¹⁷“Now after several years I came to bring alms to my nation and to present offerings; ¹⁸in which they found me occupied in the temple, having been purified, without any crowd or uproar. But there were some Jews from Asia— ¹⁹who ought to have been present before you and to make accusation, if they should have anything against me. ²⁰Or else let these men themselves tell what misdeed they found when I stood before the Council, ²¹other than for this one statement which I shouted out while standing among them, ‘For the resurrection of the dead I am on trial before you today.’”

The apostle continued to articulate his defense, carefully and concisely. The natural flow of this text reflects Luke’s meticulous recollection of Paul’s words. Earlier speeches by the apostles recorded in Acts represent summaries of what was actually said, reflecting Luke’s research and more time having passed between the actual events and the writing of the book of Acts. These later events, being closer in time to Luke’s writing, seem to reflect a more real-time recording of the words of Paul. In both cases, the Holy Spirit was inspiring the writing, but this may explain the greater detail in the later chapters of the book.

Paul outlined the relevant details: He had been out of country for a long time and had only recently returned. The occasion for his return was to bring the collection (“alms”) he had raised in his travels among the Gentile churches to help meet the needs of the Jewish believers in Jerusalem. He saw this gift as a spiritual “offering.” He had done this once earlier, before launching out on his mission trips (see Acts 11:29–30). His heart was always toward his people.

But the Jews in Jerusalem had been incited against him by troublemakers from Asia (where most of his church plants were located). In a Roman court, accusations must be made in person, but Paul’s primary accusers, the Asian Jews, were not present. Therefore, the charge that he had been causing dissension against the Roman government was not sustainable in this trial. The only accusation permissible was the charge of defiling the temple. For this, Paul challenged his accusers to show their evidence against him. Of course, there was none.

Yet Paul owned up to one “misdeed”: he had shouted out his belief in the resurrection, which he knew would cause an uproar. While his intent at the time was to distract the Jewish Sanhedrin away from their kangaroo court proceedings, he now named it as the central reason for the trial before Felix. Paul had cleverly changed his position from defense to bold offense. He was proving a formidable opponent for the Sanhedrin’s hired lawyer, Tertullus.

Lord, help me not shy away from using logic and reason in my own defense.