Then Festus, having conferred with the council, answered, Thou hast appealed to Caesar. To Caesar shalt thou go.
Paul has refused a second trial in Jerusalem and has asked the emperor to hear his case, and Festus gives the one answer Roman law allowed. That short reply ends the trial at Caesarea and opens the road to Rome, and it raises two questions: was the appeal Paul's wisest step, and whose purpose did it serve?
Once Paul spoke the words, the governor had no room left to move. His reply is not a decision but an admission. It sends Paul to the highest court in the empire.
So far the difficulty was over. The governor was bound by the appeal… The king, or emperor, was to hear the case, just as the lower judges did. And this was not by flattering the princes of this world or seeking access to them, but as holy sufferers with Christ and for His name (Matthew 10:18).
Paul asked for no special treatment. He held the court to the law it already had on its books.
All the righteousness of the case lay with Paul. He therefore makes use of his standing as a Roman citizen against those who would have broken Roman law. He pushed for no change in the law, he sought nothing for himself, he employed no lawyer. The law had already ruled, and he pleaded it before a man whose office was to administer it.
The governor had offered a trial in Jerusalem to win goodwill from Paul's accusers. What he set in motion was something else entirely.
In this sudden change on the part of Festus we may see the hand of God. During the night after the uproar in the council, the Lord had appeared to Paul. He told him that he must bear witness to Him in Rome, and now He controls circumstances to bring this about… Paul knew that the proposed move was the first step toward handing him over to his enemies. Yet Festus knew very well that he had done no wrong.
Nobody in the room was aiming at that outcome. Yet it came about anyway:
This was the fulfilment of God's purpose, that Paul, brought to Rome by His providence, should bear witness there before the Emperor himself. This was not the thought of Festus, nor of the Jews… But the will of God is accomplished without the will of men.
Commentators differ on whether Paul was right to appeal. One points to what the Holy Spirit tells us about it:
To human eyes it was perhaps his only resource in the circumstances. But the Holy Spirit is careful to tell us that he might have gone free if he had not appealed to Caesar.
Others hold back from calling it a fault. One writer weighs the evidence and then refuses to judge Paul:
Festus and Agrippa both declare a short time later that the appeal was the only thing keeping Paul from going free. This might be seen as merely the excuse of a man who did not want the responsibility of freeing him — except that it is Agrippa who says it… How can we decide that it was lack of faith or lack of wisdom? He surely surpassed any of us in both. He stood in those circumstances as we do not, and he knew far more fully everything that was at stake.
The same writer answers the question of principle directly: Paul "fully accepts the 'powers that be' as those appointed of God to be the ministers of God for good to men, and there seems no real difficulty in his using them for that." Another simply reads it as guidance: "Festus was divinely guided in it all… This settled his journey to Rome."
Paul had long wanted to see Rome. The way he finally got there was not the way he had pictured.
It was Paul's purpose to visit Rome after going to Jerusalem (Acts 19:21), and God gave effect to it, for it was God's purpose (Acts 23:11). But how different was the way under His hand from the apostle's expectation! He must go to Rome a prisoner. This came to him through his appeal to Caesar — an appeal by no means always granted, since it was clearly open to abuse. Obvious guilt meant refusal; so did a case too trivial for the emperor to hear. Paul's innocence was beyond question, while Jewish ill will had made the case a most serious one. He appealed when he saw the governor playing with justice to please the Jews.
- Pressure. Festus offered a trial in Jerusalem to please Paul's accusers. He knew the prisoner had done no wrong.
- Plea. Paul claimed no privilege and hired no advocate; he held the governor to a law already on the books.
- Verdict. The appeal bound the judge. Once Paul spoke the word, Rome was certain.
- Purpose. What no one in that court intended, God had already announced: Paul must bear witness at Rome.
- Path. Commentators differ over whether the appeal cost Paul his freedom. All agree it carried him where God had promised — as a prisoner.
And when certain days had elapsed, Agrippa the king and Bernice arrived at Caesarea to salute Festus.
Paul is a prisoner in Caesarea, waiting under a new governor named Festus. Then a king arrives on a social call. Commentators read that simple courtesy as the opening God used for Paul's fullest testimony.
Both names belong to the Herod family. One writer traces the line and the marriages behind the pair who arrive here.
King Agrippa and Bernice paid a visit to the new governor. People knew this king's father as Herod Agrippa, and he died under awful circumstances (chapter 12) in the year 44. Agrippa was in Rome when his father died. He was too young to receive his father's kingdom. Eight years later his uncle Herod, king of Chalcis, died. That uncle had married Agrippa's sister Bernice, and Caesar gave Chalcis to Agrippa. Later Agrippa received the title of king… After her uncle's death Bernice joined her brother Agrippa in Rome. She married a Cilician ruler, but deserted him and rejoined her brother. She came with him on this visit to Caesarea.
Festus had a prisoner whose case he could not follow. Agrippa knew the religion behind it, so Festus told him the story — and made himself look good in the telling.
But while these things are happening, King Agrippa and Bernice come to greet the new governor. Festus tells them the story of Paul. In doing so he gives himself a reputation for fairness and for faithfulness to the principles of justice and honour — as we find everywhere in the world, and here too. But the story of the resurrection was only a Jewish superstition to him. Agrippa, one of the Herods and king of the southern part of Palestine, was an Edomite by race but a Jew by profession. So he was well informed about the religious questions of the country. He was also curious to get a clear answer, from a reliable source, about what this Christianity might be. It had stirred up such a movement among his people. He asks to hear Paul.
The governor's interest was practical, not spiritual. One commentator weighs the man himself:
Festus was just a man of the world. Of grace, of truth, he had no notion. The invisible and eternal realities were to him only imaginative ideas. Present things, changeable and fleeting as they are, were his life and all. God was in none of his thoughts, and apart from the Lord Jesus He remains unknown.
The visit was only a greeting between officials. What came out of it was Paul's third testimony before rulers, told in much fuller detail.
The coming of Agrippa and Bernice to greet Festus became the occasion for Paul to bear a third testimony before governors and kings. We are now given a much fuller insight into the mighty way in which he presented the truth. He had not failed before this to convey even to Festus what lay at the heart of the whole matter. When Festus spoke to Agrippa about the case, he said the controversy raged around "one Jesus, who was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive." This shows that, pagan though he was and with no real understanding, he had grasped the central fact of the gospel.
Paul's troubles were not an interruption. One writer ties what happens here to the Lord's own predictions.
After this time the apostle has to give account of himself, and to fulfil the predictions of the Lord in a striking way. The malice of the Jews brought him before courts. Their hatred handed him over to the Gentiles. It was all to turn into a testimony. Kings and rulers will hear the gospel, but the love of many will grow cold.
Felix and Drusilla had already heard Paul. Now more of the same family sit down to listen — and hearing the truth carries a cost.
Bernice was his elder sister, Drusilla his younger, and each of them famous or infamous in that day, and for very serious reasons. Felix and Drusilla had already received a most solemn warning from the prisoner. Now Agrippa and Bernice, with Festus, were to hear an appeal that leaves no soul as it finds it. The truth set before the conscience carries a responsibility that eternity will fully show.
- Visit. King Agrippa and his sister Bernice, from the Herod family, come to Caesarea on a courtesy call to the new governor.
- Motive. Festus raises Paul's case with Agrippa, an Edomite by race but a Jew by profession. Agrippa knew the religious questions Festus could not follow.
- Pulpit. That social visit became the occasion for Paul's third testimony before governors and kings, told in much fuller detail.
- Providence. Malice and courts turned into testimony, just as the Lord had foretold: kings and rulers would hear the gospel.
- Responsibility. Felix and Drusilla had already heard; now Agrippa and Bernice hear an appeal that leaves no soul as it finds it.
And when they had spent many days there, Festus laid before the king the matters relating to Paul, saying, There is a certain man left prisoner by Felix,
King Agrippa and his sister Bernice came to Caesarea to greet the new governor. During their long visit, Festus raised the case he could not settle: a prisoner Felix had left in chains.
Festus had already accepted Paul's appeal to Caesar. The problem was what to write in the covering report, and Agrippa's arrival looked like the answer.
Festus is puzzled about what to say about Paul when he sends him to Caesar. So he uses Agrippa's visit to learn more about him than he has managed to learn so far. The leaders of the nation are very worked up about this man, and yet his main crime seems to be only this: he believes that a man known to have died is alive. Resurrection seems to Festus too foolish a superstition for him to allow himself to say, "alive again."
The phrase "left prisoner by Felix" carries the record of a two-year injustice. Felix had heard Paul and understood the case. He still handed him on in chains, as a parting favour to the Jewish leaders.
"When two years had elapsed, Felix was succeeded by Porcius Festus. And desiring to do the Jews a favor, Felix left Paul in prison." There was no justice to be had from this unjust judge. It was not that he lacked sense, or wisdom, or judgment. He had all these, and so much the worse for him; but he was willing to sacrifice everything for his own ends. His hope of money had come to nothing. So now he leaves Paul bound to please those Jews whom he deeply despised. He was willing to do something that would win him favour with them, as long as it cost him nothing.
Agrippa was the son of the Herod who died under judgment earlier in Acts, and the family had already been confronted by this same prisoner. Felix's wife Drusilla was Bernice's younger sister.
As Felix and Drusilla had a most solemn warning from the prisoner, so now Agrippa and Bernice, along with Festus, were to hear an appeal that leaves no soul as it finds it. Truth set before the conscience brings a responsibility. Eternity will make that responsibility fully plain, and so will the judgment seat of Christ. Yet the man forced against his will to feel its power can ask, What is truth? and go out hard and miserable from the presence of the One who alone can give the full answer.
Festus could state Paul's case correctly and still miss everything in it. The reason lay in the man himself.
Festus was simply a man of the world. Of grace, of truth, he had no idea. The invisible and eternal realities were to him only imaginative notions. Present things, changeable and fleeting as they are, were his life and his all. God was in none of his thoughts. Apart from the Lord Jesus, He remains unknown.
A few verses later, Festus boils the whole dispute down to one question about a man named Jesus. He could only repeat what Paul had told him.
Paul had not failed earlier to convey even to Festus the thing that lay at the heart of the whole matter. In speaking to Agrippa about his case, Festus said the argument centred on "a certain Jesus, who was dead, but whom Paul asserted to be alive." This shows that, pagan though he was and with no real understanding, he had grasped the central fact of the gospel. The death and resurrection of Christ are the basis of all blessing, and the full declaration of the love of God.
A royal visit, a puzzled governor, an unwritten report. Out of these ordinary things came an audience no preacher could have arranged.
This awakened Agrippa's interest, and he asked if he might hear what Paul had to say. God was certainly behind this, to bring about a remarkable occasion in which Paul the prisoner could bear witness to the Lord Jesus with many present. What an unusual situation, where a gathering of great men is brought together to hear an address by a prisoner!
- Injustice starts it. Felix left Paul in chains to please the Jewish leaders. He sacrificed everything for his own ends.
- Perplexity carries it. Festus raised the case because he had no idea what to write to Caesar. Paul's only apparent crime was believing that a dead man is alive.
- Worldliness cannot see it. Festus had no idea of grace or truth. Present, fleeting things were his whole life, so the gospel passed through his lips without touching his heart.
- Faithfulness still lands it. Two years of chains had made the central fact plain even to a pagan judge: Jesus died, and Paul insisted He is alive.
- God overrules all of it. A courtesy visit between rulers becomes the platform where a prisoner preaches to kings. Truth set before the conscience leaves no one as it found them.