Acts 24:6

Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: whom we took, and would have judged according to our law.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(6) Who also hath gone about to profane the temple.—Better, who even attempted to profane. Here the case was clearly to be supported by the evidence of the Jews of Asia. The charge, we see, was modified from that in Acts 21:28. Then they had asserted that he had actually taken Trophimus within the sacred precincts. Now they were contented with accusing him of the attempt.

Whom we took . . .—The advocate throughout identifies himself, after the manner of his calling, with his clients; and in his hands the tumult in the Temple becomes a legal arrest by the officers of the Temple, which was to have been followed in due course by a legal trial, as for an offence against the law of Israel, before a religious tribunal.

The words from “according to our law” to “come unto thee” are omitted in many MSS., and may have been either the interpolation of a scribe, or a later addition from the hand of the writer. Assuming them to be part of the speech, they are an endeavour to turn the tables on Lysias by representing him as the real disturber of the peace. All was going on regularly till his uncalled-for intervention.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

24:1-9 See here the unhappiness of great men, and a great unhappiness it is, to have their services praised beyond measure, and never to be faithfully told of their faults; hereby they are hardened and encouraged in evil, like Felix. God's prophets were charged with being troublers of the land, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that he perverted the nation; the very same charges were brought against Paul. The selfish and evil passions of men urge them forward, and the graces and power of speech, too often have been used to mislead and prejudice men against the truth. How different will the characters of Paul and Felix appear at the day of judgement, from what they are represented in the speech of Tertullus! Let not Christians value the applause, or be troubled at the revilings of ungodly men, who represent the vilest of the human race almost as gods, and the excellent of the earth as pestilences and movers of sedition.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

Who also hath gone about - Who has endeavored.

To profane the temple - This was a serious, but unfounded charge. It arose from the gross calumny of the Jews, when they pretended that he had introduced Greeks into that sacred place, Acts 21:28. To this charge he replies in Acts 24:18.

And would have judged - That is, would have condemned and punished.

According to our law - Their law, which forbade the introduction of strangers into the temple.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

6. hath gone about—attempted.

to profane the temple—the third charge; and entirely false.

we … would have judged according to our law.

Matthew Poole's Commentary

Hath gone about to profane the temple; by bringing into the temple (as they falsely suggested) uncircumcised persons: but Tertullus does not mention this, or show in what Paul had profaned the temple; for Felix himself being uncircumcised, it would have reflected upon him too much, to be accounted, by the Jews, amongst such profane ones, as were enough to defile their temple and worship.

Would have judged according to our law; they had a law, it seems, whereby it was death to bring strangers into the temple; and some think, that by the Romans they had yet power allowed them to put it in execution:

See Poole on "Acts 21:28". And this was their aim all along, viz. to take away his life.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

Who also hath gone about to profane the temple,.... By introducing a Greek into it; see Acts 21:28 which was only a supposition and conjecture of the Asiatic Jews, and was a false and groundless one:

whom we took; as they did in the temple, and dragged him out of it:

and would have judged according to our law; which was another untruth, for they had him not before any court of judicature; they brought no charge in form against him, nor did they examine his case, and inquire into the truth of things, or hear what he had to say, but fell upon him, and beat him; and if it had not been for the chief captain and his soldiers, would have destroyed him, so far were they from proceeding according to their law: it seems by Tertullus calling the law, "our law", that he was a Jewish proselyte; or else he speaks after the manner of lawyers, who call what is their clients, theirs.

Geneva Study Bible

Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: whom we took, and would have judged according to our law.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Expositor's Greek Testament

Acts 24:6. ἐπείρασε: the charge could not be proved, cf. Acts 21:28, but the verb here used is an aggravation not a modification of the surmise (ἐνόμιζον, Acts 21:29) of the Jews.—βεβ., cf. Matthew 12:5 (βαίνω, βηλός, threshold), Jdt 9:8, 1Ma 2:12; 1Ma 4:38; 1Ma 4:44; 1Ma 4:54, 2Ma 10:5, etc., and frequent in LXX, cf. Psalms of Solomon Acts 1:8, and βέβηλος four, βεβήλωσις three times.—Probably Tertullus wanted to insinuate that the prisoner was punishable even according to Roman law, see above on Acts 21:29; but Trophimus as a Greek and not Paul would have been exposed to the death penalty, to say nothing of the fact that the charge was only one of suspicion. Schürer, Jewish People, div. i., vol. ii., p. 74, note, and references in chap. 21, Acts 21:29.—ἐκρατήσαμεν: the word could be used “de conatu vel mero vel efficaci,” and so Bengel adds “aptum igitur ad calumniam”. The orator identifies himself with his clients, and ascribes to the hierarchy the seizing of Paul, as if it was a legal act, whereas it was primarily the action of the mob violence of the people, Acts 21:30; frequently used in same sense as here by Matthew and Mark, but not at all by St. John, and only in this passage by Luke, cf. Revelation 20:2, LXX, Psalms 55, tit., Jdg 8:12; Jdg 16:21 (A al[379]).—καὶ κατὰ … ἐπὶ σέ, Acts 24:8, see critical note, omitted by R.V. in text, retained by Blass and Knabenbauer, so in Vulgate. Zöckler amongst others has recently supported Blass, and for the same reason, viz., because if the words are retained the judge is asked to inquire of Paul, and thus the Apostle becomes a witness as well as a prisoner. But, on the other hand, Paul though still a prisoner is allowed to speak for himself before both Felix and Festus. If the words are retained, παρʼ οὗ would refer to Lysias, and this would be in agreement with the remarks of Felix in Acts 24:22. Certainly ἐκρατήσαμεν seems very bald without any sequel, and this may have caused the insertion of the words; but the insertion was a bold one, although we can understand that the Jews would have been incensed against Lysias, who had twice protected Paul from their violence. The omission of the words if they formed part of the original text is no doubt difficult to explain.—ἠθελ. κρίνειν, cf. Acts 21:31; Acts 21:36, Acts 22:22, Acts 23:12, passages which give us a very different idea of the wishes of the Jews.

[379] Alford’s Greek Testament.

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

6. who also hath gone about [who moreover assayed R. V.] to profane the temple] The old English “gone about” was equivalent to “attempted.” Cp. Shaks. Mids. Nt. D. iv. 1. 212: “Man is but an ass, if he go about to expound this dream.” But the expression is somewhat obsolete now.

It is noteworthy that the Jews no longer adhere to their definite charge as made Acts 21:28, but only impute to St Paul the attempt at profanation.

whom we took] i.e. by main force. They would represent their proceedings as an arrest of a grave offender.

and would, &c.] These words, as well as Acts 24:7 and Acts 24:8 down to “come unto thee” are omitted in nearly all the oldest MSS., and by the Rev. Ver., while the Greek Text, in those MSS. where it is found, exhibits many variations. But in spite of this it is very difficult to see how the advocate could have avoided some allusion to the circumstances mentioned in these words. Of course he puts the matter in a light most favourable to the Jews. “We would have judged him according to our law” is very different language from that in which (Acts 23:27) Lysias describes Paul as in danger to be killed by the Jews. The action of Lysias too is described by Tertullus as one of great violence. Probably the Roman soldiers would not handle the mob tenderly. But Tertullus is trying to cast blame upon the chief captain and to represent his party as doing all things according to law.

according to our law] Tertullus identifies himself, advocate-like, with the Jews whose mouthpiece he is.

Bengel's Gnomen

Acts 24:6. Ἐπείρασε, attempted) This verb may be understood of a mere attempt, or else of an effectual effort: therefore it was a term suited for creating odium.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 6. - Moreover assayed for also hath gone about, A.V.; on whom also we laid hold for whom we took, A.V. To profane the temple. The same false charge as was made in Acts 21:28. The remainder of ver. 6, after the words "on whom we laid hold," the whole of ver. 7, and the first clause of ver. 8, are omitted in the R.T. on the authority of א, A, B, G, H, etc. But the propriety of the omission is doubtful (Alford, Bishop Jacobson, Plumptre), though sanctioned by Mill, Bengel, Griesbach, Lachmann, and Tisehendorf (Meyer). If the words are not genuine, it is a marvelously skilful interpolation, fitting into the place so exactly both at the beginning and at the end, and supplying a manifest want in the speech of Tertullus. (For the statement in ver. 8 A.V., camp. Acts 23:30.) Acts 24:6

Vincent's Word Studies

To profane (βεβηλῶσαι)

The word is akin to βηλός, threshold, and βαίνω, to step; and its fundamental idea, therefore, is that of overstepping the threshold of sacred places. The word profane is the Latin pro fanum, in front of the sanctuary; that which is kept outside the fane because unholy.

We laid hold

The best texts omit all after these words as far as by examining.