Acts 24
The Trial Before Felix
1Five days later the high priest Ananias went down to Caesarea with
some of the elders and a lawyer named Tertullus, and they brought their charges
against Paul before the governor. 2When Paul was called in, Tertullus
presented his case before Felix: "We have enjoyed a long period of peace under
you, and your foresight has brought about reforms in this nation. 3Everywhere
and in every way, most excellent Felix, we acknowledge this with profound
gratitude. 4But in order not to weary you further, I would request
that you be kind enough to hear us briefly.
5"We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots
among the Jews all over the world. He is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect
6and even tried to desecrate the temple; so we seized him. 8By
examining him yourself you will be able to learn the truth about all these
charges we are bringing against him."
9The Jews joined in the accusation, asserting that these things were
true.
10When the governor motioned for him to speak, Paul replied: "I know
that for a number of years you have been a judge over this nation; so I gladly
make my defense. 11You can easily verify that no more than twelve
days ago I went up to Jerusalem to worship. 12My accusers did not
find me arguing with anyone at the temple, or stirring up a crowd in the
synagogues or anywhere else in the city. 13And they cannot prove to
you the charges they are now making against me. 14However, I admit
that I worship the God of our fathers as a follower of the Way, which they call
a sect. I believe everything that agrees with the Law and that is written in the
Prophets, 15and I have the same hope in God as these men, that there
will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked. 16So I
strive always to keep my conscience clear before God and man.
17"After an absence of several years, I came to Jerusalem to bring my
people gifts for the poor and to present offerings. 18I was
ceremonially clean when they found me in the temple courts doing this. There was
no crowd with me, nor was I involved in any disturbance. 19But there
are some Jews from the province of Asia, who ought to be here before you and
bring charges if they have anything against me. 20Or these who are
here should state what crime they found in me when I stood before the
Sanhedrin-- 21unless it was this one thing I shouted as I stood in
their presence: 'It is concerning the resurrection of the dead that I am on
trial before you today.' "
22Then Felix, who was well acquainted with the Way, adjourned the
proceedings. "When Lysias the commander comes," he said, "I will decide your
case." 23He ordered the centurion to keep Paul under guard but to
give him some freedom and permit his friends to take care of his needs.
24Several days later Felix came with his wife Drusilla, who was a
Jewess. He sent for Paul and listened to him as he spoke about faith in Christ
Jesus. 25As Paul discoursed on righteousness, self-control and the
judgment to come, Felix was afraid and said, "That's enough for now! You may
leave. When I find it convenient, I will send for you." 26At the same
time he was hoping that Paul would offer him a bribe, so he sent for him
frequently and talked with him.
27When two years had passed, Felix was succeeded by Porcius Festus,
but because Felix wanted to grant a favor to the Jews, he left Paul in prison.
Acts 24:1-27
Explanation:
Paul at Caesarea (24:1--26:32)
During the Caesarean phase of Paul's Palestinian "ministry in chains," Luke
highlights a persistent Jewish opposition that hopes to capitalize on the moral
weaknesses of Roman governors. Still, humanly speaking, Roman law continues to
be Paul's final line of protection. The innocence of Paul and his gospel before
the state and the Jewish religion neutralizes the objections of Christianity's
enemies. Theophilus and his peers may in all good conscience embrace a gospel
that neither despises its roots nor threatens public order. Paul again uses his
defenses as an occasion for powerful witness. The Spirit's work is evident,
though no positive decisions are made.
Before Felix (24:1-27)
"Don't call me, I'll call you" is not only a way to dismiss telemarketers and
door-to-door solicitors. Modern-day Felixes treat the gospel with the same
indifference. Paul's trial witness before Felix at Caesarea helps us understand
the reasons for and the hazards of putting off saying yes to Jesus.
Jewish Accusations (24:1-9)
Shortly after Paul's removal to Caesarea, the Sadducean contingent of the
Sanhedrin, the high priest Ananias . . . with some of the elders, arrives to
bring charges before the governor. After Paul is called in by the crier at the
beginning of the court session, Tertullus presents the Jews' case. He was
probably a Hellenistic Jew who served as the Sanhedrin's expert legal counsel in
Roman affairs.
Tertullus's exordium with its extensive captatio benevolentiae (it takes up half
the speech as Luke reports it, vv. 2-4) curries the judge's favor with
conventional flowery rhetoric. First is an appreciative assessment of Felix's
tenure in office. In fact, the governor's rule brought anything but a long
period of peace, and there is no record of many improvements, reforms. Felix did
maintain a tense peace through an ongoing series of search-and-destroy missions
against hoodlum terrorists (Josephus Jewish Wars 2.253, 264-65; Jewish
Antiquities 20.160-61). Yet this fanned the fires of Jewish political rebellion
into fiercer and fiercer flame. Second, Tertullus curries favor by declaring his
intent to move to the charges directly and deal with them briefly, depending on
Felix's kindness to hear him.
Moving from general to specific, Tertullus carefully clothes the charges in
mainly political terms so that they may be viewed as violations of Roman law. He
begins with empirewide insurrection. The lawyer labels Paul a troublemaker
(literally, "plague-spot") and accuses him of stirring up riots among the Jews
all over the world. Whether the implication is general insurrection (Latin
seditio) or simply disrupting Jewish communities, this charge is serious
(compare Lk 23:2; Acts 17:6-7). Emperor Claudius's letter to the Alexandrines
(November 10, A.D. 41) uses similar language. He warns the Jews that if they
persist in suspicious activities, he "will by all means take vengeance on them
as fomenters of what is a general plague [nosos] infecting the whole world"
(Greek Papyri in the British Museum [P. Lond.] 1912, line 99).
Tertullus next charges disruptive heresy, which may carry with it the
implication of fomenting theologically motivated civil unrest. He uses a
contemptuous nickname for Christians, Nazarene (compare Jn 1:46; nosrim in the
Talmud [for example, Ta`anit 27b]; Williams 1985:397), and labels them a
sect--no more than an unauthorized minority movement within Judaism--and Paul
their ringleader. Felix had to constantly deal with civil uprisings from such
movements (Josephus Jewish Wars 2.253-65).
The temple defilement charge is cautiously stated as an attempted desecration.
Does this show that the Jewish leaders know they have a weak case? They have
witnessed no defilement, and the Asian Jews are not present to give testimony
(Acts 24:19). Such testimony in any case would have been perjured. Has Tertullus
also turned this into a political charge, since the Romans had given the Jews
permission to impose the death penalty on any who defiled the temple (Josephus
Jewish Wars 6.124-26)? Tertullus is at least justifying the Jews' initiative in
Paul's arrest. He is confident that the judge's cross-examination of the
defendant will verify the accusations. As the enemies of the righteous one
surround him to attack (Ps 3:6 [7 LXX]), so the Jews joined in the accusation
against Paul.
This full formulation of charges reveals several characteristics of persecutors'
words. They will be broad, exaggerated, unsubstantiated, untruthful allegations.
Double entendre and a trimming of charges will be used to fit what can barely be
proved. Should we expect any less from those in the kingdom of the "father of
lies" (Jn 8:44; Acts 26:18)?
Paul's Christian Affirmations (24:10-21)
With a nod, a gesture befitting his rank (NIV translates it more generally,
motioned), Felix indicates that Paul may take up his defense. His exordium with
its captatio benevolentiae is respectful, affirming, within the bounds of truth,
and brief. Paul gladly makes his defense because Felix's long tenure in
Palestine has provided experience, knowledge and insight on Jewish affairs.
Felix may well have spent a decade already in Palestine, first as administrator
of Samaria under Cumanus (A.D. 48-52) and then as governor from A.D. 52 to the
time of Paul's trial, A.D. 58 (Tacitus Annals 12.54; Josephus Jewish Wars 2.247;
Jewish Antiquities 20.137). Paul's introduction models the bold, yet respectful,
demeanor that Peter counsels us all to adopt when we stand before civil
authorities and are required to "give the reason for the hope" that is within us
(1 Pet 3:15-16).
Paul's answer to the insurrection charge (Acts 24:11-13) is framed in terms of
his recent activity in Jerusalem, since this only is within the governor's
jurisdiction. Motive, method, opportunity and proof of the alleged crime do not
exist. As to motive, whether to celebrate Pentecost (20:16), render account of
his stewardship thus far or rededicate himself to the next phase of ministry,
Paul went up to Jerusalem to complete a spiritual pilgrimage, to worship
(compare 8:27), not to start a "holy war." While on an earlier visit he had
engaged in debate and witness to non-Christian Jews, this time he evidently
confined himself to the Christian community (9:28-30/22:18; 21:17-26). His
method of operation did not include arguing . . . at the temple, or stirring up
a crowd for insurrection (epistasis; 2 Macc 6:3). In fact, if anyone could be
accused of stirring up a crowd and inciting the city to riot, it was Paul's
initial accusers (Acts 21:27-28, 30, 34-35). He lacked opportunity to
orchestrate a revolt, since he had arrived in Jerusalem only twelve days before
he was arrested. Besides, no proof of the charges can be now offered.
Paul's solid defense teaches us that though proclaiming a controversial message
may spark an uproar, messengers themselves must always be peace-loving,
circumspect and law-abiding.
As Paul answers the heresy charge, he reveals the uniqueness of Christianity
vis-a-vis first-century Judaism. All Paul did in his life as a service of
worship to God, he did as a follower of "the Way." Both the Dead Sea Scroll
community and the New Testament church via John the Baptist's ministry used as
their mandate Isaiah 40:3, "prepare the way for the LORD" (Lk 3:3-6; 1QS
8:13-16). Christianity, or the lifestyle it commended, became known as "the Way"
(Acts 9:2; 19:9, 23; 22:4, 22; compare 1QS 9:16-21). The Dead Sea Scroll
community prepared "the way for the LORD" through the study of the law, but
Jesus' teaching set his followers on a more eschatologically imminent, ethically
radical, profoundly personal and dynamically evangelistic "way" (Lk 14:25-33; Jn
14:6; Acts 1:8; Pathrapankal 1979:537-38).
Paul also emphasizes the Christian's continuity with Old Testament Jewish faith.
He worships the same God, the God of our fathers (3:13; 5:30; 7:32/Ex 3:6). He
does so with the same belief. He believes all that is written according to the
Law and in the Prophets (Lk 24:25-27, 44; Acts 26:22). His worship involves the
same hope, . . . that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the
wicked (Is 26:19; Dan 12:2; 1 Enoch 51:1-2). And his worship has the same aim:
to live with conscience clear before God and man, no conscious record of
misdeeds, in light of the coming judgment at the final resurrection (Acts 23:1).
For Jewish seekers and believers in any age, Paul's confession gives an
encouragement that Christianity is, in the end, not a betrayal but the
fulfillment of the Old Testament faith. The challenge is that this fulfillment
will radically transform the Jewishness of those who step onto the "Way"
inaugurated by Messiah Jesus.
Paul answers the temple defilement charge by emphasizing the purpose and
propriety of his visit and pointing out that the eyewitness accusers of this
alleged violation are not present (24:17-19). Paul's purpose was that of any
pious pilgrim: to bring my people gifts for the poor and to present offerings. A
person with such a purpose would hardly have temple defilement in his plans. In
fact, his propriety--he was ceremonially clean, at least concluding his
purification on his return from Gentile lands (21:26-27), and orderly, for he
assembled no crowd or any disturbance--demonstrates this. The lack of eyewitness
accusers to this most specific and immediately life-threatening of charges (see
comment at 21:30) is an essential point in Paul's defense. He is relying on the
time-honored Roman judicial principle that before any verdict, accusers must
face the accused in person and there must be opportunity for a defense (25:16;
Appian Roman History: Civil Wars 3.54). Converts from Judaism and nominal
Christianity do well to emulate Paul's pursuit of the true worship of God
through respect for and constructive engagement with his religious past.
One "crime" Paul will own up to: his shout before the Sanhedrin, It is
concerning the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial before you today
(23:6). The witnesses are present, but for two reasons this is no "crime." To
the Romans Paul's statement is a matter of theology, irrelevant to their
jurisprudence. To first-century normative Judaism, it is not heresy to confess
hope in messianic salvation inaugurated through the resurrection of the dead
(24:14-15). To see these hopes finding their initial and crucial fulfillment in
the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth is, of course, another matter.
Paul's introduction of the resurrection issue is not only good legal-defense
strategy but also good evangelism. To speak of the final accounting before God
and the eternal destiny that flows from it is to point out one of the
certainties of human existence. Many may run from it, following alternate paths
of personal eschatology--reincarnation or immediate annihilation. But all will
have to face judgment. The resurrection of Jesus--proof of coming judgment,
promise of eternal salvation--must be at the heart of all "good news" preaching
(17:30-31; 26:23; Lk 24:46-47).
Judicial Procrastination (24:22-27)
Luke gives two reasons that Felix delays his verdict: his thorough acquaintance
with Christianity and his desire to hear the testimony of Claudius Lycias, the
only independent witness to any civil disturbances. Whether from Drusilla or
from his decadelong tenure in Palestine, Felix knew "the Way," the opposition to
it from the Jewish leaders-and increasingly from the people--and the potential
for civil unrest that its very presence seemed to create.
Since Felix already has all the facts, are truth and justice compromised by his
delay (Krodel 1986:442)? There may still be confusion over discrepancies among
the testimonies of Tertullus, Paul and Claudius Lysias. Felix may want to
interrogate the tribune in order to get to the bottom of the matter (Bruce
1988:446; Sherwin-White 1963:53). At the very least Felix protects himself from
further civil unrest sparked by Paul's being at large and does the Sanhedrin a
favor. And providentially, in protective custody Paul is kept from the hands of
Jews intent on his death.
Paul's circumstances in custody include some measure of freedom and access to
his friends (at least his traveling companions [Krodel 1986:442]; possibly also
Christians of Caesarea [Haenchen 1971:656]). They take care of him,
communicating with him, maybe even bringing food. These details serve as silent
witness to Paul's innocence, for he is being treated as a Roman citizen simply
detained for trial.
The judicial delay leads to gospel declaration (vv. 22-25). After several days,
Felix and his Jewish wife Drusilla come to the section of the palace where the
prisoners are kept and send for Paul.
Drusilla, one of the three daughters of Agrippa I (12:1-23), was born A.D. 38
and promised at a young age to Epiphanes, the son of Antiochus king of
Commagene, if he would become a Jewish proselyte (Josephus Jewish Antiquities
19.354-55; 20.139-40). He refused to do so. So after the death of Agrippa I
(A.D. 44), Drusilla's brother Agrippa II (Acts 25:13--26:32) gave her in
marriage to Azizus, King of Emesa, a small domain on the Orontes. Azizus did
consent to be circumcised. Enter Felix, whom Tacitus said indulged in "every
kind of barbarity and lust" (Histories 5.9). Captivated by Drusilla's beauty, he
wooed her away from Azizus with the aid of a Cyprian Jew named Atomus, who
pretended to be a magician. Drusilla married Felix as much to escape the enmity
of her sister Bernice, who abused her because of her beauty, as in response to
his amorous spell (Josephus Jewish Antiquities 20.139-44). Felix was thrice
married (Suetonius Claudius 28). This Drusilla replaced another Drusilla,
granddaughter of Antony and Cleopatra. The couple would have been known to some
in Luke's Roman audience, since they repaired to Rome after Felix was removed
from his procuratorship in A.D. 59.
To such a dissolute couple Paul preaches faith in Christ [Messiah] Jesus (Acts
3:20; 5:42; 17:3; 18:5; 20:21). Given Felix's and Drusilla's past, it is not
surprising that Paul focuses on matters that are foundational to a call to
repentance: righteousness, self-control and the judgment to come (Jn 16:8-11).
The couple, indeed, need to understand God's standard, their accountability and
the reality of a final reckoning. In brief, they must face the bad news of their
lost spiritual condition before they can grasp and embrace the good news.
Neither has pursued righteousness, "right conduct before God which follows the
will of God and is pleasing to him" (Schrenk 1964:198; Lk 1:75; compare Acts
13:10). Self-control, whether in regard to sex, money or power, is foreign to
them. While Drusilla would know of the judgment to come from her Jewish
upbringing (see 24:15), Felix, a Roman freedman, knows of it only in a different
form, probably being "vaguely persuaded that souls went down from the tomb to
some deep places where they received rewards and punishments" (Cumont 1959:86).
In an age when the majority view all moral values as relative, the Christian
witness needs to find a way to speak of God's righteousness again in such a way
that it raises a standard for all. In a time when sin is viewed as alternative
lifestyles, psychosocial dysfunctions, addictions or even disease, the gospel
witness needs to find a way to speak meaningfully of responsible moral
self-control. In an age of anxiety when humans know "something is wrong," though
they have rejected the moral categories--absolutes, sin and guilt--that would
enable them to know "someone is wrong," the Christian witness must learn how to
declare a judgment to come in terms that make sense. Unless this happens,
repentance will be impossible and the salvation rescue will appear unnecessary
and hence irrelevant.
Paul always preached for a decision, and under the conviction of the Holy Spirit
Felix knows this message is for him. It fills him with fear. He is startled,
terrified, at the prospect of the last day (Lk 24:5, 37; Acts 10:4). But this
does not lead to humble faith. Felix uses procrastination to stay in control of
his own destiny. He will determine when and to what extent these matters are
considered in the future.
How often does fear hide behind a busy schedule? How many have fooled themselves
into thinking that by not deciding they have truly "kept all the options open"
and at a convenient time in the future they will give the claims of Christ the
serious attention they deserve? Actually indecision is a decision--a choice to
remain where we are, outside God's saving grace, with the condemnation of the
judgment to come our only prospect (Jn 3:18, 36).
But Felix's procrastination is more than a coping strategy. It also expresses
his greed. Following common provincial administrative practice, he demands
gold--seeks a bribe--from Paul in exchange for his release (Josephus Jewish
Antiquities 20.215; Jewish Wars 2.273). He is evidently willing to trade hope of
life eternal later for hope of money now (24:15, 26). Jesus warned of the
unevenness of such a trade (Lk 9:25; compare 8:14).
Felix's desire for glory led him to trade the approval of fellow human beings
for justice. He left office under a cloud. A Jewish delegation's complaint to
the emperor about his ruthless suppression of a dispute between Jews and
Gentiles in Caesarea led to his removal (Josephus Jewish Antiquities 20.182;
Jewish Wars 2.266-70).
As he leaves, he curries the Jews' favor by leaving Paul in prison. Paul's
plight, clearly a miscarriage of justice and unworthy of a Roman citizen,
nevertheless continues to provide the protection that is needed if Paul is ever
to experience the divine promise--witness in Rome.
Felix's profligate life warns us all not to let sex, money or power put us into
a "don't call me, I'll call you" stance toward the gospel.