The Pulpit Commentary — Acts — Volume 2 — Section 256

Ver, 8.-Prorestatiom of mnocenCII. The contrast between the two trials needs careful attention. "On the second occasion, when Paul was tried before Festus, the Jews had no ore.tor to plead for them, so the trial degenerated into a scene of passionate clamour, in which St. Paul simply met the many accusations against him by calm denials." 'l'he Jews seem to have brought no witnesses, and the apostle knew well enough that no Roman judge would listen to mere accusations unsupported by testimony. On the one side was accusation without witness ; it was enough if, on the other side, there was the plea of •• not guilty," and the solemn protestation of innocence. The charges so clamorously made were: 1. Of Paul's heresy. He was declared to be a renegade Jew, whose teachings were proving most mischievous, and striking at the very foundations of the Mosaic religious system. St. Pa.ul answered with an emphatic denial. He was but proclaiming those very truths for the sake of which the Mosaic system had been ~iven, and of which it had testified, and for which it had been the preparation. 2. Of Paul's sa,cril,ege. This was, in the view of formal religionists, the height of all crime. Their charge rested on a statement of fact: this Paul had brought Trophimus, an Ephesian, into the temple, in order to pollute their temple and offer them an open insult. This Paul simply denied. Therll was no such fact. He had not brought Trophimus into the temple; and, if the Roman governor took any notice at all of this charge, he would certainly have demauded witnesses to prove the fact, and have thrown the burden of finding the necessary witn<.>sses on the accusers, and not on the prisoner. 8. Of Paul's treason. 'l'his the Jews could only insinuate, but this point they hoped would especially influence Festus. Such a ma.n must be dangerous to the state; popula.r tumults have a.ttended his presence in every city where he has gone. He ought not to be set at liberty. Festus was not in the least likely to be frightened into doing an injustice, and could read the cha.racter of hie prisoner too well to pay any heed to their clamour and their insinuations. "If there was a single grain of truth in the Jewish accusa.tions, Panl had not been guilty of anything a.pproaching to a capital crime." It may be impressed that (1) there are times in a ma.n's life when he is called upon to make a full defence of himself age.inst any charges that may be brought against him. This is especially necessary when the charges ta.ke definite shape, and seem to have sa.nction and support. But (2) there are times in life when a ma.n should attempt no defence, but stand firmly on his plea of innocence, and wait his time for his righteousness to become clear as the noonday. 'l'his is best when the charges are vague, and evidently the results of misrepresentation and sla.nder. It la hopeless to attempt the correction of such evils; we can only live them down. ·Our conduct must depend on the nature of the attack that is made on us, Even if speolfie charges are made, we may find it wisest to do as the apostle did, and throw the burden of proof altogether upon our accusers.-H. T. Ver. ll..-..4.ppeal to <h,(1!f'. In introducing this subject, the difficulty in which Festns was placed should be shown. His predecessor had just been recalled, through the opposition of these very Jews who were now seeking a. favour from him, and to resist them in their first request would be sure to excite a strong prejudice against him. Bo even Festus a.ttempted the weakness of a compromise. He sa.w that the matter was not one with which a Roman tribunal could concern itself. It was really a locally religious dispu&e. So be thought he could meet the case by persuading Paul to go to JerUBalem en. XXV. 1-27.] Tm; ACTS OF THE Al'OSTLES. 263