Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 25:18
Against whom when the accusers stood up, they brought none accusation of such things as I supposed:
18. of such things as I supposed ] Following the authority of some ancient MSS. the Rev. Ver. gives “of such evil things as, &c.”
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
None accusation … – No charge as I expected of a breach of the peace; of a violation of the Roman law; of atrocious crime. It was natural that Festus should suppose that they would accuse Paul of some such offence. He had been arraigned before Felix; had been two years in custody; and the Jews were exceedingly violent against him. All this, Festus would presume, must have arisen from some flagrant and open violation of the laws.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 18. They brought none accusation of such things as I supposed] It was natural for Festus, at the first view of things, to suppose that Paul must be guilty of some very atrocious crime. When he found that he had been twice snatched from the hands of the Jews; that he had been brought to Caesarea, as a prisoner, two years before; that he had been tried once before the Sanhedrin, and once before the governor of the province; that he had now lain two years in bonds; and that the high priest and all the heads of the Jewish nation had united in accusing him, and whose condemnation they loudly demanded; when, I say, he considered all this, it was natural for him to suppose the apostle to be some flagitious wretch; but when he had tried the case, and heard their accusations and his defence, how surprised was he to find that scarcely any thing that amounted to a crime was laid to his charge; and that nothing that was laid to his charge could be proved!
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
For Festus, knowing how Paul had been prosecuted by the Jews before Felix, and what charge they had been at, and what journeys they had made about him, could not think less than that he was a capital offender.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
18. as I supposed“suspected”crimespunishable by civil law.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Against whom when the accusers stood up,…. As they were obliged to do, whilst they were exhibiting their charges, bearing their testimonies, and producing their proofs; Ac 25:7.
They brought none accusation of such things as I supposed: for by his being left in bonds, and by the information of the chief priests and elders, and their violence against him, he imagined he must be chargeable with some notorious capital crime.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Brought (). Imperfect active of , referring to their repeated charges.
Of such evil things as I supposed ( ). Incorporation of the antecedent into the relative clause and change of the case of the relative from the accusative object of to the genitive like (Robertson, Grammar, p. 719). Note the imperfect active of to emphasize Festus’s state of mind about Paul before the trial. This old verb only three times in the N.T. (here, Ac 13:25 which see; 27:27).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Stood up [] . See on Luk 18:11; Luk 19:8.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Against whom when the accusers stood up,” (peri hou stathentes hoi kategoroi) “Concerning whom the accusers standing,” with contention, kept on standing, mouthing the same slanderous accusations over and over again, without providing any specific evidence for a single charge, as they did two years earlier, just parroting what their hired orator, Tertullus had stated, Act 24:9.
2) “They brought none accusation,” (oudemian aitian eperon) “Not one actual charge they put forth,” before me and my appointed counselors, advisors, or assistants who confer with me on adjudication of matters of controversy.
3) “Of such things as I supposed: (hon ego hupenooun poneron) “Of such wicked or morally vicious nature as I suspected they would bring,” as treason or sedition as I had been led by them to believe, when they bugged my ear for a week, when I was among them in Jerusalem, Act 25:2-3; after I heard their rambling, conflicting generalizations against Paul, and his more definitive, intelligible, apparently honest replies, Act 25:7-11.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
−
18. They laid no such crime to his charge. I marvel why Festus doth say, that there was no such crime objected to Paul as he supposed, seeing he was accused of sedition; but we may again conjecture by this, yea, plainly know, that their accusations were so vain, that they ought not to have been brought before the judgment-seat; as if a man did utter a slanderous speech unadvisedly. For which cause he saith, that the state of the cause did consist in questions of the law. Therefore, we see that he putteth a difference between those offenses which were wont to be punished by man’s laws, and the controversy which was between Paul and the Jews; not that the religion ought to be corrupted freely, − (605) or that their malapertness is tolerable, who overthrow the worship of God with their own inventions; but because the man being a Roman, cared not for Moses’ law; therefore he speaketh so disdainfully when he saith, that they did strive about their superstition; though this word δεισιδαιμονια be taken of the Grecians, as well in good as evil part; to wit, because the worshipping of false gods was common in all places. Notwithstanding, his meaning is, that he careth not what manner of religion the Jews have. And no marvel if a man which was an ethnic, [heathen] and had not learned that the rule of godliness must be fet [sought] from the mouth of God, know not how to distinguish between the pure worship of God and superstitions. −
Wherefore, we must hold fast that mark whereby we may discern the one from the other, that there is no godliness but that which is grounded in the knowledge of faith, lest we grabble [grope] in darkness. Moreover, the Romans were so drunken with prosperous success, that they thought that they were more acceptable to God than any other; as at this day the Turks, by reason of their manifold victories, deride the doctrine of Christ. This was a lamentable case, that a man being an unbeliever and idolater, sitteth as judge amidst the Jews, to give judgment of the sacred oracles of God according to his ignorance, but all the fault was in Paul’s adversaries, who did not care for the majesty of God, so they might satisfy and obey their own madness. Notwithstanding, there rested nothing for Paul to do, but to clear himself of those crimes which were laid against him. So at this day, though inward brawls, which are among Christians, do defame the name of Christ and his gospel among the Turks and Jews, yet the defenders of holy doctrine are unworthily blamed, which are enforced to enter the combat. −
Of one Jesus. It is not to be doubted but that Paul intreated, both gravely and with such vehemency as became him, of the resurrection of Christ; but Festus, by reason of his pride, thought it no meet matter for him to occupy his head about. He doth not, indeed, openly deride Paul, but he showeth plainly how negligently he heard him when he disputed of Christ. Whereby we see how little preaching availeth, yea, that it availeth nothing at all, unless the Spirit of God do inwardly touch the hearts of men. For the wicked do lightly pass over whatsoever is spoken, as if a man should tell them a tale of Robin Hood. − (606) Wherefore, there is no cause why the carelessness of many should trouble us at this day, seeing Paul prevailed nothing with Festus. But this place doth witness that many speeches did pass in the handling of the matter, whereof Luke maketh no mention. For he had spoken nothing as yet of Christ, and yet this latter narration doth show that Paul intreated seriously before the Jews of his death and resurrection. Which could not be, but he must needs intreat of the principal points of the gospel. Therefore, I guess that Paul did so handle the matter, that when he had refuted the false accusations of the Jews, wherewith they went about to burden him before the governor, having gotten a fit occasion, he began afterward to speak freely of Christ.
(605) −
“
Impune violari.” he violated with impunity.
(606) −
“
Acsi quis fabulas narraret,” as if one were telling them fables.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
18. Such things as I supposed Some act of robbery or rebellion, such as was daily being perpetrated.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
“Concerning whom, when the accusers stood up, they brought no charge of such evil things as I supposed, but had certain questions against him of their own religion, and of one Jesus, who was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.”
And that was when his dilemma had begun, for instead of charging the man with recognisable crimes and wrongdoing of the kind that he had expected, they had instead charged him with what they saw as religious misdemeanours. It had all been about ‘not observing the Law of Moses’, and ‘violating the Temple’ (although no specific example had been proved by witnesses) and about a man called Jesus, whom the Jews were quite certain was dead, while Paul claimed that He was alive. It was all very strange.
‘And of one Jesus, who was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.’ It is probable that he had not realised the significance of this, that is, that it indicated that He was alive because He had risen from the dead and ascended into heaven. (Paul’s testimony would make this clearer). But it went to the heart of the matter. For it was His resurrection and enthronement that declared Who He was and proved His ability to effectively work in the salvation of men and women. It proved His right to rule, and to call men now to come under the Kingly Rule of God, that is, to submit to His rule. And it proved that He had the power to give life, and to provide men with His Holy Spirit, and to forgive their sins.
It was this that Paul was willing to live and die for. It was this that the High Priest and his cronies were afraid of. For if it was true then they had brought about the crucifixion of the Son of God, of Israel’s Messiah, and had proved unfaithful to God, and were even now opposed to His will. If it was true then they had no right to be where they were, for it meant that they were in opposition to all that they were supposed to stand for..
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
18 Against whom when the accusers stood up, they brought none accusation of such things as I supposed:
Ver. 18. Of such things as I supposed ] They accused Paul of sedition; but because they failed in the proof, he makes it nothing. This is said by the historian (Tacitus) to be the commune crimen eorum qui crimine vacabant, the innocent man’s crime.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
18. . ] See Act 25:7 ; E. V., ‘ against whom ,’ supposing to refer to ( ) , is wrong. The word or , added in the best MSS. at the end of this verse, looks very like a gloss to explain or , and this suspicion is strengthened by the variations in its form and place. ‘Hinc iterum conjicere licet, imo aperte cognoscere, adeo futiles fuisse calumnias ut in judicii rationem venire non debuerint, perinde ac si quis convicium temere jactet.’ Calv.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 25:18 . . .: classical, cf. Thuc., v., 76; Herod., i., 26, so in Polyb. and Jos., but see critical note. : criminis delatio, accusatio , and so in Act 25:27 ; see for various meanings Grimm, sub v. : possibly he supposed that there were to be some charges of political disturbance or sedition like that which had recently given rise to such bloody scenes and a conflict between Greeks and Jews in the streets of Csarea. St. Chrys., Hom. , well emphasises the way in which the charges against Paul had repeatedly broken down.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Against = Concerning. Greek. peri, as in verses: Act 25:9, Act 25:15, Act 25:16, Act 9:19, Act 9:20, Act 9:24, Act 9:26.
brought = were bringing. Greek. epiphero. See Act 19:12. But the texts read phero, same as in Act 25:7.
none. Greek. oudeis.
accusation = charge. Greek. aitia, the common word for cause, or charge.
supposed. See Act 13:25.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
18. .] See Act 25:7; E. V., against whom, supposing to refer to (), is wrong. The word or , added in the best MSS. at the end of this verse, looks very like a gloss to explain or , and this suspicion is strengthened by the variations in its form and place. Hinc iterum conjicere licet, imo aperte cognoscere, adeo futiles fuisse calumnias ut in judicii rationem venire non debuerint, perinde ac si quis convicium temere jactet. Calv.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Act 25:18. , I supposed, or suspected) from their very great vehemence.-, I) as yet a stranger.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Reciprocal: Joh 18:31 – Take Act 18:14 – If Act 25:5 – if
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Act 25:18. Against whom, when the accusers stood up, they brought none accusations of such things as I supposed. The intenseness of feeling with which the Jews pressed Festus in the matter of the trial and condemnation of Paul, led the governor, when he heard the words treason and sedition mixed up with the case, to expect to find in the important prisoner some famous and well-known leader of Sicarii or Jewish rebels; but when he inquired more particularly into the details of the case, he found as regarded sedition or disloyalty to the Csar nothing but the vaguest rumours, and that the real points urged against him were connected with matters devoid of interest for a Roman brought up in the Materialistic school of his age. Festus, like another and still more eminent Roman official who appears in this history, cared for none of these things (Act 18:17).
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Act 25:18-19. Against whom, when the accusers stood up And offered what they had to say; they brought none accusation of such things as I supposed From the general clamour they had made against him, as a seditious and dangerous person, they would have done. He had inferred, from the eagerness of their prosecution, and their urging the matter thus upon the Roman governors, one after another, 1st, That they had something to accuse him of, which was dangerous either to private property or to the public peace. Such were the outcries against the primitive Christians: so loud, so fierce, that the standers by, who judged of them by those outcries, could not but conclude that they were the worst of men; and, indeed, to represent them as such was the design of that clamour, as it was of that against our Saviour. 2d, That they had something to accuse him of that was cognizable in the Roman courts, and of which the governor was properly the judge; as Gallio expected, Act 18:14. Otherwise it was absurd and ridiculous to trouble him with it. But had certain questions Disputable matters; against him of their own superstition Or religion rather; for, as Agrippa was a Jew, and now came to pay a visit of respect to Festus on his arrival at his province, it is improbable that he would use so rude a word as one that properly signified superstition: so that this text affords a further argument that the word will admit a milder interpretation, as has been observed on Act 17:22; and of one Jesus Thus does Festus speak of him to whom every knee shall bow; which was dead Or had been dead; whom Paul Unaccountably; affirmed to be alive Though, at the same time, he acknowledged that he had been crucified at Jerusalem, and expired on the cross. And was this a doubtful question? But why, O Festus, didst thou doubt concerning it? Only because thou didst not search into the evidence of it. Otherwise that evidence might have opened to thee till it had grown up into full conviction; and thy illustrious prisoner had led thee into the glorious liberty of the children of God!
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
See notes on verse 14