Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 25:8
While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.
8. While he answered for himself] Rev. Ver., with MSS., “While Paul said in his defence.” He offered an “Apologia” for himself. He did not make a defence against the unsubstantiated charges, but alluded only to those points on which they would try to prove their case, i.e. his alleged attempt to defile the Temple, his breaches of the Jewish law, and any insurrectionary outbreaks, in which the accusers would try to prove him a leader, and which might be construed into opposition to the Roman power. On this last his accusers would lay most stress. St Luke has only given us the three heads of St Paul’s Apologia.
Neither against the law of the Jews ] The accusation on the former occasion had not dwelt on this point, but in the course of two years they had discovered that the Apostle had taught among the Gentiles that circumcision was no necessary door for admission to Christianity, and this they would construe into an offence against the Jewish law.
have I offended any thing at all] Rev. Ver., “have I sinned at all.”
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
While he answered … – See this answer more at length in Act 24:10-21. As the accusations against him were the same now as then, he made to them the same reply.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 8. While he answered for himself] In this instance St. Luke gives only a general account, both of the accusations and of St. Paul’s defense. But, from the words in this verse, the charges appear to have been threefold:
1. That he had broken the law.
2. That he had defiled the temple.
3. That he dealt in treasonable practices: to all of which he no doubt answered particularly; though we have nothing farther here than this, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Paul answers unto the three crimes which he was charged with:
1. He had not offended against the law, having been always a religious observer of it: nor:
2. Against the temple, which he went into devoutly, and upon a religious account: nor:
3. Against Caesar; having never taught any rebellion, nor said or done any thing against his government.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
While he answered for himself,…. As he was allowed by the Roman laws to do, he pleaded his own cause, and showed the falsehood of the charges exhibited against him; by observing, that as the crimes alleged against him were reducible to three heads, neither of them were just and true:
neither against the law of the Jews; the law of Moses, whether moral, ceremonial, or judicial; not the moral law, that he was a strict observer of, both before and since his conversion; nor the ceremonial law, for though it was abolished, and he knew it was, yet for peace sake, and in condescension to the weakness of some, and in order to gain others, he submitted to it, and was performing a branch of it, when he was seized in the temple; nor the judicial law, which concerned the Jews as Jews, and their civil affairs: neither against the temple; at Jerusalem, the profanation of which he was charged with, by bringing a Gentile into it; which was a falsehood, at least a mistake:
nor yet against Caesar, have I offended at all; for he was charged with sedition, Ac 24:5. Caesar was a common name to the Roman emperors, as Pharaoh was to the kings of Egypt; and which they took from Julius Caesar the first of them, who was succeeded by Augustus Caesar, under whom Christ was born; and he by Tiberius, under whom he suffered; the fourth was Caius Caligula; the fifth was Claudius, mentioned in Ac 11:28 and the present Caesar, to whom Paul now appealed, was Nero; and though succeeding emperors bore this name, it was also given to the second in the empire, or the presumptive heir to it: authors are divided about the original of Caesar, the surname of Julius; some say he had it from the colour of his eyes, which were “Caesii”, grey; others from “Caesaries”, his fine head of hair; others from his killing of an elephant, which, in the language of the Moors, is called “Caesar”: the more common opinion is, that he took his name from his mother’s womb, being “Caeso”, cut up at his birth, to make way for his passage into the world; in which manner also our King Edward the Sixth came into the world.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
While Paul said in his defence ( ). Genitive absolute again, present middle participle of , old verb to make defence as in Acts 19:33; Acts 24:10; Acts 26:1; Acts 26:2. The recitative of the Greek before a direct quotation is not reproduced in English.
Have I sinned at all ( ). Constative aorist active indicative of , to miss, to sin. The is cognate accusative (or adverbial accusative). Either makes sense. Paul sums up the charges under the three items of law of the Jews, the temple, the Roman state (Caesar). This last was the one that would interest Festus and, if proved, would render Paul guilty of treason (j). Nero was Emperor A.D. 54-68, the last of the emperors with any hereditary claim to the name “Caesar.” Soon it became merely a title like Kaiser and Czar (modern derivatives). In Acts only “Caesar” and “Augustus” are employed for the Emperor, not “King” () as from the time of Domitian. Paul’s denial is complete and no proof had been presented. Luke was apparently present at the trial.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Have I offended [] . See on the kindred noun aJmartia, sin, Mt 1:21.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “While he answered for himself,” (tou Paulou apologournenou) “While Paul defended himself,” or served as his own witness and council, defending himself in the Roman court, regarding a) the law of Moses, b) the Holy Jewish Temple, and c) Caesar, or his respect for the Ron-ran government. To answer was blessed, Mat 5:11.
I
2) “Neither against the law of the Jews,” (hoti oute eis ton nomon ton loudaion) “That neither against the Law of the Jews,” the Law of Moses.
3) “Neither against the temple,” (oute eis to hieron) “Nor against the temple,” of the Jews, the Jewish temple in Jerusalem where he had gone for purification and an offering, to worship.
4) “Nor yet against Caesar,” (oute eis Kaisara) “Nor against Caesar,” whose centurions, chief captain Lysias, the Roman soldiers, Felix and Festus, the Roman governors he had treated with highest respect.
5) “Have I offended any thing at all.” (ti hemarton) “Have I missed the mark in anything at all,” as relates to my civil, moral, or religious conduct.
This is the second time Paul had met these character assassin charges brought against him, without any substantial sustaining or corroborating evidence. Paul was innocent of the charges, and they had no truthful evidence against him, anymore than they had two years earlier when Felix gave their accusations a hearing, Act 24:5-8; Act 12:13; Act 15:18.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
8. Answered The three neithers of his answer indicate what were the three charges, namely, heresy against the law of the Jews, sacrilege against the temple, and treason against Cesar. This last charge of treason is new, and is probably founded on Paul’s assertion of the kingship of Jesus.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘While Paul said in his defence, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar, have I sinned at all.” ’
Paul was therefore given the opportunity to defend himself, and he declared that he was guilty of none of the charges, neither in respect of the Law of the Jews, nor in respect of the Temple, nor with regard to Caesar. Among other things he had clearly been charged with being a man who disregarded local law, who had violated the Temple, and who had been involved in activities against Caesar, none of which, as we know, were true.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Act 25:8 . They were not in a condition to prove them, seeing that he stated for his vindication, that, etc. On with (more frequently with ), comp. Xen. Oec . xi. 22.
. . .] These were consequently the three principal points to which the of the Jews referred. Comp. Act 21:28 , Act 24:5 f., to which they now added the political accusation, as formerly against Jesus.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
8 While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.
Ver. 8. Neither against the law of the Jews ] Quam multa quam paucis! how much, how little, said Cicero of Brutus’ laconical epistle: and the same may I say of this defence, How much in a little! See Trapp on “ Act 24:12 “
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
8. ] These were the three principal charges to which the . . . . of the Jews referred (Meyer).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 25:8 . Evidently the charges classed as before under three heads, (1) the Law, (2) the Temple, (3) the Empire. In this verse Hilgenfeld ascribes to his “author to Theophilus”(Jngst, too, omits the words). But, not content with this, he concludes that the whole narrative which follows about Agrippa is to ratify the innocence of Paul before a crowned head of Judaism, cf. Act 9:15 , where . is also ascribed to the “author to Theophilus,” and perhaps also ; we are therefore to refer to this unknown writer the whole section Act 25:13 to Act 26:32 . with only here in Acts, three times in Luke’s Gospel, three times in 1 Cor., only once elsewhere in N.T., Mat 18:21 .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
While, &c. Literally Paul making his defence. Greek. apologeomai. See Act 19:33.
he. The texts read “Paul”.
Neither. Greek. oute.
against. Greek. eis. App-104.
temple. Greek. hieron. See Mat 23:16.
nor yet = neither. Greek. oute, as above.
have I offended = did I transgress. Greek. hamartano. App-128.
any thing at all = any thing. Greek. tis. App-123.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
8.] These were the three principal charges to which the . . . . of the Jews referred (Meyer).
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Neither: Act 25:10, Act 6:13, Act 6:14, Act 23:1, Act 24:6, Act 24:12, Act 24:17-21, Act 28:17, Act 28:21, Gen 40:15, Jer 37:18, Dan 6:22, 2Co 1:12
Reciprocal: Mat 22:17 – Caesar Luk 20:24 – Caesar’s Act 17:7 – and these Act 18:13 – General Act 19:37 – which Act 22:1 – my Act 23:29 – but Act 28:18 – General
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
8
Act 25:8. Whichever they meant, Paul denied having transgressed against either.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Act 25:8. While he answered for himself. No doubt repeating in the main the arguments briefly reported in the first trial before the Procurator Felix (chap. Act 24:10-21), adding, probably, an indignant denial, and one that convinced his judge respecting the alleged treason against the emperor and the state.
Some years later, perhaps five or six, it was upon this accusation of treason that Pauls enemies no doubt finally compassed their purpose. They contrived, it has been surmised, in some way to weave round the apostle a network of suspicion that he had been connected with the disastrous fire of Romethe fire falsely ascribed to the persecuted Christians of the imperial city. He was re-arrested, we know, in that short period of activity and missionary labour which succeeded his liberation from the Roman imprisonment, as far as we can gather, on no mere Jewish accusation of transgression against the Mosaic law and the traditional ordinances of his race. Graver charges, no doubt, were alleged. It was not a difficult matter, in those days which followed the persecution after the great fire, to bring about the condemnation of one of the hated Nazarenes, especially of one so distinguished as the great Paul, the loved and hated. The second imprisonment at Rome, we learn from his own words to Timothy (Second Epistle), was close and rigorous in character. The brave, generous teacher wrote hopeless of life, though full of joy and hope as to his future, but not here, not with his disciples and his friends. After his Second Epistle to Timothy, over the apostles life and work there falls a great hush, which tells too surely its own story. We hardly need the universal tradition of the Church to tell us what the end was.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
See notes on verse 6