Acts 23:7

KJV

And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided.

KJV (with Strong's)

And {G1161} when he {G846} had {G2980} so {G5124} said {G2980}, there arose {G1096} a dissension {G4714} between the Pharisees {G5330} and {G2532} the Sadducees {G4523}: and {G2532} the multitude {G4128} was divided {G4977}.

Complete Jewish Bible

When he said this, an argument arose between the P’rushim and the Tz’dukim, and the crowd was divided.

Berean Standard Bible

As soon as he had said this, a dispute broke out between the Pharisees and Sadducees, and the assembly was divided.

American Standard Version

And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and Sadducees; and the assembly was divided.

Commentary

### 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
* **Literary Context:** This verse immediately follows Paul's shrewd declaration in [Acts 23:6](/acts/23-6 "Paul's Strategic Declaration to the Sanhedrin") that he is a Pharisee and is on trial concerning the hope and resurrection of the dead. Paul had been arrested in Jerusalem following an uproar in the Temple and was brought before the Sanhedrin, the supreme Jewish judicial and legislative body. Having just been struck on the mouth by order of the High Priest Ananias, Paul, despite his initial protest, recognized the composition of the council. His statement was a brilliant tactical maneuver, designed not merely to state a fact about his background, but to exploit the well-known, deep-seated theological animosity between the two powerful sects comprising the Sanhedrin: the Pharisees and the Sadducees. The ensuing "dissension" is the direct and intended consequence of Paul's strategic utterance, effectively turning his accusers against each other.
* **Historical & Cultural Context:** The Sanhedrin was composed of seventy-one members, including the high priest, elders, and scribes, drawn primarily from the aristocratic Sadducees and the popular, scholarly Pharisees. These two groups represented the dominant theological and political forces in first-century Judaism, yet they held fundamentally opposing doctrines. The Sadducees, largely from the priestly aristocracy, accepted only the written Torah as authoritative and denied the resurrection of the dead, the existence of angels, and the concept of spirits ([Matthew 22:23](/matthew/22-23 "Sadducees Deny the Resurrection")). In contrast, the Pharisees, who were more popular among the common people, believed in the resurrection, angels, spirits, and upheld the authority of both the written Law and oral traditions. This profound theological chasm often led to intense disputes, and Paul, intimately familiar with both traditions as a former Pharisee, expertly leveraged this existing fault line within the very body meant to judge him.
* **Key Themes:** Acts 23:7 powerfully illustrates several key themes. Firstly, it highlights **Strategic Wisdom and Divine Providence**. Paul, facing an unjust trial and potential condemnation, demonstrates remarkable discernment and tactical genius. His declaration was not a lie, but a strategically framed truth that exposed the internal divisions of his accusers, diverting their focus from his alleged crimes to their own theological disputes. This maneuver, though humanly devised, also underscores **God's Sovereignty**, demonstrating how He can use existing human conflicts and the wisdom of His servants to protect them and advance His divine plan, ultimately preventing the Sanhedrin from reaching a unified condemnation against Paul. Secondly, the verse vividly portrays **Profound Theological Division**. It serves as a stark reminder of the deep doctrinal rifts that existed within Judaism, particularly concerning the foundational belief in the resurrection, a doctrine central to the Christian gospel. This division, which Paul exploited, foreshadows the ongoing conflict between those who embrace the full truth of God's revelation and those who limit it.

### EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS

#### Key Word Analysis
* **dissension (Greek, _stásis'_):** From the base of *hístēmi* (to stand); literally, a standing (properly, the act), but by analogy, position or existence. By implication, it refers to a popular uprising, sedition, or figuratively, a controversy. In Acts 23:7, it denotes a vehement and passionate argument, a civil strife, or even an uproar that leads to a physical separation and loud contention among the members of the Sanhedrin. It implies a serious, disruptive disagreement, not merely a polite debate.
* **multitude (Greek, _plēthos'_):** From *plēthō* (to fill); meaning a fullness, a large number, a throng, or populace. Here, it specifically refers to the large gathering of members of the Sanhedrin, emphasizing the collective body that was present and subsequently divided by the theological rift Paul instigated. It underscores the significant number of individuals involved in the ensuing chaos.
* **divided (Greek, _schízō'_):** Apparently a primary verb; to split or sever, either literally or figuratively. This term conveys a forceful separation, a tearing apart. In this context, it describes the complete rupture and polarization of the Sanhedrin, where the members were literally split into two opposing camps, reflecting their fundamental theological disagreements. The intensity of the verb suggests a deep and irreconcilable break.

#### Verse Breakdown
* **"And when he had so said":** This phrase immediately connects the ensuing chaos to Paul's preceding declaration in [Acts 23:6](/acts/23-6 "Paul's Declaration to the Sanhedrin"). It indicates that Paul's words acted as the direct catalyst for the dramatic events that followed, highlighting the intentionality and immediate impact of his strategic statement. His utterance was precise and potent enough to trigger the inherent divisions within the Sanhedrin.
* **"there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees":** This clause describes the immediate and profound consequence of Paul's statement. The Greek term for "dissension" (*stasis*) signifies more than a mere disagreement; it implies a violent rupture, a standing apart, or even an uproar. This indicates that the theological differences between the two sects, particularly concerning the resurrection, were so fundamental and volatile that Paul's mention of it instantly ignited a fierce and public dispute within the very court meant to judge him.
* **"and the multitude was divided":** This final clause underscores the complete polarization of the Sanhedrin. The "multitude" refers to the entire assembly, which was literally "split" (*schizō*) into two opposing factions. This division was not superficial but deeply rooted in their core beliefs, leading to a chaotic scene where the members of the highest Jewish court turned against each other, effectively preventing them from reaching a unified verdict against Paul.

#### 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.

* [Matthew 10:34](/matthew/10-34 "Jesus Brings Division, Not Peace")
* [Romans 8:28](/romans/8-28 "God Works All Things for Good")
* [1 Corinthians 1:10](/1_corinthians/1-10 "Call for Unity in the Church")

### 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](/matthew/10-16 "Be Shrewd as Snakes and Innocent as Doves")). 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
* **How does Paul's strategic use of truth in a hostile environment challenge or affirm your approach to difficult conversations about faith?**
* **In what ways might God be using existing divisions or conflicts in your life or community to advance His purposes?**
* **What core theological truths are non-negotiable for you, and how prepared are you to stand for them, even if it causes division?**

### FAQ

**Why did Paul declare himself a Pharisee, and was this a deceptive act?**

Answer: Paul's declaration in [Acts 23:6](/acts/23-6 "Paul's Declaration to the Sanhedrin") 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](/philippians/3-5 "Paul's Pharisaic Background"). 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](/matthew/22-23 "Sadducees Deny the Resurrection")). 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](/acts/9-15 "Paul, a Chosen Instrument")). While God desires unity among His people ([Ephesians 4:3](/ephesians/4-3 "Eager to Maintain the Unity of the Spirit")), 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](/1_corinthians/15-14 "If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless"). 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](/matthew/10-34-36 "Jesus Brings Division")). Yet, it is through the resurrected Christ that true unity is found, as He breaks down dividing walls ([Ephesians 2:14](/ephesians/2-14 "Christ is Our Peace")) and gathers all who believe into one body, the Church ([Ephesians 4:4-6](/ephesians/4-4-6 "One Body, One Spirit, One Hope")). 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.

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.

Cross-References

Psalms 55:9

¶ Destroy, O Lord, [and] divide their tongues: for I have seen violence and strife in the city.

Acts 14:4

But the multitude of the city was divided: and part held with the Jews, and part with the apostles.

John 7:40

Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet.

John 7:43

So there was a division among the people because of him.

Matthew 10:34

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.