DON'T GO BY
WHAT "WORKS"

9 But Festus, wanting to do the Jews a favour,, answered Paul, and said, Do you want to go up to Jerusalem, and be judged there of these things in my presence?
10 Then Paul said, I stand before Caesar's judgment seat, where I ought to be judged: I have done no wrong to the Jews, as you know very well.
11 For if I am an offender, or have committed anything deserving death, I do not refuse to die: but if there be none of these things of which these men accuse me, no one may deliver me to them. I appeal to Caesar.
12 Then Festus, when he had conferred with the council, answered, Have you appealed to Caesar? To Caesar you shall go.

31 And when they had gone aside, they talked between themselves, saying, This man has not done anything deserving of death or of bonds.
32 Then Agrippa said to Festus, This man could have been set at liberty, if he had not appealed to Caesar.

30 And Paul lived two full years in his own hired house, and received all who came to him,
31 Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him.

~•~ ~•~ ~•~

When Paul, in the course of his trial, perceived that there was no way of persuading the Jews to treat him justly, or to give him protection and safety in their land, he appealed to Caesar. His appeal was accepted. Later, the authorities agreed that he could have been set free if he hadn't appealed to Caesar. Does that mean he shouldn't have done so? Then, the book of Acts closes, leaving us with a "cliff-hanger," not telling us whether or not he ever had his trial by Caesar, let alone how it turned out if he did have it. Granted, there are traditions that tell us he had his trial and was fully acquitted, and returned to his ministry for a number of years before being arrested again. But we cannot be entirely sure of those traditions; and, even if we could, we could not base any spiritual teaching on them because they are not Scripture.
A number of reasons have been suggested as to why the Scriptures leave us on this note of suspense, wondering what happened to Paul in the end. It could well be that several of these reasons are true. After all, we often have more than one reason for doing a certain thing, don't we? I am suggesting one reason, which teaches us a very important lesson. When we read that Paul appealed to Caesar, but that he could have been set free sooner if he hadn't, we naturally wonder whether he did the right thing by making that appeal. And, when we wonder whether a certain course of action was right or not, one of the first things our human nature wants to know is, "Did it work?" If what a person did, worked, then we are inclined to assume it was the right thing to do. If it didn't work, we assume it wasn't the right thing. That's what we call pragmatism, the philosophy that bases all determination of right and wrong on what works, and what accomplishes the most.
I think that's one reason why God didn't tell us what happened to Paul concerning his proposed trial. God wanted to teach us that pragmatism is NOT a Christian value. If the book of Acts had closed by telling us that Paul had had his trial and been fully acquitted, we would have been inclined to say, "Good job, Paul! You made the right decision!" But if the record had closed by telling us that Paul had been condemned to death, or to life imprisonment, we'd have been inclined to say, "Too bad, Paul! You made a dreadful mistake!" So God left us with our question unanswered, to teach us that, in determining whether a course of action is right or wrong, we can't go by whether or not it "works." Of course, God's will always "works" in God's sight, as eternity will reveal; but since at present we can't see circumstances as God sees them, we can't tell whether something really "works" in the light of eternity. We have to leave that up to God to determine.
God has given us other criteria by which to determine whether our decisions are right, whether they appear to "work" or not. For one, our decisions are right if we TRUST GOD'S GUIDANCE. There is every evidence that Paul did exactly that. Why, then, could he not be set free after his speech to King Agrippa? Roman law said that, once an accused person had appealed to Caesar, no inferior judge could either condemn, nor acquit him. Only Caesar could pronounce the judgment. The purpose of that law was to protect the accused against inferior judges, who were often harsh or corrupt.
It is undeniable that, because of Paul's appeal, a great deal of time passed before he could be tried. The trial would be expensive, and it would take a long time for witnesses to travel to Rome. That explains why he had to wait for two years under house arrest, even after he got to Rome. Yet, would a quick solution, by not appealing to Caesar, really have been as good as we might at first think? Of course, human nature likes to see problems get solved fast; but is that always the wisest course to follow? How safe would Paul have been if he had been released "on the spot?" He evidently detected that Festus was unwilling to exonerate him before the Jews (25:9). How much protection could he therefore count on after a release in Palestine?
Remember that a few years earlier, forty men had plotted to kill Paul, and even taken an oath not to eat nor drink until they had done so. Paul was escorted by to Caesarea by an army, only because he had learned of the plot, and informed the captain. Therefore even if Paul were escorted to the sanhedrin in Jerusalem, could there not have been men in ambush again to kill him on the way? And could he have counted on a fair trial by the sanhedrin, even if he got there safely? The sanhedrin would probably deal as corruptly with Paul as it had with Christ.
Some say that Paul should not have used his Roman citizenship to obtain judgment by Caesar, since a Christian is a citizen of heaven. However, do the Scriptures teach that we musn't make any use at all of our earthly citizenship rights? I frankly don't find that in the Bible.
On a historic street in Ottawa (Canada's national capital), there is a wooden platform called "the speaker's platform." The law says that, if you're a Canadian citizen, then as long as you wait for your turn (on a first-come-first-served basis), you are entitled to stand on that platform and "express yourself." But very few people use that platform, except preachers of the Gospel, who make very frequent use of it. And I'm one of those preachers! Now, would anybody venture to say that it's wrong for us to avail ourselves of our legal right as Canadian citizens in preaching the Gospel from that platform? That would be rather far-fetched, wouldn't it? And neither do I think we have ground for saying that Paul shouldn't have made use of his Roman citizenship to gain a hearing by Caesar.
I therefore don't think we have any valid reason to doubt that the Lord guided Paul in his decision, showing him that he had no option but to appeal to Caesar. He was confident that the Holy Spirit would provide him with the right answer just as quickly as he needed it.
But when they shall lead you, and hand you over, take no thought beforehand what you shall say, neither premeditate: but whatever shall be given you in that hour, say that; for it is not you that speak, but the Holy Spirit (Mark 13:11).
Our decisions are also right if we FULFILL GOD'S PURPOSE. We are not told whether or not Paul's purpose-- his release-- was fulfilled; but we are definitely told that God's purpose was. God's purpose was that Paul should go to Rome to bear witness of Christ.
And the night following, the Lord stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer, Paul: for as you have testified of Me in Jerusalem, so you must bear witness also at Rome (Acts 23:11).
That's exactly what Paul did during his two years under house arrest, as the last two verses of the book of Acts tell us.
Furthermore, going to Rome was an answer to Paul's prayer. He had written to the Roman Christians (Romans 1:10) that he was praying the Lord to send him to Rome; and he told the Ephesians, during his last visit with them, of his desire to go there. The Lord answered his request in a rather different way from how he probably expected, but his request was nevertheless granted.
God's ultimate purpose for the saints in anything, is that He be glorified (Revelation 4:11). That purpose is guaranteed if we make all our decisions out of a desire to please Him (see I John 5:14). We have every reason to believe that that is what Paul desired.
God's plan for us may include trials that are unforeseen to us; but it also permits a deeper work than our own engineering would permit. It appears that Paul wrote the epistles of Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon during his two-year house arrest told of at the end of Acts. Would he have found, or taken, the time to write them if he had been free, and as active as he usually was? Since God preserved the style of the human writers of His Word, rather than simply dictating it verbally, the truths written must have gone through the human writers' souls. For the deep truths in these epistles to go through Paul's soul would take considerable time and meditation. This was part of the good that the delay of his trial was working toward, according to Romans 8:28.
Our decisions are furthermore right if we RECEIVE GOD'S VINDICATION. And again, this divine vindication is given, not by whether what we decided on seems to "work" or not, but by the means we will now show.
I confess that, for many years, whenever I read the words, "This man could have been set at liberty if he had not appealed to Caesar," my reaction was, "Oh oh, Paul! You goofed! You shouldn't have said that!" However, when Paul arrived in Rome and talked to the Jews there, he was still convinced that he had done the right thing (Acts 28:19). That was in spite of his going through the dreadful storm and shipwreck on the way, as told of in Acts chapter 27. Since Paul had such an unshakeable conviction that he had done the right thing, what right have we to say he hadn't?
We rather need to learn that, having trouble is NOT a sign that what we are doing displeases God. It reminds me of what I heard about an open-air Gospel meeting in Montreal, in the days when Christians were openly persecuted in French Canada. A policeman put the preacher in the "strangle-hold." Those who saw that, said it was fortunate that that preacher was a former lumberjack, and therefore fantastically strong, and kept the policeman from squeezing him as hard as he evidently wanted to. A weaker man would likely have had the wind squeezed out of him. And the meeting was instantly broken up. Some of the participants reacted by saying, "I'm not taking part in any more open-air meetings. If we have trouble, the thing can't be of God!" Is that right? That certainly isn't what Paul evidently thought-- nor what any Christian martyr ever thought-- or else there would never have been any martyrs. Nor would anyone ever have endured persecution, or the hardships that missionaries must go through to bring the Gospel to the ends of the earth. Let's beware of such cowardly thinking.
There are clear evidences of God's hand on Paul all along the way. He provided for his needs, including the rent for the house where he was held under arrest. During those years he could not go out and do any tent making; he had to depend entirely on the Lord to send in the funds to pay his rent. And in those days, prisoners were not provided with food and clothes, except by people who cared about them enough to bring them these needs. It was in those circumstances that Paul wrote to the Philippians, "My God shall supply all your need, according to His riches in glory, by Christ Jesus" (Philippians 2:19). He knew what he was writing about!
The kindly treatment Paul got from the centurion during his sea voyage (27:3, 42, 43), and especially his insistence on saving Paul's life when the soldiers wanted to kill all the prisoners, was certainly evidence that God was keeping him. So was the unique consolation he received from God, reassuring him that he would get to Rome and that nobody on board would be drowned, and even giving him enough courage to cheer up the others on the ship (27:21-25, 33-35). And, by the grace of God, the guards permitted Paul to spend a week with Christians in Rome before being put under house arrest (28:14, 15).
The Lord gave Paul a number of opportunities to serve Him during his voyage and house arrest. On the island of Malta, he bore testimony by being a "servant to all"in the menial task of gathering firewood, showing that no job was beneath his dignity (28:3). He then was able to minister to Publius' father and heal him of his sickness (28:8, 9). Then, when he was under house arrest, evidently the Holy Spirit drew people to come to him and hear the Gospel, or receive counsel and edification, since Paul was prevented from going out to them where they were. This showed that "the Word of God is not bound" (II Timothy 2:9). And just think of all the exposure to the Gospel that Paul's guards got, being chained to him day and night, even if they worked by shifts! They heard every word of testimony and teaching he spoke to his visitors! And, even if Paul's life had ended after the two-year house arrest, let us consider that Christ's public ministry was completed in only three-and-a-half years. It is therefore not necessarily God's will that His servants have a lengthy ministry of many years on earth. What counts is that they complete what He wants them to do; and His blessing on it is their vindication.
If there was any Christian in recent centuries who must have appeared a failure to his contemporaries, it would be Joseph Scriven (1819-1886). The night before his planned wedding day, his fiancée was drowned. He then sought to enter a military career, but was refused because of poor health. Then he immigrated to Canada (from Ireland), and undertook one kind of ministry after another, most of them in spreading the Gospel through some form of charitable work. Every time, his undertaking succeeded for awhile, and then he was forced to give it up. He got engaged a second time, but his fiancée died of sickness before the planned wedding date, Scriven therefore remained a bachelor all his life.
Yet, being in fellowship with New-Testament assemblies, Scriven had many opportunities to preach; and those who sat under his ministry said that his face appeared as the face of an angel (see Acts 6:15). And the Lord used him in one splendid way that was totally unsuspected by his contemporaries. When his father died, he wrote a poem with the sole intention of comforting his mother through it. But his mother showed the poem to friends, and they found great blessing through it. Eventually a friend wrote a tune for it, and many who were blessed through it were determined that it must be published. That was the origin of the hymn What a Friend We Have in Jesus! Few hymns, if any, have been sung so widely, and translated into so many languages, and been a means of as much blessing and comfort to so many people, as that hymn. It was born from a life-long experience of Christ's consolation in trials. But it only became that well known, after Scriven's death. What greater evidence need we that we can't determine whether a person's undertakings are a success or a failure, nor whether his course of action was right or wrong, by the appearances of whether or not it "works?"
Let us therefore totally reject pragmatism as a criteria for the value of a Christian's decisions, undertakings, and life. This will avoid a great deal of questioning and discouragement. If we seek to govern our decisions and evaluations by God's criteria, we will enjoy God's consolation and encouragement, whatever the appearances to human sight may be.