The Book of Acts
Paul's Trial Before Felix, Part 2
Acts 24:10–16
Tonight we'll be in Acts 24:10-16, and what we have here, you will remember, starts out as the trial of Paul before Felix. But it actually winds up as the trial of Felix before Paul, and more correctly stated, before God.
He is the classic case of putting off making a commitment to Christ. Now, Felix was a powerful man. He served as the governor of Judea from AD 52 to 59, But spiritually speaking, Felix was a fool. And in the providence of God, he crosses paths with Paul. And it would seem that he is the man in charge. He holds the law in his hand. He calls the shots.
But as we'll see next time, when Paul shared the faith with Felix, it frightened him and he put off making a decision about Christ. Instead, he told Paul, he would call him when it was convenient, and as far as we know, it never was.
Paul should have been the one frightened. After all, his life is in jeopardy. But instead, he has a perfect peace. Felix, the one who was in control, or so he thought, when confronted with righteousness, self-control and judgment to come, it scared him to death.
And in this passage, we find these two men coming face to face.
As I said last week, there are three ways to look at what happens. You can look at it from the viewpoint of Paul, you can look at it from the viewpoint of God, and you can look at it from the viewpoint of Felix. We've been seeing it from Paul’s viewpoint, and tonight we'll continue with that perspective.
As the scene opens in 24, the trial takes place. It’s got three parts, like any trial: the prosecution, the defense, and the judgment. Last week, we heard the prosecution.
Ananias, some of the Jewish elders and a hired lawyer named Tertullus have presented their case against Paul. He blows smoke at Felix and brags on all his accomplishments to butter him up, then asks him to find Paul to be guilty of sedition among the Jews, a threat to the security of the area and guilty of treason against Rome. And to validate their accusations, they call some witnesses. So that's
the prosecution.
Incidentally, it’s all lies, every bit of it. But that’s to be expected – I told you last week – isn’t it; that if you live a godly life in the face of an ungodly world, you’re going to suffer. That’s part of it. All that live godly in the present age are going to suffer persecution.
Tonight I we will hear
2. The Defense
verse 10
I notice immediately that Paul had no representation other than himself. He didn't hire a lawyer. he didn't bring any witnesses. He knows he's innocent, and he is trusting the Lord. And apparently, since what he said wound up in Scripture, it must have been inspired and directed by the Holy Spirit.
He says, “Felix, I know you’ve been around long enough to judge fairly in the case, so I’m anxious to answer, and I cheerfully answer for myself.”
Now, people have accused Paul of flattery. They say, “Paul is sort of buttering him up.” But I don't think so. He just acknowledges the fact that Felix has held his position for a long time, and he expects to get a fair hearing.
And that was true, and it should be what anyone expects when they stand before a judge. Not only had Felix been there a long time, that meant he was familiar with Jewish affairs. So Paul is in effect saying, “Felix, I know that you have been around long enough to know this is a theological problem, and to know the real hassle that is behind this, and I am glad to give my defense because I know that you know that.” There is no flattery here.
If not flattery, it might be psychology. He is putting Felix on the spot. He may be pressured by the case, but now he is pressured to make a fair decision because Paul just said he'd been around long enough to have experience in this kind of stuff.
Paul then presents his defense. He starts with the charge of sedition
verses 11-13
So they said he was a political criminal. Paul answers with a very logical argument. He says, "Felix, do the math. It's only been twelve days since I arrived in Jerusalem and five of those were spent in Caesarea. So the maximum possible time that he had spent in Jerusalem was about a week.
In essence he says, “I haven’t had time to start a riot. I haven’t had time to get a revolution off the ground. There is no way.” And that’s right.
In fact, if you go back to chapter 21, you can find out what he spent those seven days doing. Chapter 21 and 23 – he arrived in Jerusalem. James and the other believers who were there – the Christians – were very concerned about Paul because they had heard word that Paul had become anti-Semitic; Paul was anti-Jewish, that his Christianity had gone amok and he was against all the customs and traditions of the Jews. Paul said, “That’s not so.”
And so the elders of the church in Jerusalem said, “Well, you’d better prove that, and there are four guys who are going to take a Nazarite vow.” A Nazarite vow was simply an outward form expressing consecration in the heart. It happened to be a Jewish form. It isn’t evil; it’s just there. It’s just a custom.
So Paul said, “Fine. I’ll go along and I’ll do the same thing they’re doing in form, and then everyone will see that I’m not against these customs.” So that’s what happens in verses 23-27. Verse 26 says, “Then Paul took the men, and the next day, purifying himself with them, entered the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification.” So they went into the temple for this period of purification.
Verse 27, “And when the seven days were almost end,” – imagine; most of those seven days that he was there were in the temple. So he spent seven days in there carrying out a vow, five days in Caesarea, and they’re accusing him of starting a riot. He says, “Felix, you must understand that I went to Jerusalem to worship, and it’s only been 12 days, and there hasn’t been any time for any kind of rebellion.” That’s a fairly good argument, wouldn’t you say?
And by the way, he adds, at the end of verse 11, “...I went up to Jerusalem to worship,” not to desecrate, not to start a riot, not to start a revolution, not to profane the temple; just to worship.” And he was carrying out the worship act of the Nazarite vow, which signified consecration to the Jew. So, that’s what he was doing the whole time; he hadn’t done anything wrong.
verse 12
In so many words, he enters his pleas of "not guilty".
By the way, we'll hear him say the same thing in chapter 25 when he appears before Festus and again in chapter 28 where he gives another defense of himself in Rome.
By the way, notice, in particular, what he denies:
verse 12: "disputing in the temple"
This is the word for reasoning or arguing. It's interesting that almost every place he went, he disputed, except in Jerusalem.
So why didn’t he do it there? I think it is because he was sensitive to the situation. His colleagues had helped him to understand they were sitting on a powder keg.
Also, he denies stirring people up in the city or the temple.
That’s something else he had done in every other city he had been in. Everywhere he went, he reasoned out of the Scriptures or gathered up a crowd and preached the gospel, But that 's not what happened in Jerusalem.
When he got to Jerusalem, it was in an attempt to salve the situation and calm things down. And I think there is an indication of why he knew he needed to do that back in
Acts 22
17-21
Remember, the Lord Jesus told Paul that Jerusalem was not going to receive his testimony, that he was not responsible for the ministry there. I think his goal in coming to Jerusalem was to fellowship
fellowship with the Christians.
And he does everything he can to calm things down and help and that's all. There is no indication that he was even trying to evangelize while he was there.
So he denies there charges of trying to incited the crowds.
verse 13
Now if you don’t have any proof, you don’t have any case. They can’t prove anything. So he denies the charges and makes clear the fact that they can’t prove them. That takes care of sedition. He has done nothing treasonous.
The second thing they accused him of was
- heresy
This one is a little more tricky because he can't deny his Christianity, but he needs to deny their charge. So what he says is, “I am not a heretic, but I am a Christian.”
verse 14
Now understand, if he denies he is a heretic, then that means his accusers are. And that's what he says: “I am real one that worships rightly. They are the ones in error." And you can imagine how that went over.
Notice, verse 14, he refers to "the Way". The unsaved people of the day used to slur the Christians by calling them "Nazarites” or “Christians” which was a reference to “little Christs”. But the Christians called themselves “The Way”.
In fact, you see examples of both of those references here in the trial of Paul. In verse 7, Tertullus accuses Paul of being the ringleader of "the Nazarites. I think that is probably why Paul intentionally uses this reference to being a part of "the Way", which is accused of being a sect or cult.
Obviously, "the Way' is a reference back to what Jesus said in John 14 when He called Himself that.
We say, “Where did they get that name?” Peter preached, “There is no other name under Heaven given among men whereby we must be saved.” Peter even uses it in II Peter 2:2. He says that “False teachers, by their pernicious ways, cause the way of truth to be evil spoken of.”
It's interesting, isn't it, that it wasn't popular to say that Jesus was the Way then, and it's still not today!
But Paul says, “I confess to you that I worship the God of my fathers, which were Jewish, by the way, as Jesus did." He accepted everything written in the Law and Prophets and so do I."
verse 15
You can just picture the High Priest standing over there, rolling his eyes and saying, “Here we go again with the resurrection!” because the Sadducees didn’t believe in the resurrection. that's what started the fight in the Sanhedrin to begin with.
So there is Paul's confession. “I go on record to say that it is true that I am a believer in the Way and consequently, I truly worship my God; I believe all of His revelation, including the part about resurrection.”
Now remember, he is being accused of heresy. SO who are real heretics? Paul, the one who accepts the entire Scriptural record or the high priests who have ceased worshiping God and believing all the Law and the Prophets?
After all, if you believed all the law and the prophets, you have to believe in Christ because He is the centerpiece of the Law and the prophets!
And if you don't believe and accept what Scripture says, you're a heretic! Once again, it is a very strong argument.
Paul is actually the only real Jew in the room! A real Jew would be following the Messiah. That's what he's saying. He's the only guy there that that believes in the truth, the resurrection of the dead, the just and the unjust as Jesus taught it.”
And that's why he can make the statement he does in
verse 16
As a true Jew, as one who believes in God, in His word, and in the hope of the resurrection, that causes me to want to live a pure life. I don’t want to offend God; I don’t want to offend man.”
That ought to be the ultimate goal of us all, to be able to stand up and say, “My desire in life is never to offend God and never to offend man, and to never have my conscience accuse me, so I live my life in accord with the standards of my God, what His Word reveals."
And the only way to do that is to live by what you believe. It's fine to say, "I believe", but what we really believe is what we do. Everything else is just talk.
Look through the list of accusations in verses 14 and 15, and you will find the lifestyle of Paul. He believed in those great truths and he built his life on them.
Out of American history comes the story of a man named Charles Blondin who was a tight-rope walker. He gained quite a reputation as a tightrope walker, especially by crossing Niagra Falls.
The rope he walked was 1,100 feet long, 3.25 inches in diameter and 160 feet above the water. He first crossed the Falls on June 30, 1859. Then he started adding theatrics to the performance.
He did it blindfolded; in a sack, pushing a wheelbarrow; on stilts; sitting down midway while he cooked and ate an omelet and standing on a chair with only one of its legs balanced on the rope.
On one occasion, he got ready to cross and an acquaintance standing by, “Do you believe I can go across there?”
And the man said, “Yes.” He said, “Will you climb on my back and go with me?” And he declined.
Then he asked his manager, Harry Colcord, “Do you believe I can walk across?”, and he said, “Yes.” He said, “Would you climb on my back and go with me?” He said, “Yes.” He did, and they went across together.
So which man believed him? Obviously, it was the second man. You don’t believe what you don’t live by, I don’t care what the principle is. If you really believe it, it’s a part of your life, not just a part of what you say.
Paul said, “I believe all that is written in the Law and the Prophets, and I live a life consistent with what I believe, and I've got a clear conscience.”
Can you do that? Can you stand before the world blameless, void of offense? That’s the epitome of testimony. And so Paul defends himself and sets the stage for the verdict, which we’ll see next time.
Let’s bow in prayer.
