Charles Ellicott Commentary Acts 24

After five days.—The interval may have just allowed time for messengers to go from Caesarea to Jerusalem, and for the priests to make their arrangements and engage their advocate. Possibly, however, the five days may start from 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, Paul, who had never learned it, was able to speak at once by a special inspiration. Proceedings before a procurator of Judea and the provincials under him were almost of necessity, as in the case of our Lord and Pilate, in Greek.

Had Paul spoken in Latin, 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 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 halfway 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.

Seeing that by you we enjoy great quietness.—The orator had, it would seem, learned 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 (Josephus, Antiquities 20.8, §5; Wars 2.13, §2), and Tertullus shows his skill in the emphasis which he lays on “quietness.” By a somewhat interesting coincidence, Tacitus (Annals 12.54), 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 manuscripts giving a word that expresses this meaning, and the others one that 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 favor with Nero as he had been with Claudius (Josephus, Antiquities 20.8, §10).

By your 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 Caesar”—on their coins and on medals struck in their honor. Tertullus, after his manner, goes one step further, and extends the term to the procurator of Judea.

That I be not further tedious . . .—Better, that I may not detain you 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 righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, of which the Apostle afterwards spoke to the same ruler.

We have found this man a pestilent fellow.—The Greek gives the more emphatic substantive, a pestilence, a plague. The advocate passes from flattering the judge to invective against the defendant, and lays stress on the fact that he is charged with the very crimes which Felix prided himself on repressing. St. Paul, we may well believe, did not look like a sicarius, or brigand, but Tertullus could not have used stronger language had he been caught red-handed in the act.

A mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world.—The “world” is, of course, here, as elsewhere, the Roman empire. (See Note on Luke 2:1.) The language may simply be that of vague invective, but we may perhaps read between the lines some statements gathered, in preparing the case, from the Jews of Thessalonica (Acts 17:6) and Ephesus (Acts 21:28) who had come to keep the Feast of Pentecost at Jerusalem.

A ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.—This is the first appearance of the term of reproach as transferred from the Master to the disciples. (Compare Note on John 1:46.) It has continued to be used by both Jews and Muslims; and it has been stated (Smith’s Dict. of Bible, Art. ‘Nazarene’), that during the Indian Mutiny of 1855 the Muslim rebels relied on a supposed ancient prophecy that the Nazarenes would be expelled from the country after ruling for a hundred years.

Who also hath gone about to profane the temple.—Better, who even attempted to profane. Here the case was clearly to be supported by the evidence of the Jews of Asia. The charge, we see, was modified from that in Acts 21:28. Then they had asserted that he had actually taken Trophimus within the sacred precincts. Now they were contented with accusing him of the attempt.

Whom we took . . .—The advocate throughout identifies himself, in keeping with his profession, with his clients; and in his hands the tumult in the Temple becomes a legal arrest by the officers of the Temple, which was to have been followed in due course by a legal trial, as for an offence against the law of Israel, before a religious tribunal.

The words from “according to our law” to “come unto you” are omitted in many manuscripts, and may have been either the interpolation of a scribe, or a later addition from the hand of the writer. Assuming them to be part of the speech, they are an endeavour to turn the tables on Lysias by representing him as the real disturber of the peace. All was going on regularly until his uncalled-for intervention.