That, on this occasion, Paul dwelt, with any particularity, on the appearance of Jesus in the flesh after his resurrection, is not said: and, as it would not have contributed anything to the purpose, the less particular the safer and the better. _Lord_ or not _Lord_, that which appeared was at any rate a _spirit_: and for the war against the Sadducees, a spirit was all that was wanted: no matter of what sort. SECTION 4. TRIAL III. PLACE, CÆSAREA.--_Acts_ 24:1-23. SCENE, "Governor" Felix's judicatory. Judge, said Governor. Prosecutor, Orator Tertullus: Present, his clients,--the "High Priest" and "the Elders." Procedure, accusatorial. Time, "twelve days," ver. 11, "after Trial 1; eleven, after Trial 2." I. Counsel's Speech--Points touched upon in it, these:--verses 1-4. 1. Opening compliment to Governor Judge.--His "providence" and "clemency." II. 1. Vituperative surplusage, of course, as if in B. R.: though not paid for, in fees and taxes, by the sheet.--Defendant, "a pestilent fellow." Charges three. To make the matter more intelligible, had the proceeding been by writing in the first instance, they might have been styled counts. 2. Charge 1. Defendant "a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world." 3. Charge 2. Said Defendant "a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes." 4. Charge 3. Defendant "gone about to profane the temple." 5. Statement made of Trial 2, and the termination given to it by Roman chief captain Lysias, taking said Defendant out of their hands, and commanding accusers' appearance in this court: verses 7, 8. 6. _Viva voce_ evidence accordant: witnesses, neither quality nor number stated. "And _the Jews_ also assented, saying that these things were so." ver. 9. III. Defendant's defence: verses 10-21. Points touched upon in it, these:-- 1. Defendant's confidence in this his judge. 2. At Jerusalem "to worship" was his errand. The ostensible one, yes: of the real one,--supplanting the Apostles,--of course nothing said. 3. In the temple, defendant was not "found by _them_," by whom? "disputing with any man." Disputing? No. It was to take the oath--the seven-days-long false oath,--that he went there:--this, and nothing else. The priests, in whose keeping he was, and on whose acceptance the validity and efficacy of the ceremony depended, were not men to be disputed with. 4. Defendant not found by them "raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city." ver. 12. No: neither was any such raising charged upon him: nor would it have suited his purpose. Seditious _acts_ are one thing; seditious _discourses_, another. From seditious acts he had nothing to gain; from seditious discourses everything: to wit, in so far as the effect of it was to weaken men's attachment to the law of the land, and engage them to transfer it to the schism he had raised in the religion of Jesus.