The travelers were received with that touching symbol of brotherhood, the kiss of peace, (f1886) which was exchanged between the Christians of those days on every occasion of public as well as private meeting. Then the main business of the assembly was commenced by an address from St. Paul. This was not the first occasion on which he had been called to take a similar part, in the same city, and before the same audience. Our thoughts are naturally carried back to the days of the Apostolic Council, when he first declared to the Church of Jerusalem the Gospel which he preached among the Gentiles, and the great things which God had wrought thereby. (f1887) The majority of the Church had then, under the influence of the Spirit of God, been brought over to his side, and had ratified his views by their decree. But the battle was not yet won; he had still to contend against the same foes with the same weapons.

We are told that he now gave a detailed account (f1888) of all that "God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry" since he last parted from Jerusalem four years before. (f1889) The foundation of the great and flourishing Church of Ephesus doubtless furnished the main interest of his narrative; but he would also dwell on the progress of the several Churches in Phrygia, Galatia, and other parts of Asia Minor, and likewise those in Macedonia and Achaia, from whence he was just returned. In such a discourse, he could scarcely avoid touching on subjects which would excite painful feelings, and rouse bitter prejudice in many of his audience. He could hardly speak of Galatia without mentioning the attempted perversion of his converts there. He could not enter into the state of Corinth without alluding to the emissaries from Palestine, who had introduced confusion and strife among the Christians of that city. Yet we cannot doubt that St. Paul, with that graceful courtesy which distinguished both his writings and his speeches, softened all that was disagreeable, and avoided what was personally offensive to his audience, and dwelt, as far as he could, on topics in which all present would agree. Accordingly, we find that the majority of the assembled Elders were favorably impressed by his address, and by the tidings which he brought of the progress of the Gospel. The first act of the assembly was to glorify God for the wonders He had wrought. (f1890) They joined in solemn thanksgiving with one accord; and the Amen (1Corinthians 14:16) which followed the utterance of thanks and praise from apostolic lips was swelled by many voices.

Thus the hope expressed by St. Paul on a former occasion, (2Corinthians 9:12.) concerning the result of this visit to Jerusalem, was in a measure fulfilled. But beneath this superficial show of harmony there lurked elements of discord, which threatened to disturb it too soon. We have already had occasion to remark upon the peculiar composition of the Church at Jerusalem, and we have seen that a Pharisaic faction was sheltered in its bosom, which continually strove to turn Christianity into a sect of Judaism. We have seen that this faction had recently sent emissaries into the Gentile Churches, and had endeavored to alienate the minds of St. Paul’s converts from their converter. These men were restless agitators, animated by the bitterest sectarian spirit; and although they were numerically a small party, yet we know the power of a turbulent minority. But besides these Judaizing zealots, there was a large proportion of the Christians at Jerusalem, whose Christianity, though more sincere than that of those just mentioned, was yet very weak and imperfect. The "many thousands of Jews which believed" had by no means all attained to the fulness of Christian faith. Many of them still knew only a Christ after the flesh, — a savior of Israel, — a Jewish Messiah. Their minds were in a state of transition between the Law and the Gospel, and it was of great consequence not to shock their prejudices too rudely, lest they should be tempted to make shipwreck of their faith, and renounce their Christianity altogether. Their prejudices were most wisely consulted in things indifferent by St. James; who accommodated himself in all points to the strict requirements of the Law, and thus disarmed the hostility of the Judaizing bigots. He was, indeed, divinely ordained to be the Apostle of this transition-Church. Had its councils been less wisely guided, had the Gospel of St. Paul been really repudiated by the Church of Jerusalem, it is difficult to estimate the evil which might have resulted. This class of Christians was naturally very much influenced by the declamation of the more violent partisans of Judaism. Their feelings would be easily excited by an appeal to their Jewish patriotism. They might without diffcult be roused to fury against one whom they were taught to regard as a despiser of the Law, and a reviler of the customs of their forefathers. Against St. Paul their dislike had been long and artfully fostered; and they would from the first have looked on him perhaps with some suspicion, as not being, like themselves, a Hebrew of the Holy City, but only a Hellenist of the Dispersion.

Such being the composition of the great body of the Church, we cannot doubt that the same elements were to be found amongst the Elders also. And this will explain the resolution to which the assembly came, at the close of their discussion on the matters brought before them. They began by calling St. Paul’s attention to the strength of the Judaical party among the Christians of Jerusalem. They told him that the majority, even of the Christian Church had been taught to hate his very name, and to believe that he went about the world "teaching the Jews to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs." They further observed that it was impossible his arrival should remain unknown; his renown was too great to allow him to be concealed: his public appearance in the streets of Jerusalem would attract a crowd (f1891) of curious spectators, most of whom would be violently hostile. It was therefore of importance that he should do something to disarm this hostility, and to refute the calumnies which had been circulated concerning him. The plan they recommended was, that he should take charge of four Jewish Christians, (f1892) who were under a Nazaritic vow, accompany them to the temple, and pay for them the necessary expenses attending the termination of their vow. Agrippa I., not long before, had given the same public expression of his sympathy with the Jews, on his arrival from Rome to take possession of his throne. (f1893) And what the King had done for popularity it was felt that the Apostle might do for the sake of truth and peace. His friends thought that he would thus, in the most public manner, exhibit himself as an observer of the Mosaic ceremonies, and refute the accusations of his enemies. They added, that, by so doing, he would not countenance the errors of those who sought to impose the Law upon Gentile converts; because it had been already decided by the Church of Jerusalem, that the ceremonial observances of the Law were not obligatory on the Gentiles. (f1894)

It is remarkable that this conclusion is attributed expressly, in the Scriptural narrative, not to James (who presided over the meeting), but to the assembly itself. The lurking shade of distrust implied in the terms of the admonition was certainly not shared by that great Apostle who had long ago given to St. Paul the right hand of fellowship. We have already seen indications, that, however strict might be the Judaical observances of St. James, they did not satisfy the Judaizing party at Jerusalem, who attempted, under the sanction of his name, (Acts 15; See Galatians 2:12.) to teach doctrines and enforce practices of which he disapproved. The partisans of this faction, indeed, are called by St. Paul (while anticipating this very visit to Jerusalem) "the disobedient party." (Romans 15:31.) It would seem that their influence was not unfelt in the discussion which terminated in the resolution recorded. And though St. James acquiesced (as did St. Paul) in the advice given, it appears not to have originated with himself.

The counsel, however, though it may have been suggested by suspicious prejudice, or even by designing enmity, was not in itself unwise. St. Paul’s great object (as we have seen) in this visit to Jerusalem was to conciliate the Church of Palestine. If he could win over that Church to the truth, or even could avert its open hostility to himself, he would be doing more for the diffusion of Christianity than even by the conversion of Ephesus. Every lawful means for such an end he was ready gladly to adopt. His own principles, stated by himself in his Epistles, required this of him. He had recently declared that every compliance in ceremonial observances should be made, rather than cast a stumbling-block in a brother’s way. (Romans 14.) He had laid it down as his principle of action to become a Jew to Jews that he might gain the Jews, as willingly as he became a Gentile to Gentiles that he might gain the Gentiles. (See 1Corinthians 9:20.) He had given it as a rule, that no man should change his external observances because he became a Christian; that the Jew should remain a Jew in things outward. (f1895) Nay more, he himself observed the Jewish festivals, had previously countenanced his friends in the practice of Nazaritic vows, (f1896) and had circumcised Timothy, the son of a Jewess. So false was the charge that he had forbidden the Jews to circumcise their children. (f1897) In fact, the great doctrine of St. Paul concerning the worthlessness of ceremonial observances rendered him equally ready to practise as to forsake them. A mind so truly catholic as his was necessarily free from any repugnance to mere outward observances; a repugnance equally superstitious with the formalism which clings to ritual. In his view, circumcision was nothing, and uncircumcision was nothing; but faith, which worketh by love. And this love rendered him willing to adopt the most burdensome ceremonies, if by so doing he could save a brother from stumbling. Hence he willingly complied with the advice of the assembly, and thereby, while he removed the prejudices of its more ingenuous members, doubtless exasperated the factious partisans who had hoped for his refusal.

Thus the meeting ended amicably, with no open manifestation of that hostile feeling towards St. Paul which lurked in the bosoms of some who were present. On the next day, which was the great feast of Pentecost, (f1898) St. Paul proceeded with the four Christian Nazarites to the Temple. It is necessary here to explain the nature of their vow, and of the office which he was to perform for them. It was customary among the Jews for those who had received deliverance from any great peril, or who from other causes desired publicly to testify their dedication to God, to take upon themselves the vow of a Nazarite, the regulations of which are prescribed in the sixth chapter of the book of Numbers. (f1899) In that book no rule is laid down as to the time during which this life of ascetic rigor was to continue:(f1900) but we learn from the Talmud and Josephus (f1901) that thirty days was at least a customary period. During this time the Nazarite was bound to abstain from wine, and to suffer his hair to grow uncut. At the termination of the period, he was bound to present himself in the Temple with certain offerings, and his hair was then cut off and burnt upon the altar. The offerings required (f1902) were beyond the means of the very poor, and consequently it was thought an act of piety for a rich man (f1903) to pay the necessary expenses, and thus enable his poorer countrymen to complete their vow. St. Paul was far from rich; he gained his daily bread by the work of his own hands; and we may therefore naturally ask how he was able to take upon himself the expenses of these four Nazarites. The answer probably is, that the assembled Elders had requested him to apply to this purpose a portion of the fund which he had placed at their disposal. However this may be, he now made himself responsible for these expenses, and accompanied the Nazarites to the Temple, after having first performed the necessary purifications together with them. (f1904) On entering the Temple, he announced to the priests that the period of the Nazaritic vow which his friends had taken was accomplished, and he waited (f1905) within the sacred enclosure till the necessary offerings were made for each of them, and their hair cut off and burnt in the sacred fire.

He might well have hoped, by thus complying with the legal ceremonial, to conciliate those, at least, who were only hostile to him because they believed him hostile to their national worship. And, so far as the great body of the Church at Jerusalem was concerned, he probably succeeded. But the celebration of the festival had attracted multitudes to the Holy City, and the Temple was thronged with worshippers from every land; and amongst these were some of those Asiatic Jews who had been defeated by his arguments in the Synagogue of Ephesus, and irritated against him during the last few years daily more and more, by the continual growth of a Christian Church in that city, formed in great part of converts from among the Jewish Proselytes. These men, whom a zealous feeling of nationality had attracted from their distant home to the metropolis of their faith, now beheld, where they least expected to find him, the apostate Israelite, who had opposed their teaching and seduced their converts. An opportunity of revenge, which they could not have hoped for in the Gentile city where they dwelt, had suddenly presented itself. They sprang upon their enemy, and shouted while they held him fast,

"Men of Israel, help. This is the man that teacheth all men everywhere against the People and the Law, and this Place." (f1906)

Then as the crowd rushed tumultously towards the spot, they excited them yet further by accusing Paul of introducing Greeks into the Holy Place, which was profaned by the presence of a Gentile. The vast multitude which was assembled on the spot, and in the immediate neighborhood, was excited to madness by these tidings, which spread rapidly through the crowd. The pilgrims who flocked at such seasons to Jerusalem were of course the most zealous of their nation; very Hebrews of the Hebrews. We may imagine the horror and indignation which would fill their minds when they heard that an apostate from the faith of Israel had been seized in the very act of profaning the Temple at this holy season. A furious multitude rushed upon the Apostle; and it was only their reverence for the holy place which preserved him from being torn to pieces on the spot. They hurried him out of the sacred enclosure, and assailed him with violent blows. (See Acts 21:31, 32.) Their next course might have been to stone him or to hurl him over the precipice into the valley below. They were already in the Court of the Gentiles, and the heavy gates (f1907) which separated the inner from the outer enclosure were shut by the Levites, — when an unexpected interruption prevented the murderous purpose.

It becomes desirable here to give a more particular description than we have yet done of the Temple-area and the sanctuary which it enclosed. Some reference has been made to this subject in the account of St. Stephen’s martyrdom (p. 65), especially to that "Stone Chamber" — the Hall Gazith — where the Sanhedrin held their solemn conclave. Soon we shall see St. Paul himself summoned before this tribunal, and hear his voice in that hall where he had listened to the eloquence of the first martyr. But meantime other events came in rapid succession, for the better understanding of which it is well to form to ourselves a clear notion of the localities in which they occurred.

The position of the Temple on the eastern side of Jerusalem, the rela tion of Mount Moriah to the other eminences on which the city was built, the valley which separated it from the higher summit of Mount Zion, and the deeper ravine which formed a chasm between the whole city and the Mount of Olives, — these facts of general topography are too well known to require elucidation. (f1908) On the other hand, when we turn to the description of the Temple-area itself and that which it contained, we are met with considerable difficulties. It does not, however, belong to our present task to reconcile the statements in Josephus (f1909) and the Talmud (f1910) with each other and with present appearances. (f1911) Nor shall we attempt to trace the architectural changes by which the scene has been modified, in the long interval between the time when the Patriarch built the altar on Moriah for his mysterious sacrifice, (Genesis 22.) and our own day, when the same spot(f1912) is the "wailing-place" of those who are his children after the flesh, but not yet the heirs of his faith. Keeping aloof from all difficult details, and withdrawing ourselves from the consideration of those events which have invested this hill with an interest unknown to any other spot on the earth, we confine ourselves to the simple task of depicting the Temple of Herod as it was when St. Paul was arrested by the infuriated Jews.

That rocky summit, which was wide enough for the threshing-floor of Araunah, (1Chronicles 21:18; 2Chronicles 3:1.) was levelled after David’s death, and enlarged by means of laborious substructions, till it presented the appearance of one broad uniform area. (f1913) On this level space the temples of Solomon and Zerub babel were successively built: and in the time of the Apostles there were remains of the former work in the vast stones which formed the supporting wall on the side of the valley of Jehoshaphat, (f1914) and of the latter in the eastern gate, which in its name and its appearance continued to be a monument of the Persian power. (f1915) The architectural arrangements of Herod’s Temple were, in their general form, similar to the two which had preceded it. When we think of the Jewish sanctuary, whether in its earlier or later periods, our impulse is to imagine to ourselves some building like a synagogue or a church: but the first effort of our imagination should be to realize the appearance of that wide open space, which is spoken of by the prophets as the "Outer Court" or the "Court of the Lord’s House;" (f1916) and is named by Josephus the "Outer Temple," and, both in the Apocrypha and the Talmud, the "Mountain of the House." (f1917) That which was the "House" itself, or the Temple, properly so called, (f1918) was erected on the highest of a series of successive terraces, which rose in an isolated mass from the center of the Court, or rather nearer to its north-western corner. (f1919)

In form, the Outer Court was a square; a strong wall enclosed it; the sides corresponded to the four quarters of the heavens, and each was a stadium or a furlong in length. (f1920) Its pavement of stone was of various colors:(f1921) and it was surrounded by a covered colonnade, the roof of which was of costly cedar, and was supported on lofty and massive columns of the Corinthian order, and of the whitest marble. (f1922) On throe sides there were two rows of columns: but on the southern side the cloister deepened into a fourfold colonnade, the innermost supports of the roof being pilasters in the enclosing wall. About the south-eastern angle, where the valley was most depressed below the plateau of the Temple, we are to look for that "Porch of Solomon" ( John 10:23, Acts 3:11) which it familiar to us in the New Testament:(f1923) and under the colonnades, or on the open area in the midst, were the "tables of the money-changers and the seats of them who sold doves," which turned that which was intended for a house of prayer into a "house of merchandise" (John 2:16), and "a den of thieves" (Matthew 21:13). Free access was afforded into this wide enclosure by gates (f1924) on each of the four sides, one of which on the east was called the Royal Gate, and was perhaps identical with the "Beautiful Gate" of Sacred History, (f1925) while another on the west was connected with the crowded streets of Mount Zion by a bridge over the intervening valley. (f1926)

Nearer (as we have seen) to the north-western corner than the center of the square, arose that series of enclosed terraces on the summit of which was the sanctuary. These more sacred limits were fenced off by a low balustrade of stone, with columns at intervals, on which inscriptions in Greek and Latin warned all Gentiles against advancing beyond them on pain of death. (f1927) It was within this boundary that St. Paul was accused of having brought his Heathen companions. Besides this balustrade, a separation was formed by a flight of fourteen steps leading up to the first platform, (f1928) which in its western portion was a narrow terrace of fifteen feet wide round the walls of the innermost sanctuary, — while the eastern portion expanded into a second court, called the Court of the Women. (f1929) By this term we are not to understand that it was exclusively devoted to that sex, but that no women were allowed to advance beyond it. This court seems to have contained the treasury (f1930) (Mark 12:41, Luke 21:1) and various chambers, of which that at the south-eastern corner should be mentioned here, for there the Nazarites performed their vows; (f1931) and the whole court was surrounded by a wall of its own, with gates on each side, — the easternmost of which was of Corinthian brass, with folding-doors and strong bolts and bars, requiring the force of twenty men to close them for the night. (f1932) We conceive that it was the closing of these doors by the Levites, which is so pointedly mentioned by St. Luke (Acts 21:30):and we must suppose that St. Paul had been first seized within them, and was then dragged down the flight of steps into the Outer Court.

The interest, then, of this particular moment is to be associated with the eastern entrance of the Inner from the Outer Temple. But to complete our description, we must now cross the Court of the Women to its western gate. The Holy Place and the Holy of Holies were still within and above the spaces we have mentioned. Two courts yet intervened between the court last described and the Holy House itself. The first was the Court of Israel, the ascent to which was by a flight of fifteen semicircular steps; (f1933) the second, the Court of the Priests, separated from the former by a low balustrade. (f1934) Where these spaces bordered on each other, to the south, was the hall Gazith, (f1935) the meeting-place of the Sanhedrin, partly in one court and partly in the other. A little farther towards the north were all those arrangements which we are hardly able to associate with the thoughts of worship, but which daily reiterated in the sight of the Israelites that awful truth that "without shedding of blood there is no remission," — the rings at which the victims were slaughtered, — the beams and hooks from which they were suspended when dead, — and the marble tables at which the entrails were washed:(f1936) — here, above all, was the Altar, the very place of which has been plausibly identified by the bore in the sacred rock of the Moslems, which appears to correspond exactly with the description given in the Mischna of the drain and cesspool which communicated with the sewer that ran off into the Kedron. (f1937)

The house itself remains to be described. It was divided into three parts, the Vestibule, the Holy Place, and the Holy of Holies. Prom the Altar and the Court of the Priests to the Vestibule was another flight of twelve steps, the last of the successive approaches by which the Temple was ascended from the east. The Vestibule was wider (f1938) than the rest of the House: its front was adorned with a golden vine of colossal proportions:(f1939) and it was separated by a richly-embroidered curtain or veil from the Holy Place, which contained the Table of Show-bread, the Candlestick, and the Altar of Incense. After this was the "second veil" (Hebrews 9:3), closing the access to the innermost shrine, which in the days of the Tabernacle had contained the golden censer and the ark of the covenant, but which in Herod’s Temple was entirely empty, though still regarded as the "Holiest of All." (ib.) The interior height of the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies was comparatively small: but above them and on each side were chambers so arranged that the general exterior effect was that of a clerestory (f1940) rising above aisles: and the whole was surmounted with gilded spikes, (f1941) to prevent the birds from settling on the sacred roof.

Such is a bare outline of the general plan of the Jewish Temple. Such was the arrangement of its parts, which could be traced, as in a map, by those who looked down from the summit of the Mount of Olives, as the modern traveler looks now from the same place upon the Mosque of Omar and its surrounding court. As seen from this eminence, — when the gilded front of the vestibule flashed back the rays of the sun, and all the courts glittered (to use the comparison of Josephus) with the whiteness of snow, — while the column of smoke rose over all, as a perpetual token of acceptable sacrifice, — and worshippers were closely crowded on the eastern steps and terraces in front of the Holy House, and Pilgrims from all countries under heaven were moving through the Outer Court and flocking to the same point from all streets in the city, — the Temple at the time of a festival must have been a proud spectacle to the religious Jew. It must have been with sad and incredulous wonder that the four Disciples heard from Him who wept over Jerusalem, that all this magnificence was presently to pass away. ( Matthew 24:2, 3; Mark 13:2, 3; Luke 21:6.) None but a Jew can understand the passionate enthusiasm inspired by the recollections and the glorious appearance of the national Sanctuary. And none but a Jew can understand the bitter grief and deep hatred which grew out of the degradation in which his nation was sunk at that particular time. This ancient glory was now under the shadow of an alien power. The Sanctuary was all but trodden under foot by the Gentiles. The very worship was conducted under the surveillance of Roman soldiers. We cannot conclude this account of the Temple without describing the fortress which was contiguous, and almost a part of it.

If we were to remount to the earlier history of the Temple, we might perhaps identify the tower of Antonia with the "palace" of which we read in the book of Nehemiah (Nehemiah 2:8, 7:2). It was certainly the building which the Asmonean princes erected for their own residence under the name of Baris. (f1942) Afterwards rebuilt with greater strength and splendor by the first Herod, it was named by him, after his Romanizing fashion, in honor of Mark Antony. (f1943) Its situation is most distinctly marked out by Josephus, who tells us that it was at the north-western (f1944) corner of the Temple-area, with the cloisters of which it communicated by means of staircases (Acts 21:35, 40). (f1945) It is difficult, however, to define the exact extent of ground which it covered in its renewed form during the time of the Herods. There is good reason for believing that it extended along the whole northern side of the great Temple court, from the north-western corner where it abutted on the city, to the northeastern where it was suddenly stopped by the precipice which fronted the valley: and that the tank, which is now popularly called the Pool of Bethesda, was part of the fosse which protected it on the north. (f1946) Though the ground on which the tower of Antonia stood was lower than that of the Temple itself, yet it was raised to such a height, that at least the south-eastern of its four turrets (f1947) commanded a view of all that went on within the Temple, and thus both in position and in elevation it was in ancient Jerusalem what the Turkish governor’s house is now, — whence the best view is obtained over the enclosure of the Mosque of Omar. But this is an inadequate comparison. If we wish to realize the influence of this fortress in reference to political and religious interests, we must turn rather to that which is the most humiliating spectacle in Christendom, the presence of the Turkish troops at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, where they are stationed to control the fury of the Greeks and Latins at the most solemn festival of the Christian year. Such was the office of the Roman troops that were quartered at the Jewish festivals in the fortress of Antonia. (f1948) Within its walls there were barracks for at least a thousand soldiers. (f1949) Not that we are to suppose that all the garrison in Jerusalem was always posted there.

It is probable that the usual quarters of the "whole cohort" (Matthew 27:27), or the greater part of it, were towards the western quarter of the city, in that "praetorium" (John 18:28) or official residence(f1950) where JESUS was mocked by the soldiers, and on the tessellated pavement (f1951) in front of which Pilate sat, and condemned the savior of the world. But at the time of the greater festivals, when a vast concourse of people, full of religious fanaticism and imbittered by hatred of their rulers, flocked into the Temple courts, it was found necessary to order a strong military force into Antonia, and to keep them under arms, so that they might act immediately and promptly in the case of any outbreak.

A striking illustration of the connection between the Portress and the Temple is afforded by the history of the quarrels which arose in reference to the pontifical vestments. These robes were kept in Antonia during the time of Herod the Great. "When he died, they came under the super intendence of the Roman procurator. Agrippa I., during his short reign, exercised the right which had belonged to his grandfather. At his death the command that the Procurator Cuspius Fadus should take the vestments under his care raised a ferment among the whole Jewish people; and they were only kept from an outbreak by the presence of an overwhelming force under Longinus, the Governor of Syria. An embassy to Rome, with the aid of the younger Agrippa, who was then at the imperial court, obtained the desired relaxation: and the letter is still extant in which Claudius assigned to Herod, King of Chalcis, the privilege which had belonged to his brother. (f1952) But under the succeeding Procurators, the relation between the fortress Antonia and the religious ceremonies in the Temple became more significant and ominous. The hatred between the imbittered Jews and those soldiers who were soon to take part in their destruction grew deeper and more implacable. Under Ventidius Cumanus, (f1953) a frightful loss of life had taken place on one occasion at the passover, in consequence of an insult perpetrated by one of the military. (f1954) When Felix succeeded him, assassination became frequent in Jerusalem: the high priest Jonathan was murdered, like Becket, in the Temple itself, with the connivance of the Procurator:(f1955) and at the very moment of which we write, both the soldiers and the populace were in great excitement in consequence of the recent "uproar" caused by an Egyptian impostor (Acts 21:38), who had led out a vast number of fanatic followers "into the wilderness" to be slain or captured by the troops of Felix. (f1956)

This imperfect description of the Temple-area and of the relations subsisting between it and the contiguous fortress is sufficient to set the scene before us, on which the events we are now to relate occurred in rapid succession. We left St. Paul at the moment when the Levites had closed the gates, lest the Holy Place should be polluted by murder, — and when the infuriated mob were violently beating the Apostle, with the full intention of putting him to death. The beginning and rapid progress of the commotion must have been seen by the sentries on the cloisters and the tower: and news was sent up (f1957) immediately to Claudius Lysias, the commandant of the garrison, that "all Jerusalem was in an uproar" (v. 31). The spark had fallen on materials the most inflammable, and not a moment was to be lost if a conflagration was to be averted. Lysias himself rushed down instantly, with some of his subordinate officers and a strong body of men, (f1958) into the Temple court. At the sight of the flashing arms and disciplined movements of the imperial soldiers, the Jewish mob desisted from their murderous violence. "They left off beating of Paul." They had for a moment forgotten that the eyes of the sentries were upon them: but this sudden invasion by their hated and dreaded tyrants reminded them that they were "in danger to be called in question for that day’s uproar." (Acts 19:40.)

Claudius Lysias proceeded with the soldiers promptly and directly to St. Paul, (f1959) whom he perceived to be the central object of all the excitement in the Temple court: and in the first place he ordered him to be chained by each hand to a soldier:(f1960) for he suspected that he might be the Egyptian rebel, (f1961) who had himself baffled the pursuit of the Roman force, though his followers were dispersed. This being done, he proceeded to question the bystanders, who were watching this summary proceeding, half in disappointed rage at the loss of their victim, and half in satisfaction that they saw him at least in captivity. But "when Lysias demanded who he was and what he had done, some cried one thing, and some another, among the multitude" (v. 33, 34); and when he found that he could obtain no certain information in consequence of the tumult, he gave orders that the prisoner should be conveyed into the barracks within the fortress. (f1962) The multitude pressed and crowded on the soldiers, as they proceeded to execute this order: so that the Apostle was actually "carried up" the staircase in consequence of the violent pressure from below. (f1963) And meanwhile deafening shouts arose from the stairs and from the court, — the same shouts, which, nearly thirty years before, surrounded the praetorium of Pilate, (Compare Luke 23:18, John 19:15.) — "Away with him, away with him!"

At this moment, (f1964) the Apostle, with the utmost presence of mind, turned to the commanding officer who was near him, — and, addressing him in Greek, said respectfully, "May I speak with thee?" Claudius Lysias was startled when he found himself addressed by his prisoner in Greek, and asked him whether he was then mistaken in supposing he was the Egyptian ringleader of the late rebellion. St. Paul replied calmly that he was no Egyptian, but a Jew; and he readily explained his knowledge of Greek, and at the same time asserted his claim to respectful treatment, (f1965) by saying that he was a native of "Tarsus in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city:" and he proceeded to request that he might be allowed to address the people. The request was a bold one; and we are almost surprised that Lysias should have granted it: but there seems to have been something in St. Paul’s aspect and manner, which from the first gained an influence over the mind of the Roman officer; and his consent was not refused. And now the whole scene was changed in a moment. St. Paul stood upon the stairs and turned to the people, and made a motion with the hand, (f1966) as about to address them. And they too felt the influence of his presence. Tranquillity came on the sea of heads below: there was "a great silence:" and he began, saying, —