A Conscience Void of Offense

Acts 24:1-27

There are differences between animals and man. Animals don’t have a soul, while God breathed a soul into Adam. Animals have instinct - they’re guided by natural impulse while man has a conscience - they’re guided by God’s moral laws written in their hearts. That’s why animals can either nurse their young or kill their young - based on instinct - there’s no moral struggle. But because of God’s law, there’s moral struggle - no one can kill their children easily. But this doesn’t mean they don’t. The human conscience can be influenced, hardened, and seared. In 2 Kings 6, King Jehoram passed by the city of Samaria. There was famine. There, a woman cried out to him for help. She’d made a pact with another woman. They’d kill her son one day and eat him together. Tomorrow, they’d kill the other woman’s son and eat him together. She kept her part but the other woman hid her son. So she wanted the king to address the unfairness. Her conscience recognized the other woman’s duplicity, but she ignored the elephant in the room. She killed and ate her own son! Yes, in times of desperation, we can go against our conscience. The default condition of many people. This can even be the case of religious people. The Pharisees - who kept the law religiously, and the Sadducees - who made atonement for sin - were all willing parties in the kangaroo trial and crucifixion of Christ. Even a pagan - Pontius Pilate - found no guilt in him. This can also happen in church - people behave like animals. Which is why the Apostle Paul warned the Galatians - “Beware you don’t destroy one another! You’re always biting and devouring one another.”

A conscience void of offense and sin is a powerful tool. But a conscience riddled with offense is a dangerous thing. There are 3 observations that we can make about the conscience from this passage. Firstly, religious people can have consciences full of offense. Secondly, forgiven people foster consciences void of offense. Thirdly, wicked men can have zero conscience.

Firstly, religious people can have consciences full of offense. We saw previously that Paul was sent by military escort to Caesarea. By God’s providence, he was saved from a wicked plot to ambush and kill him. In Caesarea, he would stand trial before Felix the governor. And his accusers would also be required to appear. They had wanted to create issues from the sidelines, but now were required to appear before an official court. But when they came, they came with lies. After 5 days, according to verse 1, the High Priest and the elders finally came to Caesarea from Jerusalem. And they were accompanied by a person named Tertullus. We learn that he was an orator - some versions translate this as spokesman or lawyer. He was there to inform the governor against Paul. You could say, he was the lawyer for the offense - he was the prosecutor. He was trained to do this. He was the Queen’s Counsel’s - the lawyer who wore silk robes. Note that no Pharisees came - only the Sadducees. The Pharisees were also scribes and lawyers - but they were not there perhaps because they may have been persuaded to be on Paul’s side. So these Sadducees got their own high powered lawyer - and one who lied for them. In verse 2, he started his accusations against Paul - “And when he was called forth, Tertullus began to accuse him.” Roman trials started with the prosecutor. Now, notice what he said - “Seeing that by thee we enjoy great quietness, and that very worthy deeds are done unto this nation by thy providence, we accept it always, and in all places, most noble Felix, with all thankfulness. Notwithstanding, that I be not further tedious unto thee, I pray thee that thou wouldest hear us of thy clemency a few words.” In other words, we Jews enjoy great peace because of you, Felix. Because of you, the nation of Judea has experienced prosperity by your foresight. All of us accept your rule with thankfulness. And we’re so sorry to trouble you with this - please be patient with us.

Now, these were lies because the Jews despised Felix. The Sanhedrin weren’t grateful for his rule, but were opposed to him. They had great disagreements with him. In fact, the next year after this event, Felix had Jonathan, the newly appointed High Priest after Ananias, assassinated. This was recorded by Josephus Flavius, the historian. The reason for this was because Jonathan criticized his governing of Judea. He threatened to report him to Caesar. So Felix persuaded Jonathan’s friends with a large sum of money (some friend!). He hired assassins to kill Jonathan in the Temple. During a Jewish festival, they mingled with worshipers hiding daggers in their clothes - and when he came close to them, they stabbed him. This basically tells us that there were already tensions between Felix and the Jewish rulers. But to get his favor, they lied. They went against conscience. Remember, if they were truly God-fearing men, where should their praises be directed? Who gives peace in the land? Who gives prosperity? To whom should they have been thankful? God. But their conscience was full of offense. They resorted to lies because they hated Paul. But they didn’t only lie, they tried to bring claims against Paul.

We see here that they tried to stir trouble. In verses 5-6, they raised 3 charges. And if these charges were true, Felix as governor would’ve been very angry at Paul. Tertullus said, “For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes: Who also hath gone about to profane the temple.”He charged Paul with being a political enemy. He called Paul a pestilent fellow - a disease. He infects the jews by creating sedition - riots. And this was a serious charge. If Felix was such a good governor, why were there these problems? It was a veiled attempt to destabilize Felix. You see, 10 years before this, there was a riot in Alexandria by Jews. And Caesar had called it a pestilence. So the same language was used to warn Felix that if he didn’t deal with Paul like Caesar did the others, it would spread. All the peace and prosperity he brought to Judea would disappear.

He also charged Paul with being a cult leader - he’s the ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes. One of the things that Rome was very wary of was new religions. One of their duties was to approve the main religions. Why? So that there would be no disorder. New thoughts have the tendency to destabilize regimes. So while Rome allowed new ideas that were part of existing religions, they outlawed completely new faiths. And so the orator knew that and tried to paint Christianity as a completely new religion.

And he charged Paul with profaning or defiling the temple. This was also political in nature because the Romans had a policy that allowed Jews to handle their own temple affairs. So technically, the Sanhedrin should deal with such contravening of their laws. In other words, Felix, you have no jurisdiction here. If you are really for peace with the Jews, and you have given us authority over our temple, and he transgressed our laws - then what business do you have in this whole matter? Let’s give you a break - what Claudius Lysias did was wrong - he shouldn’t have bothered you with this. How could he taken Paul so violently away from us, and then summoned us here? And in verse 9, we see that all the Jews agree - “and the Jews also assented, saying that these things were so.” Not just one lawyer, but all his clients - the High Priest and the elders. So they all shared in these lies and stirring of trouble. Folks, religious people who want their ways, can be like this. You’ve seen, I’ve seen it, we may even be guilty of it.

But we see secondly, that truly forgiven people foster consciences void of offense. Christian are not perfect - but we must strive for clear consciences. After the prosecution spoke, Paul who was unrepresented, spoke. He was his own defense - his own lawyer. We know that Paul was not perfect - he was the chief of sinners, he split with Barnabas over Mark, he had conflicts with Peter. But when it came to these charges, Paul was not guilty. Here, he addressed Felix from verse 10 onwards - “Felix, you’ve been a judge for many years. I’m more than happy to answer these charges.” He then proceeded to describe what happened in verses 11-13. He was in Jerusalem for 12 days. When he was in the temple, synagogue, and city, he started no riots. “And they neither found me in the temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city: Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me.” So where are the riots? I started no riots. Where’s the proof. In fact, if you remember, the Jews of Asia were the ones who started the riots. Okay, so he addressed the first charge. Then concerning the second charge of starting a new religion, Paul said in verses 14-16 that they were wrong. “They accuse me of heresy - but I worship God according to the Scriptures. I worship the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob! I’m not worshiping another God. The Gospel I teach is found in the Old Testament. The Bible teaches the resurrection of the dead. One day, the just and the unjust would resurrect and be judged.” I’m not guilty - if anything, it’s the Sadducees who don’t believe the resurrection - they’re not worshiping God according to their religion. Religious people who reject the Bible will have a defiled conscience. But my conscience is clear before God and man. “And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offence toward God, and toward men.” I’m not guilty - because of the hope of this future resurrection, I’ve been forgiven, and will live my life with a clear conscience.

Furthermore, in answering the third charge, Paul asked them to prove it. They said he defiled the temple - so where’s the charge? If you can’t justify your accusations, then am I not justified? He said in verses 17-20 to Felix that he was at the temple after many years to bring his offerings and money for the poor. He had come to undergo the rites of purification. But he wasn’t there with a crowd, neither did he stir trouble, but it was the Jews of Asia who had issues with him. But where are they now? Shouldn’t they bring the charge? Isn’t that the issue? No, I think these have an issue with my preaching the gospel. That’s why I’m being questioned today. Paul’s conscience was clear - that’s why he kept going back to the evidence, and he wasn’t afraid to call for a trial. This was why he could be bold - the evidence was on his side; all they had was accusations without substance. So the offense had made the accusations, and Paul had given his defense. You would think Paul would’ve been freed.

But no. We see thirdly, that this wicked man had zero conscience. After the different sides spoke, Felix decided to defer the case. Why? Verse 22 says he already had a more perfect knowledge of the way. He knew about Christianity, he knew Christianity was not like this, he knew Paul was not guilty of these charges. And the way he knew it was because his wife Drusilla was a Jew, verse 24. But he wanted to wait for Claudius Lysias to come so he’d know more about the issue. But he already knew the issue - Claudius already told him in writing and to say Paul was not guilty. And the reason why Felix did this was because he was greedy. Verse 27 says that he kept Paul in prison at Caesarea for 2 years. Couldn’t Claudius come? Why did Felix stall? In fact, Felix had a lot of time for Paul, summoning him often. Verse 26 says, “He hoped also that money should have been given him of Paul, that he might loose him: wherefore he sent for him the oftener, and communed with him.” He wanted money from Paul - he wanted Paul to bribe him so that he would release him sooner. And he tempted Paul often, with a carrot - calling him often. And he also made it easy for Paul to get money to bribe him. We learn in verse 23 that he kept Paul under very light guard - just one centurion.

If Paul was a dangerous cult leader, a rioter, you guard him with more men. This means Felix knew the charges were bogus. Such a light guard would give way to many visitors. They came to minister to his needs - they’d have brought food and money. So Felix was hoping to benefit from this. He kept an innocent man for 2 years, without calling for more witnesses, with the hope of release, putting Paul’s conscience in constant flux - should I bribe or shouldn’t I bribe? And what’s worse was this - after 2 years, his time was up and another governor took over. When governors leave, it was customary for them to release prisoners. But Felix didn’t want to do that. His relationship was so bad, that if he had released Paul in those 2 years, the Jews would’ve surely complained to Caesar. Zero conscience. He kept Paul for his own gain. But how did Paul react? With anger and sadness? No. You see, a clear conscience is a powerful thing. Paul preached.

In verses 24-25, we learn that Felix and Drusilla visited Paul often. In fact, he sent for Paul often, and both heard him preach about faith in Christ. Paul would reason, “of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come.” Meaning, Paul preached about what was right in God’s eyes, how an uncontrolled and intemperate life was sinful, and how judgment awaited sinners. Felix trembled. But he never repented. Why? Because Felix was a hardened man. You see, Felix was a wicked man. And while his conscience responded in fear, he was hardened. His wife Drusilla, was his third wife. She was King Agrippa’s sister. Felix had an affair with her and stole her away from her husband. Paul would’ve known this and spoken against this. He’d have spoken about their need for Christ, their sins, the judgment that would come on them. With clear conscience, he preached. He had to preach. He couldn’t not preach.

But what did Felix do? Verse 25 - “…Felix trembled, and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee.” He didn’t deal with it, he didn’t repent, he just simply wanted to forget about it. He wouldn’t face the shame or acknowledge his wrong. When Adam and Eve were walking in obedience before the fall, they were naked and unashamed. They didn’t hide anything because there was no reason to hide. But after they sinned, they hid from God because they knew they sinned. A conscience that is unclean. Felix couldn’t bear it - go away for now - I’ll call you again. But he didn’t. He couldn’t bear the truth.

Dearly beloved, this is God’s Word for us today. But how might we apply this?

Have you ever told a white lie - giving an answer that would save you from embarrassment? Or Dad, when you smell a dirty diaper, you ignore it and wait for your wife to change it? We don’t grow out of our deception. Satan is the father of lies. He lied to our first parents and got them to sin. And we have been battling with deception ever since.

But thank God he has built within us a conscience. Conscience is that part of man that guides his sense of right and wrong. When we sin, our conscience is violated and we feel shame. When Adam and Eve sinned they tried to cover their nakedness. Their conscience was violated. They felt shame.

Sometimes man’s conscience becomes corrupted. For example, Hitler rejected the Bible, and formed his own laws - to him, it was right to kill Jews. He felt his quest was so noble that murder was permissible. His conscience was seared with a hot iron until it no longer functioned. He felt no shame.

But when we know what the Word of God says about sin and righteousness, our conscience is rightly taught and rightly functions. When we sin, we will feel shame. Just when David was confronted with his sin, he responded with remorse.

But without the Word of God as the standard, our standard of right and wrong rules. And our conscience will follow. It is truly a scary thing when our conscience is not guided by the Word of God.

In this passage we see 3 kinds of people and their consciences. Firstly, religious people who seared their conscience. Secondly, a forgiven man cleared by conscience. Thirdly, a wicked man with no conscience.

1. Religious People Can Have Consciences Full of Offense

A. They resorted to lies

B. They resorted to stirring trouble

2. Forgiven People Foster Consciences Void of Offense

A. He was not guilty

B. He was justified

3. Wicked Men Can Have “Zero” Conscience

A. He was greedy

B. He was hardened

Conversation for Change