Acts 22:25

Act 22:25-29. And as they — The soldiers ordered by the tribune; were binding him with thongs — In order to their scourging him; Paul said unto the centurion that stood by — To see the tribune’s orders executed; Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned? — A freeman of Rome might be bound with a chain, and beaten with a staff; but he might not be bound with thongs, neither scourged nor beaten with rods. The centurion told the chief captain, saying, Take heed what thou doest — Greek, Ορα τι μελλεις ποιειν, consider what thou art about to do; for this man is a Roman — Yea, and there was a stronger reason to stop proceedings, and to consider, for this man was a servant of God. Paul said, I was free born — Not, as some have supposed, because he was born at Tarsus; for, as Dr. Lardner has unanswerably proved, that was not a Roman colony, or what the Romans called municipium, a free town, or a place where all the natives were free of Rome by birth. But, it is probable, either his father, or some of his ancestors, had been made free of Rome for some military service. We learn hence, that we are under no obligations, as Christians, to give up our civil privileges (which we ought to receive and prize as the gifts of God) to every insolent invader. In a thousand circumstances, gratitude to God and duty to men will oblige us to insist upon them, and engage us to strive to transmit them improved to posterity. Then straightway they — Who had bound him, and were about to examine him by scourging; departed from him — Not daring to proceed; and the chief captain — Whom we may justly suppose to have had considerable influence at Rome; also was afraid, because — Though he had not scourged him, yet he had bound him — In order to his being scourged; which was a breach of privilege, for which he might have been accused by Paul to his superiors.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

22:25-29 Paul claimed his status as a Roman citizen at this critical time when he was about to be tortured to make him confess his supposed crime. Roman citizenship was a valuable asset, and claiming it falsely was a capital offense. Its principal benefits were the prohibition of scourging and the right to appeal to the emperor (25:11). The commander was frightened at having nearly violated Roman law (cp. 16:35-39).

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

Act 22:25. Προέτειναν, they stretched him out) that the back of Paul might be the more entirely exposed to the strokes. This act of stretching him out is ascribed neither to the centurion, who merely stood by, nor to the chief captain (tribune), who did not even stand by; but to those of whom Act 22:29, in the beginning, speaks.—τοῖς ἱμᾶσιν) with thongs, wherewith they bound him, when making him ready for receiving the strokes. Μάστιγες, scourges, were threatened; but the ἱμάντες, thongs, differ from them, being used for binding him who was to be examined by scourges.—ἀνθρώπον Ῥωμαῖον, a man that is a Roman) It was a daring deed, as Cicero says, to bind a Roman citizen: it was a wicked deed to scourge him. Paul did not appeal to his right of citizenship against the bonds, Act 22:29 (which subsequently made the captain “afraid”); for these had been foretold: he did appeal to it against the scourging, in order that he might defend his body and life, being hereafter about to preach the Gospel.—καὶ, and) and that too.—ὑμῖν, you) Emphatic. For it was allowed nowhere.

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

Act_22:25-27. ʼΩς δὲ προέτειναν αὐτὸν τοῖς ἱμᾶσ.] But when they had stretched him before the thongs. Those who were to be scourged were bound and stretched on a stake. Thus they formed the object stretched out before the thongs (the scourge consisting of thongs, comp. bubuli cottabi, Plaut. Trin. iv. 3. 4). Comp. Beza: quum autem eum distendissent loris (caedendum). On ἱμάς of the leathern whip, comp. already Hom. Il. xxiii. 363; Anthol vi. 194; Artemidor. ii. 53. The subject of προέτ. is those charged with the execution of the punishment, the Roman soldiers. Following Henry Stephanus, most expositors (among them Grotius, Homberg, Loesner, Heinrichs, Kuinoel, Olshausen) take προτείνοιν as equivalent to προβάλλειν (Zonaras: προτείνουσιν· ἀντὶ τοῦ προτιθέασι καὶ προβάλλονται): cum loris eum obtulissent s. tradidissent. But προτείνειν never means simply tradere, but always to stretch before, to hold before, sometimes in the literal, sometimes in a figurative[139] sense. But here the context, treating of a scourging, quite demands the entirely literal rendering. Others take τοῖς ἱμᾶσιν instrumentally (comp. Vulg.: cum adstrinxissent eum loris), of the thongs with which the delinquent was either merely bound (Erasmus, Castalio, Calvin, de Dieu, Hammond, Bengel, Michaelis, also Luther), or, along with that, was placed in a suspended position (Scaliger, Ep. ii. 146, p. 362). But in both cases not only would τοῖς ἱμᾶσιν be a very unnecessary statement, but also the ΠΡΟ in ΠΡΟΈΤ. would be without reference; and scourging in a suspended position was not a usual, but an extraordinary and aggravated, mode of treatment, which would therefore necessarily have been here definitely noted.

εἰ ἄνθρ. Ῥωμ. κ. ἀκατάκρ. κ.τ.λ.] See on Act_16:37. The problematic form of interrogation: whether, etc. (comp. on Act_1:6), has here a dash of irony, from the sense of right so roughly wounded. The καί is: in addition thereto. Δύο τὰ ἐγκλήματα· καὶ τὸ ἄνευ λόγου καὶ τὸ Ῥωμαῖον ὄντα, Chrysostom. On the non-use of the right of citizenship at Philippi, see on Act_16:23.

Act_22:27. Thou art a Roman? A question of surprise, with the emphatic contemptuous σύ.

[139] For example, of the holding forth or offering of conditions, of a gain, of money, of the hand, of friendship, of a hope, of an enjoyment, and the like, also of pretexts. See Bornemann, Schol. in Luc. p. 181 f.; Valckenaer, ad Callim. fragm. p. 224.

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 22:25 . προέτειναν : “and when they had tied him up with the thongs,” R.V., i.e. , with the ligatures which kept the body extended and fixed while under flogging; Vulgate, “cum astrinxissent eum loris”; but προέ . is rather “stretched him forward with the thongs,” i.e. , bound him to a pillar or post in a tense posture for receiving the blows, see critical note. Blass takes προέτειναν as an imperfect, cf. Act 28:2 . τοῖς ἱμᾶσιν : referring to the thongs usually employed for so binding, and this seems borne out by Act 22:29 δεδεκώς : not “for the thongs,” as in R.V. margin, so Lewin, Blass, Weiss and others, as if = μάστιξ . Grimm admits that the word may be used either of the leathern thongs with which a person was bound or was beaten, but here he prefers the latter. τὸν ἑστῶτα ἑκατόν .: the centurion who presided over the scourging, just as a centurion was appointed to be in charge over the execution of our Lord; on the form ἑκατόν ., only here in Acts, see Simcox, Language of the N.T. , p. 30, and see Moulton and Geden, sub v. - άρχης , and above on Act 10:1 . εἰ : “interrogatio subironica est, confidentiæ plena,” Blass (so Wendt). καὶ : “and that too,” δύο τὰ ἐγκήματα · καὶ τὸ ἄνευ λὁγου καὶ τὸ Ῥωμαῖον ὄντα , Chrys., cf. Act 16:37 . The torture was illegal in the case of a Roman citizen, although it might be employed in the case of slaves and foreigners: Digest. Leg. 48, tit. 18, c. 1. “Et non esse a tormentis incipiendum Div. Augustus constituit.” At Philippi St. Paul had probably not been heard in his protests on account of the din and tumult: “nunc quia illi negotium est cum Romanis militibus, qui modestius et gravius se gerebant, occasione utitur” Calvin.

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

There is no cause why we may not use those lawful means which God giveth us, to repel, or put away an injury.

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

Paul said to the centurion that stood by--to superintend the torture and receive the confession expected to be wrung from him.

Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, &c.--See on Act 16:37.

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 25. And as they bound him, &c.] They were going to tie him to a post, that they might scourge him.

Is it lawful, &c.] The Roman law absolutely forbade the binding of a Roman citizen. See Clarke on Ac 16:37.

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

25. Is it lawful? He allegeth first the privilege of the city, then he defendeth himself by common law. And though there were more weight in the second point, (to wit, that it is not lawful to scourge a man before his cause is heard) yet should he have prevailed nothing, unless the centurion had been more moved with the honor of the Roman empire. For nothing was then more heinous than to do any thing which was contrary to the liberty of the people of Rome. Valerius’ law, the law of Porcius, and of Sempronius, and such like, did forbid that no man should do any violence to the body of the city of Rome without the commandment of the people. The privilege was so (sure and) holy, that they thought it to be not only a deadly offense, but also such an offense as could not be purged, that a citizen of Rome should be beaten.

Therefore, Paul escaped rather by the privilege than by common equity, yet did he not doubt in a good cause to bear off the injury which was prepared for him, with this buckler of the city. But we must know that he did so allege the right and privilege of the city, that the chief captain was brought to believe him, because his words should not have been credited unless he had used some proof. Moreover, it was no hard matter for a man, who was well known, to bring forth witnesses. We alleged a cause in the sixteenth chapter, why he suffered himself to be scourged at Philippos, [Philippi] which he now preventeth by his own declaration; to wit, because he should not have been heard in a tumult raised among the common people (Acts 16:37). But because he hath now to deal with the soldiers of Rome, who did behave themselves more moderately and gravely, he useth the opportunity.

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.

(25) And as they bound him with thongs.—The words have sometimes been rendered, “they stretched him forward for the straps”—i.e., put him into the attitude which was required for the use of the scourge; and grammatically the words admit this sense. The Authorised version is, however, it is believed, right. The Greek word for “thong” is always used in the New Testament in connection with the idea of tying (Mar_1:7; Luk_3:16; Joh_1:27). It appears here to be expressly distinguished from the “scourges” of Act_22:24, and in Act_22:29 we find that St. Paul had actually been bound. He was, i.e., according to Roman custom, stripped to the waist, and tied with leathern thongs, as our Lord had been, to the column or whipping-post which was used within the fortress for this mode of torture. In both instances, it will be noted, the order for the punishment came from a Roman officer.

Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman . . .?—Stress is laid on both points. It was unlawful to scourge a Roman citizen in any case; it was an aggravation so to torture him, as slaves were tortured, only as a means of inquiry. On the whole question of the rights of Roman citizens, and St. Paul’s claim to those rights, see Note on Act_16:37.

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

25. And as they bound him with thongs] Rev. Ver. “And when they had tied him up with the thongs.” This gives more of the force of the verb in the Greek which implies the stretching of the prisoner forward, so that he may be in a position to receive the blows. Some have translated “for the thongs,” but the word rendered “thongs” is one which is always used for straps employed for straining or binding tight, and rarely, if ever, for the implement by which the chastisement is inflicted.

the centurion that stood by] He was superintending the work of fastening the prisoner to the whipping-post, which was done by the common soldiers.

a man that is a Roman] It was an offence punishable with the severest penalties for a man to claim to be a Roman citizen, if he were not one. The peril of such an assertion, if it were not true, convinces the centurion at once, and though we are not told so expressly we may feel sure that the operation of “tying up” was stopped.

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.

Then the chief captain came, and said unto him,.... To Paul:

tell me, art thou a Roman? he had told him before that he was a Jew of Tarsus, and which was true, and had said nothing of his being a Roman; wherefore the chief captain desires that he would tell him the whole truth of the matter, whether he was a Roman or not:

he said yea; that he was one.

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

25 And as they bound him with thongs, Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned?

Ver. 25. A man that is a Roman] A citizen of Rome might neither be bound nor beaten. {See Trapp on "Act 16:37"} Paul by this freedom escaped whipping; we by that which Christ hath purchased us, not for gold or silver, but his own blood, 1Pe 1:19, escape the pain of eternal torment.

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.

Bound him with thongs - With cords, preparatory to scourging.

Is it lawful ... - It was directly contrary to the Roman law to bind and scourge a Roman citizen. See the notes on Act 16:36-37.

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

A Roman. That is, a Roman citizen, a freeman of Rome. (Witham) --- The apostle, on this occasion, not to injure the faith of some weak Christians, who might be scandalized at his public disgrace, prevents the scourging, which on another occasion he patiently submitted to. By the thongs he was probably bound to a pillar; (Tirinus) or being tied hand and foot, was stretched on the ground, with his face downwards. This was frequently done among the Romans. (Calmet) --- See also Gretser de cruce, lib. i. chap. 10; who declares that it was the Roman custom to bind to a stake or pillar, such as were condemned to be flogged.

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).

They bound him with thongs; they who were to be scourged were bound to a post or column (amongst the Jews) of a cubit and a half high, inclining downwards upon it; and these thongs were such wherewith they bound Paul to this column or pillar; and with such also they intended to scourge him.

Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned? that is, it is not lawful to scourge a Roman; much less, uncondemned: See Poole on "Act 16:37". This latter, the laws of no nation that was civilized did ever allow.

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

25. Bound him with thongs—Rather, stretched him forward (to the whipping-post) for the thongs with which the lashes were to be inflicted upon the bare back. (See our note on Joh_19:1.)

Is it lawful—(See note on Act_16:37.) The centurion shrinks back appalled at Paul’s momentous claim of citizenship, and departs to warn the committed chiliarch. 27.

Yea—(Note Act_16:38.)

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

When they had tied him up with the thongs for as they bound him with thongs, A.V. When they had tied him up, etc. This does not seem to be a right rendering. Proteinw can only mean "to stretch out before," or "expose to the action," of anything, when taken in a literal sense; iJmav, again, more naturally means the "thong" or lash of a whip or scourge than a thong to bind a man with; indeed, it is thought to be etymologically connected with mastix, Meyer, therefore, rightly understands the passage to mean when they had stretched him on the stake ready to receive the scourging. Is it lawful, etc.? Paul now pleads his privileges as a Roman citizen, just in time to stop the outrage, remembering, no doubt, the terror inspired in the Philippian magistrates when they found they had beaten with rods an uncondemned Roman citizen. (see Act_16:38) Uncondemned (ajkatakritouv); Act_16:37. Only found in these two passages in the New Testament, andnowhere else.

Times to suffer, and times to get relief from suffering.

This subject is suggested by the fact that, although the apostle"s plea of his Roman birthright would have always stood him in good stead, he only used it occasionally; from which fact we may assume that he sometimes felt it was his duty to submit to suffering, and that, at other times, he equally felt it his duty to resist suffering. Probably a careful estimate of the circumstances connected with each case led to his decisions. Here we may see that no special testimony could be made by his patient enduring of suffering, seeing that he was among strangers, who knew nothing of him or his mission, so he felt at liberty to secure relief from indignity and pain, and appealed for his rights as a Roman citizen. The apostle spoke as they were preparing to scourge him. According to the Roman custom, he was stripped to the waist, and tied with leather thongs to the column, or whipping-post, which was used within the fortress for this kind of torture. "It was unlawful to scourge a Roman citizen in any case; it was an aggravation so to torture him as slaves were tortured only as a means of inquiry". (see Act_16:37) Remember the familiar passage, Ecc_3:1-8.

I CHRIST"S CALL TO SUFFER. Of St. Paul Christ had said, "I will show him how great things he must suffer for my Name"s sake" So to his early disciples Christ spoke of persecution and suffering as part of his disciples" necessary lot. Compare his teachings in the sermon on the mount Mat_5:10-12) with Joh_15:18-21.

1. As a historical fact, the earlier apostles found, suffering attend on fulfilling Christ"s mission; and the Apostle Paul had a life full of peril and of pain.

2. As a fact of present observation, suffering is very largely the Christian"s lot. It comes partly by reason of his conflict with evil in himself and in the world, and partly as a Divine arrangement for his moral testing and training.

3. As a doctrine of the Divine Word, suffering is

(1) a means of sanctifying to the believer," Tribulation worketh patience," etc.;

(2) a means of witnessing to the world the power of God"s sustaining grace and the beauty of the Christian virtues. God has such witnesses in his great sufferers, in every age and in every sphere of life.

II CHRIST"S CALL TO AVOID SUFFERING. See his instructions as given to the apostles and the "seventy," when he sent them on their trial mission. If persecuted in one city, they were to flee to another. Nay, in this avoidance of suffering, our Lord set us his own example; for, on more than one occasion he went away from a neighborhood which had become perilous, and escaped from those who would cast him from the hill-top. So St. Paul, in connection with our text, felt justified in avoiding and resisting suffering. The practical difficulty we find is to know when we should bear and when we should resist; and the following suggestions may be fully illustrated:

1. When we can recognize an immediate good in our sufferings, either a blessing of men or the glory of God, we should be prepared cheerfully to bear.

2. When the suffering plainly comes in the orderings of God"s providence, we ought to bear it.

3. When we find that we can, by patient suffering, make a needed witness for the Christian truth or the Christian spirit, we should be willing to suffer.

4. When we find ourselves among strangers and enemies we may use our influence to avoid suffering.

5. And when our suffering plainly comes from the mere willfulness or the pure ignorance of men, we do right to resist. It may also be urged that we must always follow along the line of "conscience" and "duty," whatever consequences may follow. Therefore the "three Hebrew youths" dare not shrink from the fiery furnace, nor Daniel from the den of lions. Impress that we have an inward leading of God"s Spirit, even as St. Paul had; and that, if we will follow the lead in all simplicity, we shall be able to decide, in the circumstances of life that arise, whether it is our duty to suffer or to avoid suffering. Whether we bear or whether we refuse to bear, we must seek to glorify Christ, and do all things as part of our loving life-service rendered to him. R.T.

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

And as they - The soldiers ordered by the tribune, were binding him with thongs - A freeman of Rome might be bound with a chain and beaten with a staff: but he might not be bound with thongs, neither scourged, or beaten with rods: Paul said to the centurion - The captain, who stood by to see the orders of the tribune executed.

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

25. “And when they were extending him forth to the scourgers,” i. e., the soldiers were shoving him forward to receive this awful and murderous flagellation, designed to coerce the desired confession, Paul said to the centurion standing by, “Is it lawful to cowhide a man, i. e., a Roman and uncondemned?”

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

25-29. When Paul was led within the castle, the executioner made immediate preparation for his cruel work. (25) " And as he was bending him forward with the straps Paul said to the centurion, who was standing by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man who is a Roman, and uncondemned? (26) When the centurion heard this, he went and told the chiliarch, saying, Take heed what you are about to do, for this man is a Roman. (27) Then the chiliarch came and said to him, Tell me, are you a Roman? And he said, Yes. (28) And the chiliarch answered, With a great sum I obtained this citizenship. And Paul said, But I was born so. (29) Then they who were about to examine him immediately departed from him; and the chiliarch was alarmed, when he knew that he was a Roman, and that he had bound him. " Previous to applying the scourge, the victim was bent forward upon a reclining post, to which he was bound by straps. It was this binding which caused the alarm of the chiliarch, and not the binding of his arms with chains. The latter was legal, and hence Paul remained so bound, but the former was illegal. It was just at the critical moment, when he was bent forward upon the post, and the straps were being adjusted, that the quiet assertion of citizenship caused his release, and struck terror into the heart of the officer. Notwithstanding this exemption was extended only to a favored few, we can but admire the majesty of a law, which in a remote province, and within the walls of a prison, suddenly released a prisoner from the whipping-post, by the simple declaration, "I am a Roman citizen."

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:

Here the word "they" refers to the soldiers.

the thongs

These were strips of leather or animal hide.

Is it lawful for you to scourge a man who is a Roman and who has not been put on trial?

Paul uses this question to make the centurion check the validity of having his soldiers whip Paul. AT: "It is not lawful for you to whip a man who is a Roman and who was not given his legal right to a trial!" (See: Rhetorical Question)

What are you about to do?

This question is used to urge the commander to reconsider his plan to whip Paul. AT: "You should not do this!" (See: Rhetorical Question)

translationWords

Paul

centurion

lawful

Rome

citizen

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

25. ὡς δὲ προέτεναν αὐτὸν τοῖς ἱμᾶσιν, and when they had tied him up with the thongs. The person to be scourged was stretched forward (προτείνειν) so that he might be in a position to receive the blows. Some have translated ‘for the thongs,’ but ἱμάς is nearly always used for straps employed for straining or binding tight, and rarely, if ever, for the implement by which the chastisement is inflicted.

πρὸς τὸν ἑστῶτα ἑκατόνταρχον, to the centurion that stood by. He was superintending the tying up of the prisoner to the whipping-post, which was done by the common soldiers.

ἄνθρωπον Ῥωμαῖον, a man that is a Roman. It was an offence punishable with the severest penalties for a man to claim to be a Roman citizen, if he were not one. The peril of such an assertion, if it were not true, convinces the centurion at once, and though we are not told so expressly we may feel sure that the operation of ‘tying up’ was stopped.

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.

25.] And while they were binding him down with the thongs. Dr. Bloomfield quotes from Dio Cassius, xi. 49, Ἀντίγονον ἐμαστίγωσε σταυρῷ προδήσαντες, and explains rightly, I think, the προ in both verbs to allude to the position of the prisoner, which was, bent forward, and tied with a sort of gear made of leather to an inclined post. De W. and others render τοῖς ἱμᾶσιν, ‘for the scourge’ (dat. commodi); but why should μάστιξιν be varied? and can it be shewn (as Dr. B. asks) that the word in the plural will bear this meaning?

ἑκατόνταρχον] The ‘centurio supplicio præpositus’ of Tacitus and Seneca,—standing by to superintend the punishment.

εἰ ἄνθ. κ.τ.λ.] See ch. 16:37, note.

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

Bound him with thongs (proeteinan aujton toiv iJmasin). Against the rendering of the A. V. is the word proeteinan, they stretched forward, in allusion to the position of the victim for scourging, and the article with thongs; "the thongs," with reference to some well - known instrument. If the words referred simply to binding him, with thongs would be superfluous. It is better, therefore, to take thongs as referring to the scourge, consisting of one or more lashes or cords, a sense in which it occurs in classical Greek, and to render stretched him out for (or before) the thongs. The word is used elsewhere in the New Testament of a shoe - latchet (Mr 1:7; Luk 3:16; Joh 1:27).

Roman. See on ch. Act 16:37.

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