God's Faithfulness in an Unjust World
Introduction: Things are vastly different in the world today compared to even one year ago. This time last year we weren’t dealing with COVID-19. We weren’t dealing with a (nearly) worldwide pandemic. We weren’t adjusting to wearing a mask, social distancing, and, perhaps one of the more prominent changes, limited (if any) attendance at College football games and concerts. Things are vastly different. I believe that is a fair statement. There is, however, another step that could be taken beyond the word “different.” It would be very tempting to go a step further and say things are “unjust” or “unfair.” Now, if one was to go that route, then that would indicate some presupposed definition of what is “just” and what is “fair.” There would have to be a comparison between what one believes to be fair and just and what is currently happening in our world. So, whatever your definition of “normal” may be, I would argue in my own vernacular, “This ain’t it!” One lesson to be learned in situations such as these, as well as through this passage of Scripture in the book of Acts, is this: God is faithful regardless of the circumstances. Our God can be trusted.
1. God is faithful in geography (1-5)
1 Festus then, having arrived in the province, three days later went up to Jerusalem from Caesarea.
2 And the chief priests and the leading men of the Jews brought charges against Paul, and they were urging him,
3 requesting a concession against Paul, that he might have him brought to Jerusalem (at the same time, setting an ambush to kill him on the way).
4 Festus then answered that Paul was being kept in custody at Caesarea and that he himself was about to leave shortly.
5 “Therefore,” he *said, “let the influential men among you go there with me, and if there is anything wrong about the man, let them prosecute him.”
Witherington observes that ‘it is a measure of the importance the Jewish officials placed on this matter that they not only confronted Festus with this matter as soon as he came to town but also were willing to go to such lengths to eliminate the Paul problem’.
If the case was so urgent, the Jews could make the effort to come to Caesarea. So he suggested that a responsible delegation should accompany him to Caesarea where they could make their accusations against Paul in a formal manner.
What is apparent is that Festus was determined to allow justice to take its course.
2. God is faithful in conflict (6-12)
6 After he had spent not more than eight or ten days among them, he went down to Caesarea, and on the next day he took his seat on the tribunal and ordered Paul to be brought.
7 After Paul arrived, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood around him, bringing many and serious charges against him which they could not prove,
8 while Paul said in his own defense, “I have committed no offense either against the Law of the Jews or against the temple or against Caesar.”
9 But Festus, wishing to do the Jews a favor, answered Paul and said, “Are you willing to go up to Jerusalem and stand trial before me on these charges?”
10 But Paul said, “I am standing before Caesar’s tribunal, where I ought to be tried. I have done no wrong to the Jews, as you also very well know.
11 “If, then, I am a wrongdoer and have committed anything worthy of death, I do not refuse to die; but if none of those things is true of which these men accuse me, no one can hand me over to them. I appeal to Caesar.”
12 Then when Festus had conferred with his council, he answered, “You have appealed to Caesar, to Caesar you shall go.”
Like Felix, Festus saw in the case of Paul an opportunity to ingratiate himself with the Jews. He therefore asked Paul whether he was willing to go and be tried at Jerusalem.
Paul saw clearly that he could hope for justice and for acquittal only from the Romans, not from the Jews.
The Lord’s words to Paul in the vision recorded in 23:11 were ‘you must (dei) also testify in Rome’. As noted in connection with that verse, it is most likely the risen Jesus who addresses Paul, since ‘the Lord’ refers to testifying ‘about me’. Tannehill concludes that ‘by his own decision Paul can help to fulfill the Lord’s purpose that he bear witness in the centers of power, including Rome’.
3. God is faithful in ministry (13-22)
13 Now when several days had elapsed, King Agrippa and Bernice arrived at Caesarea and paid their respects to Festus.
14 While they were spending many days there, Festus laid Paul’s case before the king, saying, “There is a man who was left as a prisoner by Felix;
15 and when I was at Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews brought charges against him, asking for a sentence of condemnation against him.
16 “I answered them that it is not the custom of the Romans to hand over any man before the accused meets his accusers face to face and has an opportunity to make his defense against the charges.
17 “So after they had assembled here, I did not delay, but on the next day took my seat on the tribunal and ordered the man to be brought before me.
18 “When the accusers stood up, they began bringing charges against him not of such crimes as I was expecting,
19 but they simply had some points of disagreement with him about their own breligion and about a dead man, Jesus, whom Paul asserted to be alive.
20 “Being at a loss how to investigate such matters, I asked whether he was willing to go to Jerusalem and there stand trial on these matters.
21 “But when Paul appealed to be held in custody for the Emperor’s decision, I ordered him to be kept in custody until I send him to Caesar.”
22 Then Agrippa said to Festus, “I also would like to hear the man myself.” “Tomorrow,” he *said, “you shall hear him.”
Going further than the narrator did in vv. 7–8, Festus reveals that the accusations raised against Paul were actually theological: the Jewish leaders had ‘some points of dispute about their own religion and about a dead man named Jesus who Paul claimed was alive’.
It is interesting that by this stage the question of Paul’s alleged desecration of the temple has quite disappeared from sight, and the topic of the resurrection (23:6; 24:21) has replaced it. Festus talks about it as something that he fails to comprehend, and indeed it is difficult to see how it could have become a point on which to hang a criminal charge. But this is precisely the point. The real ground of dispute is that Paul preaches the resurrection of Jesus,
Here, the governor gives ‘a masterful “outsider” characterization of the central Christian claim: that one who was dead (tethnēkotos) is now being declared to be living (zēn)’.
Festus hides the fact that he was actually ‘wishing to do the Jews a favour’ (v. 9). He says nothing of Paul’s protest and argument for justice (vv. 10–11), simply noting that he ‘made his appeal to be held over for the Emperor’s decision’ (eis tēn tou Sebastou diagnōsin, ‘for His Majesty’s examination and decision’).