Acts 24 Studies

For those who may wish to ‘study’ this chapter, the following simple resources are provided for you. Each chapter is divided into a number of studies and each study or passage has a simple four-Part, verse-by-verse approach, to help you take in and think further about what you have read.

Passage: Acts 24:1-9

1 Five days later the high priest Ananias went down to Caesarea with some of the elders and a lawyer named Tertullus, and they brought their charges against Paul before the governor. 2 When Paul was called in, Tertullus presented his case before Felix: ‘We have enjoyed a long period of peace under you, and your foresight has brought about reforms in this nation. 3 Everywhere and in every way, most excellent Felix, we acknowledge this with profound gratitude. 4 But in order not to weary you further, I would request that you be kind enough to hear us briefly.

5 ‘We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world. He is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect 6 and even tried to desecrate the temple; so we seized him. 8 By examining him yourself you will be able to learn the truth about all these charges we are bringing against him.’

9 The other Jews joined in the accusation, asserting that these things were true.

A. Find Out:

1. Who came to bring charges against Paul? v.1
2. What did the lawyer say about Felix? v.2,3
3. What did he first say about Paul? v.5a
4. How did he describe Paul? v.5b
5. What also did he say Paul had done? v.6
6. Who else confirmed these things? v.9

B. Think:

1. What signs are there that Judaism is treating Paul seriously?
2. How is the prosecutor shown to be good at his job?
3. How, from your own knowledge, are the charges false?

C. Comment:

That official Judaism is out to get Paul is evidenced by the presence of the high priest himself coming to Caesarea with a Jewish lawyer to oversee the proceedings. This lawyer starts out with an ironic appeal to win over Felix. He praises Felix for his rule which had brought peace (in fact by brutally putting down a number of Jewish insurrections!). This irony is double edged because it will also remind Felix of what he has had to do with troublesome Jews and the implication is going to be that here is another troublesome Jew of the same ilk that you will have to deal with.

Indeed, he proceeds to lay the charges about Paul: that he is a Jewish agitator, a sect leader and one who had come to desecrate the temple in Jerusalem. In the way he puts these charges, although they are what the Jewish leaders believe about Paul, more importantly they are charges that Felix could identify as being the sort of thing he was constantly having to deal with as rebel Jews kept rising up to try to overthrow their Roman overlords. He declares that Paul stirs up Jews everywhere to riot (Jews had rejected Paul’s message violently all over Asia Minor!), is a cult leader (a potential rebel leader?) and sought to desecrate the temple (to cause riotous upset?). Dangerous claims!

D. Application:

1. The truth can be slightly twisted to give a different picture.
2. Zealous religiosity will go to any lengths for its own ends.

Passage: Acts 24:10-21

10 When the governor motioned for him to speak, Paul replied: ‘I know that for a number of years you have been a judge over this nation; so I gladly make my defence. 11 You can easily verify that no more than twelve days ago I went up to Jerusalem to worship. 12 My accusers did not find me arguing with anyone at the temple, or stirring up a crowd in the synagogues or anywhere else in the city. 13 And they cannot prove to you the charges they are now making against me. 14 However, I admit that I worship the God of our ancestors as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect. I believe everything that is in accordance with the Law and that is written in the Prophets, 15 and I have the same hope in God as these men themselves have, that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked. 16 So I strive always to keep my conscience clear before God and man.

17 ‘After an absence of several years, I came to Jerusalem to bring my people gifts for the poor and to present offerings. 18 I was ceremonially clean when they found me in the temple courts doing this. There was no crowd with me, nor was I involved in any disturbance. 19 But there are some Jews from the province of Asia, who ought to be here before you and bring charges if they have anything against me. 20 Or these who are here should state what crime they found in me when I stood before the Sanhedrin – 21 unless it was this one thing I shouted as I stood in their presence: “It is concerning the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial before you today.”’

A. Find Out:    

1. What did Paul say he had not been doing? v.12
2. Why had he come to Jerusalem? v.17
3. In what state was he? v.18
4. What did he admit? v.14a
5. What did he believe? v.14b,15
6. What did he say ought to happen? v19,20

B. Think:

1. What was the negative side to Paul’s defence?
2. How did he give himself a character reference?
3. What did he suggest should be the way ahead in this case?

C. Comment:

Paul confirms first of all that he had been in Jerusalem and that he had come back after several years’ absence, specifically to worship in Jerusalem, to give thanks to God, and to provide for the poor. In each of these things Paul is showing the sort of person he is – a devout Jew and certainly not a rebel leader.

As to what went on in the temple, he asserts that he was ritually clean according to the Jewish ceremonial laws, and that he was in the temple for legitimate reasons and was not arguing with anyone or stirring anyone up, either in the temple or in the city itself. These are facts that can be clearly verified. He does confirm he is a member of the Way, as the early Christian church was called, but that simply involves much orthodox belief that his accusers believe.

No, says Paul, it was certain Jews from Asia Minor who were the ones who were causing the upset and they are the ones who ought to be brought before the court, because they were the ones causing the dispute. And while we’re at it, he continues, if these accusers here in court have got any crime in mind they should state it. When I was before the Sanhedrin I committed no crime – unless calling out about the resurrection from the dead is a crime!

D. Application:

1. When we are in the clear we need not fear the truth.
2. Answering an accusation is an opportunity for testimony.

Passage: Acts 24:22-27

22 Then Felix, who was well acquainted with the Way, adjourned the proceedings. ‘When Lysias the commander comes,’ he said, ‘I will decide your case.’ 23 He ordered the centurion to keep Paul under guard but to give him some freedom and permit his friends to take care of his needs.

24 Several days later Felix came with his wife Drusilla, who was Jewish. He sent for Paul and listened to him as he spoke about faith in Christ Jesus. 25 As Paul talked about righteousness, self-control and the judgment to come, Felix was afraid and said, ‘That’s enough for now! You may leave. When I find it convenient, I will send for you.’ 26 At the same time he was hoping that Paul would offer him a bribe, so he sent for him frequently and talked with him.

27 When two years had passed, Felix was succeeded by Porcius Festus, but because Felix wanted to grant a favour to the Jews, he left Paul in prison.

A. Find Out:

1. Why did Felix adjourn the case? v.22
2. What was to happen to Paul in the meantime? v.23
3. What happened, when? v.24
4. What did Paul do, with what effect? v.25
5. What was Felix hoping? v.26
6. How long did this go on for? v.27

B. Think:

1. Why did the case not come to a satisfactory conclusion?
2. How was Felix treating Paul, and why?
3. What sort of impact do you think Paul is having?

C. Comment:

The prosecutor has spoken and Paul has made his defence, but Felix sits on the fence! He says he needs the army commander there, presumably as a witness, so the case is adjourned. And there we have a frustrating mystery. Why did the commander not come? Why did God allow Paul to remain out of action for two whole years? What was happening to the churches that Paul had helped establish in the meantime? Why? Why? Why? Answer: we don’t know! We could speculate: perhaps God wanted the churches to stand on their own two feet? Perhaps Paul still kept contact by writing to them? Perhaps Paul’s health wasn’t up to him travelling? We just don’t know!

All we do know is that for two years Paul seems to have faithfully shared with Felix and his wife, and yet not to any satisfactory conclusion. At the end of two years neither seem to have become believers, Paul is still in prison, and is then just handed on to the next governor. Why? Perhaps to have an ongoing purifying influence on these Roman governors. We just don’t know, but the lesson is clear: when we seem stuck in one place, when we don’t know what the outcome will be, when we can’t see any fruit coming forth, STILL REMAIN FAITHFUL ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS!

D. Application:

1. We must just leave the outcome to God. We can but be faithful.
2. Present inaction will not go on for ever, it’s just a part of the plan!