Community Bible Study -- Acts Text of Presentation, Lesson 21, Acts 24:1-25:12 Click Here to see Lesson 21 Photos . . . Click Here to return to Acts Home Page

Paul Before Felix and Festus

Last week Paul appeared before the Jewish Sanhedrin at a public hearing called by the Roman commander, Lysias. He quickly recognized the Sadducees were not interested in justice, but only wanted him dead; hence he succeeded in spinning the issue as a conflict between Pharisees and Sadducees . . . saying that as “a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee,” he is “on trial because of my hope in the resurrection of the dead” (Acts 23:6). The hearing devolved into a conflict between Pharisees and Sadducees – so heated that Roman troops had to take Paul away for his protection. Then, because of a plan by Paul’s enemies to have him killed while in Roman custody, Lysias transferred Paul to the provincial capital of Caesarea, and the custody of the Roman governor.

As this lesson begins, Paul is in Herod’s Place in Caesarea, in the custody of Governor Antonius Felix. Roman historian Tacticus describes Felix as “a tyrant with the disposition of a slave.” He and his brother Pallas actually were slaves – but gained their freedom, and Pallas manipulated himself into political prominence as “right-hand man” to Caesar Claudius. In 52 AD Claudius sent Felix to Caesarea as Governor of the Province of Judea and Samaria. Felix tried to learn about the people he was sent to govern – including the “Jesus people” (Acts 24:22). He married a Jewish princess, Drusilla: great granddaughter of Herod the Great, and sister of King Herod Agrippa II (who appears in the next lesson). Yet he was thoroughly corrupt, and used his position for personal wealth . . . as is demonstrated later in the story. His cruelty made rank-and-file Jews more anti-Roman. According to Josephus, Felix brutally suppressed false Messiahs and others who opposed Rome, such as followers of “the Egyptian” mentioned in Acts 21; and when Ananias’ predecessor as high priest repeatedly challenged him, Felix arranged his assassination! Felix has been governor for 5 years when Paul is brought before him in 57 AD. Nero replaced Claudius as emperor three years earlier, but Felix has hung on to power.

Paul is not charged with a crime; the Romans are protecting him until representatives of the Jewish Sanhedrin come to press charges. And by moving Paul from Jerusalem to Caesarea, the legal battle is moved from the Sanhedrin’s turf to Paul’s. The Jewish high court has extensive power and influence in Jerusalem; but in Caesarea, a Roman citizen like Paul has the advantage. Nevertheless, High Priest Ananias decides this battle is important enough to pursue. The day after a messenger from Felix reaches Jerusalem, Ananias personally makes the 2-day trip to Caesarea . . . along with other Sanhedrin representatives and a slick trial lawyer named Tertullus – a Roman or Hellenized Jew.

Upon their arrival, a hearing is convened by Governor Felix. Tertullus opens with flattery. Felix is the cruelest governor since Pilate, but Tertullus proffers “profound gratitude” for “peace” and “reforms” and “foresight” under his governance (Acts 24:2-3). Then Tertullus makes the following charges (Acts 24:5-6): 

1.      Paul is “a troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world.”

2.      Paul “is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect.”

3.      Paul “tried to desecrate the temple.”

Tertullus is slick; his three charges are substantive and actionable!

The first is a charge that Paul committed a Roman crime. This is significant . . . and is arguably true. Paul had precipitated riots in many parts of the Roman empire . . . most recently in Ephesus, home of his accusers in the temple. Even if Paul is the victim of those riots – not the perpetrator – peace is more important to Romans than justice. They want tax revenues to flow smoothly, whatever it takes.

The second charge is calculated to differentiate the followers of Jesus from official Judaism . . . ie, those under the “control” of the high priest and the Sadducees. Tertullus may be implying Jesus’ followers are an insurrectionist sect like those Felix has suppressed – Felix knows better than that . . . or that Christians are a separate religion, not eligible for the special tolerance given Jews by the Romans. This was what the Jews argued in Corinth before Proconsul Gallio (Acts 18), who said religious disputes did not belong in his court; but now the charge is made by the Jewish high priest himself after Roman soldiers had to break up a riot in Jerusalem; Tertullus may saying the charge should be revisited.

The third charge would seem of no concern to the Romans . . . but it is the most devilishly clever of all. Rome allowed the Jews to kill any Gentile – even a Roman – who walked through the Gate Beautiful into the “Jews only” portion of the temple. That was the only capital punishment Jews were allowed to inflict without Roman approval. Hence this charge is, in essence, a request to move Paul to Jerusalem to be tried by the Sanhedrin on the charge that he brought Gentiles into the temple (Acts 21:28).

Not all bible versions include Acts 24:7, which ties these three charges together by claiming Paul was about to be tried under Jewish law, but Lysias prevented that “with much violence” (24:7 NAS). Hence behind his veil of flattery and diplomacy – Tertullus seems to be sending the subtle message: “Make it easy on yourself, Felix. Turn Paul over to us so we may try him in a Jewish court for desecrating the temple. Everything will be legal, the riots will stop, and you won’t get your hands dirty!”

After Tertullus finishes, Paul is asked to respond, and addresses all three charges:

1.      He admits he is a follower of Jesus, but emphasizes he is still an observant Jew, hence eligible for the religious tolerance Rome gives to the Jews. “I was ceremonially clean when they found me in the temple courts” (Acts 24:18), Paul says; “I believe everything that agrees with the Law and that is written in the Prophets, and I have the same hope in God as these men” (Acts 24:14-15).

2.      He denies the charges of causing a riot or desecrating the temple . . . and points out that Ananias and the Sanhedrin are citing hearsay evidence; he demands the right to confront his accusers: the Jews from Ephesus who started the riots.

3.      As he did in the Sanhedrin, Paul tries to spin this as a dispute between Pharisees and Sadducees . . . challenging the Sanhedrin to confess that the only “crime” they have observed was his claim to be on trial because he believes in the resurrection of the dead . . . which everyone knows is not a Roman crime.

Paul is pretty slick himself!

Felix isn’t interested in justice . . . but like most sleazy people, he is well attuned to sense a hidden agenda in other sleazy people – such as Tertullus. Since Felix is “well acquainted with” the Jesus movement (Acts 24:22), the charges probably don’t ring true. He may be suspicious about the prompt attendance of Ananias and the Sanhedrin – who normally would resist a request to appear in Caesarea – and suspicious of the fact they came without witnesses. He wants more information . . . and realizes Lysias, the Roman commander, is an eyewitness. He will wait until Lysias comes. 

This is the last thing the Sanhedrin wants. They hoped Felix – like Pilate – would wash his hands of the matter and hand Paul over . . . maybe encouraged by some bribe money. But if Lysias is called to testify, they know he will corroborate what Paul has said; and just as a policeman’s testimony carries special weight in court, Lysias will be believed. Ananias and the Sanhedrin will be humiliated – so they return to Jerusalem rather than face that.

This leaves Paul with Felix. But Paul is no longer a free man under the protection of Rome.  He has been formally accused of inciting a riot, a valid Roman charge; he is now a prisoner awaiting trial. The Sanhedrin failed in their plot to kill Paul . . . but they seem to have gained the next best thing: they have contained Paul. Tertullus probably realized this when he made the charge . . . because as a prisoner in Caesarea, Paul is no longer able to preach the gospel of Jesus as freely as before.

But the Sanhedrin fail to appreciate that Christianity has grown naturally through the Holy Spirit over the last 20-plus years, and the gospel will continue to spread through the world with or without Paul. His “seminary” in Ephesus has trained missionaries; and Apollos in Corinth is probably doing the same, as are countless, nameless others. And under “house arrest,” Paul is free to write and receive letters . . . functioning to counsel fellow Christians and set standards of faith and practice.

Paul in prison isn’t even sacrificing his great debating and oratorical skill: one of his special strengths as a witness for Jesus. Let’s read from Acts 24:

Felix came with his wife Drusilla, who was a Jewess. He sent for Paul and listened to him as he spoke about faith in Christ Jesus. As Paul discoursed on righteousness, self-control and the judgment to come, Felix was afraid and said, “That's enough for now! You may leave. When I find it convenient, I will send for you” (Acts 24:24-25).

Antonius Felix is a brutal, evil man, who took his wife Druscilla away from her 1^st husband – yet Paul has convicted him of his sins, and made him afraid of his fate if the God does come in judgement. Conviction of sin is the first step to repentance and justification through Jesus . . . and even Felix takes this first step! But he seems to stop there.

It’s important that Paul is not having a one-on-one discussion with Felix and Drusilla. The interview takes place in a public hearing – probably in the theater of Caesarea – attended by guards, Roman officials, other petitioners, and various retainers. Paul is witnessing in the halls of Roman power, before some of the most important people in the world! Furthermore, Acts 24:26 says Felix “sent for (Paul) frequently”! What an opportunity! Is that why the Holy Spirit sent Paul to Jerusalem to be betrayed by the church and arrested?

Paul’s case goes nowhere. Ananias and the Sanhedrin remain in Jerusalem – content to have Paul “contained” in Caesarea. They may be bribing Felix to keep Paul there . . . and are surely offering bigger bribes to turn Paul over to certain death at a Sanhedrin trial in Jerusalem. But Felix knows Paul is innocent and will not stoop that low with a Roman citizen. Acts says Felix refuses to dismiss the case because he is “hoping that Paul would offer him a bribe” (Acts 24:26). Felix, after all, has principles: he must receive a bribe to declare Paul “not guilty”; to free him without a bribe will send the wrong message!

Why doesn’t Paul pay the bribe? The bible has many admonitions against accepting a bribe . . . but nothing against giving a bribe; two proverbs even speak kindly about giving bribes (Prov 17:8, 21:14). This is probably because bribery – baksheesh – is so ingrained in the middle eastern culture that a commandment not to give bribes would exclude people from ordinary commerce. Yet a refusal to accept a bribe makes is a statement about personal standards of right and wrong.

Hence Paul’s refusal to offer a bribe is not based on moral grounds. Paul may feel God has placed him here to witness in the halls of Roman power in Caesarea as the first step in Christianizing the Roman empire – and freedom would take away that opportunity! Remember . . . individual salvation is a relatively recent concept. Ancient people practiced the religion of the king; and that’s how the Roman empire was Christianized 250 years later when Constantine became the first Christian emperor.

The hearings go on for 2 years; then Nero replaces Antonius Felix with Porcius Festus. Prisoners awaiting trial usually had their cases decided before a new governor arrived . . . but Felix leaves under a cloud – barely escaping with his life when he returns to Rome – so he leaves Paul in prison “to grant a favor to the Jews” (Acts 24:27) . . . perhaps so the Jewish leadership will say nice things about him to Nero.

Very little is known about Festus. He died after only two years in office, but he may have been the most sincere and honorable man ever to be governor of Judea and Samaria. Acts 25 implies he wants to do right by the people he governs, and he begins his reign by traveling to Jerusalem to meet with the Sanhedrin. One of their special requests is about Paul: they renew their demand that he be brought to Jerusalem for trial. (Their actual plan is to kill Paul en route, and have a Sanhedrin trial only but if this fails.) As a sign of their sincerity, the Sanhedrin agrees to travel to Caesarea for a hearing with Paul before Festus.

When Festus convenes the hearing, it sounds must like the one two years earlier with Felix: the Sanhedrin brings “serious charges . . . which they could not prove” (Acts 25:7), and Paul makes the same denial: “I have done nothing wrong against the law of the Jews or against the temple or against Caesar” (Acts 25:8). Festus, a sincere man, wants to begin his term as governor with the Jewish leadership happy, so he seeks a compromise: he seems to propose that Paul be found “not guilty” of a Roman crime, but sent to Jerusalem to be tried for his Jewish “crime” in the Sanhedrin. Festus may feel a religious trial isn’t a big deal, since they have no authority to carry out the death penalty – but he hasn’t dealt with the Sadducees long enough to know their true character: they will have Paul killed in a way that will allow them plausible deniability. But Paul knows the game, and will have nothing of it. As a Roman citizen, Paul has rights, and he claims his right to appeal to a higher court. He says:

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! (Acts 25:11)

Festus is surprised by Paul’s appeal . . . but after conferring with his advisers, he decides this is Paul’s right. So Paul begins his trip to Rome . . . where he expects to witness before Nero.

But before Paul leaves Caesarea, he has one more important witness to give and one more important audience to attend: before King Herod Agrippa II, son of the man who killed James and planned to kill Peter. That audience will be the subject of the next lesson.