Acts 26

H. Leo Boles Commentary On Acts 26 PAUL BEFORE AGRIPPAAct_26:1-32 1 And Agrippa said unto Paul,—After Festus had introduced the case, Agrippa seems to assume the chairmanship of the meeting; so he addressed Paul and told him that he was permitted to speak for himself. Agrippa as a king and guest presides at the grandest place. No charges are preferred against Paul; Festus had admitted that he had no proof of any charges. When Paul was granted the privilege of speaking for himself, he “ stretched forth his hand.” This was the usual gesture for silence. Paul now stood before the assembly as a prisoner, with one arm, probably his left arm, chained to the soldier who guarded him. A wide contrast in earthly pomp and glory between Paul, an innocent prisoner in chains, and the royal robed court is here seen. 2 I think myself happy, king Agrippa,—Paul now makes “ his defence.” It is not a “ defence” in the strictest sense of that word; Paul is only being examined that Festus may learn more about him. Paul did not flatter King Agrippa when he said, “ I think myself happy,” but was speaking courteously to the king. He was glad of the opportunity to preach Christ. The accusations which were made against him involved the gospel. It is only another opportunity for Paul to preach the gospel. Agrippa could understand Paul in all his references to Jewish beliefs and hopes. Paul’ s beginning in his defense before Felix (Acts 24:10) was adorned with courteous language. 3 especially because thou art expert in all customs—Agrippa knew the Jewish religion; he knew the sects of Pharisees and Sad- ducees; he knew their expectations of a Messiah, their ceremonial laws; hence, he could hear Paul with patience and understanding. Paul’ s defense is divided into two divisions: (1) his early life which was well known as a Pharisee (Acts 22:3; Galatians 1:14; Philippians 3:5-6), and (2) his life as a prisoner. Agrippa II was especially fitted to act as judge, for he was not merely a ruler of Jewish lands, and the appointed guardian of the temple, but he was also in religion, professedly at least, a Jew. His father, Agrippa I, was famous for his rigid observance of Jewish rites. 4-5 My manner of life then from my youth up,—Paul’ s early life in Tarsus and in Jerusalem was open and known to all. Here Paul emphasizes his training and beliefs before his conversion. It is thought that Paul went as a youth to Jerusalem from Tarsus to get his education. Since all the Jews knew of his early life they could testify, if they would, that Paul belonged to the sect of the Pharisees, and was very jealous of all the tenets of faith and practice of the Pharisees. “ After the straitest sect’’ comes from the Greek “ akribestaten hairesin,” which is a superlative expression. Paul was most rigid and precise in his life as a Pharisee. The word for “ sect” is the same as that used in Acts 24:5, and is sometimes translated “ heresy.” “ Religion” is from the Greek “ threskeias,” and is the old word for religious worship or discipline. Paul knew the rules of the Pharisees, and he lived rigidly according to these rules. 6-7 And now I stand here to be judged—Thus far Agrippa could bear testimony to the truthfulness of all that Paul had said. It was his belief in the fulfillment of an old national hope that had brought him to the place that he now stands as a prisoner before Agrippa. The Pharisees had firmly and persistently hoped in the promises of God that a Messianic kingdom would be established, and Paul in preaching Christ was declaring that that hope had been realized. It was a strange paradox! Paul was now a pris¬oner for the very thing which the Jews emphasized so strongly and believed so confidently, and now he was made a prisoner by the Jews themselves! Paul had made the resurrection of Christ the basis of his gospel of the Messianic kingdom, and this had enraged the Jews. Paul declared that Jesus, who had been crucified and buried, was now raised from the dead, but the Jews denied this. (Acts 25:19.) 8 Why is it judged incredible with you,—Paul turned suddenly from Agrippa to the audience. “ Incredible” means “ unfaithful” (Luke 12:46), “ faithless” (John 20:27), or “ unbelievable.” It is from the Greek “ apiston.” The Greek shows that Paul is not only addressing Agrippa, but his audience. If God can or does raise the dead, why should anyone not believe that he has raised Jesus? If he has raised Jesus, has not the crucified One become the Christ? All that Paul had done was to preach that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah; he had preached that this Jesus had been crucified, buried, and raised from the dead, and that he was now at the right hand of God, reigning over his Messianic king¬dom. Why should Agrippa and others not believe in him ? 9 I verily thought with myself—Here Paul in his defense makes a turn to his conversion. His words express sympathy for those who are now as he was before his conversion; he had been led from unbelief to faith; he will not become discouraged even in Agrippa in a like transition. (1 Timothy 1:12-17.) Paul did not reason himself into Christianity by a chain of arguments, but he was brought into the highest degree of faith in it from the highest degree of prejudice. Paul is politely saying that he could excuse them more readily, because he was then sincerely doing the same kind of wrong to others which he was suffering then as a prisoner. 10 And this I also did in Jerusalem:—Paul here relates some incidents of his persecution of Christians before he was converted. He was an official persecutor of the saints under the direction of the Sanhedrin. He mentions “ the chief priests" who were Saddu- cees, though he himself was a Pharisee. Both Pharisees and Sad- ducees were then joined in persecuting Christians. When they were put to death, he says: “ I gave my vote against them.” The Greek “ katenegka psephon” literally means “ I cast down my pebble.” The ancient Greeks used white pebbles for acquittal (Revelation 2:17) and black ones for conviction or condemnation. They liter¬ally cast the pebbles into the urn.

Many think from this that Paul was a member of the Sanhedrin, and if a member of it, that he was married at that time, as no one was permitted to be a member of the Sanhedrin who was unmarried. It is possible to take this language figuratively as meaning that he gave his approval; hence, he would not be necessarily a member of the Sanhedrin. It seems more likely that he was a member. We know that he was not married when he wrote 1 Corinthians 7:7 f. It is possible that he was a widower at the time he wrote First Corinthians. 11 And punishing them oftentimes—Paul had no mercy on Christians at that time. Paul describes very accurately his zeal in persecuting Christians. He went from one synagogue to another in Jerusalem searching for Christians that he might bring them be¬fore the proper authorities and punish them. Sometimes the local Sanhedrin sat in the synagogues and were judges under Jewish law; punishment was administered in the presence of the judges and in the synagogues. (Matthew 10:17 Matthew 23:34; Mark 13:9.) “ I strove to make them blaspheme” indicates that he was not success¬ful in making them “ blaspheme.” He attempted to make them “ blaspheme” because the sentence of death was passed upon the one who blasphemed. In his mad efforts to cause them to blaspheme he used every means available. To “ blaspheme” means to speak against God, Christ, or the Holy Spirit.

Christians did not yield and maintained their integrity before God. “ Being exceedingly mad against them” means that Paul not only acted in ignorance (1 Timothy 1:13), but that he might plead the temporary insanity of madness. He even went into strange cities, or “ foreign cities,” which means that he went into cities outside Judea, perhaps in Galilee and Samaria, and especially Damascus. 12-13 Whereupon as I journeyed to Damascus—Paul was clothed with his official authority as he journeyed to one of these “ foreign cities,” Damascus. This is the third account in Acts of Paul’ s conversion; the other two accounts are found in chapters 9 and 22. In this third account of Paul’ s conversion some new de¬tails are introduced; they are as follows: (1) it was at midday (verse 13); (2) the light was “ above the brightness of the sun” (verse 13) ; (3) this light enveloped not only Paul, but those “ that journeyed with me” (verse 13) ; (4) the whole company fell to the earth (verse 14); (5) Jesus spoke “ in the Hebrew language” (verse 14); (6) he said, “ It is hard for thee to kick against the goad” (verse 14); and (7) a much fuller account of what Jesus said to him, and in particular how he commissioned him to preach to the Gentiles (verses 16, 18). The variations noted in the three records of his conversion impress us with the truthfulness of the narrative, because they are so natural as to be a certain accompaniment of the same story told at different times. 14 And when we were all fallen to the earth,—Paul and the entire company traveling with him were smitten to the earth, and Paul heard the voice of the Christ speaking to him in the Hebrew language, and asking him why he persecuted Christ. The voice quoted a proverb: “ It is hard for thee to kick against the goad.” This is found as a proverb in both Greek and Latin literature; some think that there was a similar proverb among the Hebrews. A reference to this proverb by Paul at this time would impress upon Festus and Agrippa Paul’ s culture and education. This throws some light on the state of Paul’ s mind before his conver¬sion. Some think that Paul was already stifling conscientious doubts and scruples, and that he is warned against rebelling against God’ s will and wounding his conscience the more deeply. The “ goad” was a stick six or eight feet long.

The plow had but one handle and the plowman held the plow with one hand and the goad in the other; it was carried horizontally and used to prod the ox to make him go faster or obey the plowman. If the ox kicked when pricked with the goad he received a severer prod. 15 And I said, Who art thou, Lord?—Here the record is brief; Saul simply asks who spoke to him, or “ Who art thou, Lord?” The record of the answer of Jesus is equally brief; he simply says, “ I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.” The word “ persecute” is the Latin “ persequor,” which means “ to follow through or after.” Paul was following the disciples of Jesus and punishing them; to persecute a disciple of Jesus is to persecute him. 16 But arise, and stand upon thy feet:—Paul had been cast down; now he is to be raised up; he was smitten down and hum¬bled before God that he might be exalted. There was no occasion for Paul to be afraid; he is summoned to a new and nobler work. He is to cease his persecution of Christ and go preach him as the Savior of man. He was to become a witness for Christ both in what he had already seen and heard and what he was yet to see and hear. Paul was an apostle because Jesus had appeared to him, taught him, and commissioned him. (1 Corinthians 9:1 1 Corinthians 15:8.) Paul had other visions besides the one on the road to Damascus. (Acts 18:9 Acts 23:11; 2 Corinthians 12:2.) Paul is here given a twofold mis¬sion : (1) he is to be “ a minister,” which meant a servant; the service was to proclaim remission of sins and an inheritance among the saints to the Gentiles; (2) furthermore, he was to be “ a wit¬ness” ; that is, he was to testify what he had seen and heard. The witness oftentimes must go further than verbal testimony: he must suffer and perhaps die for Christ. “ Witness” and “ martyr” are represented by the same word in the Greek, “ martures.” 17-18 delivering thee from the people,—“ Delivering” is from the Greek “ exairoumenos,” which means both “ to choose out, to select” one from many and also “ to rescue, to deliver.” Some commentators hold to one meaning here and others to the latter sense; even some have given it both meanings. It seems that the American Standard revisers have given it the correct meaning. It must have been an encouragement to Paul to recall the assurance given him; he could face the trials and persecution with the assur¬ance that the Lord would “ deliver” him from the enemy. We have here condensed what Jesus said to Saul: (1) as he lay on the ground; (2) by the mouth of Ananias; (3) and in the vision in the temple. Paul was commissioned to convince, enlighten, and instruct. By enlightening the people they could see their lost con¬dition; by instructing them they would know how to “ turn from darkness to light,” and be delivered “ from the power of Satan unto God” ; they would then be cleansed of their sins and receive a prom¬ise of “ an inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith” in Christ. “ Satan” is from the Greek “ satana,” and means “ adversary,” the inveterate adversary of God and all good; Satan is the head of the kingdom of evil, and of the whole hierarchy of evil spirits and evil influences. (2 Corinthians 11:14; Ephesians 1:21 Ephesians 6:12; Colossians 2:15; 2 Thessalonians 2:9.) Paul’ s recitation of these words of Jesus to him justifies himself before this cultured audience for his response to the command of Jesus, which resulted in Paul’ s arrest and imprisonment. 19-20 Wherefore, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient— Paul here makes a direct address to Agrippa. He had made it clear that his command had come from God, his message was a “ heavenly vision.” He emphasized the divinity and authority by which he was commanded; he omitted the personal affliction of blindness and restoration to sight. The divine authority of his com¬mand is made clear to Agrippa; this would impress Agrippa more than the others. For Paul to be disobedient to this command from heaven would have been disobedience to God. How could any de¬vout Jew refuse to obey the command? Next Paul began to recite what he did; he began to declare “ both to them of Damascus first, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the country of Judaea, and also to the Gentiles” the gospel of God.

This included a demand of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, repentance of sins, and obedience in baptism. This sketch of Paul’ s work showed to Agrippa that he began with his own people, and then went to the Gentiles. His service both to Jew and Gentile, according to his commission, was promptly rendered; he did not hesitate for a moment, but began at once. We know from the record that Luke has given that it is easy to trace Paul’ s preaching at Damascus and Jerusalem. Barnabas testified that he preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus (Acts 9:27), and that in Jerusalem he disputed against the Grecian Jews (Acts 9:28-29), but we have some difficulty in fixing the exact date of his preaching throughout all the country of Judea. “ Works worthy of repentance” is an expression frequently used by John the Baptist. (Matthew 3:8.) This meant the natural fruit of true repentance. 21 For this cause the Jews seized me—Paul here tells Agrippa why he was arrested or seized by the Jews; first, because he went about preaching the gospel, and especially because he de¬livered the message to the Gentiles, as well as to the Jews, thereby proclaiming that the kingdom of the Messiah made no distinction on account of nationality. Paul’ s unpardonable sin in the eyes of the Jews was his preaching the gospel to the Gentiles. Paul had been seized violently and illegally; he had been retained as a pris¬oner without cause; he now stood before Agrippa in chains as a prisoner for obeying God. 22 Having therefore obtained the help—Paul attributed the help that he had obtained from God as the source of his strength to continue suffering for Christ Jesus. The divine assistance enabled him to continue his work. The same source from which his com¬mission had come was the source of his help. The memories of the stoning which he had received at Lystra, the persecutions of Phi¬lippi, Corinth, and Thessalonica, the danger in the theatre of Ephe¬sus, and the later deadly perils at Jerusalem, all were endured by the help that was from Jehovah. Paul did not regard rank or age; he preached the gospel “ both to small and great.” He had preached the gospel to the poor, and now he was preaching it to King Agrippa and Governor Festus and the nobility of Caesarea. He had not gone beyond “ what the prophets and Moses did say should come.” He neither added to nor left off anything that had been said through Moses and the prophets. 23 how that the Christ must suffer,—The prophets had foretold the sufferings that Christ would endure; some give the inter¬pretation of “ must suffer” to mean that there was no escape of Christ from suffering; others give this the meaning of his nature as to how he may suffer; that is, the degree of sufferings that he could endure. When John the Baptist called Jesus “ the Lamb of God,” it was a new idea to those who had studied Isaiah and learned that the Messiah would be the suffering “ servant” of God. Paul here showed two things: (1) that the Messiah was divinely destined to suffer; and (2) that the Messiah having suffered was the first fruits of the resurrection of the dead. Christ having been raised from the dead would proclaim light to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles. “ People” usually means God’ s people, Israel, as distinguished from the heathen. 24 And as he thus made his defence,—At this point Paul was rudely interrupted by Festus; it seems that he forgot the usual dignity of his office and burst out into a loud laugh of scorn and said; “ Paul, thou art mad; thy much learning is turning thee mad.” “ Mad” is from the Greek “ mainei,” which means “ raving.” Festus did not understand Paul’ s enthusiasm and his speaking of visions and the resurrection of the dead. He thought that Paul’ s “ much learning” was turning him to madness. “ Much learning” literally means “ many letters.” (John 7:15.) Our word “ mania,” or “ maniac,” comes from the Greek “ manei.” Paul had not displayed any high degree of learning, but what he had said was beyond the comprehension of Festus. 25 But Paul saith, I am not mad,—Paul was not “ mad” ; he was not a “ maniac” as Festus declared, but spoke the truth. He spoke words of truth and not vain imaginations or fancies; he had no disease of the mind; his words were well chosen and expressed accurately what he had seen, heard, and experienced. Paul ad¬dressed Festus with his usual courtesy. He had not spoken words of fancy, but solid facts; not wild flight of the imagination, but lit¬eral and exact truth. 26 For the king knoweth of these things,—Festus did not understand, but King Agrippa understood. Agrippa was a Jew by practice, and knew about the hopes that the nation had in a coming Messiah; he knew something of the predictions of the prophets. He had heard much about Paul; hence, he understood Paul. Paul knew that his manner of life before his conversion and after his conversion was known to the public; furthermore, he knew that the crucifixion and burial and resurrection of Christ were public facts. Christians did not try to keep them secret, but published them to the world. The Jews had attempted to stop the preaching of these facts, but had failed to do so.

Paul’ s experiences were not kept secret either; his vision on the road to Damascus, his coming to Jerusalem, and all that he had done had been published. Agrippa knew all these things. After answering Festus. Paul turned and continued his address to Agrippa. 27 King Agrippa, believest thou the prophets?—Paul had “ cornered” Agrippa; he makes this direct appeal to Agrippa. As a professor of the Jewish religion Agrippa had accepted the proph¬ets; hence, Paul’ s direct challenge to him. He must now reject the prophets or believe Paul. He must give up the Jewish religion or believe what Paul had preached. Paul probes the heart of Agrippa a little deeper when he added: “ I know that thou believ¬est.” There was nothing left now for Agrippa but to believe what Paul had preached or to reject it. To reject it would be to reject the prophets and the Jewish religion. Agrippa might dis¬pute Paul’ s interpretation of prophecy, but he could not as a Jew and in the presence of a Jew speak of Paul as Festus had. 28 And Agrippa said unto Paul,—Agrippa is forced to make reply; he could not evade; neither could he deny what Paul had said. Paul had not accused his enemies of any crime. His “ de¬fence” was the preaching of the gospel; he did not plead for him¬self, but reasoned and persuaded Agrippa to accept Christ. What a turn affairs had taken! The Authorized Version has Agrippa saying: “ Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.” “ En oli- gio” does not mean “ almost,” but it is not clear as to what it does mean. Some think that it may refer to “ time,” “ in little time,” while others think that it means “ with small effort you are trying to persuade me to be a Christian” ; while still others think that Agrippa is speaking ironically, but not unpleasantly.

He seems to push it aside for the time being, as if to say: “ Do you think that you can make me become a Christian by your speech making?” Festus was contemptuously ignorant; King Agrippa was sadly in-different. “ Christian” is here used the second time by Luke. The first time is in Acts 11:26. There were many reasons for hin¬drances in the way of Agrippa’ s becoming a Christian. His wealth, his throne, his companion, his associations with Bernice and others, all were hindrances in becoming a Christian. Perhaps his nature was touched and he was, like Felix, made to tremble; but also like Felix, he procrastinated, with no intention ever to accept the Christ. 29 And Paul said, I would to God,—Paul makes a very happy response to Agrippa. We can gather some from Paul’ s answer as to what Agrippa meant. If Agrippa spoke ironically or sarcasti¬cally, Paul ignored his tone and responded courteously and sympa¬thetically. “ Whether with little or with much” may be translated “ both in little and in great” ; it may mean that Paul says: “ I would pray to God, not as you put it, lightly, but as fully as I can,” or “ I would pray to God that whether persuaded with little evidence or much,” or I would pray to God that “ both in a little measure and in a great measure” Agrippa might become a Christian. He desired that Agrippa become as he was “ except these bonds.” He would have Agrippa and all others be Christians, but would have them free from the persecution and bonds which he had to endure. Paul had been brought before the assembly chained after the Roman fashion to a soldier or soldiers who kept guard over him. These chains had not been removed while Paul made his “ defence.” Paul was bound in chains, but Agrippa and the others were in the bonds of ignorance, bonds of sin, and bonds of imperfection. 30-31 And the king rose up, and the governor,—The entire company led by King Agrippa “ rose up” as if to dismiss Paul’ s ad¬dress. The royal assembly had gathered with pomp; some of them may have been moved with curiosity; others to do honor to King Agrippa; but they withdrew— some of them hopelessly ignorant of what they had heard; others withdrew with indifference, and pos¬sibly tired of listening to Paul; still others with some conviction and a clearer understanding of Paul’ s case. When they had retired, “ they spake one to another,” and expressed themselves as being convinced that Paul had done “ nothing worthy of death or of bonds.” They may have assembled with different motives and viewpoints, but they are all agreed on this one thing; namely, Paul is innocent. Paul’ s words had made a favorable impression on them. However, they were all puzzled as to what disposition to make of Paul’ s case. Paul had won none of them to Christ, but he had won their favor. Festus was left by their confusion in the same predicament that he was before Paul made his “ defence.” Why did they not set him free ? 32 And Agrippa said unto Festus,—This answers why Paul had not been set free. Agrippa told Festus that Paul could have been set free “ if he had not appealed unto Caesar.” Paul had ap¬pealed to Caesar only because Festus had tried to get him to go to Jerusalem and be tried there. Festus comes out with no honor in the case. Since Agrippa had some influence with Caesar, it may be that Festus could write something favorable to Paul when send¬ing him to Rome. The authorities could not free themselves from the responsibility for the safe custody of Paul, and by releasing him, they would expose his life to the conspiracies of the Jews. So at least Paul gained that safe journey to Rome which he had for many years been wishing to make.

J.W. McGarvey Commentary On Acts 26Acts 26:1-3. Festus having stated the case, and the assembly being in waiting, the king assumed the presidency of the assembly. (1) “Then Agrippa said to Paul, You are permitted to speak for yourself. Then Paul stretched forth his hand, and offered his defense: (2) I think myself happy, King Agrippa, because I shall defend myself this day before you, touching all the things of which I am accused by the Jews; (3) especially as you are acquainted with all the customs and questions among the Jews. Wherefore, I beseech you to hear me patiently.” It must have been his left hand which he stretched forth as he began this exordium, for his right was chained to the soldier who guarded him. The compliment to Agrippa for his acquaintance with Jewish customs and controversies was not undeserved. It afforded Paul unfeigned gratification to know, that, after so many efforts to make himself understood by such men as Lysias, Felix, and Festus, he was at length in the presence of one who could fully understand and appreciate his cause. Acts 26:4-8. After the exordium, he proceeds to state, first, his original position among the Jews, and to show that he was still true to the chief doctrine which he then taught. (4) “My manner of life from my youth, which was from the beginning among my own nation in Jerusalem, all the Jews know, (5) who knew me from the beginning, if they were willing to testify, that, according to the strictest sect of our religion, I lived a Pharisee. (6) Even now, it is for the hope of the promise made by God to the fathers, that I stand here to be judged; (7) to which promise our twelve tribes, by earnest worshiping night and day, hope to attain. Concerning this hope, King Agrippa, I am accused by the Jews. (8) What! Is it judged a thing incredible among you, that God should raise the dead?” The Pharisees were the least likely of all the Jewish sects to be unfaithful to Jewish institutions. It was, therefore, much in Paul’s favor that he was able to call even his enemies to witness that from his youth he had lived in the strict discipline of that sect. It was yet more so, to say that he was still a firm believer in the leading doctrine of the party, and to reiterate the assertion made on two former occasions, that it was on account of the hope of a resurrection that he was accused.

This was not the avowed cause, but it was the real cause of their accusations; for the assumptions that Christ had risen from the dead was the ground-work of all Jewish opposition and persecution. He interprets the promise made by God to the fathers, by which he doubtless means the promise, “ In thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed,” as referring to the resurrection, because that is the consummation of all the blessings of the gospel. He exposes the inconsistency of his enemies by observing, that it was even Jews who were accusing him of crime in demonstrating this great hope so cherished by the twelve tribes. Then, turning from Agrippa to the whole multitude. he asks, with an air of astonishment, if they really deem it an incredible thing that God should raise the dead. If not, why should he be accused of crime for declaring that it had been done? Acts 26:9-11. To still further illustrate his former standing among the Pharisees, he describes his original relation toward the cause of Christ. (9) “I thought with myself that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus, the Nazarene, (10) which I also did in Jerusalem. Many of the saints I shut up in prison, having received authority from the high priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my vote against them. (11) And in all the synagogues I punished them often, compelling them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even to foreign cities.” With such a record as this, there was no room to suspect him of any such bias as would render him an easy or a willing convert to Christ. On the contrary, it must have appeared to Agrippa, and the whole audience, most astonishing that such a change could take place. Their curiosity to know what produced the change must have been intense, and he proceeds to gratify it. Acts 26:12-18. (12) “Whereupon, as I was going to Damascus, with authority and commission from the high priests, (13) at midday, O King, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining around me and those who were journeying with me. (14) And when we had all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking to me, and saying, in the Hebrew dialect, Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads. (15) And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus, whom you persecute. (16) But rise and stand upon your feet; for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to choose you for a minister and a witness of the things which you have seen, and of those in which I will appear to you; (17) delivering you from the people and the Gentiles, to whom I now send you (18) to open their eyes, to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive remission of sins, and inheritance among the sanctified by faith in me.” On the supposition that Paul here spoke the truth, Agrippa saw that no prophet of old, not even Moses himself, had a more authoritative or unquestionable commission than he. Moreover, the same facts, it true, demonstrated, irresistible, the resurrection and glorification of Jesus. As to the truth of the narrative, its essential features consisted in facts about which Paul could not be mistaken, and his unparalleled suffering, for more than twenty years, together with the chain even now upon his arm, bore incontestable evidence of his sincerity. But being an honest witness, and the facts such that he could not be mistaken, the facts themselves must be real. It is difficult to conceive what stronger evidence the audience could have had in favor of Jesus, or what more triumphant vindication of the change which had taken place in Paul. Acts 26:19-21. By these facts the speaker proceeds to justify his change of position, and his subsequent career. (19) “Whereupon, King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision; (20) but announced, first to those in Damascus, then in Jerusalem, and in all the country of Judea, and to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works suitable to repentance. (21) On account of these things the Jews seized me in the temple, and attempted to kill me.” This is a more detailed statement of the cause of Jewish enmity, which had been more briefly expressed by the statement that it was concerning the hope of the resurrection that he was accused. Acts 26:22-23. That the Jews had not succeeded, with all their mobs, and conspiracies, and corruption of rulers, in destroying his life, was a matter of astonishment, and Agrippa might well admit that it was owing to the protecting providence of God. (22) “Having, however, obtained help from God, I have stood until this day, testifying both to small and great, saying nothing else than those things which Moses and the prophets did say should be, (23) that the Christ should suffer, and that he first, by his resurrection from the dead, should show light to the people and to the Gentiles.” Here he assumes that, instead of dishonoring Moses, he and his brethren alone were teaching the things which both Moses and the prophets had foretold; that it was required, by their writings, that the Messiah should suffer and rise from the dead. By the statement that Christ first showed light to the people and the Gentiles by his resurrection, he must mean that he was the first to bring the subject into clear light, by an actual resurrection to glory; for there had already been some light upon it, as is proved by Paul’s previous statement in reference to the hope to which the twelve tribes had been, in all their worship, seeking to attain. Acts 26:24. At this point in his speech, Paul was interrupted by Festus. It was a very strange speech in the ears of that dissolute heathen. It presented to him a man who from his youth had lived in strict devotion to a religion whose chief characteristic was the hope of a resurrection from the dead; who had once persecuted to death his present friends, but had been induced to change his course by a vision from heaven; and who, from that moment, had been enduring stripes, imprisonment, and constant exposure to death, in his efforts to inspire men with his own hope of a resurrection. Such a career he could not reconcile with those maxims of ease or of ambition which he regarded as the highest rule of life. Moreover, he saw this strange man, when called to answer to accusations of crime, appear to forget himself, and attempt to convert his judges rather than to defend himself.

There was a magnanimity of soul displayed in both the past and the present of his career, which was above the comprehension of the sensuous politician, and which he could not reconcile with sound reason. He seems to have forgotten where he was, and the decorum of the occasion, so deeply was he absorbed in listening to and thinking of Paul. (24) “And as he offered these things in his defense, Festus cried, with a loud voice, Paul, you are beside yourself. Much learning has made you mad.“ Acts 26:25. Paul saw at once, from the tone and manner of Festus, as well as from the admission of his great learning, that the charge of insanity was not intended as an insult; but that it was the sudden outburst of a conviction which had just seized the mind of the perplexed and astonished governor. His answer, therefore, was most respectful. (25) “But he said, I am not mad, most noble Festus, but speak forth words of truth and soberness.” He saw, however, that Festus was beyond the reach of conviction; for a man who could see in the foregoing portion of this speech only the ravings of a madman, could not easily be reached by the argument, or touched by the pathos of the gospel. Acts 26:26-27. In Agrippa Paul had a very different hearer. His Jewish education enabled him to appreciate Paul’s arguments, and to see repeated, in that noble self-sacrifice which was an enigma to Festus, the heroism of the old prophets. As Paul turned away from Festus and fixed his eye upon the king, he saw the advantage which he had over his feelings, and determined to press it to the utmost. He continues: (26) “For the king understands concerning these things, to whom also I speak with freedom: for I am persuaded that none of these things are hidden from him; for this thing was not done in a corner. (27) King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know that you believe.“ Acts 26:28. With matchless skill the apostle had brought his proofs to bear upon his principal hearer, and with the boldness which only those can feel who are determined upon success, he pressed this direct appeal so unexpectedly, that the king, like Festus, was surprised into a full expression of his feelings. (28) “Then Agrippa said to Paul, You almost persuade me to be a Christian.” Under ordinary circumstances, such a confession would have struck the auditory with astonishment. But under the force of Paul’s speech, there could not have been a generous soul present that did not sympathize with Agrippa’s sentiment. Acts 26:29. Paul’s reply, for propriety of wording and magnanimity of sentiment, is not excelled in all the records of extemporaneous response: (29) “And Paul said, I could pray to God, that not only you, but all who hear me this day, were both almost and altogether such as I am, except these bonds.” It was not till he came to express a good wish for his hearers and his jailers, a wish for that blessedness which he himself enjoyed, that he seemed to think again of himself, and remember that he was in chains. Acts 26:30-32. The course of remark and the feeling of the audience had now reached that painful crisis in which it was necessary either to yield at once to the power of persuasion, or to break up the interview. Unfortunately for the audience, and especially for Agrippa, the latter alternative was chosen. The heart that beats beneath a royal robe is too deeply encased in worldly cares to often or seriously entertain the claims of such a religion as that of Jesus. A spurious religion, which shifts its demands to suit the rank of its devotees, has been acceptable to the great men of the nations, because it helps to soothe an aching conscience, and is often useful in controlling the ignorant masses; but men of rank and power are seldom willing to become altogether such as the Apostle Paul. They turn away from too close a pressure of the truth, as did Paul’s royal auditory. (30) “When he had said these things, the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and those seated with them; (31) and when they had gone aside, they conversed with one another, saying, This man had done nothing worthy of death or of bonds. (32) And Agrippa said to Festus, This man might have been set at liberty, if he had not appealed to Cæsar.” The decision that he had done nothing worthy of death or of bonds was the judgment of the whole company, while Agrippa went further, and said that he ought, by right, to be set at liberty.

If Festus had decided thus honestly before Paul had made his appeal, he would have been released; but as the appeal had now been made, to Cæsar he must go. Whether Festus now knew any better than before what to write to Cæsar, Luke leaves to the imagination of the reader.

“ACTS OF THE "

Chapter Twenty-Six IN THIS CHAPTER

1. To consider Paul’s defense before King Agrippa

2. To review Paul’s question on belief of the prophets to Agrippa

3. To observe King Agrippa, Festus, and others in deliberation on Paul

SUMMARY Paul went before King Agrippa and made his defense. In the beginning, Paul reviewed his life as a Jew - before his conversion. King Agrippa gave Paul permission to speak for himself. Paul began by acknowledging that Agrippa was an “expert” in the Jewish customs and questions concerning the Jews. Paul told of his former life as a Jew/Pharisee. Paul had spent his early life in Jerusalem - all the Jews knew this. He was a member of the strictest sect, the Pharisees. Paul noted that he was being judged for the “hope of the promise made by God to our fathers.” Paul reiterated that this was the core of the accusation - this “hope.” Paul asked Agrippa, “Why should it be thought incredible by you that God raises the dead?” Paul then stated that he originally thought he should act contrary to Jesus. He cast Christians into prison, voted for their deaths, punished them, compelled them to blaspheme; he even persecuted them to foreign cities. Paul then told of the Lord’s appearance on the road to Damascus. While Paul was engaged in persecuting Christians, he journeyed toward Damascus. At midday, a bright light shone on him and his companions. They all fell to the ground. The Lord spoke to Paul in the Hebrew language. The Lord identified Himself as Jesus. The Lord told Paul of the purpose of His appearing: to make him a minister and witness of the things he had seen and of the things that would be revealed to him. Paul was sent by the Lord to the Gentiles, to open their eyes - that they may receive forgiveness of sins. Paul told Agrippa that he had to be obedient to the heavenly vision. He declared the Gospel in Damascus, Jerusalem, Judea, and then to the Gentiles. Paul told the Gentiles to “repent, turn to God, and do works befitting repentance.” He said for these things the Jews seized him at the temple and tried to kill him. He recognized that God had helped him to that very time. Paul only preached those things which the prophets and Moses had said would come to pass: that Christ would suffer; that Christ would be the first to rise from the dead; and, that He would proclaim light to the Jews and Gentiles. Festus then interrupted Paul. He interjected at Paul’s defense with a loud voice. He said, “Paul, you are beside yourself! Much learning is driving you mad!” Paul replied, “I am not mad, most noble Festus, but speak words of truth and reason.” He pointed out that Agrippa knew of these things. Paul further noted that none of these things had been “done in a corner.” (Acts 26:1-26)

Paul asked King Agrippa if he believed the prophets. He had a brief dialogue with Agrippa about his belief. He addressed King Agrippa, “do you believe the prophets? I know that you do believe.” Agrippa replied, “You almost persuade me to become a Christian.” Paul responded that he would, for not only Agrippa, but for all who heard him to become Christians. Of course, Paul did not desire for any to be in bonds, as he was. (Acts 26:27-29)

King Agrippa, Festus, and the others then deliberated about Paul. No charges were found against him. They said, “This man is doing nothing deserving of death or chains.” Agrippa pointed out that Paul might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar. (Acts 26:30-32)

OUTLINE I. PAUL MADE HIS DEFENSE BEFORE KING AGRIPPA (Acts 26:1-26) A. PAUL AS A JEW - BEFORE HIS (Acts 26:1-11)1. King Agrippa gave Paul permission to speak for himself 2. Paul began by acknowledging that Agrippa was “expert” in the Jewish customs and questions about the Jews 3. Paul told of his former life as a Jew/Pharisee a. Paul had spent his early life in Jerusalem - all Jews knew this b. He was a member of the strictest sect, the Pharisees c. Paul noted that he was being judged for the “hope of the promise made by God to our fathers” d. Paul reiterated that this was the accusation - this “hope” e. Paul asked Agrippa, “Why should it be thought incredible by you that God raises the dead?” f. Paul originally thought he should act contrary to Jesus g. Paul cast Christians in prison, voted for their deaths, punished them, compelled them to blaspheme; he even persecuted them to foreign cities

B. PAUL TOLD OF THE LORD’S ON THE ROAD (Acts 26:12-18)1. While Paul was engaged in persecuting Christians, he journeyed on the road to Damascus a. At midday a bright light shone on him and his companions b. They all fell to the ground c. The Lord then spoke to Paul in the Hebrew language d. The Lord identified Himself as Jesus e. The Lord told Paul of the purpose of appearing: to make him a minister and witness of the things he had seen and of the things that would be revealed to him f. Paul was sent by the Lord to the Gentiles, to open their eyes - that they may receive forgiveness of sins

C. PAUL THE LIGHT TO THOSE IN (Acts 26:19-23)1. Paul told Agrippa that he had to be obedient to the heavenly vision a. He declared the Gospel in Damascus, Jerusalem, Judea, and then to the Gentiles b. Paul told the Gentiles to “repent, turn to God, and do works befitting repentance” 2. Paul said for these things the Jews seized him at the temple and tried to kill him a. Paul recognized that God had helped him to that time 3. Paul only preached those things which the prophets and Moses had said would come to pass a. That Christ would suffer b. That Christ would be the first to rise from the dead c. That Christ would proclaim light to the Jews and Gentiles

D. FESTUS PAUL (Acts 26:24-26)1. Festus interjected at Paul’s defense with a loud voice a. He said, “Paul, you are beside yourself! Much learning is driving you mad!” 2. Paul replied to Festus a. He said, “I am not mad, most noble Festus, but speak words of truth and reason.” b. Paul pointed out that Agrippa knew of these things c. Paul further noted that none of these things had been “done in a corner”

II. PAUL ASKED AGRIPPA IF HE THE (Acts 26:27-29) A. PAUL HAD A WITH KING AGRIPPA ABOUT HIS BELIEF (Acts 26:27-29)

1. Paul addressed Agrippa, “do you believe the prophets? I know that you do believe.”
2. Agrippa replied, “You almost persuade me to become a Christian.”
3. Paul responded that he would for not only Agrippa, but for all who heard him to become Christians a. Of course, Paul did not desire for any to be in bonds, as he was

III. KING AGRIPPA, FESTUS, AND OTHERS ABOUT PAUL (Acts 26:30-32) A. NO CHARGES WERE FOUND AGAINST PAUL (Acts 26:30-32)1. Agrippa, Festus and the others went aside to deliberate a. They said, “This man is doing nothing deserving of death or chains.” 2. Agrippa pointed out that Paul might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar

REVIEW FOR THE CHAPTER

1. What are the main events in this chapter?- To consider Paul’s defense before King Agrippa (Acts 26:1-26)

• To review Paul’s question on belief of the prophets to Agrippa (Acts 26:27-29)
• To observe King Agrippa, Festus, and others in deliberation on Paul (Acts 26:30-32)

2. What did Paul indicate that King Agrippa was “expert” in? (Acts 26:3)- All customs and questions which have to do with the Jews (Acts 26:3)

3. In what city did Paul state that from his youth he spent with his own nation? (Acts 26:4)- Jerusalem (Acts 26:4)

4. What sect had Paul been a part? What word did he use to describe it? (Acts 26:5)- Pharisees (Acts 26:5)

• “strictest” (Acts 26:5)

5. What did Paul say he was being judged for? (Acts 26:6)- “for the hope of the promise made by God to our fathers” (Acts 26:6)

6. [Fill in the blank] “Why should it be thought ___________ by you that God raises the dead?” (Acts 26:8)

7. List some of the things that Paul did “contrary to the name of Jesus.” (Acts 26:9-12)- Shut up saints in prison (Acts 26:10)

• Cast his vote against them for death (Acts 26:10)
• Punished Christians (Acts 26:11)
• Compelled them to blaspheme (Acts 26:11)
• Persecuted Christians even to foreign cities (Acts 26:11)

8. What did Paul see on the road to Damascus? What time of day? How bright was it? (Acts 26:12-13)- Paul saw a light from heaven (Acts 26:13)

• At midday (13)
• Brighter than the sun (Acts 26:13)

9. After falling to the ground, what language did the Lord speak to Paul? (Acts 26:14)- Hebrew (Acts 26:14)

10. What did the voice ask Paul? (Acts 26:14)- “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?” (Acts 26:14)

11. Who did the voice say he was? (Acts 26:15)- “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.” (Acts 26:15)

12. Why did the Lord appear to Paul? (Acts 26:16)- “to make you a minister and witness both of the things which you have seen and of the things which I will reveal to you” (Acts 26:16)

13. To whom (what people) was Paul sent? (Acts 26:17)- Gentiles (Acts 26:17)

14. What was Paul to do for these people? For what purpose? (Acts 26:18)- To open their eyes (Acts 26:18)

• To turn them from darkness to light (Acts 26:18)
• To turn them from the power of Satan to God (Acts 26:18)
• “that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me” (Acts 26:18)

15. What did Paul declare that they should do? (Acts 26:19-20)- They should repent (Acts 26:20)

• They should turn to God (Acts 26:20)
• They should do works befitting repentance (Acts 26:20)

16. Because of his obedience to that heavenly vision, what did the Jews do to Paul? (Acts 26:21)- They seized Paul in the temple (Acts 26:21)

• They tried to kill Paul (Acts 26:21)

17. How was Paul able to stand before Agrippa that day? (Acts 26:22)- Through the help of God (Acts 26:22)

18. What 3 things did Paul say in accordance with the prophets and Moses? (Acts 26:22-23)- Christ would suffer (Acts 26:23)

• Christ would be the first to rise from the dead (Acts 26:23)
• Christ would proclaim light to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles (Acts 26:23)

19. What did Festus say to Paul at this point? (Acts 26:24)- “Paul, you are beside yourself! Much learning is driving you mad!” (Acts 26:24)

20. How did Paul respond to Festus? (Acts 26:25)- “I am not mad, most noble Festus, but speak words of truth and reason.” (Acts 26:25)

21. Where were all of these things NOT done? (Acts 26:26)- “not done in a corner” (Acts 26:26)

22. What did Paul ask King Agrippa? (Acts 26:27)- “do you believe the prophets?” (Acts 26:27)

23. What did King Agrippa say in response to Paul? (Acts 26:28)- “You almost persuade me to become a Christian.” (Acts 26:28)

24. What did Agrippa, Festus and the others say among themselves? (Acts 26:31)- “This man is doing nothing deserving of death or chains.” (Acts 26:31)

25. What did Agrippa then say to Festus? (Acts 26:32)- “This man might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.” (Acts 26:32)

.Verse 1 The first twenty-three verses give Paul’s address, outlined by Bruce thus: 1The complimentary exordium (Acts 26:2 f). 2His Pharisaic heritage (Acts 26:4 f). 3His former persecuting zeal (Acts 26:9 f). 4His vision on Damascus road (Acts 26:12 f). 5His lifelong obedience to vision (Acts 26:19 f). 6His arrest (Acts 26:21). 7His teaching (Acts 26:21-23).[1]The rest of the chapter gives Festus’ interruption and the exchange between Paul and King Agrippa (Acts 26:24-29), also the conclusion of the meeting (Acts 26:30-32). ENDNOTE: [1] F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, Publisher, 1954), p. 488. E. PAUL’S FIFTH DEFENSE: BEFORE KING HEROD AGRIPPA II AND BERNICEAnd Agrippa said unto Paul, Thou art permitted to speak for thyself. Then Paul stretched forth his hand, and made his defense. (Acts 26:1) Thou art permitted … Ramsay thought that “In the examination Agrippa, as a king, took precedence and conducted the proceedings,"[2] but such a view appears incorrect. As a vassal king, Aprippa was in town to honor the all-powerful deputy of Caesar, whose “five resident cohorts of the Imperial Army under his command”[3] spoke eloquently of the dread authority on the Tiber. Thus, as Hervey said, “It was by the courtesy of Festus that Agrippa thus took the chief place."[4] That this is true appears from the fact that Agrippa, with like courtesy, does not say, “I permit thee to speak,” but gives the permission impersonally, “Thou art permitted, etc.” Paul stretched forth his hand … This characteristic gesture of the great apostle is frequently mentioned, and there must have been something quite unusual about it. Did he make this with the arm that was encumbered by a chain? What dramatic authority of this gesture so impressed Luke that he so frequently spoke of it? Somehow, the power and nobility of that sweeping movement of the apostle’s arm comes through for all who read this after so many centuries. [2] Sir William M. Ramsay, Pictures of the Apostolic Church (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1959), p. 297. [3] J. S. Howson, Life and Epistles of St. Paul (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, Publisher, 1966), p. 618. [4] Sir William M. Ramsay, Pictures of the Apostolic Church (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1959), p. 310. Verse 2 I think myself happy, king Agrippa, that I am to make my defence before thee this day touching all the things whereof I am accused by the Jews.I think myself happy … The privilege of addressing a king and the governor was one that Paul appreciated; and, since he had already been cleared of all charges of sinning against Caesar, he could confine himself strictly to things pertaining to the gospel, which things alone were the cause of the hatred he had encountered. Accused by the Jews … “The Jews” would have the meaning of “the whole nation of the Jews,” and that is neither what Paul said nor meant. Alexander Campbell translated this expression simply as “Jews,” both here and in Acts 26:7 <>, as having in both passages the meaning of “certain Jews."[5]ENDNOTE: [5] Alexander Campbell, Acts of Apostles (Austin, Texas: Firm Foundation Publishing House), pp. 169-170. Verse 3 Especially because thou art expert in all customs and questions which are among the Jews: wherefore I beseech thee to hear me patiently.Especially … Not only was Paul glad for the opportunity of addressing a man who, unlike Festus, was knowledgeable of the Jewish religion, the Holy Scriptures and the prophecies which foretold the Messiah; but also, the chance to speak to these terminal representatives of the Herodian kings must have thrilled Paul’s heart; but, over and beyond all this, he hoped for an opportunity to open the young king’s heart to the truth. Hear me patiently … Paul made no promise of brevity, as had Tertullus (Acts 24:4), the inference being that he would speak at length, which it may be assumed he did. This entire chapter may be read aloud in less than five minutes; and when it is considered that Paul certainly must have spoken for at least half an hour, the brevity of the Scriptural record is apparent. Verse 4 My manner of life then from my youth up, which was from the beginning among mine own nation and at Jerusalem, know all the Jews.Barnes stressed the great likelihood of Paul’s having been “distinguished in the school of Gamaliel for zeal in the Jewish religion,"[6] for the same was attested by his receiving a commission against the Christians (Acts 9:1). It may then be deduced that some of Paul’s bitterest accusers had known him during his school days and as the young persecutor. ENDNOTE: [6] Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1953), Acts, p. 348. Verse 5 Having knowledge of me from the first, if they be willing to testify, that after the straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee.Paul does not here disclaim being still a Pharisee, “because it was for the chief hope of the Pharisees that he was now accused."[7]The straitest sect … This was a proper description of the Pharisees’ beliefs, which stressed the utmost compliance with the law of Moses. ENDNOTE: [7] A. C. Hervey, op. cit., p. 264. Verse 6 And now I stand here to be judged for the hope of the promise of God unto our fathers.The promise … Without any doubt this refers to the Messiah, the promised Saviour who would take away the sin of the world. The relationship of the coming of the Holy One to the Pharisees’ belief lay in their faith in the resurrection of the dead. That belief in the resurrection was the foundation upon which the primitive church received the resurrection of Christ, the same event being that which declared him “Son of God with power” (Romans 1:4). See my Commentary on Romans, p. 8. By stressing this common ground between the Pharisees and the Christians, the belief in the resurrection of the dead, Paul hoped to enlist on behalf of the truth any good will that might have remained among the Jews. Verse 7 Unto which promise our twelve tribes, earnestly serving God night and day, hope to attain. And concerning this hope I am accused by the Jews, O king!Twelve tribes … Despite the widespread opinion to the effect that the ten northern tribes “disappeared,” there is no doubt that “A great part of the ten tribes had at various times returned to their country,"[8] Anna, for example, having been of the tribe of Asher (Luke 2:36). Concerning this hope … refers to the hope of the resurrection of the dead as proved by the resurrection of Christ. In fact Paul made our Lord’s resurrection to be the only sure proof of that hope; and, as Milligan said, “He taught that the hope of Israel was to be found only in and through Jesus of Nazareth!"[9] This, of course, infuriated many of the Jews; but this seemed to Paul an incredible behavior on their part. Accused by the Jews … Here again, the proper rendition would be “accused by Jews,” that is, some Jews (see under Acts 26:2). Harrison agreed with Campbell on this, rendering it “by Jews.” Paul’s meaning was given by him thus: “It is an utterly amazing thing that Jews who have hope in the resurrection should accuse Paul for entertaining the same hope."[10] MacGreggor renders this, “Jews, of all people!"[11][8] John Wesley, Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House), in loco. [9] Robert Milligan, Analysis of the New Testament (Cincinnati, Ohio: Bosworth, Chase and Hall), p. 404. [10] Everett F. Harrison, Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 478. [11] G. H. C. MacGreggor, The Interpreter’s Bible (New York: Abingdon Press, 1954), Vol. IX, p. 324. Verse 8 Why is it judged incredible with you, if God doth raise the dead?This identified Paul’s principal accusers as being the Sadducees who denied the resurrection; and his affirmation that Jesus had risen from the dead further identified them as murderers of the Son of God. Their hatred, therefore, “was principally instigated by his preaching the resurrection, and preaching it through Christ."[12]Lange, Hackett, Howson, and other able scholars give what is thought to be a better rendition of this verse, as follows: “What! Is it judged incredible, etc.?"[13] This avoids the categorical declaration that Paul’s hearers made such a judgment, although of course Festus certainly did so. [12] J. W. McGarvey, Commentary on Acts (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company), 2p. 251. [13] John Peter Lange, Commentary on Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House), p. 441. Verse 9 I verily thought with myself that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.Having already shown that he was one with Agrippa in the hope of the resurrection which he supposedly held, Paul here moved to find further common ground with him, as having been, like Agrippa’s whole family, a persecutor of the church. I verily thought … means that Paul truly believed, “proving that a man may be conscientious even when engaged in enormous wickedness."[14]With myself … “All thinking with self is self-centered … It is only when we center our thinking in Christ that we think correctly."[15]Here, as McGarvey said, it is clear that “Paul thought he was doing God service; but this must not prevent us from interpreting the remark about kicking against the goad as referring to the goadings of conscience."[16][14] Albert Barnes, op. cit., p. 350. [15] W. R. Walker, Studies in Acts (Joplin, Missouri: College Press), p. 89. [16] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 254. Verse 10 And this I also did in Jerusalem: and I both shut up many of the saints in prison, having received authority from the chief priests, and when they were put to death I gave my vote against them.Many of the saints … Although Paul had avoided calling the Christians “saints” when he spoke in Jerusalem, here before an unbiased audience he did so, “in order to bear witness for Christ and his church."[17]They were put to death … indicates that many more Christians lost their lives through Saul’s activities than would be supposed from the mention of Stephen only in the New Testament. I gave my vote against them … There is no way that this can mean merely that “I approved.” “The Greek here means, I cast down my pebble,' ... They literally cast their pebbles into the urn, white for acquittal, black for condemnation."[18] Despite the fact of Barnes and others denying that Paul was a member of the Sanhedrin,[19] strong agreement is felt here with Boles, Hervey and Dummelow who declared that this clause is equivalent to: "I was one of those who in the Sanhedrin voted for their death."[20] From the fact of Paul's being in all probability a member of the Sanhedrin (Howson concluded that he was also a married man.[21]The silence of the New Testament on that proves nothing, for Paul's "suffering the loss of all things for Christ" (<a href="/bible/parallel/PHP/3/8" class="green-link">Philippians 3:8</a>) might well have included his being forsaken by his wife. [17] Lange, as quoted by John Wesley, op. cit., in loco. [18] H. Leo Boles, Commentary on the Acts (Nashville: The Gospel Advocate Company, 1953), p. 402. [19] Albert Barnes, op. cit., p. 350. [20] A. C. Hervey, op. cit., p. 265. [21] J. S. Howson, op. cit., p. 64. Verse 11 And punishing them oftentimes in all the synagogues, I strove to make them blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto foreign cities.The English Revised Version (1885) is superior to the KJV text which seems to say that some of the Christians were caused to blaspheme; "but the tense of the Greek word indicates that Paul failed in this";[22]he only attempted to cause them to commit such a sin. Even unto foreign cities ... is quite a revealing phrase, indicating a much more extensive range of Saul's persecution, which obviously included operations against the church in many places besides Damascus. Again, the brevity of the sacred narrative is noted. ENDNOTE: [22] Everett F. Harrison, op. cit., p. 478. Verse 12 Whereupon as I journeyed to Damascus with the authority and commission of the chief priests, at midday, O king, I saw on the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them that journeyed with me. And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew language, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? It is hard for thee to kick against the goad. And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. But arise, and stand upon thy feet: for to this end have I appeared unto thee, to appoint thee a minister and a witness both of the things wherein thou hast seen me, and of the things wherein I will appear unto thee.It was a midday (<a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/26/13" class="green-link">Acts 26:13</a>). Both in Acts 9 and Acts 22, there were given accounts of Saul's conversion; and all that is said in those chapters is applicable here. A number of interesting supplemental bits of information, however, are visible in this account of it. We are indebted to Boles for this summary of additional information derived from this third account: The light was brighter than the sun (<a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/26/13" class="green-link">Acts 26:13</a>). The light enveloped the whole company (<a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/26/13" class="green-link">Acts 26:13</a>). The whole company fell to the earth (<a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/26/14" class="green-link">Acts 26:14</a>). Jesus spoke in Hebrew (<a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/26/14" class="green-link">Acts 26:14</a>). He said, "It is hard for thee to kick against the goad" (<a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/26/14" class="green-link">Acts 26:14</a>). There is a fuller account of what Jesus said (<a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/26/16" class="green-link">Acts 26:16</a> <a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/26/18" class="green-link">Acts 26:18</a>).[23]Regarding the last of these additions, it appears that some of the things told Paul by Ananias were also spoken to Paul directly from heaven, by the Lord. This would account for the full and immediate trust which Paul placed in Ananias' words. He knew they were also the words of the Lord. Some scholars suppose that here, Paul merely blended into one account the words of both Ananias and the Lord; which, as both were truly "from the Lord," might actually have been the case.[24] We do not know. Hard for thee to kick against the goad ... This is allegedly a Gentile proverb not in use among the Jews; but there is no reason thus to limit the prevalence of it. Every agricultural country on earth has either this or a similar proverb, and certainly nobody had to explain it to Paul. As the Lord was sending Paul to the Gentile nations, it was appropriate that such a Gentile proverb should have been used. Many commentators on Acts have expressed sentiments similar to those of Boles, who said, "The variations in the three accounts impress us with the truthfulness of the narrative."[25] The variations are so natural and spontaneous as to place the stamp of validity upon all three narrations. Of the things wherein I will appear unto thee ... This is a promise by the Lord of repeated appearances to Paul, as in <a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/18/9" class="green-link">Acts 18:9</a> f; <a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/22/17" class="green-link">Acts 22:17</a> f; and <a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/23/11" class="green-link">Acts 23:11</a> f. [23] H. Leo Boles, op. cit., p. 403. [24] A. C. Hervey, op. cit., p. 266. [25] H. Leo Boles, op. cit., p. 403. Verse 17 Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom I send thee.This verse was the Lord's solemn promise to Paul that he would be protected, not only from "the people," meaning the Jews, but from "the Gentiles" as well. Paul was repeatedly endangered from both sources. Only by such assurance could a man have acted with the courage Paul displayed throughout his career. Verse 18 To open their eyes, that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive remission of sins and an inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith in me.Remission of sins ... That men should receive this blessing was the principal burden of apostolic preaching, the great need of humanity having ever been that of reconciliation with God and the restoration of fellowship with the Eternal. In a vital sense, this is the only blessing that matters. With remission of sins, all of the hardships of life, all of the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, all of the disappointments and sufferings, all of life's frustrations and sorrows, resolve at last in eternal glory for the redeemed; but without remission of sins, the most favored and successful life, the most powerful and famous, the most affluent and popular, must inevitably resolve into a hopeless grave and a resurrection to everlasting shame and contempt. "Remission" is one of the great New Testament words. Sanctified by faith in me ... This, like so many references involving "faith" in the English Revised Version (1885), is an erroneous rendition. As Alexander Campbell noted, it should be translated: "Sanctified by the faith respecting me."[26] The most conspicuous fault of the English Revised Version (1885) lies in this very sector, notwithstanding the fact that it is still the best version that we have, and, as Bruce said, "the best" for purposes of accurate study. For other similar mistranslations, see my Commentary on Romans, pp. 109ff. What Paul was affirming in this expression was not the popular heresy that people are saved by "faith only," but that the remission of their sins is available by means of "the faith regarding" Christ, through Christianity. ENDNOTE: [26] Alexander Campbell, op. cit., p. 172. Verse 19 Wherefore, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision: both to them of Damascus first, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the country of Judaea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, doing works worthy of repentance.I was not disobedient ... This has the effect of saying: O king, you could not expect me to have violated a voice from heaven. Damascus first, and at Jerusalem ... Paul's words here are not exactly clear; because, as was evident in our studies of Romans, Paul's use of the word "first" does not always denote a chronological order, but has the meaning of "the first thing I want to mention." See my Commentary on Romans, p. 14. In view of this, one may only smile at the radical critics who, evidently not being in on this little characteristic of Paul's, come up with shouts of "contradiction." MacGreggor, while admitting the unusual construction of the Greek (a typically Pauline touch), nevertheless gives the typically knee-jerk response of the radical critic, affirming a contradiction of <a href="/bible/parallel/GAL/1/22" class="green-link">Gal 1:22</a>,[27] in which place Paul said that when Galatians was written he was still unknown by face to the churches of Judaea. It is therefore certain, then, that Paul did not use the word "first" here in any chronological sense at all. Incidentally, this little Pauline trait of so using the word "first" reminds one of that tiny "M" on the Morgan dollar, certifying absolutely the name of the designer. This verse here confirms absolutely the Pauline authorship of this address, removing one of the crutches of liberalism which likes to suppose that Luke composed this speech and put it in Paul's mouth. Never! In a thousand years, Luke would never have come up with a wild-card "first" like that of Paul here and elsewhere in his epistles. Gentiles should repent and turn to God ... This is exactly the statement of God's redemptive plan for believers, as given in <a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/3/19" class="green-link">Acts 3:19</a>; and here, as there, it means "repent and be baptized." See under <a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/3/19" class="green-link">Acts 3:19</a>. As William Barclay observed (discussing what believers should do), "The first demand was the demand for repentance ... the second demand was the demand for baptism."[28]; <a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/2/38" class="green-link">Acts 2:38</a> <a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/3/19" class="green-link">Acts 3:19</a>; and here, are all confirmations of this. Doing works worthy of repentance ... Such a plank as this in the platform of God's will would have a special pertinence to Agrippa and Bernice. As Root said, "The dissolute Agrippa needed to be told, Live as men who have repented should’ (Goodspeed)."[29][27] G. H. C. MacGreggor, op. cit., p. 328. [28] William Barclay, Turning to God (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1964), pp. 47,50. [29] Orrin Root, Acts (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1966), p. 190. Verse 21 For this cause the Jews seized me in the temple, and assayed to kill me.The Jews … means, in a sense, their nation; as represented by its highest authorities. Verse 22 Having therefore obtained the help that is from God, I stand unto this day testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but what the prophets and Moses did say should come; how that the Christ must suffer, and how that he first by the resurrection of the dead should proclaim light both to the people and to the Gentiles.Help that is from God … In view of the marvelous deliverances Paul had already received, protecting him against the skill and cunning of his powerful enemies, even his foes must have been willing to admit that God had helped him. Nothing but what the prophets and Moses did say should come … MacGreggor noted that the Jews refused to receive Isaiah 53 as Messianic, therefore denying that the Christ was prophetically represented as a sufferer,[30] which is of course true; but in this very blindness to what their prophets so emphatically foretold lay the secret of their rejection of the Lord Jesus Christ. As to the question whether or not the prophecies of Isaiah, and others, actually foretold Jesus’ suffering, Christ taught that they did; Stephen affirmed it; Paul believed it; the primitive church accepted it; and any Christian may read it for himself in the glorious chapter of Isaiah 53. This insistence of Paul that the new institution was, indeed and truth, fully identified with that divine institution set forth typically and prophetically in the Old Testament is evident in all of his writings. See full study of this in my Commentary on Romans, pp. 6ff. He first by the resurrection … There is a genuine sense in which Christ’s resurrection was first, despite instances of raising dead in both the Old Testament and the New Testament. As Milligan said, “He was the first that rose above the power of death. Lazarus died again."[31] Hervey cautioned against a misunderstanding of this verse, saying: Christ was the first to rise, and he will be followed by them that are his. But it is not true to say that he was the first to give light to Jews and Gentiles and will be followed by others doing the same.[32][30] G. H. C. MacGreggor, op. cit., p. 328. [31] Robert Milligan, op. cit., p. 406. [32] A. C. Hervey, op. cit., p. 267. Verse 24 And as he thus made his defence, Festus saith with a loud voice, Paul, thou art mad; thy much learning is turning thee mad.As Walker declared: “Festus had advertised his ignorance at the beginning of the hearing; but in this interruption, he headlined it."[33] There is no light to the blind, no music to the deaf; and “This poor fool thought that because he could not understand Paul’s sermon, no one could."[34]With a loud voice … is “another detail, revealing the eyewitness of the scene described."[35]By this loud cry charging Paul with madness, Festus betrayed the total lack of spiritual discernment which is always the mark of the carnal man. A typically cynical subaltern of Rome, he decided to break up a meeting with which he had no sympathy at all. It must have been a great shock to him that his royal guests were getting the message, and that they were deeply and favorably impressed with it. [33] W. R. Walker, op. cit., p. 91. [34] Ibid. [35] A. C. Hervey, op. cit., p. 267. Verse 25 But Paul saith, I am not mad, most excellent Festus; but speak forth words of truth and soberness.I am not mad … Paul was the sanest man in the hall where he spoke, with the exception of Luke; and his quiet, firm denial bore the stamp of truth. Wesley exclaimed: How inexpressibly beautiful is this reply! how strong! yet how decent and respectful. Madmen do not call men by their names and titles of honor. Thus, Paul refuted the charge.[36]ENDNOTE: [36] John Wesley, op. cit. Verse 26 For the king knoweth of these things, unto whom also I speak freely: for I am persuaded that none of these things is hidden from him; for this hath not been done in a corner.This was not done in a corner … That earthquake which accompanied the Son of God in his visitation of our planet is still sending shock waves around the earth. The fact of his birth split human history into B.C. and A.D.; his crucifixion bruised the head of Satan himself; his resurrection brought life and immortality to light through the gospel; his teachings monitor the deeds and thoughts of all men; and his word shall judge the living and the dead at the Last Day. Done in a corner? Yes, in a little corner of the universe known as the Planet Earth; but that earth can never forget him, or get rid of him. As some of the Sadducees and Pharisees were able to see while he was among them: “The world is gone after him” (John 12:19). Verse 27 King Agrippa, believest thou the prophets? I know that thou believest.Agrippa was doubtless embarrassed by this question. His pagan host would laugh at him if he replied in the affirmative; and yet there is a possibility that he came very near to doing so. At least Paul seems to have thought so. Verse 28 And Agrippa said unto Paul, With but little persuasion thou wouldest fain make me a Christian.The KJV is a far better rendition than this, the word “fain” being nowhere in the Greek. All the scholars admit that the text is difficult to translate; and the diverse renditions prove conclusively that they simply do not know how to translate it. Note the following examples: Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian (KJV). You are trying to make me play the Christian (Bruce). In brief, you are trying to persuade me to make a Christian out of me (Williams). In a short time you are persuading me to become a Christian (RSV). In a little you are persuaded to make me a Christian (The Codex Alexandrinus). In brief, you are confident that you can make me a Christian (Weymouth). You are in a hurry to persuade me and make a Christian of me (Goodspeed). Much more of this and you will make me a Christian (Phillips). In a short while, thou wouldest persuade me to become a Christian (Douay Version). It will be seen from the above that scholarship does not know how to translate Agrippa’s remark. None of the renditions above equals the vigor of the KJV, unless it is the Douay; and therefore we shall construe the words as having essentially the meaning assigned in those two historic versions. Paul’s reply to Agrippa, in fact, confirms those versions as having properly translated the passage. Verse 29 And Paul said, I would to God, that whether with little or much, not thou only, but also all that hear me this day, might become such as I am, except these bonds.Paul’s reply shows that he believed Agrippa’s response was that of one half-converted, hence the insistence of this appeal. The very use of the honored and holy word “Christian” by such a one as Agrippa is in itself weighty. (See dissertation on this word under Acts 11:26.) One should be on guard against the allegations of a certain class of writers who speak of this word as did MacGreggor: “The word Christian on Agrippa’s lips would certainly be a sneer; his reply cannot imply that Paul is on the verge of converting him."[37] On the other hand, that is exactly what the words do imply. And as for the word “Christian” ever having been a term of contempt for the followers of Jesus, this is one of the most fallacious conceits that ever fogged the minds of students of God’s word. There is no historical evidence that “Christian” was ever used with an unfavorable connotation. It is amazing that a class of scholars always screaming about “hard evidence” will themselves accept the proposition regarding “Christian” without any evidence at all! ENDNOTE: [37] G. H. C. MacGreggor, op. cit., p. 330. Verse 30 And the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat with them:If the king had not been deeply moved and “almost persuaded” by Paul, would he not have risen when Festus tried to break up the assembly with that loud cry? Of course he would have. The very fact that he kept on sitting there shows that he wanted no part of Festus’ rejection of what Paul was saying. Courtesy demanded that no one leave until the king did so; therefore Paul was enabled to continue somewhat even after Festus’ interruption. Verse 31 And when they had withdrawn, they spake one to another, saying, This man doeth nothing worthy of death or of bonds.Thus, in succession, through five defenses, the verdict has been in favor of Paul’s innocence, without exception. Verse 32 Agrippa said unto Festus, This man might have been set at liberty, if he had not appealed unto Caesar.Thus a Herod testifies to the innocence and sincerity of the apostle Paul; and, although there is no evidence that Agrippa was ever any more than half-persuaded to be a Christian, this favorable verdict from him is nevertheless of great significance. This writer does not hesitate to find in this wholesome verdict rendered by Agrippa II the reason for the providential blessing of God which attended this ruler’s life. He was confirmed in his kingdom after the Jewish war and lived on until the year 100 A.D. (see under Acts 25:13). By contrast look at those officials who either persecuted Paul or denied him justice: Ananias “the whited wall” was out of office in two years, and murdered by his own people within a decade. Felix was recalled within two years; and he and his family perished in the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 A.D. Drusilla perished with her husband Felix and her son in the same eruption. Bernice fell into public disgrace in Rome. Festus died within two years of denying Paul justice. The Sanhedrin was destroyed forever by the Jewish War ending with the sack of Jerusalem and destruction of the temple in A.D. 70, only about a decade after the events related in these chapters. Nero (who later executed Paul) died wretchedly, and in disgrace. On and on the list might go; but Herod Agrippa II alone continued until the second century. He alone fearlessly gave an unequivocal verdict of Paul’s innocence. See any connection? This writer thinks that he does! In further pursuit of this theme, reference is made to the writings of Lactantius,[38] who devoted twenty pages to the record of the judgments, punishments, disasters, miseries and sudden death which came upon the great heathen persecutors of Christianity, giving in detail all the horrors that befell such men as Nero, Domitian, Decius, Valerian, Aurelian, Diocletian etc. All of this was in direct and circumstantial fulfillment of what Jesus assuredly promised his apostles: And shall not God avenge his elect? (Luke 18:7). History answers that God did indeed do so. We conclude this line of thought with the words of Dummelow: The words of Jesus’ prophecy (Luke 18:7) were literally fulfilled in the calamities which overtook the Jews and the chief heathen persecutors of the Christians.[39]Here is concluded the record of Paul’s five defenses made in Jerusalem and Caesarea; and with his appeal to Caesar, his case was transferred to Rome. This involved him in a long and dangerous voyage which was unfolded by Luke in the next two chapters. The thing that stands out in all of Paul’s defenses was the speaker’s innocence and sincerity in preaching the unsearchable riches of the crucified and risen Saviour. [38] Lactantius, Of the Manner in Which the Persecutors Died, published in The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, Publisher, 1951), Vol. VII, pp. 301-302. [39] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 763.Questions by E.M. Zerr For Acts Chapter 261. What permission was given Paul? 2. State the manner of calling for attention. 3. Tell why Paul felt happy at this moment. 4. How many of the accusations does he intend to answer 5. Is verse three said in flattery ? 6. On what ground were these things said by Paul ? 7. Where did he spend the days of his youth ? 8. What did the Jews know as to his religion? 9. Because of what is he now judged? 10. Who had received this promise? 11. How did it affect the twelve tribes? 12. What should not be thought incredible? 13. Had Paul’ s thoughts always been correct? 14. In what way had they differed from the present ? 15. How had he shown his interest formerly? 16. Did he do so on his own authority ? 17. In what way did he join in death of saints? 18. In what buildings did he punish them? 19. What did he compel them to do? 20. How did he show his madness against them ? 21. To what special place did he journey ? 22. What did he carry with him ? 23. Were they from the same people now accusing him ? 24. On the way what did he see ? 25. At what time of day ? 26. What indicates the superior brightness of the light? 27. Who fell to the earth? 28. Who heard the voice? 29. Compare this with Acts 9:7. 30. In what language did the voice speak? 31. What was the nationality of the men with Paul? 32. State the accusation the voice made against Paul ? 33. How could he do this to one living in Heaven? 34. What was Paul told to do? 35. For what purpose had the Lord appeared to him ? 36. To what people was he to be sent ? 37. That they might receive what? 38. Prom what and to what must they be turned? 39. How did Paul respond to the heavenly vision? 40. Where did he do his first preaching? 41. In what other places did he preach ? 42. What kind of works did he require? 43. Tell what all this caused the Jews to do. 44. By what did he continue to the present day ? 45. To what writings does he refer for support? 46. How was Christ the first to rise from the dead ? 47. Who interrupted PauPs speech? 48. Of what did he accuse him? 49. Repeat the reply. 50. To what circumstances does he refer for proof? 51. What question was asked of Agrippa? 52. Why refer to the prophets ? 53. Repeat the statement of Agrippa. 54. In his reply to Agrippa why the exception made ? 55. What private verdict was formed by the hearers ? 56. Why was Paul not set at liberty ?

Acts 26:1

1 Act 26:1. Agrippa was courteously invited to share the judicial “bench” with Festus. Under such a privilege, he bade the defendant to make a speech in his own behalf. Stretched forth his hand was a gesture of respect for the court, and a call to attention.

Acts 26:2

2Act 26:2. Paul made a complimentary speech to Agrippa, but it was not flattery as we shall see. He had good reasons for his happy feelings over the situation.

Acts 26:3

3Act 26:3. Paul here states the reasons for his happiness expressed in the preceding verse. Agrippa was not of pure Jewish blood, yet he was brought up under the influence of Jewish teaching, and was acquainted with the law of Moses. This would qualify him to appreciate the things that Paul would say.

Acts 26:4

4Acts 26:4. Paul was brought up in Jerusalem (chapter 22:3), so that the leaders of his own nation had full opportunity for knowing about his manner of life.

Acts 26:5

5Acts 26:5. Most straitest is a double superlative and hence is an improper translation. The two words are derived from AKRIBES (by superlative inflection), and Thayer defines it “most exact.” Paul means that he was a member of the Pharisees who were the most exacting of the Jews in their adherence to the law of Moses. They should have known, therefore, that he would not violate that law as the Jewish leaders charged him.

Acts 26:6-7

7Acts 26:6-7. The promise has a general reference to the benefits expected to come to the world through the seed of Abraham (Christ), but the special item of those benefits was the resurrection from the dead (verse 8). The Pharisees professed to believe in the resurrection as well as did Paul, but they resented his teaching that it was to be accomplished through Jesus (chapter 4:2).

Acts 26:8

8Acts 26:8. Why should it be thought, etc. The resurrection from the dead would not be any more impossible with God than any of the other works of His providence, therefore it was unreasonable to call that particular miracle in question.

Acts 26:9

9Acts 26:9. The apostle then took up the history of his personal case to show that his present conduct and teaching was a complete change from what it had once been. (See the comments on this subject at chapter 22:4.)

Acts 26:10

0Acts 26:10. A saint is one who is “set apart for God, to be, as it were, exclusively his,” according to Thayer. It is one of the names applied to the followers of Christ who are elsewhere called Christians and disciples. Paul’s mention of the authority of the chief priests was to show he acted according to the recognized law of the Jews.

Acts 26:11

1Act 26:11. Compelled them to blaspheme. The American Standard Version translates this clause, “strove to make them blaspheme,” which is evidently the meaning of the apostle. The first word is from the same original as “compellest” in Galatians 2:14, where we know that Peter did not actually induce the Gentiles to do the things mentioned, for Paul’s rebuke put a stop to his perversion. But he was using pressure for the purpose of forcing them to do as he contended. Likewise, Paul tried to terrorize the disciples into blaspheming the name of Christ, but they suffered death or imprisonment before denying their Lord. Unto strange cities means those on the outside. His last campaign was to reach to Damascus which was a city “outside” Palestine.

Acts 26:12-13

3Act 26:12-13. At midday the sun would be straight over them, hence a light that would be above the brightness of the sun would indeed be a strong one.

Acts 26:14

4Acts 26:14. All of the group fell to the ground but only Paul (or Saul) heard the voice. (See the comments at chapter 9:5 for the meaning of pricks.)

Acts 26:15

5Acts 26:15. This is also explained at chapter 9:5.

Acts 26:16

6Acts 26:16. Jesus did not appear to Paul to make him a Christian; men were appointed for that work. But an apostle must have seen the Lord after his resurrection, and that is why, he appeared to Paul. Having been a witness of the fact that Jesus was alive, he was also to minister or serve Him by telling it to others.

Acts 26:17

7Acts 26:17. Paul’s delivery from his enemies was to be continued until the work for which he had been appointed had been accomplished.

Acts 26:18

8Acts 26:18. Open their eyes spiritually to the truths of the Gospel. Darkness is ignorance of those truths, and light is the knowledge of them. Satan is the minister of darkness, and God is the source of divine light. Forgiveness of sins was to be the personal benefit conferred on those who accepted these truths. Inheritance means a share of the spiritual possessions enjoyed by the sanctified, which denotes the same as the “saints” in verse 10, and this state was to be obtained by faith in the risen Lord.

Acts 26:19

9Acts 26:19. Not disobedient refers to the assignment to preach as the next verse shows. Chapter 9:20 says he “straightway” preached Christ in the synagogues.

Acts 26:20

0Acts 26:20. First unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem. According to Galatians 1:18 it was three years before Paul preached at Jerusalem and other places in Judea.

Acts 26:21

1Act 26:21. Paul had done nothing that called for any punishment whatsoever, much less that of being slain. He therefore wished this court to know the truth of the motive for being persecuted by the Jews.

Acts 26:22

2Act 26:22. Paul again declared that his preaching was according to the predictions of the very writings that the Jews professed to believe. It is good to hear him give God the glory for his endurance, as he stood in the hearing of this mixed judicial court.

Acts 26:23

3Act 26:23. In this verse Paul specifies the most important one of the “things” of which he made mention in the preceding one. That was the fact that Christ was the first that rose from the dead (to die no more, Romans 6:9). And that this great fact was bringing light to the Gentiles (as well as to the Jews).

Acts 26:24

4Acts 26:24. Learning is from GRAMMA which Thayer defines, “Any writing, a document or record.” Paul had made such wide reference to the writings of ancient scribes that Festus thought such knowledge had thrown him into a state of frenzy, to the extent -that he had lost control of himself.

Acts 26:25

5Acts 26:25. Paul made a direct denial of the charge concerning his mental condition, soberness being from a Greek word that means “self-control.” But his reply to Festus was respectful and one that recognized his standing. Thayer says the word for noble is “used in addressing men of conspicuous rank or office.”

Acts 26:26

6Acts 26:26. The king means Agrippa for whose special hearing Paul was making this speech, and who was acquainted with the ancient writings to which the apostle had referred. Corner is from GONIA which Thayer defines, “A secret place.” This thing means the story of Jesus including his public life, crucifixion and evidences of his resurrection, all of which was known to thousands of people.

Acts 26:27

7Acts 26:27. Agrippa was acquainted with the Old Testament writings, and this question of Paul was a challenge to the king to make a consistent application of them.

Acts 26:28

8Acts 26:28. Agrippa was logical enough to see the conclusion required from the premises that Paul had cited. He really believed the truth of the prophetic statements, and the facts and truths connected with the story of Christ clearly connected Him with the prophecies. His unwillingness to go all the way that his conclusions would lead, was not from any doubts as to the rightful claims of the Gospel upon his life. But many personal interests of a worldly nature intervened against his better judgment. He was willing only to make the concession to Paul that is expressed by the famous sentence that has become the subject of song and poetry in various literature.

Acts 26:29

9Acts 26:29. This verse expresses the sincere interest of the apostle in the spiritual welfare of his distinguished listeners. There is no sign of personal triumph in his remarks, for he realizes that nothing short of wholehearted obedience to Christ will avail anything for the unsaved, hence Yes wish was for the completeness of the conviction that was acknowledged by Agrippa. Except these bonds. How gracious was this remark, which shows the complete absence of bitterness, or any feeling that others too should be humiliated who were no better than he.

Acts 26:30-31

1Act 26:30-31. At the conclusion of Paul’s speech the meeting “broke up” and the royal hearers went aside to confer with each other. That was not in order to decide on a verdict, for such action had been taken from them by the appeal of the prisoner. But to see if either of them had discovered “somewhat to write” to Caesar (chapter 25:26). It was admitted that no such discovery had been made, but rather that the prisoner was not worthy even of bonds.

Acts 26:32

2Act 26:32. Agrippa was the visiting jurist who was invited to give a critical ear to the speech of the prisoner. It was proper, therefore, for him to express the opinion that we have recorded. Had it not been for the appeal that Paul had made, he could have been released from all custody at this time.