Acts 24:18

ἐν οἷς, see critical note. If we read ἐν αἷς = “amidst which,” R.V., “in presenting which,” margin, with reference to προσφοράς, including not only the offerings in connection with the Apostle's association of himself with the poor men in the Nazirite vow, but also offerings such as those referred to in Acts 24:17. ἐν οἷς = inter quæ (Winer-Schmiedel, pp. 193, 228), i.e., in reference to these matters generally, cf. Acts 26:12. εὗρον, cf. Acts 24:5 : “they found me,” indeed, as they have said, but οὐ μετὰ ὄχλου κ. τ. λ.; a direct answer to the charge of profaning the Temple: he had gone there for worship and sacrifice, “then how did I profane it?” Chrys., Hom.,. ἡγνισμένον : the expression is generally taken to refer to the offerings involved in the association with the vow, Acts 21:26, but it may also include other acts of worship and purification in the Temple. τινὲς : in A.V. the word is simply referred to εὗρον and there is no difficulty; but if we insert δέ after it (see critical note). R.V. renders “but there were certain Jews from Asia,” etc. The sentence breaks off, and the speaker makes no direct reference to Acts 21:27, but implies that these Asiatic Jews should have been present to accuse him if they had any accusation to make their absence was in the prisoner's favour; “the passage as it stands (i.e., with this break) is instinct with life, and seems to exhibit the abruptness so characteristic of the Pauline Epistles,” cf. Acts 26:9, see Page's note in loco. Others take δέ though less forcibly as more strictly in opposition to the preceding words, meaning that his accusers had not found him as they alleged, and as Tertullus alleged, Acts 24:5, but that certain Jews of Asia had found him. Hackett retains δέ, and sees in the words a retort of the charge of riot upon the true authors of it: “but certain Jews from Asia” it is they who excited a tumult, not I; the verb could be omitted, a true picture of the Apostle's earnestness, because so readily suggested from θορύβου, but this interpretation seems hardly borne out by the context.