|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Home |
First Covenant |
Second Covenant |
Topical Studies |
Table of Contents |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CHAPTER TWENTY FOUR
"Feeble Felix"
Acts 24:1-4
Five days On the 5th day after their departure from Jerusalem. This time was occupied, doubtless, in their receiving the command to go to Caesarea, and in making the necessary arrangements. This was the twelfth day after Paul's arrival at Jerusalem. See Acts 24:11. (from The Bible Exposition Commentary. Copyright © 1989 by Chariot Victor Publishing, and imprint of Cook Communication Ministries.) Ananias The high priest (Acts 23:2). The elders A deputation of elders along with the high priest Ananias, not the whole Sanhedrin, but no hint of the forty conspirators or of the Asian Jews. The Sanhedrin had become divided so that now it is probably Ananias (mortally offended) and the Sadducees who take the lead in the prosecution of Paul. (from Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament, Electronic Database. Copyright © 1997, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament. Copyright © 1985 by Broadman Press.) Came down In the Bible record,
(from Barnes' Notes, Electronic Database Copyright © 1997, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.) Tertullus A certain "attorney" retained by the high priest and Sanhedrin to accuse the apostle Paul at Caesarea before the procurator Felix. He evidently belonged to the class of professional attorneys who were to be found not only in Rome but in other parts of the empire, where they went with the expectation of finding occupation at the tribunals of the provincial magistrates. We may infer that Tertullus was of Roman, or, at all events, of Italian, origin; the Sanhedrin would naturally desire his services on account of their own ignorance of the Latin language and of the ordinary procedure of a Roman law court. (from The New Unger's Bible Dictionary. Originally published by Moody Press of Chicago, Illinois. Copyright © 1988.) Roman law was as complex as our modern law, and it took an expert to understand it and know how to apply it successfully to his client's case. As for his heritage, we find various opinions:
The prosecution would always begin first, both in Roman and in Jewish trials. Tertullus begins his speech with a standard captatio benevolentiae - flattery to secure Felix's favor. (Rhetoric manuals emphasized winning the judge's favor, and speeches before public officials always opened by praising them.) Although flattery was sometimes true, this example is blatantly false: revolutionaries had escalated under Felix's corrupt and repressive administration, bringing neither peace nor reforms. (From IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.) The lawyer spent almost as much time on his introduction as he did on the specific charges against Paul. His description of Felix was obviously fawning flattery, for Felix was known for his violent use of repressive force and corrupt self-aggrandizement. Felix had been a slave, won his freedom, and curried favor with the imperial court. Tacitus, a Roman historian, bitingly summed up Felix's character with the terse comment, "He exercised royal power with the mind of a slave." (from Bible Knowledge Commentary/Old Testament Copyright © 1983, 2000 Cook Communications Ministries; Bible Knowledge Commentary/New Testament Copyright © 1983, 2000 Cook Communications Ministries. All rights reserved.) Tertullus began with the customary flattery, a normal part of the judicial routine. After all, before you can win your case, you must win over your judge. Tacitus, the Roman orator and politician, called flatterers "those worst of enemies"; and Solomon wrote that ."a flattering mouth works ruin" (Proverbs 26:28, NKJV). The lawyer complimented Felix because the governor's many reforms had brought quietness to the land. (Question: Why did it require nearly 500 soldiers to protect one man in transit from Jerusalem to Caesarea?) It was true that Felix had put down some revolts, but he had certainly not brought peace to the land. In fact, during the time Felix was suppressing robbers in his realm, he was also hiring robbers to murder the high priest Jonathan! So much for his reforms. (from The Bible Exposition Commentary. Copyright © 1989 by Chariot Victor Publishing, and imprint of Cook Communication Ministries. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) This was said in the customary style of flatterers and orators, to conciliate the favor of the judge, and is strikingly in contrast with the more honest and straight forward introduction in reply of Paul, Acts 24:10. Though it was said for flattery, and though Felix was in many respects an unprincipled man, yet it was true that his administration had been the means of producing much peace and order in Judea, and that he had done many things that tended to promote the welfare of the nation. In particular,
Not to hinder or detain you Speakers could apologize for wearying the official as if they had not really finished praising him (e.g., the Letter of Aristeas 8); this was a rhetorical technique for flattering someone even beyond the limits of one's own rhetorical skills or credibility. From the Amplified Bible
Acts 24:5-6
The prosecutor's accusations against Paul were no more truthful than his flattery. He brought three charges:
Compare the charges against Jesus:
1st Accusation: He is a plague
Wuest translates it: "For we found this man to be a pest and a plague and an instigator of insurrections among all the Jews throughout the Roman empire." This Personal charge was based on the Jews' conflicts with Paul in different parts of the Roman world. It was his own countrymen, not the Roman authorities, who caused Paul trouble from city to city. The Jews from Asia (Acts 21:27) would certainly have stories to tell about Lystra, Corinth, and Ephesus! Adam Clarke observes: Tertullus did not say that Paul was a pestilent fellow, but he said that he was the very pestilence itself. As for Paul being "a pest," it all depends on one's point of view. The Jews wanted to maintain their ancient traditions, and Paul was advocating something new. The Romans were afraid of anything that upset their delicate "peace" in the Empire, and Paul's record of causing trouble was long and consistent. As Vance Havner used to say, "Wherever Paul went there was either a riot or a revival!" 2nd Accusation: Ringleader of an illegal religion Ringleader = Prootostateen (NT: 4414). This word is properly a military word, and denotes "one who stands first in an army, a standard-bearer, a leader, a commander." The meaning is that Paul had been so active, and so prominent in preaching the gospel, that he had been a leader, or the principal person in extending the sect of the Nazarenes. The political charge was much more serious, because no Roman official wanted to be guilty of permitting illegal activities that would upset the "Pax Romana" (Roman Peace). Rome had given the Jews freedom to practice their religion, but the Roman officials kept their eyes on them lest they use their privileges to weaken the Empire. If Paul indeed was a "ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes," then his enemies could easily build a case against him. At that time, the Christian faith was still identified with the Jews, and they were permitted by the Romans to practice their religion. There had been Gentile seekers and God-fearers in the synagogues, so the presence of Gentiles in the churches did not create legal problems. Later, when the number of Gentile believers increased and more of the congregations separated from the Jewish synagogues, then Rome saw the difference between Jews and Christians and trouble began. Rome did not want a rival religion thriving in the Empire and creating problems. The sect of the Natzratim, a Hebrew word derived from “Natzeret” (Nazareth), the town where Yeshua Jesus the Messiah lived most of his life. The Greek word used here is “Nazœraios”; it is used six times in Acts and five times in the Gospels as descriptive of Yeshua himself, and in these places the Jewish New Testament renders it “from Natzeret.” Today a similarly derived Hebrew word, “Notzrim,” is the ordinary word for “Christians”; after two thousand years it no longer refers to a group considered to be within Judaism. Most English translations use the term “Nazarenes” in this verse. (from Jewish New Testament Commentary Copyright © 1992 by David H. Stern. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) 3rd Accusation: Tried to desecrate the temple Profaning the temple was a capital charge. Tertullus could accuse Paul only of trying to desecrate the temple, because no witnesses could prove that he had actually taken Trophimus inside (Acts 21:29). Tertullus knew that there was some basis for this charge because Paul had preached to the Jews that Jesus Christ was their King and Lord. To the Romans and the unbelieving Jews, this message sounded like treason against Caesar (Acts 16:20-21; 17:5-9). Tertullus' third accusation had to be handled with care because it implicated a Roman officer who had saved a man's life. For the most part, Roman officials like Felix did not want anything to do with cases involving Jewish Law. The fewer Jews who ended up in Roman courts, the better it would be for the Empire. Tertullus had to present this third charge in a way that made the Jews look good without making the Romans look too bad, and he did a good job.
(from The Bible Exposition Commentary. Copyright © 1989 by Chariot Victor Publishing, and imprint of Cook Communication Ministries. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) The Asian Jews thought he had actually done so (Acts 21:28), but by this time even his accusers realized he had not. Attempted profanation of the Temple is a reduced charge. "We arrested him." This is a gross understatement — they wanted to lynch him (Acts 21:30-32&N). Sect = Greek airesis - it gives us the English word “heresy.” It is used in Jewish literature to refer to other groups, including the P’rushim (Pharisee) — it does not necessarily have a negative connotation. Tertullus wants Felix to understand the Natzratim as a Messianic group, and that any group supporting a Messiah is loyal to a different king and subversive of Roman hegemony. (from Jewish New Testament Commentary Copyright © 1992 by David H. Stern. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) From the Amplified Bible
Acts 24:7-9
Tertullus alleged that the Jewish Sanhedrin was handling Paul's case in perfectly legal fashion, when the Roman tribune, Lysias, without justification, intervened and by force took Paul out of their hands. This is, of course, a serious distortion of the facts; but Lysias was not present to give his side of the story. (from The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright © 1962 by Moody Press. All rights reserved.) The text of verses 7-8 a is questionable (see marginal notes in translations); if these verses are original, they refer to a conflict over whether the Sanhedrin or the Roman commander has jurisdiction over the case; from all that we know about Felix, he would certainly side with the commander. (From IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.) Note: Most of the above text is missing from the Greek text of A.D. 400. I find it quite interesting that the account of Lysias intervening is left out of the Greek text but is found in the Syriac text which was spoken by the disciples of Jesus and which has not been changed for 2,000 years, like the Greek text has. Also, note that Chrysostom (below) made direct reference to these verses in A.D. 400. Paul the Learner Tertullus argued that if Claudius had not interfered, the Jews would have tried Paul themselves, and this would have saved Felix and Rome a great deal of trouble and expense. In closing his argument Tertullus hinted that Claudius Lysias should have been there personally and had not just sent the Jewish leaders to present the case. Why was he absent? Could he not defend his case? Was he trying to "pass the buck" to others? As far as we know, during the two years Paul was detained in Caesarea, Claudius never did show up to tell his side of the story. We wonder why. But Paul was there and Felix could get the truth out of him! "If you examine Paul," the clever lawyer said, "you will find that what I am saying is true." The other members of the Jewish delegation united in agreeing with their lawyer, which was no surprise to anybody. (from The Bible Exposition Commentary. Copyright © 1989 by Chariot Victor Publishing, and imprint of Cook Communication Ministries. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) Tertullus pretends that they would have judged Paul righteously if Lysias had not interposed; but the truth was that, without regard to law or justice, they would have murdered him on the spot. Tertullus offered the Jews as his witnesses of the truth of what he had said. It is evident that we have here only the summary or outline of the speech which he made it is incredible that a Roman rhetorician would have on such an occasion delivered an address so brief, so meager, and so destitute of display as this. But it is doubtless a correct summary of his address, and contains the leading points of the accusation. It is customary for the sacred writers, as for other writers, to give only the outline of discourses and arguments. Such a course was inevitable, unless the New Testament had been swelled to wholly undue proportions. The Jews had gone as the accusers of Paul, and they bore testimony, when called upon, to the truth of all that the orator had said. Whether they were examined individually or not is not declared. In whatever way their testimony was arrived at, they confirmed unanimously the accusation which he had brought against Paul. (from Barnes' Notes, Electronic Database Copyright © 1997, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.) Here Tertullus closes his opening and statement of the case; and now he proceeds to call and examine his witnesses; and they were no doubt examined one by one, though Luke sums the whole up in one word-The Jews also assented, saying, that these things were so. Whoever considers the plan of Tertullus' speech, will perceive that it was both judicious and artful. Let us take a view of the whole:
(from Adam Clarke's Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright © 1996, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.) HISTORICAL OUTLOOK FROM 400 A. D. BY ARCHBISHOP JOHN CHRYSOSTOM
From the Amplified Bible
Acts 24:10 & 11
But the governor did not examine Paul. He merely nodded his head as a signal that it was now Paul's turn to speak. Paul did not flatter Felix (see 1 Thessalonians 2:1-6)
Paul's rhetorical skills prove as effective as, or more effective than, those of his paid accuser Tertullus. Here Paul begins a narration, a stating of the case's facts. Paul shows himself skilled in the rhetoric of his day. (from IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.) Many years Felix and Cumanus had been joint governors of Judea; but after Cumanus had been condemned for his bad administration of affairs, the government fell entirely into the hands of Felix. This was about seven years before Paul was arraigned, and might be called many years, as he had been long enough there to become acquainted with the customs and habits of the Jews; and it might also be called long in comparison with the short time which his immediate predecessors had held the office. See Josephus, Antiq., book 20, chapters 7 and 7. A judge This word is evidently used here in the sense of magistrate, or one appointed to administer the affairs of government. To determine litigated matters was, however, one part of his office. It is remarkable that Paul did not begin his speech, as Tertullus had done, by any flattering address, or by any of the arts of rhetoric. He founded his plea on the justice of his cause, and on the fact that Felix had had so much experience in the affairs of Judea that he was well qualified to understand the merits of the case, and to judge impartially. Paul was well acquainted with his character, and would not by flattering words declare what was not strictly true. As far as the temple charge was concerned, Paul was in the temple to worship and not to lead a disturbance. In fact, the temple records would show that Paul was registered to pay the costs for four Jews who had taken a Nazarite vow. Paul had not preached in the temple or the synagogues, nor had he preached anywhere in the city. (Years before, Paul had made an agreement with Peter and the Jerusalem elders that he would not evangelize the Jews in Jerusalem. See Galatians 2:7-10.) Nobody could prove that he was guilty of leading any kind of rebellion against the Jews or the Romans. (from The Bible Exposition Commentary. Copyright © 1989 by Chariot Victor Publishing, and imprint of Cook Communication Ministries. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) No more than 12 days Since he had been in Jerusalem only a week (the twelve days of Acts 24:11, minus the five days of Acts 24:1), there had hardly been time to organize and lead an assault on the temple! While students of Paul's life do not agree on every detail, the order of events was probably something like this:
(from The Bible Exposition Commentary. Copyright © 1989 by Chariot Victor Publishing, and imprint of Cook Communication Ministries. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) To Worship Proskuneo (NT:4352) - to kiss, like a dog licking his master's hand; to fawn or crouch to, i.e. (literally or figuratively) prostrate oneself in homage (do reverence, to adore). The Douay-Rheims Bible translates it: "I went up to adore in Jerusalem." From the Amplified Bible
Acts 24:12-14
This verse is a propositio, the proposition or thesis of Paul's speech; this was a standard part of ancient speeches. (from IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.) The first charge of Tertullus against Paul was that he was "a pestilent fellow." The charge of his being a pest was so general that Paul did not think it necessary to attempt to refute it. They neither found me In the temple disputing with anyone
(from Barnes' Notes, Electronic Database Copyright © 1997, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.) Nor can they prove Although ancient courts preferred arguments from probability over eyewitness accounts, proof was essential. For example, Herod's son Antipater, after much proof of his guilt, offered only oaths in favor of his innocence, so the Syrian legate Varus had him executed. But this I confess Roman lawyers also had defenses for those who confessed their guilt, admitting that the deed was wrong (concessio); they could claim they meant well (purgatio) or simply beseech pardon (deprecatio). But when Paul admits a deed, he does not admit that it is wrong or ask pardon for it. Instead, he creates a masterful defense:
Having disposed of the temple charges, Paul then dealt with the charges of sedition and heresy. Even though the high priest was a Sadducee, there were certainly Pharisees in the official Jewish delegation, so Paul appealed once again to their religious roots in the Scriptures. The fact that Paul was a Christian did not mean that he worshiped a different God from the God of his fathers. It only meant he worshiped the God of his fathers in a new and living way, for the only acceptable way to worship the Father is through Jesus Christ (John 5:23). His faith was still founded on the Old Testament Scriptures, and they bore witness to Jesus Christ. The Sadducees accepted the five Books of Moses (the Law), but not the rest of the Old Testament They rejected the doctrine of the Resurrection because they said it could not be found anywhere in what Moses wrote. (Jesus had refuted that argument but they chose to ignore it. See Matthew 22:23-33.) By declaring his personal faith in the Resurrection, Paul affirmed his orthodox convictions and identified himself with the Pharisees. Once again, the Pharisees were caught on the horns of a dilemma, for if Paul's faith was that of a heretic, then they were heretics too! (from The Bible Exposition Commentary. Copyright © 1989 by Chariot Victor Publishing, and imprint of Cook Communication Ministries. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) Of this reply we may observe:
There are two arguments in this statement.
The God of my fathers My father's God, Yahweh; the God whom my Jewish ancestors adored. There is something very touching in this, and suited to find its way to the heart of a Jew. He had introduced no new object of worship (compare Deut 13:1-5); he had not become a follower of a false or foreign God; and this fact was really a reply to their charge that he was setting up a new sect in religion. The same thing Paul affirms of himself in 2 Tim 1:3: "I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with a pure conscience." (from Barnes' Notes, Electronic Database Copyright © 1997, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.) This is precisely the response a present-day Messianic Jew makes to Jews who consider him apostate. The God we worship is the only God, Elohey-avoteynu, “the God of our fathers” (the phrase is found in the first blessing of the ‘Amidah, the central synagogue prayer). Likewise today's Messianic Jew, with Sha’ul, believes everything that accords with the Torah “as upheld by the Messiah” (1 Corinthians 9:21&N, Galatians 6:2&N) and everything written in the Prophets, including the prophecies pointing to Yeshua as the Messiah. (from Jewish New Testament Commentary Copyright © 1992 by David H. Stern. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) From the Amplified Bible
Acts 24:15 & 16
Paul and the early Christians did not see themselves as "former Jews" but as "fulfilled Jews." The Old Testament was a new book to them because they had found their Messiah. They knew that they no longer needed the rituals of the Jewish Law in order to please God, but they saw in these ceremonies and ordinances a revelation of the Savior. Both as a Pharisee and a Christian, Paul had "taken pains" always to have a good conscience and to seek to please the Lord. Having replied to the false charges of Tertullus, Paul then proceeded to answer the false accusation of the Asian Jews that he had profaned the temple (Acts 24:17-19). He had not come to Jerusalem to defile the temple but to bring needed help to the Jewish people and to present his own offerings to the Lord. (This is the only mention in Acts of the special offering.) When the Asians saw him in the temple, he was with four men who were fulfilling their Nazarite vows. (from The Bible Exposition Commentary. Copyright © 1989 by Chariot Victor Publishing, and imprint of Cook Communication Ministries. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) I have hope in God...resurrection Pharisaism and the rest of Judaism that believed in the resurrection of the righteous were divided on the resurrection of the wicked.
(from IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.)
Perhaps he designated in this remark the Pharisees who were present. He held nothing in this great cardinal point which they did not also hold. For the reasons why he introduced this point so prominently, and the success of thus introducing it, see the notes on Acts 23:6-10. Strive to have a good conscience Paul often appeals to his conscientiousness as the leading habit of his life. Even before his conversion he endeavored to act according to the dictates of conscience. See Acts 26:9; compare Phil 3:5-6. He means that he endeavored to keep his conscience so enlightened and pure in regard to duty, and that he acted according to its dictates in such a way that his conduct should not be displeasing to God or injurious to man. To have such a conscience implies two things:
The great and noble aim of Paul was to be pure; and no slander of his enemies, any trials, persecutions, perils, or pains of dying could take away the approving voice of conscience. Alike in his travels and in his persecutions; among friends and foes; when preaching in the synagogue, the city, or the desert; or when defending himself before governors and kings, he had this testimony of a self-approving mind. Happy they who thus frame their lives. And happy will be the end of a life where this has been the grand object of the journey through this world. (from Barnes' Notes, Electronic Database Copyright © 1997, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.) From the Amplified Bible
Acts 24:17-19
Many years Paul had been away from Jerusalem for approximately 6 or 7 years. Alms and offerings To bring alms
Almsgiving was highly regarded in Judaism but would not impress Felix, although he would regard it as harmless. More impressive is its value as clear proof of Paul's solidarity with his people and their ancestral customs. Again on a probability argument (v. 16), this point would make the charge of violating the temple absurd. Paul had appeared publicly but had not spoken publicly before the riot, and the lack of eyewitnesses in such a public place refutes his opponents' argument, especially when the chief witnesses had conveniently returned to Asia after the feast. (from IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.) The gift was not only for Messianic Jews but for unbelieving Jews as well, since they too are included in “my nation” (see Romans 15:25-31&NN and Galatians 2:10&N, where believing Jews and Gentiles are enjoined to show kindness and charity toward Jews specifically.) That Sha’ul considered the Messianic Jewish community in Jerusalem part of the Jewish nation is not even an issue, nor should there be any question today that Messianic Jews are part of the Jewish people. (In spite of this the State of Israel's High Court of Justice in 1989 made Messianic Jews Israel's refuseniks — the only Jews in the world not to be considered Jews for purposes of Israel's Law of Return, which allows any Jew anywhere to immigrate to Israel and be a citizen.) (from Jewish New Testament Commentary Copyright © 1992 by David H. Stern. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) They ought to have been here Now Paul reached the heart of his defense, for it was required by Roman law that the accusers face the accused at the trial, or else the charges would be dropped. Ananias had wisely not brought any of the Hellenistic Jews with him, for he was sure that their witness would fall down under official examination. These men were good at inciting riots; they were not good at producing facts. Paul closed his defense by replying to the members of the Jewish council (Acts 24:20-21). Instead of giving him a fair hearing, the high priest and the Sanhedrin had abused him and refused to hear him out Ananias was no doubt grateful that Paul said nothing about his slap in the face, for it was not legal for a Roman citizen to be treated that way. (from The Bible Exposition Commentary. Copyright © 1989 by Chariot Victor Publishing, and imprint of Cook Communication Ministries. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) They were the proper witnesses, and as they had staid away it showed that they were not prepared to undergo a strict examination. They alone could testify as to anything that occurred in the temple; and as they were not present, that charge ought to be dismissed. (from Barnes' Notes, Electronic Database Copyright © 1997, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.) From the Amplified Bible
Acts 24:20 & 21
Do we detect a bit of holy sarcasm in Paul's closing statement? We might paraphrase it "If I have done anything evil, it is probably this: I reminded the Jewish council of our great Jewish doctrine of the Resurrection." Remember, the Book of Acts is a record of the early church's witness to the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 1:22). The Sadducees had long abandoned the doctrine, and the Pharisees did not give it the practical importance it deserved. Of course, Paul would have related this doctrine to the resurrection of Jesus Christ and the Sanhedrin did not want that. They had accused Paul of being anti-Jewish and anti-Roman, but they could not prove their charges. If the Jewish leaders had further pursued any of these charges, their case would have collapsed. But there was enough circumstantial evidence to plant doubts in the minds of the Roman officials, and perhaps there was enough race prejudice in them to water that seed and encourage it to grow. After all, had not the Emperor Claudius removed the Jews from Rome? (Acts 18:2) Perhaps Paul would bear watching. (from The Bible Exposition Commentary. Copyright © 1989 by Chariot Victor Publishing, and imprint of Cook Communication Ministries. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) Roman magistrates would view this as a matter of internal Jewish religious disputes, nothing on which to judge a case of Roman law. (from IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.) This was what Paul had said before the council-the main thing on which he had insisted, and he calls on them to testify to this, and to show, if they could, that in this declaration he had been wrong. Chubb and other infidels have supposed that Paul here acknowledges that he was wrong in the declaration which he made when he said that he was called in question for the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead (Acts 23:6), and that his conscience reproached him for appearing to be time-serving, for concealing the true cause of offence against him, and for attempting to take advantage of their divisions of sentiment, thus endeavoring to produce discord in the council. But against this supposition we may urge the following considerations:
It would be as if Ferdinand Magellan's crew were to stand trial for claiming to have circumnavigated the globe before judges who differed on whether the earth is round or flat. The principle can be applied today. For example, if a group of people, Jewish or not, is divided over whether or not the Bible is God's inspired word to humanity, with most “right-wing” people, e.g., Orthodox Jews and Evangelical Christians, saying it is, and most “left-wing” people, e.g., Reform Jews, Liberal Christians and secularists, saying it is not or hedging, it would be confounding issues for a Messianic Jew to try to defend his faith before them all together; since they would already, for their own reasons, be in disagreement over a point that Messianic Judaism takes as given. (from Jewish New Testament Commentary Copyright © 1992 by David H. Stern. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) Note: I believe that every one who is born of Abraham through Jacob in the Jewish race, is a Jew, whether he or she accepts the Messiah of God, Jesus Christ or not. But I do not believe that the unbelieving Jews or the unbelieving Gentile will make heaven there home because of race or anything else apart from the blood of the Messiah, Jesus Christ. Paul the Learner Having made confession of his faith, he gives a plain and faithful account of his case, and of the wrong done him by his persecutors. Twice he had been rescued by the chief captain out of the hands of the Jews, when they were ready to pull him to pieces, and he challenges them to prove him guilty of any crime either time.
Paul claimed that no proof had been brought of any wrongdoing on his part and that the only real charge brought against him was a doctrinal one concerning the resurrection of the dead. This was a matter in which a Roman court would have no interest or jurisdiction. (from The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright © 1962 by Moody Press. All rights reserved.) HISTORICAL OUTLOOK FROM 400 A. D. BY ARCHBISHOP JOHN CHRYSOSTOM Homily 50 - Acts 24:10-21
Note: The statements of John Chrysostom are his own, there may be other thoughts on a passage of Scripture found in the early church fathers, that I have not found or even looked at. The reason why I am using his thoughts is because I find them quite refreshing and useful. Paul the Learner From the Amplified Bible
Acts 24:22 & 23
Accurate knowledge of The Way How Felix knew about Christianity can only be surmised. Probably he heard about it from Drusilla, his wife, who was a daughter of Herod Agrippa I and a sister of Herod Agrippa II. Because she was a Jewess (v. 24) she would know about the Way. Besides this, Felix could scarcely have ruled in Judea for several years without learning something about the faith of the early church. (from Bible Knowledge Commentary/Old Testament Copyright © 1983, 2000 Cook Communications Ministries; Bible Knowledge Commentary/New Testament Copyright © 1983, 2000 Cook Communications Ministries. All rights reserved.) "Knowing" (second perfect active participle of oida) "more accurately" (comparative of adverb akriboos). More accurately than what? Than the Sanhedrin supposed he had "concerning the Way," the things concerning the Way, common in Acts for Christianity). How Felix had gained this knowledge of Christianity is not stated.
(from Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament, Electronic Database. Copyright © 1997, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament. Copyright © 1985 by Broadman Press.) When Lysias comes The probability is, that while unable to condemn - being convinced of the futility of the charges against him - yet unwilling to enrage the Jews by an acquittal, he made his desire to confer with Lysias a pretext for delaying judgment. (from Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright © 1997, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.) Lysias, the commander, is the independent witness, who would not be expected to have bias for either side. Neither Paul nor his accusers mention Jesus, and Paul's words are acceptable Pharisaism; but Felix recognizes the religious issue involved. It would have been difficult for Felix not to have known of the massive Judean Jesus movement (Acts 21:20), but he and the Romans by this period were treating it as politically innocuous; the difference between Christians and the brigands who were assassinating people was finally clear. (from IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.) There is no evidence that he ever did. Felix is simply putting off a decision in Sha’ul's favor that would alienate the leaders of the people he is ruling. See verse 26 for a clearer picture of Felix's motives. (from Jewish New Testament Commentary Copyright © 1992 by David H. Stern. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) Let him have liberty Felix already had a rather accurate knowledge (RSV) of this new sect in Judaism called the Way. Perhaps he had obtained this knowledge from his wife Drusilla (see v. 24). However, the statements of Tertullus and Paul embodied conflicting testimony, and therefore he adjourned the hearing until Lysias, the Roman tribune, should come to Caesarea, at which time he promised to decide the case (RSV). Paul was placed in a custody that allowed him considerable liberty and permitted his friends to minister to his needs. Luke does not inform us whether Lysias came to Caesarea and whether the promised hearing was conducted. (from The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright © 1962 by Moody Press. All rights reserved.) Paul is probably still kept in the procurator's own palace (Acts 23:35), making it easy for Felix to visit him — and also for Paul's friends to provide him money, some of which might later be used to Felix's advantage (verse 26). Corrupt officials might keep someone imprisoned for their own ends; a later but partly analogous story is told of the Roman emperor Domitian acquitting a philosopher for his wisdom — then retaining him in detention so he could question him in private. (from IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.) It is evident from this verse that Felix was disposed to show Paul all the favors that were consistent with his safe keeping. He esteemed him to be a persecuted man, and doubtless regarded the charges against him as entirely malicious. What was Felix's motive in this cannot be certainly known. It is not improbable; however, that he detained him:
If ever a man failed both personally and officially, that man was Felix, procurator of Judea. He certainly could not plead ignorance of the facts, because he was "well acquainted with the Way" (NIV). His wife, Drusilla, was a Jewess and perhaps kept him informed of the activities among her people, and as a Roman official, he would carefully (if privately) investigate these things. He saw the light, but he preferred to live in the darkness. Felix saw to it that Paul was comfortably cared for while at the same time safely guarded. "Liberty" in Acts 24:23 means that he was not put in the common jail or kept in close confinement He had limited freedom in the palace, chained to a soldier. (The guards were changed every six hours, a perfect captive congregation!) Paul's friends were permitted to minister to him (Greek: "wait on him as personal servants"), so people could come and go to meet his needs. What Paul's ministry was during those two years in Caesarea, we do not know, but we can be sure he gave a faithful witness for the Lord. (from The Bible Exposition Commentary. Copyright © 1989 by Chariot Victor Publishing, and imprint of Cook Communication Ministries. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) From the Amplified Bible
Acts 24:24 & 25
Drusilla Drusilla was Herod Agrippa I's youngest daughter and Agrippa II's sister. She married the king of a small region in Syria, but at the age of sixteen divorced him at Felix's instigation to marry him instead. Although it violated normal Roman policy for a governor to marry a woman from his province, Felix had much power as long as his brother Pallas remained in favor in Rome. Drusilla is about twenty years old here, and her Jewish faith may help influence her husband to listen to Paul. Drusilla was the daughter of Herod Agrippa the elder.
(from Barnes' Notes, Electronic Database Copyright © 1997, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.) He reasoned Dialegoménou (NT:1256) - to say thoroughly, i.e. discuss (in argument or exhortation)
The record of one such witness is given by Luke, and it makes Felix's guilt even greater. Not only was Felix's mind informed, but his heart was moved by fear, and yet he would not obey the truth. It is not enough for a person to know the facts about Christ, or to have an emotional response to a message, He or she must willingly repent of sin and trust the Savior. "But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life" (John 5:40, NKJV). It must have been the curiosity of his wife, Drusilla, that prompted Felix to give Paul another hearing. She wanted to hear Paul; for, after all, her family had been involved with "the Way" on several occasions. Her great-grandfather tried to kill Jesus in Bethlehem (Matthew 2); her great-uncle killed John the Baptist and mocked Jesus (Luke 23:6-12); and Acts 12:1-2 tells of her father killing the Apostle James. Dr. Luke has given us only the three points of Paul's sermon to this infamous couple: righteousness, self-control; and the judgment to come. But what an outline! Paul gave them three compelling reasons why they should repent and believe on Jesus Christ.
Felix was afraid Literally "Felix became terrified." Roman leaders prided themselves in their ability to be stoical and restrain their emotions under all circumstances, but a conviction from God gripped Felix's heart, and he could not hide it. Paul had diagnosed the case and offered the remedy. It was up to Felix to receive it. What did Felix do? He procrastinated! "When I have a convenient time, I will call for you," he told the apostle. "Procrastination is the thief of time," wrote Edward Young. Perhaps he was thinking about the English proverb, "One of these days is none of these days." Procrastination is also the thief of souls. The most "convenient season" for a lost sinner to be saved is right now. "Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation" (2 Corinthians 6:2). Consider Felix's foolish attitudes.
Although wealthy households often kept philosophers around for their interesting insights, God's prophets were not quite as pleasant as most philosophers (Jeremiah 38:14-23). Self-control was one of the favored topics of many moralists, but the future judgment was strictly Jewish teaching and probably not the side of Jewish teaching the procurator was accustomed to hearing. (Although there were Egyptian Jewish judgment oracles, most upper-class Jews under Greek influence would think like Sadducees or like a handful of aristocratic Pharisees such as Josephus [who could accommodate Platonic views of the afterlife] or like Philo, whose views accommodated Hellenism to the furthest possible extent.) (from IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.) Sha’ul delivered a complete salvation message suited to the condition of his hearer:
(from Jewish New Testament Commentary Copyright © 1992 by David H. Stern. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) From the Amplified Bible
Acts 24:26 & 27
Hoped money would be given him This shows the character of Felix. He was desirous of procuring a bribe. Paul had proven his innocence, and should have been at once discharged. But Felix was influenced by avarice, and he therefore detained Paul in custody with the hope that, wearied with confinement, he would seek his release by a bribe. But Paul offered no bribe. He knew what justice was, and he would not be guilty, therefore, of attempting to purchase what was his due, or of gratifying a man who prostituted his high office for the purposes of gain. The Roman governors in the provinces were commonly rapacious and avaricious, like Felix. They usually took the office for its pecuniary advantage, and they consequently usually disregarded justice, and made the procuring of money their leading object. (from IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.) It may seem remarkable that he did not fear that he would again become alarmed. But the hope of money overcame all this. Having once resisted the reasoning of Paul, and the strivings of the Spirit of God, he seems to have had no further alarm or anxiety. He could again hear the same man, and the same truth, unaffected. When sinners have once grieved God's Spirit, they often sit with unconcern under the same truth which once alarmed them, and become entirely hardened and unconcerned. (from The Bible Exposition Commentary. Copyright © 1989 by Chariot Victor Publishing, and imprint of Cook Communication Ministries. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) Sent for him more often Instead of listening to Paul, Felix tried to is use Paul as a political pawn, either to get money from the church or to gain favor with the Jews. The fact that Felix had further discussions with Paul is no indication that his heart was interested in spiritual things. Paul's friends were coming and going, and perhaps some of them had access to the large offering sent by the Gentile churches. Certainly Paul gave further witness to the governor, but to no avail. When Felix was replaced, he left Paul a prisoner, but it was Felix who was really the prisoner. The governor's mind was enlightened (Acts 24:22), his emotions were stirred (Acts 24:25), but his will would not yield. He tried to gain the world, but as far as we know, he lost his soul. He procrastinated himself into hell. Dr. Clarence Macartney told a story about a meeting in hell. Satan called his four leading demons together and commanded them to think up a new thing that would trap more souls.
(from The Bible Exposition Commentary. Copyright © 1989 by Chariot Victor Publishing, and imprint of Cook Communication Ministries. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) Two years At the end of two years, the governor was recalled to Rome by the emperor Nero under accusation by the Jews of bad administration. Though Felix knew that justice required Paul's dismissal, he left him in prison because he saw that he could thereby ingratiate himself with the Jews. While this two-year incarceration must have been very trying to Paul, one redeeming feature was that throughout this entire time Luke was in Palestine with the apostle. Quite certainly Luke used this time to gather information about the life and ministry of Jesus and to compile notes about the life of the early church. This material later appeared in the Gospel of Luke and in the Acts. (from The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright © 1962 by Moody Press. All rights reserved.) When Felix was being replaced by Porcius Festus (probably summer of A.D. 59 A.D.), Jewish leaders from Caesarea finally went to Rome and accused him (Roman law had permitted provincials to accuse their governors since 149 B.C.). Fortunately for his sake, his powerful brother Pallas, although no longer in power in Nero's court, may have retained sufficient influence to protect him from Jewish retribution. "Wishing to do the Jews a favor" here may mean that he needs all the Jewish mercy he can get. (from IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener Copyright © 1993 by Craig S. Keener. Published by InterVarsity Press. All rights reserved.) Porcius Festus The successor of Felix as procurator of Judea, He assumed this office at Nero's appointment in A.D. 60. He held it until his death in A.D. 62. (from Holman Bible Dictionary. Copyright © 1991 by Holman Bible Publishers. All rights reserved.) The only sources of information concerning Festus are the NT and Josephus. Josephus' writings picture Festus as a prudent and honorable governor. Felix's maladministration bequeathed to Festus the impossible task of restoring order to a province embroiled in political strife and overrun by robbers. The Sicarii (assassin zealots), as the robbers were called on account of the small swords they carried, would come upon a village, plunder it, set it on fire, and murder whom-ever they wished. Through the use of an impostor, Festus succeeded in ridding the province of many of these criminals (Ant. xx.8 .10 [185-88]). But his procuratorship was too short to undo the legacy of his predecessor, and under his successor, Albinus, the situation rapidly deteriorated once again (BJ ii.14 .1 [271-76]). (from International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, revised edition, Copyright © 1979 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. All rights reserved.) Festus sided with Agrippa against the Jews as to the high wall they built to prevent Agrippa seeing from his dining room in the palace into the temple court, for it hindered the Roman guard also from seeing the temple from the castle of Antonia during the great feasts. The Roman emperor under the influence of Poppaea, a proselyte, decided on appeal in favor of the Jews. Festus after a procuratorship of less than two years died in the summer of A.D. 62. (from Fausset's Bible Dictionary, Electronic Database Copyright © 1998, 2003, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.) The Porcia family had attained senatorial rank in Rome centuries earlier. (from Jewish New Testament Commentary Copyright © 1992 by David H. Stern. All rights reserved. Used by permission.) Left Paul bound Left him in custody to the charge of his successor. His object in this was to conciliate the Jews; that is, to secure their favor, and to prevent them, if possible, from accusing him for the evils of his administration before the emperor. The account which Luke gives here coincides remarkably with what Josephus has given. He says that Porcius Festus was sent as successor to Felix by Nero. He does not, indeed, mention Paul, or say that Felix sought to conciliate the favor of the Jews, but he gives such an account as to make the statement by Luke perfectly consistent with his character while in office. He informs us that Felix was unpopular, and that there was reason to apprehend that the Jews would accuse him before the emperor; and, therefore, the statement in the Acts that he would be willing to show the Jews a favor, is in perfect keeping with his character and circumstances, and is one of those undesigned coincidences which show that the author of the Acts was fully acquainted with the circumstances of the time and that his history is true. The account in Josephus is, that "when Porcius Festus was sent as successor to Felix by Nero, the principal inhabitants of Caesarea went up to Rome to accuse Felix; and he had been certainly brought to punishment unless Nero had yielded to the importunate solicitations of his brother Palias, who was at that time had in the greatest honor by him" (Antiq., book 20, chapter 8, section 9). The plan of Felix, therefore, in suppressing the enmity of the Jews, and conciliating their favor by injustice to Paul, did not succeed, and is one of those instances, so numerous in the world, where a man gains nothing by wickedness.
(from Barnes' Notes, Electronic Database Copyright © 1997, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.) HISTORICAL OUTLOOK FROM 400 A. D. BY ARCHBISHOP JOHN CHRYSOSTOM Homily 51 - Acts 24:22-27
‘But the lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bar my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel.’ Acts 9:15 (KJV) From the Amplified Bible
(End of Chapter Twenty Four)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Home |
First Covenant |
Second Covenant |
Topical Studies |
Table of Contents |
Top | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
