LISTEN
WATCH
READ
Main Idea
False accusations are an opportunity to grow spiritually and point people to Christ.
As a freshman at App State, I encountered an infamous evangelist on Sanford Mall who came once a year, using a terrible tactic to engage the students in conversation. He would eventually get to the message of repentance and forgiveness, but only after he would point to random students passing by and call them horrible names. I happened to be walking by when he pointed to a friend of mine from high school and called her a harlot. This was one of the sweetest people I knew, and I could immediately see the surprise and hurt in her eyes. I was shocked at the crass false accusation from a complete stranger. While she remained stunned and silent, I couldn’t contain my anger. I got in the man’s face and started to yell at him. “How dare you! You don’t even know her?!” I was livid with righteous indignation. I defended her integrity and probably said some other things about that guy that I shouldn’t have. At that moment, I couldn’t believe his audacity. I had to say something.
Let’s put you into a hypothetical. Imagine you were my friend in that scenario. How would you respond? I want you to think about that as we read the story today.
Passage
Acts 24:1–21 ESV
And after five days the high priest Ananias came down with some elders and a spokesman, one Tertullus. They laid before the governor their case against Paul. And when he had been summoned, Tertullus began to accuse him, saying:
“Since through you we enjoy much peace, and since by your foresight, most excellent Felix, reforms are being made for this nation, in every way and everywhere we accept this with all gratitude. But, to detain you no further, I beg you in your kindness to hear us briefly. For we have found this man a plague, one who stirs up riots among all the Jews throughout the world and is a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes. He even tried to profane the temple, but we seized him. By examining him yourself you will be able to find out from him about everything of which we accuse him.”
The Jews also joined in the charge, affirming that all these things were so.
And when the governor had nodded to him to speak, Paul replied:
“Knowing that for many years you have been a judge over this nation, I cheerfully make my defense. You can verify that it is not more than twelve days since I went up to worship in Jerusalem, and they did not find me disputing with anyone or stirring up a crowd, either in the temple or in the synagogues or in the city. Neither can they prove to you what they now bring up against me. But this I confess to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the Law and written in the Prophets, having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust. So I always take pains to have a clear conscience toward both God and man. Now after several years I came to bring alms to my nation and to present offerings. While I was doing this, they found me purified in the temple, without any crowd or tumult. But some Jews from Asia— they ought to be here before you and to make an accusation, should they have anything against me. Or else let these men themselves say what wrongdoing they found when I stood before the council, other than this one thing that I cried out while standing among them: ‘It is with respect to the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial before you this day.’ ”
Some people like the fight. I think Paul is one of those, metaphorically speaking. Here, Paul and Tertullus are like boxers who intentionally step into the intellectual ring to fight. It’s game on.
Reading the passage made me think of an epic showdown on June 28, 1997, between Mike Tyson and Evander Holyfield. Two heavyweight champions would go toe-to-toe again (they had fought the year before) to the sound of a roaring crowd. I was fifteen then and captivated. I couldn’t wait to watch these two pros go at it, but after only a few rounds, the fight had to stop. Holyfield shrieked in pain and jumped backward. Why? Because Tyson had bitten the top portion of Holyfield’s ear clean off! Then, after Holyfield agreed to continue, Tyson bit his other ear! And almost as quickly as the match had begun, it ended with a disqualification. Tyson played dirty and dishonestly, much like…
Tertullus
Who he is – hired orator well versed in the speaking techniques of Aristotle and Demetrius, who acts as a prosecuting attorney for the Sanhedrin.
His two rhetorical de. vices –
1. Efficient and succinct pandering
• brag about Felix’s peaceful reign (which is a lie. There wasn’t peace, and Felix was the worst)
• his foresight
• call him ‘most excellent’
• boast in his reforms
• humbly honor him
2. False accusations.
His four false and unprovable accusations are thrown like a flurry of punches:
Paul is a plague
This is an ad hominem attack in which you assault your opponent’s character and/or authority.
A plague is a contagious degenerative disease that harms the population. By saying this, Tertullus is claiming that Paul is damaging to their society as a public menace, and his “disease” spreads to everyone around him.
This punch is thrown to make Paul look bad.
Paul causes riots
No doubt, Claudius Lysias informed Felix of the riot and mob that formed in Jerusalem.
Tertullus claims that Paul started it.
Tertullus knew Felix likely didn’t care about Jewish theology, but he was tasked with civil order. Inciting riots would have been an actionable offense that Felix could have acted on.
Paul is a ringleader
Tertullus then tries to paint Paul as the leader of a fringe religious sect called the Nazarenes.
The Romans despised new religions because they were unrooted and untrustworthy. Old religions were more respectable. Judaism was old and, therefore, trustworthy. Plus, Felix’s wife, Drusilla, was Jewish so that he would have had a soft spot for them. As a skilled orator and attorney (and maybe even a Jew himself because of his use of the ‘we’ pronoun), he would have known that it would help his case to distance Paul from Judaism and make him look like a rebel leader of a new religion… one that was not protected by Roman law, as Judaism was.
This would have been a second charge that Felix could use against Paul as an actionable offense against Rome.
Paul profanes the temple
This was the accusation that Paul brought an unclean gentile into the temple.
This was utterly false, but it was something the Jews used previously, so it is being used now.
It was also the least concerning for Felix because it didn’t break Roman law, but it was worth mentioning because it would have upset his wife.
Then, Tertullus ends with the words of a self-proclaimed hero: “he tried this… but we seized him.” We saved the day and ensured this rebel didn’t harm your people further. You are welcome, sir.
Then he finished with a confident statement: “You’re a smart man. I’m sure you’ll side with us once you’re finished here.”
The depraved actions of the Sanhedrin have already been likened to the demon-possessed man living in the tombs, wanting to tear Paul apart.
False understanding and accusations have been a part of the Christian life from the beginning.
1. In Paul’s day, we see these types of accusations.
2. After the time of the Apostles, Rome looked at the holy kiss as incest, communion as cannibalism, and faith in one God as atheism.
3. How about today? What does our secular society misunderstand about us? Instead of being known for our Christlike love for God and one another, we are labeled as intolerant, homophobic, judgmental, close-minded, bigoted, unintelligent, oppressive, self-righteous, and even likened to oppressive regimes like the Nazis.
As Solomon said, there is nothing new under the sun. Fake news and faulty assumptions will always be a part of the Christian life, and your witness will stand or fall in how you confront them.
With that said, let’s look at how Paul handles his.
Paul
Now, let’s hit rewind and see how Paul reacts to the punches.
First, let’s notice that Paul doesn’t pander. He acknowledges Felix’s authority and gets straight to it.
Then, he gets into a series of confessions, so let’s view his response as a series of dodges and punches.
Paul was peaceful
This would be Paul ducking under Tertullus’ first and second punches (riots and ringleaders)
Paul points out that it’s ridiculous to think 12 days is enough time to incite a riot and become their ringleader. And Felix can verify this timeframe spent in Jerusalem.
And not only was 12 days insufficient to make such a ruckus, the Jews (who were conveniently absent at the trial) didn’t find Paul disputing anyone or stirring up the crowd.
He was peacefully attending the Pentecost celebration at the temple (in the synagogue, and the city, for that matter). He was there by himself, minding his own business.
These are all empty claims that cannot be proven by any stretch of the imagination.
However, Paul is willing to confess to specific actions, which, as we will see, are actually punches thrown at Tertullus.
Paul maintains the connection between Judaism and Christianity
Paul claims that he isn’t a ringleader of a sect but rather a follower of The Way.
According to The Way:
1. Paul worships Israel’s God (the God of our Fathers), welding Christianity to Judaism and making them inseparable, against Tertullus’ efforts.
2. Paul believes in Israel’s scriptures. Not only does Paul worship the God of the Jews, but he also believes in their sacred scriptures.
3. Paul hopes in God through the resurrection. His accusers accept such a hope. This hope is for the eternal joy for the just and the justice of eternal punishment for the unjust. In fact, a portion of the Sanhedrin (the Pharisees) would agree with all three of these confessions.
Paul acts with a clear conscience
He does this in full view of both God and man. He is not one of the unjust whom he previously mentioned. He has acted justly to everyone, everywhere, in accordance with the law and morality of Israel’s God.
Not only is this his appeal to right standing to his accusers, but it is also a claim of innocence to Felix because Judaism is an accepted and legal religion under Roman law.
Paul has brought relief aid to the Jewish people
We don’t see this highlighted in Acts, but Paul mentions it multiple times in various letters (Rm 15:25–26; 1 Co 16:3; 2 Co 8:1–9:15).
This would be a counter-punch to Tertullus’ ad hominem remark. He called Paul a plague there, but in reality, Paul is bringing a financial aid package to the saints in Jerusalem that restores life, not destroys it. What a punch!
Paul was performing Jewish rituals
Paul was also completing the Nazarite vow at the temple when the Jews from Asia found him, which would have been proof positive that he was respecting Jewish law and the temple, not defiling them.
Then Paul throws a sharp uppercut.
“The Jews from Asia ought to be here to give an account…”
Why is that such a heavy blow? Because all of the accusations hurled at Paul happened before the Sanhedrin got involved. The Jews from Asia were the eye-witnesses, and they were conveniently (and intentionally) absent from the conversation.
Paul stands on his previous statement
…But, since they aren’t, the Sanhedrin can only bear witness to what they saw and heard, and the only thing I cried out within their earshot was:
“It is with respect to the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial before you this day.”
And so, Paul mike-drops his defense in the exact same way he did while on trial before the Sanhedrin.
He is not a rioter or ringleader. He was quietly worshipping and fulfilling a vow at the temple, and he upheld the teachings and practices of a legal religion protected under Roman law. No eyewitnesses were present. No accusations are provable, and instead of being a destructive force, Paul proves he was there to help the poor and needy among his people. Paul and the Christian message are no threat to the Pax Romana (or Roman peace).
Case closed. Game Over.
Your witness is everything. When you are wrongfully accused or slandered, your response is not about destroying your opponent. Paul didn’t slander Tertullus or sling mud at him. His goal wasn’t to beat him to a bloody pulp in the intellectual ring. His goal was to demonstrate his innocence and honor God through his defense. How did you imagine yourself reacting in the hypothetical I mentioned at the beginning? Did the story today change your approach or motivation?
Takeaway
The enemy will attack you through false accusations and misinformation.
If you keep your conduct pure and your conscience clear, there will be no real case against you.
Here are 4 Rs of what to do if you find yourself on the defensive:
1. Don’t retaliate.
2. Relate to Jesus’ suffering and humility while being unjustly treated (he was made perfect through suffering).
3. Remember God’s ultimate justice and vindication will prevail and that the effectiveness of your witness depends on how you…
4. Respond by standing your ground, defending your innocence, and pointing people to Christ while being accused.
False accusations are an opportunity to grow spiritually and point people to Christ.
Questions
- Why did Tertullus accuse Paul of being a plague, causing riots, being a ringleader, and profaning the temple? What was his intention behind these accusations?
- What were the key points Paul made in his defense against the accusations brought by Tertullus? How did he show his innocence?
- How can we apply Paul’s example of responding to false accusations with grace, truth, and integrity in our daily lives, especially when we are misunderstood or wrongly accused?
- What practical steps can we take from Paul’s response to false accusations to help us maintain a clear conscience and stand firm in our faith when faced with challenges or persecution?
- How can we follow Paul’s example of standing our ground in faith and defending the truth of our beliefs while also showing love and grace to those who may falsely accuse or misunderstand us?