Book of Acts

Chapter 25Theme: Paul before Festus

Michael FronczakBible Study Resource Center

564 Schaeffer Dr.Coldwater, Michigan 49036

www.biblestudyresourcecenter.com

Copyright © 2010

Theme: Paul before Festus

Josephus’s portrait of Festus is much more positive than his portrait of Felix or Albinus; Festus corrected disturbances and caught many of the revolutionaries. It also appears from Josephus that Festus died in office, having served in Palestine only a year or two. Extensive parallels between Jesus’ hearings in Luke 23 and Paul’s in Acts 25-26 indicate that Luke wishes to parallel them, as some other historians paralleled figures; his point is that Christians must follow in Jesus’ footsteps.1

McGee Introduction: Paul had been unjustly kept in prison for two years. Festus is the new governor who followed Felix. Now Paul will appear before this new governor.

We have seen Paul before the mob on the steps of the castle in Jerusalem. We have seen him before the Sanhedrin. We have seen him before Felix and then in private interview with Felix and his wife Drusilla. Apparently there were other meetings. Now he will appear before Festus. Later he will appear before Agrippa. Paul appeared before all these rulers and it must have been a tedious time for Paul, something to try his patience. However, I’m sure that he rejoiced in the opportunity given him to testify before the high political figures of the Roman Empire. Remember that when the Lord Jesus had apprehended Paul on the Damascus road, He had said, “… he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel” (Acts 9:15). Paul is moving according to God’s plan and program.

Each time Paul tells about what the Lord Jesus had done for him, and he tells it with a great deal of conviction and enthusiasm. Paul witnesses a good confession of Jesus Christ. Although Felix trembled as he listened, the rascality and cupidity and covetousness of this man triumphed. He had his chance. He sent for Paul many times but he wanted a bribe, not salvation.

Those two years that Paul languished in prison are silent years in the life of Paul. Perhaps he chafed under it all. We don’t know. We do know that the hand of God was manifested in all this, and His purposes were carried out. How comforting this can be for us when our activity seemingly comes to a standstill.2

1 Bible Background Commentary, New Testament2McGee, J. V. (1997, c1981). Thru the Bible commentary. Based on the Thru the Bible radio program. (electronic ed.) (4:621). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

1

Acts 25:1Now when Festus was come into the province, after three days he ascended from Caesarea to Jerusalem.

Festus has a unique problem, he is the new governor and here is a guy whom the Jews hate, who is appealing to Caesar. So, he should send Paul to Rome, yet on what charges?

Ascended, and you always go up to Jerusalem, you never go down to Jerusalem. No one ever said, "Let's go down to Jerusalem." It's always, "Let's go up to Jerusalem."

Into the province. The province of Judea; for Judea at that time was a Roman province.

Barnes: To Jerusalem. The governors of Judea at this time usually resided at Caesarea; but as Jerusalem had been the former capital; as it was still the seat of the religious solemnities; as the sanhedrim held its meetings there; and as the great, and rich, and learned men, and the priests resided there, it is evident that a full knowledge of the state of the province could be obtained only there. Festus therefore, having entered on the duties of his office, early went to Jerusalem to make himself acquainted with the affairs of the nation.3

Clarke: Now when Festus was come into the province—By the province is meant Judea; for, after the death of Herod Agrippa, Claudius thought it imprudent to trust the government in the hands of his son Agrippa, who was then but seventeen years of age; therefore Cuspius Fadus was sent to be procurator. And when afterwards Claudius had given to Agrippa the tetrarchate of Philip, that of Batanea and Abila, he nevertheless kept the province of Judea more immediately in his own hands, and governed it by procurators sent from Rome. Joseph. Ant. lib. xx. cap. 7, sec. 1. Felix being removed, Porcius Festus is sent in his place; and having come to Caesarea, where the Roman governor generally had his residence, after he had tarried three days, he went up to Jerusalem, to acquaint himself with the nature and complexion of the ecclesiastical government of the Jews; no doubt, for the purpose of the better administration of justice among them.4

Festus’s residence would be in Caesarea, but it was politically appropriate to visit the local authorities centered in Jerusalem.

This section (vv. 1-12) is crucial because in it Paul appealed to Caesar. It sets the direction for the remainder of the book and also shows how the apostle reached Rome.Little is known of Porcius Festus, Roman procurator of Judea, A.D. 58-62, but what history discloses is favorable. His desire to rule well is attested by his going to Jerusalem

3 Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament4 Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the New Testamentvv. verses

2

three days after arriving in the province. No doubt he had heard of the volatile nature of that city!5

ESV 1-12: The new procurator Festus wanted to win the favor of his constituents. When approached by the Jewish leaders concerning Paul, he at first resisted but later gave in to their desire to try Paul in Jerusalem. To avoid the fate that awaited him there, Paul invoked his citizen's right of appeal for trial before the emperor.

“To the Jews, Jerusalem is the high point of temporal and spiritual life. The Holy City is situated in the high hills of Judaea. The New Testament contains the phrase ‘up to Jerusalem’ or ‘up unto Jerusalem’ twenty-two times. Westerners will often view any place north as ‘up north,’ whereas in the Holy Land the region around the Sea of Galilee, though north, is referred to as ‘down north,’ being lower in elevation. “So from the Galilee, the Jordan Valley, the Coastal Plains, or anywhere in the country, it was a journey up to Jerusalem. ‘When he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast.’ ("Luke 2:42Luke 2:42.) ‘The Jews' passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.’ ("John 2:13John 2:13.) ‘When he had thus spoken, he went before, ascending up to Jerusalem.’ ("Luke 19:28Luke 19:28.) ‘He was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem.’ ("Acts 13:31Acts 13:31.) ‘Now when Festus was come into the province, after three days he ascended from Caesarea to Jerusalem.’ ("Acts 25:1Acts 25:1.)” (D. Kelly Ogden, Where Jesus Walked: The Land and Culture of New Testament Times, 5)

Acts 25:2Then the high priest and the chief of the Jews informed him against Paul, and besought him,

The new plot was to get Paul sent back to Jerusalem and then have men kill him on the way (Acts 25:3).

Barnes: Then the High Priest. The high priest at this time was Ismael, the son of Fabi. He had been promoted to that office by Agrippa. Josephus' Antiq. b. xx. ch. viii. Acts 23:2. Some Mss. read high priests here, in the plural number, and this reading is approved by Mill and Griesbach. There is, however, no improbability in supposing that the high priest Ismael might have been also as much enraged against Paul as the others.

Barnes: Informed him against Paul. Informed him of the accusation against him; and doubtless endeavoured to prejudice the mind of Festus against him. They thus showed their unrelenting disposition. It might have been supposed that after two years this unjust prosecution would be abandoned and forgotten. But malice does not thus forget its object; and the spirit of persecution is not thus satisfied. It is evident that there was here every probability that injustice would be done to Paul, and that the mind of Festus would be biassed against him. He was a stranger to Paul, and to the embittered feelings of the

5Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. (1983-c1985). The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures (2:422). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

3

Jewish character, he would wish to conciliate their favour on entering on the duties of his office. And a strong representation therefore, made by the chief men of the nation, would be likely to prejudice him violently against Paul, and to unfit him for the exercise of impartial justice.

Clarke: The high priest—informed him against Paul—They supposed that as Felix, to please them, on the resignation of his government, had left Paul bound, so Festus, on the assumption of it, would, to please them, deliver him into their hand; but, as they wished this to be done under the color of justice, they exhibited a number of charges against Paul, which they hoped would appear to Festus a sufficient reason why a new trial should be granted; and he be sent to Jerusalem to take this trial. Their motive is mentioned in the succeeding verse.

Relations between Felix and the Jewish authorities had been strained; a new governor, however, meant a new chance to introduce agendas previously deferred.

One item heavy on the minds of the religious authorities was a trial for Paul. They knew their case was so weak that the only way they could rid themselves of him was by ambush while he was being transferred from Caesarea to Jerusalem.6

The chief priests and the principal men probably refers to the Sanhedrin. Previously they had cooperated with the 40 zealots in their plot against Paul (23:12–15); now they themselves plotted against Paul.

Acts 25:3And desired favour against him, that he would send for him to Jerusalem, laying wait in the way to kill him.

The Jews say that they want to examine Paul, but really it is just a ploy to get him back to Jerusalem so they can kill him.

Barnes: And desired favour against him. Desired the favour of Festus, that they might accomplish their wicked purpose on Paul.

Barnes: Laying wait in the way to kill him. That is, they would lie in wait, or they would employ a band of Sicarii, or assassins, to take his life on the journey. Acts 21:38; Acts 23:12. It is altogether probable that if this request had been granted, Paul would have been killed. But God had promised him that he should bear witness to the truth at Rome, (Acts 23:11;) and his providence was remarkable in thus influencing the mind of the Roman governor, and defeating the plans of the Jewish council.

3-5. They wanted Paul moved; given the frequent assaults by revolutionaries throughout the country, the priestly aristocracy would not necessarily appear to have sponsored the

6Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. (1983-c1985). The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures (2:422). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

4

violence against Paul (as violent as some of their own agendas were reported to be, according to early Jewish sources).

LAN: 7Although two years had passed, the Jewish leaders still were looking for a way to kill Paul. They told Festus about Paul and tried to convince him to hold the trial in Jerusalem (so they could prepare an ambush). But God and Paul thwarted their schemes again.Festus now has become the governor replacing Felix, and when he went up to Jerusalem, Festus went up right away indicating there must have been a existing problem. And immediately the high priest, now this was a different high priest. Ananias had passed now from the scene in the intervening two years, a new high priest, but they're still so incensed against Paul that they were still plotting to kill him. So they mentioned about Paul, "Let's bring him up to Jerusalem to stand trial here." And then on the way to Jerusalem they were planning to ambush him.

We can see that Paul’s generous “imprisonment” in Caesarea was actually a providential provision of protective custody against the murderous intentions of the Jews, as well as a “forced rest” in light of his unfailing missionary service in years past, and great tasks in the years ahead.

Acts 25:4But Festus answered, that Paul should be kept at Caesarea, and that he himself would depart shortly thither.

Festus had everything to gain and nothing to lose in granting this request, but God was working and put in his heart to hear Paul in Caesarea.

Clarke: Festus answered, that Paul should be kept at Caesarea—It is truly astonishing that Festus should refuse this favor to the heads of the Jewish nation, which, to those who were not in the secret, must appear so very reasonable; and especially as, on his coming to the government, it might be considered an act that was likely to make him popular; and he could have no interest in denying their request. But God had told Paul that he should testify of him at Rome; and he disposed the heart of Festus to act as he did; and thus disappointed the malice of the Jews, and fulfilled his own gracious design.

Clarke: He—would depart shortly—So had the providence of God disposed matters that Festus was obliged to return speedily to Caesarea; and thus had not time to preside in such a trial at Jerusalem. And this reason must appear sufficient to the Jews; and especially as he gave them all liberty to come and appear against him, who were able to prove the alleged charges.

Evidently Festus felt their request was unreasonable so he promised to reopen the case in Caesarea. Paul was already there and Festus was returning there.

7 Life Application Notes

5

Perhaps Festus was in fact familiar with why Sha’ul was in Caesarea; or he preferred to adhere to the normal course of Roman justice, rather than make an exception that could produce untoward consequences for which he would be blamed. Maybe he was simply too busy to deal with this special request so early in his term of office, or he may have suspected not all was “kosher.” He plays safe, offers standard procedure, and the Judean leaders can only accede. 8

The Jews hated Felix, and they wrote letters to Rome detailing their outrage over his brutality against them. As a result, Felix was replaced as governor by Porcius Festus. Festus learned from the mistakes of Felix. Three days after arriving in Caesarea, Festus headed to Jerusalem to meet with the Jewish leaders to establish some sort of working arrangement with the high priest and the Sanhedrin. they petitioned him: The Jewish leaders pressured Festus not for a concession or a favor. They wanted Festus to send Paul back to Jerusalem for trial. Their plan was to assassinate Paul on the way (23:15).9

Festus unwittingly protected Paul by insisting that any hearing should take place in his headquarters at Caesarea.

Acts 25:5Let them therefore, said he, which among you are able, go down with me, and accuse this man, if there be any wickedness in him.

Clarke: Let them—which among you are able Those who have authority; for so is this word often used by good Greek authors, and by Josephus. Festus seems to have said: “I have heard clamours from the multitude relative to this man; but on such clamours no accusation should be founded: yourselves have only the voice of the multitude as the foundation of the request which you now make. I cannot take up accusations which may affect the life of a Roman citizen on such pretenses. Are there any respectable men among you; men in office and authority, whose character is a pledge for the truth of their depositions, who can prove any thing against him? If so, let these come down to Caesarea, and the cause shall be tried before me; and thus we shall know whether he be a malefactor or not.”

Acts 25:6And when he had tarried among them more than ten days, he went down unto Caesarea; and the next day sitting on the judgment seat commanded Paul to be brought.

Sitting on his tribunal (NASB), pro tribunali, means that this is an official hearing.

8Stern, D. H. (1996, c1992). Jewish New Testament Commentary : A companion volume to the Jewish New Testament (electronic ed.) (Ac 25:4). Clarksville: Jewish New Testament Publications.9 The Nelson Study Bible

6

Acts 25:7And when he was come, the Jews which came down from Jerusalem stood round about, and laid many and grievous complaints against Paul, which they could not prove.

The Jews no doubt invented many false charges against Paul in order to turn the mind of the new governor against him and so get him in their hands, but they could prove nothing.One thing about Roman justice is that you had to prove your case against the man. So though they made many complaints, yet they couldn't prove any.

Clarke: The Jews—laid many and grievous complaints against Paul—As they must have perceived that the Roman governors would not intermeddle with questions of their law, etc., they no doubt invented some new charges, such as sedition, treason, etc., in order to render the mind of the governor evil affected towards Paul; but their malicious designs were defeated, for assertion would not go for proof before a Roman tribunal: this court required proof, and the blood-thirsty persecutors of the apostle could produce none.

7-8. The accusations against Jewish law and temple (Acts 21:28) would be relevant to a Roman magistrate only if Paul had violated the sanctity of the temple, a charge that had not been demonstrated. An implication of treason (seditio) against Caesar, however, would be fatal.

We presume these Jews to be members of, or servants of, the Sanhedrin, the highest Jewish authority. Therefore they were the “experts” of their day regarding the Law of Moses. They knew better than anyone else the innumerable rules and proscriptions of the rabbinic tradition. They were the type who would never eat with Gentiles or feast without washing their hands. Yet while they were careful about the small commandments, they had forgotten the larger ones. The hypocrites would not walk through a field on the Sabbath for fear that they would inadvertently plant a see, but they had no problem plotting Paul’s death by ambush (v. 3). Had they forgotten the 6th commandment, ‘thou shalt not kill’ (Ex 20:13)? Next, their hypocritical memory fails them again when they bear false witness against Paul before Festus—thereby violating the 9th commandment. Christ warned of the leaven of the Pharisees. The Master called this straining at a gnat while swallowing a camel (Matt 23:24), and this chapter is an excellent example of those who had ‘omitted the weightier matters of the law’.10

Acts 25:8While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.

Paul defended himself against every charge and said nothing against the law of the Jews, against their temple, or against Caesar, and so disproved every charge to the satisfaction of Festus.

10 http://www.gospeldoctrine.com/NewTestament/ntindex.html

7

Clarke: While he answered for himself—In this instance St. Luke gives only a general account, both of the accusations and of St. Paul’s defense. But, from the words in this verse, the charges appear to have been threefold:

1. That he had broken the law.2. That he had defiled the temple.3. That he dealt in treasonable practices: to all of which he no doubt answered

particularly; though we have nothing farther here than this, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.

I haven't offended the law; I haven't offended the temple. I haven't offended Caesar.

Acts 25:9But Festus, willing to do the Jews a pleasure, answered Paul, and said, Wilt thou go up to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these things before me?

[But Festus, willing to do the Jews a pleasure] The hearings ended with Paul vindicated on all charges and Festus seeking some means to pacify the Jews and win them to his favor.

[Wilt thou go up to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these things before me?] This is question number 70 in Acts. The next question is in Acts 25:12.

Clarke: Willing to do the Jews a pleasure—This was merely to please them, and conciliate their esteem; for he knew that, as Paul was a Roman citizen, he could not oblige him to take a new trial at Jerusalem.

Barnes: But Festus, willing to do the Jews a pleasure. Desirous of securing their favour, as he had just entered on his administration. Comp. Acts 24:27. In this he evinced rather a desire, of popularity than an inclination to do justice, Had he been disposed to do right at once, he would have immediately discharged Paul. Festus perceived that the case was one that did not come fairly within the jurisdiction of a Roman magistrate; that it pertained solely to the customs and questions among the Jews, (Acts 25:18-20;) and he therefore proposed that the case should be tried before him at Jerusalem. It is remarkable, however, that he had such a sense of justice, and law, as not to suffer the case to go out of his own hands. He proposed still to hear the cause, but asked Paul whether he was willing that it should be tried at Jerusalem? As the question which he asked Paul was one on which he was at liberty to take his own course, and as Paul had no reason to expect that his going to Jerusalem would facilitate the cause of justice, it is not remarkable that he declined the offer, as perhaps Festus supposed he would.

History reports that Festus was a fairer and more cooperative governor than most who ruled Judea; he undoubtedly wishes to engender a good relationship with the provincials here.

8

BKC: After Paul briefly and categorically denied the allegations against him, Festus asked the prisoner if he would be willing to go . . . to Jerusalem for another trial. Festus had changed his mind on this (cf. vv. 4-5), apparently feeling this would be a suitable compromise to placate the Jews. Also he was realizing he did not know how to handle this kind of religious case (v. 20).11

ESV 9-11: Felix, “desiring to do the Jews a favor,” had kept Paul in prison for two years (24:27). In light of the new plot against Paul (25:2–3), if Festus, wishing to do the Jews a favor, had done the same, it could have been deadly for Paul. Festus assured Paul that he—not the Jews—would try him. But Paul was not reassured. He feared Festus would give him up to the Jews. As a Roman citizen he had the right to appeal his case to Caesar. He exercised that right in order to remove the matter from the governor's hands (a.d. 59). “Caesar” was the emperor Nero Caesar, who reigned a.d. 54–68. The first five years of his reign were relatively peaceful; after that his actions became increasingly cruel and irrational.

Acts 25:10Then said Paul, I stand at Caesar’s judgment seat, where I ought to be judged: to the Jews have I done no wrong, as thou very well knowest.

Paul’s appeal to Caesar. Roman citizens had the right to appeal to Caesar’s tribunal (provocatio ad Caesarem), although the emperor in this period normally delegated the hearing and judging of cases to others. Later, the governor Pliny in Bithynia executed many Christians but sent those who were citizens to Rome for trial. Noncitizen provincials had no automatic right to appeal a governor’s decision (except to accuse the governor of extortion or on a capital charge).12

"Caesar appellate," the two words that any Roman citizen could utter when he felt that he was getting a raw deal in the local court.

[I stand at Caesar's judgment seat, where I ought to be judged] Paul could see no point in going to Jerusalem to go through the same charges a third time. Then, too, he knew that the Jews would plot to kill him and that God had already told him that he must yet see Rome; so he made his appeal to Caesar (Acts 25:10-12).

[to the Jews have I done no wrong, as thou very well knowest] Festus admitted this (Acts 25:18-19).

cf. confer, comparevv. versesv. verse11Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. (1983-c1985). The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures (2:422). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.12 Bible Background Commentary, New Testament

9

Clarke: I stand at Caesar’s judgment seat—Every procurator represented the person of the emperor in the province over which he presided; and, as the seat of government was at Caesarea, and Paul was now before the tribunal on which the emperor’s representative sat, he could say, with the strictest propriety, that he stood before Caesar’s judgment seat, where, as a freeman of Rome, he should be tried.

Clarke: As thou very well knowest—The record of this trial before Felix was undoubtedly left for the inspection of Festus; for, as he left the prisoner to his successor, he must also leave the charges against him, and the trial which he had undergone. Besides, Festus must be assured of his innocence, from the trial through which he had just now passed.

Barnes:Then said Paul, etc. The reasons why Paul declined the proposal to be tried at Jerusalem are obvious. He had experienced so much violent persecution from his countrymen, and their minds were so full of prejudice, misconception, and enmity, that he had neither justice nor favour to hope at their hands. He knew, too, that they had formerly plotted against his life, and that he had been removed to Cesarea for the purpose of safety. It would be madness and folly to throw himself again into their hands, or to give them another opportunity to form a plan against his life. As he was, therefore, under no obligation to return to Jerusalem, and as Festus did not propose it because it could be supposed that justice would be promoted by it, but to gratify the Jews, Paul prudently declined the proposal, and appealed to the Roman emperor.

Barnes: I stand at Caesar's judgment seat. The Roman emperors, after Julius Caesar, were all called Caesar; thus, Augustus Caesar, Claudius Caesar, etc., as all the kings of Egypt were called Pharaoh, though they had each his proper name, as Pharaoh Necho, etc. The emperor at this time (A. D. 60) was Nero, one of the most cruel and impious men that ever sat on a throne. It was under him that Paul was afterwards beheaded. When Paul says, "I stand at Caesar's judgment-seat, he means to say that he regarded the tribunal before which he then stood, and on which Festus sat, as really the judgment-seat of Csesar. The procurator, or governor, held his commission from the Roman emperor, and it was, in fact, his tribunal. The reason why Paul made this declaration may be thus expressed:

"I am a Roman citizen. I have a right to justice. I am under no obligation to put myself again in the hands of the Jews. I have a right to a fair and impartial trial; and I claim the protection and privileges which all Roman citizens have before their tribunals, the right of a fair and just trial."

It was, therefore, a severe rebuke of Festus for proposing to depart from the known justice of the Roman laws; and, for the sake of popularity, proposing to him to put himself in the hands of his enemies.

Barnes: Where I ought to be judged. Where I have a right to demand and expect justice. I have a right to be tried where courts are usually held, and according to all the forms of equity which are usually observed.

10

Barnes: Have I done no wrong. I have not injured their persons, property, character, or religion, This was a bold appeal, which his consciousness of innocence and the whole course of proceedings enabled him to make, without the possibility of their gainsaying it.

Barnes: As thou very well knowest. Festus knew, probably, that Paul had been tried by Felix, and that nothing was proved against him. He had now seen the spirit of the Jews, and the cause why they arraigned him. He had given Paul a trial, and had called on the Jews to adduce their "able" men to accuse him; and, after all, nothing had been proved against him. Festus knew, therefore, that he was innocent. This abundantly appears also from his own confession, Acts 25:18,19. As he knew this, and as Festus was proposing to depart from the regular course of justice for the sake of popularity, it was proper for Paul to use the strong language of rebuke, and to claim what he knew Festus did not dare to deny him, the protection of the Roman laws. Conscious innocence may be bold; and Christians have a right to insist on impartial justice, and the protection of the laws. Alas! how many magistrates there have been like Festus, who, when Christians have been arraigned before them, have been fully satisfied of their innocence, but who, for the sake of popularity, have departed from all the rules of law, and all the claims of justice.

LAN: Every Roman citizen had the right to appeal to Caesar. This didn’t mean that Caesar himself would hear the case, but that the citizen’s case would be tried by the highest courts in the empire. Festus saw Paul’s appeal as a way to send him out of the country and thus pacify the Jews. Paul wanted to go to Rome to preach the gospel (Romans 1:10), and he knew that his appeal would give him the opportunity. To go to Rome as a prisoner was better than not to go there at all.

BKC: Paul would have nothing to do with this switch for several reasons: (1) The journey from Caesarea to Jerusalem would be most dangerous. The 40 Jews who two years before (cf. 24:27) had taken an oath to murder Paul (23:13-14) would probably have gotten out of their oath somehow by then, but they would still want to kill Paul. (2) The possibility of a fair trial in Jerusalem was remote. (3) He had already languished as a prisoner in Caesarea for some two years. The charges brought against Paul were civil (they said he had done wrong to the Jews); therefore the present court where Festus represented Caesar, was the proper one.13

McGee: There are some people who think that Paul made a mistake here, that he should never have appealed to Caesar. They think he should simply have let his case rest with Festus. Friend, don’t you see that Festus was going to use Paul for his own political ends? Festus was going to take Paul back to Jerusalem. Perhaps Festus was receiving bribes from the Jews who had come from Jerusalem. I am reluctant to criticize Paul. I don’t think that he made a mistake here. Paul was a Roman citizen and he exercised his rights as a citizen, which was the normal and the right thing for him to do. Going back to Jerusalem would have surely meant death for him. He doesn’t purposely make himself a martyr. In fact, he did what he could to avoid martyrdom.

cf. confer, compare13Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. (1983-c1985). The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures (2:423). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

11

Friend, there are a people today who wear a hair shirt—and God didn’t give it to them. In other words, they like to take the position of a martyr. I’ve had a number of people who have told me that I should rejoice that I have a cancer because now I can suffer for Christ and maybe die for Christ. Well, I can tell you, I don’t feel that way about it. I want to get rid of the cancer. I want to live. I think a person is depressed spiritually and mentally if he wants to put on a hair shirt and lie on a cold slab. Martin Luther tried that and he found it didn’t accomplish anything.

You will remember that two years before this the Lord had appeared to Paul and had promised him a trip to Rome (Acts 23:11). That’s what is taking place. He went to Rome by the will of God. He was in chains—but the Lord hadn’t told him how he would get to Rome. This was God’s method for him. When Paul wrote to the Romans, he told them that he was praying to be able to come to Rome and he asked them to pray that he might be able to come (Rom. 1:9–10; 15:30–32). I believe he went to Rome by the will of God.14

Acts 25:11For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die: but if there be none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may deliver me unto them. I appeal unto Caesar.

[I appeal unto Caesar] Paul knew that Festus was only seeking to pacify the Jews by handing him over to them, so was constrained to appeal to Caesar. Every Roman citizen had the right of such appeal so Paul knew this was the only thing left to do save his life and continue in his work for Christ. No Roman representative could do otherwise than send him to Rome under these circumstances. An appeal to Caesar was highly respected. The Julian law condemned any magistrate who condemned, tortured, imprisoned, or put to death anyone who would appeal to Caesar. (Dake)

Barnes: I refuse not to die. I have no wish to escape justice. I do not wish to evade the laws, or to take advantage of any circumstances to screen me from just punishment. Paul's whole course showed that this was the noble spirit which actuated him. No true Christian wishes to escape from the laws. He will honour them, and not seek to evade them. But, like other men, he has rights; and he may and should insist that justice should be done. Barnes: No man may deliver me unto them. No man shall be allowed to do it. This bold and confident declaration Paul could make, because he knew what the law required, and he knew that Festus would not dare to deliver him up contrary to the law. Boldness is not incompatible with Christianity; and innocence, when its rights are invaded, is always bold. Jesus firmly asserted his rights when on trial, (John 18:23;) and no man is under obligation to submit to be trampled on by an unjust tribunal in violation of the laws.

Barnes: I appeal unto Caesar. I appeal to the Roman emperor, and carry my cause directly before him. By the Valerian, Porcian, and Sempronian laws, it had been enacted,

14McGee, J. V. (1997, c1981). Thru the Bible commentary. Based on the Thru the Bible radio program. (electronic ed.) (4:622). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

12

that if any magistrate should be about to beat, or to put to death, any Roman citizen, the accused could appeal to the Roman people, and this appeal carried the cause to Rome. The law was so far changed under the emperors, that the cause should be carried before the emperor, instead of the people. Every citizen had the right of this appeal; and when it was made, the accused was sent to Rome for trial. Thus Pliny (Ep. 10, 97) says, that those Christians who were accused, and who, being Roman citizens, appealed to Csesar, he sent to Rome to be tried. The reason why Paul made this appeal was, that he saw that justice would not be done him by the Roman governor. He had been tried by Felix, and justice had been denied him; and he was detained a prisoner in violation of law, to gratify the Jews. He had now been tried by Festus, and saw that he was pursuing the same course; and he resolved, therefore, to assert his rights, and remove the cause, far from Jerusalem and from the prejudiced men in that city, at once to Rome. It was in this mysterious way that Paul's long-cherished desire to see the Roman church, and to preach the gospel there, was to be gratified. Romans 1:9, and Romans 1:10,11. For this he had prayed long, (Romans 1:10, 15:23,24;) and now at length this purpose was to be fulfilled. God answers prayer; but it is often in a way which we little anticipate. He so orders the train of events-he so places us amidst a press of circumstances-that the desire is granted in a way which we could never have anticipated, but which shows in the best manner that he is a hearer of prayer.

Paul knew that he was innocent of the charges against him and could appeal to Caesar’s judgment. He knew his rights as a Roman citizen and as an innocent person. Paul had met his responsibilities as a Roman, and so he had the opportunity to claim Rome’s protection. The good reputation and clear conscience that result from our walk with God can help us remain guiltless before God and blameless before the world.

McGee: I detect a note of impatience here. Rome was noted for its justice, and Paul respected authority. However, Paul is not getting justice, and so he makes a legal appeal. God intended that Paul use his rights as a Roman citizen. It is very interesting for us to observe that God leads some people in one way and leads others in another way. Some of the others could not claim the protection of Roman citizenship.

I knew a wonderful Christian man and wife whom the Lord had blessed in a material way. They had built a lovely home, a home in which it was always a delight to visit. The man told me that he felt under conviction because he had a lovely home, and he wanted to open his home and use it for Christian witnessing and testimony as much as possible. So I asked him, “Did you ever stop to think that God blessed you materially and gave you such a nice home because He knew you were the kind of a man who would use his home for Him?” Then I said to him, “You just go ahead and fall into a sweet sleep every night, knowing that you are in the will of God and thanking Him for that lovely home.” Now the Lord didn’t give me that kind of a home because evidently He doesn’t intend for me to use my home for that type of thing.

What has the Lord done for you, friend? Whatever it is, you should use it for Him. If you are in a political position, you should use that position for Him. If the Lord has put something in your hand, use it for Him. Remember that Moses had a rod in his hand—just a rod, but he was to use it for God. That is the whole thought here. Paul had his

13

Roman citizenship. It was a rod in his hand. He’s going to use it, use it for God. I don’t think that Paul made a mistake here.

These were words of destiny. Roman law made provision for any Roman-born citizen who felt he was not being tried fairly to “appeal to Caesar,” where presumably he might receive full justice. This, too, was abused by the emperors, for even in Rome Paul remained in prison for at least two years (cf. 28:30). However, within the providence of God, it was during this time that he produced some of his greatest epistles. These are the so-called “Prison Epistles”: Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon. Paul’s appeal to Caesar was prompted by a twofold realization: (1) He knew he could not receive justice in Palestine because of the influence of the Sanhedrin upon the Roman courts there. The prejudice of the members of the Sanhedrin, and of those whose zeal for Mosaic Law was almost identical with their patriotism or zeal for an independent nation, would ensure that Paul would not receive a fair trial. (2) The Roman courts were notoriously unjust when they had sufficient motive. For example, in the case of Paul in Caesarea, one governor, Felix, kept him in prison merely because it pleased the Jews and because he hoped to get money from Paul (24:26, 27). An example of the half-hearted but sincere desire of a Roman official to implement justice appears in the words of Governor Festus, the successor of Felix, which he stated to King Agrippa II (v. 27).15

Paul knew that as a citizen of Rome he could insist on a trial before the Roman judgment seat, and not the Jewish Sanhedrin, where he would find little justice. The appeal to Caesar was the right of any Roman citizen. If a citizen thought he was not getting justice in a provincial court, he could appeal to the emperor himself. If the appeal was declared valid, all other proceedings in the lower courts ceased and the prisoner was sent to Rome for disposition of his case.

InDepth—Roman CitizenshipWhen it suited his needs, Paul used his status as a Roman citizen to frustrate his

adversaries. His citizenship made kings and governors, soldiers and priests, and Romans and Jews all think twice about their intended actions toward him. But what did it mean to be a citizen of Rome?

The Roman Empire was the reigning power of its day. Being a citizen of the empire carried certain rights, responsibilities, and status. A citizen was liable for Roman property taxes and municipal taxes, but also had the right to vote in Rome (although during Paul’s time different social classes had different rights). A Roman citizen was guaranteed a fair trial and was protected against certain forms of harsh punishment. A Roman citizen could not be executed without a trial and could not be crucified except by order of the emperor. A citizen could even appeal to Caesar in order to be tried in Rome.

Paul was born a Roman citizen, but how his family gained that citizenship is unknown. There were several ways to become a Roman citizen. Being born to a Roman parent was one way. Retiring from the Roman army was another. Citizenship could be granted by an emperor or a Roman general to an individual or to an entire group. Finally a person could purchase citizenship.

15 Beliver’s Study Bible

14

The empire of Rome was so powerful that few wished to incur its wrath by breaking its laws. Paul was intelligent enough to know all of his rights and savvy enough to know how to use them to his and especially God’s advantage. Not only did his rights as a Roman citizen often save his life in dangerous situations (22:25), they also allowed him to carry the gospel message to jailers, shipmates, kings, and to the emperor in Rome (25:11).16

“Falsely imprisoned, with no specific or substantial charge against him, Paul declines to go willingly back to Jerusalem, back to stand in jeopardy before the fanatical mob which had caused the crucifixion of his Lord. Instead, Roman citizen that he was, he appeals unto Caesar. And Caesar's Procurator decrees that unto Caesar shall Christ's apostle bow. “But why? Why all this imprisonment? Why these repeated mock-like-trials before one ruler after another—all to no avail as far as freeing the innocent Paul is concerned. Why does not the Lord send an angel to deliver his apostle, as he did when Peter was imprisoned by Herod? “Clearly it is the design of Deity to use Paul's imprisonment as the means of taking the testimony of Jesus to the great and the mighty of the world. The gospel is for the poor and for the privileged. It is to be ‘proclaimed by the weak and the simple unto the ends of the world, and before kings and rulers.’ ("#D&C 1:23D. & C. 1:23.)” (Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 2:198)17

Acts 25:12Then Festus, when he had conferred with the council, answered, Hast thou appealed unto Caesar? unto Caesar shalt thou go.

[when he had conferred] The appeal of Paul to Caesar was evidently conditional or Festus would not have conferred with his council of Roman officers. A direct appeal without condition would have brought no other choice on the part of Festus. We may therefore understand Paul to say, "I now stand before a tribunal where I ought to be judged; if you refuse to hear and try this cause here, rather than go to Jerusalem, I appeal to Caesar."

[council] Greek: sumbouliou (GSN-4824), the assembly of counselors or board of advisers to the procurator in every province (not the same word sunedrion used elsewhere in Acts). Rulers took council with this board of advisers before rendering judgment. This council advised him to send Paul to Caesar if this was Paul's desire.

[Hast thou appealed unto Caesar?] This is question 71. The next question is in Acts 26:8. The fact Festus asked Paul this question proves that the request of Paul was conditional, but if he really meant to appeal to Caesar it would be granted.

Clarke: Conferred with the council—From this circumstance, we may learn that the appeal of Paul to Caesar was conditional; else Festus could not have deliberated with his

16 The Nelson Study Bible17 http://www.gospeldoctrine.com/NewTestament/ntindex.html

15

council whether it should be granted; for he had no power to refuse to admit such an appeal. We may, therefore, understand Paul thus: “I now stand before a tribunal where I ought to be judged; if thou refuse to hear and try this cause, rather than go to Jerusalem, I appeal to Caesar.” Festus, therefore, consulted with the council, whether he should proceed to try the cause, or send Paul to Rome; and it appears that the majority were of opinion that he should be sent to Caesar.

Clarke: Hast thou appealed unto Caesar, etc.—Rather, Thou hast appealed unto Caesar, and to Caesar thou shalt go. The Jews were disappointed of their hope; and Festus got his hand creditably drawn out of a business with which he was likely to have been greatly embarrassed.

Barnes: Unto Caesar shalt thou go. He was willing in this way to rid himself of this trial, and of the vexation attending it. He did not dare to deliver him to the Jews in violation of the Roman laws; and he was not willing to do justice to Paul, and thus make himself unpopular with the Jews. He was, therefore, probably rejoiced at the opportunity of thus freeing himself from all the trouble in the case, in a manner against which none could object.

A Roman judge normally had a consilium, or council, with whom to confer; because a governor might not be learned in the law (iuris prudentes), it was important for him to have some advisors who were, although he was ultimately free to disregard their counsel. A citizen could appeal a capital sentence (appelatio), but appealing before a case had been heard (provocatio), as Paul does here, was less common, because it was not necessarily advantageous. Festus has reason to comply with Paul’s request. The political implications of dismissing an appeal to Caesar were unpleasant, whereas the benefits of sending Paul to Rome free Festus from having to disappoint the Jerusalem leaders if his own juridical conclusions differ from theirs.18

There is some debate as to whether Festus was legally bound to remand the case to Caesar (Nero, who reigned from A.D. 54-68), or if he could have chosen to handle the case himself. If Festus had decided to hear the case and made a negative decision, Paul could still have appealed to Caesar. But Festus probably had no alternative but to transfer the case to Rome. So after he had conferred with his council, he announced that in view of Paul’s appeal, he must go to Caesar.

In considering difficult or unusual cases, Roman administrators usually had an advisory board or council of high-ranking officials for consultation.

Acts 25:13And after certain days king Agrippa and Bernice came unto Caesarea to salute Festus.

18 Bible Background Commentary

16

Agrippa is the last of the Herods. The dynasty of the Herods were Edomites, he was Idumean (he came from Edom). The Edomites came from Esau, the rival brother of Jacob (whom the Jews came from). The Romans had established the Edomites on the throne,which created a strange situation because, while they were familiar with the customs of the Jews, they were not Jewish.Herod attempted to win the favor of the Jews by rebuilding the Temple.Herod the Great was the one who killed the babes in Bethlehem.Herod Antipas was the one who beheaded John the Baptist when Salome danced for him.Herod Agrippa I is the one who put the apostle James to death with a sword.Herod Agrippa II is the one seen here.

Bernice was sister of Drusilla (wife of Felix), yet she was also her husband’s sister. Incest on the throne! Agrippa and Bernice, husband and wife, and brother and sister!

[Agrippa] This was the second son of Herod Agrippa who is mentioned in Acts 12:1. At the death of his father he was too young to be king, but in 50 A.D. Claudius gave him the kingdom of Chalcis. His uncle, the husband of Bernice, had died two years before. Shortly after this he was appointed the tetrarchies of Abilene and Trachonitis, with the title of king. His relations with his sister Bernice were the occasions of much suspicion. He was of Idumean descent and well acquainted with Jewish laws. He was also given power to appoint the high priests. He was strongly attached to the Romans and did all in his power to keep the Jews from rebellion. When they did rebel he united his army with Titus and helped destroy Jerusalem. He survived the ruin of his country several years.19

Barnes: And Bernice. She was sister of Agrippa. She had been married to Herod, king of Chalcis, her own uncle by her father's side. After his death, she proposed to Polemon, king of Pontus and part of Cilicia, that if he would become circumcised she would marry him. He complied, but she did not continue long with him. After she left him, she returned to her brother Agrippa, with whom she lived in a manner such as to excite scandal. Josephus directly charges her with incest with her brother Agrippa. Antiq. b. xx. chap. vii. _ 3.

[salute Festus] To pay respects to the new governor.

This was Herod Agrippa II, son of Herod Agrippa I, and a descendant of Herod the Great. He had power over the temple, controlled the temple treasury, and could appoint and remove the high priest. Bernice was the sister of Herod Agrippa II. She married her uncle, Herod Chalcis, became a mistress to her brother Agrippa II, and then became mistress to the emperor Vespasian’s son, Titus. Here Agrippa and Bernice were making an official visit to Festus. Agrippa, of Jewish descent, could help clarify Paul’s case for Roman governor. Agrippa and Festus were anxious to cooperate in governing their neighboring territories.

19 Dake Study Notes, Dake’s Study Bible

17

BKC: The King Agrippa referred to here was Agrippa II, son of Herod Agrippa I (12:1) and a great-grandson of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1). (See the chart on the Herods at Luke 1:5.) At this time he was a young man of about 30 years of age and the ruler of territories northeast of Palestine with the title of King. Because he was a friend of the Roman imperial family he was awarded the privilege of appointing the Jewish high priest and also had been made the custodian of the temple treasury. His background made him eminently qualified to hear Paul; he was well acquainted with the Jews’ religion (cf. Acts 25:26-27).

Agrippa II and his sister Bernice, came to Caesarea to pay their respects to Festus. Though Bernice had a tendency to support the Jews she lived a profligate life. She had an incestuous relationship with Agrippa, her brother.

King Agrippa—great-grandson of Herod the Great, and Drusilla’s brother (see on Ac 24:24). On his father’s awful death (Ac 12:23), being thought too young (seventeen) to succeed, Judea, was attached to the province of Syria. Four years after, on the death of his uncle Herod, he was made king of the northern principalities of Chalcis, and afterwards got Batanea, Iturea, Trachonitis, Abilene, Galilee, and Perea, with the title of king. He died A.D. 100, after reigning fifty-one years.

and Bernice—his sister. She was married to her uncle Herod, king of Chalcis, on whose death she lived with her brother Agrippa—not without suspicion of incestuous intercourse, which her subsequent licentious life tended to confirm.

came to salute Festus—to pay his respects to him on his accession to the procuratorship.20

Festus had just come into office as the new governor; so the king comes over for a visit. I have a notion these politicians work together. They all belong to the same party.

ESV 13-22: Festus Presents the Case to King Agrippa II. A visit to Caesarea by the Jewish King Agrippa II afforded Festus an opportunity for a hearing to formulate charges against Paul.

Agrippa the king was Agrippa II, son of Herod Agrippa I (see notes on 12:1; 24:24), and great-grandson of Herod the Great (see note on Matt. 2:1). He ruled over several minor, primarily Gentile territories. The emperor Claudius had conferred on Agrippa II rule over the temple in Jerusalem and the right to appoint the high priest (see Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 20.222, 223). Bernice was his half sister and constant companion.

Chuck Smith: This is king Agrippa, Herod Agrippa II. It was his great grandfather Herod who had ordered the death of the innocent children at the time of the birth of Christ. His great uncle Herod had ordered the death of John the Baptist. His father, Herod Agrippa, had ordered the death of James that we mentioned earlier. This is Herod

cf. confer, compare20Jamieson, R., Fausset, A. R., Fausset, A. R., Brown, D., & Brown, D. (1997). A commentary, critical and explanatory, on the Old and New Testaments. On spine: Critical and explanatory commentary. (Ac 25:13). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

18

Agrippa II. His wife was Bernice who was also his sister. She also was a daughter of Herod Agrippa I, she was the sister also to Drusilla who was the wife of Felix. It's getting to be a mixed-up family affair here. Bernice had originally been married to her uncle whom she divorced and married a wealthy merchantman and when Herod Agrippa met her in Rome, he enticed her to leave him and to come and live with him. So it was really a very unsavory situation that existed here between Herod Agrippa II and Bernice. Because Festus was new in the office, a new governor, and Herod Agrippa was still the king over a portion of the province, he came to greet him.21

Acts 25:14And when they had been there many days, Festus declared Paul’s cause unto the king, saying, There is a certain man left in bonds by Felix:

[Paul's cause unto the king, saying, There is a certain man left in bonds by Felix] Festus knew that Agrippa was better acquainted with matters of Jewish religion than he was, so spoke to him of the case of Paul.

BBC: 13-14. When Agrippa I died (Acts 12:23), his son, Agrippa II (here), was only seventeen; his daughters were Berenice (sixteen), Mariamne (ten) and Drusilla (six). Agrippa II ruled a small part of Palestine and worked with the Roman administration. He was an advocate for his people but was also loyal to Rome and later struck a coin in A.D. 89 commemorating Rome’s triumph over the Jewish rebels. Josephus’s record shows that Agrippa visited Roman officials frequently, especially when they first arrived. Festus later took Agrippa’s side in a dispute with the priests.

Berenice (also spelled Bernice) was Agrippa’s sister. Some ancient writers maligned her close relationship with her brother Agrippa, slandering it as incestuous, but their charge is unlikely. Berenice later became the mistress of the Roman general Titus, who besieged Jerusalem, but once he became emperor so much scandal arose about his consorting with a Jewish woman that he was forced to ignore her; she finally left Rome brokenhearted. She was fifteen years older than Titus.

Acts 25:15About whom, when I was at Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, desiring to have judgment against him.

Clarke: Desiring to have judgment against him—Instead of judgment, condemnation, sentence of death, is the reading of ABC, and several others, which is probably genuine. This is evidently the meaning of the place, whichever reading we prefer. Nothing could satisfy these men but the death of the apostle. It was not justice they wanted, but his destruction.

21 Chuck Smith, Pastor Notes on Acts, Calvary Chaple, Costa Mesa CA

19

McGee: Agrippa and Bernice stayed there quite a long time. Dr. Luke calls it “many days.” Finally they ran out of conversation. Even a king and a governor finally run out of things to talk about. When there was a lull in the conversation, Festus said, “Oh, by the way, I should tell you about a prisoner that we have here. It’s a rather odd, unusual case. His name is Paul and he was arrested and brought down here by Felix. Felix left him for me. I’d like you to hear him.”

Acts 25:16To whom I answered, It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man to die, before that he which is accused have the accusers face to face, and have licence to answer for himself concerning the crime laid against him.

The heathen had a better sense of justice than the religious Jews who should have been ashamed by this fact; but they were past all sense of shame. They killed their own Messiah when the heathen protested the slaying of an innocent man. They killed Stephen in a rage without a trial. They gloated over the death of James and thirsted for the lives of Peter, Paul, and many others and all this contrary to the very law they claimed to keep. It was not justice the Jews wanted, but the life of the apostle. What the heathen thought of these religious people desiring the lives of people instead of saving their lives is only recorded in heaven.

Clarke: Before that he which is accused have the accusers face to face, etc.—For this righteous procedure the Roman laws were celebrated over the civilized world. APPIAN, in his Hist. Roman., says: It is not their custom to condemn men before they have been heard. And PHILO De Praesid. Rom., says: “For then, by giving sentence in common, and hering impartially both plaintiff and defendant, not thinking it right to condemn any person unheard, they decided as appeared to them to be just; without either enmity or favor, but according to the merits of the case.” See Bp. Pearce. England can boast such laws, not only in her statute books, but in constant operation in all her courts of justice. Even the king himself, were he so inclined, could not imprison nor punish a man without the regular procedure of the law; and twelve honest men, before whom the evidence has been adduced, the case argued, and the law laid down and explained, are ultimately to judge whether the man be guilty or not guilty. Here, in this favored country, are no arbitrary imprisonments—no Bastiles—no lettres de cachet. : the law makes the king, says Bracton, and the king is the grand executor and guardian of the laws—laws, in the eyes of which the character, property, and life of every subject are sacred.

Roman law required that the accused be permitted to confront his accusers and defend himself against charges in a public hearing.

Acts 25:17

20

Therefore, when they were come hither, without any delay on the morrow I sat on the judgment seat, and commanded the man to be brought forth.

Acts 25:18Against whom when the accusers stood up, they brought none accusation of such things as I supposed:

[the accusers stood up, they brought none accusation of such things as I supposed] The Romans did not give the lives of men away to favor anyone. The accusers of Paul did not bring any accusation against him that was worthy of death. Festus reported, "The charges were different from what I had supposed. They concerned certain questions of their own religion and about one Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul claimed to be still alive. Because I did not understand such things, I asked Paul if he was willing to go to Jerusalem and answer questions of this kind, but Paul refused and appealed to Caesar" (Acts 25:14-21).

Clarke: They brought none accusation of such things as I supposed—It was natural for Festus, at the first view of things, to suppose that Paul must be guilty of some very atrocious crime. When he found that he had been twice snatched from the hands of the Jews; that he had been brought to Caesarea, as a prisoner, two years before; that he had been tried once before the Sanhedrin, and once before the governor of the province; that he had now lain two years in bonds; and that the high priest and all the heads of the Jewish nation had united in accusing him, and whose condemnation they loudly demanded; when, I say, he considered all this, it was natural for him to suppose the apostle to be some flagitious wretch; but when he had tried the case, and heard their accusations and his defense, how surprised was he to find that scarcely any thing that amounted to a crime was laid to his charge; and that nothing that was laid to his charge could be proved!

ESV: Festus's statement that the Jews brought no charge . . . of such evils as I supposed indicates his conclusion that Paul had broken no Roman laws. To Festus, this was merely a religious dispute—a judgment Luke as the author of Acts wants the reader to appreciate.

Acts 25:19But had certain questions against him of their own superstition, and of one Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.

[superstition] All that is meant by this religion, national creed, or worship.

[whom Paul affirmed to be alive] This is all the enlightenment this poor heathen got out of the religious discussions between the Jews and Paul.

21

Clarke: And of one Jesus, which was dead, etc.—In this way does this poor heathen speak of the death and resurrection of Christ! There are many who profess Christianity that do not appear to be much farther enlightened.

Even though Festus knew little about Christianity, he somehow sensed that the resurrection was central to Christian belief.

Acts 25:20And because I doubted of such manner of questions, I asked him whether he would go to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these matters.

[doubted of such manner of questions] Literally, I was at a loss to know how to decide such questions.

Clarke: I doubted of such manner of questions—Such as, whether he had broken their law, defiled their temple; or whether this Jesus, who was dead, was again raised to life.

Acts 25:21But when Paul had appealed to be reserved unto the hearing of Augustus, I commanded him to be kept till I might send him to Caesar.

[Augustus] The august, or venerable. It was a title Roman emperors assumed following the death of Julius Caesar.

17-21. The real issue here is one of Jewish law—one not tried by Roman courts. Luke again shows the Roman impression that Christianity was part of Judaism and thus should be accorded legal toleration.

Acts 25:22Then Agrippa said unto Festus, I would also hear the man myself. To morrow, said he, thou shalt hear him.

[I would also hear the man myself] Paul the prisoner was becoming famous as the witness of Jesus to rulers of the earth, fulfilling Matthew 10:18; Acts 9:15. His fame had spread abroad throughout all Judea, Samaria, Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, and other countries, so the king was curious to hear him. His father had been a persecutor of Christianity and had killed James. He proceeded to take Peter and would have destroyed others also if he had not been removed by death. Agrippa had no doubt heard much about Christianity by this time.

Clarke: I would also hear the man myself—A spirit of curiosity, similar to that of Herod, Luke 23:8. As Herod, the father of this Agrippa, had been so active an instrument in endeavoring to destroy Christianity, having killed James, and was about to have put

22

Peter to death also, had not God sent him to his own place, there is no doubt that Agrippa had heard much about Christianity; and as to St. Paul, his conversion was so very remarkable that his name, in connection with Christianity, was known, not only throughout Judea, but through all Asia Minor and Greece. Agrippa, therefore might naturally wish to see and hear a man of whom he had heard so much.

Barnes: Then Agrippa said, etc. Agrippa doubtless had heard much of the fame of Jesus, and of the new sect of Christians; and probably he was induced by mere curiosity to hear what Paul could say in explanation and defence of the doctrine of Christianity. This wish of Agrippa gave occasion to the noblest defence which was ever made before any tribunal, and to as splendid eloquence as can be found anywhere in any language. See Acts 26.

BBC: Compare Luke 23:8. As a newcomer, Festus would naturally want the counsel of Agrippa, who knew Judaism but was more sympathetic to Roman interests than the priestly aristocracy was proving to be. Agrippa had a good Greek education, and Festus might have gravitated to him as one of the few local people with whom he could talk.

McGee: Actually, Festus was in a sort of hot seat here. The charge against Paul was sedition and for that he should die, but he had committed no crimes. Now Paul has appealed to Caesar. What are you going to do with a prisoner like that? So he asked Agrippa to help him out.

I’m of the opinion that Agrippa had previously heard about Paul and was actually anxious to hear him. He wanted to know more about the charges and he wanted to hear what Paul would have to say. So they arranged for a meeting.

It is interesting to see how this meeting was arranged by a king and a governor. Yet all the while they were actually fulfilling prophecy even though they were unaware of this. Paul is to appear before kings, as the Lord had said.

Chuck Smith: Festus had no jurisdiction or ruling over Paul. So it was not really a legal process. Paul had already appealed to Caesar and that's where Paul's next legal official hearing would take place. But this was just an entertainment for Herod Agrippa and his wife. It was just a big occasion to have a big time of entertainment. "We'll listen to this fellow." However, Herod Agrippa was a student of the Jewish scriptures, and he had studied the customs and the manners of the Jews carefully so that he is interested, no doubt, in what Paul might have to say concerning Jesus Christ. As we will get into Paul's defense before Agrippa next week, this will be brought out.

Acts 25:23And on the morrow, when Agrippa was come, and Bernice, with great pomp, and was entered into the place of hearing, with the chief captains, and principal men of the city, at Festus’ commandment Paul was brought forth.

23

This must have been quite a scene with Festus in his Roman robes, and King Agrippa and Bernice with all the royal ceremony, and in comes Paul, probably in his prison clothes!

[pomp] Greek: phantasia (GSN-5325), splendor, parade. Only used here. The verb phantazo (GSN-5324) is translated "sight" in Hebrews 12:21.

[chief captains] Greek: chiliarchos (GSN-5506), commanders of 1,000 men in the Roman army.

[principal men of the city] Eminent men of the city.

Clarke: The place of hearing—A sort of audience chamber, in the palace of Festus. This was not a trial of Paul; there were no Jews present to accuse him, and he could not be tried but at Rome, as he had appealed to Caesar. These grandees wished to hear the man speak of his religion, and in his own defense, through a principle of curiosity.

BBC: The pomp Luke mentions here was characteristic of royal families, including Jewish ones (e.g., 1 Macc. 11:6). The “commanders” (NASB) or “officers” (NIV) are the five tribunes, Roman commanders of the five cohorts in Caesarea and each equal in rank to the one tribune in Jerusalem (Acts 21:31).

Paul was in prison, but that didn’t stop him from making the most of his situation. Military officers and prominent city leaders met in the palace room with Agrippa to hear this case. Paul saw this new audience as yet another opportunity to present the gospel. Rather than complain about your present situation, look for ways to use every opportunity to serve God and share him with others. Your problems may be opportunities in disguise.

Paul Witnesses to Agrippa II. Amid considerable pomp (25:23–27), Paul testified before the king (in fulfillment of 9:15). Of the three “defense” speeches (chs. 22, 24, 26), this one before Agrippa gives the most detailed exposition of the gospel.

Chuck Smith: That is, they were dressed in their royal purple apparel. Festus was probably dressed in his crimson robes and, of course, there stood the legionnaires who were the tallest of the Romans, the special elite guards standing there at attention with their fancy uniforms, and the whole assembly of the notable people. It was a public occasion where the king might show off his glory, and so he comes into the arena and all of the others, and probably this was done at the arena there in Caesarea that still exists to the present day. You who have made your pilgrimage to Israel have had the privilege of sitting in that arena in Caesarea. It's always just awesome to sit there and to realize that this is probably the arena where Paul came to make his defense before Herod Agrippa. "They had come with great pomp,"

Acts 25:24

24

And Festus said, King Agrippa, and all men which are here present with us, ye see this man, about whom all the multitude of the Jews have dealt with me, both at Jerusalem, and also here, crying that he ought not to live any longer.

Festus made an introduction of Paul to the assembled multitude of great men who were curious to hear Paul talk about his religion. He was not on trial, for he was to be tried in Rome.

Acts 25:25But when I found that he had committed nothing worthy of death, and that he himself hath appealed to Augustus, I have determined to send him.

[I found that he had committed nothing worth of death] Again Festus testified of Paul's innocence (Acts 25:18-19,25)

BKC: 25-27. The statement in verse 25 is significant because it shows that Festus, like Felix before him, found Paul had done nothing deserving of death (cf. 23:9, 29; 26:31).

It would look bad for Festus to send Paul to Caesar with no clear charges against him. Festus believed that Agrippa, with his knowledge of Jewish customs and laws, could help Festus write out some charges that would be specific enough for Caesar Nero to consider.

Two interesting terms for Roman royalty are found in this chapter, the first of which is Sebastos meaning “revered” or “august” and used in the New Testament only in 25:21, 25; 27:1. In chapter 25 it is translated “Emperor” and in 27:1 it is rendered “Imperial.”

The other term is kyrios meaning “lord.” In 25:26 “the lord” is translated His Majesty. Both Augustus and Tiberius refused this title for themselves because they felt it exalted them too highly; however, by the time Paul made his appeal to Caesar, Nero was on the throne and “lord” was used much more commonly of the Caesar. Though Nero did accept the title of “lord,” he had not yet gone to the excesses that characterized his reign later. At this juncture Nero was reputed to be a fair-minded ruler.

Acts 25:26Of whom I have no certain thing to write unto my lord. Wherefore I have brought him forth before you, and specially before thee, O king Agrippa, that, after examination had, I might have somewhat to write.

[lord] Greek: kurios (GSN-2962), lord. Rejected by some Roman emperors, but claimed by others, especially Nero. When Greeks called the emperor Nero “lord” (Acts 25:26), they often meant it as a divine title; but no Roman would yet use it thus.

Barnes: No certain thing. Nothing definite, and well established. They had not accused Paul of any crime against the Roman laws; and Festus professes himself too ignorant of

cf. confer, compare

25

the customs of the Jews to inform the emperor distinctly of the nature of the charges, and the subject of trial.

Barnes: Unto my lord. To the emperor; to Caesar. This name lord the emperors Augustus and Tiberius had rejected, and would not suffer it to be applied to them. Suetonius (Life of Augustus, v. 53) says, "The appellation of Lord he always abhorred as abominable and execrable." See also Suetonius' Life of Tiberius, v. 27. The emperors that succeeded them, however, admitted the title, and suffered themselves to be called by this name. Nothing would be more satisfactory to Nero, the reigning emperor, than this title.

Barnes: I might have somewhat to write. As Agrippa was a Jew, and was acquainted with the customs and doctrine of the Jews, Festus supposed that, after hearing Paul, he would be able to inform him of the exact nature of these charges, so that he could present the case intelligibly to the emperor.

Acts 25:27For it seemeth to me unreasonable to send a prisoner, and not withal to signify the crimes laid against him.

Clarke: For it seemeth to me unreasonable, etc.—Every reader must feel the awkward situation in which Festus stood. He was about to send a prisoner to Rome, to appear before Nero, though he had not one charge to support against him; and yet he must be sent, for he had appealed to Caesar. He hoped therefore that Agrippa, who was of the Jewish religion, would be able to discern more particularly the merits of this case; and might, after hearing Paul, direct him how to draw up those letters, which, on sending the prisoner, must be transmitted to the emperor.This chapter ends as exceptionably as the twenty-first. It should have begun at Acts 25:13, and have been continued to the end of the twenty-sixth chapter, or both chapters have been united in one.

1. FROM St. Paul’s appeal to Caesar, we see that it is lawful to avail ourselves, even in the cause of God, of those civil privileges with which his mercy has blessed us. It is often better to fall into the hands of the heathen than into the hands of those who, from mistaken views of religion, have their hearts filled with bitter persecuting zeal. Those who can murder a man, pretendedly for God’s sake, because he does not think exactly with them on ceremonial or speculative points of divinity, have no portion of that religion which came down from God.

2. The Jews endeavored by every means to deny the resurrection of our Lord; and it seems to have been one part of their accusation against Paul, that he asserted that the man, Jesus, whom they had crucified, was risen from the dead. On this subject, a pious writer observes: “What a train of errors and miseries does one single instance of deceit draw after it; and what a judgment upon those, who, by corrupting the guards of the sepulchre, the witnesses of the resurrection of our Lord, have kept the whole nation in infidelity!” Thus it often happens in the world that one bad counsel, one single lie or calumny, once established, is the source of infinite evils.

26

3. The grand maxim of the Roman law and government, to condemn no man unheard, and to confront the accusers with the accused, should be a sacred maxim with every magistrate and minister, and among all private Christians. How many harsh judgments and uncharitable censures would this prevent! Conscientiously practised in all Christian societies, detraction, calumny, tale-bearing, whispering, backbiting, misunderstandings, with every unbrotherly affection, would necessarily be banished from the Church of God.

Barnes: To signify. To specify, or make them known. In concluding this chapter, we may observe:

(1.) That in the case of Agrippa, we have an instance of the reasons which induce many men to hear the gospel, he had no belief in it; he had no concern for its truth or its promises; but he was led by curiosity to desire to hear the minister of the gospel of Christ. Curiosity thus draws multitudes to the sanctuary. In many instances they remain unaffected and unconcerned in regard to its provisions of mercy. They listen, and are unmoved, and die in their sins. In many instances, like Agrippa, they are almost persuaded to be Christians, Acts 26:28. But, like him, they resist the appeals; and die uninterested in the plan of salvation. In some instances, they are converted; and their curiosity, like that of Zaccheus, is made the means of their embracing the Saviour, Luke 19:1-9. Whatever may be the motive which induces men to desire to hear, it is the duty of the ministry cheerfully and thankfully, like Paul, to state the truth, and to defend the Christian religion.

(2.) In Festus we have a specimen of the manner in which the great men, and the rich, and the proud, usually regard Christianity. They esteem it to be a subject of inquiry in which they have no interest; a question about "one dead Jesus," whom Christians affirm to be alive. Whether he be alive or not, whether Christianity be true or false, they suppose, is an inquiry which does not pertain to them. Strange that it did not occur to Festus that if he was alive, his religion was true; and that it was possible that it might be from God. And strange that the men of this world regard the Christian religion as a subject in which they have no personal interest, but as one concerning which Christians only should inquire, and in which they alone should feel any concern.

(3.) In Paul we have the example of a man unlike both Festus and Agrippa. He felt a deep interest in the subject-a subject which pertained as much to them as to him. He was willing not only to look at it with curiosity, but to stake his life, his reputation, his all, on its truth, he was willing to defend it everywhere, and before any class of men. At the same time that he urged his rights as a Roman citizen, yet it was mainly that he might preach the gospel. At the same time that he was anxious to secure justice to himself, yet his chief anxiety was to declare the truth of God. Before any tribunal, before any class of men, in the presence of princes, nobles, and kings, of Romans and of Jews, he was ready to pour forth irresistible eloquence and argument in defence of the truth. Who would not rather be Paul than either Festus or Agrippa? Who would not rather be a prisoner like him, than invested with authority like Festus, or clothed in splendour like Agrippa? And who would not rather be an honest and cordial believer of the gospel like Paul, than, like them, to be cold contemners or neglecters of the God that made them, and of the Saviour that died, and rose again?

27

The charge against Paul is political, but all the evidence involves Jewish religion, which would be incomprehensible to Roman procurators. Agrippa II is the first official competent in both Roman and Jewish law to hear Paul’s defense; he will thus supply the evaluation for Festus’s letter to Nero.

Chuck Smith: Festus had been put in a real pickle by Paul when Paul appealed to Caesar, because he was a Roman citizen, he had that right. Festus had to send him to Caesar. However, being just a political pawn and there no real charges against him, if Paul comes to Caesar without legitimate charges, then Festus is in trouble because he hasn't been exercising his position as judge in fairness which the Roman government always sought. Fairness for the Roman citizens. And so Festus had a real problem when Paul appealed to Caesar, because there weren't any legitimate charges that he could make against Paul. And it would immediately be obvious to Caesar that Festus had failed to do his job as a governor and it would look bad for Festus. So Festus was really glad for this occasion, because he was hoping by Agrippa's listening to Paul, they might be able to get some kind of charges that will seem to be legitimate charges against Paul when he is sent to stand before Caesar. That at least there might seem to be legitimate charges. And so this is what Festus says, "The purpose of this now is that we might formulate our charges against this man as we send him to Caesar so that we'll have the formal charges that we might make. Because it really doesn't seem right to send a prisoner and not be able to signify the crimes of which he is guilty." Festus was in big trouble, hopefully now Agrippa will help him out by being able to formulate charges against Paul. As we get into the next chapter, we'll find out that, unfortunately for Festus, it didn't work and Agrippa just said, "You've got a problem," and let it go at that. But didn't really help in formulating any charges against Paul.Next week, Paul's exciting defense before Agrippa. It's one of my favorite chapters in the book of Acts. There's so much here in Paul's defense before Agrippa, and I think you'll find it extremely fascinating in your study. And then we will begin to journey towards Rome with Paul in chapter twenty-seven next week, as he is on his way, finally, to Rome. "I must see Rome," and now he's getting on his way. As Paul testified to Felix of righteousness, of temperance, and of judgment to come, he trembled. And he said, "I will hear you again on a more convenient day." It is not enough that you feel sorry for your sins. It is not enough that you experience the conviction of the Holy Spirit and even tremble at the thought of the judgment to come. It is necessary that you submit your life to Jesus Christ and to receive His forgiveness and cleansing. For there is to be a resurrection, both of the just and the unjust. And "whosoever names are not found written in the Lamb's book of life will be cast into the lake burning with fire and this is the second death". Don't think that that's just someone's wild concept or superstitious belief. That is the Word of God--plain, powerful, and you would be wise to take heed. You would be wise not to follow the weakness of Felix who deferred making decisions. But you would be wise to make your decision tonight to receive Jesus Christ as your Savior and as your Lord. You would be welcome to go back to the prayer room, which is on the far corner over here. The door goes behind the block wall; the prayer room is behind that block wall.

28

And there will be counselors and pastors back there who will be happy to pray with you. I would suggest you not say, "Well, some other night. I intend to do it sometime." I would encourage you, do it tonight. You don't know but what this may be your last opportunity. As Amos said, "Prepare to meet thy God". One day you're going to meet God, but if you haven't prepared by receiving Jesus Christ, it's going to be an awesome, horrible experience. May the Lord be with you. May the Lord bless you. May the Lord keep you by His power and in His love that you might be God's instrument this week to share His love with others. That you might be a blessing to those that you come in contact with as they draw from your relationship with Jesus and are strengthened and blessed because of your walk with Him.

29