A Common Background
Acts 22:1-5
By using Aramaic, the daily language of ordinary Jews, Paul established a bond with the crowd, and they settled into attentive quietness. Greek would have been a poor choice. The crowd was already seething with resentment at his willingness to consort with Greek gentiles. To hear him speak the common gentile language may have riled them up again.
Paul proceeded to emphasize his Jewishness. He pointed to his childhood in Jerusalem, his education under the great rabbi Gamaliel, and his zeal in keeping the law. He noted that when he was a young man, he was a leading opponent of "this way," which, as we have seen (Acts 9:2; 18:25–26; 19:9, 23), was an expression generally used to label the religion of Jesus. He had persecuted Jesus' followers even unto death, and not content with the havoc he wreaked in Judea, he gained letters from the high priest authorizing him to arrest Jesus' followers in Damascus and bring them for trial in Jerusalem. Lest the crowd disbelieve him, he said that his story could be corroborated by no less a figure than the current high priest, as well as by the "estate of the elders." The phrase is a single Greek word, presbuterion,1 basis of the English word presbytery.2 Conveying the meaning "elders"3 or "elderhood,"4 presbuterion would have been understood by Paul’s hearers as referring to the Sanhedrin, whose members were known as "the elders of the people" (Luke 22:66).5 Paul was saying that his youthful zeal for Mosaic religion was well known to all the Jewish leaders.
Paul so far was trying to convince the crowd to view him as a fellow Jew who in the past had been exactly like themselves. It was a good strategy, humanly speaking, for if they strongly identified with him, they would surely be much more inclined to believe his testimony. Therefore, he built his testimony on common ground. The crowd surging in the courtyard was zealous for the law and antagonistic to the way of Jesus, just as Paul had been many years ago.
Conversion Recalled
Acts 22:6-16
Then Paul moved on to tell about his dramatic encounter with Christ on the road to Damascus. He underscored the miraculous character of the vision and its aftermath: the unearthly light that burst upon him, the voice of a man who had died but had risen again, the strange blindness that descended on Paul, and his instant recovery at the bidding of Ananias. All these happenings made it hard to dismiss Paul’s story as mere imagination. An imagination far adrift from the real world does not become blind as a result. Nor do others participate in its flights of fancy. Yet the men with Paul when the vision occurred told him later that they saw the light as well. Before the incident, they shared his hostility to the way, so they had no reason to confirm any claim he made afterward unless it was true.
Next, Paul tried to show that his life's ministry also had a supernatural basis. During his encounter with Christ on the road to Damascus, he learned that he would be given a special work to accomplish. Later, in Damascus, the same Ananias verified the words of the vision when he prophesied under the influence of the Spirit that Paul would be a witness to all men of what he had seen and heard.
The Lord's Direction for His Life
Acts 22:17-21
A few years after his conversion, Paul came to Jerusalem and visited the Temple. There, while praying, he fell into a trance and heard the voice of Christ. In his recollection of this incident, Paul was again trying to show the crowd that his commitment to "the way" arose from divine intervention in his life. He had actually spoken with the risen Christ on more than one occasion.
Christ commanded him to leave Jerusalem. He said that to stay and share his testimony with the Jews would be futile. They would simply reject him. Paul protested that the Jews knew how bitterly he had opposed the way, even to the point of imprisoning believers and applauding the stoning of Steven. It was obvious that his complete turnaround could only be explained as a work of God. But Christ declined to debate with Paul. He simply repeated His command, saying emphatically, "Depart: for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles."
We cannot help wondering why Paul told the crowd about Christ’s earlier instruction to leave Jerusalem. The clearly implied reason he should not stay was that its people were too hard-hearted and obstinate to receive good preaching. This turn in Paul’s speech hardly seems a good line of argument if he was trying to win the crowd’s support. He must have been simply saying what came to mind. Christ's warning of rejection filled his thoughts when he saw its fulfillment in the sea of faces before him, all seething with passion to take his life.
Rejection
Acts 22:22-23
Paul was hoping that when the Jews heard his testimony from his own mouth, they would perceive his sincerity and recognize truth. Surely they would understand that he would not be putting his life in constant jeopardy by preaching Christ unless he had sound reasons for believing he was right. Surely when they heard his reasons, resting on firsthand experience of heavenly things, they would believe him. But no, Paul's first mention of the gentiles rekindled the madness of the mob, and they exploded in hateful denunciations of Paul, shouting that he deserved to die. To show how scandalized they were by Paul's testimony, they cast off their outer cloaks and threw dust in the air.
Pondering a Question
Did Paul use the right approach in his speech to the crowd?
Paul found himself in peril of his life because he had been walking outside the Lord's will. If by the Lord’s leading he had come to Jerusalem and given the speech, it probably would have been very different. His speech was skillful in many respects. It was logical, well-constructed, full of references calculated to draw sympathy, replete with strong evidence of the supernatural, and in all respects a fine piece of extemporaneous argument.
But it was a little short on common sense. Paul wanted the Jews to hear his testimony of conversion, because personal testimony is always the strongest form of witness for Christ. Paul’s mistake was to move directly to his testimony with no mention of the immediate charges against him. The crowd was incensed because they believed he had desecrated the Temple. Thus, to create an atmosphere more receptive to his testimony, he should have started by simply reassuring the Jews that he never introduced a gentile to the Temple, never contemplated it, and looked on callous disregard of Jewish law with as much horror as they did. In other words, he should have plotted much the same course that he followed a few days later when he defended himself before Felix. If the speech before the mob had been designed by the Spirit as a tool for winning souls, its words would have been much wiser.
Pondering a Question
Why did Paul fail to dispute the false charges?
The reason is simple. He was less interested in defending himself than in declaring the gospel to his beloved fellow Jews.6 Having gained attentive silence in the surging mob, he went straight to his testimony because he feared losing the opportunity to present it if he became sidetracked into clearing himself of false charges. The force behind his conduct after arrest was the same self-sacrificing love that drove him to Jerusalem in the first place. But, as we have said, it was a misguided love and therefore an unholy love, because God had overruled what that love was determined to accomplish—a last attempt by the apostle to present Christ to his own people.7
Getting Practical
The wisdom in accepting good advice
In Caesarea, Paul’s last stop before reaching Jerusalem, a crowd of personal friends, all outstanding for godliness, stood around him and begged him not to proceed on his journey. They had all seen undeniable proofs that going on was against God’s will. He should have listened to them, just as we also should listen to fellow believers who feel burdened to tell us that we have stepped out of line. Our brothers and sisters in Christ are a valuable resource for correcting our wrong ideas and bad decisions. As the Word of God admonishes, "The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise" (Prov. 12:15; see also Prov. 15:22).
A critical decision for a young man or woman is which person to marry. The process of coming to a final choice should not be a rush of emotion in obedience to Cupid. Rather, it should be a slow walk of wisdom in obedience to God. The required wisdom will be attentive both to God’s Word and to feedback from more mature adults. The first to be consulted, obviously, are parents and grandparents. But others such as a pastor or older sibling will also be helpful.
For anyone coming to an advanced age, a critical decision is when to stop driving. Driving is so useful in preserving independence that everyone is reluctant to give it up. No one is free from strong bias against recognizing that it has become too dangerous. Thus, if he is wise, an elderly person will not trust his own judgment. He will seek out the advice of other people, especially his own children and other close relatives, and give it fair and thoughtful consideration.
A Narrow Escape from the Lash
Acts 22:24-29
When the Roman officer saw that Paul's speech to the crowd merely incited them to greater wildness, he lost patience with Paul and ordered his soldiers to carry him into the fortress. He ordered further that they examine him by scourging. He meant they should beat him with a lash until he was so desperate to escape from further pain that he would tell them everything they wished to know. This method of extracting a confession from a suspected criminal was standard procedure for Roman rulers when dealing with their non-Roman subjects, and Claudius naturally assumed that Paul was an ordinary subject without special rights.8
Never before had Paul faced anything as brutal as what he was about to suffer. He had on five occasions received a lashing by the Jews, which was limited to thirty-nine strokes (2 Cor. 11:24). Three times he had been beaten with rods by Roman magistrates (Acts 16:22–23; 2 Cor. 11:25). But never had he been scourged with the kind of whip used by the Romans. Known as the flagellum, it was the same instrument used to torture Christ after He was condemned by Pilate (Matt. 27:26–30; John 19:1–3). Sprouting from the end of a wooden handle were leather thongs, each studded with sharp-edged pieces of bone or metal. Normal practice for the soldier swinging it was to deliver a stroke and then draw the thongs across the victim's back. Often the lashing was done by strong men specially trained for the job who bore the rank of lictor. There was no upper limit on strokes.9 Indeed, the scourging generally continued until the officer in charge judged that any more strokes might be fatal.10 Still, death was sometimes the outcome.11
As they prepared Paul for the lash, they "bound him with thongs."12 A better translation is "stretched him forward for the thongs." The probable meaning is that they bent his body forward over a low barrier and bound his hands to a low point on a post or column on the other side. Paul then protested, calling out to the centurion nearby that he was being treated illegally. He was a Roman citizen, and Roman law protected a citizen from punishment if he had not been found guilty in a proper trial. Moreover, it declared that a citizen could not be subjected to any punishment so humiliating and sadistic as scourging.13
The centurion recognized the impropriety in what they were doing and immediately informed his superior that Paul was a Roman citizen. He cautioned his superior against torturing the prisoner.
Pondering a Question
Why did the centurion believe Paul?
Scholars do not agree when answering this question. Some suggest that no one dared to venture a false claim of citizenship because the penalty was severe, even death.14 Yet when faced with scourging, which was about the worst torture possible short of execution, a man might well lie about his citizenship simply to secure delay, in the hope that time would afford some opportunity for escape. It is therefore unlikely that the centurion simply believed what Paul said. The likely scenario is that Paul—a man who had already appeared many times before civil authorities and who had been repeatedly forewarned by the Spirit that he could anticipate more trouble in the future (Acts 20:22-23)—had come prepared to defend himself.
Most vital was proof of citizenship. One generally accepted proof was a birth certificate establishing that the bearer had been registered as a citizen within thirty days after birth. A child qualified for registration only if his father was a citizen also. To accomplish it, the child's representative—either the father or his recognized agent—had to furnish the proper Roman official with a declaration (a professio) that citizenship was indeed the child's birthright.15 Then a wooden diptych—a folding tablet about seven inches high and six inches wide with writing impressed on its waxed inner surfaces—was issued as a birth certificate which throughout life would serve as sufficient proof of the child's legal standing. The writing inside recorded the person's name, his date of birth, the names of seven witnesses, and the letters q. p. f. c. r. e. ad k. (an abbreviation for words declaring that the child was a Roman citizen).16
We therefore surmise that immediately after claiming citizenship, Paul proved it by taking his birth certificate from a secure place in his garments and showing it to the centurion.
Delving Still Deeper
Wise self-protection
So far as we know, the first time Paul protected himself by claiming Roman citizenship was at Philippi. Presumably, he would not have risked even worse consequences by making a claim insupportable by proof. Therefore, he must have been carrying his birth certificate. It is probable that the diptych confirming a man's citizenship was normally kept in family archives at his hometown.17 Perhaps Paul secured his when he was passing through Tarsus at the beginning of his second missionary journey.
Seeing the wisdom in the centurion’s advice, the captain went to question Paul personally. He asked whether Paul was indeed a Roman, and Paul answered, "Yes." The captain was astonished. The man before him did not look like a Roman. He was obviously a Jew. The captain blurted out that he himself had been able to obtain citizenship only by paying a large sum of money. It is unlikely that he is confessing the whole picture of truth. His mention of a large sum and his current high rank make it probable that the money served to buy not only citizenship, but also the equestrian status (comparable to that of a knight in medieval times) required of a high military officer, and perhaps also his present standing as commander of a cohort.18
Delving Deeper
Details truly reflecting their time and place
In Luke's story of Paul's ministry, we find several occasions when authorities conceded that a Roman citizen was exempt from brutal treatment and entitled to due process. The friendly climate that Roman citizens found wherever they traveled in the empire was a holdover from earlier days, going back to the Republic, but was still pervasive in the 40s and 50s when Paul was planting churches. It was not until the latter portion of the first century, when citizenship was cheapened by the swelling numbers who managed to acquire it, that the legal climate for citizens chilled dramatically. Yet what we find in Acts for an earlier period is a strong point of historical accuracy.19
Even more striking is Luke's report that Claudius obtained citizenship by paying a large sum of money. The meaning is that he obtained it by bribing an official. This debasement of an inherited honor to a mere commodity traded on the black market was commonplace during the reign of Claudius (41-54),20 doubtless when the tribune became a citizen, for the newly enfranchised customarily adopted the name of the current emperor.21 But the practice of selling citizenship status came under censure during the reign of Nero (54–68). Again, we see that the writer is speaking as a close witness to actual events rather than as a fabricator of events many years earlier.22
Implicit in the centurion's words was disbelief that Paul was wealthy enough to obtain citizenship in such a way. After being manhandled by the mob, he did not cut an imposing figure. His clothing was in tatters, and his face was covered by dirt and blood. Moreover, if the captain was able to discount the effects of the beating, he could see that what Paul wore to the Temple was hardly the ostentatious dress of someone who was rich and important. He was not wearing a toga, a form of dress permissible only for Romans,23 and wealthy Jews normally wore expensive rings and other badges of their wealth (Jas. 2:2-3). Also, as the captain heard Paul’s speech to the crowd, he may have understood enough to surmise that Paul was a man devoted to a religious life rather than to business or other worldly affairs. Perhaps he even recognized that Paul was a rabbi. Therefore, it came as a great surprise when he learned that Paul was a Roman. How could he have afforded such a privilege? Paul replied that he had not bought citizenship. He had inherited it from his father. Earlier we discussed how Paul's progenitors might have become Roman citizens.24
As soon as the captain was satisfied that Paul was telling the truth, he called off the scourging and pondered what to do. He was afraid of mistreating Paul. The Romans were successful as a conquering nation in part because they believed in the rule of law and treated any breach of their own law as a serious matter. If a lower official like Claudius failed to carry out due process, the result might be the end of his career. Claudius was especially fearful because he had already broken the law by putting an uncondemned Roman citizen in bonds. As we will see, the realization that he was at fault shaped his later conduct toward Paul, the result being greatly to Paul’s benefit.
Getting Practical
The rule of law
Paul spared himself from a beating by claiming his rights as a Roman citizen. Was he in this matter also straying from divine direction? I think not. It was a tactic he had used before with results helpful to his ministry. Far more than the Romans, God Himself believes in the rule of law, for He is the supreme lawgiver. From Him have come the laws known as the Ten Commandments as well as the book of moral law known as the Bible. Also, to suppress evil in this world, He has given us human government with its lawmaking powers (Rom. 13:1-6).
Upholding the rule of law, if only for his own protection from injustice, falls within a believer's responsibility to act as salt and light (Matt. 5:13-16). One practical use of salt, which retards the growth of bacteria and other organisms responsible for decay, is as a preservative. If a believer is performing his God-given role in society, he is saltlike in resisting the forces of moral decay that would undermine wholesome laws and freedoms. He is a preserver of what is good.
Claudius’s Solution
Acts 22:30
Claudius Lysias did not know what to do with his prisoner. The reason for the tumult surrounding Paul was a great mystery. What did the Jews have against him? Before he could deal with Paul properly, he had to know why the Jews viewed him as a threat to public order and safety, or to their way of life. At last, determined to gain the information he needed before he could dispose of the prisoner, the officer resolved to take Paul before the Sanhedrin. He wanted to hear from Jewish leaders exactly what accusations they had to bring against Paul. So, he ordered them to convene the Sanhedrin in a full session. When they gathered the next day, he went to the meeting himself, taking Paul along, probably unbound, so that he might speak in his own defense. After arrival, the apostle took a prominent place in the midst of them all.
Delving Deeper
God's will for Paul
Paul’s encounter with Christ not long after his conversion provides further evidence that he was out of God’s will when, at the climax of his career, he went back to Jerusalem with the intent of preaching Christ despite all the risks. Long ago, Christ had rejected his arguments for further witness to the Jews there. He commanded Paul to leave Jerusalem, and He told him clearly that his mission in life was to reach the gentiles. Never had He reappeared to Paul for the purpose of rescinding the directions He gave Paul originally.