Acts 23:15

The council. That is, the Sanhedrin. It seemed necessary to resort to a plot such as this because: (1) The Sanhedrin could not inflict the death penalty (see on John 18:31; Acts 7:58). (2) Even if it could have done so it might have had little or no jurisdiction over Paul as a Roman citizen. (3) Even if it had had jurisdiction, the influence of the Pharisees would now probably have made it impossible to secure a verdict against Paul.

To morrow. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the omission of this word.

As though. This clause reads literally, “as though you would examine matters concerning him more accurately.”

We. Emphatic in the Greek.

Ready to kill him. They would see that Paul never reached the council chamber, and thus, presumably, no suspicion of complicity would attach to any members of the council. His assassination would be attributed to fanatics. Perhaps indeed these 40 plotters were fanatical “daggermen,” or Sicarii (see on ch. 21:38). Here, as in his Gospel, Luke makes evident that the Jews and not the Romans were chiefly responsible for difficulties that arose over the proclamation of the gospel (see Luke 23:2, 4, 14, 22). Josephus records a similar Jewish plot against Herod (Antiquities xv. 8. 1–4), and there were plots against Christ (John 7:19; 8:40; 10:39).

Philo justified the assassination of apostates: “It is well that all who have a zeal for virtue should be permitted to exact the penalties offhand and with no delay, without bringing the offender before jury or council or any kind of magistrate at all, and give full scope to the feelings which possess them, that hatred of evil and love of God which urges them to inflict punishment without mercy on the impious. They should think that the occasion has made them councilors, jurymen, high sheriffs, members of assembly, accusers, witnesses, laws, people, everything in fact, so that without fear or hindrance they may champion religion in full security” (The Special Laws i. 9. 55; Loeb ed., vol. 7, p. 131).