Acts of the Apostles Chapter 24 – "When I get an opportunity"
Read or listen The Acts of the Apostles Chapter 24 online (ESV, Bible Gateway)
Three accusations – Acts 24:1-9
The Jews' attempt to violently resolve the problem Paul had caused had failed due to the vigilance of Paul's nephew. The high priest Ananias was forced to go to Caesarea to accuse Paul before Governor Felix.
A lawyer, a skilled speaker, Tertullus, had been brought along. He began his speech by uninhibitedly praising the governor. In reality, Felix – a former slave who had risen to power under the wing of his brother Pallas – was not well liked. He was arbitrary and self-serving (compare verse 26: "At the same time he hoped that money would be given him by Paul."). His brother had gained favor with Emperor Claudius and had been made treasurer.
Tertullus makes three accusations against Paul:
Paul is “a plague, one who stirs up riots among all the Jews throughout the world”. A plague is a reference to the contagiousness of this danger. Paul stirs up the people against the Roman authority. He is therefore a criminal who is dangerous to the empire.
The second accusation is Paul's position as the head of "the sect of the Nazarenes". Judaism included several sects - Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes - but they all enjoyed the protection of the Roman state. Now Tertullus is trying to get Paul, and at the same time the Christians, to be excluded from Judaism, as a sect. This would also mean that Christians would no longer have the protection of the state enjoyed by Jews.
Paul has attempted to desecrate the temple. It is significant that there is no longer talk of desecrating the temple, but only of attempting to desecrate it. What this attempt refers to remains unclear. Paul did not bring Greeks, that is, Gentiles, into the temple, but is it now claimed that he attempted to do so?
Or is the accusation to be understood more spiritually, that Paul is speaking against the temple? In any case, the accusation was significant, because the Jews were allowed to kill even a Roman citizen if he desecrated the temple.
Tertullus “forgets” the chaotic situation that preceded the arrest and the role of the tribune Lysias in Paul’s arrest. Talking about those events would have been difficult because they would have brought back to people's minds how things had progressed.
Our Bible is missing verse 7 because it is not in the most reliable Greek manuscripts. The missing section is: “We wanted to try him under our law. But Tribune Lysias came along and took him out of our hands with much force, ordering his accusers to come before you.”
The addition is a correct description of what happened, but it is unlikely that Tertullus would have said it, as it would have drawn the governor’s attention to the religious nature of the issue, as Paul does in his defense (verse 21). Tertullus did not want to emphasize that Paul had broken Jewish law, but Roman law. Felix would not condemn Paul for religious disputes. Instead, a political crime, i.e. incitement to rebellion, had to be found.
Who was rioting? – Acts 24:10-13
After receiving permission, Paul responds to the charges in the order in which they are presented. First, Paul shows that he did not incite a riot in Jerusalem. There was too little time—12 days—and the Jews cannot prove that he had gathered a crowd or stirred up the people to revolt. Nor had he argued or stirred up disagreements. Paul states that mere accusation is not enough; there should also be evidence. The principle still applies today: innocence does not need to be proven, but guilt.