Although there are pressures constantly working against it – we live in a relatively polite society.
Although, there are people who seem to delight in hurting other people’s feelings, most people don’t.
And even when people think badly about other people, the only time that they actually put their opinions into words, is when those others have their backs turned.
But sometimes circumstances seem to squeeze our negative opinions out of us.
And for people who are in high levels of power, and who don’t really care what others think about them, they may be more prone to saying out loud what they think.
But you and I, as Christians, need to strive to keep our tongues under lock and key.
I can look back on my life and remember some occasions when I didn’t do that and people were hurt – not the least of those people was me.
The Apostle James reminds us – “Behold, we put bits in the horses’ mouths, that they may obey us; and we turn about their whole body.
Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth!
And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.
For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind:
But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.
Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.
Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.”
He was the professed Jew, who not only knew the history of Israel from the days of the Lord Jesus, but he was also basically familiar with the questions within Jewish theology.
Festus was the newcomer to Judea, and he was most likely a blank-page when it came to Jewish religion.
For all intents and purposes Festus was a secularist.
As Paul went on with his “apologia,” poor Festus was getting more and more confused and amazed.
Finally he burst out, “Paul, thou art beside thyself; much learning doth make thee mad.”
There are some lessons to be recognized in this. Let’s see if we can dig some of them out.
It was probably exactly what Agrippa and Bernice thought, but who were too polite to say.
Festus didn’t say that Paul was a criminal, even though some of the Jews might have said that.
And he didn’t say that Paul was an hypocrite, a fraud, a charlatan or religious thief.
This was not an example of name-calling.
But he felt compelled to make a comment upon a subject about which he was dumber than a stump.
We need to remind ourselves that Festus had probably reached his exalted office because he deserved it.
Unlike his predecessor, history seems to agree that this man was basically honest and just.
Sure, he had power and he undoubtedly used his power to run over people who might have deserved it.
When he said that Paul was mad or insane, he was being just as forthright as Paul had been.
He probably really did think that Paul didn’t have both oars in the water.
And in fact he suggested that it was probably due to all the time that he spent thinking and studying.
This was not a completely disrespectful statement, and even hints at a tiny compliment:
What do most children do when they are angry at another kid, but they can’t very well get back at them?
How many times have we heard professed adults call other people or groups names?
I wish that I had a dollar for every time that I have heard an adult call someone or some group a name.
To put it somewhat kindly: that is an easy response.
To put it more unkindly: to call someone “stupid” or “mad” is more often than not a stupid thing to do.
Festus simply didn’t have anything better to say, but he felt compelled to say something.
If he had seen what Paul had seen and heard what he had heard on the road to Damascus,
then he too would have become a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.
This was an easy charge to make, because it was made based upon COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS.
Obviously Paul had turned his back on wealth, power and fame.
He had been the religious Heistman winner for the year 40 AD.
And all that people like Agrippa and Festus could see was that Paul rejected it.
He had drawn a target on his own back and invited the archers of Israel to try to hit it.
And he had walked into the sacred temple of the Jews as though he wanted to be attacked.
Not only did the Romans think of it as the worst possible way to die, but Jewish law stated that it was the worst possible curse; it was reprehensible and abominable even to God.
And yet Paul chose to love a man who had been crucified.
Aren’t there some ways in which we are just as insane as Paul?
What Festus did was to verbalize what many in Judea might have said.
I’m sure that this was a common opinion.
Sure, there were others who were saying much worse things.
There were people saying that he was a blasphemer.
Undoubtedly in some circles he was accused of stealing from the Lord.
But when you come right down to it, it was foolish and short-sighted to say that Paul was insane.
As Brother Bill likes to point out: there is an insanity in sin.
To say that the world is flat is foolish or insane, but that doesn’t keep some people from saying it.
To say that there is no God is foolishness and insanity, but there are millions of people who talk that way.
If you would surrender your self-proclaimed personal authority and acknowledge that Paul MIGHT be RIGHT,
Then perhaps you too might become charged with Biblical insanity someday.”
He didn’t respond with the same kind of statement that Festus made, although most people would have.
He simply made a respectful denial:
“I am not mad, most noble Festus; but speak forth the words of truth and soberness.”
As I picture in my mind this exchange, I hear Festus agitated and emotional,
But Paul I picture as calm and cool as if he was talking to his best friend about the weather.
He was doing, just what Peter encouraged of us all in his first epistle:
He was not only telling the truth, but he was talking about the Truth.
Do you remember the conversation that the Lord Jesus had with Pilate?
A better question is: “Who is Truth?”
Paul told his audience that he was talking about nothing more than the truth.
And he was doing it with SOBERNESS.
According to Strong’s Concordance, the Greek word translated “soberness” means with a “sound mind and self-control.”
Accepted or not, It was Paul’s testimony that he was perfectly sane and rational.
As I said a few minutes ago, Paul was primarily speaking to Agrippa rather than Festus.
The governor had his chance to hear the testimony of Paul earlier, but he failed to respond properly.
Now Paul was speaking to the Jewish King and his wife.
So Festus’ interjection was answered respectfully but briefly, and then Paul turned back to Agrippa.
“King Agrippa believest thou the prophets? I know that thou believest.”
In a way, this was part of Paul’s reply to Festus.
Who is more insane, the one who believes the revelation of God or the one who rejects it?
“If I am mad, then so is King Agrippa, because he believes the Old Testament scriptures – don’t you King Agrippa?”
What is more stupid or insane – to build one’s faith on the proven Word of God or the unproven expostulations of atheistic science or faulty human reasoning?
Who is more mad?
or the man whose standard of right and wrong fluctuate with each new Country-Western song that comes along?
Who is more mad?
or those who are in the House of God hearing another exposition of the Bible?
The insane think that everyone is insane but themselves.
This behavior started long before Paul, and it won’t end until there are no unbelievers left.
What do you think that Noah’s neighbors said of him?
And what did they say of Jeremiah?
Who was more insane the teenagers who ridiculed Elisha and who were killed by a bear, or the preacher of righteousness?
The mission work of William Carey was publically characterized in the British House of Commons as “the mission of a madman.”
Once after Roland Hill got very excited as he preached, he was publically castigated as an “enthusiast.”
Later he replied: “Because I am in earnest, men call me an enthusiast, but I am not;
I once saw a gravel pit fall in, and bury three human beings alive.
I shouted so loud for help that I was heard at the distance of a mile;
help came, and rescued two of the poor sufferers.
No one called me an enthusiast then;
and when I see eternal destruction ready to fall on poor sinners, and about to entomb them irrecoverably in an eternal mass of woe,
and I call aloud on them to escape, shall I be called an enthusiast now?”
His former friends and colleagues said that he had become “mad” because he had embraced the truth.
Years later a man and lady were on there way to hear Chalmers preach when they met a friend who asked where they were going.
When they told him, he replied, “What! To hear that madman?”
They talked for a while and then convinced the man to come with them, and he agreed, just for the fun of it.
To the surprise of all three, when Dr. Chalmers read his text it was Acts 26:25 –
We aren’t surprised to hear the world charge us with insanity.
It has been doing that for a long time.
Bit it is not us who are the insane.