‘And Agrippa said to Festus, “his man might have been set at liberty, if he had not appealed to Caesar.” '

So much so that Agrippa said to Festus that Paul might have been immediately set free, if he had not appealed to Caesar. This verdict by the man who could appoint and remove the High Priests of Jerusalem was clearly seen by Luke as more than counteracting the verdicts of the High Priests themselves. The chief man in Judaism had declared Paul to be innocent. Let all take note.

So now Paul must go under escort to Rome. They could have released him. His appeal was only binding if there were grounds for it, and there were no grounds for an appeal from one who was innocent. But all recognised that political expediency prevented his release. They would not unjustly condemn him, but they dared not release him because of the impact on the Jews. To them he was a political pawn. Indeed had he not been a Roman citizen he would probably reluctantly have been handed over to the Jewish court with a helpless shrug of the shoulders, for them to determine ‘justice', with a view to keeping the peace ‘for the good of the empire'. So the alternative of releasing him was not an option. It would have brought turmoil. He had become too much of a religious issue in a country gripped by religious ferment for that to be possible. They were responsible politicians.

Continues after advertising
Continues after advertising