SEV Biblia, Chapter 23:6
¶ Entonces Pablo, sabiendo que una parte era de saduceos, y la otra de fariseos, clam en el concilio: Varones hermanos, yo soy fariseo, hijo de fariseo: de la esperanza y de la resurreccin de los muertos soy yo juzgado.
Clarke's Bible Commentary - Acts 23:6
Verse 6. I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee] Instead of farisaiou, of a Pharisee, ABC, some others, with the Syriac and Vulgate, have farisaiwn, of the Pharisees; which, if acknowledged to be the genuine reading, would alter the sense thus, I am a Pharisee, and a disciple of the Pharisees, for so the word son is frequently understood. Of the hope and resurrection] Concerning the hope of the resurrection, the kai, and, being here redundant; indeed, it is omitted by the Syriac, all the Arabic, and AEthiopic. St. Paul had preached the resurrection of the dead, on the foundation and evidence of the resurrection of Christ. For this, he and the apostles were, some time before, imprisoned by the high priest and elders, chap. iv. 1-3; v. 17, because they preached, THROUGH JESUS, the resurrection of the dead. This they could not bear; for, if Jesus Christ rose from the dead, their malice and wickedness, in putting him to death, were incontrovertibly established.
John Gill's Bible Commentary
Ver. 6. But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees , etc.] That is, that one part of the sanhedrim consisted of Sadducees, which was often the case; sometimes the high priest was of this sect, as Ananias probably was, and sometimes the greater part of the sanhedrim were Sadducees, and even sometimes the whole; (see Gill on Acts 5:17), but this sanhedrim were only part of them Sadducees: and the other Pharisees ; of both these sects, (see Gill on Matthew 3:7). he cried out in the council ; with a loud voice, that he might be heard by all: men and brethren , I am a Pharisee ; he was not only brought up in that sect from his youth, and lived according to it before his conversion, but he was still a Pharisee; wherefore he does not say, I was, but I am a Pharisee; for whatever distinguished the Pharisee from the Sadducee, whether in principle, or in practice, and manner of living, which agreed with Christianity, the apostle still retained; as the belief of the immortality of the soul, the resurrection of the dead, and a future state, and strict holiness of life and conversation. The son of a Pharisee ; the Alexandrian copy, and some others, and the Vulgate Latin version, read in the plural number, the son of Pharisees; his father and his mother were both Pharisees; for there were women Pharisees f1149 , as well as men; so that he was a Pharisee of the Pharisees, as well as an Hebrew of the Hebrews; and this is said to show that he was by education of that sect. Of the hope and resurrection of the dead, I am called in question ; that is, either for the hope of the resurrection of the dead, ( Acts 24:15) or for professing the hope of eternal life, and happiness in a future state, and the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, when the soul and body will be reunited, and enjoy endless felicity together: not that these were the particular things now charged upon him, and for which he was now trying and judging; but that these were the ground and foundation of the hatred and persecution of him, because he preached the resurrection of Christ from the dead, and the resurrection of men through him, and that there was hope of eternal life and salvation by him. And in this the apostle showed the prudence and wisdom of the serpent, along with the innocence of the dove, hereby to divide the assembly, and free himself from them; and it was but just and right; for since they would not hear him about to make a fair and open defence of his cause, but ordered him to be smitten on the mouth, it was but justice to throw them into confusion, and save himself.
Matthew Henry Commentary
Verses 6-11 - The Pharisees were correct in the faith of the Jewish church. The Sadducees were no friends to the Scripture or Divine revelation; the denied a future state; they had neither hope of eternal happiness, no dread of eternal misery. When called in question for his being Christian, Paul might truly say he was called in question for the hop of the resurrection of the dead. It was justifiable in him, by thi profession of his opinion on that disputed point, to draw off the Pharisees from persecuting him, and to lead them to protect him from this unlawful violence. How easily can God defend his own cause! Thoug the Jews seemed to be perfectly agreed in their conspiracy agains religion, yet they were influenced by very different motives. There is no true friendship among the wicked, and in a moment, and with the utmost ease, God can turn their union into open enmity. Divin consolations stood Paul in the most stead; the chief captain rescue him out of the hands of cruel men, but the event he could not tell Whoever is against us, we need not fear, if the Lord stand by us. It is the will of Christ, that his servants who are faithful, should be always cheerful. He might think he should never see Rome; but God tell him, even in that he should be gratified, since he desired to go ther only for the honour of Christ, and to do good.
Greek Textus Receptus
γνους 1097 5631 V-2AAP-NSM δε 1161 CONJ ο 3588 T-NSM παυλος 3972 N-NSM οτι 3754 CONJ το 3588 T-NSN εν 1520 A-NSN μερος 3313 N-NSN εστιν 2076 5748 V-PXI-3S σαδδουκαιων 4523 N-GPM το 3588 T-NSN δε 1161 CONJ ετερον 2087 A-NSN φαρισαιων 5330 N-GPM εκραξεν 2896 5656 V-AAI-3S εν 1722 PREP τω 3588 T-DSN συνεδριω 4892 N-DSN ανδρες 435 N-VPM αδελφοι 80 N-VPM εγω 1473 P-1NS φαρισαιος 5330 N-NSM ειμι 1510 5748 V-PXI-1S υιος 5207 N-NSM φαρισαιου 5330 N-GSM περι 4012 PREP ελπιδος 1680 N-GSF και 2532 CONJ αναστασεως 386 N-GSF νεκρων 3498 A-GPM εγω 1473 P-1NS κρινομαι 2919 5743 V-PPI-1S
Vincent's NT Word Studies
6. The one part were Sadducees, etc. Perceiving the impossibility of getting a fair hearing, Paul, with great tact, seeks to bring the two parties of the council into collision with each other.The resurrection. A main point of contention between the Pharisees and Sadducees, the latter of whom denied the doctrine of the resurrection, of a future state, and of any spiritual existence apart from the body.
Robertson's NT Word Studies
23:6 {But when Paul perceived} (gnous de ho paulos). Perceiving (second aorist ingressive of ginwskw). Paul quickly saw that his cause was ruined before the Sanhedrin by his unwitting attack on the high priest. It was impossible to get a fair hearing. Hence, Vincent says, "Paul, with great tact, seeks to bring the two parties of the council into collision with each other." So Alford argues with the motto "divide and conquer." Farrar condemns Paul and takes #24:21 as a confession of error here, but that is reading into Paul's word about the resurrection more than he says. Page considers Luke's report meagre and unsatisfactory. Rackham thinks that the trial was already started and that Paul repeated part of his speech of the day before when "the Sadducees received his words with ostentatious scepticism and ridicule: this provoked counter-expressions of sympathy and credulity among the Pharisees." But all this is inference. We do not have to adopt the Jesuitical principle that the end justifies the means in order to see shrewdness and hard sense in what Paul said and did. Paul knew, of course, that the Sanhedrin was nearly evenly divided between Pharisees and Sadducees, for he himself had been a Pharisee. {I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees} (egw farisaios eimi huios farisaiwn). this was strictly true as we know from his Epistles (#Php 3:5). {Touching the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question} (peri elpidos kai anastasews nekrwn krinomai). this was true also and this is the point that Paul mentions in #24:21. His failure to mention again the fact that he was a Pharisee throws no discredit on Luke's report here. The chief point of difference between Pharisees and Sadducees was precisely this matter of the resurrection. And this was Paul's cardinal doctrine as a Christian minister. It was this fact that convinced him that Jesus was the Messiah and was "the very center of his faith" (Page) and of his preaching. It was not a mere trick for Paul to proclaim this fact here and so divide the Sanhedrin. As a matter of fact, the Pharisees held aloof when the Sadducees persecuted Peter and the other apostles for preaching resurrection in the case of Jesus and even Gamaliel threw cold water on the effort to punish them for it (#Ac 5:34-39). So qen Paul was really recurring to the original cleavage on this point and was able to score a point against the Sadducees as Gamaliel, his great teacher, had done before him. Besides, "Paul and Pharisaism seem to us such opposite ideas that we often forget that to Paul Christianity was the natural development of Judaism" (Page). Paul shows this in #Ga 3; Ro 9-11.
