Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 16:21
And teach customs, which are not lawful for us to receive, neither to observe, being Romans.
21. and teach customs ] Better, set forth (So R. V.), make proclamation of; the word refers to the preaching of the Apostles.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And teach customs – The word customs here ethe refers to religious rites or forms of worship. See the notes on Act 6:14. They meant to charge the apostles with introducing a new religion which was unauthorized by the Roman laws. This was a cunning and artful accusation. It is perfectly evident that they cared nothing either for the religion of the Romans or of the Jews. Nor were they really concerned about any change of religion. Paul had destroyed their hopes of gain; and as they Could not prevent that except by securing his punishment or expulsion, and as they had no way of revenge except by endeavoring to excite indignation against him and Silas for violating the laws, they endeavored to convict thorn of such violation. This is one among many instances, Where wicked and unprincipled people will endeavor to make religion the means of promoting their own interest. If they can make money by it, they will become its professed friends or if they can annoy Christians, they will at once have remarkable zeal for the laws and for the purity of religion. Many a man opposes revivals of religion, and the real progress of evangelical piety from professed zeal for truth and order.
Which are not lawful for us to receive – There were laws of the Roman empire under which they might shield themselves in this charge, though it is evident that their zeal was; not because they loved the laws more, but because they loved Christianity less. Thus, Servius on Virgil, Aeneid, viii. 187, says, care was taken among the Athenians and the Romans that no one should introduce new religions. It was on this account that Socrates was condemned, and the Chaldeans or Jews were banished from the city. Cicero (DeLegibus, ii. 8) says, No person shall have any separate gods, or new ones; nor shall he privately worship any strange gods, unless they be publicly allowed. Wetstein (in loco) says, The Romans would indeed allow foreigners to worship their own god, but not unless it were done secretly, so that the Worship of foreign gods would not interfere with the allowed worship of the Romans, and so that occasion for dissension and controversy might be avoided. Neither was it lawful among the Romans to recommend a new religion to the citizens, contrary to what was confirmed and established by the public authority, and to call off the people from that. It was on this account that there was such a hatred of the Romans against the Jews (Kuinoel). Tertullian says that there was a decree that no god should be consecrated unless approved by the senate (Grotius). See many other authorities quoted in Dr. Watsons Apology (Defense) for Christianity.
To observe – To do.
Being Romans – Having the privileges of Roman citizens. See the notes on Act 16:12.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 21. And teach customs] , Religious opinions, and religious rites.
Which are not lawful for us to receive] The Romans were very jealous of their national worship. Servius, on the following lines of Virgil, has given us correct information on this point; and has confirmed what several other writers have advanced:-
Rex Evandrus ait: Non haec solemnia nobis
______ ______ ______ ______
Vana superstitio, veterumque ignara deorum,
Imposuit. AEn. viii. v. 185, c. King Evander said:-It is not vain superstition, ignorant of the ancient worship of the gods, which has imposed these rites on us.
Duo dicit, says Servius: non ideo Herculem colimus aut quia omnem religionem veram putamus; aut quia deos ignoramus antiquos. Cautum enim fuerat, et apud Athenienses, et apud Romanos; ne quis NOVAS introduceret RELIGIONES: unde et Socrates damnatus est: et Chaldaei et Judaei unt urbe depulsi.
“He says two things: we do not worship Hercules because we believe every religion to be true; nor are we ignorant of the ancient gods. Great care was taken, both among the Athenians and Romans, that no one should introduce any new religion. It was on this account that Socrates was condemned, and on this account the Chaldeans and the Jews were banished from Rome.”
CICERO, De Legibus, lib. ii. c. 8, says: Separatim nemo habessit deos; neve NOVOS; sed nec ADVENAS, nisi publice ADSCITOS, PRIVATIM colunto. “No person shall have any separate gods, nor new ones; nor shall he privately worship any strange gods, unless they be publicly allowed.” The whole chapter is curious. It was on such laws as these that the people of Philippi pleaded against the apostles. These men bring new gods, new worship, new rites; we are Romans, and the laws forbid us to worship any new or strange god, unless publicly allowed.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
There was at Philippi, as appears Act 16:12, a colony of the Romans, and they were governed by their laws, by which they might make no innovation in religion without the consent of the senate, and afterwards of their emperors; which here these persecutors allege.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
21. And teach customs, which are notlawful for us to receive, neither to observe, being RomansHerealso there was a measure of truth; as the introduction of new godswas forbidden by the laws, and this might be thought to apply to anychange of religion. But the whole charge was pure hypocrisy; for asthese men would have let the missionaries preach what religion theypleased if they had not dried up the source of their gains, so theyconceal the real cause of their rage under color of a zeal forreligion, and law, and good order: so Act 17:6;Act 17:7; Act 19:25;Act 19:27.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And teach customs,…. The Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions read in the singular number, “custom or law”; referring to the doctrine of salvation by Christ, in whose name the spirit of divination was cast out of the maid, and whom they took for a new deity; and so concluded that the apostle and his company were introducing a new religious law or custom, the worship of another God:
which are not lawful for us to receive, neither to observe, being Romans; for the city of Philippi was a Roman colony, and so the inhabitants of it called themselves Romans; or these men might be strictly such, who were transplanted hither; and with the Romans, it was not lawful to receive, observe, and worship, a new or strange deity, without the decree of the senate l.
l Tertull. Apolog. c. 5. Euseb. Eccl. Hist. l. 2. c. 2.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Customs which it is not lawful for us to receive, or to observe, being Romans ( ). Note the sharp contrast between “being Jews” in verse 20 and “being Romans” here. This pose of patriotism is all sound and fury. It is love of money that moves these “masters” far more than zeal for Rome. As Roman citizens in a colony they make full use of all their rights of protest. Judaism was a religio licita in the Roman empire, only they were not allowed to make proselytes of the Romans themselves. No Roman magistrate would pass on abstract theological questions (18:15), but only if a breach of the peace was made ( ) or the formation of secret sects and organizations. Evidently both of these last points are involved by the charges of “unlawful customs” by the masters who are silent about their real ground of grievance against Paul and Silas. (kin to , 1Co 15:33) is from , to be accustomed or used to a thing. The Romans granted toleration to conquered nations to follow their religious customs provided they did not try to win the Romans. But the Jews had made great headway to favour (the God-fearers) with increasing hatred also. Emperor worship had in store grave peril for both Jews and Christians. The Romans will care more for this than for the old gods and goddesses. It will combine patriotism and piety.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Being Romans. The Romans granted absolute toleration to conquered nations to follow their own religious customs, and took the gods of these countries under their protection. Otho, Domitian, Commodus, and Caracalla were zealous partisans of the worship of Isis; Serapis and Cybele were patronized at Rome; and in the reign of Nero the religious dilettante at Rome affected Judaism, and professed to honor the name of Moses and the sacred books. Poppaea, Nero’s consort, was their patroness, and Seneca said, “the Jewish faith is now received on every hand. The conquered have given laws to the conquerors.” On the other hand, there were laws which forbade the introduction of strange deities among the Romans themselves. In 186 B. C., when stringent measures were taken by the government for the repression of Bacchanalian orgies in Rome, one of the consuls, addressing an assembly of the people, said : “How often in the ages of our fathers was it given in charge to the magistrates to prohibit the performance of any foreign religious rites; to banish strolling sacrificers and soothsayers from the forum, the circus, and the city; to search for and burn books of divination; and to abolish every mode of sacrificing that was not conformable to the Roman practice” (Livy, 39, 16) It was contrary to strict Roman law for the Jews to propagate their opinions among the Romans, though they might make proselytes of other nations.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “And teach customs,” (kai katangellousin ethe) “And advocate customs or ethics,” a code of conduct they espouse, that believers should follow the morals, ethics, and doctrines of Christ in separated living, Luk 9:43; Rom 12:1-2; 1Co 6:19-20; 1Jn 2:15-17.
2) “Which are not lawful for us to receive,” (a ouk eksestin hemin paradechesthai) “Which is not lawful (existing) for us to embrace,” a standard of conduct that is just not for us to emulate or espouse. This charge was pure hypocrisy- they really cared not what, they preached or how they worshipped, so long as it did not dry up the source of their silver or gold, demonstrating that the “love of money is the root of all (all kinds of) evil,” 1Ti 6:10.
3) “Neither to observe, being Romans.” (oude poiein Romaiois) “Not at all to do as Romans,” to hold our reputation as Romans. Why? Because their code of conduct was one of sensual behavior, patterned after the philosophy that truth and good for each was to do what brought each the greatest degree of pleasure or sensual gratification, without regards for moral consequences. This was the “humanism” concept of many that day, as it still is of many today. These “losers of gain” from the healed damsel, their major investment, sought to hide their religion, law, and good order, see also Act 17:5-9; Act 19:23; Act 19:29.
CUSTOMS – – – NOT LAWFUL
Every city had its own special protecting deities; to bring into it a new worship was an invasion which the people were as ready to resent as the magistrates to punish. Observe that in the superstitious city of Philippi these prejudices were easily aroused, but not in the philosophical and skeptical city of Athens, nor in the commercial city of Corinth (Act 17:1 to Act 18:28). “How often in the ages of our fathers was it given in charge to the magistrates, to prohibit the performance of any foreign religious rites; to banish strolling sacrificers and soothsayers from the forum, the circus, and the city; to search for, and burn, books of divination; and to abolish every mode of sacrificing that was not conformable to the Roman practice.”
(Livy, B. 39, ch. 14) -Abbott.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
−
21. Ordinances which. They lean to a prejudice, lest the cause should come to be disputed; as the Papists deal with us at this day, this was decreed in a General Council; it is a more ancient and common opinion, than that is may be called in question; custom hath long time approved this; this hath been established by consent more than a thousand years ago. But to what end tend all these things, save only that they may rob the Word of God of all authority? They make boast of man’s decrees, but in the mean season they leave no place at all for the laws of God. We may see only this place what force these prejudices ought to have. The laws of the Romans were excellent, but religion doth depend upon the Word of God alone. Therefore in this matter we must take great heed, that men being brough under, the authority of God alone do prevail, and that he make all things which in the world are excellent subject to him. −
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(21) And teach customs.The word is used as including ritual as well as social habits, and seems to have been specially used of the whole system of Jewish life. (See Notes on Act. 6:14; Act. 15:1; Act. 21:21.)
Being Romans.The people of Philippi, as a colonia, had a right to claim the title of Roman citizens, which could not have been claimed by those who were merely inhabitants of a Greek city, such as Thessalonica or Corinth. (See Note on Act. 16:12.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
21. Customs not lawful Roman law did by most solemn sanctions decree that to the magistrates it should pertain to forbid all foreign rites, and banish all priestlings, ( sacrificulos,) and prophets or preachers, from the forum, circus, or city; and should abolish every sacrificial institute not established by ancient Roman custom. All who imported new or unrecognised religions, whether in doctrine or ceremony, by which men’s minds were disturbed, should be punished, the nobler by banishment, the humbler by death. Such was the law our apostles were bound to face.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Act 16:21. And teach customs which are not lawful, &c. Tertullian and Eusebius assert, that the Romans had an ancient law, which forbad the worship of new deities without the permission of the senate; and it is plain from Livy, that, as often as it was violated, it was publicly vindicated by the authority of the state. It is remarkable, that Tully, in his “Book of Laws,” gives us the very law in question: The sense of it is to this effect: “No man shall worship the gods clandestinely, or have them separately to himself; nor shall any new and foreign god be worshipped by individuals, till such god hath been legally approved of, and tolerated by the magistrates.” If the plea of these Gentiles be founded upon this law, as undoubtedly it was, the inferences they drew from it were generally acknowledged. The comment which the great author just quoted has given us on this law, not only supports this assertion, but seems to be the same: “For each man to have his gods (says he) in peculiar, whether new or stranger-gods, without public allowance, tends to defeat and confound religion:” and what was that, but the same as the miserable plea of their troubling the city exceedingly? But the letter of Mecaenas to Augustus, in Dion Cassius, sets this matter in a stronger light. According to him, “The introducing a new religion, or a new god, if indulged, would indispose men toward the magistrate, and make them less fond of the civil and religious constitutions of their country; from whence factions and confederacies against the state would arise.” The apostle’s enemies seem to lay great stress upon their being Romans; and the reason of their doing so, appears, from what we have observed, that the Romans were remarkable for not introducing into their public or established worship any new rites, though the Grecians did. This difference was founded on the different genius and origin of the two people; for Rome rising on her own foundation, independent on, and unrelated to any other state, and highly possessed with the enthusiasm of distinction and empire, would naturally esteem her tutelary idol gods as her own peculiar deities, and therefore would reject all foreign mixtures. On the contrary, the Grecian states, related to, and dependent on each other, would more easily admit of an association of their national idol deities; yet we must not hence conclude, that the introduction of a new public worship was allowed even in the Grecian states: it was permitted, but not without the licence of the civil magistrates. Plato has recorded the same law as we quoted from Cicero; and it is further remarkable, that the crime for which Socrates was brought to his trial, and capitally condemned, was the introducing of new deities. But the apostles went further; theycarried the pretensions of the Christian religion so high, that they claimed the title of the only true one for it; and, not stopping here, they urged a necessity for all men to forsake their national religions, and embrace the gospel. What true fortitude did they display through grace! and how exactly similar is the plea of persecutors in all ages! A Socrates must die on this ground in the Heathen world; and an infinitely greater than Socrates must be crucified as a slave on the same plea! Let the faithful confessors of Christ glory when honoured with the same treatment on the same plea, whether from Heathens, Papists, or Protestants.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
21 And teach customs, which are not lawful for us to receive, neither to observe, being Romans.
Ver. 21. Neither to observe, &c. ] An ordinary thing to oppose the placits and devices of men to the truth of God.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
21. ] “Dio Cassius tells us that Mcenas gave the following advice to Augustus: , and the reason is alleged, viz. that such innovations lead to secret associations, conspiracies, and cabals, .” (C. and H. i. p. 356.) So Julius Paulus, Sentent. v. 21. 2, cited by Wetst., ‘Qui novas et usu vel ratione incognitas religiones inducunt, ex quibus animi hominum moveantur, honestiores deportantur, humiliores capite premuntur.’
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 16:21 . : religious customs here; the charge ostensibly put forward was really that of introducing a religio illicita, licita as it was for the Jews themselves. No doubt the fact that they were Jews presented in itself no ground of accusation, but their Jewish nationality would suggest the kind of customs with the introduction of which it would be easy to charge them, e.g. , circumcision. The introduction of Jewish habits and mode of life included under , cf. Act 6:14 , Act 21:21 , would upset the whole social system, so that here, as on other occasions, the missionaries suffered from being identified with their Jewish countrymen. . : Wetstein, in loco; Marquardt, Rm. Staatsrecht , iii., 70, and see preceding verse, cf. Act 15:5 , Act 21:21 . In LXX, cf. Exo 23 . : in natural contrast (at the end of the sentence) to the despised Jews: as inhabitants of a Roman colonia they could lay claim to the proud title. On the force of and see Alford’s note in loco.
teach = proclaim. Same as “shew” (Act 16:17).
customs. Greek. ethos. See note on Act 6:14.
are = it is.
receive. Greek. paradechomai. Only here, Act 22:18. Mar 4:20. 1Ti 5:19. Heb 12:6.
neither. Greek. oude.
observe = do. being. Greek. eimi. Note the distinction. These men, being Jews to begin with . . . us who are Romans, as is well known.
21. ] Dio Cassius tells us that Mcenas gave the following advice to Augustus:- , and the reason is alleged, viz. that such innovations lead to secret associations, conspiracies, and cabals, . (C. and H. i. p. 356.) So Julius Paulus, Sentent. v. 21. 2, cited by Wetst., Qui novas et usu vel ratione incognitas religiones inducunt, ex quibus animi hominum moveantur, honestiores deportantur, humiliores capite premuntur.
Act 16:21. , customs) The world has either admitted, or adopted, all the dogmas of all the philosophers; but this is the characteristic of the truth of the Gospel, that it has in it something singularly both hostile to and hated by human corruption.- , which not) But is it lawful to hold fast ungodly customs?-, being Romans) A frequent objection of the community of the world against the kingdom of GOD. Even in our days Romanism is repugnant to (opposes) Paul.
Act 26:3, Jer 10:3
Reciprocal: Exo 5:4 – wherefore Est 3:8 – their laws Mat 2:3 – he Luk 23:2 – perverting Act 16:12 – a colony Act 17:7 – and these Act 24:5 – we have Act 28:22 – for
Act 16:21. These men, being Jews, Act 16:21. Teach customs which are not lawful for us to observe, being Romans. It was no very easy matter for these angry men to formulate their complaint against Paul and Silas, so they had recourse to the favourite accusation against men of a strange race and nationalitythey charged them with attempting to stir up political disturbances. It was the old charge of the Jews against the Lord, and many times it was revived with success in the case of His chief followers. This false accusation procured for Paul his long Roman imprisonment, and in the end brought him to a bloody death. The accusation, Calvin, quoted by Gloag, strikingly remarks, was craftily composed: on the one hand they boast of the name of Romans, than which no name was more honourable; on the other hand they excite hatred against the apostles and bring them into contempt by calling them Jews, which name was at that time infamous (they had lately been banished from Rome by the Emperor Claudius); for as regards religion the Romans had less affinity to the Jews than to any other nation.
Judaism was a religio licita sanctioned for the Jews, but the Roman policy by no means allowed this strange eastern faith to be propagated among the Roman peoples.
A severe law, if not in force at this time, certainly enacted shortly after, sternly forbade any one not a Jew undergoing the rite of circumcision. Any citizen of Rome who was circumcised was liable to perpetual exile and the confiscation of his goods. A master who allowed his slaves to submit themselves to this rite exposed himself to a like penalty. The surgeon who circumcised was to be put to death. Even a Jew who caused his slaves who were not Jews to be circumcised was guilty of a capital offence. Gentle and tolerant though the policy of the Empire on tie whole was to foreign religions, still if the votaries of a foreign religion showed themselves in earnest and wishful to convert others to their faith, at once the state regarded such men as public enemies.
It was this jealous feeling which the enemies of the Christians, fully conscious of, so often and so easily aroused against Christ and His great followers.
It should be observed how, in the words of the accusation here, the Jew, the member of an obnoxious sect, is placed in strong opposition to the Roman, the citizen of the mighty, victorious world empire.
See notes on verse 19
16:21 {13} And teach customs, which are not lawful for us to receive, neither to observe, being Romans.
(13) It is an argument of the devil to use the authority of ancestors, though not distinguishing exactly which ancestors.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes