2 Corinthians 11:24

Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one - That is, he was five times scourged by the Jews, whose law (Deu 25:3) allowed forty stripes; but they, pretending to be lenient, and to act within the letter of the law, inflicted but thirty-nine. To except one stripe from the forty was a very ancient canon among the Jews, as we learn from Josephus, Antiq. lib. iv. ch. viii. sec. 21, who mentions the same thing: πληγας μιας λειπουσης τεσσαπακοντα· forty stripes, excepting one. The Mishna gives this as a rule, Mish., Maccoth, fol.

De 25:3 ordained that not more than forty stripes should be inflicted To avoid exceeding this number, they gave one short of it: thirteen strokes with a treble lash [BENGEL]. This is one of those minute agreements with Jewish usage, which a forger would have not been likely to observe.

Of the Jews ... - On this verse and the following verse it is of importance to make a few remarks preliminary to the explanation of the phrases: (1) It is admitted that the particulars here referred to cannot be extracted out of the Acts of the Apostles. A few can be identified, but there are many more trials referred to here than are specified there. (2) This proves that this Epistle was not framed from the history, but that they are written independently of one another - Paley. (3) Yet they are not inconsistent one with the other. For there is no article in the enumeration here which is contradicted by the history, and the history, though silent with respect to many of these transactions, has left space enough to suppose that they may have occurred. (a) There is no contradiction between the accounts. Where it is said by Paul that he was thrice beaten with rods, though in the Acts but one beating is mentioned, yet there is no contradiction. It is only the omission to record all that occurred to Paul. But had the history, says Paley, contained an account of four beatings with rods, while Paul mentions here but three, there would have been a contradiction. And so of the other particulars. (b) Though the Acts of the Apostles be silent concerning many of the instances referred to, yet that silence may be accounted for on the plan and design of the history. The date of the Epistle synchronizes with the beginning of Acts 20. The part, therefore, which precedes the twentieth chapter is the only place in which can be found any notice of the transactions to which Paul here refers. And it is evident from the Acts that the author of that history was not with Paul until his departure from Troas, as related in 1Co 16:10; see the note on that place. From that time Luke attended Paul in his travels. […]