It was Paul’s purpose to visit Rome (Acts 19:2121After these things were ended, Paul purposed in the spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying, After I have been there, I must also see Rome. (Acts 19:21)) after going to Jerusalem; and God gave effect to it, for it was God’s purpose (Acts 23:1111And the night following the Lord stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer, Paul: for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome. (Acts 23:11)). But how different was the way under His hand from the apostle’s expectation? He must go a prisoner to Rome. This befell him through his appeal to Caesar — all appeal by no means always granted, as it was evidently liable to abase. If the guilt were manifest, it was refused so also if the case were frivolous enough to be unworthy of the emperor’s hearing. Paul, whose innocence was unquestionable, while the case was rendered in the highest degree serious through Jewish ill will, appealed when he saw the procurator trifling with justice to gratify the Jews. This decided matters for the present. But the Spirit of God saw further testimony needed by man, and this was brought about by a visit of distinguished visitors to the Roman governor soon after.
“Now when certain days passed, Agrippa the king and Bernice arrived at Cæsarea to salute (or, having sainted) Festus. And as they were spending several days there, Festus set Paul’s case before the king, saying, There is a certain man left prisoner by Felix; about whom when I was in Jerusalem the chief priests and the elders of the Jews filed information, asking for condemnation against him. Unto whom I answered, that it is no custom for Romans to give up any man before that the accused have the accusers face to face, and have had opportunity of defense concerning the complaint. When therefore they came together here, I made no delay but next day sat on the judgment-seat and commanded the man to be brought; concerning whom, when the accusers stood up, they were bringing no charge of such evil things as I supposed, but had certain questions of their own religion, and of one Jesus dead as He is, Whom Paul affirmed to be alive. And I, being perplexed in the inquiry concerning these things, asked whether he would go to Jerusalem and there be judged of these things. But when Paul appealed to be kept for the decision of Augustus, I commanded him to be kept till I should send him unto Caesar. And Agrippa [said] unto Festus, I also should wish to hear the man myself. To-morrow, saith he, thou shalt hear him” (Acts 25:13-2213And after certain days king Agrippa and Bernice came unto Caesarea to salute Festus. 14And 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: 15About whom, when I was at Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, desiring to have judgment against him. 16To whom I answered, It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man to die, before that he which is accused have the accusers face to face, and have licence to answer for himself concerning the crime laid against him. 17Therefore, 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. 18Against whom when the accusers stood up, they brought none accusation of such things as I supposed: 19But had certain questions against him of their own superstition, and of one Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. 20And because I doubted of such manner of questions, I asked him whether he would go to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these matters. 21But when Paul had appealed to be reserved unto the hearing of Augustus, I commanded him to be kept till I might send him to Caesar. 22Then Agrippa said unto Festus, I would also hear the man myself. To morrow, said he, thou shalt hear him. (Acts 25:13‑22)).
The royal personage here introduced was son of Herod Agrippa I, whose awful fate was described in Acts 12. Too young to reign at his father’s death, he was by Claudius given Chalcis, the principality of his uncle, with certain privileges in Jerusalem; and Philip’s old tetrarchy and more were added by the same emperor soon after, with the title of king. Bernice was his elder sister, Drusilla his younger, and each of them famous or infamous in that day with reason too grave. As Felix and Drusilla had a most solemn warning from the prisoner, so now were Agrippa and Bernice with Festus to hear an appeal which leaves no soul as it is found. The truth before the conscience carries with it a responsibility which eternity, not to say the judgment seat of Christ, will fully manifest. Yet the man involuntarily forced to feel its power can ask What is truth? and goes out hard and wretched from His presence Who alone can give the adequate answer. But wisdom is justified of all her children; as she learned. who had been till then a child of folly: Jesus was of God made to her wisdom and every other good she lacked. Why was it not so with these high estates?
The governor’s motive for bringing Paul before Agrippa appears to have been his own doubt what to report to the emperor. Festus was just a man of the world. Of grace, of truth, he had no notion. The invisible and eternal realities were to him only imaginative ideas. Present things, changeable and fleeting as they are, were his life and all. God was in none of his thoughts; apart from the Lord Jesus He remains unknown.
There was another obstacle in his way, his good opinion of himself, and endeavor to claim from others the highest character for honesty and honor, energy and prudence. This runs through his speech, as we saw it pervading the self-applauding letter of Claudius Lysias in chap. 23. What is man to be accounted, whose breath is in his nostrils? One look at self in God’s presence puts in dust and ashes, as in Job’s case when approved of Him, for his three friends were not. How can ye believe, said our Lord, receiving as ye do glory one of another, and the glory that is from the only God ye seek not? Where there is no self-judgment, the Savior is but “one Jesus,” like any child of man. He who so speaks is a sinner ripening for judgment.
What the sentiments of Festus were about the mythological reveries of the Greeks and Romans, bound up with their paganism, we know not. Skepticism, ever the fatal dissolvent of society and the body politic, as it is the reaction from idolatry, was then all but universal among the educated class. It is clear that, with the contempt usual in such men, they never conceived of the truth outside themselves. Above all appeared the strange tale and great stumbling block of unbelief, Jesus dead and risen, and this in the midst of the busy heedless world, among a despised and subject race. It is just named incidentally as a psychological phenomenon in Paul and as singularly rousing the animosity of the Jews, an ever-turbulent race. Unable to give the emperor any reasonable account of the prisoner who had appealed, he states the case to one whom current report declared to be, on the one hand well versed in all Jewish questions, and in some respects the more zealous religiously because he was not of Israelitish lineage, as on the other he was notoriously devoted to the Roman interest. So indeed he continued throughout the great war that demolished the Jewish polity, their “place and nation,” and throughout a long reign to the first year of Trajan. To hear the case might gratify the curiosity of Herod Agrippa and perhaps relieve Festus of some perplexity.
The explanation to the king was not unskillful. It was in truth, as he intimated, a matter of Felix, left over for him. Paul was a prisoner when Festus entered on his province, who could not therefore be expected to know all from the first. Next, it was certain that the leading Jews were grievously incensed against him, which could not but weigh with a governor of little or no experience locally. Roman self-complacency breaks forth in the assertion of their policy of inflexible and impartial equity: an excellent principle by no means the rule in the provinces, any more than at home, but convenient to lay down by a governor as a check on flagrant injustice, which Felix and Festus surely saw in the actual prosecution. Who again could reproach himself with lack of zeal in the public cause? The Jews had been prompt enough in coming down from Jerusalem to accuse in Cæsarea; and the governor had lost not a day in sitting to judge the case, if there had been one according to Roman law. But there was nothing tangible before the court; no infraction of the public peace or propriety, any more than private wrong in violence or corruption. It was absurd to bring before a Roman tribunal such matters as occupied Paul’s accusers. Facts there were none; only questions of a visionary nature.
It is improbable that even a Roman procurator of Judea would be so discourteous as to speak of the views in controversy as a “superstition,” especially in speaking to king Agrippa; any more than that Paul so characterized the Athenians, when he was setting before them Jesus and the resurrection. It seems better therefore to avail ourselves of the better, or at least colorless, sense which the word undoubtedly bears in authors of that day still extant. “Religion” is therefore here chosen, as “system of worship” has also been suggested in a similar sense.
But when one knows the infinite truth that the Son came to bring God into the world and put sin out of it, how shocking is the dark incredulity that slurs over facts so transcendent in the words, “one Jesus now dead, whom Paul asserted to be alive”! The vindication of God’s moral glory, and the display of His love, and the proof of coming judgment, all turn on it. Without it sin reigns in death, and destruction for sinners without exception or hope. There is no kingdom possible of righteousness and peace; only hell filled with the wicked and accursed. Jesus alive from the dead for evermore has changed all. Nor need we wait to see the glorious results. The Christian sees and walks by faith, not by sight. We rest, not only on a God that cannot lie, but on the fact already accomplished that Jesus died as propitiation for our sins; rose from the dead, and has taken His seat at God’s right hand in heaven. We rest on the accomplishment of God’s will in the one offering of Himself for sins; and now He sits as truly man on the Father’s throne, as He came down God to become man and bring in new and everlasting glory to God by His death. He therefore is made unto us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption; and we who believe are of God in Him, as once we were only in Adam, heirs of sin and ruin. When the Lord appears again, the results will appear before the universe; and the creation, all the creation, that now groans in bondage and corruption will be delivered: for He is the Second man and Last Adam, and we shall reign along with Him in glory.
But the wisdom of the world is folly, which slights the grace and truth which came by Jesus Christ, Who came to His own things, and they that were His own received Him not. He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not. So Festus showed now, as did Agrippa afterward in the same blindness of unbelief which pervaded other princes of this age: for had they known they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. And Christendom is returning to the darkness of heathenism. Never among the baptized did naturalism so govern men’s minds; never before did nominal Christians manifest such incredulity in the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, or even in creation. If the dead Jesus is alive, He has the keys of death and hades; and where is then philosophy? Where is natural law? What has natural law to do with creating? Still less can it apply to grace reigning through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
But to return: when Festus mentions Paul’s declining to go to Jerusalem and appealing to Caesar, Agrippa expresses the wish himself to hear; and an audience is fixed for the morrow. This leads to a yet fuller testimony as we shall see, before not a governor only but a king.