A way with words..

Something caught my attention on a recent reading of Acts 23.

Paul is normally really plain in expressing the Gospel and what he believes, but in this trial before the Sanhedrin he deliberately and quite cleverly subverts the questions and starts an argument between the Pharisees and Sadducees:

"I stand on trial because of my hope in the resurrection of the dead. When he said this, a dispute broke out between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided. [And Luke explains](the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, and that there are neither angels nor spirits, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all.)" 23 v.6-7

It seems unusual for him to divert attention away in this way and perhaps even slightly deceptive - that's not really what they considered the trial was about surely? (although of course a fairly essential component) Perhaps he was just trying to highlight the lack of evidence or case against him..?

He later refers to this in his trial before Felix (chapter 24) when he admits that he caused a disturbance with his comments about resurrection before the Sanhedrin - and that was his only crime.

Thoughts?