Acts 25:7-12 meaning

In Acts 25:7-12, Paul enters his plea of not guilty and appeals to Caesar in order to avoid being shipped back to Jerusalem. Two years have passed since Paul’s trial and imprisonment in Caesarea. He has been summoned to a second trial in the same location, but with the new governor Festus presiding as judge.

Luke, the author of Acts, described the previous trial in great detail (Acts 24:1-23). This second trial is explained more briefly, because the accusations are redundant and preposterous, and Paul’s defense strategy is simply to deny them. Paul’s accusers—influential Jewish priests and elders—wanted to persuade Festus to give custody of Paul back to the Jewish leadership.

If successful in acquiring Paul as their prisoner, the priests and elders planned to march him into an ambush on the way back to Jerusalem, where he would be assassinated (Acts 25:3). Paul will evade this outcome by appealing to plead his case to Caesar, ending all further arguments or dealmaking.

The trial begins:

After Paul arrived, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood around him, bringing many and serious charges against him which they could not prove (v. 7).

Luke summarizes the case against Paul rather than quoting anything spoken. At this point, the complaint against Paul is effectively a rerun of the first trial before Felix, the violent Sanhedrin trial (Acts 23:1-10), and the accusations of the mob in the temple (Acts 21:27-30).

After Paul arrived before Festus’s tribunal seat, the prosecution surrounds him and makes its case against him. The men who are prosecuting Paul are not named nor are their occupations described; Luke calls them the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem. These were “influential men” from “among” the high priests and elders, so they were probably also priests and elders (Acts 25:5). They had journeyed with Governor Festus down from Jerusalem to the coastal city of Caesarea.

Caesarea was where every Roman governor of Judea made his headquarters. The journey from Jerusalem is described as coming down because Jerusalem was built high in the hills of Judea. Any departure from Jerusalem required a journey down, in elevation. Festus’s disposition toward the Jewish leadership seems to have become friendly, at least to a political extent, as will be revealed in a few verses.

These accusers stood around Paul, bringing many and serious charges against him which they could not prove.

Luke does not enumerate the charges, only that there were many of them and some were serious. None of these accusations were charges which they could prove. In previous trials and confrontations during this campaign against Paul (Acts 21:28, 24:5-6), the accusations have been:

• he is a man who preaches to all men everywhere against the Jews, the Law, and the temple,
• he has defiled the holy temple by bringing Greeks into it,
• he is a real pest,
• he is a fellow who stirs up dissension among all the Jews throughout the world,
• he is a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes,
• and he even tried to desecrate the temple (repeating the accusation that he brought Gentiles into the temple).

Presumably, these same accusations were made here at the trial before Festus. Perhaps some new ones had been added. In his retelling of this trial, Festus describes the prosecution in underwhelming terms,

“When the accusers stood up, they began bringing charges against him not of such crimes as I was expecting, but they simply had some points of disagreement with him about their own religion and about a dead man, Jesus, whom Paul asserted to be alive.”
(Acts 25:18-19)

The religious disagreements did not resonate as criminal or punishable to Festus, a Roman. Nor by Jewish standards was Paul’s belief in resurrection a heresy, since the Pharisees also believed in a future resurrection (Acts 23:6, 8-9). Nor were any of the priests or elders making direct accusations based on their own eyewitness. Their accusation that Paul defiled the temple could not be proven. They relied on hearsay. Paul pointed this out at his last trial, that the men who attacked him were not present to make accusations. The Jewish leadership were not witnesses to the unproven claim that Paul brought Gentiles into the temple’s inner court.

Although there may be multiple motivations behind this multi—year campaign against Paul, the overarching reason is that the Jewish leadership, both priests and rabbis, reject Jesus as the Messiah and want to destroy one of the most influential leaders of His following: Paul.

The priests do not want Jesus to be worshipped or preached as resurrected. Jesus was crucified around 25 years before Acts 25, and they want His legacy to die with Him. But Paul preaches that Jesus came back to life, and claims he has spoken to Him numerous times, which is part of the reason why a growing number of Jews and Gentiles worship Him as the Son of God and Messiah. The priests do not believe in resurrections and they have rejected Jesus as the Messiah. This rejection is ongoing. They perceive that belief in Jesus is a threat to their political power (John 11:48).

The Pharisees, however, do believe in a future resurrection, and some of them even became believers in Jesus (Acts 15:5), though perhaps not those currently on the Sanhedrin council. But the fact that Paul has gone around the world inviting Gentiles to be reconciled to God simply through faith, and not by becoming proselytes (converting to Judaism), is aggravating to the legalistic rabbi elites (Galatians 5:1-6). Both political groups see Paul as a threat to their power and their traditions.

Here, before Festus, Paul gives a concise defense:

while Paul said in his own defense, “I have committed no offense either against the Law of the Jews or against the temple or against Caesar” (v. 8).

Paul’s defense is simply to deny their accusations. He addresses the claims that he has violated the Law of the Jews or done something against the temple by declaring, ‘I have committed no offense against either.’ In saying this, Paul makes clear that he continued the custom of keeping the Jewish laws. He will maintain this again in 28:17 when he tells the leaders of the Jews in Rome that he has not violated the “customs of our fathers.”

Paul’s practice of keeping the Law while not requiring Gentile converts to keep Jewish religious custom is consistent with the agreement reached in Acts 15, that Jews would continue to follow Jewish custom while Gentiles would only be required to do a few things that would allow them to share fellowship with Jewish believers. This was due to a recognition that both Jew and Gentile are saved by grace through faith (Acts 15:11).

Paul also broadens his defense to say that he has not committed any offense or crime against Caesar. Regarding all laws, whether religious and Jewish, or secular and Roman, Paul has not broken any of them. He is an innocent man. There is no evidence he has done anything wrong according to the standards of any of the present authorities and their cultures.

Luke now reveals that Festus is more interested in winning support from the Jewish leadership than he is in justice. As he later admits after hearing Paul’s testimony, “This man is not doing anything worthy of death or imprisonment” (Acts 26:31). He knows Paul should be freed, and he has the power to free him. But Festus is content to use Paul as a way of strengthening the relationship between the Judean elites and himself:

But Festus, wishing to do the Jews a favor, answered Paul and said, “Are you willing to go up to Jerusalem and stand trial before me on these charges?” (v. 9).

Given the priest and elders’ status among the Jewish people—the people whom Festus is trying to peacefully govern—Festus is evidently interested in keeping them happy. He seems to be trying to start out on the right foot with the local leaders at the outset of his governorship over Judea. He had also spent nearly two weeks with the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem and on the journey back to Caesarea (Acts 25:1-6).

This favor is what the Jews had originally requested, that Festus give them a “concession,” (v. 3). Both favor and “concession” in verse 3 translate the Greek word, “charis.” “Charis” is often translated as “grace.” It means favor with context determining who is favoring whom and for what reason. Festus is trying to grant the Jews’ original request, to give them special treatment, to do them the favor they asked, that Paul be “brought to Jerusalem” (v. 3), now that the formality of having a trial is near its conclusion.

So, wishing to do the Jews a favor and purchase their support, Festus answered Paul with a question. It is likely a rhetorical question, where Paul’s answer won’t change the outcome. Festus asks Paul if he is willing to go back up to Jerusalem and stand trial before Festus on these charges. The pretense of why this change of location might be necessary is that it would move the trial to the “scene of the crime,” to Jerusalem and the temple, where Paul is accused of having acted offensively. But there is no real reason to journey back to Jerusalem just to hold the same trial with the same accusations from the same people.

That Festus wanted Paul to stand trial before him on these same charges did not make sense. Paul is already standing trial before Festus on these charges, here and now. The ruling could be made today. But Festus is trying to do the Jews a favor. He probably doesn’t know about the planned ambush to kill Paul, but he is playing right into the hand of the Jewish leadership in marching Paul into an assassination.

Two years earlier, a Roman commander had to muster 470 soldiers to sneak Paul out of town by night to get him safely to Felix so that a dispassionate, objective trial could theoretically occur (Acts 23:23-24). To send Paul back to Jerusalem would be regressive. Yet, this seems to be the next step—a step backward—already decided by Festus, so that the Jews will notice the favor he has done them, and will support his administration while he is governor.

But Paul has a trump card to play. He agrees to be relocated for another trial, but not in Jerusalem:

But Paul said, “I am standing before Caesar's tribunal, where I ought to be tried. I have done no wrong to the Jews, as you also very well know (v. 10)

Paul rightly says that he is standing before Caesar’s tribunal (judgment seat, court). The Romans are in authority over Judea, and Caesar is the highest authority in Rome. As governor, Festus is acting on behalf of Caesar and Rome’s authority. It is good and proper that Paul be tried by Rome, it is where he ought to be tried, not in Jerusalem, not by the Sanhedrin.

Paul cuts to the chase: I have done no wrong to the Jews, as you also very well know. Festus knows there is no reason to send Paul back to Jerusalem. He could rule on his innocence that very moment. This man has been a prisoner for two years based solely on the hostility of the Jewish leadership. But Paul has done no wrong to the Jews. Festus can see this; he very well knows that the trial is a sham and that he is unjustly assisting Paul’s accusers.

Paul describes two scenarios to illustrate how this trial is farcical and unproductive. One hypothetical is where he is guilty of a serious crime:

“If, then, I am a wrongdoer and have committed anything worthy of death, I do not refuse to die” (v. 11).

If, Paul postulates, he is a wicked criminal, a wrongdoer who has done something terrible, having committed anything worthy of death, then Paul does not refuse to die. He opens the door wide when he says that if he has committed anything worthy of death, anything at all, any crime of that degree. The Romans were not shy about executing criminals. If this is the case, Paul accepts his punishment. He is saying, “Look, if I’m guilty, then execute me already.”

Paul then explains the second scenario:

but if none of those things is true of which these men accuse me, no one can hand me over to them (v. 11).

If Paul is innocent of all accusations, if none of the things are true which the prosecution has claimed, then there is no reason for Paul to enter the custody of the priests and elders. He has just told Festus, I have done no wrong to the Jews, as you also very well know. If and because that is the case, that Paul is obviously innocent and is the victim of a political hit job, then no one can hand him over to his accusers. He is saying, “If I’m innocent, why would you give me over to my enemies?”

There is no basis for sending Paul back to the city where his enemies have tried to murder him three times already (Acts 21:31, 23:2, 14), and will undoubtedly try to again. Paul probably suspects that another ambush is waiting for him, since this was the plan two years earlier in Jerusalem. The whole reason he is in Caesarea is because his accusers in Jerusalem kept trying to kill him. If he leaves Caesarea for Jerusalem, he knows he will be slain.

So Paul instead says, “I appeal to Caesar” (v. 11). This is Paul’s right as a Roman citizen. If a Roman citizen wanted Caesar to judge his case, then Caesar would do so. Paul likely does this, in part, because he knows that Rome is where he must preach the gospel. Jesus appeared to him in a vision when he was first arrested in Jerusalem. The Lord encouraged Paul and told him, “Take courage; for as you have solemnly witnessed to My cause at Jerusalem, so you must witness at Rome also” (Acts 23:11).

Paul’s original plan was to go to Rome, then Spain, after his visit to Jerusalem (Romans 15:24). But because of his imprisonment, he is stuck in limbo. The Jewish leadership want him dead. The Roman governors should have freed him. But the Roman governor Felix kept him locked up hoping for a bribe. Felix’s successor Festus appears to have no problem throwing him to the wolves. So, unable to go to Rome as a free man, Paul is content to be taken there as a prisoner.

Festus considers Paul’s appeal,

Then when Festus had conferred with his council, he answered, “You have appealed to Caesar, to Caesar you shall go” (v. 12).

That he first conferred with his council may indicate that Festus was seeking a loophole which would let him do what he wanted to do, which was to send Paul back to Jerusalem and judge him there, to establish a good relationship with the Jewish leadership.

But there was no way around it. Festus will not transgress Roman law. Paul’s appeal must be carried out. Paul has appealed to Caesar to hear his case, so to Caesar Paul shall go, which means Paul will finally go to the capital of the empire—Rome.