What a scene it must have been, with Paul standing before this august gathering of celebrities and leaders. They, having arrived and seating themselves, with all due dignity and solemnity; he, in his chains, accompanied, no doubt, by one or more guards. This gathering was, at best, an informal hearing, a favor to Festus, and probably a matter of curiosity to those who attended. It seems Agrippa did not take Paul all that seriously and that no one came expecting or hoping to be converted. It was, as comics, say “A tough crowd!” Perhaps hearing Paul would at least help them understand the mindset of this sub-unit of Judaism, Christianity, and perhaps help them find a way to quell the uprisings and disorder that seemed always to be popping up.

Some men would have been dazzled to stand before the “movers and shakers” of their generation. For Paul, this was just one more in a long series of hearings where his conduct, ministry, and gospel were scrutinized by public officials for some sign of wrongdoing.

While Paul always proclaimed Christ with “fear and trembling” (1 Corinthians 2:1-5), knowing that the gospel was a “stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Gentiles” (1Corinthians 1:23), he must also have rejoiced at the opportunity to proclaim Christ before this audience of Caesarean dignitaries. Though powerful and influential, they were lost and Paul had been called to preach the gospel to such as them.

Paul would have made a good lawyer. Quickly figuring out that Agrippa was in charge of the proceedings, Paul engaged the man and complimented him on his expertise in the Law. The issue before them really had little to do with Paul’s own beliefs or conduct, even his alleged crime of attempting to desecrate the temple. The gospel was the central issue here. Was it legitimately part of Judaism or, as the Jews charged, a cult, distinct from and opposed to Judaism? Paul set out to show that the gospel was the fulfillment of the hope of Israel; in other words, Christianity was as Jewish as it gets.

The Jews consistently attempted to disown Christianity in general, and Paul’s preaching in particular, as a “counterfeit Judaism,” a sect which did not have their sanction and which was diametrically opposed to their faith. Paul dealt with the issues through his own example, because his life explained and illustrated the animosity between Judaism and the gospel. Would his Jewish opponents represent Paul as some out-of-town foreigner, who came to Jerusalem to stir up trouble for the Jews? Paul was a Jew, not born in Jerusalem, but a Jew who was brought up there, trained in the strictest order of Judaism. He was no stranger to Judaism or Jerusalem, but was, from his early days as a child, an active, dynamic, leader. And so Paul began his defense by starting at the beginning, with his own faith and practice as a Jew, in Jerusalem.

Paul’s opponents had misrepresented him and his personal religious life. Paul had been well-known before his conversion; if he was now viewed as an enemy of Judaism, it had not always been so. He had once been Judea’s national hero. He had been one of the outstanding young men of Judaism. Paul was accused of forsaking his faith, but this was simply untrue! He was on trial at this moment not for opposing Judaism, but for adhering to it. He was guilty of hoping and believing in the promise made by God concerning the Messiah. Was it possible to be more Jewish than that?

Paul now turned to Agrippa, a Jewish ruler, and asks, “Why is it considered incredible among you people if God does raise the dead?” If belief in the resurrection of the dead is a fundamental premise of Judaism, how was it that the Jews condemn Paul for believing in the resurrection of Jesus? Why did they find believing in an actual instance of resurrection (namely, Jesus) so incredibly difficult? Judaism was not consistent with itself in its response to Paul’s proclamation of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead.

The watershed issue between Paul and his Jewish opponents was the doctrine of the resurrection, particularly of Jesus. This fueled the fires of opposition against Paul and Christianity. This was the reason for the uprisings associated with Paul, which the Roman leaders were still trying to sort out. Paul then set out to show how he, as an unbelieving Jew, opposed Christianity because of the same failure, and how, through a confrontation with the resurrected Christ, he was converted from an opponent of the gospel to one of its most renowned proponents.

Paul was not unfamiliar with the failure of the Jews to be consistent with their own faith. As an unbelieving Jew, Paul found Christianity with its central doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus, an abhorrent thing, something to be violently opposed. Paul understood the opposition of his Jewish peers because, before he was saved, he’d felt obliged to attack and oppose the name of Jesus of Nazareth, Who was worshipped and followed by Christians as the risen Messiah of Israel. He practiced his opposition in Jerusalem and in distant foreign cities. He tried to force Christians to renounce their faith in Jesus as Messiah which was blasphemy. He cast them into prison and enthusiastically voted for their execution as heretics. In his opposition to Jesus, he worked closely with the Sanhedrin, with the cooperation of the chief priests, the very ones who now took the lead in opposing him.

Paul’s opposition to Christianity, to the gospel, had been the result of his own misguided Judaism, which had been exposed and corrected by a direct encounter with the risen Jesus, which Paul now went on to describe as the turning point in his life and in his understanding and practice of Judaism.

Paul did not describe his conversion as some kind of evolution, but rather as a radical transformation, a change from darkness to light, from death to life, from persecuting Christianity to practicing and promoting it. Jesus stopped him dead in the act of actively opposing the church and turned him around. Paul was not seeking the truth; he was convinced that he knew the truth, and that Christianity was a lie. He was not acting independently in his persecution of the Christian community; he had the full consent and authority of the chief priests.

Sharing the bare details of his conversion, Paul moved on to the “divine commission” which was given to him at the time of his conversion. Like every believer, Paul was saved for a reason. Paul was appointed to be both a minister and a witness, not only to the things which he had just seen, but also to those things which were yet to be revealed to him in subsequent appearances.

With this call to be a witness, was the promise of divine protection, both from the Jews and Gentiles, for he was being sent as a witness to both groups. As God’s instrument of salvation, Paul was called to “open the eyes” of those who were blinded by their sin, so that they might “turn from darkness to light,” and “from the dominion of Satan to the kingdom of God.” The goal of this was the “forgiveness of sins” and the reception of “an inheritance,” by all who have been sanctified by faith in Jesus. We read here the gospel in a nutshell.

The Lord commissioned Paul to proclaim the gospel. Plucked from darkness, his eyes now opened, Paul was called to lead others to the light. As Paul received the forgiveness of sins and an eternal inheritance, he now had the privilege of introducing others to that same salvation.

Paul then focused on the consequences of his conversion and commission. His encounter with the resurrected Jesus radically changed his life so that he no longer persecuted the church but preached Jesus as the Messiah, the Christ. The life he now lived was based on his conversion and commission. He refused to disobey his heavenly calling. This led to his persecution by the Jews. His status with them had changed as radically as his status with God. Once a “Hebrew of Hebrews”, a Pharisee of the strictest order, he was now considered a traitor to Judaism. This was the reason for all the Jewish anger and opposition that had culminated in Paul being seized in the temple and nearly beaten to death. He hadn’t desecrated the temple. His only crime was in believing that Jesus is the Messiah and proclaiming that belief. His deliverance from the Jews, though by the hands of Roman officials, was God’s work. Paul would not be silenced because God would not have him silenced.

Paul’s “defense” was a declaration of the gospel. This group, though they thought they were judging Paul and making some decision about his ministry, were actually being forced to make some decision about his message. They were given a choice here – repent and believe what the Jews rejected or ignore God’s calling to them. No report is given of any having come to faith that day, though some may have believed. There’s no question they heard the gospel that day. We just don’t know their response.

The gospel controlled and dominated Paul’s life. He did not speak about Christianity as some academic theory, a topic of great debate and intense opposition. He presented the gospel as the means by which this audience could be saved, calling on them to repent and believe.

Festus could stand it no longer! I can almost hear him mumbling to himself, “What next? Will this Paul give an invitation? Will he have an altar call? This is no defense, it is a crusade!” Festus accused Paul of being out of his mind. Festus protested, “This is insane!” Paul defended his presentation as solemn truth. The words of an insane man cannot be taken seriously; the words which Paul spoke must be taken as a matter of eternal life or death. The gospel is both truth and reality. Paul quickly turned his attention to Agrippa, a Jew, whom Paul believed was convinced that the Old Testament revelation was the Word of God. Agrippa also knew from his own experience that Paul was speaking truthfully and accurately. These were not mad ramblings of a confused mind. Paul’s words, Agrippa must know, were consistent both with Old Testament revelation and with events as they had taken place in Israel. Paul pressed Agrippa for a commitment. Did he believe? Would he believe? Agrippa’s salvation was what was important to Paul. Where did he stand? What would he do? Even if Festus rejected Paul’s words as insanity, Agrippa had much more knowledge. Paul urged him to cross the line and make a commitment to salvation.

Agrippa knew he was on the spot and appeared to be uncomfortable. Seemingly unwilling to believe, yet unable to deny what had been said, his response to Paul has been understood in various ways. Agrippa clearly did not come to faith in that hour. Perhaps he was sincere in saying he needed more time, or perhaps he was merely trying to avoid the issue. Paul was not deterred, picking up the conversation where Agrippa left off. Would Agrippa accuse Paul of trying to convert him? Okay. Paul desired that Agrippa and all the others might be just as he was—saved by grace, through faith in Jesus as the risen Lord. In this, Paul was guilty as charged and proud of it. The interview was over. Things were getting uncomfortable for Paul’s audience. They had come for his trial, but now felt themselves on trial.

The meeting hadn’t been called to give Paul a chance to preach to the dignitaries and seek to convert them. They’d come to hear Paul’s case, so that Festus could report something, anything, to Caesar. As Paul was led away, those gathered together expressed their unanimous conclusion – this man was not guilty of any crime. There really were no charges against Paul that would hold up in court. Paul should never have been brought to trial in the first place.

This was no compliment to his handling of the matter. The reason why Festus had a problem on his hands was because there were no valid charges against Paul. The Jews were wrong. Had Festus dealt with Paul justly, he would not have the problem which he now faced. Agrippa indicated as much. Yet he also deemed Paul foolish to have appealed to Caesar. But for that appeal, Paul would now be a free man. (Perhaps Agrippa was not aware of the plot against Paul in Jerusalem, for he would have realized that to be free in Jerusalem was to be in danger of assassination.) Agrippa was unaware of the divine plan which included Paul’s journey to Rome.

I find it interesting that Paul cared so much about the condition of those who were standing in judgment of him. He was a prisoner, doomed to die, but he was saved, so he was not truly the one in trouble. His audience had the problem, so Paul spoke according to the need. Paul had once been on the fast track to becoming one of these rulers and now he used the story of how he had been turned from that path by an encounter with Jesus. That encounter had shown him that he was mistaken about Judaism and about the Christian connection to it.

I think the problem for Christians today is largely the same problem that Jews had in Paul’s day. We believe some things in principle, but we refuse to believe them in practice and in particular. Today, there are many truths, many doctrines, which professing Christians firmly believe in principle, but refuse to practice in particular. We say we believe in the goodness of God, omniscience (knowing all) and omnipotence (having all power), but when the chips are down and life seems to challenge these truths, we are not so willing to act upon these truths which we claim we believe.

Let’s take the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, for example. We profess to believe that because Jesus was raised from the dead, we, too, shall be raised. What happens when the doctor tells us we have a malignancy? What happens when we are required to take a stand which puts our life in danger? Where, then, is our faith in the resurrection of the dead?

If we fail to believe in practice what we claim to believe in principle, what is the solution? How can we develop a practical faith, which not only believes, but also acts on this belief?

We develop a living faith by living in accordance with the Word of God, in obedience to the commands of our Lord (as given personally by Jesus or through His apostles in the epistles of the New Testament).

I encourage you to read through the entire New Testament, making note of all the commands that are given, either by Jesus in the gospels or by the apostles in the epistles. Then, do them! It will be very difficult to obey these commands apart from believing in the doctrines on which they are based. I think that our practical faith is proportionate to our practice of our faith by our obedience to the commands of Scripture. Would we have a practical faith, and not merely a theoretical one? Then let us practice our faith, by obeying God’s commands.

Inexperience and its outcome can prove to be a humbling thing. We’ve most of us been in the uncomfortable position of the first day on the job. I think Ben Sliney of the FAA would understand how Festus felt as he took over for Felix as Roman governor of Judea. Mr. Sliney had airplanes flying into buildings on his first day on the job (September 11, 2001); Festus had Paul of Tarsus. Mr. Sliney had 20-odd years in air traffic control before that faithful day, but nothing could prepare him for his first day on the job as national coordinator. Festus had a distinguished carrier in Roman politics, but his predecessor Felix had left him with a problem that had never before existed in the Roman world – a sovereign God determined to have His man preach the gospel to governors and kings.

A Roman governor possessed considerable power, but Festus was new to Judea and a stranger to the Jews. His inexperience and insecurity played a major role in the outcome of Paul’s two-year imprisonment, resulting in Paul’s appeal to Caesar. Felix, a seasoned politician who knew both the Jews and Christianity, had allowed his corruption to cause many problems for his replacement. Festus had some very hard lessons to learn. His first case was also one of the worst problems he would face in his short stay in office. Paul’s trial seemed quite simple at first, cut and dried, but it proved to be a nightmare for Festus because it was an almost explosive situation that would be detrimental to his popularity and career.

Josephus recorded that Festus was a prudent and honorable governor who took over Judea after Felix had allowed the province to become embroiled in political strife and robberies. Festus succeeded in ridding the province of many of these criminals, but he was only in office a short time and his successor allowed the situation to deteriorate rapidly after that.

Unfortunately for Festus, he also inherited the unresolved problem of Paul, who was still being held prisoner in Caesarea. It became Festus’ task to identify some charge against Paul so that he could be tried and this long-standing problem ended. In all honesty, Festus tried, but failed to fulfill this obligation. In his search for the truth, however, the gospel was proclaimed to many people of position and power, which was God’s plan all along.

Scholars say that it is a mystery that Paul’s case ever got this far in the Roman judicial system and even more so that it made it all the way to the court of Caesar. A false accusation based on an inaccurate and hasty conclusion by witnesses who seem to have disappeared somehow made it to the highest court in the land. I don’t know if you could get more improbable than that.

“Three days after Festus arrived in the province, he went up to Jerusalem from Caesarea.
Then the chief priests and the leaders of the Jews presented their case against Paul to him; and they appealed,
asking him to do them a favor against Paul, Lit asking a favor against him that he might summon him to Jerusalem. They were preparing an ambush along the road to kill him.
However, Festus answered that Paul should be kept at Caesarea, and that he himself was about to go there shortly.
 “Therefore,” he said, “let the men of authority among you go down with me and accuse him, if there is any wrong in this man.” Acts 25:1-6

Festus, wanting to start off on the right foot, presented himself almost immediately in Jerusalem, where he spent several days. The Jewish leaders pressed him to send Paul to Jerusalem for trial. They had no intention of actually trying Paul, but it would have been easier to assassinate him had they had custody of him. Festus quickly grasped the political implications of what they were requesting, but he declined to allow them to take custody. I don’t think he knew about the assassination plot, but Paul was a Roman citizen, so a trial in Jerusalem was not proper. They were welcome to come to Caesarea if they wanted to press charges. A brilliant move, intended to gain the upper hand among these “provincials”, Festus must have often have wondered how it all went so terribly wrong.

“When he had spent not more than eight or 10 days among them, he went down to Caesarea. The next day, seated at the judge’s bench, he commanded Paul to be brought in.
When he arrived, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood around him and brought many serious charges that they were not able to prove,
while Paul made the defense that, “Neither against the Jewish law, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I sinned at all.”
Then Festus, wanting to do a favor for the Jews, replied to Paul, “Are you willing to go up to Jerusalem, there to be tried before me on these charges?”
But Paul said: “I am standing at Caesar’s tribunal, where I ought to be tried. I have done no wrong to the Jews, as even you can see very well.
If then I am doing wrong, or have done anything deserving of death, I do not refuse to die, but if there is nothing to what these men accuse me of, no one can give me up to them. I appeal to Caesar!”
After Festus conferred with his council, he replied, “You have appealed to Caesar; to Caesar you will go!” Acts 25:6-12

Again, assuming himself to be in charge, Festus did not rush back to Caesarea, but lingered in Jerusalem for another week and a half. Once returned to Caesarea, he promptly set Pau’s trial for the following day. The charges shocked Festus! They were nothing like what he had expected. The Jews had fundamental issues with Paul’s teachings on the gospel, particularly his insistence that Jesus was the Messiah, attested by His resurrection from the dead. The Jewish officials had seemed quite sensible in Jerusalem, presenting their “Romanized” charges against this troublemaker, but once in Paul’s presence they turned into a wolf pack, circling their prey, shouting their accusations.

Even dictators must maintain a certain level of popular support or find themselves removed from office, so Festus quickly moved to appease the Jews. Protecting Paul, even though he was a Roman citizen, would be a costly move and the politician in Festus weighed the implications of one man’s life over the peace and tranquility of the entire region. Festus knew that the charges against Paul were primarily religious and theological in nature, thus not truly matters involving Roman law, but he lacked enough information about Judaism and Christianity to understand what the Jews were arguing about. It seemed to him to make sense to allow the Sanhedrin to handle this case, which he would explain to Agrippa in Acts 25:18-20. He proposed Paul go to Jerusalem to stand trial with Festus as judge. The Jews would get what they wanted and, given the lack of evidence, Paul would be found innocent (probably).

I think Festus was a bit in the dark about all the history. Maybe chain of evidence wasn’t a strong suit in the 1^st Century. He apparently didn’t know that a trial before the Sanhedrin had already been attempted and I don’t think he knew about the assassination plot (the original plotters had apparently not starved to death in the last two years; I guess hunger strikes are not what they used to be – and yes, I mean that pun deliberately). No wonder Paul refused the offer, but it surprised Festus.  Combined with Paul’s other teachings on the role of government and its God-given responsibilities (Romans 13:1-5; Titus 3:1; 1 Peter 2:13-17), we see that government had a responsibility to protect those who are not guilty. Paul has been tried before and the charges against him were not proven. Now Festus wanted to try him again. We would call that double jeopardy. Seeing that Festus was failing to carry out his appointed duty, Paul therefore used his rights as a Roman citizen to the full and exercised his right of appeal to Caesar.

This was a well-established right in Roman society, going back to the foundation of the Republic in 509 BC. The implications of Paul’s appeal to Caesar required Festus to send Paul to Caesar along with a full report of the circumstances leading to his appeal and a listing of the charges. Charges? No Roman official since Paul’s arrest had able to identify any charges! The absence of these charges reflected badly on the Judean administration and upon Festus, who was now in charge there. Festus was in trouble not even a month into his new job.

Was it a coincidence that Herod and Agrippa stopped in at Caesarea to pay their respects to the new governor just at that moment? I don’t know. Seems too coincidental, but who knows. Herod Agrippa II was the ruler of a client kingdom northeast of Judea (about where Lebanon is now). The son of Herod Agrippa I, he had been deeply entangled in Roman politics since his father’s death in AD 44. He was accompanied on this state visit to Caesarea by his sister (and possible lover) Julia Bernice, the eldest daughter of Herod Agrippa I. Thus we have seen three of the children of Herod Agrippa I, who had James killed, in this short space of time.

I think Festus was ecstatic to have Agrippa’s advice on dealing with the dilemma that was Paul. He admitted he was in over his head and didn’t have a clue where to turn. Agrippa’s family had had frequent contact with the gospel. The case must have sounded excitingly complex and he had probably already heard of Paul. He asked if he could speak with him.

“Then Agrippa said to Festus, “I would like to hear the man myself.” “Tomorrow,” he said, “you will hear him.”

We’ll look at Paul’s “defense” next time.

Things didn’t look good for Paul. The Jews wanted to kill him and the Roman rulers wanted to avoid ruling in his favor, even when all evidence demanded a verdict of not guilty. We know that God was in control, but I have to wonder if Paul wasn’t terrified.  If he was, the words recorded don’t show that.

Paul would not truly use his hearing before Agrippa to defend himself, but would use it instead to proclaim the gospel to a large group of very prominent people, including Festus, Agrippa, Bernice, Roman military commanders and a large number of prominent men from Caesarea. Thanks to Agrippa, Paul was allowed to proclaim the gospel without hindrance or interruption by the Jews who opposed him.

God always keeps His promises and usually in ways that make our chins hit the ground. Theologians call that sovereignty. People in Paul’s day were dumbfounded by it as much as we are today.  God had promised Paul that he would testify to the gospel before Gentiles and kings back when he was first saved. So far, God had kept that promise – first the Gentiles, then the Roman officials, now King Agrippa and soon Caesar himself. God orchestrated an enormous host of people and evens to bring Paul to this point. From a human standpoint, nothing’s going right for the apostle from Tarsus, but from God’s standpoint, it’s all working to good. The greatest opportunities for ministry often come dressed in the form of failure or of frustratingly limited circumstances. In Caesarea, Paul’s options looked limited and diminishing, but Paul was exactly where God wanted him to be, poised on the cusp of almost limitless opportunity, to proclaim the gospel to people he never would have had contact with otherwise.

I think when we look back upon our lives from the vantage point of eternity, we will see that many of the most significant ways God has used us for His glory are very much like the way in which He used Paul in Acts. God will not only fulfill His promises in and through us, but He will do it in a way that He gets the glory and the praise, and that we will fall before Him in wonder and worship. The disasters of your life or mine, like those which befell Paul and other Biblical saints, are the materials with which God builds His program to promote His gospel. We need not pursue disaster and difficulty as some kind of virtue, but we shouldn’t dread them when God brings them our way. What a comfort to us who live in a fallen, chaotic world, knowing that behind the chaos is a sovereign God, Who is able to use our best efforts, and sometimes our worst, to achieve His purposes.