
The soldiers extract him by force, and that night comes the shortest and most personal word he receives in the book. Cheer up, Paul, for as you have testified about me at Jerusalem, so you must testify also at Rome. Two things are given: the past is accepted — what happened on the stairs and in the council was testimony, not failure — and the future is fixed. He will get to Rome. Nothing is said about how, and the how turns out to be two years in a cell and a shipwreck.
settled What this mark means