Acts 16:37

16:37-39 Paul and Silas were both Roman citizens, so the beating and imprisonment (16:22-24) had been illegal. After the city officials learned of this, they were justifiably alarmed because they had committed a crime against Rome. • Let them come themselves to release us: Paul made use of his rights as a Roman citizen in order to clear his name and ensure that no disrepute would attach to the Christian message or those who accepted it. Luke intended to show that Christianity should enjoy the same status as Judaism in the Roman Empire as a permitted religion—the Christian faith was compatible with the life of a Roman citizen. Accordingly, it was important to note that Paul made use of his rights as a Roman citizen (cp. 22:25-27) and was ready to use the privileges of citizenship to advance the cause of Christ in a hostile world.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Act 16:37. Ῥωμαίους, Romans) The citizens of Tarsus had the rights of Roman citizenship. Paul does not use the plea of his being a Roman as his principal argument, but for another reason, viz. to serve as a consideration which would have weight with his adversaries (κατʼ ἄνθρωπον). In the region which he now for the first time visited, a more specious persecution might have created the opinion that he was one of a wicked life, and this would have raised a prejudice in the way of the spreading of the Gospel. Wherefore Paul makes a solemn protestation once for all, that he is innocent. The innocence of the apostles was known at Jerusalem; for which reason they bore all things there in silence.—οὐ γὰρ) This expresses a degree of just ἀποτομία, severity, and sternness. For bitterness had no place in the apostle’s mind, especially at so gracious a season: Act 16:26; Act 16:33.—αὐτοὶ, themselves) not by the sergeants or attendants.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Act_16:37. Πρὸς αὐτούς] to the jailor and the lictors; the latter had thus in the meantime come themselves into the prison.

δείραντες κ.τ.λ.] after they had beaten us publicly without judicial condemnation,us who are Romans. This sets forth, in terse language precisely embracing the several elements, their treatment as an open violation, partly of the law of nature and nations in general (ἀκατακρίτους, found neither in the LXX. or Apocrypha, nor in Greek writers), partly of the Roman law in particular. For exemption from the disgrace of being scourged by rods and whips was secured to every Roman citizen by the Lex Valeria in the year 254 U.C. (Liv. ii. 8; Valer. Max. iv. 1; Dion. Hal. v. p. 292), and by the Lex Porcia in the year 506 U.C. (Liv. x. 9; Cic. pro Rabir. 4), before every Roman tribunal (comp. Euseb. H. E. v. 1); therefore Cicero, in Verr. v. 57, says of the exclamation, Civis Romanus sum: saepe multis in ultimis terris opem inter barbaros et salutem tulit.

That Silas was also a Roman citizen, is rightly inferred from the plural form of expression, in which there is no reason to find a mere synecdoche. The distinction, which was implied in the bestowal of this privilege, cannot be adduced against the historical character of the narrative (Zeller), as we know not the occasion and circumstances of its acquisition. But how had Paul (by his birth, Act_22:18). Roman citizenship? Certainly not simply as a native of Tarsus. For Tarsus was neither a colonia nor a municipium, but an urbs libera, to which the privilege of having governing authorities of its own, under the recognition, however, of the Roman supremacy, was given by Augustus after the civil war, as well as other privileges (Dio Chrys. II. p. 36, ed. Reiske), but not Roman citizenship; for this very fact would, least of all, have remained historically unknown, and acquaintance with the origin of the apostle from Tarsus would have protected him from the decree of scourging (see Act_21:29; comp. with Act_22:24 ff.). This much, therefore, only may be surely decided, that his father or a yet earlier ancestor had acquired the privilege of citizenship either as a reward of merit (Suet. Aug. 47) or by purchase (Act_22:28; Dio Cass. lx. 17; Joseph. Bell. Jud. ii. 14), and had transmitted it to the apostle. According to Zellers arbitrary preconceptions, the mention of the Roman citizenship here and in chap. 22. had only the unhistorical purpose in view of recommending the apostle to the Romans as a native Roman.

καὶ νῦν λάθρα ἡμᾶς ἑκβάλλ.] is indignantly opposed to δείραντες ἡμᾶς δημοσίᾳ … ἔβαλον εἰς φυλακήν: and now do they cast us out secretly? The present denotes the action as already begun (by the order given). Paul, however, for the honour of himself and his work, disdains this secret dismissal, that it might not appear (and this the praetors intended!) that he and Silas had escaped. On the previous day he had, on the contrary, disdained to avert the maltreatment by an appeal to his citizenship, see on Act_16:23. The usual opinion is (so also de Wette) that the tumult in the forum had prevented him from asserting his citizenship. But it is obvious of itself that even the worst tumult, at Act_16:22 or Act_16:23, would have admitted a Civis Romanus sum, had Paul wished to make such an appeal.

οὐ γὰρ ἀλλά] not so, but. It is to be analyzed thus: for they are not to cast us out secretly; on the contrary (ἀλλά) they are, etc. γάρ specifies the reason why the preceding (indignant) question is put, and ἀλλά answers adversatively to the οὐ. See Hartung, Partikell. II. p. 48; comp. Devar. p. 169, ed. Klotz; also Stallb. ad Protag. p. 343 D, and the examples in Wetstein.

αὐτοί] in their own persons they are to bring us out.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Act 16:37 . Δείραντες ἡμᾶς δ .: in flagrant violation of the Lex Valeria, B.C. 500, and the Lex Porcia B.C. 248; see also Cicero, In Verrem , v., 57, 66, it was the weightiest charge brought by Cicero against Verres. To claim Roman citizenship falsely was punishable with death, Suet., Claud. , xxv. ἀκατακρίτους : “uncondemned” gives a wrong idea, cf. also Act 22:25 , although it is difficult to translate the word otherwise. The meaning is “without investigating our cause,” res incognita , “causa cognita multi possunt absolvi; incognita quidem condemnari nemo potest,” Cicero, In Verrem , i., 9, see also Wetstein, in loco. The word is only found in N.T., but Blass takes it as = Attic, ἄκριτος , which might be sometimes used of a cause not yet tried . The rendering “uncondemned” implies that the flogging would have been legal after a fair trial, but it was illegal under any circumstances, Ramsay, St. Paul , p. 224. δημοσίᾳ . contrasted with λάθρα , so a marked contrast between ἔβαλον εἰς φυλ . and ἐκβάλλουσιν . Ῥωμαίους ὑπάρχοντας : “Roman citizens as we are,” the boast made by the masters of the girl, Act 16:21 . St. Paul, too, had his rights as a Roman citizen, see below on Act 22:28 . The antithesis is again marked in the Apostles’ assertion of their claim to courtesy as against the insolence of the prætors they wish ἐκβάλλειν λάθρα ; nay, but let them come in person ( αὐτοί ), and conduct us forth ( ἐξαγαγέτωσαν ). οὐ γὰρ : non profecto; Blass, Grammatik , pp. 268, 269, “ut sæpe in responsis,” see also Page, in loco. ἐξαγ .: not only his sense of justice, but the fact that the public disgrace to which they had been subjected would seriously impede the acceptance of the Gospel message, and perhaps raise a prejudice to the injury of his Philippian converts, would prompt Paul to demand at least this amount of reparation. Wetstein’s comments are well worth consulting.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

We must not render injury for injury, and yet notwithstanding it is lawful for us to use such helps as God giveth us, to bridle the outrageousness of the wicked, that they hurt not others in like sort.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Paul said unto them--to the sergeants who had entered the prison along with the jailer, that they might be able to report that the men had departed.

They have beaten us openly--The publicity of the injury done them, exposing their naked and bleeding bodies to the rude populace, was evidently the most stinging feature of it to the apostle's delicate feeling, and to this accordingly he alludes to the Thessalonians, probably a year after: "Even after we had suffered before, and were shamefully entreated (or 'insulted') as ye know at Philippi" (Th1 2:2).

uncondemned--unconvicted on trial.

being Romans--(See on Act 22:28).

and cast us into prison--both illegal. Of Silas' citizenship, if meant to be included, we know nothing.

and now do they thrust us out--hurry us out--see Mar 9:38, Greek.

privily?--Mark the intended contrast between the public insult they had inflicted and the private way in which they ordered them to be off.

nay verily--no, indeed.

but let them come themselves and fetch us out--by open and formal act, equivalent to a public declaration of their innocence.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 37. They have beaten us openly - being Romans] St. Paul well knew the Roman laws; and on their violation by the magistrates he pleads. The Valerian law forbade any Roman citizen to be bound. The Porcian law forbade any to be beaten with rods. "Poreia lex virgas ab omnium civium Romanorum corpore amovit." And by the same law the liberty of a Roman citizen was never put in the power of the lictor. "Porcia lex libertatem civium lictori eripuit." See CICERO, Orat. pro Rabirio. Hence, as the same author observes, In Verrem, Orat. 5: "Facinus est vinciri civem Romanum, scelus verberari." It is a transgression of the law to bind a Roman citizen: it is wickedness to scourge him. And the illegality of the proceedings of these magistrates was farther evident in their condemning and punishing them unheard. This was a gross violation of a common maxim in the Roman law. Causa cognita, possunt multi absolvi; incognita, nemo condemnari potest. Cicero. "Many who are accused of evil may be absolved, when the cause is heard; but unheard, no man can be condemned." Every principle of the law of nature and the law of nations was violated in the treatment these holy men met with from the unprincipled magistrates of this city.

Let them come themselves and fetch us out.] The apostles were determined that the magistrates should be humbled for their illegal proceedings; and that the people at large might see that they had been unjustly condemned, and that the majesty of the Roman people was insulted by the treatment they had received.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

38. They were afraid, because they were Romans. They are not once moved with the other point, because they had handled innocents cruelly without discretion; and yet that was the greater reproach. But because they did not fear that any man would punish them, they were not moved with God’s judgment. This is the cause that they do carelessly pass over that which was objected concerning injury done by them, only they are afraid of the officers of the Romans, and lest they should be beheaded for violating the liberty in the body of a citizen. They knew that this was death if any of the chief governors [prefects] should commit it, then what should become of the officers of one free city? Such is the fear of the wicked, because they have an amazed conscience before God, they do long time flatter themselves in all sins, until the punishment of men hang over their heads.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(37) They have beaten us openly uncondemned, being Romans.—By the Lex Porcia (B.C. 247), Roman citizens were exempted from degrading punishment, such as that of scourging. It was the heaviest of all the charges brought by Cicero against Verres, the Governor of Sicily, that he had broken this law: “Facinus est vinciri civem Romanum, scelus verberari” (Cic. in Verr. v. 57). The words civis Romanus sum acted almost like a charm in stopping the violence of provincial magistrates. St. Paul was a citizen by birth (see Note on Act_22:28), his father having probably been wealthy enough to buy the jus civitatis, which brought with it commercial as well as personal privileges. It did not necessarily involve residence at Rome, but makes it probable that there were some points of contact with the imperial city.

There is something like a tone of irony in the “being Romans,” echoing, as it did, the very words of his accusers (Act_16:21). He, too, could stand on his rights as a citizen. The judges had not called on the prisoners for their defence, had not even questioned them. Even if they had not been citizens the trial was a flagrant breach of justice, and St. Paul wished to make the strategi feel that it was so. Here we note that he seems to couple Silas with himself. It is possible, as the Latin form of his name, Silvanus (2Co_1:19; 1Th_1:1) suggests, that he also was a citizen of Rome, but St. Paul’s mode of speech was natural enough, even on the assumption that he only could claim the privilege. We could hardly expect him to say with minute accuracy: “They have beaten us uncondemned, and I, for my part, am a Roman citizen.”

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

37. But Paul said unto them] i.e. to the lictors, through the jailor. It is highly probable that the conversation of the Roman officers would be in Latin, and that the proceedings of the previous day may have been conducted in that language. In this way, if Paul and Silas were unfamiliar with the Latin speech, we might account for the non-mention or the disregard of their Roman citizenship. If either the Apostle did not comprehend all that was going on or could not, amid the confusion of such a tumultuous court, make himself understood, the message which he now sends to the magistrates might have had no chance of being heard before the scourging was inflicted.

They have beaten us openly] i.e. publicly. (So R. V.) For no doubt they had been lashed to the palus or public whipping-post in the sight of the people.

uncondemned] For all that had been listened to was the charge of the accusers, who, leaving out all mention of the real reason of their charge, viz., that they had lost a source of money-making, put forward the plea that the missionaries were disturbers of public law and order. The crowd shouted with the accusers, and the magistrates, forgetting their position, joined with the mob (Act_16:22) in the assault on the Apostles.

being Romans] The Greek is more full=men that are Romans, (so R. V.) and is in marked contrast with the charge of the accusers, which ran, “These men, being Jews.” The laws which had been violated by this act were the Lex Valeria (b.c. 508) and the Lex Porcia (b.c. 300). On the outrage, compare Cicero’s language in the Verrine orations (v. 66), ‘Facinus est vinciri civem Romanum, scelus verberari, prope parricidium necari.’

thrust us out privily] The Apostle would say: let our dismissal from prison be as widely published as was our previous punishment.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

But Paul said unto them,.... The sergeants, who were present when the jailer reported to Paul the message they came with from the magistrates; though the Syriac version reads in the singular number, "Paul said to him", to the jailer:

they have beaten us openly uncondemned, being Romans, and have cast us into prison; what the magistrates ordered to be done to them, is reckoned all one as if they had done it themselves; and which was done "openly", before all the people, in the most public manner; to their great reproach, being put to open shame, as if they had been the most notorious malefactors living; when they were "uncondemned", had done nothing worthy of condemnation, being innocent and without fault, as the Syriac and Ethiopic versions render the word; nor was their cause heard, or they suffered to make any defence for themselves; and what was an aggravation of all this, that this was done in a Roman colony, and by Roman magistrates; and to persons that were Romans, at least one of them, Paul, who was of the city of Tarsus: for, according to the Porcian and Sempronian laws, a Roman citizen might neither be bound nor beaten (n); but these magistrates, not content to beat Paul and Silas, without knowing the truth of their case, had cast them into prison as malefactors, and for further punishment:

and now do they thrust us out privily? nay, verily; or so it shall not be: this shows, that the apostle was acquainted with the Roman laws, as well as with the rites and customs of the Jews; and acted the wise and prudent, as well as the honest and harmless part; and this he did, not so much for the honour of the Roman name, as for the honour of the Christian name; for he considered, that should he and his companion go out of the prison in such a private manner, it might be taken for granted, that they had been guilty of some notorious offence, and had justly suffered the punishment of the law for it, which would have been a reproach to Christianity, and a scandal to the Gospel: wherefore the apostle refuses to go out in this manner, adding,

but let them come themselves, and fetch us out; that by so doing, they might own the illegality of their proceedings, and declare the innocence of the apostles.

(n) Cicero orat. 10. in Verrem, l. 5. p. 603. & orat. 18. pro Rabirio, p. 714.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

37 But Paul said unto them, They have beaten us openly uncondemned, being Romans, and have cast us into prison; and now do they thrust us out privily? nay verily; but let them come themselves and fetch us out.

Ver. 37. They have beaten us] A Roman, by the Valerian law, might not be bound; by the Porcian law, he might not be beaten or put to death, but by the Romans themselves, with the consent of the people. This privilege Paul pleads, and well he might; for the name of a Roman citizen was terrible to other nations. Though we may not return evil for evil, yet we may use all lawful means to right and secure ourselves.

And now do they thrust us out?] Doctor Fuller the chancellor came to William Wolsey the martyr, whom he had imprisoned, and said, Thou dost much trouble my conscience; wherefore I pray thee depart, and rule thy tongue, so that I hear no more complaint of thee; and come to church when thou wilt, and if thou be complained of, so far as I may, I promise thee I will not hear of it. "Master Doctor," quoth he, "I was brought hither by a law, and by a law I will be delivered," &c.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

They have beaten us openly uncondemned - There are three aggravating circumstances mentioned, of which Paul complains:

(1) That they had been beaten contrary to the Roman laws.

(2) That it had been public; the disgrace had been in the presence of the people, and the reparation ought to be as public.

(3) That it had been done without a trial, and while they were uncondemned, and therefore the magistrates ought themselves to come and release them, and thus publicly acknowledge their error. Paul knew the privileges of a Roman citizen, and at proper times, when the interests of justice and religion required it, he did not hesitate to assert them. In all this, he understood and accorded with the Roman laws. The Valerian law declared that if a citizen appealed from the magistrate to the people, it should not be lawful for magistrate to beat him with rods, or to behead him (Plutarch, Life of P. Valerius Publicola; Livy, ii. 8). By the Porcian law it was expressly forbidden that a citizen should be beaten (Livy, iv. 9). Cicero says that the body of every Roman citizen was inviolable. “The Porcian law,” he adds, “has removed the rod from the body of every Roman citizen.” And in his celebrated oration against Verres, he says, A Roman citizen was beaten with rods in the forum, O judges; where, in the meantime, no groan, no other voice of this unhappy man, was heard except the cry, ‘I am a Roman citizen’! Take away this hope,” he says, “take away this defense from the Roman citizens, let there be no protection in the cry I am a Roman citizen, and the praetor can with impunity inflict any punishment on him who declares himself a citizen of Rome, etc.”

Being Romans - Being Romans, or having the privilege of Roman citizens. They were born Jews, but they claimed that they were Roman citizens, and had a right to the privileges of citizenship. On the ground of this claim, and the reason why Paul claimed to be a Roman citizen, see the notes on Act 22:28.

Privily - Privately. The release should be as public as the unjust act of imprisonment. As they have publicly attempted to disgrace us, so they should as publicly acquit us. This was a matter of mere justice; and as it was of great importance to their character and success, they insisted on it.

Nay, verily; but let them come ... - It was proper that they should be required to do this:

(1) Because they had been illegally imprisoned, and the injustice of the magistrates should be acknowledged.

(2) Because the Roman laws had been violated, and the majesty of the Roman people insulted, and honor should be done to the laws.

(3) Because injustice had been done to Paul and Silas, and they had a right to demand just treatment and protection.

(4) Because such a public act on the part of the magistrates would strengthen the young converts, and show them that the apostles were not guilty of a violation of the laws.

(5) Because it would tend to the honor and to the furtherance of religion. It would be a public acknowledgement of their innocence, and would go far toward lending to them the sanction of the laws as religious teachers. We may learn from this also:

(1) That though Christianity requires meekness in the reception of injuries, yet that there are occasions on which Christians may insist on their rights according to the laws. Compare Joh 18:23.

(2) That this is to be done particularly where the honor of religion is concerned, and where by it the gospel will be promoted. A Christian may bear much as a man in a private capacity, and may submit, without any effort to seek reparation; but where the honor of the gospel is concerned; where submission, without any effort to obtain justice, might be followed by disgrace to the cause of religion, a higher obligation may require him to seek a vindication of his character, and to claim the protection of the laws. His name, and character, and influence belong to the church. The laws are designed as a protection to an injured name, or of violated property and rights, and of an endangered life. And when that protection can be had only by an appeal to the laws, such an appeal, as in the case of Paul and Silas, is neither vindictive nor improper. My private interests I may sacrifice, if I choose; my public name, and character, and principles belong to the church and the world, and the laws, if necessary, may be called in for their protection.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Romans. St. Paul inherited his right of citizenship from his father; it does not appear how Silas obtained it, perhaps by purchase. There is no proof that Silas was a freeman of Rome. (Denis the Carthusian) --- It was forbidden by the Porcian and Sempronian laws, for a Roman citizen to be scourged, unless he was likewise convicted of a capital crime. Cicero pro Rabirio. Facinus est vinciri civem Romanum: scelus verberari. Id. cont. Verrem. The Romans were always very jealous of the dignity of their city. We cannot but admire St. Paul’s astonishing desire of suffering for the name of Jesus, in concealing a circumstance, the very naming of which would have saved him the cruel scourging he suffered. If he now refuses to go out of the prison privately, it is to vindicate his honour, and to avert the scandal, which the new converts would naturally feel, in seeing their master treated as a criminal. He exemplified in this instance St. Augustine’s principal; "Our lives are necessary for ourselves, but our reputation for others." (Haydock) --- Estius declares, that Silas was also a Roman citizen, and that from this circumstance he probably received a Roman name, as Paul did. For in other parts of Scripture we find him styled Silvanus. (2 Corinthians i. 19.) and at the commencement of both the epistles to the Thessalonians. --- Not so; but let them come, &c. St. Paul patiently submitted himself to be whipped in a most disgraceful and cruel manner, which he could easily have prevented or put a stop to, by saying, I am a Roman citizen. Afterwards, when they were for setting him at liberty, he claims his privilege, he puts all the magistrates in a fright; they run to ask him pardon, and entreat him with all civility to leave the town, which he does not think fit to do, till he visited his brethren and friends. (Witham)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Paul said unto them, the officers who were sent to the prison with the message about their liberty.

They have beaten us; the magistrates, who commanded them to be beaten, are justly charged with the beating of them, as if they had themselves done it.

Openly; it was no small aggravation of their injustice, and these holy men’s sufferings, that they had, for the greater spite unto them, openly scourged them.

Uncondemned; for they were not tried, or permitted to speak for themselves.

Being Romans; having the privilege of Roman citizens, which was sometimes given to whole communities. Now such by their laws might not be bound, much less beaten, (and least of all uncondemned), without the consent of the Romans.

Let them come themselves and fetch us out; this the apostle stands upon, not so much for his own, as for the gospel’s sake, that it might not be noised abroad, that the preachers of it were wicked and vile men, and did deserve such ignominious punishment. Though they were as innocent as doves, it became them also to be as wise as serpents.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

37. Beaten us… Romans—The memorable oratory of Cicero against Verres has universally diffused the knowledge of the fact that the exclamation! “I am a Roman citizen!” exempted the legal utterer from stripes, the punishment of slaves. By the Porcian law the body of a Roman citizen was sacred from stripes or the power of a lictor.

Uncondemned— A second violation of law in the same act. And this fact of their allowing of no trial and no hearing deprived them of all plea of ignorance of Paul’s citizenship. It is a difficult question to decide how Paul, being a Jew, became a Roman; that is, endowed with the rights of a citizen of Rome. This right could at some periods be purchased, and some Jews did purchase it on account of its great protective convenience, but Paul “was freeborn,” Act_22:27-28. Nor did it arise from his being a Tarsean, for in spite of that known fact (Act_21:39) the chief captain was ready to scourge him. Tarsus was, by favour of Augustus, “a free city;” that is, under allegiance to Rome it was allowed to choose its own magistrates, pass its own laws, and govern itself; yet this did not endow its inhabitants individually with the immunities of a Roman citizen. His father was such a citizen, it may be, by purchase, or by some public service. There, indeed, is a third supposition. A slave, if emancipated within the city of Rome, became thereby a citizen. Now, as it happens, the Roman general, Cassius, offended at the hostility of Tarsus, sold a large number of the inhabitants into slavery at Rome, and of these Paul’s father may have been one. When Cassius was conquered at Philippi the enslaved Tarsians were emancipated, and thus Paul’s father may have been enfranchised, and Paul “free-born.”

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Publicly for openly A.V. dhmosia,; (Act_18:28 Act_20:20) men that are for being, A.V.; do they now cast for now do they thrust, A.V.; bring for fetch, A.V. Men that are Romans. We have exactly the same phrase inkritov, Act_22:25, on a similar occasion, where also is the only other example of the word ajkata uncondemned.

Akritov with a like meaning ("untried," "without trial"), is common in classical Greek. The Latin phrase is indicta causa. By the Lex Valeria (A.U.C. 254), "No quis magistratus civem Romanum adversus provocationem necaret neve verberaret," every Roman citizen had a right to appeal (provocare) to the populace against any sentence of death or stripes pronounced by the consuls or any other magistrate; and by the Lex Porcia (A.U.C. 506), no Roman citizen could be scourged. Silas, it appears from the phrase, "us men that are Romans," was also a civis Romanus. But nothing more is known about it. It does not appear why their exemption as Roman citizens was not made good before; but probably the magistrates refused to listen to any plea in their haste and violence.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

They have beaten us publicly, being Roman - St. Paul does not always plead this privilege. But in a country where they were entire strangers, such treatment might have brought upon them a suspicion of having been guilty of some uncommon crime, and so have hindered the course of the Gospel.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

37-39. To be thus released from prison, as though they had simply suffered the penalty due them, would be a suspicious circumstance to follow the missionaries to other cities; and, fortunately, the means of escaping it were at hand. (37) " But Paul said to them, They have beaten us publicly, uncondemned, being Romans, and have cast us into prison; and do they now cast us out privately? No. But let them come themselves, and lead us out. (38) The officers told these words to the magistrates, and when they heard that they were Romans, they were alarmed. (39) And they came, and entreated them, and led them out, and asked them to depart out of the city. " If the fact of their having been scourged and imprisoned should follow them to other cities, it would do them no harm, provided it were also known that the magistrates had acknowledged the injustice done them, by going in person to the prison, and giving them an honorable discharge.

As it was a capital crime, under the Roman law, to scourge a Roman citizen, and Paul and Silas both enjoyed the rights of citizenship, they had the magistrates in their power, and could dictate terms to them. The terms were promptly complied with; for men who can be induced to pervert justice by the clamor of an unthinking mob will nearly always prove cowardly and sycophantic when their crimes are exposed, and justice is likely to overtake them. By making complaint to the proper authorities, Paul might have procured their punishment; but he had been taught not to resent evil, and was himself in the habit of teaching his brethren. "Avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath; for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord." His conduct, on this occasion, happily illustrates this precept. If he had appealed to the Roman authorities for the punishment of his tormenters, he would have been avenging himself in the most effectual method. But to yield, as he did, this privilege, was to leave vengeance in the hands of God, to whom it belongs. By this course Paul gained the approbation of God, and the admiration of posterity, while justice lost nothing; for the unresenting demeanor of the apostle "heaped coals of fire on their heads," and the Judge of all the earth held their deeds in remembrance. The incidents justifies Christians in making use of civil laws to protect themselves, but not to inflict punishment on their enemies.

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

General Information:

All of the times the word "they" is used and the first time "them" is used, the words refer to the magistrates. The word "themselves" refers to the magistrates. The second time the word "them" is used, it refers to Paul and Silas.

General Information:

The word "us" refers only to Paul and Silas. (See: Exclusive and Inclusive "We")

said to them

Probably Paul is speaking to the jailer, but he intends for the jailer to tell the magistrates what he says. AT: "said to the jailer" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

They have publicly beaten us

Here "They" refers to the magistrates who commanded their soldiers to beat them. AT: "The magistrates ordered their soldiers to beat us in public" (See: Metonymy)

without a trial, even through we are Romans citizens—and they threw us into prison

"men who are Roman citizens, and they had their soldiers put us in jail though they had not proven in court that we were guilty"

Do they now want to send us away secretly? No!

Paul uses a question to emphasize that he will not allow the magistrates to send them out the city in secret after they had mistreated Paul and Silas. AT: "I will certainly not let them send us out of the city in secret!" (See: Rhetorical Question)

Let them come themselves

Here "themselves" is used for emphasis. (See: Reflexive Pronouns)

when they heard that Paul and Silas were Romans, they were afraid

To be a Roman meant to be a legal citizens of the Empire. Citizenship provided freedom from torture and the right to a fair trial. The city leaders were afraid that more important Roman authorities might learn how the city leaders had mistreated Paul and Silas. (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

translationWords

Paul

Rome

prison

Silas

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

37. ὁ δὲ Παῦλος ἔφη πρὸς αὐτούς, but Paul said unto them, i.e. to the lictors, through the jailor. It is highly probable that the conversation of the Roman officers would be in Latin, and that the proceedings of the previous day may have been conducted in that language. In this way, if Paul and Silas were unfamiliar with the Latin speech, we might account for the non-mention or the disregard of their Roman citizenship. If either the Apostle did not comprehend all that was going on or could not, amid the confusion of such a tumultuous court, make himself understood, the message which he now sends to the magistrates might have had no chance of being heard before the scourging was inflicted.

δείραντες ἡμᾶς δημοσίᾳ, having beaten us publicly. For no doubt they had been lashed to the palus or public whipping-post in sight of all the people.

ἀκατακρίτους, uncondemned. There had been no reality of a trial, no attempt to get at the truth. For all that had been listened to was the charge of the accusers, who, leaving out all mention of the real reason of their charge, viz. that they had lost a source of money-making, put forward the plea that the missionaries were disturbers of public law and order. The crowd shouted with the accusers, and the magistrates, forgetting their position, joined with the mob (Act 16:22) in the assault on the Apostles.

ἀνθρώπους Ῥωμαίους ὑπάρχοντας, men that are Romans. This is in marked contrast with the charge of the accusers, which ran, ‘These men, being Jews.’ The laws which had been violated by this act were the Lex Valeria (B.C. 508) and the Lex Porcia (B.C. 300). On the outrage, compare Cicero’s language in the Verrine orations (v. 66), ‘Facinus est vinciri civem Romanum, scelus verberari, prope parricidium necari.’

λάθρα ἡμᾶς ἐκβάλλουσιν; are they thrusting us out privily? The Apostle would say, Our punishment was in public, let our dismissal be public too.

οὐ γάρ, ἀλλά. The explanation of this combination of particles appears to be to understand the previous question as a refusal to come forth = ‘We will not be thrust out privily. For that is not what ought to be, but let them come,’ &c. So that the ‘Nay verily’ of A.V. gives the sense very well.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

37.] δημοσίᾳ and λάθρα are opposed: the injury had been public: the reparation, not to Paul and Silas merely, but to the Gospel of which they were the heralds, must be public also.

ἀνθρ. Ῥωμ. ὑπάρχ.] By the Lex Valeria, passed a.u.c. 254, and the Lex Porcia, a.u.c. 506, Roman citizens were exempted from stripes and torture: by the former, till an appeal to the people was decided,—by the latter, absolutely. The following passages of Cicero illustrate our text: ‘Porcia lex virgas ab omnium civium Romanorum corpore amovit.’ Pro Rabirio, c. 3. ‘Cædebatur virgis in medio foro Messanæ civis Romanus, judices: cum interea nullus gemitus, nulla vox alia istius miseri, inter dolorem crepitumque virgarum audiebatur, nisi hæc: Civis Romanus sum.’ In Verrem, lib. v. 62, 63. ‘Facinus est vinciri civem Romanum; scelus verberari; prope parricidium, necari.’ Ibid. 66. Many others are given by Kuinoel, Biscoe, &c.

On the question, how Paul came to be born a Roman citizen, see note on ch. 22:28: and on ὑπάρχ., note, ver.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

They have beaten us publicly, uncondemned, men that are Romans. Hackett remarks that "almost every word in this reply contains a distinct allegation. It would be difficult to find or frame a sentence superior to it in point of energetic brevity." Cicero in his oration against Verres relates that there was a Roman citizen scourged at Messina; and that in the midst of the noise of the rods, nothing was heard from him but the words, "I am a Roman citizen." He says : "It is a dreadful deed to bind a Roman citizen; it is a crime to scourge him; it is almost parricide to put him to death."

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.