Dennis Tuuri

# Reformation Covenant Church Sermon Transcript
**Pastor Dennis Tuuri**

Chapter 24, we’ll be reading verses 1 through 23 again. And we have a picture here of an even greater monstrosity than what we just read of. We read of and sang of the nations around Israel plotting their destruction. And now we read in this text further what we’ve been reading and considering for quite a long time, the plotting of the destruction of the church. Church, those who are the Israel, those who rule for God, by those who are supposed Israel, the church itself, the institutional church in Jerusalem.

So, let’s stand as we consider this text and pray God that he would give us understanding of it that we might reform our lives.

And after five days, Ananias, the high priest, descended with the elders, and with a certain orator named Tertullus, who informed the governor against Paul. And when he was called forth, Tertullus began to accuse him, saying, Seeing that by thee we enjoy great quietness, and that very worthy deeds are done unto this nation by thy providence, we accept it always, and in all places, most noble Felix, with all thankfulness.

Notwithstanding that I be not further tedious unto thee, I pray thee that thou wouldest hear us of thy clemency a few words. For we have found this man, a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes, who also have gone about to profane the temple, whom we took, and would have judged according to our law. But the chief captain, Lysias, came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, commanding his accusers to come unto thee, by examining of whom thyself made us take knowledge of all these things whereof we accused him.

And the Jews also assented, saying that these things were so.

Then Paul, after that the governor had beckoned unto him to speak, answered. For as much as I know that thou hast been of many years a judge unto this nation, I do the more cheerfully answer for myself, because that thou mayest understand that there are yet but 12 days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship. And they neither found me in the temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city, neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me.

But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy. So worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets, and have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust. And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offense toward God, and toward men.

Now, after many years, I came to bring alms to my nation and offerings, whereupon certain Jews from Asia found me purified in the temple, neither with multitude nor with tumult who ought to have been here before thee, and object if they had ought against me. Or else let these same here say, if they have found any evildoing in me, while I stood before the council, except it be for this one voice that I cried standing among them, touching the resurrection of the dead, I am called in question by you this day.

And when Felix heard these things, having more perfect knowledge of that way, he deferred them and said, When Lysias the chief captain shall come down, I will know the uttermost of your matter. And he commanded a centurion to keep Paul and to let him have liberty and that he should forbid none of his acquaintances to minister or come unto him.

Let us pray. Father, we thank you for your most holy word. We thank you Lord God for the covenant keeper, the Lord Jesus Christ. We thank you on the basis of his ascension and glorification, you have sent your spirit forth into your people. We thank you that we are indwelt by that selfsame spirit. And we know Lord God that he comes to teach us the things of Jesus. Father, we pray that he would do that now. We pray that he would take this word which he always uses and bring conviction to us. Bring repentance to us, Lord God. Bring a desire to conform to your most holy will. And bring us strength and grace from you that we may indeed reform our lives on the basis of this word.

We ask these things confidently for we pray in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ by his authority claiming nothing but his work for us and also consecrating our prayers and the answer to them for the usefulness of his kingdom. Amen.

Please be seated.

Happy delayed. Happy deferred the matter. Happy had his own motivations, his own desires. And as a result, he delayed. Felix means happy. You know, Bible names, as James B. Jordan has said, are kind of like Indian names. They mean things. Names mean things. We live in a culture that thinks that names are just sort of pretty sounding sort of things. They’re not. Names mean things. Felix means happy. And here we have a man who is real concerned about his own happiness. And he hears this case against Paul and he does not bring the obvious verdict which would have been to free Paul. You know, in a way I kind of wish—I don’t really—but I can say that I wish that the end of this story would be Paul’s being set totally at liberty.

Now the word in the King James version says liberty, but it doesn’t really mean total freedom, and he is still in bonds, not chains, but he’s still restricted in his freedom to be at Caesarea. Felix does not find in his favor. Happy here defers the matter, delays for his own particular reasons. And we always have reasons for delaying things.

Let’s remember what this story is all about. Let’s place it in the context of the book of Acts. The Apostle Paul is the apostle to the Gentiles, but he’s not just the apostle to the Gentiles. He always goes to the Jews first and then the Gentiles. He always starts with the institutional church in his missionary journeys. All three of them we saw him doing that. We saw him going to the Jews to the synagogues then being rejected there and establishing churches sometimes right next door to the synagogue.

And a real visual picture for us in that particular instance of the movement of history. Apostle Paul has gone on three missionary journeys. We know that at least at the end of the second journey, he came back and fulfilled his Nazirite vow by shaving his hair off and going back to the temple and going through those rich rituals and every evidence I think in the text both in the preceding chapters and indeed in this one where Paul said that he went to Jerusalem for the purpose of taking alms and also making offerings and offerings is always used that word in the context of religious rituals at the temple that those offerings have to do with the fulfillment of his Nazirite vow.

We have much evidence to assume that at the end of his third journey as well he went through the purification rites not just for the men that we know were fulfilling a Nazirite vow, those Christian men, but also for himself, and he was with them, a group of Nazirites. Apostle Paul has gone on holy warfare by preaching the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit has accomplished his work. The Holy Spirit has sent the sword of God amongst people, and some are judged and rejected by God because they’re not part of the elect, but the elect have heard the message of the Lord Jesus Christ preached through Paul’s lips.

Paul has come back at the end of his third journey, and he now goes to Jerusalem. He heads from Caesarea, this very place which he returns to now to Jerusalem. He’s there but 12 days, he tells Felix here in the context of this great controversy that occurs.

Now he goes back to Jerusalem as he said primarily to worship God. That’s what the text we just read said. That was his purpose was to worship and then secondarily to bring alms and offerings by which he shows his worship. He shows his devotion to God through his alms for the people of God and through his offerings in terms of a conscience void of offense toward God and men. So the offerings and alms correlate to the first and second tablets of the law or responsibilities to God or responsibilities to men.

And Paul has done this. He’s gone back not to worship in some kind of pietistic sense but a sense that has direct application to the people of God by bringing them on and goes through the regulated worship that was then still in place since the temple’s then stood. The regulated worship of God’s word.

Well, he does this in a sense to bring a message to the Jews at Jerusalem. Remember the head of the church, James, the rulers of the church said, “Well, why don’t you go down and help these other guys fulfill their Nazirite vows as well?” And so Paul does that. He begins his message, so to speak, to Jerusalem in a nonverbal way. We might say in today’s parlance by this outward observance showing his devotion to the temple and what it stood for—the Lord Jesus Christ’s work.

Well, the response of those who are supposedly the institutional church, but in reality, they’ve become Amalek. They become the sons of Lot, so to speak. They’d become the enemies of the church. Their reaction to this is to find him in the temple, drag him outside the temple, and to beat him nearly to death, and then he’s rescued. And so, we’ve got this presentation of a witness reaction by people beating him up and then a rescue by the Imperial Protector. He then extends grace to the mob one more time on his way up to the castle there. He stops in the steps, says, “Let me talk to these folks.” They say, “Okay.” And so he then talks to the people in Hebrew—you remember—Aramaic in their particular language.

So he presents another presentation of what he actually is and who he is as a disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ. And their response is to say, “This guy should be killed.” And then he’s pulled out one more time by the imperial protector and rescued.

Well, then they say, “Bring him down to the Sanhedrin. We want to hear him.” So, they take him down to the Sanhedrin. The high priest orders that his face be slapped. Paul says, “I’m on trial for the resurrection of the dead, the hope of Israel, Messiah.” A riot breaks out. So, they’re to kill him again, and they have to be rescued a third time by the imperial protector.

Well, at this point in time, then a plot forms against Paul and you know the story. 470 men being used by God. God turning the heart of the commander of the Roman forces to protect the church as he has done throughout covenant history. He spirits Paul away in the night to Caesarea. He’s rescued again. So time after time they want to kill him. Time after time God rescues him and he brings him to Caesarea. And at Caesarea we then have the accusation, the formal accusation from the nation of Israel.

Remember I said that it’s important to look at the setting for any particular thing in scripture you’re reading particularly historical accounts of what occurs. God doesn’t write full detailed videotaped events for us. He writes a story of what actually occurred and it’s completely accurate. But nonetheless, it is a literary device. And like all literary devices, it must be understood and related to in the way God presents it to us.

And the first thing he tells us in this story is who these guys are. It’s Ananias. It’s the same high priest, the one who suffered Paul to be heard. And he is the high priest of the nation. That’s what the text wants us to understand him as representative of the nation of Israel. And so when it says after Tertullus, his spokesman, after Tertullus makes his attack on Paul and it says the elders of the church assented to this—and really the words in Greek means sort of joined in the fight against Paul. It’s a picture for us of the full rejection of Paul, not just by the high priest who obviously has some personal stuff going on and cannot control himself, but by the whole nation, the elders, the representatives of the people, the representatives of the institutional church.

And so we have a second witness they think to the accusation against a sinful man but in reality it’s a second witness by God to us of their depravity of their sinful rejection of God and the witness of the people is important here and so they bring charge against Paul and they accuse him of the three standard things you remember from the outline last week they accuse him of sedition causing a big uprising getting people all worked up whether or not what he’s saying is good or bad getting people all worked up.

It’s true that if you rile up a mob to do violence, then you’ve sinned in some way, but Paul didn’t do that. But they said he did. They said he riled up the people. They said secondly that he was a schismatic, that he was part of a sect, these Nazarenes. And they said third that he had committed or attempted to commit sacrilege to profane the temple.

So these are the charges against Paul. And remember, these are placed in the context so that God wants so that God clearly demonstrates to us the heart of these men who attacked Paul. It’s placed in the context of flattery by Tertullus, their spokesman, toward this vicious, unrighteous ruler, Felix, who was not a good man. We’ll talk more about that next week.

And when Paul preaches the gospel to Felix as direct relationship to his own particular sense, he’s not a good man. But he, Tertullus says, has done many great things. And by thy providence, we have all this peace and these great deeds done. And remember, we said that providence in the New Testament is always relating to God’s providence, not man’s providence, God’s care. And you got to remember too that at this particular period of time, it was a great the word providence was associated with Caesar. and so coins were stamped the providence of Caesar or providence of Augustus. You see, they claimed that Caesar was God with Augustus. And so Augustus’s providence is what creates peace in the earth.

It’s a false messiah. And there’s many things we could talk about in terms of the relationship of the gospel, the true gospel to the false gospel of Augustus and the false gospel of the civil state as the great provider. And we could spend all week talking about how in our particular day and age, the state thinks of itself as the provider. They have to bring providence to the culture because they don’t believe in God.

And if there’s no God who’s going to take care of things, then somebody else has to. And that somebody is always the voice of the people united into a particular civil state. And so in our culture today, we are familiar with men who assert the providence of the civil state. And we know how terrible that is and indeed how justice is never served in the context of that.

And so this charge is brought against Paul and we talked last week about Paul’s reply to that particular charge. They charged him with being a pest in his own person. They’ve charged him also with being the leader of a group of such pests, so to speak, these cultists. They’ve charged him of trying to deprive the temple of its consecration. Sacrilege in this case of the temple worship here spoken of means to make the temple common and to deprive it of its consecration.

So Paul then answers these charges and he answers them in three different ways. There are three very clear sections to his defense. And the first section he says what he didn’t do. The second section he says what he is, who he is. And then the third section, he actually says specifically what he did do in the context of his stay at Jerusalem. And in this way, he combats these three charges in each of these sections. But he also has three sections that can be correlated back to the three charges.

The rulers say, “You’ve been seditious.” And he says, “I didn’t stir up anybody in the first section. I didn’t do that.” The rulers say he’s part of a sect. And he says, “Well, here’s who I really am. There is a group, there is the way, but it’s not a sect. It’s the Orthodox Church. And they say, “You’ve committed sacrilege.” And then he says, “Well, this is what I actually did in the temple.” So he answers each of the charges in a very skillful manner and in a manner to bring out the sinfulness of the people making the charges.

And in that first section, you remember he said, “I didn’t do this. I didn’t stir up the people in the temple, nor in the city, nor in the places around. Neither did I do these things. It’s a denial, denial, denial, denial in those verses of the section, verses 12 through 13. He didn’t do it. He didn’t dispute with anyone in the temple. He didn’t raise up people anywhere. And then he says, I am liable to conclude then since I didn’t do any of these things that there are no substantial charges they can bring against me here.

It’s as if he is saying: I am entitled to conclude they have no proof to adduce of that of that description of the charges they have brought against me. I didn’t do these things and I don’t think they’ve got anything by which they can say I’ve really done wrong.

Then he says but in reality I am part of a group—the way—but that way is no sect. And in the middle section of his defense he says that there is one God, one scripture, one Messiah and he worships the God of the fathers. He believes in the one scripture through the prophets and the law and he believes in one hope, one Messiah.

You know, this is the same old story. I thought, you know, one way to start the talk may be to sing: “It’s still the same old story, a fight for love and glory, a case of do or die.” Not much changes in the human condition, does it really? We read this story and we read men who want to bring charges against those who are consecrated to God. Well, nothing’s really changed there. Denial of the hope of the Messiah. Nothing changes there. The institutional church frequently finds itself in a place where it wants to suppress the onward march of God’s spirit and the claims of the Lord Jesus Christ on men’s lives. And frequently vested interests are in a position of combating those who would challenge vested interests not directly but through the simple assertion of truth.

And so there’s really nothing much new here and we always see or frequently see in history these civil states, you know, kind of tottering back and forth trying to meet the middle ground between parties and so it is here still the same old story and there still the same old answer to these kind of dilemmas in men’s life the answer is the word of God the scriptures.

In this section of who Paul is and who we should be the center of what he says he is one who believes the Bible begins that say he worships the God of the fathers. He believes in the law and the prophets and he believes in the hope of the resurrection and as a result he lives his life a particular way. Well, the center of all this is the Bible. There is no hope in the biblical sense of the term apart from the sure revelation of God of that hope and the subject of it in the scriptures. And there is no correct way to worship God apart from the regulation of God’s word.

Paul doesn’t have man-created hope. And Paul does not engage in man-created worship. And in fact, we see right in these the very circumstances that led him to this problem that he was following a regulated principle of worship, so to speak. He was following through with the requirements of the temple system. Even though Christ had been sacrificed, he was not. He did not want to take it upon himself to do away completely with temple worship until God destroyed that system in AD 70.

You know, otherwise you got to say that Paul has just screwed up somehow. Didn’t understand this or he was being hypocritical or he was being a man-pleaser and none of that stuff is true. Ultimately, the reason he was in the temple is because he did not want to take it upon himself to change the law of God until God made it clear that temple system was completely done away with. We can no longer do these things.

Why? Because we cannot create a temple today. Temple’s gone. Sacrificial fire is gone. Showing that all these things are completed in the Lord Jesus Christ. But why does God allow this inner period here from the mid-30s to 70 AD when the temple stands and can be sacrificed in? Why does he do that? You ever wondered about that? Why did he just rend the veil of the temple?

Well, it’s a test of course. We always think of it in terms of a test to the Judaizers who want to place all their confidence in the temple system and reject the substance. And that’s true. But isn’t it also true that God used it as a test of people that would claim to be New Testament Christians and reject Old Testament law on the basis of what they think is right or wrong rather than waiting for God’s elimination of the temple system.

I think part of the reason he did it was so that we could see the Apostle Paul doing these things. And the Apostle Paul could preach to us as he preached to these Jews and to this Roman governor that the scriptures are one word from God and that if we’re going to be like Paul, New Testament Christians, then we’re men who have to know the scriptures and that means the Old Testament and the New Testament.

And so when the church today says that we’re only going to worship a short Bible, and we’re going to preach grace, but not law, and we’re going to teach not hope, but defeat in terms of the real world implications of the resurrected Savior of Messiah. It declares itself to be those who do not worship the God of the fathers. Only if the fathers understood to be the church fathers or the New Testament fathers.

But see when Paul says the God of the fathers, he means one long continuity back to Adam. Those are the fathers.

So praise God’s holy name that in the context of our day and age, I couldn’t have said this a hundred years ago really, but in the context of our day and age, he’s raised up people. Maybe not many people yet. Maybe it’s a prophetic witness to the culture. Maybe it’s the beginning of reformation and revival. He’s raised up a people again who assert the whole scriptures, the law of God and the law of God as it applies as Paul will apply it next week to civil magistrates as well and pagan civil magistrates at that. And praise God that he’s raised up a people who believe in the hope of Messiah as preached by the Apostle Paul.

You remember back in Antioch Pisidia, first missionary journey, first town. Paul talks to the Jews. And what do you do when you talk to people that assert a belief in the Bible? You use the Bible. He doesn’t do that with the pagans. He begins with creation, providence, and judgment. And we’ll see that next week as well. But with the Jews who assert a belief in the Bible, you don’t got to establish that. You take that as a given. And then he preaches from the Bible the necessity of Messiah dying and what Messiah is all about, what the hope of the resurrection is all about. And he talks about God’s historical acts of deliverance and real world implications, the temporary stages as a demonstration of the hope that will culminate one day in the final return of our Lord Jesus Christ and in the resurrection of all the just and the unjust and the resulting judgment to them.

And praise God that we live in a day when God is raising up again an awareness of what Paul asserts to us here.

So Paul gives his defense. Paul says that because I believe in the scriptures, I worship the God of the fathers and I have this hope of Messiah. One God, one word, one hope because of those things and particularly related to the hope of the resurrection and judgment and in and by way of implication judgments in the earth today. I live my life differently. He said I exercise. I labor with my conscience might be void of offense toward God or men.

And that’s why he went to bring alms and offerings God and men. We said last week that we must have this sense of hope based upon not just a hopeful wishful thinking of ours and we must also have this sense of exercising our conscience to the end that we might have a conscience void of offense toward God or man exercising ourselves rather.

And so it’s important to notice here that God places rather and God through Paul again this relationship of his moral activity to a realization of God’s judgment and particularly God’s final judgment. Eternal varieties eternal truths sharpen the focus of our life.

This is one reason why the Puritans and many others throughout church history would have their children consider on a regular basis and they would consider their own death. Their own death sounds morbid to us today. We want nothing to do with death. We want to hide it off in the nursing homes, the hospitals. We don’t want it in the hospitals. We want it in the homes. Get rid of it altogether. We don’t want to think about it because we’re in sin as a culture. The last thing we want to think about are those eternal truths.

But the first thing we should want to think about as Christians is the fact that we will die in this body. I guess somebody was mentioning to me that I don’t know if it was the Puritans or not, some particular elements of church history, men would actually have their burial clothes hung up in the closet waiting for them. They’d look at them. They’d think about it and that put them into a sharper frame of reference when they want to go ahead and when they’re tempted to sin against their fellow man or when they’re tempted to sin against their wife or against their husband or against their children. Sins of commission or sins of omission.

What is sin? Any want of conformity unto or transgression of the law of God.

We’ll see that in Felix here. He doesn’t sin by transgressing. He doesn’t do anything deliberately sinful against Paul, but he has a want of conformity to the law of God. He should have released Paul and he would have if he would have kept in mind the eternal truths and acted on the basis of that truth that he would be judged for his deeds. And so we want to keep that in front of ourselves, eternal truths that motivate us to ethical conduct and change in our own particular relationship to God.

Paul says, “I’m not a member of a sect. I am the Orthodox Church.” And on the basis of that, he makes his defense. And then he goes to the third element of his defense, which is to say what he specifically did. He’s talked about what he didn’t do. He’s denied the charges. He’s talked about who he is as a member of the way. And now he’s going to say what he actually did when he got to Jerusalem.

Okay. And this is the context for all: happy here delaying his judgment and as a result suffering the judgment of God stands convicted of his sin.

So Paul now moves into that section of his defense where he talks about his own particular what he actually did in the context of what they’ve accused him of doing. Verse 17. Now after many years I came and this is after many years is a relationship to how he is as a member of the way. So he’s been a member of the way a long time here and after many years since when I came to bring alms I came rather to bring alms to my nation and offerings and notice here I don’t want I could again this could be a big focus for today who does he bring the alms for? Everybody starving in Jerusalem? No. Charity begins at home. That’s an old phrase. That it doesn’t mean your own home—it does mean that too—but it means also the extended home of the church. Paul’s particular concern with his alms was for the members of the nation, those who are elect incorporated by God.

And in any event, he says he brought came to bring alms and offerings. And as I said, offerings mean sacrificial offerings here.

Whereupon certain Jews from Asia found me purified in the temple. See, now he’s purified. Again, an indication of what he was doing in terms of the offerings, neither with a multitude nor with tumult who ought to have been before thee and object if they have ought against me. That’s a very important judicial principle, isn’t it? Our country has in the wisdom in providence of God and his grace our country has been formed with a basis in our civil courts that saying we have to be faced by our accusers and Paul says well you know it is right and we can take by that according to the revelation of God that his accusers be there to bring charges against him.

I didn’t cause a tumult in front of Ananias here or Tertullus. I don’t know what they’re talking about. I want to talk to the people that are bothered, who are bothered with me and you know it is sad that the church today—culture certainly but first, the church engages in the same sort of thing. People don’t want to come directly and bring accusation against others. They want to go through other people and they avoid personal confrontation this way. It’s just flat wrong.

And Paul says here, it’s flat wrong for these guys for bringing a charge against me without the specific people who have charged me with this. Where are those people in the temple? Where are those Jews from Asia? They got so upset they dragged me out of the temple or beaten me to death. If they’ve got a charge, bring it forward. We’ll hear it out. We’ll talk about matters of fact, not matters of slander and innuendo and charges behind my back and being accused by people that don’t have the courage or obedience to God’s word to bring forth the charge.

So Paul says, establishing a very important biblical principle of justice. Where are these folks? Or else let these same here say, if they found any evildoing in me while I stood before the council. In other words, he’s saying these folks. The only thing they could witness to—they weren’t at the temple. Where they were, where I was in the council meeting, the Sanhedrin met. Now, these are the Sadducee element of that Sanhedrin. So, he says, “Well, the only place they’ve seen me is in the council. So, if they have a charge against me relative to my council appearance, let’s hear it. Otherwise, there’s no case.”

See, Paul is a good lawyer. He knows what the basic truths are of God’s system of justice. And so, he argues on the basis of that. And he says, “Well, when I was in the council, if that’s the problem, if these guys have any charges against me, I guess it must be when I said I’m on trial for the hope of the resurrection.” Must be that.

Now, this is pretty shrewd reasoning by Paul. And he invokes here another biblical truth relative to judicial process. And that is that if you’re going to charge me with the crime, you have to charge everybody else who’s done the same thing with the same crime. See? In other words, he’s saying, I know, he’s not saying this overtly, but he’s saying it—behind everybody knows that half of this Sanhedrin believe in the resurrection. So, if the charge is that I spoke on behalf of the resurrection, the hope of Messiah, if that’s the charge, then you’re going to have to charge most of or at least a significant portion of the institutional church of Jerusalem.

It is always a way to get to men’s motives by insisting that they be consistent with the charges they bring against you. Okay? If somebody brings a charge against you for doing something that they didn’t bring a charge against somebody else for, is it really the doing of that thing that they’re most concerned about? Well, obviously not. So, what is it? Well, it’s something else. And it’s something that they’re trying to hide or obfuscate for whatever reason. They may think it’s an honorable reason, but it’s not honorable if they don’t bring forth what their actual accusation or charge against you is.

See, so this is another judicial principle or truth from the scriptures that a charge has to be applied across the board to a particular culture. You can’t charge me with sin if you’re not going to charge somebody else does the same thing with that same sin. Otherwise, see, I know that your motivation is bad. There’s something else going on here, some personal animus at play, which you’re trying to cloak in a charge of violation of law.

And so Paul says, “Well, you know, if they weren’t there in the temple, they can’t charge me with that. Even if I did something in the temple, they can’t bring charges because it would have been hearsay.” And hearsay is not admitted here. They got to have my got to have what we would call today a best evidence. Okay? Best evidence has to be brought forth. And the best evidence are the people that said this stuff to them directly or they said that the charges against Paul, the people that heard Paul directly, the eyewitnesses. And if these are the eyewitnesses, he’s saying then what you charge me with is the resurrection from the dead and you know in that case then we know your your charges here are bogus because we know that many people in Israel believe in this same hope and in fact the scriptures teach it and in fact if you guys don’t want to assert it here that you believe in this then you’re the sect not me.

So Paul very adroitly in this third portion of his defense demonstrates the sinfulness of the men that bring their charges against him and then we have Felix’s response to all this.

When Felix heard these things, having a more perfect knowledge of the way.

And there’s a lot of discussion in the commentaries what that means. We know that there was a church planted early on at Caesarea. We know that when Paul was in Caesarea that there was a large contingent church there that sent people with him to Jerusalem. So maybe Felix’s more perfect knowledge of the way is based on that church. Maybe it’s based upon Paul’s assertion here though. Paul has just given Felix a synopsis of what the faith is and so he’s brought him to a more perfect knowledge.

But in any event, another part of this is that Felix knows the Jewish people. He’s been there a dozen years in the context of the Jewish people. And he knows this last point of Paul’s is dynamite. He knows that if we get into this one, that I’m going to have to either call these guys bald-faced liars for asserting a charge that they don’t really apply to other people, or we’re going to have to charge half the people of Israel at Jerusalem.

So, he knows it’s trouble. And like any good ruler, he steers clear of trouble. He attempts to steer clear of trouble. And of course, when we attempt to steer clear of trouble by employing means apart from God’s means, we steer right into the deepest water we could possibly steer into. We go into that place where Calvin said that all the arrows of God are shot at that place. And Felix here steers into those waters.

I’ve talked pretty favorably about the Roman government up to now and its protection of Paul. It’s important to see that. But, you know, in this shift that we see going on, remember that Alexander—the quote from Jay Alexander last week, big shift. Now, Paul’s defense is not to Jewish people or the Jewish leaders as it was in the last couple of chapters. Now it’s they’re there, they’re hearing it, but now it’s to the Roman governor.

You see, and in that shift, the shift of focus goes really from Ananias to Felix. And all of a sudden, Felix has put in sharp relief for us. He becomes the object here. And so God wants us at the end of this little tale and this transitionary tale story based upon it is historical fact. He wants us to consider now Felix. We know who Ananias is by now. We know that story. We’ve been there, done that. And now we’re talking about Felix.

And the first thing we find out about Felix here is that he’s not going to be a just ruler. Happy delays again. He defers the matter. Well, when Lysias comes down, then I’ll have a lot better understanding of this case. So, we’ll wait till then. And I don’t want to get you guys too mad at me, so I won’t have Paul’s restrictions too tight. But restricted he shall be. His friends can minister to him, but he stays here. He’s under arrest. This is going to go on for a couple years, this arrest. It’ll be productive for Paul in terms of writing. But make no mistake about it, the scriptures want us to see Felix’s delay as a sinful action. Sin is what goes on here.

J. Alexander said he takes the coward’s way out at this point in time by deferring a matter. That’s what cowards do. They put things off. They don’t want to face the realities of what God has given to them. And so, they put it off.

And I want to before I let me just I was I want to get into the delay and the dangers of delay here for the last few minutes of this talk. But just briefly first before that we see two people here in these last couple of verses, Felix and Paul. And Paul is not put at total liberty. Now he’s done everything right throughout this account. Excellent witness to the Lord Jesus Christ. But God does not set him at total liberty. So we come here and we hear the word of God and usually what we want is tell me the formula for happiness in my life. Tell me how can I be set totally at liberty. See but that doesn’t work that way. God says that when you obey him, it does not necessarily mean or imply that you’re going to have a real happy life or that be set at liberty at least for a few years yet you may have this problem too.

God calls us to suffer and to submit to his will trusting in him.

Now I want to give you encouragement for the battle and I want to give you exhortation to not delay in your correct responses to God and I want to picture a Felix as a man who did delay and suffered the judgments of God. But I want to do it in the context of saying that don’t think that if you don’t delay and you work hard at your profession, both with your mouth and your deeds, and you labor, you work real diligently to produce this good conscience, the way a woman labors to produce this beautiful little baby in the context of the family that the end result of that is going to be total liberty. Probably won’t be. God places us in a context, an environment that he has determined is best for us and best more importantly than that for his purposes in the world.

Remember Jesus gave Paul assurance that don’t be afraid. These guys aren’t going to kill you. You’re going to get to go to Rome and be in prison there, but you’re going to get to go there to fulfill your mission. See? And so our focus, the days of our sojourning on this earth should not be a desire for heaven too early. I hate to say it quite that way, but in a way that’s what I mean. We don’t want to desire heaven too early. We want to desire what God desires for us. We want to submit to his will and we want to say we have a good conscience toward God and men. We’re pleased with that even if we’re in bonds, even if we’re beheaded as some of these men were, even if we’re crucified. See, we want to find our joy and delight in obedience and submission.

Now, that’s not the end of the story. Lord Jesus, for the joy that was set before him endured the cross and there is a sense and this can be overdone but there is certainly a very real sense in which our sojourn on earth is a cross. It is a daily dying to self living to Christ. And to keep us in mind of all of that God places all these things around us that we don’t want around us. We want them away from us. We come here wanting away from all those things. Well, Felix was the same sort of guy as us. You know, Ananias was the same sort of guy as Paul was before God reached down and and touched Paul. And Felix is the same sort of guy as us. He wants happiness. That’s what his name means. Happy. And he’s not going to be too happy here if he lets Paul go because he’s got to govern these people at Jerusalem. And they’re not going to like him at all.

And so he figures the way to happiness is a middle course here. And he delays judgment on this particular case. And he gives us a picture here of the dangers of delay.

Now I don’t want to talk about this a lot. But look at the next few verses in the account. We’re going to talk about this next week, Lord willing. But it goes on to say that in verses 24 through 27, “And after certain days, and Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jew, he sent for Paul and heard him concerning the faith in Christ. And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come.” So Paul is preaching here to Felix, and he’s telling them of righteousness, temperance, judgment to come.

There’s a good three-point outline for next week. that’s good. There’s a good summation of the faith. You know, if you want to talk about apologetics and witnessing and this kind of stuff, here’s a good thing right here. Listen next week real carefully and we’ll talk about these things.

But Paul witnesses to Felix. Righteousness, temperance, the judgment to come. Felix trembled. He trembles. You know, God’s working on Felix’s conscience. We’ll talk about this next week again. But see, just as Felix came to a realization in this trial of what was going on, he knew Paul was completely innocent of these charges. So in the same way when Paul preaches the gospel to him, he trembles for fear about the judgment to come. He knows it’s there. Everybody knows. And when the purpose of the gospel comes is to awaken that knowledge, that conviction in men’s hearts. Felix trembles just as he knew relative to the trial.

But what does he do? He answers, “Go thy way for this time. When I have a convenient season, I will call for thee. He hoped also that money should have been given him of Paul that he might loose him. Wherefore he sent for him the oftener and communed with him. But after two years Pontius Festus came unto Felix to his room and Felix willing to show the Jews a pleasure left Paul bound.”

Well, see Felix twice in this particular account here delays defers. First in reference to the trial, second in reference to the gospel. Felix is a delayer. Somebody keeps putting things off. As with Jessica talk last week, a little sleep, little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest, a little time for consideration. I don’t want to rush into this decision. You know, these things are tricky and you don’t want to get people upset. So, Felix delays. And I don’t want this gospel. It sounds very interesting and there’s things that ring true in my heart, but I, you know, maybe I’ll become a Christian next year. Maybe I’ll you know, kick that sinful habit next week and maybe I’ll try to pay those debts next year and maybe I’ll try to teach the kids more about the Bible next week or tomorrow.

Not today. Maybe tomorrow. Right now, what I need is a little rest. Right now, what I need is some time to recover. But now, what I need right now is time to recuperate. I need a little sleep. I need a little slumber. I need a little at least folding of the hands to rest, contemplation, back contemplation, meditate. Well, you know, I don’t want to rush into, you know, what I’m going to teach these kids today. Yeah, I should treat the wife better, you know, but I got to think about what that means, and I got to plan it out before I start doing it. Yeah, I really ought to communicate better with my husband or I ought to communicate better with my wife, but not today. I’ll think about this and plan it out.

The dangers of delay—I think, is the moral lesson that God wants us to take from this particular piece of scripture. I offer to you the dangers of delay of Felix.

You know Felix is a judicial officer of the state ordained not by men but by a sovereign God. He’s there at God’s behest. And Felix violates the truth revealed to us in Ecclesiastes 8:11. Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore, the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil. The dangers of delay for a judicial officer of the state is that his delay produces evil in the context of the population he is trying to govern.

Felix is—we know how to pin the whole thing out of it. Felix is at least in part responsible for the insurrection, rebellion, and basic evil of the Jewish nation as they move toward AD 70 and the sword of God coming down upon their neck. Part of it is at Felix’s doorstep. God holds Felix responsible for the sins of those people because they came to him wickedly and sinfully, charging an upright man who had done nothing wrong. And Felix may not have killed Paul, but he left him bound. He left him in prison. And worse than that, he didn’t rebuke the high priest, his lawyer, and the elders of the people of Israel for having brought a false charge, an unsubstantiated charge.

It was his responsibility as a civil governor to bring sentence to that right speedily against evildoers. And when civil governors defer punishment, the people’s heart is fully set to do evil.

The danger of delay for a person who makes a judicial decision is that delay creates more sin in the context of the world around about them. Now, the Jews are responsible for their sin and the rulers, the subjects rather, of the rulers are responsible for their sin. I’m not saying that they’re not responsible or that they were forced to do it by the civil rulers’ delay. But the point is the scriptures tell us that there are consequences to our action and Felix is held responsible by God for causing delay in judgment as a result of wickedness of the people.

Now we could apply this to our day and age today because murderers are not speedily tried, found convicted and punished. We have more murder in this culture. That’s what the scriptures say clearly. Deuteronomy 17. You know if a person is not executed, then the result of that execution, which is to have the people be afraid and avoid high-handed sins, that won’t go on and end. There is deterrence taught in the scriptures definitively in Deuteronomy 17 based upon the death penalty.