TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Commentary on Acts 23 verses 6–11
Many are the troubles of the righteous, but some way or other the Lord delivereth them out of them all. Paul owned he had experienced the truth of this in the persecutions he had undergone among the Gentiles (see Ti2 3:11): Out of them all the Lord delivered me. And now he finds that he who has delivered does and will deliver. He that delivered him in the foregoing chapter from the tumult of the people here delivers him from that of the elders.
I. His own prudence and ingenuity stand him in some stead, and contribute much to his escape. Paul's greatest honour, and that upon which he most valued himself, was that he was a Christian, and an apostle of Christ; and all his other honours he despised and made nothing of, in comparison with this, counting them but dung, that he might win Christ; and yet he had sometimes occasion to make use of his other honours, and they did him service. His being a citizen of Rome saved him in the foregoing chapter from his being scourged by the chief captain as a vagabond, and here his being a Pharisee saved him from being condemned by the sanhedrim, as an apostate from the faith and worship of the God of Israel. It will consist very well with our willingness to suffer for Christ to use all lawful methods, nay, and arts too, both to prevent suffering and to extricate ourselves out of it. The honest policy Paul used here for his own preservation was to divide his judges, and to set them at variance one with another about him; and, by incensing one part of them more against him, to engage the contrary part for him.
1.The great council was made up of Sadducees and Pharisees, and Paul perceived it. He knew the characters of many of them ever since he lived among them, and saw those among them whom he knew to be Sadducees, and others whom he knew to be Pharisees (Act 23:6): One part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, and perhaps nearly an equal part. Now these differed very much from one another, and yet they ordinarily agreed well enough to do the business of the council together. (1.) The Pharisees were bigots, zealous for the ceremonies, not only those which God had appointed, but those which were enjoined by the tradition of the elders. They were great sticklers for the authority of the church, and for enforcing obedience to its injunctions, which occasioned many quarrels between them and our Lord Jesus; but at the same time they were very orthodox in the faith of the Jewish church concerning the world of spirits, the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. (2.) The Sadducees were deists - no friends to the scripture, or divine revelation. The books of Moses they admitted as containing a good history and a good law, but had little regard to the other books of the Old Testament; see Mat 22:23. The account here given of these Sadducees is, [1.] That they deny the resurrection; not only the return of the body to life, but a future state of rewards and punishments. They had neither hope of eternal happiness nor dread of eternal misery, nor expectation of any thing on the other side death; and it was upon these principles that they said, It is in vain to serve God, and called the proud happy, Mal 3:14, Mal 3:15. [2.] That they denied the existence of angels and spirits, and allowed of no being but matter. They thought that God himself was corporeal, and had parts and members as we have. When they read of angels in the Old Testament, they supposed them to be messengers that God made and sent on his errands as there was occasion, or that they were impressions on the fancies of those they were sent to, and no real existences - that they were this, or that, or any thing rather than what they were. And, as for the souls of men, they looked upon them to be nothing else but the temperament of the humours of the body, or the animal spirits, but denied their existence in a state of separation from the body, and any difference between the soul of a man and of a beast. These, no doubt, pretended to be free-thinkers, but really thought as meanly, absurdly, and slavishly, as possible. It is strange how men of such corrupt and wicked principles could come into office, and have a place in the great sanhedrim; but many of them were of quality and estate, and they complied with the public establishment, and so got in and kept in. But they were generally stigmatized as heretics, were ranked with the Epicureans, and were prayed against and excluded from eternal life. The prayer which the modern Jews use against Christians, Witsius thinks, was designed by Gamaliel, who made it, against the Sadducees; and that they meant them in their usual imprecation, Let the name of the wicked rot. But how degenerate was the character and how miserable the state of the Jewish church, when such profane men as these were among their rulers!
2.In this matter of difference between the Pharisees and Sadducees Paul openly declared himself to be on the Pharisees' side against the Sadducees (Act 23:6): He cried out, so as to be heard by all, "I am a Pharisee, was bred a Pharisee, nay, I was born one, in effect, for I was the son of a Pharisee, my father was one before me, and thus far I am still a Pharisee that I hope for the resurrection of the dead, and I may truly say that, if the matter were rightly understood, it would be found that this is it for which I am now called in question." When Christ was upon earth the Pharisees set themselves most against him, because he witnessed against their traditions and corrupt glosses upon the law; but, after his ascension, the Sadducees set themselves most against his apostles, because they preached through Jesus the resurrection of the dead, Act 4:1, Act 4:2. And it is said (Act 5:17) that they were the sect of the Sadducees that were filled with indignation at them, because they preached that life and immortality which is brought to light by the gospel. Now here, (1.) Paul owns himself a Pharisee, so far as the Pharisees were in the right. Though as Pharisaism was opposed to Christianity he set himself against it, and against all its traditions that were set up in competition with the law of God or in contradiction to the gospel of Christ, yet, as it was opposed to Sadducism, he adhered to it. We must never think the worse of any truth of God, nor be more shy of owning it, for its being held by men otherwise corrupt. If the Pharisees will hope for the resurrection of the dead, Paul will go along with them in that hope, and be one of them, whether they will or no. (2.) He might truly say that being persecuted, as a Christian, this was the thing he was called in question for. Perhaps he knew that the Sadducees, though they had not such an interest in the common people as the Pharisees had, yet had underhand incensed the mob against him, under pretence of his having preached to the Gentiles, but really because he had preached the hope of the resurrection. However, being called in question for his being a Christian, he might truly say he was called in question for the hope of the resurrection of the dead, as he afterwards pleaded, Act 24:15, and Act 26:6, Act 26:7. Though Paul preached against the traditions of the elders (as his Master had done), and therein opposed the Pharisees, yet he valued himself more upon his preaching the resurrection of the dead, and a future state, in which he concurred with the Pharisees.
3.This occasioned a division in the council. It is probable that the high priest sided with the Sadducees (as he had done Act 5:17, and made it to appear by his rage at Paul, Act 23:2), which alarmed the Pharisees so much the more; but so it was, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees (Act 23:7), for this word of Paul's made the Sadducees more warm and the Pharisees more cool in the prosecution of him; so that the multitude was divided; eschisthē - there was a schism, a quarrel among them, and the edge of their zeal began to turn from Paul against one another; nor could they go on to act against him when they could not agree among themselves, or prosecute him for breaking the unity of the church when there was so little among them of the unity of the spirit. All the cry had been against Paul, but now there arose a great cry against one another, Act 23:9. So much did a fierce furious spirit prevail among all orders of the Jews at this time that every thing was done with clamour and noise; and in such a tumultuous manner were the great principles of their religion stickled for, by which they received little service, for the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. Gainsayers may be convinced by fair reasoning, but never by a great cry.
4.The Pharisees hereupon (would one think it?) took Paul's part (Act 23:9): They strove, diemachonto - They fought, saying, We find no evil in this man. He had conducted himself decently and reverently in the temple, and had attended the service of the church; and, though it was but occasionally, yet it showed that he was not such an enemy to it as he was said to be. He had spoken very handsomely in his own defence, and given a good account of himself, and had now declared himself orthodox in the great principles of religion, as well as regular and conscientious in his conversation; and therefore they cannot see that he has done any thing worthy of death of bonds. Nay, they go further, "If a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him concerning Jesus, and put him upon preaching as he does, though we may not be so far satisfied as to give credit to him, yet we ought to be cautioned not to oppose him, lest we be found fighting against God;" as Gamaliel, who was himself a Pharisee, had argued, Act 5:39. Now here, (1.) We may observe, to the honour of the gospel, that it was witnessed to even by its adversaries, and confessions, not only of its innocency, but of its excellency, were extorted sometimes by the power of truth even from those that persecuted it. Pilate found no fault in Christ though he put him to death, nor Festus in Paul though he detained him in bonds; and the Pharisees here supposed it possible that Paul might have a commission sent him for heaven by an angel to do what he did; and yet it should seem, as elders, they after this joined with the high priest in prosecuting him, Act 24:1. They sinned against the knowledge which they not only had, but sometimes owned, as Christ had said of them, They have both seen and hated both me and my Father, Joh 15:24. Yet, (2.) We will hope that some of them at least did henceforward conceive a better opinion of Paul than they had had, and were favourable to him, having had such a satisfactory account both of his conversation in all good conscience and of his faith touching another world; and then it must be observed to their honour that their zeal for the traditions of the elders, which Paul had departed fRom. was so far swallowed up in a zeal for the great and fundamental doctrines of religion, to which Paul still adhered, that if he will heartily join with them against the Sadducees, and adhere to the hope of the resurrection of the dead, they will not think his shaking off the ceremonial law to be an evil in him, but charitably hope that he walks according to the light God has given him by some angel or spirit, and are so far from persecuting him that they are ready to patronize and protect him. The persecuting Pharisees of the church of Rome are not of this spirit: for let a man be ever so sincere and zealous for all the articles of the Christian faith, yet, if he lay not his neck under the yoke of their church's authority, they find evil enough in him to persecute him unto the death.
II. The chief captain's care and conduct stand him in more stead; for when he has thrown this bone of contention between the Pharisees and Sadducees (which set them together by the ears, and gained a fair testimony from the Pharisees), yet he is never the nearer, but is in danger of being pulled in pieces by them - the Pharisees pulling to have him set at liberty, and the Sadducees pulling to have him put to death, or thrown to the people, like Daniel into the den of lions; so that the chief captain is forced to come with his soldiers and rescue him, as he had done, Act 21:32, and Act 22:24. 1. See here Paul's danger. Between his friends and his enemies he had like to have been pulled to pieces, the one hugging him to death, the other crushing him to death, such violences are those liable to that are eminent, and that are become remarkable, as Paul was, who was by some so much beloved and by others so much maligned. 2. His deliverance: The chief captain ordered his soldiers to go down from the upper wards, and to take them by force from among them, out of that apartment in the temple where he had ordered the council to meet, and to bring him into the castle, or tower of Antonio; for he saw he could make nothing of them towards the understanding of the merits of his cause.
III. Divine consolations stood him in most stead of all. The chief captain had rescued him out of the hands of cruel men, but still he had him in custody, and what might be the issue he could not tell. The castle was indeed a protection to him, but withal it was a confinement; and, as it was now his preservation from so great a death, it might be his reservation for a greater. We do not find that any of the apostles or elders at Jerusalem came to him; either they had not courage or they had not admission. Perhaps, in the night following, Paul was full of thoughts and cares what should become of him, and how his present troubles might be turned to answer some good purpose. Then did the Lord Jesus make him a kind visit, and, thought at midnight, yet a very seasonable one (Act 23:11): The Lord stood by him, came to his bed-side, though perhaps it was but a bed of straw, to show him that he was all the day long with him really as sure as he was in the night with him visibly. Note, Whoever is against us, we need not fear if the Lord stand by us; if he undertake our protection, we may set those that seek our ruin at defiance. The Lord is with those that uphold my soul, and then nothing can come amiss. 1. Christ bids him have a good heart upon it: "Be of good cheer, Paul; be not discouraged; let not what has happened sadden thee, nor let what may yet be before thee frighten thee." Note, It is the will of Christ that his servants who are faithful should be always cheerful. Perhaps Paul, in the reflection, began to be jealous of himself whether he had done well in what he said to the council the day before; but Christ, by his word, satisfies him that God approved of his conduct. Or, perhaps, it troubled him that his friends did not come to him; but Christ's visit did itself speak, though he had not said, Be of good cheer, Paul. 2. It is a strange argument which he makes use of to encourage him: As thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome. One would think this was but cold comfort: "As thou hast undergone a great deal of trouble for me so thou must undergo a great deal more;" and yet this was designed to encourage him; for hereby he is given to understand, (1.) That he had been serving Christ as a witness for him in what he had hitherto endured. It was for no fault that he was buffeted, and it was not his former persecuting of the church that was now remembered against him, however he might remember it against himself, but he was still going on with his work. (2.) That he had not yet finished his testimony, nor was, by his imprisonment, laid aside as useless, but was only reserved for further service. Nothing disheartened Paul so much as the thought of being taken off from doing service to Christ and good to souls: Fear not, says Christ, I have not done with thee, (3.) Paul seems to have had a particular fancy, and an innocent one, to go to Rome, to preach the gospel there, though it was already preached, and a church planted there; yet, being a citizen of Rome, he longed for a journey thither, and had designed it (Act 19:21): After I have been at Jerusalem, I must also see Rome. And he had written to the Romans some time ago that he longed to see them, Rom 1:11. Now he was ready to conclude that this had broken his measures, and he should never see Rome; but even in that Christ tells him he should be gratified, since he desired it for the honour of Christ and to do good.
Continue studying Acts 23:7 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
Acts 23:7 captures a dramatic turning point in the Apostle Paul's trial before the Sanhedrin, where his strategic declaration regarding the resurrection ignited a fierce theological and political schism between the two dominant Jewish factions, the Pharisees and the Sadducees. This immediate and profound dissension within the high court effectively paralyzed their ability to present a unified front against Paul, leading to a chaotic division among the assembly members.
CONTEXT
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
The passage powerfully employs Dramatic Irony, as Paul, the accused, skillfully manipulates the internal conflicts of his accusers, turning their own theological divisions into his defense. The Sanhedrin's attempt to condemn Paul is undermined by their inability to agree among themselves, a situation unforeseen by them but orchestrated by Paul's insight. Conflict is the central literary device, not only in the literal sense of the dispute between the Pharisees and Sadducees but also in the broader theological conflict between differing interpretations of God's law and revelation. This internal strife within the Sanhedrin serves as a microcosm of the larger spiritual battle between truth and error. Furthermore, there is an element of Foreshadowing, as this scene anticipates the ongoing theological debates and divisions that would characterize the early church's mission, particularly regarding the resurrection and the nature of salvation, themes Paul would continue to champion.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Acts 23:7 profoundly illustrates how God can sovereignly work through human conflict and even the strategic wisdom of His servants to accomplish His divine purposes. The immediate and violent dissension among the Sanhedrin members, triggered by Paul's declaration, demonstrates that God can use existing divisions and the very opposition against His people to protect them and advance the gospel. This event underscores the vital importance of the resurrection doctrine, which was a fundamental point of contention then and remains central to Christian faith today. It reminds us that truth, particularly the truth of Christ's resurrection, often divides, but it is through this division that genuine faith is clarified and God's plan unfolds.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
Acts 23:7 offers profound insights for believers navigating complex situations today. Paul's example teaches us the importance of understanding the landscape of our interactions, discerning the underlying beliefs and potential points of division among those we engage with. While we must never compromise truth, there is wisdom in how and when we articulate it, strategically framing our message to expose deeper issues or to protect the gospel's advance. This doesn't imply deception, but rather a Spirit-led discernment akin to Paul's, who was "shrewd as snakes and innocent as doves" (Matthew 10:16). Furthermore, this passage is a powerful reminder of God's unwavering sovereignty. Even in moments of intense conflict, chaos, or apparent disorder, God remains in control, capable of using human interactions, divisions, and even the schemes of opponents to achieve His purposes and protect His people. We can find peace knowing that our ultimate security rests not in human strategies alone, but in God's providential care, which works all things for the good of those who love Him.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why did Paul declare himself a Pharisee, and was this a deceptive act?
Answer: Paul's declaration in Acts 23:6 that he was a Pharisee and was on trial concerning the resurrection was not deceptive, but a brilliant strategic maneuver. Paul genuinely was a Pharisee by birth and training, as he states in Philippians 3:5. More importantly, he was being accused of teaching against the Law and the Temple, but his true "crime" from a Jewish perspective was his belief in Jesus' resurrection, which was a core Pharisaic belief (unlike the Sadducees who denied it). By framing his defense around the resurrection, he highlighted the fundamental theological disagreement within the Sanhedrin itself, effectively turning the two factions against each other and diverting attention from the charges against him. This allowed God's plan for Paul to continue, as he was eventually sent to Rome.
What were the main theological differences between the Pharisees and Sadducees that led to such a violent dissension?
Answer: The core theological differences that fueled the dissension were profound and irreconcilable. The Sadducees, primarily the priestly aristocracy, accepted only the written Torah (the first five books of Moses) as authoritative. They denied the resurrection of the dead, the existence of angels, and the concept of spirits (Matthew 22:23). Their focus was on temple rituals and maintaining the status quo. In contrast, the Pharisees, who were more popular among the common people, accepted the entire Old Testament, believed in the resurrection of the dead, the existence of angels and spirits, and upheld the authority of oral traditions alongside the written Law. Paul's declaration about the resurrection directly challenged the Sadducees' core tenets while aligning with the Pharisees' beliefs, thus igniting the long-standing theological animosity between them.
How does God use division for His purposes, as seen in this passage?
Answer: Acts 23:7 illustrates that God can use existing human divisions and conflicts, even those rooted in theological disagreement, to achieve His sovereign purposes. In this instance, the immediate and violent dissension between the Pharisees and Sadducees prevented the Sanhedrin from presenting a unified front against Paul. This chaos ultimately led to Paul's protection by the Roman commander and his eventual transfer to Caesarea, and later to Rome, fulfilling God's plan for him to bear witness to Christ before kings (Acts 9:15). While God desires unity among His people (Ephesians 4:3), He can strategically use division among those who oppose His truth to advance His kingdom and protect His servants, demonstrating His ultimate control over all circumstances.
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
Acts 23:7, while detailing a tactical masterstroke by Paul, ultimately points to the centrality of Christ and His resurrection. Paul's declaration that he was on trial concerning "the hope and resurrection of the dead" was not merely a clever defense; it was a profound theological statement that directly implicated the gospel message. The very point of contention—the resurrection—is the cornerstone of Christian faith, as declared by Paul himself in 1 Corinthians 15:14. The division within the Sanhedrin over this truth foreshadows the ongoing spiritual battle over who Jesus is and what His resurrection means for humanity. Just as Paul faced opposition for proclaiming the resurrected Christ, Jesus Himself was the ultimate source of division, declaring He came not to bring peace but a sword, dividing families and nations over their response to Him (Matthew 10:34-36). Yet, it is through the resurrected Christ that true unity is found, as He breaks down dividing walls (Ephesians 2:14) and gathers all who believe into one body, the Church (Ephesians 4:4-6). Thus, Paul's trial, ignited by the truth of the resurrection, serves as a powerful testament to the divisive yet ultimately unifying power of the gospel of Jesus Christ.