On the morrow, because he would have known the certainty wherefore he was accused of the Jews, he loosed him from his bands, and commanded the chief priests and all their council to appear, and brought Paul down, and set him before them.
On the morrow, because he would have known the certainty wherefore he was accused of the Jews—Unable to torture Paul, the tribune seeks θὸ ἀσφαλὲς (to asphales, 'the certainty, reliable information') about the Jewish accusations (κατηγορεῖται, katēgoreitai, 'he is accused'). The phrase βουλόμενος γνῶναι (boulomenos gnōnai, 'wanting to know') shows genuine desire to understand the charges, which seem religious rather than criminal.
He loosed him from his bands, and commanded the chief priests and all their council to appear—The tribune ἔλυσε (elyse, 'released') Paul from chains and convened the Sanhedrin. Commanding (ἐκέλευσε, ekeleuse) Jewish leadership to assemble shows Roman authority over local religious courts. And brought Paul down, and set him before them—Paul transitions from Roman custody to a kind of legal hearing before the Sanhedrin, though still under Roman protection. This sets up Paul's strategic declaration 'I am a Pharisee' (23:6), which divides the council and further demonstrates the theological nature of the opposition.
Historical Context
The Sanhedrin was the highest Jewish court, composed of 71 members including chief priests (Sadducees), scribes, and elders (Pharisees). Rome allowed it jurisdiction over religious matters but retained control of capital punishment. The tribune's convening of the Sanhedrin was within his authority as garrison commander—he needed to determine if the charges against Paul were criminal (Roman jurisdiction) or religious (Jewish jurisdiction). This hearing (c. AD 57) becomes another opportunity for Paul to testify before Jewish leaders, fulfilling Jesus's prediction (Acts 9:15).
Questions for Reflection
How does the tribune's desire for 'certainty' about the charges contrast with the Jewish leaders' willingness to kill Paul without clear legal grounds?
What does Paul's movement from Roman military custody to the Sanhedrin hearing teach about God's sovereignty over all earthly authorities?
In what ways does this passage illustrate that opposition to the gospel is often fundamentally theological/spiritual rather than genuinely legal or ethical?
Related Resources
Explore related topics, people, and study resources to deepen your understanding of this passage.
Analysis & Commentary
On the morrow, because he would have known the certainty wherefore he was accused of the Jews—Unable to torture Paul, the tribune seeks θὸ ἀσφαλὲς (to asphales, 'the certainty, reliable information') about the Jewish accusations (κατηγορεῖται, katēgoreitai, 'he is accused'). The phrase βουλόμενος γνῶναι (boulomenos gnōnai, 'wanting to know') shows genuine desire to understand the charges, which seem religious rather than criminal.
He loosed him from his bands, and commanded the chief priests and all their council to appear—The tribune ἔλυσε (elyse, 'released') Paul from chains and convened the Sanhedrin. Commanding (ἐκέλευσε, ekeleuse) Jewish leadership to assemble shows Roman authority over local religious courts. And brought Paul down, and set him before them—Paul transitions from Roman custody to a kind of legal hearing before the Sanhedrin, though still under Roman protection. This sets up Paul's strategic declaration 'I am a Pharisee' (23:6), which divides the council and further demonstrates the theological nature of the opposition.