Now we’re ready for Acts 24. Paul is under arrest and has been taken to Caesarea under heavy guard to appear before Felix, the governor of Judea. Ananias and the elders (the council or Sanhedrin) follow five days later to make their accusations known to Felix (verse 1). Here is an example of the legal process followed in Roman provinces. In this case, as the one responsible to keep the peace in Jerusalem, Lysias had the authority to gather the facts or cause of the uproar concerning Paul and deal with it himself. This is why he ordered Paul beaten and questioned (22:24), thinking he would get to the truth, make a decision and put the issue to rest.
But when he found out Paul was a Roman citizen, everything changed. It became a situation that was beyond his authority, so he sent Paul to Felix. Now it became the responsibility of Paul’s accusers to appear before Felix and bring charges. So, they immediately went to Caesarea with an advocate named Tertullus to make their case. The KJV, referring to Tertullus, calls him an “orator”. This is from rhetor, a public speaker. Some translations call him a lawyer. But Tertullus (a Roman) was not a trained legal professional. However, it was a common practice to hire a public speaker to make a skillful, orderly presentation of a case in court.
In verses 2 through 4 Tertullus heaps praise on Felix, and given the situation and history of conflicts, both Felix and Paul’s accusers knew this was false praise. Then he presents four accusations against Paul. The first is that Paul is a “pestilent fellow” (in the KJV “fellow” is in italics, meaning it was added for clarification). “Pestilent” is from loimos, a plague (a destructive, contagious disease), used metaphorically to describe Paul, not as a “pestilent fellow”, but a literal plague on the Jewish people.
The second accusation was that Paul promoted sedition (discontent or rebellion against authority). This was an important charge. The Jews wanted Felix to assume Paul was stirring up rebellion against Roman authority, when it was actually their religious authority he challenged.
Then they accused Paul of being a leader of the “sect of the Nazarenes”. Here, “sect” is from hairesis, heresy. Here it refers to believers in Christ. The Jews would not call them Christians; to do so would be an admission that Jesus was the Christ. Instead, they called Him, “Jesus of Nazareth” (Acts 6:14) and believers, “those who follow the heresy of the Nazarenes”.
And it must be pointed out that Tertullus saved the best charge (or for Paul, the worst charge) for last. He accused Paul of defiling the temple. The reason is that the Romans (in order to at least partially appease the Jewish religious authorities) allowed the Jews to put to death on their own judgment anyone who defiled the temple.
If you look at the KJV translation, it differs from the original text in the next several verses. The last part of verse 6, all of verse 7 and the first part of verse 8 was added, again for clarification; but since this additional text is found in some later manuscripts, it is not in italics, as it should be. However, the added text does accurately describe what probably happened. “We seized Paul in the temple, and would have condemned him to death according to our law (verse 6). But Lysias came and took him from us by force (verse 7). And ordered us to present our accusations personally to you. And by examining him yourself, you will now be able to learn the truth of these charges (verse 8). Then all the Jews agreed with the accusations, declaring that all those things were true.” (Verse 9)
Then Felix gave Paul the opportunity to defend himself against the charges. We won’t go through this except to say the basis of Paul’s defense was that none of the charges could be proven (verse 13) and no witnesses were put forward to verify the charges (verses 18-19). He also admitted to being a follower of the Way, which they were saying is heresy. And concluded that the real problem was his belief in a resurrection (verses 15, 21).
This brings us to verse 22, “But Felix, who had an accurate understanding of the Way, adjourned the trial, saying, When Lysias comes, I’ll decide your case.” So, the question arises, how did Felix gain this “accurate understanding of the Way”? The answer is that Drusilla, his second wife, was a Jewess and was, no doubt, familiar with the controversy surrounding Jesus and claims that He was the Messiah foretold by Moses and the prophets.
You might wonder why Luke mentions this now; so, let’s look at this. Felix has postponed this trial for several reasons at this point. One reason is that his knowledge of the Way has made him somewhat curious about what Paul has to say about it, as we will see. Another is that Paul is a Roman citizen, so Felix has to be careful about how he handles this case. And yet another is that in their accusations the Jews have intimated that Lysias was guilty of wrongdoing when he prevented them from killing Paul, as they were lawfully permitted to do. This whole matter was getting more and more complicated.
As a result, Felix commanded a centurion to keep Paul in custody, but give him some “freedom” (from anesis, a loosening or indulgence, here it indicates a moderation of normal restrictions placed on one in custody) and permit his friends to care for his needs (verse 23). And in the following days Felix and Drusilla would send for Paul and listen to him talk about faith in Christ, righteousness, self-control and a future judgment (verses 24-25). And, at one point Luke says Felix “trembled” (from emphobos, to be afraid, used here to illustrate conviction). However, there is no indication that either Felix or Drusilla ever became believers. It’s more likely this was simply a diversion or curiosity to them.
And in the next verse we see what Felix really wanted. “At the same time he hoped to get money from Paul, so he sent for him often to talk with him.” (Verse 26) This was a common practice. Felix knew that Paul was prominent among believers in Christ, had many friends and hoped they would raise money to gain his freedom. And, evidently, this was not a good plan as the next verse tells us after two years had passed Porcius Festus took Felix’ place as governor of Judea, but Felix had kept Paul in custody as a favor to the Jews.
Josephus tells us the reason Felix kept Paul under arrest all that time was because he knew the Jews were going to Rome to press their case before the new emperor (Nero), so he was trying to appease them. However, they went and it was told the emperor would have punished Felix for protecting Paul (and because he tired of hearing of other indiscretions), except his brother (Pallas still had much influence) interceded for him. And, as been previously noted, there was no sympathy in Rome for Christians (remember, they would not worship Roman idols, participate in the temple rites or revere the emperor as a god).
Now Porcius Festus is the new governor of Judea, appointed by the new emperor Nero, who had tired of hearing complaints from both Jews and Gentiles concerning Felix. Not much is known about Festus before he came to this position, and he was governor for only a short time. But, the one thing said about him was that he was more just and even-handed in the way he dealt with the difficult problems that continued to arise in the region.
When Acts 25 begins, Festus has immediately traveled to Jerusalem, where the Jews presented their charges against Paul (verses 1-2). Festus has inherited this continuing problem. The Jews had seized Paul in the temple, followed him to Caesarea, sent a delegation to Rome to complain about how Lysias and Felix had handled the situation and now (after 2 years had passed) Festus was in Jerusalem still dealing with it. And to further prove their resolve to kill Paul, the Jews begged Festus to send him back to Jerusalem, hoping to kill him on the way (verse 3).
But Festus essentially told them Paul was in custody in Caesarea and, if they wanted, they could go there and press their charges. As the account continues, there’s another episode of accusations and defense. Then, in an effort to appease the Jews, Festus asks Paul if he’s willing to go to Jerusalem to be put on trial there. Paul answers that he is already in the proper (Roman) jurisdiction, where he should be tried, he appealed to Caesar and Festus agrees, “You have appealed to Caesar, to Caesar you will go.” (Verses 4-12)
It may have become apparent by now that Festus’ handling of this is a little schizoid, he doesn’t give in to them, then he appears to be willing to give them what they want, then he slams the door in their face – making it impossible for them to get their hands on Paul. But this illustrates a common attitude of Roman authority towards Jews. On the one hand they were charged with the responsibility of keeping the peace, which sometimes required compromise or appeasement – something they viewed as a threat to their authority. On the other hand, the Jews never tried to hide the fact they despised Roman authority, were arrogant and were repulsed at anything that wasn’t Jewish.
I know I’m playing the junior psychologist here, but I can just see into Festus’ mind when he’s thinking, I could give them what they want and this whole matter would be settled, but I don’t like them and they don’t like me, and since I have the authority to do whatever I want, I’ll send Paul to Rome and out of their reach.
In Acts 25:13 we see yet another new face, king Agrippa, who comes to Caesarea with his wife Bernice, to welcome Festus to Judea. This is the same man called Herod in Acts 12:1 who killed James, the brother of John. Officially he is known as Herod Agrippa II, and was the grandson of Herod the Great. He was only 17 years old when his father Aristobulus died. Considered too young to rule his father’s kingdom, he was educated in Rome in the court of the emperor Claudius. He was eventually given the lands formerly ruled by his grandfather and by this time had been the king of Judea for about 10 years. And, as his position dictated, he had authority over all the affairs connected to the temple in Jerusalem.
As you go through the rest of Acts 25, Festus acquaints Agrippa with Paul’s case and wants him to hear Paul’s explanation of the situation. The reason is that Festus has already determined to send Paul to Rome, but has only a faint understanding of the charges against him. He doesn’t know what to write to explain them to Caesar and hopes Agrippa will hear Paul, then help him put the charges in writing (25:24-27).
So then Acts 26:1-23 is Paul’s defense, again very similar to the others. Except that in verse 23 Paul is talking about Christ rising from the dead. Then in the next verse Festus shouts at Paul, saying, “You’re crazy!” And Paul’s reply goes something like this, “I’m not crazy, I’m telling the truth. The king knows about all these things. I can speak to him with confidence. I’m convinced that not one of these things has escaped his notice, because none of it was done in secret. King Agrippa, do you believe what the prophets have foretold? I know you do.” (Verses 24-27)
Agrippa’s response in the next verse is short and to the point. “Do you think you can persuade me to become a Christian in such a short time?” And they all got up and left the hall. Then both Festus and Agrippa agreed that Paul had done nothing deserving of death or imprisonment, and Agrippa said, “This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.” (Verses 31-32)
Now, finally, Paul is on his way to Rome.