TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Acts 22:22–30. His three-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
Paul was going on with this account of himself, had shown them his commission to preach among the Gentiles without any peevish reflections upon the Jews, and we may suppose designed next to show how he was afterwards, by a special direction of the Holy Ghost at Antioch, separated to this service, how tender he was of the Jews, how respectful to them, and how careful to give them the precedency in all places whither he came, and to unite Jews and Gentiles in one body; and then to show how wonderfully God had owned him, and what good service had been done to the interest of God's kingdom among men in general, without damage to any of the true interests of the Jewish church in particular. But, whatever he designs to say, they resolve he shall say no more to them: They gave him audience to this word. Hitherto they had heard him with patience and some attention. But when he speaks of being sent to the Gentiles, though it was what Christ himself said to him, they cannot bear it, not so much as to hear the Gentiles named, such an enmity had they to them, and such a jealousy of them. Upon the mention of this, they have no manner of patience, but forget all rules of decency and equity; thus were they provoked to jealousy by those that were no people, Rom 10:19.
Now here we are told how furious and outrageous the people were against Paul, for mentioning the Gentiles as taken into the cognizance of divine grace, and so justifying his preaching among them.
I.They interrupted him, by lifting up their voice, to put him into confusion, and that nobody might hear a word he said.
Galled consciences kick at the least touch; and those who are resolved not to be rules by reason commonly resolve not to hear it if they can help it. And the spirit of enmity against the gospel of Christ commonly shows itself in silencing the ministers of Christ and his gospel, and stopping their mouths, as the Jews did Paul's here. Their fathers had said to the best of seers, See not, Isa 30:10. And so they to the best of speakers, Speak not. Forbear, wherefore shouldst thou be smitten? Ch2 25:16.
II.They clamoured against him as one that was unworthy of life, much more of liberty.
Without weighing the arguments he had urged in his own defence, or offering to make any answer to them, they cried out with a confused noise, "Away with such a fellow as this from the earth, who pretends to have a commission to preach to the Gentiles; why, it is not fit that he should live." Thus the men that have been the greatest blessings of their age have been represented not only as the burdens of the earth, but the plague of their generation. He that was worthy of the greatest honours of life is condemned as not worthy of life itself. See what different sentiments God and men have of good men, and yet they both agree in this that they are not likely to live long in this world. Paul says of the godly Jews that they were men of whom the world was not worthy, Heb 11:38. And therefore they must be removed, that the world may be justly punished with the loss of them. The ungodly Jews here say of Paul that it was not fit he should live; and therefore he must be removed, that the world may be eased of the burden of him, as of the two witnesses, Rev 11:10.
III.They went stark mad against Paul, and against the chief captain for not killing him immediately at their request, or throwing him as a pry into their teeth, that they might devour him (Act 22:23); as men whose reason was quite lost in passion, they cried out like roaring lions or raging bears, and howled like the evening wolves; they cast off their clothes with fury and violence, as much as to say that thus they would tear him if they could but come at him. Or, rather, they thus showed how ready they were to stone him; those that stoned Stephen threw off their clothes, Act 22:20. Or, they rent their clothes, as if he had spoken blasphemy; and threw dust into the air, in detestation of it; or signifying how ready they were to throw stones at Paul, if the chief captain would have permitted them. But why should we go about to give a reason for these experiences of fury, which they themselves could not account for? All they intended was to make the chief captain sensible how much they were enraged and exasperated at Paul, so that he could not do any thing to gratify them more than to let them have their will against him.
IV.The chief captain took care for his safety, by ordering him to be brought into the castle, Act 22:24.
A prison sometimes has been a protection to good men from popular rage. Paul's hour was not yet come, he had not finished his testimony, and therefore God raised up one that took care of him, when none of his friends durst appear on his behalf. Grant not, O Lord, the desire of the wicked.
V.He ordered him the torture, to force from him a confession of some flagrant crimes which had provoked the people to such an uncommon violence against him. He ordered that he should be examined by scourging (as now in some countries by the rack), that he might know wherefore they cried so against him. Herein he did not proceed fairly; he should have singled out some of the clamorous tumultuous complainants, and taken them into the castle as breakers of the peace, and should have examined them, and by scourging too, what they had to lay to the charge of a man that could give so good an account of himself, and did not appear to have done any thing worthy of death or of bonds. It was proper to ask them, but not at all proper to ask Paul, wherefore they cried so against him. He could tell that he had given them no just cause to do it; if there were any cause, let them produce it. No man is bound to accuse himself, though he be guilty, much less ought he to be compelled to accuse himself when he is innocent. Surely the chief captain did not know the Jewish nation when he concluded that he must needs have done something very bad whom they cried out against. Had they not just thus cried out against our Lord Jesus, Crucify him, crucify him, when they had not one word to say in answer to the judge's question, Why, what evil has he done? Is this a fair or just occasion to scourge Paul, that a rude tumultuous mob cry out against him, but cannot tell why or wherefore, and therefore he must be forced to tell?
VI.Paul pleaded his privilege as a Roman citizen, by which he was exempted from all trials and punishments of this nature (Act 22:25):
As they bound him with thongs, or leathern bands, to the whipping post, as they used to bind the vilest of malefactors in bridewell from whom they would extort a confession, he made no outcry against the injustice of their proceedings against an innocent man, but very mildly let them understand the illegality of their proceedings against him as a citizen of Rome, which he had done once before at Philippi after he had been scourged (Act 16:37), but here he makes use of it for prevention. He said to the centurion that stood by, "You know the law; pray is it lawful for you who are yourselves Romans to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned?" The manner of his speaking plainly intimates what a holy security and serenity of mind this good man enjoyed, not disturbed either with anger or fear in the midst of all those indignities that were done him, and the danger he was in. The Romans had a law (it was called lex Sempronia), that if any magistrate did chastise or condemn a freeman of Rome, indicta causa - without hearing him speak for himself, and deliberating upon the whole of his case, he should be liable to the sentence of the people, who were very jealous of their liberties. It is indeed the privilege of every man not to have wrong done him, except it be proved he has done wrong; as it is of every Englishman by Magna Charta not to be dis-seized of his life or freehold, but by a verdict of twelve men of his peers.
VII.The chief captain was surprised at this, and put into a fright.
He had taken Paul to be a vagabond Egyptian, and wondered he could speak Greek (ch. 21:37), but is much more surprised now he finds that he is as good a gentleman as himself. How many men of great worth and merit are despised because they are not known, are looked upon and treated as the offscouring of all things, when those that count them so, if they knew their true character, would own them to be of the excellent ones of the earth! The chief captain had centurions, under-officers, attending him, ch. 21:32. One of these reports this matter to the chief captain (Act 22:26): Take heed what thou doest, for this man is a Roman, and what indignity is done to him will be construed an offence against the majesty of the Roman people, as they loved to speak. They all knew what a value was put upon this privilege of the Roman citizens. Tully extols it in one of his orations against Verres, O nomen dulce libertatis, O jus eximium nostrae civitatis! O lex Porcia! O leges Semproniae; facinus est vincere Romanum civem, scelus verberare - O Liberty! I love thy charming name; and these our Porcian and Sempronian laws, how admirable! It is a crime to bind a Roman citizen, but an unpardonable one to beat him. "Therefore" (says the centurion) "let us look to ourselves; if this man be a Roman, and we do him any indignity, we shall be in danger to lose our commissions at least." Now,
1.The chief captain would be satisfied of the truth of this from his own mouth (Act 22:27): "Tell me, art thou a Roman? Art thou entitled to the privileges of a Roman citizen?" "Yes," says Paul, "I am;" and perhaps produced some ticket or instrument which proved it; for otherwise they would scarcely have taken his word.
2.The chief captain very freely compares notes with him upon this matter, and it appears that the privilege Paul had as a Roman citizen was of the two more honourable than the colonel's; for the colonel owns that his was purchased: "I am a freeman of Rome; but with a great sum obtained I this freedom, it cost me dear, how came you by it?" "Why truly," says Paul, "I was free-born." Some think he became entitled to this freedom by the place of his birth, as a native of Tarsus, a city privileged by the emperor with the same privileges that Rome itself enjoyed; others rather think it was by his father or grandfather having served in the war between Caesar and Antony, or some other of the civil wars of Rome, and being for some signal piece of service rewarded with a freedom of the city, and so Paul came to be free-born; and here he pleads it for his own preservation, for which end not only we may but we ought to use all lawful means.
3.This put an immediate stop to Paul's trouble. Those that were appointed to examine him by scourging quitted the spot; they departed from him (Act 22:29), lest they should run themselves into a snare. Nay, and the colonel himself, though we may suppose him to have a considerable interest, was afraid when he heard he was a Roman, because, though he had not beaten him, yet he had bound him in order to his being beaten. Thus many are restrained from evil practices by the fear of man who would not be restrained from them by the fear of God. See here the benefit of human laws and magistracy, and what reason we have to be thankful to God for them; for even when they have given no countenance nor special protection to God's people and ministers, yet, by the general support of equity and fair dealing between man and man, they have served to check the rage of wicked and unreasonable illegal men, who otherwise would know no bounds, and to say, Hitherto it shall come, but no further; here shall its proud waves by stayed. And therefore this service we owe to all in authority, to pray for them, because this benefit we have reason to expect from them, whether we have it or no, as long as we are quiet and peaceable - to live quiet and peaceable lives in all godliness and honesty, Ti1 2:1, Ti1 2:2.
4.The governor, the next day, brought Paul before the sanhedrim, Act 22:30. He first loosed him from his bands, that those might not prejudge his cause, and that he might not be charged with having pinioned a Roman citizen, and then summoned the chief priests and all their council to come together to take cognizance of Paul's case, for he found it to be a matter of religion, and therefore looked upon them to be the most proper judges of it. Gallio in this case discharged Paul; finding it to be a matter of their law, he drove the prosecutors from the judgement-seat (Act 18:16), and would not concern himself at all in it; but this Roman, who was a military man, kept Paul in custody, and appealed from the rabble to the general assembly. Now,
(1.)We may hope that hereby he intended Paul's safety, as thinking, if he were an innocent and inoffensive man, though the multitude might be incensed against him, yet the chief priests and elders would do him justice, and clear him; for they were, or should be, men of learning and consideration, and their court governed by rules of equity. When the prophet could find no good among the poorer sort of people, he concluded that it was because they knew not the way of the Lord, nor the judgments of their God, and promised himself that he should speed better among the great men, as the chief captain here did, but soon found himself disappointed there: these have altogether broken the yoke, and burst the bonds, Jer 5:4, Jer 5:5. But,
(2.)That which he is here said to aim at is the gratifying of his own curiosity: He would have known the certainty wherefore he was accused of the Jews. Had he sent for Paul to his own chamber, and talked freely with him, he might soon have learned from him that which would have done more than satisfy his enquiry, and which might have persuaded him to be a Christian. But it is too common for great men to affect to set that at a distance from them which might awaken their consciences, and to desire to have no more of the knowledge of God's ways than may serve them to talk of.
Historical interpretation
Historical Reception
3 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
"And as they bound him with thongs, Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman and uncondemned?" Paul lied not, God forbid: for he was a Roman. If there was nothing else, he would have been afraid to pretend this, lest he should be found out, and suffer a worse punishment. And observe he does not say it peremptorily, but, "Is it lawful for you?" The charges brought are two, both its being without examination, and his being a Roman. They held this as a great privilege, at that time: for they say that it was only from the time of Hadrian that all were named Romans, but of old it was not so. He would have been contemptible had he been scourged: but as it is, he puts them into greater fear than they him.
Had they scourged him, they would also have dismissed the whole matter, or even have killed him; but as it is, the result is not so. See how God permits many good results to be brought about quite in a human way, both in the case of the Apostles and of the rest of mankind. Mark how they suspected the thing to be a pretext, and that in calling himself a Roman, Paul lied: perhaps surmising this from his poverty.
However, the face cannot be designated as the right face and the left, but high rank can be either according to God or according to this world. Hence, it is as though the face were divided into the right cheek and the left, in order to signify that, whenever his becoming a Christian becomes an occasion of contempt in the case of any follower of Christ, he should be much more ready to be despised in his own person if he holds any of the honors of this world. Just as in the case of the apostle himself, when in his person people were persecuting the Christian denomination; if he then remained silent regarding the dignity which he held in the world, he would not have turned the other cheek to those who were striking him on the right cheek. But by saying, “I am a Roman citizen,” he was not unprepared to have them despise in his person the thing that he deemed of least value, when in his person they had despised a name so precious and salutary. Did he thereby endure in any less degree the chains which it was not lawful to place on Roman citizens? Or did he blame anyone for this injustice? Even though some people spared him on account of the title of Roman citizen, he did not on that account fail to offer them something to strike, for he yearned to correct by his own patience the perversity of those whom he saw to be honoring in his person the left portion rather than the right. The one thing to be considered is the spirit of kindness and clemency with which he acted toward those from whom he was suffering the injuries.
For the divine command made what seems shameful honorable. Thus the apostle called himself at one time a Pharisee and at another a Roman, not because he was afraid of death but because it was fair to do so in a fight. Likewise he appealed to Caesar upon learning of the Jews’ plot against him. He sent his sister’s son to the tribune to report the plots being hatched against him, not because he clung to this present life but in obedience to the divine law. For our Master certainly does not wish us to throw ourselves into obvious peril. This [Jesus] taught us not only with words but also through action, for more than once he avoided the murderous violence of the Jews.
Continue studying Acts 22:25 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
As preparations for a brutal scourging commence, the Apostle Paul strategically intervenes by asserting his Roman citizenship and the fundamental right to due process, challenging the legality of the centurion's actions. This pivotal moment not only averts an unlawful punishment but also sets the stage for Paul to appeal to higher Roman authorities, demonstrating his astute wisdom and God's sovereign protection in advancing the gospel.
Context
Literary Context
This verse immediately follows a chaotic sequence in Jerusalem. Paul, having been falsely accused and attacked by a Jewish mob in the temple courts, was rescued by the Roman chief captain, Claudius Lysias, who then sought to understand the cause of the uproar (Acts 21:27-36). Paul was granted permission to address the agitated crowd from the barracks stairs, speaking in Hebrew (Acts 21:37-40). However, his testimony, particularly the mention of his mission to the Gentiles, incited further rage, leading Lysias to order Paul to be brought into the barracks and examined by scourging to extract a confession (Acts 22:22-24). It is precisely as the soldiers are binding Paul for this interrogation that he interjects, revealing his Roman status and challenging the legality of their intended actions.
Historical & Cultural Context
Roman citizenship was a highly prized status, conferring significant legal protections and privileges throughout the Roman Empire. Among these, the most pertinent to Paul's situation was the Lex Porcia and Lex Sempronia, which prohibited the scourging of a Roman citizen. Furthermore, a Roman citizen had the right to a fair trial, the right to appeal to Caesar (known as provocatio ad Caesarem), and could not be condemned without due process. Scourging (Latin: flagellatio or verberatio) was a severe form of punishment, often a prelude to crucifixion, designed to inflict extreme pain and even death. It was typically reserved for slaves, non-citizens, or criminals convicted of serious offenses. The centurion, as a Roman officer, would have been acutely aware of these laws and the severe penalties for violating a citizen's rights, including potential execution for himself.
Key Themes
Paul's declaration in Acts 22:25 underscores several crucial themes. Firstly, it highlights the importance of legal rights and due process, demonstrating that even in a divinely guided mission, human legal frameworks can be utilized for protection and strategic advantage. Secondly, it showcases Paul's strategic wisdom and discernment; he does not reveal his citizenship immediately but at the critical juncture when his rights are about to be violated, thereby preventing an unlawful act and gaining an audience with Roman authorities. This aligns with the Lord's later assurance to Paul that he must testify in Rome (Acts 23:11). Thirdly, the incident reveals God's sovereign hand in protecting His servants and orchestrating events to fulfill His purposes. Paul's citizenship, though a secular status, becomes a providential tool in God's plan to bring the gospel to the highest echelons of the Roman Empire.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This verb, from πρό (pro, "before") and τείνω (teinō, "to stretch"), literally means "to stretch forth" or "to protend." In this context, it refers to the act of tying someone prostrate or stretching them out, specifically for the purpose of scourging. The imagery conveys the immediate, physical preparation for a brutal interrogation, emphasizing Paul's imminent danger.
Impersonally, this word means "it is right" or "it is permissible." It carries the weight of legality and moral propriety. Paul's use of this term is not a question seeking information but a direct challenge to the centurion's authority and actions, appealing to established Roman law and the concept of justice that was foundational to Roman governance.
This compound word, formed from the negative particle 'a' (ἀ) and a derivative of 'to condemn' (κατακρίνω), means "without (legal) trial" or "uncondemned." It is the crux of Paul's legal argument, asserting that he has not been formally accused, tried, or found guilty of any crime, making any form of punishment, especially scourging, a grave violation of his rights as a Roman citizen.
Verse Breakdown
"And as they bound him with thongs"
This clause sets the immediate scene, highlighting the physical act of preparation for scourging. The "thongs" (Greek: himás) refer to the leather straps or whips used for flogging, emphasizing the severity of the impending punishment. The implication is that the process had already begun, making Paul's intervention timely and critical.
"Paul said unto the centurion that stood by"
This identifies Paul's direct and authoritative address to the Roman officer in charge. The centurion, a commander of a hundred men, represented Roman authority and law. Paul's choice to speak to him directly, rather than to the common soldiers, indicates his understanding of the chain of command and his intent to appeal to a higher level of responsibility.
"Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned?"
This is the precise, penetrating question that halts the proceedings. It is a rhetorical question, not seeking an answer but asserting a legal truth. Paul combines two critical elements of his defense: his status as "a Roman" citizen and his state of being "uncondemned," meaning he had not received a legal trial or conviction. This question simultaneously challenges the centurion's authority, reminds him of Roman law, and asserts Paul's inviolable rights.
Literary Devices
The primary literary device at play in Acts 22:25 is the Rhetorical Question. Paul's inquiry, "Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned?", is not posed to elicit information, but rather to make a forceful assertion of legal principle and to challenge the centurion's actions directly. It functions as a powerful legal argument, compelling the centurion to acknowledge the illegality of his intent without Paul having to explicitly state, "You cannot scourge me." This direct, yet indirect, confrontation is highly effective. Additionally, there is an element of Irony present. The Roman authorities, representatives of a system priding itself on law and order, are on the verge of violating their own fundamental legal principles by punishing an uncondemned Roman citizen. Paul's question exposes this contradiction, highlighting the potential for injustice even within a structured legal system.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Paul's strategic use of his Roman citizenship in Acts 22:25 demonstrates a profound theological truth: God can use any means, including secular legal systems and personal status, to protect His servants and advance His kingdom purposes. Paul was not relying on his citizenship instead of God, but rather using it as a providential tool within God's larger plan. This incident underscores the importance of wisdom and discernment in navigating hostile environments, showing that faithfulness to Christ does not preclude intelligent engagement with the world's systems. It also highlights the biblical concept of justice and due process, principles that resonate throughout Scripture, emphasizing the value of human dignity and fair treatment, even for those accused. Ultimately, Paul's preservation here is not just for his personal safety but to enable his continued testimony, leading him closer to his ultimate goal of reaching Rome with the gospel.
Reflection and Application
Acts 22:25 offers profound insights for believers navigating a complex world. Paul's actions remind us that while our ultimate citizenship is in heaven, we are also citizens of earthly nations, and we have a responsibility to understand and, when necessary, utilize the legal rights and protections afforded to us. This is not about self-preservation at all costs, but about discerning how God might use our circumstances, including our civil status, to further His purposes and protect our ability to proclaim the gospel. Paul's wisdom in waiting for the precise moment to speak, and his clear, concise articulation of his rights, teaches us the importance of discernment, courage, and strategic thinking in the face of adversity. We are called to be "wise as serpents and innocent as doves" (Matthew 10:16), recognizing that God often works through ordinary means and human agency to accomplish His extraordinary plans. Our reliance on God's sovereignty should not lead to passivity, but to active, Spirit-led engagement with the realities of our world, always seeking to honor Christ and advance His kingdom.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Was Paul's Roman citizenship a common thing for Jews in his time?
While not every Jew was a Roman citizen, it was not exceptionally rare. Citizenship could be acquired through various means: by birth (if one's father was a citizen), through military service, or by purchase. Paul's family, being from Tarsus in Cilicia (a free city and a Roman provincial capital), likely acquired citizenship through one of these avenues, possibly through his ancestors' service or a grant to the city of Tarsus. Paul himself states in Acts 22:28 that he was "free born," indicating he inherited his citizenship from his parents, distinguishing him from the chief captain who "obtained this citizenship for a large sum."
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
Paul's dramatic assertion of his Roman citizenship, preventing an unlawful scourging, serves as a powerful testament to God's providential care for His servants and His strategic use of human circumstances to advance the gospel. While Paul leverages his earthly status, his ultimate reliance is on the divine commission to bear witness to Christ. This incident, preventing immediate harm, directly facilitates Paul's eventual journey to Rome, fulfilling the Lord's own declaration that Paul "must testify also at Rome" (Acts 23:11). In a profound way, Paul's experience echoes the trajectory of Christ Himself, who, though innocent, submitted to the unjust legal processes of His day, ultimately enduring the scourging and crucifixion that Paul was spared. Christ's perfect obedience and suffering, even unto death, secured the ultimate freedom and justification for all who believe, a freedom far surpassing any earthly legal protection. Paul, as an apostle of Christ, embodies the paradox of the gospel: empowered by divine authority, yet operating within human systems, always pointing back to the one who, by His sacrifice, established true justice and offered eternal life (John 3:16). Thus, Paul's legal defense, under God's sovereign hand, becomes a stepping stone in the unfolding narrative of redemption, carrying the message of the crucified and risen Christ to the very heart of the Roman Empire, demonstrating that no earthly power can ultimately thwart the divine plan (Romans 8:31).