Acts 25


The Trial Before Festus

¹Three days after arriving in the province, Festus went up from Caesarea to Jerusalem, ²where the chief priests and Jewish leaders appeared before him and presented the charges against Paul. ³They urgently requested Festus, as a favor to them, to have Paul transferred to Jerusalem, for they were preparing an ambush to kill him along the way. ⁴Festus answered, "Paul is being held at Caesarea, and I myself am going there soon. ⁵Let some of your leaders come with me and press charges against the man there, if he has done anything wrong."
⁶After spending eight or ten days with them, he went down to Caesarea, and the next day he convened the court and ordered that Paul be brought before him. ⁷When Paul appeared, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood around him, bringing many serious charges against him, which they could not prove.
⁸Then Paul made his defense: "I have done nothing wrong against the law of the Jews or against the temple or against Caesar."
⁹Festus, wishing to do the Jews a favor, said to Paul, "Are you willing to go up to Jerusalem and stand trial before me there on these charges?"
¹⁰Paul answered: "I am now standing before Caesar's court, where I ought to be tried. I have not done any wrong to the Jews, as you yourself know very well. ¹¹If, however, I am guilty of doing anything deserving death, I do not refuse to die. But if the charges brought against me by these Jews are not true, no one has the right to hand me over to them. I appeal to Caesar!"
¹²After Festus had conferred with his council, he declared: "You have appealed to Caesar. To Caesar you will go!"

Acts 25:1-12

Explanation:

Before Festus (25:1-12)

"I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves" (Mt 10:16). The Jews' persistent, pernicious opposition had corrupted the exercise of Roman justice in Palestine, and only a shrewd and timely appeal to Caesar would extricate innocent Paul from the process. Paul's loyalty to and reliance on the rule of law would certainly endear him to Luke's audience. How they and we should once more marvel at our sovereign Lord's providential working, this time through the shrewd yet innocent Paul. It brings the apostle's witness one step closer to his divinely ordained goal: to bear witness to his Lord in Rome (Acts 19:21; 23:11).

The Venue Question (25:1-6)

The brief but firm and honorable rule of Porcius Festus began with efficiency and wisdom (A.D. 59-61; Josephus Jewish Antiquities 20.182-97; Jewish Wars 2.271). Only three days after setting foot in the province he proceeded to his territory's true capital, Jerusalem, to meet the Jewish leaders.

Luke describes the leaders in general terms as chief priests and Jewish leaders, probably indicating that more than the Sanhedrin was involved. They urgently requested (better "persistently implored") the governor for a favor (the imperfect and present tenses point to importunate repetition): a change of venue for Paul's trial. Such a request was not out of the ordinary (Pliny Epistles 10.81.3-4). Yet it masked a deadly purpose: an ambush to kill him along the way (compare Acts 23:21, 16). They would use treachery to be rid of Paul, as they had with his Lord (Lk 22:2-6; Acts 2:23).

Persistence and deceit are the trademarks of the church's persecutors. Therefore Christians must be "wise as snakes"--realistic, not naive or cynical. Nothing should take them by surprise, and they must try to anticipate all eventualities.

Festus's reply is a reasoned denial. The accused is incarcerated in Caesarea and the judge, the governor, is about to go there shortly; it makes sense for the accusers to go there as well. Festus issues a friendly invitation for the leaders to accompany him to Caesarea.

The soldiers' attempt to restore order in the temple area, the prisoner's transfer after the uncovered plot, and his continued incarceration as Felix's favor to the Jews when he left office were all occasions when military officers and governors acted on purely temporal or self-serving motives (21:32-36; 23:23-35; 24:27). Here too Festus makes a decision simply for his own convenience. But again, God is providentially directing human affairs so that the might of Rome will continue to protect his messenger. All who obey God's call and commit themselves to fulfill his purposes can have the confidence that the same providence protects them until their mission is done.

The Trial: Accusations and Affirmations (25:6-8)

With customary efficiency Festus convened the court--literally, "sat down on the judgment seat" (bema). "This formality was necessary for his verdict to have legal validity" (Bruce 1988:451). Like predators after their quarry the Jews . . . stood around him, bringing many serious charges against him. But they are unprovable charges (compare 24:13, 19).

Before the bar of blind justice persecution will never prove a case built on lies. Here again the opponents of the gospel will be frustrated (6:10; 19:9-10). But Christians must always be sure they suffer for the right reason--because they are Christians--and that there is no case against them (1 Pet 4:14-16).

Though Festus's subsequent comments reveal that Paul is charged with much more (Acts 25:19), Luke presents Paul's defense as a brief affirmation: I have done nothing wrong against the law of the Jews or against the temple or against Caesar. The Jews have indeed consistently charged Paul with teaching and acting against the law (21:28; compare 24:5), the temple (21:28; 24:6) and Caesar (24:5). Paul has stoutly defended himself in each of these areas (law--22:3; 24:14-16; temple--22:17; 24:17-18; Caesar--24:11-13).

In this affirmation Luke capsulizes his conviction about first-century Christianity's two defining relationships. As to Judaism, it has not betrayed its religious roots. It stands in direct continuity with the Old Testament faith in its ethics and worship. The Jews can find no apostasy here. As to the state, Christianity is no revolutionary disrupter of the civil order, though in its own way it will produce a radical transformation of society, one heart at a time.

The Disposition and Paul's Appeal to Caesar (25:9-12)

The next step in a trial featuring unsubstantiated charges and a solid defense should be acquittal. But Luke lets us know that a miscarriage of justice is in the making when he notes that Festus's next question is motivated by a desire to do the Jews a favor, what they have asked for (25:3; compare 24:27). Favoritism takes the blindfold off justice (Lev 19:15; Prov 17:15). Instead of declaring Paul innocent, Festus asks whether he is willing for the trial to be continued but with a change of venue to Jerusalem.

Paul's response and the way Festus later recounts the offer in conversation with Agrippa indicates that Festus's apparently innocent question about change of venue may cloak an inference of change of jurisdiction (25:11, 19-20). He could be implying that the Sanhedrin would be given immediate jurisdiction over this "religious" case and he would ratify whatever decision they take. In that way he promises that Paul will stand trial before me.

In a reverse parallelism construction, which climaxes with his appeal to Caesar, Paul evaluates his present and future judicial dealings with the Roman court and the Jews. He makes his statements turn on a profession of his integrity.

A. I am now standing before Caesar's court, where I ought to be tried.

B. I have not done any wrong to the Jews, as you yourself know very well.

C. If, however, I am guilty of doing anything deserving death, I do not refuse to die.

B. But if the charges brought against me by these Jews are not true, no one has the right to hand me over to them.

A. I appeal to Caesar!

Not only does Paul reveal his own integrity, stating that if guilty he will not refuse to undergo the law's full penalty, but he also unmasks the governor's failings. The governor knows Paul's innocence but won't declare an acquittal. The governor has proposed a change of venue which will in some way involve an illegal change of jurisdiction. To "hand Paul over" (charizomai) to the Jewish leaders is indeed to grant the Jews a favor (charis, 25:9). The only way to overcome these failings is for Paul to take the proceedings out of the hands of this lower court. By appealing directly for a trial before the imperial court, which was the right of every Roman citizen, Paul stops the judicial proceedings (Ulpian Digest 48.6.7, cited in Sherwin-White 1963:58).

Paul's shrewdness allows him to overcome the governor's moral failings and the fatal results that they would likely produce. It also enables Paul to retain the initiative of the divine "must" that has ultimate control of his personal destiny (23:11). Again God has providentially so ordered the decisions of individuals and nations that embedded in Roman law is an appeal mechanism that can now be employed by his witness, who was born a Roman citizen. But it requires Paul to exercise faith, courage, integrity and shrewdness.

Festus conferred with his council. It was customary for the governor, even the emperor, to have a body of assessors--higher-ranking military officers, younger civil servants in training and dignitaries from the local population--to help him evaluate court cases. Festus wants to make sure the appeal is in order based on the type of charges that have been brought. So assured, he makes the terse declaration You have appealed to Caesar. To Caesar you will go! The might of Rome protects; the might of Rome provides the transport. Paul will bear witness in Rome, possibly before the emperor himself (9:15; 23:11).

Acts 25


Festus Consults King Agrippa

¹³A few days later King Agrippa and Bernice arrived at Caesarea to pay their respects to Festus. ¹⁴Since they were spending many days there, Festus discussed Paul's case with the king. He said: "There is a man here whom Felix left as a prisoner. ¹⁵When I went to Jerusalem, the chief priests and elders of the Jews brought charges against him and asked that he be condemned.
¹⁶"I told them that it is not the Roman custom to hand over any man before he has faced his accusers and has had an opportunity to defend himself against their charges. ¹⁷When they came here with me, I did not delay the case, but convened the court the next day and ordered the man to be brought in. ¹⁸When his accusers got up to speak, they did not charge him with any of the crimes I had expected. ¹⁹Instead, they had some points of dispute with him about their own religion and about a dead man named Jesus who Paul claimed was alive. ²⁰I was at a loss how to investigate such matters; so I asked if he would be willing to go to Jerusalem and stand trial there on these charges. ²¹When Paul made his appeal to be held over for the Emperor's decision, I ordered him held until I could send him to Caesar."
²²Then Agrippa said to Festus, "I would like to hear this man myself." He replied, "Tomorrow you will hear him."

Paul Before Agrippa

²³The next day Agrippa and Bernice came with great pomp and entered the audience room with the high ranking officers and the leading men of the city. At the command of Festus, Paul was brought in. ²⁴Festus said: "King Agrippa, and all who are present with us, you see this man! The whole Jewish community has petitioned me about him in Jerusalem and here in Caesarea, shouting that he ought not to live any longer. ²⁵I found he had done nothing deserving of death, but because he made his appeal to the Emperor I decided to send him to Rome. ²⁶But I have nothing definite to write to His Majesty about him. Therefore I have brought him before all of you, and especially before you, King Agrippa, so that as a result of this investigation I may have something to write. ²⁷For I think it is unreasonable to send on a prisoner without specifying the charges against him."

Acts 25:13-27

Explanation:

A King's Curiosity (25:13-22)

The King Agrippa who comes to pay his respects to Festus was Marcus Julius Agrippa II (A.D. 27-100), son of Agrippa I (Acts 12:1-25) and great-grandson of Herod the Great (Mt 2:1-23). Brought up in Rome in the court of Claudius, he was a favorite of the emperor, though too young to immediately succeed his father at his death in A.D. 44. In A.D. 50, following the death of his uncle (Herod of Chalcis, A.D. 48) he was granted the petty kingdom of Chalcis, northeast of Judea. He later exchanged it for the tetrarchy of Philip, Abilene (or Abila), Trachonitis and Acra (the tetrarchy of Varus) in A.D. 53. In A.D. 56 Nero added to his kingdom the Galilean cities of Tarichea and Tiberias with their surrounding lands and the Perean city of Julias (or Betharamphta) with fourteen villages belonging to it (compare Josephus Jewish Wars 2.220-23, 247, 252; Jewish Antiquities 20.104, 138, 159; Longenecker 1981:547). He had supreme power in Jewish religious life, for the Romans gave him the right to appoint the high priest and custodianship of the temple treasure and the high priest's vestments (Josephus Jewish Antiquities 20.213, 222). He was the last of the Herodian line.

Accompanying him now is his sister Bernice, a year younger than he. She had been engaged to Marcus, a nephew of the philosopher Philo of Alexandria. Then she married her uncle Herod, king of Chalcis. At his death she returned to live with her brother Agrippa II and engaged in an incestuous relationship with him. This gained her notoriety both in Palestine and in Rome (Josephus Jewish Antiquities 20.145-46; Juvenal Satires 6.156-60).

Festus discusses Paul's case with Agrippa, laying it before him so he could get his opinion on it. In the process Paul is described in four ways.

1. He has been left as a prisoner (Acts 25:14). Luke's verb form (the perfect periphrastic) stresses the continuing results of Felix's past decision. Paul as prisoner lives out a paradox that persecution brings. Though he is innocent (23:29; compare Lk 23:4, 15, 22), he is treated as a criminal--in bonds, without freedom, knowing all the shame brought by incarceration and implied guilt (Acts 23:18; 26:29; 28:16; compare Lk 22:37; 23:32). Yet Paul's status has resulted from fulfillment of prophecy and obedience to the path of suffering that all faithful witnesses to the truth must tread (Lk 21:12; Acts 20:23; 21:11, 13; also see Lk 22:37, 42).

2. Paul was opposed yet protected (Acts 25:15-16). Now it becomes clear: it was not just a change of venue that the Jerusalem Jews sought (vv. 2-3); they wanted a change of jurisdiction, as Paul had asserted (v. 11). They wanted Festus to agree that Paul was guilty of a capital offense against their law and that he should be handed over to them for summary execution. Had they taken the time to explain to Festus about crimes that merited "death at the hands of heaven" and how the Romans had accommodated the Jews' concern about "temple defilement" offenses (see comment at 21:30)? Festus's reliance on a basic principle of Roman justice was Paul's protection. "Our law, Senators, requires that the accused shall himself hear the charge preferred against him and shall be judged after he has made his own defense" (Appian Roman History: Civil Wars 3.54; compare Ulpian Digest 48.17.1, cited in Haenchen 1971:672). So it was not only a desire for convenience but also a commitment to justice that preserved Paul's life. That justice is also the biblical way (Deut 19:15-21).

3. Paul was tried, but no punishable charges resulted (Acts 25:17-19). Festus with customary efficiency convened the court (compare 25:6). Taking a hostile stance, the accusers surprised the governor by making religious charges: some points of dispute . . . about their own religion (compare 25:7). This was the consistent understanding of Roman officials about the nature of Jewish opposition to Christianity (18:15; 23:29). Evidently Festus has concluded there is nothing to the sedition charges; Paul has indeed done nothing wrong . . . against Caesar (25:8). Paul is not guilty of violating Caesar's decrees against creating disturbances in the Jewish community. Festus has not decided about Paul's culpability in the temple defilement matter, an issue of dual jurisdiction.

The main point of dispute is a dead man named Jesus who Paul claimed was alive (v. 19). The phrasing reveals Festus's attitude toward Christ's resurrection and innocently communicates the prominent role it played in Paul's defense. Though more general references to "resurrection of the dead" have peppered Paul's defense (23:6; 24:15, 21), we now know that Jesus' resurrection is the central point of contention. Paul certainly made that clear in his speech before the temple mob (22:7-10, 14-15, 17-21).

Paul began with the objective historical fact of the resurrection, and so must we. It is the essential foundation for any supernatural working whereby we come to our "defining moment" of meeting our risen Savior and entering into a personal relationship with him.

4. Paul was offered a change of venue but instead appealed to Caesar (25:20-21). Festus was at a loss--perplexed--about this testimony to supernatural events (compare Lk 24:4; Acts 2:12; 5:24; 10:17). Not only the nature of the evidence but also the limits of his sphere of authority rendered Festus incompetent to judge these matters (Lk 20:25). This trial was about "God's" sphere, not "Caesar's." But Festus's perplexity did not keep him from trying, as his offer of a change of venue shows.

Festus and all governmental officials following him do well to learn the limits provided by a biblically grounded distinction between the proper spheres of authority of church and state. The state's judicial wisdom is never competent to decide matters of theology. Its power is never a valid enforcer of church/temple decisions.

The way Luke describes Paul's request as an appeal to be held over for the Emperor's (literally, "His Majesty's") decision shows that he was asking not only for removal from a Roman provincial tribunal to the imperial court but also for protection during the process. Festus' order was, literally, "to send him up to Caesar" (anapempo, a technical term for transfer to a superior tribunal; Josephus Jewish Wars 2.571).

With some curiosity, possibly disdain, Agrippa says he would like to hear "the person." The imperfect eboulomen is either a true past indicating a wish he had entertained for some time (compare Lk 9:9; 23:8) or a desiderative intended to soften the remark and make it more polite, diffident or vague (Williams 1985:414). Festus accedes to his desire: Tomorrow you will hear him.

To hear a messenger with the word of God is the first step on the path to saving faith (Lk 8:8, 15, 18; Acts 4:4; 10:22, 33; 13:44; 18:8). Agrippa and Festus at this point unwittingly appear to model two essential prerequisites for receiving the gospel: a teachable spirit and a desire to hear the message.

A Governor's Dilemma (25:23-27)

As Luke sets the scene, a majestic court in full regalia assembles. In come Agrippa, Bernice, . . . high ranking officers (Festus's tribunes, who commanded the cohorts stationed at Caesarea; compare Josephus Jewish Antiquities 19.365) and leading men of the city, a group mainly, if not entirely, Gentile. What a contrast when prisoner Paul is led in chained! Does Luke want us to look beyond the trappings of earthly, temporal power and see where the real power lay, in the manacled hands of a Spirit-filled witness to an eternal gospel, "the power of God for salvation"?

Festus articulates his dilemma by setting side by side the Jewish and Roman assessments of Paul, including the prisoner's appeal, and then presenting his need (vv. 24-27). Either by command or by exclamation Festus invites all present to consider Paul. As someone observes an unusual sight, whether the supernatural/miraculous (3:16; 4:13; 7:56; 8:13; 10:11; 28:6) or the innocent suffering (Lk 23:35, 48), so the assembled dignitaries should look at this man. This one whom Festus will shortly declare innocent has aroused the hostility of the whole Jewish community. What was previously presented as a request for a change of venue or a statement of charges and request for a death penalty we now learn was a petition delivered with bloodthirsty shouting (boao, "to cry or shout with unusually large volume"; Louw and Nida 1988:1:398) that he ought not to live any longer (compare 22:22). The same zeal for the purity of the temple and the sanctity of Jewish religious identity that fired the arresting mob and the plotters continued unabated throughout Felix's tenure and greeted Festus (21:27-36; 22:22; 23:12-22). Little did Paul's opponents realize that their "ought not" (me dein) stood in direct opposition to the divine "ought" (dei) of Paul's mission to Rome (23:11; 27:24).

All persecution in the final analysis is born of religious, ideological or ethnic pride or fear. It is a blind, irrational hostility against the truth of the gospel, which seeks to frustrate the purposes of God but in the end only finds itself "kicking against the goads" (26:14).

Festus now gives us for the first time his assessment of Paul's status before Roman law: I found he had done nothing deserving of death. Like his Lord, Paul has been declared innocent three times, a full exoneration in a judicial system where the accused was given three opportunities to defend himself (Lk 23:4, 15, 22; Acts 23:29; 25:25; 26:31). Festus fails to mention the political pressure and perplexity that led to his offer of a change of venue and in turn to Paul's appeal to Caesar (25:9-11, 20-21). Rather, he proceeds directly to the matter of Paul's appeal, leaving the impression, which is made explicit at the end of the hearing, that Paul is to blame for his continuing incarceration (26:32). Neither the governor nor the king explicitly takes into account that the decision to send an innocent man to Caesar, once he has appealed, is as much a political as a judicial decision. In Paul's case, not only would Caesar be insulted but the Jews would be infuriated if this prisoner were set free.

When persecutors use the state to further their ends and the result is a failure in the administration of justice, Christians must live in such integrity that even then their innocence before the laws of the state will be apparent to all.

Festus needs to find charges that may accompany the prisoner (Ulpian Digest 49.5-6, cited in Bruce 1990:494). With his search for things definite [asphales] to write, Festus joins Claudius Lycias in the desire to get at the truth about the Jewish opposition to Christianity (21:34; 22:30). He also models the stance that Luke desires all his readers to take toward the Christian gospel (Lk 1:4).

An informal hearing before Agrippa should help. He is well acquainted with Judaism. In a face-saving expression, Festus again affirms Paul's innocence and states his dilemma: it is unreasonable (alogon; Josephus Jewish Antiquities 1.24)--in the sense of "illogical, absurd," not "unfair"--that a prisoner be sent on to Caesar without prosecutable charges. Doing the right thing, even after a failure of judicial administration, will put Festus in a position to hear and respond to the truth of the gospel.