Acts 23 2

Acts 23:2 kjv

And the high priest Ananias commanded them that stood by him to smite him on the mouth.

Acts 23:2 nkjv

And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth.

Acts 23:2 niv

At this the high priest Ananias ordered those standing near Paul to strike him on the mouth.

Acts 23:2 esv

And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth.

Acts 23:2 nlt

Instantly Ananias the high priest commanded those close to Paul to slap him on the mouth.

Acts 23 verses

Acts 23 2 Meaning

In Acts 23:2, Ananias, the then-High Priest, issues a direct, unprovoked command for Paul to be physically struck on the mouth while Paul is addressing the Jewish supreme court, the Sanhedrin. This act of violence was a direct response to Paul's declaration of having lived with a clear conscience before God, seen by Ananias as a provocative or blasphemous statement given Paul's past as a persecutor and now as an accused Christian. The striking was not a legal procedure but an act of contempt and a deep insult, signifying that Paul's words were deemed false, heretical, or offensive to the religious authority, silencing him and denying his right to speak freely in his own defense.

Acts 23 2 Context

Paul, having been arrested in Jerusalem, is brought before the Sanhedrin (Acts 23:1) for judgment. This is a continuation of the charges against him for allegedly defiling the temple and teaching against the Law and the people. Paul begins his defense by declaring, "Brothers, I have lived before God in all good conscience up to this day." This statement is immediately met with Ananias's command.

Historically, this Ananias served as High Priest from 47-59 AD, appointed by Herod of Chalcis, though his appointment was irregular at times. He was known for his corruption and avarice, accumulating wealth by dishonest means and oppressing poorer priests, according to the historian Josephus. His command to strike Paul reveals his arrogant abuse of authority and disregard for due judicial process. The scene takes place within the Sanhedrin, the highest Jewish religious court, which, under Roman rule, still exercised significant authority over Jewish religious law. For a prisoner, especially one making a religious declaration, to be struck in court, was a profound act of personal and judicial contempt, bypassing all norms of respectful discourse, and an unlawful interruption of defense.

Acts 23 2 Word analysis

• And (δὲ - de): A conjunction often signaling a slight transition or emphasis on what follows. Here, it marks the immediate and dramatic reaction to Paul's declaration, connecting the narrative flow seamlessly.
• the high priest (ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς - ho archiereus): Refers to Ananias. The title designates the chief religious official and presiding judge of the Sanhedrin. His authority was significant, but his conduct here reveals its abuse. This office had lost much of its spiritual gravitas and often devolved into political maneuvering and corruption during the Roman occupation, as exemplified by Ananias himself.
• Ananias (Ἀνανίας - Ananias): The specific high priest mentioned. He is a significant historical figure beyond the biblical narrative. Flavius Josephus (Jewish Antiquities XX.v.2, 107; XX.vi.2, 131; XX.ix.2, 206-7) details his notoriety for greed, violence, and even robbing lower priests, marking him as a highly unpopular and corrupt individual. His actions here align with his historical reputation.
• commanded (ἐπέταξεν - epetaxen): An emphatic verb, implying a stern, authoritative, and direct order. It was not a request but a decree. This verb highlights the immediate exercise of raw power and absence of formal judicial procedure.
• those who stood by him (τοῖς παρεστῶσιν αὐτῷ - tois parestōsin autō): These would be officers of the court or temple guards who were responsible for enforcing orders and maintaining decorum. Their proximity and immediate action emphasize the perceived legitimacy of Ananias's command within the court's framework.
• to strike (τύπτειν - tuptein): A verb meaning "to strike" or "to beat." It denotes physical violence, often a sharp blow. This act goes beyond verbal chastisement or warning, constituting a clear physical assault.
• him (αὐτὸν - auton): Referring to Paul. The direct object of the violent action.
• on the mouth (ἐπὶ τὸ στόμα - epi to stoma): The specific target of the strike. This detail is crucial. Striking someone on the mouth was an act of extreme disrespect and humiliation, implying that their words were false, profane, or offensive, and meant to silence them forcefully. It questioned Paul's integrity and accused him of lying or blaspheming in the presence of the highest religious tribunal.

Words-group by words-group analysis:

• "the high priest Ananias commanded": This phrase immediately establishes the source of the order and highlights the misuse of high religious authority. The high priest should embody justice and religious law, but Ananias personifies its corruption, giving a non-judicial, violent command.
• "those who stood by him to strike him": This demonstrates the direct chain of command and the willingness of officials to execute an unlawful order from a figure of authority. The "him" here is Paul, already a prisoner and vulnerable.
• "on the mouth": This specific target emphasizes the profound insult and attempted degradation of Paul. It suggests that Paul's opening statement, his claim of "good conscience," was perceived as utterly false and deserving of being silenced forcefully and disrespectfully. It directly assaults his voice and credibility.

Acts 23 2 Bonus section

• Ananias's Later Demise: Josephus records that Ananias met a violent end. He was targeted by Jewish rebels (Sicarii) at the outset of the First Jewish-Roman War (66 AD), accused of being a Roman sympathizer. He attempted to hide in an aqueduct but was discovered and brutally murdered, fulfilling Paul's prophetic utterance in Acts 23:3, "God is going to strike you, you whitewashed wall!"
• Jewish Legal Practices: While corporal punishment existed in Jewish law, striking someone on the mouth during a trial was not a recognized legal procedure for maintaining order or punishment. Such an act would be seen as an informal and deeply disrespectful abuse of power, violating principles of fair hearing.
• Theological Parallel to Christ's Suffering: This episode starkly parallels the unjust trials and physical abuse endured by Jesus (e.g., John 18:22), reinforcing a theological pattern where messengers of God's truth often face persecution and humiliation at the hands of religious establishments. This strengthens the early Christian understanding of suffering as a part of discipleship.
• Paul's Humility: Although angered by the injustice (Acts 23:3), Paul swiftly apologizes in Acts 23:5 upon realizing he spoke to the High Priest, citing Ex 22:28 ("You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people"). This demonstrates Paul's deep respect for the office of High Priest, even when occupied by a corrupt individual, showing a nuanced application of obedience to divine command amidst personal injustice.

Acts 23 2 Commentary

Acts 23:2 is a brief yet potent verse that vividly portrays the raw, unjust authority exercised by the Jewish religious leadership against Paul. Ananias's command to strike Paul on the mouth, delivered immediately after Paul's assertion of a good conscience, was a calculated act of humiliation and intimidation. It wasn't a punishment prescribed by law, nor a judicial decision; rather, it was a display of Ananias's personal contempt and impatience, indicative of the corruption that plagued the high priestly office in that era. This physical assault served to silence Paul and invalidate his claim before he could articulate his full defense, suggesting that his very words were offensive or blasphemous. This unjust treatment echoes the suffering of prophets and Christ Himself, illustrating the consistent hostility of religious authority toward divine truth and its messengers when that truth challenges their entrenched power structures. Paul's experience underscores the perils of faithfully proclaiming the Gospel, even within ostensibly religious settings.