Acts 24:8

Act 24:8. Παρʼ οὗ, from whom) i.e. from Paul.

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

Act 24:8 . ἀνακ .: not an examination by torture, which could not be legally applied either to Paul or to Lysias as Roman citizens, but in the sense of a judicial investigation in this sense peculiar to Luke, cf. Luk 4:9 , and Plummer on Luk 23:14 , cf. Act 25:26 below. A.V., “by examining of whom thyself,” etc., which is quite misleading whether we retain the words omitted above in R.V. or not, because this rendering reads as it Felix was to examine the accusers, whereas the relative pronoun is in the singular, παρʼ οὐ .

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

Commanding his accusers to come unto thee--Here they insinuate that, instead of troubling Felix with the case, he ought to have left it to be dealt with by the Jewish tribunal; in which case his life would soon have been taken.

by examining whom--Lysias, as would seem (Act 24:22).

thyself mayest, &c.--referring all, as if with confidence, to Felix.

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 8. Commanding his accusers to come, c.] Here Tertullus closes his opening and statement of the case and now he proceeds to call and examine his witnesses; and they were no doubt examined one by one, though St. Luke sums the whole up in one word -The Jews also assented, saying, that these things were so. Whoever considers the plan of Tertullus's speech, will perceive that it was both judicious and artful. Let us take a view of the whole:-

1. He praises Felix to conciliate his favour.

2. He generally states the great blessings of his administration.

3. He states that the Jews, throughout the whole land, felt themselves under the greatest obligations to him, and extolled his prudent and beneficent management of the public affairs every where.

4. That the prisoner before him was a very bad man; a disturber of the public peace; a demagogue of a dangerous party; and so lost to all sense of religion as to attempt to profane the temple!

5. That, though he should have been punished on the spot, yet, as they were ordered by the chief captain to appear before him, and show the reason why they had seized on Paul at Jerusalem, they were accordingly come; and, having now exhibited their charges, he would,

6. proceed to examine witnesses, who would prove all these things to the satisfaction of the governor. 7. He then called his witnesses, and their testimony confirmed and substantiated the charges. No bad cause was ever more judiciously and cunningly managed.

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

8. Having made inquiry. A good request, that the governor do not give sentence before he thoroughly examine and know the matter; and that he do not condemn Paul before he be lawfully convict. But how dare they put in these conditions, seeing their own consciences do accuse them of unjust dealing? I answer, that they had witnesses in readiness; and that they do not offer themselves to prove the matter until they do call them; though there were another end. For they did hope that Felix would be so persuaded with such glorious words, that he would turn over unto them the man whom they did accuse for a condemned man, whom they might handle at their pleasure. In sum, the more fierce they be upon him, and the more they were puffed up with some affiance they had in themselves, they think they shall get the upper hand by this means, because the party arraigned shall have no license granted to defend himself. Thus do false accusers boldly boast that their matter is plain, that they may blind the eyes of the judges.

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.

(8) By examining of whom . . .—Literally, from whom thou shalt be able, by examining him thyself, to know thoroughly . . . The English construction suggests that the “accusers” are the persons to be examined, but as the Greek relative is in the singular this cannot possibly be the meaning. Tertullus apparently suggests that the judge should interrogate the prisoner—perhaps, by using a technical term, with a well-understood significance, that he should examine him by scourging, or some other mode of torture. Strictly speaking, the “examination” of Which Tertullus speaks was a preliminary inquiry, previous to the actual trial, to ascertain whether there were sufficient grounds for further proceedings. It will be observed that he keeps back the fact of St. Paul’s being a Roman, and it does not follow that Tertullus knew that Lysias had informed Felix of it. It is possible, however, after all, if we admit the genuineness of Act_24:7, that the relative pronoun may refer to Lysias and not to the Apostle; and this agrees with the language of Felix in Act_24:22.

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

8. commanding his accusers to come unto thee] Which Lysias had not done till Paul was removed beyond reach of pursuit.

by examining of whom] In the A. V. the relative “whom” is here naturally referred to “accusers.” A glance at the Greek shews that this cannot be, for it is in the singular number. The Rev. Ver. gives the literal rendering of the passage thus, “From whom thou wilt be able, by examining him thyself. to take knowledge, &c.” If the supposed interpolation be accepted as text, then “whom” and “him” would most properly be referred to Lysias. Felix might on the arrival of the chief captain question him and learn the truth of what had taken place. And with this the remark of Felix in Act_24:22 fits in, “When Lysias the chief captain shall come down, I will determine your matter.” If however the doubtful words be rejected, then the pronouns must refer to St Paul. But it is curious, to say the least, that Tertullus should suggest to Felix that the truth of his case should be supported by an examination of the person accused. It has therefore been suggested that the word rendered “examining” has regard to some process of torture by which a prisoner might be forced to confess the truth. But for this no sufficient support has been found. The noun derived from this verb is employed (Act_25:26) for the inquiry before Agrippa. On the whole there seems quite as much to be said in favour of the Textus Receptus from internal evidence, as can be brought against it by the evidence of MSS.

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.

Commanding his accusers to come unto thee,.... But this was not done till after Paul had set forth his case before the people, upon the stairs leading to the castle: and after he had pleaded his own cause before the sanhedrim; and after the chief captain had had intelligence of the Jews lying in wait to kill him: Tertullus would insinuate that the captain was blameworthy, that he hindered a legal process against Paul; and that it was owing to him, that this trouble was given the governor, as well as the high priest and elders, who by his orders came down from Jerusalem to Caesarea; and that had it not been for him this affair might have been finished with more dispatch, and less trouble.

By examining of whom; not the accusers, but either the chief captain, as some think, or rather Paul:

thyself mayest take knowledge of all these things whereof we accuse him; so impudent was Tertullus, and of such effrontery and assurance, that he feared not to say, that the governor, by examining Paul himself, would easily come to the knowledge of the things he was accused of, and plainly see that he was guilty of them; so that there would be no need of their attestations, or of producing witnesses against him.

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

8 Commanding his accusers to come unto thee: by examining of whom thyself mayest take knowledge of all these things, whereof we accuse him.

Ver. 8. By examining of whom] By this outfacing boldness, and these specious pretences, they hoped to have swayed the governor to deliver up the prisoner to their pleasure without any more ado, and to have condemned him unheard. But God had otherwise ordered it.

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.

Commanding his accusers ... - Act 23:30.

By examining of whom - That is, the Jews who were then present. Tertullus offered them as his witnesses of the truth of what he had said. It is evident that we have here only the summary or outline of the speech which he made It is incredible that a Roman rhetorician would have on such an occasion delivered an address so brief, so meagre, and so destitute of display as this. But it is doubtless a correct summary of his address, and contains the leading points of the accusation. It is customary for the sacred writers, as for other writers, to give only the outline of discourses and arguments. Such a course was inevitable, unless the New Testament had been swelled to wholly undue proportions.

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

From him thou...mayest know. By the construction it is doubtful whether from Lysias, or from St. Paul. (Witham) --- Behold them here ready to support the heads of accusation I have brought forward, and which are moreover so self-evident, that the party accused will not dare to deny them. (Bible de Vence)

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).

By examining of whom; not that the Jews would have any witnesses produced, and fairly examined; but the pronoun being singular, it refers to Paul, whom Tertullus would have examined, and put to the question, or racked, that he might confess what they would have had him guilty of: or it is as if he had said, (so impudent is impiety), that Paul himself could not deny (if he were asked) the accusation which was brought against him.

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

From whom thou wilt be able, by examining him thyself, to take for by examining of whom thyself mayest take, A.V. According to the R.V, whom refers to St. Paul, but according to the A.V., to Lysias. This last agrees with ver. 22. By examining him; (ajnakrinav Luk_23:14; Act_4:9 Act_12:19 Act_17:11 Act_28:18; elsewhere only in St. Paul"s Epistles) Inkrisiv, Act_25:26 the kindred ajna examination, is used.

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.

8. παρ’ οὗ δυνήσῃ αὐτὸς ἀνακρίνας, κ.τ.λ., from whom thou wilt be able by examining him thyself to take knowledge, &c. When the Text. Recept. stood, the words ‘whom’ and ‘him’ in this passage referred to Claudius Lysias, from whom Felix might naturally be expected to make enquiry; without the supposed interpolation the words apply to St Paul. Thus Tertullus suggests to Felix that the truth of the case against the Apostle would be found to be supported by an examination of the accused. This appears strange reasoning. It has therefore been suggested that the word ἀνακρίνας has regard to some process of torture by which a prisoner might be forced to confess the truth. But for this no sufficient support has been found. The noun ἀνάκρισις derived from this verb is employed (Act 25:26) for the enquiry before Agrippa. On the whole there seems quite as much to be said in favour of the Textus Receptus from internal evidence as can be brought against it by the evidence of MSS.

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.

8.] παρʼ οὗ, if the disputed words be inserted, refers naturally enough to Lysias; but if they be omitted, to Paul, which would be very unlikely,—that the judge should be referred to the prisoner (for examination by torture (Grot. and al.) on one who had already claimed his rights as a Roman citizen can hardly be intended) for the particulars laid to his charge. Certainly it might, on the other hand, be said that Tertullus would hardly refer the governor to Lysias, whose interference he had just characterized in such terms of blame; but (which is a strong argument for the genuineness of the doubtful words) remarkably enough, we find Felix, ver. 22, putting off the trial till the arrival of Lysias.

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

From whom. Paul. It would refer to Lysias if the omitted passage above were retained.

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