TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Commentary on Acts 25 verses 13–27
We have here the preparation that was made for another hearing of Paul before King Agrippa, not in order to his giving judgment upon him, but in order to his giving advice concerning him, or rather only to gratify his curiosity. Christ had said, concerning his followers, that they should be brought before governors and kings. In the former part of this chapter Paul was brought before Festus the governor, here before Agrippa the king, for a testimony to both. Here is,
I. The kind and friendly visit which king Agrippa made to Festus, now upon his coming into the government in that province (Act 25:13): After certain days, king Agrippa came to Caesarea. Here is royal visit. Kings usually think it enough to send their ambassadors to congratulate their friends, but here was a king that came himself, that made the majesty of a prince yield to the satisfaction of a friend; for personal converse is the most pleasant among friends. Observe,
1.Who the visitants were. (1.) King Agrippa, the son of that Herod (surnamed Agrippa) who killed James the apostle, and was himself eaten of worms, and great grandson of Herod the Great, under whom Christ was born. Josephus calls this Agrippa the younger; Claudius the emperor made him king of Chalcis, and tetrarch of Trachonitis and Abylene, mentioned Luk 3:1. The Jewish writers speak of him, and (as Dr. Lightfoot tells us) among other things relate this story of him, "That reading the law publicly, in the latter end of the year of release, as was enjoined, the king, when he came to those words (Deu 17:15), Thou shalt not set a stranger king over thee, who is not of thy brethren, the tears ran down his cheeks, for he was not of the seed of Israel, which the congregation observing, cried out, Be of good comfort, king Agrippa, thou art our brother; for he was of their religion, though not of their blood." (2.) Bernice came with him. She was his own sister, now a widow, the widow of his uncle Herod, king of Chalcis, after whose death she lived with this brother of hers, who was suspected to be too familiar with her, and, after she was a second time married to Polemon king of Cilicia, she got to be divorced from him, and returned to her brother king Agrippa. Juvenal (Sat. 6) speaks of a diamond ring which Agrippa gave to Bernice, his incestuous sister: -
- Berenices
In digito factus pretiosior; hunc dedit olim
Barbarus incestae, dedit hunc Agrippa sorori.
That far-famed gem which on the finger glow'd
Of Bernice (dearer thence), bestowed
By an incestuous brother.
- Gifford
And both Tacitus and Suetonius speak of a criminal intimacy afterwards between her and Titus Vespasian. Drusilla, the wife of Felix, was another sister. Such lewd people were the great people generally in those times! Say not that the former days were better.
2.What the design of this visit was: they came to salute Festus, to give him joy of his new promotion, and to wish him joy in it; they came to compliment him upon his accession to the government, and to keep up a good correspondence with him, that Agrippa, who had the government of Galilee, might act in concert with Festus, who had the government of Judea; but it is probable they came as much to divert themselves as to show respect to him, and to share in the entertainments of his court, and to show their fine clothes, which would do vain people no good if they did not go abroad.
II. The account which Festus gave to king Agrippa of Paul and his case, which he gave.
1.To entertain him, and give him some diversion. It was a very remarkable story, and worth any man's hearing, not only as it was surprising and entertaining, but, if it were truly and fully told, very instructive and edifying; and it would be particularly acceptable to Agrippa, not only because he was a judge, and there were some points of law and practice in it well worth his notice, but much more as he was a Jew, and there were some points of religion in it much more deserving his cognizance.
2.To have his advice. Festus was but newly come to be a judge, at least to be a judge in these parts, and therefore was diffident of himself and of his own ability, and willing to have the counsel of those that were older and more experienced, especially in a matter that had so much difficulty in it as Paul's case seemed to have, and therefore he declared it to the king. Let us now see the particular account he gives to king Agrippa concerning Paul, Act 25:14-21.
(1.)He found him a prisoner when he came into the government of this province; and therefore could not of his own knowledge give an account of his cause from the beginning: There is a certain man left in bonds by Felix; and therefore, if there were any thing amiss in the first taking of him into custody, Festus is not to answer for that, for he found him in bonds. When Felix, to do the Jews a pleasure, left Paul bound, though he knew him to be innocent, he knew not what he did, knew not but he might fall into worse hands than he did fall into, though they were none of the best.
(2.)That the Jewish sanhedrim were extremely set against him: "The chief priests and the elders informed me against him as a dangerous man, and not fit to live, and desired he might therefore be condemned to die." These being great pretenders to religion, and therefore to be supposed men of honour and honesty, Festus thinks he ought to give credit to them; but Agrippa knows them better than he does, and therefore Festus desires his advice in this matter.
(3.)That he had insisted upon the Roman law in favour of the prisoner, and would not condemn him unheard (Act 25:16): "It is not the manner of the Romans, who herein govern themselves by the law of nature and the fundamental rules of justice, to deliver any man to die, to grant him to destruction" (so the word is), "to gratify his enemies with his destruction, before the accused has the accusers face to face, to confront their testimony, and have both licence and time given him to answer for himself." He seems to upbraid them as if they reflected upon the Romans and their government in asking such a thing, or expecting that they would condemn a man without trying him: "No," says he, "I would have you to know, whatever you may allow of among yourselves, the Romans allow not of such a piece of injustice among them." Audi et alteram partem - hear the other side, had become a proverb among them. This rule we ought to be governed by in our private censures in common conversation; we must not give men bad characters, nor condemn their words and actions, till we have heard what is to be said in their vindication. See Joh 7:51.
(4.)That he had brought him upon his trial, according to the duty of his place, Act 25:17. That he had been expeditious in it, and the prosecutors had not reason to complain of his being dilatory, for as soon as ever they had come (and we are sure they lost no time) without any delay, on the morrow, he had brought on the cause. He had likewise tried him in the most solemn manner: He sat on the judgment-seat, as they used to do in weightier causes, while those that were of small moment they judged de plano - upon even ground. He called a great court on purpose for the trial of Paul, that the sentence might be definitive, and the cause ended.
(5.)That he was extremely disappointed in the charge they brought against him (Act 25:18, Act 25:19): When the accusers stood up against him, and opened their indictment, they brought no accusations of such things as I supposed.
[1.]He supposed by the eagerness of their prosecution, and their urging it thus upon the Roman governors one after another, First, That they had something to accuse him of that was dangerous either to private property or the public peace, - that they would undertake to prove him a robber, or a murderer, or a rebel against the Roman power, - that he had been in arms to head a sedition, - that if he were not that Egyptian who lately made an uproar, and commanded a party of cut-throats, as the chief captain supposed him to be, yet he was one of the same kidney. Such were the outcries against the primitive Christians, so loud, so fierce, that the standers-by, who judged of them by those outcries, could not but conclude them the worst of men; and to represent them so was the design of that clamour, as it was against our Saviour. Secondly, That they had something to accuse him of that was cognizable in the Roman courts, and which the governor was properly the judge of, as Gallio expected (Act 18:14); otherwise it was absurd and ridiculous to trouble him with it, and really an affront to him.
[2.]But to his great surprise he finds the matter is neither so nor so; they had certain questions against him, instead of proofs and evidences against him. The worst they had to say against him was disputable whether it was a crime or no-moot-points, that would bear an endless debate, but had no tendency to fasten any guilt upon him, questions fitter for the schools than for the judgment-seat. And they were questions of their own superstition, so he calls their religion; or, rather, so he calls that part of their religion which Paul was charged with doing damage to. The Romans protected their religion according to their law, but not their superstition, nor the tradition of their elders. But the great question, it seems, was concerning one Jesus that was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. Some think the superstition he speaks of was the Christian religion, which Paul preached, and that he had the same notion of it that the Athenians had, that it was the introducing of a new demon, even Jesus. See how slightly this Roman speaks of Christ, and of his death and resurrection, and of the great controversy between the Jews and the Christians whether he were the Messiah promised or no, and the great proof of his being the Messiah, his resurrection from the dead, as if it were no more than this, There was one Jesus that was dead, and Paul affirmed he was alive. In many causes issue is joined upon this question, whether such a person that has been long absent be living or dead, and proofs are brought on both sides; and Festus will have it thought that this is a matter of no more moment. Whereas this Jesus, whom he prides himself in being thus ignorant of, as if he were below his notice, is he that was dead, and is alive, and lives for evermore, and has the keys of hell and of death, Rev 1:18. What Paul affirmed concerning Jesus, that he is alive, is a matter of such vast importance that if it be not true we are all undone.
(6.)That therefore he had proposed to Paul that the cause might be adjourned to the Jewish courts, as best able to take cognizance of an affair of this nature (Act 25:20): "Because I doubted of such manner of questions, and thought myself unfit to judge of things I did not understand, I asked him whether he would go to Jerusalem, appear before the great sanhedrim, and there be judged of these matters." He would not force him to it, but would be glad if Paul would consent to it, that he might not have his conscience burdened with a cause of this nature.
(7.)That Paul had chosen rather to remove his cause to Rome than to Jerusalem, as expecting fairer play from the emperor than from the priests: "He appealed to be reserved to the hearing of Augustus (Act 25:21), having no other way to stop proceedings here in this inferior court; and therefore I commanded him to be kept a close prisoner till I might send him to Caesar, for I did not see cause to refuse his appeal, but rather was pleased with it."
III. The bringing of him before Agrippa, that he might have the hearing of his cause.
1.The king desired it (Act 25:22): "I thank you for your account of him, but I would also hear the man myself." Agrippa knows more of this matter, of the cause and of the person, than Festus does; he has heard of Paul, and knows of what vast concern this question is, which Festus makes such a jest of, whether Jesus be alive or no. And nothing would oblige him more than to hear Paul. Many great men think it below them to take cognizance of the matters of religion, except they can hear them like themselves in the judgment-seat. Agrippa would not for all the world have gone to a meeting to hear Paul preach, any more than Herod to hear Jesus; and yet they are both glad to have them brought before them, only to satisfy their curiosity. Perhaps Agrippa desired to hear him himself, that he might be in a capacity to do him a kindness, and yet did him none, only put some credit upon him.
2.Festus granted it: Tomorrow thou shalt hear him. There was a good providence in this, for the encouragement of Paul, who seemed buried alive in his imprisonment, and deprived of all opportunities of doing good. We know not of any of his epistles that bore date from his prison at Caesarea. What opportunity he had of doing good to his friends that visited him, and perhaps to a little congregation of them that visited him every Lord's-day, was but a low and narrow sphere of usefulness, so that he seemed to be thrown by as a despised broken vessel, in which there was no pleasure; but this gives him an opportunity of preaching Christ to a great congregation, and (which is more) to a congregation of great ones. Felix heard him in private concerning the faith of Christ. But Agrippa and Festus agree he shall be heard in public. And we have reason to think that his sermon in the next chapter, though it might not be so instrumental as some other of his sermons for the conversion of souls, redounded as much to the honour of Christ and Christianity as any sermon he ever preached in his life.
3.Great preparation was made for it (Act 25:23): The next day there was a great appearance in the place of hearing, Paul and his cause being much talked of, and the more for their being much talked against.
(1.)Agrippa and Bernice took this opportunity to show themselves in state, and to make a figure, and perhaps for that end desired the occasion, that they might see and be seen; for they came with great pomp, richly dressed, with gold and pearls, and costly array; with a great retinue of footmen in rich liveries, which made a splendid show, and dazzled the eyes of the gazing crowd. They came meta pollēs phantasias - with great fancy, so the word is. Note, Great pomp is but great fancy. It neither adds any read excellency, nor gains any real respect, but feeds a vain humour, which wise men would rather mortify than gratify. It is but a show, a dream, a fantastical thing (so the word signifies), superficial, and it passeth away. And the pomp of this appearance would put one for ever out of conceit with pomp, when the pomp which Agrippa and Bernice appeared in was, [1.] Stained by their lewd characters, and all the beauty of it sullied, and all virtuous people that knew them could not but contemn them in the midst of all this pomp as vile persons, Psa 15:4. [2.] Outshone by the real glory of the poor prisoner at the bar. What was the honour of their fine clothes, compared with that of his wisdom, and grace, and holiness, his courage and constancy in suffering for Christ! His bonds in so good a cause were more glorious than their chains of gold, and his guards than their equipage. Who would be fond of worldly pomp that here sees so bad a woman loaded with it and so good a man loaded with the reverse of it?
(2.)The chief captains and principal men of the city took this opportunity to pay their respects to Festus and to his guests. It answered the end of a ball at court, it brought the fine folks together in their fine clothes, and served for an entertainment. It is probable that Festus sent Paul notice of it overnight, to be ready for a hearing the next morning before Agrippa. And such confidence had Paul in the promise of Christ, that it should be given him in that same hour what he should speak, that he complained not of the short warning, nor was put into confusion by it. I am apt to think that those who were to appear in pomp perplexed themselves more with care about their clothes than Paul, who was to appear as a prisoner, did with care about his cause; for he knew whom he had believed, and who stood by him.
IV. The speech with which Festus introduced the cause, when the court, or rather the audience, was set, which is much to the same purport with the account he had just now given to Agrippa. 1. He addressed himself respectfully to the company: "King Agrippa, and all men who are here present with us." He speaks to all the men - pantes andres, as if he intended a tacit reflection upon Bernice, a woman, for appearing in a meeting of this nature; he does not refer any thing to her judgment nor desire her counsel; but, "All you that are present that are men (so the words are placed), I desire you to take cognizance of this matter." The word used is that which signifies men in distinction from women; what had Bernice to do here? 2. he represents the prisoner as one that the Jews had a very great spite against; not only the rulers, but the multitude of them, both at Jerusalem and here at Caesarea, cry out that he ought not to live any longer, for they think he has lived too long already, and if he live any longer it will be to do more mischief. They could not charge him with any capital crime, but they wanted to have him out of the way. 3. He confesses the prisoner's innocency; and it was much for the honour of Paul and his bonds that he had such a public acknowledgement as this from the mouth of his judge (Act 25:25): I found that he had committed nothing worthy of death. Upon a full hearing of the case, it appeared there was no evidence at all to support the indictment: and therefore, though he was inclinable enough to favour the prosecutors, yet his own conscience brought in Paul not guilty. And why did he not discharge him then, for he stood upon his deliverance? Why, truly, because he was so much clamoured against, and he feared the clamour would turn upon himself if he should release him. It is a pity but every man that has a conscience should have courage to act according to it. Or perhaps because there was so much smoke that he concluded there could not but be some fire, which would appear at last, and he would detain him a prisoner in expectation of it. 4. He acquaints them with the present state of the case, that the prisoner had appealed to the emperor himself (whereby he put ann honour upon his own cause, as knowing it not unworthy the cognizance of the greatest of men), and that he had admitted his appeal: I have determined to send him. And thus the cause now stood. 5. He desires their assistance in examining the matter calmly and impartially, now that there was no danger of their being interrupted, as he had been with the noisiness and outrage of the prosecutors - that he might have at least such an insight into the cause as was necessary to his stating it to the emperor, Act 25:26, Act 25:27. (1.) He thought it unreasonable to send a prisoner, especially so far as Rome, and not withal to signify the crimes laid against him, that the matter might be prepared as much as possible, and put in a readiness for the emperor's determination; for he is supposed to be a man of great business, and therefore every affair must be laid before him in as little compass as possible. (2.) He could not as yet write any thing certain concerning Paul; so confused were the informations that were given in against him, and so inconsistent, that Festus could make nothing at all of them. He therefore desired Paul might thus be publicly examined, that he might be advised by them what to write. See what a great deal of trouble and vexation those were put to, and to what delay, nay, and to what hazard, in the administration of public justice, who live at such a distance from Rome, and yet were subject to the emperor of Rome. The same was this nation of ours put to (which is about as far distant from Rome the other way) when it was in ecclesiastical affairs subject to the pope of Rome, and appeals were upon all occasions made to his court; and the same mischiefs, and a thousand worse, would those bring upon us who would again entangle us in that yoke of bondage.
And see what a vindication! So writes Festus, and the ruthlessness of the Jews is openly made a show of: for when it is the governor that says these things, he is a witness above all suspicion: so that the Jews are condemned by him also. For, when all had pronounced sentence against them, then, and not sooner, God brings upon them the punishment. But observe: Lysias gave it against them, Felix against them, Festus against them - although he wished to gratify them - Agrippa against them. What further? The Pharisees - even they gave it against themselves. No evil, says Festus, "of such things as I supposed: no accusation did they bring against him." And yet they did bring it: true, but they did not prove it: for their evil design and daring plot against him gave cause to surmise this, but the examination brought out nothing of the kind.
Continue studying Acts 25:16 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
SUMMARY
In Acts 25:16, the Roman governor Festus articulates a fundamental principle of Roman jurisprudence to King Agrippa II and Bernice, explaining why he could not summarily condemn the apostle Paul. He asserts that Roman custom dictates that no man should be delivered to death without first confronting his accusers face to face and being granted the opportunity to answer for himself concerning the charges laid against him. This declaration underscores the Roman commitment to due process, contrasting sharply with the Jewish leaders' desire for a swift, biased conviction and highlighting the legal safeguards that inadvertently served God's sovereign plan for Paul.
CONTEXT
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
The passage employs several literary devices to convey its message effectively. Exposition is prominent, as Festus clearly and directly explains the Roman legal procedure, providing insight into the administrative workings of the Empire. There is a subtle Contrast implied between the Roman commitment to due process and the Jewish leaders' desire for a swift, perhaps prejudiced, condemnation of Paul. The language used is highly Legal Language, reflecting the formal and procedural nature of the Roman judicial system, with terms like "manner," "accused," "accusers," "licence to answer," and "crime laid against him" all contributing to this formal tone. This precise legal terminology underscores the gravity and established nature of the principles Festus is articulating.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Acts 25:16 powerfully illustrates how God's sovereign plan can unfold even through the established legal and political systems of the world. Festus's adherence to Roman due process, though motivated by his duty as a governor, inadvertently served to protect Paul and advance the gospel's trajectory towards Rome. This demonstrates that God is not limited by human opposition or political machinations; rather, He can use the very structures designed by humanity, even secular ones, to achieve His divine purposes. The principle of fair trial, confrontation of accusers, and the right to defense, articulated here, resonates with broader biblical themes of justice, truth, and the protection of the innocent, reminding believers that God values righteous judgment and often works through imperfect human systems to uphold it.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
Festus's declaration in Acts 25:16 offers profound insights for contemporary reflection and application. It reminds us of the inherent value of due process and the protection of individual rights, principles that find echoes in God's own character of justice and fairness. In a world often characterized by hasty judgments, social media trials, and the erosion of presumption of innocence, this verse calls believers to champion equitable systems, to listen to all sides of a story, and to resist the urge to condemn without full understanding. It also serves as a powerful reminder that God is sovereign over all earthly authorities and institutions. Even when facing seemingly insurmountable obstacles or unjust accusations, we can trust that God is at work, orchestrating events—even through the adherence of pagan officials to their own laws—to accomplish His purposes and protect His people. Our call is to live righteously, speak truth, and trust in His unfailing providence, knowing that He can turn even legal challenges into opportunities for His name to be glorified.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
What was the "manner of the Romans" that Festus referred to?
Answer: The "manner of the Romans" refers to their established legal custom and principles of due process. Specifically, Festus highlights two key aspects: first, that it was not their practice to condemn anyone to death without a proper trial, and second, that the accused must be allowed to confront their accusers "face to face" and be given a full opportunity to "answer for himself concerning the crime laid against him." This commitment to a fair hearing, the right of confrontation, and the right to defense were foundational elements of Roman jurisprudence, distinguishing it from more arbitrary or summary forms of justice. This principle is seen throughout the Roman legal interactions in Acts, such as Paul's defense before Felix in Acts 24.
Why was it important for Paul to have his accusers "face to face" and "licence to answer for himself"?
Answer: These provisions were crucial safeguards against false accusations and arbitrary condemnation. The requirement for accusers to be "face to face" (Greek: kata prosōpon, literally "according to face") ensured that the charges were made openly and directly, preventing secret or anonymous accusations and allowing the accused to identify their detractors. Having "licence to answer for himself" (Greek: topon apologías labeín, literally "to receive a place of defense" or "opportunity for defense") meant that Paul was granted the full right to present his own case, refute the charges, and call witnesses, ensuring that his side of the story was heard before any judgment was rendered. These rights were fundamental to a just legal process, preventing a conviction based solely on the prosecution's claims and upholding the principle of innocent until proven guilty, as also reflected in Old Testament law in Deuteronomy 17:6.
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
While Acts 25:16 directly describes a Roman legal custom, its underlying principles of justice, truth, and the right to defense find profound echoes and ultimate fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. Jesus, the perfectly innocent Lamb of God, was denied every aspect of the due process that Festus here champions. He faced false accusations without proper witnesses (Matthew 26:59-60), was condemned by a biased religious court (Mark 14:64), and was delivered to death by a Roman governor, Pilate, who knew Him to be innocent yet succumbed to political pressure (John 19:4-6). Jesus, though having "licence to answer for himself," often remained silent, fulfilling prophecy and bearing the sins of humanity (Isaiah 53:7). Thus, the very legal principles that protected Paul pointed to the profound injustice suffered by Christ, whose perfect sacrifice became the ultimate act of divine justice, taking away the "crime laid against" all who believe in Him (2 Corinthians 5:21). In Christ, the innocent was condemned so that the guilty might be acquitted, demonstrating God's perfect justice and boundless mercy.