Acts 24

The second phase of the legal proceedings against Paul takes place before the Roman procurator Felix in Caesarea (about 60 miles northwest of ) the province capital of Roman Palestine. This is the only time in Acts that Paul is actually prosecuted. The legal protocol follows Roman judicial procedures. is the prosecuting attorney and presents the charges. Paul is the defendant and he responds. The case is then remanded to the judge who renders a verdict or postpones it indefinitely.

Tertullus accuses Paul of 4 illegalities: 1) being a pest 2) being an agitator 3) being the ringleader of a Jewish sect 4) trying to defile the temple.

Paul’s rebuttal is his “confession” of the “Way’s” continuity with Jewish belief.

V. 1-4 Ananias arrives with some elders and Tertullus. His opening remarks conform to the rhetorical conventions of a legal argument in the ancient world. He flatters Felix shamelessly to establish a good rapport and possibly a good verdict.

Vs. 5-8 the strongest accusation against Paul essentially is sedition – that is Paul is an agitator among the Jews. This charge echoes the Jewish charge earlier that Paul is teaching the Jews of the diaspora to forsake Moses thereby threatening the very identity of the Jews. What matters to the Romans is that Paul is threatening the Pax Romana.

However, the prosecution has not brought key witnesses to support its allegation – the Jews from the Diaspora.

The charge of being a ring leader of the sect of the Nazarenes is also a strong charge because of the possible understanding of the Greek word for sect – Hairesis. Luke has used this word earlier to represent “parties” like Sadducees and Pharisees. Here it is related to the charge of rabble rousing within the overarching Judaic tradition.

Finally Paul faces a charge of profaning the temple. There is in fact no evidence to support the charge.

The prosecution ends its case. But Felix refuses to hear Paul then, choosing instead to question him in private and outside the bounds of the trial – that is outside the bounds of the Roman law.

Vs. 9-20 Paul’s speech consists of 3 main points that prove his innocence.

1) Sedition – Paul has come to Jerusalem to worship. He comes as a pilgrim coming to celebrate with other faithful Jews. The notice he filled with the temple priests of his completion of the Nazaritic vows is proof he could only have been in Jerusalem 12 days or less – a very short time to organize a rebellion. 2) Ringleader of a religious sect – rather than counter the charge Paul “confesses.” He is in fact leader of a sect – not a new sect but he is also a worshipper of the “God of our ancestors.” 3) Profaning the temple – Paul explains more in depth what his true reason was in coming to Jerusalem –reasons itself would endorse. Vs. 21- 27 “Felix was rather well informed about the Way” implies that Felix has no argument with Paul’s definition of the church’s beliefs and practices.

Felix calls for a postponement rather than keeping his word to decide the case when Paul’s accusers arrived.

Two years of confinement was the limit according to Roman law that a Roman citizen could be held without a verdict. Felix should have released Paul but did not.