Expositor's Bible Commentary Commentary Acts 24

“Five days later” evidently means five days from Paul’s arrest in the temple (cf. Paul’s remark that “no more than twelve days ago I went up to Jerusalem to worship,” v.11). With the notations of time and of place (“Caesarea”), the names of Paul’s adversaries (“the high priest Ananias... with some of the elders and a lawyer named Tertullus”), and the identification of the judge (“the governor,” i.e., Felix), the stage is set for Paul’s defense. Ananias characteristically decided to prosecute Paul as quickly as possible (cf. comment on 23:2). To present his trumped-up charges as effectively as possible, he employed a lawyer named Tertullus. This man was probably a Hellenistic Jew who had expertise in affairs of the empire and had manifested strong allegiance to Judaism.

The governor, Antonius Felix, was born a slave and freed by Antonia, the mother of the emperor Claudius. He was a brother of Pallas, who was also a freedman of Antonia and became a good friend of the young prince Claudius. Through the influence of Pallas, Felix was appointed in A. D. 48 to a subordinate government post in Samaria. In 52 Claudius appointed him governor of Judea. History tells us that he was a master of cruelty and lust. During his governorship, insurrections and anarchy increased throughout Palestine. Try as he would to put down the uprisings and regain control, his brutal methods only alienated the Jewish population more and led to further disturbances. Despite his low birth, Felix had a succession of three wives—the third being Drusilla, the youngest daughter of Agrippa I, who had been unhappy as the wife of Azizus, king of Emesa; Felix desired her because of her beauty and persuaded her to leave Azizus for him. The relationship between these two seems to have been based upon greed, lust, and expectations of grandeur.

Tertullus began the case for the prosecution with the customary flattery for the judge in words chosen for his purpose. Many Jews would have been shocked to hear the high priest’s mouthpiece attributing “a long period of peace” and “reforms” to Felix’s administration; and few would have joined in any expression of “profound gratitude” for the governor’s frequent displays of ferocity, cruelty, and greed. But Tertullus knew how to appeal to Felix’s vanity. It was also customary to promise brevity, though such is human nature that the promise was rarely kept.

Tertullus began the case for the prosecution with the customary flattery for the judge in words chosen for his purpose. Many Jews would have been shocked to hear the high priest’s mouthpiece attributing “a long period of peace” and “reforms” to Felix’s administration; and few would have joined in any expression of “profound gratitude” for the governor’s frequent displays of ferocity, cruelty, and greed. But Tertullus knew how to appeal to Felix’s vanity. It was also customary to promise brevity, though such is human nature that the promise was rarely kept.

Tertullus began the case for the prosecution with the customary flattery for the judge in words chosen for his purpose. Many Jews would have been shocked to hear the high priest’s mouthpiece attributing “a long period of peace” and “reforms” to Felix’s administration; and few would have joined in any expression of “profound gratitude” for the governor’s frequent displays of ferocity, cruelty, and greed. But Tertullus knew how to appeal to Felix’s vanity. It was also customary to promise brevity, though such is human nature that the promise was rarely kept.

The three charges laid against Paul (v.5) are probably only a precis of the entire case. Tertullus obviously intended to create the impression of political sedition against Rome in his first two charges (disturbing the peace among the Jews; being a ringleader of the Nazarenes) and to argue the right for Judaism to impose the death penalty in his third charge (attempting to desecrate the temple; cf. comment on 21:28–29). During his reign over Judea, Felix had repeatedly crucified the leaders of various uprisings and had killed many of their followers for disturbing the Pax Romana. Tertullus’s endeavor, as supported by the high priest and the Jewish elders with him, was to put Paul on the same level as these brigands, with the hope that in his insensitivity to the issues, Felix would act in his usual manner simply on the basis of their testimony. As in Jesus’ trial before Pilate, their accusations were framed principally in terms of political sedition (cf. Lk 23:2, 5), though all along their main grievance was religious.