Act 24:10-21 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 10. Had beckoned unto him to speak . Either by a nod or by the hand. Hast been of many years . Felix and Cumanus had been joint-governors of Judea; but after Cumanus had been condemned for his bad administration of the affairs, the government fell entirely into the hands of Felix. This was about seven years before Paul was arraigned before him, and with might be called many years, as he had been long enough there to become acquainted the customs and habits of the Jews; and it might also be called long in comparison with the short time which any of his immediate predecessors had held the office. See Josephus, Ant. b. xx. ch. vi., vii. A judge . This word is evidently used here in the sense of magistrate, or one appointed to administer the affairs of government. To determine litigated matters was, however, one part of his office. It is remarkable that Paul did not begin his speech as Tertullus had done, by any flattering address, or by any of the arts of rhetoric. He founded his plea on the justice of his cause, and on the fact, that Felix had had so much experience on the affairs of Judea, that he was well qualified to understand the merits of the case, and to judge impartially. Paul was well acquainted with his character, and would not by flattering words declare that which was not strictly true. I do the more cheerfully , etc. Since you are so well acquainted with the customs and habits of the Jews, I the more readily submit the case to your disposal. This address indicated great confidence in the justice of his cause; and was the language of a man bold, fearless, and conscious of his innocence. (1) "governor" "Felix, made Procurator over Judea, A.D. 53" (f) "answer" (+) "myself" "make my defence"

Acts 24:10-21

Verse 10. Had beckoned unto him to speak. Either by a nod or by the hand.

Hast been of many years. Felix and Cumanus had been joint-governors of Judea; but after Cumanus had been condemned for his bad administration of the affairs, the government fell entirely into the hands of Felix. This was about seven years before Paul was arraigned before him, and with might be called many years, as he had been long enough there to become acquainted the customs and habits of the Jews; and it might also be called long in comparison with the short time which any of his immediate predecessors had held the office. See Josephus, Ant. b. xx. ch. vi., vii.

A judge. This word is evidently used here in the sense of magistrate, or one appointed to administer the affairs of government. To determine litigated matters was, however, one part of his office. It is remarkable that Paul did not begin his speech as Tertullus had done, by any flattering address, or by any of the arts of rhetoric. He founded his plea on the justice of his cause, and on the fact, that Felix had had so much experience on the affairs of Judea, that he was well qualified to understand the merits of the case, and to judge impartially. Paul was well acquainted with his character, Acts 24:25 and would not by flattering words declare that which was not strictly true.

I do the more cheerfully, etc. Since you are so well acquainted with the customs and habits of the Jews, I the more readily submit the case to your disposal. This address indicated great confidence in the justice of his cause; and was the language of a man bold, fearless, and conscious of his innocence.

(1) "governor" "Felix, made Procurator over Judea, A.D. 53" (f) "answer" 1Pet 3:15 (+) "myself" "make my defence" Verse 11. Because that thou mayest understand. Greek, "Thou being able to know." That is, he could understand or know, by taking the proper evidence. Paul does not mean to say that Felix could understand the case, because he had been many years a judge of that nation. That fact would qualify him to judge correctly, or to understand the customs of the Jews. But the fact that he had been but twelve days in Jerusalem, and had been orderly and peaceable there, Felix could ascertain only by the proper testimony. The first part of Paul's defence Acts 24:11-13 consists in an express denial of what they alleged against him.

Are yet but twelve days. Beza reckons these twelve days in this manner: The first was that on which he came to Jerusalem, Acts 21:15. The second he spent with James and the apostles, Acts 21:18. Six days were spent in fulfilling his vow, Acts 21:21,26. On the ninth day the tumult arose, being the seventh day of his vow, and on this day he was rescued by Lysias, Acts 21:27, 22:29. The tenth day he was before the sanhedrim, Acts 22:30, 23:10. On the eleventh the plot was laid to take his life; and on the same day, at evening, he was removed to Caesarea. The days on which he was confined at Caesarea are not enumerated, since his design in mentioning the number of days was to show the improbability that, in that time, he had been engaged in producing a tumult; and it would not be pretended that he had been so engaged while confined in a prison at Caesarea. The defence of Paul here is, that but twelve days occurred from the time that he went to Jerusalem, till he was put under the custody of Felix; and that during so short a time it was wholly improbable that he would have been able to excite sedition.

For to worship. This farther shows that the design of Paul was not to produce sedition. He had gone up for the peaceful purpose of devotion, and not to produce riot and disorder. That this was his design in going to Jerusalem, or at least a part of his purpose, is indicated by the passage in Acts 20:16. It should be observed, however, that our translation conveys an idea which is not necessarily in the Greek--that this was the design of his going to Jerusalem. The original is, "Since I went up to Jerusalem worshipping," προσκυνησων i.e., he was actually engaged in devotion when the tumult arose. But his main design m going to Jerusalem, was to convey to his suffering countrymen there the benefactions of the Gentile churches. See Acts 24:17, Rom 15:25,26.

(h) "neither found me" Acts 25:8, 28:17 Verse 12. And they neither found me, etc. The first charge of Tertullus against Paul was, Acts 24:5, that he was "a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition." The charge of his being a pest was so general, that Paul did not think it necessary to attempt to refute it. To the specification, that he was a mover of sedition, he replies by a firm denial, and by a solemn declaration that they had not found him in any synagogue, or in the city, or in the temple, either disputing or exciting a tumult. His conduct there had been entirely peaceable; and they had no right to suppose that it had been otherwise anywhere.

(h) "neither found me" Acts 25:8, 28:17 Verse 13. Neither can they prove the things, etc. That is, that I am a mover of sedition, or a disturber of the peace of the people. This appeal he boldly makes; he challenges investigation; and as they did not offer to specify any acts of disorder or tumult excited by him, this charge falls of course.

(i) "prove the things" 1Pet 3:16 Verse 14. But this I confess, etc. The next specification in the charge of Tertullus was, Acts 24:5, that he was "a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes." To this, Paul replies in this and the two following verses. Of this reply we may observe,

(1.) that he does not stoop to notice the contempt implied in the use of the word Nazarenes. He was engaged in a more important business than to contend about the name which they chose to give to Christians.

(2.) He admits that he belonged to that sect or class of people. That he was a Christian he neither denied, nor was disposed to deny.

(3.) He maintains that in this way he is still worshipping the God of his fathers. Of this, the fact that he was engaged in worship in the temple, was sufficient proof.

(4.) He shows them that he believed only what was written in the law and the prophets; that this involved the main doctrine of their religion--the hope of the resurrection of the dead, Acts 24:15; and that it was his constant and earnest desire to keep a pure conscience in all things, Acts 24:16. These are the points of his defence to this second charge, and we shall see that they fully meet and dispose of the accusation.

After the way. After the manner or mode of worship.

Which they call heresy. This translation does not express to us the force of the original. We have attached to the word heresy an idea which is not conveyed by the Greek word, and now commonly understand by it, error of doctrine. In Paul's answer here, there is an explicit reference to their charge, which does not appear in our version. The charge of Tertullus was, that he was the ringleader of the sect τηςαιρεσεως of the Nazarenes, Acts 24:5. To this, Paul replies, "After the way which they call sect, (αιρεσιν, not error of doctrine, but after a way which they maintain is producing division or schism,) so worship I the God of my fathers." Paul was not ashamed to be called a follower of that sect or party among the Jewish people. Nor should we be ashamed to worship God in a mode that is called heresy or schism, if we do it in obedience to conscience and to God.

So worship I. I continue to worship. I have not departed from the characteristic of the Jewish people, the proper and public acknowledgment of the God of the Jews.

The God of my fathers. My fathers' God; Jehovah; the God whom my Jewish ancestors adored. There is something very touching in this, and fitted to find its way to the heart of a Jew. He had introduced no new object of worship, (comp. De 13:1-5;) he had not become a follower of a false or foreign God; and this fact was really a reply to their charge, that he was setting up a new sect in religion. The same thing Paul affirms of himself in 2Ti 1:3: "I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with a pure conscience."

Believing all things, etc. Particularly respecting the Messiah. So he more fully explains his meaning in his speech before king Agrippa, Acts 26:23.

In the Law and in the Prophets. Commanded in the law of Moses, and foretold by the prophets. That Paul had ever disbelieved any of these things, they could not prove; and his whole course had shown that he fully credited the sacred records. Most of his arguments in defending Christianity had been drawn from the Jewish writings.

(*) "heresy" "A sect" (a) "worship" Mic 4:5 (b) "God of my fathers" 2Ti 1:3 (c) "written in the law" Lk 24:27, Acts 26:22, 28:23 (d) "in the prophets" Mt 22:40, Lk 16:16, Jn 1:45, Acts 13:15, Rom 3:21 Verse 15. And have hope toward God. Having a hope of the resurrection of the dead, which arises from the promises of God.

Which they themselves, etc. That is, the Pharisees. Perhaps he designated in this remark the Pharisees who were present, he held nothing in this great cardinal point, which they did not also hold. For the reasons why Paul introduced this point so prominently, and the success of thus introducing it, Acts 23:1, also Acts 23:2-9.

Both the just and unjust. Of the righteous and the wicked; that is, of all the race. As they held this, they could not arraign him for holding it also.

(e) "hope toward God" Acts 23:6, 26:6,7, 28:20 (+) "allow" "admit" (f) "resurrection of the dead" Dan 12:2, Jn 5:28,29, 1Cor 15:12-27 Rev 20:6,13 (++) "unjust" "righteous and unrighteous" Verse 16. And herein. In this, or for this purpose.

Do I exercise myself. ασκω. I accustom or employ myself; I make it my constant aim and endeavour. It is the purpose of my constant study. Paul often appeals to his conscientiousness as the leading habit of his life. Even before his conversion he endeavoured to act according to the dictates of conscience. See Acts 26:9. Comp. Php 3:5,6.

To have always a conscience, etc. To do that which is right, so that my conscience shall approve of it, and never reproach me.

Void of offence. αροσκοπον. That which is inoffensive, or which does not cause one to stumble or fall. lie means, that he endeavoured to keep his conscience so enlightened and pure in regard to duty, and that he acted according to its dictates in such a way, that his conduct should not be displeasing to God, or injurious to man. To have such a conscience implies two things:

(1.) That it be enlightened or properly informed in regard to truth and duty; and,

(2,) that that which is made known to be right should be honestly and faithfully performed. Without these two things, no man can have a conscience that shall be inoffensive and harmless.

Toward God. In an honest endeavour to discharge all the duties of public and private worship, and to do constantly what he requires. In believing all that he has spoken; doing all that he requires; and offering to him the service which he approves.

Toward men. In endeavouring to meet all the demands of justice and mercy; to advance their knowledge, happiness, and salvation; so that I may look back on my life with the reflection that I have done all that I ought to have done, and all that I could do, to promote the welfare of the whole human family. What a noble principle of conduct was this! How devoted, and how pure! How unlike the conduct of those who live to gratify debasing sensual appetites, or for gold or honour; and who pass their lives in such a manner as to offer the grossest offence to God, and to do the most injury to man! The great and noble aim of Paul was to be pure; and no slander of his enemies, no trials, persecutions, or perils, and no pains of dying, could take away the approving voice of conscience. Alike in his travels, and in his persecutions; among friends and foes; when preaching in the synagogue, the city, or the desert; or when defending himself before governors and kings, he had this testimony of a self-approving mind. Happy they who thus frame their lives. And happy will be the end of a life where this has been the grand object of the journey through this world.

(g) "have always" Acts 23:1 Verse 17. Now after many years. After many years' absence. Paul here commences a reply to the charges of Tertullus, that he had endeavoured to profane the temple, Acts 24:6. He begins by saying that his design in coming up to Jerusalem was to bring to them needed aid in a time of distress. It would be absurd to suppose, therefore, that his object in coming was to violate the customs of the temple, and to defile it.

I came to bring. See Acts 11:29,30. Rom 15:25.

Alms. Charities; the gift of the churches.

To my nation. Not to all the nation; but to the poor saints or Christians who were in Judea, and who were suffering much by persecutions and trials.

And offerings. The word used here properly denotes an offering or gift of any kind; but it is usually applied to an oblation, or offering made to God in the temple--a thank-offering, a sacrifice. This is probably its meaning here. He came to bring aid to his needy countrymen, and an offering to God; and it was, therefore, no part of his purpose to interfere with, or to profane the worship of the temple.

(h) "to bring alms" Acts 11:29,30, 20:16, Rom 15:25 Verse 18. Certain Jews from Asia. Acts 21:27.

Found me purified in the temple. Acts 21:26,27. They found me engaged in the sacred service of completing the observance of my vow.

Neither with multitude. Not having introduced a multitude with me--in a quiet and peaceful manner. Verse 19. Who ought to have been here, etc. They were the proper witnesses; as they had stayed away, it showed that they were not prepared to undergo a strict examination. Paul, therefore, justly complains that the very persons who alone could testify against him were absent, and showed that there was really no well-founded charge against him. They alone could testify as to anything that occurred in the temple; and as they were not present, that charge ought to be dismissed.

(i) "here before thee" Acts 25:16 (&) "object" "accuse me" (|) "ought" "anything" Verse 20. Or else. Since they are not here to witness against me in regard to what occurred in the temple, let these here present bear witness against me, if they can, in regard to any other part of my conduct. This was a bold appeal, and it showed his full consciousness of innocence.

Let these same here say. The Jews who are here present. Any evil doing. Any improper conduct, or any violation of the law.

While I stood before the council. The sanhedrim, Acts 23:1-10. As they were present there, Paul admits that they were competent to bear witness to his conduct on that occasion; and calls upon them to testify, if they could, to any impropriety in his conduct.

(&) "evil doing" "crime" Verse 21. Except it be for this one voice. For this one expression, or decimation. This was what Paul had said before the council--the main thing on which he had insisted; and he calls on them to testify to this, and to show, if they could, that in this declaration he had been wrong. Chubb and other infidels have supposed that Paul here acknowledges that he was wrong in the declaration which he made, when he said, that he was called in question for the doctrine of the resurrection of the del (Acts 23:6,) and his conscience reproached him for appearing to be time-serving, and for concealing the true cause of offence against him; and for attempting to take advantage of their divisions of sentiment, and endeavouring to produce discord in the council. But against this interpretation we may urge the following considerations:

(1.) Paul wished to fix their attention on the main thing which he had said before the council.

(2.) It was true, as has been shown on the passage, (Acts 23:1-10), that this was the principal doctrine which Paul had been defending.

(3.) If they were prepared to witness against him for holding and teaching the resurrection of the dead as a false or evil doctrine, he called on them to do it. As this had been the only thing which they had witnessed before the council, he calls on them to testify to what they knew only, and to show, if they could, that this was wrong.

Touching the resurrection, etc. Respecting the resurrection, Acts 23:6.

(*) "one voice" "declaration" (+) "cried" "proclaimed"