Skip to content
Translation
King James Version
Or else let these same here say, if they have found any evil doing in me, while I stood before the council,
Ask
KJV (with Strong's)
Or else G2228 let G2036 these G846 same G3778 here say G2036, if G1536 they have found G2147 any G1536 evil doing G92 in G1722 me G1698, while I G3450 stood G2476 before G1909 the council G4892,
Ask
Complete Jewish Bible
Or else, let these men themselves say what crime they found me guilty of when I stood in front of the Sanhedrin,
Ask
Berean Standard Bible
Otherwise, let these men state for themselves any crime they found in me when I stood before the Sanhedrin,
Ask
American Standard Version
Or else let these men themselves say what wrong-doing they found when I stood before the council,
Ask
World English Bible Messianic
Or else let these men themselves say what injustice they found in me when I stood before the council,
Ask
Geneva Bible (1599)
Or let these themselues say, if they haue found any vniust thing in mee, while I stoode in the Council,
Ask
Young's Literal Translation
or let these same say if they found any unrighteousness in me in my standing before the sanhedrim,
Ask
See on the biblical-era map
All Acts Sites (Eastern Mediterranean)
All Acts Sites (Eastern Mediterranean) View full PDF
Overview of Paul's Journeys
Overview of Paul's Journeys View full PDF

Map © Biblica Open Bible Maps · CC BY-SA 4.0

In the KJVVerse 27,790 of 31,102

Study This Verse

SUMMARY

In Acts 24:20, Paul, standing before Governor Felix, issues a direct challenge to his Jewish accusers. He demands that they specify any concrete "evil doing" or criminal activity they observed or discovered in him during his previous appearance before the Jewish Sanhedrin in Jerusalem. This verse underscores Paul's assertion of blamelessness and shifts the burden of proof back to his accusers, highlighting the unsubstantiated nature of their charges against him.

CONTEXT

  • Literary Context: Acts 24:20 is embedded within Paul's defense speech before Governor Felix in Caesarea. Following his arrest in Jerusalem and a foiled assassination plot, Paul was brought to Caesarea. The preceding verses (Acts 24:1-9) detail the accusations brought against Paul by the high priest Ananias, the elders, and the orator Tertullus, who presented Paul as a "pestilent fellow," a "stirrer up of sedition," and a "ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes" who attempted to profane the temple. Paul's defense (Acts 24:10-21) systematically refutes these charges. Verse 20 specifically refers back to his previous appearance before the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, as recounted in Acts 23, where he was interrogated but no specific criminal charge was proven. Paul's challenge here serves to expose the lack of tangible evidence supporting their broad accusations.
  • Historical & Cultural Context: Paul's trial takes place in Caesarea Maritima, the Roman provincial capital of Judea, before Governor Antonius Felix. This setting is crucial as it involves Roman law, which required specific charges and evidence for conviction, unlike some Jewish legal traditions that could be influenced by religious zeal. Paul, as a Roman citizen, had the right to a fair trial. The "council" (συνέδριον, synédrion) mentioned is the Jewish Sanhedrin, the supreme Jewish religious and judicial body in Jerusalem. Paul's challenge to them to "say, if they have found any evil doing in me, while I stood before the council" highlights the procedural nature of the accusations. The Jewish leaders were motivated by religious animosity and political expediency, seeing Paul's message about Jesus as a threat to their authority and traditions, as seen in their earlier attempts to silence the apostles in Acts 5:28.
  • Key Themes: This verse contributes significantly to several key themes in the book of Acts. Firstly, it emphasizes Paul's Integrity and Innocence in the face of persistent false accusations, a recurring motif for early Christian leaders. Paul consistently maintains that his actions are not criminal but are rooted in his faith in Christ and the resurrection, as he states in Acts 24:14-15. Secondly, it highlights the Burden of Proof in legal proceedings; Paul effectively challenges his accusers to provide concrete evidence, exposing the vagueness and unsubstantiated nature of their claims. This legal tactic underscores the Roman legal principle of onus probandi. Thirdly, the verse illustrates the broader theme of False Accusation and Persecution faced by the early church, often driven by religious jealousy and misunderstanding, mirroring the unjust trials faced by Jesus himself. Finally, Paul's steadfastness in his defense demonstrates the theme of Standing for Truth even when facing powerful opposition and potential imprisonment, reflecting his commitment to the Gospel message, which he articulates throughout his ministry, for example in Acts 20:24.

EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS

Key Word Analysis

  • say (Greek, épō', G2036): Meaning "to speak or say (by word or writing)." Paul's challenge is for his accusers to verbally declare or articulate any specific wrongdoing. This emphasizes the lack of a clear, spoken accusation with substantiating details, contrasting with the general and vague charges brought by Tertullus. Paul demands a precise statement of guilt.
  • found (Greek, heurískō', G2147): Meaning "to find (literally or figuratively); to get, obtain, perceive, see." This word suggests a process of discovery or observation. Paul is not merely asking if they think he did wrong, but if they discovered or perceived any actual "evil doing" during his public appearance before the Sanhedrin. It implies a search for evidence that yielded nothing incriminating.
  • evil doing (Greek, adíkēma', G92): Meaning "a wrong done; iniquity, matter of wrong." This term refers to a concrete, actionable offense or an act of injustice. Paul's use of this specific term highlights that his accusers have failed to identify any actual criminal act or moral transgression that would warrant their accusations, distinguishing his actions from mere religious disagreement.

Verse Breakdown

  • "Or else let these same [here] say": Paul presents an alternative challenge or proposition to his accusers, the Jewish leaders present at the trial. He invites them to speak up and present their case, implying that if they cannot prove the general accusations, they should at least be able to point to something specific.
  • "if they have found any evil doing in me": This is the core of Paul's challenge. He directly questions whether his accusers were able to discover or discern any specific wrong, crime, or act of injustice on his part. The phrasing implies a search for evidence that yielded nothing substantial.
  • "while I stood before the council": Paul limits the scope of their accusation to a specific, public event – his previous appearance and interrogation before the Jewish Sanhedrin in Jerusalem. This specifies the timeframe and setting, making it clear that he is asking for evidence from a known, official proceeding, not vague rumors or past events.

Literary Devices

Paul's statement in Acts 24:20 employs several effective literary devices. Primarily, it functions as a Rhetorical Challenge or Rhetorical Question. Paul is not genuinely expecting his accusers to suddenly produce evidence, but rather he uses the challenge to expose the emptiness and lack of substance in their accusations. By demanding that they "say, if they have found any evil doing," he highlights their inability to provide concrete proof, thereby undermining their entire case. This also serves as a form of Apostrophe, as he directly addresses his accusers who are present. Furthermore, the verse demonstrates Paul's astute understanding of Legal Pleading and argumentation. His precise language, using terms like "evil doing" and referencing his appearance "before the council," reflects a careful, almost forensic, approach to his defense, aiming to demonstrate his innocence within the Roman legal framework. The entire passage is steeped in Forensic Rhetoric, as Paul systematically dismantles the prosecution's claims by appealing to facts and the absence of evidence.

THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS

Acts 24:20 powerfully illustrates the theme of righteous suffering and the vindication of truth in the face of false accusation. Paul's steadfastness and clear conscience reflect a life lived in accordance with God's will, even when it brings him into conflict with powerful religious and political authorities. His challenge to his accusers underscores the divine principle that truth will ultimately prevail, and that those who walk in integrity have a strong defense, not just before human courts, but before God. This narrative serves as an encouragement to believers to live blamelessly, so that even when unjustly accused, their character can stand as a testament to their faith. It resonates with the broader biblical theme of God's protection and vindication of His servants, even amidst trials.

REFLECTION AND APPLICATION

Paul's bold challenge in Acts 24:20 offers profound lessons for contemporary believers. In a world often characterized by misinformation, swift judgment, and baseless accusations, Paul's example calls us to live with such integrity and transparency that even our detractors struggle to find legitimate fault in our character or actions. His readiness to stand firm and demand specific evidence reminds us that while we are called to be humble, we are also called to defend the truth and our blameless conduct when unjustly attacked. This does not mean being argumentative, but rather, as Paul demonstrates, calmly and truthfully presenting the facts. It encourages us to cultivate a clear conscience before God and humanity, knowing that our ultimate vindication comes from Him. When facing unjust criticism, we are invited to trust in God's justice and to respond with grace and truth, allowing our lives to be a testament to the transforming power of the Gospel.

Questions for Reflection

  • In what areas of my life might I be susceptible to false accusations, and how can I live with greater integrity to minimize such vulnerabilities?
  • How does Paul's calm and reasoned defense inspire me to respond when I face unjust criticism or misunderstanding?
  • What does it mean to have a "clear conscience" before God and others, and how can I actively pursue that in my daily life?

FAQ

What was the "council" Paul referred to in Acts 24:20?

Answer: The "council" Paul refers to is the Jewish Sanhedrin, the supreme Jewish religious and judicial body in Jerusalem. Paul had been brought before this council shortly after his arrest in Jerusalem, as detailed in Acts 22:30 and Acts 23:1-10. His challenge in Acts 24:20 is to his accusers, many of whom were members of or associated with this very council, to specify any wrongdoing they found during that previous public hearing.

Why was Paul so confident in challenging his accusers to find "evil doing"?

Answer: Paul's confidence stemmed from his clear conscience and the conviction that his actions, though controversial to some, were not criminal or morally corrupt under either Jewish or Roman law. He believed he had lived "in all good conscience before God" (Acts 23:1). His ministry was about preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ, not inciting rebellion or profaning the temple, as his accusers claimed. He knew their accusations were rooted in religious jealousy and misunderstanding of his faith, not in actual "evil doing" on his part. His confidence was in his integrity and the truth of his mission.

CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT

Paul's blamelessness in Acts 24:20, and his challenge to his accusers to find "any evil doing" in him, powerfully foreshadows and points to the ultimate blamelessness of Jesus Christ. While Paul, a redeemed sinner, could assert his innocence concerning specific charges, Jesus alone lived a life of perfect righteousness, utterly without sin, as declared in Hebrews 4:15. Like Paul, Jesus was falsely accused and subjected to unjust trials by religious and political authorities, yet no legitimate "evil doing" could be found in Him (Luke 23:4). Indeed, Pilate himself declared, "I find no guilt in him" (John 19:4). Paul's defense, though a human effort, reflects the divine standard of justice and integrity perfectly embodied by Christ. Ultimately, Jesus, the Lamb of God without blemish or spot (1 Peter 1:19), took upon Himself the "evil doing" of humanity, suffering the penalty for our sins so that we might be declared righteous in Him (2 Corinthians 5:21). Thus, Paul's plea for vindication points to the greater vindication and redemptive work of Christ, who, though innocent, was condemned for our sake.

Copy as

Commentary on Acts 24 verses 10–21

I. II. Main points1. 2. Sub-points(1.) (2.) Details

We have here Paul's defence of himself, in answer to Tertullus's charge, and there appears in it a great deal of the spirit of wisdom and holiness, and an accomplishment of Christ's promise to his followers that when they were before governors and kings, for his sake, it should be given them in that same hour what they should speak. Though Tertullus had said a great many provoking things, yet Paul did not interrupt him, but let him go on to the end of his speech, according to the rules of decency and the method in courts of justice, that the plaintiff be allowed to finish his evidence before the defendant begins his plea. And when he had done, he did not presently fly out into passionate exclamations against the iniquity of the times and the men (O tempora! O mores! - Oh the degeneracy of the times!) but he waited for a permission from the judge to speak in his turn, and had it. The governor beckoned to him to speak, Act 24:10. And now he also may have leave to speak out, under the protection of the governor, which was more than he could hitherto obtain. And, when he did speak, he made no reflections at all upon Tertullus, who he knew spoke for his fee, and therefore despised what he said, and levelled his defence against those that employed him. And here,

I. He addressed himself very respectfully to the governor, and with a confidence that he would do him justice. Here are not such flattering compliments as Tertullus soothed him up with, but, which was more truly respectful, a profession that he answered for himself cheerfully, and with good assurance before him, looking upon him, though not as one that was his friend, yet as one that would be fair and impartial. He thus expresses his expectation that he would be so, to engage him to be so. It was likewise the language of one that was conscious to himself of his own integrity, and whose heart did not reproach him, whoever did. He did not stand trembling at the bar; on the contrary, he was very cheerful when he had one to be his judge that was not a party, but an indifferent person. Nay, when he considers who his judge is, he answers the more cheerfully; and why so? He does not say, "Because I know thee to be a judge of inflexible justice and integrity, that hatest bribes, and in giving judgment fearest God, and regardest not man;" for he could not justly say this of him, and therefore would not say it, though it were to gain his favour ever so much; but, I the more cheerfully answer from myself, because I know thou hast been many years a judge to this nation, and this was very true, and being so, 1. He could say of his own knowledge that there had not formerly been any complaints against Paul. Such clamours as they raised are generally against old offenders; but, though he had long say judge there, he never had Paul brought before him till now; and therefore he was not so dangerous a criminal as he was represented to be. 2. He was well acquainted with the Jewish nation, and with their temper and spirit. He knew how bigoted they were to their own way, what furious zealots they were against all that did not comply with them, how peevish and perverse they generally were, and therefore would make allowances for that in their accusation of him, and not regard that which he had reason to think came so much from part-malice. Though he did not know him, he knew his prosecutors, and by this might guess what manner of man he was.

II. He denies the facts that he was charged with, upon which their character of him was grounded. Moving sedition, and profaning the temple, were the crimes for which he stood indicted, crimes which they knew the Roman governors were not accustomed to enquire into, and therefore they hoped that the governor would return him back to them to be judged by their law, and this was all they wished for. But Paul desires that though he would not enquire into the crimes he would protect one that was unjustly charged with them from those whom he knew to be spiteful and ill-natured enough. Now he would have him to understand (and what he said he was ready, if required, to make out by witnesses),

1.That he came up to Jerusalem on purpose to worship God in peace and holiness, so far was he from any design to move sedition among the people or to profane the temple. He came to keep up his communion with the Jews, not to put any affront upon them.

2.That it was but twelve days since he came up to Jerusalem, and he came up to Jerusalem, and he had been six days a prisoner; he was alone, and it could not be supposed that in so short a time he could do the mischief they charged upon him. And, as for what he had done in other countries, they knew nothing of it but by uncertain report, by which the matter was very unfairly represented.

3.That he had demeaned himself at Jerusalem very quietly and peaceably, and had made no manner of stir. If it had been true (as they alleged) that he was a mover of sedition among all the Jews, surely he would have been industrious to make a party at Jerusalem: but he did not do so. He was in the temple, attending the public service there. He was in the synagogues where the law was read and opened. He went about in the city among his relations and friends, and conversed freely in the places of concourse; and he was a man of a great genius and an active spirit, and yet they could not charge him with offering any thing either against the faith or against the peace of the Jewish church. (1.) He had nothing in him of a contradicting spirit, as the movers of sedition have; he had no disposition to quarrel or oppose. They never found him disputing with any man, either affronting the learned with captious cavils or perplexing the weak and simple with curious subtleties. He was ready, if asked, to give a reason of his own hope, and to give instruction to others; but he never picked a quarrel with any man about his religion, nor made that the subject of debate, and controversy, and perverse dispute, which ought always to be treated of with humility and reverence, with meekness and love. (2.) He had nothing in him of a turbulent spirit: "They never found me raising up the people, by incensing them against their governors in church or state or suggesting to them fears and jealousies concerning public affairs, nor by setting them at variance one with another or sowing discord among them." He behaved as became a Christian and minister, with love and quietness, and due subjection to lawful authority. The weapons of his warfare were not carnal, not did he ever mention or think of such a thing as taking up arms for the propagating of the gospel or the defence of the preachers of it; though he could have made, perhaps, as strong a party among the common people as his adversaries, yet he never attempted it.

4.That as to what they had charged him with, of moving sedition in other countries, he was wholly innocent, and they could not make good the charge (Act 24:13): Neither can the prove the things whereof the now accuse me. Hereby, (1.) He maintains his own innocency; for when he says, They cannot prove it, he means, The matter is not so. He was no enemy to the public peace; he had done no real prejudice, but a great deal of real service, and would gladly have done more, to the nation of the Jews. He was so far from having any antipathy to them that he had the strongest affection imaginable for them, and a most passionate desire for their welfare, Rom 9:1-3. (2.) He bemoans his own calamity, that he was accused of those things which could not be proved against him. And it has often been the lot of very worthy good men to be thus injured, to have things laid to their charge which they are the greatest distance from and abhor the though of. But, while they are lamenting this calamity, this may be their rejoicing, even the testimony of their consciences concerning their integrity. (3.) He shows the iniquity of his prosecutors, who said that which they knew they could not prove, and thereby did him wrong in his name, liberty, and life, and did the judge wrong too, in imposing upon him, and doing what in them lay to pervert his judgment. (4.) He appeals to the equity of his judge, and awakens him to look about him, that he might not be drawn into a snare by the violence of the prosecution. The judge must give sentence secundum allegata et probata - according to that which is not only alleged but proved, and therefore must enquire, and search, and ask diligently, whether the thing be true and certain (Deu 13:14); he cannot otherwise give a right judgment.

III. He gives a fair and just account of himself, which does at once both clear him from crime and likewise intimate what was the true reason of their violence in prosecuting him.

1.He acknowledges himself to be one whom they looked upon as a heretic, and that was the reason of their spleen against him. The chief captain had observed, and the governor now cannot but observe, an uncommon violence and fury in his prosecutors, which they know not what to make of, but, guessing at the crime by the cry, conclude he must needs have been a very bad man only for that reason. Now Paul here unriddles the matter: I confess that in the way which they call heresy - or a sect, so worship I the God of my fathers. The controversy is in a matter of religion, and such controversies are commonly managed with most fury and violence. Note, It is no new thing for the right way of worshipping God to be called heresy; and for the best of God's servants to be stigmatized and run down as sectaries. The reformed churches are called heretical ones by those who themselves hate to be reformed, and are themselves heretics. Let us therefore never be driven off from any good way by its being put into an ill name; for true and pure Christianity is never the worse, nor to be the worse thought of, for its being called heresy; no, not though it be called so by the high priest and the elders.

2.He vindicates himself from this imputation. They call Paul a heretic, but he is not so; for,

(1.)He worships the God of his fathers, and therefore is right in the object of his worship. He does not say, Let us go after other gods, which we have not known, and let us serve them, as the false prophet is supposed to do, Deu 13:2. If so, they might justly call his way heresy, a drawing of them aside into a by-path, and a dangerous one; but he worships the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, not only the God whom they worshipped, but the God who took them into covenant with himself, and was and would be called their God. Paul adheres to that covenant, and sets up no other in opposition to it. The promise made unto the fathers Paul preached as fulfilled to the children (Act 13:32, Act 13:33), and so directed both his own devotions and those of others to God, as the God of their fathers. He also refers to the practice of all his pious ancestors: I worship the same God that all my fathers worshipped. His religion was so far from being chargeable with novelty that it gloried in its antiquity, and in an uninterrupted succession of its professors. Note, It is very comfortable in our worshipping God to have an eye to him as the God of our fathers. Our fathers trusted in him, and were owned by him, and he engaged to be their God, and the God of their seed. He approved himself theirs, and therefore, if we serve him as they did, he will be ours; what an emphasis is laid upon this, He is my father's God, and I will exalt him! Exo 15:2.

(2.)He believes all things which are written in the law and the prophets, and therefore is right in the rule of his worship. His religion is grounded upon, and governed by, the holy scriptures; they are his oracle and touchstone, and he speaks and acts according to them. He receives the scriptures entire, and believes all things that are there written; and he receives them pure, for he says no other things than what are contained in them, as he explains himself, Act 26:22. He sets not up any other rule of faith, or practice but the scriptures - not tradition, nor the authority of the church, nor the infallibility of any man or company of men on earth, nor the light within, nor human reason; but divine revelation, as it is in the scripture, is that which he resolves to live and die by, and therefore he is not a heretic.

(3.)He has his eye upon a future state, and is a believing expectant of that, and therefore is right in the end of his worship. Those that turn aside to heresy have a regard to this world, and some secular interest, but Paul aims to make heaven of his religion, and neither more nor less (Act 24:15): "I have hope towards God, all my expectation is from him, and therefore all my desire is towards him and all my dependence upon him; my hope is towards God and not towards the world, towards another world and not towards this. I depend upon God and upon his power, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead at the end of time, of all, both the just and unjust; and the great thing I aim at in my religion is to obtain a joyful and happy resurrection, a share in the resurrection of the just." Observe here, [1.] That there shall be a resurrection of the dead, the dead bodies of men, of all men from the beginning to the end of time. It is certain, not only that the soul does not die with the body, but that the body itself shall live again; we have not only another life to live when our present life is at an end, but there is to be another world, which shall commence when this world is at an end, into which all the children of men must enter at once by a resurrection from the dead, as they entered into this, one after another, by their birth. [2.] It shall be a resurrection both of the just and of the unjust, the sanctified and the unsanctified, of those that did well, and to them our Saviour has told us that it will be a resurrection of life; and of those that did evil, and to them that it will be a resurrection of condemnation, Joh 5:29. See Dan 12:2. This implies that it will be a resurrection to a final judgment, by which all the children of men will be determined to everlasting happiness or misery in a world of retribution, according to what they were and what they did in this state of probation and preparation. The just shall rise by virtue of their union with Christ as their head; the unjust shall rise by virtue of Christ's dominion over them as their Judge. [3.] God is to be depended upon for the resurrection of the dead: I have hope towards God, and in God, that there shall be a resurrection; it shall be effected by the almighty power of God, in performance of the word which God hath spoken; so that those who doubt of it betray their ignorance both of the scriptures and of the power of God, Mat 22:29. [4.] The resurrection of the dead is a fundamental article of our creed, as it was also of that of the Jewish church. It is what they themselves also allow; nay, it was the expectation of the ancient patriarchs, witness Job's confession of his faith; but it is more clearly revealed and more fully confirmed by the gospel, and therefore those who believed it should have been thankful to the preachers of the gospel for their explications and proofs of it, instead of opposing them. [5.] In all our religion we ought to have an eye to the other world, and to serve God in all instances with a confidence in him that there will be a resurrection of the dead, doing all in preparation for that, and expecting our recompence in that.

(4.)His conversation is of a piece with his devotion (Act 24:16): And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offence towards God and towards men. Prophets and their doctrine were to be tried by their fruits. Paul was far from having made shipwreck of a good conscience, and therefore it is not likely he has made shipwreck of the faith, the mystery of which is best held in a pure conscience. This protestation of Paul's is to the same purport with that which he made before the high priest (Act 23:1): I have lived in all good conscience; and this was his rejoicing. Observe, [1.] What was Paul's aim and desire: To have a conscience void of offence. Either, First, "A conscience not offending; not informing me wrong, nor flattering me, nor dealing deceitfully with me, nor in any thing misleading me." Or, Secondly, A conscience not offended; it is like Job's resolution, "My heart shall not reproach me, that is, I will never give it any occasion to do so. This is what I am ambitious of, to keep upon good terms with my own conscience, that it may have no cause either to question the goodness of my spiritual state or to quarrel with me for any particular action. I am as careful not to offend my conscience as I am not to offend a friend with whom I daily converse; nay, as I am not to offend a magistrate whose authority I am under, and to whom I am accountable; for conscience is God's deputy in my soul." [2.] What was his care and endeavour, in pursuance of this: "I exercise myself - askō. I make it my constant business, and govern myself by this intention; I discipline myself, and live by rule" (those that did so were called ascetics, from the word here used), "abstain from many a thing which my inclination leads me to, and abound in all the exercises of religion that are most spiritual, with this in my eye, that I may keep peace with my own conscience." [3.] The extent of this care: First, To all times: To have always a conscience void of offence, always void of gross offence; for though Paul was conscious to himself that he had not yet attained perfection, and the evil that he would not do yet he did, yet he was innocent from the great transgression. Sins of infirmity are uneasy to conscience, but they do not wound it, and waste it, as presumptuous sins do; and, though offence may be given to conscience, yet care must be taken that it be not an abiding offence, but that by the renewed acts of faith and repentance the matter may be taken up again quickly. This however we must always exercise ourselves in, and, though we come short, we must follow after. Secondly, To all things: Both towards God, and towards man. His conscientious care extended itself to the whole of his duty, and he was afraid of breaking the law of love either to God or his neighbour. Conscience, like the magistrate, is custos utriusque tabulae - the guardian of each table. We must be very cautious that we do not think, or speak, or do any thing amiss, either against God or man, Co2 8:21. [4.] The inducement to it: Herein, en toutō, for this cause; so it may be read. "Because I look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come, therefore I thus exercise myself." The consideration of the future state should engage us to be universally conscientious in our present state.

IV. Having made confession of his faith, he gives a plain and faithful account of his case, and of the wrong done him by his persecutors. Twice he had been rescued by the chief captain out of the hands of the Jews, when they were ready to pull him to pieces, and he challenges them to prove him guilty of any crime either time.

1.In the temple. Here they fell furiously upon him as an enemy to their nation and the temple, Act 21:28. But was there any colour for the charge? No, but evidence sufficient against it, (1.) It was very hard to accuse him as an enemy to their nation, when after long absence from Jerusalem he came to bring alms to his nation, money which (though he had need enough himself of it) he had collected among his friends, for the relief of the poor at Jerusalem. He not only had no malice to that people, but he had a very charitable concern for them, and was ready to do them all good offices; and were they his adversaries for his love? Psa 109:4. (2.) It was very hard to accuse him of having profaned the temple when he brought offerings to the temple, and was himself at charges therein (Act 21:24), and was found purifying himself in the temple, according to the law (Act 24:18), and that in a very quiet decent manner, neither with multitude nor with tumult. Though he was a man so much talked of, he was far from coveting to show himself when he came to Jerusalem, or to be crowded after, but went to the temple, as much as was possible, incognito. They were Jews from Asia, his enemies, that caused him to be taken notice of; they had not pretence to make a tumult and raise a multitude against him, for he had neither multitude nor tumult for him. And as to what was perhaps suggested to Felix that he had brought Greeks into the temple, contrary to their law, and the governor ought to reckon with him for that, the Romans having stipulated with the nations that submitted to them to preserve them in their religion, he challenges them to prove it (Act 24:19): "Those Jews of Asia ought to have been here before thee, that they might have been examined, whether they had aught against me, that they would stand by and swear to;" for some that will not scruple to tell a lie have such heavings of conscience that they scruple confirming it with an oath.

2.In the council: "Since the Jews of Asia are not here to prove any thing upon me done amiss in the temple, let these same that are here, the high priest and the elders, say whether they have found any evil doing in me, or whether I was guilty of any misdemeanor when I stood before the council, when also they were ready to pull me in pieces, Act 24:20. When I was there, they could not take offence at any thing I said; for all I said was, Touching the resurrection of the dead I am called in question by you this day (Act 24:21), which gave no offence to any one but the Sadducees. This I hope was no crime, that I stuck to that which is the faith of the whole Jewish church, excepting those whom they themselves call heretics."

Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers verses 10–21. Public domain.
Copy as
John ChrysostomAD 407
Homily on Acts 50
Or else let these same here say, if they have found any evil doing in me while I stood before the council, except it be for this one voice, that I cried, standing among them, Touching the resurrection of the dead I am called in question by you this day. For this is justification in superabundance, not to flee from his accusers, but to be ready to give account to all. Of the resurrection of the dead, says he, am I this day called in question. And not a word said he of what he had to say, how they had conspired against him, had violently kept him, had laid wait for him - for these matters are of course spoken of by the tribune - but by Paul, though there was danger, not so: no, he is silent, and only defends himself, though he had very much to say. In which alms, says he, they found me in course of purifying in the Temple. Then how did he profane it? For it was not the part of the same man both to purify himself and worship and come for this purpose, and then to profane it.
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as

Continue studying Acts 24:20 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.

TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.