Act 16:37, 25:16 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 37. They have beaten us openly uncondemned . There are three aggravating circumstances mentioned, of which Paul complains. (1.) That they had been beaten, contrary to the Roman laws. (2.) That it had been public; the disgrace had been in the presence of the people, and the reparation ought to be as public. And (3) that it had been done without a trial, and while they were uncondemned and therefore the magistrates ought themselves to come and release them, and thus publicly acknowledge their error. Paul knew the privileges of a Roman citizen; and at proper times, when the interests of justice and religion required it, he did not hesitate to assert them. In all this he understood and accorded with the Roman laws. The Valerian law declared, that if a citizen appealed from the magistrate to the people, it should not be lawful for the magistrate to beat him with rods, or to behead him. (Plutarch, Life of P. Valeflus Publicola. Livy, ii. 8.) By the Porcian law, it was expressly forbidden that a citizen should be beaten, (Livy, iv. 9.) Cicero (Pro. Rabir. chap. 4) says, that the body of every Roman citizen was inviolable. "The Porcian law," he adds, "has removed the rod from the body of every Roman citizen." And in his celebrated oration against Verres, he says, "A Roman citizen was beaten with rods in the forum, O judges; where, in the mean time, no groan, no other voice of this unhappy man was heard, except the cry, 'I am a Roman citizen'--Take away this hope," he says, "take away this defence from the Roman citizens--let there be no protection in the cry, I am a Roman citizen --and the praetor can with impunity inflict any punishment on him who declares himself a citizen of Rome," etc. Being Romans . Being Romans, or having the privilege of Roman citizens. They were born Jews, but they claimed that they were Roman citizens, and had a right to the privilege of citizenship. On the ground of this claim, and the reason why Paul claimed to be a Roman citizen, . Privily . Privately. The release should be as public as the unjust act of imprisonment. As they have publicly attempted to disgrace us, so they should as publicly acquit us. This was a matter of mere justice; and as it was of great importance to their character and success, they insisted on it. Nay, verily; but let them come , etc. It was proper that they should be required to do this, (1.) because they had been illegally imprisoned, and the injustice of the magistrates should be acknowledged. (2.) Because the Roman laws had been violated, and the majesty of the Roman people thus insulted and honour should be done to the laws. (3.) Injustice had been done to Paul and Silas, and they had a right to demand just treatment and protection. (4.) Such a public act on the part of the magistrates would strengthen the young converts, and show them that the apostles were not guilty of a violation of the laws. (5.) It would tend to the honour and to the furtherance of religion. It would be a public acknowledgment of their innocence; and would go far towards lending to them the sanction of the laws as religious teachers. We may learn from this also, (1.) that though Christianity requires meekness in the reception of injuries, that there are occasions where Christians may insist on their rights according to the laws. Comp. . (2.) That this is to be done, particularly where the honour of religion is concerned, and where by it the gospel will be promoted. A Christian may bear much as a man in a private capacity, and may submit, without any effort to seek reparation; but where the honour of the gospel is concerned--where submission, without any effort to obtain justice, might be followed by disgrace to the cause of religion--a higher obligation may require him to seek a vindication of his character, and to claim the protection of the laws. His name, and character, and influence, belong to the church. The laws are designed as a protection to an injured name, or of violated property and rights, and of an endangered life. And when that protection can be had only by an appeal to the laws, such an appeal, as in the case of Paul and Silas, is neither vindictive nor improper. My private interests I may sacrifice, if I choose; my public name, and character, and principles belong to the church and the world; and the laws, if necessary, may be called in for their protection. (++) "openly" "Publicly" (d) "being Romans" (|) "privily" "privately" (&) "verily" "truly" (e) "themselves"

Acts 16:37

Verse 37. They have beaten us openly uncondemned. There are three aggravating circumstances mentioned, of which Paul complains.

(1.) That they had been beaten, contrary to the Roman laws.

(2.) That it had been public; the disgrace had been in the presence of the people, and the reparation ought to be as public. And

(3) that it had been done without a trial, and while they were uncondemned and therefore the magistrates ought themselves to come and release them, and thus publicly acknowledge their error. Paul knew the privileges of a Roman citizen; and at proper times, when the interests of justice and religion required it, he did not hesitate to assert them. In all this he understood and accorded with the Roman laws. The Valerian law declared, that if a citizen appealed from the magistrate to the people, it should not be lawful for the magistrate to beat him with rods, or to behead him. (Plutarch, Life of P. Valeflus Publicola. Livy, ii. 8.) By the Porcian law, it was expressly forbidden that a citizen should be beaten, (Livy, iv. 9.) Cicero (Pro. Rabir. chap. 4) says, that the body of every Roman citizen was inviolable. "The Porcian law," he adds, "has removed the rod from the body of every Roman citizen." And in his celebrated oration against Verres, he says, "A Roman citizen was beaten with rods in the forum, O judges; where, in the mean time, no groan, no other voice of this unhappy man was heard, except the cry, 'I am a Roman citizen'--Take away this hope," he says, "take away this defence from the Roman citizens--let there be no protection in the cry, I am a Roman citizen--and the praetor can with impunity inflict any punishment on him who declares himself a citizen of Rome," etc.

Being Romans. Being Romans, or having the privilege of Roman citizens. They were born Jews, but they claimed that they were Roman citizens, and had a right to the privilege of citizenship. On the ground of this claim, and the reason why Paul claimed to be a Roman citizen, Acts 22:28.

Privily. Privately. The release should be as public as the unjust act of imprisonment. As they have publicly attempted to disgrace us, so they should as publicly acquit us. This was a matter of mere justice; and as it was of great importance to their character and success, they insisted on it.

Nay, verily; but let them come, etc. It was proper that they should be required to do this,

(1.) because they had been illegally imprisoned, and the injustice of the magistrates should be acknowledged.

(2.) Because the Roman laws had been violated, and the majesty of the Roman people thus insulted and honour should be done to the laws.

(3.) Injustice had been done to Paul and Silas, and they had a right to demand just treatment and protection.

(4.) Such a public act on the part of the magistrates would strengthen the young converts, and show them that the apostles were not guilty of a violation of the laws.

(5.) It would tend to the honour and to the furtherance of religion. It would be a public acknowledgment of their innocence; and would go far towards lending to them the sanction of the laws as religious teachers. We may learn from this also,

(1.) that though Christianity requires meekness in the reception of injuries, that there are occasions where Christians may insist on their rights according to the laws. Comp. Jn 18:23.

(2.) That this is to be done, particularly where the honour of religion is concerned, and where by it the gospel will be promoted. A Christian may bear much as a man in a private capacity, and may submit, without any effort to seek reparation; but where the honour of the gospel is concerned--where submission, without any effort to obtain justice, might be followed by disgrace to the cause of religion--a higher obligation may require him to seek a vindication of his character, and to claim the protection of the laws. His name, and character, and influence, belong to the church. The laws are designed as a protection to an injured name, or of violated property and rights, and of an endangered life. And when that protection can be had only by an appeal to the laws, such an appeal, as in the case of Paul and Silas, is neither vindictive nor improper. My private interests I may sacrifice, if I choose; my public name, and character, and principles belong to the church and the world; and the laws, if necessary, may be called in for their protection.

(++) "openly" "Publicly" (d) "being Romans" Acts 22:25 (|) "privily" "privately" (&) "verily" "truly" (e) "themselves" Dan 6:18,19, Mt 10:16

Acts 25:16

Verse 16. It is not the manner, etc. He here states the reasons which he gave to the Jews for not delivering Paul into their hands. In Acts 25:4,5, we have an account of the fact that he would not accede to the requests of the Jews; and he here states that the reason of his refusal was, that it was contrary to the Roman law. Appian, in his Roman history, says, "It is not their custom to condemn men before they are heard." Philo de Preesi. Rom. says the same thing. In Tacitus (Annul. ii.) it is said, "A defendant is not to be prohibited from adducing all things, by which his innocence may be established." It was for this that the equity of the Roman jurisprudence was celebrated throughout the world. We may remark, that it is a subject of sincere gratitude to the God of our nation, that this privilege is enjoyed in the highest perfection in this land. It is the privilege of every man here to be heard; to know the charges against him; to be confronted with the witnesses; to make his defence; and to be tried by the laws, and not by the passions and caprices of men. In this respect our jurisprudence surpasses all that Rome ever enjoyed; and is not inferior to that of the most favoured nation of the earth.

To deliver. To give him up as a favour--χαριζεσθαι--to popular clamour and caprice. Yet our Saviour, in violation of the Roman laws, was thus given up by Pilate, Mt 27:18-25.

Have the accusers face to face. That he may know who they are, and hear their accusations, and refute them. Nothing contributes more to justice than this. Tyrants suffer men to be accused without knowing who the accusers are, and without an opportunity of meeting the charges. It is one great principle of modem jurisprudence, that the accused may know the accusers, and be permitted to confront the witnesses, and adduce all the testimony possible in his own defence.

And have license. Greek, "Place of apology," may have the liberty of defending himself.

(++) "manner" "custom"