The life and work of St. Paul

THE LAST JOURNEY TO JERUSALEM. 541
during the few and much occupied days which had elapsed since his return,
given himself the trouble to inquire whether a Kamhit, or a Boethusian, or a
Canthera was at that particular moment adorned with the empty title which
he probably disgraced. He must, of course, have been aware that the high
priest was the Nasi of the Sanhedrin, but in a crowded assembly he had not
noticed who the speaker was. Owing to his weakened sight, all that ho saw
before him was a blurred white figure issuing a brutal order, and to this
person, who in his external whiteness and inward worthlessnoss thus reminded
him of the plastered wall of a sepulchre, he had addressed his indignant
denunciation. That he should retract it on learning the hallowed position of
the delinquent, was in accordance with that high breeding of the perfect
gentleman which in all his demeanour ho habitually displayed.
But while we can easily excuse any passing touch of human infirmity, if
such there were, in his sudden vehemence, we cannot defend his subsequent
conduct at that meeting. Surely it was more than pardonable if on that day
he was a little unhinged, both morally and spiritually, by the wild and awful
trials of the day before. In the discussion which was going on about his
case, his knowledge of the Sanhadrin, of which he had been a member, enabled
him easily to recognise that his judges were still mainly divided into two
parties the Sadducean priests and the Pharisaic elders and scribes. The
latter were the more popular and numerous, the former were the more wealthy
and powerful. Now St. Paul well knew that these two parties were separated
from each other by an internecine enmity, which was only reconciled in the
presence of common hatreds. He knew, too, that one main point of contention
between them arose from questions about the Unseen "World, and the lifo
beyond the grave. 1
Seeing, therefore, that he would meet with neither justice
nor mercy from that tribunal, he decided to throw among them the apple of
"
discord, and cried out amid the Babel of tongues, Brethren, I am a
Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. I am being judged about the hope and
resurrection of the dead." The plan showed great knowledge of character,
and the diversion thus caused was for the time eminently successful ; but was
it worthy of St. Paul ? Undoubtedly there were points in common between
him and the Pharisees. "They taught a resurrection of the dead: so did he.
They taught the coming of the Kingdom of God : so did he. They taught
the Advent of the Messiah : so did he. They taught an intercourse of God
with men by the medium of angels, dreams, and visions : so did he. He
shared with the Pharisees exactly those doctrines, on account of which he was
regarded by the Sadducees as a seducer of the people." This is true ; but, on
the other hand, his belief in the risen Messiah was not the point on which he
was mainly being called in question. 2 That belief, had it stood alone, would
Matt. xxii. 23 ; Jos. B. J. ii. 8, 14 ; Antt. xviii. 1, 4.
2 Reuss, whose Actes des Ap6tres I had not read till these pages were written, takes a
very similar view, p. 218. Yet it is, of course, possible that St. Paul's exclamation may
have been justified by some circumstances of the discussion which have not been preer^ed
in the narrative.