Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 24:14

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

14. after the way which they call heresy ] Better (with Rev. Ver.) “after the Way which they call a sect.” The word is the same which is used in Act 24:5 for the “sect” of the Nazarenes. St Paul employs the expression “the Way,” in that sense in which it soon became well known, to signify “the Christian religion.” See note on Act 9:2.

so worship I the God of my fathers ] Better, as Rev. Ver., “so serve I the God of our fathers.” The verb is not the same as in Act 24:11. Here the notion is of service which a man is bound to pay. The Apostle means that he has cast off no morsel of his old allegiance. The adjective can equally be rendered by “ my fathers” or “ our fathers,” but St Paul’s aim is to shew that he has not severed himself from the ancestral faith of the whole nation, and so his thought would include himself with them.

believing all things which are written in the law and the prophets ] The Rev. Ver. gives very literally “all things which are according to the Law, and which are written in the Prophets.” The Apostle thus testifies to his complete acceptance of all the Jewish Scriptures. Sometimes the division is given as “the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms” (Luk 24:44), but more frequently, as in the text, only two sections are named (cp. Mat 7:12; Mat 11:13; Mat 22:40; Luk 16:16; Joh 1:45).

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

But this I confess … – The next specification in the charge of Tertullus was Act 24:5 that he was a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes. To this, Paul replies in this and the two following verses. Of this reply we may observe:

(1) That he does not stoop to notice the contempt implied in the use of the word Nazarenes. He was engaged in a more important business than to contend about the name which they chose to give to Christians.

(2) He admits that he belonged to that sect or class of people. That he was a Christian he neither denied, nor was disposed to deny.

(3) He maintains that in this way he was still worshipping the God of his fathers. Of this, the fact that he was engaged in worship in the temple was sufficient proof.

(4) He shows them that he believed only what was written in the Law and the prophets; that this involved the main doctrine of their religion the hope of the resurrection of the dead, Act 24:15; and that it was his constant and earnest desire to keep a pure conscience in all things, Act 24:16. These are the points of his defense to the second charge, and we shall see that they fully meet and dispose of the accusation.

After the way – After the manner or mode of worship.

Which they call heresy – This translation does not express to us the force of the original. We have attached to the word heresy an idea which is not conveyed by the Greek word, since we now commonly understand by it error of doctrine. In Pauls answer here, there is an explicit reference to their charge which does not appear in our version. The charge of Tertullus was, that he was the ringleader of the sect ( tes haireseos) of the Nazarenes, Act 24:5. To this Paul replies, After the way which they call sect hairesin, not error of doctrine, but after a way which they affirm is producing division or schism), so worship I the God of my fathers. Paul was hot ashamed to be called a follower of that sect or party among the Jewish people. Nor should we be ashamed to worship God in a mode that is called heresy or schism, if we do it in obedience to conscience and to God.

So worship I – I continue to worship. I have not departed from the characteristic of the Jewish people, the proper and public acknowledgment of the God of the Jews.

The God of my fathers – My fathers God, Yahweh; the God whom my Jewish ancestors adored. There is something very touching in this, and suited to find its way to the heart of a Jew. He had introduced no new object of worship (compare Deu 13:1-5); he had not become a follower of a false or foreign God; and this fact was really a reply to their charge that he was setting up a new sect in religion. The same thing Paul affirms of himself in 2Ti 1:3; I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with a pure conscience.

Believing all things … – Particularly respecting the Messiah. So he more fully explains his meaning in his speech before King Agrippa, Act 26:23.

In the law and in the prophets – Commanded in the Law of Moses, and foretold by the prophets. That Paul had ever disbelieved any of these things they could not prove; and his whole course had shown that he fully credited the sacred records. Most of his arguments in defending Christianity had been drawn from the Jewish writings.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Act 24:14-16

But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers.

What is heresy

I. Here is the case of men holding high office in the Church of God, yet mistaking truth for error, and branding as heresy that which is Divine. These men have had many successors, who at various points in the Churchs history have, in the name of religion, inflicted the most inhuman cruelties on the noblest saints of God. Nor can these foul deeds be declared the sole heritage of any one Church. Nor can we look calmly into history without seeing that the barbarities inflicted in the name of orthodoxy have arisen largely from a mistaken estimate of heresy. What is heresy? Judging from history, heresy might be defined as the faith of the minority. The word heretical has been loosely held to the opposite of orthodox. Orthodoxy has been held to mean the commonly received opinions. But this is an abuse of words. Orthodoxy means right opinions, whether held by the few or the many. Again, heresy is not confined in its application to opinions, but includes anything that takes from the truth; and truth is not only formulated in opinion, it is also revealed in feeling and embodied in life. By blindness to this truth, the Church has sinned grievously. Let me emphasise this important truth by showing–

1. That heresies of heart and life are unspeakably the more vital. Doctrine is important only as it points to duty and fruits out in life. Of necessity, therefore, it holds a second place. Heresy of creed may be the result of many influences acting on the mind from childhood, and may exist along with entire loyalty of heart to Christ. But heresy of spirit and life can only be the offspring of a depraved heart. The honour of our Master and the interests of His kingdom are far more seriously imperilled by that which is un-Christly in the behaviour of His followers, than by what may be defective in their doctrines.

2. Heresies of heart and life are unspeakably the more prevalent. In what land is membership in a Christian Church accepted as any guarantee of integrity? Where is the line of demarcation in society, which separates the Christian and non-Christian? Is it not a fact that even among prominent Christian professors there are found features of conduct which can only be regarded as grievous heresies of life. And Churches have shared this grievous guilt. How often have they dealt a grievous blow to vital religion, by manifesting a burning concern for orthodoxy in the order of worship, or creed, and yet a loose indifference as to heresies of spirit and of life?

II. Here is the case of a single man, strong in his own conviction, daring the many who brand him a heretic. This persecuted apostle reveals a grand manliness here. Though a prisoner before the magnates of the Church, and the potentates of the state, yet does he stand boldly forward, and without halt or hesitation declare, This I confess unto thee, etc. Why? Because the heresy had become the voice of God in his soul. It had been burned into his being and become part of himself. Now this daring the public authorities and the popular voice in obedience to conscience–

1. Is seldom met with in our time. And this not because persecution, open and in public courts, is rare in our day, but chiefly because so few think for themselves. It is the custom to go with the crowd. The vast multitude have never made their own those truths which they profess to hold. They are content to use language which they have never examined–to sing songs which they do not feel, and to give their adhesion to declarations which so far as they know may be the very truth of God or the merest drivel.

2. Requires noble and heroic elements of manhood.

(1) Great courage.

(2) Fidelity to conscience.

(3) Readiness of self-sacrifice.

Lessons: Let us–

1. Cultivate more definite personal convictions.

2. Not fear to avow our convictions whoever may gainsay.

3. Guard heart and life as the chief exponents of the truth.

4. Cultivate charity towards all men. (J. B. Wylie.)

Paul before Felix

Two things are of prime importance in this scripture;

1. Pauls answer to the charge of heresy; and–

2. Pauls preaching to the Roman governor and his lady.

I. Pauls answer to the charge of heresy or of being the ringleader of a sect. A heresy is an opinion which someone chooses to hold, and which becomes conspicuous because it is not the commonly held opinion. Paul freely acknowledges that his way is the way which they call a sect or a heresy. He does not accept the popular and prevailing views. He confesses the sin, if it be a sin, of being in the minority. But having made that acknowledgment, he proceeds to defend that heretical way as the way of the old faith and hope. Pauls trouble was not that he did not believe enough, but that he believed too much. That is the sum of my offence–he says–that I believe in all things which are according to law and which are written in the prophets. I belong to a sect! he indignantly cries, much more a leader of it! Nay; but I serve the God of our fathers, and I accept the revelation which He gave them in all its fulness. That is a noble defence to make against such a charge, if it be a true defence, That has been virtually or actually the defence of the whole line of prophets and reformers from the days of Elijah down. The Church of God has from time to time settled down to a half belief in both His law and His love. A few earnest souls accept the message and apply it to their consciences and lives. Soon the cry of heresy and a sect is raised. But it is only the forgotten truth which was always in the Book, and which has been overlaid by the rubbish of neglect or overgrown by the weeds of sinful indulgence and its consequence, which has been brought to light. It is so easy to disbelieve some of the contents of the law and the prophets. Here was one party in this Jewish Church who had given up all belief in the supernatural, and another party who, putting it all in their creed, allowed it no weight in the conduct of their lives. Paul says, I keep to the old faith, and the whole of it; and that is my offence. Paul also defends his way as that of the old hope. He believes in the resurrection both of the just and the unjust. There is glory in being a heretic when the common faith is lifeless and the common hope is dumb. But no one can be called a leader of a sect who in the decay of faith goes back to a vital faith. He represents the old faith and the old hope, and not a new. Paul also defends his way as that of the old righteousness. With this belief in the totality of revelation and this hope based on it, the apostle was striving to live a truly righteous life. He does not say that he has fully attained it, but he is seeking after it. He exercises himself to have a conscience void of offence toward God and man alway. He is following the light of conscience enlightened by Gods Word, and he follows it without fear or faltering. His heresy is too great moral earnestness; too large a receptivity for the whole truth of God.

II. Pauls preaching to the Roman governor (George M. Boynton.)

The charge of sectarianism

To be charged with schism and sectarianism is not the worst thing for a Christian believer. Paul was not afraid of that reputation; nor was John Huss, nor John Wycliffe, nor Martin Luther, nor Hugh Latimer, nor Nicholas Ridley, nor John Calvin, nor John Knox, nor John Wesley. Calling a man a sectarian is no proof that he holds any error in religious doctrine. The real question is, What is the truth? not, Does this man agree with the majority of Christians in the statement of truth? (H. C. Trumbull, D. D.)

Believing all things that are written in the law and the prophets.

Pauls apology

Here is Pauls apology; faith at the bottom, hope as the immediate effect and product of it, and an holy conversation as the fruit and consequent. The same method is observed in 1Ti 1:5, and 2Pe 1:5-6. Note.–

I. The expressions here used.

1. Concerning faith.

(1) The object, Things written in the law and the prophets–all the Scriptures then extant (Mat 11:13; Luk 16:29). The object of our faith, who have received the rule of faith more enlarged (Eph 2:20), is prophets and apostles. The object of faith may be considered–materially, such things as God hath revealed; formally, because God hath revealed them.

(2) The extent, All things. A believer receiveth all truths which are of Divine revelation, whether precepts, promises, threatenings, doctrines, or histories.

(3) The act, Believing. It is not enough not to deny or not to contradict, but we must actually and positively believe. The reason why people feel so little force of their faith is because they leap into the Christian faith by the advantage of their birth, but do not consider what nor why they believe. But true faith is a positive, firm assent, excited in us by the Spirit of God. To a sound belief there is necessary–

(a) A knowledge or full instruction in the things which we believe (1Jn 4:16); first known and then believed.

(b) A due conviction of the certainty of them (Luk 1:4; Joh 6:69; Joh 17:8).

(c) Practical trust and affiance; for Christianity doth not only propound bare truths to be assented unto, but joyful, comfortable truths suitable to our necessity and desires (Heb 3:6).

(d) Application, that we may know for our good (Job 5:27).

2. Concerning hope.

(1) Mark that he propoundeth his hope as the immediate product of faith. What good will it do me to believe the doctrines of the prophets and apostles, if I expect no good from thence? Faith would be vain, and religion vain. Only note here that hope is two fold.

(a) The fruit of regeneration (1Pe 1:3).

(b) Built upon experience (Rom 5:4-5).

(2) Observe that he pitcheth upon the resurrection as the great thing hoped for, because then is our full and final happiness (1Ti 1:16; Joh 20:31). This is the great thing which we hope, wait, and labour for.

3. Concerning his manners and conversation (verse 16). Observe–

(1) His encouragement, Herein.

(a) Interpreters expound this, in the meantime, till faith be turned into vision, hope into fruition (Heb 6:12).

(b) Again, by virtue of this faith and hope. Faith and a good conscience are often coupled (1Ti 1:5). We cannot keep the one without the other.

(2) The integrity of his obedience, set forth in all the necessary requisites.

(a) Sincerity. For his conscience was in it, and a good conscience; and the goodness of conscience consisteth in its ability to do its office, in its clearness, purity, tenderness, quietness, peaceableness.

(b) Strictness and exactness.

He would keep this good conscience void of offence. It may be understood–

(a) Passively, that conscience be not offended, or receive wrong by any miscarriage of ours, for it is a tender thing. The least dust in the eye hindereth its use, so doth sin offend and trouble the conscience.

(b) Actively, that we offend not, nor offer wrong to others.

(3) Impartiality, Both towards God and towards men. There are two tables, and we are to take care we do not give offence to God or men, by neglecting our duty either.

(4) Constancy, Always. A conscience brought forth for certain turns is not a good conscience.

4. The laborious diligence wherewith he carried it on: I exercise myself. We must make it our constant labour and endeavour–

(1) By a diligent search into the mind of God (Rom 12:2; Eph 5:10; Eph 5:17).

(2) By a serious inquiry into the state of our own hearts and ways (Psa 4:4; Jer 8:6).

(3) By a constant watchfulness (Psa 39:1).

(a) By a serious resistance and mortification of sin (Mat 5:29-30; Gal 5:24).

(4) By the use of means which God hath appointed.

II. The reasons why this is true Christianity.

1. The necessity of it. It is a great question how far obedience belongeth to faith, whether as a part or as an end, fruit and consequent. I answer–Both ways. Consent of subjection is a part of faith, actual obedience a fruit of it.

2. The comfort of obedience to us. We cannot make out our evidence and plea but by a uniform, constant, and impartial obedience.

3. It is for the honour of Christ (2Th 1:11-12; Joh 15:8; Php 1:1). (T. Manton, D. D.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 14. That after the way which they call heresy] See the explanation of this word in Clarke’s note on “Ac 5:17“, and see before, Ac 24:5, where what is here translated heresy, is there rendered sect. At this time the word had no bad acceptation, in reference to religious opinions. The Pharisees themselves, the most respectable body among the Jews, are called a sect; for Paul, defending himself before Agrippa, says that he lived a Pharisee according to the strictest , sect, or heresy of their religion. And Josephus, who was a Pharisee, speaks, , of the heresy or sect of the Pharisees. LIFE, chap. xxxviii. Therefore it is evident that the word heresy had no bad meaning among the Jews; it meant simply a religious sect. Why then did they use it by way of degradation to St. Paul? This seems to have been the cause. They had already two accredited sects in the land, the Pharisees and Sadducees: the interests of each of these were pretty well balanced, and each had a part in the government, for the council, or Sanhedrin, was composed both of Sadducees and Pharisees: see Ac 23:6. They were afraid that the Christians, whom they called Nazarenes, should form a new sect, and divide the interests of both the preceding; and what they feared, that they charged them with; and, on this account, the Christians had both the Pharisees and the Sadducees for their enemies. They had charged Jesus Christ with plotting against the state, and endeavouring to raise seditions; and they charged his followers with the same. This they deemed a proper engine to bring a jealous government into action.

So worship I the God of my fathers] I bring in no new object of worship; no new religious creed. I believe all things as they profess to believe; and acknowledge the Law and the Prophets as divinely inspired books; and have never, in the smallest measure, detracted from the authority or authenticity of either.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

But this I confess; he makes here a good confession, and is indeed a follower of Christ, who before Pontius Pilate is said to have witnessed a good confession, 1Ti 6:13.

Heresy: this word is of a middle signification, being sometimes taken in a good sense, as Act 26:5, and thus the Greeks did use it sometimes when they spake of their philosophers; though the Jews called the doctrine of Christ so in the worst acceptation of the word; which doctrine this blessed apostle is not ashamed to own. Yet he does withal truly assert, that he worshipped no other God than the God of his fathers, but worshipped him whom Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (whom they so much gloried in) had worshipped; and that he had no other religion than what was taught in the law and the prophets, from whom they themselves had received theirs.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

14, 15. But this I confess totheein which Felix would see no crime.

that after the way they callheresyliterally, and better, “a sect.”

so worship I the God of myfathersthe ancestral God. Two arguments are contained here:(1) Our nation is divided into what they call sectsthe sectof the Pharisees, and that of the Sadduceesall the differencebetween them and me is, that I belong to neither of these, but toanother sect, or religious section of the nation, which from its Headthey call Nazarenes: for this reason, and this alone, am Ihated. (2) The Roman law allows every nation to worship its owndeities; I claim protection under that law, worshipping the God of myancestors, even as they, only of a different sect of the commonreligion.

believing all, &c.Here,disowning all opinions at variance with the Old Testament Scriptures,he challenges for the Gospel which he preached the authority of theGod of their fathers. So much for the charge of heresy.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

But this I confess unto thee,…. What was truth he was not ashamed of, but ready to own, and bear his testimony for, whatever was the consequence of it:

that after the way which they call heresy; referring to the charge of his being a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes, Ac 24:5 and meaning by the way the Christian religion, or the doctrines of Christianity, which the Jews called heresy; and as early as this were the Christians, by them, called heretics: so we read r of

, “a prayer against the heretics”, which Samuel (the little) composed before, or in the presence of R. Gamaliel the elder, he approving of it; which R. Gamaliel was Paul’s master; and some have thought, that Samuel the little, the composer of this prayer, was Saul himself; so that he knew very well that the Christian doctrine was called heresy, and the Christians heretics, for he had called them so himself in the time of his unregeneracy; but now he was not ashamed to profess that way, and walk in it, and according to it worship God, as follows:

so worship I the God of my fathers; even Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, suggesting, that by embracing Christianity, he had not denied, and gone off from the worship of the one, only, living, and true God, the God of Israel; and that there was an entire agreement between the saints of the Old Testament, and the Christians of the New, in the object of worship; the Vulgate Latin version reads, “so serve I the Father, and my God”; that is, God the Father, who is the Father of Christ, and the God and Father of believers in him:

believing all things which are written in the law and the prophets; which the Sadducees did not; and strictly adhering to these, and not to the traditions of the elders, as did the Scribes and Pharisees; so that since he believed whatever was contained in the sacred writings, he could not be charged justly with heresy; and as he believed, so he taught nothing but what was agreeably to the Scriptures of the Old Testament.

r Ganz Tzemach David, par. 1. fol. 25. 2. Vid. T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 28. 2. & 29. 1. Maimon. Hilch. Tephilla, c. 2. sect. 1.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

I confess (). The only charge left was that of being a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes. This Paul frankly confesses is true. He uses the word in its full sense. He is “guilty” of that.

After the Way ( ). This word Paul had already applied to Christianity (22:4). He prefers it to “sect” ( which means a choosing, then a division). Paul claims Christianity to be the real (whole, catholic) Judaism, not a “sect” of it. But he will show that Christianity is not a deviation from Judaism, but the fulfilment of it (Page) as he has already shown in Acts 24:3; Acts 24:9.

So serve I the God of our fathers ( ). Paul has not stretched the truth at all. He has confirmed the claim made before the Sanhedrin that he is a spiritual Pharisee in the truest sense (23:6). He reasserts his faith in all the law and the prophets, holding to the Messianic hope. A curious “heretic” surely!

Which these themselves also look for ( ). Probably with a gesture towards his accusers. He does not treat them all as Sadducees. See Tit 2:13 for similar use of the verb ( , looking for the happy hope).

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

The way. See on ch. Act 9:2.

A sect. See on verse 5. The word is commonly used in an indifferent sense, as signifying merely a school or party. So ch. Act 14:5; Act 28:29. Here, however, in a bad sense – a schisomatic sect, as in 1Co 11:19.

Worship [] . Better, as Rev., serve. See on Luk 1:74.

God of my fathers [ ] . A familiar classical phrase, and therefore well known to Felix. Thus Demosthenes calls Apollo the patrwov (ancestral God) of Athens. Socrates is asked (Plato, “Euthydemus,” 302), “Have you an ancestral Zeus [ ] ? So, frequently, in the classics. Similarly, the Roman phrase, Di patrii,” the gods of the forefathers. ” On the Roman reverence for the ancestral religion, see note on ch. 16 21. The Roman ‘s own sentiment would prepare him to respect Paul ‘s.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “But this I confess unto thee,” (homologo de touto soi) “But this I confess to you,” your honor, Felix.

2) “That after the way which they call heresy, (hoti kata ten hoson hen legousin airesin) “But in the way which they call (with derision) a sect,” heretical – The “they” being his accusers, primarily Sadducee Jews who denied the existence of angels, or spirits, and of the physical resurrection of the dead, Act 23:8; as affirmed by our Lord, Joh 5:28-29,

3) “So worship I the God of my fathers,” (houtos latreuo to patroo theo) “I thus worship the ancestral God,” the trinitarian elohim God of our Jewish fathers, of the ancient fathers of Israel, Act 26:21-23; 2Ti 1:1.

4) “Believing all thing which are written in the law,” (pisteuon pasi tois kata ton nomon) “Believing all the things according to (in harmony with) the law,” law of Moses, interpreted in contextual setting, Act 28:23-24.

5) “And in the prophets: (kai tois en tois prophetais gegrammenois) “And the things also having been written in the prophets,” as they relate to salvation and obedient service in and to the Lord Jesus Christ, Luk 16:16; Luk 24:44; Act 10:43; Act 13:38-41; Act 15:9.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

−

14. But I confess. Because they had laid to Paul’s charge impiety and the polluting of the temple, he purgeth himself of both now, that Felix may understand that his adversaries were moved with evil will. − (578) For though the religion, which is pretended, be false and preposterous, yet the study thereof did oftentimes find favor with men, who took no great heed. Wherefore it was to be feared lest Felix, if he had conceived any sinister suspicion of Paul, should not only have pardoned the zeal of the priests, but also have granted their requests. Wherefore Paul doth also refute this point of the accusation; and that so, that he doth not touch the faith of the gospel, because (as we have said) that was no fit place for making confession thereof. But what is this that he saith, that he worshippeth God according to the way which they call heresy? Some think that this is added like to a concession; because the enemies take that in evil part which ought to be attributed to judgment and right election; as if Paul had said, that that form of religion which he had followed is, indeed, called heresy, but unworthily. But seeing that name was not infamous either among the Jews or Gentiles, it is unlikely that he maketh answer before a profane man, touching that which they counted everywhere rather a commendation than any vice. When Christians have conference together, the Spirit of God commandeth that heretics be counted detestable; and he teacheth us to beware of heresies, because they bring upon the Church plague, dissension, and wasteness. Therefore, it is a thing not to be suffered among the people of God, whose safety consisteth in the unity of faith. But because the Jews did then openly boast of their sects, that excuse, whereof we spake of late, was superfluous. Therefore, it remaineth that he do either mean that he is a Pharisee, or that he call the Jewish religion or the profession of the gospel (without infamy) heresy; because they were distinguished from the use and custom of all nations. Seeing he did before confess himself to be a Pharisee, there shall no inconvenience ensue, if we say that he doth repeat the same now; especially seeing he speaketh shortly after of the resurrection of the dead. But because this first point doth only contain a confession concerning the worship of the God of the fathers, I think that he doth rather speak generally of the Jewish religion, or of the Christian faith which did flow thence. Paul was a citizen of Rome, notwithstanding as he came of the Jews by his ancestry, he confesseth that he continueth in the religion which he had learned of the fathers. And to this end doth the adverb of likeness tend; for it showeth a known thing, namely, the manner of worship whereunto the Jews were addicted. He maketh express mention of the God of his fathers, because it was not lawful for a man that was a Roman to receive the doctrine of the law unless he had come of the Jews. Also he toucheth his adversaries, which handle him so cruelly; whereas, notwithstanding, they both worship one God. I (saith he) worship the same God (according to the manner delivered by mine ancestors) which they themselves worship, and even as they worship him. Neither doth that hinder because he was fallen from the ceremonies of the law, and was content with the spiritual worship of God. For Paul thinketh it sufficient for him to wipe away that blot of impiety which his adversaries had falsely cast upon him. Therefore the Papists are ridiculous, who feign that Paul alloweth [approveth] all manner [of] antiquity. We, say they, worship the God of our fathers with Paul, as the custom was delivered to us from hand to hand; as if (even they themselves being judges) it were sufficient for the Jews or Turks to hold up the same buckler against the faith of Christ. But the apostle meant nothing less than simply to ground religion in the authority of ancestors, and to defend his godliness with that defense, which might have been common to all the superstitions of the Gentiles; he meant only to stop the mouth of his adversaries. Nevertheless, he taketh this for a plain matter, that the fathers, from whom the Jewish religion came, were good and sincere worshippers of God; so that the Jews, which were not degenerate, might well boast, that the God of their fathers whom they worshipped was the only Creator of heaven and earth; and that the country gods − (579) of all the rest of the world were mere and vain inventions. −

Believing all things. A short exposition of the sentence next going before. For, because he had not simply affirmed that he worshipped God, but did add this word ουτως, or so: he doth now set down how he worshippeth God. Whereby it appeareth what great heed he taketh for fear he entangle himself in those accidental − (580) superstitions which reigned among the Jews. As if any of us do at this day answer the Papists, that he worshippeth the God whom they profess, as we be taught out of the law and out of the gospel. By this let us learn that God is not rightly worshipped, so that our obedience can please him, unless it be of faith, which is the only ground-work of godliness. For he (to the end he may prove himself to be the servant of God) doth not thrust upon them bare ceremonies; but he saith flatly that he believeth. Furthermore, this place containeth a profitable doctrine, that this is the only foundation of right and true − (581) faith, for a man to submit himself to the Scripture, and reverently to embrace the doctrine thereof. Furthermore, Paul doth in this place divide the Scripture into the law and the prophets, that he may the more plainly prove that he doth not dissent from the universal consent of the Church. −

(578) −

“

Sola malevolentia impelli,” were instigated by sheer malevolence.

(579) −

“

Gentiles,” the Gentile.

(580) −

“

Adventitiis,” adventitious.

(581) −

“

Orthodoxae,” orthodox.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

THE INSPIRATION AND INFALLIBILITY OF THE BIBLE

Act 24:14-16.

THE nine articles of faith formulated and adopted by The Worlds Christian Fundamentals Association, May, 1919, gave first place to the authority and integrity of the Bible. This was not because they set the Scriptures above the Saviour, but on account of the patent fact that apart from the Scriptures we know nothing of the Saviour; or at least so little as to make lifes pathway dark and doubtful. Jesus is the worlds only Saviour! We grant, There is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved, but the Jesus of our worship and our hope is the Jesus of the Bible. To speak of discarding the Scriptures and retaining the Saviour is like saying, If American history were destroyed Washington would remain; or if Jewish history were dropped absolutely out of existence, Abraham would still be the Father of the faithful. The hour in which we live gives fresh occasion to the old and inspired question, If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do? When France discarded the Bible, it tore established faith to shreds (to employ the language of Mr. Campbell). And when England adopted Deism and threw the Scriptures away, its spirituality was dead. Mr. Campbell said an English king declared that half his bishops were atheists. But when Wesley harked back to the Book, he called England from its spiritual grace, and when Luther restored and preached it in Germany, he produced a reformation and witnessed a revival, both of which have gone on until this hour. In other words, apart from the Scriptures, spiritual life is unknown to history and is an impossible conception. That makes our theme of fundamental importance. To three things we here invite attention.

THE HISTORY OF THE BIBLE ITSELF

When Paul affirmed that he believed all that is written in the Law and the Prophets, he referred to that portion of the Bible in existence at his time. The phrase on his lips covered exactly the same conception that arises in the mind of the present-day Christian man when he speaks of the Bible, and involves common facts.

Its authors were notable men. Peter declared that God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy Prophets since the world began (Act 3:21). Writing his Second Epistle (2Pe 1:21), he further affirmed, For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. Paul, speaking of the dispensation of the grace of God given unto him by revelation, declared that this mystery in their generation, was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto His holy Apostles and Prophets by the Spirit (Eph 3:5).

If one take the pains to remind himself of who these men were, he will neither dispute the character of their accomplishments nor the holiness of their lives. What a matchless man was Moses! Never equaled by another mortal! What a marvelous warrior was Joshua! What a white soul was Samuel! What an imperial character was David!

What a philosopher was Job! What a prophet was Isaiah! It takes the pen of a Paul to depict the characters of these giants of old, and even he seems to feel his insufficiency, for after having paid them the tribute of the eleventh chapter of Hebrews, he takes breath and says,

And, what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets:

Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions,

Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens, etc (Heb 11:32-34).

No other book ever had such authors back of it. Your latest scientific compendium, your most complete encyclopedia, your library full of the worlds greatest classicsthese all fade away compared with the Bible, as stars are obscured by the rising sun. When their writers are forgotten, not one name will be stricken from the galaxy of Bible authors.

The Bible claims to be inspired of God. When Paul affirmed his faith in what was written in the Law and in the Prophets, he remembered the contention that these men had spoken and written under the power of the Spirit. It is doubtful if he ever penned a single Epistle in which he did not remind his readers of that circumstance. Writing to the Romans he reminded them that he was separated unto the Gospel of God, (Which He had promised afore by His Prophets in the Holy Scriptures,) (Rom 1:1-2). Writing to the Galatians he affirmed that the Gospel which was preached by him was not received of man, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. Penning the Epistle to Timothy, the son he had begotten in the Gospel, he made that colossal, yet justifiable claim, All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works (2Ti 3:16-17).

A. J. F. Behrens, at one time a destructive critic, but later converted to unshaken confidence in the Bible, says, Two things I know, that the Bible is Gods Book, and that it is true! I smile when I hear men disputing about the phrase, The Bible is the Word of God, and The Word of God is in the Bible. I believe both, as I believe body and soul constitute a man. The message of God is the eternal soul. The history is the body in which the soul lives and moves. The body is the medium through which that soul goes. The message is infallible and eternal. That message to me would not be infallible did I believe the history false and fabricated.

Its translations are unequalled. We believe the Divine purpose of retaining His Book comparatively intact was phrased by His servant John as he concluded the Revelation,

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book (Rev 22:18-19).

The tercentenary of the King James version was fixed upon by evangelical ministers to pay tribute to that work, and the tributes could not exceed its desserts, for with all the necessary changes incidental to a language in three hundred years, the King Tames version remains to this hour a perfect marvel of accuracy in translation; and that literary merit of which scholars have recently made so much, finds its basis not in the circumstance that the scholars of that hour deliberately determined to give to the world a work of model English, but rather, in the very demand that they be faithful to what God had spoken by the mouth of His holy Prophets and Apostles.

Arthur Pierson, in his volume, Character, Culture and Conduct, says, Libraries are not always a blessing; they are sometimes a curse. The Alexandrian Library is said to have contained seven hundred thousand volumes. It was called by Livy, Elegantiae regum curaeque egregium opus, and embraced the whole Greek and Latin literature. It is reported that when burned it supplied fuel for six months to the four thousand baths of Alexandria. Scholars have been wont to speak of this loss as an unmitigated disaster, and to heap execration upon the name of the Calif Omar, who is said, on poor authority, to have burned it. But, in the ruins which modern enterprise has disinterred at the foot of Vesuvius, we have proof that ancient society was so corrupt that, as Dr. Wayland said, a necessity similar to that which occasioned the flood, or the fires of Sodom, caused God to overwhelm the works of ancient civilization with a deluge of barbarism, and to consign the most splendid monuments of ancient literature to almost universal oblivion. In contrast, how miraculous the preservation of the Biblethat library in itself! While kingdoms have been dismembered, thrones have crumbled, and nations dropped out of history, the Word of God, firmer than the eternal hills, has survived them all a witness to the race that the highest guaranty for literary perpetuity is moral purity. And, Pierson might have added that this preservation of the Bible has not only expressed itself in the fact, but in the fancy, for not in all ages has such scholarship combined to preserve any book from the slightest error of translation, or the minutest addition, or inconsequential subtraction.

But Paul voices more here than confidence in the history of the Bible.

THE BIBLE AND CHRISTIAN CONVICTION

He makes it the basis of Christian conviction. When a great conference declares the first article of their faith after this manner: We believe that the Bible is the Word and Revelation of God, and is therefore our only authority, it is not only speaking with Isaiahthe Old Testament EvangelTo the law and to the testimony, if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them, but with Paul, the Evangel of the New, who declared that his belief is based on that which is according to the Law, and which is written in the Prophets. It is little wonder, therefore, that when he went to Berea and preached, and the people in the synagogue heard his speech, they felt driven back to the examination of the Scriptures to see whether these things were so. Paul had no new philosophy and had declared no novel faith, but was defending the assertions of the ancient dogma.

When the Sadducees, who were the critics of Christs time, were about Him with their quibbling questions, Jesus explained their ignorance after this manner: Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures.

If Christ faced the critics of the present moment, He would need to change his phraseology in nothing. This fact is practically confessed by Professor George B. Foster when, in the preface to his volume, The Function of Religion, he says to those who would be his students, concerning his own state of mind, and his leadership of them that were willing to follow him, I have tried to do no more than cleave to the sunnier side of doubt. And may there be light and warmth enough to keep us from freezing in the dark. It is a pitiful confession!

Paul also regards the Bible the rule of conduct. Here again the evangelicals and premillenarians have spoken with him. The great Apostle affirms that just because of this confidence he is exercising, he is to have A conscience void of offence toward God, and toward men. Long before this mighty Apostle made his appearance in the Church, the Psalmist had given reason for the strength of angels, namely, that they hearkened unto the voice of His Word (Psa 103:20), fulfilling the same. He believed also that that word marks the way for men, and so he wrote,

Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the Law of the Lord.

Blessed are they that keep His testimonies, and that seek Him with the whole heart (Psa 119:1-2).

For himself he cries out,

Oh, that my ways were directed to keep Thy statutes!

Then shall I not he ashamed, when I have respect unto all Thy Commandments? (Psa 119:3; Psa 119:6).

Addressing young men he says,

Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to Thy Word (Psa 119:9).

In the New Testament the same idea exactly is expressed,

Now ye are clean through the Word which I have spoken unto you.

The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Verily, verily I say unto you, if a man keep My saying, he shall never see death.

It is a significant thing that when the great Sermon on the Mount was being finished in what one has called the imagery of incomparable solemnity, Christ said,

Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of Mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

And every one that heareth these sayings of Mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:

And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of if (Mat 7:24-27).

James, regarded as one of the most practical of all the Apostles, dipped his pen to emphasize this great truththe vital relation between faith and practice:

Be ye doers of the Word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

For if any be a hearer of the Word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.

But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed (Jas 1:22-23).

As Henry Ward Beecher said, The Scriptures of the Old and New Testament alike employ external and physical elements as the means of adjusting internal manhood. The end and aim of the Bible is not external, but internal; and where it has employed external elements, it employs them as having relation to internal manhood. The drift of the Book from Genesis to Revelation is the building up of men in Christ Jesus. A manhood which is central, royal, divine, is the thing which it aims at. Its object is mans spiritual development and perfection. If it teaches domestic life, if it teaches civic duties, if it teaches in material elements, it is because all these, in their place and proportion, have relation to the building up of that spiritual manhood which is inherent in men.

Lorimer once declared, There is no position we occupy, no relationship we sustain, no serious issues we have to meet, concerning which we may not, if we will, obtain the fullest information; neither is there any honest doubt, springing from a troubled conscience, that has not its antidote in the affluent provisions of Divine grace. If you would know how to approach and honor your Creator; if you would realize the claims of Christ upon your faith and love; if you would learn how to fulfil your obligations as parent, child, citizen, or friend, and if you would understand how to live and die triumphantly, you have but to consult the sacred volume, whose pages glow with simplest wisdom and with safest counsels.

Paul also made it the ground of Christian expectation. His hope of the resurrection rests solely on Gods revelation. Christian assurance is the product of the promises of the Word, and Christian confidence results from a knowledge of the prophecies of the Word. It was this Apostle who wrote to Titus,

For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;

Looking for that Blessed Hope, and the Glorious Appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ (Tit 2:11-13).

Such was the Apostles expectation, and this his fellow Apostles shared. Peter, in his Epistle, reminds his hearers that,

We have also a more sure word of prophecy; where-unto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts? (2Pe 1:19).

The Blessed Hope of the one was the day-dawn for the other. Just what it would mean to the Church of God, and even the unregenerate world, to lose the promises and prospects presented by this Bible, was forcefully illustrated by Henry Rogers in his Eclipse of Faith, when he recorded a dream entitled A Blank Bible. He thought that he had taken up his Greek New Testament one morning to read, as was his custom, and he found the book a total blank. Thinking that some blank book had somehow gotten into his library, he took down a Bible and then a Hebrew Bible. These were also blank. While he was musing on this mystery, his servant came to tell him of a strange robbery. He had gone to his Bible in the morning and found it blank. Going out on the street he met a friend who told him excitedly that during the night every copy of the Bible had been taken from his home, and volumes containing only pure white paper left in their stead. On pursuing the investigation it was found that it was universal, and even the Bible Society could not produce a copy in which the same miracle had not taken place. In fact, as though in judgment upon the race for the abuse of the Book, God had actually withdrawn it from among men, and not a sentence from the Word of God remained in all human literature. Mr. Rogers thought in his dream that as soon as men had lost the Bible, they began to prize it as never before. Any price would have been paid for a single copy. One old sinner declared, It is confounded hard to be deprived of religion in old age. Another, whose vices were common talk, was greatly alarmed for the morals of mankind, now that the Guide Book to duty was lost. Did dream ever present to disordered imagination a more dire calamity? As Dr. Arthur Pierson says, What if every Bible should turn to blank paper; what if all that it has wrought in man and for man could be obliterated from human character, all ideals and ideas of chastity and charity, equity and ethics, mercy and magnanimity; all the motives for morality and piety, heroism and martyrdom, which it has suppliedwho can conceive of the wreck and ruin which would reach unto every heart and home in church and community? It would be found that millions of men, and whole peoples who had remained unbelieving, would still own their civilization to this very Word of God, and when the Bible was withdrawn, a darkness would be felt that covered the earth.

Permit some words on

THE BIBLE AND CHRISTIAN CONQUEST

Paul was not speaking to hear himself talk, or to compel the attention of others. His whole ministry had a definite object. He was executing the great commission; he was striving toward a Christ of conquest and of a crown, and he was using the Scriptures as the very sword with which opposition was to be put down and the King brought back.

The Scriptures are Gods appeal to the soul. Paul knew it well and voiced it in his Epistle to the Romans, For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth. Peter so thought, and in his general Epistle he reminded believers that they had been born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. The way of salvation for the soul is faith in Jesus Christ. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life, but as Paul wrote to the Romans, So belief cometh of hearing, and hearing by the Word of Christ (Rom 10:17, A.S.V.).

Walter Rauschenbusch was not the most stalwart defender of the Scriptures known to the twentieth century, and yet, hearking back to that confidence in the Word in which his mother confirmed his youth, he asks, What is the Bible to me? and answers, To my religious instinct it is the history of the revelation of the existence, the holiness and the love of God; to my conscience it is a mirror, in which I recognize my blemishes; to my moral judgment it is a whetstone, upon which it is sharpened and quickened; to my will it is the battle-cry that summons to conflict and victory; to my aesthetic sense its exalted poesy, simple narrative and heroic figures are a source of constant joy; to my memory it is the old, tried friend of childhood days; to my heart it is the voice of comfort in loneliness, of hope in discouragement. Above all, it is the principal means by which I can understand Jesus Christ and in Him the Father.

The Scriptures are Gods solution of all problems. The temptations of life are summed up in those to which Jesus was subjected in the wilderness. But He answered them every one with an appeal to the Word of God, and came off more than conqueror. Next to the terror of lifes sin is the weakness of its sorrows. When the broken-hearted sisters made their appeal to Jesus He turned their thought to the promises of Gods Word, of that very resurrection defended by the Apostle in the text that introduces this chapter. When the problems of marriage and divorce were presented to Jesus, He reminded His inquirers of what the Scriptures had originally said. If one wants a perfect guide of morals, the decalogue is Gods answer; if one would know what to do in benevolence, the Old Testament presents the tithe, and the New retains it and adds a love-offering. If one would understand his social obligations, the Sacred Book will explain, Bear ye one anothers burdens, the strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others, etc. What Christ was to the individual soul, the Scriptures are to societythe worlds soul. Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you, and learn of Me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. We confess frankly that if we be chargeable with making a fettish of the Book, an affection for it second only to that which we feel for Christ, sometimes we wonder if we should make it second, when we remember that God indicted these words: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.

All the Scriptures need is sincere and intelligent advocacy. The century waits for no new theology, but for a Pauline presentation of the old revelation. The one man that is meeting the cry of this hour as no other can, is the man equipped in the knowledge of the Scriptures. The greatest single phase of work the church over which I preside has ever undertaken since God gave it human birth in a dingy hall, is the establishment of a Bible Training School, the chief purpose of which is the equipment of men and women in the knowledge of this revelation, that they might go forth to make its promises, provision and prophecy known to a dying world.

Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley

(14) After the way which they call heresy.Better, which they call a sect. The Greek noun is the same as in Act. 24:5, and ought, therefore, to be translated by the same English word. As it is, the reader does not see that the way had been called a heresy. In using the term the way, St. Paul adopts that which the disciples used of themselves (see Note on Act. 9:2), and enters an implied protest against the use of any less respectful and more invidious epithet.

So worship I the God of my fathers.Better, perhaps, so serve I, the word being different from that in Act. 24:11, and often translated by serve elsewhere (Act. 7:7; Heb. 8:5). The service includes worship, but is wider in its range of meaning.

Believing all things which are written . . .This was a denial of the second charge, of being a ring leader of a sect. His faith in all the authoritative standards of Judaism was as firm and full as that of any Pharisee. The question whether that belief did or did not lead to the conviction that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ, was one of interpretation, with which Felix, at all events, had nothing to do, and which St. Paul, when making a formal apologia before a Roman ruler, declines to answer.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

14. Heresy On the second charge of HERESY he now replies (14-16) by professing his faith in the essentials of Judaism and avowal of conscientious life.

They call But I do not admit to be so.

God of my fathers My ancestral God, and, therefore, I am guiltless of breaking Roman law by deserting my ancestral religion.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

“But this I confess to you, that after the Way which they call a sect, so serve I the God of our fathers, believing all things which are according to the law, and which are written in the prophets, having hope toward God, which these also themselves look for, that there will be a resurrection both of the just and unjust.”

However, one thing he would admit to and that was that he belonged to ‘the Way’, which they scornfully called a sect. But this did not make him a bad Jew for in ‘the Way’ he served the God of his fathers believing all that was according to the Law of Moses and what was written in the prophets. So really they were not a sect at all. And as a result of his belief he had ‘hope towards God’, a hope similar to his accusers as a whole (the Jews, though not the Sadducees), that there will be a resurrection of the just and unjust (see Isa 26:19; Dan 12:2; Eze 37:12; Joh 5:29).

Once again he makes clear that any real disagreement is about what they taught, especially the doctrine of the resurrection, and seeks to win to his side those of the opponents who believe in the resurrection. For Luke, with his readers in mind, this continual reference to the resurrection is important. It is central to the Christian message. Paul is here precisely because of the truth of the resurrection.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The charge of being a Nazarene:

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

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

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

Paul here took up the next charge, that of being a ringleader of the Nazarenes. Without referring to the title bestowed upon him, he proudly confesses to the truth of that charge, if that be a crime, incidentally including, however, a rebuke to the Jews themselves. After the way which they were pleased to call a sect, a schismatic party, he served the God of the fathers. The thought underlying Paul’s words was that Christianity was not a separation, but rather a fulfilling of the Jewish religion and belief. There is no difference in kind, but only in degree between the Old and New Testament religion; the Jewish patriarchs were saved by their faith in the coming Messiah, while the Christians are Saved by their faith in the Christ that has come and fulfilled the chief prophecies of old. In this way Paul’s faith was placed in all the things that were written throughout the Law and in the prophets; only Paul knew that the Messianic hopes had been realized in Jesus of Nazareth, while his accusers were still groping about in the darkness and blindness of a hope that would never be fulfilled. And he cherished the same hope toward God as these men also accepted, namely, that a resurrection of the just as well as of the unjust would surely take place. Note that Paul here makes no distinction between the high priest, a Sadducee, and the representatives of the Sanhedrin that were Pharisees, preferring to regard them as simply Jews that held the hope of their entire nation. For that reason, since he was firm in this belief, Paul exercised himself, he earnestly endeavored also, as they did, to have a clear conscience toward God and toward all men everywhere. The strongest motive and impelling power in a Christian is his faith in the Word of God and his hope of the resurrection of the dead. Note: The defense of Paul, in this section especially, is a fine apology of Christianity and the Christian faith. Thus the opponents of the true faith are silenced, when they cannot prove their assertions against the Christians, and when, in addition, the faith and the life of the Christians can truthfully be urged in their defense. The Christians do not constitute a new sect; their religion is the true religion, as it was in the world from the beginning; they believe in the Word of God and have the hope of the resurrection of the body and of eternal life.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Act 24:14. So worship I the God of my fathers, This was a very proper plea before a Roman magistrate, as it proves that he was under the protection of the Roman laws, since the Jews were so; whereas, had he introduced the worship of new gods, he had forfeited that protection.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Act 24:14-15 . ] opposes the positive confession, which now follows, to the preceding merely negative assurance (Act 24:12-13 ): but, doubtless , I confess: “As a Christian I reverence the same God with the Jews, follow the same rule of faith, and I have the same hope on God, that there shall be a resurrection,” etc. Thus, notwithstanding that malicious . ., I am in nowise an enemy of the existing religion (protected by the roman laws!). And with full truth could this “confessio ingenua, voluntaria, plena” (Bengel) be furnished by Paul (in opposition to Baur and Zeller; also Schneckenburger, p. 147 f.), as he recognised in Christianity the completion of the divine law and the fulfilment of the prophets; and this recognition, as regards the law , necessarily presupposes the belief in all that is written in the law , namely, in its connection with the fulfilment effected by Christ (comp. Rom 3:31 ; Rom 13:8 ff.; Gal 3:24 ), although the law as a rule of justification has reached its end in Christ (Rom 10:4 ).

. . .] according to the way, which , etc., according to the Christian mode of life (Act 22:4 , Act 9:2 , Act 19:23 ).

. ] for Tertullus had, Act 24:5 , used , in itself a vox media (school, party, see Wetstein on 1Co 11:19 ), in a bad sense (a schismatic party, sect ).

] the God worshipped by the ancestors of my nation and from them received (Act 22:3 ). How inviolable were even to the heathen their ancestral gods! See Wetstein and Kypke, II. p. 122 f.; and on the expression very common also among the Greeks, Lobeck, Aglaoph . p. 1206, 769 ff.; Ellendt, Lex. Soph . II. 533 f.

. . ] is now that which is emphatically indicated by : in this way : (namely) believing all things , etc. Comp. Bornemann in Rosenmller, Repert . II. p. 277; Bernhardy, p. 284.

] throughout the law (-book) .

] contains a characteristic circumstance accompanying . . .

] even they themselves there , is spoken to those present as the representatives of the nation in the transaction. It was natural that this point of view in its generality should admit no reference to the Sadducean deviation from the national belief of the resurrection, or at all to special differences concerning this dogma. It is just as certain that Paul understood and morally , and not according to the sense of the self-conceit of the descendants of Abraham (Bertholdt, Christol . pp. 176 ff., 203 ff.). Comp. on Luk 14:14 .

] expectant . The hope is treated as objective (see on Rom 8:24 ). Comp. Eur. Alc . 131; Job 2:9 ; Isa 28:10 ; Tit 2:13 ; and comp. on Gal 5:5 .

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

DISCOURSE: 1807
PAULS VINDICATION OF HIMSELF BEFORE FELIX

Act 24:14-15. But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets: and have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.

IN the chapter before us we have a striking instance of the confidence inspired by the consciousness of truth. St. Paul had been seized under the mistaken idea that he had introduced a heathen into the temple, and profaned the temple. Had there been no other ground of animosity against him, it is probable that he would soon have convinced his adversaries of their mistake; but he was the great Apostle of the Gentiles, and therefore very obnoxious to the whole Jewish nation. Hence a prejudice existed against him, as hostile to the temple and the law: and the moment a cry was raised against him, though on quite a mistaken ground, it excited an universal tumult. From the enraged populace he was rescued by the Roman soldiers: and an opportunity was thus afforded him of vindicating himself before the Roman Governor at Cesarea. Ananias, the high-priest, with the elders of the Jewish people, went down, with a famous orator named Tertullus, to accuse him. Tertullus, anxious only to obtain judgment against him, omitted nothing whereby he might gain his cause. He complimented Felix on the equity and acceptableness of his government; when it was universally complained of as most iniquitous: and he charged Paul with the profanation of the temple, of which he had not been in the least guilty; and with exciting the tumult, which the Jews themselves had raised. But, in the midst of all, Paul stood like a rock, unmoved by the waves that dash upon it. When permitted to speak, he followed his accuser through the various articles of the charge. In his introduction, he shewed the difference between the artful compliments of a courtier, and the respectful address of a Christian: and, in the remainder of his short apology, he refuted every accusation that was brought against him. There was one part indeed of the charge, which, in a less obnoxious form, he acknowledged. He was accused of being a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes: This, says he, I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers.

Now from this acknowledgment of his we shall take occasion to shew,

I.

In what way the Christian serves his God

We have not here to consider the Christians experience at large; but simply to advert to his faith and hope

[The Christian believes all things that are written in the law and the prophets. Whatever God has told him, whether it accord with his pre-conceived notions or not; yea, whether he can comprehend it or not; he does not presume to gainsay it, but receives it upon the authority of God But the things to which the Apostle more especially alluded in the text, were those which relate to Christ and his Gospel [Note: Act 26:22-23.]; such as the prophecies which predicted his advent, the representations which shadowed forth his work and offices; and the promises made to his obedient followers; all of which are embraced by the Christian with faith unfeigned.

This is the foundation on which the Christian builds his hope. He expects assuredly, that there shall be a resurrection both of the just and unjust, when every one shall receive according to that he hath done, whether it be good or evil. To the ungodly this period is an object of fear and terror; but to the Christian, of joyful hope. He knows in whom he has believed; and is presuaded, that what He hath promised, he is able also to perform: to that day therefore he looks forward, as the completion of all his wishes, and the consummation of all his joys ]

In all this there appears to be nothing very remarkable. But before we affirm that, let us consider,

II.

In what light this service of his is often viewed

[Where these sentiments are held in a merely speculative manner, they give no offence: they are even approved as orthodox: but where they are practically maintained and enforced, they are vilified as heresy, and loaded with every opprobrious name. It is in vain that we appeal to the law and the prophets; it is in vain that we shew to men that these are the things which they themselves allow; in vain we refer them to the articles and homilies, which contain the acknowledged sentiments of our Church; or to the prayers which every member of our Church offers up to God: nothing can convince men that we are not heretics or fanatics. Practical Christians are still a sect everywhere spoken against [Note: Act 28:22.].

Now what is the reason of this? Whence is it that the same truths which are approved in theory, should be disapproved when reduced to practice? The reason is, that whilst held in theory only, they leave us in full possession of all our evil habits and propensities; but when applied to practice, they produce a course of life directly opposite to the desires of the flesh, and the customs of the world. Suppose, for instance, a mans faith be such as enables him to realize all that the Scriptures have spoken; to tremble at every threatening, and to expect the accomplishment of every promise; suppose it lead him to live entirely by faith on the Son of God, as all his salvation and all his desire: what a difference will this of necessity put between him and others! Suppose his hope also be such as disposes him to live in daily preparation for his last account, and in a blessed anticipation of the glory that awaits him; will not this make him appear strange and singular? and will not those who feel condemned by his heavenly life, reflect on him, rather than on themselves? Doubtless they will: they did so in the days of Christ and his Apostles; who neither said, nor did, more than the Scriptures required: but the people hated the light, and would not come to the light, lest their deeds should be reproved; and agreed to brand that as heresy, which they could not prevail upon themselves to embrace and practise. And thus it will be to the end of time: men will let you think as you please, if only you will conform to their habits: but if you will take the Scriptures as the only rule of your faith and practice, you shall be hated and reviled for it as long as there is an ungodly man upon earth: He that is born after the flesh, will, and cannot but, hate and persecute him that is born after the Spirit: The servant cannot be above his Lord.]

What then is to be done? Are we to lay aside this service? if not, let us inquire,

III.

In what manner it is to be maintained

This whole apology affords us a very bright example. We are not to sacrifice truth and virtue to a senseless or malignant clamour; but to maintain our principles,

1.

With firmness of mind

[We are to prove all things; and then to hold fast that which is good [Note: 1Th 5:21.]. We cannot be too careful in examining every principle which is inculcated as of Divine authority. We should never give our assent to any doctrine whatever upon the testimony of man; but should search the Scriptures for ourselves, to see whether the things we hear be agreeable to them or not. But, when once we are satisfied that any thing is really from God, then we must hold it fast. We must not be tossed to and fro, like children, with every wind of doctrine; nor, on the other hand, must we be deterred from confessing Christ through the fear of man: but we must hold fast that which we have received, that no man may take our crown [Note: Rev 3:11.]: we must hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering [Note: Heb 10:23.]. St. Paul had enough to intimidate him, if there were any legitimate reason for yielding to the impressions of fear on such occasions: but nothing could move him: not even life itself was of any value in his sight, when standing in competition with fidelity to his Lord. It was his attachment to Christ that was the real ground of the persecution he now met with; yet he would not deny his Lord; but confessed himself an heretic, according to their acceptation of the term. Thus should we be steadfast in the faith; and be willing even to lay down our lives in its defence.]

2.

With tenderness of spirit

[There is a contemptuous way of speaking of the world, in which some professors of religion indulge themselves, which is extremely reprehensible. It is true indeed that the world are both blind and carnal; but we ought to look well to our own spirit when we take upon ourselves to call them so: for, who is it that has made us to differ? or what have we that we have not received? When we think of their blindness and carnality, it should not be in the proud spirit of a Pharisee, Stand off, I am holier than thou, but with tears, even with floods of tears, on account of their unhappy condition [Note: Luk 19:41. Psa 119:136. Jer 13:17.]. We should call to mind our own former blindness. (as Paul does [Note: Act 26:9-11.],) for the humiliation of our own souls, and as an encouragement to seek their welfare. And we should be ready always to give a reason of the hope that is in us with meekness and fear [Note: 1Pe 3:15.]; in meekness instructing them, if God peradventure may give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth [Note: 2Ti 2:22-24.] ]

3.

With purity of heart

[This the Apostle particularly specified as the associate of his faith and hope [Note: ver. 16.]. To profess a regard for Christian principles whilst we are regardless of Christian practice, is only to deceive our own souls. Faith and a good conscience are the two pillars on which the fabric of our religion stands: and if either of them give way, the other falls of course [Note: 1Ti 3:9; 1Ti 1:19.]. The world will try our principles by this touchstone: they will say, What do ye more than others? And truly, when we profess so much higher principles than they, they have a right to expect in us a purer life. Not that they would be justified in rejecting the Gospel, even if every professor of it were to become a Judas: but such is their perverseness, that they will harden themselves more against religion on account of one Judas, than they will esteem it for the piety of a dozen other Apostles. This however is only an additional reason for watchfulness on our part. Whatever may be the conduct of the world, our duty is to shew them our faith by our works. In this way we may hope at least to do some good: we shall by well-doing put to silence the ignorance of foolish men, and make them ashamed who falsely accuse our good conversation in Christ. We may hope too that in some instances we may accomplish more; and win by our good conversation those who never would listen to the written word. At all events, it is in this way that we must approve ourselves to God, and stand with confidence before him in the day that he shall judge the world.]

Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)

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

Ver. 14. Which they call heresy ] Haeresis est vex Eccleslae peculiaris. Antiquitus enim dicebatur, In hac haeresi sum, id est in hac sum sententia vel sic sentio. (Tull. Paradox.) Ecclesiastical writers take it for an error in religion, for an opinion repugnant to the word of God. There must be in it, Error in ratione, et pertinacia in voluntate. Fevardentius, that fiery friar, feigns 1400 errors and heresies, all which he fathers and fastens on the Calvinists. Genebrard imputes to Calvin as an error, that he taught Christ to be , God of himself. It is not so long since, whosoever among us was not an Arminian, was eo nomine a doctrinal Puritan, as he was then termed; and now, he that was the old English Puritan, cried out upon as the worst of men, and greatest Heteroclite. a

a – pudet haec opprobria noble et dici potuisse et non potuisse refelli.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

14. ] The here has its peculiar force, of taking off the attention from what has immediately preceded, and raising a new point as more worthy of notice. But (‘ if thou wouldst truly know the reason why they accuse me ’), ‘hinc ill lacrym.’

, in allusion to used by Tertullus, Act 24:5 . The word is capable of an indifferent or of a had sense. Tertullus had used it in the latter. Paul explains what it really was.

= . Notice in the words the skill of Paul. The term was one well known to the Greeks and Romans, and which would carry with it its own justification. “Invisum quippe erat gentibus, nominatim etiam Romanis, si quis se peregrinis aut diis aut deorum cultibus addiceret; prterea Judis per multa imperatorum et magistratuum decreta et senatus consulta sancita erat potestas, Deum patrium colendi, patriis ritibus et sacris utendi. Jos. Antt. xiv. 17; xvi. 4” (Kuinoel). In his address to the Jews (ch. Act 22:14 ) the similar expression . , brings out more clearly those , in whom Felix had no interest further than the identification of Paul’s religion with that of his ancestors required.

. . ] See on . . , above. Then (if the words in brackets be omitted: and it is not easy to imagine that St. Luke wrote them) the dat. is used of the personal agents, the prophets. He avoids saying ‘ by Moses ,’ because the mention of the law would carry more weight.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Act 24:14 . .: “verbum forense idemque sacrum,” Bengel. “Unum crimen confitetur,” viz. , that of belonging to the sect of the Nazarenes, “sed crimen non esse docet”. . : “according to the way which they call a sect,” R.V. For see Act 9:2 , and for the reading in [381] text critical note. : a word of neutral significance, which Tertullus had used in a bad sense. For St. Paul Christianity was not , a separation from the Jewish religion, but was rather , cf. Act 13:32 . . , cf. Act 22:3 . The Apostle may have used the expression here as a classical one which the Roman might appreciate, cf. , Thuc., ii., 71; n. , ix., 247, and instances in Wetstein. (On the distinctions between and , Gal 1:14 , see Syn [382] , Grimm-Thayer.) Moreover St. Paul could appeal to the fact that liberty had been given to the Jews by the Romans themselves to worship the God of their fathers (see Alford’s note, in loco ). : “so serve I,” R.V., see on Act 7:42 ; if it is true that the word always describes a divine service like , and that this idea appears to spring from the conception of complete devotion of powers to a master which lies in the root of the word (Westcott), no verb could more appropriately describe the service of one who called himself of God and of Christ. . . . .: “all things which are according to the law,” R.V., “iterum refutat Tertullum, Act 24:6 ,” Bengel; “and which are written in the prophets,” R.V. The mention of the prophets as well as of the law shows that a reference to the Messianic hopes is intended.

[381] R(omana), in Blass, a first rough copy of St. Luke.

[382] synonym, synonymous.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

after = according to. Greek. kata. App-104. the way. See note on Act 9:2.

heresy. Same word as “sect”, Act 24:5.

worship. Greek. latreuo. App-137.

God. App-98.

of my fathers. Greek. patroos. See note on Act 22:6.

believing. Greek. pisteuo. App-150.

are = have been.

in = according to. Greek. kata, as above.

prophets. App-189.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

14.] The here has its peculiar force, of taking off the attention from what has immediately preceded, and raising a new point as more worthy of notice. But (if thou wouldst truly know the reason why they accuse me), hinc ill lacrym.

, in allusion to used by Tertullus, Act 24:5. The word is capable of an indifferent or of a had sense. Tertullus had used it in the latter. Paul explains what it really was.

= . Notice in the words the skill of Paul. The term was one well known to the Greeks and Romans, and which would carry with it its own justification. Invisum quippe erat gentibus, nominatim etiam Romanis, si quis se peregrinis aut diis aut deorum cultibus addiceret; prterea Judis per multa imperatorum et magistratuum decreta et senatus consulta sancita erat potestas, Deum patrium colendi, patriis ritibus et sacris utendi. Jos. Antt. xiv. 17; xvi. 4 (Kuinoel). In his address to the Jews (ch. Act 22:14) the similar expression . , brings out more clearly those , in whom Felix had no interest further than the identification of Pauls religion with that of his ancestors required.

. .] See on . . , above. Then (if the words in brackets be omitted: and it is not easy to imagine that St. Luke wrote them) the dat. is used of the personal agents, the prophets. He avoids saying by Moses, because the mention of the law would carry more weight.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Act 24:14. , I confess) A forensic word, and one also used in sacred things, and appropriately employed here. A confession ingenuous, voluntary, full; having respect to faith in this verse; to hope, in the following verse; to love, in Act 24:17. They who assent to this confession are accused of being a sect (heresy), with the same injustice as Paul was.-, way) He confesses that he is one of those whom Tertullus had termed Nazarenes.- , they call a sect, heresy) This appellation (Act 24:5) Paul corrects, not that it was at the time an odious term (as sect or heresy is now), but because it is not a sufficiently worthy one. , a sect, is a thing of human caprice (humour): the way () is a thing divinely ordained. He had said all that was required for his defence; but now, skilfully making a handle of the opportunity, he adds a confession of faith.-) Paul confutes the prejudice as to the newness of Christianity.-, in the law) Again he refutes Tertullus, Act 24:6.-, written) concerning Jesus of Nazareth, Act 24:5.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

I confess: Psa 119:46, Mat 10:32

after: Act 9:2, Act 19:9, Act 19:23, Amo 8:14, 2Pe 2:2

heresy: Act 24:5, 1Co 11:19, Gal 5:20, Tit 3:10, 2Pe 2:1

so: Mic 4:2

the God: Act 3:13, Act 5:30, Act 7:32, Act 22:14, Exo 3:15, 1Ch 29:18, 2Ti 1:3

believing: Act 3:22-24, Act 10:43, Act 26:22, Act 26:27, Act 28:23, Luk 1:70, Luk 24:27, Luk 24:44, Joh 5:39-47, 1Pe 1:11, Rev 19:10

in the law: Act 13:15, Mat 7:12, Mat 22:40, Luk 16:16, Luk 16:29, Joh 1:45, Rom 3:21

Reciprocal: 2Ch 15:12 – seek Act 4:2 – preached Act 22:4 – this Act 26:5 – sect Act 28:22 – for

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

THE GOD OF OUR FATHERS

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

Act 24:14

St. Paul, face to face with his opponents before the judgment-seat of Felix, on the one hand makes an admission, on the other puts forward a claim. He admits that his beliefs are not those of the Jews who are prosecuting him. The way of Christ which he follows is not the way of their religion. They call his way by a hard name, but at the same time he claims that he and they worship the same God, the God of his fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and he goes on to assert that he believes all things which are written in the law and in the prophets. How far was he justified in making this claim? Ceremonial law for him had ceased to be of any practical efficacy, but yet he still fully recognised its Divine origin and the Divine purpose which it had served. He felt that Christ had come not to destroy but to fulfil the law. He felt that the God of Moses and the God of Jesus Christ were in the fullest sense of the words the same. St. Pauls view that the Gospel of Christ supplanted and at the same time carried on the Law of Moses finds numerous illustrations in the subsequent history of the Christian Church.

I. All great religious movements within the Church stand in a twofold attitude towards the past.

(a) On the one hand there is a break with the past. New ideas take possession of mens minds. Some old belief, some old form of worship is seen to be in some respects false and unworthy.

(b) On the other hand, there is also continuity with the past. The new development still has its roots in the past. It is adjusted to the old beliefs which are still retained. The fundamental principles of Christianity remain as true as they were before, but they are viewed in a new light, they are presented in a fresh way.

And this twofold aspect of religious movements is strikingly marked in the English Reformation. The Reformed Anglican Church broke away from many past errors and abuses, but it did not become a new Church. It still stood firmly rooted in the past. The Church of Rome has condemned our Reformed Church as heretical and schismatic. May we not say, on the other hand, In a way that they call heresy, so worship we the God of our fathers?

II. Every generation has its own religious ministry, its own way of presenting to the world the Gospel of salvation. It has not merely to adjust itself to the preceding generation, to take up and carry on the work and ideas which have been handed on to it, but it has at the same time its own special problems to consider. It has to take into account the newer ideas on scientific and social questions which are continually growing up. Each generation of Christians gives its own interpretation to the difficulties of Christianity. Each generation accommodates its needs to the eternal truths of the teaching of Jesus Christ. No one generation can ever fully understand another. That is, of course, especially the case where religion is confronted with scientific problems, and over and over again the leaders of religious thought have betrayed religion by putting forward its accidental characteristics as if they were essential. It is essential evidence of the truth of Christianity that it has this wonderful power of assimilating all that is good and true in modern thought. If it had not possessed this receptivity, this flexibility, it would run the risk of becoming fossilised. It could not continue to be a living force if it ceased to be in touch with the highest forms of modern progress.

III. Our own generation has its own religious problems, and it may be that it will hereafter be regarded as a great turning-point in the history of Christianity. At present we are too near to it, too much under its influence to be able to judge about that. There are those who would have us believe that Christianity has been weighed in the balance and found wanting, that our faith is crumbling away underneath us. I do not believe that those who hold this view appreciate the latent resources, the reserve force of Christianity, but the fact that such things are said throws an immense responsibility upon individual believers. We need all the adaptability and all the resoluteness of St. Paul. It rests with us to show that a man may be a sincere Christian without in the least cutting himself off from the social and intellectual movement of his time. It rests with us to let our light shine before men, to prove by our life that religion is a living force within us, something that we have made a reality to ourselves by striving after truth to the best of our power. Do not lightly cut yourselves adrift from that great Christian past which you have inherited from those who have gone before you. Even though you have doubts and difficulties, do not give up the practice of prayer. The God of our fathers is still very near us. He is still ready to hear us in our struggles and temptations as He heard His people in the days gone by. We cannot, of course, as Christians all hold exactly the same opinions. Our forms of worship may not be in all cases exactly the same. But we have one common object of worship, the God of our fathers. That is the link which binds all Christians together. Christ is in us and God is in Christ. I in them, and Thou in Me, that they may be made perfect in one.

Rev. Dr. H. G. Woods.

Illustration

Suppose a Christian of to-day could be transported into the Christianity of the third, or the tenth, or even the sixteenth century, it would often be difficult for him to understand or sympathise with the ideas, the aspirations, the conduct of these Christians of the past. The principles would be the same, there would be a common ground of faith, but the atmosphere would be different. The ideals would not be the same. The character of the religious life would not be altogether the same. There were, no doubt, in those times many examples of beautiful and saintly lives, still in some respects there would certainly be a sense of discord between the past and the present. That is because the Christianity of each age necessarily reflects to some extent the spirit of its age, and so it is true that, within certain limits, what were regarded as heresies in one age have become the commonplaces of later generations.

Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary

4

Act 24:14. To confess does not mean to admit any wrongdoing; it is only an admission of certain facts of which he was not ashamed, but which were objectionable to his critics. Paul does not admit that he is worshiping God through heresy, but, that he is serving Him with the system that his accusers called by such a name. He further states that the law (of Moses) and the prophets had taught that same system to be coming sometime.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Act 24:14. But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers. More accurately rendered, after the way which they call a sect. The word translated heresy () is represented by sect in Act 24:5. Paul here defends himself against the second accusation, the being a ringleader of the Nazarene sect. He boldly and gladly at once proclaims, as a long line of glorious confessors have done since his day, that he is a Christian; but he adds, Christian or Nazarene though he be, he is a worshipper of no strange gods, but his God is the God of his Jewish fathers. For fidelity to this worship surely he deserves no punishment at the hands of the government, for the Jewish religion was countenanced and protected by Rome. Though a Nazarene, he was still a Jew.

Believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets. Yes, he asserted he was a true Jew, believing all the glorious promises written in the Law and Prophets. In this faith of his he followed out the words of the Master: Think not that I am come to destroy the Law and the Prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil (Mat 5:17). In other words, Paul denied that in becoming a Christian or a Nazarene he had in any way apostatized from the faith of his fathers. Christianity to him was but the fulfilment of Judaism.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Here the apostle answers the second part of the charge brought against him; namely, the charge of heresy, and being the ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.

Where note, That although the apostle would not, out of his great modesty, take upon himself to be one of the heads or chiefs among them, a ringleader, as they styled him; yet as to the owning of that way, notwithstanding all the imputations they had cast upon it, he doth it with the greatest freedom and courage, in the presence of his judge and accusers; This I confess, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I, &c.

Here observe, 1. The false imputation which Christianity suffered under in its first appearance; After the way which they call heresy. It is no new thing to nickname the worshippers of the true God, to call them heretics, and their way to worship heresy.

Observe, 2. The way taken by St. Paul to remove this false imputation; namely, by an appeal to scripture and antiquity: So worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things that are written in the law and the prophets.

Where note, How he appeals to scripture as the ground and rule of his faith, the law and the prophets; and then he appeals to the best and purest antiquity for the object of his worship; So worship I the God of my Fathers.

Observe, 3. The freedom and courage of the apostle in owning his religion, notwithstanding these false imputations, even in the presence of his greatest enemies, and when they were in hopes to destroy him for it; This I confess unto thee. The apostle abhorred that mean and base-spirited principle, which makes it lawful for men to deny their religion when it brings them into danger: no, he valued his above, and preferred it before, his personal safety.

God Almighty inspire us with the same courage and holy resolution, that when our adversaries of the church at Rome pronounce us heretics, and call our religion heresy, we may answer them as our apostle answered their forefathers, the subtle Pharisee, After the way which you call heresy, so worship we the God of our fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and the prophets.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Act 24:14-16. But As to what they have alleged against me with regard to the Nazarenes; this I confess unto thee And am not ashamed publicly to avow it in the presence of the greatest personages upon earth; that after the way which they call , a sect; (so the same word is properly rendered, Act 24:5;) so worship I the God of my fathers And am authorized by our sacred writings so to do; believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets On which every part of the religion which I profess is founded, and which I should not either understand or believe if I worshipped or served the God of my fathers any other way, or did not believe in and receive Jesus Christ as the true Messiah, to whom both the law and the prophets bear witness. And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow All the Pharisees allowed it; that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust In a public court, this was peculiarly proper to be observed. The pious Jews expected a resurrection, as Paul did, on the foundation of the promises of God, delivered by Moses and the prophets. This was a very proper defence before a Roman magistrate, who, by the laws of the empire, was bound to allow every man to worship God according to the religion of his country. And herein , on this account, because I believe all things written in the law and the prophets, and expect a future resurrection and an eternal state; I exercise myself And make it the continual care and study of my life; to have always a conscience void of offence toward God, and toward man That so, whatever accusations are brought against me, my own heart may not condemn me, but I may always find internal support amidst all the external injuries I may receive from mankind.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

See notes on verse 10

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

14. I confess this unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy serve I the God of my fathers, believing all things which have been written according to the law and in the prophets,

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

24:14 {3} But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call {i} heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

(3) Paul proceeds in the case of religion from a conjectural state to a practical state, not only admitting of the religion which he was accused of, but also proving it to be true, to be heavenly and from God, and to be the oldest of all religions.

(i) Here this word “heresy” or “sect” is taken in a good sense.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

Paul rebutted the second charge of leading a cult (Act 24:5) by explaining that his beliefs harmonized with the teachings of the Hebrew Scriptures. This would have helped Felix see that the real conflict between Paul and his accusers was religious and not political, as Tertullus had made it appear.

Paul was not claiming that the church is the continuation of Israel (cf. Eph 2:11-22). His point was that his beliefs did not contradict anything predicted in the Old Testament.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)