The Centrality of the Resurrection Text: Acts 24:10-21
Introduction: A Cheerful Defense
We come now to the Apostle Paul, standing before the Roman governor Felix. This is not a theological debating society. This is a formal legal proceeding with capital charges on the table. Paul has been accused of being a public nuisance, a rabble-rouser, a ringleader of a bizarre sect, and a defiler of the temple. These are serious accusations, and they have been delivered by a professional orator, a slick lawyer named Tertullus, who began his prosecution with a thick layer of flattery for the governor. It is now Paul's turn to speak. And how does he begin? "I cheerfully make my defense."
This is not the cheerfulness of a man whistling past the graveyard. This is the settled confidence of a man whose conscience is clear and whose hope is anchored in a reality that transcends Roman courts and Jewish accusers. Paul's defense here is a master class in Christian apologetics. It is courteous, factual, and relentlessly theological. He does not simply refute the charges against him; he reframes the entire debate. He shows that the real issue is not about a riot in the temple, but about the hope of Israel. The real conflict is not between Paul and the Jews, but between two competing visions of what it means to be a faithful Jew. And at the dead center of that conflict is the linchpin of all reality: the resurrection of the dead.
What we see in this passage is that for Paul, Christianity was not a new religion that he had invented. It was the fulfillment of the old one. He argues that he is the true conservative, the one who actually believes the Scriptures his accusers claim to revere. This is a crucial lesson for us. We are not the innovators. We are not the ones who have departed from the faith of our fathers. We are the ones who believe that God keeps His promises. And the central promise, the one upon which everything else hangs, is the promise of resurrection.
The Text
And when the governor had nodded for him to speak, Paul answered: "Knowing that for many years you have been a judge to this nation, I cheerfully make my defense, since you are able to ascertain the fact that no more than twelve days ago I went up to Jerusalem to worship. And neither in the temple, nor in the synagogues, nor across the city did they find me carrying on a discussion with anyone or causing a riot. Nor are they able to prove to you of what they are now accusing me. But this I confess to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I do serve the God of our fathers, believing everything that is in accordance with the Law and that is written in the Prophets; having a hope in God, for which these men are waiting, that there shall certainly be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous. In view of this, I also do my best to maintain always a conscience without fault both before God and before men. Now after several years I came to bring alms to my nation and offerings; in which they found me, having been purified in the temple, without any crowd or uproar. But there were some Jews from Asia, who ought to have been present before you and to make accusation, if they should have anything against me. Or else let these men themselves tell what wrongdoing they found when I stood before the Sanhedrin, other 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.’"
(Acts 24:10-21 LSB)
A Factual Rebuttal (vv. 10-13)
We begin with Paul's direct response to the charges.
"Knowing that for many years you have been a judge to this nation, I cheerfully make my defense, since you are able to ascertain the fact that no more than twelve days ago I went up to Jerusalem to worship. And neither in the temple, nor in the synagogues, nor across the city did they find me carrying on a discussion with anyone or causing a riot. Nor are they able to prove to you of what they are now accusing me." (Acts 24:10-13)
Notice the contrast with Tertullus. Where the lawyer laid on the flattery, Paul offers respectful, factual acknowledgment. Felix has been in his post for a while; he knows the lay of the land. He understands the tempestuous nature of Jewish politics. Paul is appealing to the governor's experience. This is not groveling; it is shrewd and respectful.
Paul then dismantles the accusations with simple, verifiable facts. The charge was that he was a "troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world." Paul's response is to establish a clear timeline. It was only twelve days ago that he arrived in Jerusalem. His purpose was not insurrection but worship. He was not found arguing, debating, or inciting anyone, whether in the temple, the synagogues, or anywhere else in the city. He is essentially saying, "Your Excellency, you can check the receipts. The facts are on my side."
He concludes this section with a direct challenge: "Nor are they able to prove to you of what they are now accusing me." This is the essence of a legal defense. An accusation is not proof. Slander is not evidence. Paul rests his case on the absence of any factual basis for their claims. He stands on the principle of justice: the burden of proof is on the accuser. This is a straightforward, common-sense defense. But Paul does not stop there. He knows that a purely negative defense is insufficient. He must provide the true story, the positive reality that his accusers have twisted.
A Theological Confession (vv. 14-16)
Having dealt with the lies, Paul now turns to the truth. And this is where the sermon truly begins.
"But this I confess to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I do serve the God of our fathers, believing everything that is in accordance with the Law and that is written in the Prophets; having a hope in God, for which these men are waiting, that there shall certainly be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous. In view of this, I also do my best to maintain always a conscience without fault both before God and before men." (Acts 24:14-16 LSB)
Paul makes a confession, but it is not a confession of guilt. It is a confession of faith. He says that he follows "the Way." This was an early name for the Christian faith. It is a brilliant name, rooted in the Old Testament concept of walking in the way of the Lord and in Jesus' own declaration, "I am the way, the truth, and the life." His accusers call it a "sect," a hairesis, from which we get our word heresy. They are trying to frame Christianity as a schismatic, breakaway cult. Paul's response is to say that this Way is, in fact, the authentic continuation of the faith of their fathers.
How does he prove this? First, he serves the same God: "the God of our fathers." Second, he believes the same book: "everything that is in accordance with the Law and that is written in the Prophets." Paul is claiming to be more orthodox than his accusers. They are the ones picking and choosing from the Scriptures. He is the one who believes it all. This is a presuppositional power move. He is not defending himself from their standard; he is judging their standard by the ultimate standard of God's Word.
Third, and most importantly, he holds the same hope: "a hope in God... that there shall certainly be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous." This was a doctrine held by the Pharisees, who were part of the council that condemned him. He is driving a wedge into the prosecution's case. He is saying, "The very hope that many of you claim to hold is the reason I am standing here." The difference is that for Paul, this hope is not an abstract, future theological point. It has crashed into history in the person of Jesus Christ. The resurrection is no longer just a promise; it is a past-tense event with cosmic implications.
This hope, this belief in the resurrection, is not just a theological opinion for Paul. It is the engine of his ethics. "In view of this," he says, because of this hope, "I also do my best to maintain always a conscience without fault both before God and before men." The resurrection is the foundation of his personal integrity. Why? Because if there is a resurrection of the righteous and the unrighteous, then there is a final judgment. History is not a meaningless cycle; it is a story that is heading toward a final accounting. Every thought, word, and deed will be brought into the light. Knowing this, Paul labors to keep his accounts short with both God and man. This is a profound connection. True doctrine produces true piety. If your eschatology does not make you strive for a clear conscience, then you have a defective eschatology.
The True Context (vv. 17-21)
Paul now returns to the events in Jerusalem, but he reframes them in light of his theological confession.
"Now after several years I came to bring alms to my nation and offerings; in which they found me, having been purified in the temple, without any crowd or uproar. But there were some Jews from Asia, who ought to have been present before you and to make accusation, if they should have anything against me. Or else let these men themselves tell what wrongdoing they found when I stood before the Sanhedrin, other 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.’" (Acts 24:17-21 LSB)
Far from being a seditious troublemaker, Paul's purpose in coming to Jerusalem was an act of charity and piety. He came to bring "alms to my nation," a reference to the collection he had taken up among the Gentile churches for the poor saints in Judea. He also came to present "offerings." He was found in the temple, not defiling it, but undergoing a rite of purification. He was there peacefully, lawfully, and charitably. There was no crowd, no uproar, until his accusers manufactured one.
He then makes a sharp legal point. The ones who started the whole affair, the Jews from Asia, are not even present. They are the supposed eyewitnesses, and they have not bothered to show up in court. This is a fatal flaw in the prosecution's case. He challenges the members of the Sanhedrin who are present to state what crime he was guilty of when he stood before them.
And then he brings it all back to the central point. He knows they found no wrongdoing, "other than for this one statement which I shouted out... ‘For the resurrection of the dead I am on trial before you today.’" Paul masterfully reduces the entire complex of charges, the slander, the riots, the political maneuvering, down to one single, foundational issue. This is not about Roman law or temple purity. This is about the resurrection. He is forcing everyone in the room, Felix included, to confront the central claim of the Christian faith. Is Jesus of Nazareth risen from the dead, or is He not? Everything hangs on the answer to that question.
Conclusion: The Non-Negotiable Hope
Paul's defense before Felix is more than just a historical account. It is a paradigm for how the church is to conduct itself in a hostile world. We are to be cheerful in our defense, clear in our facts, and courageous in our confession.
But above all, we must understand what the central issue is. The world will always try to frame its opposition to us in political, social, or cultural terms. They will call us disturbers of the peace, haters, bigots, or a threat to the public order. And while we must be prepared to give a factual answer to those charges, as Paul did, we must never allow the debate to remain on that superficial level. We must, like Paul, continually press the central issue, the non-negotiable truth upon which everything stands or falls: the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.
The resurrection is not simply one doctrine among many. It is the validation of all doctrine. It is God the Father's public "Amen" to the finished work of His Son. It is the guarantee of our justification, the power for our sanctification, and the promise of our glorification. It is the ultimate proof that God's kingdom has invaded history and that Jesus is Lord.
This is why Paul was on trial, and it is why the church will always be on trial. Our message is an offense to a world that wants to be its own god and write its own story. The empty tomb is a declaration of war against every human system that seeks to find ultimate meaning apart from the risen Christ. Our confession is that a man who was executed by the state has been raised to the highest throne in the universe, and that He will one day return to judge the living and the dead. This is the hope that enables us to cheerfully make our defense. This is the truth that compels us to strive for a clear conscience. And this is the reality for which we, like Paul, are on trial before the world today.