Acts 24:6

24:6 trying to desecrate the Temple: See study note on 21:28-29.

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

Act 24:6. Ἐπείρασε, attempted) This verb may be understood of a mere attempt, or else of an effectual effort: therefore it was a term suited for creating odium.

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

Act 24:6 . ἐπείρασε : the charge could not be proved, cf. Act 21:28 , but the verb here used is an aggravation not a modification of the surmise ( ἐνόμιζον , Act 21:29 ) of the Jews. βεβ ., cf. Mat 12:5 ( βαίνω , βηλός , threshold), Jdt 9:8 , Mal 2:12Mal 2:12 ; 1Ma 4:38 ; 1Ma 4:44 ; 1Ma 4:54 , 2Ma 10:5 , etc., and frequent in LXX, cf. Psalms of Solomon Act 1:8 , and βέβηλος four, βεβήλωσις three times. Probably Tertullus wanted to insinuate that the prisoner was punishable even according to Roman law, see above on Act 21:29 ; but Trophimus as a Greek and not Paul would have been exposed to the death penalty, to say nothing of the fact that the charge was only one of suspicion. Schürer, Jewish People , div. i., vol. ii., p. 74, note, and references in chap. 21, Act 21:29 . ἐκρατήσαμεν : the word could be used “de conatu vel mero vel efficaci,” and so Bengel adds “aptum igitur ad calumniam”. The orator identifies himself with his clients, and ascribes to the hierarchy the seizing of Paul, as if it was a legal act, whereas it was primarily the action of the mob violence of the people, Act 21:30 ; frequently used in same sense as here by Matthew and Mark, but not at all by St. John, and only in this passage by Luke, cf. Rev 20:2 , LXX, Psa 55 , tit. , Jdg 8:12 ; Jdg 16:21 (A al [379] ). καὶ κατὰ … ἐπὶ σέ , Act 24:8 , see critical note, omitted by R.V. in text, retained by Blass and Knabenbauer, so in Vulgate. Zöckler amongst others has recently supported Blass, and for the same reason, viz. , because if the words are retained the judge is asked to inquire of Paul, and thus the Apostle becomes a witness as well as a prisoner. But, on the other hand, Paul though still a prisoner is allowed to speak for himself before both Felix and Festus. If the words are retained, παρʼ οὗ would refer to Lysias, and this would be in agreement with the remarks of Felix in Act 24:22 . Certainly ἐκρατήσαμεν seems very bald without any sequel, and this may have caused the insertion of the words; but the insertion was a bold one, although we can understand that the Jews would have been incensed against Lysias, who had twice protected Paul from their violence. The omission of the words if they formed part of the original text is no doubt difficult to explain. ἠθελ . κρίνειν , cf. Act 21:31 ; Act 21:36 , Act 22:22 , Act 23:12 , passages which give us a very different idea of the wishes of the Jews.

[379] Alford’s Greek Testament .

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

hath gone about--attempted.

to profane the temple--the third charge; and entirely false.

we . . . would have judged according to our law.

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 6. Hath gone about to profane the temple] This was a heavy charge, if it could have been substantiated, because the Jews were permitted by the Romans to put any person to death who profaned their temple. This charge was founded on the gross calumny mentioned, Ac 21:28-29; for, as they had seen Trophimus, an Ephesian, with Paul in the city, they pretended that he had brought him into the temple.

Would have judged according to our law] He pretended that they would have tried the case fairly, had not the chief captain taken him violently out of their hands; whereas, had not Lysias interfered, they would have murdered him on the spot.

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

6. Who went about to pollute the temple. It was a light and almost a frivolous accusation to lay this to his charge before the Roman governor, who could have wished that the temple had been turned topsy-turvy. But because nothing was more fit for procuring uproars than the polluting of the temple, he doth craftily accuse Paul thereof, as if he should say, that it was no thanks to him that Jerusalem was not on an uproar; and that he carried such a firebrand as might have procured sore hurt if he had not been prevented. Also he includeth that other thing, that because Paul had offended in matters of religion, it did belong properly to the Jews to give judgment in that matter. And here he complaineth also of the chief captain Lysias, because he robbed them of their right. Therefore his drift is, to obtain at the hands of the ruler that he will restore to them that which Lysias had taken from them. This is also not void of subtilty, in that Tertullus doth discredit the chief captain, because he dealt more courteously towards Paul than the priests would he should; and glancingly he bringeth him in suspicion, because he dare not openly accuse him. But the question is, whether they could hope that the governor would grant them so much, seeing the Roman magistrates alone were to sit upon life and death? I answer, that he maketh in this place some semblance of equity, as if they were purposed to handle him more gently than he deserved. For though they might not condemn any man to death, yet they might use some light chastisement as was scourging. Nevertheless, Tertullus doth not cease to desire before the president to have him put to death.

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.

(6) Who also hath gone about to profane the temple.—Better, who even attempted to profane. Here the case was clearly to be supported by the evidence of the Jews of Asia. The charge, we see, was modified from that in Act_21:28. Then they had asserted that he had actually taken Trophimus within the sacred precincts. Now they were contented with accusing him of the attempt.

Whom we took . . .—The advocate throughout identifies himself, after the manner of his calling, with his clients; and in his hands the tumult in the Temple becomes a legal arrest by the officers of the Temple, which was to have been followed in due course by a legal trial, as for an offence against the law of Israel, before a religious tribunal.

The words from “according to our law” to “come unto thee” are omitted in many MSS., and may have been either the interpolation of a scribe, or a later addition from the hand of the writer. Assuming them to be part of the speech, they are an endeavour to turn the tables on Lysias by representing him as the real disturber of the peace. All was going on regularly till his uncalled-for intervention.

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

6. who also hath gone about [who moreover assayed R. V.] to profane the temple] The old English “gone about” was equivalent to “attempted.” Cp. Shaks. Mids. Nt. D. iv. 1. 212: “Man is but an ass, if he go about to expound this dream.” But the expression is somewhat obsolete now.

It is noteworthy that the Jews no longer adhere to their definite charge as made Act_21:28, but only impute to St Paul the attempt at profanation.

whom we took] i.e. by main force. They would represent their proceedings as an arrest of a grave offender.

and would, &c.] These words, as well as Act_24:7 and Act_24:8 down to “come unto thee” are omitted in nearly all the oldest MSS., and by the Rev. Ver., while the Greek Text, in those MSS. where it is found, exhibits many variations. But in spite of this it is very difficult to see how the advocate could have avoided some allusion to the circumstances mentioned in these words. Of course he puts the matter in a light most favourable to the Jews. “We would have judged him according to our law” is very different language from that in which (Act_23:27) Lysias describes Paul as in danger to be killed by the Jews. The action of Lysias too is described by Tertullus as one of great violence. Probably the Roman soldiers would not handle the mob tenderly. But Tertullus is trying to cast blame upon the chief captain and to represent his party as doing all things according to law.

according to our law] Tertullus identifies himself, advocate-like, with the Jews whose mouthpiece he is.

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.

Who also hath gone about to profane the temple,.... By introducing a Greek into it; see Act 21:28 which was only a supposition and conjecture of the Asiatic Jews, and was a false and groundless one:

whom we took; as they did in the temple, and dragged him out of it:

and would have judged according to our law; which was another untruth, for they had him not before any court of judicature; they brought no charge in form against him, nor did they examine his case, and inquire into the truth of things, or hear what he had to say, but fell upon him, and beat him; and if it had not been for the chief captain and his soldiers, would have destroyed him, so far were they from proceeding according to their law: it seems by Tertullus calling the law, "our law", that he was a Jewish proselyte; or else he speaks after the manner of lawyers, who call what is their clients, theirs.

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

6 Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: whom we took, and would have judged according to our law.

Ver. 6. To profane the temple] A loud lie: but innocence is no target against calumny.

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.

Who also hath gone about - Who has endeavored.

To profane the temple - This was a serious, but unfounded charge. It arose from the gross calumny of the Jews, when they pretended that he had introduced Greeks into that sacred place, Act 21:28. To this charge he replies in Act 24:18.

And would have judged - That is, would have condemned and punished.

According to our law - Their law, which forbade the introduction of strangers into the temple.

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

Hath gone about to profane the temple; by bringing into the temple (as they falsely suggested) uncircumcised persons: but Tertullus does not mention this, or show in what Paul had profaned the temple; for Felix himself being uncircumcised, it would have reflected upon him too much, to be accounted, by the Jews, amongst such profane ones, as were enough to defile their temple and worship.

Would have judged according to our law; they had a law, it seems, whereby it was death to bring strangers into the temple; and some think, that by the Romans they had yet power allowed them to put it in execution:

See Poole on "Act 21:28". And this was their aim all along, viz. to take away his life.

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

Moreover assayed for also hath gone about, A.V.; on whom also we laid hold for whom we took, A.V. To profane the temple. The same false charge as was made in Act_21:28. The remainder of ver. 6, after the words "on whom we laid hold," the whole of ver. 7, and the first clause of ver. 8, are omitted in the R.T. on the authority of a, A, B, G, H, etc. But the propriety of the omission is doubtful (Alford, Bishop Jacobson, Plumptre), though sanctioned by Mill, Bengel, Griesbach, Lachmann, and Tisehendorf (Meyer). If the words are not genuine, it is a marvelously skilful interpolation, fitting into the place so exactly both at the beginning and at the end, and supplying a manifest want in the speech of Tertullus. (For the statement in ver. 8 A.V., comp. Act_23:30)

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

See notes on verse 2

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.

6. ὅς καὶ τὸ ἱερὸν ἐπείρασεν βεβηλῶσαι, who moreover assayed to profane the Temple. The orator puts as a fact now, what had at first been only an opinion of the Asiatic Jews, that Paul had brought Trophimus into the Temple (Act 21:29). The mob made it as a charge in their excitement, but Tertullus speaks in cold blood.

ὃν καὶ ἐπρατήσαμεν, whom we also took, i.e. laid hold of by main force. The verb implies that force was needed for Paul’s arrest.

Here the words, which are rendered in the A.V. ‘and would have judged according to our Law. But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, commanding his accusers to come unto thee,’ are omitted in nearly all the oldest MSS., while the Greek text in those MSS. in which the passage is found exhibits many variations. Yet in spite of this it is hard to see how the advocate could have avoided some allusion to the circumstances mentioned in these words. Of course he puts the matter in a light most favourable to the Jews. ‘We would have judged him according to our Law’ is very different language from that in which (Act 23:27) Lysias describes Paul as in danger to be killed by the Jews. The action of Lysias too is described by Tertullus as one of great violence. Probably the Roman soldiers would not handle the mob tenderly. But Tertullus is trying to cast blame upon the chief captain and to represent his party as doing all things according to law.

If the words be an interpolation, it is one which differs very greatly from those which are common in the Acts. In other places of the book such insertions have merely been made to bring the whole of a narrative under view at once, and there has been no variation of an account previously given elsewhere. But here we have a passage not representing the facts as stated before, but giving such a version of them as might make Lysias appear to have been in the wrong, and to have exercised his power in Jerusalem most arbitrarily against men who were only anxious to preserve the purity of their sacred temple. As both the Syriac and the Vulgate represent the passage it is not quite satisfactory to reject it.

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.

6.] Considerable difficulty rests on the omission of the words καὶ κατά to πρὸς σέ. Their absence from the principal mss., their many variations in those which contain them, are strongly against their genuineness; as also is the consideration that no probable reason for their omission can be suggested. On the other hand, as De Wette observes, it is hardly imaginable that so little should have been assigned to the speaker as would be if these words were omitted. Besides this, the historic aorist ἐκρατήσαμεν seems to require some sequel, some reason, after this seizure, why he was there present and freed from Jewish durance. The phænomena are common enough in the Acts, of unaccountable insertions, and almost always in D (here deficient). See a list of such in Prolegg. to Acts, § v. 3. But in this place it is the omission which is unaccountable, for no similarity of ending, no doctrinal consideration can have led to it. The two reasons cited from Matthæi by Bloomfield, ed. 9,-1) “that the critics believed the Jews hardly likely to have accused Lysias himself,”—2) “because the words παρʼ οὗ, at ver. 8, must be referred to Paul: though by its (sic) position, it seems to refer to Lysias,” are futile and childish enough (on the latter of them, see below); and I only refer to them, to shew by what sort of considerations English readers are still supposed to be influenced.

I still retain the words, in dark brackets, being as much at a loss as ever to decide respecting them, and being moved principally by the aorist ἐκρατήσαμεν, inexplicable without any sequel. It may of course be said that this very circumstance may have given rise to their insertion. But of the two it seems to me less likely that Tertullus should have ended with ἐκρατήσαμεν, than that an abridgment of his speech should have been attempted. It may be a question how far we can detect traces of deliberate abridgment, in our early mss., of the text of the Acts.]

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

To profane [βεβηλωσαι] . The word is akin to bhlov, threshold, and bainw, to step; and its fundamental idea, therefore, is that of overstepping the threshold of sacred places. The word profane is the Latin pro fanurn, in front of the sanctuary; that which is kept outside the fane because unholy.

We laid hold. The best texts omit all after these words as far as by examining.

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