Acts 25:7Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

αιτιώματα, "accusations," is an exceedingly rare word. Blass still considered it a hapax, saying: "αιτίωμα pro αιτίαμα nusquam extat." The only example of its use known to me, apart from this passage, is found in P.Fay. 111.8, from A.D. 95/96.

ούκισχυον, "they had no strength," is an imperfect tense and implies many unsuccessful attempts. Barrett thinks that, in principle, it could be translated: "They could not prove it, however hard they tried."

The scene is described very summarily. The contents of the accusations are not reported, though the reader already knows them; see the commentary on Acts 24:5. Yet Paul's answer, also very brief, shows that they had not changed; see the commentary on Acts 25:8.

The trial of Paul opened again, and the Jews who had come from Jerusalem again began accusing him before the procurator. But the many grave charges they brought against Paul remained unproved. Festus could have released Paul, but since the Jews objected (Acts 28:19), he wished to please them. He asked the apostle whether he wanted his trial transferred to Jerusalem and handed over to the Sanhedrin. But Paul did not wish to be delivered to the Jews, and demanded Caesar’s judgment.

Eight or ten days later, Festus returned to the palace in Caesarea. On the very next day he took his judicial seat on the tribunal to hear the case.

The Jews now found it possible to do without a hired advocate. The proceedings turned into a scene of heated clamor, in which the Apostle Paul answered the many charges against him with calm denial.

The Jews noisily surrounded the judgment seat and repeated their accusations of heresy, sacrilege, and treason. But since not a single witness came forward against him, the Apostle Paul had only to set forth the circumstances of the case again.

They stood around, perhaps among other things in order to frighten Paul and deprive him of presence of mind and courage.

Many and grievous accusations: the writer of Acts does not say what they were. He only notes that these accusations were unsupported assertions and lacked proof.

From the apostle's answer (verse 8), one can see that the accusations were the same as those presented at the trial before Felix (Acts 24:5-6). Yet one charge was either completely new or at least stated more sharply.

They accused the apostle of some offense against Caesar, against the imperial majesty. Perhaps this was the same accusation that he was an agitator (Acts 24:5).

The trial of the Apostle Paul was begun by Festus very soon, on the day after his return from Jerusalem. The Jews gathered closely around the presiding seat and brought many accusations against Paul.

Yet, as usual, they could not prove them. There was no real crime in him. What they considered criminal from their own personal point of view could not be acknowledged as such by a pagan judge.

"See," says Saint John Chrysostom, "when he returned, he immediately sat on the judgment seat. So impatiently did they urge him on, so greatly did they hurry!"

The accusations against the apostle were probably the former ones. For this reason the writer of Acts does not repeat them.