Acts 23:4

KJV

And they that stood by said, Revilest thou God's high priest?

KJV (with Strong's)

And {G1161} they that stood by {G3936} said {G2036}, Revilest thou {G3058} God's {G2316} high priest {G749}?

Complete Jewish Bible

The men nearby said, “This is the cohen hagadol of God that you’re insulting!”

Berean Standard Bible

But those standing nearby said, “How dare you insult the high priest of God!”

American Standard Version

And they that stood by said, Revilest thou God’s high priest?

Commentary

### SUMMARY
Acts 23:4 captures the immediate and indignant reaction of those present in the Sanhedrin chamber to Paul's sharp rebuke of the High Priest Ananias. Having just been struck on the mouth by Ananias's order, Paul retorted by calling the High Priest a "whited wall." The bystanders, shocked by what they perceived as an egregious insult to God's divinely appointed representative, immediately challenged Paul's audacity, demanding to know how he dared to revile the high priest. This moment underscores the profound reverence for the office of the high priest within Jewish society, even when the individual holding the office might be personally flawed.

### CONTEXT
* **Literary Context:** This verse is situated within a dramatic and pivotal moment in Paul's ministry: his appearance before the Jewish high council, the Sanhedrin, following his arrest in Jerusalem. The preceding verses in [Acts 22:30-23:3](/acts/22-30-23-3 "Paul Before the Sanhedrin") set the stage. Paul, having been granted permission to speak, began his defense by declaring his clear conscience before God. This declaration was abruptly interrupted by the High Priest Ananias, who, without apparent cause or due process, commanded those standing by to strike Paul on the mouth ([Acts 23:2](/acts/23-2 "High Priest Ananias Orders Paul Struck")). Paul's immediate, fiery response, calling Ananias a "whited wall" and prophesying God would strike him, provoked the swift and outraged reaction recorded in [Acts 23:4](/acts/23-4 "Bystanders Rebuke Paul"). The narrative then proceeds to Paul's realization that he had spoken to the High Priest and his subsequent apology ([Acts 23:5](/acts/23-5 "Paul's Apology and Citation of Exodus 22:28")), followed by his shrewd tactic of dividing the Sanhedrin by appealing to his Pharisaic belief in the resurrection ([Acts 23:6-9](/acts/23-6-9 "Paul Divides the Sanhedrin")).
* **Historical & Cultural Context:** The Sanhedrin was the supreme Jewish judicial and legislative body in Jerusalem, comprising 71 members, including the High Priest, chief priests, elders, and scribes. The High Priest was the presiding officer and held immense religious and political authority, considered by many to be God's direct representative on earth. The office was deeply revered, rooted in the Old Testament priesthood established by God through Moses ([Exodus 28](/exodus/28 "Instructions for Priestly Garments")). To insult the High Priest was not merely a personal affront but a perceived blasphemy against God's appointed authority. Ananias, the High Priest from AD 47-59, was known for his corruption and brutality, having been involved in the assassination of James, the brother of Jesus, and later murdered during the Jewish revolt. Paul, as a former Pharisee and a student of Gamaliel ([Acts 22:3](/acts/22-3 "Paul's Education Under Gamaliel")), would have been intimately familiar with the immense respect accorded to the High Priest and the Mosaic law that forbade speaking evil of a ruler ([Exodus 22:28](/exodus/22-28 "Do Not Revile God or Curse a Ruler")). The bystanders' reaction reflects this deeply ingrained cultural and religious reverence for the sacred office, regardless of the individual's character.
* **Key Themes:** This incident highlights several significant themes. Firstly, it underscores the **reverence for authority**, particularly religious authority, within Jewish society. The High Priest's office was seen as sacrosanct, a direct link to God's covenant with Israel, and therefore, any disrespect towards it was met with severe condemnation. Secondly, it reveals **Paul's human reaction** to injustice. Despite his spiritual maturity, Paul's initial outburst was a raw, indignant response to an unprovoked and unlawful assault, demonstrating his passionate nature and his struggle with righteous anger. This moment humanizes Paul, showing that even apostles grapple with immediate, emotional responses before discerning the full context. Thirdly, the event touches upon the theme of **divine justice and prophetic utterance**. Paul's immediate prophecy that God would strike Ananias, a corrupt High Priest, hints at a divine judgment that would indeed befall Ananias later in history, aligning with the broader biblical theme of God's ultimate vindication of the righteous and judgment of the wicked. Finally, it sets the stage for Paul's subsequent appeal to his Pharisaic background, demonstrating his strategic wisdom in navigating hostile environments and his unwavering commitment to proclaiming the truth of the resurrection, a central tenet of the gospel ([1 Corinthians 15:3-4](/1_corinthians/15-3-4 "The Gospel: Christ's Death and Resurrection")).

### EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
#### Key Word Analysis
* **Revilest thou (Greek, _loidoréō_):** From G3058, this verb means "to reproach, i.e. vilify." It signifies a harsh, abusive, or contemptuous form of speech directed at someone, implying a deliberate act of insult or verbal abuse. The bystanders accuse Paul of speaking in a manner that is not merely critical but actively demeaning and disrespectful, especially given the High Priest's exalted status.
* **God's (Greek, _theós_):** From G2316, this word refers to "a deity, especially (with ὁ) the supreme Divinity." Its inclusion here emphasizes the sacred nature of the High Priest's office. The High Priest was not merely a human leader but was considered God's representative, making an insult to him an indirect affront to God Himself. This highlights the theological gravity of Paul's perceived transgression in the eyes of the bystanders.
* **high priest (Greek, _archiereús_):** From G749, this term denotes "the high-priest (literally, of the Jews, typically, Christ); by extension a chief priest." It refers to the chief religious authority in Judaism, the head of the Sanhedrin, and the one responsible for the most sacred rituals, including the Day of Atonement. The bystanders' use of this title underscores the immense dignity and divine appointment associated with the office, making Paul's "reviling" seem all the more shocking and inappropriate.

#### Verse Breakdown
* **"And they that stood by said,"**: This opening clause immediately establishes the reaction of the onlookers. "They that stood by" (G3936, _parístēmi_) indicates those who were present and observing the proceedings, likely members of the Sanhedrin or their attendants. Their collective voice signifies a shared sense of outrage and a unified condemnation of Paul's words, highlighting the cultural consensus regarding the sanctity of the high priestly office.
* **"Revilest thou God's high priest?"**: This is a rhetorical question, laden with accusation and shock. The verb "revilest thou" (G3058, _loidoréō_) implies a strong, contemptuous verbal assault. The core of their accusation is that Paul has dared to insult not merely a man, but "God's high priest," emphasizing the divine appointment and sacred nature of the office. The question is not seeking information but expressing profound indignation and calling Paul's actions into question as a grave transgression against religious authority and divine order.

#### Literary Devices
The passage employs several literary devices to heighten the drama and convey the cultural significance of the moment. **Rhetorical Question** is prominently used in "Revilest thou God's high priest?" This is not a genuine inquiry but an expression of shock, condemnation, and an implicit demand for an explanation or apology. It serves to underscore the perceived audacity of Paul's words. **Dramatic Irony** is also present, as the audience knows Paul's identity as a former Pharisee and a devout Jew, making his "insult" even more jarring to the bystanders who may not fully grasp the context of Ananias's unjust command. Furthermore, there is an element of **Juxtaposition** between Paul's righteous indignation at injustice and the bystanders' rigid adherence to the principle of respecting authority, even when that authority is corrupt. This tension creates a powerful scene that highlights the complexities of faith and obedience in challenging circumstances.

### THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Acts 23:4 powerfully illustrates the tension between righteous indignation at injustice and the divine command to honor those in authority. While Paul's initial outburst was a human reaction to an unlawful and humiliating act, the bystanders' immediate rebuke highlights the deeply ingrained reverence for the office of the high priest as God's appointed representative. This incident forces us to grapple with the complexities of submitting to authority, even when that authority is flawed or acts unjustly, a theme consistently explored throughout Scripture. It underscores that the office itself often carries a sacred weight, distinct from the personal character of the individual holding it.

* [Exodus 22:28](/exodus/22-28 "Do Not Revile God or Curse a Ruler")
* [1 Peter 2:13-17](/1_peter/2-13-17 "Submission to Authority")
* [Romans 13:1-7](/romans/13-1-7 "Submission to Governing Authorities")

### REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
The scene in Acts 23:4 challenges believers to consider their own responses to perceived injustice and to those in positions of authority, particularly within the church or civil government. While Paul's initial, human reaction to being unjustly struck is understandable, his subsequent apology in [Acts 23:5](/acts/23-5 "Paul's Apology and Citation of Exodus 22:28"), citing the Old Testament command not to speak evil of a ruler, demonstrates a commitment to God's law and a willingness to humble himself even when wronged. This teaches us the importance of self-control and discernment, even in moments of provocation. It reminds us that our witness for Christ should always be characterized by respect, even when we disagree or face unfair treatment. We are called to honor the office, even if we lament the actions of the individual. This passage encourages us to pray for those in authority, to seek peaceful and respectful means of addressing injustice, and to remember that ultimate justice belongs to God.

#### Questions for Reflection
* **How do I typically react when I feel unjustly treated by someone in authority?**
* **What is the difference between speaking truth to power and "reviling" someone in authority, and how can I discern this distinction in my own words and actions?**
* **In what ways can I honor the office or position of authority, even when I disagree with or am hurt by the individual holding that position?**

### FAQ
**Why were the bystanders so shocked by Paul's words to the High Priest?**

Answer: The bystanders were shocked because, in Jewish society, the High Priest held an exceptionally sacred and revered position. He was not merely a political or religious leader but was considered God's direct representative on earth, responsible for the most holy rituals, including the Day of Atonement. The Mosaic Law explicitly forbade speaking evil of a ruler, as stated in [Exodus 22:28](/exodus/22-28 "Do Not Revile God or Curse a Ruler"). Therefore, Paul's sharp retort, calling Ananias a "whited wall," was perceived as a direct insult not just to the man, but to the divinely appointed office and, by extension, to God Himself. Their reaction highlights the deep cultural and religious reverence for the High Priesthood, making Paul's words appear as an act of profound disrespect and even blasphemy in their eyes.

### CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
While Acts 23:4 details a human interaction involving Paul's struggle with authority, it ultimately points to Christ in profound ways. Jesus Himself stood before the High Priest and the Sanhedrin, enduring unjust accusations and physical abuse without reviling His accusers ([Matthew 26:57-68](/matthew/26-57-68 "Jesus Before the Sanhedrin")). Unlike Paul's initial, understandable human outburst, Jesus perfectly embodied the principle of not reviling those in authority, even when they were corrupt and condemned Him to death. He was the ultimate "Lamb led to the slaughter" who "did not open his mouth" ([Isaiah 53:7](/isaiah/53-7 "The Suffering Servant")). Furthermore, the very office of the high priest, so revered by the bystanders, finds its ultimate and perfect fulfillment in Jesus Christ. He is the true and eternal High Priest, not of the Levitical order, but "after the order of Melchizedek" ([Hebrews 7:11-17](/hebrews/7-11-17 "Christ's Superior Priesthood")), who offered Himself as the perfect sacrifice once for all ([Hebrews 9:11-14](/hebrews/9-11-14 "Christ's Superior Sacrifice")). The temporary, flawed human high priests foreshadowed Christ, who perfectly mediates between God and humanity, offering a priesthood that is "holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens" ([Hebrews 7:26](/hebrews/7-26 "Christ, Our Perfect High Priest")). Thus, the scene in Acts 23:4, with its focus on the human high priest, ultimately directs our gaze to the divine High Priest, Jesus, who perfectly fulfilled the office and transcended its earthly limitations.

Note: Commentary is generated by AI with a directive for Biblical fidelity. Always rely on the Holy Spirit for discernment. The Scripture text and cross-references are from verified, non-AI sources.