Acts 24 sermon study

Very helpful & practical commentary on Acts 24
Introduction: It will be important to know some background information about the prominent persons before whom Paul testified. Antonius Felix, procurator (imperial governor) of Judea from AD 52 to 59, was a commoner, not an “equestrian”--the noble class from which nearly all high Roman officials and came. His unprecedented rise from humble social origins to his royal position was owed to the influence of his brother Pallas, who had much influence at the Roman court under Emperor Claudius. During his term of office, several Jewish uprisings occurred and Felix put them down with such extreme ruthlessness that he alienated more moderate Jews which in turn led to worse political unrest. Eventually he was relieved of his duties because of how his heavy-handedness was backfiring so badly. Felix at the time of his meeting with Paul was married to Drusilla, the youngest daughter of the Jewish king Herod Agrippa I (whose death is described in Acts 12:19-23). All historical accounts report that she was a ravishing beauty. Originally she was betrothed to the crown prince of Commagene, in Asia Minor, but the marriage did not take place because the the prince would not convert to Judaism. Instead, she married the king of Emesa, a small state in Syria. But according to the Jewish historian Josephus, Felix seduced her with the help of a Cypriot magician, and she left her husband to marry him. At the time of this incident with Paul, she was not yet 20 years old.

24:24-27. What can we tell from this brief description that Paul said to Felix and Drusilla? First of all, Paul spoke of “faith in Christ Jesus”. It is helpful to see how Luke can summarize the gospel message in this way. It shows us that the gospel is a) The centrality of Christ. He did not come just to show us the way, but he came to be the way. He did not just come to tell us what we must do to be saved, but he came to save. b) The necessity of faith. We are not saved by what we do, but by believing in what he has done. But Luke also tells us that Paul dealt with three topics. There have been two views of what these topics were. The first view thinks that these are the three “tenses” of salvation: “the dikaiosune (‘righteousness’) of which Paul spoke was ‘the righteousness of God’ or divine act of justification which he had elaborated in his letter to the Romans. In this case, the three topics of conversation were what are sometimes called the three ‘tenses’ of salvation, namely how to be justified or pronounced righteous by God, how to overcome temptation and gain self-mastery, and how to escape the awful final judgment of God. “ (Stott, p.364) But a second view thinks that these three topics were an personal application to the lives of Felix and Drusilla. Therefore “righteousness” had to do with the lack of justice with which Felix ruled the country, and “self-control” had to do how Drusilla had broken her marriage vows, and “the judgment to come” had to do with the final penalty if these things were not repented for. I prefer to follow John Stott’s interpretation, since I don’t see how a discourse which did nothing but denounce Felix and Drusilla’s sins would have a) gotten Felix to say, “I want to hear from you again” (v.25b), nor would have b) been summarized as a discourse on “faith in Christ Jesus”. However, I think that it is very clear that a presentation of the gospel, and of salvation in all three tenses, would have necessarily begun to work on their consciences. In other words, there is nothing more convicting than to preach the gospel (rather than the law). To preach about the Son of God who came to die for our sins shows a) how serious sin is, and b) how much we owe it to him to now follow him. No wonder Felix was “afraid” (v.25)! If Paul had just preached a moral code, Felix would have been angry, not afraid. Preaching the Law reveals sin by saying: “You must obey God because he will crush you if you don’t stop sinning! Obey him out of fear.” Preaching the Gospel reveals sin by saying: “You must obey God because he let his Son be crushed so you could be free from sin. Obey him out of love.” The gospel shows us a God more holy than that of traditional religion (since He won’t settle for just our imperfect moral efforts) yet a God more loving than that of traditional religion ( since He was willing to sacrifice his own Son for us). Thus this kind of God is deeply alarming to the human conscience--more alarming than a God who just thunders out the Law and demands morality. The God of the gospel deserves more service and surrender, because of what he has done for us.
In short, both interpretations of the three topics are essentially correct. By preaching the gospel with great thoroughness, the implications for Felix and Drusilla’s life became painfully clear. But it was by preaching salvation by Christ and not by moral works that Paul convicted them so deeply about their immorality.

#2.
24:22-27. What were the four factors that contributed to prevent Felix from embracing the gospel? Do the same factors prevent you from doing what is right? The first factor seems almost trivial--an unwillingness to be “inconvenienced” (v.25c). Felix did not want his examination of Christianity to get in the way of any of his normal life goals or lifestyle. Although this may seen trivial, further reflection will reveal its seriousness. People who don’t want their schedules or routines or customary patterns of behavior to be interrupted often refuse to take Christianity seriously. They know that if they were to become Christians, it would not require huge changes--just inconveniences, minor embarassments, small changes. And yet they are unwilling. The second factor was fear. He was “afraid” (v.25b). We looked at some of the reasons above for this fear. But what exactly was he afraid of? Probably, there was a mixture of “right” fear and “wrong” fear. The “right” fear would have perhaps been some pangs of conscience. Paul’s eloquent message would have made him afraid that maybe there was a God, and maybe he had displeased him. But if the main fear Felix had was “right”, he would have moved toward listening to Paul more--not to send him away. Surely the fear that blocked the way for Felix is simply the fear of the unknown. This is a very general anxiety made up of a jumble of poorly formlated fears--what would happen if I converted? would I lose control? would I have to do many things that would make me a laughing stock? what will happen to my social standing? what will my friends think? The third factor was politics. “Felix wanted to grant a favor to the Jews” (v.27). Becoming a Christian is an individual decision between the person and God. Yet in many situations, an inquirer feels great political pressure from organized power blocks to avoid Christianity. This goes beyond the normal fear of being laughed at by friends. Often a person realizes that his or her conversion to Christianity will mean they will be excluded from some important social structure. It may mean the stalling of a career or the loss of access to a whole circle of influence and power. In many countries it means the loss of many civil rights. The fourth factor was greed. “He was hoping that Paul would offer him a bribe” (v.26). This was completely illegal, even in that time and place, but it was business as usual for Felix. Here we see Felix under some spiritual conviction, but his self-interest, his relentless attitude of “what’s in this for me?” overwhelms any healthy seeking. These four specific factors probably boil down in to two basic motives--self-interest and self-protection. If we are not willing to make sacrifices (vs. self-interest) and
make ourselves vulnerable (vs. self-protection), we will fail like Felix to embrace God’s will for us.                                   

#3 HOW & WHY PEOPLE ARE INTERESTED IN GOSPEL
What does this (Felix and wife at end of ch24) tell us about how and why people are interested in the gospel?
We cannot know the reasons for this spiritual interest for sure, but these hints remind us of some important principles about how and why people become open to the gospel. It is true that a brilliant presentation of the gospel can surprise non-believers and give them favorable impressions, but there must be some fundamental “shifts” within a person’s heart that create an openness to the gospel. No matter how eloquent or rational the presentation, it will not persuade if the hearer has no sense of need, of personal relevance.
The two most basic ways of sensing personal relevance are indicated by Felix and Drusilla’s history. 1) Friends or acquantances that find Christ. If someone you know and have some respect/affection for is either interested in Christ, or has found Christ, that makes the gospel suddenly much more plausible to you. Even if you don’t “get it”, your friend’s interest lengthens you attention span greatly. You are willing to listen more to the gospel, in case you are missing something. 2) A sense of personal weakness or inadequacy. If you have disappointed yourself, or if you have become aware of failure or powerlessness in some area of your life, your sense of spiritual need grows. Again, this lengthens your attention span, and you don’t give the gospel a hearing. It is the people who a) know no one they respect who is a Christian, or b) feel very competent and equal to the challenges of life--who simply laugh off the gospel.
There are many practical implications. First, as Christians, we should not “push” our arguments or our presentation of the gospel on someone who clearly is not interested. Unless they have a sense of the gospel’s “plausibility” and relevance, they won’t sit still for much explanation of what the faith is or why it is true. Second, this means that there is no more important witness than to: a) live exemplary lives and b) gently let people know you are a Christian. The most direct way to open a person is the gospel is to just let them get to know a Christian who they respect. (In New York City--people will most respect Christians who are excellent in their work, who are compassionate in their concern for people in need, who are fair and civil and non-condescending to people with whom they differ.  –Tim Keller