Acts 24 12

Acts 24:12 kjv

And they neither found me in the temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city:

Acts 24:12 nkjv

And they neither found me in the temple disputing with anyone nor inciting the crowd, either in the synagogues or in the city.

Acts 24:12 niv

My accusers did not find me arguing with anyone at the temple, or stirring up a crowd in the synagogues or anywhere else in the city.

Acts 24:12 esv

and they did not find me disputing with anyone or stirring up a crowd, either in the temple or in the synagogues or in the city.

Acts 24:12 nlt

My accusers never found me arguing with anyone in the Temple, nor stirring up a riot in any synagogue or on the streets of the city.

Acts 24 verses

Acts 24 12 Meaning

Acts 24:12 presents Paul's direct rebuttal to the accusations of sedition and public disturbance leveled against him by Tertullus, the prosecuting attorney. Paul firmly states that his accusers found no evidence of him disputing in a contentious manner or inciting people to riot, whether within the Temple precincts, in the synagogues, or anywhere in the city of Jerusalem. He emphasizes that his conduct was not aimed at stirring up trouble, but was instead peaceful and orderly. This verse highlights his defense against being portrayed as a public agitator or a threat to Roman order.

Acts 24 12 Context

Acts 24:12 is a crucial part of Paul's defense speech before Governor Felix in Caesarea. Following the highly accusatory speech by Tertullus (Acts 24:2-8), who branded Paul a "pestilent fellow" (a plague), a "mover of sedition" among the Jews, and a "ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes," Paul is granted permission to speak. His defense is calm, reasoned, and methodical. In this specific verse, Paul directly addresses the primary Roman concern raised by Tertullus: public disorder and sedition. The historical context involves Roman Judea, where governors like Felix were highly sensitive to anything that could destabilize the region or challenge Roman authority, making charges of sedition (rebellion or incitement) extremely serious. Paul's denial serves to invalidate the core legal premise of the accusation and assert his innocence of any actions that would legitimately concern Roman administration.

Acts 24 12 Word analysis

• And they neither found me (οὔτε γάρ με εὗρον): The use of oute (neither/nor) twice emphatically denies the two main types of accusation. Heuron (εὗρον) from heurisko (to find, discover) highlights the lack of factual basis for the charges. Paul is asserting that despite their investigation or search for evidence, nothing corroborating their claims was ever uncovered. This implies the accusers lacked verifiable proof.
• in the temple (ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ): Refers to the sacred precincts, including the courts where Jewish teaching and disputes often occurred. This directly counters the implied charge that Paul was profaning or disturbing this holy space, a point raised in Acts 21:28 by the Asian Jews. It emphasizes the location where Paul allegedly caused trouble.
• disputing (διαλεγόμενον): Present participle of dialogomai (διαλέγομαι), meaning to discourse, reason, argue. While Paul often engaged in such reasoning (e.g., Acts 17:17; 18:4, 19:8), here he denies "disputing" in a confrontational, seditious, or trouble-making manner. He differentiates his customary teaching/dialogue from inciting unrest, as if to say, "I reasoned, but not in a way that constitutes agitation."
• with any man (πρός τινα): This phrase signifies universality. Paul denies disputing in a disruptive way with anyone—whether Jew or Gentile, religious leader or common person. It extends the scope of his denial to include individual confrontations that might escalate.
• neither raising up the people (οὔτε ἐπίστασιν ποιοῦντα ὄχλου): This is the crux of the denial of sedition. Epistasin (ἐπίστασιν) here refers to a gathering for hostile or seditious purposes, an uprising, or public commotion. Poiounta ochlou (ποιοῦντα ὄχλου), literally "making a crowd/mob," clearly denies the act of actively inciting or creating a public disturbance. This is a direct refutation of Tertullus's charge of being a "mover of sedition." The Romans understood such "mob-making" as a threat to their authority.
• neither in the synagogues (οὔτε ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς): Another public place for Jewish gathering and teaching, often where Paul first preached the Gospel. By denying trouble here, he emphasizes that his teaching did not result in civic unrest even in religious contexts. It shows the consistency of his peaceful conduct.
• nor in the city (οὔτε κατὰ τὴν πόλιν): This covers all other public spaces in Jerusalem. From the Temple courts to the synagogues and the wider urban environment, Paul declares himself free from any activities that would lead to public unrest. This provides a comprehensive geographic and social denial of the accusations.

• "neither found me... disputing... neither raising up the people": This phrase group indicates a forensic denial. Paul is not just saying "I didn't do it," but "they couldn't find evidence of me doing it." This places the burden back on the accusers, suggesting their testimony is baseless. The parallel denial ("neither...neither") strengthens the comprehensive nature of his innocence regarding these two core charges.
• "in the temple... in the synagogues... nor in the city": This triple geographic denial covers all possible venues where public sedition might occur. It paints a picture of Paul's consistent peaceful conduct across the full spectrum of Jerusalem's public life. This shows the extensiveness of his blamelessness.

Acts 24 12 Bonus section

• Roman Legal Framework: Charges of sedition (Latin: seditio, turbato) were among the most serious crimes under Roman law, especially in provinces like Judea which were prone to unrest. A governor's failure to suppress such activities could cost him his career or worse. Paul's emphatic denial directly addresses this acute Roman sensitivity.
• Rhetorical Skill: While Tertullus used elaborate rhetoric, Paul's defense is straightforward and factual. His concise denials, devoid of flowery language, convey a sense of truthfulness and reliance on observable facts rather than persuasive eloquence. He uses repetition (neither...nor) effectively for emphasis.
• Christian Apolgetics: This verse, and Paul's defense, forms an early model of Christian apologetics – defending the faith against hostile accusations. It demonstrates that Christian practice, despite its revolutionary message, was not inherently a threat to public order or civil governance, a point many early Christians had to make to Roman authorities.

Acts 24 12 Commentary

Acts 24:12 serves as Paul's precise and categorical denial of the most politically sensitive charge against him: that he was a sower of discord and a promoter of sedition. This charge was crafted to appeal directly to Roman fears of rebellion. Paul's denial isn't a vague plea but a targeted refutation, systematically addressing the allegations point by point. He distinguishes between reasoned dialogue, a common practice in ancient public squares and synagogues, and the deliberate act of stirring up an "insurrection" or "mob." By covering the Temple, synagogues, and the entire city, Paul presents an unblemished record of his recent stay in Jerusalem, challenging his accusers to provide concrete evidence of public disturbance, which they demonstrably could not. This demonstrates Paul's integrity and adherence to Roman law, even while fiercely upholding his faith. It reveals a pattern of falsely accused followers of Christ, often due to misinterpretation or deliberate distortion of their mission.