CRITICAL REMARKS
Acts 22:22. Away with such a fellow from the earth.—As in Acts 21:36. It is not fit. Better, it was not fit that he should live.—Meaning that he had long ago forfeited his life.
Acts 22:23. Cast off their clothes.—Not in preparation for stoning him, as in Acts 7:58 (Meyer, Zöckler), which would have been futile, seeing he was now in the custody of the Romans (Alford), but for the same reason that they threw dust into the air—not as a prelude to stone-throwing, but as an expression of their rage, and as an indication of what they would willingly have done to him, had they been able (Lechler, Holtzmann).
Acts 22:24. That ye might know.—Presumably the military tribune had not understood the apostle’s speech, and, desirous of ascertaining the cause of such an ebullition of wrath against his prisoner, commanded him to be fetched into the castle and examined by scourging.
Acts 22:25. As they.—i.e., the soldiers entrusted with this duty. Bound.—Or, when they had tied him up (R.V.), with thongs (Luther, Alford, Wordsworth, Plumptre). A different translation gives, when they stretched him forth and so made him ready for the thongs (De Wette, Meyer, Lechler, Spence, Zöckler, Holtzmann), by binding him or tying him up to a post. Is it lawful?—Two wrongs were about to be committed.
(1) The apostle was about to be scourged, being a Roman—which Roman law (Lex Porcia; see Livy, Acts 10:9; Cicero, Verr., v. 63) disallowed; and
(2) to be punished before being condemned—which equally Roman statute forbade (see on Acts 16:37).
Acts 22:26. Take heed (omitted by best authorities) what thou doest.—Or, What are you about to do?
Acts 22:27. Tell me.—The military tribune wished to know whether the centurion’s report was correct.
Acts 22:28. With a great sum had Lysias obtained Roman citizenship. Hence he is supposed to have been a Greek. “Augustus was very sparing in conferring the freedom of the city; but the succeeding emperors were more liberal” (Adam’s Roman Antiquities, p. 38). “In the reign of Claudius Messalina used to sell the freedom of the city, and at various prices at different times” (Alford). How Paul came to be free (or a Roman) born can only be conjectured. As Tarsus was simply an urbs libera and neither a Colonia nor a Municipium, his father or some ancestor may have obtained his citizenship either as a reward for distinguished service or by purchase.
Acts 22:29. The military tribune was afraid both because Paul had been bound (for scourging) which he ought not to have been, being a Roman, and because he had been bound before being condemned. “Facinus est vinciri civem Romanum, scelus verberari, parricidum necari” (Cicero, Verr., v. 66).
Acts 22:30. The best authorities omit from his bands. These were the fetters originally placed upon him (Acts 21:33). Down means from the castle to the chamber where the Sanhedrim were assembled. This chamber, there is reason to believe, was not their accustomed place of meeting, the Hall Gazith, or the hall of hewn stone, an apartment in the inner temple, since Lysias’ soldiers would not have been allowed to enter so sacred a place, but a room in the city near the Tyropæan bridge to which tradition says they removed their sittings forty years before the destruction of Jerusalem, or about twenty-six before the events here recorded.
Note.—The preceding speech to the Jewish people has been by Baur (Paul, his Life and Works, i. 121, E. T.), and Zeller (Die Apostelgeschichte, pp. 280, 281) pronounced an invention of the author of Acts on the following grounds:
1. The unlikelihood of Lysias having granted liberty to so dangerous a character as he imagined Paul to be to address the fanatic mob that swarmed round the castle stairs.
2. The unlikelihood of the crowd having listened so long in silence to a man whom already they had adjudged to be worthy of death; and,
3. The unlikelihood of the speech having been interrupted, like that of Stephen, before the Sanhedrim, and like that of Paul before the Areopagus, at a certain point. But waiving the obvious answers that these objections are too subjective—are, in fact, not criticism, but mere arbitrary suppositions—it may be urged, with reference to the first, that even the worst of criminals are allowed to speak in their own defence; that Lysias did not know what sort of speech Paul intended to make, and may have imagined that Paul would only utter a few words; and that Paul having commenced his oration, Lysias may have been too deeply interested in what he heard to think of recalling his permission. As regards the second, the silence of the multitude is satisfactorily explained by the statement that Paul addressed them in Hebrew, and by the tenor of Paul’s speech, which throughout, until the mention of the Gentiles was reached, contained nothing to ruffle their tempers. For the third it should suffice to reply that, if the speech was to be interrupted at all it could not fail to be interrupted “at a certain point”; while a glance at the three speeches, of Stephen before the Sanhedrim, of Paul before the Sanhedrim, and of Paul again before the Jewish people, will show that the cause of interruption was different in each: in Stephen’s the accusation of the Sanhedrim as the murderers of Jesus (Acts 7:52); in Paul’s Areopagus oration, the mention of Jesus and the resurrection (Acts 17:32); in the present speech, the emphasising of his mission to the Gentiles (Acts 22:21-22). So far from suggesting systematic invention, these variations confirm the genuineness and historicity of all three speeches.
HOMILETICAL ANALYSIS.—Acts 22:22-29
The Effect of Paul’s Oration on his Audience; or his Narrow Escape from Scourging
I. The impotent rage of Paul’s hearers.—
1. Their sudden interruption. From the beginning of this speech they had kept on listening till he reached the point when he proceeded to talk of his mission to the Gentiles. Then their suppressed wrath could no longer be restrained; they stopped his defence by a simultaneous yell.
2. Their fanatical outcry. “Away with such a fellow from the earth, for it is not fit that he should live.” What let loose their passion was not so much the mention of the word “Gentiles” as the idea that he should claim to have been sent by Divine authority on a mission to the Gentiles rather than to the Jews. “This, to the fanatic Jewish mind, was a startling statement, and, if true, would at once remove all reason for their jealousy of the foreigner. But could it be true that the long-expected Messiah—the peculiar glory of the chosen race—could, in their own proud house in Jerusalem, speak to this man from His glory throne in heaven, and command him to leave his own city and people and to devote himself solely to the uncircumcised Gentiles? Was not such an assertion of itself rank blasphemy? Could King Messiah send one—once belonging to their own strictest sect of the Pharisees—to these unconverted heathen to tell them that the Messiah, the Redeemer of Israel, was equally their Messiah and Redeemer? One who could say such things was surely “unworthy to live” (Spence).
3. Their passionate demonstration. Shouting with still more vehement cries, and stripping off their garments, they threw dust into the air—not as a preliminary to the work of stoning, since Paul now was in the hands of the Romans, but as a means of giving vent, in Oriental fashion, to their uncontrollable rage. They were simply beside themselves with indignation and fury.
II. The perilous mistake of the castle captain.—
1. In commanding Paul to be bound. The captain, of course, was not aware that Paul was entitled to all the privileges of a Roman citizen, otherwise he would have hesitated to put bonds on him, and far less to order him to be tied up for scourging. But bound the apostle had been at the beginning of the uproar (Acts 21:33), and now he was strapped to a post like a common criminal in preparation for the vilest indignity that can be put upon a man made in God’s image—for being whipped like a dog (Acts 22:25).
2. In treating Paul like a prisoner before he had been condemned. This also offended against the majesty of Roman law, which, however, regardless of the lives of slaves and evil-doers, was infinitely jealous of the liberties and honours of those who had attained the rank of citizens in the great commonwealth. No wonder the centurion grew alarmed when he learnt that his prisoner was a civis Romanus, and as little that this alarm communicated itself to the captain when he heard the exact state of affairs from his subordinate.
III. The escape of Paul from the indignity of scourging.—
1. The captain’s conversation with Paul. Astonished at the report brought by his subordinate, the commandant of the castle at once repaired to the apostle’s presence that by asking he might satisfy himself as to the truth of Paul’s claim to be a Roman citizen. Finding that Paul adhered to the assertion of his citizenship, the captain expressed surprise that one in apparently so destitute circumstances should be possessed of a privilege which he, the captain himself, had procured only at a great price. He was further astonished to learn that Paul had been free born, although nothing escaped Paul as to how this had come to pass. If some suppose the captain rather easily and quickly accepted the apostle’s word, it needs only to be remembered that Paul’s assertion contained nothing in itself improbable, and was besides of such a sort—incurring so severe penalties if found to be false—that no one would readily venture to make it unless if were true (see “Critical Remarks”).
2. The captain’s order to the centurion and his guards. Unstrap the apostle from the whipping post—which they did. “Straightway they departed from him.” The idea of examining him by torture they abandoned. That the fetters with which Paul had been first bound (Acts 21:33) were not removed is apparent from the statement that on the morrow he was loosed (Acts 22:30).
Learn.—
1. The fierce hostility with which men always and everywhere resent an invasion of their privileges. The Jews, in this respect, have not been without successors, even among Christians.
2. The fantastic tricks that are sometimes played by men “dressed in a little brief authority.” The captain was not the first man who overrode his commission, neither has he been the last.
3. The right of every man to protect himself, by all lawful means, against unnecessary and unjust suffering. Paul’s sheltering himself behind his Roman citizenship fell under this category.
4. The value of Christian citizenship, which can be purchased by no sum, but must be obtained free, and which can shield from dangers greater than those which menaced Paul.
5. The fear which all men inwardly have, or ought to have, when they do wrong.
HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Acts 22:22. Some Thoughts about Preachers and their Hearers.
I. Preachers may get a silent hearing from their audiences without either gaining their assent or making on them any deep impression. Preachers, above all men, should guard against judging by appearances.
II. Preachers commonly obtain a respectful hearing from their audiences so long as they keep on prophesying smooth things. The moment they begin to touch the consciences, or challenge the privileges, of those who listen, they find the attitude of these change.
III. Preachers must be prepared for hearing themselves denounced by their hearers, and that in no measured terms. Their unpopularity may often be the measure of their fidelity.
IV. Preachers may warrantably infer they are doing excellent work, and speaking true words, when they encounter opposition from the unbelieving, worldly, or nominally religious among their hearers. Preachers should beware when all men speak well of them.
Acts 22:23. Opposition, to Foreign Missions.
I. As much a fact to-day as it was in the time of Paul.—Both men of the world (like the unbelieving Jews) and members of the Christian Church (like many Jewish Christians) are opposed to sending preachers of the gospel “far hence to the Gentiles.”
II. If not so demonstrative as in Paul’s day, perhaps as decided and difficult to overcome.—The cause of missions to the heathen kindles in hearts anger, and evokes from some lips words of hostile denunciation—exactly now as then.
III. As unreasonable in our day as it was in Paul’s.—The salvation of the gospel was intended for all nations, and not simply for those presently within the pale of Christendom, any more than it was exclusively for the Jews.
IV. As culpable in our day as it was in Paul’s, if not more so. Considering that if Paul, being a Jew, had acted on this principle Christianity had never reached the shores of Europe, and far less of Britain.; and considering the clearer light now possessed by the Church, as to the world-wide destiny of the gospel, and of its fitness to bless mankind.
Acts 22:25. “Is it lawful to scourge a man who is a Roman and uncondemned?”—A threefold reminder—
I. Of the inalienable rights of men.
II. Of the sacred honour of citizens.
III. Of the inviolable dignity of Christians.—Gerok.
Acts 22:27. Roman and Heavenly Citizenship.—A parallel and a contrast.
I. The parallel.—
1. Both might be acquired by aliens.
2. Both might be obtained by inheritance.
3. Both conferred great privileges.
4. Both ensured complete protection.
II. The contrast.—
1. Roman citizenship now a thing of the past; heavenly citizenship a thing of the present.
2. Roman citizenship, at the best, temporal and earthly; heavenly citizenship celestial and eternal.
3. Roman citizenship might be obtained for money; heavenly, citizenship can be purchased by no price.
4. Roman citizenship conferred social and political privileges; heavenly citizenship privileges that are spiritual and religious.
5. Roman citizenship protected the body; heavenly citizenship protects the soul.
Acts 22:28. This Citizenship; conjoined with Philippians 3:20, Our Citizenship; or, the superiority of the Christian citizenship.
I. Its dignity is greater.—No need to disparage or depreciate Roman citizenship. In Paul’s day Roman citizenship was undoubtedly a great thing, an object worthy of being aspired after by persons of highest rank. Foreigners counted it a signal honour. Just as to-day to be a citizen of Great Britain is reckoned a higher dignity than to be the subject of any other kingdom or empire on earth. Yet even this is nothing when compared with being a citizen of heaven whose sovereign is the King of kings, whose vicegerent is the Lord of glory, whose ministers are angels, whose laws are righteousness and truth, whose revenues are the resources of the universe, whose mission is to bless mankind, whose influence is always on the side of peace and love, whose subjects are in one sense all the nations of the earth, in another the whole family of the redeemed, and whose dominion shall be one day universal.
II. Its immunities are larger.—Writers on Roman antiquities report that the rights and privileges of Roman citizens were large and varied—including liberty, family, marriage, fatherhood, property, willing and inheriting, tutelage and wardship (see Adams’ Roman Antiquities, pp. 39 ff.). Yet the privileges of our citizenship surpass these.
1. Sonship. Not merely subjects or servants, but children of the Great King (see Galatians 3:26; Ephesians 2:19; 1 John 3:2).
2. Acceptance. Not regarded as enemies, but considered as friends (Ephesians 1:6; Romans 8:1).
3. Liberty. Free use of all our powers in the service of God (2 Corinthians 3:17; Galatians 5:1; James 1:25). A Roman citizen might be sold as a slave; not so a citizen of heaven.
4. Protection. Roman citizenship did not shield from ordinary ills; nor does Christian citizenship. Yet this defends the soul lest it should be hurt by these (Romans 8:28; 1 Peter 3:13).
5. Property. Romans distinguished between common and private property. So are certain things common to Christian citizens, as the common salvation and the common means of grace; and other things private possessions, as special gifts and graces.
6. Family. Roman citizens (originally) could not abandon the family to which they belonged, a restriction which has perpetuated itself in the modern idea of caste. Corresponding to this, Christians belong to God’s family, and are not at liberty to leave it, though others may pass into it.
7. Heirship. A Roman citizen could will and inherit. A citizen of heaven cannot will, but shall inherit (Romans 8:17; Revelation 21:7).
III. Its terms are easier.—Roman citizenship could be secured in two ways: by birth or by purchase. Christian citizenship so far resembles that of Rome, that it too may, and indeed, must, be obtained in both of these ways.
1. By birth. Only not physical, but spiritual. No man a child of God, a subject of grace, an heir of heaven, because his parents were these before him; heaven’s citizens must be born again (John 3:3).
2. By purchase. Only it must be without money and without price. Citizenship in heaven cannot be bought and sold in earth’s markets, but must be accepted by all who would make it theirs as a free gift.
Lesson.—Walk worthy of this citizenship.