Act 24:5 | KingComments | STEP | The Council took its time to prepare the matter well. They also hired an attorney, literally an orator. After five days they appeared before the governor with this orator, one Tertullus, and brought charges against Paul. Tertullus was thoroughly informed by the Council and would bring their case forward with verve, but without success. He was hired because of his oratorical talent, but has no inner connection with the case itself. He starts his speech with an enormous show of flattery. The “much peace” they “attained” and the “reforms … for this nation” that Tertullus praises as having been brought about by Felix’s policies are gross lies. There is nothing known of such a policy by this man who, on the contrary, was known as a man of low morals. The gratitude is extraordinarily feigned, it is hypocrisy of the highest order. The Jews could drink this man’s blood, but they kept quiet or nodded in agreement with this hypocrisy. With his judicial flattery, Tertullus wants to address the stadholder’s feelings. The governor only had to listen for a moment and the matter would be perfectly clear to him. Then the governor could get back to dealing with the really important and difficult matters. The man standing in front of him turned out to be a pest. It is a sick man who also spreads sickness. It is abundantly clear that he is a cause of riots among all Jews throughout the entire empire. Could anyone be an even bigger criminal? In addition, he is also the leader of a state dangerous sect, that of the Nazarenes. Tertullus easily swings from one extreme to the other. He praises Felix as a high-ranking man of stature, while in the same breath he presents the high-ranking apostle as a pest, someone who is harmful to public health. With all this, Tertullus wants to give the impression that Felix is rendering the whole world a great service when he condemns this man. He removes a rotten fruit that would otherwise further destroy all the beautiful fruits of Roman policy, of which the Jews are also a beautiful fruit. Indeed, “this man” was “a fellow who stirs up dissension”. Everywhere he went, there was commotion and unrest among the Jews. Only they, the Jews, were the troublemakers themselves. Tertullus presents Paul as a gang leader of “the sect of the Nazarenes”, a name for the Christians that we only find here. He turns the followers of the Nazarene, the Lord Jesus, into a gang. Tertullus also makes the great accusation, albeit in a weakened form, regarding the desecration of the temple. He presents it as if Paul ‘tried’ to desecrate the temple, which actually means that he did not do it. But also, the attempt has been a reason to arrest him and judge him according to “our own” law. It is still the old lie that Paul wanted to bring his Greek friend Trophimus into the temple. To reinforce the accusation, Tertullus refers to what Lysias did in delivering Paul. It seems that Tertullus means that Lysias shouldn’t have done that, because then Felix wouldn’t have had to spend his good time on this matter. By talking about “much violence” Tertullus also hints how much they would have liked to get rid of this man. But this is how the case turned out. They did what Lysias commanded and have come to Felix. Felix will understand that you don’t do that if you’re not very sure about your case. While Tertullus made his plea like this, the Jews repeatedly showed their consent. They have supported Tertullus by asserting that everything is as he presents it.

‏ Acts 24:5

Paul Charged Before Felix

The Council took its time to prepare the matter well. They also hired an attorney, literally an orator. After five days they appeared before the governor with this orator, one Tertullus, and brought charges against Paul. Tertullus was thoroughly informed by the Council and would bring their case forward with verve, but without success. He was hired because of his oratorical talent, but has no inner connection with the case itself.

He starts his speech with an enormous show of flattery. The “much peace” they “attained” and the “reforms … for this nation” that Tertullus praises as having been brought about by Felix’s policies are gross lies. There is nothing known of such a policy by this man who, on the contrary, was known as a man of low morals. The gratitude is extraordinarily feigned, it is hypocrisy of the highest order. The Jews could drink this man’s blood, but they kept quiet or nodded in agreement with this hypocrisy.

With his judicial flattery, Tertullus wants to address the stadholder’s feelings. The governor only had to listen for a moment and the matter would be perfectly clear to him. Then the governor could get back to dealing with the really important and difficult matters. The man standing in front of him turned out to be a pest. It is a sick man who also spreads sickness. It is abundantly clear that he is a cause of riots among all Jews throughout the entire empire. Could anyone be an even bigger criminal? In addition, he is also the leader of a state dangerous sect, that of the Nazarenes.

Tertullus easily swings from one extreme to the other. He praises Felix as a high-ranking man of stature, while in the same breath he presents the high-ranking apostle as a pest, someone who is harmful to public health. With all this, Tertullus wants to give the impression that Felix is rendering the whole world a great service when he condemns this man. He removes a rotten fruit that would otherwise further destroy all the beautiful fruits of Roman policy, of which the Jews are also a beautiful fruit.

Indeed, “this man” was “a fellow who stirs up dissension”. Everywhere he went, there was commotion and unrest among the Jews. Only they, the Jews, were the troublemakers themselves. Tertullus presents Paul as a gang leader of “the sect of the Nazarenes”, a name for the Christians that we only find here. He turns the followers of the Nazarene, the Lord Jesus, into a gang.

Tertullus also makes the great accusation, albeit in a weakened form, regarding the desecration of the temple. He presents it as if Paul ‘tried’ to desecrate the temple, which actually means that he did not do it. But also, the attempt has been a reason to arrest him and judge him according to “our own” law. It is still the old lie that Paul wanted to bring his Greek friend Trophimus into the temple.

To reinforce the accusation, Tertullus refers to what Lysias did in delivering Paul. It seems that Tertullus means that Lysias shouldn’t have done that, because then Felix wouldn’t have had to spend his good time on this matter. By talking about “much violence” Tertullus also hints how much they would have liked to get rid of this man. But this is how the case turned out. They did what Lysias commanded and have come to Felix. Felix will understand that you don’t do that if you’re not very sure about your case.

While Tertullus made his plea like this, the Jews repeatedly showed their consent. They have supported Tertullus by asserting that everything is as he presents it.