# 56: 5-2-08 1

Acts 26

Paul had been led by the Holy Spirit to Jerusalem, where he had testified for Jesus to a mob of unbelieving
Jews. The Lord had then appeared to Paul, indicating that he would also bear witness for Him in Rome
(Acts 23:11).

As the Lord cleared the way to bring Paul to Rome, several opportunities arose for Paul to preach the
gospel: first, before the Roman procurator, Felix; and then, before Festus, who replaced Felix. These
“preaching engagements” were actually trials, where the Jewish rulers were prosecuting Paul, attempting to
incriminate him under the Roman law. But Paul was innocent, and his trials bore that out.

Both Felix and Festus had recognized Paul’s innocence, but they also realized that, if they declared him
“not guilty”, they risked the disfavor of their Jewish subjects. So, wishing to curry the good favor of the
Jews, Felix had simply deferred judgment, and left Paul in prison. In this way, Festus “inherited” Paul’s
case.

Festus also rendered no decision, and attempted to have Paul sent back to Jerusalem. Paul denounced this
lack of justice, and appealed his case to Caesar – which Festus must have found to be a relief, because it
took the problem off of his hands.

The challenge that remained for Festus was that he did not understand Paul’s case well enough to write an
intelligent brief, which must accompany the prisoner to Rome. The issues to do with the Jews’ religion
were beyond the comprehension of this brand-new governor. But providentially, King Herod Agrippa II
and his sister Bernice had come to visit, to congratulate Festus on his recent appointment as governor.

Now the Herods were Idumaeans – descendants of the Edomites; and they were only half-Jewish. But it so
happened that Agrippa was reputedly an expert on matters of Jewish religious beliefs and practices, as well
as on issues that pertained to the Jewish nation. If anyone could help Festus prepare his report for Rome, it
was Agrippa.

So Festus brought up Paul’s case with Agrippa, hoping to engage his curiosity. The king expressed interest
in hearing what Paul had to say; and Festus eagerly set up the interview for the following day.

With much pomp and ceremony, King Agrippa and Bernice entered the auditorium, as well as the five
military commanders of the Caesarean cohorts, and other prominent civil authorities. Festus commanded
Paul to be brought in, who was shackled, and Festus introduced his case to Agrippa.

At the end of chapter 25, we read the objective of Festus for this informal inquiry: that he might have
something to write. It would be absurd to send a prisoner to Rome, without stating the history of the case,
and what he was charged with.

Only one charge that the Jews brought against Paul would have been a violation of Roman law – sedition –
but Festus indicated that his finding regarding that charge was that Paul was innocent.

Festus could see the other charges related to the Jewish religion, and didn’t belong in a Roman court, but
Paul could not be tried for them by the Jewish Sanhedrin, either – for he was a Roman citizen. The one
charge where the Sanhedrin would have had jurisdiction – violation of the sanctity of the temple – was
clearly unfounded – there were no witnesses. But Festus could not bring himself to declare Paul not guilty,
because of how the Jews would react.
# 56: 5-2-08 2

Festus was in a difficult position; but he had put himself in that position by not acquitting Paul. Now he
sought to find a way to express the history of the case, and specify appropriate charges against Paul, so that
he would have no political fallout over this with Rome.

So Festus was looking for something to write; in particular, some charges. Agrippa had said that he would
like to hear Paul himself (Acts 25:22). Why? Because apparently, Agrippa had an interest in learning more
about the followers of Jesus, of whom he had heard; and he had been wanting to hear about them for some
time.

Agrippa was an expert in Jewish customs and issues because it was an interest of his; he enjoyed learning
about it. It is known that Agrippa was an avid student of history, especially Jewish history. This new
movement appealed to his interest in Jewish affairs. So while Festus was looking for something to write,
Agrippa was looking to learn something new.

The motives of the other dignitaries are unknown; certainly, their positions required that they should be
there, and so they were. History shows that Bernice seemed to have like interests to her brother; they had a
very close relationship – perhaps unnaturally close, it is said.

And what of Paul? Well, he certainly had to be there, as well. A prisoner does not have much say, as to
where he goes, and what he does, does he? But Paul nonetheless had an objective with this hearing, as
well.

Was his objective to defend himself before the king and these prominent men? No. Paul had already been
found innocent before two Roman governors, although they would not render a verdict. He had appealed to
Caesar, and was slated to go to Rome; there was no need for him to defend himself. This was not a trial,
anyway; it was just an informal inquiry.

Paul was present when Festus stated before Agrippa that he was trying to determine charges against Paul;
but that was of no concern to Paul. Paul was innocent, and the Lord was his defense; as He had been in the
other two trials.

So what was Paul’s objective? He would actually state it, as this hearing drew to a close. Look down in
verse 22 of chapter 26: “Therefore, having obtained help from God, to this day I stand, witnessing both to
small and great …”

That was Paul’s objective: and on this particular day, he would be witnessing to the great – to a king and a
governor and commanders and prominent men – great ones, in this world – witnessing to them about Jesus.
And that was the Lord’s objective, as well; that these men – sinners, just like all other men – would repent
of their sin, and turn to the One who could save them – Jesus.

So Paul’s hearing before Agrippa began.

26:1-3 Festus had turned over the examination of Paul to Agrippa (Acts 25:26), who gave Paul permission
to speak freely for himself. The phrase “answered for himself” in verse one speaks of making a defense;
but in this case, Paul was not defending himself; if he was doing that, he would specifically have refuted
the charges made against him by the Jews, much as he had in his two Roman trials.
# 56: 5-2-08 3

Paul defense before Agrippa was not of himself, but of the gospel – the good news of Jesus Christ. It
would take a form similar to his speech before the Jewish mob – it would involve Paul’s personal testimony
– but the Holy Spirit would specifically tailor what Paul said to appeal particularly to the mind of Agrippa,
while at the same time in no way excluding the prominent Gentiles present – should they have ears to hear.

As before, Luke records just an outline of what Paul actually would have said, which he addressed
specifically to Agrippa.

Having been given the freedom to speak, Paul raised his hand in salutation to Agrippa, then proceeded.
Although this hearing was informal, the presence of the dignitaries demanded that the speech should be
somewhat formal; so Paul began with a gracious acknowledgment of the king; not mere flattery, but a true
statement concerning him.

The Greek word translated “happy” in verse two actually means blessed; possessing the favor of God. If
Paul really meant he was happy, he would be saying that it was great luck that he was being heard by King
Agrippa.

But Paul would not have seen this as luck, or chance. This was not some coincidental meeting, that just
happened to come about, which would bring good fortune to Paul. There’s no such thing. And beside, it
wasn’t Paul who needed this meeting. It was Agrippa – and the other dignitaries in the room. The meeting
was for them.

Paul wasn’t saying he was happy about this hearing; he was saying he was blessed. Why? Because the
Lord had favored Paul with the opportunity to bear the gospel to these people. Paul no doubt saw himself as
blessed whenever the Lord chose to use him that way. His ministry was full of blessing – to preach the
gospel both to small and great (v. 22).

And Paul was blessed to be a blessing (Gen 12:2); through the words that the Holy Spirit gave him that day,
these “great ones” would have the opportunity to be blessed with eternal life – if they would believe what
they heard. This was not luck, or chance, or coincidence, but a meeting very much purposed by the Lord,
who is sovereign over time and circumstance – to bring about His purposes – that none should perish, but
that all should come to repentance (2 Pet 3:9).

Paul understood from the statement of Festus that his purpose in having this inquiry was to have something
to write to Rome about Paul’s case. Because of this, the Holy Spirit would frame Paul’s statement within
the context of Paul’s conflict with the Jews; but most of what Paul would say to Agrippa would branch off
from this to pursue the Lord’s issue, which was Agrippa’s heart – and the heart of every other dignitary in
that room.

So Paul declared his intention to defend himself against the accusations of the Jews. He knew that, unlike
Festus, Agrippa would be able to understand these things, declaring Agrippa knowledgeable in all Jewish
customs and questions.

This was honest praise; Agrippa was apparently well-acquainted with the Law and with Jewish traditions,
as well as with current issues dealing with the Jews. Rome considered him to be an expert in Jewish
affairs. The Holy Spirit would seek to build on this knowledge, to create a foundation for true faith in
Agrippa.

Paul asked for a patient hearing as he began his defense.

# 56: 5-2-08 4

v. 4-5 Paul began by giving his listeners his background. He spoke of his upbringing in Jerusalem, and of
his education as a Pharisee; he was trained as a lawyer, a teacher of the Law. This, the Jews could testify
to; for many would have still been around in Jerusalem who had known Paul since at least the beginning of
his career.

Paul pointed out that Pharisees were the strictest sect of Judaism; they believed in the letter of the Law, and
the traditions of the fathers; and they embraced all of the OT as the revealed word of God.

Although King Agrippa would have been raised quite differently – he was brought up in Rome, and would
have had a Greek education – he apparently had a strong interest in the Scriptures, and would have
therefore been familiar with them, as well. The Scriptures, then, became common ground for Paul and
Agrippa – Paul as a teacher of it; Agrippa, as an interested student.

v. 6-7 Now, did Paul say that he was judged and accused by the Jews according to the formal charges they
brought up before Felix and Festus? Remember, these charges were sedition, leading a radical sect, and
profaning the temple. Did Paul indicate these charges? No; those charges were just a pretext.

Paul said he was being judged, accused for “the hope of the promise made by God to our fathers”. What
was the great hope of the nation? The Messiah. All of the promises that God had made to the forefathers
of Israel are wrapped up in their Messiah – He is their hope. Let’s consider this, for a moment.

God had promised to make Abraham a great nation – the nation Israel (Gen 12:2); and that in Abraham, all
the nations of earth would be blessed – through the Coming Seed of that nation Israel (Gen 3:15, 12:3).

Later, God promised Abraham that his seed would inherit the land God purposed for them – as an
everlasting possession (Gen 13:15, 17:8). And God had shown Abraham how he could know they would
inherit it – for God made a covenant with Himself to give them the land; and that covenant would be
ratified in the blood of His Christ – Abraham’s Seed – their Messiah (Gen 15).

The nation, and the Promised Seed who would come from them, were called in Isaac (Gen 21:12); they
were chosen in Jacob (Gen 25:23). And to each of these forefathers, the LORD God confirmed the promise
He had made to Abraham (Gen 26:1-5, 28:12-15).

This promise of God included each of the forefathers, and the nation that descended from them –
generation after generation of the nation of Israel. But the forefathers, and all previous generations of
Israel, were dead; how could they then inherit the land? They will do so in the resurrection of the just.
Turn to Daniel chapter 7. Daniel had prophesied of the end times, when the Messiah will return to the
earth.

[Daniel 7:13-14] The Son of Man was known by the Jews to refer to the Messiah here (Mt 26:63-65).
Daniel had a vision of Him receiving His inheritance – the earthly kingdom – from the Father.

Skip down to verse 27.

[Daniel 7:27] This earthly kingdom would be given to “the people” – the saints of the Most High God.
These saints are the righteous Jews – God’s nation, that He made for Himself. This is the nation Israel.

When will this happen? After a time of great trouble, which we know as the Great Tribulation. Turn to
chapter 12.
# 56: 5-2-08 5

[Daniel 12:1-3] After the Great Tribulation, Daniel’s people – the righteous Jews – will be delivered.
Daniel then prophesied of the resurrection of the just and the unjust. The just will be like the stars forever
and ever – they will be resurrected to life everlasting.

Turn to the last verse of the book, where the vision ends. Daniel wanted to know more, but this was the
sum of what was to be revealed to him.

[Daniel 12:13] Notice what Daniel was told. He was to go his way until the end, at which time he would
rest – die – and then arise – be resurrected – to his inheritance at the end of the days. What inheritance?
The inheritance of his people, the nation Israel.

This was the fullness of Israel’s hope – that they would be resurrected to everlasting life, at which time,
they would inherit the land that God had promised to them, through their forefathers. And who would give
them that inheritance? The One who was in possession of it – the Son of Man, the Messiah of Israel.

[Return to Acts 26]

That was the promise made by God to the fathers; that was Israel’s hope – in the Coming Seed, their
Messiah. Through Him, Israel expected to inherit the land, in the resurrection of the just. Most of Israel,
and particularly the Pharisees, adhered to this hope. So why was Paul being judged for that? Because the
Coming Seed had come, and Paul was proclaiming Him – He was Jesus. But the Jews refused to believe it.

Instead, the Jews – Paul spoke of them as the twelve tribes, pointing to their origin from the forefathers –
they were earnestly serving God night and day, hoping to attain that promise. That’s a hope-so hope; that’s
a hope that’s in vain, where Israel hopes to attain the promise based on their own righteousness.

God’s promise is based on a know-so hope; a hope that does not disappoint (Rm 5:5) – because it is based
on the righteousness of Christ – on the One who knew no sin, and became sin for us – that we might be
made the righteousness of God – in Him (2 Cor 5:21).

Paul was proclaiming that the Messiah had come – and that He is Jesus of Nazareth. He is that “certain
Jesus” who had died, whom Paul affirmed to be alive again – resurrected from the dead.

What Paul was pointing out to Agrippa was that he was being prosecuted for proclaiming the very hope
held by all of Israel – and prosecuted by Jews, no less. In the Greek, the word “Jews” is given emphasis.
Paul had pointed out to each of his judges that he was being judged concerning the hope and the
resurrection: the Sanhedrin (Acts 23:6), Felix (Acts 24:21) and Festus (Acts 25:19).

Certainly Agrippa would be well familiar with many of the Scriptures regarding the Coming Messiah. All
of the Scriptures we reviewed just now concerning the Messiah are found in the OT. And there is no doubt
that Agrippa had heard of Jesus – of His crucifixion, of His reported resurrection. Would Agrippa be
willing to consider that Jesus was, in fact, Israel’s Messiah? Paul continued with his personal testimony,
demonstrating that he himself did not consider it, at first.

v. 8-9 Paul’s statement in verse 8 was most likely not addressed to Agrippa. The “you” in the sentence is
in the plural; Paul was addressing more than one person here. Who would have thought it incredible – a
thing not to be believed – that God raises the dead? It is possible that Agrippa and Bernice might think it
incredible, but certainly all the Gentiles in the room would tend to think it unbelievable, for the Greek mind
prevailed amidst their cultures.
# 56: 5-2-08 6

The Greek philosophers maintained that a body cannot be raised from the dead; they considered the thought
of resurrection absurd. Remember Festus’ words about “one dead Jesus, whom Paul insisted was alive”
(Acts 25:19).

But Paul wanted to open up the thinking of these Gentiles to the possibility of resurrection; not of the body
rising on its own, but of God raising the dead. After all, if God can create a body, and make it alive, is
there any reason to think He cannot raise it again from the dead? With God, all things are possible (Mt
19:26).

But even Paul, who was a Pharisee, who believed in the resurrection, did not believe that Jesus rose from
the dead – at first. Paul then took his listeners along his own personal journey to show them how he was
proven wrong – by Jesus Himself.

Initially, Paul refused to believe that Jesus was Israel’s hoped-for Messiah; and in his unbelief, he felt it was
his duty to persecute those who did believe in Him.

v. 10-11 Paul was showing how, in his religious zeal, he became the chief persecutor of those who
believed in Jesus. We are familiar with his terrible story.

Authorized by the Sanhedrin, Paul went from house to house in Jerusalem, dragging any believers he found
off to prison. It would seem that more than Stephen met the martyr’s end by mob action, and Paul heartily
assented to their deaths, as he had to Stephen’s (“cast my vote against them”).

But martyrs can draw sympathy; so Paul tried to get believers to blaspheme, if possible – to renounce their
faith in Jesus. No doubt, the coercion took the form of torture, which would suit Paul’s zealous rage.

But Paul went further. In his mind, the followers of Jesus were like a spreading cancer; they must be
eradicated. So when the believers dispersed, fleeing the persecution in Jerusalem, Paul went after them.
Paul was showing Agrippa and the other listeners how vehemently he had been opposed to Jesus and His
followers.

v. 12-13 Paul now began to relate his experience along the Damascus road to Agrippa. He had purposed to
go to Damascus in pursuit of believers who had fled Jerusalem, intending to extradite them back to
Jerusalem, by the authorization of the high priest there. Just outside of Jerusalem, Paul had his memorable
encounter, which began with a blaze of light that knocked him, and the men with him, right off their feet to
the ground.

v. 14-15 Paul was actively pursuing the followers of Jesus, filled with malice toward them and their
Master, when he had an encounter with Jesus Himself along the way. He saw a light, brighter than the sun
at midday – when the sun is the brightest. A supernatural light, followed by a voice – where there had been
no man – a supernatural voice.

The voice asked, in Aramaic – the language of the Jews in Judea – why Saul (Paul) was persecuting Him.
Paul was persecuting those who believed in Jesus; I’m sure his head began to reel with what the Voice said
to him, in that language.

And the voice declared that it was hard for Paul to kick against the goads. You may remember that this was
a proverbial expression alluding to unruly oxen which kick against the pricks that are applied to keep them
in the way. The Lord had opened up the way of Life everlasting through Jesus, but Paul was resisting that
way; he instead was going his own way. In so doing, he was only hurting himself.
# 56: 5-2-08 7

Then Paul posed the question that he had to ask – that he already knew the answer to – there is no doubt
that he was dreading the response. Who was it who was speaking to him? Who was this Lord from
heaven? The voice identified Himself – “I am Jesus”. It was Jesus – and in persecuting His followers, Paul
had been persecuting Jesus Himself; the members of His Body.

Now, it was a well-known fact that Jesus of Nazareth had been crucified some years before under the
Roman procurator of Judea at that time – Pontius Pilate. And yet, here was Jesus, speaking to Paul; in an
earlier account, it is said that Paul had actually seen the Lord on the road (Acts 9:27). Jesus had been dead,
and here He was, alive, radiant with the light of heaven. What is the logical conclusion? That this was the
resurrected, glorified Lord; the risen Jesus.

Paul continued to relate the things that Jesus said.

v. 16-18 The things that Luke records here do not appear in the previous accounts of Paul’s conversion.
They relate specific details of the commission which Jesus gave to Paul. Jesus was appointing Paul as a
minister – in this context, meaning one who ministers the Word of God. And Paul was also to be a witness,
both of what he had already seen, and of what the Lord would reveal to him. What had Paul already seen?
The risen Lord. He would be a witness to the fact that Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified is alive again –
He is alive forevermore.

We have seen that the Lord had revealed many things to Paul since his conversion that day on the road to
Damascus, in terms of visions and revelations of His will. But perhaps most significant were the Lord’s
revelations of deep spiritual truths, which we have access to through Paul’s letters to the churches.

The Lord assured Paul that, in the pursuit of his commission, he would have the Lord’s divine protection,
both with the Jews and the Gentiles. Certainly we have seen this time and time again throughout Paul’s
ministry, as the Lord delivered him from both the Jews and the Gentiles.

And the Lord made it plain that the Gentiles would be the particular mission field of Paul. This would have
been of particular interest to Paul’s Gentile audience this day. As for Agrippa, he would have been
beginning to realize why it was that Paul had roused the fury of the Jews.

Paul was to be a witness of the risen Lord to all men, particularly to the Gentiles; but what was the
significance of that witness? It was of eternal significance.

As Paul shared the gospel, men would hear of the One who had died in their stead, to pay the penalty for
their sins; who then was resurrected, overcoming death with eternal life – which He freely offered to any
and all who would come to Him, believing.

The gospel would open men’s eyes to the truth, so that they could be delivered from the power of darkness,
and translated into the kingdom of the Son of God’s love (Col 1:13), receiving forgiveness of sins through
the shed blood of Jesus (Col 1:14), and an inheritance among the saints – eternal life, in a body of glory
(Eph 1:13-14). Were there any weary hearts present this day, who were ready to hear such good news?

Perhaps Agrippa would have heard in this commission many similar notes to the commission that the LORD
gave to His Servant, from the Servant Songs of Isaiah. As the Body of Christ, believers are even today
continuing the commission of the Servant of Jehovah (Is 42:1-7).

Paul then very simply summed up his response to what he saw and heard.
# 56: 5-2-08 8

v. 19-20 Paul was not disobedient to the heavenly vision. What was that vision? The risen Jesus. Paul
was not disobedient to Jesus, now his Lord; Paul obeyed Him.

Paul had been the most ardent enemy of Jesus; but once he had encountered Him personally, he was utterly
changed; he became His most devoted follower. Through Paul’s testimony, the Lord was now revealing
Himself to the people present in the room this day; making Himself known to them, personally. Would any
choose to be obedient to the heavenly vision?

Where had Paul had his encounter with Jesus? On the road to Damascus. Where did his ministry begin?
In Damascus. Paul’s obedience was immediate and whole-hearted.

After Damascus, we know that Paul was in Nabatean Arabia for about three years. There the Lord opened
up the Scriptures to Paul, and revealed to him many deep spiritual truths.

Then Paul was in Jerusalem, but only for a short time, having to flee from the Hellenists he antagonized
there (just as Stephen had , whom Paul had persecuted). After that, it was off to Caesarea, and back home
to Cilicia. It was there that Barnabas found Paul and brought him back to Syrian Antioch, to help with the
work there, before they began their missionary ventures in other countries.

In verse 20, the phrase “throughout all the region of Judea, and to the Gentiles” is considered
grammatically awkward; some believe the translation should instead read, “in every country, to Jews and
Gentiles”. If so, this would describe the pattern we routinely saw for Paul as we have studied Acts, where
he preached the gospel in every region and country he came to: to the Jews first, and then to the Gentiles.

And what was it that Paul declared, in his preaching the gospel, to both Jew and Gentile? Repent – turn to
God – and then, you will be able to do righteous works. To anyone who was self-righteous – such as most
of the Jews – the thought of having to repent was a stumbling-block. They were the seed of Abraham, and
they lived righteously already – they did not see themselves as sinners, like the unrighteous Gentiles. They
had no need for a Messiah who had died for them (1 Cor 1:23).

Again, Agrippa would have been able to see just what caused the Jews to become so inflamed over Paul;
the Jews would greatly resent the implication that they must come to God on the same terms as the
Gentiles.

Paul continued.

v. 21-23 Yes, Paul knew the true reasons why the unbelieving Jews were trying to kill him; it was because
he extended salvation equally to all men, both Jew and Gentile, insisting that all must repent and turn to
God through believing in the One whom He sent – Jesus. That was why the Asian Jews had accused him in
the first place – because of this message, which he preached back in their home country, to both Jew and
Gentile.

But the Lord rescued Paul from all of his persecutors, even to this day, as he stood before Agrippa and the
others – preaching the same message. The sufferings of Christ; His death in the stead of men; His
resurrection, by which He secured eternal Life for men – they were all spoken of, in the Law and the
Prophets – that is, in the OT Scriptures.
# 56: 5-2-08 9

In that Luke has given us only an outline of what Paul actually said, you can be certain that Paul quoted
many Scriptures to support this, including Psalm 22, Isaiah 53 and Psalm 16. It is likely that Agrippa was
familiar with these Scriptures; and as Paul expounded them, perhaps he could see the connection Paul was
making with Jesus. But then there was a sudden interruption.

v. 24 Paul had asked for the patience of his listeners, but the patience of Festus had come to an end. To
hear Paul speaking of this certain Jesus, who was dead; to hear him claim that Jesus was resurrected, and
had appeared to Paul; and then to hear Scripture after Scripture in supposed support of these absurdities
sent Festus over the top. Clearly Paul had had a brilliant mind; but it was equally clear to Festus that Paul
was now out of his mind; he was a raving lunatic.

Although the outburst of Festus may seem to us incredibly rude and tactless, remember that the Romans
saw themselves as the superior culture in their world; and as overlords, they felt they had the right to be as
rude as they liked. Resurrection seemed to them uncultured, barbaric; a religious superstition, a foreign
thought, as were so many of the thoughts of the Jews to them.

The mind of Festus was closed to such possibilities; he just thought he would spare everyone else in the
room of the rantings of this religious fanatic. The Word of God fell by the wayside of this closed heart; as
soon as the Word fell on it, it was quickly snatched away (Mt 13:4, 19).

Meanwhile, Paul responded quickly and calmly to Festus, refuting his statement.

v. 25-27 Paul let Festus know he was not out of his mind; in fact, quite the opposite: the words that he
spoke were the essence of truth and reason itself. The very evenness with which Paul answered Festus
supported his words. And then Paul boldly appealed to Agrippa himself, to confirm that what he had been
saying was the truth.

As a regional king, Agrippa could not possibly be ignorant of Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus had preached openly
throughout Judea and Galilee, and His death outside of Jerusalem by crucifixion was a matter of public
record. Many of his disciples testified to having seen Him resurrected from the dead – if one was to believe
that testimony.

And several of Agrippa’s predecessors had had dealings with Jesus – and with His followers, who had
multiplied throughout many lands, and openly worshiped Jesus as God. This was not some secret society;
all was done out in the open, and was subject to public scrutiny; there was nothing to hide.

Paul had just shown that these same known facts concerning Jesus were a fulfillment of the OT Scriptures
concerning the Messiah. So the question was, did Agrippa believe the prophets? Did he believe what
Scripture said? If so, Scripture itself declared Jesus to be the Messiah of Israel.

Paul boldly went even one step further – he said that he knew Agrippa believed the prophets. All that
Agrippa was required to do was to acknowledge this – which would confirm the truth of what Paul was
saying.

v. 28 This is a sad, sad statement. The actual construction in the Greek lends itself more to this
translation: “In short, you are trying to make me act the Christian” (Bruce).
# 56: 5-2-08 10

You see, Paul’s question put Agrippa in quite a quandary. If he affirmed his belief in the prophets, he would
also have to admit that what they taught of Messiah’s death and resurrection was true – and that he agreed
with a madman. That would make Agrippa look quite foolish in front of his Roman friends. On the other
hand, if Agrippa flatly denied believing in the prophets, it would jeopardize his relationship with Jews –
particularly the pious Jews in Jerusalem.

Agrippa was not willing for either of these things; he was too filled with the cares of this world to really
consider what Paul was saying any longer. Those cares choked the word right out of his heart; there would
be no fruit of righteousness borne there (Mt 13:7, 22).

Agrippa needed out from under Paul’s question; so he just brushed it aside with a glib remark of his own.
He declared that Paul was trying to make him act the Christian; to negotiate him into a position where he
would have to declare what Paul was saying was true, as any believer would.

Although there is some question as to Agrippa’s words and his tone, we can be sure that he was dismissing
Paul, and the appeal that Paul had just made to Agrippa’s heart, for two reasons: First of all, Agrippa used
the term “Christian”, which Paul had not; it was thought to have been a derogatory term of ridicule in its
early usage.

Secondly, after Paul’s reply, Agrippa stood up, ending the inquiry. He had heard enough. Note, however,
that Agrippa knew enough about the followers of Jesus to label them “Christians”. Clearly he knew more
about Jesus than he would say.

v. 29 Making Agrippa – or anyone – act the Christian was the furthest thing from Paul’s mind. He had
bared his heart to Agrippa and these other members of high society – these “great ones”. Paul was willing
for whatever it took, that they might be persuaded as he had been, in the truth.

That truth had set Paul free, and created in him a desire to free others – and that’s what Paul wished for
them. He wished Agrippa and the others could be as he was – and I’m sure he held up his shackled hands as
he said it – except for these chains.

v. 30-32 The inquiry was over. Agrippa stood, and then the others; and they withdrew to discuss the case.

There was not much to discuss. Paul was clearly innocent, as Festus himself had already determined; in
fact, Agrippa told him that Paul could have been freed, if he hadn’t appealed his case to Caesar. I’m sure
Festus didn’t mention that he had been unwilling to free Paul, because of the Jews, and that’s why Paul
appealed his case!

So Paul continued as a prisoner – the ambassador for Christ in chains (Eph 6:20) – but all the while, free in
his spirit. And the others? There is no evidence in Scripture or history to suggest that the word penetrated
any of those hearts that day. It would seem that all of these “great ones” continued in their bondage to sin
and death, having let their great moment of opportunity pass them by.