Chapter 24 question 2

[starship.jrm]

2. Comment on the difficulty Paul faced in framing his defense in
these hearings in
which he was being charged with violations of Jewish law, but
also implicitly
with disturbing the peace and causing trouble for Roman
governance.

Paul frames his answer to the insurrection charge (Acts 24:11-13) by
recounting his recent activity in Jerusalem. This is all that is
within the governor's jurisdiction. Motive, method, opportunity and
proof of the alleged crime do not exist. Paul indicates he went up to
Jerusalem only to worship. He had earlier debated with and witnessed
to non Christian Jews but his methods did not include arguing at the
temple, or stirring up the crowd for insurrection.

By using this defense, Paul teaches us that though proclaiming a
controversial message may spark opposition, the messengers themselves
must always act in a law-abiding manor.

Paul also emphasizes the Christian's continuity with Old Testament
Jewish faith. He worships the same God, the God of our fathers. This
confession gives us encouragement that Christianity is, in the end,
not a betrayal but the fulfillment of the Old Testament faith.

Paul answers the temple defilement charge by pointing out the purpose
of his pilgrimage was to bring his people gifts for the poor and to
present offerings. Such a plan would not include temple defilement and
he assembled no crowd or planned any disturbance. The lack of
eyewitnesses to this specific and dangerous charge was an important
point in Paul’s defense. He was relying on the Roman judicial
principle that the accused can face his accuser and has the
opportunity to defend himself.