Acts 24:10

Then Paul, after that the governor had beckoned unto him to speak, answered, Forasmuch as I know that thou hast been of many years a judge unto this nation, I do the more cheerfully answer for myself:

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(10) Forasmuch as I know . . .—We note at once the difference between St. Paul’s frank manliness and the servile flattery of the advocate. He is content to appeal to the experience of the “many years” (really about six, but this was more than the average duration of a procuratorship, and the words might, therefore, be used without exaggeration) during which he had held office. Such a man was not likely to attach too much weight to the statements of Tertullus and Ananias. Felix, after having ruled for a short time with a divided authority (see Note on Acts 24:2), had superseded Cumanus in A.D. 52 or 53.

I do the more cheerfully answer for myself.—The verb for “answer” is connected with our English “apology” in its older sense of “vindication” or “defence.”

MacLaren's Expositions

Acts

PAUL BEFORE FELIX

Acts 24:10 - Acts 24:25.

Tertellus made three charges against Paul: first, that he incited to rebellion; second, that he was a principal member of a ‘sect’; third {with a ‘moreover,’ as if an afterthought}, that he had profaned the Temple. It was more clever than honest to put the real cause of Jewish hatred last, since it was a trifle in Roman eyes, and to put first the only thing that Felix would think worth notice. A duller man than he might have scented something suspicious in Jewish officials being so anxious to suppress insurrection against Rome, and probably he had his own thoughts about the good faith of the accusers, though he said nothing. Paul takes up the three points in order. Unsupported charges can only be met by emphatic denials.

I. Paul’s speech is the first part of the passage.

Its dignified, courteous beginning contrasts well with the accuser’s dishonest flattery. Paul will not lie, but he will respect authority, and will conciliate when he can do so with truth. Felix had been ‘judge’ for several years, probably about six. What sort of a judge he had been Paul will not say. At any rate he had gained experience which might help him in picking his way through Tertullus’s rhetoric.

The Apostle answers the first charge with a flat denial, with the remark that as the whole affair was less than a fortnight old the truth could easily be ascertained, and that the time was very short for the Jews to have ‘found’ him such a dangerous conspirator, and with the obviously unanswerable demand for proof to back up the charge. In the absence of witnesses there was nothing more to be done about number one of the accusations, and a just judge would have said so and sent Tertullus and his clients about their business.

The second charge Paul both denies and admits. He does belong to the followers of Jesus of Nazareth. But that is not a ‘sect’; it is ‘the Way.’ It is not a divergence from the path in which the fathers have walked, trodden only by some self-willed schismatics, but it is the one God-appointed path of life, ‘the old way,’ the only road by which a man can walk nobly and travel to the skies. Paul’s whole doctrine as to the relation of Judaism to Christianity is here in germ and in a form adapted to Felix’s comprehension. This so-called sect {Acts 24:14 takes up Tertullus’s word in Acts 24:5} is the true Judaism, and its members are more truly ‘Jews’ than they who are such ‘outwardly.’ For what has Paul cast away in becoming a Christian? Not the worship of the God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob, not the law, not the prophets, not the hope of a resurrection.

He does not say that he practises all the things written in the law, but that he ‘believes’ them. Then the law was revelation as well as precept, and was to be embraced by faith before it could be obeyed in practice; it was, as he says elsewhere, a ‘schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ.’ Judaism is the bud; Christianity is the bright consummate flower. Paul was not preaching his whole Gospel, but defending himself from a specific charge; namely that, as being a ‘Nazarene,’ he had started off from the main line of Jewish religion. He admits that he is a ‘Nazarene,’ and he assumes correctly that Felix knew something about them, but he denies that he is a sectary, and he assumes that the charge would be more truly made against those who, accusing him, disbelieved in Christ. He hints that they did not believe in either law or prophets, else they would have been Nazarenes too.

The practical results of his faith are stated. ‘Herein’; that is in the faith and hope just spoken of. He will not say that these make him blameless towards God and men, but that such blamelessness is his aim, which he pursues with earnest toil and self-control. A Christianity which does not sovereignly sway life and brace its professor up to the self-denial needful to secure a conscience void of offence is not Paul’s kind of Christianity. If we move in the circle of the great Christian truths we shall gird ourselves to subdue the flesh, and will covet more than aught else the peace of a good conscience. But, like Paul, we shall be slow to say that we have attained, yet not afraid to say that we strive towards, that ideal.

The third charge is met by a plain statement of his real purpose in coming to Jerusalem and frequenting the Temple. ‘Profane the Temple! Why, I came all the way from Greece on purpose to worship at the Feast; and I did not come empty-handed either, for I brought alms for my nation’-the contributions of the Gentiles to Jews-’and I was a worshipper, discharging the ceremonial purifications.’ They called him a ‘Nazarene’; he was in the Temple as a ‘Nazarite.’ Was it likely that, being there on such an errand, he should have profaned it?

He begins a sentence, which would probably have been an indignant one, about the ‘certain Jews from Asia,’ the originators of the whole trouble, but he checks himself with a fine sense of justice. He will say nothing about absent men. And that brings him back to his strong point, already urged, the absence of proof of the charges. Tertullus and company had only hearsay. What had become of the people who said they saw him in the Temple? No doubt they had thought discretion the better part of valour, and were not anxious to face the Roman procedure.

The close of the speech carries the war into the enemy’s quarters, challenging the accusers to tell what they had themselves heard. They could be witnesses as to the scene at the Council, which Tertullus had wisely said nothing about. Pungent sarcasm is in Paul’s closing words, especially if we remember that the high officials, like Ananias the high-priest, were Sadducees. The Pharisees in the Council had acquitted him when they heard his profession of faith in a resurrection. That was his real crime, not treason against Rome or profanation of the Temple. The present accusers might be eager for his condemnation, but half of their own Sanhedrim had acquitted him. ‘And these unworthy Jews, who have cast off the nation’s hope and believe in no resurrection, are accusing me of being an apostate! Who is the sectary-I or they?’

II. There was only one righteous course for Felix, namely, to discharge the prisoner.

But he yielded to the same temptation as had mastered Pilate, and shrank from provoking influential classes by doing the right thing. He was the less excusable, because his long tenure of office had taught him something, at all events, of ‘the Way.’ He had too many crimes to venture on raising enemies in his government; he had too much lingering sense of justice to give up an innocent man. So like all weak men in difficult positions he temporised, and trusted to accident to make the right thing easier for him.

His plea for delay was conveniently indefinite. When was Lysias coming? His letter said nothing about such an intention, and took for granted that all the materials for a decision would be before Felix. Lysias could tell no more. The excuse was transparent, but it served to stave off a decision, and to-morrow would bring some other excuse. Prompt carrying out of all plain duty is the only safety. The indulgence given to Paul, in his light confinement, only showed how clearly Felix knew himself to be doing wrong, but small alleviations do not patch up a great injustice.

III. One reading inserts in Acts 24:24 the statement that Drusilla wished to see Paul, and that Felix summoned him in order to gratify her.

Very probably she, as a Jewess, knew something of ‘the Way,’ and with a love of anything odd and new, which such women cannot do without, she wanted to see this curious man and hear him talk. It might amuse her, and pass an hour, and be something to gossip about.

She and Felix got more than they bargained for. Paul was not now the prisoner, but the preacher; and his topics were not wanting in directness and plainness. He ‘reasoned of righteousness’ to one of the worst of unrighteous governors; of ‘temperance’ to the guilty couple who, in calling themselves husband and wife, were showing themselves given over to sinful passions; and of ‘judgment to come’ to a man who, to quote the Roman historian, ‘thought that he could commit all evil with impunity.’

Paul’s strong hand shook even that obdurate soul, and roused one of the two sleeping consciences. Drusilla may have been too frivolous to be impressed, but Felix had so much good left that he could be conscious of evil. Alas! he had so much evil that he suppressed the good. His ‘convenient season’ was then; it never came again. For though he communed with Paul often, he trembled only once. So he passed into the darkness.

Benson Commentary

Acts 24:10-13. Then Paul — Having heard with patient silence all the false charges preferred against him, after the governor had given him a sign to speak, answered in a speech widely different from that of Tertullus, true, modest, solid, and unaffected; forasmuch as I know, &c. — Paul would not introduce his speech by flattering Felix with notorious untruths, as the Jewish orator had done, or by paying him any fulsome compliment; yet he addresses him very respectfully, and with such a degree of ease and freedom as manifested his confidence that the governor would do him justice; that thou hast been of many (of several) years a judge of this nation — And so not unacquainted with our religious rites and customs, or with the affairs of the Christians, and temper of the Jews, my accusers, and consequently more capable of understanding and deciding a cause of this nature. There was no flattery in this; it was a plain fact; he had governed Judea six or seven years; I do the more cheerfully answer for myself — And it may be observed, his answer exactly corresponds with the three articles of Tertullus’s charge, sedition, heresy, and profanation of the temple. As to the first, he suggests that he had not been long enough at Jerusalem to form a party, and attempt an insurrection; (for it was but twelve days since he went up thither, five of which he had been at Cesarea, one or two were spent in his journey thither, and most of the rest he had been confined at Jerusalem;) and he challenges them to produce, in fact, any evidence of such practices, Acts 24:11-13. As to the second, he confesses himself to be a Christian; but maintains this to be a religion perfectly agreeable to the law and the prophets, and therefore deserving a fair reception, Acts 24:14-16. And as for profaning the temple, he observes, that he behaved there in a most peaceful and regular manner, so that his innocence had been manifest even before the sanhedrim, where the authors of the tumult did not dare to appear against him.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

24:10-21 Paul gives a just account of himself, which clears him from crime, and likewise shows the true reason of the violence against him. Let us never be driven from any good way by its having an ill name. It is very comfortable, in worshipping God, to look to him as the God of our fathers, and to set up no other rule of faith or practice but the Scriptures. This shows there will be a resurrection to a final judgment. Prophets and their doctrines were to be tried by their fruits. Paul's aim was to have a conscience void of offence. His care and endeavour was to abstain from many things, and to abound in the exercises of religion at all times; both towards God. and towards man. If blamed for being more earnest in the things of God than our neighbours, what is our reply? Do we shrink from the accusation? How many in the world would rather be accused of any weakness, nay, even of wickedness, than of an earnest, fervent feeling of love to the Lord Jesus Christ, and of devotedness to his service! Can such think that He will confess them when he comes in his glory, and before the angels of God? If there is any sight pleasing to the God of our salvation, and a sight at which the angels rejoice, it is, to behold a devoted follower of the Lord, here upon earth, acknowledging that he is guilty, if it be a crime, of loving the Lord who died for him, with all his heart, and soul, and mind, and strength. And that he will not in silence see God's word despised, or hear his name profaned; he will rather risk the ridicule and the hatred of the world, than one frown from that gracious Being whose love is better than life.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

Had beckoned unto him to speak - Either by a nod or by the hand,

Hast been of many years - Felix and Cumanus had been joint governors of Judea; but after Cumanus had been condemned for his bad administration of affairs, the government fell entirely into the hands of Felix. This was about seven years before Paul was arraigned, and might be called many years, as he had been long enough there to become acquainted with the customs and habits of the Jews; and it might also be called long in comparison with the short time which his immediate predecessors had held the office. See Josephus, Antiq., book 20, chapters 7 and 7.

A judge - This word is evidently used here in the sense of magistrate, or one appointed to administer the affairs of government. To determine litigated matters was, however, one part of his office. It is remarkable that Paul did not begin his speech, as Tertullus had done, by any flattering address, or by any of the arts of rhetoric. He founded his plea on the justice of his cause, and on the fact that Felix had had so much experience in the affairs of Judea that he was well qualified to understand the merits of the case, and to judge impartially. Paul was well acquainted with his character (see the notes on Acts 24:25), and would not by flattering words declare what was not strictly true.

I do the more cheerfully ... - Since you are so well acquainted with the customs and habits of the Jews, I the more readily submit the case to your disposal. This address indicated great confidence in the justice of his cause, and was the language of a man bold, fearless, and conscious of innocence.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

10. thou hast been many years a judge to this nation—He had been in this province for six or seven years, and in Galilee for a longer period. Paul uses no flattery, but simply expresses his satisfaction at having to plead before one whose long official experience of Jewish matters would enable him the better to understand and appreciate what he had to say.

Matthew Poole's Commentary

Beckoned unto him, by some sign with his hand. Though St. Paul would not flatter Felix with notorious untruths, as Tertullus had done, yet he speaks very respectfully, and mentions his continuance in the government; the rather, because, if he had been so seditious a person as Tertullus would have represented him to have been, Felix could not but have heard of him, and of any mischief that had been done by him.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

Then Paul, after the governor had beckoned unto him to speak,.... Tertullus having finished his account, Paul was silent to his charge and calumnies, until the governor beckoned with his hand or head, or made some sign to him to speak for himself; which he might not do, until leave was given him; and then he

answered as follows:

forasmuch as I know that thou hast been of many years a judge unto this nation; some say he was in the thirteenth, others in the tenth year of his government; some copies read a "just judge"; but this does not so well agree with the character of Felix; See Gill on Acts 24:27.

I do the more cheerfully answer for myself; since if he had been such a mover of sedition everywhere, he must in this course of years have known or heard something of it; and seeing also he could be no stranger to the temper of the Jews, that they were given to envy, revenge, lying, and perjury, and therefore would not easily believe all they said, or rashly take their part, but rather would pity the apostle, who had fallen into such hands, and do him justice.

Geneva Study Bible

{2} Then Paul, after that the governor had beckoned unto him to speak, answered, Forasmuch as I know that thou hast been of {g} many years a judge unto this nation, I do the more cheerfully answer for myself:

(2) Tertullus, by the devil's rhetoric, begins with flattery and finishes with lies: but Paul using heavenly eloquence, and but a simple beginning, casts off from himself the crime of sedition, with which he was being charged, with a simple denial.

(g) Paul pleaded his cause two years before Felix departed out of the province, see Ac 24:27, but he had governed Trachonite, and Batanea, and Galavnite, before Claudius made him governor of Judea; see Josephus in the History of the Jewish War, lib. 2, cap. 11.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Meyer's NT Commentary

Acts 24:10. In what a dignified, calm, and wise manner does Paul open his address!

ἐκ πολλῶν ἐτῶν] therefore thou hast an ample judicial experience as regards the circumstances of the nation and their character. “Novus aliquis praeses propter inscitiam forte perculsus esset tam atroci delatione,” Calvin.

Felix entered on the procuratorship after the banishment of his predecessor Cumanus, in the year 52 (according to Wieseler, 53); see Joseph. Antt. xx. 7.1. Even in the time of Cumanus he had great influence, particularly in Samaria, without, however, being actually governor of that country, as is incorrectly stated in Tac. Ann. xii. 54 in contradiction to Josephus, or of Upper Galilee (as is erroneously inferred by Heinrichs, Kuinoel, Hildebrand, and others, from Joseph. Bell. ii. 12. 8). See Anger, de temp. rat. p. 88; Wieseler, p. 67 f.; comp. also Gerlach, l.c., p. 75; Ewald, p. 549. He was thus at this time (see Introduction, § 4) probably in the seventh year of his procuratorship.[153]

κριτήν] is not, with Beza, Grotius, Heinrichs, Kuinoel, and others (after שׁפט), to be taken generally as praefectus, rector, but specially as judge; for the judicial position of Felix in his procuratorship was the point here concerned. On the participle with ἘΠΙΣΤΆΜ., see Winer, p. 324 [E. T. 435].

ΕὐΘΥΜΌΤΕΡΟΝ] the more cheerfully, namely, than I would be able to do if thou wert still new in this judicial office.

τὰ περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ ἀπολογοῦμαι] I bring forward in defence the things concerning myself. Comp. Plat. Crit. p. 54 B, Phaed. p. 69 D, Conv. p. 174 D, and Stallb. in loc., Pol. iv. p. 420 B, 453 C; Dem. 227. 13, 407. 19; Thuc. iii. 62. 4.

[153] To reduce the ἐκ πολλῶν ἐτῶν to three years (Stölting, Beitr. z. Exeg. d. Paul. Br. p. 192), even apart from the duration of the government of Felix being thereby assumed as much too short (ver. 27), is rendered exegetically impossible by the expression itself. For a captatio benevolentiae, so definite (ἐτῶν) a statement of time, if by πολλῶν were meant only three years, would be very inappropriate, as the words would contain a flat untruth. How easily would a more flexible expression have presented itself for such a purpose, such as ἐκ πολλοῦ χρόνου, or ἐξ ἱκανῶν (or κλειόνων) ἐτῶν!

Expositor's Greek Testament

Acts 24:10. On the language of the speech see Bethge, p. 229.—This short apology before Felix is not without its traces of Paul’s phraseology, e.g., ἐλπίδα ἔχων, Acts 24:15, with which we may compare Romans 15:4, 2 Corinthians 3:12; 2 Corinthians 10:15, Ephesians 2:12, 1 Thessalonians 4:13, in all of which we have the phrase ἐλπ. ἔχειν (only once elsewhere in N.T., 1 John 3:3); προσδέχονται in Acts 24:15, with which we may compare Titus 2:13; προσφοράς, Acts 24:17, cf. Romans 15:16; διʼ ἐτῶν, Acts 24:17, with Galatians 2:1 (διά with genitive of time, only once elsewhere in N.T., Mark 2:1), and more especially ἀπρόσκοπον συνειδ., cf. 1 Corinthians 10:32, Php 1:10, and for συνείδησις, see Acts 23:1 (cf. Nösgen, Apostelgeschichte, p. 54, and Alford, Acts, Introd., p. 14). Wendt regards the whole speech as a free composition of the author of Acts, and even this view contrasts favourably with what Wendt himself calls the wilful attempts to refer different words and phrases in the speech to various Redactors, see for illustrations of this arbitrariness his note on p. 369 (1899).—νεύσαντος: in N.T., elsewhere only John 13:24. Friedrich draws attention to the frequent mention of beckoning, or making signs, as characteristic of Luke’s writings, p. 29, cf. Luke 1:22; Luke 1:62 (διανεύω, ἐννεύω), Acts 5:7 (κατανεύω); Acts 13:16; Acts 26:1; Acts 24:10, etc.—Ἐκ πολλῶν ἐτῶν: in view of the constant change of procurators a period of five to seven years would quite justify St. Paul’s words. Ewald argued for ten years from the statement, Tac., Ann., xii., 54, that Felix had been joint procurator with Cumanus before he had been appointed sole procurator of Judæa, Samaria, Galilee, Peræa. But no mention is made of this by Jos., Ant., xx., 7, 1. If, however, so it is argued, Felix had occupied a position of importance in Samaria in the time of the rule of Cumanus without being himself actually joint procurator, this would perhaps account for Jonathan the high priest asking that he might be appointed procurator after the departure of Cumanus (Jos., Ant., xx., 8, 5, B.J., ii., 12, 6); such a request is difficult to understand unless Jonathan had some ground for supposing that Felix would be acceptable to the Jews. But the description of Tacitus, l.c., is also difficult to understand, since we naturally ask what was the relative rank of Felix and Cumanus? or were there two procuratorial districts? and the statement of Josephus seems clearly to intimate that Felix was first appointed to the province after the deposition of Cumanus, and that he went to Palestine as his successor, B.J., ii., 12, 6, cf. Ant., xx., 8, 5, Schürer, Jewish People, div. i., vol. ii., p. 173 ff., and “Felix,” Hastings’ B.D.—Both Tacitus and Josephus are taken to imply that Felix succeeded Cumanus in 52 A.D. as procurator, Ann., xii., 54, Jos., Ant., xx., 7, 1. But if O. Holtzmann and McGiffert are right in placing St. Paul’s imprisonment in Cæsarea in 53–55 A.D., it seems scarcely intelligible that St. Paul should speak of the “many years” of the rule of Felix, unless on the supposition that Tacitus is right and that Felix had ruled in Samaria and Judæa whilst Cumanus had ruled in Galilee. Harnack, Chron., i., 236, following Eusebius, assigns the eleventh year of Claudius, 51 A.D., as the year in which Felix entered upon office, and thinks that a procuratorship lasting from 51–54 might be described in St. Paul’s words, but, as Wendt justly points out (1899), the expression πολλὰ ἔτη is much more fitting if spoken some years later. Schürer follows Josephus, Jewish People, div. i., vol. ii., p. 173 ff., and so more recently Dr. A. Robertson, “Felix,” Hastings’ B.D., and Dr. Zahn, Einleitung, ii., p. 635 (so also article, Biblical World, Nov., 1897), whilst Wendt, p. 58 (1899), would appear to incline to the same view.—But it is to be noted that St. Paul speaks of Felix as κριτής, and in this expression it may be possible to find a point of reconciliation between the divergencies resulting from a comparision of Josephus and Tacitus. Felix may have held an office during the procuratorship of Cumanus which may have given him some judicial authority, although of course subordinate to the procurator, whilst on the other hand his tenure of such an office may well have prompted Jonathan’s request to the emperor that Felix should be sent as procurator (a request upon which both Schürer and Zahn lay such stress). The phrase πόλλα ἔτη may thus be further extended to include the tenure of this judicial office which Felix held earlier than 52 A.D., see also Turner, “Chronology,” Hastings’ B.D., i., 418, 419, McGiffert, Apostolic Age, p. 358, O. Holtzmann, Neutest. Zeitgeschichte, p. 128, Ramsay, St. Paul, p. 313, Gilbert, Student’s Life of Paul, p. 249 ff., 1899.—κριτὴν, see above, p. 480; on the addition δίκαιον, defended by St. Chrysostom (so , Syr. H.), Blass remarks “continet adulationem quæ Paulum parum deceat, quidquid dicit Chrysostomus”.—τῷ ἔθνει τούτῳ: St. Paul is speaking of the Jews as a nation in their political relationship, in addressing a Roman governor, not as God’s people, λαός.—εὐθυμότερον: adverb only here in N.T., not in LXX, but in classical Greek, for the adjective see Acts 27:36 (2Ma 11:26), and the verb εὐθυμεῖν, Acts 24:22.—St. Paul also begins with a captatio benevolentiæ, but one which contains nothing but the strict truth; he might fairly appeal to the judicial experience of Felix for the due understanding of his case.—τὰ περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ: for the phrase τὰ περί τινος as characteristic of St. Luke, three times in Gospel, eight times in Acts (six times in St. Paul’s Epistles and not in other Gospels, except Mark 5:27, R.V.), cf. Hawkins, Horæ Synopticæ, p. 38, Friedrich, p. 10 (so Lekebusch and Zeller).—ἀπολογοῦμαι: only in Luke and Paul, Luke 12:11; Luke 21:14, Acts 19:33; Acts 25:8; Acts 26:1-2; Acts 26:24; Romans 2:15, 2 Corinthians 12:19, each time in Acts, except Acts 19:38, with reference to Paul: R.V. “I make my defence”; see Grimm-Thayer, sub v., for the construction of the verb, in classical Greek as here, Thuc., iii., 62, Plat., Phædo, 69 D. In LXX, cf. Jeremiah 12:1, 2Ma 13:26.

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

10–21. St Paul’s answer to the charge

10. Then Paul, &c.] When the governor had given him leave to speak the Apostle addressed his defence to the points charged against him. He had not excited the people, nor been the leader of any body of Nazarenes, nor had he polluted the temple.

thou hast been of many years a judge] We have arrived in the history at about a.d. 58 or 59, and Felix had been made procurator in a.d. 52. So that “many years” is about six or seven. But many of the governors were recalled before they had held office so long. In Acts 24:17 “many years” must be about four or five.

I do the more cheerfully, &c.] The best MSS. have the positive, “I cheerfully make my defence.” St Paul was so far of good courage, because the experience of Felix, and his knowledge of Jewish manners and customs, would enable him to appreciate the statements which related to the Apostle’s presence in Jerusalem.

Bengel's Gnomen

Acts 24:10. [Ὁ Παῦλος, Paul) By a simple narrative Paul overthrows the exaggerated accusation.—V. g.]—νεύσαντος, having beckoned to him) A gesture becoming the gravity of a judge.—ἐκ πολλῶν ἐτῶν, for many years) Six or seven. Experience on the part of a judge is desired by one who has a good cause: ch. Acts 26:3.—κριτὴν, a judge) Paul does not flatter (by adding any complimentary epithet).—εὀθύμως) So the old MSS.[138] Afterwards more recent MSS. have εὐθυμότερον.

[138] Thence the reading εὐθύμως, formerly marked with the sign δ, has been elevated in the margin of Ed. 2 to the sign β, with the consent of the Germ. Vers.—E. B.

ABE Vulg. read εὐθύμας; but Rec. Text, εὐθυμότερον, without the oldest authorities’ sanction.—E. and T.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 10. - And when the governor, etc., Paul answered for then Paul, after that the governor, etc., answered, A.V.; cheerfully for the more cheerfully, A.V. and T.R.; make my defense for answer for myself, A.V. Forasmuch as I know, etc. St. Paul, with inimitable skill, pitched upon the one favorable side of his judge's person, viz. his long experience in Jewish affairs, and made it the subject of his opening reference - a courteous and conciliatory reference, in striking contrast with the false, fulsome flattery of Tertullus. Of many years. If Paul was speaking in the year A.D. , and Felix had been governor only since A.D. , "many years" was rather an hyperbole. But Tacitus expressly states that Felix was joint procurator with Cumanus; and therefore he had been a judge to the Jewish nation long before the banishment of Cumanus. Tacitus's authority is infinitely superior to that of Josephus, and this passage strongly supports the statement of Tacitus ('Annal.,' 12:54). Make my defense (τὰ περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ ἀπολογοῦμαι). For the word ἀπολογοῦμαι, and for the situation of St. Paul, and for the gracious promise provided for such situation, see Luke 12:12; Luke 21:15; see too Acts 19:33; Acts 25:8; Acts 26. l, 2; and for the use of ἀπολογία, see Acts 22:1, note. Acts 24:10

Vincent's Word Studies

The more cheerfully (εὐθυμότερον)

The best texts read the positive of the adverb, εὐθύμως, cheerfully.