Another coal mining plaque. West Virginia Capitol.
Thursday, 1 February 2024
Then Paul, after the governor had nodded to him to speak, answered: “Inasmuch as I know that you have been for many years a judge of this nation, I do the more cheerfully answer for myself, Acts 24:10
Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).
You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).
A literal translation would be, “And Paul answered, the governor having beckoned him to speak, ‘Knowing from many years, you, being judge to this nation, cheerfully these concerning myself I make a defense’” (CG).
Tertullus presented the charges against Paul, and the Jews assented to what Tertullus said, maintaining that his words were true. With that complete, it next says, “And Paul answered, the governor having beckoned him to speak.”
There is a sense of order and decorum. The plaintiff was allowed to speak in an uninterrupted fashion. Upon completion, the governor acknowledged Paul’s right to defend himself, and so he nodded or made a sign of some sort that indicated Paul could begin his defense. Paul then answered, beginning with, “Knowing from many years.”
He avoids the unnecessary words of flattery used by his opponent. He also defends himself without using a lawyer. Instead, he appeals directly to the justice of his case, stating that he knew it would be upheld because of Felix’s lengthy service.
The “many years” that he refers to is actually six or seven at this point. However, it is noted by Tacitus that Felix had already been a joint procurator with his predecessor Cumanus. Also, scholars note that many in his position were recalled after a much shorter period, and so from that perspective, “many years” is a good description.
He would be well educated in how to conduct such affairs and also well-versed in the Jewish rites, customs, and laws. Understanding this, Paul’s words continue, saying, “you, being judge to this nation.”
Again, there is nothing superfluous or unnecessary stated. Paul simply acknowledges that the governor had a right to judge the matter set before him. It is an implicit acceptance of the position and, thus, the judgment that will be rendered. Also, knowing that he is now under Roman jurisdiction, he will get a trial that fairly acknowledges his state as a Roman. Therefore, he continues with, “cheerfully these concerning myself I make a defense.”
The word Paul uses, translated as answer, is apologeomai. It is a word that is related to the “apology” or defense one would make for the Christian faith. In this case, it is a rightful defense against charges brought against him.
In all, the words Paul uses show a person who is bold in his words because of his belief in his personal innocence concerning wrongdoing. There is nothing smug, flattering, or superfluous in his opening statement. And more, he has the fact that a plot to kill him was initiated by the leaders of Israel to bolster his defense.
Whether those leaders knew that their plot was discovered or not, the governor did. It is a stain on their actions, and it weakens any charges brought against Paul, making them suspect and biased.
Life application: It can be difficult at times to restrain oneself from blurting out a defense against false charges. This is true regardless of the size of the offense that is being accused. Little things can be just as annoying to listen to as big ones. However, it is best to allow people to speak in an uninterrupted manner.
To see this type of thing in action, watch reporters who are designated to conduct interviews or debates for political positions, like those running for Congress or even the presidency. It is not uncommon for a question to be asked by the reporter, and then a lucid, rational, and well-thought-out answer is given. Because the response does not fit with the reporter’s worldview, he or she immediately begins to interrupt the candidate.
This is unprofessional and it demonstrates a weakness in any supposed impartiality of the reporter. And yes, it is as common for those on the left to do this as it is for dogs to pant. Don’t be like a panting dog in your own time of defense. And don’t be like one if you are asked to impartially judge or oversee a matter such as an interview or debate. Let your words be few, directed, and spoken at the proper time without interrupting others in the process.
Glorious Lord God, may we be careful to speak clearly and thoughtfully when there are words that may affect our standing in the eyes of others or even our freedom in society. Help us know what to say at such a time, give us grace and patience in our responses, and may we honor You in our lives. Amen.