Acts 24:10-21 - Arthur Peake's Commentary on the Bible

Bible Comments

Paul's Speech. Paul does not speak till the procurator invites him to do so, according to the necessary order of all judicial proceedings. His speech is not quite so fine as that of Tertullus, yet while strictly to the point, as was necessary in the circumstances, it is full of elegant turns which have to some extent confused the scribes, so that the text is at some points uncertain. Felix has been for many years procurator; no further compliment is paid him.

The twelve days of Acts 24:11 are apparently the sum of the seven days of Acts 21:27, and the five of Acts 24:1. But a few more must be added (Acts 21:17-18; Acts 21:26; Acts 23:11). Paul's visit to Jerusalem was made from a religious motive, and he was not involved in any disturbance or debate there, in Temple or synagogue or street. The accusations are denied, as incapable of proof; except that which charges him with belonging to a sect. He calls it the Way, the method, and claims that it does not prevent him from being a good Jew, nor from believing all that is contained in the Law and the Prophets, nor from the belief of the Pharisees, who are accusing him, in the coming resurrection of just and unjust. His principles are those of all good Jews, and he has striven to act up to them (Acts 24:16). He then speaks (Acts 24:17) of the errand which after an absence of years brought him to Jerusalem, of which in all the exciting days there no mention was made. Having come to Jerusalem with alms and offerings for his people, he was quietly discharging in the Temple, in the course of that undertaking, a vow of purification; here the grammar breaks down; he thinks of the Jews of Asia (Acts 21:27) who raised the outcry against him, and they are left without a verb to say what they did; they should have been present before Felix to substantiate the charges they made. The Pharisees who appear as his accusers were not present, but they had him before them in the Sanhedrin. Can they bring any charge against him on the ground of what took place there? On one point perhaps they can; the apostle apologises for having said he was being tried for believing in the resurrection (Acts 23:6), which shows the artificial nature of this speech and of the part of the narrative on which it is based.

Acts 24:10-21

10 Then Paul, after that the governor had beckoned unto him to speak, answered, Forasmuch as I know that thou hast been of many years a judge unto this nation, I do the more cheerfully answer for myself:

11 Because that thou mayest understand, that there are yet but twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship.

12 And they neither found me in the temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city:

13 Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me.

14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

15 And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.

16 And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offence toward God, and toward men.

17 Now after many years I came to bring alms to my nation, and offerings.

18 Whereupon certain Jews from Asia found me purified in the temple, neither with multitude, nor with tumult.

19 Who ought to have been here before thee, and object, if they had ought against me.

20 Or else let these same here say, if they have found any evil doing in me, while I stood before the council,

21 Except it be for this one voice, that I cried standing among them, Touching the resurrection of the dead I am called in question by you this day.