The New Testament refers to “lawyers” several times,
and if we aren’t careful, we might picture those people the way that we picture lawyers today.
We need to remember that the lawyers and scribes were the same people in the New Testament.
And they were not attorneys, barristers or solicitors as they are today.
The Biblical lawyers were students, teachers and copyists of the Mosaic Law.
So when Ananias, the Jewish High Priest and a group of his Sadducean cronies from the Sanhedrin
traveled the 70 miles from Jerusalem to Caesarea to stand in Caesar’s court,
they didn’t bring their own lawyers, they sought for a Roman, civil lawyer.
Now we can use the picture of a modern lawyer.
This Tertullus, as appears from his name, was a Roman, and there is no indication that he was a proselyte.
He stood before the Governor and beside the Jews as nothing more than their attorney.
We have no reason not to believe that he was pleading a case for which he had been hired.
He was not necessarily there to tell the truth or to act for justice – that was supposed to be Felix’s job.
Tertullus had only one purpose – to accomplish the will and pleasure of the people who had hired him.
Notice that the Bible describes him as being an “orator,” and not specifically a “lawyer.”
The Greek word for “orator” has given us our English word “rhetoric.”
“Rhetoric” is the art or skill of using language in order to persuade people.
There is a sense in which Biblical preachers are not supposed to be orators,
It’s the preacher’s job, in the sense of a prophet, to declare the truth and open the door for God to change hearts.
It’s not about truth or falsehood, or there would be very few defense attorneys.
The average courtroom is a battlefield of a verbal arguments, with some truth mixed in.
The word “sedition” refers to dissension and insurrection.
In other words, the accusation was that Paul was a social troublemaker.
This was the only charge out of the three in which the Romans had any interest.
Sedition meant a challenge to their authority, and that was something which they took very seriously.
And, it’s quite ironic that the Jews made this charge against Paul,
If there ever was a seditious nation under the blanket of Rome it was these Jews.
So in this case the pot was calling the kettle “black.”
What would happen in an American courtroom if one of the lawyers called the defendant a “pest”?
This kind of name-calling is not to be tolerated in our “civilized” courts.
But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not terrified: for these things must first come to pass; but the end is not by and by. Then said he unto them, Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven.”
And what does society think about such pestilences?
When it comes to AIDs and other plagues, the government throws hundreds of billions of dollars at it.
And just about everywhere Paul went there was a riot of some kind.
But a survey of the history of Paul proves that HE was not the cause of the trouble.
In Jerusalem during his first visit there after his conversion, the Jews plotted to kill him, so to calm the situation he left town.
In Antioch in Pisidia Paul and Barnabas were having a great ministry among the Gentiles,
And the Jews stirred up the devout and honourable women, and the chief men of the city, and raised persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and expelled them out of their coasts.”
Once again it was the Jews who were the rabble-rousers.
In Philippi, after healing a demon-possessed woman, her managers created a riot.
In Thessalonica and Corinth the Jews disrupted the public peace because they were jealous of the success of the missionaries.
In Ephesus there was a huge riot, and the truth about Christ was at the heart of it, but the riot started with the idolatrous tradesmen.
And then there was the attack against Paul as he was trying to peaceably worship the Lord there in the temple in Jerusalem.
Paul was never seditious, although he certainly ruffled feathers and stirred emotions.
He was certainly not advocating riot and revolution as many of his country-men were doing.
And if it had been permitted, Paul could have introduced the records of court of Corinth.
Paul had already been tried for charges like these and had been acquitted in other courts.
Was Paul a pestilent fellow?
Well, yes he was, in the same way that a sick patient might think that a nurse with a daily needle full of anti-biotic is a pest.
After a quick examination of the facts, Paul should have been released.
And in the British and Canadian legal systems, the High Priest should have been found guilty of creating a fraudulent law-suit.
Paul was a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.
The word “ringleader” means that Paul stood on the front-lines, a leader, a chief, a champion.
That Paul was just such a person, no one can, or would want, to deny.
It was not an honour which Paul sought for himself.
This was something into which the Lord put himl, by command, by commission and by circumstances.
After all, he had been an ardent enemy of the truth, and should have been deemed unworthy of such a great honour.
Notice that the High Priest didn’t want Tertullus to call Paul or any of us “Christians.”
That would be approaching the recognition of Jesus as the Christ.
The title “Christian” came from the heathen of Antioch, who meant the term in a derogatory way.
The Jews used the term “Nazarene” in exactly the same derogatory way.
And then there is that word “sect.”
In my library at home there is a scholarly history book written by a Canadian college professor.
The title clearly outlines that the author thinks that there is a difference between a true church, a sect and a cult.
To this man, a “cult” is a religious group or sect, which is extreme, radical and troublesome.
A “sect” is a religious group which follows some clearly defined principles which make them different from the larger group, without being dangerous.
And to this man a “church” means any of several large Protestant or Catholic denominations.
The Jehovah Witnesses are a cult, and we, Independent Baptists are a sect.
But we Baptists are not the slightest bit surprised at this.
And they basically said that about our Saviour.
“But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets.”
that you had traveled from Seattle, to New York, to London to Singapore to Tokyo and back to Seattle,
and that you now knew that the earth was not flat but round, you would be called “a heretic.”
You would be a heretic, but you would also be right.
But that is not a bad thing; that is a good thing.
And, just like Gallio, Felix had no authority, or even interest, in such things.
Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: whom we took, and would have judged according to our law.
But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands.”
This charge is a complete calumny.
It is a malicious charge made for no other purpose than to hurt the reputation of the Apostle.
I say that because Tertullus, as a good lawyer, knew that Felix could not possibly care less about that matter.
This is equivalent to a prosecutor raising the question of a woman’s morals when she is on trial for murder.
Paul’s lawyer should have been on his feet in protest.
It had nothing to do with the case before the judge.
Was Paul guilty of profaning the temple? He was not.
Where were the Asian Jews who first began shouting that charge when he was first arrested?
This was nothing but a malicious, wicked attack, and it had no business being raised in Caesar’s court.
There is much more wickedness and deceit involved in Tertullus’ presentation before Felix,
but tonight, we’ll stop with those three charges.
The Governor should have ordered the immediate release of the prisoner, but he was too corrupt for that.
And what lessons should we learn from this:
Well, we are reminded here that life is not necessarily “fair” – even for the dedicated servant of God.
Nevertheless, “all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.”