CHAPTER 25
Three days after arriving in the province, Festus went up from Caesarea to Jerusalem, where the chief priests and the Jewish leaders appeared before him and presented the charges against Paul. Acts 25:1-2
Utley remarks about Festus the successor of Felix saying, “He was a nobler personality, but obviously under the same political pressure and mind set.” 1 The new governor wasted no time in going up from his headquarters in Caesarea to Jerusalem. Jerusalem was the religious center of Israel and it was there that he would meet the men in power, particularly the high priest, the Sanhedrin and other leaders.
Now there was a new high priest in power, Ishmael ben Fabus. From the use of the plural “priests” it seems likely that the old priest Ananias also was still hanging out in the corridors of power. It seems here that the priests and Sanhedrin picked up right where they left off with Felix and began to pressure the new governor concerning Paul. Their pressure tactics had to be reckoned with since they had just instigated the removal of Felix.2
“They requested Festus, as a favor to them, to have Paul transferred to Jerusalem, for they were preparing an ambush to kill him along the way” (25:3). The Jewish leaders were intent on trying out their new and inexperienced leader. Their plan remained the same, and that plan was to get Paul to Jerusalem. They had no concern of getting him there for trial but strangely enough, they planned to murder him along the way. We must marvel at the Roman dedication for a fair trial and the depraved Jewish plans for murder. Guzik comments: “If your religion makes you a liar and a murderer, there is something wrong with your religion…” 3 Obviously, there was no problem with the Romans in having the trial at Jerusalem, since the Roman court could sit in either place.4 However, Festus was wise enough to suspect that there might be foul play in Jerusalem.
Guzik remarks: “We can see that Paul’s generous imprisonment in Caesarea was actually a providential provision of protective custody against the murderous intentions of the religious leaders. It was also a season of rest and replenishment after his years of hard missionary service, preparing him for the challenges in the years ahead…” 5
“Festus answered, ‘Paul is being held at Caesarea, and I myself am going there soon. Let some of your leaders come with me, and if the man has done anything wrong, they can press charges against him there’” (25:4-5). We have to appreciate Festus here for showing some backbone and initially standing up against the religious establishment. The Jews would not give up but would continue to make the same request later. Festus was determined to have Roman justice in this case. The procedure would go like this: “First, charges had to be formulated and sustained by the prosecutor, Secondly, there would be ‘a proper formal act of accusation by the interested party.’ Thirdly, the case was heard by ‘the holder of the imperium in person’ in this case the procurator.” 6
“After spending eight or ten days with them, Festus went down to Caesarea. The next day he convened the court and ordered that Paul be brought before him. When Paul came in, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood around him. They brought many serious charges against him, but they could not prove them” (25:6-7). The Jewish leaders did appear in Caesarea for the court case, this time without their lawyer. However, it seems that they had the same worn-out charges against Paul – charges which they could not prove. As Bruce says, “unsubstantiated charges did not constitute a prima
facie case.” 7
As we have seen before, the Jews were trying vainly to accuse Paul of some act of sedition (seditio) against the Roman Empire. Such a charge if substantiated would be fatal.8 They were likely aware that the Roman court would not convict Paul on purely religious grounds. There had to be some political twist to their charges if they were to be
successful. 9
PAUL’S DEFENSE
Then Paul made his defense: “I have done nothing wrong against the Jewish law or against the temple or against Caesar.” Acts 25:8
Since Paul’s trials are so thoroughly reported we can probably suspect that Dr. Luke was sitting somewhere in the balcony taking notes.10 With his defense Paul clears the air, that he has done nothing against the Jews or the Romans. He was fully aware that as in previous trials no evidence whatsoever was being offered concerning his guilt.
“Festus, wishing to do the Jews a favor, said to Paul, ‘Are you willing to go up to Jerusalem and stand trial before me there on these charges?’” (25:9). It seems that this trial had reached an impasse almost at its beginning. The pressure was now on the new procurator to do something and we see him beginning to bend in favor of the Jews. He was now thinking of sending Paul into the lion’s den awaiting him at Jerusalem. After all, the supposed crimes were committed at Jerusalem and it would seem reasonable for Paul to be tried there.11
“Paul answered: ‘I am now standing before Caesar’s court, where I ought to be tried. I have not done any wrong to the Jews, as you yourself know very well” (25:10). Since there was no testimony or proof offered it should now have been self-evident to the proconsul that Paul was innocent. Paul was a Roman citizen and he had every right to be tried in a Roman court.12 He knew full well that there would be no justice for him in Jerusalem and he was determined not to go there.
“If, however, I am guilty of doing anything deserving death, I do not refuse to die. But 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!” (25:11). From ancient times Roman citizens had the right to appeal to Caesar for justice. “Only if the man was a murderer, a pirate, or a bandit caught in the act, was the appeal invalid…When Paul uttered the fateful words, ‘I appeal to Caesar,’ Festus had no choice.” 13 “…By appealing to Caesar, Paul forced the Romans to guard him and take him to Rome…It must have infuriated the Jewish leaders when Paul, by one statement, took the case completely out of their hands.” 14
Today, knowing about the madness of Nero, we might wonder why Paul would appeal to him. Scholars tell us that the early years of Nero’s reign were almost like a golden age. At that time he was under the influence of the Stoic philosopher Seneca and the prefect of the praetorian guard, Afranius Burrus.15 In the later years of his reign he became a madman and was particularly intent upon persecuting Christians.
“After Festus had conferred with his council, he declared: ‘You have appealed to Caesar. To Caesar you will go!’” (25:12). Normally a Roman judge had a council or a consilium with which to confer.16 There was not so much need to confer in this matter because Festus really had no choice. He had to send Paul to Rome.
FESTUS CONSULTS WITH KING AGRIPPA
A few days later King Agrippa and Bernice arrived at Caesarea to pay their respects to Festus. Acts 25:13
The king mentioned here is Herod Agrippa II, the son of the Herod Agrippa I mentioned in Acts 12:1. When his father suddenly died in AD 44, he was only seventeen and was judged too young to immediately inherit his father’s kingdom. Later in AD 50, Claudius gave him a small kingdom that had belonged to Chalcis in Lebanon. He also received the right to appoint the Jewish high priest. In 53, he was given the former territories of Herod Philip in the upper Galilee. Later on, Nero added territories around the Sea of Galilee, Tarichaea and Tiberias. Soon Agrippa changed the name of his capital Caesarea Philippi to Neronias, to honor the emperor.17 Herod Agrippa II was always loyal to Rome and no doubt for this reason he hurried to welcome the new Roman procurator.
At Agrippa’s side was his sister Bernice (also spelled Berenice). Bernice was the oldest daughter of Herod Agrippa I. We have already met her youngest sister Drusilla, the wife of Felix. Bernice was first married to her uncle, Herod of Chalcis. After his death she lived with her brother, Agrippa II. She appeared often at her brother’s side, as in this verse. There was much talk that incest was involved in their relationship. To shield herself from scandal she persuaded Polemo, King of Cilicia, to embrace Judaism and then married him. This marriage did not last and she returned to Agrippa.18
Later, at the time of the war with Rome, Bernice would have a love affair with the Roman general Titus. She eventually went to Rome and lived as his consort. When he became emperor she was compelled to leave the city. This account is disclosed in the writings of Tacitus, Seutonius, and Cassius Dio.19 It is especially ironic that such a couple would shortly sit in judgment of the great Apostle Paul.
“Since they were spending many days there, Festus discussed Paul’s case with the king. He said: ‘There is a man here whom Felix left as a prisoner” (25:14). Herod Agrippa was part Jewish and was reputed to be an expert in the matter of Jewish religion. Festus greatly desired some insight from him as he attempted to word the report about Paul that he would later send to Caesar.20
“When I went to Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews brought charges against him and asked that he be condemned” (25:15). The Jerusalem crowd was bloodthirsty. Those depraved leaders would settle for nothing less than the blood of Paul.
“I told them that it is not the Roman custom to hand over anyone before they have faced their accusers and have had an opportunity to defend themselves against the charges. When they came here with me, I did not delay the case, but convened the court the next day and ordered the man to be brought in” (25:16-17). The Romans felt strongly that someone who was accused had a right to meet his or her accuser in a court of law. Accused persons had a right to defend themselves.21
“When his accusers got up to speak, they did not charge him with any of the crimes I had expected” (25:18). Clearly, Festus had expected the Jewish leaders to come before him with hard evidence of a crime and with testimonies of such. They had neither, but seemed to present him with certain religious disputes which would not be considered in a Roman court.
“Instead, they had some points of dispute with him about their own religion and about a dead man named Jesus who Paul claimed was alive” (25:19). We can perceive in this whole section that the resurrection of the dead was a basis of the dispute between Paul and the Jews. We need to remember that this very group was responsible for the previous murder of Jesus, although they could find no fault in him. We can understand how the idea of his resurrection would be so offensive to them.
The doctrine of the resurrection is not presented very clearly in the Old Testament. However, there are quite a number of scriptures that speak of it. Undoubtedly, the Pharisees were convinced of the resurrection by some of these passages. Perhaps the earliest one is found in Job 19:25-27. Job says: “I know that my redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand on the earth. And after my skin has been destroyed, yet in my flesh I will see God;
I myself will see him with my own eyes— I, and not another. How my heart yearns within me!” Other pertinent passages are Psalms 16:9-11; 49:15; Isaiah 25:8; 26:19; Ezekiel 37:1-14; and Daniel 12:2. Of course, the resurrection was made plain through the rising again of Jesus the Messiah, who appeared to hundreds of his followers and to Paul himself.
“I was at a loss how to investigate such matters; so I asked if he would be willing to go to Jerusalem and stand trial there on these charges” (25:20). Bock sums it up saying: “Festus understands that the core of the dispute is the claim that Jesus was resurrected and is alive.” 2
“But when Paul made his appeal to be held over for the Emperor’s decision, I ordered him held until I could send him to Caesar” (25:21). The Greek word for Emperor here is Sebastos. In Latin, the word is Augustus. It was a word of honor applied to the ruler of the Roman Empire. Another similar title was “Caesar.” Sebastos was a title that had been applied since the days of Caesar Octavianus in 27 BC.23 The word Sebastos in itself refers to being venerable or worthy of honor and reverence.24 Before such an exalted one Paul was destined to appear.
“Then Agrippa said to Festus, ‘I would like to hear this man myself.’ He replied, ‘Tomorrow you will hear him’” (25:22). Some commentators have noted how closely the upcoming meeting with Agrippa II parallels the meeting of Jesus with Herod Antipas recorded in Luke 23;6-12.25 In speaking of the preparation for this meeting Barclay says: “Doubtless Festus had donned the scarlet robe which a governor wore on state occasions…near Festus would stand the captains in command of the five cohorts which were stationed at Caesarea; and in the background there would be a solid phalanx of the tall Roman legionaries on ceremonial guard…Into such a scene came Paul, the little Jewish tent-maker, with his hands in chains…” 26
POMP AND CIRCUMSTANCE
The next day Agrippa and Bernice came with great pomp and entered the audience room with the high-ranking military officers and the prominent men of the city. At the command of Festus, Paul was brought in. Acts 25:23
What a show must have been put on that day! With this royal appearance, the scripture was at last fulfilled. Jesus had promised his followers, “…on account of me you will stand before governors and kings as witnesses to them” (Mk. 13:9). But specifically, the Lord had said of Paul: “…This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel” (Acts 9:15).
The word for “pomp” is the Greek phantasies, meaning to make a parade with splendor and much show.27 Agrippa’s father had displayed a lot of pomp but was at last eaten by worms (12:23). All this reminds us of the poem of Thomas Gray written back in 1751:
The boast of heraldry, the pomp of power,
And all that beauty, all that wealth e’er gave,
Awaits alike the inevitable hour.
The paths of glory lead but to the grave.28
In all this the Apostle Paul knew a great secret. He had previously expressed it in 1 Corinthians 1:25: “For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.” There would someday be a parade for Paul, a parade drenched in the light of heavenly splendor with the heraldry of divine trumpets. That parade would be far beyond the imagination of the fading dignitaries assembled that day. Paul’s glory would be celebrated for thousands of years to come and would last forever and ever.
We should note that this occasion was not a trial as such. It was in fact a hearing.29 Even if it could be considered a trial, Wiersbe says “…before the session ended, Paul became the judge, and Festus, King Agrippa, and Bernice became the
defendants!” 30
“Festus said: ‘King Agrippa, and all who are present with us, you see this man! The whole Jewish community has petitioned me about him in Jerusalem and here in Caesarea, shouting that he ought not to live any longer. I found he had done nothing deserving of death, but because he made his appeal to the Emperor I decided to send him to Rome’” (25:24-25). Festus was caught on the horns of a dilemma. He was facing a difficult crisis of his own making. All he had needed to do was declare Paul innocent and end the whole matter. He did not have the courage to do that and now that Paul had had appealed to Caesar it was too late to do it. Marshall notes: “ The effect of the scene as a whole is to emphasize the uprightness of Roman legal proceedings over against the partiality and injustice of the Jews…There is tremendous emphasis on the climax: ‘This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.’” 31
“But I have nothing definite to write to His Majesty about him. Therefore I have brought him before all of you, and especially before you, King Agrippa, so that as a result of this investigation I may have something to write” (25:26). The matter of what to write to Caesar was really bothering Festus. He was probably having nightmares about it. How could he send a perfectly innocent man to Caesar and have no charges to send along. This would surely be seen as malfeasance in office. He was hoping that Agrippa, with all his background and knowledge could rescue him. Alas, it was probably not to be!
It might be noted here that the expression “His Majesty” or “Lord” as in most other versions, is the Greek word kurios. The historian James Jeffers says:
During the first century AD, the cult of the living emperor became an accepted feature of public life…The Greek term kyrios (“lord”) was used to refer to the emperor Nero…Domitian, expanded the concept of the divinity of the emperor and scandalized his fellow Romans by demanding that they address him as “lord and god” (dominus et deus). He was assassinated not long thereafter.” 32
At that time and later, many Christians suffered by not accepting the emperor as “Lord” and for not making sacrifice to him.
“For I think it is unreasonable to send a prisoner on to Rome without specifying the charges against him” (25:27). Again, we see how Festus is haunted by the fact that he has no letter to write to Caesar. He could no doubt almost hear Caesar’s reply, “Why, then, did you not set the prisoner free?” 33 Without a charge against Paul he would surely be censured for incompetence.