This commentary was published in 1983. Greenberg’s second volume on Ezekiel 21-37 was published in 1995, and Stephen Cook finished the commentary in 2018.
Second, there are some other deals December 1-15:
David Jackman, Get Preaching: Why Expository Preaching, $3.99
Collin Hansen, Blind Spots: Becoming a Courageous, Compassionate, and Commissioned Church, $5.99
Helen-Ann Hartley, Making Sense of the Bible, $6.99
Megan Hill, Sighing on Sunday: 40 Meditations for When Church Hurts, $7.99
Lawrence O. Richards, New Testament Life and Times, $18.32 (maybe that price is wrong?)
Judith M. Lieu, Neither Jew nor Greek? Constructing Early Christianity, 11.44
Carol A. Newsom, The Spirit within Me: Self and Agency in Ancient Israel and Second Temple Judaism (The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library), $13.99
Pietro Bovati, Re-establishing Justice’s Legal Terms, Concepts and Procedures in the Hebrew Bible, $14.99
Luke Timothy Johnson, The First and Second Letters to Timothy (The Anchor Yale Bible Commentary), $15.99
Raymond Brown, Epistles of John (The Anchor Yale Bible Commentary), $17.99
This is an interesting mix between academic resources and pastoral resources.
Judith Lieu’s book is a “ground-breaking study in the formation of early Christian identity, by one of the world’s leading scholars. She explores the formation and shaping of early Christian identity within Judaism and within the wider Graeco-Roman world in the period before 200 C.E”
No subscription required. Or get a double discount with a 1- or 2-year subscription bundle. Logos shuffles its bundles every year, so your “gold” package last year is a little different this year. But you do not need to repurchase the whole package. Dynamic pricing means you never pay twice for a book, and on top of that, you get a discount. Click through and check out your pricing…it might be time to pull the trigger on a Platinum Logos library. This is a Black Friday, or Cyber Monday, or “take my money” Tuesday. Whatever it’s called these days. If you want something else, try this code: M7S0Q6E1. That should save you an extra 5%
This Logos Free Book of the Month promotion runs through December 15.A new free book will be available on December 15 at 9:00 a.m. PST. As always, you can use the (free) basic edition or the inexpensive Fundamentals collection to use these free and discounted books.
All the links are Logos Affiliate links. If you plan to buy Logos books, use this link to support Reading Acts.
The tribune wants to know the truth, so he ordered the council to meet (22:30). Luke’s account of Paul before the Sanhedrin begins to shift the story away from Paul in Jerusalem to Paul in Roman custody.
Luke’s report in Acts 23 is sometimes thought to be inaccurate. When soldiers learned that Paul was a citizen, they would immediately remove his chains. As Barrett says, Luke is not writing a police report, “he wishes to indicate that Paul appeared before the Council as a free man” (Barrett, Acts, 2:1053). That the commander could order the Sanhedrin to meet is another question. Did a Roman tribune have the authority to order the Jewish council to meet? This may be an informal meeting, but the tribune wants the local Jewish authorities to sort out what happened and report back to him. The phrase γνῶναι τὸ ἀσφαλές might be better rendered “to know the facts.”
Would a Roman tribune abandon a citizen to the local authorities? Probably not, but the council was not asked to decide his case, but to “find out the truth.” They may have been eager to help because it could lead to Paul’s removal. Although the Roman tribune was not in the meeting, he was close enough to intervene if there was trouble.
Paul immediately announces to his fellow Jews that he has fulfilled all his obligations under the Law. “Even his persecution of the church had been carried out with good conscience; it was, as he thought, his bounden duty (cf. 26:9)’ (Barrett, Acts, 2:424).” With this statement, he claims to have kept every bit of the ceremonial law that this body held sacred. Paul says this again in Acts 24:16 and Philippians 3:6-9. Paul, as a Jew, was a righteous Jew. This is a bold claim considering why he is there in the first place.
The high priest Ananias orders Paul struck for blasphemy (23:2). The high priest considers Paul’s words to be blasphemy and orders the guard to smack Paul in the mouth. The high priest is Ananias, son of Nedebeus. Josephus reports that Ananias was one of the most evil and greediest of the High Priests (Ant. 20:206-13). He was appointed high priest by Herod of Chalcis and held the office AD 47-59 (R. F. O’Toole, “Ananias (Person),” ABD 1:224-25). Ananias, son of Nedebeus, seized the tithes that should have gone to the common priests for himself, keeping the average priest in poverty. He was sent to Rome under suspicion of helping start riots between Jews and Samaritans. He was cleared of the charges and restored to office by the emperor Claudius, primarily because he had the support of Herod Agrippa II.
Ironically, this man thinks Paul was being blasphemous. (Imagine Richard Nixon accusing you of being a liar!) He thinks Paul’s words are a boast. Paul could not have maintained a good conscience regarding the Law.
Paul curses the High Priest, then apologizes (23:3-5). Paul lashes back at Ananias with venom, saying that God will strike him and calling him a whitewashed wall. Is this a curse on Ananias? In the Old Testament, the idea of God “striking” usually means he is judging, as when he “struck” Egypt with plagues. A whitewashed wall refers to an old, crumbling wall. This may allude to Ezekiel 13:14 (cf. CD 8:12). Jesus called the teachers of the Law “whitewashed tombs” (Matt 23:27). Paul believes this man who ordered him to be struck was a hypocrite. The parallel in Luke 11:44 has “unmarked graves, not whitewashed tombs.
Does Paul’s reaction violate Jesus’ command against retaliation? When he was struck, Jesus did not retaliate. John 18:22; Find the Luke verse here. 1 Peter 2:23: “When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly.”
The people who hear Paul’s words are horrified at his attitude toward the high priest. According to Exodus 22:28, the people were not to speak ill of their leaders in any circumstances. (Hopefully, this is one of those verses we can say is “under Law…! “)
How could Paul not know this was the High Priest? Some have interpreted Paul’s words here ironically (Calvin, Augustine) or even in sarcasm. It would have been unusual for Paul not to be able to tell who the High Priest was in the group, unless the hastily organized meeting meant the HP was not wearing some sign of his office (not the full regalia, that would not be appropriate for this meeting). The most likely explanation is that Paul was not familiar with Ananias, since he had not been in Jerusalem regularly in twenty years. Remember, there is no nightly news service that carries the man’s photograph every night.
Paul’s words of apology show that he did not knowingly offend the high priest, but the blow was enough to convince Paul that this was a hostile crowd, so he changed tactics, claiming to be on trial because he believed in the resurrection.
Because they shout and throw dust cloaks into the air, it appears that they take Paul’s speech as blasphemy.
Rather than accomplishing his goal (reconciliation with the Jewish crowd), he has angered them even more. The seeds of the nationalistic rebellion against Rome are already present in Jerusalem in the late 50s. The revolt begins only about eight years after this event. The nationalistic fervor that fuels that rebellion is already at work in the Temple.
Paul is taken to be interrogated by the Romans, who likely have no idea what he has said to the crowd. Typical interrogation by the Romans included torture, but only after other means failed to turn up the facts. This is not a punishment but a method of extracting the truth during the “fact-finding” portion of Paul’s trial. Since Paul is to be flogged, the commander seems to have assumed that Paul is, in fact, a troublemaker, and he wants to get to the facts immediately.
While they were preparing him for this, Paul mentions that he was a Roman citizen. Why does he wait until he is arrested, bound, and about to be flogged? Paul may have waited to put the Roman soldiers in a difficult position, but they must now make amends for withholding Paul’s rights as a citizen.
The centurion in charge of the interrogation immediately reported to Tribune Claudius Lysias that Paul was a Roman citizen. The tribune says he “bought his citizenship for a large sum” (22:27 ESV). Could someone actually purchase a citizenship? Mark Anthony sold Roman citizenships, and later Claudius’s wife, Messalina, sold citizenships (Cicero, Philippicae, II, 92; V, 11-12). The Philippics (or Philippicae) are fourteen speeches (44-42 BC) condemning Mark Anthony after the assassination of Julius Caesar. Tarja, The Trial of Paul, 82). Suetonius tells a story about Nero granting citizenship certificates to some young Greek dancers because he liked their performance (Sherwin-White, Roman Law and Roman Society, 146-149). (See this post on the possibility Paul was from a wealthy family.)
Paul was born a citizen. Likely, Paul’s citizenship was granted to his father or grandfather for services rendered to the empire, possibly as slaves. While this is speculative, many scholars have suggested that his family served as tentmakers in the military. Paul had a higher social status than a Roman tribune. Paul has dual citizenship from Tarsus and Rome. He was born a Roman citizen rather than having purchased it. In addition, Paul is well educated (speaking Greek and Aramaic) and may come from a wealthy family.
Paul’s citizenship is indeed a serious problem for the Romans responsible. Cicero said, “To bind a Roman citizen is a crime, to flog him is an abomination, to slay him almost an act of murder” (Verrine Orations, 2.5.66, cited by Witherington, Acts, 677-78).
Paul’s Roman citizenship is important for the rest of the story because it determines who will hear Paul’s case and decide his fate (Rome, not the Jews). Paul’s treatment throughout the rest of the book of Acts is based on Paul’s legal status as a Roman citizen.
This account of Paul’s vision in the Temple is new information that was not found in the earlier part of Acts. In Acts 9, Ananias tells Paul that God is sending him to the Gentiles. But in Acts 22, Paul does not say Ananias told him about his commission, but God himself tells Paul this while Paul was worshiping in the temple. This is a significant change Paul may have made to appeal to the audience: Jews who worship in the Temple. Paul emphasizes this vision because he was in the Temple praying when he received it. How could he now be accused of desecrating the Temple?
Paul says that he “fell into a trance.” This word “trance” is usually translated as “amazed” or “astonished”, but in this passage and in Acts 10-11, it is clearly used to describe a state of viewing something supernatural, such as Peter’s divine calling. There may be a reason for using this phrase here, to parallel what happened to Paul with what eventually happened to Peter in Acts 10.
The content of this vision is a warning that he will not have success among the people of Jerusalem. Because of this, scholars often draw parallels between Paul’s experience here and Isaiah’s vision in Isaiah 6. Both occur while they are praying in the temple, and both are told they will not have success. But this is where the parallels end. Isaiah remains in Jerusalem and continues his ministry, knowing that a righteous remnant remains in the city. Paul is explicitly told to leave the city.
When did Paul receive this vision (in the chronology of Acts)? Acts 9:29-30 indicates Paul came to Jerusalem briefly and tried to reason with the “Grecian Jews.” This threatened Paul’s life, and the brothers helped him leave for Tarsus. However, Luke does not tell us that Paul was warned in a vision. Galatians 1:18-21 mentions a trip to Jerusalem three years after his conversion. This is either the same trip as Acts 9:29-30 or another later trip. Acts 9 is not very clear in chronology, but three years may have passed before he finally went to Jerusalem to meet the apostles.
The Lord tells Paul that he has been sent to the Gentiles. While Paul objects to this commission based on his approval of Stephen’s execution, the Lord sends him “far away” to the Gentiles.
Hearing that Paul was sent to the Gentiles gets the Jews to demand that he be killed (22:22-29). Why? Because they shout and throw dust cloaks into the air, it appears that they take Paul’s speech as blasphemy. Rather than accomplishing his goal (reconciliation with the Jewish crowd), he has angered them even more. The seeds of the nationalistic rebellion against Rome are already present in Jerusalem in the late 50s. The revolt begins only about eight years after Paul causes a riot in the Temple. The nationalistic fervor that fuels the rebellion is already at work in the Temple.
Study Assistant is the main upgrade in Logos 46 for Logos subscribers. According to Logos, Study Assistant is an environment for “Bible study by letting you ask questions in everyday language and get clear, concise answers drawn directly from resources.”
Ask a question, and the Study Assistant responds, “Working on it.” I assume larger libraries take longer than smaller ones, but the wait was not a problem at my very large library. The answer is a short paragraph or two with notes to resources. The AI does not always quote sources; instead, it rewords them and includes a link to the reference. The three or four books used for that answer are listed below the paragraphs, with full bibliographic references and links to open the books to the appropriate sections. Users can hover over the page number in the chat to see the Study Assistant’s notes or click it to open the book and read the section in context.
How is Study Assistant different than the regular Logos Smart Search? They are quite similar. Unlike AI search, you can ask the Study Assistant follow-up questions to keep the conversation going. In this sense, it is more like ChatGPT or Perplexity. For example, I asked how Paul became a Roman citizen. The Study Assistant gave me a good answer from the books I own. If I were researching this question myself, I would have used these resources, though it would have taken longer to find the relevant answer. I then asked if someone could buy their citizenship, and the response used three different sources. I probably would not have used one of the commentaries, but it did point out two helpful dictionary articles.
I asked the regular Smart Search the same question. The AI Synopsis was similar but not identical, and used two of the three same sources. Smart Search also includes dozens of hits from your library that might be helpful but were not used in the AI synopsis. Smart Search does not allow follow-up questions in a conversational style, but there is a button to continue the search using Study Assistant. At least when I reviewed Study Assistant, this button did not create a new session; it overwrote the session I had open. The button should open a new tab and create a new conversation. I did this a few more times to confirm the behavior of the “continue in Study Assistant button.” At the time of this review, you cannot have two Study Assistant tabs open, unlike Smart Search. Starting a new conversation deletes the old one, and conversations cannot be saved. This is a known problem in the beta version I tested; hopefully, this will be fixed in the future.
I then asked, “Explain more about being born a citizen.” Another good answer, with four more different resources. In this case, the Study Assistant wrote: “What more natural,” as one scholar notes, “than that Paul should sometimes use this civic privilege to illustrate spiritual truths?” But there was no footnote for this quotation. I used a regular search of my library (using a precise search) and found the quotation. It was from the last-cited source. Since the Study Assistant used a direct quotation, it needed a note, even though it was the most recent source. Another quibble: I do not like the phrase, “as one scholar notes.” Please give me the author, not a generic reference to “some scholar.”
I then asked this as a follow-up question: “You said Paul refers to his citizenship. Where does he do this?” The Study Assistant reported the three places in Acts where Paul does this and summarizes them. No sources outside the Bible for that answer. I then asked, “So Paul does not refer to his citizenship in his letters?” A great answer (no, he does not), but the AI mentions that citizenship is important in Philippians. As with the previous answers, there are three good sources that the conversation had not yet used. Follow-up question: “Why do you think Paul does not mention his citizenship?” This is the first time the Study Assistant repeated a source, citing four in response.
Finally, I asked, “What application could a pastor draw from Paul’s silence on his citizenship?” I thought the answer was good and was close to what I might have done without the Study Assistant.
I tried to limit the Study Assistant’s resources: “Using only the Journals in my library, what was Paul’s missionary strategy?” It tried to search the journals of George Whitefield and John Wesley, which have nothing on Paul’s missionary journeys. I tried to clarify: “By Journals, I mean academic journals.” That worked. A good answer, but only one source was an academic journal article. I tried, “What does Ben Witherington say about Paul’s missionary strategy?” Study Assistant used two Witherington books, and asked me, “The search was constrained to sources authored by Ben Witherington. Would you like me to search your entire library instead?” In this case, the Study Assistant found three authors who interacted with Witherington on the topic of Paul’s missionary strategy. I tried a few more scholars and usually got two or three books.
I asked the Study Assistant to find references in my Logos library to me as the author. It found my book and one book review I wrote for JETS, even though there are many more in Logos. The precise Smart Search says 49 results in 46 articles in 21 resources. I realize this is narcissistic, but we have all Google ourselves, right? Right?
I asked the Study Assistant to do something I can do with ChatGPT. I have used ChatGPT to scan a table of contents and format bibliographic references in SBL Style (book sections). ChatGPT even formatted that date into an EndNote file I imported into my EndNote database. I could create each entry by hand (usually by copying and editing data), but that is time-consuming. So I tried this with Study Assistant. “Using the table of contents for the book ‘Who Is This Son of Man?,’ create a bibliography.” It found the book in my library, “Who Is This Son of Man?”: The Latest Scholarship on a Puzzling Expression of the Historical Jesus, edited by Larry W. Hurtado and Paul L. Owen. It listed the table of contents but did not know how to format an SBL bibliography for the book. So I asked: “Can you format the book sections into a bibliography in SBL format?” Certainly! The Study Assistant cheerfully presented me with a well-formatted bibliography, which I copied and pasted into Word. So that was successful. But I really want it in EndNote format, so I asked, “Can you convert that bibliography into an EndNote file?” The Study Assistant politely apologized, saying it cannot create a file because “My capabilities are limited to generating text responses.” It did tell me I can get EndNote format citations using the citation tool. I took the date from Word, pasted it into ChatGPT, told it to generate a .enw file, and imported that date into EndNote.
One thing some users might find frustrating is that the default search is “all books,” including books you do not own. You will still see the bibliographic reference (with page numbers), but when you click the book, Logos prompts you to buy it. This is useful for finding new resources that could be relevant to your research. If you prefer, you can set the AI only to use resources from your library.
Something I would really like to see added is the ability to expand the number of sources Study Assistant uses. Three or four sources is limited to me. I want to ask the Study Assistant to find a topic across all my academic journals so I can get a list of sources to read to research it. Not two or three articles, all the sources. Anyone who has been using Logos for many years has dozens (hundreds?) of out-of-copyright books they have accumulated from upgrades. I do not want a 200-year-old commentary, and I want the best, and I want to be the one who identifies what the best is.
There are three buttons at the bottom (thumbs up/down, and copy). The copy button only copies a single section of the chat, not the entire conversation. You can copy the conversation manually, but I found that the formatting is off (links do not copy). At the time of this review, users cannot save conversations.
Some concluding reflections: As a university professor who is living through the AI fear and loathing in academia, adding AI to Logos was disturbing. The percentage of students using AI to write essays is very high (although I get far fewer plagiarized papers these days). Initially, I was dead set against AI, and I am still “almost dead set” against AI for the classes I teach. When you are writing an essay that asks you to read the Bible and reflect on it, I think AI is disruptive. As someone who regularly teaches and preaches in local churches, I really question whether AI is a good way to prepare sermons. Can the Holy Spirit illuminate the AI to write appropriate applications for my congregation?
However, I have also weathered the academic fear and loathing of Wikipedia in the early 2000s. Academics lost their minds over Wikipedia as a resource in college essays. At first, I outlawed Wikipedia as a source. But now, I use Wikipedia almost every day to define obscure terms or find incredibly detailed (and documented) explanations. I never rely on Wikipedia as a source in academic writing, but I will use the endnotes and track down a “legit” source. For several years, I would be thrilled to see Wikipedia in a student paper (because college students thought Yahoo Answers and WikiHow were pretty cool). These days, college students rely on AI trained on Wikipedia (so no access to academic sources) or (worse) on random, unedited, or unvetted data from blogs.
So is AI in Logos bad? Evil? Some people think AI is a sign that the Antichrist is about to appear and replace us with AI. Meh. It is not all that bad. AI is mostly hype at this point, and it is impossible to do tech without adding AI to the title. At this point, any AI is just a really fancy search engine with access to more data than any search engine before. Logos did not add Hal 9000 to your software, and this AI assistant is (probably) not going to try to kill you or take away your job. It does the same things you always did, but much faster.
Study Assistant is the next logical addition to the Logos Bible Software ecosystem. After adding fuzzy searches and smart searches, it makes sense to have the same kind of AI-driven conversational search one encounters on Google or ChatGPT. If AI bothers you, think of Logos’s Smart Search and Study Assistant as fancy skin for the old, indexed search (which still exists in Logos if you prefer to use it). There is room for improvement, but since moving to a subscription model, Logos has been rolling out updates more frequently.
