Jun 21, 2015
Acts 25:1-22
Download Audio:
Outline:
I don’t think this will come as a surprise to anyone, but we live in a society that is experiencing a seismic philosophical-shift in thinking. As a result of secular influences coupled with the decreasing influence of mainline Christianity, societal norms in America are being reconstituted. The question is what will this reconstitution actually look like?
It is clear that a concerted move has been made to transform America into a society that is more accepting and tolerant of all moral positions. With the one exception of the person who believes in moral absolutes. This person is deemed categorically unfit for the public square.
Understand… What makes relativism problematic to a culture is that it isn’t the logical end to the thought process! For if all things are true then by default nothing is true. And if nothing is true then life is void of any fundamental meaning.
Again… If everyone’s opinion matters equally then ultimately no personal opinion actually matters. And if no personal opinion matters then the individuals who have these opinions lack any form of significance (we’re all simply the evolutionary byproduct of randomness).
In the end all relativism accomplishes is bridging societal progress from theistic meaning to nihilistic meaninglessness. Think about it like this… The reason people move from theism to relativism is the fact they’ve been sold on the idea that God is the fundamental problem with society. (Think about the temptation of Eve in the garden.)
And yet, the reason many then move from relativism to nihilism (if they don’t repent and return to theism) is that when it becomes painfully obvious they’ve been lied to as things inevitably worsen the natural tendency is to become cynical about the essence of life.
There is a conversation between Matthew McConaughey’s character Rust Cohle and Woody Harrelson’s character Martin Hart in the hit HBO show “True Detective” where Rust eloquently and depressingly expresses the cynical outlook of nihilism.
After explaining to Hart that he wasn’t a Christian, Rust explains his core belief system, “I think human consciousness, is a tragic misstep in evolution. We became too self-aware, nature created an aspect of nature separate from itself, we are creatures that should not exist by natural law. We are things that labor under the illusion of having a self; an accretion of sensory, experience and feeling, programmed with total assurance that we are each somebody, when in fact everybody is nobody. Maybe the honorable thing for our species to do is deny our programming, stop reproducing, walk hand in hand into extinction, one last midnight – brothers and sisters opting out of a raw deal.” Hart then interjects by asking, “So what’s the point of getting out of bed in the morning?” Cohle reasons, “I tell myself I bear witness. The real answer is that it’s obviously my programming and I lack the constitution for suicide.”
While the “erosion of truth” is the clear hallmark of culture embracing relativism, it is the “erosion of trust” that indicates the cultural shift towards nihilism may well be underway. Recent studies show that this tend is currently taking place in America today.
According to new polling by the “Harvard University Institute of Politics” millennials trust virtually no institution in our society (the only two in positives were the military and scientists). Their research revealed only 12% trust the Press, 14% Wall Street, 18% Congress, 25% the Federal Government, 37% the President, 42% the Supreme Court, and 50% the Police.
Beyond this a 2014 Pew Survey of Millennials found this trend was not limited to just societal institutions. Pew found that only 19% of Millennials believe that “most people can be trusted.” Down from previous generations: 40% of Baby Boomers and 31% of Generation X’ers.
Even when you expand the polling to include a wider demographic of American society the General Social Survey conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago confirms that “trust in other people is lower today than at any other point in the last four decades.”
In his article “Millennials Don’t Trust Anyone - That’s a big deal” Washington Post columnist Chris Cillizza explains what makes this growing lack of trust so alarming. He writes, “If we all become nihilists… The ability of politics and politicians (or any other major institution) to effect any real change among the populace becomes virtually impossible.”
I bring this up because Christians are not immune from the negative effects of societal trends - including this growing inability to trust people and institutions.
Many of you refuse to vote figuring… Washington is corrupt and broken!
Many of you have commitment issues figuring… You can’t be hurt if you’re never vulnerable!
Many of you are scared of marriage figuring… 50% of them end in heartache anyway!
Many of you are hesitant to plug into a church figuring… Everyone eventually lets you down!
And while there are probably justifiable reasons for being cynical, please consider… Do you trust God or are you skeptical He might also let you down? Really (be honest)… When it’s all said and done do you trust that Jesus will actually follow through on His promises? Do you trust that He’s able to work through your present circumstances to accomplish His plan for your life? Do you even trust that He has a plan for your future?
I think while most of us would say yes to these questions (at least in the theoretical) and while we would all agree trusting Jesus completely is essential if we’re really going to follow Him, for many the problem with trust and why we end up cynical comes back to a fundamental misunderstanding of what this practically looks like in the life of the believer.
As we transition into Acts 25 it’s important we remember that while Paul was incarcerated and his outlook daunting, Jesus had given him several key promises through His Word. Not only would “Paul testify of Jesus in Rome,” but he would “bear His name before kings.”
For Paul this is where the rubber of his Christian faith would meet the hard road of reality… While his present circumstance could have easily led him to be pessimistic concerning these promises would he fight the urge and trust that God would come through in the end?
In looking at how Paul practically trusted in the promises he’d been given, this morning we’re going to see that trusting God requires patience and demands wisdom.
Keep in mind that as Acts 25 opens Paul has been in Caesarea under house arrest for the last two years when, on account of the brutality and mismanagement of the province, the Governor Felix was summoned back to Rome and replaced by Festus.
Since history tells us the Jews were sending a delegation to testify against him, Luke tells us instead of releasing Paul, in his final act as governor, Felix “wanting to do the Jews a favor” decides to leave Paul in chains. Note: No formal charges have yet to be levied against him.
Imagine how much of a head scratcher this development had to of been for Paul! For a man who’d spent the last decade traveling the world spreading the Gospel, sitting in Caesarea must have seemed counterintuitive. I’m sure Paul expected that before departing Felix would release him and he could begin the journey to Rome… But this was not to be so!
While on the surface remaining in Caesarea could have easily caused Paul’s confidence in the Lord’s promises to waiver, it’s clear he remained patient knowing that if God had not orchestrated events to get him Rome it simply meant He still had use of him in Caesarea!
Understand… When God gives us a promise it is paramount that we trust that His timing to fulfill such promises is always perfect! Trusting God requires patience!
A.W. Tozer, “What then are we to do about our problems? We must learn to live with them until such time as God delivers us from them… We must pray for grace to endure them without murmuring. Problems patiently endured will work for our spiritual perfecting. They harm us only when we resist them or endure them unwillingly.”
Before we continue let’s establish a Profile of Porcius Festus: Little is known of Festus other than two things implied by our text. First, it would seem, unlike his predecessor, Festus was a nobel man serious about his civic responsibilities. Historically, Festus had been charged by Rome with the task of cleaning up the mess left behind by Felix.
Secondly, as we’re going to see over the next two chapters, it will become evident Festus not only knew very little of the Jewish faith, but was simply unaware of the events that had occurred over the last 30 years in Judea involving Jesus of Nazareth.
Acts 25:1-5, “Now when Festus had come to the province, after three days he went up from Caesarea to Jerusalem. Then the high priest and the chief men of the Jews informed him against Paul; and they petitioned him, asking a favor against him, that he would summon him to Jerusalem - while they lay in ambush along the road to kill him. But Festus answered that Paul should be kept at Caesarea, and that he himself was going there shortly. “Therefore,” he said, “let those who have authority among you go down with me and accuse this man, to see if there is any fault in him.”
Because Felix’s actions had antagonized the Jews and unnecessarily stirred up unrest in a region known to be a tender-box, “three days” into his tenure as governor Festus “went up to Jerusalem” in order to smooth over political relations with the Jewish people.
Knowing Festus’ motivations for coming “up from Caesarea… the high priest and the chief men of the Jews” view the change in leadership as an opportunity to make a move against Paul. Note: Even two years removed from the events these men are still filled with hate!
Luke tells us after they “inform Festus” about Paul and the crimes he was guilty of (we can imagine how one sided that account had to of been) they boldly “ask for a favor.” The favor: Summon for Paul to be brought to Jerusalem so they could ambush him along the way!
Knowing Paul was untouchable in Caesarea and faced with the reality he would likely be acquitted if he was given a fair trial these religious men full of utter hatred towards Paul choose to cash in their political chips by having Festus do them this one favor.
Understanding the potential implications participating in such a conspiracy against a Roman citizen under his control might have for his political career, Festus wisely counters their request with a proposal of his own. While “Paul would be kept at Caesarea” Festus advises they send with him “those who have authority” in order to “accuse this man to see if there is any fault in him.” Basically, Festus proposes a retrial promising to resolve the issue.
Acts 25:6-9, “And when he had remained among them more than ten days, he went down to Caesarea. And the next day, sitting on the judgment seat, he commanded Paul to be brought. When he had come, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood about and laid many serious complaints against Paul, which they could not prove, while he answered for himself, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended in anything at all.” But Festus, wanting to do the Jews a favor, answered Paul and said, “Are you willing to go up to Jerusalem and there be judged before me concerning these things?”
After a “ten day” stay in Jerusalem Luke records that Festus returned “to Caesarea” where he immediately makes good on his promise to retry the case against Paul. And yet, as with the first go-around, while the Jews “laid many serious complaints against him” they still couldn’t meet the burden of proof required to convict a Roman citizen.
Though it would seem Festus agreed that Paul had committed no offense “against the law of the Jews, against the temple, or against Caesar” the entire dynamic helped him understand why Felix had refused to issue a ruling. Paul was a political hot-potato!
As I see the flow of the narrative I believe the reason Festus refused to participate in the conspiracy to have Paul assassinated was the justifiable belief Felix had probably bungled the case so badly that a new trial would easily lead to the outcome the Jews desired.
And yet, now that he’s heard the case and come to the realization that Paul (keep in mind a Roman citizen) was not only innocent of any wrongdoing but had done nothing even warranting incarceration, Festus finds himself in what we’d call a political pickle.
On one side of the equation Festus knew Roman law required Paul be immediately released. And yet, since his mandate from Rome had been to re-establish good relations with the Jews Festus also knew releasing Paul could have potentially explosive repercussions.
So… Knowing he couldn’t convict Paul but also realizing he couldn’t release him either, Festus “wanting to do the Jews a favor” asks Paul if he’d be “willing to go up to Jerusalem” for a third trial “concerning these things?” Sadly, Festus chooses to join the conspiracy.
Acts 25:10-12, “So Paul said, “I stand at Caesar’s judgment seat, where I ought to be judged. To the Jews I have done no wrong, as you very well know. For if I am an offender, or have committed anything deserving of death, I do not object to dying; but if there is nothing in these things of which these men accuse me, no one can deliver me to them. I appeal to Caesar.” Then Festus, when he had conferred with the council, answered, “You have appealed to Caesar? To Caesar you shall go!”
Whether Paul understood Festus was deliberately participating in the conspiracy to kill him or not he rightly found a proposed change in venue to be suspect. To this point Paul even calls out Festus, “You very well know” that “I have done nothing wrong of which these men accuse me.” “Explain how a change in venue is going to provide a change in outcome?”
Because Paul knew he would not get a fair trial with Festus, under Roman rite and privilege as a citizen, Paul decides to forgo a trial in Jerusalem by appealing his case to Caesar.
Note: This had to of been news to Festus’ ears! We’re told after quickly “conferring with the council” Festus realizes Paul has given him the perfect out! He could tell the Jews he was willing to do them a favor by sending Paul to Jerusalem, but that because he’d decided to appeal his case to Caesar his hands were completely tied.
However… While this may have given him an out with the Jews, Paul appealing his case to Rome did create an entirely different set of problems for Festus. Not only was there no verdict for Paul to appeal, but technically he still hasn’t been formally charged with a crime.
This means before sending Paul to Rome Festus will need to come up with a justifiable reason why they had incarcerated a citizen without charge for the last two years.
Q: Why would Paul refuse to go to Jerusalem and instead appeal his case to Caesar? Could this be possibly seen as evidence that Paul was being impatient with God’s timetable and was now taking matters into his own hands? I don’t think this is the case.
For starters, Paul was not afraid of the plot to kill him! Because of the promises given to him by Jesus Paul was confident nothing could keep him from Rome… Not even these Jews!
Instead, I see Paul’s actions as evidence he’s finally surrendered to his calling. As we’ve mentioned it had never been Jesus’ plan for Paul to go to Jerusalem. So now faced with the decision to go share the Gospel with the Jews or appeal his case to Caesar Paul wisely decides to act in a manner consistent with the directives he had already been given.
Understand… Trusting God demands wisdom! Paul wanted to remain patient and wait on God’s timing, but he was also wise enough to recognize another detour to Jerusalem was not part of God’s plan. The key was that any decisions in his control would be made in order to move him in the direction of God’s leading knowing it wouldn’t effect God’s timing.
Sadly, it’s all to often that we demonstrate an inability to trust God when we willfully take matters into our own hands because of a lack of patience. And yet, when given choices to act inline with God’s promises it’s wise to do so! The case can be made that it was in choosing to appeal his case to Caesar that Paul was demonstrating his trust in God!
Acts 25:13-22, “And after some days King Agrippa and Bernice came to Caesarea to greet Festus. When they had been there many days, Festus laid Paul’s case before the king, saying: “There is a certain man left a prisoner by Felix, about whom the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, when I was in Jerusalem, asking for a judgment against him. To them I answered, ‘It is not the custom of the Romans to deliver any man to destruction before the accused meets the accusers face to face, and has opportunity to answer for himself concerning the charge against him.’
Therefore when they had come together, without any delay, the next day I sat on the judgment seat and commanded the man to be brought in. When the accusers stood up, they brought no accusation against him of such things as I supposed, but had some questions against him about their own religion and about a certain Jesus, who had died, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.
And because I was uncertain of such questions, I asked whether he was willing to go to Jerusalem and there be judged concerning these matters. But when Paul appealed to be reserved for the decision of Augustus, I commanded him to be kept till I could send him to Caesar.” Then Agrippa said to Festus, “I also would like to hear the man myself.” “Tomorrow,” he said, “you shall hear him.”
Before we close our study… I do want to point out that as a direct result of Paul’s willingness to trust the Lord (demonstrated by his patiences and wisdom) he’s now about to see the promises of God finally come to fruition! In chapter 26 we’ll see Paul “bear His name before Kings,” and then in chapter 27 Paul will begin his journey to Rome.
In conclusion… As I consider this societal transition from theism to relativism to nihilism I can’t help but notice the way this cultural reconstitution is effecting people. C.S. Lewis once observed that “there are only two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.’”
And it’s to his point that I would simply add a third grouping… Yes, as Lewis correctly reasons, there are those who choose to place their trust in God. These men and women boldly declare their confidence in God in spite of their circumstances… “Thy will be done!”
As Martin Luther once said these people “pray, and let God worry.” And since this is their approach their hearts are full of hope! Their lives filled with expectation and confidence in the will and work of God! These are people who choose to lay hold of the promises of God and cling to them no matter what may come their way!
Lewis was even correct that there’s a group of people placing their trust in anything other than God. They have boughten into the premise of relativism that the Moral Absolute Giver is the problem with society. They believe man (as his own god) with his institutions (the towers he builds to the sky) are the ultimate remedy to the ails that face humanity.
But it should be pointed out that this second group of people almost inevitably transform into a third for when “God says, ‘All right, then, have it your way’” it doesn’t take long for the lofty ideals of relativism to fall back to earth as devastating failures.
And it’s in this moment, faced with the reality that man and his institutions cannot be trusted, that one of two things ultimately occurs… People either become an apathetic, self-indulged, pessimists (like Rust Cohle) or they repent of their rebellion and place their trust in the True God who has never failed to be worthy! What kind of person are you?
On October 7, 2011 C.H. Spurgeon posted the following exhortation on Facebook, “Oh, blessed trust! To trust him whose power will never be exhausted, whose love will never wane, whose kindness will never change, whose faithfulness will never fail, whose wisdom will never be nonplussed, and whose perfect goodness will never be dimmed! Happy art thou, reader, if this trust is thine! So trusting, thou shalt enjoy sweet peace now, and glory hereafter, and the foundation of thy trust shall never be removed.”