Chapter 40

Festus And Agrippa

Acts 25:1-27

 

The new governor, Porcius Festus, was a better man than his predecessor, Felix.  He took up his duties with the intention of doing what was right.  However, Festus soon discovered that Jewish politics was not an easy matter to handle, especially the two-year-old case of the Apostle Paul, prisoner with no official charges against him.  Paul was a Jew whose countrymen wanted to kill him, and he was a Roman citizen whose government did not know what to do with him.

 

What a dilemma!  If Festus released Paul, the Jews would cause trouble, and that was something the new governor dared not risk.  However, if he continued to hold Paul prisoner, Festus would eventually have to explain why a Roman citizen was being held without definite official charges.  Festus knew that it was smart for him to act quickly and take advantage of the fact that he was a newcomer on the scene.  To delay would only make the problem worse, and it was bad enough already. 

 

In Acts 25, we find Festus doing two things.  First, he attempted steps of conciliation with the Jewish leaders (vv. 1-12) and then he sought consultation with Agrippa both privately and publicly (vv. 13-27). 

 

I can personally relate to and sympathize with Festus.  He did not create this problem, he did not cause it, he inherited it.  When you are in a position of leadership, sometimes you inherit problem situations.  When I went to the church at Mt. Vernon, there were some serious relationship problems lingering from the past.  Those problems had caused the fellowship between to churches to be broken.  I was immediately thrown into a very tough dilemma.  I kept going by telling myself that I had not created the problem, I had inherited the problem.  Now, I have been here for almost 14 full years and the problems usually have my fingerprints all over them! 

 

Leaders sometimes have to deal with problems which they did not create.  It is normal for a leader to want the people whom he leads to be happy and pleased with his leadership.  At times, however, there is a conflict between what pleases the people and what is the right thing to do.  Festus faced that conflict in the situation involving Paul.  He was the new governor and wanted to make a good first impression on the Jewish people.  They wanted to kill Paul.  Was that the right thing to do?  Festus had to find out.

 

 

Conciliation With The Jews, vv. 1-12.

 

Festus lost no time in visiting the holy city and paying his respects to the Jewish religious leaders, v. 1.  And those leaders lost no time in bringing up Paul's case, v. 2.

 

So intent and hostile were they against Paul that they actually had an assassination plot going against the Apostle, v. 3.  They were planning an ambush while Paul and a small group of guards were traveling from Caesarea to Jerusalem.  Imagine it!  It has been two years and the hatred is just as intense as it ever was against Paul.

 

Festus knew nothing of this planned ambush but for whatever reason wisely determined that Paul would remain at Caesarea where he was going to return to shortly, v. 4.  He did, however, invite them to accompany him to Caesarea and make their case against Paul, v. 5.  Festus was there for ten more days, verse 6 tells us, and then he returned to Caesarea whereupon the very next day he convened a trial against Paul.

 

The trial is summarized in just two verses, vv. 7-8.  Please take note of some very important phrases...

  "many and grievous complaints against Paul" - They complained about what he had done.  They said a lot about what he had done and they accused him of awful things.  I suspect that these guys really thought that everything they said about Paul was true.  Often, once we come to a conclusion about a person, we decide that he is guilty of some sin, we make up our mind and that's all there is to it.  We hear a rumor.  "Did you know that so-and-so did such-and-such?"  Our curiosity causes us to listen to rumors when we should turn aside.  Proverbs 20:19 says that we should not associate with gossips and talebearers.  We jump to some conclusion and decide that the person must be guilty.  Then we spread the rumor without ever checking it out and finding out if it is even true.  We just assume that it must be.  And when we pass it on we say, "I was told by someone, whom I will not name that so-and-so did such-and-such."  I always ask, "Who told you that?"  Usually I hear, "It was told to me in confidence so I can't reveal my source."  You can reveal all the dirt just not who is spreading the dirt.  That is totally unfair and completely wrong. 

 

About 12 years ago, I man kept reporting to me the complaints of someone else in the church.  I asked him, "Who said that?"  "I can't tell you."  Finally, I said to that man, "If you are not going to tell me who the complainer is then don't tell me the complaint.  All you are doing is giving me information and then tying my hands with that information.  I can't go to that person and resolve my problems."  I'll just tell you right now, I don't keep those kinds of confidences.  If you tell me something about yourself, I'll never tell a soul.  But if you tell me something bad about someone else, I'm going to go directly to that person and tell them what I heard and who I heard it from.  That has a way of weaning people from talking bad about other people to me.  If you've got a problem with somebody what are you suppose to do?  Go directly to that person, Matthew 18:15.

 

These men had it in for Paul.  He could do no right and so they complained and criticized and accused him of many terrible things.

 

  "which they could not prove" - The bottom line is not what do you suspect, not what do you think but what can you prove?  Don't jump to conclusions, make sure you've got proof!  To begin with - love is not suspicious.  According to I Corinthians 13 love "believes all things and hopes all things" - it is always trusting and optimistic and never suspicious.  But if you do suspect someone of sin, don't accuse until you have the proof.  In church discipline, it takes the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses so that every word may be established. 

 

My first pastor was a man named Garland Singleton.  He was old when I was a boy.  He retired when I was 12.  I remember on one occasion there were, apparently, some rumors flying through the church about some people’s sins.  One service, Bro. Singleton said, "I put a box in the back of the church.  If you have an accusation of sin against someone in this church then write it down and sign your name to it.  I, then, will read your accusation before the congregation, and if we determine it to be true, then we will exclude that member.  If you are not willing to put the accusation in a signed written form then I don't want to hear about it."  Guess what?  The rumors stopped.

 

Look, they could accuse Paul of everything in the world, but Festus quickly recognized that they couldn't prove any of it.  According to verse 8, with every accusation, Paul had the same answer.

 

Festus saw that no progress was being made, so he asked Paul if he would be willing to be tried in Jerusalem.  Verse 9 says that he did this to please the Jews.  I think that this was Festus' first mistake in the handling of this case.  Maybe he didn't realize it, but a trip to Jerusalem would jeopardize the very life of Paul.  A Roman judge could not move a case to another court without the consent of the accused.  According to verses 10-11, Paul expressed that he favored capital punishment even of himself if he was guilty.  He said that he was not guilty and that this matter was not one for biased Jewish leaders but for Caesar himself.  He knew by God's revelation that his destination was Rome not Jerusalem and the fastest way to get there was to appeal to Caesar.  By this one statement, Paul took the case completely out of the hands of the Jews.  With resign (and perhaps with some personal embarrassment over his failure in his first case), Festus said, "You want to go to Caesar, then to Caesar you will go" (v. 12).

 

 

Consultation With Agrippa, vv. 13-27.

 

The new governor's problems were not over.  He still had to determine what legal charges there were against his prisoner.  A letter was going to accompany Paul across the Mediterranean Sea to Rome explaining the case.  The letter would contain a list of Paul's crimes.  Festus didn't know what that letter should say.

 

About that time, Festus had an official state visit from Herod Agrippa and his sister, Bernice.  This was the last of the Herodians to rule - great-grandson of the Herod who had ordered the slaughter of babies of Bethlehem, son of the Herod who had beheaded James.

 

A Private Conversation.  Festus sought first the counsel of Agrippa in a private meeting, vss. 14-21.  Here, he retells the events of the first 13 verses of this chapter.  The most interesting and telling verse is verse 19.  From the perspective of Festus, the big deal between Paul and the Jews was that Paul affirmed that Jesus was alive and the Jews said that he was dead.   The conversation arrested the interest of Agrippa and according to verse 22, he wanted to meet and hear what Paul had to say.  Agrippa arranged for it happen the very next day.

 

A Public Confrontation.  This public hearing was surrounded by much pomp and ceremony, v. 23.  There were lots of important people present but Luke makes no specific mention of any of the Jewish religious leaders being present.  All of this because of one little Jewish man who preached the Gospel of Christ!  The Lord had promised Paul that he would bear witness before Gentiles and kings (Acts 9:15) and that promise was being fulfilled again.  Once Paul was finished with his defense, all his hearers would know how to be saved and would be without excuse.  By the end of Paul's speech, Paul became the judge, Festus, Agrippa and Bernice the defendants!

 

To set it all up, Festus made a flowery speech explaining the purpose of the meeting (vv. 24-25) and why he wanted Agrippa to hear Paul (vv. 26-27).

 

So what did Paul say?  Find out next time!