Bullet Point Bible

The Formal Accusation Against Paul

¹ After five days the high priest Ananias came down with some elders and an attorney named Tertullus, and they brought formal charges against Paul to the governor.² When Paul had been summoned, Tertullus began to accuse him, saying, "We have experienced a lengthy time of peace through your rule, and reforms are being made in this nation through your foresight.³ Most excellent Felix, we acknowledge this everywhere and in every way with all gratitude.⁴ But so that I may not delay you any further, I beg you to hear us briefly with your customary graciousness.⁵ For we have found this man to be a troublemaker, one who stirs up riots among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.⁶ He even tried to desecrate the temple, so we arrested him.⁷⁸ When you examine him yourself, you will be able to learn from him about all these things we are accusing him of doing."⁹ The Jews also joined in the verbal attack, claiming that these things were true.

The Jewish leadership escalated their case against Paul by bringing it before the Roman governor Felix in Caesarea Maritima, the Roman administrative capital of Judea.
Ananias, the high priest, personally attended, indicating the seriousness with which the Sanhedrin viewed Paul's case.
They hired Tertullus, likely a Roman or Hellenized Jew skilled in Roman legal rhetoric, to present their case formally.
Tertullus began with flattery (captatio benevolentiae), praising Felix for peace and reforms, a common rhetorical tactic, though Felix's rule was actually known for corruption and unrest (according to historians like Tacitus).
The charges against Paul were threefold: sedition ("stirring up riots"), sectarianism ("ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes"), and sacrilege ("tried to desecrate the temple"). These were serious charges under Roman law, especially sedition.
"Sect of the Nazarenes" was a derogatory term used by opponents for early Christians, linking them to Jesus of Nazareth. Acts 24:5
The claim that Paul tried to desecrate the temple refers back to the incident in Acts 21:27-29, which was based on false assumptions.
Tertullus presented the arrest as an attempt to uphold order and religious law, omitting the illegal mob violence and the Roman intervention that saved Paul's life (Acts 21:31-32).
The other Jewish leaders supported Tertullus' accusations, presenting a united front against Paul.

Paul Begins His Defense

¹⁰ When the governor gestured for him to speak, Paul replied, "Because I know that you have been a judge over this nation for many years, I confidently make my defense.¹¹ As you can verify for yourself, not more than twelve days ago I went up to Jerusalem to worship.¹² They did not find me arguing with anyone or stirring up a crowd in the temple courts or in the synagogues or throughout the city,¹³ nor can they prove to you the things they are accusing me of doing.

Paul, like Tertullus, began respectfully but avoided excessive flattery, acknowledging Felix's experience as a judge in Judea, which implied Felix would understand the complexities of Jewish affairs.
Paul addressed the charge of sedition directly, stating the short timeframe (twelve days) since his arrival in Jerusalem, limiting the opportunity for the alleged widespread troublemaking. Acts 24:11
He countered the accusation of stirring up riots by stating he was not found arguing or inciting crowds anywhere in Jerusalem – neither the temple, synagogues, nor the city itself.
Paul challenged the prosecution to provide evidence for their claims, highlighting the lack of substance behind the accusations. This placed the burden of proof back on the accusers, consistent with Roman legal principles.
His defense strategy focused on facts and verifiable timelines, contrasting with Tertullus' rhetoric and unsubstantiated claims.

Paul's Confession of Faith

¹⁴ But I confess this to you, that I worship the God of our ancestors according to the Way (which they call a sect), believing everything that is according to the law and that is written in the prophets.¹⁵ I have a hope in God (a hope that these men themselves accept too) that there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous.¹⁶ This is the reason I do my best to always have a clear conscience toward God and toward people.

Paul openly admitted to following "the Way," acknowledging it was what his accusers called a "sect," but reframing it positively. "The Way" was an early term for Christianity (Acts 9:2, Acts 19:9, Acts 19:23).
He affirmed his continuity with Jewish faith, stating he worshiped the God of their ancestors and believed fully in the Law and the Prophets (the Hebrew Scriptures). This countered the charge of being anti-Jewish.
Paul highlighted the core Christian hope in the resurrection, crucially noting that this hope (at least in a general resurrection) was shared by some of his accusers, specifically the Pharisees (Acts 23:6-8). This subtly pointed out common ground and the internal divisions among his opponents.
He specified the resurrection includes "both the righteous and the unrighteous," reflecting a belief in a final judgment for all (Daniel 12:2, John 5:28-29).
Paul connected his faith directly to his ethical behavior, stating his hope motivated him to maintain a clear conscience toward God and people, implicitly denying the charges of wrongdoing. Acts 24:16

Paul Explains His Actions in Jerusalem

¹⁷ After several years I came to bring to my people gifts for the poor and to present offerings,¹⁸ which I was doing when they found me in the temple, ritually purified, without a crowd or a disturbance.¹⁹ But there are some Jews from the province of Asia who should be here before you and bring charges, if they have anything against me.²⁰ Or these men here should tell what crime they found me guilty of when I stood before the council,²¹ other than this one thing I shouted out while I stood before them: 'I am on trial before you today concerning the resurrection of the dead.'"

Paul explained the actual reason for his presence in Jerusalem: delivering charitable funds collected from Gentile churches for the poor believers in Judea (Romans 15:25-26, 1 Corinthians 16:1-4). This demonstrated goodwill, not sedition.
He emphasized that when arrested, he was ritually purified in the temple, engaged in religious observance, not causing a disturbance. This directly refuted the charge of temple desecration. Acts 24:18
Paul pointed out a procedural flaw: the original accusers (Jews from Asia, see Acts 21:27) were absent. Roman law generally required accusers to be present.
He challenged the Sanhedrin members present (Ananias and the elders) to state any actual crime found during his hearing before them (Acts 23:1-10).
Paul cleverly reminded Felix that the only real point of contention in the Sanhedrin hearing was his statement about the resurrection of the dead, which caused chaos among the council members themselves (Acts 23:6-10). This framed the issue as an internal Jewish theological dispute, not a Roman legal matter.

Felix Delays Judgment

²² Then Felix, who understood the facts concerning the Way more accurately, adjourned their hearing, saying, "When Lysias the commanding officer comes down, I will decide your case."²³ He ordered the centurion to guard Paul, but to let him have some freedom, and not to prevent any of his friends from meeting his needs.

Felix deferred judgment, claiming he needed testimony from Claudius Lysias, the Roman commander who had arrested Paul in Jerusalem (Acts 21:31-33).
Luke notes Felix was "quite well informed about the Way," possibly through his wife Drusilla (who was Jewish) or simply from governing Judea where Christianity was spreading. This suggests his delay might not have been solely for information gathering.
Despite adjourning, Felix seemed unconvinced by the accusations, as he granted Paul "some privileges" (custodia libera, a form of house arrest), allowing him relative freedom and contact with friends.
This lenient custody allowed Paul's friends to support him, possibly enabling continued communication and ministry even while detained.
Felix's delay tactic kept Paul in legal limbo, potentially hoping to appease the Jewish leaders without condemning an apparently innocent man, or perhaps seeking personal gain (as seen later).

Felix and Drusilla Hear Paul Privately

²⁴ Some days later, when Felix arrived with his wife Drusilla, who was Jewish, he sent for Paul and heard him speak about faith in Christ Jesus.²⁵ While Paul was discussing righteousness, self-control, and the coming judgment, Felix became frightened and said, "Go away for now, and when I have an opportunity, I will send for you."²⁶ At the same time he was also hoping that Paul would give him money, and for this reason he sent for Paul as often as possible and talked with him.

Felix, accompanied by his wife Drusilla, initiated private audiences with Paul. Drusilla was the daughter of Herod Agrippa I (Acts 12) and had left her previous husband to marry Felix, a scandalous affair by Jewish standards.
Felix's initial interest was hearing about "faith in Christ Jesus," perhaps out of curiosity or Drusilla's influence.
Paul's message focused on core ethical and theological themes: righteousness (God's standards and provision), self-control (moral discipline), and the coming judgment (accountability before God).
These topics directly challenged Felix's known lifestyle of corruption, cruelty, and immorality (including his relationship with Drusilla). Felix's reaction was fear, not repentance.
Felix dismissed Paul when the message became uncomfortable, using the excuse of waiting for a better "opportunity," revealing a desire to avoid conviction. Acts 24:25
Luke explicitly states Felix's corrupt motive: hoping for a bribe from Paul in exchange for release. This was common among Roman officials but illegal. Felix's frequent summons were driven by greed, not genuine interest.

Paul Left Imprisoned as Felix Departs

²⁷ After two years had passed, Porcius Festus succeeded Felix, and because he wanted to do the Jews a favor, Felix left Paul in prison.

Paul remained imprisoned in Caesarea for two full years under Felix's governorship. This lengthy detention without resolution highlights the injustice Paul endured.
Felix was eventually replaced by Porcius Festus (around 59-60 AD) due to his misrule and complaints against him, particularly regarding his violent suppression of Jewish-Gentile conflicts in Caesarea.
As a final act, seeking to curry favor with the Jewish population he had alienated (and perhaps to avoid further complaints against himself upon leaving office), Felix deliberately left Paul imprisoned for his successor to deal with.
This decision prioritized political expediency over justice, leaving Paul's unresolved case as a problem for the next governor and prolonging Paul's confinement.
Paul's two-year imprisonment, though unjust, may have provided time for reflection, writing (potentially some prison epistles, though dating is debated), and receiving support from fellow believers (Acts 24:23).

The Bullet Point Bible

Acts 24