<p>21:28 <i>C</i><i>rying out: Men of Israel, help This is the man that teaches all men everywhere against the people and the law, and this place, and moreover he brought Gentiles also into the temple and has defiled this holy place</i>- We can read this as conscious slander. But see on :29 <em>They supposed</em>. I suggest they rehearsed their fears and illogical deductions in their minds to such a point that they became actually convinced this had happened. They saw him with one Gentile, and assume that Gentile had been brought into the temple; and that therefore the other three men seen with him in the temple were therefore also Gentiles. Josephus claims that Gentile entry into the temple was a capital offence. It would've been highly unlikely that Paul would even have got Gentiles beyond the Jewish temple guards. The whole conclusion was improbable in the extreme. But this is where legalistic quasi-logical deduction and supposition lead to.</p><p>The accusations they make against Paul are the very ones which were being made by the Jewish Christians in the Jerusalem ecclesia (:21). This is another reason for thinking that the crowds of Jerusalem Jews baying for Paul's blood included legalistic, Judaistic members of the Jerusalem church. If, as I currently believe, Paul wrote Hebrews from Italy (ponder Heb. 13:24), then we see his utter grace in even bothering to reason with them and urge them not to return to Judaism.</p>