The Expert – Acts 26:1-3, 28

A month or six-weeks ago, we had a Wednesday-night lesson on Felix and Drusilla.

When we were done I was afraid that I had confused you more than I helped anyone in understanding the interwoven family of Herod.

When we started I said that would be our last lesson on the Herods, even though we had one more major reference coming up.

Well, we are into that final reference and I’m going to go back on my word.

I did such a poor job explaining Herod’s family that I have to try to undo my earlier mistake.

But I’m not going back to the beginning; at least I’m not going to try to explain all the brothers and sisters.

Another reason that I’m attacking this question again is that it is germane to our understanding of this chapter.

Paul said that he was happy to be able to answer for himself about the charges against him.

For those of you who like to keep up on this sort of thing: “answer for myself” is the Greek word “apologeomai” ( ap-ol-og-eh’-om-ahee ).

Once again, we run into the word “apologetics.”

Paul was happy to make his defense, because in this case he stood before a Roman government official who was actually an expert in the questions about Paul’s conduct and supposed heresies.

Our theme this evening is basically how this man Herod became such an expert.

And that means that we have to begin with the life of Herod Agrippa II.

As I tried to explain back in early October, this man was the son of Herod Agrippa I.

Herod Agrippa I is usually, simply called “Herod,” just to keep us as confused as possible.

He was the man who “stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church.

He killed James the brother of John with the sword.

And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also.”

But the Lord was not finished with Peter, and an angel was dispatched to release him from prison.

Then Acts 12 goes on to say:

“And Herod was highly displeased with them of Tyre and Sidon: but they came with one accord to him, and, having made Blastus the king’s chamberlain their friend, desired peace; because their country was nourished by the king’s country.

And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them. And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man.

And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory; and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.”

The man about whom we are reading in this chapter was 17 years old when his father died.

The Romans felt that he was much too young to ascend to the throne, so Herod’s kingdom was divided between four different people, including at least one relative.

That relative was Herod’s brother, who also became known as “Herod.”

I know that it is confusing, but remember that “Herod” was basically the family name.

He probably had another name like “Agrippa,” but we aren’t told what that was.

He was simply known as Herod.

And that Herod was made “King” of Calchis.

Bernice, was the eldest of Herod Agrippa Senior’s daughters and was probably older than Agrippa Junior.

She became the wife of her uncle Herod, King of Calchis.

(Do you have any nieces or nephews willing to marry you? I certainly don’t.)

When the King of Calchis died a few years later, Herod Agrippa II, was considered old enough to succeed him, and thus Herod Agrippa II became “King Agrippa.”

After the death of her husband, Bernice was married to the King of Cilicia, but that marriage didn’t last.

So when her brother moved into her old palace at Calchis, she moved in with him.

And at that point Agrippa and his sister lived as if they were man and wife.

There are some records that suggest that eventually she became the mistress of Titus, the Roman general who destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 AD.

Remember too, that Drusilla, the wife of Festus’ predecessor was sister to both of these two.

As Herod Agrippa II displayed the political talents of the Herodian family, he was given more and more territory to govern and more and more responsibility.

Herod Agrippa was never “king” of Israel or “king” of Judea.

He was “King of Calchis,” just as his uncle had been, but he did eventually have some religious authority in Judea.

So, when Festus became governor of Judea, it was the polite and the political thing for Herod Agrippa II and his “wife” Bernice to come for a visit.

In some ways Festus and Agrippa were equals and in some ways Festus was Agrippa’s superior.

Herod was “king” of a neighboring Roman province, but he had some special authority inside Festus’ territory.

Herod Agrippa II was an expert in all customs and questions which were among the Jews.

As we’ve said before, the Herodian family professed to be Jewish.

Originally, Antipas, the grandfather of Herod the Great, was made King of Idumea.

Idumea was the name given to the most southerly part of Judah, the place where Beersheba was located.

At one point Israel extended north to south from Dan to Beersheba.

But the majority of the people of that south country were not the children of Jacob, or at least not purely so.

So it has often been argued that the Herods were not true Children of Israel.

But at the very least they were nominal proselytes – very loose proselytes – very loose … period.

At times their family ruled over all or parts of Palestine and Israel,

but it was not because they were the descendants of David and Solomon or even Saul and Jonathan.

Antipas was made King of Judea by the governing foreign power.

As I said, as Herod Agrippa II matured, he was given more and more responsibility.

As a “Jew” he had special knowledge and connection to the religion of Israel and to the High Priest.

As a result, Claudius Caesar made him responsible for the management of the Temple in Jerusalem.

Claudius was no fool; he could recognize that the Jews were always going to be a problem for him.

And to have “Jew” in his pocket and governing the Temple, might be an help some day.

So Felix and Festus were in charge of the government of Judea, but within that rule, Agrippa had charge over the Temple in addition to his other tasks in other provinces.

He was to oversee the finances, maintenance and operation of the Temple.

And more importantly, Agrippa was the man who appointed and removed the High Priest.

This actually got him into trouble, because eventually he was changing the priests more often than he was changing his shirt.

Agrippa knew the Law of Moses, at least from the Sadducean point of view.

“Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead, King Agrippa?”

He knew the rites and the ceremonies, and there are records that he maintained them.

For example John Gill quotes several Jewish authorities.

One said, “a pipe sounded before them till they came to the mountain of the house (the temple), and when they came to the mountain of the house, even King Agrippa carried the basket upon his shoulder, and went on till he came to the court.”

Concerning the reading of the law by a king, Gill quotes another Jewish account:

“A king stands and takes (the book of the law), and reads sitting;

King Agrippa stood and took it, and read standing, and the wise men praised him;

and when he came to that passage, Deuteronomy 17:15 ‘Thou mayest not set a stranger over thee,’ his eyes flowed with tears;

they said unto him, ‘Fear not, Agrippa, thou art our brother.’”

In another place “according to the tradition of the doctors, when persons attending a funeral met a bride and her party, the mourners gave way to the wedding party,

and both were to make way for a king of Israel, when they met him;

but they say concerning King Agrippa that he met a bride, and gave way to her, and they praised him.”

Whereas it was forbidden to eat on the eve of the Passover,

so that people might eat the unleavened bread with appetite;

King Agrippa didn’t eat at all that he might be properly prepared for the feast.

Gill goes on to say that Agrippa’s adherence to many of the rites and rules of the Jews was well-known.

It may, or may not, have been nothing but show,

but at least to the leadership of Israel, he was a religious man.

And it was to this that Paul was referring when he said that he was an expert.

In other words, Herod Agrippa was probably familiar with the theological questions concerning Paul.

But the point that I want to leave with you this evening is very simple:

Being an expert in religion – any religion – the religion of the Jews or the religion of the Baptists – doesn’t make a person a child of God.

After listening to Paul’s apologia, Agrippa said, “Almost, thou persuadest me to be a Christian.”

We need to pray for ourselves, our children and our grandchildren, that we don’t end up like Agrippa.

More than being experts in all the customs and questions which are among the Baptists, we need to experts in our knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ.

How about you?