Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 24:11
Because that thou mayest understand, that there are yet but twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship.
11. because that thou mayest understand ] Rev. Ver. taking a slightly different reading, “Seeing that thou canst take knowledge.” The Apostle means that it was easy to find evidence about all that had happened in such a short space of time. Beside which Felix’s knowledge of Jewish customs would tell him that this was just the time at which foreign Jews came to Jerusalem.
that there are yet but twelve days ] The Rev. Ver. has the more modern English, which is also closer to the Greek, “that it is not more than twelve days.” The time may be accounted for thus: the day of St Paul’s arrival, the interview with James on the second day, five days may be given to the separate life in the temple during the vow, then the hearing before the council, next day the conspiracy, the tenth day St Paul reached Csarea, and on the thirteenth day (which leaves five days (Act 24:1), as Jews would reckon from the conspiracy to the hearing in Csarea) St Paul is before Felix. See Farrar’s St Paul, ii. 338 (note).
since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship ] The Rev. Ver. gets rid of the antiquated English by rendering, “since I went up to worship at Jerusalem.” But the A. V. gives more of the emphasis which St Paul intended to lay on the object of his visit. He went on purpose to worship. Was it likely that he would try to profane the temple? And the verb which he uses expresses all the lowly adoration common among Orientals. The Apostle probably chose it for this reason. He would have Felix know that it was in a most reverent frame of mind that he came to the feast.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Because that thou mayest understand – Greek: Thou being able to know. That is, he could understand or know by taking the proper evidence. Paul does not mean to say that Felix could understand the case because he had been many years a judge of that nation. That fact would qualify him to judge correctly, or to understand the customs of the Jews. But the fact that he himself had been but twelve days in Jerusalem, and had been orderly and peaceable there, Felix could ascertain only by the proper testimony. The first part of Pauls defense Act 24:11-13 consists in an express denial of what they alleged against him.
Are yet but twelve days – Beza reckons these twelve days in this manner: The first was that on which he came to Jerusalem, Act 21:15. The second he spent with James and the apostles, Act 21:18. Six days were spent in fulfilling his vow, Act 21:21, Act 21:26. On the ninth day the tumult arose, being the seventh day of his vow, and on this day he was rescued by Lysias, Act 21:27; Act 22:29. The tenth day he was before the Sanhedrin, Act 22:30; Act 23:10. On the eleventh the plot was laid to take his life, and on the same day, at evening, he was removed to Caesarea. The days on which he was confined at Caesarea are not enumerated, since his design in mentioning the number of days was to show the improbability that in that time he had been engaged in producing a tumult; and it would not be pretended that he had been so engaged while confined in a prison at Caesarea. The defense of Paul here is, that but twelve days elapsed from the time that he went to Jerusalem until he was put under the custody of Felix; and that during so short a time it was wholly improbable that he would have been able to excite sedition.
For to worship – This further shows that the design of Paul was not to produce sedition. He had gone up for the peaceful purpose of devotion, and not to produce riot and disorder. That this was his design in going to Jerusalem, or at least a part of his purpose, is indicated by the passage in Act 20:16. It should be observed, however, that our translation conveys an idea which is not necessarily in the Greek that this was the design of his going to Jerusalem. The original is, Since I went up to Jerusalem worshipping proskuneson; that is, he was actually engaged in devotion when the tumult arose. But his main design in going to Jerusalem was to convey to his suffering countrymen there the benefactions of the Gentile churches. See Act 24:17; Rom 15:25-26.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 11. There are yet but twelve days] This is his reply to their charge of sedition; the improbability of which is shown from the short time he had spent in Jerusalem, quite insufficient to organize a sedition of any kind; nor could a single proof be furnished that he had attempted to seduce any man, or unhinge any person from his allegiance by subtle disputations, either in the temple, the synagogues, or the city. So that this charge necessarily fell to the ground, self-confuted, unless they could bring substantial proof against him, which he challenges them to do.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
That thou mayest understand, either by what thou hast heard already, or by what the witnesses, when examined, will declare.
There are yet but twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem; there were but twelve days since Pauls coming to Jerusalem; seven of them he had spent there, until the time of his purification was accomplished; and the other five days he had been in custody, and at Caesarea: by which St. Paul proves how unlikely it was, that in so short a time he, being a stranger in those parts, should raise any tumults.
For to worship; he being so far from designing any mischief, that he only intended to worship God.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
11. thou mayest understandcansteasily learn.
that there are yet but twelvedays since I went up to Jerusalemnamely, 1. The day of hisarrival in Jerusalem (Ac21:15-17); 2. The interview with James (Ac21:18-26); 3. The assumption of the vow (Ac21:26); 4, 5, 6. Continuance of the vow, interrupted by thearrest (Ac 21:27, c.) 7.Arrest of Paul (Ac 21:27); 8.Paul before the Sanhedrim (Act 22:30;Act 23:1-10); 9. Conspiracyof the Jews and defeat of it (Ac23:12-24), and despatch of Paul from Jerusalem on the evening ofthe same day (Act 23:23; Act 23:31);10, 11, 12, 13. The remaining period referred to (Ac24:1) [MEYER]. Thisshort period is mentioned to show how unlikely it was that he shouldhave had time to do what was charged against him.
for to worshipa verydifferent purpose from that imputed to him.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Because that thou mayest understand,…. By what Paul now asserted, and by the witnesses which he could produce to certify the truth of it:
that there are yet but twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship; that is, from the time that he went up from Caesarea to Jerusalem, to the present time, in which he stood before Felix, pleading his own cause; which may be reckoned, thus, he came in one day from Caesarea to Jerusalem, Ac 21:16 the next day he visited James and the elders, Ac 21:18 on the third day he purified himself in the temple, Ac 21:26 where he was taken and used ill by the Jews; on the fourth day, he was brought before the sanhedrim, and defended himself, Ac 22:30 on the fifth day forty Jews conspire to take away his life, Ac 23:11, on the sixth day he came to Caesarea, being sent there by Lysias, Ac 23:32 and five days after this, which make eleven, Ananias, and the elders, with Tertullus, came down to accuse him; and this day was the twelfth, on which his trial came on. And of these twelve days he was a prisoner nine, and therefore could not have done so much mischief, and stirred up so much sedition as was insinuated; and in opposition to the charge of profaning the temple, he observes that he came up to Jerusalem to “worship”; namely, at the feast of Pentecost.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Seeing that thou canst take knowledge ( ). Genitive absolute again. The same word and form () used by Tertullus, if in Greek, in verse 8 to Felix. Paul takes it up and repeats it.
Not more than twelve days ( ). Here (than) is absent without change of case to the ablative as usually happens. But this idiom is found in the Koine (Robertson, Grammar, p. 666).
Since (‘ ). Supply , “from which day.”
To worship (). One of the few examples of the future participle of purpose so common in the old Attic.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “Because that thou mayest understand,” (dunamenou sou epignonai) “As you are able to know fully,” you can easily understand or verify.
2) “That there are yet but twelve days,” (hoti ou pleious eisin moi hemerai dodeka) “That there are, (exist) or have been no more than twelve days,” less than two weeks, as follows: First, the day of his arrival in Jerusalem, Act 21:15; Act 21:17; Second, his interview day with James, Act 21:18; Third, that of his vow, Act 21:26; The fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh day of his vow ending in his arrest, Act 21:27; Eighth, appearance before the Sanhedrin; Ninth that of conspiracy, Act 23:12; Tenth, the dispatch of Paul from Jerusalem to Caesarea, Act 23:23-31, and the remaining period referred to Act 23:33; Act 24:1, to show how unlikely he had had time to do all that was alleged against him.
3) “Since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship.” (ap’ es aneben proskuneson eis lerousalem) “Since (when) I went up into Jerusalem worshipping,” a very different purpose from that motive imputed to him by his accusers. Would a man who had gone to a place for worship, maliciously profane the peace? He would have Felix know that he had gone to the feast in a very reverent frame of mind, to worship “in spirit and in truth,” Joh 4:24, as well as to carry alms to his own nation, Rom 15:25-26.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
−
11. To worship. First, it is certain that he came for other causes, and he will afterward confess that this was the chief, that he might bring alms for the sustentation of the brethren. But we may well excuse him, because it was not of necessity that he should give an account of his coming; only he meant, by the way, to excuse himself of corrupt religion. Wherefore, though he came to Jerusalem for some other cause, yet this is always true, that he came with no other mind, but to profess himself to be a worshipper of God, and to approve the holiness of the temple by his worshipping. The other question is more hard, how he saith that he came to worship, seeing the religion of the temple was already abolished, and all difference of the temple − (575) taken away? I answer in this place likewise, that though he do not make his purpose known, yet he doth not lie or dissemble. For the faithful servants of Christ were not forbidden to worship in the temple, so they did not tie holiness to the place, but did lift up pure hands freely without making choice of places ( 1Ti 2:8). It was lawful for Paul to enter into the temple after he was come to Jerusalem, that he might make his godliness known, and there to use the solemn rites of the worship of God, because he was void of superstition; so he did not offer any propitiatory sacrifices which were contrary to the gospel. Therefore religion did not compel him to come to Jerusalem according to the appointment of the law, as if the sanctuary were the face of God as in times past; yet he doth not abhor the external worship which was unto men a testimony of godliness. −
(575) −
“
Omne tempii discrimen,” all distinction or temple.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(11) I went up to Jerusalem for to worship.This was, by implication, St. Pauls answer to the charge of the attempted profanation. One who had come to worship was not likely to be guilty of the crime alleged against him.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
11. Because On the first charge, namely, of SEDITION, Paul takes the twelve days of which the present witnesses could testify of their own knowledge, and declares what his conduct was. Because that depends on I do answer.
To Jerusalem to worship Positively Paul now states his conduct to be that of a loyal Jew going to the religious capital, and his object being to worship there at the great national festival of the Passover. Negatively, he goes on to deny anything seditious, whether in temple, in popular assembly in any of the many synagogues, or in the streets of the city.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Act 24:11 . Paul adds a more special reason subordinate to the general one (Act 24:10 ), for his . Since he had returned from abroad only twelve days ago, and accordingly the ground of facts on which they wished him condemned ( , comp. Act 21:28 ) was still quite new, the procurator, with his long judicial experience among the Jewish people, could the less avoid the most thorough examination of the matter.
] without , which Elz. has as a gloss. See on Act 4:22 .
] from the day on which ( , sc. , comp. on Act 1:2 ; Act 1:22 ) I had come up. This is the day of the accomplished , the day of the arrival , not of the departure from Caesarea (Wieseler). Comp. Act 11:2 ; Khner, 444; Winer, p. 258 [E. T. 343]. As to the reckoning of the twelve days , it is to be observed: (1) That by the present the inclusion of the days already spent at Caesarea is imperatively required. Hence the assumption of Heinrichs, Hildebrand, and others is to be rejected as decidedly erroneous: “Dies, quibus P. jam Caesareae fuerat, non numerantur; ibi enim (!!) in custodia tumultum movere non poterat” (Kuinoel). (2) That permits us to regard as the current day on which the discussion occurred, either the twelfth or the (not yet elapsed) thirteenth; as, however, Paul wished to express as short a period as possible, the latter view is to be preferred. There accordingly results the following calculation:
I.
Day of arrival in Jerusalem, Act 21:15-17 .
II. Meeting with James, Act 21:18 ff. III. Undertaking of the Nazarite vow and offerings, Act 21:26 . IV. V. The seven days’ time of offering broken off by the arrest, Act 21:27 . VI. VII. Arrest of the apostle, Act 21:27 ff. VIII. Paul before the Sanhedrim, Act 22:30 , Act 23:1-10 . IX. Jewish conspiracy and its disclosure, Act 23:12 ff. On the same day Paul, before midnight, is brought away from Jerusalem, Act 23:23 ; Act 23:31 . X. . . ., Act 24:1 . XI. XII. XIII. The current day. It further serves to justify this calculation: (1) that it sufficiently agrees with the vague statement in Act 21:27 : , to place the arrest on the fifth day of that week; (2) that, as terminus a quo for , Act 24:1 , the ninth day may not only be assumed generally (because the immediately preceding section of the narrative, Act 23:31 ff., commences with the departure of Paul from Jerusalem), but is also specially indicated by the connection , inasmuch as this . so corresponds to the , Act 23:32 , that there is presented for both statements of time one and the same point of commencement, namely, the day on which the convoy (after nine in the evening) left Jerusalem. Anger ( de temp. rat . p. 110) deviates from this reckoning in the two points, that he places as the first of the five days, Act 24:1 , the day of the arrival at Caesarea; and he does not include at all in the reckoning the day on which Paul came to Jerusalem (because Paul reached it, perhaps, only after sunset). But the former is unnecessary (see above), and the latter would not only be at variance with Paul’s own words, . ., Act 24:11 (by which the day of arrival is included), but also would bring the reckoning of the apostle into contradiction with Act 21:17-18 ( ). Wieseler, p. 103 f., and on Gal . p. 588, has reckoned the days in an entirely different manner but in connection with his opinion (not to be approved) that the in Act 21:27 are to be understood of the Pentecostal week namely: two days for the journey to Jerusalem; the third day, interview with James; the fourth , his arrest in the temple (Pentecost); the fifth , the sitting of the Sanhedrim; the sixth , his removal to Caesarea; the seventh , his arrival there; the twelfth , the departure of Ananias from Jerusalem, Act 24:1 ; the thirteenth , the hearing before Felix.
] thus with quite an innocent and legally religious design.
.] (see the critical remarks), belongs to .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
11 Because that thou mayest understand, that there are yet but twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship.
Ver. 11. There are yet but twelve days ] And therefore in so short a time I could surely do no such great matters as they charge me with.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
11. ] The point of this seems to be, that Felix having been so long time a judge among the Jews, must be well able to search into and adjudicate on an offence whose whole course was comprised within so short a period.
The twelve days may be thus made out: 1. his arrival in Jerusalem, ch. Act_21:15 to Act_17:2 . his interview with James, ib. Act 21:18 ff. Act 21:3 . his taking on him the vow, ib. 26; 3 7. the time of the vow, interrupted by 7. his apprehension, ch. Act 21:27 ; Act 8 . his appearance before the Sanhedrim, ch. Act 22:30 ff; Act 9 . his departure from Jerusalem (at night); and so to the 13th, the day now current, which was the 5th inclusive from his leaving Jerusalem. This, which is also De Wette and Meyer’s arrangement, is far more natural than that of Kuin., Olsh., Heinr., &c., who suppose that the days which he had already spent at Csarea are not to be counted , because his raising disturbances while in custody was out of the question. The view advocated by Wieseler (Chron. der Apost.-gesch. pp. 103 ff.), that Paul was apprehended on the very day of his appearance with the men in the temple, I cannot but regard, notwithstanding his arguments in its favour, as inconsistent with the text of ch. Act 21:26-27 ; as also his idea that the Apostle did not take the vow on himself : the expression clearly negativing the latter supposition; and , Act 24:26 , being manifestly, unless to one warped by a hypothesis, identical with of Act 24:27 . See note there. I mention this here , because these suppositions materially affect his arrangement of the twelve days, which he gives thus: 2nd, from Csarea to Jerusalem; 3rd, interview with Jas 4 th, (Pentecost) visit to the temple with the Nazarites, and apprehension ; 5th, before the Sanhedrim; 6th, departure from Jerusalem; 7th, arrival in Csarea; then, five days from that (but see note on Act 24:1 ), Ananias, &c., leave Jerusalem (but how does this appear from Act 24:1 ? must surely denote their arrival at Csarea, where the narrator, or, at all events, the locus of the history is); 13th, arrival of Ananias, &c., at Csarea, and hearing (improbable) of Paul. So that the above hypotheses are not the only reasons for rejecting Wieseler’s arrangement.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 24:11 . . : “seeing that thou canst take knowledge” ( .), R.V., the shortness of the time would enable Felix to gain accurate knowledge of the events which had transpired, and the Apostle may also imply that the time was too short for exciting a multitude to sedition. . : on see Act 24:1 and critical note. The number is evidently not a mere round number, as Overbeck thinks, but indicates that Paul laid stress upon the shortness of the period, and would not have included incomplete days in his reckoning. It is not necessary therefore to include the day of the arrival in Jerusalem ( points to the day as something past, Bethge), or the day of the present trial; probably the arrival in Jerusalem was in the evening, as it is not until the next day that Paul seeks out James (Wendt). The first day of the twelve would therefore be the entry in to James, the second the commencement of the Nazirite vow, the sixth that of the apprehension of Paul towards the close of the seven days, Act 21:27 ; the seventh the day before the Sanhedrim, the eighth the information of the plot and (in the evening) Paul’s start for Csarea, the ninth the arrival in Csarea; and, reckoning from the ninth five days inclusively, the day of the speech of Tertullus before Felix would be the thirteenth day, i.e. , twelve full days; cf. Act 20:6 , where in the seven days are reckoned the day of arrival and the day of departure (Wendt, in loco ). Meyer on the other hand reckons the day of St. Paul’s arrival in Jerusalem as the first day, and the five days of Act 24:1 from his departure from Jerusalem for Csarea. For other modes of reckoning see Wendt’s note, Farrar, St. Paul , ii., 338, Alford, Rendall, and Lumby, in loco . Weiss points out that it is simplest to add the seven days of Act 21:27 and the five days of Act 24:1 , but we cannot by any means be sure that Act 21:27 implies a space of full seven days: “varie numerum computant; sed simplicissimum est sine dubio, e septem diebus, Act 21:27 , et quinque, Act 24:1 , eum colligere,” so Blass, but see his note on the passage. , cf. Act 20:16 , the purpose was in itself an answer to each accusation reverence not insurrection, conformity not heresy, worship not profanity. “ To worship I came , so far was I from raising sedition,” Chrys. There were other reasons no doubt for St. Paul’s journey, as he himself states, Act 24:17 , cf. Rom 15:25 , but he naturally places first the reason which would be a defence in the procurator’s eyes. Overbeck and Wendt contend that the statement is not genuine, and that it is placed by the author of Acts in St. Paul’s mouth, but see on the other hand Weiss, in loco . It seems quite captious to demand that Paul should explain to the procurator all the reasons for his journey, or that the fact that he came to worship should exclude the fact that he also came to offer alms.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
mayest = canst.
understand. Greek. ginosko. App-132, but the texts read epiginosko.
yet but = not (Greek. ou. App-105.) more than.
twelve days: i.e. since Act 21:17.
since = from (Greek. apo. App-104.) which.
to. Greek. en, but the texts read eis, unto.
for. Omit.
worship. Greek. proskuneo. App-137.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
11. ] The point of this seems to be, that Felix having been so long time a judge among the Jews, must be well able to search into and adjudicate on an offence whose whole course was comprised within so short a period.
The twelve days may be thus made out: 1. his arrival in Jerusalem, ch. Act 21:15 to Act 17:2. his interview with James, ib. Act 21:18 ff. 3. his taking on him the vow, ib. 26; 3-7. the time of the vow, interrupted by-7. his apprehension, ch. Act 21:27; Acts 8. his appearance before the Sanhedrim, ch. Act 22:30 ff; Acts 9. his departure from Jerusalem (at night); and so to the 13th, the day now current, which was the 5th inclusive from his leaving Jerusalem. This, which is also De Wette and Meyers arrangement, is far more natural than that of Kuin., Olsh., Heinr., &c., who suppose that the days which he had already spent at Csarea are not to be counted, because his raising disturbances while in custody was out of the question. The view advocated by Wieseler (Chron. der Apost.-gesch. pp. 103 ff.), that Paul was apprehended on the very day of his appearance with the men in the temple, I cannot but regard, notwithstanding his arguments in its favour, as inconsistent with the text of ch. Act 21:26-27; as also his idea that the Apostle did not take the vow on himself: the expression clearly negativing the latter supposition; and , Act 24:26, being manifestly, unless to one warped by a hypothesis, identical with of Act 24:27. See note there. I mention this here, because these suppositions materially affect his arrangement of the twelve days, which he gives thus: 2nd, from Csarea to Jerusalem; 3rd, interview with James 4 th, (Pentecost) visit to the temple with the Nazarites, and apprehension; 5th, before the Sanhedrim; 6th, departure from Jerusalem; 7th, arrival in Csarea; then, five days from that (but see note on Act 24:1), Ananias, &c., leave Jerusalem (but how does this appear from Act 24:1? must surely denote their arrival at Csarea, where the narrator, or, at all events, the locus of the history is); 13th, arrival of Ananias, &c., at Csarea, and hearing (improbable) of Paul. So that the above hypotheses are not the only reasons for rejecting Wieselers arrangement.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Act 24:11. , twelve) Deducting the five days, of which Act 24:1 speaks, there were seven days: and concerning these seven see ch. Act 21:17-18; Act 21:26-27 (the seven days of purification were nearly ended , when he was made prisoner), wherein the verb should be attended to; and the sense is, When these things were being done, which Paul had taken in hand, Act 24:26 : furthermore see ch. Act 22:30, Act 23:11-12; Act 23:32.- I went up) from Cesarea. Felix might have understood or known ( ) the fact from the Cesareans.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
but: Act 24:1, Act 21:18, Act 21:27, Act 22:30, Act 23:11, Act 23:23, Act 23:32, Act 23:33
to worship: Act 24:17, Act 21:26
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1
Act 24:11. But twelve days. The events to which Paul refers had occurred so recently, that it would be easy to find testimony to the contrary if any doubt was felt by Felix.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Act 24:11. Because that thou mayest understand, that there are yet. But twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship. The twelve days are best reckoned thus:
1st Day.Arrival at Jerusalem; meeting with James, the Lords brother, the head of the Christian Church at Jerusalem.
2d Day.Levitical purification, and first visit to the temple as a Nazarite pilgrim.
3d, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th Days.The period of the Nazarite ceremonies and offerings, closed with the attack on Paul by Asian pilgrims, and his subsequent arrest by Claudius Lysias.
8th Day.The apostle is arraigned before the Sanhedrim.
9th Day.In the castle of Antonia; the assassination plot; Paul leaves Jerusalem for Csarea, guarded by the military escort.
10th Day.The party arrives at Antipatris.
11th Day.The prisoner is delivered over to Felix in Csarea.
12th Day.At Csarea; in the judgment hall of Herod.
13th Day.Paul appears before the court of Felix.
This computation would allow for the statement of Act 24:1 : After five days, Ananias the high priest descended with the elders; and also for Pauls: Twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship. A good deal of time has been spent, we might even say wasted, in the calculation of these days, and how they were to be reckoned so as to justify the various notes as to time scattered up and down the narrative. These calculations, it should be remembered, are always rough onesnow part of a day is reckoned, now it is omitted. Nothing depends really on the exact harmony of such a recital. Like the other small chronological and geographical alleged discrepancies in these Acts, it is only the cavilling, hostile spirit seeking to find errors where none really exist, which finds difficulties in this noble and faithful record of the laying the foundation stories of Christianity. Paul prefaces his defence by stating his object in coming up to Jerusalem: it was to worship, and yet he was charged with profanity; but with this part of the accusation he proposed to deal later. He touches at first the point more likely to affect a Roman judge, the charge of stirring up sedition.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
See notes on verse 10
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Verse 11
Twelve days. In carefully reckoning the days enumerated in the course of the narrative, from the time of Paul’s arrival at Jerusalem, we make more than twelve, unless we consider the five mentioned Acts 24:1 as commencing, not at the time of Paul’s arrival at Cesarea, but at that of his apprehension by Lysias.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
In response to Tertullus’ first charge (Act 24:5), Paul said that since he had been in Jerusalem only 12 days he had not had time to be much of a pest.