CRITICAL REMARKS
Acts 21:26. Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself, might read took the men the next day, and having purified himself, not by performing the ordinary ablutions required before entering the temple (Howson), but by entering with them upon the same course of dedication. To signify (better, declaring) the accomplishment of the days of purification.—I.e., either that the days were fulfilled and the time come for the four men to be released from their vows (Wieseler, Conybeare and Howson); or, better, announcing his intention to fulfil along with them the (seven) days which by the law must precede the termination of the vow (Alford, Hackett, Plumptre, Spence, Holtzmann and others).
Acts 21:27. Seven days was the ordinary period for the most solemn purifications (Exodus 29:37; Leviticus 12:2; Leviticus 13:6; Numbers 12:14; Numbers 19:14). Of these seven days Paul observed only two, or at least four, as appears from Acts 24:11 (see “Critical Remarks”), which shows the interval between Paul’s arrival in Jerusalem and his speech before Felix was only twelve days. When his arrest took place the seven days were “almost ended”—i.e., they were not completed when he was apprehended. In the temple meant most likely in the court of the women, afterwards called this holy place (Acts 21:28), into which no foreigner was permitted to enter under pain of death. “This court was four square, and had a wall about it peculiar to itself.” There was also a stone partition all round, three cubits high, whose construction was very elegant, and upon which stood pillars at equal distances from one another, declaring the law of purity, some in Greek and some in Roman letters, that “No foreigner should go within that sanctuary” (Jos., Wars, V. Acts 21:2, VI. ii. 4). The correctness of this statement, which was long disputed, has been recently confirmed by Monsieur Clermont Ganneau’s discovery of one of those prohibitory notices, with an inscription in Greek, of which the following is a translation: No foreigner to proceed within the partition wall and enclosure around the sanctuary; whoever is caught in the same will on that account be liable to incur death” (Recent Discoveries on the Temple Hill, p. 134).
Acts 21:30. They took, or laid hold on Paul.—Baur and Holtzmann regard it as improbable that these Jews, among whom doubtless were many zealots for the Messiah’s faith and for the law, should have seized Paul when engaged in the performance of a pious work of the law, and accordingly reject this story as unhistorical. But why should fanatical Jews always have acted in logically and religiously consistent fashion, when enlightened and sober-minded Christians do not? The doors were most probably the gates which led into the women’s court.
Acts 21:31. The chief captain of the band.—The chiliarch, or military tribune of the cohort, whose name was Claudius Lysias (Acts 23:26), resided in the Castle of Antonia, a gigantic fortress on a rock or hill, about eighty-five feet high, at the north-west angle of the temple area, which communicated with its northern and western porticoes, “and had flights of stairs descending into both, by which the garrison could at any time enter the court of the temple and prevent tumults” (Robinson, Biblical Researches, I., p. 432. Compare Josephus, Wars, V. Acts 21:8).
Acts 21:33. Two chains.—I.e., bound by a chain to a soldier on each side (compare Acts 12:6).
Acts 21:34. Into the castle.—More correctly, into the camp or barracks attached to the tower.
Acts 21:36. Away with him.—Compare Acts 22:22; Luke 23:18; John 19:15.
Acts 21:37. Canst thou speak Greek?—Lit., dost thou know Greek? Ἑλληνιστὶ γινώσκεις. Compare Græce nescire in Cicero (Pro. Flac., 4) and τοὺς Συριστὶ ἐπισταμένους in Xenophon (Cyrop., VII. Acts 21:31).
Acts 21:38. That (or, the) Egyptian.—Josephus (Wars, II., xiii, 5) mentions an Egyptian, a false prophet, who, having deluded thirty thousand men, led them round about from the Wilderness to the Mount of Olives with the view of breaking into Jerusalem from that place, and states that Felix, having fallen upon them, either destroyed or captured alive the greater portion of his followers, and dispersed the rest, while he himself escaped with a small number. In another account (Ant., XX. viii. 6) the Jewish historian says that this Egyptian went to Jerusalem and advised the common people to go along with him to the Mount of Olives, which they did in vast crowds, he promising to show them the walls of Jerusalem fall down at his command; and that Felix sallied out against them with a great company of horsemen and footmen, slew four hundred, and made two hundred prisoners, but did not capture the Egyptian, who escaped. Tholuck (Glaubwürdigkeit, p. 169) has shown how the variations in Josephus’s story may be harmonised; but even if they could not, they would only prove that Josephus, while substantially confirming Luke’s account, was not so accurate a historian as Paul’s friend.
Acts 21:39. Of no mean city.—Josephus (Ant., I. vi. 1) calls Tarsus the most important city in all Cilicia. “Many of the coins of Tarsus bear the title of Autonomous and Metropolis” (Hackett).
Acts 21:40. That Lysias should have given Paul licence or leave to address the people need occasion no surprise. Paul had satisfied Lysias that he was no wild revolutionary, but a peaceful Cilician; and besides, Lysias may have seen in Paul’s countenance from the first what convinced him his prisoner was no ordinary man. The Hebrew tongue, or dialect, was the Syro-Chaldaic or Aramean, as in John 5:2; John 19:13, the mother tongue of the Jews in Judæa at that time.
HOMILETICAL ANALYSIS.—Acts 21:26-40
Arrested in the Temple; or, Long Looked for, Come at Last
I. The Apostle’s arrest—
1. Where it occurred. In the temple—i.e., the temple court, into which Paul had entered, and in one of the cloisters of which he most likely stayed during the period of his purification. Perhaps at the moment he was in the court of the women (see below).
2. When it took place. On the last of the seven days (say some) when the necessary offerings were being presented for himself and the four Nazarites, but better as the seven days were running on and nearing completion, so that the offerings were not presented.
3. By whom it was instigated. By certain Jews from Asia who had been acquainted with his missionary activity in Asia Minor, and more especially in Ephesus, who had observed him in the city accompanied by Trophimus, an Ephesian, and who now lighted upon him in the temple court. Throughout the whole of his career the Jews (unbelieving) had been his persistent, unsleeping, and remorseless antagonists. The method they adopted in this instance to raise a tumult against him was effective.
(1) They laid hands on him, as if he had been an evil doer, a criminal who they purposed to hand over to the tender mercies of the law.
(2) They raised a shout against him in the temple court, which inflamed the crowd there present, and spreading abroad throughout the city, threw it into confusion, much as Ephesus had been thrown into a turmoil by the cry of Demetrius (Acts 19:29), and attracted an excited mob around the temple gates.
(3) They pointed him out as the man—the notorious fellow—who went about everywhere teaching all (men and women) against the people—i.e., of Israel—an appeal to their patriotism; against the law—i.e., of Moses—an appeal to their orthodoxy; and against this place—i.e., the temple, the holy dwelling-place of Jehovah—an appeal to their religion.
(4) They accused him, though falsely, of sacrilege—i.e., of having violated the sanctity of the holy place by bringing (as they erroneously supposed) Trophimus, the Ephesian, into not the court of the Gentiles, but the court of the women, into which none but Jews could pass under penalty of death (see “Critical Remarks”).
4. How it was effected.
(1) Tumultuously. The crowd rushed into the temple and seized the apostle’s person.
(2) Violently. They dragged him forcibly outside the sacred precincts in order that these might not be stained with his blood (compare 2 Chronicles 23:14), which they clearly intended to shed. More than likely also this was the reason why the temple gates were so expeditiously shut behind the retreating mob, in case it should return and carry out its murderous project in the holy place.
II. The Apostle’s rescue.—
1. Opportune. The mode selected for the carrying out of their deadly intention was the slow one of beating (Acts 21:32), which allowed time for the information to spread and be carried to Claudius Lysias (Acts 23:26), the chief captain of the band, or military tribune (chiliarch) of the cohort, in the Tower of Antonia near by, whose business it was to quell all riots which might occur (and these were frequent) in connection with the Jewish festivals (see Jos., Ant., XX. Acts 21:3; and Wars, V. Acts 21:8). The moment, therefore, Lysias understood the situation, he ran down upon the crowd with a company of soldiers and centurions, the sight of which at once checked their blood-thirsty fury and caused them to leave off beating the apostle. Magistrates were appointed to be terrors to evil-doers (Romans 13:4), and crowds, it is well known, have a salutary fear of the ruler’s sword.
2. Incomplete. Rescued from the hands of the Jews and from the jaws of death, he was yet not set at liberty. The chiliarch commanded him (wrongfully, as he afterwards learnt, Acts 22:25), to be bound as a prisoner, with two chains, and fetched into the castle. The reason for this procedure was the impossibility of learning anything correctly from the infuriated rabble about either who the apostle was or what he had done. Those who composed that rabble could only follow after the retreating soldiers as they bore off their prisoner, and cry, “Away with him,” as their fathers had thirty years before shouted in front of Pilate’s prætorium (John 19:15). Yea, so violent did they become, that Paul might have been snatched from the soldier’s hands and lynched on the spot, had not the soldiers, to whom he was bound, lifted him into their arms or upon their shoulders and borne him up the castle stairs.
III. The Apostle’s request.—
1. The preliminary conversation. When the top of the stairs had been reached, just before passing into the castle, the apostle, addressing the chief captain in Greek, solicited permission to “say something” to him. Surprised at hearing Greek on the lips of (as he supposed) a foreign Jew whom he did not expect to find a person of culture, he first asked the apostle if he knew Greek, and on receiving a reply in the affirmative, inquired further if he (the apostle) was not then (as the captain had concluded before he heard the apostle speak Greek) that Egyptian impostor—spoken of by Josephus Ant., XX. vii. 6; Wars, II. xiii. 5; see “Critical Remarks”)—who shortly before had stirred up to sedition and led out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers, literally, the four thousand men of the Sicarii or Assassins. To this, of course, Paul responded, that he was not that renowned brigand chief, but a Jew of Tarsus in Cilicia, and a citizen of no mean city. Honourable men are never afraid to give account of themselves and their doings.
2. The solicited permission. To address the people—which showed Paul had not parted with his courage, and was still as ready to fight with wild beasts as he had been at Ephesus (Acts 19:30; 1 Corinthians 15:32). “The request was a bold one,” write Conybeare and Howson, “and we are almost surprised that Lysias should have granted it; but there seems to have been something in St. Paul’s aspect and manner which from the first gained an influence over the mind of the Roman officer.” In another sense, the request was a comparatively harmless one, and on its being granted Paul at once moved to the stair front, and looking into the faces of the demoniac crowd, beckoned to them with his chained hand, signalling that he wished to speak. “What nobler spectacle,” exclaims Chrysostom, “than that of Paul at this moment! There he stands, bound with two chains, ready to make his defence unto the people. The Roman commander sits by, to enforce order by his presence. An enraged populace look up to him from below. Yet, in the midst of so many dangers, how self-possessed is he, how tranquil!” (quoted by Hackett). As if startled by the heroism of the man, the angry crowd forget to shout. A great silence ensues which deepens into an intenser stillness as the accents of their old Hebrew tongue fall upon their ear.
Learn.—
1. How unexpectedly evil may befall one. Paul, doubtless, never dreamt of being apprehended in the temple.
2. How difficult it is to quench the passion of hate in unrenewed hearts. The Jews dogged Paul’s steps like sleuth-hounds.
3. How easily a misconception may arise. Paul’s enemies had seen him and Trophimus in the city, and at once jumped to the conclusion that Paul had fetched his Greek friend into the Holy Place.
4. How quickly a lie can spread. In a few moments the slander was in possession of the town.
5. How nearly one may come to being killed and yet be rescued. A few moments longer before Lysias arrived and Paul might have been a dead man.
6. How strangely a good man may be talked of behind his back. The governor clearly had heard it said that Paul was a sort of bandit chief.
7. How bravely a Christian can comfort himself in face of peril. Not many men could have faced the mob as Paul did from the castle stairs.
HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Acts 21:26. Paul among the Nazarites.
I. Not as a slave of human ordinances, but in the might of evangelical liberty, which has power over all things that promote the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:12).
II. Not as a dissembler before the people, but in the ministry of brotherly love, which bears the infirmities of the weak (Romans 15:1).
III. Not as a fugitive from the cross, but in the power of apostolic obedience, which knows to deny itself from love to the Lord (Luke 9:23).
Acts 21:27. Unrealised Aims; or, man proposes but God disposes.
I. Many plans that promise well turn out ill.—The recommendation of James and the elders, and the compliance of Paul were Intended to ensure Paul’s safety, but they actually led to his arrest.
II. When a plan turns out badly it cannot be safely argued that the plan was not good.—We agree with the view which thinks James’s counsel, and Paul’s practice were not, in this instance the best—we cannot pronounce them sinful; but even had they been the wisest they might have failed.
II. The success of a plan does not necessarily demonstrate that the plan was good.—Nothing more common than for the counsels of the wicked to prosper on earth and in time, though they will eventually be overthrown.
Acts 21:27-38. The Troubles of a Good Man. Paul.
I. Doubly slandered.—
1. Charged with apostasy in religion (Acts 21:28).
2. Blamed for committing sacrilege (Acts 21:28).
II. Nearly murdered.—
1. Violently dragged from the court of the women (Acts 21:30).
2. Mercilessly beaten by the angry mob (Acts 21:32).
III. Innocently bound.—
1. Like a dangerous criminal (Acts 21:33).
2. Though no one could tell for what (Acts 21:34).
IV. Ignorantly suspected.—
1. Of being an Egyptian when he was a Jew.
2. Of being a leader of assassins when he was only a peaceful citizen.
3. Of having stirred up sedition when in truth he was a preacher of peace (Acts 21:38-39).
Acts 21:38. “Art not thou that Egyptian?” “A remarkable proof of the erroneous and absurd thoughts which the blind world entertains of the children and servants of God. They regard us as idiots, madmen, seducers, enemies of mankind, and under this form they hate us. Thus was Christ also numbered among transgressors” (Gerok in Lange).
“Art not thou that Egyptian?” or, misconceptions entertained by the world concerning the followers of Christ, who are often slandered as
I. Disturbers of social order.—Paul was accused of being a brigand chief. Had often been reviled as a revolutionary. On this ground the early Christians were persecuted under the Roman emperors. Usual to accuse them as evil doers (see 1 Peter 2:12). In the days of the Stuart ascendency in our own country Nonconformists were treated as enemies of the commonwealth, because they worshipped God according to their own consciences. To-day Christians are looked upon by many, if not as open malefactors, at least as impracticable persons, who, by crying out against social evils, such as drink, gambling, licentiousness, trouble society.
II. Self-interested deceivers.—Lysias obviously thought Paul was one of this class. Christianity has often been represented as a huge imposture, a gigantic system of deception, invented by priests for their self-interest. This accusation, which was common last century, is not unknown in this. Believers are often maligned as persons who have adopted a profession of religion simply as a cloak for their covetousness. No doubt such abuses have existed and such individuals have been found in the Church; but Christianity is no invention of deceivers.
III. Hypocritical pretenders.—Giving themselves out to be “saints” when they are as wicked as other people. No doubt of some professing Christians this is true; but it is ignorant calumny to represent all as such. Still Christians should study to approve their sincerity by a holy walk and conversation.
IV. Impracticable visionaries.—Doubtless the captain considered Paul such when he fancied the apostle was that Egyptian who had been aiming at upsetting the supremacy of Rome by means of a handful of Sicarii. So the world pronounces Christians visionaries, fools, fanatics, idiots, dreamers, and such like when they talk of,
1. Applying the principles of Christianity to ordinary life;
2. Bringing the whole world round to the acceptance of Christianity; and,
3. Living for the other world rather than for this.