The gospel on trial, Acts 23

For the sake of context, let me remind you of the circumstances which have occurred prior to this chapter.  Paul had arrived in Jerusalem, and gone to great extremes to try to make sure he did not offend the Jews, even to the point of helping certain Jewish men consummate their Nazarite vows, which Paul may have participated in as well which included purifying himself, shaving his head and making a sacrifices in the temple.  But certain Jews from Asia had come as well and having seen a certain Greek man in the city with Paul assumed that he had brought him and other Gentiles into the temple and defiled it.  Or if they did not assume that, they used it as a pretext to accuse Paul of a great crime against the temple.  So the whole city ends up in a riot in which Paul was being mobbed literally to death. 

Someone ran to the Roman garrison and told the commander there was a riot occurring at the temple mount, so he took a group of soldiers and rushed to the temple area and took Paul prisoner.  Unable to find out why the riot had started or what Paul had done he took him away to question him, and when Paul spoke to him in the Greek language the commander was surprised to find that Paul was not some Egyptian terrorist leader that he had thought him to be.  So Paul asked before he went into the barracks if he could speak to the people.  And the commander agreed.  Paul saw it as an opportunity to preach to the Jews at Jerusalem.  The whole city was gathered there and became dead silent when he began to speak to them in Hebrew.

So Paul started out by giving his testimony.  He told how he had been one of them, even a leader of the Jewish religion, a Pharisee taught under the famed rabbi Gamaliel.  He told them how he was on the road to Damascus to persecute the Christians when a voice from heaven called out to him and a bright light blinded him.  He told how it was Jesus Christ, who they had put to death.  He told how he was saved by faith in Christ and was baptized.  Now the Jews listen quietly to him of all that he had to say  up to the point where he said that Christ had told him to go and preach the gospel to the Gentiles.  And at that point they burst into another riot.  Once again the commander of the Roman soldiers had to intervene and take Paul  away in order to prevent him from coming to harm. 

The commander still didn’t know what all the ruckus was about.  So at first the commander thought he would just start to scourge Paul until he confessed whatever crime he was guilty of.  But when Paul told him he was a Roman citizen and it was not lawful to scourge an uncondemned man, then he ordered for the chief priests and the Council to assemble so that he could find out what they had against him.

Now then our text today picks it up at that point.  Paul is brought before the Sanhedrin, the ruling council of the Jews made up of 70 leaders, plus the high priest.   Now I have entitled today’s message “The Gospel on Trial.”  If you look at our website, you will notice that a large portion of my messages in Acts have been about some effect of the gospel.  In Defense of the Gospel, Bound for the Sake of the Gospel, The Power of the Gospel, and many more if you care to look.  Following that pattern, today is the Gospel on Trial. And for the sake of breaking down this chapter into sections, I have made an outline as follows;  the Council, the Commendation, and the Conspiracy.  We are going to start of course with the Council.

As I said, the Council is hurriedly called to the commander’s headquarters for a hearing, a makeshift trial of the Apostle Paul.  It’s interesting that Paul’s accusers are the leaders of what is really the church of God which had become apostate.  Judaism was the national religion of Israel.  The Jews were allowed a certain degree of self rule under Rome’s authority.  So on the one side you have 71 of the most esteemed leaders of Judaism, on the other side you have the Apostle Paul, and acting as the judge and jury is the Roman commander, who would have been in charge of  10 centurions and 1000 Roman soldiers.  He was the face of the martial law Rome imposed on it’s territories such as Israel, who were allowed a certain degree of self rule, but they were superintended by the Roman government who settled any problems that the Jews were not able to deal with, or had not been given authority to handle.  So it is a trial of sorts, and Paul is defending himself against what amounts to 71 lawyers, with a biased judge sitting on the seat of judgment who has the power to condemn Paul to death if he desires.

And it’s interesting that Paul is given the floor first.  I’m not an authority about judicial proceedings, but I believe it is customary to announce the charges, or to bring charges against a person before you hear from the defense.  But in this case it is as if it’s a foregone conclusion that Paul must be guilty of some grievous crime, and though they do not know what it is, they will give Paul the floor in order to try to establish his innocence.  It is a reversal of proper procedure.  He is guilty and has to prove his innocence. We are going to see in the next few chapters that they never do come to a point of having anything to formally charge Paul with.  They will set him before kings in order to try to find something to accuse him of, and eventually even send him to Caesar, but they will never have a criminal charge against him.

Paul’s situation is very similar to that of Christ.  Wrongfully accused, wrongfully arrested, beaten without being found guilty, tried in kangaroo court and the Roman judge repeatedly says I find no fault in this man, and yet the Jews cry out for His blood.  And finally Pilate goes along with them and orders Christ’s execution.  It will be a couple of years before Paul is executed, but there are many parallels in his ordeal to Christ’s.  Paul would write the Philippians later and say, in Phil. 3:10 “that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death.”  He would indeed know the fellowship of His sufferings.  And I would suggest that as believers, we too must share in the fellowship of His sufferings if we are going to share in His glory, even as Hebrews 2 makes clear. We may not be thrown in prison, but to some extent we will learn obedience from the things which we suffer, if we are truly followers of Christ.  Suffering is the means by which God sanctifies His people. Heb. 12:6 “FOR THOSE WHOM THE LORD LOVES HE DISCIPLINES,AND HE SCOURGES EVERY SON WHOM HE RECEIVES."

Perhaps Paul realized the irony of these events as he looked intently at the Council gathered together before him.  He used to be a part of the Sanhedrin, though 20 years earlier.  Now he looks intently at them, and says earnestly to them, “Brethren, I have lived my life with a perfectly good conscience before God up to this day.”  Notice he calls them brethren, acknowledging that he was one of them.  And another point that should be noticed is the word translated “lived” technically should be translated “lived as a citizen,” or “conducted myself as a citizen.”  Now that’s important, because he is not talking about achieving spiritual perfection here, but about being a model citizen of the nation of Israel.  He had broken no laws.  That is what he had originally been accused of.  And so Paul defends his actions.  He says he has a clear conscience before God.

And in response the high priest orders him to be struck in the mouth.  The word there is a stronger word than a slap.  It means to beat someone. 

Now there are a lot of Monday morning quarterbacks out there that seem to love to take this instance as well as some other things that Paul did during this time and say that Paul sinned.  That he loses his temper.  Some say that his whole desire to go to Jerusalem was a prideful, egotistical thing which caused him to be unnecessarily arrested. But I do not happen to agree with the critics of Paul, even though many of them are men that I have great respect for.   I tend to think that unless specifically indicated by scripture that Paul was in error, we should give him the benefit of the doubt.

But specifically, most of them find fault with Paul’s response to getting punched in the mouth.  Perhaps that’s because they haven’t been punched in the mouth themselves, and that makes them a little less compassionate towards those that are.  Have you ever noticed that?  Have you ever noticed how people who haven’t ever had a particular problem tend to be less compassionate towards those that have a problem such as alcoholism or drug addiction or things like that? It’s easy to become judgmental and look down on those caught up in such a thing as having somehow been more deserving, that they must have brought it upon themselves.  But I would remind you that we are all sinners.  And the sins of some men go before them, and the sins of others follow after.  But we are all sinners. And sooner or later, your sins will find you out.

But I want to defend Paul’s answer and response as not being sinful.  He says in vs. 3 in response to getting punched in the mouth, “God is going to strike you, you whitewashed wall! Do you sit to try me according to the Law, and in violation of the Law order me to be struck?”  Now a lot of Bible scholars say that Paul lost his temper here.  But I would remind you that this is supposed to be a court of law.  Paul is acting as his own lawyer.  And I think that he has every right to yell, “Objection!”  I think he has every right to be angry.  We don’t know if he was angry or not, but I can assure you that I would be angry if I got punched in the mouth for no reason whatsoever. 

But for Paul’s innocence I will appeal to the example of Jesus who entered into the temple on two separate occasions and made a whip of cords, and kicked over the money changers tables and drove out of the temple the scoundrels that were soaking the poor people who came to make sacrifices.  I would have to say that Jesus was a little bit angry.  When you start kicking over tables and chairs and beating people with whips I think it’s safe to say that you’re angry.  So Jesus got angry.  He had a righteous anger.  He said the zeal for My Father’s house has consumed Me.  I think there is a place for anger.  Eph. 4:26 says, “Be angry and sin not.”  Jesus had a right to be angry because the Sanhedrin and the chief priests were prostituting the temple and taking unfair advantage over people who were coming to worship.

And Paul had good reason to be angry.  The Sanhedrin were claiming that Paul had violated the law of the temple, and yet they were violaters of the sanctity of the temple.  They not only robbed people of their money and their sacrifices, but they robbed them of the truth of the scriptures.  They had adulterated the scriptures for their profit.  Furthermore they had put to death the Messiah of the Jews because He had threatened their position, their power and their profit center.  So they murdered the Son of God. 

So I believe Paul rather vehemently responded, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall.”  Well, how about that response, the critics say?  Maybe Paul should have turned the other cheek.  He should not have said that.  After all, whitewashed wall refers to a whitewashed tomb which had dead man’s bones in it.  It looked white and clean on the outside, but it is corrupted on the inside.  And Paul didn’t have to be so mean.  He didn’t have to call them that.  He wasn’t very loving.

Well, once again Jesus said basically the same thing to the Pharisees in Matt. 23:27-28  "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness. So you, too, outwardly appear righteous to men, but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.”  That actually is only one of eight “woes” that Jesus gives in that chapter, all directed at the scribes and Pharisees.  So we might argue that Paul essentially is following the example set by Jesus and perhaps even tones it down a bit.

Now the question of turning the other cheek is a fair one and we should explain the difference here.  As I said earlier, the Sanhedrin represented the rulers of Judaism which was supposed to be the church of God.  They claimed to represent God, to teach the truth of God and lead the people to faith in God.  And that is the reason that there is a harsher judgment towards those that are teachers than those that are followers.  Jesus had nothing but compassion towards the lost sheep of Israel.  And Paul as well is in Jerusalem for the sake of bringing the gospel to the Jews, and for the hope that some of them will be saved he is willing to risk his life.  But for the religious leaders both Jesus and Paul had scathing criticism, because they saw through their hypocrisy.  Consequently, as a pastor I have compassion towards those that are trapped in churches that are not teaching the gospel, or that have been led astray by false teachers. But I have harsh criticism for those that teach a false way and put stumbling blocks before the people.  And the Bible backs up that distinction. James 3:1 “Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment.”

So Paul makes the point that the High Priest was guilty of breaking the law for having Paul struck before even being charged or certainly found guilty of a charge.  And Paul was absolutely correct according to Duet. 25 which says that a man has to be found guilty to be beaten.  And according to historians, Paul's words ended up being prophetic. The corrupt High Priest’s final days - despite all his scheming and bribes - were lived as a hunted animal and ended by being brutally assassinated by  the hands of his own people.

But the Jews rebuke Paul for his response, and say “Do you revile God’s high priest?” And Paul apologizes by saying, “I was not aware, brethren, that he was high priest; for it is written, ‘YOU SHALL NOT SPEAK EVIL OF A RULER OF YOUR PEOPLE.’”  Again, the critics use this as an example that Paul realized that he had done wrong, and was guilty of losing his temper.  But there are a couple of things that counter that argument.  One is that the Council was not seated in it’s usual quarters, nor more than likely wearing their ceremonial robes.  So it was just a guy in the crowd as far as Paul was concerned that told them to strike him.  He would not have recognized him without his ceremonial robes or his seat in the Sanhedrin.  And secondly, there is the issue of Paul’s eyesight.  There are at least a couple of places in Paul’s epistles where he makes reference to his eyesight, and the idea seems to be that he had very poor vision, possibly due to his experience on the road to Damascus. Though God had healed him, yet it’s possible that God left a tangible reminder which Paul later called his thorn in the flesh which God did not take from him.  But again, it’s a good possibility that Paul was unable to see well enough or determine from the situation that the man speaking was the high priest.

Well, I think at that point that Paul realizes he is not going to get a fair trial.  He is having to defend himself for something he didn’t do.  Whatever he says is going to be used against him.  The Roman commander is going to let his accusers beat him up right in his courtroom.  And they are not going to even formally charge him.  So Paul comes up with another tactic.  He is well versed in the politics of the Sanhedrin.  He knows it is made up of two political groups that are essentially at odds with one another doctrinally, but politically they are allies in their resentment towards Rome.  And Paul is astute enough to know that they are united in their resentment towards Christianity.  Even more so than they hated Rome they hate Christ.  Remember when Christ was being examined they cried out, “We have no king but Caesar!” They feigned allegiance to Rome, but their hatred for Christianity was obvious.

So Paul’s strategy was to use his opponents differences against one another.  It was basically a strategy of “divide and conquer.”  There is an ancient proverb which says, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”  And that encapsulates the restrained animosity of the Pharisees and Sadducees, the two groups that made up the Sanhedrin.  But Paul as a former member realizes how deep the division is.  And one of the main points is that the Sadducees do not believe in spirits, or angels, nor in the resurrection.  But the Pharisees believe in all of them.  So it was as if there was a conservative branch and a liberal branch of the Sanhedrin. 

Paul, perhaps realizing that if he is going to get out of there alive he has to get the whole case thrown out of court, says, “Brethren, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees; I am on trial for the hope and resurrection of the dead!”  And that started another near riot, with the Pharisees saying “We find nothing wrong with this man; suppose a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?” The argument became so heated, that the commander was afraid that they would tear Paul in pieces.  Each side was literally pulling him apart.  So once again the commander has to rescue Paul by force and take him to the barracks in order to keep harm from happening to him.

Now I have spent all this time covering my first point, and I have two more points to go.  So I will just briefly say something about each of the remaining points.  In a way, they are sort of the application to this story.  Paul is on trial for the gospel.  And in some way, sooner or later we will all be on trial for the gospel if we really are contending for the faith.  We will encounter opposition.  We will encounter hostility.  We will be attacked. Sometimes we will find that even enemies of one another will unite in their hatred for us. Many times like Paul we will find ourselves alone, seemingly abandoned, feeling like everyone is against us.  Wondering where God has gone when we needed Him.  Wondering why God doesn’t answer. 2Tim. 3:12 “Indeed, all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.”

One thing I love about the Psalms is that David often talks about those very kinds of things.  “My God, My God, why have You forsaken me?” (Ps. 22) Or Ps. 3, “O Lord, how my adversaries are increased! Many are rising up against me. Many are saying of my soul, ‘there is no help for him in God.’”  David cries out to God to vindicate him because he is righteous, in Ps. 7.  “Arise O Lord, in thine anger, Lift up Thyself against the rage of my adversaries.”  He says in Psalm 6 that at night he makes his bed swim with his crying, and he dissolves his couch with his tears.  In Psalm 56 David says that God keeps his tears in a bottle.  I read that it was a custom in the ancient Mideast, when people mourned at a funeral, to catch their tears in a bottle and give them to the person they mourned for as a token of their affection and care.  What a picture that presents of God’s care for us when we are afflicted.

So here is Paul, probably quite dejected, bruised, feeling abandoned perhaps, overwhelmed by the hatred towards him, and he is in the prison and probably considering that his life is soon to be over.  I’m sure a godly man such as he was praying some of the prayers of David.  And suddenly in the middle of the night, in the darkness, the Lord appears to him.  Luke isn’t big on dramatics, he just states the facts.  But what a dramatic thing.  Twenty years after the Damascus road experience, the Lord appears at his side and says, “Take courage; for as you have solemnly witnessed to My cause at Jerusalem, so you must witness at Rome also.”

I love the fact that it says the Lord appeared at his side.  Not way off in a vision in heaven somewhere.  Not far off, but at his side.  Proverbs 18:24 says, “there is a friend that sticks closer than a brother.” Psalm 34:18, “The LORD is near to the brokenhearted, And saves those who are crushed in spirit.”  And Psalm 145:18

“The LORD is near to all who call upon Him, To all who call upon Him in truth.”

I was talking to a young man the other day about prayer and he was asking if he should pause for a while when he is praying to try to hear if God is answering him.  And I said if you want to hear from God, then read His Word, don’t listen for voices in your head.  God speaks through His word.  Paul was an apostle.  And this is one of the special times that the Lord manifested Himself to Paul and spoke to him.  But we have the written word of God which Peter says is a more sure word of prophecy.  Besides, as I told this young man, if you think you hear a little voice in your head, how will you know if it is of God?  It has to be corroborated with the word of God, in order to know it is the word of God.  That is the problem with the pope speaking ex cathedra. They claim that his words are the words of God, therefore they supersede the written word of God.  And that is how they get the doctrine of the assumption of Mary and other false doctrines.  So we can rely on the written word of God. 

But Paul is comforted by the word of the Lord.  He recieves commendation from the Lord. He knows that he will not die before he gets to Rome.  His commission is confirmed by the Lord, he is meant for Rome.  And I’m sure that was a great comfort and encouragement to Paul.  When we are discouraged, that is where we need to go.  To the word of God.  To the promises of God. Psalm 12:6-7  “The words of the LORD are pure words; As silver tried in a furnace on the earth, refined seven times. You, O LORD, will keep them; You will preserve him from this generation forever.”

Finally, the last point quickly, the conspiracy.  We read the story, I will not retell it in the little time we have left.  But I want to point out one major principle.  What we see here is the providence of God.  We don’t see a miracle.  A miracle is when God breaks through the natural world, the natural processes, and performs a supernatural event.  Providence is when God performs His will using natural circumstances to accomplish His purposes. 

There is a great debate in theological circles between Calvinism and Armenianism.  And I hate the exclusiveness of both of those titles.  As if one necessarily excludes the other.  Basically, when you hear those names used, they refer to the sovereignty of God versus the free will of man.  I do not have time to debate the merits or detriments of each of those doctrinal positions today.  But I will say this.  Providence is God using His sovereignty to work through man’s free will in order to achieve the purpose and provision of God.

And we see that illustrated here.  The evil conspiracy of the Jews is to murder Paul.  But providentially God has placed Paul’s nephew nearby to overhear their plot.  And in turn he tells Paul, and Paul has him tell the commander.  And then the commander makes a military decision, a tactical decision and arranges for 470 solders to escort Paul out at 9pm at night and marches 35 miles to Antipatris arriving the next day.  Then the soldiers return and the horsemen continue on with Paul to Caesarea which is another 35 miles or so, which is a Gentile city.  And Paul is delivered to the Governor Felix.  And Felix has Paul put up in Herod’s Praetorium, which was the former palace of Herod.  Not a supernatural miracle in all of those proceedings.  People seem to be making decisions on their own, and yet God superintends all these random circumstances to bring about His purposes.  That is a greater miracle than sending an angel to sweep Paul up and deliver him.  And I believe that is the predominant way that God uses today to work out His will in the world; through providence.

I can’t help but remember Psalm 32:6-7 which we sang part of earlier, “Therefore, let everyone who is godly pray to You in a time when You may be found; Surely in a flood of great waters they will not reach him.  You are my hiding place; You preserve me from trouble; You surround me with songs of deliverance.”

I think this story of Paul being moved from Jerusalem to Caesarea is one of the greatest illustrations of the providence of God.  And I just want to close by encouraging you that as you go through trials and tribulations, to lean not on your own wisdom, but rest on the promises of God.  And the God of Providence will work out His plan for you as you wait on Him. Romans 8:28 “And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.”  Paul was on a mission from God, and so he could expect God to see him through all the tribulations that happened in the course of his mission.  And when we are living our lives as a witness for God, then we can expect God to providentially work all things together for good as well.  But a word of warning, providence does not necessarily cover us when we pursue our goals and live our lives for our pleasure or benefit and then expect God to get us out of the mess we make of our lives.  When we live for ourselves, we do so to our own peril.  God is not bound to extract us from the mess we get into as a result of our waywardness and selfishness.  But when we live for God, for His purposes, then we can trust in His providence no matter how dire the circumstances may seem.

William Cowper wrote these words many years ago, but I believe they are still true for us today; “God moves in a mysterious way His wonders to perform; He plants His footsteps in the sea And rides upon the storm.  Deep in unfathomable mines Of never failing skill  He treasures up His bright designs  And works His sov’reign will. Ye fearful saints, fresh courage take; The clouds ye so much dread Are big with mercy and shall break  In blessings on your head. Judge not the Lord by feeble sense,

But trust Him for His grace;  Behind a frowning providence He hides a smiling face.