Acts 24 commentary

ACTS 24 COMME TARY
EDITED BY GLE PEASE
Paul’s Trial Before Felix
1 Five days later the high priest Ananias went
down to Caesarea with some of the elders and a
lawyer named Tertullus, and they brought their
charges against Paul before the governor.
BAR ES, "And after five days - This time was occupied, doubtless, in their
receiving the command to go to Caesarea, and in making the necessary arrangements.
This was the twelfth day after Paul’s arrival at Jerusalem. See Act_24:11.
Ananias, the high priest - See the notes on Act_23:2.
Descended - Came down from Jerusalem. This was the usual language when a
departure from Jerusalem was spoken of. See the notes on Act_15:1.
With a certain orator named Tertullus - Appointed to accuse Paul. This is a
Roman name, and this man was doubtless a Roman. As the Jews were, to a great extent,
ignorant of the Roman laws, and of their mode of administering justice, it is not
improbable that they were in the habit of employing Roman lawyers to plead their
causes.
Who informed the governor against Paul - Who acted as the accuser, or who
managed their cause before the governor.
CLARKE, "After five days - These days are to be reckoned from the time in which
Paul was apprehended at Jerusalem, and twelve days after he had arrived in that city;
see Act_24:11. Calmet reckons the days thus: - St. Luke says that Paul was apprehended
at Jerusalem when the seven days of his vow were nearly ended, Act_21:27; that is, at
the end of the fifth day after his arrival. The next day, which was the sixth, he was
presented before the Sanhedrin. The night following, he was taken to Antipatris. The
next day, the seventh, he arrived at Caesarea. Five days afterwards, that is, the twelfth
day after his arrival at Jerusalem, the high priest and the elders, with Tertullus, came
down to accuse him before Felix. - But see the note on Act_23:32.
A certain orator named Tertullus - This was probably a Roman proselyte to
Judaism; yet he speaks every where as a Jew. Roman orators, advocates; etc., were
found in different provinces of the Roman empire; and they, in general, spoke both the
Greek and Latin languages; and, being well acquainted with the Roman laws and

customs, were no doubt very useful. Luitprandus supposed that this Tertullus was the
same with him who was colleague with Pliny the younger, in the consulate, in the year of
Rome, 852; who is mentioned by Pliny, Epist. v. 15. Of this there is no satisfactory proof.
GILL, "And after five days Ananias the high priest descended with the
elders,.... From Jerusalem to Caesarea: these five days are to be reckoned not from the
seizing of Paul in the temple, but from his coming to Caesarea; the Alexandrian copy
reads, "after some days", leaving it undetermined how many: the high priest, with the
elders, the members of the sanhedrim, with "some" of them, as the same copy and the
Vulgate Latin version read, came down hither; not merely as accusers, by the order of
the chief captain, but willingly, and of their own accord, to vindicate themselves and
their people, lest they should fall under the displeasure of the Roman governor, for
encouraging tumults and riots: the high priest must be conscious to himself that he had
acted in an illegal manner, in ordering Paul to be smitten on the mouth, in the midst of
the council, in the presence of the chief captain; and if it had not been for the soldiers,
Paul had been pulled to pieces in the council: and the elders knew what a hand they had
in the conspiracy against his life; and they were sensible that this plot was discovered,
and Paul was secretly conveyed away; and what the captain had wrote to the governor,
they could not tell, and therefore made the more haste down to him, to set themselves
right, and get Paul condemned:
and with a certain orator named Tertullus: this man, by his name, seems to have
been a Roman; and because he might know the Roman, or the Greek language, or both,
which the Jews did not so well understand, and was very well acquainted with all the
forms in the Roman courts of judicature, as well as was an eloquent orator; therefore
they pitched upon him, and took him down with them to open and plead their cause. The
name Tertullus is a diminutive from Tertius, as Marullus from Marius, Lucullus from
Lucius, and Catullus from Catius. The father of the wife of Titus, before he was emperor,
was of this name (k); and some say her name was Tertulla; and the grandmother of
Vespasian, by his father's side, was of this name, under whom he was brought up (l).
This man's title, in the Greek text, is ρητωρ, "Rhetor", a rhetorician; but though with the
Latins an "orator" and a "rhetorician" are distinguished, an orator being one that pleads
causes in courts, and a rhetorician a professor of rhetoric; yet, with the Greeks, the
"Rhetor" is an orator; so Demosthenes was called; and so Cicero calls himself (m).
Who informed the governor against Paul; brought in a bill of information against
him, setting forth his crimes, and declaring themselves his accusers; they appeared in
open court against him, and accused him; for this is not to be restrained to Tertullus, but
is said of the high priest, and elders with him; for, the word is in the plural number,
though the Syriac version reads in the singular, and seems to refer it to the high priest.
HE RY, "We must suppose that Lysias, the chief captain, when he had sent away
Paul to Caesarea, gave notice to the chief priests, and others that had appeared against
Paul, that if they had any thing to accuse him of they must follow him to Caesarea, and
there they would find him, and a judge ready to hear them - thinking, perhaps, they
would not have given themselves so much trouble; but what will not malice do?
I. We have here the cause followed against Paul, and it is vigorously carried on. 1. Here is

no time lost, for they are ready for a hearing after five days; all other business is laid
aside immediately, to prosecute Paul; so intent are evil men to do evil! Some reckon
these five days from Paul's being first seized, and with most probability, for he says here
(Act_24:11) that it was but twelve days since he came up to Jerusalem, and he had
spent seven in his purifying the temple, so that these five must be reckoned from the last
of those. 2. Those who had been his judges do themselves appear here as his
prosecutors. Ananias himself the high priest, who had sat to judge him, now stands to
inform against him. One would wonder, (1.) That he should thus disparage himself, and
forget the dignity of his place. She the high priest turn informer, and leave all his
business in the temple at Jerusalem, to go to be called as a prosecutor in Herod's
judgment-hall? Justly did God make the priests contemptible and base, when they made
themselves so, Mal_2:9. (2.) That he should thus discover himself and his enmity
against Paul!. If men of the first rank have a malice against any, they think it policy to
employ others against them, and to play least in sight themselves, because of the odium
that commonly attends it; but Ananias is not shamed to own himself a sworn enemy to
Paul. The elders attended him, to signify their concurrence with him, and to invigorate
the prosecution; for they could not find any attorneys or solicitors that would follow it
with so much violence as they desired. The pains that evil men take in an evil matter,
their contrivances, their condescensions, and their unwearied industry, should shame us
out of our coldness and backwardness, and out indifference in that which is good.
JAMISO , "Act_24:1-27. Paul, accused by a professional pleader before Felix,
makes his defense, and is remanded for a further hearing. At a private interview Felix
trembles under Paul’s preaching, but keeps him prisoner for two years, when he was
succeeded by Festus.
after five days — or, on the fifth day from their departure from Jerusalem.
Ananias ... with the elders — a deputation of the Sanhedrim.
a certain orator — one of those Roman advocates who trained themselves for the
higher practice of the metropolis by practicing in the provinces, where the Latin
language, employed in the courts, was but imperfectly understood and Roman forms
were not familiar.
informed ... against Paul — “laid information,” that is, put in the charges.
CALVI , "1.Seeing Ananias goeth down to Cesarea to accuse Paul, it maketh the
conjecture more probable, which I brought before touching his priesthood. For it
was not meet for the highest priest to take such a journey. Therefore some other
man was highest priest at that time; and Ananias being one of the chief priests,
forasmuch as he was in great authority, and was withal a stout − (562) man, did take
this embassage upon him. He bringeth with him a train, and that of the worshipful
company of elders, that the governor might be moved with their very pomp to
condemn Paul. But forasmuch as Paul did use no eloquence, they had no need to
hire a rhetorician to contend with him in eloquence. Moreover, they did exceed both
in dignity and also in multitude, so that it was an easy matter for them to oppress a
poor man, and such a one as was destitute of man’s help. Therefore it was a sign of
an evil conscience, in that seeing they were men of great experience, exercised in
public affairs, and skillful in matters pertaining to courts, they hire a rhetorician.
Eloquence is, I confess, the gift of God; but in this matter they went about nothing

else but to deceive the judge therewith. And Luke declareth this, therefore, that we
may know that the Jews did omit nothing whereby they might oppress Paul; and
that they might not only prove him guilty, − (563) but so dash him out of
countenance, that he might not be able to defend himself; and so let us consider that
it came to pass by the wonderful providence of God, that Paul did so stoutly endure
such sore assaults. Wherefore, if it so fall out at any time that a godly man being
alone be beset with a great number of enemies, let him call to mind this history, and
let him be of good courage. As David doth likewise exhort us by his own example, −
“If tents were pitched about me, I will not fear,
because thou art with me,” ( Psalms 27:3). −
“ Strenuus,” active. his innocence.
“ Perverterent ejus innocentiam,”
COFFMA , "The third of five defenses which marked the early part of Paul's
period of imprisonment is given in this chapter, the same being a formal
arraignment and trial before the Procurator Felix at Caesarea, about 58 A.D., in
which the high priest Ananias and his company from Jerusalem were legally
represented by a lawyer named Tertullus, and in which Paul convincingly spoke on
his own behalf. Events of this chapter (except the last paragraph) occurred only
twelve days from the time Paul entered Jerusalem from Caesarea (Acts 21:17). For
discussion of Felix, see under Acts 23:24, and for notes on Ananias under Acts 23:2.
C. PAUL'S THIRD DEFE SE: THE SPEECH BEFORE GOVER OR FELIX
And after five days the high priest Ananias came down with certain elders, and with
an orator, one Tertullus; and they informed the governor against Paul. And when
he was called, Tertullus began to accuse him, saying. (Acts 24:1-2a)
And after five days ... Boles very properly says that this may mean "either five days
from Paul's departure from Jerusalem, or five days after his arrival in
Caesarea."[1] However, Ramsay deduced that it means "five days from Paul's
leaving Jerusalem."[2] See more on this under Acts 24:11.
An orator, one Tertullus ... Having been foiled as a mob, and their forty
conspirators having been left holding the bag, the high priest and company now
tried another approach. "Cunning, assassination and conspiracy having failed, they
tried the tinsel of oratory, attempting to gain their desire by flattery."[3]
Informed the governor against Paul ... The word Luke employed here is a technical
one, having "the nature of a formal indictment."[4]
[1] H. Leo Boles, Commentary on Acts ( ashville: Gospel Advocate, 1953), p. 377.
[2] Sir William M. Ramsay, Pictures of the Apostolic Church (Grand Rapids,

Michigan: Baker Book House, 1959), p. 288.
[3] John Peter Lange, Commentary on Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan
Publishing House), p. 422.
[4] E. H. Plumptre, Ellicott's Commentary on the Holy Bible (Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959), p. 159.
ELLICOTT, "(1) After five days.—The interval may have just allowed time for
messengers to go from Cæsarea to Jerusalem, and for the priests to make their
arrangements and engage their advocate. Possibly, however, the five days may start
from St. Paul’s departure from Jerusalem and this agrees, on the whole, better with
the reckoning of the twelve days from the Apostle’s arrival there, in Acts 24:11.
Descended.—Better, came down, in accordance with the usage of modern English.
A certain orator named Tertullus.—Men of this class were to be found in most of
the provincial towns of the Roman empire, ready to hold a brief for plaintiff or
defendant, and bringing to bear the power of their glib eloquence, as well as their
knowledge of Roman laws, on the mind of the judge. There is not the slightest
ground for supposing, as some have done, that the proceedings were conducted in
Latin, and that while the chief priests were obliged to employ an advocate to speak
in that language, St. Paul, who had never learnt it, was able to speak at once by a
special inspiration. Proceedings before a procurator of Judæa and the provincials
under him were almost of necessity, as in the case of our Lord and Pilate, in Greek.
Had St. Paul spoken in Latin, St. Luke, who records when he spoke in Hebrew (Acts
21:40), and when in Greek (Acts 21:37), was not likely to have passed the fact over;
nor is there any evidence, even on that improbable assumption, that St. Paul
himself, who was, we know, a Roman citizen, had no previous knowledge of the
language. The strained hypothesis breaks down at every point. The name of the
orator may be noted as standing half-way between Tertius and Tertullianus.
Who informed the governor against Paul.—The word is a technical one, and implies
something of the nature of a formal indictment.
BE SO , "Acts 24:1. After five days, Ananias — Who would spare no trouble on
the occasion; descended — To Cesarea, seventy miles from Jerusalem; with several
of the elders — Members of the sanhedrim. It seems the commander of the
horsemen, who brought Paul to Cesarea, was ordered, on his return, to inform the
high-priest and elders at Jerusalem of the day which the governor should fix for
hearing their accusation, and for trying the prisoner. With a certain orator named
Tertullus — Whose business it was to open the cause, and to harangue the governor
in the most agreeable manner that he could; who — That is, all who, as the word
οιτινες implies, not referring to Tertullus only, but to the high-priest and elders
also; informed the governor against Paul — Advanced a general accusation against
him, on which they desired to be more particularly heard.

BURKIT, "Observe here, How Ananias the high-priest, with the elders or heads of
the Jewish council at Jerusalem, travel from thence to Cesarea, a great many miles,
to inform the governor against St. Paul; After five days Ananias descended, &c.
The devil's drudges stick at no pains, spare for no cost, in doing his drudgery. A
persecuting spirit claps wings to a person, it makes him swift in his motion, and
zealous in his application and endeavours.
Observe, 2. How the high-priest carrieth with him one of their most eminent and
eloquent advocates, to implead the innocent apostle.
Satan never miscarries in any of his enterprises and wicked designs for want of fit
tools to carry them on. He hath his Tertullus, an eloquent orator, ready, who could
tune his tongue any way for a large fee. Ananias descended, with a certain orator
named Tertullus, &c.
CO STABLE, "The heat of the Jews' hatred of Paul is obvious from their speedy
trip to Caesarea. The five days seem to describe the period from Paul's arrest in the
temple courtyard to this trial (cf. Acts 24:11; Acts 21:27). The Jews' antagonism is
also clear in that Ananias himself made the trip, and Paul's accusers had hired a
special attorney to present their case. Tertullus (a diminutive form of Tertius;
Romans 16:22) was probably a Hellenistic Jew in view of his Roman name, though
he could have been a Roman Gentile. "Attorney" is the translation of a Greek word
that appears only here in the ew Testament (rhetoros), which means a lawyer who
was especially skillful in oratory.
HAWKER 1-9, "And after five days Ananias the high priest descended with the elders,
and with a certain orator named Tertullus, who informed the governor against Paul. (2)
And when he was called forth, Tertullus began to accuse him, saying, Seeing that by thee
we enjoy great quietness, and that very worthy deeds are done unto this nation by thy
providence, (3) We accept it always, and in all places, most noble Felix, with all
thankfulness. (4) Notwithstanding, that I be not further tedious unto thee, I pray thee
that thou wouldest hear us of thy clemency a few words. (5) For we have found this man
a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and
a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes: (6) Who also hath gone about to profane the
temple: whom we took, and would have judge d according to our law. (7) But the chief
captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands,
(8) Commanding his accusers to come unto thee: by examining of whom thyself mayest
take knowledge of all these things, whereof we accuse him. (9) And the Jews also
assented, saying that these things were so.
In all this flaming speech there is not a single charge except that of being a follower of
Christ, whom by way of contempt they called the Nazarene. A pestilent fellow, and a
mover of sedition, were general words of abuse, and without proof. And although this
orator prefaced his accusation of Paul with a fulsome compliment to Felix, yet the whole
offence of the Apostle was for preaching Christ. And the chief priest, Ananias, and the
Jews, could find nothing beside to criminate the Apostle!
But they were all unconscious, while charging Paul as a ringleader of the sect of the
Nazarenes, what indirect honor they were thereby conferring on the Apostle. If the

Reader will consult my Poor Man’s Concordance, under the article Nazarene, he will
there see the subject treated somewhat largely. I shall only here therefore observe, that
as the Lord Jesus was specially and peculiarly called the Nazarene, being in fact in his
human nature the only Nazarite to God; it was the highest of all possible honors to call
Paul a ringleader of the holy order. The word is derived from Netzar, signifying
separated. And in reference to Christ, it means the peculiar separation of that holy
portion of our nature, underived from the fallen stock, but formed by the overshadowing
power of the Holy Ghost, and sanctified to the vast purpose of union with the Godhead.
So personally and peculiarly is Christ, as Christ, the true Nazarite, yea, the only Nazarite,
to whom all others were but types and shadows, Lam_4:7.
And it is worthy our closest observation, in proof of this, as if Jehovah would have Christ
specially known by this name, that the Lord Jesus is by way of eminency so
distinguished both in heaven and earth, by angels, devils, yea, by the Lord himself, who
sweetly called himself by the name from heaven, when speaking to the Apostle Paul, The
Apostles: Joh_1:45, Angels: Mar_16:6, Roman soldiers: Joh_18:5, The servant maid in
Pilate’s hall: Mat_26:71, Pilate himself: Joh_19:19, Christ’s servants in working
miracles: Act_3:6 and Act_4:10, Devils: Mar_1:24, And our dear Lord himself: Act_
22:8. Reader! these are sweet testimonies to this one great point, when that point is
considered in terms equal to its importance, that Jesus Christ is the one and only
Nazarite to God.
BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR 1-9, "And after five days Ananias the high priest
descended … with a certain orator named Tertullus.
Paul before Felix—a picture of barristerial depravity
1. From his Roman name we judge that Tertullus was a Roman barrister of signal
abilities, and perhaps of great reputation. The Jews, probably, for the most part
being ignorant of Roman law, employed Roman lawyers to represent them in the
courts of justice.
2. The charge is threefold.
(1) Sedition. “A mover of sedition,” literally, “a pestilence, or a pest.”
Demosthenes and Cicero speak of different persons as the pest of the Republic,
the State, the Empire. All the commotions which Paul’s enemies created were laid
to his charge. To the Romans no crime was more heinous than that of sedition,
for they seemed afraid that their vast empire might in some part give way.
(2) Heresy. “A ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.” This charge has the merit
of truth.
(3) Sacrilege (verse 6). This was a foul calumny. After these charges this clever
but unprincipled advocate does two things:
(a) Implies that the Sanhedrin would have judged Paul righteously if Lysias
had not interposed.
(b) He gets the Jews to assent to all he had stated.
3. This piece of history presents to us a picture of a corrupt barrister. We see him
doing things which disgrace his profession.
I. Venally adopting a bad cause. What was his motive? Love of right—chivalry? No,

money. He sold his services to the cause—
1. Of the strong against the weak.
2. Of the wrong against the right. The English courts exhibit something analogous to
this sometimes. There are eminent members of the bar, some of whom are
wonderfully pious in public meetings, whose services in a bad cause can be easily
secured by a handsome fee.
II. Wickedly advocating a bad cause. In his advocacy we discover—
1. Base flattery (verses 2, 3).
2. Flagrant falsehood. He lays, as we have seen, three false charges against him.
3. Suppressed truth. He said nothing about the conspiracy (Act_23:14-15). The man
who suppresses a truth when its declaration is demanded by the nature of the case is
guilty of falsehood, is a deceiver. (D. Thomas, D. D.)
Paul misunderstood
The other day Paul was mistaken for “that Egyptian, which before these days made an
uproar,” etc. Today a hired orator describes Paul as “a pestilent fellow,” etc. Does this
tally with what you know about him?
1. There is no cause too bad not to hire an advocate to represent it. This Tertullus
was the genius of abuse; the worse the cause the glibber his tongue. He lives today,
and takes the same silver for his flippant eloquence.
2. How possible it is utterly to misconceive a great character! There is a key to every
character, and if you do not get the one you never can understand the other. The
difficulty of the man of one idea is to understand any other man who has two. Some
of us are so easy to understand, simply because there is so little to be comprehended.
No character was so much misunderstood as Jesus Christ’s; and He said, “If they
have called the Master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them
of His household!”
3. Here, too, is the possibility of excluding from the mind every thought
characterised by breadth and charity. It does not occur to the paid pleader to say,
“This man is insane, romantic, has a craze about a theory too lofty or immaterial for
the present state of things.” Sometimes a charitable spirit will take some such view.
But Tertullus knew that he was talking to a man who could only understand coarse
epithets, for he himself, though a judge in those times, was the basest of his tribe.
Yet, without viciousness, there may be great narrowness. You will contract that
narrowness if you do not sometimes come out of your little village into great London.
I am not wishful to make every man into a Tertullus who opposes apostolic life and
thought. It is possible honestly to oppose even Paul, but the honesty itself is an
expression of mental contractedness. What is perfectly right to the eye within given
points may be astronomically wrong when the whole occasion is taken in. So men
may be parochially right and imperially wrong; men may be perfectly orthodox
within the limits of a creed and unpardonably heterodox within the compass of a
faith.
4. How wonderful it is that even Tertullus is obliged to compliment the man whom
he was paid to abuse!

(1) He was a pestilent fellow. There was nothing negative about Paul, and
Tertullus confirms that view. Paul was not a quiet character; wherever he was he
was astir. According to Tertullus, Paul was also “a mover of sedition, etc., among
all the Jews throughout the world”—a sentence intended to touch the ear of the
Roman judge. Felix might well listen when the man before him was accused of
being an insurrectionist. That he was “a mower of sedition” in the sense implied
by Tertullus was not true, but Paul was the prince of revolutionists. Every
Christian is a revolutionist. Christianity tears up the foundations, and, after this,
begins to build for eternity.
(3) Paul was “a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.” So the prisoner is not
made into a little man even by the paid accuser. Paul never could be held in
contempt. Put him where you will, he becomes the principal man in that
company. A rich banker said, when someone asked him questions regarding his
fortune, “I cannot help it; if I were tonight stripped and turned into the streets of
Copenhagen, I would be as rich in ten years as I am now—I cannot help it.” Paul
could not help being the first man of every company.
5. What is the inevitable issue of all narrow-mindedness. Falsehood (verse 6).
Imagine Tertullus being excited regarding the purity of the temple! How suddenly
some men become pious! What a genius is hypocrisy! You cannot misrepresent the
people in the temple and yet be concerned honestly for the temple itself. Conclusion:
The incident would hardly be worth dwelling upon were it confined to its own four
corners, but it is a typical instance repeated continually in our day. The good
develops the bad ever. Let a George Fox arise, and how will he be characterised,
except as “a pestilent fellow,” “a mover of sedition,” and “a ringleader of a sect”? Let
a John Wesley arise, or a George Whitefield, a John Bunyan, or a John Nelson; read
the early annals of English Christianity and evangelism; read the history of the early
Methodist preachers, and you will find that every age that has brought a Paul has
brought along with him a Tertullus. Thank God! nothing but epithets can be hurled
against Christianity, yet Christianity stands up today queenly, pure, stainless—every
stone thrown at her lying at her feet. (J. Parker, D. D.)
The opening statement of a prosecuting, counsel
The statement of Tertullus was supposed to convey to the judge an impartial description
of the prisoner, and a just outline of his offence. Anyone not acquainted with Paul would
conclude that he was a sort of Barabbas. And if one had remonstrated with the eloquent
lawyer he, with a bland smile rippling over his countenance, would have justified himself
by repeating the stereotyped phrase, “Sir, I have spoken according to the instructions
given me in my brief.”
The speech of Tertullus
I. Shows that even then noble men connected with the gospel were branded with a name
of scornful contempt. Coining a name of scorn is not a modern invention. As a rule—
1. In the name there lies concealed a pain-inflicting sting. What a sting was in the
name “Nazarenes!”
2. And such names are generally published and circulated by persons who might be
expected to act differently—Priests, Scribes, Pharisees and religious persons. And
today it is not from atheists, but from persons nominally religious, that Christians

receive the cruellest thrusts of scorn.
II. Reminds us that different interpretations may be given of the work done by one man.
Here Paul was a walking pest, a scatterer of contagious evil; elsewhere men could not
find words strong enough to express the grateful joy they felt as they witnessed the
apostle’s work. Thus is it today.
III. Starts the reflection that the position and pursuits of a man may be the opposite at
one period of life from what they have been at another. Twenty-five years before Paul
was the ringleader of the opposition raised by priests and Scribes against the sect of the
Nazarenes. Such a change is not of rare occurrence now.
IV. Gave indirect testimony to the thoroughness of the life and work of the apostle. As
Paul heard himself spoken of as being “a pestilent fellow,” etc., a moment’s reflection
would help him to gather the honey of consolation from the lawyer’s rhetoric. All that
was said against Paul testified to his zeal and influence as a Christian worker. Had he
been an idler the enemies of the Cross would not have thought it necessary to haul him
to a bar of justice. If a man finds the world fraternising with him, he may suspect that he
is not so loyally zealous in Christ’s cause as he should be; but if some worldly Tertullus
storms at him he may console himself that his service is a work which incenses a sin-
loving world.
V. Suggests that sectarian zeal may blind men to their true and best interest. The priests
could not conceive it possible that Paul might be right, and they, after all, might be
wrong. In fact, they would rather see Paul put to death than have their useless creed and
ritual superseded by a gospel which would bring to light life and immortality. The same
spirit reigns rampantly among the bigots who today ask, “Can there any good thing come
out of Nazareth?” (C. Chapman, M. A.)
Paul and Tertullus: or false eloquence and true
1. False eloquence is flattering: it speaks to please the hearers (verse 3). True
eloquence does not flatter: it addresses the heart and conscience.
2. False eloquence is hypocritical: it dwells only on the lips; it is honey in the mouth
and gall in the heart (verses 5, 6). True eloquence does not dissimulate: it proceeds
from the heart and speaks as it feels (verses 10, 14-16).
3. False eloquence is deceitful: it makes black white and white black (verses 5, 6).
True eloquence does not lie: it denies only what is false (verse 13), but confesses what
is true (verses 14, 15), and makes the matter speak instead of the words (verses 16-
20). (K. Gerok.)
Eloquence true and false
Eloquence, considered as the power of giving a luminous and impressive statement of
truth; of marshalling our arguments in distinct and forceable order; of portraying virtue
in all its charms, and vice in all its deformity; of defending the innocent against
oppression and calumny, and dragging forth the wicked to execration and punishment;
eloquence employed in these important offices, and uniting with the clear deductions of
reason and experience, all the energies of language, and all the ornaments of an ardent
and cultivated imagination, is undoubtedly one of the noblest and most enviable talents

which a mortal can possess. It may uphold the religion and morals of a nation; it may
save a sinking state from ruin. But when it aims at exciting the passions, without
enlightening the mind; when, with its false colouring, it makes the worse appear the
better cause; when it corrupts the imagination and undermines the principles of
morality; when, like a base prostitute, it offers itself to every person who demands its
assistance; when it flatters where it should reprove, and condemns what it ought to
applaud and defend; it is more noxious than the pestilence which infects the air that we
breathe, or than the lightning which blinds us with its glare and overwhelms us with its
irresistible force. (J. Dick, D. D.)
Eloquence perverted
Eloquence is the gift of God; but eloquence in a bad man is poison in a golden cup. (St.
Augustine.)
Orators and preachers
God’s preachers are not orators of acquired words, but witnesses of revealed facts. (R.
Besser, D. D.)
Sanguinary orators
We have a class of speakers in this country who are silent on all great social and
cosmopolitan topics, but make themselves heard and felt the moment any matter of
warlike fascination comes to the surface. All other questions float down the stream of
public opinion without causing them even to indicate their existence. They remind one
of those animals noted for their bloodthirstiness in the warm regions of Africa—the
caribitos (Serrasalmo). Their haunts are at the bottom of rivers, but a few drops of blood
suffice to bring them by thousands to the surface; and Humboldt himself mentions that
in some part of the Apure, where the water was perfectly clear and no fish were visible,
he could in a few minutes bring together a cloud of caribitos by casting in some bits of
flesh. With equal ease we can collect all our war orators if we only give them one
sanguinary pretext. (Scientific Illustrations.)
Lawyers without a perception of justice
Lawyers generally know too much of law to have a very clear perception of justice, just as
divines are often too deeply read in theology to appreciate the full grandeur and the
proper tendencies of religion. Losing the abstract in the concrete, the comprehensive in
the technical, the principal in its accessories, both are in the predicament of the rustic
who could not see London for the houses.

2 When Paul was called in, Tertullus presented his
case before Felix: “We have enjoyed a long period
of peace under you, and your foresight has
brought about reforms in this nation.
BAR ES, "And when he was called forth - When Paul was called forth from
prison. See Act_23:35.
We enjoy great quietness - This was said in the customary style of flatterers and
orators, to conciliate the favor of the judge, and is strikingly in contrast with the more
honest and straight forward introduction in reply of Paul, Act_24:10. Though it was said
for flattery, and though Felix was in many respects an unprincipled man, yet it was true
that his administration had been the means of producing much peace and order in
Judea, and that he had done many things that tended to promote the welfare of the
nation. In particular, he had arrested a band of robbers, with Eleazar at their head,
whom he had sent to Rome to be punished (Josephus, Antiq., book 20, chapter 8); he
had arrested the Egyptian false prophet who had led out 4,000 men into the wilderness,
and who threatened the peace of Judea (see the note on Act_21:38); and he had
repressed a sedition which arose between the inhabitants of Caesarea and of Syria
(Josephus, Jewish Wars, book 2, chapter 13, section 2).
Very worthy deeds - Acts that tended much to promote the peace and security of
the people. He referred to those which have just been mentioned as having been
accomplished by Felix, particularly his success in suppressing riots and seditions; and
as, in the view of the Jews, the case of Paul was another instance of a similar kind, he
appealed to him with the more confidence that he would suppress that also.
By thy providence - By thy foresight,” skill, vigilance, prudence.
CLARKE, "Tertullus began to accuse him - There are three parts in this oration
of Tertullus: -
1. The exordium.
2. The proposition.
3. The conclusion.
The exordium contains the praise of Felix and his administration, merely for the purpose
of conciliating his esteem, Act_24:2-4; The proposition is contained in Act_24:5. The
narration and conclusion, in Act_24:6-8.
By thee we enjoy great quietness - As bad a governor as Felix most certainly was,
he rendered some services to Judea. The country had long been infested with robbers;
and a very formidable banditti of this kind, under one Eliezar, he entirely suppressed.
Joseph. Antiq. lib. xx. cap. 6; Bell. lib. ii, cap. 22. He also suppressed the sedition raised
by an Egyptian impostor, who had seduced 30,000 men; see on Act_21:38 (note). He
had also quelled a very afflictive disturbance which took place between the Syrians and

the Jews of Caesarea. On this ground Tertullus said, By thee we enjoy great quietness;
and illustrious deeds are done to this nation by thy prudent administration. This was all
true; but, notwithstanding this, he is well known from his own historians, and from
Josephus, to have been not only a very bad man, but also a very bad governor. He was
mercenary, oppressive, and cruel; and of all these the Jews brought proofs to Nero,
before whom they accused him; and, had it not been for the interest and influence of his
brother Pallas; he had been certainly ruined.
GILL, "And when he was called forth,.... Not Tertullus the orator; for this is not to
be understood of him, and of his being admitted to speak, as is thought by some, but the
Apostle Paul; which is put out of doubt by the Vulgate Latin version, which reads, "and
Paul being cited"; he was ordered to be brought out of custody into the court, to hear his
indictment, and answer for himself:
Tertullus began to accuse him; to set forth his crimes, which he introduced with a
flattering preface to Felix:
saying, seeing that by thee we enjoy great quietness, and that very worthy
deeds are done unto this nation by thy providence; very likely he might refer to
his purging the country of robbers; he took Eleazar, the chief of them, who had infested
the country for twenty years, and many others with him, whom he sent bound to Rome,
and others of them he crucified; and whereas there arose up another set of men, under a
pretence of religion, who led people into the wilderness, signifying, that God would show
them some signs of liberty; these seemed, to Felix, to sow the seeds, and lay the
foundation of division and defection, which showed his sagacity, and which Tertullus
here calls "providence"; wherefore, foreseeing what would be the consequence of these
things, if not timely prevented, he sent armed men, horse and foot, and destroyed great
numbers of them; and particularly he put to flight the Egyptian false prophet, who had
collected thirty thousand men together, and dispersed them (n); and yet his government
was attended with cruelty and avarice; witness the murder of Jonathan the high priest,
by a sort of cut throats, who were connived at by him; particularly by the means of Dora
his friend, whom he corrupted; and the pillaging of many of the inhabitants of Caesarea
(o): so that this was a piece of flattery, used by Tertullus, to catch his ear, and gain
attention, and insinuate himself into his affections.
HE RY, "II. We have here the cause pleaded against Paul. The prosecutors brought
with them a certain orator named Tertullus, a Roman, skilled in the Roman law and
language, and therefore fittest to be employed in a cause before the Roman governor,
and most likely to gain favour. The high priest, and elders, though they had their own
hearts spiteful enough, did not think their own tongues sharp enough, and therefore
retained Tertullus, who probably was noted for a satirical wit, to be of counsel for them;
and, no doubt, they gave him a good fee, probably out of the treasury of the temple,
which they had the command of, it being a cause wherein the church was concerned and
which therefore must not be starved. Paul is set to the bas before Felix the governor: He
was called forth, Act_24:2. Tertullus's business is, on the behalf of the prosecutors, to
open the information against him, and he is a man that will say any thing for his fee;
mercenary tongues will do so. No cause so unjust but can find advocates to plead it; and
yet we hope many advocates are so just as not knowingly to patronise an unrighteous
cause, but Tertullus was none of these: his speech (or at least an abstract of it, for it

appears, by Tully's orations, that the Roman lawyers, on such occasions, used to make
long harangues) is here reported, and it is made up of flattery and falsehood; it calls evil
good, and good evil.
1. One of the worst of men is here applauded as one of the best of benefactors, only
because he was the judge. Felix is represented by the historians of his own nation, as well
as by Josephus the Jew, as a very bad man, who, depending upon his interest in the
court, allowed himself in all manner of wickedness, was a great oppressor, very cruel,
and very covetous, patronising and protecting assassins. - Joseph. Antiq. 20.162-165.
And yet Tertullus here, in the name of the high priest and elders, and probably by
particular directions from them and according to the instructions of his breviate,
compliments him, and extols him to the sky, as if he were so good a magistrate as never
was the like: and this comes the worse from the high priest and the elders, because he
had given a late instance of his enmity to their order; for Jonathan the high priest, or one
of the chief priests, having offended him by too free an invective against the tyranny of
his government, he had him murdered by some villains whom he hired for that purpose
who afterwards did the like for others, as they were hired: Cujus facinoris quia nemo
ultor extitit, invitati hac licentia sicarii multos confodiebant, alios propter privatas
inimicitias, alios conducti pecunia, etiam in ipso templo - No one being found to punish
such enormous wickedness, the assassins, encouraged by this impunity, stabbed
several persons, some from personal malice, some for hire, and that even in the temple
itself. An yet, to engage him to gratify their malice against Paul, and to return them that
kindness for their kindness in overlooking all this, they magnify him as the greatest
blessing to their church and nation that ever came among them.
(1.) They are very ready to own it (Act_24:2): “By thee we, of the church, enjoy great
quietness, and we look upon thee as our patron and protector, and very worthy deeds
are done, from time to time, to the whole nation of the Jews, by thy providence - thy
wisdom, and care, and vigilance.” To give him his due, he had been instrumental to
suppress the insurrection of that Egyptian of whom the chief captain spoke (Act_21:38);
but will the praise of that screen him from the just reproach of his tyranny and
oppression afterwards? See here, [1.] The unhappiness of great men, and a great
unhappiness it is, to have their services magnified beyond measure, and never to be
faithfully told of their faults; and hereby they are hardened and encouraged in evil. [2.]
The policy of bad men, by flattering princes in what they do amiss to draw them in to do
worse. The bishops of Rome got themselves confirmed in their exorbitant church power,
and have been assisted in persecuting the servants of Christ, by flattering and caressing
usurpers and tyrants, and so making them the tools of their malice, as the high priest, by
his compliments, designed to make Felix here.
JAMISO , "Seeing that by thee we enjoy great quietness, etc. — In this
fulsome flattery there was a semblance of truth: nothing more. Felix acted with a degree
of vigor and success in suppressing lawless violence [Josephus, Antiquities, 20.8.4;
confirmed by Tacitus, Annals, 12.54].
by thy providence — a phrase applied to the administration of the emperors.
CALVI , "2.Seeing we live in great peace. Tertullus useth a preface nothing
appertinent to the matter; because he commendeth Felix wisdom and virtues that he
may purchase favor. Therefore it is a filthy and flattering exordium. ot that I am
of their mind who reprehend Tertullus for speaking the judge fair, and for seeking

to win his favor. For it is not always disagreeing with the right and lawful form of
pleading to commend the judge; and there may reasons be brought on both sides (as
they say) touching this matter. But I mislike nothing but this which is altogether
corrupt. For the rhetorician doth insinuate himself under false praises, that he may
darken the matter which is called in question. For to what end doth he speak of
peace and a well ordered state, save only that Felix may think that the safety of
Judea consisteth in condemning Paul, and that he may examine the matter no
further? Moreover, it appeareth by Josephus, how covetously, cruelly, and
voluptuously, Felix behaved himself in that province. The unworthy and tragical
murdering of the highest priest, Jonathas, because he set himself against his
dissolute tyranny, was already past; − (564) and, finally, almost at the very same
time, Claudius Caesar was enforced with the complaints of the whole nation, to put
Festus in his place, and to call him to answer for himself. −
Therefore we see how shamefully this orator did lie. And seeing all Paul’s
adversaries sing the same song, we see that they be blinded with hatred and malice,
and that they treacherously betray the state of their country; neither do they pass
what befall them so Paul may die the death. −
Where Erasmus translateth it, Many things are well done, the old interpreter
seemeth to come nearer unto Paul’s meaning, who saith, that κατορθωµατα are
wrought, which signifieth as much as reformations or dressings. Therefore Tertullus
commendeth the industry of Felix, because he had cleansed Judea from many
corruptions, and he restored many things which would otherwise have decayed; −
(565) to wit, to the end he may the more greedily seek to purchase the favor of the
nation (which he knew was otherwise offended with him) by the death of one man. −
“ Jam praecesserat,” had already been committed.
“ Quae alioqui pessum ibant,” which were otherwise becoming worse.
COFFMA , "As De Welt said, "Tertullus was doing his mercenary best!"[5] Some
of the "evils" which Felix had corrected were well known, for example, his defeat of
the Egyptian false prophet (Acts 21:38). Tertullus did not mention the murder of
Jonathan the high priest. But of course, "If a man lacks arguments, he will flatter
the judge."Acts 2pp. 245.">[6] "Felix was a man of the most infamous character,
and a plague to all the provinces over which he presided."[7]
[5] Don DeWelt, Acts Made Actual (Joplin, Missouri: College Press, 1958), p. 303.
Acts 2pp. 245.">[6] R. Tuck, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Wm. B. Eerdmans, Publishers, 1950), Vol. 18, Acts 2pp. 245.
[7] John Wesley, ew Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker
Book House), in loco.
COKE, "Acts 24:2. Tertullus began to accuse him,— Almost every word of this

oration is false,—the accusation of St. Paul, the encomium on the government of
Felix, and the declaration of a lawful intention in what they had done and
attempted. When he says, We enjoy great quietness by thee, he probably refers to
what Felix had done to clear the country of robbers and impostors; for all the
historians agree that he was in every other respect a man of so bad a character, that
his government was a plague to all the provinces over which he presided; and as for
Judea, its state under Felix was so far from being what Tertullus here represents,
that Josephus, besides what he says of the barbarous and cowardly assassination of
Jonathan the high-priest by his means, declares, that the Jews accused himbefore
ero of unsufferable oppressions; and had certainly ruined him, if his brother
Pallas had not interposed in his favour. We may read the next clause, and illustrious
deeds are happily done to this nation by your prudent administration, which is the
exact rendering of the original.
ELLICOTT, "(2) Seeing that by thee we enjoy great quietness.—The orator had, it
would seem, learnt the trick of his class, and begins with propitiating the judge by
flattery. The administration of Felix did not present much opening for panegyric,
but he had at least taken strong measures to put down the gangs of sicarii and
brigands by whom Palestine was infested (Jos. Ant. xx. 8, § 5; Wars, ii. 13, § 2), and
Tertullus shows his skill in the emphasis which he lays on “quietness.” By a
somewhat interesting coincidence, Tacitus (Ann. xii. 54), after narrating the
disturbances caused by a quarrel between Felix, backed by the Samaritans, and
Ventidius Cumanus, who had been appointed as governor of Galilee, ends his
statement by relating that Felix was supported by Quadratus, the president of Syria,
“et quies provinciæ reddita.”
That very worthy deeds . . .—Better, reforms, or improvements; the better MSS.
giving a word which expresses this meaning, and the others one which implies it.
This, as before, represents one aspect of the procurator’s administration. On the
other hand, within two years of this time, he was recalled from his province, accused
by the Jews at Rome, and only escaped punishment by the intervention of his
brother Pallas, then as high in favour with ero as he had been with Claudius (Jos.
Ant. xx. 8, § 10).
By thy providence . . .—The Greek word had at this time, like the English, a
somewhat higher sense than “prudence” or “forethought.” Men spoke then, as now,
of the “providence” of God, and the tendency to clothe the emperors with quasi-
divine attributes led to the appearance of this word—“the providence of Cæsar”—
on their coins and on medals struck in their honour. Tertullus, after his manner,
goes one step further, and extends the term to the procurator of Judæa.
BE SO , "Acts 24:2-3. And when he — Paul; was called forth — To hear the
charge preferred against him, and make his defence; Tertullus began to accuse him
— In an oration, almost every word of which was false; the accusation of Paul; the
encomium on the government of Felix; and the declaration of a lawful intention in
what they had done and attempted. Seeing that by thee we enjoy great quietness —
Thus this orator, to induce the governor to give countenance to their cause, and to

punish Paul as the disturber of the public peace, compliments him on the wisdom
and vigour of his administration; but in so doing he is guilty of using the most
barefaced flattery; for although Felix had repressed the Sicarii, and other robbers,
he was himself a great oppressor of the nation, by the cruelty and injustice of his
administration, all historians agreeing, that he was a man of so bad a character, that
his government was a plague to all the provinces over which he presided. And as for
Judea, its state under him was so far from being what Tertullus here represents,
that Josephus (besides what he says of the barbarous and cowardly assassination of
Jonathan the high-priest by his means) declares, that the Jews accused him before
ero of insufferable oppressions, and had certainly ruined him if his brother Pallas
had not interposed in his favour. (Antiq., Acts 20:8.) And that very worthy deeds —
Greek, κατορθωµατων γινοµενον, illustrious deeds; are done unto this nation —
The whole Jewish nation; by thy providence — The continual care and vigilance of
thy prudent administration. See here, reader; 1st, The unhappiness of great men
who have their services magnified beyond measure, and are seldom or never
faithfully told of their faults; in consequence of which they are encouraged and
hardened in evil. 2d, The policy of bad men; who flatter princes in what they do
amiss, to draw them in to act still worse. The bishops of Rome obtained their
exorbitant power, and have been assisted in persecuting the servants of Christ, by
flattering and caressing usurpers and tyrants, and making them such tools of their
malice, as the high-priest, by his compliments, designed to make Felix here! We
accept it always, and in all places — Everywhere and at all times we embrace it;
most noble Felix with all thankfulness — If it had been true, that Felix was such a
governor, it would have been just that they should have thus accepted his good
offices, with all thankfulness. The benefits which we enjoy by government, especially
when administered by wise and good governors, is what we ought to be thankful for
both to God and man; this is part of the honour due to magistrates, to acknowledge
the quietness we enjoy under their protection, and the worthy deeds done by their
prudence.
BURKIT, "Observe here, St. Paul the prisoner being called forth, Tertullus, the
orator, began to show his art by a flattering insinuation, which mightily prevails
with men of mean and corrupt minds. There is no cause so foul and bad, but some
will be found to plead it; yea, to justify and defend it. And if so, judges had need be
wise, as the angels of God, discerning between truth and falsehood.
Observe farther, how Tertullus seeks to gain the judges favour by flattery and
falsehood: to win judges by flattery hath ever by false accusers been taken for the
surest way of sucess; but after all, flattery is a very provoking and wrath-procuring
sin; and it is hard to say, which is most dangerous, to receive flattery or to give it.
When men give much glory to man, 'tis hard for man to give that glory back again
to God. 'Tis hell and death to flatter sinners, or suffer ourselves to be flattered by
them.
Observe, lastly, That bad government is better than no government; tyranny itself is
better than anarchy. The Jews were not now their own masters, but tributaries to
the Romans. Yet Tertullus acknowledges, many worthy deeds were done unto their

nation by the prudence of the Roman governor: "Seeing that by thee we enjoy great
quietness, and that very worthy deeds are done unto this nation by thy providence,
we accept it always, and in all places, most noble Felix."
PETT 2-3, "It may be that the arrogant High Priest, who may well have despised
Felix, thought that by using Tertullus he could impress him by the use of a
professional, and blind him with science so that he would yield the case rather than
look foolish. But he was to learn that Felix, while a rogue, was no fool.
The case presented by Tertullus is so clearly artificial and flattering that it is
obviously the work of a trained advocate who is seeking to win over the judge and
present the best case, and Felix would have recognised this. He was a brutal man
and it is doubtful if flatteries would impress him. He knew quite well what the
people thought about him, and he knew Ananias the High Priest. They were two of a
kind, this high-bred Jew and this bumped up ex-slave.
First we have the flattery, which is aimed at winning over the judge. To hear it you
would have thought that Palestine was enjoying unprecedented peace, instead of
being ever on the brink of violence and in a ferment of hatred, with Felix one of the
most unpopular procurators to date.
‘We enjoy much peace.’ Palestine had never been a more dangerous place except at
time of war, although it is true that Felix did seek to exterminate what he saw as
brigands. But they were often religious enthusiasts, and while the High Priest would
have had as little patience with them as he had, many of the people saw a number of
them as patriots.
‘By the providence.’ A carefully chosen word which can fit in with whatever Felix
believes. Possibly Roma or whichever god Felix happened to believe in. Or perhaps
Felix’s own providence. Whichever way it is, Palestine are lucky to have such a
ruler!
‘Evils are corrected for this nation, we accept it in all ways and in all places, most
excellent Felix, with all thankfulness.” ’ He is sure that Felix, who is so adept at
correcting all evils in the nation, and to whom they are all so grateful, will now also
deal with the one he is about to describe.
CO STABLE 2-4, "Flattery of officials in formal speeches was fashionable in
Paul's day, and Tertullus heaped praise on Felix. The title "most excellent" usually
applied to men who enjoyed a higher social rank than Felix. Felix was a fierce ruler
and the "peace" that existed was a result of terror rather than tranquillity.
Tertullus praised Felix for being a peacemaker in preparation for his charge that
Paul was a disturber of the peace (Acts 24:5-6). Felix's "reforms" were more like
purges. Speakers also usually promised to be brief, which promises then as now they
did not always keep.

MACLARE , "A LOYAL TRIBUTE
These words were addressed by a professional flatterer to one of the worst of the many
bad Roman governors of Syria. The speaker knew that he was lying, the listeners knew
that the eulogium was undeserved; and among all the crowd of bystanders there was
perhaps not a man who did not hate the governor, and would not have been glad to see
him lying dead with a dagger in his breast.
But both the fawning Tertullus and the oppressor Felix knew in their heart of hearts that
the words described what a governor ought to be. And though they are touched with the
servility which is not loyalty, and embrace a conception of the royal function attributing
far more to the personal influence of a monarch than our State permits, still we may
venture to take them as the starting-point for two or three considerations suggested to
us, by the celebrations of the past week.
I almost feel that I owe an apology for turning to that subject, for everything that can be
said about it has been said far better than I can say it. But still, partly because my silence
might be misunderstood, and partly because an opportunity is thereby afforded for
looking from a Christian point of view at one or two subjects that do not ordinarily come
within the scope of one’s ministry, I venture to choose such a text now.
I. The first thing that I would take it as suggesting is the grateful
acknowledgment of personal worth.
I suppose the world never saw a national rejoicing like that through which we have
passed. For the reigns that have been long enough to admit of it have been few, and
those in which intelligently and sincerely a whole nation of freemen could participate
have been fewer still. But now all England has been one; whatever our divisions of
opinion, there have been no divisions here. Not only have the bonfires flared from hill to
hill in this little island of ours, but all over the world, into every out of the way corner
where our widely-spread race has penetrated, the same sentiment has extended. All have
yielded to the common impulse, the rejoicing of a free people in a good Queen.
That common sentiment has embraced two things, the office and the person. There was
a pathetic contrast between these two when that sad-hearted widow walked alone up the
nave of Westminster Abbey, and took her seat on the stone of destiny on which for a
millennium kings have been crowned. The contrast heightened both the reverence due to
the office and the sympathy due to the woman. The Sovereign is the visible expression of
national power, the incarnation of England, living history, the outcome of all the past,
the representative of harmonised and blended freedom and law, a powerful social
influence from which much good might flow, a moderating and uniting power amidst
fierce partisan bitterness and hate, a check against rash change. There is no nobler office
upon earth.
And when, as is the case in this long reign, that office has been filled with some
consciousness of its responsibilities, the recognition of the fact is no flattery but simple
duty. We cannot attribute to the personal initiative of the Queen the great and beneficent
changes which have coincided with her reign. Thank God, no monarch can make or mar
England now. But this we can say,
‘Her court was pure, her life serene.’
A life touched with many gracious womanly charities, delighting in simple country
pleasures, not strange to the homes of the poor, quick to sympathise with sorrow,
especially the humblest, as many a weeping widow at a pit mouth has thankfully felt;

sternly repressive of some forms of vice in high places, and, as we may believe, not
ignorant of the great Comforter nor disobedient to the King of kings,-for such a royal life
a nation may well be thankful. We outsiders do not know how far personal influence
from the throne has in any case restrained or furthered national action, but if it be true,
as is alleged, that twice in her reign the Queen has kept England from the sin and folly of
war, once from a fratricidal conflict with the great new England across the Atlantic, then
we owe her much. If in later years that life has somewhat shrunk into itself and sat silent,
with Grief for a companion, those who know a like desolation will understand, and even
the happy may honour an undying love and respect the seclusion of an undying sorrow.
So I say: ‘Forasmuch as under thee we enjoy great quietness, we accept it with all
thankfulness.’
II. My text may suggest for us a wider view of progress which, although not
initiated by the Queen, has coincided with her fifty years’ reign.
In the Revised Version, instead of ‘worthy deeds are done,’ we read ‘evils are corrected’;
and that is the true rendering. The double function which is here attributed falsely to an
oppressive tyrant is the ancient ideal of monarchy-first, that it shall repress disorders
and secure tranquillity within the borders and across the frontiers; and second, that
abuses and evils shall be corrected by the foresight of the monarch.
Now, in regard to both these functions we have learned that a nation can do them a great
deal better than a sovereign. And so when we speak of progress during this fifty years’
reign, we largely mean the progress which England in its toiling millions and in its
thinking few has won for itself. Let me in very brief words try to touch upon the salient
points of that progress for which as members of the nation it becomes us as Christian
people to be thankful. Enough hosannas have been sung already, and I need not add my
poor voice to them, about material progress and commercial prosperity and the growth
of manufacturing industry and inventions and all the rest of it. I do not for a moment
mean to depreciate these, but it is of more importance that a telegraph should have
something to say than that it should be able to speak across the waters, and ‘man doth
not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.’ We
who live in a great commercial community and know how solid comfort and hope and
gladness are all contingent, in millions of humble homes, upon the manufacturing
industry of these districts, shall never be likely to underrate the enormous expansion in
national industry, and the consequent enormous increase in national wealth, which
belongs to this last half century. I need say nothing about these.
Let me remind you, and I can only do it in a sentence or two, of more important changes
in these fifty years. English manners and morals have been bettered, much of savagery
and coarseness has been got rid of; low, cruel amusements have been abandoned.
Thanks to the great Total Abstinence movement very largely, the national conscience has
been stirred in regard to the great national sin of intoxication. A national system of
education has come into operation and is working wonders in this land. Newspapers and
books are cheapened; political freedom has been extended and ‘broadened slowly down,’
as is safe, ‘from precedent to precedent,’ so that no party thinks now of reversing any of
the changes, howsoever fiercely they were contested ere they were won. Religious
thought has widened, the sects have come nearer each other, men have passed from out
of a hard doctrinal Christianity, in which the person of Christ was buried beneath the
cobwebs of theology, into a far freer and a far more Christ-regarding and Christ-centred
faith. And if we are to adopt such a point of view as the brave Apostle Paul took, the
antagonism against religion, which is a marked feature of our generation, and contrasts
singularly with the sleepy acquiescence of fifty years ago, is to be put down to the credit

side of the account. ‘For,’ he said, like a bold man believing that he had an irrefragable
truth in his hands, ‘I will tarry here, for a great door and an effectual is opened, and
there are many adversaries.’ Wherever a whole nation is interested and stirred about
religious subjects, even though it may be in contradiction and antagonism, God’s truth
can fight opposition far better than it can contend with indifference. Then if we look
upon our churches, whilst there is amongst them all abounding worldliness much to be
deplored, there is also, thank God, springing up amongst us a new consciousness of
responsibility, which is not confined to Christian people, for the condition of the poor
and the degraded around us; and everywhere we see good men and women trying to
stretch their hands across these awful gulfs in our social system which make such a
danger in our modern life, and to reclaim the outcasts of our cities, the most hopeless of
all the heathen on the face of the earth. These things, on which I have touched with the
lightest hand, all taken together do make a picture for which we may be heartily
thankful.
Only, brethren, let us remember that that sort of talk about England’s progress may very
speedily become offensive self-conceit, and a measuring of ourselves with ludicrous self-
satisfaction against all other nations. There is a bastard patriotism which has been very
loud-mouthed in these last days, of which wise men should beware.
Further, such a contemplation of the elements of national progress, which we owe to no
monarch and to no legislature, but largely to the indomitable pluck and energy of our
people, to Anglo-Saxon persistence not knowing when it is beaten, and to the patient
meditation of thoughtful minds and the self-denying efforts of good philanthropical and
religious people-such a contemplation, I say, may come between us and the recognition
of the highest source from which it flows, and be corrupted into forgetfulness of God.
‘Beware lest when thou hast eaten and art full, and thy silver and thy gold is multiplied,
and all that thou hast is multiplied, then thine heart be lifted up, and thou forget the
Lord thy God. . . and thou say in thine heart, My power, and the might of mine hand,
hath gotten me this wealth. But thou shalt remember the Lord thy God, for it is He that
giveth thee power to get wealth.’
And the last caution that I would put in here is, let us beware lest the hosannas over
national progress shall be turned into ‘Rest and be thankful,’ or shall ever come in the
way of the strenuous and persistent reaching forth to the fair ideal that lies so far before
us.
III. That leads me to the last point on which I would say a word, viz., that my
text with its reference to the correction of evils, as one of the twin functions
of the monarch, naturally suggests to us the thought which should follow all
recognition of progress in the past-the consideration of what yet remains to
be done.
A great controversy has been going on, or at least a remarkable difference of opinion has
been expressed in recent months by two of the greatest minds and clearest heads in
England; one of our greatest poets and one of our greatest statesmen. The one looking
back over sixty years sees but foiled aspirations and present devildom and misery. The
other looking back over the same period sees accomplished dreams and the prophecy of
further progress. It is not for me to enter upon the strife between such authorities. Both
are right. Much has been achieved. ‘There remaineth yet very much land to be
possessed.’ Whatever have been the victories and the blessings of the past, there are
rotten places in our social state which, if not cauterised and healed, will break out into
widespread and virulent sores. There are dangers in the near future which may well task
the skill of the bravest and the faith of the most trustful. There are clouds on the horizon

which may speedily turn jubilations into lamentations, and the best security against
these is that each of us in his place, as a unit however insignificant in the great body
politic, should use our little influence on the side that makes for righteousness, and see
to it that we leave some small corner of this England, which God has given us in charge,
sweeter and holier because of our lives. The ideal for you Christian men and women is
the organisation of society on Christian principles. Have we got to that yet, or within
sight of it, do you suppose? Look round you. Does anybody believe that the present
arrangements in connection with unrestricted competition and the distribution of
wealth coincide accurately with the principles of the New Testament? Will anybody tell
me that the state of a hundred streets within a mile of this spot is what it would be if the
Christian men of this nation lived the lives that they ought to live? Could there be such
rottenness and corruption if the ‘salt’ had not ‘lost his savour’? Will anybody tell me that
the disgusting vice which our newspapers do not think themselves degraded by printing
in loathsome detail, and so bringing the foulness of a common sewer on to every
breakfast-table in the kingdom, is in accordance with the organisation of society on
Christian principles? Intemperance, social impurity, wide, dreary tracts of ignorance,
degradation, bestiality, the awful condition of the lowest layer in our great cities, crushed
like some crumbling bricks beneath the ponderous weight of the splendid
superstructure, the bitter partisan spirit of politics, where the followers of each chief
think themselves bound to believe that he is immaculate and that the other side has no
honour or truth belonging to it-these things testify against English society, and make
one almost despair when one thinks that, after a thousand years and more of professing
Christianity, that is all that we can show for it.
O brethren! we may be thankful for what has been accomplished, but surely there had
need also to be penitent recognition of failure and defect. And I lay it on the consciences
of all that listen to me now to see to it that they do their parts as members of this body
politic of England. A great heritage has come down from our fathers; pass it on bettered
by your self-denial and your efforts. And remember that the way to mend a kingdom is
to begin by mending yourselves, and letting Christ’s kingdom come in your own hearts.
Next we are bound to try to further its coming in the hearts of others, and so to promote
its leavening society and national life. No Christian is clear from the blood of men and
the guilt of souls who does not, according to opportunity and capacity, repair before his
own door, and seek to make some one know the unsearchable riches of the Gospel of
Christ.
There is no finality for a Christian patriot until his country be organised on Christian
principles, and so from being merely a ‘kingdom of the world’ become ‘a Kingdom of our
God and of His Christ.’ To help forward that consummation, by however little, is the
noblest service that prince or peasant can render to his country. By conformity to the
will of God and not by material progress or intellectual enlightenment is a state
prosperous and strong. To keep His statutes and judgments is ‘your wisdom and
understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes and say,
Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.’
Preached on the occasion of the Jubilee of Queen Victoria.

3 Everywhere and in every way, most excellent
Felix, we acknowledge this with profound
gratitude.
BAR ES, "We accept it always - We admit that it is owing to your vigilance, and
we accept your interposition to promote peace with gratitude.
Always, and in all places - Not merely in your presence, but we always
acknowledge that it is owing to your vigilance that the land is secure. “What we now do
in your presence, we do also in your absence; we do not commend you merely when you
are present” (Wetstein).
Most noble Felix - This was the title of office.
With all thankfulness - In this there was probably sincerity, for there was no doubt
that the peace of Judea was owing to Felix. But at the same time that he was an energetic
and vigilant governor, it was also true that he was proud, avaricious, and cruel. Josephus
charges him with injustice and cruelty in the case of Jonathan, the high priest (Antiq.,
book 20, chapter 8, section 5), and Tacitus (History, book 5, chapter 9) and Suetonius
(Life of Claudius, chapter 28) concur in the charge.
CLARKE, "We accept it always, and in all places - We have at all times a
grateful sense of thy beneficent administration, and we talk of it in all places, not only
before thy face, but behind thy back.
GILL, "We accept it always, and in all places,.... The sense is, that the Jews
observed with pleasure the provident care the governor took of their nation, and at all
times spoke well of him; and wherever they came commended his conduct, and owned
the favours they received from him, and the blessings they enjoyed under his
government: and then giving him his title of honour,
most noble Felix; Tertullus adds, that this the Jews did
with all thankfulness; as sensible of the obligations they were under to him; but this
was all a farce, mere artifice, and wretched flattery.
HE RY, "(2.) They promise to retain a grateful sense of it (Act_24:3): “We accept it
always, and in all places, every where and at all times we embrace it, we admire it, most
noble Felix, with all thankfulness. We will be ready, upon any occasion, to witness for
thee, that thou art a wise and good governor, and very serviceable to the country.” And,
if it had been true that he was such a governor, it had been just that they should thus
accept his good offices with all thankfulness. The benefits which we enjoy by
government, especially by the administration of wise and good governors, are what we
ought to be thankful for, both to God and man. This is part of the honour due to
magistrates, to acknowledge the quietness we enjoy under their protection, and the

worthy deeds done by their prudence.
4 But in order not to weary you further, I would
request that you be kind enough to hear us
briefly.
BAR ES, "Be not further tedious unto thee - By taking up your time with an
introduction and with commendation.
CLARKE, "That I be not farther tedious unto thee - That I may neither
trespass on thy time, by dwelling longer on this subject, nor on thy modesty, by thus
enumerating thy beneficent deeds.
Hear us of thy clemency - Give us this farther proof of thy kindness, by hearkening
to our present complaint. The whole of this exordium was artful enough, though it was
lame. The orator had certainly a very bad cause, of which he endeavored to make the
best. Felix was a bad man and bad governor; and yet he must praise him, to conciliate
his esteem. Paul was a very good man, and nothing amiss could be proved against him;
and yet he must endeavor to blacken him as much as possible, in order to please his
unprincipled and wicked employers. His oration has been blamed as weak, lame, and
imperfect; and yet, perhaps, few, with so bad a cause, could have made better of it.
GILL, "Notwithstanding, that I be not further tedious unto thee,....
Suggesting, that he could say a great deal more under this head, but, for brevity sake,
should omit it; and because he would not tire his patience, and hinder business going
forward:
I pray thee, that thou wouldst hear us of thy clemency a few words; he praises
him for his humanity and good nature, and for his patience in hearing causes, and
promises him great conciseness in the account he should give him; and entreats that,
according to his wonted goodness, he would condescend to hear what he had to lay
before him; all which was artfully said to engage attention to him.
HE RY, "(3.) They therefore expect his favour in this cause, Act_24:4. They pretend
a great care not to intrench upon his time: We will not be further tedious to thee; and yet
to be very confident of his patience: I pray thee that thou wouldest hear us of thy

clemency a few words. All this address is only ad captandam benefolentia - To induce
him to give countenance to their cause; and they were so conscious to themselves that it
would soon appear to have more malice than matter in it that they found it necessary
thus to insinuate themselves into his favour. Every body knew that the high priest and
the elders were enemies to the Roman government, and were uneasy under all the marks
of that yoke, and therefore, in their hearts, hated Felix; and yet, to gain their ends
against Paul, they, by their counsel, show him all this respect, as they did to Pilate and
Caesar when they were persecuting our Saviour. Princes cannot always judge of the
affections of their people by their applauses; flattery is one thing, and true loyalty is
another.
2. One of the best of men is here accused as one of the worst of malefactors, only
because he was the prisoner. After a flourish of flattery, in which you cannot see matter
for words, he comes to his business, and it is to inform his excellency concerning the
prisoner at the bar; and this part of his discourse is as nauseous for its raillery as the
former part is for its flattery. I pity the man, and believe he has no malice against Paul,
nor does he think as he speaks in calumniating him, any more than he did in courting
Felix; but, a I cannot but be sorry that a man of wit and sense should have such a
saleable tongue (as one calls it), so I cannot but be angry at those dignified men that had
such malicious hearts as to put such words into his mouth. Two things Tertullus here
complains of to Felix, in the name of the high priest and the elders: -
(1.) That the peace of the nation was disturbed by Paul. They could not have baited
Christ's disciples if they had not first dressed them up in the skins of wild beasts, nor
have given them as they did the vilest of treatment if they had not first represented them
as the vilest of men, though the characters they gave of them were absolutely false and
there was not the least colour nor foundation for them. Innocence, may excellence and
usefulness, are no fence against calumny, no, nor against the impressions of calumny
upon the minds both of magistrates and multitudes to excite their fury and jealousy; for,
be the representation ever so unjust, when it is enforced, as here it was, with gravity and
pretence of sanctity, and with assurance and noise, something will stick. The old charge
against God's prophets was that they were the troublers of the land, and against God's
Jerusalem that it was a rebellious city, hurtful to kings and provinces (Ezr_4:15, Ezr_
4:19), and against our Lord Jesus that he perverted the nation, and forbade to give
tribute to Caesar. It is the very same against Paul here; and, though utterly false, is
averred with all the confidence imaginable. They do not say, “We suspect him to be a
dangerous man, and have taken him up upon that suspicion;” but, as if the thing were
past dispute, “We have found him to be so; we have often and long found him so;” as if
he were a traitor and rebel already convicted. And yet, after all, there is not a word of
truth in this representation; but, if Paul's just character be enquired into, it will be found
directly the reverse of this.
COFFMA , "Hear us ... In this, Tertullus, in good legal style, associates himself
with his clients, continuing to use the first person plural pronoun throughout.
Thy clemency ... Felix would indeed bestow clemency, not upon the accusers, but
upon Paul in the mild manner of his imprisonment.
Tedious unto thee ... Here is the art of the sycophant. "He speaks as if obliged to
restrain himself from the further panegyrics which his feelings would naturally
prompt!"[8]

E D OTE:
[8] E. H. Plumptre, op. cit., p. 159.
ELLICOTT, "(4) That I be not further tedious . . .—Better, that I may not detain
thee too long. Here again we note the tact of the sycophant. He speaks as if obliged
to restrain himself from the further panegyrics which his feelings would naturally
prompt.
Of thy clemency . . .—The Greek word expresses the idea of equitable consideration.
The epithets of the hired orator stand in striking contrast with the “righteousness,
temperance, and judgment to come,” of which the Apostle afterwards spoke to the
same ruler.
BE SO , "Acts 24:4-9. otwithstanding, that I be not further tedious — ινα δε µη
επι πλειον σε εγκοπτω, that I may not trouble thee any further, by trespassing either
on thy patience or modesty. The eloquence of Tertullus was as bad as his cause; a
lame introduction, a lame transition, and a lame conclusion! Did not God confound
the orator’s language? I pray that thou wouldest hear — What we have to offer; of
thy clemency — With thy usual candour and well-known goodness. For we have
found this man a pestilent fellow — Or rather, a pestilence, or plague, as λοιµος
signifies; a man infecting others with pernicious principles, and spreading mischief
wherever he comes; and a mover of sedition among all the Jews — Rendering them
disaffected to the government, and exciting them to rise in rebellion against it; and a
ringleader of the sect of the azarenes — A term of reproach, which, it seems, was
given to the disciples of Christ even at that early period. Who also hath gone about
to profane the temple —
By bringing heathen into it. “Tertullus artfully mentions this, as the most express
fact he had to charge upon him, as he knew that the Romans allowed the Jews a
power of executing, even without forms of law, any person who should be found in
such an act of profanation; and he seems to have intended to make a merit of their
moderation, that they intended, nevertheless, fairly to have tried him, and not to
have destroyed him on the spot, as Lysias had justly charged them with attempting
to do. And it is observable, that Tertullus nowhere expressly avows so much as a
design to have put Paul to death, though it was undoubtedly intended.” —
Doddridge. Thus, after a fawning preface, Tertullus prefers charges against Paul,
for which there was not the shadow of a foundation, except that he was a leading
person among the azarenes, or Christians. For that he had moved the Jews to
sedition against the government, or that he went about to profane the temple, was
utterly false; (see Acts 21:28;) and so it was also, that they took him to judge him
according to their law; for they took him by violence, and drew him out of the
temple, and went about to kill him without any judicial process. In short, the whole
accusation, together with the circumstances by which the orator aggravated it, were
all mere fictions, of which he offered no proof whatever, only that (Acts 24:9) the
Jews — amely, the high-priest and the elders; assented, saying that these things

were so.
5 “We have found this man to be a troublemaker,
stirring up riots among the Jews all over the
world. He is a ringleader of the azarene sect
BAR ES, "(3.) They therefore expect his favour in this cause, Act_24:4. They
pretend a great care not to intrench upon his time: We will not be further tedious to
thee; and yet to be very confident of his patience: I pray thee that thou wouldest hear us
of thy clemency a few words. All this address is only ad captandam benefolentia - To
induce him to give countenance to their cause; and they were so conscious to themselves
that it would soon appear to have more malice than matter in it that they found it
necessary thus to insinuate themselves into his favour. Every body knew that the high
priest and the elders were enemies to the Roman government, and were uneasy under all
the marks of that yoke, and therefore, in their hearts, hated Felix; and yet, to gain their
ends against Paul, they, by their counsel, show him all this respect, as they did to Pilate
and Caesar when they were persecuting our Saviour. Princes cannot always judge of the
affections of their people by their applauses; flattery is one thing, and true loyalty is
another.
2. One of the best of men is here accused as one of the worst of malefactors, only
because he was the prisoner. After a flourish of flattery, in which you cannot see matter
for words, he comes to his business, and it is to inform his excellency concerning the
prisoner at the bar; and this part of his discourse is as nauseous for its raillery as the
former part is for its flattery. I pity the man, and believe he has no malice against Paul,
nor does he think as he speaks in calumniating him, any more than he did in courting
Felix; but, a I cannot but be sorry that a man of wit and sense should have such a
saleable tongue (as one calls it), so I cannot but be angry at those dignified men that had
such malicious hearts as to put such words into his mouth. Two things Tertullus here
complains of to Felix, in the name of the high priest and the elders: -
(1.) That the peace of the nation was disturbed by Paul. They could not have baited
Christ's disciples if they had not first dressed them up in the skins of wild beasts, nor
have given them as they did the vilest of treatment if they had not first represented them
as the vilest of men, though the characters they gave of them were absolutely false and
there was not the least colour nor foundation for them. Innocence, may excellence and
usefulness, are no fence against calumny, no, nor against the impressions of calumny
upon the minds both of magistrates and multitudes to excite their fury and jealousy; for,
be the representation ever so unjust, when it is enforced, as here it was, with gravity and
pretence of sanctity, and with assurance and noise, something will stick. The old charge
against God's prophets was that they were the troublers of the land, and against God's
Jerusalem that it was a rebellious city, hurtful to kings and provinces (Ezr_4:15, Ezr_
4:19), and against our Lord Jesus that he perverted the nation, and forbade to give

tribute to Caesar. It is the very same against Paul here; and, though utterly false, is
averred with all the confidence imaginable. They do not say, “We suspect him to be a
dangerous man, and have taken him up upon that suspicion;” but, as if the thing were
past dispute, “We have found him to be so; we have often and long found him so;” as if
he were a traitor and rebel already convicted. And yet, after all, there is not a word of
truth in this representation; but, if Paul's just character be enquired into, it will be found
directly the reverse of this.
CLARKE, "For we have found this man, etc. - Here the proposition of the
orator commences. He accuses Paul, ant his accusation includes four particulars: -
1. He is a pest, λοιµος; an exceedingly bad and wicked man.
2. He excites disturbances and seditions against the Jews.
3. He is the chief of the sect of the Nazarenes, who are a very bad people, and should
not be tolerated.
4. He has endeavored to pollute and profane the temple, and we took him in the fact.
A pestilent fellow - The word λοιµος, pestis - the plague or pestilence, is used by
both Greek and Roman authors to signify a very bad and profligate man; we have
weakened the force of the word by translating the substantive adjectively. Tertullus did
not say that Paul was a pestilent fellow, but he said that he was the very pestilence itself.
As in that of Martial, xi. 92: -
Non vitiosus homo es, Zoile, sed vitium.
“Thou art not a vicious man, O Zoilus, but thou art vice itself.”
The words λοιµος, and pestis, are thus frequently used. - See Wetstein, Bp. Pearce, and
Kypke.
A mover of sedition - Instead of ̣ασιν, sedition, ABE, several others, with the
Coptic, Vulgate, Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Oecumenius, read ̣ασεις, commotions,
which is probably the true reading.
Among all the Jews - Bp. Pearce contends that the words should be understood
thus - one that stirreth up tumults Against all the Jews; for, if they be understood
otherwise, Tertullus may be considered as accusing his countrymen, as if they, at Paul’s
instigation, were forward to make insurrections every where. On the contrary, he wishes
to represent them as a persecuted and distressed people, by means of Paul and his
Nazarenes.
A ringleader - Πρωτοστατην. This is a military phrase, and signifies the officer who
stands on the right of the first rank; the captain of the front rank of the sect of the
Nazarenes; της των ναζωραιων αᅷρεσεως, of the heresy of the Nazarenes. This word is used
six times by St. Luke; viz. in this verse, and in Act_24:14, and in Act_5:17; Act_15:5;
Act_26:5; Act_28:22; but in none of them does it appear necessarily to include that bad
sense which we generally assign to the word heresy. - See the note on Act_5:17, where
the subject is largely considered; and see farther on Act_24:14 (note).

GILL, "For we have found this man a pestilent fellow,.... Pointing to Paul, the
prisoner at the bar; the word here used signifies the "pest" or "plague" itself; and it was
usual with orators among the Romans, when they would represent a man as a very
wicked man, as dangerous to the state, and unworthy to live in it, to call him the pest of
the city, or of the country, or of the empire, as may be observed in several places in
Cicero's Orations.
And a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world: sedition
was severely punished by the Romans, being what they carefully watched and guarded
against, and was what the Jews were supposed to be very prone unto; and Tertullus
would suggest, that the several riots, and tumults, and seditions, fomented by the Jews,
in the several parts of the Roman empire, here called the world, were occasioned by the
apostle: the crime charged upon him is greatly aggravated, as that not only he was guilty
of sedition, but that he was the mover of it, and that he stirred up all the Jews to it, and
that in every part of the world, or empire, than which nothing was more false; the Jews
often raised up a mob against him, but he never rioted them, and much less moved them
against the Roman government: and to this charge he adds,
and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes; not Nazarites, as Calvin seems to
understand the passage; for these were men of great repute among the Jews, and for
Paul to be at the head of them would never be brought against him as a charge: but
Nazarenes, that is, Christians, so called by way of contempt and reproach, from Jesus of
Nazareth; which name and sect being contemptible among the Romans, as well as Jews,
are here mentioned to make the apostle more odious.
HE RY, "[1.] Paul was a useful man, and a great blessing to his country, a man of
exemplary candour and goodness, blessing to all, and provoking to none; and yet he is
here called a pestilent fellow (Act_24:5): “We have found him, loimon - pestem - the
plague of the nation, a walking pestilence, which supposes him to be a man of a
turbulent spirit, malicious and ill-natured, and one that threw all things in disorder
wherever he came.” They would have it thought that he had dome a more mischief in his
time than a plague could do, - that the mischief he did was spreading and infectious, and
that he made others as mischievous as himself, - that it was of as fatal consequence as
the plague is, killing and destroying, and laying all waste, - that it was as much to be
dreaded and guarded against as a plague is. Many a good sermon he had preached, and
many a good work he had done, and for these he is called a pestilent fellow.
[2.] Paul was a peace-maker, was a preacher of that gospel which has a direct tendency
to slay all enmities, and to establish true and lasting peace; he lived peaceably and
quietly himself, and taught others to do so too, and yet is here represented as a mover of
sedition among all the Jews throughout all the world. The Jews were disaffected to the
Roman government; those of them that were most bigoted were the most so. This Felix
knew, and had therefore a watchful eye upon them. Now they would fain make him
believe that this Paul was the man that made them so, whereas they themselves were the
men that sowed the seeds of faction and sedition among them: and they knew it; and the
reason why they hated Christ and his religion was because he did not go about to head
them in a opposition to the Romans. The Jews were every where much set against Paul,
and stirred up the people to clamour against him; they moved sedition in all places
where he came, and then cast the blame unjustly upon him as if he had been the mover

of the sedition; as Nero not long after set Rome on fire, and then said the Christians did
it.
[3.] Paul was a man of catholic charity, who did not affect to be singular, but made
himself the servant of all for their good; and yet he is here charged as being a ringleader
of the sect of the Nazarenes, a standard-bearer of that sect, so the word signifies. When
Cyprian was condemned to die for being a Christian, this was inserted in hi sentence,
that he was auctor iniqui nominis et signifer - The author and standard-bearer of a
wicked cause. Now it was true that Paul was an active leading man in propagating
Christianity. But, First, It was utterly false that this was a sect; he did not draw people to
a party or private opinion, nor did he make his own opinions their rule. True Christianity
establishes that which is of common concern to all mankind, publishes good-will to men,
and shows us God in Christ reconciling the world to himself, and therefore cannot be
thought to take its rise from such narrow opinions and private interests as sects owe
their origin to. True Christianity has a direct tendency to the uniting of the children of
men, and the gathering of them together in one; and, as far as it obtains its just power
and influence upon the minds of men, will make them meek and quiet, and peaceable
and loving, and every way easy, acceptable, and profitable one to another, and therefore
is far from being a sect, which is supposed to lead to division and to sow discord. True
Christianity aims at no worldly benefit or advantage, and therefore must by no means be
called a sect. Those that espouse a sect are governed in it by their secular interest, they
aim at wealth and honour; but the professors of Christianity are so far from this that
they expose themselves thereby to the loss and ruin of all that is dear to them in this
world. Secondly, It is invidiously called the sect of the Nazarenes, by which Christ was
represented as of Nazareth, whence no good thing was expected to arise; whereas he was
of Bethlehem, where the Messiah was to be born. Yet he was pleased to call himself,
Jesus of Nazareth, ch. 22:8. And the scripture has put an honour on the name, Mat_
2:23. And therefore, though intended for a reproach, the Christians had not reason to be
ashamed of sharing with their Master in it. Thirdly, It was false that Paul was the author
of standard-bearer of this sect; for he did not draw people to himself, but to Christ - did
not preach himself, but Christ Jesus.
JAMISO 5-8, "a pestilent fellow - a plague, or pest.
and a mover of sedition among all the Jews — by exciting disturbances among
them.
throughout the world — (See on Luk_2:1). This was the first charge; and true only
in the sense explained on Act_16:20.
a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes — the second charge; and true enough.
CALVI , "5.For we found this man. Tertullus doth aim at a double mark. The first
is this, that Paul may be delivered to the Jews, because they be very skillful in
matters which concern the worship of God and the law of Moses. But and if he deny
this, he layeth to his charge a crime worthy of death, because he procured
contention − (566) among the people. They knew that the Romans did hate nothing
more, therefore they urge that the sorest against Paul. This doth Tertullus amplify
when he saith, that Paul had moved the Jews throughout the whole world. But I
wonder why he addeth that he is the author or chief of the sect of the azarites,
which we know was rather a praise than a dispraise among the Jews. I think that

they mean not those who, according to the old and lawful custom of the law, did
consecrate themselves to God, but those troublesome murderers who did also vaunt
and boast that they were zealous men. − (567) Some − (568) think that azarites are
here put for Christians, which may very well be. But if we like the former exposition
better, he doth craftily lay to Paul’s charge that he was one of that sect which the
Romans did hate. For whereas these zealous men would above all other have been
counted for notable observers of the law, they advanced a color of zeal as a banner
to stir up the minds of the common people. evertheless, these good men, who are so
zealous over their liberty, do not spare the chiefest maintainers thereof, so they may
cause Paul to be hated by means of them. They would have commended the
azarites as courageous defenders of the law, if it had not been in this matter, but
now, as if they did infect the whole world, they seek to bring upon Paul great
reproach by saying that he is one of them. Moreover, they slander Paul impudently,
for no man did think that he was guilty of that crime. Therefore they lay to his
charge, no less wickedly than maliciously, a crime which they take up at their foot, −
(569) and invent without all color. But such is the careless security of hypocrites,
that they think they may do whatsoever they will, so they color their doings with
zeal. −
“ Seditionem... concitaverit,” stirred up sedition.
“ − Tumultusos illos sicarios qui se etiam plausibili nomine vociferabant zelotas ,”
those tumultuary assassins who, assuming a specious name, boasted of being zelotae,
(zealous)
“ − Quae factio circiter illud tempus emerserit; imo ex Josephi historia colligitur
jamtunc fuisse grassatos ,” about this time that faction had broken out, nay, it
appears from Josephus that it had even then made considerable progress, omitted.
“ Crimen velut ex trivio aereptum,” some charge, picked up, as it were, in the
streets.
COFFMA , "Briefly stated: Paul was accused of being (1) a pest, (2) an
insurrectionist, (3) a ringleader of the azarenes, and (4) one who had attempted to
profane the temple. All these charges except o. 3 were unspecific, and even it was
unsupported by any evidence whatever. "The weak part of Tertullus' case was that
he produced no evidence to support his charges."[9]
The sect of the azarenes ... "This is the only place in the ew Testament where this
term is used of the followers of Jesus."[10] In no sense whatever is Christianity "a
sect."
Assayed to profane the temple ... ote how this is changed from "profaning the
temple" as they at first alleged (Acts 21:28).
By examining him thyself ... Agreement is felt with McGarvey who construed this as
"a hint of examination by scourging,"[11] as indicated by their careful avoidance of

Acts 24 commentary

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (11)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (18)

Similar to Acts 24 commentary

Similar to Acts 24 commentary (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Acts 24 commentary