Proverbs 18:16-18 — A man’s gift maketh room for him, and bringeth him before great men. He that is first in his own cause seemeth just; but his neighbor cometh and searcheth him. The lot causeth contentions to cease, and parteth between the mighty.

Myra and I have been reading the account of Paul’s trial before he appealed to Caesar and was sent to Rome. It’s impossible to review the events without being reminded of Jesus’s trial.

The two trials serve as a good example of something it’s important to remember when reading the Bible. Things change! It’s a great mistake to overlay our understanding of our own culture on the scripture that we’re studying.

At first blush the trials are scandalous. Let’s set aside the Jewish elements. We know that the Jews were implacable enemies of Jesus and His followers. There could be no fair trial for Jesus or Paul from then. But what about the Romans?

Historians tell us that the Romans formulated an elaborate legal system, over a thousand years from the “twelve tablets” to the Justinian codex. Many elements of our own legal system can be traced back to the Romans. So surely the Roman trials would have been fair? Not so much …

One thousand years after the time of Solomon, his wisdom still seemed a pretty good picture of the way things worked. A Roman trial would take place before a judge who could be one of any number of officials. There were very few rules about how a trial could be run. There was a concept of a jury trial, but little notion of facts as the basis for a decision. Trials were won by the most eloquent advocate. As Solomon put it, “He that is first in his own cause seemeth just; but his neighbor cometh and searcheth him.” The judge would make his decision based on how impressed he was — and by the mood of any bystanders.

Of course great advocacy wasn’t the only way judges could be swayed. Solomon had that right too … “A man’s gift maketh room for him, and bringeth him before great men” — without palms being greased there was no guarantee of a trial, and decisions could be bought.

If we thought that Roman justice matched up to the laws as they were written, Paul’s appeal to Caesar would make very little sense. The “facts” in evidence, as Aggrippa acknowledged, would not have condemned him — “Then said Agrippa unto Festus, This man might have been set at liberty, if he had not appealed unto Caesar.” (Acts 26:32). Our quick look at the practice of law makes it clear that Paul could not take the risk.

Well I know it was a bit theoretical … but I hope you get my point. It’s easy to read the Bible, to see things that look like the way they are today and not realize that the practice has changed completely. Step back in time!