Acts 24:7Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Then they accuse Lysias also. "Lysias came and with great violence took him out of our hands." They say that he ought not to have done this, but he did it. By this he indicates that it was grievous for them to go to a foreign court. They would not have troubled Felix if the commander had not compelled them to do so and had not taken this man from them, which he ought not to have done. He says that an injury was inflicted upon us. Therefore judgment over him ought to have taken place among us. That this is so is clear from what follows: "with great violence."

The accusation brought here by the Sanhedrin against Paul consisted solely of what could have significance in the eyes of the Roman government regarding the Jews. They accused Paul of everywhere violating the rights granted to the Jews for peaceful use within the empire. They said that he was causing disturbances and divisions among them, and that recently he had dared to profane the temple. They complained against the tribune, saying that he had hindered the Jews from judging Paul according to the rights granted to them.

After five days Paul's accusers appeared in Caesarea: the high priest Ananias with the elders. They had armed themselves with an advocate, the orator Tertullus, who delivered the accusation against Paul before the procurator (vv. 1-9). Yet the eloquence of this speaker did not achieve its purpose.

“Coming, he took him and sent,” and so forth: this is a brief account of the matter (Acts 21:31-23:33). The rhetorician points, though cautiously, to the action of Lysias, who took Paul from them, as an unlawful interference in a matter supposedly concerning only the Sanhedrin.

“He ought not,” he says, “to have done this, but he did. By this he expresses that it was grievous for them to go to a foreign tribunal. They would not have troubled him, the governor, if the tribune had not compelled them to do so.

Nor would they have come if he had not taken this man from them, which he ought not to have done. They say that the offense was committed against us. Therefore the judgment concerning him ought to have taken place among us” (Chrysostom).

The rhetorician’s reference to Lysias is as crafty as it is malicious. He speaks of violence committed against them by Lysias, but he is silent about the reason that moved Lysias to do this.

Then the rhetorician asks that the accused himself be examined on all the points of accusation, that is, Paul. The other Jews present there somehow confirmed all this.

According to Saint John Chrysostom, the rhetorician, in referring to Lysias, speaks as though saying: “He ought not to have done this, but he did. By this he expresses that it was grievous for them to go to a foreign tribunal.