Verse by Verse

 ¹ Now after five days Ananias the high priest came down with the elders and a certain orator named Tertullus. These gave evidence to the governor against Paul.

² And when he was called upon, Tertullus began his accusation, saying: “Seeing that through you we enjoy great peace, and prosperity is being brought to this nation by your foresight,

³ we accept it always and in all places, most noble Felix, with all thankfulness.

⁴ Nevertheless, not to be tedious to you any further, I beg you to hear, by your courtesy, a few words from us.

⁵ For we have found this man a plague, a creator of dissension among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.

⁶ He even tried to profane the temple, and we seized him, and wanted to judge him according to our law.

⁷ But the commander Lysias came by and with great violence took him out of our hands,

⁸ commanding his accusers to come to you. By examining him yourself you may ascertain all these things of which we accuse him.”

⁹ And the Jews also assented, maintaining that these things were so.

Long years before Moses had declared, by inspiration of God, that if Israel rebelled against Him: The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low … he shall be the head, and thou shalt be the tail (Deuteronomy 28:43-44).

This process was rapidly taking place as the chosen people declined in power before the ascendancy of Rome. Even a few years previous, at their rejection of Christ, the Council had largely taken matters into their own hands and had driven Pilate to do what they wished, as “the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed, and Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required” (Luke 23:23-24). Now they come with abject flattery to a ruler they despised, careful not to be “tedious,” to him and beseeching him out of his “clemency” to hear them a “few words” (vs. 2-4). — Stam pages 87-88.

Tertullus (v.1) — a Latin name — a professional speaker or lawyer hired by the Jews to make their case because of his familiarity with Roman legal proceedings. He may have been a Hellanistic Jew, but whether he was or not, he spoke for the Jews.

we enjoy great peace (v.2) — It is true that Felix had suppressed the brigands who infested Judaea, and that he had driven off the Egyptian impostor (Acts 21:38) and dispersed his followers. He also quelled riots as they arose from time to time. Tertullus alludes to this in flattering style, though Felix had, otherwise, given much cause for discontent. He had even caused the high priest Jonathan to be assassinated by the Sicarii. — Walker, pages 501-502.

__________

prosperity is bring brought (v.2) — Literally “Reforms are taking place.” The reforms or corrections in question must be the suppression of the disorders already referred to, as we know of no other. — Walker, page 502

tedious (v.4) = hinder — “hinder you from doing your duties”

pestilent (v.5) — infecting society with his teaching

The indictment (v. 5-6) contains three counts. First stands a political accusation. This, in presence of the high Roman officer, was of the greatest importance. Any conspiracy against the Roman government was a capital offense. The charge of sedition or treason was thus at once laid at the door of the apostle. The second offense Tertullus brought against Paul was of a religious nature. As a ringleader of the Nazarenes, presented by him as a sect of the Jews, he had abetted that which was against the peace of Judaism and introduced not alone a disturbing element, but had transgressed another Roman law, which forbade the introduction of unrecognized religious sects. The third charge was the profanation of the temple. If this last charge could have been proven against Paul the sentence of death would have fallen against him. — Gaebelein, page 390.

__________

Nazarenes (v.5) — The term is used of Christ in Acts 2:22, 3:6; 4:10, 6:14, 22:8, 26:9. It is here, for the first time, applied to His followers. In the lips of opponents, it was already a term of contempt, and was to come more and more into vogue among the Jews as their name for the despised and hated Christians. — Walker, page 503.

__________

According to their testimony (v.6-7) everything had gone smoothly and they were just about to give Paul a fair trial when Lysias “came upon them” and “with great violence took him away!” This was a more brazen misrepresentation than anything Lysias had written, for not only were they about to kill Paul when Lysias rescued him, but they had almost torn him to pieces a second time and had finally taken part with more than 40 assassins in a vicious plot to do away with him. Indeed, it was Lysias who had commanded them to give Paul a hearing and they had then fought so among themselves that Paul’s very life had again been endangered. — Stam, page 92.

__________

The Jews’ strategy went farther than the formal charges, involving the propriety of Lysias’ having sent Paul to Felix for a Roman trial. In another brazen departure from the truth Tertullus declared that the Jews had apprehended Paul and would have judged him according to their law, but that Lysias had come and “with great violence” had taken him out of their hands, commanding them to make their complaints before Felix.

This, of course, was flatly contradictory to Lysias’ report and an obvious attempt to turn the tables on him, making him the disturber of the peace, so that Felix might be induced to give Paul back into their hands — and that the assassins might yet have their opportunity to strike.

Finally, Tertullus suggests that Paul be examined by torture, whether or not Felix delivers him into their hands, indicating further that their motive in all this was purely revenge.

examining (v.8) anakrino is used forensically of a searching examination by torture (See John 19:1, Luke 23:14; Acts 22:24, 29, etc.) Since The Greek relative is in the singular, Tertullus could not have been suggesting such an examination of the Jews, nor, in the context, could he have meant that Lysias should be thus examined. The “whom” then, refers to Paul. — Stam, pages 89-90.

²³ And he called for two centurions, saying, “Prepare two hundred soldiers, seventy horsemen, and two hundred spearmen to go to Caesarea at the third hour of the night;

²⁴ and provide mounts to set Paul on, and bring him safely to Felix the governor.”

²⁵ He wrote a letter in the following manner:

²⁶ Claudius Lysias, To the most excellent governor Felix: Greetings.

²⁷ This man was seized by the Jews and was about to be killed by them. Coming with the troops I rescued him, having learned that he was a Roman.

²⁸ And when I wanted to know the reason they accused him, I brought him before their council.

²⁹ I found out that he was accused concerning questions of their law, but had nothing charged against him deserving of death or chains.

³⁰ And when it was told me that the Jews lay in wait for the man, I sent him immediately to you, and also commanded his accusers to state before you the charges against him. Farewell.

³¹ Then the soldiers, as they were commanded, took Paul and brought him by night to Antipatris.

³² The next day they left the horsemen to go on with him, and returned to the barracks.

³³ When they came to Caesarea and had delivered the letter to the governor, they also presented Paul to him.

³⁴ And when the governor had read it , he asked what province he was from. And when he understood that he was from Cilicia,

³⁵ he said, “I will hear you when your accusers also have come.” And he commanded him to be kept in Herod’s Praetorium.

two centurions (v.23) — of the 10 reporting to him — these were probably the most reliable

make ready (v.23) — fully armed

spearmen (v.23) = lit. “right hand graspers” — probably light infantry who carried a spear in the right hand

third hour (v.23) — 9 pm

Felix the governor (v.24) — Antonius Felix, a Greek by birth, was the younger brother of Pallas, the emperor Claudius’s favorite. The two brothers had formerly been slaves of Antonia, Claudius’s mother, but she had made them freedmen and advanced them. Pallas’s influence at court procured Felix a military command in Samaria under the procurator Ventidius Cumanus; and, on the latter’s degradation from office, Felix became procurator of Judaea in his stead (about A.D. 52). He proved to be a cruel, corrupt and avaricious governor. Tacitus the historian tells us that “he wielded the power of a king with the mind of a slave.” During his last two years of office, serious riots occurred in Caesarea between the Jewish and Syrian inhabitants, and Felix acted in a very high-handed manner. He was recalled to Rome to answer the charges against him, and only escaped condemnation through his brother’s influence. He is then lost to view in history. — Walker, page 497.

having learned that he was a Roman (v.27) — a lie to make himself look better. Lysias thought Paul was Egyptian (Acts 21:38). He didn’t learn Paul was Roman until after he’d intervened and when he was about to have him scourged (Acts 22:24-25)

Antipatris (v.31) — A city founded by Herod the Great, and so called in honor of his father. It was about 35 miles from Jerusalem, a little more than half way to Caesarea. Here the party halted, being now beyond the reach of surprise. — Walker, page 498.

what province (v.34) — to see if he had jurisdiction

Praetorium (v.35) — Built by Herod the Great as a royal residence and now occupied by the Roman procurator. The Romans called it ” a praetorium”, and it was a fortress with a soldier garrison as well as a palace. Paul was kept in military custody, in the guard-room attached to the palace-garrison. — Walker, pages 499-500

¹² And when it was day, some of the Jews banded together and bound themselves under an oath, saying that they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul.

¹³ Now there were more than forty who had formed this conspiracy.

¹⁴ They came to the chief priests and elders, and said, “We have bound ourselves under a great oath that we will eat nothing until we have killed Paul.

¹⁵ Now you, therefore, together with the council, suggest to the commander that he be brought down to you tomorrow, as though you were going to make further inquiries concerning him; but we are ready to kill him before he comes near.”

¹⁶ So when Paul’s sister’s son heard of their ambush, he went and entered the barracks and told Paul.

¹⁷ Then Paul called one of the centurions to him and said, “Take this young man to the commander, for he has something to tell him.”

¹⁸ So he took him and brought him to the commander and said, “Paul the prisoner called me to him and asked me to bring this young man to you. He has something to say to you.”

¹⁹ Then the commander took him by the hand, went aside, and asked privately, “What is it that you have to tell me?”

²⁰ And he said, “The Jews have agreed to ask that you bring Paul down to the council tomorrow, as though they were going to inquire more fully about him.

²¹ But do not yield to them, for more than forty of them lie in wait for him, men who have bound themselves by an oath that they will neither eat nor drink till they have killed him; and now they are ready, waiting for the promise from you.”

²² So the commander let the young man depart, and commanded him , “Tell no one that you have revealed these things to me.”

curse (v.12) — They declared themselves anathema. The pledged their own destruction if they failed to keep their vow.

chief priests and elders (v.14) — the Sadducees on the council (Acts 5:17)

This is the only mention of Paul’s sister or her son (v.16) — or anyone in Paul’s family — in Scripture. They may have lived there, or his nephew may have been in Jerusalem as a student or to attend the feast.

young man (v.17) = youth

agreed (v.20) — In the New Testament, the Greek word here translated “agreed” is only used in reference to agreements against Christ or Paul (Luke 22:5; John 9:22).

I wonder what happened to the 40+ Jews who pledged not to eat or drink until Paul was dead. Did they really die of thirst and hunger? I’m guessing they broke their vows, or their buddies in the council exempted them.

Earlier in Acts, when the kingdom gospel was in full force, Peter and Paul were both released from jail miraculously. But now, at the end of the transition period, God (who had told Paul the night before that he would witness in Rome) effected (or maybe even just foresaw) his release by the simple, non-miraculous method of having his nephew find out about the plot.

⁶ But when Paul perceived that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, “Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee; concerning the hope and resurrection of the dead I am being judged!”

⁷ And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided.

⁸ For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection—and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both.

⁹ Then there arose a loud outcry. And the scribes of the Pharisees’ party arose and protested, saying, “We find no evil in this man; but if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him, let us not fight against God.”

¹⁰ Now when there arose a great dissension, the commander, fearing lest Paul might be pulled to pieces by them, commanded the soldiers to go down and take him by force from among them, and bring him into the barracks.

¹¹ But the following night the Lord stood by him and said, “Be of good cheer, Paul; for as you have testified for Me in Jerusalem, so you must also bear witness at Rome.”

cried out (v.6) = lit. “continued crying out” — Paul later seems to have regretted this (Acts 24:20-21).

a Pharisee, a son of a Pharisee (v.6) — In Philippians 3:4-8, Paul calls these things “dung.”

The next utterance of the apostle is still more strange. Once again he addresses the council as men and brethren. Then he cried “I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee; of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.” This is the third claim he makes and it shows how far he had drifted. He had claimed being a Jew, then had pleaded his Roman citizenship, and now before the council, he reminds them that he is a Pharisee and the son of a Pharisee. Later from his Roman prison he wrote to the Philippians that he counted this all as dung. He had done so before. Here no doubt is a relapse. — Gaebelein, page 382.

scribes (v9) — expounders and teachers of Jewish law, mostly belonging to the Pharisees’ party. They were concerned with the letter of the law as well as rituals and traditions.

a spirit or an angel (v.9) — They wouldn’t admit that Paul saw the risen Christ.

The circumcision apostles and the multitudes of Jewish believers at Jerusalem had for years believed and proclaimed the resurrection of Christ, yet the unbelieving Jews, even now, tolerated them. Why this great outcry against Paul. It was because he had, by revelation, preached the resurrection of “the Seed of David” in a new light as the basis for a proclamation of freedom from the law and salvation by grace to Jew and Gentile alike (see 2 Timothy 2:7-9; Romans 4:22-25; 10:9, etc.). This was what they so bitterly opposed. — Stam, page 71.

I can’t help wondering if Paul was totally discouraged with himself. He’d been told not to go to Jerusalem by the Holy Spirit, but he’d gone anyway because of his zeal for reaching the Jews. He’d been talked, by James, into participating in a law ceremony which was contrary to everything he’d written in Galatians, but he’d done it because of his zeal for the Jews. And now he was beaten and imprisoned and hated; his ministry was in serious danger; his desire to go to Rome evidently thwarted. His discouragement and frustration had caused him to speak out against the high priest and to appeal to his former position as a Pharisee, both of which he had to feel were mistakes.

But Paul served a God of grace. In the darkness of his cell, the Lord appeared and told him to cheer up. The Lord was with him and would allow him to continue his ministry. It wasn’t as a prisoner that Paul expected to go to Rome, but as a prisoner, he would be a witness for the Lord.

This is not the only crisis in which Paul was given supernatural encouragement. He had been thus sustained in the dangerous days at Corinth (Acts 18:9-10) and would be again in the fearful storm on the way to Rome (Acts 27:22-24) and at his first appearance before Caesar (2 Timothy 4:16-17). — Stam, page 73.

 ¹ Then Paul, looking earnestly at the council, said, “Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.”

² And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth.

³ Then Paul said to him, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! For you sit to judge me according to the law, and do you command me to be struck contrary to the law?”

⁴ And those who stood by said, “Do you revile God’s high priest?”

⁵ Then Paul said, “I did not know, brethren, that he was the high priest; for it is written, ‘You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.’”

earnestly beholding (v.1) — perhaps this indicates that Paul was no longer acting humbly before his accusers but as an equal, recognizing that his chances were better with the Romans and that this was not a true trial.

council (v.1) — the Sanhedrin — As a Pharisee, Paul was formerly a member.

I have lived (v.1) = lit. “I have behaved as a citizen”

Ananias (v2) — Son of Nedebaeus, high priest A.D. 47-59. He received his appointment through Herod of Chalcis. On account of acts of violence against the Samaritans during his term of office, he was summoned to Rome for inquiry, but was acquitted through the influence of the younger Agrippa.

Jospehus describes his avariciousness and acts of robbery and violence. He seems to have been deposed towards the end of Felix’s tenure of office as procurator. His treatment of Paul agrees with what we otherwise know of him. He met with a violent death at the hands of the Sicarii some years after his deposition from office, in A.D. 66. — Walker, page 487.

whited wall (v.3) — hypocrite — a whitewashed coat of paint on a precarious, about-t0-fall-down wall

I did not know (v.5) — some say this is because of Paul’s poor eyesight, some say it’s because Paul didn’t consider Ananais to be worthy of the office and some say Paul truly didn’t know. (See Stam, below.)

In the first place, it would not be like Paul to “speak evil of dignitaries.” Second, Israel’s high priests, at this time in her history, were appointed with gross irregularity, partly due to national apostasy from God’s commands and partly to Rome’s intrusion, so that one illegitimate high priest after another held office and the council was even presided over, at times, by substitute “high priests.” Under these circumstances — and Paul having been in Jerusalem but a few days — it is quite understandable that he would not recognize the high priest.

Had the apostle known that it was the high priest who had ordered him smitten he would have refrained from rebuking him in view of the command in Exodus 22:28. But having done so he merely explained how this had come about and retracted neither his rebuke nor his prediction. The more shame that the high priest should be guilty of so brazenly violating the basic rules of justice. — Stam, pages 68-69.

written (v.5) — Exodus 22:28, from the Septuagint

Some commentaries state that Paul was upset — angry at his treatment as a criminal, frustrated by the rejection of the Jews he came to help, sore from his beating and rough treatment, and probably tired. They maintain that his opening statement was self-justification and not Spirit-led, and that in response to being hit he lost control and was acting in his old nature. Stam has a different take (below).

Fault has been found with the apostle for not showing the same humility as had his Lord when similarly outraged. In this connection it should be observed that our Lord had come to earth especially to take the blame and bear the penalty for the sins of others and particularly for His people, Israel, while on this occasion Paul faced Israel’s rulers after their final demonstration of apostasy against Messiah. The actions of both our Lord and Paul on these two occasions are therefore representative; the one of God’s mercy to Israel, the other of His judgment upon them. — Stam, page 67.

²² And they listened to him until this word, and then they raised their voices and said, “Away with such a fellow from the earth, for he is not fit to live!”

²³ Then, as they cried out and tore off their clothes and threw dust into the air,

²⁴ the commander ordered him to be brought into the barracks, and said that he should be examined under scourging, so that he might know why they shouted so against him.

²⁵ And as they bound him with thongs, Paul said to the centurion who stood by, “Is it lawful for you to scourge a man who is a Roman, and uncondemned?”

²⁶ When the centurion heard that, he went and told the commander, saying, “Take care what you do, for this man is a Roman.”

²⁷ Then the commander came and said to him, “Tell me, are you a Roman?”
He said, “Yes.”

²⁸ The commander answered, “With a large sum I obtained this citizenship.”
And Paul said, “But I was born a citizen.”

²⁹Then immediately those who were about to examine him withdrew from him; and the commander was also afraid after he found out that he was a Roman, and because he had bound him.

³⁰ The next day, because he wanted to know for certain why he was accused by the Jews, he released him from his bonds, and commanded the chief priests and all their council to appear, and brought Paul down and set him before them.

this word (v.22) — Gentiles

The cause of the great uprising that followed Paul’s address should be kept in mind as we read this part of the narrative. The multitude raised no commotion as the apostle related how he had found Jesus to be the Messiah. Tens of thousands in Jerusalem believed this and the rest tolerated it (See Acts 21:20). What enraged them was Paul’s preaching of the finished work of the now-risen Christ and the consequent replacement of law by grace sufficient for uncircumcised Gentiles as well as Jews (21:28). This was the issue even among the believers at Jerusalem (See  21:20-21).

And this is still the great issue today. “Christianity” as an offshoot of Judaism, with believers in Christ under the law, is tolerated, but true Christianity, with its freedom from the law and its riches of grace cannot be countenanced! Even some leaders of Fundamentalism pronounce it anathema. This, the glorious all-sufficiency of Christ, is what Satan hates and opposes most bitterly. — Stam, pages 49-50.

tore off their clothes (v.23) — their outer garments, perhaps in preparation for stoning

scourging (v.24) — torture to find the truth or to force a confession. In this case, to find out why the Jews were so demonstrative in their hatred of Paul.

bound (v.25) — The Roman method of scourging was to strip the man and either tie him to a pillar in a bending position or to stretch him on a frame. He was then lashed with leather thongs weighted with pieces of lead. The verb here used is peculiar to this verse, and means “to stretch forward” into a position for scourging. — Walker, page 483.

lawful (v.25) — It was against Roman law to scourge a Roman citizen.

you (v.27) — emphatic — Are YOU (whom I took to be a Jewish trouble-maker) a Roman?

sum (v.28) — It is known that, under the emperor Claudius, his wife Messalina and his chief ministers sold the Roman citizenship. It was most likely through having purchased the privilege under that emperor that the chief captain bore the name Claudius Lysias (see Acts 23:26). — Walker, page 484.

but I (v.28) — emphatic, with an air of dignity

born (v.28) — We don’t know how Paul’s family became Roman citizens.

council (v.30) — the Sanhedrin

If the unbelieving Jews were Paul’s bitter enemies then “James and the elders” along with any of the 12 apostles who were present, were his very doubtful friends. Neither now, nor later, do we find one of them standing at his side, even though James, Peter and John had officially and publicly acknowledged him, some years back, as the apostle of grace and the apostle to the Gentiles.

Indeed, the compromise which James and his party had persuaded Paul to make had produced nothing — but this uproar — while they stayed in the background. — Stam, pages 57-58.

¹⁷ “Now it happened, when I returned to Jerusalem and was praying in the temple, that I was in a trance

¹⁸ and saw Him saying to me, ‘Make haste and get out of Jerusalem quickly, for they will not receive your testimony concerning Me.’

¹⁹ So I said, ‘Lord, they know that in every synagogue I imprisoned and beat those who believe on You.

²⁰ And when the blood of Your martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by consenting to his death, and guarding the clothes of those who were killing him.’

²¹ Then He said to me, ‘Depart, for I will send you far from here to the Gentiles.’”

Paul’s conversation with the Lord in the temple is not recorded in Acts 9.

Paul considered himself responsible, at least in part, for the unbelief of the Jews.

His defense was that he loved the Jews, but that God had sent him to the Gentiles.

Paul hoped that his own testimony of his change of heart from a persecutor to a follower of Christ would convince the Jews in Jerusalem to do likewise, but the Lord told him they would not listen. In fact, his life was in danger (Acts 9:29). If Paul had followed the Lord’s instructions to leave Jerusalem, he wouldn’t have been in the position he was in at the time covered in Acts 22.

returned to Jerusalem (v.17) — Acts 9:26

trance (v.17) = lit. “a carrying outside one’s self”

imprisoned and beat (.v19) — tense indicates a continuous action

12 “Then a certain Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good testimony with all the Jews who dwelt there,

13 came to me; and he stood and said to me, ‘Brother Saul, receive your sight.’ And at that same hour I looked up at him.

14 Then he said, ‘The God of our fathers has chosen you that you should know His will, and see the Just One, and hear the voice of His mouth.

15 For you will be His witness to all men of what you have seen and heard.

16 And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’

Paul, in talking to the Jews who were “zealous for the law,” (Acts 21:20) mentions that Ananais was “a devout man according to the law” (v.12). He does not mention Christ by name but calls him the Just One (v.14). He also does not mention the Gentiles until later.

chose (v.14) = appointed, lit. “to take in hand”

⁶ “Now it happened, as I journeyed and came near Damascus at about noon, suddenly a great light from heaven shone around me.

⁷ And I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?’

⁸ So I answered, ‘Who are You, Lord?’ And He said to me, ‘I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting.’

⁹ “And those who were with me indeed saw the light and were afraid,but they did not hear the voice of Him who spoke to me.

¹⁰ So I said, ‘What shall I do, Lord?’ And the Lord said to me, ‘Arise and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all things which are appointed for you to do.’

¹¹ And since I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of those who were with me, I came into Damascus.

This is Paul’s personal account of his conversion which was earlier given in Luke’s words in Acts 9:3-8.

great light (v.6) — brighter than the sun (Acts 26:13) — evident especially as it was noon

heard not the voice (v.9) — Acts 9:7 says that Paul’s companions heard the voice.

Paul heard a voice speaking to him in definite and articulate words; whereas those who traveled with him only heard the sound of a voice but caught no words. This appears from the difference in the Greek construction used in Acts 9:7, and accounts for the statement of Acts 22:9. — Walker, page 207.

 ¹ “Brethren and fathers, hear my defense before you now.”

² And when they heard that he spoke to them in the Hebrew language, they kept all the more silent. Then he said:

³ “I am indeed a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, taught according to the strictness of our fathers’ law, and was zealous toward God as you all are today.

⁴ I persecuted this Way to the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women,

⁵ as also the high priest bears me witness, and all the council of the elders, from whom I also received letters to the brethren, and went to Damascus to bring in chains even those who were there to Jerusalem to be punished.”

Paul made his defense on the same stairs on which Pilate condemned Christ 26 or so years earlier.

brought up (v.3) — educated

Gamaliel (v.3) — see Acts 5:34.

zealous toward God (v.3) — For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God (Romans 10:2-3).

Note how skillfully he implies that he is no longer [a zealot] while Acts 21:20 informs us that even the Jewish believers were still zealots for the law. — Stam, page 48.

persecuted (v.4) — Galatians 1:13-14

this way (v.4) — Christianity (Acts 24:14)

high priest (v.5) — Ananias

elders (v.5) — Sanhedrin and others, the “council of elders”