85 Acts 24:1-21 The Lawyer vs. The Tentmaker

June 22, 2025

Christopher C. Freeman

Title: The Lawyer Vs. The Tentmaker Text: Acts 24:1-21 FCF: We often struggle defending ourselves with wrong motives or beliefs. Prop: Because God’s providence includes wicked people accusing His children falsely, we mut not fear for ourselves but defend the gospel against attack. Scripture Intro: ESV [Slide 1] Turn in your bible to Acts chapter 24. In a moment we’ll begin reading in the English Standard Version starting from verse 1. You can follow along in the pew bible or in whatever version you prefer. Last time we saw Paul delivered safely from a plot on his life. Now this Roman prisoner has been transported to Caesarea to face his accusers before the governor of Judea, Antonius Felix. But Paul is still not out of danger. What will the apostle face in this trial? Will Felix be reasonable? Will his accusers even show up? Let’s look. Stand with me to give honor to and focus on the reading of the Word of God. Invocation: Creator and Designer of the Universe and all that is within it, we humbly come before You today to seek clarity. We often face the ridicule, mockery, and disdain of those who are deceived. We often are slandered and maligned, labeled with unkind and unfair labels. Yet we confess and believe that You, our Lord, are the Designer and Maker of all that is. We confess that You have promised that all things work for the good of Your people. And so we must confess that even these things are for our good. Help us Lord to learn from Your servant Paul today. Help us to trust Your infallible plan. We pray this in Jesus’ name Amen. Transition: Let us get right to the text this morning to find out what happens to Paul in Caesarea. I.) God’s providence includes wicked people accusing His children falsely, so we must not fear false accusations. (1-9) a. [Slide 2] 1 - And after five days the high priest Ananias came down with some elders and a spokesman, one Tertullus. They laid before the governor their case against Paul. i. Although the Chief Priests, the Elders, and the Sanhedrin were ready to execute a scheme to kill Paul with very little preparation, to actually bring a Roman suit against Paul would be far more difficult than simply killing him. ii. Paul stayed in Herod’s Praetorium for 5 days while Ananias gathered some Elders who would go with him as well as one other important member of their entourage. iii. Although the ESV calls him a spokesperson here, more likely, as other translations indicate, Tertullus was an attorney specializing in Roman Law. iv. His name is Latin, so we recognize that he is probably not a Jew. Certainly not a Jew from Judea. v. So, in the 5 days between Paul’s move to Caesarea and his accusers actually arriving, they have been quite busy. vi. They have hired an attorney and have formed their Roman case against Paul. vii. So, what is their case? viii. Well before we get to hear about that, Let’s spend some time talking about Felix. Afterall, that is how Tertullus starts his prosecution of Paul. b. [Slide 3] 2 - And when he had been summoned, Tertullus began to accuse him, saying: “Since through you we enjoy much peace, and since by your foresight, most excellent Felix, reforms are being made for this nation, 3 - in every way and everywhere we accept this with all gratitude. 4 - But, to detain you no further, I beg you in your kindness to hear us briefly. i. Although it would be easy to see this as Tertullus’ attempt to butter up Felix, we should recognize that Tertullus is a professional orator and attorney. Nothing he says in these opening remarks are without some purpose. ii. Certainly, part of that purpose would be to ingratiate Felix to their cause. iii. We actually still have some of this in our legal system. We refer to the judges as “Your Honor” and it is generally wise to be on the good side or at least not be on the BAD side of a judge even in our legal system. iv. But Tertullus has built a legal case against Paul and everything he says to Felix about Felix is designed to bring stark contrast between the judge and the accused. To the extent that for the judge to find Paul guilty is because Paul is the opposite of Felix. v. In the text we see a great many things spoken that present Felix in quite the positive light. vi. But what do we know about this man? Was he really a good governor? How long did he serve? And what was his track record? vii. Much of what we know about Antonius Felix is taken from the Roman historian Tacitus and the Jewish historian Josephus. viii. Although their accounts of the man are not completely consistent on some details, the fact of the matter is that largely both historians agree on a few key facts. 1. First, Felix was formerly a slave along with his brother Pallas. a. Pallas was a friend and confidant of the Emperor Claudius and was freed from slavery by Cladius’ mother. b. Along with Pallas Felix too was freed. c. So his freedom was given on account of someone else. 2. Second, Felix married three times in his life. And because of those marriages he advanced in power and authority. a. His first wife was the daughter of Marc Antony and Cleopatra and his third wife was Drucilla the daughter of Herod Agrippa the First. b. So, once again, because of others he advanced into positions he did not earn. 3. Third, in the situation we spoke of a few weeks ago where Ananias, the high priest of Israel, was sent to Rome for excessive brutality against the Samaritans – you guessed it, Felix was in the middle of this too. a. The man who was governor of Samaria at that time took all the blame instead of Ananias. He was exiled. And guess who took his place? Yep. Felix. b. Again, he was given a position, he did not earn. 4. Finally, both Josephus and Tacitus agree that Felix’ governing of the province was marked by increasing unrest and brutality. a. Tacitus says “with savagery and lust he exercised the powers of a king with the disposition of a slave.” b. In AD 55 he put down an Egyptian man who claimed to be the Messiah. We’ve already talked about this some since Paul was thought to be that man by Lysias. c. Felix put down this Egyptian with mercilessness and brutality. d. And generally speaking, the Jews hated Felix. He continually did things to frustrate them and took rather liberal approaches to their laws. This infuriated especially the Pharisees who had a rather conservative view of scripture. ix. So, in light of this background, what are we to make of Tertullus’ words about Felix? x. He says that they are thankful to Felix because he has brought much peace and many reforms. xi. Either Tertullus is just lying or, what is more likely, is that this just shows us the cunning and wickedness of Ananias and the spiritual leaders of Israel. xii. Even though Felix was merciless, savage, and brutal being recognized by even Roman historians as being barbaric – Ananias had no issues with his rule. And that is kind of that problem, right? xiii. Ananias and Felix are two peas in a pod. xiv. Furthermore, the attributes ascribed to Felix are the exact opposite of the charges they are about to bring against Paul. xv. So, what are those charges? c. [Slide 4] 5 - For we have found this man a plague, one who stirs up riots among all the Jews throughout the world i. Felix is described as a bringer of peace, but Paul is described as a plague. A blight. One who stirs up riots among all the Jews throughout the world. ii. This first charge against Paul is a rather unfair assessment of Paul’s history over his missionary journeys. iii. Paul certainly had been involved in a number of riots and angry mobs but we can accurately say that he never instigated them nor did he perpetuate them. iv. In many cases we see Paul leave a city, many times by his own choosing, in order to avoid further unrest. v. We also would point out that it was actually the Jews in every case who started the aggression then hunted Paul down following him from city to city in order to continue to stir people up against him. vi. So, this first charge is exactly backward. Paul incited no riots… the Jews simply hated what he said so much that THEY stirred up people against him. vii. And there is a good bet that Felix knows that this is actually the way it was. Why? viii. The Jews were notorious for causing riots and issues in the Roman Empire for decades. Since before the Romans even controlled Judea. ix. We should also observe how absolutely insignificant this charge is to Paul or Felix at this particular time. x. Even if it were true that Paul started riots in various parts of the Roman Empire, that really has no bearing on this trial before Felix. xi. Even if Felix wanted to find him guilty, he would have to investigate reports from various locations about these incidents. xii. This is why Paul’s defense focuses on what has happened in the last few days not in the last several years. Because that is all Felix can really focus on anyway. xiii. But this charge has done its damage. It has compared Felix the peacemaker to Paul the troublemaker. xiv. Paul is starting riots everywhere and Jerusalem is just another in a long list. xv. As we know, Rome doesn’t look too kindly on rabble rousers and riot makers. That he is a riot-starting-plague is a serious charge against him. xvi. What is the next charge? d. [Slide 5] and is a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes. i. A second charge brought against Paul is connected to the first. ii. Paul instigates these riots among the Jews because he is the ringleader or peddler of the heresy known as Nazarene. iii. This charge comes somewhat closer to being an issue Felix must deal with since Rome had granted Judaism a special status among religions that could be practiced in the Roman Empire. iv. If the Nazarene teaching of The Way is indeed a heresy of Judaism, then it would not have the same freedoms that Judaism had been given. v. But is Paul really the ringleader? vi. As Paul will go on to testify in future trials, the ringleader is very clearly the Risen Jesus of Nazareth. He is merely a servant of this Jesus. vii. But the fact that he is the leader of this heresy is actually a secondary matter. Paul will go to great lengths in his response not to combat the idea that he is the leader of this group but to deny that it is a heresy of Judaism. We’ll get there in a few minutes. viii. Tertullus said that Felix had, through masterful providence, designed many reforms which reinterpreted cultural and religious laws for the better of the people. But Paul is charged with being a leader of a heresy that leads to nothing but riots and unrest. e. [Slide 6] 6 - He even tried to profane the temple, but we seized him. i. Here is the final charge laid to Paul and it is also related to the previous two. ii. Paul is a plague and incites riots among the Jews because he is the ringleader of the Nazarene Heresy and the proof of that is that he tried to profane the temple with his heretical teachings. iii. This is the charge that could really get him killed. iv. Roman practice throughout the empire was to support the worship of local deities and the prevention of the desecration of any temples or gods. v. They were remarkably syncretistic. And although the Romans did not generally allow the Jews to execute their criminals. When it came to temple desecration the Romans would allow them to execute those who violated their law. vi. So here we see the Jews are fighting for their right to protect their own temple and enforce their own religious laws. vii. This is what is at stake. viii. Felix knows this. ix. If this charge is proven to be true, and Felix does not allow the Jews to execute Paul… then tensions would no doubt continue to rise between Rome and the Jews. x. This is as much a political move as it is a legal one. xi. Of course, what they failed to bring with them is evidence and witnesses… something Paul will point out in his defense. f. [Slide 7] [We wanted to judge him according to our own Law. 7 But Lysias the commander came along, and with much violence took him out of our hands, 8 ordering his accusers to come before you.] i. Every word on the screen is omitted from most modern translations of the bible. Some put the text in brackets with a foot note explaining that there is doubt about the inspiration of these words. ii. It boils down to textual criticism and understanding how we harmonize manuscripts from different times and in different manuscript families. iii. Within the discipline of textual criticism there are several rules or guidelines we follow to determine which manuscripts are closer to the original autographs. iv. [Slide 8] In this particular case, every rule points to this section not being written originally by Luke. v. Most likely it was added in at a later date to attempt to provide commentary on how the Jews may have seen the events unfold. g. [Slide 9] 8 - By examining him yourself you will be able to find out from him about everything of which we accuse him.” i. The final point that Tertullus makes is to abdicate their role as accusers to produce any evidence for their claims and grant that to Felix. ii. This is actually not all that uncommon in Roman cases. iii. As we study Roman culture, Felix would have had absolute authority to not only do the work of Judge and jury but also to do the work of detective. iv. And Tertullus is saying that if Felix cannot substantiate their claims against Paul by interrogating him, then it is Felix’s failure to interrogate him properly. v. And here we see some subtle pressure put on a man that everyone knows doesn’t deserve the position he is in. h. [Slide 10] 9 - The Jews also joined in the charge, affirming that all these things were so. i. Again, this clues us in to the fact that Tertullus is probably not Jewish. ii. If he was, we are left to wonder who these Jews are. iii. But because he wasn’t, the Jews present at this trial are the High Priest and the Elders who had made the journey to Casarea to accuse him. iv. In any case, it seems like the case is closed. v. There are three charges, all of them with serious consequences if they are found to be true. vi. All Felix has to do is say the word and Paul will die. i. [Slide 11] Summary of the Point: What is God’s will for Paul? It has been revealed to him by Jesus Christ Himself. Jesus came to him that night in the barracks of the Anatolian Fortress, just after the debacle of the Sanhedrin trial. Jesus told him that he must have courage because just like he bore witness to the gospel in Jerusalem, he must go and do the same in Rome. God is getting Paul to Rome. And yet we see in this text a top-notch attorney has just laid out three charges against Paul all of which could earn him serious penalties and even death. Paul’s life hangs on a thread. But we know better. It isn’t just that God will prevent this from keeping Paul from going to Rome… but my friends as the weeks go on we will see that these charges will actually serve to get Paul to Rome. Once again, we are reminded that the providential and sovereign hand of God is always working all things according to the counsel of His will. There is nothing that happens that He has not already foreordained. So what does that mean for us? We must not fear what wicked men say about us when they slander us and accuse us falsely. Transition: [Slide 12 (blank)] So what does not fearing men’s false accusations look like? If Paul is given a chance to speak, will he just quietly say, “I am trusting the Lord to bring me to Rome safely.” And then sit down? Let’s see what Paul does. II.) God providence includes wicked people accusing His children falsely, but we must make a defense of the hope that we have in us. (10-21) a. [Slide 13] 10 - And when the governor had nodded to him to speak, Paul replied: “Knowing that for many years you have been a judge over this nation, I cheerfully make my defense. i. Paul is invited by the governor to speak. Felix needs to hear his side of the case, especially since Tertullus invited Felix to examine him. ii. Paul begins by acknowledging Felix’s last decade of service in the area. iii. Because he has had such a long tenure, Paul feels confident and even happy to bring his defenses before him. Hoping that he will be reasonable. b. [Slide 14] 11 - You can verify that it is not more than twelve days since I went up to worship in Jerusalem, 12 - and they did not find me disputing with anyone or stirring up a crowd, either in the temple or in the synagogues or in the city. i. Paul pivots and exploits the failure in the first charge against him. ii. Their charge was he had caused riots all over the Roman Empire with Jews. iii. However, Paul points out that he did not do so in Jerusalem only 12 days ago. iv. In this he recognizes that Felix has no jurisdiction or concern about things that have happened in the distant past in other provinces. v. What he is concerned about is what has happened most recently in his province. vi. And most recently, Paul did not cause any issues in the temple, in the synagogues or even in the city itself. vii. Further Paul invites Felix to verify this. viii. There is some question about how to interpret Paul’s 12 day comment. We can talk about it more on Thursday, but the best way to see it is as if Paul was saying, “I only spent a total of 12 days in Jerusalem, which isn’t enough time to start a riot.” ix. In this way, Paul effectively defeats their first charge. x. They say that I am a plague and a riot maker among the Jews. xi. But I spent 12 days in Jerusalem and neither had time to start a riot nor can they produce one witness to accuse me of stirring up crowds in the temple, the synagogues or even in the city itself. xii. In other words, if this is all related to me being some kind of heretical religious zealot, I am doing a pretty poor job at peddling my beliefs. c. [Slide 15] 13 - Neither can they prove to you what they now bring up against me. i. Paul confronts the other two charges against him with the same general statement. ii. They are unable to prove anything that they have accused him of. iii. They cannot prove that he is the ringleader of the Nazarene heresy, nor can they prove that he attempted to desecrate the temple. iv. But Paul doesn’t want to allow them to get away with calling those who follow Jesus, heretics. d. [Slide 16] 14 - But this I confess to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the Law and written in the Prophets, 15 - having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust. 16 - So I always take pains to have a clear conscience toward both God and man. i. This is actually a brilliant defense used in some of the more famous Roman cases we have documented. ii. The person without admitting to a crime does confess something about themselves that vindicates them. iii. What is Paul saying? iv. Although I am certainly a follower of The Way, The Way is not a heresy of Judaism, but is rather the next step in Judaism. v. It is verified by the law and the prophets which spoke of this time in Judaism where the Messiah would come and give a New Covenant. vi. And a key part of that New Covenant is the belief that both the just and the unjust will be raised from the dead. vii. Now it is clear that Ananias would not believe in the resurrection. He was a Sadducee. viii. But some of the Elders Ananias brought with him no doubt were Pharisees. ix. Really his defense here is that he has not created a heresy of Judaism or another faith altogether, instead he is following what has been prophesied… the real Judaism is following Jesus of Nazareth because He died and rose again just as He said He would. x. And in this way Paul’s conscience is clear. He is not doing this for money, for power, or prestige, but because the Fathers of Israel and the prophets spoke of this long ago. e. [Slide 17] 17 - Now after several years I came to bring alms to my nation and to present offerings. 18 - While I was doing this, they found me purified in the temple, without any crowd or tumult. But some Jews from Asia— i. Again, Paul is just clearly proclaiming that he is Jewish. ii. After several years being away, he came to give to the poor (probably the financial relief package he had collected from Asian and Greek churches to bring to the church of Jerusalem). iii. It was while he was being a good Jew, having been purified, in the temple, a place he was supposed to be, doing what he was supposed to do, that they found him. iv. And there were no crowds around him or tumults at all. v. Until what? vi. Until some Jews from Asia. vii. But that’s the problem right. viii. Paul actually interrupts himself here… f. [Slide 18] 19 - they ought to be here before you and to make an accusation, should they have anything against me. i. Absent from these witnesses are the Jews who actually stirred up the crowd against Paul. ii. Where are they? iii. Tertullus wasn’t in the temple that day. Ananias wasn’t in the temple that day. The Elders of Israel weren’t there. iv. Where are the Jews from Asia who were there? Why are they not present to make an accusation? v. Why indeed. vi. Paul is aiming for the dismissal of the case here. vii. How? viii. In Roman law, a witness who abandons their responsibility to bring an accusation against someone in court would actually be guilty of a crime themselves. ix. In that case the charges levied without a plaintiff are dismissed and in most cases the trial is dismissed as well. x. But if the charges against him weren’t seen personally by the Jews present, what is their experience with Paul? What crimes have they observed him do? g. [Slide 19] 20 - Or else let these men themselves say what wrongdoing they found when I stood before the council, 21 - other than this one thing that I cried out while standing among them: ‘It is with respect to the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial before you this day.’ ” i. Paul points out that these men should speak concerning what they found him guilty of at the trial before the Sanhedrin. ii. And there lies the rub. iii. That trial was a debacle. iv. They broke out into a theological dispute and brought NO charges against Paul except for theological disagreements. v. Disagreements where SOME OF THEM even AGREED with Paul. It can’t be heresy if some of the ruling religious council of Israel agree with what he says. vi. Certainly, at this trial of the Sanhedrin, they did not mention any of the charges which they brought to Felix this day. vii. The only thing they had against him was what he had said bout the resurrection of the dead. viii. Paul points out that the only reason he is on trial is because they want Rome to solve this sectarian dispute between the Jews and the Christians. ix. And that is a great defense… because Rome has no interest in doing that. x. Paul deftly points out in his defense that none of the charges he has been formally accused with were personally witnessed by anyone present at the trial that day. xi. What does that mean? xii. It means that this should be… case dismissed. It is actually a fairly easy decision for Felix to make. xiii. But… we’ll wait until next week to find out what he decides. h. [Slide 20] Summary of the Point: God is working in this trial. God is using the false accusations against Paul and really against Christianity to move Paul down the road to Rome. But Paul does not sit idlily by and trust the Lord passively. Instead, he actively trusts the Lord by giving a defense for the hope he has in him. Tertullus made a huge mistake, guided by God’s hand. That mistake was to bring into the trial the reputation of followers of Jesus. If this trial was only about Paul… perhaps Paul remains more passive. But Tertullus makes this about the church and if he makes it about the church, he makes it about the gospel. Paul defends the gospel. He flips the script and explains how the followers of Jesus are rooted in the same scriptures and prophets that the Jews also claim and shows how he has not been the cause of trouble but that these Jews are making accusations that they are unwilling to back up in a trail setting. Thus, Paul provides a positive example that when we are falsely accused, we must give a defense for the hope we have in us. We must contend for the gospel. Conclusion: So, CBC, what have we learned today and how then shall we live? Whare are some basics of faith and practice we should observe through this. Basics of Faith and Practice: In many ways, knowing how the book of Acts ends helps us to understand the primary point of teaching or doctrine that Luke is revealing throughout all the events of Paul’s journey to Rome. But verse 11 of chapter 23 is the interpretive guide for how we are to apply that doctrinal truth. God’s providential hand is guiding Paul through many twists and turns to arrive in Rome at precisely the right time. Meaning that even this strong case against Paul raised with false accusations by a professional attorney is part of that plan God has for Paul. But Jesus’ words to Paul help us to know what to do when we are in situations where we don’t know the details of God’s plan but do know the end of God’s plan. God’s plan for us, His children, those who are in Christ, is to save us from death and resurrect us to life eternal in His Son. And so our response to every threat, every false accusation, every bad thing we face must depend on those promises which the Lord has given us. In the text today we recognize two specific responses. First is to not fear false accusations of men. Other New Testament writers encourage us to continue living godly lives so that these accusations will bring shame to our accusers and glory to our God the Father. The second response is to defend the gospel from misrepresentations or false accusations. But let us seek to apply these things more specifically this morning. 1.) Mind Transformation: “What truth must we believe from this text?” or “What might we not naturally believe that we must believe because of what this text has said?” We must affirm that God’s providence includes false accusations from wicked people. a. Through the church age, the forces of darkness, working in conjunction with man’s natural wickedness, have levied countless false charges against God’s people. b. Even a cursory reading of John Foxes’ book of martyrs displays that through every age of the church wicked men have hunted down and within the legal government system brought to bear against God’s children charges which they did not commit. c. Many times, this led to imprisonment, torture, and even death. d. If God is all knowing, He would have known of these plans of the wicked. e. If God is all powerful, he could have orchestrated events to keep His people from being in such a position. f. If God is all good, he would be highly motivated to not allow injustice to be executed upon His people. g. But because all these are true, we must conclude that God’s hidden plan, which He has made since before the foundation of the world, even includes when people falsely accuse us of wrongdoing. h. Once again, I won’t belabor the point, because it will continue to come up… i. But the only option we have as bible believing people is to affirm that God providentially orchestrates all events in our lives to accomplish His hidden will. j. Because we know He is all powerful, all good, and all knowing, this must be true. k. What does this mean for us? 2.) De-Exhortation: “What actions should we stop doing” or “What behaviors do we naturally practice that this passage tells us to stop doing?” We must not fear what wicked men may do through false charges and injustice. a. We as Americans have a particular hatred of injustice, impingement on our freedoms, or being labeled as guilty when we aren’t. b. That is why our legal system was designed to assume the innocence of a person unless it is proven beyond reasonable doubt that we are actually guilty. c. Our culture is shifting to declare guilt and innocence by popular opinion rather than by a court of law, but there is still a tenacious desire in us to defend or prosecute those we feel are innocent or guilty. d. Along with this we might grow fearful or even angry when we are accused of something that we did not do. e. We have all heard stories of people who were convicted in a court of law for doing something which earned them a life sentence or even the death sentence, only to discover 20 years later new evidence that the person did not actually commit the crime. f. Stories like these fuel the fear that we might be misrepresented or even slandered for doing something we didn’t do. g. But affirming that God providentially moves in all the events of life to accomplish the counsel of His will allows us to take a step back and do as Jesus instructs in the sermon on the mount. h. Rather than expressing fear or anger over false charges, we should instead rejoice for suffering these false accusations against us. We should rejoice for having the opportunity to suffer for the sake of Christ. i. We don’t need to fear what men may do to us or what crazy schemes they may concoct to cancel us. j. We need only to trust the Lord who knows all our ways and has a plan that He has already accomplished to save us from this life and resurrect us to life eternal. k. Of course, God’s sovereign decrees dwell in the paradox of human responsibility. And that is the nature of our next application. 3.) Refutation: “What lies must we cast down” or “What do we naturally believe, or have been taught to believe, that this passage shows is false?” We must deny that trusting God’s sovereign providential hand means to do nothing. a. Paul rises in defense here. b. We’ll get to why he does this in a moment but for now let us just recognize that Paul acted. c. Paul did not sit back and decline to speak because he knew he would get to Rome since Jesus said it would be so. d. If God told us that we would go to Africa tomorrow and lead someone to Christ, but we never booked a flight or did anything to get ourselves there, well that is just plain disobedience. e. God telling us what will be does not give us liberty to do nothing. f. Instead, just like it always does, belief that God is telling the truth requires us to obey as if it is true. g. Because of this, if we are in the same position as Paul we must… 4.) Exhortation: “What actions should we take?” or “What is this passage specifically commanding us to do that we don’t naturally do or aren’t currently doing?” We must be ready to give a defense for the hope we have in us. a. While I cannot say that it is morally wrong or a sin to defend ourselves against false charges, I can say that we don’t see that happening here for Paul. b. Not really. c. Paul doesn’t debate that he isn’t the ringleader of the Nazarene Heresy. He doesn’t debate that he was involved in riots. d. But he does debate the charge that Christianity is opposed to God’s law. Because that cannot be allowed to go unchecked. e. Paul very clearly outlines how he as a follower of Christ did not start a fight in Jerusalem, he was in the temple following the law. f. He says that The Way is rooted in the same Fathers and prophets that all his accusers believed in too. g. For the sake of the gospel and the reputation of Christ followers, Paul makes his defense. Certainly, this vindicates himself to some degree, but it is obvious his aim is greater than that. h. We too must be laser focused on what is important. i. Again, I do not think it is wrong to defend ourselves or even make a legal defense for ourselves if we are accused falsely. But, our primary goal in every instance in life is to make much of the gospel of Jesus Christ and if necessary, contend for it. j. Sadly, oftentimes we care more about defending ourselves than we do the gospel or our gospel witness. k. Natural man is well equipped to defend himself. And this is often our default setting. l. But it takes a spiritually mature person to defend themselves righteously and also prioritize the Kingdom of God in their defense. m. Paul strikes that perfect balance in our text today. And we must strive to emulate him. 5.) Comfort: “What comfort can we find here?” or “What peace does the Lord promise us in light of this passage of scripture?” In God’s courtroom all men are judged by a perfect and just God. a. Though our courts have some of the fairest rules in place to assure that only the guilty are punished for their crimes, the fact of the matter is that the judicial system, even in this nation, is full of injustice. b. It may happen in our lives that we will be falsely accused and though we make a strong defense we are imprisoned or even killed for something we did not do. c. But the Christian worries little about this life. They know that in God’s courtroom, the only courtroom that really matters, they will be declared righteous, not of themselves, but on the account of Christ who became their sin so that they might become the righteousness of God. d. We find comfort in the kingdom that is coming… not in the kingdom that is. 6.) Evangelism: “What about this text points us to Jesus Christ, the gospel, and how we are restored?” The gospel produces a law keeping and blameless church. a. Paul finds it especially necessary for followers of Christ to be known as people who follow the law of God and draw their teachings from the Fathers and the Prophets. b. In our time the gospel has been reduced to a magical prayer that you pray which God is somehow obligated to honor because you said the right words. c. But Paul defends the godly and noble character of the church. Why? d. Because God’s true children are godly and holy people. e. In Matthew 7 Jesus talks about those who in the midst of being cast from his presence object on the grounds that they had done mighty works in his name. But Jesus still rejects them because as He says, I never knew you. f. And then the clincher… you lawless ones. Or you lawbreakers. g. You see although the gospel certainly tells us that we cannot earn God’s grace or forgiveness and that only Christ can purchase our salvation…. The gospel also clearly teaches us that those who are truly saved are being conformed into the image of Christ. We are, as I said a moment ago, the righteousness of God. h. The fact of the matter is that no man will enter the kingdom of heaven if they purposefully continue to violate God’s law. i. So, my friends, if you are here today and you have prayed a prayer – but your life is still lived intentionally violating God’s law… then you must realize that you have no hope. j. Those whom the Lord has set free are free indeed. Meaning free not only from the penalty of sin but from its power as well. Let me close with a prayer recorded in the Didache (did-ah-kay) which is a very early record of church worship and teaching. We give thanks to you, Father, for your holy name which you made to dwell in our hearts. Thank you for the knowledge, faith, and immortality which you made known to us through Jesus your Son. To you be glory forever. You, Lord Almighty, created all things for your name's sake, and gave people food and drink for their enjoyment, that they might give thanks to you. And you have blessed us with spiritual food and drink and eternal light through your Son. Above all we give thanks to you that you are mighty. To you be glory forever. Remember your church, Lord, to deliver it from all evil and to make it perfect in your love, and gather it together in its holiness from the four winds to your kingdom which you have prepared for it. For yours is the power and the glory forever. Let grace come and let this world pass away. Hosanna to the God of David. If any one is holy, let them come! If any one be not, let them repent. Maranatha-our Lord, come! We pray this in Jesus’ name, amen. Benediction: May the Lord of Hosts be with you So that you will become greater and greater still, Until you receive that crown of life Which the Lord has prepared for those that love Him. Until we meet again, go in peace.