Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 25:13
And after certain days king Agrippa and Bernice came unto Caesarea to salute Festus.
13 22. Festus consults King Agrippa about his prisoner. Agrippa wishes to hear Paul’s defence
13. And after certain days ] More literally, but with no manifest gain, Rev. Ver. gives “Now when certain days were passed.”
king Agrippa ] This was Herod Agrippa II., son of Herod Agrippa I., and consequently a great-grandson of Herod the Great. He was therefore brother of Bernice and Drusilla. On account of his youth he was not appointed to succeed his father when he died. But after a time the Roman Emperor gave him the kingdom of Chalcis, from which he was subsequently transferred to govern the tetrarchies formerly held by Philip and Lysanias, and was named king thereof. His kingdom was afterwards increased by the grant of other cities which Nero gave him. At the fall of Jerusalem he retired to Rome, with his sister Bernice, and there died a.d. 100. He had sided with the Romans in the war against the Holy City. Festus was likely to avail himself of an opportunity of consulting Agrippa, for he would expect to be soundly advised by him on any question of Jewish law.
and Bernice ] She was the eldest daughter of Herod Agrippa I. She had first been married to her uncle Herod, king of Chalcis. Her connexion with her brother Agrippa II. was spoken of both by Roman and Jewish writers as sinful. She was subsequently married to Polemon, king of Cilicia, but soon left him and lived with Agrippa II. in Rome.
came unto Cesarea to salute Festus ] Rev. Ver., following MSS., gives “arrived at Csarea, and saluted Festus,” with a marginal rendering “having saluted.” This would seem to imply that the salutation had taken place elsewhere than at Csarea. This is very improbable. Csarea was the official residence of the governor, and thither would the vassal-king Agrippa come to pay his formal visit of welcome to the representative of Rome.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
After certain days, king Agrippa – This Agrippa was the son of Herod Agrippa Act 12:1, and great-grandson of Herod the Great. His mothers name was Cypros (Josephus, Jewish Wars, book 2, chapter 11, section 6). When his father died he was at Rome with the Emperor Claudius. Josephus says that the emperor was inclined to bestow upon him all his fathers dominions, but was dissuaded by his ministers. The reason of this was, that it was thought imprudent to bestow so large a kingdom on so young a man, and one so inexperienced. Accordingly, Claudius sent Cuspius Fadus to be procurator of Judea and of the entire kingdom (Josephus, Antiq., book 19, chapter 9, section 2). When Herod, the brother of his father, Agrippa the Great, died in the eighth year of the reign of Claudius, his kingdom – the kingdom of Chalcis – was bestowed by Claudius on Agrippa (Josephus, Antiq., book 20, chapter 5, section 2). Afterward, he bestowed on him the tetrarchy of Philip and Batanea, and added to it Trachonitis with Abila (Antiq., book 20, chapter 7, section 1). After the death of Claudius, Nero, his successor, added to his dominions Julias in Perea and a part of Galilee. Agrippa had been brought up at Rome, and was strongly attached to the Romans. When the troubles commenced in Judea which ended in the destruction of Jerusalem, he did all that he could to preserve peace and order, but in vain. He afterward joined his troops with those of the Romans, and assisted them at the destruction of Jerusalem. After the captivity of that city he went to Rome with his sister Bernice, where he ended his days. He died at the age of seventy years, about 90 a.d. His manner of living with his sister gave occasion to reports respecting him very little to his advantage.
And Bernice – She was sister of Agrippa. She had been married to Herod, king of Chalcis, her own uncle by her fathers side. After his death she proposed to Polemon, king of Pontus and part of Cilicia, that if he would become circumcised she would marry him. He complied, but she did not continue long with him. After she left him she returned to her brother Agrippa, with whom she lived in a manner such as to excite scandal. Josephus directly charges her with incest with her brother Agrippa (Antiq., book 20, chapter 7, section 3).
To salute Festus – To show him respect as the governor of Judea.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Act 25:13-27
And after certain days King Agrippa and Bernice came unto Caesarea.
Agrippa and Bernice
Each of the characters thus brought on the scene has a somewhat memorable history.
1. The former closes the line of the Herodian house. He was the son of the Agrippa whose tragic end is related in Act 12:20-23, and was but seventeen years of age at the time of his fathers death, in A.D. 44. He did Hot succeed to the kingdom of Judaea, which was placed under the government of a procurator; but on the death of his uncle Herod, the king of Chalets, in A.D. 48, received the sovereignty of that region from Claudius, and with it the superintendence of the temple and the nomination of the high priests. Four years later he received the tetrarchies that had been governed by his great-uncles Philip and Lysanias (Luk 3:1), with the title of king. In A.D. 55 Nero increased his kingdom by adding some of the cities of Galilee (Jos. Ant. 19, 9, 1; 20:1, 3; 8, 4). He lived to see the destruction of Jerusalem, and died under Trajan (A.D. 100) at the age of seventy-three.
2. The history of Bernice, or Berenice (the name seems to have been a Macedonian form of Pherenice), reads like a horrible romance, or a page from the chronicles of the Borgias. She was the eldest daughter of Herod Agrippa I, and was married at an early age to her uncle the king of Chalets. Alliances of this nature were common in the Herodian house, and the Herodias of the Gospels passed from an incestuous marriage to an incestuous adultery (See Mat 14:1). On his death Berenice remained for some years a widow, but dark rumours began to spread that her brother Agrippa, who had succeeded to the principality of Chalcis, and who gave her, as in the instance before us, something like queenly honours, was living with her in a yet darker form of incest, and was producing in Judaea the vices of which his fathers friend, Caligula, had set so terrible an example (Sueton. Calig. c. 24). With a view to screening herself against these suspicions, she persuaded Polemon, king of Cilicia, to take her as his queen, and to profess himself a convert to Judaism, as Azizus had done for her sister Drusilla, and accept circumcision. The ill-omened marriage did not prosper. The queens unbridled passions once more gained the mastery. She left her husband, and he got rid at once of her and her religion. Her powers of fascination, however, were still great, and she knew how to profit by them in the hour of her countrys ruin. Vespasian was attracted by her queenly dignity, and yet more by the magnificence of her queenly gifts. His son Titus took his place in her long list of lovers. She came as his mistress to Rome, and it was said that he had promised her marriage. This, however, was more than even the senate of the empire could tolerate, and Titus was compelled by the pressure of public opinion to dismiss her, but his grief in doing so was matter of notoriety. Dimisit invitus invitam (Sueton. Titus, c. 7; Tacit, Hist. 2.81; Jos. Ant. 20.7, 3). The whole story furnished Juvenal with a picture of depravity which stands almost as a pendent to that of Messalina (Sat. 6.155-9). (Dean Plumptre.)
Pauls introduction to Agrippa
Here we have–
I. Bitter antagonism. This is revealed in the Jews. They hated the one Jesus whom Paul preached as having died and risen again. There are men now who hate Christianity–its principles, author, advocates, and disciples. The opposition, however, is as futile as it is wicked.
II. Idle curiosity. This is revealed in Agrippa. I will also hear the man myself. Being a Jew, he could not have been ignorant of Paul, and now an opportunity occurred for him to see the man and hear his tale. His wish was not a wish for spiritual instruction. Multitudes now go to hear preachers from the same motive.
III. Proud indifference. This is revealed in Festus. He cared nothing about this one Jesus who was dead, and whom Paul affirmed to be alive. Religious indifferentism is the prevalent sin of Christendom. This is worse, for many reasons, than theoretic infidelity.
IV. Vital faith. This is revealed in Paul.
1. Paul had a faith.
2. His faith was in Christ.
3. His faith was his very life.
To it he lived, and for it he was prepared to suffer and to die. For me to live, he said, is Christ, and to die is gain. (D. Thomas, D. D.)
Paul before princes and rulers
A noble picture, from which we recognise–
I. The glory of God, who sets open doors before His servants even in bonds, and knocks with His Word at palaces as well as huts.
II. The fidelity of His servant who bears testimony to the Lord everywhere undazzled by the splendour of human greatness, and unclogged by the fetters of his own trouble. (K. Gerok.)
The principles of a sound administration
I. It should do everything which belongs to its office.
1. In respect of accusers: to receive and listen to them patiently (verses 15-18).
2. In respect of the accused: to hear their defence impartially, and to protect their persons against the craft and violence of their enemies (verses 16, 18, 21).
II. It should omit everything which does not belong to its office.
1. It should assume no judgment in matters of faith.
2. It should not arbitrarily anticipate the higher judge (verse 25), but conscientiously prepare the way. (K. Gerok.)
The judgment of worldly men concerning matters of faith
1. Their highest standpoint is that of civil law, as here with Festus.
2. Their judgment is depreciatory: they reckon them as belonging to the domain of superstition, and pride themselves on not understanding such questions (verses 19-21).
3. Their sympathy is, as with Agrippa, an affair of curiosity and fashion (verse 22). (Lisco.)
The blindness of mere worldly education in matters of Christian truth
1. The precious articles of the Christian faith are to it the offspring of superstition, not worth the trouble of being accurately instructed therein (verses 19, 20).
2. The living Head of the Church is one Jesus who is dead, of whose power and presence there is no trace (verse 19).
3. The chosen servants of God are to it incomprehensible and whimsical men, of whom nothing can be made (verses 24-27). (K. Gerok.)
Face to face
When any member of Mr. Kilpins church at Exeter came with details of real or supposed injuries received from a fellow member, after listening to the reporter, Mr. Kilpin would inquire if they had mentioned these grievances to their offending brother or sister. If the reply was in the negative–and usually it was so–he would then calmly order a messenger to fetch the offender, remarking that it would be ungenerous to decide, and unscriptural to act, merely from hearing the statement of one party. This determination always produced alarm, and the request that nothing might be mentioned to the party implicated. Assertions and proofs are very different grounds for the exercise of judgment, and are more distinct than angry persons imagine.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 13. King Agrippa] This was the son of Herod Agrippa, who is mentioned Ac 12:1. Upon the death of his father’s youngest brother, Herod, he succeeded him in the kingdom of Chalcis, by the favour of the Emperor Claudius: Jos. Antiq. lib. xx. cap. 4, s. 2; and Bell. lib. ii. cap. 12, s. 1. Afterwards, Claudius removed him from that kingdom to a larger one, giving him the tetrarchy of Philip, which contained Trachonitis, Batanea, and Gaulonitis. He gave him, likewise, the tetrarchy of Lysanias, and the province which Varus had governed. Jos. Antiq. lib. xx. cap. 6, s. 1; Bell. lib. ii. cap. 19, s. 8. Nero made a farther addition, and gave him four cities, Abila, Julias in Peraea, Tarichaea and Tiberias in Galilee: Jos. Antiq. lib. xx. cap. 7, s. 4; Bell. lib. ii. cap 13, s. 2. Claudius gave him the power of appointing the high priest among the Jews; Joseph. Antiq. lib. xx. cap. 1, s. 3; and instances of his exercising this power may be seen in Joseph. Antiq. lib. xx. cap. 7, s. 8, 11. This king was strongly attached to the Romans, and did every thing in his power to prevent the Jews from rebelling against them; and, when he could not prevail, he united his troops to those of Titus, and assisted in the siege of Jerusalem: he survived the ruin of his country several years. See Bishop Pearce and Calmet.
Bernice, or, as she is sometimes called, Berenice, was sister of this Agrippa, and of the Drusilla mentioned Ac 24:24: She was at first married to her uncle Herod, king of Chalcis, Jos. Antiq. lib. xix. cap. 9, s. 1; and, on his death, went to live with her brother Agrippa, with whom she was violently suspected to lead an incestuous life. Juvenal, as usual, mentions this in the broadest manner-Sat. vi. ver. 155:-
Deinde adamas notissimus, et Berenices
In digito factus pretiosior: hunc dedit olim
Barbarus incestae, dedit hunc Agrippa sorori.
“Next, a most valuable diamond, rendered more precious by being put on the finger of Berenice; a barbarian gave it to this incestuous woman formerly; and Agrippa gave this to his sister.”
Josephus mentions the report of her having criminal conversation with her brother Agrippa, , . To shield herself from this scandal, she persuaded Polemo, king of Cilicia, to embrace the Jewish religion, and marry her; this he was induced to do on account of her great riches; but she soon left him, and he revolted to heathenism: see Jos. Antiq. lib. xx. cap. 7, s. 3. After this, she lived often with her brother, and her life was by no means creditable; she had, however, address to ingratiate herself with Titus Vespasian, and there were even rumours of her becoming empress-propterque insignem reginae Berenices amorem, cui etiam nuptias pollicitus ferebatur.-Suet. in Vit. Titi. Which was prevented by the murmurs of the Roman people: Berenicen statim ab urbe dimisit, invitus invitam.-Ibid. Tacitus also, Hist. lib. ii. cap. 1, speaks of her love intrigue with Titus. From all accounts she must have been a woman of great address; and, upon the whole, an exceptionable character.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
This Agrippa is called by Josephus, the younger, and was the son of Herod Agrippa, or Agrippa the Great, who in this book of the Acts is called Herod, whose death is mentioned, Act 12:23. But this Agrippa was brother to Drusilla and Bernice, here spoken of, and lived in incest with her, whom Juvenal in his satire speaks of:
Barbarus incestae dedit hunc Agrippa sorori.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
13. King Agrippagreat-grandsonof Herod the Great, and Drusilla’s brother (see on Ac24:24). On his father’s awful death (Ac12:23), being thought too young (seventeen) to succeed, Judea,was attached to the province of Syria. Four years after, on the deathof his uncle Herod, he was made king of the northern principalitiesof Chalcis, and afterwards got Batanea, Iturea, Trachonitis, Abilene,Galilee, and Perea, with the title of king. He died A.D.100, after reigning fifty-one years.
and Bernicehis sister.She was married to her uncle Herod, king of Chalcis, on whose deathshe lived with her brother Agrippanot without suspicion ofincestuous intercourse, which her subsequent licentious life tendedto confirm.
came to salute Festustopay his respects to him on his accession to the procuratorship.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And after certain days,…. Several days after the above appeal made by Paul:
King Agrippa and Bernice came unto Caesarea to salute Festus: this King Agrippa was the son of Herod Agrippa, who killed James the brother of John, and of whose death mention is made in Ac 12:1 the Jewish chronologer h calls him Agrippa the Second, the son of Agrippa the First, the fifth king of the family of Herod: he was not king of Judea, this was reduced again into a province by Claudius; and upon the death of his uncle Herod, king of Chalcis, he was by the said emperor made king of that place, who afterwards removed him from thence to a greater kingdom, and gave him the tetrarchy, which was Philip’s, his great uncle’s; namely, Batanea, Trachonitis, and Gaulanitis, to which he added the kingdom of Lysanias; (see Lu 3:1) and the province which Varus had; and to these Nero added four cities, with what belonged to them; in Peraea, Abila and Julias, and in Galilee, Tarichea and Tiberias i. The Jewish writers often make mention of him, calling him, as here, King Agrippa;
[See comments on Ac 26:3], and so does Josephus k. According to the above chronologer l he was had to Rome by Vespasian, when he went to be made Caesar; and was put to death by him, three years and a half before the destruction of the temple; though others say he lived some years after it: and some of the Jewish writers affirm, that in his days the temple was destroyed m. Agrippa, though he was a Jew, his name was a Roman name; Augustus Caesar had a relation of this name n, who had a son of the same name, and a daughter called Agrippina; and Herod the great being much obliged to the Romans, took the name from them, and gave it to one of his sons, the father of this king: the name originally was given to such persons, who at their birth came forth not with their heads first, as is the usual way of births, but with their feet first, and which is accounted a difficult birth; and “ab aegritudine”, from the grief, trouble, and weariness of it, such are called Agrippas o. Bernice, who is said to be with King Agrippa, is not the name of a man, as some have supposed, because said to sit in the judgment hall with the king, but of a woman; so called, in the dialect of the Macedonians, for Pheronice, which signifies one that carries away the victory; and this same person is, in Suetonius p, called Queen Beronice, for whom Titus the emperor is said to have a very great love, and was near upon marrying her: she was not wife of Agrippa, as the Arabic version reads, but his sister; his father left besides him, three daughters, Bernice, Mariamne, and Drusilla, which last was the wife of Felix, Ac 24:24. Bernice was first married to her uncle Herod, king of Chalcis q, and after his death to Polemon, king of Cilicia, from whom she separated, and lived in too great familiarity with her brother Agrippa, as she had done before her second marriage, as was suspected r, to which incest Juvenal refers s; and with whom she now was, who came together to pay a visit to Festus, upon his coming to his government, and to congratulate him upon it.
h Ganz Tzemach David, par. 1. fol. 26. 1. i Joseph. de Bello Jud. l. 2. c. 11. sect. 5. & c. 12. sect. 1. 8. & c. 13. sect. 2. k Antiqu. l. 20. c. 8. sect. 1. l Tzemach David, ib. col. 2. m Jarchi & Bartenora in Misn. Sota, c. 7. sect. 8. n Sueton. in Vita Augusti, c. 63, 64. o A. Gell. Noct. Attic. l. 16. c. 16. p In Vita Titi, c. 7. q Joseph. Antiqu. l. 19. c. 5. sect. 1. & c. 9. sect. 1. & de Bello Jud. l. 2. c. 11. sect. 5, 6. r Antiqu. l. 20. c. 6. sect. 3. s Satyr 6.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
| Agrippa’s Visit to Festus; Paul Arraigned before Agrippa. |
| |
13 And after certain days king Agrippa and Bernice came unto Csarea to salute Festus. 14 And 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: 15 About whom, when I was at Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, desiring to have judgment against him. 16 To 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. 17 Therefore, 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. 18 Against whom when the accusers stood up, they brought none accusation of such things as I supposed: 19 But had certain questions against him of their own superstition, and of one Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. 20 And because I doubted of such manner of questions, I asked him whether he would go to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these matters. 21 But when Paul had appealed to be reserved unto the hearing of Augustus, I commanded him to be kept till I might send him to Csar. 22 Then Agrippa said unto Festus, I would also hear the man myself. To morrow, said he, thou shalt hear him. 23 And on the morrow, when Agrippa was come, and Bernice, with great pomp, and was entered into the place of hearing, with the chief captains, and principal men of the city, at Festus’ commandment Paul was brought forth. 24 And Festus said, King Agrippa, and all men which are here present with us, ye see this man, about whom all the multitude of the Jews have dealt with me, both at Jerusalem, and also here, crying that he ought not to live any longer. 25 But when I found that he had committed nothing worthy of death, and that he himself hath appealed to Augustus, I have determined to send him. 26 Of whom I have no certain thing to write unto my lord. Wherefore I have brought him forth before you, and specially before thee, O king Agrippa, that, after examination had, I might have somewhat to write. 27 For it seemeth to me unreasonable to send a prisoner, and not withal to signify the crimes laid against him.
We have here the preparation that was made for another hearing of Paul before King Agrippa, not in order to his giving judgment upon him, but in order to his giving advice concerning him, or rather only to gratify his curiosity. Christ had said, concerning his followers, that they should be brought before governors and kings. In the former part of this chapter Paul was brought before Festus the governor, here before Agrippa the king, for a testimony to both. Here is,
I. The kind and friendly visit which king Agrippa made to Festus, now upon his coming into the government in that province (v. 13): After certain days, king Agrippa came to Csarea. Here is royal visit. Kings usually think it enough to send their ambassadors to congratulate their friends, but here was a king that came himself, that made the majesty of a prince yield to the satisfaction of a friend; for personal converse is the most pleasant among friends. Observe,
1. Who the visitants were. (1.) King Agrippa, the son of that Herod (surnamed Agrippa) who killed James the apostle, and was himself eaten of worms, and great grandson of Herod the Great, under whom Christ was born. Josephus calls this Agrippa the younger; Claudius the emperor made him king of Chalcis, and tetrarch of Trachonitis and Abylene, mentioned Luke iii. 1. The Jewish writers speak of him, and (as Dr. Lightfoot tells us) among other things relate this story of him, “That reading the law publicly, in the latter end of the year of release, as was enjoined, the king, when he came to those words (Deut. xvii. 15), Thou shalt not set a stranger king over thee, who is not of thy brethren, the tears ran down his cheeks, for he was not of the seed of Israel, which the congregation observing, cried out, Be of good comfort, king Agrippa, thou art our brother; for he was of their religion, though not of their blood.” (2.) Bernice came with him. She was his own sister, now a widow, the widow of his uncle Herod, king of Chalcis, after whose death she lived with this brother of hers, who was suspected to be too familiar with her, and, after she was a second time married to Polemon king of Cilicia, she got to be divorced from him, and returned to her brother king Agrippa. Juvenal (Sat. 6) speaks of a diamond ring which Agrippa gave to Bernice, his incestuous sister:–
| ————–Berenices In digito factus pretiosior; hunc dedit olim Barbarus incest, dedit hunc Agrippa sorori. That far-famed gem which on the finger glow’d Of Bernice (dearer thence), bestowed By an incestuous brother.–GIFFORD. |
And both Tacitus and Suetonius speak of a criminal intimacy afterwards between her and Titus Vespasian. Drusilla, the wife of Felix, was another sister. Such lewd people were the great people generally in those times! Say not that the former days were better.
2. What the design of this visit was: they came to salute Festus, to give him joy of his new promotion, and to wish him joy in it; they came to compliment him upon his accession to the government, and to keep up a good correspondence with him, that Agrippa, who had the government of Galilee, might act in concert with Festus, who had the government of Judea; but it is probable they came as much to divert themselves as to show respect to him, and to share in the entertainments of his court, and to show their fine clothes, which would do vain people no good if they did not go abroad.
II. The account which Festus gave to king Agrippa of Paul and his case, which he gave.
1. To entertain him, and give him some diversion. It was a very remarkable story, and worth any man’s hearing, not only as it was surprising and entertaining, but, if it were truly and fully told, very instructive and edifying; and it would be particularly acceptable to Agrippa, not only because he was a judge, and there were some points of law and practice in it well worth his notice, but much more as he was a Jew, and there were some points of religion in it much more deserving his cognizance.
2. To have his advice. Festus was but newly come to be a judge, at least to be a judge in these parts, and therefore was diffident of himself and of his own ability, and willing to have the counsel of those that were older and more experienced, especially in a matter that had so much difficulty in it as Paul’s case seemed to have, and therefore he declared it to the king. Let us now see the particular account he gives to king Agrippa concerning Paul, v. 14-21.
(1.) He found him a prisoner when he came into the government of this province; and therefore could not of his own knowledge give an account of his cause from the beginning: There is a certain man left in bonds by Felix; and therefore, if there were any thing amiss in the first taking of him into custody, Festus is not to answer for that, for he found him in bonds. When Felix, to do the Jews a pleasure, left Paul bound, though he knew him to be innocent, he knew not what he did, knew not but he might fall into worse hands than he did fall into, though they were none of the best.
(2.) That the Jewish sanhedrim were extremely set against him: “The chief priests and the elders informed me against him as a dangerous man, and not fit to live, and desired he might therefore be condemned to die.” These being great pretenders to religion, and therefore to be supposed men of honour and honesty, Festus thinks he ought to give credit to them; but Agrippa knows them better than he does, and therefore Festus desires his advice in this matter.
(3.) That he had insisted upon the Roman law in favour of the prisoner, and would not condemn him unheard (v. 16): “It is not the manner of the Romans, who herein govern themselves by the law of nature and the fundamental rules of justice, to deliver any man to die, to grant him to destruction” (so the word is), “to gratify his enemies with his destruction, before the accused has the accusers face to face, to confront their testimony, and have both licence and time given him to answer for himself.” He seems to upbraid them as if they reflected upon the Romans and their government in asking such a thing, or expecting that they would condemn a man without trying him: “No,” says he, “I would have you to know, whatever you may allow of among yourselves, the Romans allow not of such a piece of injustice among them.” Audi et alteram partem–Hear the other side, had become a proverb among them. This rule we ought to be governed by in our private censures in common conversation; we must not give men bad characters, nor condemn their words and actions, till we have heard what is to be said in their vindication. See John vii. 51.
(4.) That he had brought him upon his trial, according to the duty of his place, v. 17. That he had been expeditious in it, and the prosecutors had not reason to complain of his being dilatory, for as soon as ever they had come (and we are sure they lost no time) without any delay, on the morrow, he had brought on the cause. He had likewise tried him in the most solemn manner: He sat on the judgment-seat, as they used to do in weightier causes, while those that were of small moment they judged de plano–upon even ground. He called a great court on purpose for the trial of Paul, that the sentence might be definitive, and the cause ended.
(5.) That he was extremely disappointed in the charge they brought against him (Act 25:18; Act 25:19): When the accusers stood up against him, and opened their indictment, they brought no accusations of such things as I supposed.
[1.] He supposed by the eagerness of their prosecution, and their urging it thus upon the Roman governors one after another, First, That they had something to accuse him of that was dangerous either to private property or the public peace,–that they would undertake to prove him a robber, or a murderer, or a rebel against the Roman power,–that he had been in arms to head a sedition,–that if he were not that Egyptian who lately made an uproar, and commanded a party of cut-throats, as the chief captain supposed him to be, yet he was one of the same kidney. Such were the outcries against the primitive Christians, so loud, so fierce, that the standers-by, who judged of them by those outcries, could not but conclude them the worst of men; and to represent them so was the design of that clamour, as it was against our Saviour. Secondly, That they had something to accuse him of that was cognizable in the Roman courts, and which the governor was properly the judge of, as Gallio expected (ch. xviii. 14); otherwise it was absurd and ridiculous to trouble him with it, and really an affront to him.
[2.] But to his great surprise he finds the matter is neither so nor so; they had certain questions against him, instead of proofs and evidences against him. The worst they had to say against him was disputable whether it was a crime or no-moot-points, that would bear an endless debate, but had no tendency to fasten any guilt upon him, questions fitter for the schools than for the judgment-seat. And they were questions of their own superstition, so he calls their religion; or, rather, so he calls that part of their religion which Paul was charged with doing damage to. The Romans protected their religion according to their law, but not their superstition, nor the tradition of their elders. But the great question, it seems, was concerning one Jesus that was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. Some think the superstition he speaks of was the Christian religion, which Paul preached, and that he had the same notion of it that the Athenians had, that it was the introducing of a new demon, even Jesus. See how slightly this Roman speaks of Christ, and of his death and resurrection, and of the great controversy between the Jews and the Christians whether he were the Messiah promised or no, and the great proof of his being the Messiah, his resurrection from the dead, as if it were no more than this, There was one Jesus that was dead, and Paul affirmed he was alive. In many causes issue is joined upon this question, whether such a person that has been long absent be living or dead, and proofs are brought on both sides; and Festus will have it thought that this is a matter of no more moment. Whereas this Jesus, whom he prides himself in being thus ignorant of, as if he were below his notice, is he that was dead, and is alive, and lives for evermore, and has the keys of hell and of death, Rev. i. 18. What Paul affirmed concerning Jesus, that he is alive, is a matter of such vast importance that if it be not true we are all undone.
(6.) That therefore he had proposed to Paul that the cause might be adjourned to the Jewish courts, as best able to take cognizance of an affair of this nature (v. 20): “Because I doubted of such manner of questions, and thought myself unfit to judge of things I did not understand, I asked him whether he would go to Jerusalem, appear before the great sanhedrim, and there be judged of these matters.” He would not force him to it, but would be glad if Paul would consent to it, that he might not have his conscience burdened with a cause of this nature.
(7.) That Paul had chosen rather to remove his cause to Rome than to Jerusalem, as expecting fairer play from the emperor than from the priests: “He appealed to be reserved to the hearing of Augustus (v. 21), having no other way to stop proceedings here in this inferior court; and therefore I commanded him to be kept a close prisoner till I might send him to Csar, for I did not see cause to refuse his appeal, but rather was pleased with it.”
III. The bringing of him before Agrippa, that he might have the hearing of his cause.
1. The king desired it (v. 22): “I thank you for your account of him, but I would also hear the man myself.” Agrippa knows more of this matter, of the cause and of the person, than Festus does; he has heard of Paul, and knows of what vast concern this question is, which Festus makes such a jest of, whether Jesus be alive or no. And nothing would oblige him more than to hear Paul. Many great men think it below them to take cognizance of the matters of religion, except they can hear them like themselves in the judgment-seat. Agrippa would not for all the world have gone to a meeting to hear Paul preach, any more than Herod to hear Jesus; and yet they are both glad to have them brought before them, only to satisfy their curiosity. Perhaps Agrippa desired to hear him himself, that he might be in a capacity to do him a kindness, and yet did him none, only put some credit upon him.
2. Festus granted it: To-morrow thou shalt hear him. There was a good providence in this, for the encouragement of Paul, who seemed buried alive in his imprisonment, and deprived of all opportunities of doing good. We know not of any of his epistles that bore date from his prison at Csarea. What opportunity he had of doing good to his friends that visited him, and perhaps to a little congregation of them that visited him every Lord’s-day, was but a low and narrow sphere of usefulness, so that he seemed to be thrown by as a despised broken vessel, in which there was no pleasure; but this gives him an opportunity of preaching Christ to a great congregation, and (which is more) to a congregation of great ones. Felix heard him in private concerning the faith of Christ. But Agrippa and Festus agree he shall be heard in public. And we have reason to think that his sermon in the next chapter, though it might not be so instrumental as some other of his sermons for the conversion of souls, redounded as much to the honour of Christ and Christianity as any sermon he ever preached in his life.
3. Great preparation was made for it (v. 23): The next day there was a great appearance in the place of hearing, Paul and his cause being much talked of, and the more for their being much talked against.
(1.) Agrippa and Bernice took this opportunity to show themselves in state, and to make a figure, and perhaps for that end desired the occasion, that they might see and be seen; for they came with great pomp, richly dressed, with gold and pearls, and costly array; with a great retinue of footmen in rich liveries, which made a splendid show, and dazzled the eyes of the gazing crowd. They came meta polles phantasias—with great fancy, so the word is. Note, Great pomp is but great fancy. It neither adds any read excellency, nor gains any real respect, but feeds a vain humour, which wise men would rather mortify than gratify. It is but a show, a dream, a fantastical thing (so the word signifies), superficial, and it passeth away. And the pomp of this appearance would put one for ever out of conceit with pomp, when the pomp which Agrippa and Bernice appeared in was, [1.] Stained by their lewd characters, and all the beauty of it sullied, and all virtuous people that knew them could not but contemn them in the midst of all this pomp as vile persons, Ps. xv. 4. [2.] Outshone by the real glory of the poor prisoner at the bar. What was the honour of their fine clothes, compared with that of his wisdom, and grace, and holiness, his courage and constancy in suffering for Christ! His bonds in so good a cause were more glorious than their chains of gold, and his guards than their equipage. Who would be fond of worldly pomp that here sees so bad a woman loaded with it and so good a man loaded with the reverse of it?
(2.) The chief captains and principal men of the city took this opportunity to pay their respects to Festus and to his guests. It answered the end of a ball at court, it brought the fine folks together in their fine clothes, and served for an entertainment. It is probable that Festus sent Paul notice of it overnight, to be ready for a hearing the next morning before Agrippa. And such confidence had Paul in the promise of Christ, that it should be given him in that same hour what he should speak, that he complained not of the short warning, nor was put into confusion by it. I am apt to think that those who were to appear in pomp perplexed themselves more with care about their clothes than Paul, who was to appear as a prisoner, did with care about his cause; for he knew whom he had believed, and who stood by him.
IV. The speech with which Festus introduced the cause, when the court, or rather the audience, was set, which is much to the same purport with the account he had just now given to Agrippa. 1. He addressed himself respectfully to the company: “King Agrippa, and all men who are here present with us.” He speaks to all the men—pantes andres, as if he intended a tacit reflection upon Bernice, a woman, for appearing in a meeting of this nature; he does not refer any thing to her judgment nor desire her counsel; but, “All you that are present that are men (so the words are placed), I desire you to take cognizance of this matter.” The word used is that which signifies men in distinction from women; what had Bernice to do here? 2. He represents the prisoner as one that the Jews had a very great spite against; not only the rulers, but the multitude of them, both at Jerusalem and here at Csarea, cry out that he ought not to live any longer, for they think he has lived too long already, and if he live any longer it will be to do more mischief. They could not charge him with any capital crime, but they wanted to have him out of the way. 3. He confesses the prisoner’s innocency; and it was much for the honour of Paul and his bonds that he had such a public acknowledgement as this from the mouth of his judge (v. 25): I found that he had committed nothing worthy of death. Upon a full hearing of the case, it appeared there was no evidence at all to support the indictment: and therefore, though he was inclinable enough to favour the prosecutors, yet his own conscience brought in Paul not guilty. And why did he not discharge him then, for he stood upon his deliverance? Why, truly, because he was so much clamoured against, and he feared the clamour would turn upon himself if he should release him. It is a pity but every man that has a conscience should have courage to act according to it. Or perhaps because there was so much smoke that he concluded there could not but be some fire, which would appear at last, and he would detain him a prisoner in expectation of it. 4. He acquaints them with the present state of the case, that the prisoner had appealed to the emperor himself (where by he put ann honour upon his own cause, as knowing it not unworthy the cognizance of the greatest of men), and that he had admitted his appeal: I have determined to send him. And thus the cause now stood. 5. He desires their assistance in examining the matter calmly and impartially, now that there was no danger of their being interrupted, as he had been with the noisiness and outrage of the prosecutors-that he might have at least such an insight into the cause as was necessary to his stating it to the emperor, Act 25:26; Act 25:27. (1.) He thought it unreasonable to send a prisoner, especially so far as Rome, and not withal to signify the crimes laid against him, that the matter might be prepared as much as possible, and put in a readiness for the emperor’s determination; for he is supposed to be a man of great business, and therefore every affair must be laid before him in as little compass as possible. (2.) He could not as yet write any thing certain concerning Paul; so confused were the informations that were given in against him, and so inconsistent, that Festus could make nothing at all of them. He therefore desired Paul might thus be publicly examined, that he might be advised by them what to write. See what a great deal of trouble and vexation those were put to, and to what delay, nay, and to what hazard, in the administration of public justice, who live at such a distance from Rome, and yet were subject to the emperor of Rome. The same was this nation of ours put to (which is about as far distant from Rome the other way) when it was in ecclesiastical affairs subject to the pope of Rome, and appeals were upon all occasions made to his court; and the same mischiefs, and a thousand worse, would those bring upon us who would again entangle us in that yoke of bondage.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
When certain days were passed (H ). Genitive absolute of , to come between, “days intervening.”
Agrippa the King ( ). Agrippa II son of Agrippa I of Ac 12:20-23. On the death of Herod King of Chalcis A.D. 48, Claudius A.D. 50 gave this Herod Agrippa II the throne of Chalcis so that Luke is correct in calling him king, though he is not king of Judea. But he was also given by Claudius the government of the temple and the right of appointing the high priest. Later he was given also the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias. He was the last Jewish king in Palestine, though not king of Judea. He angered the Jews by building his palace so as to overlook the temple and by frequent changes in the high priesthood. He made his capital at Caesarea Philippi which he called Neronias in honour of Nero. Titus visited it after the fall of Jerusalem.
Bernice (). He was her brother and yet she lived with him in shameful intimacy in spite of her marriage to her uncle Herod King of Chalcis and to Polemon King of Cilicia whom she left. Schuerer calls her both a Jewish bigot and a wanton. She afterwards became the mistress of Titus.
Arrived at Caesarea ( ). Came down (first aorist active of ) to Caesarea from Jerusalem.
And saluted Festus ( ). The Textus Receptus has the future participle, but the correct text is the aorist middle participle which cannot possibly mean subsequent action as given in the Canterbury Revision “and saluted.” It can only mean contemporaneous (simultaneous) action “saluting” or antecedent action like the margin “having saluted.” But antecedent action is not possible here, so that simultaneous action is the only alternative. It is to be noted that the salutation synchronized with the arrival in Caesarea (note , down, the effective aorist tense), not with the departure from Jerusalem, nor with the whole journey. Rightly understood the aorist participle here gives no trouble at all (Robertson, Grammar, pp. 861-3).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Agrippa the king. Herod Agrippa ii, son of the Herod whose death is recorded in Act 12:20 – 23.
Bernice. Sister of Drusilla, the wife of Felix. She is said to have lived in incestuous relations with her brother. Juvenal, in his sixth satire, alludes to this : “A most notable diamond, made more precious by having been worn on the finger of Bernice. This a barbarian king once gave to his incestuous love. This Agrippa gave to his sister.”
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “And after certain days,” (hemeron de diagenomenon tinon) “Then after several days had passed,” following Paul’s appeal to Caesar, before Festus, Act 25:11-12.
2) “King Agrippa and Bernice,” (Agrippas ho basileus kai Bernike) “King Agrippa and Bernice,” his wife, as a mistress-sister, who after two marriages lived with him, as reported, in an incestuous manner. This is Agrippa II, whose father Herod Agrippa died in a despicable manner, reported, Act 12:19-23. Bernice and Drusilla, Act 24:24, wife of Felix, were sisters of Herod Agrippa II.
3) “Came unto Caesarea,” (katentesan eis Kaisareian) “Arrived at Caesarea,” to pay his respects to Festus upon his entering the office of procurator or governor of Judea.
4) “To salute Festus.” (aspasamenoi ton Pheston) “To greet Festus,” the new governor of the territory who succeeded Felix, and who was his brother-in-law. The three sisters of Herod Agrippa II were, Bernice the elder, Drusilla the second, and Mariamne the third, each of which, according to Josephus, dropped and swapped husbands promiscuously, Joseph Antiq. ch. 20:1, 3. It was this Herod Agrippa who built a large palace at Jerusalem. He died A.D. 100, at the age of 70 years, in the 51st year of his reign. His sister- mistress, Bernice, a beautiful woman also became mistress of, first Vespasius, then Titus, following Herod’s death.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
−
13. And after certain days. This long narration tendeth to this end, that we may know that though the handling of the cause were broken off, yet were Paul’s bands famous; and that he was nevertheless brought out of prison, that he might make profession of his faith, and dispute touching the gospel before a famous auditory; and again, that though he were contemned, yet was he not counted a wicked person, lest the glory of Christ should be abased by his slander and reproach, yea, that he had more liberty to preach the gospel being in prison, than if he had lived free in a private house. −
King Agrippa and Bernice. It is certain that this Agrippa was son to Agrippa the elder, whose filthy and detestable death was set down in the twelfth chapter. When this man was made king of Chalcis, in his uncle’s stead, after the decease of his father, he did afterward obtain a more large dominion. − (604) Bernice, of whom mention is made in this place, was his own natural sister, which was first married to Herod; king of Chalcis, her uncle, and did keep herself widow a certain season after his death, yet she did not live honestly and chastely during that time; for her great familiarity with her brother Agrippa was suspected. And to the end she might not be counted an incestuous person, she married with Polemon, king of Cilicia. Notwithstanding, because she gave herself more to lust than to chastity, she forsook him. The historiographers do nowhere say that she was her brother’s wife; and Josephus, in his Life, assigned her a dominion of her own in part of Galilee. Therefore, it is to be thought that forasmuch as they were hardened in their wickedness, they dwelt together, not regarding what men did say; yet did they abstain from marriage, lest their incestuous marriage should betray and also augment their crime. Neither is it any marvel that he came for honor’s sake to salute the governor, who did reign only at the will and pleasure of another, and did depend upon the beck and favor of the Emperor of Rome, which he was to retain and nourish by means of the governor. −
(604) −
“
Tetrarchiam,” tetrarchy.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL REMARKS
Act. 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 Act. 12:1-6; Act. 12:19-23, and the Jewish vassal-prince of Rome, who, on his fathers death, was considered too young to succeed to the sovereignty of Juda, 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 Berniceperhaps Macedonian for Pherenicewas 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 Csarea. 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 (Agrippas) overlord (Csar).
Act. 25:14. Declared, better, laid Pauls 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. Weizscker sees in the bringing of Paul before Agrippa an exact parallel to the removing of Jesus to Herod Antipas by Pilate (Luk. 23:8-12), and pronounces both unhistorical, but without reason.
Act. 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 () as that which Paul had used in Act. 25:16 shows that the arrow shot at a venture had hit the mark. Festus is eager to repel the charge (Plumptre).
Act. 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.
Act. 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 Lukes candour in recording this contemptuous remark.
Act. 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 Act. 25:9). Festus doubtless wished to set the matter in the best light for himself.
Act. 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. Neros inhuman character is too well known to require detailed mention.
Act. 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.Act. 25:13-22
Talked about by State Dignitaries; or, Festuss 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 Csarea, 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 (Act. 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 menhow much more as Christians (1Pe. 3:1)owe each other civilities which, when sincerely paid, tend to sweeten social intercourse.
II. The governors communication to the king.
1. Concerning Paul. No doubt he would mention Pauls name (see Act. 25:19). But the main facts reported with respect to him were these:
(1) That he had been left behind in Csarea 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 provedviz., 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. Ifwhich does not appear from the narrativeFestus recited to Agrippa Pauls magnanimous declaration about refusing not to die, if he had done anything worthy of death (Act. 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 manto destruction, though a gloss, correctly interprets the sense of Festuss wordsuntil 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 (Act. 25:4-5); as Festus, in rehearsing the story to Agrippa, omits to state that he had invited the Sanhedrists to come to Csarea).
(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 religioushardly 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 kings 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 (Luk. 23:8). Reports of the apostles 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 Csarea, it was not surprising that, like Drusilla his sister (Act. 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 Augustuss soldiers, was keeping guard.
Learn.
1. That courtesy becomes all men, but especially Christians.
2. That Christs witnesses, even when in prison for their Masters sake, do not cease to be men talked about and wondered at.
3. That Christs people are not always careful to avoid condemning others unheard.
4. That when other peoples interests are at stake no delay should intervene to hinder setting things to rights.
5. That the worlds 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
Act. 25:13. Christian Salutations.
I. Are becoming on the part of Christs followers towards each other (Rom. 16:16).
II. Are due by Christs followers even to such as are unbelieving (Mat. 5:47).
III. Are regarded by Christ as a high proof of sincerity in religion (Mat. 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 (Act. 25:23).
VII. Rejectors of a common salvation (Act. 26:30).
Act. 25:14. Pauls 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 worlds tribunals for protection.
Act. 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.
Act. 25:17. No delay! Cases in which there should never be procrastination.
I. In doing justice to ones 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 Christs salvation to others.
VI. In fleeing from the presence of temptation.
VII. In preparing for death and judgment.
Act. 25:18. As I supposed; or, the Worlds 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 worlds 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.
Act. 25:19. One JesusDead or Alivethe great question of the day.
I. Dead.In support of this may be urged
1. That deathwithout resurrection followingis the ordinary lot of man, and that Jesus, whatever else He was, was a bon-fide man. The exceptions to this law recorded in the Scripturessuch as the raisings mentioned in the Gospels (Mat. 9:25; Luk. 7:15; Joh. 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 (Act. 9:40) and Eutychus (Act. 20:12) must be meanwhile withdrawn from consideration. The exceptional character of Christs resurrection is in one aspect of it a difficulty in the way of assenting to its truth.
3. That Jesus, if He diedand of this by the supposition no doubt existscould not have been restored to life without a miraculous interference with the uniform order of nature, and, so far as mans 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 risensuch 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 Paulviz., visionaryis 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 mans 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 Christs 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 impostoran 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 Act. 1:3).
Act. 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 (1Co. 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.
Act. 25:22. Agrippas 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.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
f.
Pauls defense before King Agrippa. Act. 25:13 bAct. 26:32.
Act. 25:13
Now when certain days were passed, Agrippa the king and Bernice arrived at Caesarea, and saluted Festus.
Act. 25:14
And as they tarried there many days, Festus laid Pauls case before the king, saying, There is a certain man left a prisoner by Felix;
Act. 25:15
about whom, when I was at Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, asking for sentence against him.
Act. 25:16
To whom I answered, that it is not the custom of the Romans to give up any man, before that the accused have met the accusers face to face, and have had opportunity to make his defence concerning the matter laid against him.
Act. 25:17
When therefore they were come together here, I made no delay, but on the next day sat on the judgment-seat, and commanded the man to be brought.
Act. 25:18
Concerning whom, when the accusers stood up, they brought no charge of such evil things as I supposed;
Act. 25:19
but had certain questions against him of their own religion, and of one Jesus, who was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.
Act. 25:20
And I, being perplexed how to inquire concerning these things, asked whether he would go to Jerusalem and there be judged of these matters,
Act. 25:21
But when Paul had appealed to be kept for the decision of the emperor, I commanded him to be kept till I should send him to Caesar.
Act. 25:22
And Agrippa said unto Festus, I also could wish to hear the man myself. To-morrow, saith he, thou shalt hear him.
Act. 25:23
So on the morrow, when Agrippa was come, and Bernice, with great pomp, and they were entered into the place of hearing with the chief captains and the principal men of the city, at the command of Festus Paul was brought in.
Act. 25:24
And Festus saith, King Agrippa, and all men who are here present with us, ye behold this man, about whom all the multitude of the Jews made suit to me, both at Jerusalem and here, crying that he ought not to live any longer.
Act. 25:25
But I found that he had committed nothing worthy of death: and as he himself appealed to the emperor I determined to send him.
Act. 25:26
Of whom I have no certain thing to write unto my lord. Wherefore I have brought him forth before you, and specially before thee, king Agrippa, that, after examination, I may have somewhat to write.
Act. 25:27
For it seemeth to me unreasonable, in sending a prisoner, not withal to signify the charges against him.
Act. 26:1
And Agrippa said unto Paul, Thou art permitted to speak for thyself. Then Paul stretched forth his hand, and made his defence:
Act. 26:2
I think myself happy, king Agrippa, that I am to make my defence before thee this day touching all the things whereof I am accused by the Jews:
Act. 26:3
especially because thou art expert in all customs and questions which are among the Jews: wherefore I beseech thee to hear me patiently.
Act. 26:4
My manner of life then from my youth up, which was from the beginning among mine own nation and at Jerusalem, know all the Jews;
Act. 26:5
having knowledge of me from the first, if they be willing to testify, that after the straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee.
Act. 26:6
And now I stand here to be judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers;
Act. 26:7
unto which promise our twelve tribes, earnestly serving God night and day, hope to attain. And concerning this hope I am accused by the Jews, O king!
Act. 26:8
Why is it judged incredible with you, if God doth raise the dead?
Act. 26:9
I verily thought with myself that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.
Act. 26:10
And this I also did in Jerusalem: and I both shut up many of the saints in prisons, having received authority from the chief priests, and when they were put to death I gave my vote against them.
Act. 26:11
And punishing them oftentimes in all the synagogues, I strove to make them blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto foreign cities.
Act. 26:12
Whereupon as I journeyed to Damascus with the authority and commission of the chief priests,
Act. 26:13
at midday, O king, I saw on the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them that journeyed with me.
Act. 26:14
And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice saying unto me in the Hebrew language, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the goad.
Act. 26:15
And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
Act. 26:16
But arise, and stand upon thy feet: for to this end have I appeared unto thee, to appoint thee a minister and a witness both of the things wherein thou hast seen me, and of the things wherein I will appear unto thee;
Act. 26:17
delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom I send thee,
Act. 26:18
to open their eyes, that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive remission of sins and an inheritance among them that are sancitified by faith in me.
Act. 26:19
Wherefore, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision:
Act. 26:20
but declared both to them of Damascus first, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the country of Judaea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, doing works worthy of repentance.
Act. 26:21
For this cause the Jews seized me in the temple and assayed to kill me.
Act. 26:22
Having therefore obtained the help that is from God, I stand unto this day testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but what the prophets and Moses did say should come;
Act. 26:23
how that the Christ must suffer, and how that he first by the resurrection of the dead should proclaim light both to the people and to the Gentiles.
Act. 26:24
And as he thus made his defence, Festus saith with a loud voice, Paul, thou art mad; thy much learning is turning thee mad.
Act. 26:25
But Paul saith, I am not mad, most excellent Festus; but speak forth words of truth and soberness.
Act. 26:26
For the king knoweth of these things, unto whom also I speak freely: for I am persuaded that none of those things is hidden from him; for this hath not been done in a corner.
Act. 26:27
King Agrippa, believest thou the prophets? I know that thou believest.
Act. 26:28
And Agrippa said unto Paul, With but little persuasion thou wouldst fain make me a Christian.
Act. 26:29
And Paul said, I would to God, that whether with little or with much, not thou only, but also all that hear me this day, might become such as I am, except these bonds.
Act. 26:30
And the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat with them:
Act. 26:31
and when they had withdrawn, they spake one to another, saying, This man doeth nothing worthy of death or of bonds.
Act. 26:32
And Agrippa said unto Festus, This man might have been set at liberty, if he had not appealed unto Caesar.
Act. 25:13 Festus had not been in office long until he had a visit from royalty.
We might say that it was a visit of relatives, for the sister of the king was a sister to his wife. Agrippa, the king and Bernice. These came to bring greetings (and congratulations) but also to stay for many days. Among the many things of interest in the new post it was natural that Festus should mention the rather unique case of Paul. Luke had such a valuable source for his information that he could put the words of Festus to Agrippa in the first person. Luke causes Festus to say (paraphrasing his words):
933. What relation was King Agrippa to Festus?
Act. 25:14-19 There is a carry-over case from the rule of Felix. He was left a prisoner. When I arrived in Jerusalem, I heard more about him. It seems the chief priests expected me to turn him over to them as a token of my esteem. I, of course, answered that this was no custom prevailing among us Romans. (It evidently is among the Jews.) I said that our law was to face one another in the court and let the accused have equal opportunity with the accusers. They took me up on my offer and I heard their case the very next day.
Well, when the man was brought and the trial was under way I found there were no such charges as I at first imagined. I thought the man must have done some great evil to the Jews. But the only thing I could make out was an argument between them over one called Jesus whom the Jews said was dead but whom Paul strongly maintained to be alive.
Act. 25:20-22 Now I am not acquainted with such superstitious religious beliefs, so I asked Paul if he would go up to Jerusalem about this matter and be judged there before me. (Here Festus places an entirely different construction on his actions than truly happened). But what did the man do? He appealed to Caesar. So I have charged him to be kept for this trial before Augustus.
It could have been from the note found in Act. 25:22 that Agrippa had heard of Pauls imprisonment even before Festus gave him the details. The verse does seem to suggest that the king was rather anxiously awaiting a chance to hear from this strange prisoner.
I also was wishing that I could hear the man myself, said Agrippa.
Act. 25:23-27 Tomorrow you shall, answered Festus.
So according to the prearranged plan there was on the morrow a gathering not soon to be forgotten. To the king it was but another opportunity to amuse himself amid royal surroundings. This was to be done in full formal dress. The army generals were there! all the chief men of social position and rulers of the city were sent invitations. Bernice and Agrippa had on their royal robes. In the midst of all this splendor Paul appeared from the prison.
Did Paul hear the gossip of the jailor the night before the gathering? Did he know just what occasioned this appearance? Did he have knowledge that he was to speak before a king? To all these questions we will have no answer but it is interesting to speculate.
Festus had called the meeting so he now makes a formal speech of introduction. Paul stands between two soldiers with the light chain dangling from his left wrist. Festus stands before Agrippa and gestures toward Paul and says:
King Agrippa, and all others here present, behold the man, This is the one that has caused all the Jews to cry out that he should be killed, I heard this cry both here and in Jerusalem. I have tried him and found nothing at all worthy of death, but here is our problem. He has appealed to Augustus, and I will send him. But I have nothing to write of him to the emperor. I know not the details of this case. But you can help me, and especially you, King Agrippa, since you know much more about the Jewish religion than I. You can appreciate my position, that it does seem altogether unreasonable to send a prisoner with no charges.
934.
What seemed to be the greatest concern of Festus in the case of Paul?
935.
What false construction did Festus put upon his actions?
936.
Did Agrippa know of Paul before Festus told of him?
937.
Describe briefly the assembly before whom Paul was to speak.
938.
What did Festus say was the purpose of the trial?
939.
Who was in the place of highest authority in this trial?
940.
Would it be a good plan for us to tell the details of our conversion even as Paul did here?
So spoke the governor in words of flattery and not without a note of real need.
Act. 26:1 Everyone else had been speaking about and for the apostle, Agrippa gestures from his elevated seat to Paul and says;
Paul, thou art permitted to speak for thyself.
PAULS DEFENSE BEFORE AGRIPPA
Act. 26:2-29
Introduction. Act. 26:2-3.
Proposition: To demonstrate that Jesus is the Christ and that he, Paul, was innocent.
IPauls early life. Act. 26:4-8.
1.
Was among the Jews and well known by them. Act. 26:4-5 a.
2.
Was a strict Pharisee, Act. 26:5 b.
3.
Now judged for the things he and all the Jews believed. Act. 26:6-7.
4.
Application to the king. Act. 26:8.
IIHis persecution of the Christians. Act. 26:9-11.
1.
He opposed Jesus of Nazareth and His teaching. Act. 26:9.
2.
Intense persecution at Jerusalem. Act. 26:10.
3.
Details of his madness, even to foreign cities. Act. 26:11.
IIIHis conversion. Act. 26:12-19.
1.
On the road Damascus at noon and attended with an intense light. Act. 26:12-13.
2.
The voice, the message of Jesus to Saul. Act. 26:14-18.
3.
Pauls ready and complete response to the vision and voice. Act. 26:19.
IVPauls labors following his conversion. Act. 26:20.
VThe application of what has just been said to the present situation. Act. 26:21-23.
1.
The reason for his being taken in the temple was because he was carrying out the commission of Christ. Act. 26:21.
2.
What he says now and has preached before is nothing but what the prophets have said should come. Act. 26:22-23.
VIThe interruption of Festus and Pauls answer. Act. 26:24-25.
VIIThe application of Pauls answer to the king. Act. 26:26-29.
1.
The knowledge of king Agrippa of the life and death of Jesus of Nazareth. Act. 26:26.
2.
Appeal to Agrippa and his knowledge of the prophets. Act. 26:27.
3.
Agrippas conviction and almost persuasion. Act. 26:28.
4.
Pauls reply. Act. 26:29.
Now we shall proceed to carefully examine the details of this outline.
Introduction. Act. 26:2-3.
Paul counted this occasion a real privilege, which indeed it was. But more especially because of whom he had as an audience. Not just a king, but King Agrippa. The apostle states that he was very glad to speak to this one, but why? Well, a bit of background is in order here to appreciate what is to follow.
Here is a little chart of the Herod family to show you the relationship of this Herod to the rest of them.
You can see that this man was the last one of the Herods to appear in history.
When Paul said that this man knew of these things, i.e. the events of the life of Christ and of Sauls own conversion, it was surely true that he did! His grandfather attempted to kill Jesus when He was an infant. His father had attempted to kill the apostle Peter. All his life he must have heard of this one Jesus of Nazareth. It could have been that he also knew the writings of the prophets. His father being quite a student of the Jewish religion had taught him these things. At least his association with the Jews had taught him many points of their history and prophets. Herod Agrippa was himself part Jew, his mother was a Jewess.
Paul seems to have a high estimate of the knowledge of this one on such matters. The apostle says: . . . Thou art expert in all customs and questions which are among the Jews.
This was a fine introduction designed to secure the favorable attention and interest of the king and the rest of the audience. And what an audience!
Paul now proceeds to demonstrate through the telling of the history of his own life that he is innocent of all the charges laid against him and that Jesus of Nazareth is indeed the Messiah.
I.
Pauls early life. Act. 26:4-8.
1.
Was among the Jews and well known. Act. 26:4-5.
Paul was going to take his time in explaining enough of the background to prove both his complete innocence and the validity of his conversion and commission. He says first then that he was not an intruding stranger with an unusual heresy and strange teaching. He said in thought: King Agrippa, these persons who accuse me have known me and of me since my childhood. My whole life has been in closest association with my people, the Jews. A good share of my life has been spent in Jerusalem,
2.
Was a strict Pharisee. Act. 26:5 b.
Then to show in the future of his discussion the validity of his change he mentions his zeal for the law, To say that he was a Pharisee was to say that he stood for the law of Moses in the strongest, strictest manner. Indeed, Paul was to later describe himself during this period as a Pharisee of the Pharisees. The implications of this statement were well understood by Agrippa, if not by the others.
941.
Why did Paul consider it a special privilege to speak before King Agrippa?
942.
Show how it would surely be true that Agrippa knew of the things of the life of Christ and Paul.
943.
What two things did Paul hope to prove by a background explanation of his life?
944.
Why mention the fact that he was a Pharisee?
3.
Now to be judged for what he and all other Jews believed, Act. 26:6-7
And nowThis is surely suggestive of a great contrast; what he was then and what he was as he stood before the king. What a change! It must also contain a note of irony for the apostle is saying that his charges are based only on what he did believe, does now believe, and what the Jews have always believed.
. . . The hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers; unto which promise our twelve tribes, earnestly serving God night and day, hope to attain.
The hope referred to was the coming of the Messiah. This hope was based on a promise, a promise given by God to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph and others. And so it was the mainspring of the Jews hope. In this promise they saw deliverance and exaltation. How sad it was that when He came to His own . . . they received Him not. . .
Paul is saying to the king that his charges are not those of some wicked villany but concern the coming of the king of the Jews.
Ah! What a descriptive phrase is given as to the great desire of the Jews for the Messiah. Mark it:
. . . earnestly serving God night and day, hope to attain.
This can point out to us how earnest, and zealous, and self-sacrificing we can be and still be wrong.
4.
Application to the king. Act. 26:8.
If you will recall the words of Festus to Agrippa you will remember that the governor told the king of the discussion over the resurrection (cf. Act. 25:19). Paul evidently spoke of the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth as a proof of the Messiahship. Indeed, the resurrection would prove that this Jesus was the Messiah, or Christ. This thought was new and startling to the king, but none the less convincing. With these thoughts in mind we can appreciate the words of Paul to Agrippa: Why is it judged incredible with you if God doth raise the dead?
945.
How did Paul use the word our to an advantage, as in Act. 25:6?
946.
What is the hope referred to in Act. 25:6?
947.
What can we learn for ourselves in the earnest desire of the Jews for the Messiah?
948.
How would King Agrippa know of the resurrection? Why would he think it incredible?
II.
His persecution of the Christians. Act. 26:9-11.
1.
He opposed Jesus of Nazareth and His teaching. Act. 26:9.
Paul is saying: Oh, king, if you feel in opposition to this One and this new teaching, I can say that I appreciate your feeling, having felt the very same myself. Indeed, to me it was a holy responsibility. I verily thought . . . I ought to . . .
This name and its authority to me were very odious and anything I could do contrary to it, that I did.
2.
Intense persecution at Jerusalem. Act. 26:10.
And this I did in Jerusalem. (I say it with shame). I not only shut up Christians in jail, but when they were tried in the Sanhedrin for blasphemy, I gave my black pebble against them, and for their death. You ask how I could carry out the work of an officer of the law? I received permission from the chief priests to do so.
3.
Details of his madness; even to foreign cities. Act. 26:11.
Many times did the Jews find me in the synagogue. For what reason? to worship God? No. I was heretic hunting and when I found a suspect I grilled him with questions of this false Messiah until I made him blaspheme (as I thought), and then I could throw him in jail and vote for his death at the council. When there were no more to be found in Jerusalem I was so mad that I did not hesitate to pursue them even to foreign cities.
III.
His conversion. Act. 26:12-19.
(You are referred to the harmony of the three accounts of the conversion of Saul on pages 120121. There is little we could add here that is not already written there.)
IV.
Pauls labors following his conversion. Act. 26:20.
In this one descriptive verse is compacted all the efforts of the apostle to preach the gospel in the first, second and third journeys, as well as his efforts to preach immediately following his conversion. So much time and so many events could hardly be described in so short a space.
V.
The application of what has just been said to the present situation. Act. 26:21-23.
1.
The reason he was taken in the temple was because he was carrying out the commission of Christ. Act. 26:21.
If Paul was arrested for fulfilling divine summons, those who arrested him were in the wrong. The content of his preaching was but a fulfillment of the promise of the prophets. In this manner Paul showed that the cause for which the Jews seized him in the temple was indeed baseless.
2.
What I say now, I have preached before, and this is nothing but what Moses and the prophets have said would come. Act. 26:22-23.
949.
How would a statement of Pauls persecution of the Christians help in getting the message to King Agrippa?
950.
In what manner did Paul give his vote against them?
951.
How did Paul strive to make them blaspheme?
952.
How did the fact that Paul was carrying out the commission of the Messiah reflect on those who arrested him?
953.
How does Paul use Moses and the prophets in his message?
Paul now plainly states, for the benefit of those listening, that God was with him and approved the things he did and the contrary was true of those who opposed him. It was only through Gods intervention that I stand here before you this day. But as I do, I want to bear this news that all inspired spokesmen from Moses through all the prophets have borne: The Messiah was foreordained to suffer and die.
Further that: He was to be raised from the dead and by this means (His death and resurrection) He would be able to give the light of hope to all people.
Although arrested on a false charge, tried in mockery and treated shamefully, by my own people, the Lord stood by me and delivered me out of it all. I stand here before you today, O king, to testify of the same message for which I have been so treated. That message contains nothing but what Moses and the prophets said would come to pass. I want to tell to the small and the great that the Messiah was to suffer and to die and rise again from the dead. Yea, by this means He was able after His resurrection to proclaim the light of hope to all people.
VI.
The interruption of Festus and Pauls answer. Act. 26:24-25.
Festus had hoped by this hearing to learn certain things that could help in his letter to the emperor. But he was totally unprepared to hear this strange tale. Will you try to imagine how this record must have sounded to a complete outsider? Festus listened in open-mouthed amazement at Pauls account of:
(1)
The intense hatred of one religion against another (and both believing in the same God).
(2)
The leader of one side overcome and changed to the opposite side by a bright light on a road in Syria.
(3)
The wholehearted zeal of the new convert and apostle.
(4)
The persecution by those with whom he once worked.
(5)
And now he says the message he has to bring tells of the raising of a man from the dead.
954.
Why was Festus so amazed at Pauls message?
Festus could not help but perceive that this one who spoke, spoke with intelligence on the subject of the Jewish religion. This one is indeed a learned man, but his speculations into these matters have turned his brain. This is not helping my purpose at allhe is giving me nothing that I could write to the emperor. Festus burst forth in this loud impetuous ejaculation:
955.
How could Fetus speak of Pauls learning?
Paul, thou art mad; thy much learning is turning thee to madness.
Paul answers as only one led by the Holy Spirit could answer. Without a moments hesitation he replies to Festus: I am not mad, most excellent Festus (politely using the official title for the governor), but speak forth words of truth and soberness.
Paul is saying to Festus that what he has to say is neither fanciful nor nonsensical, but rather the oppositetruth and soberness. And then for the benefit of both Festus and Agrippa, Paul makes the next remark:
The king knows that the thoughts I am presenting so freely are all the events of the life of Jesus and those things that have happened to me are doubtless already known by the king. None of these things happened in secret.
Now to obtain again the attention of the king that had been diverted by the interruption of Festus, Paul says: King Agrippa, believest thou the prophets? Ah, I know of thy background and religious profession. I know thou believest.
And, Paul might also have concluded that the king believed from the expression on his face. It is my conviction that king Agrippa was deeply stirred by what Paul preached. I also believe that Paul could see this and for that reason asked the above question. It was for this same reason that Agrippa replied as he did to Pauls pointed question.
With but little persuasion thou wouldst fain make me a Christian.
There are those who feel that the king was saying this as a jest or as a slighting remark, the thought being (according to them) that Agrippa said to Paul: Ah, you are trying to make a Christian of me with just a little persuasion.
But I cannot see that such a remark fits into the tenor of the meeting. It is my conviction that King Agrippa was stirred in the same manner that Sergius Paulus was in Salamis. (Act. 13:7)
What a wonderful answer does Paul give to the statement of Agrippa. He turns the rejection of the king into a definite advantage. He says in thought: I would that it were Gods will that whether with little persuasion or with much persuasion both those of no standing (in this world) and those of great standing, would become as I amlifting his right manacled handexcept these bonds.
956.
How did Paul show courtesy in answering Festus?
957.
How did Paul prove that what he was saying was truth and soberness?
958.
Why was Paul so sure that the king believed?
959.
Do you believe Agrippa was serious in his reply to Paul?
960.
Show how Paul turned rejection into advantage.
VII.
The break-up of the meeting. Act. 26:30-32.
The signal that the trial and defense were over was given by the rising of the king from his chair. All others also rose and began moving out of the room. Paul was again led to his place of confinement. What were the thoughts of the apostle as he returned from this meeting? He could at least feel that he was free from the blood of all menincluding that of a king. When Bernice, Festus and Agrippa had withdrawn to themselves, Festus said: Why, this man should not even be in prison. He has done nothing worthy of imprisonment.
To this thought both Bernice and Agrippa agree. Agrippa comments further on the subject by saying:
This man might have been set at liberty had he not appealed unto Caesar.
Of course whether Agrippa would have agreed to his release and to the acceptance of the censure of the Jews is questionable, but this was a concession at least.
961.
What do you suppose were the thoughts of the apostle as he returned to jail?
962.
Do you believe Agrippa would have freed Paul if there had been no appeal to Caesar?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(13) King Agrippa and Bernice.Each of the characters thus brought on the scene has a somewhat memorable history. (1) The former closes the line of the Herodian house. He was the son of the Agrippa whose tragic end is related in Act. 12:20-23, and was but seventeen years of age at the time of his fathers death, in A.D. 44. He did not succeed to the kingdom of Juda, which was placed under the government of a procurator; but on the death of his uncle Herod, the king of Chalcis, in A.D. 48, received the sovereignty of that region from Claudius, and with it the superintendence of the Temple and the nomination of the high priests. Four years later he received the tetrarchies that had been governed by his great-uncles Philip and Lysanias (Luk. 3:1), with the title of king. In A.D. 55 Nero increased his kingdom by adding some of the cities of Galilee (Jos. Ant. xix. 9, 1; xx. 1, 3; 8, 5). He lived to see the destruction of Jerusalem, and died under Trajan (A.D. 100) at the age of seventy-three. (2) The history of Bernice, or Berenice (the name seems to have been a Macedonian form of Pherenice) reads like a horrible romance, or a page from the chronicles of the Borgias. She was the eldest daughter of Herod Agrippa I., and was married at an early age to her uncle the king of Chalcis. Alliances of this nature were common in the Herodian house, and the Herodias of the Gospels passed from an incestuous marriage to an incestuous adultery. (See Note on Mat. 14:1.) On his death Berenice remained for some years a widow, but dark rumours began to spread that her brother Agrippa, who had succeeded to the principality of Chalcis, and who gave her, as in the instance before us, something like queenly honours, was living with her in a yet darker form of incest, and was reproducing in Juda the vices of which his fathers friend, Caligula, had set so terrible an example (Sueton. Calig. c. 24). With a view to screening herself against these suspicions she persuaded Polemon, king of Cilicia, to take her as his queen, and to profess himself a convert to Judaism, as Azizus had done for her sister Drusilla (see Note on Act. 24:24), and accept circumcision. The ill-omened marriage did not prosper. The queens unbridled passions once more gained the mastery. She left her husband, and he got rid at once of her and her religion. Her powers of fascination, however, were still great, and she knew how to profit by them in the hour of her countrys ruin. Vespasian was attracted by her queenly dignity, and yet more by the magnificence of her queenly gifts. His son Titus took his place in her long list of lovers. She came as his mistress to Rome, and it was said that he had promised her marriage. This, however, was more than even the senate of the empire could tolerate, and Titus was compelled by the pressure of public opinion to dismiss her, out his grief in doing so was matter of notoriety, Dimisit invitus invitam (Sueton. Titus, c. 7 Tacit. Hist. ii. 81; Jos. Ant. xx. 7, 3). The whole story furnished Juvenal with a picture of depravity which stands almost as a pendent to that of Messalina (Sat. vi. 1559).
To salute Festus.This visit was probably, as the word indicates, of the nature of a formal recognition of the new procurator on his arrival in the province.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
4. Agreement and Preparation for Paul’s Speech before Agrippa II. , Act 25:13-27 .
King Agrippa II., whose history we have given in our Hist. Revelation , 21:17, was now residing in his ancestral palace at Cesarea Philippi. (Note Mat 16:13.) The Herod family lost no opportunity to court the Roman officials, and Agrippa would pay an early visit of congratulation to Festus. We have had a sight of Drusilla in the last chapter; her sister Bernice now appears magnificently in view.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Now when certain days were passed, Agrippa the King and Bernice arrived at Caesarea, and saluted Festus.’
An event then occurred that helped to resolve his dilemma, the arrival in state of King Agrippa II with his sister Bernice (Berenice). Agrippa II, son of the Herod Agrippa mentioned in chapter 12, was by this time king over the territory previously ruled by the Tetrarch Philip (Batanaea, Trachonitis and Gaulanitis) together with the Tetrarchy of Lysanius (Abila), and territory in Lebanon which had been ruled by Varus. Further to this Nero had recently allotted to him Tiberius and Tarichea with their surrounding districts, and the city of Julius with fourteen neighbouring villages. In some ways more significantly from Luke’s point of view he was also given authority over the Jerusalem High Priesthood, he could appoint and remove them as he would, and charge over the Temple and its vestments. Thus as well as having a wide area of rule he bore responsibility both for the High Priesthood and the Temple. But he was a rather weak man. On Festus’ appointment he came to see him, bringing his sister Bernice, in order to congratulate him.
Bernice was Agrippa’s sister and very strong minded, but must have been very attractive to men, although not as beautiful as Drusilla her sister, Felix’ wife. She in fact had an incestuous relationship with Agrippa, who was a weak and indolent man, and later a firm relationship with Titus before he became emperor. She was clearly therefore sexually attractive, even to her own brother.
Agrippa was constantly faithful to Rome, but he also tried to keep in favour with the Jews. He insisted, for example, that the kings who wished to marry his sisters were circumcised. He did, however, offend the Jews by adding height to the palace of the Hasmoneans, in which he lived when in Jerusalem, so that he could see into the Temple area and watch the religious activities in the inner courts. There may have been some piety in this but the priests did not like it, and accordingly built a high wall to block his view. Agrippa appealed against this to Festus, but meanwhile the Jews had appealed to Rome, and they won their case. Agrippa was thwarted.
He did not hesitate to intervene in Temple affairs. He gave the Levites who sang the Psalms the right to wear the priestly linen garments, which again the priests did not like, and later at great expense was ready to strengthen the foundations of the Temple, a process only interrupted by its destruction. He also provided road-building work in Jerusalem once the building of the Temple had been completed in order to prevent unemployment. Thus in his own way he was a thoughtful king. He was also completely loyal to Rome. He was thus able at times to ensure that Jewish affairs, and the affairs of his kingdom, were properly looked after. He was a moderating influence at a time of high tension and sought vainly to prevent the final insurrection that resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Festus Calls On Agrippa’s Assistance In Formulating a Case And Paul Gives His Testimony To Them Both (25:13-26:23).
Festus now condemns himself by admitting that he has no charge to bring against Paul. He is sending him to Caesar to be judged, but he does not know why. He has no case against Paul. This suits Luke’s apologetic purpose but it shows up Roman provincial justice (while exonerating the emperor).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Festus Recounts Paul’s Defense to King Agrippa In Act 25:13-22 Festus the Roman governor recounts the events of Paul’s defense to King Agrippa, which is essentially a description of the events recorded in the previous passage (Act 25:1-12).
Act 25:13 “And after certain days” Comments – BDAG translates this phrase, “several days afterward.”
“king Agrippa” – Comments – Act 25:13 refers to Herod Agrippa II, the son of Herod Agrippa I and great-grandson of Herod the Great, who slew the children of Bethlehem (Mat 2:16-18). The death of Herod Agrippa I is recorded in Act 12:20-25. Josephus tells us that Herod Agrippa I died when Agrippa II was only seventeen years old, and living in Rome, being brought up with Claudius Caesar. Because of his youth, he was not immediately entrusted with the vast region of his father. In A. D. 48, his uncle died, Herod king of Chalcis and brother of Agrippa I, and Claudius gave him this throne (Josephus, Wars 2.12.1), as well as the oversight of the Temple and the authority to select the high priest. As time progressed, Claudius and Nero appointed Agrippa II over the former tetrarchies that had belonged to Philip and Lysanias, and he was crowned king (Josephus, Antiquities 20.7.1, Wars 2.12.1, 8). Herod Agrippa II later sided with Rome during the Jewish wars. After the destruction of Jerusalem he and his sister Bernice retired to Rome where he died in A.D. 100. Although he was not a king over the region of Palestine, he was nonetheless the fifth king of the Herod lineage and last ruling king that Rome appointed over the Jews. [296] There are no further references to King Agrippa II and Bernice in the Scriptures outside of Act 25:13 to Act 26:32.
[296] See Josephus, A ntiquities 19.9.1-2; J. Rawson Lumby, The Acts of the Apostles with Maps, Notes and Introductions, in Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools, ed. J. J. S. Perowne (Cambridge, The University Press, 1891), 420-421; W. Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor’s Greek Testament, vol. 2 (New York: George H. Doran Company, n.d.), 495.
“and Bernice” – Comments – Bernice was the eldest daughter of King Herod Agrippa I and sister to Herod Agrippa II and Drusilla, the wife of Felix. The Scriptures tell us that Drusilla was Jewess (Act 24:24), and Josephus adds Mariamne to the list of siblings ( Wars 2.11.6), so that there were three daughters and one son born to Agrippa 1, all of these of Jewish descent. Bernice was first married at the young age of thirteen to Herod king of Chalcis, the brother of King Herod I, who was her uncle. At his death in A.D. 48, she moved in with her brother Agrippa II and remained a widow for a lengthy period of time. She was accused of having a relationship with her brother Herod Agrippa II, so quickly persuaded Polemo, king of Cilicia, to marry her in order to squelch this rumor. However, this marriage was short-lived when she left him and moved back in with her brother, which is the time when Act 25:13; Act 25:23; Act 26:30 records that King Agrippa II and Bernice came to visit Festus the governor and sat to hear Paul’s defense (A ntiquities 20.7.2-3). [297] There are no further references to King Agrippa II and Bernice in the Scriptures outside of Act 25:13 to Act 26:32.
[297] E. M. B. Green and C. H. Hemer, “Bernice,” in New Bible Dictionary, second edition, ed. J. D. Douglas (Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishing, c1962, 1982), 132.
Act 24:24, “And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in Christ.”
“came unto Caesarea to salute Festus” Comments – Caesarea was the official residence of the Roman governor over this region of the Empire. Festus had recently been appointed as governor in place of Felix by Nero (Act 24:27) (Josephus Antiquities 20.8.9, Wars 2.14.1), so that King Agrippa’s royal visit appears to be an official greeting to congratulate him in his new office. [298]
[298] Matthew Henry, Acts, in Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible, New Modern Edition, Electronic Database (Seattle, WA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1991), in P.C. Study Bible, v. 3.1 [CD-ROM] (Seattle, WA: Biblesoft Inc., 1993-2000), notes on Acts 25:13-27.
Act 24:27, “But after two years Porcius Festus came into Felix’ room: and Felix, willing to shew the Jews a pleasure, left Paul bound.”
Act 25:14 “And when they had been there many days” – Comments – The fact that much time passed during Paul’s Caesarean imprisonment shows the inconsistency of his prosecution. There was simply insufficient evidence to bring about a final verdict.
“Festus declared Paul’s cause unto the king, saying, There is a certain man left in bonds by Felix” Comments – King Herod Agrippa II was Jewish and would have understood the cause of the dispute between Paul and the Jewish leaders better than Festus, a Roman. Festus was new to his appointment as governor, so naturally would be hesitant to make quick decisions while still unfamiliar with the Jewish culture.
Act 25:15 Comments – The Jewish leaders desired to have Paul condemned of a crime, not considering a fair trial to be adequate for him. King Herod would understand the views of the Jewish leaders much better than Festus.
Act 25:16 Comments – Festus wants King Agrippa to know that he has tried to deal fairly with issues concerning his new office, and particularly with the Jewish people.
Act 25:17
Act 23:35, “I will hear thee, said he, when thine accusers are also come. And he commanded him to be kept in Herod’s judgment hall.”
Act 25:6, “And when he had tarried among them more than ten days, he went down unto Caesarea; and the next day sitting on the judgment seat commanded Paul to be brought.”
Act 25:18 Comments – Festus has been educated in the history of Jewish insurrections and efforts to repel Roman dominion. He would have heard stories of particular Jewish zealots who murdered Roman soldiers, or riots caused by the Jews. Paul’s accusers presented none of these typical criminal acts, which left Festus, desiring to begin his office with justice, without a judgment. However, fearing the wrath of the Jews, he kept Paul imprisoned, as did Felix his predecessor (Act 24:27).
Act 24:27, “But after two years Porcius Festus came into Felix’ room: and Felix, willing to shew the Jews a pleasure, left Paul bound.”
Act 25:19 Comments – Festus could describe the Christian faith as a “superstition” without offending King Herod, who was of Jewish birth. Because neither Festus nor King Agrippa had any sympathy for Jesus and His followers, Festus took the liberty to speak of Christians with open contempt.
Act 25:21 Word Study on “Augustus” BDAG says the Greek word ( ) (G4575) means, “revered, worthy of reverence, august.” The TDNT says is the Greek translation of the Latin word “augustus,” which means, “holy, sacred.” The Enhanced Strong says this word is used 3 times in the New Testament, being translated in the KJV as “Augustus 3.”
Comments – The title “Augustus,” which literally means, “the exalted” ( TDNT), was initially conferred upon Octavian, the first Roman emperor (27 B.C. to A.D. 14) (Suetonius, Octavius Augustus 7). [299] This title was transferred upon subsequent reigning Roman emperors, so that it designated Emperor Nero (A.D. 54-68) when used in Act 25:21; Act 25:25.
[299] Suetonius, History of Twelve Caesars, trans. Philemon Holland, vol. 1, in The Tutor Translations, vol. 21, ed. W. E. Henley (London: David Nutt, 1899), 85.
Act 25:21 Comments In Act 25:21 Festus the governor refers to Emperor Nero as Augustus and as Caesar. These two names were handed down from Octavius Augustus, the first official Roman emperor, and from his predecessor Julius Caesar. Tacitus tells us the people called Emperor Vespasian (A.D. 69-79) by “Augustus” and “Caesar” ( Histories 2.80). [300] The name “Augustus” was a personal name given to Roman Emperors, as a way of deifying him before the people, while the word “Caesar” was an official title, and more closely equivalent to “king.” [301] The distinction between the two terms “Augustus” and “Caesar” can be seen in modern societies when addressing the leader of certain nations. For example, in Africa a nation’s president (equivalent to Caesar) is directly addressed by calling him “Your Excellency” (equivalent to Augustus).
[300] Tacitus writes, “as Vespasian stepped from his quarters, a few soldiers who were drawn up in their usual order to salute him as their Legate, saluted him as Emperor. Then the rest ran up and began to call him Caesar and Augustus; they heaped on him all the titles of an emperor.” See Tacitus, The Histories, vol. 2, trans. Clifford H. Moore, in The Loeb Classical Library, eds. T. E. Page, E. Capps, and W. H. D. Rouse (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, c1925, 1980), 289.
[301] W. Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor’s Greek Testament, vol. 2 (New York: George H. Doran Company, n.d.), 497.
Act 25:22 Comments – The EGT says the imperfect verb “I would hear” implies “a wish entertained for some time.” Perhaps King Agrippa had heard about Paul or at least the Christian faith in general and was interested in knowing more about this issue. However, some scholars “soften” this imperfect tense to says, “I should like.” [302]
[302] W. Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor’s Greek Testament, vol. 2 (New York: George H. Doran Company, n.d.), 498.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The Fifth Witness of Paul’s Innocence, Standing Before Agrippa and Bernice (A.D. 60) Act 25:13 to Act 26:32 gives us the lengthy testimony of Paul standing trial before King Agrippa. This is the fifth and final speech that Paul will make before his accusers before setting forth to Rome to face the highest court in the Roman Empire. Paul has spoken before the Jewish mob at the Temple (Act 21:15 to Act 22:29); he has been taken before the Sanhedrin and addressed the Jewish leaders (Act 22:30 to Act 23:35); he has stood before Felix the governor (Act 24:1-27); he has stood before Festus the subsequent governor (Act 25:1-12), and now he stands before King Agrippa (Act 25:13 to Act 26:32). These preliminary trials lead up to Paul’s appeal to Caesar. Many scholars suggest Luke compiles this sequence of trials in order to reveal Paul’s innocence as a legal defense that could have been used during Paul’s actual trial.
Outline Here is a proposed outline:
1. Festus Recounts Paul’s Defense to King Agrippa Act 25:13-22
2. The Opening Speech of Festus Act 25:23-27
3. Paul’s Speech to King Agrippa Act 26:1-29
4. The Verdict of King Agrippa Act 26:30-32
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Agrippa and Bernice in Caesarea.
Festus lays the matter before Agrippa:
v. 13. and after certain days King Agrippa and Bernice came unto Caesarea to salute Festus.
v. 14. And 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,
v. 15. about whom, when I was at Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, desiring to have judgment against him.
v. 16. To 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 license to answer for himself concerning the crime laid against him.
v. 17. Therefore, 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.
v. 18. Against whom, when the accusers stood up, they brought none accusation of such things as I supposed,
v. 19. but had certain questions against him of their own superstition, and of one Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.
v. 20. And because I doubted of such manner of questions, I asked him whether he would go to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these matters.
v. 21. But 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. After a few days had passed, sometime after the trial or preliminary hearing which was destined to have such far-reaching consequences, King Agrippa and his sister Bernice came to Caesarea to offer congratulations to Festus upon his entry on his office. Agrippa II was the son of Herod Agrippa I, chap. 12. Since he was only seventeen years old at the time of his father’s death, he was not given the kingdom, but was made ruler of Chalcis, a small city and district near the Antilebanon, after the death of his uncle, and also the government of the Temple was given him, with the right of appointing the high priest. Later the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias were added to his dominions, and he bore the title of king, though not king of Judea. Bernice, his oldest sister, had been betrothed to Marcus of Alexandria, had then married her uncle, Herod of Chalcis, a few years later, was left a widow, lived with her brother, was again married, to Polemon, king of Cilicia, whom: however, she soon left. The history of her life is that of a wanton woman with only one redeeming feature, when she tried to dissuade the procurator Florus from cutting down the Jews. The two royal visitors had been in the city for some time when Festus laid the case of Paul before the king, feeling sure that the latter’s more intimate knowledge of Jewish affairs would enable him to form a correct idea of the situation. So he explained matters as he understood them. A certain man had been left in custody by Felix, concerning whom the Jews had laid information before him when he was in Jerusalem, earnestly requesting a sentence of condemnation against him. The Jews thus appear to have tried other schemes as well as that of haying the hearing transferred to Jerusalem. Festus had told the Jews that it was not the custom of the Romans to condemn one man to oblige another, before the accused have his accusers face to face and have a chance to defend himself concerning the accusation which was made against him. And when they had then come together at Caesarea, he had made no delay, he had not put off the matter another day, but on the very next day had taken his seat on the tribunal and commanded the man to be arraigned. But when the accusers stood up in court, they brought no accusation of evil concerning him as Festus had suspected. The bitterness of feeling which the chief priests and members of the Sanhedrin had exhibited in Jerusalem had led the governor to expect the charge of a very serious crime. Instead of that, as the speaker contemptuously remarks, they had certain questions about their own religion against him and concerning a certain Jesus who had died, of whom Paul insisted that he was living. During the court proceedings much must have been said on both sides which Luke did not record, since he was interested only in offering a summary of the history. in several sentences the Roman’s skepticism is revealed, as when he refers to the Jewish belief as literally demon-worship, a foolish religion, See chap. 17:22, and when he refers to Paul’s earnest statement as a mere assertion. The upshot of the matter had been that Festus had been in doubt, had been at a loss as to the manner of proceeding, of making his inquiry regarding these questions and had therefore asked whether Paul desired to go to Jerusalem and there be tried concerning them. But since Paul had made an appeal that his case be reserved for the decision of Augustus, the Roman emperor, the governor had given command to keep him in custody until he could send him to Caesar, to the highest court in the Roman empire. The report of Festus is fairly correct, though colored by his understanding of the case. But he was evidently still perplexed and counted upon Agrippa, his acquaintance with whom had reached that stage, to help him out with good advice.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Act 25:13. King Agrippa and Bernice This Agrippa was son to Herod Agrippa, whose tragical death is related ch. 12: He was by profession a Jew, had the power of the temple and the sacred treasury, and could likewise dispose of the high-priesthood as he thought proper. Bernice, his sister, was the eldest daughter of Herod Agrippa, and had been contracted in her infancy by Claudius Caesar to Mark, the son of Alexander Lysimachus, the Alabarch; but he dying before the marriage was consummated, her father married her to his own brother Herod, king of Chalcis, though that was contrary to the law of Moses. After his death she went and lived with her brother Agrippa, with whom she was suspected of an incestuous commerce; of which Josephus speaks, and to which Juvenal is supposed to refer, in a celebrated passage, Sat. 6: ver. 154, &c. To wipe off this aspersion, she endeavoured to marry again, offering herself to Polemon, king of Cilicia, upon condition that he would become a proselyte of righteousness to the Jewish religion. Polemon, who had more regard to the riches than to the character of the lady, consented to be circumcised, and actually married her. But Bernice did not continue long with her husband, which occasioned his castingoff the Jewish religion; and notwithstanding the scandal which she had formerly lain under, she went and lived where she pleased, not only continuing her criminal acquaintance (as there is too great reason to fear) with her brother Agrippa, but afterwards insinuating herself so far into the affections of Titus Vespasian, as to occasion much discourse; for she was of great beauty, and remarkably liberal: nay, she had even the prospect of being empress, had not the murmurs of the people of Rome prevented it. See Suetonius in Tito, 100: 7. Tacit. Hist. 50. 2: 100. 2 and 81. Joseph. Antiq. b. 19: 100. 5.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Act 25:13 . This Marcus Agrippa was the well-meaning, but too weak, Herod Agrippa II., son of the elder Agrippa, grandson of Aristobulus, and the great-grandson of Herod I. Soon after the death of his father (Act 12:23 ) he received from Claudius, at whose court he was brought up (Joseph. Antt . xix. 9. 2, xx. 1. 1), the principality of Chalcis, and instead of this, four years afterwards (A.D. 53), from the same emperor, the former tetrarchy of Philip and Lysanias, along with the title of king (Joseph. Antt . xx. 7. 1); and at a later period, from Nero, a further considerable increase of territory. He did not die till the third year of Trajan, being the last reigning prince of the Herodian house. See Ewald, p. 555 ff.; Gerlach in the Luther. Zeitschr . 1869, p. 62 ff.
, also Beronice and Berenice ( i.e. equivalent to , Sturz, Dial. Maced . p. 31), was his sister , formerly the wife of her uncle Herod the prince of Chalcis, after whose death she lived with her brother, probably in an incestuous relation (Joseph. Antt . xx. 7. 3), a state of matters which was only for a short time interrupted by a second marriage, soon again dissolved, with the Cilician king Polemon (Joseph. Antt . xx. 7. 5). At a later period still she became mistress of the Emperors Vespasian and Titus. See Gerlach, l.c.
] It was quite in keeping with the relation of a Roman vassal, that he should welcome the new procurator soon after his accession to office.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
E.AT THE REQUEST OF HEROD AGRIPPA, THE YOUNGER, FESTUS COMMANDS THAT THE APOSTLE SHOULD BE BROUGHT BEFORE HIM; THUS PAUL FINDS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR DEFENDING HIMSELF IN THE PRESENCE OF THE KING, IN A PUBLIC AND SOLEMN MANNER, AND OF BEARING A TESTIMONY WHICH IS NOT WITHOUT EFFECT
Act 25:13 to Act 26:32
I. Festus makes a communication to king Agrippa concerning Paul, and, at the kings request, commands him to appear, for the purpose of being examined, in the presence of an assembly of distinguished persons
Act 25:13-27
13And after certain days [But after some days had passed, ] king Agrippaand Bernice came unto Cesarea to salute Festus. 14And when they had been [had tarried] there many days, Festus declared [set forth] Pauls cause unto [before] the king; saying, There is a certain man left in bonds by Felix [left behind by Felix in confinement]:15About whom, when I was at [came to] Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, desiring to have [om. to have] judgment7 againsthim. 16To whom I answered, It [that it] is not the manner [custom] of the Romans to deliver any man to die [to deliver up any man8], before that he which [who] is accused have the accusers face to face, and have license [have obtained an opportunity, ] to answer for himself concerning the crime laid against him [concerningthe accusation]. 17Therefore, when they were come hither [After they had then () assembled here], without any delay on the morrow I [I did not defer the case, but on the next day] sat on the judgment seat, and commanded the man to be brought forth [forward]. 18Against whom when the accusers stood up, they brought none [no] accusation of such things as I supposed [of such a nature as I conjectured]: 19But had [only] certain questions against him of their own superstition [relating to their own religion], and of [to] one Jesus, which [who] was dead, whom Paul affirmed to bealive [of whom Paul said that he was alive]. 20And because I doubted of such manner of questions [But as I was at a loss as to this investigation9], I asked him whether he would go [would wish to journey] to Jerusalem, and there be judged of [concerning] these matters. 21But when Paul had appealed to be reserved unto [But Paul now appealed to the circumstance that he wished to be kept for] the hearing10 of Augustus, [of the emperor, and] I commanded him to be kept till I might [should] send him to Cesar. 22Then Agrippa said unto Festus, I would also [I would also wish to] hear the man myself. To-morrow, said he, [But he said, To-morrow] thou shalt hear him.23And on the morrow [Accordingly (), on the next day], when Agrippa was [had] come, and Bernice, with great pomp, and was [had] entered into the place of hearing [the audience-chamber], with the chief captains [the commanders], and principal menof the city, at Festus commandment Paul was brought forth [forward]. 24And Festus said, King Agrippa, and all men which [ye men who] are here [om. here, supplied by the translators] present with us, ye see this man, about whom all the multitude of the Jews have dealt with [applied to] me, both at Jerusalem, and also here, crying that he ought not to live any longer. 25But when I found [But I perceived11] that he had committed nothing worthy of death, and that [; and, as] he himself hath appealed to Augustus [to the emperor] I have determined [I resolved] to send him.12 26Of whom [however] I have no certain thing [nothing definite] to write unto my lord [to the sovereign, ]. Wherefore I have brought him forth [forward] before you, and especially before thee, O king Agrippa, that, after [an] examination had [has taken place], I might have somewhat to write13 [I may know what I should write].For it seemeth to me unreasonable to send a prisoner, and not withal to signify the crimes laid against him [prisoner, without stating the charges against him].
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Act 25:13. King Agrippa and Bernice came.This first visit of Herod, who came to offer his congratulations to the new governor, was, no doubt, made soon after the events occurred, which have just been related; hence, the expression , is to be taken in its literal sense. Herod Agrippa II. [sometimes called Agrippa the Second or Younger, to distinguish him from his father, Agrippa the First (Alex.) who is mentioned in Acts 13.Tr.] was the last of the Herods; he was the son of Agrippa I., [and a great grandson of Herod, styled the Great, Mat 2:1.]. In the year A. D. 48, he was placed [by the emperor Claudius] in possession of the principality of Chalcis, and four years afterwards, received, in place of it, the former tetrarchy of Philip, in the north-east, beyond Jordan, together with the title of king. He was also intrusted with the guardianship of the temple, and obtained the privilege of appointing the high priest. Bernice was his own sister. [Her name, (, ) is, probably, the Macedonian form of (Passow).Tr.]. She had previously been married to her uncle Herod, the prince of Chalcis; after the death of the latter (A. D. 48), she lived with her brother, and, as it was believed, in incestuous intercourse with him [Jos. Ant. xx. 7. 3.].
Act 25:14-17. a. And when they had been there many days.The case of Paul did not appear to the procurator to be so urgent, as to require that it should be at once made known to Agrippa; it was only after the latter had already spent some time in Cesarea, that Festus took an opportunity to state the subject to him. He probably expected that, as he was still a stranger in the country, he would he enabled to form a clearer judgment respecting Paul and his cause, by consulting Agrippa, whose experience and knowledge of Jewish affairs would enable him to give advice, particularly as his religion and that of the Jews was the same.
b. There is a certain man left in bonds by Felix.It will at once be seen that Festus is desirous of demonstrating to the king, on the one hand, his own integrity of character and his conscientiousness and zeal in discharging the duties of his office, and of exhibiting, on the other, the great excellence of the Roman system of laws to Agrippa, who, although, his superior in rank, was virtually his vassal. All this appears, for instance, in his report, Act 25:16, of the answer, which, as he alleges, he had given to the Jews, although that answer differs widely in its form the one which he really gave them, Act 25:4-5.The context here assigns to the meaning: to condemn one man in order to oblige another. . ., is a Latinized phrase, viz., locum respondendi accipere.
Act 25:18-19. They brought none accusation of such things as I supposed.The bitterness of feeling with which the Jews had assailed Paul, led Festus to imagine that they would accuse him of some very serious crime; but he soon ascertained that the whole case turned on certain religious questions. The Roman here designedly employs the word , which Agrippa might take in a good or a bad sense; see Act 17:22 [Exeg. note, b.]. He says, moreover, . ., as if he regarded the prince himself as a pagan, or, at least, as a man who was too enlightened to be seriously influenced by the superstition of the Jews. [. religion, not superstition. Agrippa was known to be a zealous Jew, and Festus would not have been so uncourteous as to describe his faith by an offensive term. (Hackett).Tr.]. The remark which Festus made concerning Jesus, clearly shows, that, in the course of the former proceedings, much had been said, which Luke has not recorded. The general tone, moreover, of the remarks of the Roman is that which characterizes the conversation of one who is a mere man of the world; he glides over the most important and holy subjects, without manifesting any interest in, or any respect for, them, especially when he refers to the Person of Jesus, and to the testimony of Paul; the latter, (namely, that Jesus was alive,) he disparages by representing it be a mere assertion ().
Act 25:20-22. And because I doubted, etc.The procurator represents the proposal which he had made to Paul, namely, that the latter should proceed to Jerusalem and there be judged, as one that was well meant; he explains it as having proceeded from a wish to submit an investigation, which he did not himself feel competent to conduct, to a more appropriate tribunal. [, Act 25:21, does not stand elliptically for . (Grotius, Wolf, Heinr. and others); this infinitive, on the contrary, contains the object of , or the matter of the appeal that was made. (Meyer).For , without , see Winer: Gram. 41. a. 2.Tr.]. , Augustus. [This title was first conferred by the senate on Octavianusand borne by all succeeding emperors. (Alf.).Tr.]
Act 25:23-25. And on the morrow, etc.The word acquired among the later Greek writers, as Plutarch, Diodorus, etc., the signification of pomp, display, exhibition, procession. Fantasia signifies even yet, in all the western maritime regions of Turkey, lustre or splendor (Zeitschr. der deutsch-morgenlnd. Ges. XI. 3. p. 484). [, the tribunes of five cohorts stationed at Cesarea, Jos. Jewish War. iii. 4. 2. (Meyer).Tr.].It was a numerous and splendid assembly before which Paul appeared. Festus, who presented him in a solemn manner, intentionally gave additional importance to the occasion, and, no doubt, also to himself, by alleging, in terms of exaggeration, that the whole Jewish community had applied to him in reference to this man.
Act 25:26-27. Unto my Lord, .The Commander, Dominus, was a title which not only Augustus, but even Tiberius, had positively declined to accept, as it belonged to the gods alone, e. g., Tac. Annal. II. 87; Suet. Aug. 53; Tiber. 27. But the emperors who succeeded them, willingly received this honorable appellation, and, at the time when the present events occurred, it was frequently employed. [Caligula accepted the titleHerod Agrippa had applied it to Claudiusbut it was not a recognized title of any emperor before Domitian. Suet. Dom. 13. (Alf.).Tr.]. , i.e., a charge made in precise and definite terms.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. Although the frame of mind of this pagan officer did not qualify him for understanding religious truth, he nevertheless rightly perceived that the main difficulty between Paul and his Jewish opponents, referred to the Person of Jesus, and, specially, to the question whether He was, or was not, risen. That Jesus had died on the cross, was a fact which both parties admitted. But Paul maintained that He now lived, inasmuch as he had risen from the grave; the truth of this statement the Jews in the most positive terms denied. The conversion, indeed, of Paul, by which he became another man, was originally established on his firm conviction of the truth: the Crucified One lives! It had been demonstrated to him by the appearance of Jesus. Hence his statement of that great fact, was the statement of an eye-witnessit was, strictly speaking, testimony, whereas Festus supposed that it was a mere assertion founded on a delusion. The resurrection of Jesus is, and must continue to be, the central fact of redemption through Christ(a) in a historical point of view, since, without it, the church of Christ would not have obtained an historical existence and been perpetuated; (b) in a doctrinal point of view, in reference both to the Person and to the Work of Christ; (c) as the source of life and power, since He who believes in the Risen One, lives and receives divine strength through Him; (d) in view of the future, since all the Christian hopes of the individual and of mankind, depend on the resurrection-life of the Redeemer, and are sustained and confirmed by it.
2. It is true that Festus did not state his real motive, when he alleged that his own incompetence to investigate the case of Paul, had led him to propose that it should be transferred to Jerusalem. Still, his language, as given in Act 25:20, shows that he formed a correct opinion of the case. Instead of claiming that, in view of his lofty secular position, he was qualified to understand and decide all manner of controversies, he does not regard it as incompatible with the dignity of his station to confess with all candor, that in this particular case, he was completely at a loss (), when a decision was asked of him. And, far from dictatorially and peremptorily deciding in a case involving a point of faith, he would prefer to submit the decision to suitable persons. This is an instance in which the magistrate most honorably confines himself within certain limits, rendering to Cesar the things that are Cesars, and to God the things that are Gods. He is a model for every Christian government, with regard to the course which should be observed in matters that concern the faith and the Church.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
Act 25:14. And when they had been there many days.The first days were doubtless devoted to amusements, such as are usually prepared to do honor to distinguished strangers. But when, after many days, these were exhausted, they turned their attention to the case of Paul. (Rieger).
Act 25:16. To whom I answered, It is not the manner of the Romans, etc.It were to be wished that this equitable rule or principle of the Roman law were engraved on stone and brass, and placed in a conspicuous place in the palaces of great lords, and in all court-houses, but still more, that it were inscribed on the hearts of all judges and magistrates, Job 19:23-24. They are merely hangmen, and not judges, who begin with the execution, and condemn an accused person, whether he be innocent or guilty, without giving him a hearing or a fair trial. The Gentiles were more rational and just, and they will be the judges of such men; Mat 26:66. (Starke).Festus describes, in his address to Agrippa, his own sense of justice and his impartial procedure, with much ostentation. But when we closely examine the whole transaction, it plainly appears that he did not express his real sentiments. We are told in Act 25:9, that he wished to confer a favor on the Jews. He was disposed to employ indirect means for delivering up Paul to them in Jerusalem, and was prevented from executing his purpose solely by the appeal made to the emperor. He was a mere man of the world, who was anxious to be popular among all classes, and he trimmed the sails according to the direction of the wind. This is by nature the evil tendency of us all. We are very ready to set forth our own merits, and to justify all our actions, although our conscience may convict us of many human infirmities. (Ap. Past.).
Act 25:19. But had certain questions against him of their own superstition (according to Luthers version). [and the Engl. version.Tr.],Festus does not here speak of the Jewish religion with that respect which we would expect, since Agrippa, whom he addressed, was I himself a Jew. But as great lords are often supposed to entertain in their hearts very little regard for the religion which they externally profess, an insolent tongue does not hesitate to speak contemptuously of it in their presence. (Rieger).And of one Jesus, which, was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. This report of Festus demonstrates that when Paul spoke in defence of himself before the chief council at Jerusalem, and, subsequently, before Festus, he did not confine himself to the general subject of the resurrection, but also taught and maintained this doctrine in its connection with the resurrection of Jesus. For it was a main point in his controversy with the Jews that, according to his testimony, that Jesus whom they had slain, had risen again, and was alive. Festus regarded the subject of the dispute itself as a mere matter of superstition, that was too trivial to claim attention. And yet it was (and still is) the central truth of the whole Christian faiththe prominent landmark which separated the Jewish (and modern) infidelity from the faith of the whole church of Christ. (Ap. Past.).
Act 25:20. And because I doubted [was at a loss] etc.We cannot listen without a feeling of abhorrence to the disparaging language which Festus, a pagan, and a man of the world, in his great ignorance, employs respecting the controverted point of the truth of the resurrection of Jesus; and yet we cannot but commend the moderation and equity which he, at the same time, shows; for he not only does not dictatorially pronounce judgment when such questions of faith or religion are presented; but is not even willing to admit the controversy before his judgment-seat. This pagan is governed in the present instance by better principles than many Christian rulers are, who do not scruple to treat religious controversies as if they were civil matters, to forbid the promulgation of doctrines and truths, under the penalty of excommunication, fire, and the sword, and to constitute themselves judges of the consciences of men. (Ap. Past.).
Act 25:22. Then Agrippa said unto Festus, etc.It was doubtless not simply by curiosity that Agrippa was influenced; such a feeling Festus had not made special efforts to awaken in him. A flash of lightning, or, at least, a gleam of light, had entered his soul; he had a presentiment that, in the present case, heavenly things were involved. (Williger).
Act 25:23. When Agrippa was come, and Bernice, with great pomp, etc.How soon that glory faded away before the simple words of the man of God! (Williger).Here again God provided for His servant a numerous audience, consisting of eminent and influential men, to whom it now became Pauls duty to preach the Gospel. (All this was in accordance with the words: He is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel, Act 9:15). Paul had recently found a season of repose, and had been allowed to have intercourse with his friends (Act 24:23). Soon afterwards he was brought before Festus, when the hostile Jews were present, and on that occasion testified that Jesus, the Crucified One, was alive. He now bears witness in the presence of kings, princes, and a large assembly.Here we adore the faithfulness of our God, who continually leads His servants forward and employs them, even when they are most despised by the world; He opens a door for them, when the world proposes to fetter and incarcerate them. But we also revere such a servant of Jesus, whom God could employ in every capacityas a witness of his Lords sufferingsas an exhorter of the peopleas a preacher of His resurrectionas the herald of His grace before emperors and kings. The Lord grant us, too, His grace, so that we may serve Him in all things, and, that, when He employs us, we may appear as faithful servants! (Ap. Past.).
Act 25:24. Ye see this man.Behold the man! Joh 19:5. (Williger).
Act 25:26. Wherefore I have brought him forth before thee, O king Agrippa.So, too, Pilate sent Jesus to Herod, Luk 23:7. (Williger).
Act 25:27. For it seemeth to me unreasonable, etc.Statesmen readily comprehend that it is an unreasonable course to imprison men, or inflict any other punishment upon them, on account of their religion; but their conduct is not always in accordance with their opinion. The supposed interests of the state may prevail even over reason, Mat 23:3. (Starke).When the highest civil authorities and tribunals, after receiving an appeal, at times respond by issuing unjust rescripts or decrees, one of the causes may be possibly found in the dishonesty of the official reports that had been transmitted; for the decision conforms to the report. O that princes, and men in authority, would see with their own eyes, listen to the complaints of the miserable and oppressed, and not invariably depend on the statements of their counsellors and officers! (id.).
ON THE WHOLE SECTION, Act 25:13-27.The judgment of the people of the world concerning matters of faith: I. The highest standard by which they are governed, is the civil law, as in the case of Festus, Act 25:13-18; II. Their judgment respecting the objects of faith is depreciatory; they assign these to the domain of superstition, and even pride themselves on their inability to understand such questions, Act 25:19-21; III. Their interest in such subjects proceeds, as in the case of Agrippa, from curiosity, or is awakened by external circumstances, Act 25:22. (Lisco).
Why should those be accounted blessed, who are persecuted for the truths sake? I. Because it is precisely by such persecution that their innocence is most plainly proved, Act 25:18 ff.; II. Because persecution affords them an opportunity to bear witness to the truth, Act 25:22 ff. (id.).
The principles of an impartial administration of justice, as stated by Festus. Act 25:14-27 : I. All should be done that properly belongs to such an administration of justice; (a) with respect to the accusersto receive and hear them patiently, Act 25:15; Act 25:17-18; (b) with respect to the accusedto listen with impartiality to their defence, and protect their persons against the craft and violence of their enemies, Act 25:16; Act 25:18; Act 25:21. II. All should be avoided that does not belong to it; (a) not to claim the right of judgment in matters of faith, Act 25:19-20; Act 25:26; (b) not arbitrarily to anticipate the decision of a higher judge, Act 25:25, but rather conscientiously to prepare the way for it, Act 25:26-27.
Mere intellectual culture, an incompetent guide in matters of Christian truth: I. It regards the most precious articles of the Christian faith as the offspring of superstition, and consequently as not being worthy of attention, Act 25:19-20; II. It regards the living Head of the Church as one Jesus which was dead, and it is not conscious of His vital power and gracious presence, Act 25:19; III. It regards the chosen servants of God as eccentric and incomprehensible men, with whom it knows not how to deal, Act 25:24-27.
Festus and Paul, or, The plain man of God, elevated far above the distinguished man of the world. He is elevated far above him, I. By that internal nobility which his adoption as a child of God, confers, and before which all the pride of rank fades away, Act 25:23; II. By the wide field of view which faith opens, with respect to which all mere secular culture is compelled to confess its ignorance, Act 25:19-20; Act 25:26; III. By the firm bearing which his unblamable walk before God enables him to maintain, while the loose morality of the world fluctuates between right and wrong, truth and error, Act 25:9; Act 25:20; Act 25:26.
The words of Agrippa concerning Paul: I would also hear the man myself, (Act 25:22), according to the various meanings which have been assigned to them: I. As the wish inspired by mere curiosity, which simply seeks entertainment for the passing hour; II. As the wish prompted by a secular desire for knowledge, expecting interesting matters of information; III. As the wish which a devout desire for salvation inspired, animated by the consciousness that spiritual instructions were needed (applied to our practice of attending public worship, hearing sermons, reading books of devotion, etc.).
Paul, the servant of God, in the presence of princes and rulers at Cesarea; we observe in the scene before us, I. The glory of the Lord, who (a) opens a door for his servants even when they are fettered or imprisoned; (b) and whose word knocks alike at the lofty palace and the lowly hut; II. The fidelity of His servant, who every where delivers his testimony for the Lord, (a) not dazzled by the splendor of human greatness; (b) nor enfeebled by the chains of his personal afflictions.
The audience-chamber of the governor at Cesarea: I. A magnificent apartment, exhibiting earthly glorythe display made by the assembled nobility, etc., Act 25:23; soon afterwards, II. An apartment in which holy doctrines were proclaimed, when the apostle offered his testimony, Act 26:1-23; and, ultimately, III. A judgment-hall of the divine majestywhen the apostolical discourse exposed the secrets of the heart, Act 26:24-32.
Footnotes:
[7]Act 25:15. [The text. rec. reads , with E. G. H., whereas A. B. C., Cod. Sin. (Vulg. damnationem) exhibit . Lach., Tisch., Born, and Alf. adopt the latter.Tr.]
[8]Act 25:16. In some manuscripts [G. H.], and versions [Syr. etc.], is followed by [as in text. rec.]; the two words are obviously an explanatory addition. [They are not found in A. B. C. E. Cod. Sin., and are omitted by many recent editorsTr.].
[9]Act 25:20. [Instead of doubted of such, etc. (Wicl., Tynd., Cranmer), the margin of the Engl. Bible offers the following version: I was doubtful how to inquire hereof. The marginal version .. is probably nearer to the sense of the original, than that given in the text, though both are paraphrases rather than translations. (Alex.). before , of text. rec., with H., is changed to by Lach., Tisch., and Alf., in accordance with A. B. C. E. G., Cod. Sin., Syr.Lechlers translation indicates that he retains the singular.Tr.]
[10]Act 25:21. [For hearing, the margin proposes judgment. The Greek word is .. applied in the classics to any discriminating judgment and decision. (Alex.).For , of text. rec., with G. H., Lach., Tisch., Born., and Alf. read with A. B. C. E. Cod. Sin.Tr.]
[11]Act 25:25. a. is indeed sustained by less decisive external evidence than , but the internal evidence in the same degree sustains the former, rather than the latter; if the finite verb had been originally employed, it would, unquestionably, not have been changed into the participle. [The participle, as adopted by the text. rec., is found in G. H., and is retained by Alt.; but Lach., Tisch., and Born., with A. B. C. E. read . Vulg., ego vero comperi.Cod. Sin. (original) read , which a later hand, C, altered to .Tr.]
[12]Act 25:25. b. [ after , of text. rec., with E. G. H., is dropped by Lach., Tisch., and Alf., in accordance with A. B. C. Cod. Sin., Vulg.Tr.]
[13]Act 25:26. [The last word of the verse in the text. rec. is , as found in E. G. H., and this reading is retained by several editors (Knapp, Scholz., etc.). Lach., Tisch., and Alf. read with A. B. C., Cod. Sin.Tr.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
And after certain days king Agrippa and Bernice came unto Caesarea to salute Festus. (14) And 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: (15) About whom, when I was at Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, desiring to have judgment against him. (16) To 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 license to answer for himself concerning the crime laid against him. (17) Therefore, 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. (18) Against whom when the accusers stood up, they brought none accusation of such things as I supposed: (19) But had certain questions against him of their own superstition, and of one Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. (20) And because I doubted of such manner of questions, I asked him whether he would go to Jerusalem, and there be judge d of these matters. (21) But 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. (22) Then Agrippa said unto Festus, I would also hear the man myself. Tomorrow, said he, thou shalt hear him.
I pass by all that is said here, of the pomp and grandeur of the persons in the intimacy of Festus, things but of a moment, to attend to what is more important; the concerns of the Church at this time. One circumstance is very striking, as related in this paragraph. Festus here talks of the manner of the Romans, in their delivery of criminals, to death. And, as Paul was brought before Festus by the Jews, in hopes that he would have condemned him to death, though a Jew; nothing can be more plain, than that the Jews had now totally lost the power in themselves to judge, and condemn any; for it was solely exercised by the Roman power. But, if the Reader will compare what is here said, with what took place at the death of Stephen; (see Act 7:57-58 , and Commentary there) he will discover, that a great change had taken place since that time. The Sanhedrim, in Stephen’s case, did actually try, condemn, and execute, this martyr to the Godhead of Christ, without applying to the Roman power. Whereas now, they no longer possessed it, as is evident in Paul’s trial, both before Felix, and Festus; and his appeal to Caesar. And here opens, and confirms, a blessed proof of Jacob’s prophecy, Gen 49:10 . The Gentiles were now gathering to Christ. The sceptre of Judah was totally departed, and the Shiloh come. How blessed is it to trace the sweet evidences of our holy faith, thus by scriptural testimonies!
I must detain the Reader with an observation more, on what is said in this paragraph, of the Apostle’s assertion, respecting the resurrection of Christ. Festus was astonished, he told Agrippa, that when he expected Paul’s accusers to have brought forth a charge against him of some high crimes and misdemeanors; it was nothing but of certain questions, and superstitions: and particularly, said he, of one Jesus which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. Reader! do mark the contempt with which this heathen spake of that glorious event, which is to you, and to me, our chief happiness, and greatest joy!
But, while this wretched man, considered this momentous truth as a trifle of no value to regard; let you and I rather advert to the conduct of Paul, and enquire how, or from what cause it was, the Apostle became so confident. Certain it is, that Paul had never seen Christ in the flesh, during our Lord’s ministry; for he saith himself, that he was as one born out of due time, 1Co 15:8 . And that he was, many years after Christ’s return to glory, a bitter enemy to the cause of Christ, is also equally certain. As, therefore, he was not one of those witnesses Peter speaks of, who were chosen before of God for this purpose to be his witnesses, who did eat and drink with Jesus after he arose from the dead; it becomes a subject of no small interest to enquire, how Paul got his assurance of Christ’s resurrection, and what it was, which made him so confident, that Jesus which was dead, he affirmed to be alive?
And here opens to us, a subject of peculiar sweetness and delight. For nothing can be more evident, than that Paul’s positiveness in affirming, that this One glorious Jesus which had been dead, was alive, arose, from his own personal knowledge. Jesus himself had spoken to Paul from heaven, at his conversion, Act 9:4-5 . And Jesus had again made a second manifestation of himself to Paul, as it is written: Act 22:17-21 , and 1Co 15:8 . And what confirmed yet more the whole in the Apostle’s mind, of the resurrection of Jesus, were the blessed effects which followed, in his own heart. The resurrection of Jesus became a palpable truth with Paul, from his own. Well might the Apostle affirm, that this One Lord Jesus which was dead, was alive; because, Christ’s resurrection and return to glory, had been confirmed to Paul’s heart by the blessed effects of it, in his resurrection by grace. And the same evidence rests now in the heart of every regenerated believer. Reader! you and I, and every child of God, in whose Spirit the Holy Ghost witnesseth, that we are the children of God, possess the same witness in ourselves. By the descent of the Holy Ghost upon our hearts, we prove the ascension, and consequently the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, having returned to glory, and sent him down. And, from this best of all assurances, like Paul, we may speak of Jesus as once dead, but now affirm, that he is alive. This is the sweetest and most precious of all evidences!
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
13 And after certain days king Agrippa and Bernice came unto Caesarea to salute Festus.
Ver. 13. King Agrippa and Bernice ] Son and daughter to that Herod mentioned Act 12:1 . They were known, saith Josephus, to live in detestable incest. It pleased God that his faithful servant Paul should plead for his life before these two filthy beasts; which he did freely and modestly.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
13. ] HEROD AGRIPPA II., son of the Herod of ch. 12 (see note on Act 25:1 there), was at Rome, and seventeen only, when his father died (Jos. Antt. xix. 9. 1). Claudius (ib. 9. 2) was about to send him to succeed to the kingdom, but was dissuaded by his freedmen and favourites, and sent Cuspius Fadus as procurator instead. Soon after, Claudius gave him the principality of Chalcis, which had been held by his uncle Herod (Antt. xx. 5. 2), the presidency of the temple at Jerusalem and its treasures (Antt. xx. 1. 3), and the appointment of the High Priest. Some years after the same emperor added to his jurisdiction the former tetrarchy of Philip, and Batana, Trachonitis, and Abilene (Antt. xx. 7. 1), with the title of King (B. J. ii. 12. 8). Nero afterwards annexed Tiberias, Tarichea, Julias, and fourteen neighbouring villages to his kingdom (Antt. xx. 8. 4). He built a large palace at Jerusalem (ib. 8. 11); but offended the Jews by constructing it so as to overlook the temple (ib.), and by his capricious changes in the high priesthood, and was not much esteemed by them (B. J. ii. 17. 1). When the last war broke out, he attached himself throughout to the Romans. He died in the third year of Trajan, and fifty-first of his reign, aged about seventy (Winer, Realw.).
] The Macedonian form ( or ) for . She was the eldest daughter of Herod Agrippa I., and first married to her uncle Herod, prince of Chalcis (Antt. xix. 5. 1). After his death she lived with Agrippa her brother, but not without suspicion ( , , Antt. xx. 7. 3; see also Juv. Sat. vi. 156 ff.); in consequence of which ( , Antt. ib.) she married Polemo, king of Cilicia. The marriage was, however, soon dissolved (ib.), and she returned to her brother. She was afterwards the mistress of Vespasian (Tac. Hist. ii. 81), and of Titus (Suet. Tit [150] 7; Winer, Realw.).
[150] Titus, Bp. of Bostra, cir. 360 377
] on his accession to the procuratorship, to gain his favour.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 25:13 . . : this was Herod Agrippa II., son of Agrippa I., whose tragic end is recorded in chap. 12. At the time of his father’s death he was only seventeen, and for a time he lived in retirement, as Claudius was persuaded not to entrust him with the kingdom of Juda. But on the death of Herod, king of Chalcis, A.D. 48, Claudius not only gave the young Agrippa the vacant throne, A.D. 50, but transferred to him the government of the Temple, and the right of appointing the high priest. His opinion on religious questions would therefore be much desired by Festus. Subsequently he obtained the old tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias, and the title of king was bestowed upon him. We have thus a proof of St. Luke’s accuracy in that he calls him , cf. Act 26:27 , but not king of Juda, although he was the last Jewish king in Palestine. Bernice and Drusilla were his sisters. He offended the Jews not only by building his palace so as to overlook the Temple, but also by his constant changes in the priesthood. In the Jewish wax he took part with the Romans, by whom at its close he was confirmed in the government of his kingdom, and received considerable additions to it. When Titus, after the fall of Jerusalem, celebrated his visit to Csarea Philippi Herod’s capital, called by him Neronias in honour of Nero by magnificent games and shows, it would seem that Agrippa must have been present; and if so, he doubtless joined as a Roman in the rejoicings over the fete of his people, Hamburger, Real-Encyclopdie des Judentums , ii., 1, 30, “Agrippa II.”; Schrer, Jewish People , div. i., vol. ii., p. 191 ff., “Herod’ (6), Hastings’ B.D., Farrar, The Herods , p. 193 ff. (1898). ( . = Macedonian form of , see Blass, in loco , and C.I.G. , 361; C.I. Att. , iii., i., 556, Headlam in Hastings’ B.D.): the eldest of the three daughters of Agrippa I. She was betrothed, but apparently never married, to Marcus, son of Alexander, the Alabarch of Alexandria (see Schrer for correct reading of Jos., Ant. , xix., 5, 1, Jewish People , div. i., vol. ii., p. 342, note). On his death at the age of thirteen she was married to her uncle, Herod of Chalcis, Jos., u.s. , but after a few years she was left a widow, and lived in the house of her brother Agrippa II. In order to allay the worst suspicions which were current as to this intimacy, she married Polemon, king of Cilicia, Ant. , xx., 7, 3 (Juv., Sat. , vi., 156 ff.), but she soon left him and resumed the intimacy with her brother. Like Agrippa she showed openly at least a certain deference for the Jewish religion, and on one occasion, says Schrer, u.s. , p. 197, we find even her, a bigot as well as a wanton, a Nazirite in Jerusalem, B.J. , ii., 15, 1. This was in A.D. 66, and she endeavoured while in the capital to stay the terrible massacre of Florus “the one redeeming feature of her career,” B.D. 2 . But later on, exasperated by the Jewish populace who burnt her palace, she became, like her brother, a partisan of the Romans, and in turn the mistress of Vespasian and of Titus, Tac., Hist. , ii., 81; Suet., Tit. , 7; Jos., B.J. , ii., 17, 6. O. Holtzmann, Neutest. Zeitgeschichte , p. 83, speaks of Drusilla as a worthy sister of Bernice: he might have said the same of the other sister, Mariamne, since she too left her husband for the wealth of Demetrius, the Jewish Alabarch of Alexandria, Jos., Ant. , xx., 7, 3. , see critical note. No doubt an official visit of congratulation paid by Agrippa as a Roman vassal upon the procurator’s entry on his office. The future participle makes the sense quite easy, but if we read the aorist it looks as if Agrippa and Bernice had previously saluted Felix, and afterwards came to his official residence, Csarea. Rendall includes in not only the notion of arrival but also of settling down for a stay short or long: “came to stay at Csarea and saluted Felix” (aorist), but see Simcox, Language of the N. T. , p. 125.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Act 25:13-22
13Now when several days had elapsed, King Agrippa and Bernice arrived at Caesarea and paid their respects to Festus. 14While they were spending many days there, Festus laid Paul’s case before the king, saying, “There is a man who was left as a prisoner by Felix; 15and when I was at Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews brought charges against him, asking for a sentence of condemnation against him. 16I answered them that it is not the custom of the Romans to hand over any man before the accused meets his accusers face to face and has an opportunity to make his defense against the charges. 17So after they had assembled here, I did not delay, but on the next day took my seat on the tribunal and ordered the man to be brought before me. 18When the accusers stood up, they began bringing charges against him not of such crimes as I was expecting, 19but they simply had some points of disagreement with him about their own religion and about a dead man, Jesus, whom Paul asserted to be alive. 20Being at a loss how to investigate such matters, I asked whether he was willing to go to Jerusalem and there stand trial on these matters. 21But when Paul appealed to be held in custody for the Emperor’s decision, I ordered him to be kept in custody until I send him to Caesar.” 22Then Agrippa said to Festus, “I also would like to hear the man myself.” “Tomorrow,” he said, “you shall hear him.”
Act 25:13 “King Agrippa” This refers to Agrippa II. He was the brother of Drusilla and Bernice. He was educated in Rome and was very loyal to Rome’s policies and programs.
SPECIAL TOPIC: BERNICE
Act 25:13-19 This again reveals one of Luke’s literary and theological purposes, which was to show that Christianity was not a political threat to Rome (cf. Act 25:25). In the early decades of the first century Christianity was considered a sect of Judaism, which was acknowledged by Rome as a legal religion. Rome wanted no part of disputes between Jewish religious sects!
Act 25:18 “they began charges against him not of such crimes as I was expecting” This shows the intensity and nature of the Jewish opposition. It was not political, but religious.
NASB, NRSV,
NJB, NIV”crimes”
NKJV”such things”
TEV”evil crimes”
REB”charges”
NET Bible”evil deeds”
ASV”evil things”
There are several variants.
1. ponrn genitive plural in MSS cf8 i2, B, E, meaning “things of evil” (cf. Act 28:21)
2. ponrau accusative neuter singular in MSS P74, A, C*
3. ponra accusative neuter plural in MSS *, C2
4. omit MSS L, P, and some Lectionaries (cf. NKJV)
UBS4 puts option #1 in the text with a “C” rating (difficulty in deciding).
Felix was surprised that the charges were not serious and had to do with Jewish religious matters, not legal matters.
Act 25:19 “religion” This is literally a compound term from “fear” and “gods.” This term can mean “superstition,” which was exactly what these Roman leaders thought about the Jewish religion. However, Festus would have not wanted to insult his Jewish dignitaries, so he used an ambiguous term (so too, Paul, Act 17:22).
Act 25:18-19 show again that Roman justice found no fault with Paul or Christianity.
“about a dead man, Jesus, whom Paul asserted to be alive” The resurrection was one the central pillars of the sermons (kerygma, see Special Topic at Act 2:14) in Acts (cf. Act 26:8). Christianity stands or falls on this theological assertion (cf. 1 Corinthians 15).
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
And = Now.
after certain days. Literally certain days having passed by. Greek. diaginomai. Only here; Act 27:9. Mar 16:1. certain. Greek. tines. App-124.
king Agrippa. Agrippa the Second, son of the Herod of Acts 12, and Cypros, grand-niece of Herod the Great. At the death of his father, he was too young to be appointed his successor; but in A.D. 50 Claudius gave him the kingdom of Chalcis, his uncle the husband of Bernice, who occupied that throne, having died two years before. This was shortly afterwards exchanged for the tetrarchies of Abilene and Trachonitis, with the title of king. His relations with his sister Bernice were the occasion of much suspicion. He was of the Jews’ religion, though of Idumaean descent, and well versed in Jewish laws and customs (Act 26:3). Josephus (Wars, II. xvi. 4) records a speech he made to dissuade the Jews from engaging in war with the Romans. He sided with the Romans in the war, and after A.D. 70 retired with Bernice to Rome, where he died about A.D. 100.
came. Greek. katantao. See Act 16:1.
salute. As vassal of Rome, to pay his respects to the procurator, Rome’s representative.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
13.] HEROD AGRIPPA II., son of the Herod of ch. 12 (see note on Act 25:1 there), was at Rome, and seventeen only, when his father died (Jos. Antt. xix. 9. 1). Claudius (ib. 9. 2) was about to send him to succeed to the kingdom, but was dissuaded by his freedmen and favourites, and sent Cuspius Fadus as procurator instead. Soon after, Claudius gave him the principality of Chalcis, which had been held by his uncle Herod (Antt. xx. 5. 2),-the presidency of the temple at Jerusalem and its treasures (Antt. xx. 1. 3),-and the appointment of the High Priest. Some years after the same emperor added to his jurisdiction the former tetrarchy of Philip, and Batana, Trachonitis, and Abilene (Antt. xx. 7. 1), with the title of King (B. J. ii. 12. 8). Nero afterwards annexed Tiberias, Tarichea, Julias, and fourteen neighbouring villages to his kingdom (Antt. xx. 8. 4). He built a large palace at Jerusalem (ib. 8. 11); but offended the Jews by constructing it so as to overlook the temple (ib.), and by his capricious changes in the high priesthood,-and was not much esteemed by them (B. J. ii. 17. 1). When the last war broke out, he attached himself throughout to the Romans. He died in the third year of Trajan, and fifty-first of his reign, aged about seventy (Winer, Realw.).
] The Macedonian form ( or ) for . She was the eldest daughter of Herod Agrippa I., and first married to her uncle Herod, prince of Chalcis (Antt. xix. 5. 1). After his death she lived with Agrippa her brother, but not without suspicion ( , , Antt. xx. 7. 3; see also Juv. Sat. vi. 156 ff.); in consequence of which ( , Antt. ib.) she married Polemo, king of Cilicia. The marriage was, however, soon dissolved (ib.), and she returned to her brother. She was afterwards the mistress of Vespasian (Tac. Hist. ii. 81), and of Titus (Suet. Tit[150] 7; Winer, Realw.).
[150] Titus, Bp. of Bostra, cir. 360-377
] on his accession to the procuratorship, to gain his favour.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Act 25:13. , Bernice) Sister of Agrippa- , Festus) the new governor.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Act 25:13-27
FESTUS AND AGRIPPA
Act 25:13-27
13 Now when certain days were passed,-Each of the characters before whom Paul was brought had a memorable history. Agrippa, as mentioned here, is King Herod Agrippa II; he was the son of Agrippa I who died so miserably at Caesarea. (Act 12:21-23.) He was the great grandson of Herod the Great, and was the last of the famous Herodian princes, 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 nation. Agrippa ruled over a very small portion of his fathers territory; the remainder had been made into a Roman province of Judea. Agrippa II resided at Caesarea Philippi; he died at an advanced age, having survived the fall of Jerusalem many years; it is thought that he died in A.D. 99. Bernice was a sister of Agrippa II; she was a sister also of Dru- silla. Her beauty was famous. Her history reads like a terrible romance. She married at an early age her uncle, Herod, king of Chalcis; she was left a widow while young and went to reside with her brother, Agrippa II. Polemo, king of Cilicia, adopted the Jewish religion and made Bernice his wife; however, she soon deserted him, and again returned to her brother, Agrippa II, with whom it is said she lived in illicit relationship. Later, she became the mistress of Titus, son of Vespasian, who took her to Rome, but public indignation was so great that he did not marry her. Festus had just recently been appointed governor and Agrippa and Bernice came to Caesarea and congratulated him on the honors which had been conferred upon him.
14-15 And as they tarried there many days,-The time of the sojourn of King Agrippa and Bernice was indefinite, tarried there many days; the original may mean more than one, or several days. There was sufficient time for Festus to discuss Pauls case with King Agrippa. It would help confirm the friendship of Agrippa and Bernice for Festus to advise with Agrippa about Pauls case. Festus does not make any official report to Agrippa, but engages him in an informal, personal talk about the case for his advice. Agrippa was more familiar with Jewish affairs than Festus ; he had greater experience as an official; hence, he would be of service to Festus in advising him. We get from this conversation that the Jews had asked the death sentence on Paul without a fair trial. The Jews had evidently made two proposals to Festus: (1) that he should condemn and punish Paul without trial; (2) that he should bring Paul to Jerusalem for trial there, purposing to have him killed on the road. Festus further informed Agrippa that Paul had been left by Felix; hence, it was, perhaps, an old and difficult case. This would be a good reason for Festus advising with Agrippa about it.
16 To whom I answered, that it is not the custom-It may be that Festus did some boasting in the presence of Agrippa; the record is not clear that he answered the Jews as he claimed that he did. It may not be an accurate representation of the case by Festus. It may be that the Jews did ask for sentence against Paul, and it may be that they did not. Roman officials were often unreliable ; Festus had such a good opportunity to boast of his loyalty to justice that he likely exaggerated in his own favor. Festus stated a point of Roman law and the rights of a Roman citizen. The accused had a right to demand that his accusers meet him face to face and make their charges, and give the accused the opportunity of defending himself. Paul had told Festus exactly what Festus says that he told the Jews. Those who accused Paul to Festus had not met Paul face to face. Ishmael was then high priest in place of Ananias.
17 When therefore they were come together here,-Festus here relates accurately the facts. While he was in Jerusalem Pauls accusers asked that Paul be brought to Jerusalem; Festus refused to let him be brought to Jerusalem, but told them that he would soon return to Caesarea and that they could come to Caesarea and prefer their charges against Paul. They did so, and Festus promptly demanded that Paul be brought before his judgment seat the next day.
18 Concerning whom, when the accusers stood up,-Festus continues his recitation of the details of the trial. When Pauls accusers bore witness against him and preferred their charges, and Paul made his defense, Festus saw that there was no proof offered as he had expected. Perhaps Festus was influenced by Pauls accusers at Jerusalem, and supposed that Paul was guilty of sedition and disloyalty to the emperor. However, he discovered that the charges were nothing but the vaguest rumors which could not be proved.
19 but had certain questions against him-Festus discovered that the real point urged against Paul was connected with matters devoid of interest to a Roman; no Roman law had been violated by Paul. Festus, in speaking to Agrippa, a Jewish king, would not knowingly use an offensive term. Furthermore, he showed his ignorance of the entire matter when he said that the charges against Paul were of their own religion, and of one Jesus, who was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. Festus merely understood that Paul was affirming, with other Pharisees, not the general doctrine of a resurrection, but as bearing specific testimony that Jesus had been raised from the dead, while the others denied his affirmation. Festus was like Gallio at Corinth. (Act 18:17.) This remark shows that Luke gave only a short abstract of Pauls speech before the Sanhedrin and of his defense before Agrippa; we are not told that he even mentioned the name of Jesus; yet this name, and the fact of the resurrection of Jesus, had made the strongest impression on the mind of the Roman governor. Religion, as used here, comes from the Greek deisidaimonias, and is translated in the Authorized Version as superstitious. The Greeks used this word to mean pious, or religious, or superstitious. Paul used the word in Act 17:22.
20 And I, being perplexed-Festus had already determined what to do, and it was difficult for him to justify his conduct in not releasing Paul at once, and not put the government to the expense of an appeal to Caesar. He reports accurately that he had asked Paul if he would go to Jerusalem and be judged of these matters. Festus was ignorant as to how to conduct a judicial trial about these matters of religion; to him they seemed to belong to a Jewish court; at least, this is what he says to Agrippa. This was his smooth excuse for proposing to deliver Paul over to the Jews, though it was contrary to Roman custom, as he had formerly stated. (Verse 16.) Festus stated before Agrippa not what he had formerly said, but what had since occurred to him upon reflecting.
21 But when Paul had appealed-When Paul made his appeal to Caesar, Festus had no further jurisdiction over him but to send him to Rome. There seems to be an undercurrent in Festus conversation of his displeasure at the appeal to Caesar. He had to grant the appeal, but it was a reflection on Festus fairness and justice that a Roman citizen should prefer the imperial tribunal at Rome to his own. Festus had proposed to remove the trial to Jerusalem ; this had forced Paul to take the step of his appeal. The term emperor, as used here, by many is translated Augustus. The Greek is Sebastos, and is a reverent title for the ruler of Rome.
22 And Agrippa said unto Festus,-After hearing Festus relate the details of the case, Agrippa became interested. Perhaps he had frequently heard of Paul and he desired to hear him. It may not have been a desire to satisfy his curiosity, but more to learn something about Christianity from its greatest advocate. Agrippas courteous suggestion or request to Festus was promptly accepted, and Festus promised Agrippa that he should hear Paul the next day. This was as soon as arrangements could properly be made.
23 So on the morrow, when Agrippa was come,-According to promise, Festus made arrangements for Paul to be brought before Agrippa the next day. Lukes description is so vivid that one would think that he was an eyewitness to the parade. Much or great pomp was displayed on this occasion. King Agrippa, Bernice, the chief captains, or chiliarch, leader or captain of a thousand soldiers, and the principal men of the city, together with Festus and his attendants-all these dressed in their royal garments and official robes-made a gorgeous display. The place of assembly was near Festus court. After the procession had passed in and were seated, Paul, the prisoner, was brought in. The splendor of the procession and the glittering appearance of the court, Roman and Jewish guards, and the Sanhedrin officials, all made a very imposing scene, and showed an emphatic contrast to the humble prisoner in chains. About eighteen years before this event Herod, the father of Agrippa, was smitten by an angel of the Lord as punishment for his pride. (Act 12:23.) We have here one of the direct fulfillments of the prophecy of Jesus to his disciples when he said that they would be brought before governors and kings for a testimony to them and to the Gentiles. (Mat 10:18.) Christ had said to Ananias, who was sent to Saul, that he would bear my name before the Gentiles and kings, and the children of Israel. (Act 9:15.) We now have Paul standing before rulers and kings.
24 And Festus saith, King Agrippa, and all men-Festus now with equal pomp and dignity introduced the case to those who were assembled. Festus believed that the feeling against Paul among the Jews was general; he had come in contact only with Pauls enemies. Nothing new is stated in the introduction that Festus made except that the Jews of Caesarea had joined with those from Jerusalem in urging that Paul be put to death, and that they had asked Festus to pass such a sentence on him. Festus addressed Agrippa with a courteous title. It is very likely that the Sadducees from Jerusalem had been able in the course of two years to excite much animosity against Paul among their party in Caesarea; hence, when Festus came to Caesarea, these influential men joined the Sadducees from Jerusalem in demanding the death sentence upon Paul.
25 But I found that he had committed-Festus is frank and fair in stating that he had not found Paul worthy of death. These words were emphatic on the part of Festus; they admit that Pauls accusers had failed to prove their charges. However, Festus was bound to send a formal report as to the matter, out of which the case of appeal arose, and he was in doubt as to what he should send to Caesar, and needed the advice and co-operation of Agrippa. Perhaps Paul would have been set at liberty had it not been for the persistent clamor of the Jews against him. However, since Paul had made an appeal to Caesar, Festus must send him. These points are mentioned to show the exact condition of the case; Pauls appeal had stopped all judicial proceedings except at Rome. This was not a judicial hearing, but only one for further information, which Festus now declared.
26 Of whom I have no certain thing to write-It was the rule or law when a case was appealed to the emperor to transmit a detailed account of the crime charged, and also to give a full report of the legal proceedings which had taken place in connection with the case. It is clear that Festus must admit Pauls innocence, but he reiterated that pressure from the Jews had caused him to retain Paul. Festus referred to the emperor as my lord. Augustus and Tiberius had refused to let anyone address them with such a title, but Caligula and Nero permitted such an address, and even gloried in this title. Festus pleaded for help from the other Roman officials, and especially from King Agrippa. He hoped that from this examination of Paul he would be able to formulate definitely what he should send to the emperor. This was a compliment to his other officials, and especially an act of courtesy toward King Agrippa.
27 For it seemeth to me unreasonable,-It seemed ridiculous to Festus to send a prisoner who had appealed his case to Rome without informing the higher court of the charges that were made against him. Festus hoped that the interview before Agrippa would bring out some fresh facts which had been kept in the background ; at least, he thought that the Roman official, King Agrippa, who was more familiar with Jewish religion, would help him to formulate what he should send to Caesar. It is remarkable how much trouble a single humble man gave to the Jews and the Roman courts.
Questions on Acts
By E.M. Zerr
Acts Chapter 25
Who succeeded Felix?
What was his headquarters?
To where did he go in three days?
Who approached him when he arrived?
State what they requested him to do.
What did they plot to do?
State Festus’ decision as to this request.
Also what did he declare he would do?
What further orders did he give the accusers?
How long did he remain in Jerusalem?
State his promptness in calling Paul’s case.
How definite were the charges of the Jews?
How direct yet complete was Paul’s answer?
What two governments did he recognize?
State the proposition Festus made to him.
What was his motive in making it?
Tell what court was in Jerusalem.
Could it try cases on behalf of temporal law?
If guilty at all under what law was it?
How seriously might one be guilty under this law?
State Paul’s attitude toward this law.
Would this not commit Paul to capital punishment?
To whom does Paul appeal and on what basis?
What body is meant by the “council” in the 12th verse?
How did it act on Paul’s appeal?
What dignitaries came to Caesarea?
State their purpose for coming.
What subject did their host inform them about?
Who had brought this case up?
What had they desired?
Describe the Romans’ ideas of justice.
Had the Jews asked for this?
What was Festus’ first object in calling Paul?
Was the case according to his expectations?
Relate his impressions of Jesus and his doctrine.
State his present version of ninth verse.
Did he state the truth as to Paul’s answer?
Why “Augustus” and “Caesar”in the 21st verse?
What request did Agrippa make?
State Festus’ motive for granting this request.
Describe the setting for this hearing.
By what title does Festus recognize Agrippa?
How did he describe the Jews’ clamor against Paul?
What had he already found about the case?
Tell what he had determined upon.
How definite a statement did he have to send?
What examination is meant in the 26th verse?
In what jurisdiction will it be conducted?
What unreasonable situation was troubling Festus?
Acts Chapter Twenty-Five
Ralph Starling
When Festus arrived from Caesarea to Jerusalem,
The Hight Priest and Elders asked a favor of him.
For further information would he send Paul to them?
For they secretly had plans to kill him.
Festus countered with request of his own,
Those that were able, to accompany him home.
This proposal they accepted and agreed to do,
And made charges against Paul they could not prove.
Festus asked Paul if he would go to Jerusalem.
He said No, for Im not guilty of sin.
Festus wanted to do the Jews a favor,
But Paul said, I appeal unto Caesar
About that time Agrippa and Bernice came to visit.
Festus thought Agrippa should give Paul a listen.
Agrippa agreed with appreciation,
What better way to spend a vacation.
Festus prepared Agrippa in great detail,
So he could understand Paul without fail.
And, that he, himself, would not be in a tight
To send Paul to Rome without charges wouldnt be bright.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Seeking Charges against His Prisoner
Act 25:13-27
Mark the difference with which these two men regarded our Lord. To the one, He was the supreme object of his affection and his life; to the other, He was one Jesus. Notice also that Paul had made clear his belief that Jesus was alive. Evidently the risen Christ had been the burden of Pauls preaching. Even Festus had come to understand that, although he would not accept it as true.
The Apostles audience on the morrow was the most dignified and influential that he had addressed up to this point. As the Lord told Ananias that Saul had been chosen to bear His name before Gentiles and kings and the Children of Israel, so it came to pass. See Act 9:15. There is no doubt that Paul was lifted far above the thought or fear of man by the consciousness that the Lord was standing by to strengthen him, so that through him the gospel might be fully known. Let us view every circumstance in our experience as the lamp-stand on which to place the lamp of testimony. It is a good thing to ask, How far will this promote my Lords business?
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
Agrippa
This (Act 5:13) was Herod Agrippa II., son of the Herod Agrippa I. of Act 12:1, and great-grandson of Herod the Great. (See Scofield “Mat 2:1”).
Bernice, or Berenice, was the sister of Herod Agrippa II. Act 5:13.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
king: Act 25:22, Act 25:23, Act 26:1, Act 26:27, Act 26:28
unto: 1Sa 13:10, 1Sa 25:14, 2Sa 8:10, 2Ki 10:13, Mar 15:18
Reciprocal: Gen 28:10 – General Act 10:1 – in Act 12:19 – he went Act 21:7 – and saluted
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
3
Act 25:13. The full name of this man was Herod Agrippa II, who was a ruler in another part of the Roman Empire, and who came to make a friendly judicial call upon Festus. He was accompanied by his sister Bernice, with whom he was suspected to be living in the intimacy of husband and wife.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
King Herod Agrippa II. and his Sister, the Queen Bernice, come down to Csarea to visit the new Roman Governor Festus, who tells the King about the strange Accusation hanging over Paul the Nazarene, 13-21.
Act 25:13. And after certain days King Agrippa and Bernice came unto Csarea to salute Festus. King Herod Agrippa II., son of Herod Agrippa I., who died so miserably at the Csarea festival, A.D. 44-45 (see chap. Act 12:21-23),and great-grandson of Herod the Great, was the last of that famous line of 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. This Agrippa II. was only seventeen years old when his father the king died in the sudden manner above described (Acts 12). The young prince was then at Rome, and was the intimate friend of the imperial family. Claudius, the emperor, had he not been dissuaded from his purpose by his freed men and counsellors, would have at once appointed him to the royal succession in Juda; but it was urged that he was too young to guide the destinies of that stormy province. So Cuspius Fadius was sent out as Procurator instead; but in about four years, when the young Agrippa was twenty-one years old, Claudius bestowed on him the principality of Chalcis, just then vacant owing to the death of his uncle Herod, king of that territory. With Chalcis, Claudius entrusted the young Agrippa with the presidency of the Jerusalem temple, and the power of appointing at his pleasure the high priest. This was in A.D. 49, the eighth year of his (Claudius) reign. Later on, the emperor added to his friends dominions the tetrarchy of Philip and Lysanias (see Luk 3:1), and conferred on him the coveted title of king. Agrippa II., then a powerful subject monarch, fixed his residence at Csarea Philippi, which he enlarged greatly and beautified, and subsequently called it, in honour of the reigning emperor, Neronias. Nero, on his accession, had also shown much favour to the young Jewish sovereign, and had added to his dominions the city of Tiberias and part of Galilee.
Justice has hardly been done to this last of the Herods. He had a difficult part to play in the stormy times which preceded the great catastrophe. He owed everything to Rome, and the reigning imperial family, and naturally was strongly attached to the Empire which had adopted him, and that family which seemed never weary of showing him kindness and consideration. This, should surely be taken into account when his Roman tastes and leanings are unfavourably criticised. Josephus writes much of him, and generally in a hostile spirit; for instance, he relates how, during the procuratorship of this very Festus, he had a long and serious quarrel with the Jews about his palace at Jerusalem. They alleged he had built it so high as to overlook the temple and sanctuary. The majority of the Jews, indeed, seemed to have looked upon him, though wrongfully, as a kind of spy set over them by the hated imperial government. But all through the bloody, terrible war which ended in the total collapse and ruin of the Jewish nationality, King Agrippa seems to have acted well and nobly, endeavouring constantly to act the part of a mediator between the Jews, bent on their own destruction, and the haughty Roman claims; at times even, in his longing to bring about a peace, he risked his life.
He died at an advanced age, having survived the fall of the city and the destruction of his nation a great many years, apparently in the third year of the Emperor Trajan, A.D. 99.
His beautiful sister Bernice, who accompanied him on this memorable visit to Csarea to salute the new Procurator Festus, when they met the prisoner Paul and listened to one of his marvellous apologies for Christianity and his own work, unfortunately has earned for herself a very different place in the gallery of historical portraits of the first age of our faith. Famous for her great beauty, and apparently her commanding talents, her history, even in that dissolute and wicked age, reads, to use the graphic words of Professor Plumptre, like a terrible romance or a page from the chronicles of the Borgias. Married at an early age to her uncle, Herod, king of Chalcis, she was left a widow comparatively young, and then came to reside with her brother, Agrippa II., whose career we have sketched above. By this period of her life she had already acquired a wide-spread evil reputation. Attracted by her beauty and wealth, Polemo, king of Cilicia, adopted the Jewish religion and made her his wife. But the princess soon deserted him, and again returned to her brother. It was after the dissolution of the second marriage of the wanton queen with Polemo that the visit to Csarea to salute Festus was made, on which occasion Paul made the famous defence before the brother and sister related in the next (26th) chapter of these Acts, A.D. 61-62. In the bitter quarrels which heralded the last terrible collision between the doomed Jewish nation and the Romans, Bernice played certainly a noble and heroic part, endeavouring, as did her brother King Agrippa II., to mediate between her countrymen and the Romans. On one occasion we read how, at the risk of her life, she stood barefoot and a suppliant before the tribunal of Festus the procurator, beseeching him to spare the rebel Jews.
During the last war, however, like her brother, she ranged herself on the Roman side. The Emperor Vespasian allowed himself to be much influenced by her persuasion and counsel, and grave suspicions were excited that a too close intimacy existed between the old emperor and the princess. But the strangest and most momentous page in her dark history was her connection and friendship with the son of Vespasian, the hero Titus, who brought Bernice with him to Rome, and is said to have promised to wed her, had not a storm of public indignation at the bare notion of such an alliance for the brilliant heir to the Empire induced him at the eleventh hour to dismiss heras Suetonius (Titus) pithily puts it: Dimisit invitus invitam.
The salutation of Festus here alluded to was no doubt a formal visit of congratulation from the Jewish prince (one of whose offices was the superintendence of the Jerusalem temple) to the new procurator of Juda, under whose supreme authority Agrippa to a certain extent was placed. It was also important for the vassal kings to be on terms of intimacy and close friendship with the powerful Roman lieutenant commanding in the provinces of which they were nominally the sovereigns.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Observe here, 1. How God will not be wanting to his servants in their greatest straits and sufferings, but will providentially dispose of all matters in order to their deliverance, when it may most conduce to his own glory and their good.
Thus here, King Agrippa comes to congratulate Festus; Festus declares the cause of God’s oppressed servant to the king, and God makes use both of Festus and Agrippa to screen the apostle from the violence of his enemies: In the mount will the Lord be seen; the people’s extremities are the seasons of his succour.
Observe, 2. How the very light of nature in and among the heathens condemns it as an act of manifest and notorious injustice in a judge to pass sentence upon a person unheard, and unallowed to make his defence.
This baseness was below the Roman gallantry whilst Pagans; Festus demands the accursers and the accused to appear face to face; and yet such a diabolical spirit of malice had so blinded the Jews, that, contrary to the law of nature, and the law of all nations, they would have had St. Paul here condemned, without knowing the cause, and hearing his defence.
Observe, 3. What base and vile, what low and undervaluing thoughts, and apprehension, have carnal men of the high and holy things of God.
Festus here calls the religion and worship, which was of God’s own institution, most profanely and contemptuously by the name of superstition: They had certain questions against him of their own superstition. And how slightingly doth he also speak of our glorified Redeemer, styling him one Jesus; but no wonder that the dunghill cocks of the world know not the worth of the pearl of great price.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Festus Introduces Paul and the Jews’ Case Against Him
The King Agrippa Luke says came to greet Festus is actually Herod Agrippa II. His father was Herod Agrippa I ( Act 12:1-23 ) and his great-grandfather was Herod the Great ( Mat 2:1-18 ). Bernice was his sister. She, at the age of sixteen, had already been married twice. First to Alexander of Alexandria and then to her uncle, Herod, King of Chalcis, who died in 48 A. D. At the time of this writing, she was living with her brother. Later, she served as mistress to both Vespasian and his son Titus, who probably would have married her if there had not been such an outrage among the people.
During Agrippa’s stay, Festus brought Paul’s case up for consideration. The elders of the Jews did not ask for a trial, but a guilty verdict. Festus said he told them Roman law did not ordinarily allow a man to be condemned without having an opportunity to answer his accusers face to face. Then the Jews came, Festus found no sufficient charge of evil but, as he saw it, a religious (the actual word meaning a question of demon worship) dispute over Paul’s affirmation that Jesus had been dead but was now alive. Festus then reported that he asked Paul to go to answer the questions in Jerusalem so that he could better understand the question involved, but that seems doubtful since he had already told Agrippa he had not found Paul guilty of any of matter involving Roman law. It is more likely that he was seeking to establish a favorable relationship with the Jews when Paul’s appeal to Caesar forced him to hold Paul for a higher court.
Agrippa immediately expressed an interest in hearing Paul, which Festus readily granted. The next day, Festus, Agrippa and Bernice all appeared in very formal attire, with the chief captains and important men of the city all in attendance. Paul was brought in and Festus introduced him as the man the Jews sought to have put to death in suits brought in Jerusalem and at Caesarea. Though Festus announced publicly that he had found no guilt in Paul, his actions had forced the apostle to appeal to Caesar. Perhaps his hesitation was God’s opening of the door to the most powerful court in the world of that day! So, needing some formal charge of wrong doing against Paul, Festus announced he had brought him before Agrippa for an examination ( Act 25:13-27 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
Act 25:13. And after certain days, &c. We have here the preparation that was made for another hearing of Paul before King Agrippa, not in order to his giving judgment upon him, but in order to his giving advice concerning him, or rather, only to gratify his curiosity. Christ had said concerning his disciples, and particularly concerning his apostles, that they should be brought before governors and kings, and here we find his prediction accomplished. The preceding verses inform us of Pauls being brought before Festus the governor, and the following of his being brought before Agrippa the king, for a testimony to both. King Agrippa and Bernice His sister, with whom he lived in a scandalous familiarity; came to Cesarea to salute Festus To congratulate him on his arrival in the province. The prince, here mentioned, was the son of Herod Agrippa, mentioned Act 12:1, (where see the note,) and grandson of Aristobulus, the son of Herod the Great. As he was but seventeen years of age when his father died, the Emperor Claudius did not think proper to appoint him king of Judea in the room of his father, but made it a Roman province; however, on the death of his uncle, Herod Antipas, (of whom see note on Mat 14:1,) he made him king of Chalcis, which, after he had governed it four years, he exchanged for a greater kingdom, and gave him the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias, to which Nero afterward added part of Galilee, with several towns in Pera. Of Bernices incestuous commerce with this Agrippa, Juvenal speaks, Sat. 6. ver. 155, as well as Josephus, Antiq., lib. 20. cap. 7. It is certain this lady had first been married to her own uncle, Herod, king of Chalcis; after whose death, on the report of her scandalous familiarity with her brother Agrippa, she married Polemon, king of Cilicia, whom she soon forsook, though he had submitted to circumcision to obtain the alliance. This was also the person whom Titus Vespasian so passionately loved, and whom he would have made empress, had not the clamours of the Roman people prevented it.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
13. The custom of extending congratulations to men newly inducted into high office, which has prevailed in every age of the world, led to the next important incidents of Paul’s confinement in Csarea. (13) “Now when some days had passed, King Agrippa and Bernice came to Csarea to salute Festus.” This Agrippa was the son of the Herod who murdered the Apostle James. He was, at this time, king of Chalcis, but afterward of Galilee. Bernice was his sister. She had been married to her uncle, Herod, former king of Chalcis, but he had died, and she was still a widow. She afterward married Polemo, king of Cilicia. Like nearly all the Herod family, both male and female, she was licentious and ambitious. But she and Agrippa, being Jews by birth, were better able to understand Paul’s case than Festus.
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
PAULS TRIAL BEFORE KING AGRIPPA.
(Act 25:13 to Act 26:32)
This, by far the greatest prosecution of all, had no reference to the immediate destiny of Paul, i. e., they are no longer trying for his life, as that matter has gone out of their hands, transferred to the emperor the moment Festus and his court admitted Pauls appeal. But having admitted the appeal, Festus finds himself in a terrible dilemma, apparently unanticipated, i. e., having admitted the appeal, and put himself in a position where he is forced by law to send Paul to Rome to be tried by the emperor, and, at the same time, having not a solitary allegation recognizable in Roman law to send along with he criminal. Hence Festus sees that he has exposed himself to criticism and burlesque, probably to his own serious official detriment. Will not the emperor say, Is not this pro-consul of Judea green as a gourd, to send to me a prisoner for trial, and not a solitary criminal charge against him? Hence we are not astonished at the solicitude of Festus and his serious dilemma in the matter. When King Agrippa, a prince of the celebrated Herodian family, accompanied by his queen, Bernice, come from Chalcis [their dominion, under the Roman emperor, the title of king being a mere courtesy, because lie was a member of the Herodian dynasty, though now only a Roman pro-consul], come down to Caesarea to pay Festus a royal visit, the latter, who is now much exercised over his dilemma in Pauls case, relates the whole matter to Agrippa, begging him, if possible, to help him out of the entanglement. In all this we are gratified with the high-toned integrity of Festus, in contradistinction to the condescending strategy and turpitude of his official predecessor, the unfortunate Felix.
Describing to King Agrippa the trial of Paul at his tribunal, in which he had appealed to Caesar, lie very beautifully alludes to the transparent rascality of the high priest and his confederates:
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Act 25:13-22. Agrippa and Bernice: Interest of Agrippa in Paul.Agrippa was seventeen years old when his father died (Act 12:23). He obtained from Claudius and Nero certain territories in the N. of Palestine, but he had little power of action. He built largely at Csarea Philippi and at Berytus (Aleppo), and was not much interested in religious matters. Bernice was his sister, the sister also of Drusilla. After living many years with her brother she excited the admiration of Titus and lived with him at Rome. The private conversation of Festus and Agrippa (Act 25:14-22) was probably given by the writer of the source, who was acquainted with the principles of Roman law, and made it up very correctly. Festus gives his view of the case publicly in Act 25:23-27. In Act 25:3 the Jews asked that Paul might be sent to Jerusalem; here, that sentence of condemnation might be given against him. The maxim of Act 25:16 is to be found in the Roman Digests, xlviii. 171. Festus account (Act 25:17 ff.) shows that there was no delay on his part; the charges which he reports are not those against which Paul protests in Act 25:8 but rather those of the Sanhedrin meeting in Act 23:1-9.
Act 25:20. Translate: and as I knew little about such disputes.
Act 25:21. Note mg.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Verse 13
Agrippa; called in history Agrippa the younger, the son of the Herod Agrippa who put James to death. (Acts 12:1,2.) When his father died, he was too young to succeed him, and accordingly a succession of officers, called in this history governors, were sent from Rome to administer the affairs of Judea. Agrippa had now arrived at maturity, and had been invested with the government of some countries north of Judea. Bernice was Agrippa’s sister, living with him, however, as his wife.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
25:13 {4} And after certain days king {b} Agrippa and Bernice came unto Caesarea to salute Festus.
(4) Festus, without even trying to, even before kings, brings to light the wickedness of the Jews, and Paul’s innocence, and in this way marvellously confirms the Church of God.
(b) This Agrippa was the son of Agrippa whose death Luke spoke of before, and Bernice was his sister.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Herod Agrippa II’s visit to Festus 25:13-22
The charges against Paul, and particularly his innocence, are the point of this pericope.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
This King Agrippa was Marcus Julius Agrippa II, the son of Herod Agrippa I (Act 12:1-11), the grandson of Aristobulus, and the great grandson of Herod the Great (Mat 2:1). [Note: See the diagram "Herod’s Family Tree" above at 12:1-2, and Bruce, "Chronological Questions . . .," pp. 283-84.] Herod the Great had tried to destroy the infant Jesus. One of his sons, Antipas, Agrippa II’s great uncle, beheaded John the Baptist and tried our Lord. Agrippa II’s father, Agrippa I, executed James, the son of Zebedee and the brother of John. He also imprisoned Peter and died in Caesarea (ch. 12). His son, Agrippa II, is the man Paul now faced. He had grown up in Rome and was a favorite of Emperor Claudius. He was the last in the Herodian dynasty and was the best of the Herods.
At the time he visited Festus, Agrippa was the king whom Rome had appointed over the territory northeast of the Judean province. He lived in Caesarea Philippi (Dan of the Old Testament) that he renamed Neronias in honor of Nero. Agrippa was about 30 years old at this time, and his sister, Bernice (Lat. Veronica), was one year younger. He ruled this region from A.D. 50 to 70. Drusilla, Felix’s wife, was Agrippa and Bernice’s younger sister.
Agrippa and Bernice evidently visited Festus on this occasion to pay their respects to the new governor of their neighboring province. Agrippa and Bernice were essentially favorable to the Jews. They both tried to avert the Roman massacre of the Jews in A.D. 66-70. [Note: Josephus, The Wars . . ., 2:15:1; 2:16:4]