Acts 18: 12-17 - But when Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews made a united attack on Paul and brought him before the tribunal, saying, "This man is persuading people to worship God contrary to the law." But when Paul was about to open his mouth, Gallio said to the Jews, "If it were a matter of wrongdoing or vicious crime, O Jews, I would have reason to accept your complaint. But since it is a matter of questions about words and names and your own law, see to it yourselves. I refuse to be a judge of these things." And he drove them from the tribunal. And they all seized Sosthenes, the ruler of the synagogue, and beat him in front of the tribunal. But Gallio paid no attention to any of this.

Like a few of my blogs thus far, this question stems from a story that I don't remember reading previously, although I've read the entire Bible. This story intrigued me because what seems to be an uneventful happening quickly escalates into a dramatic scene. When the Jews brought a case before Gallio, the Roman proconsul, Gallio refused to judge them, so the Jews angrily seized and beat Sosthenes, the ruler of the synagogue, but Gallio ignored their action. Why did Gallio refuse to judge Paul? Why did the Jews beat Sosthenes when Gallio turned them away? And why did Gallio ignore the beating of Sosthenes?
The Jews claimed that Paul was teaching a new religion, which was contrary to Roman law, but one speculation is that Gallio considered Paul's preaching to be an "extension" of Judaism rather than its own religion. This theory is not contrary with the literature because Gallio did tell the Jews that "[their complaint was] a matter of... [their] own law." He did not consider Paul a threat to the Roman Empire by preaching what he felt like was only an expansion of Judaism. Concerning the beating of Sosthenes, this same source says that Gallio's neglect to stop the mob served as a warning for others not to waste his time like this band of Jews.

Another source agrees with these thoughts and goes on to add that since Gallio found no fault with Paul, he rejected the Jews' case because he wanted Paul to be free to continue preaching without fear of being arrested. Because Gallio believed Paul's teaching to be part of Judaism, this allowed Paul to preach the gospel throughout the Roman Empire without being charged with breaking Roman law because Judaism was an established official religion within the Roman Empire. Therefore, Paul could not be charged with breaking a law that was already established within the empire. This source also presents an interesting guess concerning why the Jews seized Sosthenes. After the former ruler of the synagogue starting following Paul, he no longer held his position in the synagogue, so Sosthenes took his place and led the attack against Paul. However, when he mismanaged the affair so badly that the whole thing was thrown out of court, the Jews beat him in the presence of the Roman judge.

Lastly, it's possible that Gallio saw the Jews' claim against Paul as biblical interpretation, which was of no concern to the state. His refusal to judge this case left it up to the Jews to handle matters relating to their religion, affirming the separation of church and state. This is also why Gallio disregarded Sosthenes' beating. He paid no attention to the crowd of religious Jews to show how he felt that God should not be noticed in the matters of the state.
The Roman tribunal where Paul was dragged before Gallio has been uncovered in the center of the agora (a public open space used for assemblies and markets). This was the platform where Roman officials would appear before the public.
The conclusion at which I arrive comes from parts of the first two sources. Because Gallio tells the Jews that their case was a "matter of... [their] own law," I do believe that he saw Paul's preaching as an extension of Judaism, which was already recognized as an established official religion under the Roman law, and for that reason, he did not judge Paul. I also think that when he dismissed the Jews' case, he felt like his work was finished, so he disregarded the actions that followed and didn't care what the Jews did to the man whom they deemed an inadequate riot leader.
Mike Wilson
8/29/2015 07:42:32 am

I love the way you think! I'm a new Christian who has come back to God after being away for about 7 years. We need Christians who think, read and challenge their bible like this. You have a brilliant mind. Can I touch base as I'd like to exchange/share ideas and thoughts!

Aderonke A
1/6/2016 01:39:27 pm

thanks for the detailed explanation. I was particularly interested in the reason for the beating of Sosthenes but I have even understood more than that. Well done

Young One
2/9/2017 07:30:42 pm


7/26/2017 12:04:14 am

Hi. Translations such as NLT and NKJV say it was Greeks that attacked Sosthenes.

Privilege primus.
4/5/2018 05:32:09 am

That was great. I reasoned over and over why the Jews beat Sosthenes.. I never thought that way.
thanks for that understanding God bless

6/1/2018 07:27:22 am

“Sosthenes took his place and led the attack against Paul”, such misleading view. Paul addressed Sosthenes as brother in 1 Corinthians 1:1

1/18/2020 05:24:14 am

Is Sosthenes in 1 Cor the same Sosthenes in Acts? Did the beating of him by Jews help him to convert to christainity? I don’t believe you answered this question. Perhaps we just don’t know


Leave a Reply.