I. His Imprisonment in Jerusalem (continued) (21:17-23:30)
I. Paul is removed to Caesarea (vv. 23-30)
v.23 Lysias should be commended for taking a course of action that would protect Paul's welfare. The third hour of the night is 9:00 P.M. This would be an escort of 470 soldiers and their officers. Why to Caesarea?
v.24 A horse or ass was provided for Paul and probably the soldiers he would be chained to. Felix was the procurator of Judea, appointed by Claudius Caesar. He was known to be a cruel man.
v.25 This letter was not one of accusation, but simply explaining the circumstances that caused Paul to be held as a prisoner.
v.26 Lysias addresses Felix as one of higher rank. Jerusalem to Caesarea- 70 miles.
v.27 What is the difference between what really happened and what Lysias says happened? Did Lysias know Paul was a Roman citizen when he "rescued" him?
v.28 Lysias says that he took Paul before the Sanhedrin to determine the nature of his crime. True or false?
v.29 Lysias says that the only law that Paul had violated was Jewish law, not Roman law. Why then did not Lysias release Paul?
v.30 Lysias did not release Paul because he was protecting him from the conspiracy. He sent Paul to Caesarea to let the governor examine him more thoroughly concerning what crime he had possibly committed, had Lysias really told the accusers that they must appear in Caesarea?
J. Paul is delivered to Felix (vv. 31-35)
v.31 Antipatris was about halfway to Caesarea. This would put Paul out of immediate reach of the conspirators.
v.32 It seems that the 400 violated their orders of verse 23. The 70 horsemen continued on with Paul to Caesarea.
v.33 The letter was delivered and Paul presented to the governor.
v. 34 Perhaps Felix inquired of Paul's province of birth to determine whether or not he had jurisdiction over this case. Remember, Tarsus was the city, but Cilicia was the province or state.
v.35 Since Cilicia was a province of the Roman Empire, Felix was bound to hear the case. It appears Paul was dealt with kindly while awaiting his accusers.
II. Paul's Imprisonment in Caesarea (24:1-26:32)
A. He is accused before Felix (24:1-9)
v.1 The Jews were still interested in persecuting Paul. The high priest accompanied by a lawyer comes to testify against Paul. The certain elders were probably Sadducees.
v.2,3 The prosecution's opening remarks contain much flattery directed at Felix. Why? Felix is hailed as a wise judge and peacemaker, a friend of the Jew.
v.4 For Tertullus to say that Felix would hear the case with "clemency" means with reasonableness and fairness. This is more flattery because, as already noted, Felix was a harsh and cruel man.
v.5,6 Paul is charged with being a pest! In addition to or what made him a pest was a) he caused trouble wherever he went, b) he was a heretic and c) he had profaned the temple.
v.7 This verse and the first part of verse 8 are not found in the most reliable texts.
v.8 Tertullus continues to try to prejudice Felix by saying that once his examination is completed he too will find these charges to be true.
v.9 Ananias and the elders then confirmed the charges made by Tertullus against Paul. That is, they signified that what Tertullus had said was the truth.
B. Paul's Defense (vv.10-21)
v.10 Paul acknowledges the facts concerning Felix, not the lying flatteries used by Tertullus. How or why did Paul make his defense cheerfully?
v.11 To see how the 12 days transpired, see Boles p. 380-381
v.12 The charge of sedition was untrue because he had disputed with no man while in Jerusalem.
v.13 Paul denies that they can prove the charges against him.
v.14 Paul acknowledges that he is a "Christian" something separate from Judaism. That is, the completion or fulfillment of Judaism.
v.15 Paul served the same God as the Jews, he had hope, which had been taught throughout the law, and he looked forward to the judgement day. Paul was actually more true to the law than his accusers.
v.16 Paul had been believing and practicing the law as taught by the prophets with good conscience.
v.17 Why had Paul returned to Jerusalem? It has been about 4 years since his last visit. What are these alms and where did they come from?
v. 18 Paul tells what he was really doing in the temple. He had not gathered a crowd or caused a stir. The trouble started with whom?
v.19 These are the ones who should be making the accusations, they are his original accusers. These Jews had no first hand evidence of what transpired in the temple courtyard.
v.20 Can these men even produce evidence that he had been found of wrongdoing when he appeared before them?
v.21 The only charge that was made against him was his stand on resurrection of the dead. The Jews had no case against Paul.