Acts 25 20

Acts 25:20 kjv

And because I doubted of such manner of questions, I asked him whether he would go to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these matters.

Acts 25:20 nkjv

And because I was uncertain of such questions, I asked whether he was willing to go to Jerusalem and there be judged concerning these matters.

Acts 25:20 niv

I was at a loss how to investigate such matters; so I asked if he would be willing to go to Jerusalem and stand trial there on these charges.

Acts 25:20 esv

Being at a loss how to investigate these questions, I asked whether he wanted to go to Jerusalem and be tried there regarding them.

Acts 25:20 nlt

I was at a loss to know how to investigate these things, so I asked him whether he would be willing to stand trial on these charges in Jerusalem.

Acts 25 verses

Acts 25 20 Meaning

Festus, the Roman governor, candidly expressed his bewilderment and indecision regarding the specific nature of the charges brought by the Jewish leaders against Paul. Since these charges did not involve standard criminal offenses but rather esoteric questions of Jewish religion and custom, particularly concerning a dispute about Jesus being alive, Festus admitted he was at a loss for how to properly judge such matters. Consequently, he offered Paul the choice to go to Jerusalem to be tried there, believing the local Jewish religious authorities, even under Roman oversight, would be better equipped to clarify and resolve these theological controversies.

Acts 25 20 Context

Acts chapter 25 opens with Porcius Festus replacing Felix as the Roman procurator of Judea. Immediately, the Jewish high priests and leading men appealed to Festus to send Paul to Jerusalem, secretly plotting to assassinate him on the way. Festus refused, insisting Paul be tried in Caesarea, the Roman administrative capital. After a brief hearing where no actual criminal charges punishable by Roman law could be proven (Acts 25:7-8), Festus's bewilderment intensified. He reported that the accusations concerned "points of dispute with him about their own religion and about a certain Jesus, who was dead, whom Paul asserted to be alive" (Acts 25:18-19). This foundational lack of understanding forms the direct immediate context for verse 20, as Festus admits his confusion and seeks a resolution by offering a Jerusalem trial, hoping the local experts could clarify these unfamiliar religious matters. Historically, Roman governors generally sought to avoid involvement in Jewish internal religious disputes unless public order was threatened, aiming for stability and ease of administration.

Acts 25 20 Word analysis

• διαπορούμενος (diaporoumenos): This Greek term, from διαπορέω, means "being in doubt," "perplexed," or "utterly at a loss." The present participle form signifies an ongoing state of intellectual and judicial impasse. It underscores Festus's profound confusion, as he could not categorize Paul's case within Roman legal frameworks because the charges were spiritual rather than criminal.
• δὲ (de): "And" or "but." A connective particle indicating a transition, often setting up a contrast or consequence. Here, it transitions from Festus's report of the charges to his perplexed reaction.
• ἐγὼ (egō): "I." This emphatic personal pronoun highlights Festus's own personal admission of being perplexed, emphasizing his individual perspective as a Roman outsider confronting Jewish religious disputes.
• εἰς τὴν περὶ τούτων ζήτησιν (eis tēn peri toutōn zētēsin): This phrase means "about this discussion concerning these matters."
  • ζήτησιν (zētēsin): From ζήτησις (zētēsis), referring to an "inquiry," "dispute," "controversy," or "question." This word often appears in Acts describing Jewish religious or legal debates. Festus recognized the issue as a dispute within Judaism, rather than a universal crime.
  • τούτων (toutōn): "These (matters)." Refers specifically to the points of contention mentioned in Acts 25:18-19, particularly the claim that Jesus was alive despite having died.
• ἔλεγον (elegon): "I said" or "I was saying." Imperfect tense, suggesting a deliberation that culminated in the stated proposition, or a past act in narrative. It marks Festus's articulation of his attempt to resolve his confusion.
• εἰ βούλοιτο (ei bouloito): "If he wished" or "whether he desired." This optative mood indicates a conditional offer or an expression of a desired outcome. Festus presented it as a choice for Paul, implying a degree of fairness or seeking cooperation.
• πορεύεσθαι (poreuesthai): "To go" or "to journey." An infinitive indicating the proposed action.
• εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα (eis Hierosolyma): "To Jerusalem." This identifies the proposed location for the trial. Jerusalem was the hub of Jewish religious and legal authority (the Sanhedrin).
• κἀκεῖ (kakei): "And there." A compound of "καὶ" (kai, "and") and "ἐκεῖ" (ekei, "there"), explicitly reinforcing the intended new location for the judgment.
• κρίνεσθαι (krinesthai): "To be judged" or "to be tried." Passive infinitive, meaning Paul would be the one on trial, subjected to judgment. This highlights the judicial nature of the proposition.
• περὶ τούτων (peri toutōn): "Concerning these matters." This phrase reiterates the specific focus of the proposed trial, confirming it was still about the religious "questions" and "dispute" Festus found so bewildering.

Words-group analysis

• "διαπορούμενος δὲ ἐγὼ εἰς τὴν περὶ τούτων ζήτησιν": This extended phrase vividly captures Festus's complete inability to comprehend the spiritual-theological issues at the heart of Paul's case. It establishes his Roman perspective, recognizing a conflict rooted in Jewish "questions" and thus outside his legal expertise. His admission is a concession to the vast cultural and religious chasm he faced.
• "ἔλεγον εἰ βούλοιτο πορεύεσθαι εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα κἀκεῖ κρίνεσθαι περὶ τούτων": This section outlines Festus's pragmatic solution. It reveals his desire to shift the burden of judgment to those he believed were better suited (Jewish leaders in Jerusalem) while maintaining Roman authority by overseeing the process. It was a politically expedient offer aimed at both clarifying the situation and possibly appeasing the influential Jewish leaders. However, this offer directly precipitated Paul's appeal to Caesar, altering his ministry trajectory.

Acts 25 20 Bonus section

• Festus's ignorance regarding spiritual matters mirrors that of other Roman officials like Gallio (Acts 18:14-15), emphasizing a recurring theme in Acts: the difficulty for secular authorities to judge the spiritual realities presented by the gospel.
• This offer by Festus inadvertently highlighted Paul's Roman citizenship. Because the proposition was an offer (εἰ βούλοιτο, "if he wished"), Paul had the right to refuse, leading him to exercise his right of appeal to Caesar. If Festus had ordered the transfer without offering a choice, it could have been an abuse of Roman judicial process, allowing Paul's right of appeal.
• The incident demonstrates that Roman governance, though providing a degree of stability and justice, operated within specific boundaries that spiritual matters often transcended, requiring direct divine intervention or unusual human pathways (like Paul's appeal) for the Gospel to advance.

Acts 25 20 Commentary

Festus’s candid admission in Acts 25:20 – that he was utterly at a loss regarding the Jewish "questions" concerning Paul – highlights a fundamental clash between two worldviews: the pragmatic, law-and-order focused Roman mind and the divinely revealed spiritual truths of Judaism and nascent Christianity. For a Roman governor, a claim about a resurrected Jesus was either inconsequential superstition or a nonsensical philosophical debate, certainly not a crime warranting the death penalty under Roman law. This inability to discern spiritual truth with the natural mind underscores a biblical principle (1 Cor 2:14). His offer to relocate the trial to Jerusalem, a choice given to Paul, was less about genuine fairness and more about political expediency and a desire to offload a confusing religious case. He aimed to appease the influential Jewish leadership, who vehemently opposed Paul and desired his trial in Jerusalem (Acts 25:3), even while attempting to maintain Roman judicial oversight. This human perplexity and political maneuvering, however, served as an unwitting divine catalyst, providing the immediate justification for Paul's crucial appeal to Caesar, ultimately paving the way for the Gospel's entry into the heart of the Roman Empire. The verse encapsulates how God can use the ignorance and pragmatic decisions of secular authorities to further His redemptive plan.