Posts
Paul Appears Before Felix
The accusers arrived—Ananias the high priest; Tertullus, the lawyer and several of the Jewish elders of the Sanhedrin came down to Caesarea to give their false accusations against Paul. Their murder plot had failed, but they persisted in trying to kill him. Tertullus who was hired by the Sanhedrin would present the case before Felix. Tertullus spent almost as much time on his introduction as he did on the specific charges against Paul. His description of Felix was obviously to flatter Felix. The accusations were three fold: (1) Paul was a worldwide trouble maker starting riots where ever he went, (2) He was a leader of the Nazarene sect, and (3) He attempted to desecrate the temple. The religious leaders were hoping that these accusations would persuade Felix to execute Paul in order to keep peace in Jerusalem.
The first charge had a political overtone because Rome desired to maintain order throughout the empire. The second charge was also concerned with the government because Tertullus made it appear that Christianity was divorced from the Jewish religion. Rome permitted Judaism as a legal religion, but would not tolerate any new religions. By describing Christianity as a “sect” of the Nazarenes, the lawyer made Paul’s faith appear to be cultic and bizarre. Desecrating the temple also had political overtones because the Romans had given permission to the Jews to execute any Gentile who went inside the inner court of the temple. Paul earlier had been accused of bringing a Gentile into the inner court (21:28), here he is said to have attempted to desecrated the temple. After the Jews had agreed to the truth of their prosecuting attorney’s charges, Paul was given an opportunity to respond.
Paul’s introduction was much shorter and truthful. He implied Felix knew the situation in Judea well enough to make an accurate decision. Paul gave several points in his own defense. First, he had not been in Jerusalem long enough to instigate a riot. In fact one of his purposes for being in Jerusalem was to worship, to observe the feast of Pentecost (20:16). Next he denied the charge that he incited the Jews to rebel. At no time, either in the temple....the synagogues or in the city, had he disputed with the people or attempted to stir them up. These were facts, and no one could disprove them. Third, he worshiped the God of Israel in full conformity with the law and the Prophets. Furthermore his faith was not in some sect but in Christianity, which was known as the way (Acts 9:2; 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:22). His hope in the resurrection was the same as that of his accusers. Further, Paul always sought to keep his conscience clear.
Far from stirring the Jews up to insurrection, Paul had come to Jerusalem to bring alms (money) to the Jewish people. He was referring to the collection from the churches of Macedonia and Achaia, ear-marked for the needy in Jerusalem. Finally, Paul said his genuine accusers were not present, the Jews from the province of Asia who made the original false charges and incited the riot in the temple. Since the Sanhedrin had not found him guilty (23:1-9) Tertullus’ speech did not really contain any legitimate charges. When Felix heard the case he was faced with a serious dilemma. He knew enough about the Christian faith to realize who was right. Paul was obviously innocent of any crimes against Roman law. Yet if he were to acquit Paul, he would incur the wrath of the Jewish people. From a political standpoint, it was important to curry their favor. So he adopted the expedient of continuing the case. He said he would wait until Lysias the commander could come to Caesarea. This was just a delay tactic. There is no record that the commander ever did come to Caesarea. In concluding the case, Felix commanded that although Paul should remain in custody, he should be permitted limited liberty and that his friends be allowed to visit and supply him with food and clothing. With such liberty Paul could not be deemed a violent criminal. Some days after the public trial Felix and his wife Drusilla arranged a private meeting with Paul in order that they might hear more concerning the Christian faith. Without fear, Paul reasoned with Felix and his adulterous wife about righteousness, self-control, and the judgment to come. Felix seemed to be more moved than his wife. Although he was afraid, he did not trust the Savior. He deferred making a decision for Christ with the words “go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee”.
Sadly enough this convenient season never came, as far as the bible record is concerned. Yet this was not Paul’s last visit before Felix. The governor called him repeatedly during the next two years while a prisoner in Caesarea. Felix was hoping that Paul or his friends would pay him a nice bribe in order to have Paul released. After two years, in A.D. 60 Porcius Festus replaced Felix. Felix wanting to do the Jews a favor left Paul in Caesarea in chains.
Questions/Answers?
Who was Drusilla, the wife of Felix
She was the youngest daughter of Herod Agrippa I by his wife Cypros. According to the Jewish historian, Josephus, she was Jewess who married Auxesis, king of Emesa, who then converted to Judaism. Because of her great beauty, Felix desired her for his wife. She left Azizus and married the Gentile Felix in defiance of Jewish law.
The accusers arrived—Ananias the high priest; Tertullus, the lawyer and several of the Jewish elders of the Sanhedrin came down to Caesarea to give their false accusations against Paul. Their murder plot had failed, but they persisted in trying to kill him. Tertullus who was hired by the Sanhedrin would present the case before Felix. Tertullus spent almost as much time on his introduction as he did on the specific charges against Paul. His description of Felix was obviously to flatter Felix. The accusations were three fold: (1) Paul was a worldwide trouble maker starting riots where ever he went, (2) He was a leader of the Nazarene sect, and (3) He attempted to desecrate the temple. The religious leaders were hoping that these accusations would persuade Felix to execute Paul in order to keep peace in Jerusalem.
The first charge had a political overtone because Rome desired to maintain order throughout the empire. The second charge was also concerned with the government because Tertullus made it appear that Christianity was divorced from the Jewish religion. Rome permitted Judaism as a legal religion, but would not tolerate any new religions. By describing Christianity as a “sect” of the Nazarenes, the lawyer made Paul’s faith appear to be cultic and bizarre. Desecrating the temple also had political overtones because the Romans had given permission to the Jews to execute any Gentile who went inside the inner court of the temple. Paul earlier had been accused of bringing a Gentile into the inner court (21:28), here he is said to have attempted to desecrated the temple. After the Jews had agreed to the truth of their prosecuting attorney’s charges, Paul was given an opportunity to respond.
Paul’s introduction was much shorter and truthful. He implied Felix knew the situation in Judea well enough to make an accurate decision. Paul gave several points in his own defense. First, he had not been in Jerusalem long enough to instigate a riot. In fact one of his purposes for being in Jerusalem was to worship, to observe the feast of Pentecost (20:16). Next he denied the charge that he incited the Jews to rebel. At no time, either in the temple....the synagogues or in the city, had he disputed with the people or attempted to stir them up. These were facts, and no one could disprove them. Third, he worshiped the God of Israel in full conformity with the law and the Prophets. Furthermore his faith was not in some sect but in Christianity, which was known as the way (Acts 9:2; 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:22). His hope in the resurrection was the same as that of his accusers. Further, Paul always sought to keep his conscience clear.
Far from stirring the Jews up to insurrection, Paul had come to Jerusalem to bring alms (money) to the Jewish people. He was referring to the collection from the churches of Macedonia and Achaia, ear-marked for the needy in Jerusalem. Finally, Paul said his genuine accusers were not present, the Jews from the province of Asia who made the original false charges and incited the riot in the temple. Since the Sanhedrin had not found him guilty (23:1-9) Tertullus’ speech did not really contain any legitimate charges. When Felix heard the case he was faced with a serious dilemma. He knew enough about the Christian faith to realize who was right. Paul was obviously innocent of any crimes against Roman law. Yet if he were to acquit Paul, he would incur the wrath of the Jewish people. From a political standpoint, it was important to curry their favor. So he adopted the expedient of continuing the case. He said he would wait until Lysias the commander could come to Caesarea. This was just a delay tactic. There is no record that the commander ever did come to Caesarea. In concluding the case, Felix commanded that although Paul should remain in custody, he should be permitted limited liberty and that his friends be allowed to visit and supply him with food and clothing. With such liberty Paul could not be deemed a violent criminal. Some days after the public trial Felix and his wife Drusilla arranged a private meeting with Paul in order that they might hear more concerning the Christian faith. Without fear, Paul reasoned with Felix and his adulterous wife about righteousness, self-control, and the judgment to come. Felix seemed to be more moved than his wife. Although he was afraid, he did not trust the Savior. He deferred making a decision for Christ with the words “go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee”.
Sadly enough this convenient season never came, as far as the bible record is concerned. Yet this was not Paul’s last visit before Felix. The governor called him repeatedly during the next two years while a prisoner in Caesarea. Felix was hoping that Paul or his friends would pay him a nice bribe in order to have Paul released. After two years, in A.D. 60 Porcius Festus replaced Felix. Felix wanting to do the Jews a favor left Paul in Caesarea in chains.
Questions/Answers?
Who was Drusilla, the wife of Felix
She was the youngest daughter of Herod Agrippa I by his wife Cypros. According to the Jewish historian, Josephus, she was Jewess who married Auxesis, king of Emesa, who then converted to Judaism. Because of her great beauty, Felix desired her for his wife. She left Azizus and married the Gentile Felix in defiance of Jewish law.
No comments:
Post a Comment