Acts 25:13 - Meaning and Application

We have here the preparations for another hearing of Paul before King Agrippa. It was not that Agrippa would give a final judgment, but that he might offer advice, or perhaps simply satisfy his curiosity. Christ had said that his followers would be brought before rulers and kings, and that happened here. In this chapter, Paul has already stood before Festus the governor. Now he is brought before Agrippa the king, and both men are given a testimony.

First, we see the kind and friendly visit King Agrippa made to Festus when Festus had just taken office in that province (Acts 25:13). After some days, King Agrippa came to Caesarea. This was a royal visit. Kings usually thought it was enough to send ambassadors to greet their friends, but here a king came in person. He set aside royal distance for the pleasure of personal friendship, since face-to-face conversation is the most pleasant part of friendship.

Notice who these visitors were. King Agrippa was the son of the Herod who killed the apostle James and was later eaten by worms, and he was also the great-grandson of Herod the Great, under whom Christ was born. Josephus calls this man Agrippa the younger. The emperor Claudius made him king of Chalcis and tetrarch, a local ruler, of Trachonitis and Abilene, the regions mentioned in (Luke 3:1). Jewish writers also mention him. Dr. Lightfoot says they tell a story that when Agrippa publicly read the law at the end of the year of release, and came to the words, “You shall not set a stranger over you who is not your brother” (Deuteronomy 17:15), he wept because he was not of Israel’s family. When the crowd saw this, they cried out, “Take courage, King Agrippa, you are our brother,” because he shared their religion, though not their blood.

Bernice came with him. She was his own sister, now a widow, and she had been the widow of her uncle Herod, king of Chalcis. After his death, she lived with her brother Agrippa, and people suspected their relationship was too close. Later she married Polemon, king of Cilicia, but she left him and returned to Agrippa. Juvenal speaks of a diamond ring Agrippa gave to Bernice, his incestuous sister. Tacitus and Suetonius also speak of a shameful relationship later between her and Titus Vespasian. Drusilla, Felix’s wife, was another sister. Such immoral people were the great people of those times. We should not say the earlier days were better.

The purpose of this visit was to salute Festus and congratulate him on his new promotion. They came to welcome him into office and to maintain a friendly connection with him, so that Agrippa, who governed Galilee, might work in harmony with Festus, who governed Judea. But it is likely they also came for their own amusement, to enjoy the entertainments of the court and to show off their fine clothes, which would have done vain people no good if they had stayed at home.

Next, Festus told King Agrippa about Paul and his case. He did this partly to entertain him, since it was a very unusual story and worth hearing. It was surprising, interesting, and, if told fully and truthfully, very instructive. It would also have special interest for Agrippa because he was a judge, and there were legal matters in it worth his attention. Even more, he was a Jew, so there were religious matters in it that deserved his notice.

Festus also wanted Agrippa’s advice. He was new to judging, at least in that region, so he was unsure of himself and wanted counsel from someone older and more experienced, especially in a case as difficult as Paul’s. So he explained the matter to the king.

He first said that he found Paul already a prisoner when he came into the province. He could not, therefore, speak from the beginning of the case on his own knowledge: “There is a certain man left in bonds by Felix.” If anything was wrong in the first arrest, Festus was not responsible for that, because he found Paul already bound. When Felix, to please the Jews, left Paul in chains though he knew he was innocent, he did not know what he was doing. He did not know that worse hands might have Paul, though they were no better hands themselves.

Festus then said that the Jewish Sanhedrin, the Jewish ruling council, were strongly against Paul. “The chief priests and the elders informed me against him as a dangerous man, and one not fit to live, and they wanted him condemned to die.” Because these were men who claimed to be deeply religious and therefore should have been honorable and honest, Festus thought he ought to trust them. But Agrippa knew them better than he did, so Festus asked for his advice.

He also said that he had stood by Roman law in Paul’s favor and would not condemn him unheard (Acts 25:16). “It is not the Roman custom,” he said, “to give a man over to destruction before the accused has met his accusers face to face and has been allowed time and opportunity to answer for himself.” He seems to rebuke them, as if they were insulting the Romans and their government by asking such a thing, or expecting him to condemn a man without a trial. “No,” he says, “whatever you may allow among yourselves, the Romans do not allow such injustice.” The saying, hear both sides, had become a proverb among them.

This is a rule we should follow in private judgment and ordinary conversation. We should not give people bad names or condemn their words and actions until we have heard what can be said in their defense. See (John 7:51).

Festus added that he had brought Paul to trial in the proper way, as part of his duty, (Acts 25:17). He had not delayed. The prosecutors had no reason to complain that he was slow, because as soon as they had come, and they had wasted no time, he brought the case forward the next day. He also handled it in a formal and serious way. He sat on the judgment seat, as was done in weighty cases, while smaller matters were decided more casually.

He called a large court on purpose to try Paul, so the case could be settled and finished. When the accusers stood up and made their charge, Festus was deeply disappointed, because they did not bring the kind of accusations he expected (Acts 25:18, 19).

He had assumed, from how hard they pushed the case before one Roman governor after another, that they had serious charges against Paul. He expected they would accuse him of crimes against private property or public peace, perhaps of robbery, murder, or rebellion against Roman power. He may have thought Paul was connected with the Egyptian who had recently stirred up trouble and led a band of violent men, as the chief captain had first supposed.

Such were the cries raised against the first Christians, loud and fierce enough that bystanders could only think them the worst of men. That was exactly what the mob wanted, just as it had been against our Savior. Festus also assumed they had a case that belonged in a Roman court, something the governor should judge, as Gallio expected in (Acts 18:14). If that were not true, then bringing it before him was foolish and insulting.

But to his great surprise, the matter was neither of those things. They had no real proof, only disputed questions. The worst they could say was about points that could be argued endlessly, but did not prove any guilt. These were matters more fit for a classroom than for a courtroom.

Festus calls them questions of their own superstition, meaning their religion, or at least that part of it Paul was said to damage. The Romans protected religion under their law, but not superstition or human traditions. Yet the main question, it seems, was about one Jesus who had died, whom Paul said was alive.

Some think Festus was speaking of the Christian faith itself as superstition, in the same careless way the Athenians talked about a new god. Notice how lightly this Roman speaks of Christ, his death and resurrection, and the great dispute between Jews and Christians over whether he was the promised Messiah. The chief proof of his messiahship, his rising from the dead, is reduced to this: “There was one Jesus who died, and Paul says he is alive.”

In many trials, the issue is whether a missing person is alive or dead, and both sides bring evidence. Festus seems to treat this as a small matter. But Jesus, whom he speaks of so lightly, is the one who was dead and is now alive forever, and has the keys of death and the grave (Revelation 1:18). What Paul said about Jesus, that he lives, is so important that if it were not true, we would all be lost.

Festus also explained that he had offered to send the case to the Jewish courts, since they were best able to handle matters like this (Acts 25:20). Because he was unsure about such questions and felt unfit to judge what he did not understand, he asked Paul whether he would go to Jerusalem and be judged there before the great Sanhedrin, the Jewish ruling council. He did not force Paul, but would have been glad if Paul agreed, so his conscience would not be burdened with such a case.

But Paul chose to move the case to Rome rather than Jerusalem, expecting fairer treatment from the emperor than from the priests. He appealed to be kept for the decision of Augustus, that is, Caesar (Acts 25:21), since there was no other way to stop the proceedings in that lower court. So Festus ordered him kept in custody until he could be sent to Caesar, and he saw no reason to reject the appeal. In fact, he was pleased to grant it.

Then Paul was brought before Agrippa so his case could be heard. King Agrippa, Herod Agrippa II, wanted this himself (Acts 25:22). He said, in effect, “I thank you for your report, but I would like to hear the man myself.” Agrippa knew more about the matter than Festus did. He had heard of Paul, and he understood that this question, which Festus treated as a joke, was very serious, whether Jesus was alive or not.

Nothing would please Agrippa more than hearing Paul. Many powerful people think religion is beneath their attention unless they can judge it from a place of power. Agrippa would never have gone to hear Paul preach, just as Herod would not have wanted to hear Jesus preach. Yet both were glad to have them brought before them, only to satisfy curiosity. Perhaps Agrippa also wanted to hear Paul so he might have a chance to do him a kindness, though in the end he did nothing except give him some public honor.

Festus granted the request at once, saying, “Tomorrow you will hear him.” There was a wise providence in this, because it encouraged Paul, who seemed as if he were buried alive in prison and shut out from doing good. We do not know of any letters dated from his imprisonment at Caesarea. Whatever good he did for visiting friends, or perhaps a small group that met with him on the Lord’s Day, was a narrow field of service. He seemed like a broken vessel that had been cast aside.

Yet this gave him a chance to preach Christ to a large crowd, and even better, to a crowd of important people. Felix had heard him privately about the faith in Christ. Now Agrippa and Festus would hear him in public. For that reason, we have good cause to think that the sermon in the next chapter, though it may not have led to as many conversions as some of his other sermons, brought great honor to Christ and Christianity, as much as any sermon he ever preached.

Great preparations were made for the hearing the next day (Acts 25:23). There was a large gathering in the place of hearing, because Paul and his case were much discussed, especially because many spoke against them. Agrippa and Bernice, his sister, used the occasion to display their rank and make a grand show, and perhaps they had wanted the chance for that very reason, so they could see and be seen. They came with great pageantry, richly dressed in gold, pearls, and costly clothes, with a large group of attendants in fine uniforms, making a bright display that dazzled the watching crowd. They came with great pomp, but that pomp was only a kind of showy vanity.

Worldly show does not add real worth or gain real respect. It only feeds empty pride, which wise people would rather put to death than satisfy. It is only a display, a dream, something that fades quickly. The word itself points to something shallow and passing.

The splendor of Agrippa and Bernice’s appearance should make a person dislike such pomp forever. Their outward beauty was spoiled by their wicked lives, and anyone who knew them could not admire them, even in all that display, because they were vile people (Psalm 15:4). Their glory was also far less than the true honor of the poor prisoner standing before them. What were fine clothes beside his wisdom, grace, holiness, courage, and steady faithfulness in suffering for Christ? His chains for such a good cause were more glorious than their gold chains, and his guards were nobler than their attendants. Who would care for worldly splendor after seeing such a bad woman covered with it and such a good man covered with suffering?

The chief captains and leading men of the city used this chance to show respect to Festus and his guests. It was like a court ball, gathering the wealthy and important in their finest clothes for entertainment. Festus probably sent Paul word the night before, telling him to be ready for a hearing before Agrippa the next morning. Paul trusted Christ’s promise that he would be given words to speak at the right time, so he was not troubled by the short notice, and he was not thrown into confusion. Those who came in pomp likely worried more about their clothes than Paul did about his case, because he knew whom he had believed, and he knew who stood with him.

Festus then introduced the case to the court, or rather to the audience, in much the same way he had just explained it to Agrippa. He addressed the company respectfully, saying, “King Agrippa, and all men who are here with us.” He spoke to the men as men, which may have been a quiet rebuke to Bernice, a woman, for appearing in such a meeting. He did not ask for her judgment or counsel. Instead, he seemed to say, “All you men here, I want you to consider this matter.”

He also described Paul as a man the Jews hated deeply. Not only the rulers, but the crowds in Jerusalem and Caesarea were crying out that he should not live any longer. They thought he had lived too long already, and if he went on living, he would only cause more harm. Yet they could not prove any capital crime against him. They just wanted him out of the way.

Festus openly admitted Paul’s innocence, and that was a great honor to Paul and to his chains. It was a public statement from the judge himself: “I found that he had done nothing deserving death” (Acts 25:25). After a full hearing, there was no evidence to support the charges. Festus was inclined to please the accusers, but his own conscience declared Paul not guilty. Still, he did not set him free. Why? Because the uproar against Paul was so strong that he feared the crowd would turn on him if he released him. It is a pity when a man has conscience but not courage enough to act on it. Or perhaps Festus thought there must be some real charge hidden under so much smoke, and he chose to keep Paul in custody until it became clearer.

Festus then explained the present state of the case. Paul had appealed to the emperor himself, which showed confidence in his own cause, since he knew it was worthy of the highest court. Festus had accepted the appeal, so he said, “I have decided to send him.” That was where things stood.

He then asked the others to help examine the matter calmly and fairly, now that the noisy prosecutors were no longer interrupting. He wanted at least enough understanding to explain the case properly to the emperor (Acts 25:26, Acts 25:27). He thought it unreasonable to send a prisoner, especially so far as Rome, without also stating the charges against him, so the matter could be prepared as much as possible for the emperor’s decision. Since the emperor had many matters to handle, each case had to be summarized as briefly as possible.

Festus admitted he still could not write anything certain about Paul. The accusations were so mixed up and inconsistent that he could make no sense of them. So he wanted Paul to be examined publicly, so the others could help him know what to write. This shows what trouble and delay, and even danger, comes when justice is handled far from the center of power. The same kind of burden came on this nation when it was subject to the pope of Rome in church matters, and people kept appealing to his court. The same harms, and many worse, would come again to anyone who would put us back under that kind of bondage.