Atos 25

John MacArthur · Citado em PreceptAustin

Atos 25

MacArthur points out that "Knowing that an obviously intelligent, educated man such as Paul would claim that a dead man had come alive must have especially baffled Festus (cf. Acts 26:24+ "“Paul, you are out of your mind! Your great learning is driving you mad.”). Yet it was precisely the issue of the resurrection of Jesus Christ that most clearly set Christianity apart from Judaism and was the cornerstone of the gospel. Festus could not understand the implications of Christ's resurrection because he was ignorant of His life and ministry, and of Scripture. (Ibid) Jack Andrews writes that "Festus didn’t know much about Jesus—but he had heard the gospel from the apostle Paul. Paul had declared the gospel—that Jesus died for their sins, was buried, and on the third day He rose again....The resurrection of Jesus is still the dividing point—it is still the decisive point—it is still the dynamic point! We are not going to mesh with other religions—Christianity is not about religion—it is about a relationship with the Living God who rose from the dead and lives forevermore! You cannot be saved if you have not believed that Jesus rose again! Believing that Jesus died on the cross is not enough! He died and He rose again! We serve the Living Savior and Lord! This was the major sticking point with the Jews—Festus didn’t get it—it was not a big deal to the Roman governor! He wishes now that he could relive these days and turn to and trust in the certain Jesus who died and whom Paul affirmed was alive again!" (Jack Andrews Expository Studies – Understanding Acts - Volume 7) John

Atos 25

MacArthur comments on the verb "I would like" - The imperfect tense of boulomai (I would like) suggests Agrippa had been wanting to hear Paul for a long time. He undoubtedly knew of Paul and looked forward to hearing the leading spokesman for Christianity in person. I would like (want, wish) (1014) boulomai) refers to a settled desire, one born of or springing from reason and not from emotion. To will, to wish, to will deliberately, to intend, to have a purpose, to be minded. Boulomai underlines the preset determined intention which drives one's planning, wishing, resolving. In contrast, the verb thelo focuses on the desire ("wishfulness") behind making an offer. Tomorrow," he said, "you shall hear him." - "Agrippa's desire to speak with Paul gave occasion for the noblest defense of Christianity ever made before a court of law." (Arnold) For that we can thank Agrippa that he desired to hear Paul and we would be able 2000 years later to hear the great apostle filled with the Spirit and the Word. What an example to imitate he has given us (1 Cor 11:1). Longenecker adds that "Paul's meeting with Herod Agrippa II has often been paralleled with that of Jesus before Herod Antipas in Luke 23:6-12+. Not only was each arraigned before a Roman governor, but each was brought before a Jewish king who wanted very much to meet him (Luke 23:8+). Paul's time with Agrippa II, however, turned out far more harmoniously than that of Jesus before Antipas. While Luke may have had the parallels in mind (only Luke includes the pericope of Jesus' appearance before Antipas), the differences of purpose and detail are too great to class the accounts of the two meetings as doublets. Acts 25:23 So, on the next day when Agrippa came together with Bernice amid great pomp, and entered the auditorium accompanied by the commanders and the prominent men of the city, at the command of Festus, Paul was brought in. NET Acts 25:23 So the next day Agrippa and Bernice came with great pomp and entered the audience hall, along with the senior military officers and the prominent men of the city. When Festus gave the order, Paul was brought in. GNT Acts 25:23 Τῇ οὖν ἐπαύριον ἐλθόντος τοῦ Ἀγρίππα καὶ τῆς Βερνίκης μετὰ πολλῆς φαντασίας καὶ εἰσελθόντων εἰς τὸ ἀκροατήριον σύν τε χιλιάρχοις καὶ ἀνδράσιν τοῖς κατ᾽ ἐξοχὴν τῆς πόλεως καὶ κελεύσαντος τοῦ Φήστου ἤχθη ὁ Παῦλος. NLT Acts 25:23 So the next day Agrippa and Bernice arrived at the auditorium with great pomp, accompanied by military officers and prominent men of the city. Festus ordered that Paul be brought in. KJV Acts 25:23 And on the morrow, when Agrippa was come, and Bernice, with great pomp, and was entered into the place of hearing, with the chief captains, and principal men of the city, at Festus' commandment Paul was brought forth. ESV Acts 25:23 So on the next day Agrippa and Bernice came with great pomp, and they entered the audience hall with the military tribunes and the prominent men of the city. Then, at the command of Festus, Paul was brought in. CSB Acts 25:23 So the next day, Agrippa and Bernice came with great pomp and entered the auditorium with the commanders and prominent men of the city. When Festus gave the command, Paul was brought in. NIV Acts 25:23 The next day Agrippa and Bernice came with great pomp and entered the audience room with the high ranking officers and the leading men of the city. At the command of Festus, Paul was brought in. NKJ Acts 25:23 So the next day, when Agrippa and Bernice had come with great pomp, and had entered the auditorium with the commanders and the prominent men of the city, at Festus' command Paul was brought in. NRS Acts 25:23 So on the next day Agrippa and Bernice came with great pomp, and they entered the audience hall with the military tribunes and the prominent men of the city. Then Festus gave the order and Paul was brought in. YLT Acts 25:23 on the morrow, therefore -- on the coming of Agrippa and Bernice with much display, and they having entered into the audience chamber, with the chief captains also, and the principal men of the city, and Festus having ordered -- Paul was brought forth. with Bernice amid great pomp: Ac 12:21 Es 1:4 Ec 1:2 Isa 5:14 14:11 Eze 7:24 30:18 32:12 33:28 Da 4:30 1Co 7:31 Jas 1:11 1Pe 1:24 1Jn 2:16 Acts 25 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries REGALIA SURROUNDING PAUL'S HEARING Regalia describes the ceremonial emblems or robes of royalty, high office, an order, etc. This was "high drama" of the first order and the main character on stage would in fact be Jesus Christ, Whom Paul presented to the royal gathering (Acts 26:9, 15, 23, 28). Note the parallel between Jesus and Paul - Paul stands before Herod Agrippa II and as his Lord had stood before Herod Antipas (see Luke 23:6-12+). In both of these scenes the prisoner was first arraigned before the Roman governor (Pilate and Festus) and then brought before the Jewish king. John MacArthur writes that "This scene is one of the most riveting in the New Testament....The spectacle must have been breathtaking. Agrippa would have been decked out in all the trappings of royalty, including a purple robe, golden crown, rings, and perhaps a scepter. Bernice, though not technically Agrippa's queen, would have been similarly attired." Longenecker - Paul's defense before Herod Agrippa II was evidently for Luke the most important of the five defenses. It is the longest and most carefully constructed of the five—factors that of themselves give notice as to something of its importance in Luke's eyes. Perhaps Luke was in the audience chamber through the courtesy of an officer of the guard, or perhaps he heard Paul's account of the event and what was said at some time later. But however he got the information, he chose to conclude his reports of Paul's five defenses with this speech, which has quite properly been called the apostle's Apologia Pro Vita Sua (cf. Bruce, Book of the Acts, p. 488). (EBC) So, on the next day when Agrippa came together with Bernice amid great pomp - Festus really rolled out the red carpet for Agrippa and Bernice. Notice it is not just "pomp" but great (pollus = much) pomp. In English pomp means ceremonial elegance and splendor, stately or magnificent display. But it can also convey vain and ostentatious display. Given their godless lifestyles, it was probably a combination of both. And it is as if the Holy Spirit is setting the stage for the presentation of a man who was the antithesis of pomp and display. One has to be reminded of the words in 1 Sa 16:7 "But the LORD said to Samuel, “Do not look at his appearance or at the height of his stature, because I have rejected him; for God sees not as man sees, for man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart.” We do not know what Paul looked like physically and it doesn't matter for we know what he looked like spiritually and he was without question one of the most Christ-like men who ever walked on this earth and here he was on display before all the pretentiousness of these people. One has to wonder how many of those present were convicted by the Holy Spirit in Paul's subsequent message and came to the realization that it wasn't anyone in the room who was great but it was the Lord Jesus Christ Whom Paul represented as an ambassador who was truly great. What is so ironic about the great pomp is that this the very city in their father had so dreadfully perished for his pride Luke recording "On an appointed day Herod, having put on his royal apparel, took his seat on the rostrum and began delivering an address to them. The people kept crying out, “The voice of a god and not of a man!” And immediately an angel of the Lord struck him because he did not give God the glory, and he was eaten by worms and died. (Acts 12:21-23+) Pomp (5325)(phantasia from phantazo = to make visible from phaino = to show) means an appearing, show, pomp, pageantry, splendor. Phantasia (pomp) appears only here in the New Testament and denotes a grand, showy pageant. We get our English word for “Fantasy” from this Greek word. See use of phantasia in Greek philosophy (e.g., "In Hellenistic philosophy the term phantasia is most commonly used to refer not to the capacity to receive or interpret appearances but to those appearances themselves. Both the Epicureans and the Stoics use the word to refer to the impressions we receive through our senses."). Friberg on phantasia - strictly making visible; in a negative sense, as an appearance made for effect, for showing off cheap display, pomp, pageantry Gilbrant on phantasia - This noun refers to that which appears. It connotes great activity. A big impression was made on the crowds because there were many things to watch at the same time. In this usage the word came to refer to the outward ceremony and pageantry used to impress people with the importance of government dignitaries. Andrews - The king was living in a fantasy world—they put much stock in public appearance. It is still the same with rulers and governors and presidents and popes and people in authority today! They want to look good on the outside—they want to play the part! John

Atos 25

MacArthur points out that "Though Festus was inexperienced, had an obvious desire to conciliate the Jewish authorities, and lacked personal knowledge of Paul, God used him, as He had others, to providentially protect Paul from another plot against his life." (Ibid) Let them prosecute (present imperative - command)(2723)(kategoreo from kata = against + agora =place of public speaking) means to speak against a person before a public tribunal or bring an accusation in court. The cognate word kategoria was a legal technical term that referred to the content of the accusation or charge made against someone. Note that all of the Gospel uses involve accusing Jesus (except John 5:45). Kategoreo - Matt. 12:10; Matt. 27:12; Mk. 3:2; Mk. 15:3; Mk. 15:4; Lk. 6:7; Lk. 23:2; Lk. 23:10; Lk. 23:14; Jn. 5:45; Jn. 8:6; Acts 22:30; Acts 24:2; Acts 24:8; Acts 24:13; Acts 24:19; Acts 25:5; Acts 25:11; Acts 25:16; Acts 28:19; Rom. 2:15; Rev. 12:10+ (of Satan the Accuser!) Acts 25:6 After he had spent not more than eight or ten days among them, he went down to Caesarea, and on the next day he took his seat on the tribunal and ordered Paul to be brought. NET Acts 25:6 After Festus had stayed not more than eight or ten days among them, he went down to Caesarea, and the next day he sat on the judgment seat and ordered Paul to be brought. GNT Acts 25:6 Διατρίψας δὲ ἐν αὐτοῖς ἡμέρας οὐ πλείους ὀκτὼ ἢ δέκα, καταβὰς εἰς Καισάρειαν, τῇ ἐπαύριον καθίσας ἐπὶ τοῦ βήματος ἐκέλευσεν τὸν Παῦλον ἀχθῆναι. NLT Acts 25:6 About eight or ten days later Festus returned to Caesarea, and on the following day he took his seat in court and ordered that Paul be brought in. KJV Acts 25:6 And when he had tarried among them more than ten days, he went down unto Caesarea; and the next day sitting on the judgment seat commanded Paul to be brought. ESV Acts 25:6 After he stayed among them not more than eight or ten days, he went down to Caesarea. And the next day he took his seat on the tribunal and ordered Paul to be brought. CSB Acts 25:6 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. NIV Acts 25:6 After spending eight or ten days with them, he went down to Caesarea, and the next day he convened the court and ordered that Paul be brought before him. NKJ Acts 25:6 And when he had remained among them more than ten days, he went down to Caesarea. And the next day, sitting on the judgment seat, he commanded Paul to be brought. NRS Acts 25:6 After he had stayed among them not more than eight or ten days, he went down to Caesarea; the next day he took his seat on the tribunal and ordered Paul to be brought. YLT Acts 25:6 and having tarried among them more than ten days, having gone down to Caesarea, on the morrow having sat upon the tribunal, he commanded Paul to be brought; he took his seat on the tribunal: Ac 25:10,17 18:12-17 Mt 27:19 Joh 19:13 2Co 5:10 Jas 2:6 Acts 25 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries FESTUS TAKES THE BEMA SEAT After he had spent not more than eight or ten days among them - Luke does not specifically state it, but there is little doubt the Jews continued to "pester" Festus about Paul during this time he remained in Jerusalem.

Atos 25

MacArthur says "these wolves were toothless; the many and serious charges they brought were the same ones (sedition, sectarianism, and sacrilege, cf. Acts 24:5-6) that they had been unable to prove two years earlier before Felix. Those unsubstantiated charges were no more likely to convince Festus than they had Felix." Bringing many and serious charges against him which they could not prove - They may have been many and serious but they were groundless, unfounded, unsubstantiated, unproven, unsupported, uncorroborated. They were many and serious fabricated lies! And not only were they watching Paul, they were falsely accusing Paul.

Atos 25

MacArthur points out "Ironically, it was those same Jews, not the Christians, who finally rose in open revolt against Rome (ED: SEE FIRST JEWISH-ROMAN WAR - 66-73 A.D.). When Rome ultimately did take action against the Christians, it was not because they were revolutionaries. The Romans persecuted and killed them for refusing, on religious grounds, to participate in the empire-unifying ritual of emperor worship." (Ibid) John G. Butler wrote, “The world may put Christianity in a lowly, scorned position. But that does not change the value of Christianity or the vileness of evil. When evil seems overpowering and threatening to destroy, be encouraged that God is with the righteous; and, therefore, they will eventually be the victors.” R. Kent

Atos 25

MacArthur points out that Paul's statement "served as a rebuke and a call to integrity, since he did know that Paul was innocent (vv. 18-19). The high standards of Roman justice, and his duty as a Roman judge, demanded that he release the apostle." (Ibid) Acts 25:11 "If, then, I am a wrongdoer and have committed anything worthy of death, I do not refuse to die; but if none of those things is true of which these men accuse me, no one can hand me over to them. I appeal to Caesar." NET Acts 25:11 If then I am in the wrong and have done anything that deserves death, I am not trying to escape dying, but if not one of their charges against me is true, no one can hand me over to them. I appeal to Caesar!" (Act 25:11 NET) GNT Acts 25:11 εἰ μὲν οὖν ἀδικῶ καὶ ἄξιον θανάτου πέπραχά τι, οὐ παραιτοῦμαι τὸ ἀποθανεῖν· εἰ δὲ οὐδέν ἐστιν ὧν οὗτοι κατηγοροῦσίν μου, οὐδείς με δύναται αὐτοῖς χαρίσασθαι· Καίσαρα ἐπικαλοῦμαι. NLT Acts 25:11 If I have done something worthy of death, I don't refuse to die. But if I am innocent, no one has a right to turn me over to these men to kill me. I appeal to Caesar!" KJV Acts 25:11 For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die: but if there be none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may deliver me unto them. I appeal unto Caesar. ESV Acts 25:11 If then I am a wrongdoer and have committed anything for which I deserve to die, I do not seek to escape death. But if there is nothing to their charges against me, no one can give me up to them. I appeal to Caesar." CSB Acts 25:11 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!" NIV Acts 25:11 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!" NKJ Acts 25:11 "For if I am an offender, or have committed anything deserving of death, I do not object to dying; but if there is nothing in these things of which these men accuse me, no one can deliver me to them. I appeal to Caesar." NRS Acts 25:11 Now if I am in the wrong and have committed something for which I deserve to die, I am not trying to escape death; but if there is nothing to their charges against me, no one can turn me over to them. I appeal to the emperor." YLT Acts 25:11 for if indeed I am unrighteous, and anything worthy of death have done, I deprecate not to die; and if there is none of the things of which these accuse me, no one is able to make a favour of me to them; to Caesar I appeal!' If, then, I am a wrongdoer: 1 Co 15:2 Ac 18:14 Jos 22:22 1Sa 12:3-5 Job 31:21,38-40 Ps 7:3-5 no one can hand me over to them: Ac 16:37 22:25 1Th 2:15 I appeal to Caesar. Ac 25:10,25 26:32 28:19 1Sa 27:1 Acts 25 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries PAUL DOES NOT SEEK TO EVADE BUT TO DEMAND JUSTICE Paul knew he was innocent and he knew the Roman law was on his side and that he therefore had the right to demand justice. If, then, I am a wrongdoer and have committed anything worthy of death - For the sake of argument Paul states this as a condition of the first class (actually there are 2 "conditions") which assumes the possibility it is true. He is saying "If I am in the habit of committing injustice " and "if I have done anything deserving death." Notice that Paul's affirmation indicates that he is fully aware of the desire of the Jews to take his life. As Andrews says "The Jews were not after his detaining, but his death. They didn’t want him put away in a cell—they wanted him done away and killed!" NET Note - Both “if” clauses in this verse are first class conditions. Paul stated the options without prejudice, assuming in turn the reality of each for the sake of the argument. I am a wrongdoer (present tense) (91)(adikeo from adikos = unjust) means do wrong Col 3:25; the evildoer Rev 22:11. Be in the wrong Acts 25:11. Adikeo in Acts - Acts 7:24; Acts 7:26; Acts 7:27; Acts 25:10; Acts 25:11 I do not refuse to die - "I am not trying to escape death." “I do not beg off dying from myself.” Josephus the Jewish historian when brought before a mob and threatened with his life spoke words very similar to Paul - "Men, compatriots! I do not beg to avoid dying, if that is just. But at the same time I do want, before I should end my life, to indicate the truth." Not refuse (not beg for, ask for)(3868)(paraiteomai) in this context means to decline, refuse, avoid, reject. BDAG notes that "a wrestler is declared the victor when his opponents decline (refuse) to engage him upon seeing his unclothed physique." Jack Arnold - Paul believed in submission to existing government. “Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good” (Ro 13:1-4a+). He saw Festus as a minister of God in civil matters and knew he was to be subject to the laws of the land. Government is set up to do good and as long as a government does not ask a Christian to do something which would be unchristian and unbiblical, then the Christian is to submit to government. (Sermon) but - Term of contrast. If none of those things is true of which these men accuse me - This is another first class conditional statement (or here) which is assumed to be true and in this case was absolutely true. Accuse (2723) see above on kategoreo Uses in Acts = Acts 22:30; Acts 24:2; Acts 24:8; Acts 24:13; Acts 24:19; Acts 25:5; Acts 25:11; Acts 25:16; Acts 28:19 No one can hand me over to them -That is, no one can hand me over to the Jews lawfully. Paul knew if the case were moved to Jerusalem he would REALLY be tried before the Jews in one way or another and not before Festus! Paul also knew that legally Festus could not hand him over to the Jews for he was a Roman citizen and was an innocent one at that! Hand over is interesting verb for it is charizomai which meant to give freely or graciously, something Festus would have loved to do to curry favor with the Jews. But he could not make a free gift of Paul to the Jews (or their Supreme Court, the Sanhedrin). Vincent on charizomai says it conveys "an underlying sense of giving him up as a favor to the Jews." PAUL IN ESSENCE SAYS "I OBJECT!" He was not going to Jerusalem to be killed. So he makes an appeal to the "Supreme Court" of that day! Once a Roman citizen appealed to Caesar the trials in the lower courts ended! Paul put an end to the trial before the Jews by appealing to Caesar! Robert Girard pointed out, “The current Caesar was Nero. Paul’s trial took place in the fifth year of Nero’s reign, during the early years when he ruled well and under the wise influence of the Stoic philosopher Seneca. Nero’s insane crusade against Christians did not begin until five years later.” John MacArthur agrees adding that "Such appeals could come after the verdict (appellatio) or, as in Paul's case, before it (provocatio). Once granted, the appeal took the case out of the governor's hands and transferred it to the emperor. Paul's appeal seems at first glance to be sheer madness, since the emperor at the time was the infamous Nero. However, the early years of Nero's reign (during which Paul's appeal took place) were not marked by the cruelty and insanity of his later years. (Ibid) I appeal to Caesar - An appeal to the emperor was the right of a Roman citizen, and was highly respected. The Julian law condemned those magistrates, and others, as violaters of the public peace, who had put to death, tortured, scourged, imprisoned, or condemned any Roman citizen who had appealed to Caesar. This law was so sacred and imperative, that, in the persecution under Trajan, Pliny would not attempt to put to death Roman citizens, who were proved to have turned Christians, but determined to send them to Rome, probably because they had appealed. I appeal (1941)(epikaleomai from epí = upon + kaléo = call) literally means to call upon and was often used in secular Greek to refer to calling upon deity for any purpose which is interesting for here Paul "calls up Caesar" who was considered as deity by the Romans. Of course Paul did not have that intent in his appeal, but was simply expressing his wish for a hearing before the emperor. The Greek rendering of the Latin formula appello. NET Note - The appeal to Caesar was known as the provocatio ad Caesarem. It was a Roman citizen’s right to ask for a direct judgment by the emperor (Pliny the Younger, Letters 10.96). It was one of the oldest rights of Roman citizens. Epikaleomai in Acts - Acts 1:23; Acts 2:21; Acts 4:36; Acts 7:59; Acts 9:14; Acts 9:21; Acts 10:5; Acts 10:18; Acts 10:32; Acts 11:13; Acts 12:12; Acts 12:25; Acts 15:17; Acts 22:16; Acts 25:11; Acts 25:12; Acts 25:21; Acts 25:25; Acts 26:32; Acts 28:19; Robertson on I appeal - Technical phrase like Latin Caesarem appello. Originally the Roman law allowed an appeal from the magistrate to the people (provocatio ad populum), but the emperor represented the people and so the appeal to Caesar was the right of every Roman citizen. Paul had crossed the Rubicon (ED: take a decisive, irrevocable step) on this point and so took his case out of the hands of dilatory provincial justice (really injustice). Roman citizens could make this appeal in capital offences. There would be expense connected with it, but better that with some hope than delay and certain death in Jerusalem. Festus was no better than Felix in his vacillation and desire to curry favour with the Jews at Paul’s expense. No doubt Paul’s long desire to see Rome (Acts 19:21+; Ro 15:22–28) and the promise of Jesus that he would see Rome (Acts 23:11+) played some part in Paul’s decision. But he made it reluctantly for he says in Rome (Acts 28:19+ "constrained" = anagkazo = forced): “I was constrained to appeal.” But acquittal at the hands of Festus with the hope of going to Rome as a free man had vanished.

Atos 25

MacArthur adds these notes on Agrippa II - His great-uncle, Herod Antipas, figured prominently in the gospels (Luke 3:1) as the ruler who executed John the Baptist (Mark 6:14-29), sought Jesus' life (Luke 13:31-33), and later tried Him (Luke 23:7-12). His great-grandfather was Herod the Great, who ruled at the time of Jesus' birth (Matt. 2:1-19; Luke 1:5) and murdered the children of Bethlehem in an effort to kill the newborn King. The Herodian family in NT history: In addition to the father, Herod the Great, and his son and successor, Archelaus (Mt 2:1), three other sons are named in the N.T.: (1) Herod Antipas (Mk6:14ff.; Mt14:1; Lu 3:1), tetrarch of Galilee and Perea (4 B.C. until banished, A.D. 39). (2) Herod Philip (Boethos), mentioned Mk6:14 as Philip (v17; Mat 14:3; Luke 3:19). (3) Another Herod Philip (Lu3:1), tetrarch of territory east of Jordan (4 B.C. - A.D. 33). Two children of another son of Herod the Great, Aristobulus (a son not included in the N.T.), are also named: (1). Herodias (mentioned Mk6:17ff.; Mt14:3) (2). Herod Agrippa I (Ac12:1,6,18-24). Herodias, had been married to her uncle, Herod Philip (Boethos) but left him to live with another uncle, Herod Antipas, whom John the Baptist rebuked (Mk6:14 - 29; Mt14:1-14). Herodias' daughter is not named in the N.T. (Mk6:22ff.; Mt14:6-11), but from other sources it is known that her name was Salome, whose first husband was her great uncle (the Philip of Lu3:1). Others of the Herodian family named in the N.T. are three children of Herod Agrippa I: (1) Herod Agrippa II (Ac25:13ff.;26:1,2,27-32) (2) Drusilla (Ac24:24) (3) Bernice (Ac25:13; 26:30). Thus it will be observed that two or more names of each of three successive generations after Herod the Great are mentioned in the N.T. Acts 25:14 While they were spending many days there, Festus laid Paul's case before the king, saying, "There is a man who was left as a prisoner by Felix; GNT Acts 25:14 ὡς δὲ πλείους ἡμέρας διέτριβον ἐκεῖ, ὁ Φῆστος τῷ βασιλεῖ ἀνέθετο τὰ κατὰ τὸν Παῦλον λέγων, Ἀνήρ τίς ἐστιν καταλελειμμένος ὑπὸ Φήλικος δέσμιος, NLT Acts 25:14 During their stay of several days, Festus discussed Paul's case with the king. "There is a prisoner here," he told him, "whose case was left for me by Felix. KJV Acts 25:14 And when they had been there many days, Festus declared Paul's cause unto the king, saying, There is a certain man left in bonds by Felix: ESV Acts 25:14 And as they stayed there many days, Festus laid Paul's case before the king, saying, "There is a man left prisoner by Felix, CSB Acts 25:14 Since they stayed there many days, Festus presented Paul's case to the king, saying, "There's a man who was left as a prisoner by Felix. NIV Acts 25:14 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. NKJ Acts 25:14 When they had been there many days, Festus laid Paul's case before the king, saying: "There is a certain man left a prisoner by Felix, NRS Acts 25:14 Since they were staying there several days, Festus laid Paul's case before the king, saying, "There is a man here who was left in prison by Felix. YLT Acts 25:14 and as they were continuing there more days, Festus submitted to the king the things concerning Paul, saying, 'There is a certain man, left by Felix, a prisoner, There: Ac 24:27 Acts 25 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries FESTUS REVIEWS PAUL'S CASE WITH KING AGRIPPA John MacArthur explains that Paul's appeal to Caesar "though resolving an impasse (WITH THE JEWS), presented Festus with a fresh difficulty. As governor he was required to send a report along with Paul to Rome, detailing the charges against him. But in Paul's case, those charges were theological and general in nature. Festus, only two weeks into his term as governor, was unfamiliar with the nuances of Jewish theology. Since he did not understand the charges (cf. vv. 18-19), he could not write a coherent report explaining them to the emperor. Fortunately, aid arrived in the person of Herod Agrippa." (Ibid) While they were spending many days there - Festus had little concern for Paul so tooks some time before he brought up his Jewish problem in conversations with the king. David Jeremiah points out that "Agrippa II had more of a figurehead role in Jerusalem as the procurator of the temple given his knowledge of Jewish customs. He was actually subordinate to Festus in power and authority, serving as a consultant of sorts to the Romans on all things Jewish.” Spending (tarrying in imperfect tense)(1304)(diatribo from dia = through or intensifier + tribo = to wear, to spend; English diatribe = an abusive speech) literally means to rub away, to rub through, to wear away, to consume by rubbing. In the NT spoken only of TIME meaning to spend or pass time in a place, to stay, remain, tarry (Jn 3:22 = Jesus "was spending time with" His disciples, Acts 15:35 = "Paul and Barnabas stayed in Antioch"). Two uses in the Septuagint - Lev. 14:8; Jer. 35:7. Diatribo in NT mainly in Acts - Jn. 3:22; Acts 12:19; Acts 14:3; Acts 14:28; Acts 15:35; Acts 16:12; Acts 20:6; Acts 25:6; Acts 25:14 Festus laid Paul's case before the king, saying - Festus needed a quick tutorial in Judaism to help him come up with charges that would warrant his being sent to Caesar. Laid (394)(anatithemi from ana = up, again, back + histemi = to place, put or lay) is a verb which literally means to set up or lay up (literal sense in Lxx of 2 Sa 6:17 = "set it in its place") or to set apart (this sense in Lxx of Lev 27:28 = "anything which a man sets apart [dedicates] to the LORD"). Anatithemi is only used in the middle voice in the NT and means to set forth or lay a matter before someone for their consideration or to communicate with a view to consultation, “to set forth, impart or communicate one’s cause”. Friberg - (1) as setting forth one’s cause declare, refer to (for counsel) (Acts 25.14); (2) as giving additional information with a request for consideration explain, communicate, put before (Gal 2.2) There is a man who was left ( kataleipo) as a prisoner by Felix - He reviews Acts 24:27 where Luke recorded "wishing to do the Jews a favor, Felix left Paul imprisoned."

Atos 25

MacArthur explains that "Although Paul had already faced his accusers before Felix (and was not convicted of any crime), Festus wanted to discharge his duty and hear the case himself before rendering a verdict." Andrews says "Roman governor would govern by Roman rule—not Jewish wants! Gilbrant - Because of his education in the imperial palace in Rome, King Agrippa would be very familiar with Roman law and custom. Actually, it had developed over several hundred years and had often been modified to meet changing needs of the republic and then of the empire. It was eventually codified, and the Roman law codes have influenced the laws of western Europe and America. But at this time much was in the hands of the governor or the king of the particular part of the Roman Empire. It was also part of the Roman custom to bring in experts who would help the judge, governor, or king make his decisions. So it was not out of order for Festus to ask Agrippa for his opinion. Actually, what Festus said about Roman law and custom was part of the Jewish law and custom as well. When the chief priests and Pharisees wanted to arrest Jesus, the officers sent to arrest Him were so impressed by His teaching that they did not do so. This upset the Pharisees and they remarked that the crowds who were following Jesus did not know the Law and were accursed. But Nicodemus responded by asking whether their Law judged anyone before giving a hearing and finding out what he was doing (John 7:44-51). The Pharisees were implying that because they knew the Law they had more sense than to believe in Jesus. But they were wanting to kill Jesus without a trial, something which was contrary to the Law. (The Complete Biblical Library – Acts) Custom (habit)(1485)(ethos from etho = to be used, to be accustomed) refers to a usual or customary manner of behavior, habit, pattern of behavior which is more or less fixed by tradition or the usual practice. It may be established by law or otherwise generally sanctioned by the society. Hand over (grant, freely give, bestow) (5483)(charizomai from charis = grace, undeserved merit or favor) has the basic meaning of to give. To grant as a favor. To give gratuitously, generously, graciously and in kindness. Defense (627)(apologia from apo = from + logos = speech) literally means, “to talk one’s self off from". Apologia was a technical word used in the Greek law courts and was used of an attorney who talked his client off from a charge that was brought against him. In short it refers to a speech given in defense. Charges (accusation)(1462)(egklema from egkaleo = to arraign) refers to an accusation made in public (Acts 23:29) or a charge (Acts 25:16 - only 2 NT uses). It was a legal technical term (charge, accusation). It signifies the act or action of finding fault with someone. Louw-Nida = "(a technical, legal term) a formal indictment or accusation brought against someone - 'indictment, accusation, case.'" BDAG (1) 1 an indictment or charge brought against someone through judicial proceedings, charge, accusation, legal technical term - defense against the accusation Acts 25:16; a charge deserving death or imprisonment Acts 23:29 (2) 2 the act or action of expressing disapproval, reproach (Acts 23:25) This word appears in classical Greek from the Fifth Century B.C. but is not used in the Septuagint. Acts 25:17 "So after they had assembled here, I did not delay, but on the next day took my seat on the tribunal and ordered the man to be brought before me. NET Acts 25:17 So after they came back here with me, I did not postpone the case, but the next day I sat on the judgment seat and ordered the man to be brought. GNT Acts 25:17 συνελθόντων οὖν [αὐτῶν] ἐνθάδε ἀναβολὴν μηδεμίαν ποιησάμενος τῇ ἑξῆς καθίσας ἐπὶ τοῦ βήματος ἐκέλευσα ἀχθῆναι τὸν ἄνδρα· NLT Acts 25:17 "When his accusers came here for the trial, I didn't delay. I called the case the very next day and ordered Paul brought in. KJV Acts 25:17 Therefore, when they were come hither, without any delay on the morrow I sat on the judgment seat, and commanded the man to be brought forth. ESV Acts 25:17 So when they came together here, I made no delay, but on the next day took my seat on the tribunal and ordered the man to be brought. CSB Acts 25:17 Therefore, when they had assembled here, I did not delay. The next day I sat at the judge's bench and ordered the man to be brought in. NIV Acts 25:17 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. NKJ Acts 25:17 "Therefore when they had come together, without any delay, the next day I sat on the judgment seat and commanded the man to be brought in. NRS Acts 25:17 So when they met here, I lost no time, but on the next day took my seat on the tribunal and ordered the man to be brought. YLT Acts 25:17 'They, therefore, having come together -- I, making no delay, on the succeeding day having sat upon the tribunal, did command the man to be brought, I did not delay: Ac 25:6 Acts 25 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries FESTUS DID NOT POSTPONE BUT CONVENED QUICKLY So after they had assembled here, I did not delay - Indeed he acted quickly. Festus thus made it clear to Agrippa there had been no laxity on his part. He had done his duty as a Roman governor as he put Paul on trial. Gilbrant on delay - Anabolē is a legal, technical term for the postponement of trial. It is used only once in the New Testament. In Acts 25:17 Festus claimed that he did not delay Paul’s trial. (Ibid) Louw-Nida adds anabole means "extend a period of time by postponing an event - 'to put off, to postpone.'" But on the next day took my seat on the tribunal (bema) and ordered (keleuo) the man to be brought before me - He took up Paul's case the day after he had returned to Caesarea from Jerusalem (Acts 25:6). Note Festus does not use his name but just refers to the greatest apostle in history as "the man." On the other hand, as we might say in slang today, "Paul, you da man!" NET Note on tribunal - The judgment seat ( bema) was a raised platform mounted by steps and sometimes furnished with a seat, used by officials in addressing an assembly or making pronouncements, often on judicial matters. The judgment seat was a familiar item in Greco-Roman culture, often located in the agora, the public square or marketplace in the center of a city. Acts 25:18 "When the accusers stood up, they began bringing charges against him not of such crimes as I was expecting, GNT Acts 25:18 περὶ οὗ σταθέντες οἱ κατήγοροι οὐδεμίαν αἰτίαν ἔφερον ὧν ἐγὼ ὑπενόουν πονηρῶν, NLT Acts 25:18 But the accusations made against him weren't any of the crimes I expected. KJV Acts 25:18 Against whom when the accusers stood up, they brought none accusation of such things as I supposed: ESV Acts 25:18 When the accusers stood up, they brought no charge in his case of such evils as I supposed. CSB Acts 25:18 Concerning him, the accusers stood up and brought no charge of the sort I was expecting. NIV Acts 25:18 When his accusers got up to speak, they did not charge him with any of the crimes I had expected. NKJ Acts 25:18 "When the accusers stood up, they brought no accusation against him of such things as I supposed, NRS Acts 25:18 When the accusers stood up, they did not charge him with any of the crimes that I was expecting. YLT Acts 25:18 concerning whom the accusers, having stood up, were bringing against him no accusation of the things I was thinking of, Acts 25 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries UNEXPECTED ACCUSATIONS When the accusers (kategoros) stood up - The Jews presented their case to Festus and the governor reveals to King Agrippa the nature and content of the Jewish accusations against Paul. They began bringing charges against him not of such crimes (poneros = active, injurious evil) as I was expecting - We don't know exactly what genre of charges Festus was expecting but certainly he was not expecting accusations dealing with religion. He was probably surprised that the Jews did not charge Paul with serious violations of Roman law that would have warranted a death sentence. And so while Festus openly confessed Paul had done no wrong, he was willing to sacrifice Paul on the altar of political expediency. So much for his integrity! Gilbrant - The Roman courts considered criminal cases to include extortion, embezzlement, treason, corrupt practices, murder, fraud, and assault. Since the Jewish leaders were obviously wanting Paul killed, Festus supposed Paul must be guilty of something that would be in the same class as these criminal practices. But Paul was not guilty of anything like any of these, and the Jewish leaders did not try to accuse him of any such matters. (Ibid) Acts 25:19 but they simply had some points of disagreement with him about their own religion and about a dead man, Jesus, whom Paul asserted to be alive. NET Acts 25:19 Rather they had several points of disagreement with him about their own religion and about a man named Jesus who was dead, whom Paul claimed to be alive. GNT Acts 25:19 ζητήματα δέ τινα περὶ τῆς ἰδίας δεισιδαιμονίας εἶχον πρὸς αὐτὸν καὶ περί τινος Ἰησοῦ τεθνηκότος ὃν ἔφασκεν ὁ Παῦλος ζῆν. NLT Acts 25:19 Instead, it was something about their religion and a dead man named Jesus, who Paul insists is alive. KJV Acts 25:19 But had certain questions against him of their own superstition, and of one Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. ESV Acts 25:19 Rather they had certain points of dispute with him about their own religion and about a certain Jesus, who was dead, but whom Paul asserted to be alive. CSB Acts 25:19 Instead they had some disagreements with him about their own religion and about a certain Jesus, a dead man Paul claimed to be alive. NIV Acts 25:19 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. NKJ Acts 25:19 "but had some questions against him about their own religion and about a certain Jesus, who had died, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. NRS Acts 25:19 Instead they had certain points of disagreement with him about their own religion and about a certain Jesus, who had died, but whom Paul asserted to be alive. YLT Acts 25:19 but certain questions concerning their own religion they had against him, and concerning a certain Jesus who was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive; they simply had some points of disagreement: Ac 25:7 18:15,19 23:29 about their own religion and about a dead man, Jesus: Ac 17:22,23 whom Paul asserted to be alive: Ac 1:22 Acts 2:32 Acts 17:31 Acts 26:22,23 1Co 15:3,4,14-20 Rev 1:18 Acts 25 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries A DEAD MAN WHO IS ALIVE! But they simply had some points of disagreement with him about their own religion - Not only did Festus not grasp the nature of the Jewish accusations, he was not qualified to judge on religious matters in a Roman court of law. Religion (1175)(deisidaimonia from deido = fear + daimon = divinity, a pagan god) in a good sense describes reverence towards deity, pious attitude toward divinities. It indicates a dread of the gods, usually in a condemnatory or contemptuous sense. In a bad sense it referred to superstition. In a neutral sense it referred to a system of beliefs (religion). Louw-Nida = "a set of beliefs concerning deity, with the implication of corresponding behavior" and it is this last sense which is the most likely in the present passage. The only other NT uses is Acts 17:22 "So Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, “Men of Athens, I observe that you are very religious in all respects." Gilbrant comments that "The truth of the resurrection of Jesus was, of course, the central point at issue, though Festus seemed almost to hesitate to tell King Agrippa about it and added it as if it were something of an afterthought. To Festus, as to the Greek philosophers in Athens, the idea of the Resurrection was something foreign to their thinking. Festus, however, did not mock or make fun of the idea, although he obviously neither understood nor believed Paul's claim. (Ibid) Longenecker adds "Such matters were plainly incomprehensible and pointless to a Roman administrator." (Expositor's Bible Commentary) And about a dead man, Jesus, whom Paul asserted to be alive - So while Luke did not record Paul mentioning the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, it is clear that Paul did make that declaration before the pagan Festus. Asserted is in the imperfect tense indicating Paul repeatedly testified to the validity of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead (a good pattern to imitate)!

Atos 25

MacArthur has an interesting note that "Paul was probably not legally bound to attend the inquiry. He had already appealed his case to the emperor, thus taking it out of Festus's jurisdiction. But Paul would not think of passing up an opportunity to preach the gospel in such an important setting. Here is still another example of his courageous commitment to serve the Lord Jesus Christ in every circumstance. The vehicle for his gospel proclamation was to be the powerful, dramatic testimony of his conversion on the road to Damascus." Absurd (unreasonable)(249)(alogos from "a" = without + lógos = word, reason) means literally without speech or reason and so irrational, not working by reason and so contrary to reason, without cause or without basis. Longenecker on use of alogos in this context - Festus's statement that he thought it "unreasonable" (alogos) to send on a prisoner with unspecified charges against him is typical of the face-saving language used among officials when what is really meant is that the failure to specify charges would be a dereliction of duty. (EBC)