CRITICAL REMARKS
Acts 25:13. After certain days, or certain days having gone by; how many is unknown. Agrippa the king was Herod Agrippa II., the son of Agrippa I., mentioned in Acts 12:1-6; Acts 12:19-23, and the Jewish vassal-prince of Rome, who, on his father’s death, was considered too young to succeed to the sovereignty of Judæa, which accordingly was placed under procurators, though on the death of his uncle Herod, King of Chalcis, in A.D. 48 or 50 (Hackett), he received the sovereignty of that region from Claudius, along with the superintendence of the temple and the nomination of the high priests. Four years later “he received the tetrarchies of his great-uncles, Philip and Lysanius, with the title of king” (Plumptre). In A.D. 55 some Galilean cities were added to his kingdom by Nero (Jos., Ant., XIX. ix. 1, XX. i. 3, viii. 4). He died under Trajan in A.D. 100, at the age of seventy-three. Bernice, or Bernice—perhaps Macedonian for Pherenice—was his sister, and the sister of Drusilla. The eldest daughter of Herod Agrippa I., she had been married while a young girl to her uncle Herod of Chalcis, on whose death, while ostensibly living as a widow, she became, according to public rumour, the incestuous paramour of her brother Agrippa II. Afterwards Polemon, the King of Cilicia, in order to obtain her hand in marriage, professed himself a convert to Judaism, and, as Azizus had done for Drusilla, accepted circumcision. The union, however, was quickly dissolved. It was subsequent to this that she accompanied her brother to Cæsarea. Eventually she followed Titus to Rome as his mistress, in the hope of marriage which he had promised; but this was more than the Senate could tolerate, and he was forced reluctantly to part with her (Sueton., Titus, c. 7; Tacit., Hist., ii. 81; Jos., Ant., XX. vii. 3). To salute Festus probably meant to formally acknowledge him on entering on his procuratorship, as the representative of his (Agrippa’s) overlord (Cæsar).
Acts 25:14. Declared, better, laid Paul’s case, or the matters concerning Paul, before the king.—Festus might naturally conclude that Agrippa, being a Jew, would understand the points in dispute, and be able to enlighten him about them. Weizsäcker sees in the bringing of Paul before Agrippa an exact parallel to the removing of Jesus to Herod Antipas by Pilate (Luke 23:8-12), and pronounces both unhistorical, but without reason.
Acts 25:16. It is not the manner, rather custom, of the Romans (if it is of the Jews!), to deliver any man to die, should read, to give up any man, the words to die, literally “unto destruction,” being a gloss, which is not found in the best MSS. “The use of the same verb (χαρίζεσθαι) as that which Paul had used in Acts 25:16 shows that the arrow shot at a venture had hit the mark. Festus is eager to repel the charge” (Plumptre).
Acts 25:18. Against.—Better, either concerning (R.V.), or round (Alford, Hackett). In the former case the clause should be corrected with “brought”; in the latter with “stood up.”
Acts 25:19. Superstition.—Better, religion. Festus designedly, perhaps, using a word which might be interpreted either in a good or bad sense as Agrippa pleased. One Jesus.—Hackett remarks on Luke’s candour in recording this contemptuous remark.
Acts 25:20. Doubted.—The verb describes something stronger than doubt or uncertainty, and is more happily rendered “perplexed” (R.V.). This, however, was hardly the motive why Festus asked him whether he would go to Jerusalem to be judged (see Acts 25:9). Festus doubtless wished to set the matter in the best light for himself.
Acts 25:21. Augustus.—Sebastos. A title first conferred on Octavianus by the Roman Senate, and afterwards borne by all succeeding emperors. The emperor in question was Nero, the stepson of Claudius, who married his mother Agrippina, the wife of Ahenobarbus, and the daughter of Germanicus. Nero succeeded Claudius, A.D. 54. Nero’s inhuman character is too well known to require detailed mention.
Acts 25:22. I would also hear.—Meaning not that he had formerly cherished such a desire (Calvin), but that he was then wishing such a thing had been possible as that he might hear.
HOMILETICAL ANALYSIS.—Acts 25:13-22
Talked about by State Dignitaries; or, Festus’s Conversation with Agrippa about Paul
I. The royal visit to the governor.—
1. The illustrious pair.
(1) Their names: Agrippa and Bernice. II. Herod Agrippa, the royal personage here referred to was the son of Herod Agrippa I., who had perished so suddenly (A. D. 44, 45) in Cæsarea, and the great-grandson of Herod the Great, the founder of the Idumean princes, “vassals of Rome who played so distinguished a part in the story of Israel during the last fifty years of the existence of the Jews as a separate nationality” (Spence). Bernice was his sister and the sister of Drusilla, the wife of Felix (Acts 24:24). Like Drusilla, Bernice was a woman of great beauty, whose story reads “like a terrible romance or a page from the chronicles of the Borgias” (Plumptre). Agrippa and she were both illustrious for their rank, if for nothing else, though history reports them to have been not undistinguished for intellectual ability as well.
(2) Their characters. Rather infamous than illustrious, living at the time, as was currently believed, in unholy relations with one another (see “Critical Remarks”). When high station and lofty character go together, they lend a glory to each other, which makes both more attractive; when high station is conjoined with gross wickedness, the former is degraded and the latter rendered more heinous and despicable.
2. The object of their visit. To exchange courtesies with the new procurator on the assumption of his office. Whether it was dictated by genuine politeness or by self-interest which suggested the propriety of keeping “on terms of intimacy and friendship with the powerful Roman lieutenant commanding in the provinces of which he was nominally the sovereign” (Spence), may not be known; but the visit itself was proper and becoming to be made. Men, simply as men—how much more as Christians (1 Peter 3:1)—owe each other civilities which, when sincerely paid, tend to sweeten social intercourse.
II. The governor’s communication to the king.—
1. Concerning Paul. No doubt he would mention Paul’s name (see Acts 25:19). But the main facts reported with respect to him were these:
(1) That he had been left behind in Cæsarea as a prisoner by Felix, the late procurator, without any statement of the reason of his imprisonment or the nature of his offence.
(2) That he had been bitterly accused by the chief priests and the elders of the Jews, who laid before Festus, when at Jerusalem, a criminal indictment against Him demanding his instantaneous surrender to punishment.
(3) That he had been formerly placed upon his trial, and opportunity given to his accusers to make good their allegations against him, with the result that no actual crime had been brought home to him, but only an assertion of his had been proved—viz., that one Jesus, whom his opponents affirmed to be dead, was really alive.
(4) That rather than accept an offer which had been made to him to go to Jerusalem to be judged of these matters, he had appealed to be kept for the decision of the emperor. If—which does not appear from the narrative—Festus recited to Agrippa Paul’s magnanimous declaration about refusing not to die, if he had done anything worthy of death (Acts 25:11), one would like to know what impression such a display of moral heroism made upon the royal bosom! And
(5) That he was now in gaol waiting till he could be conveniently despatched to Rome.
2. Concerning himself.
(1) That he had rather snubbed the ecclesiastical dignitaries of Jerusalem, when these had approached him, by reminding them that it was not the custom of the Romans, if it was of the Jews, to hand over any man—“to destruction,” though a gloss, correctly interprets the sense of Festus’s words—until he should have had opportunity to meet his accusers face to face and reply to the charges these preferred against them. (Festus may really have said this, though Luke does not incorporate the observation in his preceding paragraph (Acts 25:4-5); as Festus, in rehearsing the story to Agrippa, omits to state that he had invited the Sanhedrists to come to Cæsarea).
(2) That he had nevertheless given them the fullest opportunity to establish their case against Paul, but that they had failed to bring out anything more tangible than this, that on the religious—hardly “superstitious,” since courtesy must have taught him better manners than so to insult his guest (see “Critical Remarks”)—questions above referred to, he, Paul, took a different side from them, and maintained Jesus was alive, while they as positively alleged He was dead.
(3) That he had been altogether at a loss how to deal with such a problem, and had proposed that it be laid before the High Ecclesiastical Court of the nation at Jerusalem, which might discuss the question, if not under his presidency, at all events in his presence.
(4) That, as Paul had declined this offer, and had appealed to Nero, he (Festus) was now waiting a convenient opportunity to have him forwarded to the imperial court. It is obvious that Festus would rather Paul had not appealed to Augustus. It was a step the exact issue of which for himself the governor, as well as for Paul the prisoner, no one could foresee. It need not be doubted that the calmest bosom of all connected with this affair was that of Paul.
III. The king’s reply to the governor.—
1. A wish expressed. “I would also hear the man myself.” Better, “I also was wishing,” meaning, as some suggest, that he had not for the first time heard of Paul, and had even before this been secretly desirous of both looking on and listening to the great Nazarene preacher, as Herod Antipas had formerly been with regard to Christ (Luke 23:8). Reports of the apostle’s doings, both in Palestine and in Asia Minor, could hardly fail to have reached the ear of Agrippa II.; and, being the son of Agrippa I. who had so fiercely persecuted the Jerusalem Christians, and who had so soon after miserably died at Cæsarea, it was not surprising that, like Drusilla his sister (Acts 24:24), he should have inwardly cherished a longing to see and hear the wonderful Jewish Rabbi who had so suddenly apostatised from the law of his fathers, and so powerfully agitated the world ever since.
2. The wish granted. Festus, out of courtesy towards his guest, and out of a secret hope, it may be conjectured, that Agrippa would be able to assist him in his perplexity, promised that next day an opportunity should be afforded him of both seeing and hearing the distinguished man whom Felix had left in bonds, and against whom the Sanhedrists were gnashing their teeth, but over whom, though Festus knew it not, a watchful Providence, even more than Augustus’s soldiers, was keeping guard.
Learn.—
1. That courtesy becomes all men, but especially Christians.
2. That Christ’s witnesses, even when in prison for their Master’s sake, do not cease to be men talked about and wondered at.
3. That Christ’s people are not always careful to avoid condemning others unheard.
4. That when other people’s interests are at stake no delay should intervene to hinder setting things to rights.
5. That the world’s charges against Christians are, for the most part, untrue.
6. That the unenlightened understanding has a difficulty in comprehending questions in religion.
7. That the grand problem of all the Christian centuries concerns the resurrection of Jesus.
8. That Christians have sometimes a better chance of getting justice at a civil tribunal than in an ecclesiastical court.
9. That wicked men have often a secret respect for ministers of the gospel.
10. That to hear the gospel out of curiosity alone is not a promising occupation.
HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Acts 25:13. Christian Salutations.
I. Are becoming on the part of Christ’s followers towards each other (Romans 16:16).
II. Are due by Christ’s followers even to such as are unbelieving (Matthew 5:47).
III. Are regarded by Christ as a high proof of sincerity in religion (Matthew 5:48).
IV. Are calculated to win the favourable regards of those who might otherwise be hostile to religion.
Agrippa and Bernice.
I. Possessors of a common nature.
II. Descendants of a common parentage.
III. Sharers of a common dignity.
IV. Partners in a common wickedness.
V. Actors in a common ceremony.
VI. Partakers of a common privilege (Acts 25:23).
VII. Rejectors of a common salvation (Acts 26:30).
Acts 25:14. Paul’s Case.
That of a follower of Christ.—
I. Accused of crimes he had not committed.
II. Suffering persecution for conscience’ sake.
III. Consigned to prison against all law and justice.
IV. Compelled to appeal to the world’s tribunals for protection.
Acts 25:16. Not the Custom of the Romans! Neither should it be of Christians.
I. To punish a man before he has been found guilty.
II. To pronounce a man guilty before he has been heard in his defence.
III. To ask him to defend himself before he knows the evidence against him.
IV. To refuse a man the right of appeal from a lower court to a higher. Yet all these violations of natural right have been perpetrated in times past in the name of religion.
Acts 25:17. No delay! Cases in which there should never be procrastination.
I. In doing justice to one’s fellow-men.
II. In relieving the cry of human distress.
III. In listening to the call of duty.
IV. In accepting the invitation of the gospel.
V. In making known Christ’s salvation to others.
VI. In fleeing from the presence of temptation.
VII. In preparing for death and judgment.
Acts 25:18. “As I supposed”; or, the World’s Misconceptions about Christianity.
I. About its founder.—The world supposes Him—
(1) to have been “one Jesus” and nothing more, whereas He is the Son of God and one with the Father.
2. To have been merely a good man and wise teacher, whereas He was the sinless One and the Truth.
3. To have died as a martyr to His own cause, whereas He laid down His life as a propitiation for our sins.
4. To be dead, whereas He is alive again for evermore.
II. About its tenets.—The world supposes—
1. That so far as these are intelligible they are only the discoveries of the natural reason, whereas they claim to be the revelations of eternal Wisdom
2. That they may be better (though, in the world’s judgment, that is questionable), but are not really different from the tenets of other religions, whereas they claim to supersede those of all other religions.
3. That they will have their day, by-and-by become obsolete, and ultimately be forgotten, whereas they will endure while the world lasts.
4. That they are no more fitted to promote the happiness of mankind than the teachings of other religions, whereas they alone have power to permanently enlighten the understanding, purify the heart, quicken the conscience, and redeem the will.
III. About its preachers.—The world supposes—
1. That they are the victims of an intellectual delusion, whereas they are the subjects of true mental illumination.
2. That they are the teachers of an idle superstition, whereas they are the bearers to mankind of the highest saving knowledge.
3. That they are troublers of society and disturbers of the peace of communities, whereas they are real restorers of order, and promoters of social well-being.
4. That they are interested self-seekers, whereas they are, when true to their vocation, disinterested apostles of goodwill and grace to men.
Acts 25:19. One Jesus—Dead or Alive—the great question of the day.
I. Dead.—In support of this may be urged—
1. That death—without resurrection following—is the ordinary lot of man, and that Jesus, whatever else He was, was a bonâ-fide man. The exceptions to this law recorded in the Scriptures—such as the raisings mentioned in the Gospels (Matthew 9:25; Luke 7:15; John 11:44)—must meanwhile be left out of view.
2. That since the so called resurrection of Jesus no one else of the human race has been recalled to life. Here again the instances of Dorcas (Acts 9:40) and Eutychus (Acts 20:12) must be meanwhile withdrawn from consideration. The exceptional character of Christ’s resurrection is in one aspect of it a difficulty in the way of assenting to its truth.
3. That Jesus, if He died—and of this by the supposition no doubt exists—could not have been restored to life without a miraculous interference with the uniform order of nature, and, so far as man’s experience goes, the occurrence of a supernatural is less probable than that of a natural phenomenon.
4. That no one is reported to have ever seen Jesus after His alleged resurrection except those who were interested in believing He had risen—such as Mary Magdalene, the women who went to the sepulchre, the ten disciples, James and the five hundred brethren.
5. That the so-called appearance of the risen One are all explainable by natural means, without calling in the aid of a supernatural occurrence, such as the reanimation of a dead body. Whatever objections may be urged against the swoon theory or the deception hypothesis, the supposition that all the appearances of the forty days were of the same sort as that made to Paul—viz., visionary—is quite sufficient to account for the rise in the early Church of a belief in the resurrection of Jesus.
II. Alive.—This alternative is based on the following considerations:
1. That, if Christ rose not from the dead, then His prediction about Himself was falsified. He distinctly claimed that after three days He should rise again. Of course an ordinary man’s predictions about himself might fail without any consequence relative to himself being deducible beyond this, that he must have been in error; but with the failure of Christ’s predictions about Himself collapses the entire superstructure of His pretensions.
2. That if Christ rose not from the dead, then He could not have been what He gave Himself out to be, not only the Messiah of Israel but the Son of God, and therefore must have been an impostor—an inference which is contradicted by all that is written concerning Him in Scripture.
3. That if Christ rose not from the dead, the origin of the Christian Church is perfectly inexplicable. Rationalists may hold that the doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus is sufficiently accounted for by the illusion or delusion of Mary Magdalene and of the enthusiasts whom her contagious ecstasy affected; but the persistence for nineteen centuries of an idea which was cradled in the excited brain of a female, and the propagation by means thereof of the Christian Church throughout these centuries cannot be explained without assuming that the resurrection of Christ was a fact.
4. That if Christ rose not from the dead, then the apostles who staked their lives on the truth of this assertion were not only of all men the most deluded, but were besides the most transcendent fanatics the world has ever seen. That one man, or even two, should have acted in the fashion in which the apostles are represented as having done might be credible, that twelve men, and much more, that five hundred men should have done so, is incredible.
5. That if Christ rose not from the dead then all the experiences of those who claim to have become conscious of a spiritual life derived from the risen Christ, must be set down as pious imaginations. We must frankly admit ourselves not prepared for this (see “Hints” on Acts 1:3).
Acts 25:20. Perplexing Things about Christianity to Worldly Men.
I. The supernatural character of its founder.—Attested by His resurrection from the dead.
II. The spiritual character of its doctrines.—Religious questions generally are in great part beyond the grasp of men of the world (1 Corinthians 2:14).
III. The lofty character of its adherents.—These, whether teachers or professors, when true to its spirit, appear actuated by motives which are more or less incomprehensible to ordinary minds.
Acts 25:22. Agrippa’s Wish.—“I also could wish to hear the man” may have been one of three sorts.
I. The wish of a supercilious curiosity, which seeks nothing more than a passing entertainment. Of such sort as are not unfrequently the motives which lead men to attend Church, hear sermons, and read good books.
II. The wish of a worldly desire of knowledge, which is only concerned about interesting information. Occasionally also this ambition leads men to wait on Christian preachers, frequent religious assemblies, and study theological works.
III. The wish of a pious thirst for salvation, which fills the need of spiritual instruction. Happily there are not wanting those who are actuated by the noblest impulses in seeking to hear gospel ministers and observe Christian ordinances.—From Gerok in Lange.