Chapter Twenty-Six

Paul’s defense speech before the assembly headed by Agrippa and Festus (1–29). The opinion of Agrippa and the assembly concerning Paul’s case (30–32).

Acts 26:1. Agrippa said to Paul: you are permitted to speak for yourself. Then Paul, extending his hand, began his defense: As king and honored guest of the procurator, Agrippa presides over the assembly, opening and closing the session. It is significant that in opening the assembly by giving Paul permission to deliver his defense speech, Agrippa — raised at the Roman court — shows such delicacy toward the procurator by speaking impersonally when addressing Paul: “it is permitted” (and not: I permit) “you to speak.” “Extending his hand.” An oratorical gesture to enhance the solemnity of the moment and the speech being delivered — which in this case had special force and significance. An extended hand with a chain hanging from it — what a powerful symbol of the unchainability of inner spiritual freedom and the righteousness of the cause! “The word of God is not chained!” In its substance, Paul’s speech contains nothing new that he had not said before. Its distinctive feature is that it constitutes a triumphant defense not so much of Paul himself as of all Christianity as a truly divinely revealed religion. The point of departure for the speech is the thought of the close connection between the Old Testament and the New. Starting from this thought, Paul declares that his guilt consists only in believing in the fulfillment of a promise whose irrevocability the Jews themselves acknowledged, though they did not consider it fulfilled.

Acts 26:2. King Agrippa! I count myself fortunate that today I am to make my defense before you in all the matters of which the Jews accuse me, Acts 26:3. especially because you are well acquainted with all the customs and controversies of the Jews. Therefore I ask you to hear me patiently. “I count myself fortunate.” Paul was undoubtedly speaking entirely sincerely. He expresses quite naturally his joy at having the opportunity to defend himself, first before a king, and second before such a king as was better acquainted than anyone with “all the customs and controversies of the Jews,” and who could therefore, better than others (for example, the procurators of Judea), judge his innocence and the higher righteousness of his cause. Such opportunities — to set out this righteous cause, of universal significance, before such distinguished listeners — presented themselves rarely, but served in an exceptional fashion to the glory of Christ’s name and to the vindication of Christianity in the eyes of the whole world. That is why it is entirely natural that “Paul with boldness begins to speak and calls himself fortunate not out of flattery, but because he is speaking before a man to whom everything is known” (Chrysostom).

Acts 26:4. My manner of life from my youth, which I spent from the beginning among my own people in Jerusalem, is known to all the Jews; Acts 26:5. they have known about me for a long time, if they are willing to testify, that I lived as a Pharisee according to the strictest sect of our religion. By pointing to his strict, Pharisaic — “according to the strictest sect of our religion” — upbringing, in the very center of the religious life of Judaism — Jerusalem, from the years of early “youth” — Paul aims to heighten the significance of the transformation that took place in him, of which he intends to speak further: a significance that has force not for him alone but for all people of sound mind and sincere, honest seekers of truth. “If they are willing to testify...” The expression implies a negative sense: it is greatly disadvantageous for the Jews to testify about all this, since it serves to increase the honor and vindication of Christianity, and it is natural that they would not wish to testify about it.

Acts 26:6. And now I stand on trial for the hope in the promise made by God to our fathers, “And now I stand on trial for the hope in the promise.” “What treachery the strictest Judaism is about to commit! — as if the apostle wished to say. This strictest Judaism could not but have approved of the ardent longing for the promise in its most zealous follower. But then, when that longing honestly and truly found its certain fulfillment, that same strictest Judaism comes forward as his executioner. A manifest absurdity! ‘Is it not senseless to strive in every way for its fulfillment, and yet to persecute one who believes in it?’ (Chrysostom).” “For the hope in the promise” — which for Paul has already received a living fulfillment in the person of the Lord Jesus, while for the rest of the Jews it is still awaited so vainly and so tardily (cf. Acts 13:32).

Acts 26:7. the promise that our twelve tribes hope to attain as they earnestly serve God night and day. It is for this hope, King Agrippa, that I am accused by the Jews. Acts 26:8. Why is it thought incredible by you that God raises the dead? “Our twelve tribes” — an ancient theocratic designation of the entire people of Israel as one united people of God. Although this division into tribes had long been blurred by the repeated captivities of the Jews and also by later — both forced and voluntary — migrations to pagan lands, the popular consciousness always retained the notion of the whole people as consisting of twelve tribes, wherever their representatives might dwell — in Palestine or in the Diaspora (cf. Jas 1:1). “Earnestly serving God night and day” — precisely in anticipation of the fulfillment of God’s promise concerning the Messiah, who was the center of all Jewish service to God, in whom they, so to speak, lived and breathed. “For this hope... I am accused.” It was clear to everyone that Paul meant here Jesus, killed by the Jews and raised by the power of God. But then, perhaps noticing a movement of indignation among the listeners, or simply wishing to forestall objections, the apostle suddenly raises his voice, speaking as if to all — both Jews and pagans, representatives of whom were present: “Why is it thought incredible by you that God raises the dead?...” — meaning here not the general resurrection of the dead, but the resurrection of Jesus Christ as clear proof of the fulfillment of the prophecies in the person of the Savior. Further, as proof of his point, Paul speaks of his conversion (Acts 26:9-23), and this third account of his, essentially identical with the other two, takes on a special nuance in his mouth, appropriate to the circumstances and audience. Since the resurrection of Jesus was visible, living proof of the fulfillment of prophecy concerning Him, the apostle, in substance, said nothing new, for even before him Moses and the prophets taught the same thing: Jesus must suffer, must rise (cf. Acts 3:24). “God raises the dead” — (cf. the note to Acts 2 and parallels) — the present tense is used to denote the constant ease and possibility of the resurrection of the dead by God, independent of the resurrection of Jesus and the future resurrection of the dead, for this is the work of the eternal and omnipotent God, admitting of no doubt or objection.

Acts 26:9. Indeed, I myself thought that I had to do many things in opposition to the name of Jesus of Nazareth. “To act against the name of Jesus” — that is, against the confession of the name of Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah, Lord, and God (cf. Acts 4:10).

Acts 26:10. And this I did in Jerusalem: having received authority from the chief priests, I put many of the saints in prison, and when they were put to death I cast my vote against them; “And this I did” — cf. Acts 3 ff. and parallels in Acts 7:8. Just as above — “indeed, I myself thought” — the apostle confesses that he too once did not believe, not that God raises the dead (this faith he always maintained, as a strict Pharisee, Acts 26 and Acts 23 ff.), but that He had raised Jesus and that Jesus was the true Son of God, and at first acted in accordance with this unbelief. This, however, makes his teaching all the more credible, since it could not have produced such a sharp contrast with his entire former mode of thought and action without a particularly strong and solid foundation, of which he once more gives an account below. “Saints” — cf. the note to Acts 20 and parallels. The apostle so calls the Christians, elevating them in the eyes of the judges and exposing all the more deeply his own injustice toward the persecuted.

Acts 26:11. and throughout all the synagogues I often punished them and tried to force them to blaspheme Jesus; and being exceedingly enraged against them, I persecuted them even to foreign cities. “I tried to force them to blaspheme” — that is, Jesus. This is not mentioned in the preceding accounts. With what contrition of heart must the confessor and apostle of Christ have recalled this! And how powerfully this must have moved to reflection these persecutors and blasphemers of Jesus, who were unwilling to believe in Him after such strong proofs of His divinity!

Acts 26:12. In this connection, while traveling to Damascus with the authority and commission of the chief priests, Acts 26:13. at midday on the road, O king, I saw a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, shining around me and those traveling with me. Acts 26:14. We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice speaking to me in the Hebrew language: Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads. Acts 26:15. I said: who are you, Lord? He said: “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. “With authority and commission” — cf. the note to Acts 9:1-2. Some curious, though minor and inessential, peculiarities of this second personal account of the apostle about his conversion can be noted in comparison with his first account (Acts 22) and the account of the author of Acts (Acts 9). These peculiarities are as follows: 1) concerning the heavenly light that shone on Paul, it is more precisely noted that this was “a light brighter than the sun” (in Acts 9 “a light from heaven,” in Acts 22 “a great light”). By this detail both accounts of Paul are supplemented. 2) The apostle then says that both he himself and his companions — “we all fell to the ground,” which is not mentioned at all in Acts 22, while in Acts 9 it is said that Paul’s companions “stood speechless” (Acts 9:7). This discrepancy hardly needs to be specially labored. It is sufficient to explain it in each case as a differently expressed desire of the apostle to depict the force of the impression made by the event on his companions (probably both in one way and the other, that is, some by falling and others by stupor, or first all by falling and then all by stupor), who expressed their terror at what was taking place. 3) The apostle notes that the Lord spoke to him in “the Hebrew language” — a remark from which it is evident that the apostle was now delivering his present speech in Greek, the most comprehensible language for his audience. Finally, 4) the most important peculiarity of the present account is that the Lord’s speech is conveyed in much greater detail. What in those accounts is conveyed as the words of the Lord to Ananias and of Ananias to Paul already in Damascus (cf. Acts 9 ff., Acts 22 ff.), here is presented as the speech of the Lord to Paul himself at the appearance, and even with certain additions. In all probability the apostle, for greater convenience, combined into one speech both what the Lord said to him directly and what Ananias said to him, expressing this in a free rendering, without adhering to the letter but without essentially distorting the truth, because Paul did indeed hear from Ananias what had been entrusted to him by the Lord. As for those details of the present account (Acts 26 and Acts 26:18) that are entirely absent from the two previous communications about this event, they too are explained very simply — by the unequal degree of detail with which one and the same essential matter is conveyed.

Acts 26:16. But rise and stand on your feet; for I have appeared to you for this very purpose: to appoint you as a servant and a witness both of the things you have seen and of the things in which I will appear to you, Acts 26:17. delivering you from the Jewish people and from the Gentiles, to whom I am now sending you Acts 26:18. to open their eyes, so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, and that by faith in me they may receive forgiveness of sins and a share among those who are sanctified. “A servant and a witness” — cf. Acts 1:8. A reference to the equality of Paul’s ministry with that of the other apostles, with the distinction that Paul is sent especially to be the apostle of the “Gentiles.” “The things you have seen and the things I will reveal to you.” Paul had seen the Lord risen and glorified, and therefore could be a fully equal witness of His resurrection, just like the other apostles (Acts 3:15; 1 Cor 9:1). (That the Lord did indeed reveal His will in the subsequent history of Paul is witnessed, among other things, in Acts 20 ff.; Acts 23 and elsewhere.) “From the Jewish people and from the Gentiles, to whom I am now sending you.” To whom I am sending — should be referred to both the Jewish people and the Gentiles, as we see throughout all of Paul’s activity, when he turned everywhere first to the Jews and only then to the Gentiles (cf. Acts 13 and parallels). “Darkness and light” — images of the spiritual state of the human being — under the power of Satan (the prince of darkness) and in the gracious Kingdom of God, the Father of lights. The first state — under the power of the prince of darkness — is a state of ignorance of God’s truth and conscious estrangement from it, the end of which is eternal perdition; the second is a state of gracious enlightenment by the light of divine truth, in filial nearness to God the Father and in eternal blessedness with all the saints (cf. Acts 20:32).

Acts 26:19. Therefore, King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision, “Therefore, I was not disobedient,” as people are sometimes disobedient to even the most obvious and compelling truths, as all those are still disobedient today by whose doing Paul was bound and now stands on trial. “By this vision He (Jesus) converted me and convinced me so that I could not be disobedient” (Chrysostom).

Acts 26:20. but first to those in Damascus and Jerusalem, then throughout all the land of Judea and to the Gentiles, I preached that they should repent and turn to God, doing deeds worthy of repentance. The apostle indicates the circle of his preaching activity (Damascus, Acts 9 ff., Jerusalem, Acts 9 ff., all the land of Judea, and finally the Gentiles — chiefly of Asia Minor, Macedonia, and Greece). The apostle characterizes the content of his preaching broadly as the preaching of repentance and conversion to God among Jews and Gentiles, to urge them to perform “deeds worthy of repentance” (cf. Matt 3:2; Acts 2 and parallels).

Acts 26:21. For these reasons the Jews seized me in the temple and tried to kill me. “For this reason,” that is, for preaching about repentance and conversion to God among Jews and Gentiles (a general characterization of the subject of his preaching), “the Jews seized me in the temple.” In Acts 21 ff. the immediate occasion for the Jews’ attack on Paul is indicated, while here the very inner cause of their hatred for him is given.

Acts 26:22. But having obtained help from God, I stand to this day, testifying to both small and great, saying nothing except what the prophets and Moses said would come, “Having obtained help from God,” visibly manifested in the rapid arrival of the military commander to rescue the apostle from the hands of the enraged crowd (Acts 21 ff.). “I stand to this day” — I remain to this day intact, testifying about Christ to all who are willing to listen, from small to great, from youth to old age, from the poor to the rich, from the obscure to the distinguished (cf. Chrysostom). “Saying nothing” — that is, nothing of my own devising, but only what was foretold by Moses and the prophets.

Acts 26:23. that the Christ was to suffer and, as the first to rise from the dead, would proclaim light to the people of Israel and to the Gentiles. The apostle specifies more clearly the general content and meaning of the prophecies of Moses and the prophets concerning Christ (cf. Acts 3 and parallels), pointing to the following three main features: the suffering of Christ (Isa 53 and parallels), the resurrection (Ps 15:8-11; cf. Acts 2 and others), and the proclamation of light to the Jews and Gentiles (Isa 60:1-3; cf. Matt 12:21; Deut 18:15-18; Acts 3 ff.). “The first to rise from the dead” — in the same sense as “firstborn from the dead” (Col 1:18), having laid by His resurrection the beginning and foundation for the resurrection of all people (1 Cor 15:23; cf. Acts 26 6 and parallels). “To proclaim light” — to illuminate with the true teaching about the salvation of the world (cf. Matt 4:16).

Acts 26:24. As he was saying these things in his defense, Festus said with a loud voice: you are out of your mind, Paul! Your great learning is driving you to madness. Paul’s speech is interrupted by Festus’s loud, angry exclamation, understandable in a man of frivolous skepticism and contemptuous attitude toward all faith. “You are out of your mind, Paul” — this expression apparently relates to Paul’s entire speech about his conversion and to all his conduct after this conversion, in which the skeptic Festus could see nothing but the ordinary raving of a disordered imagination. “Your great learning is driving you to madness” — Festus expresses himself mockingly, saying that Paul has studied too much and has, as they say, lost his wits — the verdict of extreme frivolity, itself revealing great ignorance on Festus’s own part. Evidently Festus drew his conclusion about Paul’s great learning from the fact that Paul was citing such numerous references to prophecies confirming his teaching about Christ.

Acts 26:25. No, most excellent Festus, said he, I am not out of my mind, but I am speaking words of truth and sound judgment. Acts 26:26. For the king knows about these things, and I speak to him freely. I am persuaded that none of this has escaped his notice; for this was not done in a corner. Sufficiently respectfully but with full dignity, briefly and forcefully, the apostle denies the reproach and suspicions of Festus. “I am not out of my mind, but I am speaking words of truth and sound judgment!” To reassure the pagan who does not understand the matter, the apostle appeals to the more understanding and knowledgeable Jew, King Agrippa, to whom this entire speech of the apostle is in fact addressed (Acts 26:2-3). The apostle is right in the factual side of his teaching as well. It is excusable that Festus, as a newcomer, doubts the accuracy of what Paul proclaims. But it cannot be that from the king anything of “these things” has been concealed — that is, anything relating to the life and activity of Jesus and to the life of the first Christian Church after His ascension — for all of “this was not done in a corner...” — not in secret, but publicly, and not in Jerusalem alone but in the sight of all Palestine.

Acts 26:27. Do you believe the prophets, King Agrippa? I know that you believe. Acts 26:28. Agrippa said to Paul: in a short time you would persuade me to become a Christian. Acts 26:29. Paul said: I would pray to God that, whether in a short time or a long one, not only you, but also all who are listening to me today, might become such as I am — except for these chains. Having confirmed the truth and soundness of his words by the king’s indisputable knowledge of what “was not done in a corner,” the apostle, with a sudden and decisive turn of speech, addresses himself to the conscience of Agrippa and — like a wise and skilled fisher of men (Matt 4:19) — places him in such a position that any other person honestly zealous for the truth would not have escaped being caught, as Agrippa did escape, putting the matter aside with a flippant jest and hastening to close the assembly. “Do you believe the prophets, King Agrippa? I know that you believe” — the apostle hastens to answer himself on behalf of the confused king, thrown off balance by such an unexpected examination in the realm of faith and conscience, before the educated Roman officials in whose presence the king hypocritically would have preferred to appear as a good pagan, free from Jewish superstitions. Agrippa’s answer is usually translated as: “you almost persuade me to become a Christian.” In the interests of Paul’s glory, whose eloquence called forth such praise from the king, many accept this translation. However, it is hardly probable that Agrippa, even if one grants that the apostle’s speech had strongly affected him, could have gone so far — especially in the presence of Festus, who had just called Paul almost a madman. The answer cannot be understood in this sense also because it contradicts the direct meaning of the original text. The Greek reading of this passage is: εν ολίγω (that is, χρόνω) μέ πείθεις Χριστιανόν γενέσθαι; the Greek word πείθειν — “to persuade” — more often means to try or strive to persuade. The word εν ολίγω — “in a short time” — is taken almost universally to mean a short time. If one takes into account the swiftness of the turn of speech by which Paul meant to say: “if you believe the prophets, you must believe in Jesus Christ,” the natural meaning of the answer becomes clear: “you are too quick with your conclusions!” — that is, Agrippa wished to say: you ask whether I believe the prophets? Yes, I do. But to conclude from this that I must necessarily believe in Christ, that I am already a Christian — that is already too hasty a conclusion. The Slavonic text better conveys this sense of the answer — “вмале мя препираеши христианина быти!” (“in little you are trying to make me a Christian!”). And precisely this sense harmonizes best of all with the deep and serious impression Paul’s speech made on Agrippa, his weak desire to become a Christian, and the difficult position in which Agrippa found himself, feeling on the one hand in the presence of Paul, who called him a converted Israelite, and on the other — of Festus, who respected neither Judaism nor Christianity and considered Paul a madman. Besides, this meaning is more consistent with Paul’s reply, which without it becomes a poorly understandable and empty play on words. In reality, a logical connection must exist between Agrippa’s and Paul’s answers. The king says: you are too quickly trying to make me a Christian; Paul replies: “I would pray to God that, whether in a short time or a long one” (that is, whether quickly or slowly — the difference of time is unimportant, so long as the matter is accomplished), “not only you but all who are listening to me today might become as I am!...” The last words are evidently an allusion to Festus’s remark about Paul’s “madness.” “Except for these chains” — the innocent confessor of Christ adds with touching feeling. The chains were his glory (Eph 3:1; Phlm 1; Phil 2 ff.), but of course he did not wish all Christians, his beloved children, to always be in chains (cf. Chrysostom and Theophylact).

Acts 26:30. When he had said this, the king and the governor and Bernice and those sitting with them stood up; Acts 26:31. and withdrawing to one side they talked among themselves, saying that this man was doing nothing deserving death or chains. Acts 26:32. And Agrippa said to Festus: this man might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar. Thereupon the governor decided to send him to Caesar. “The king and the governor... stood up” — not because Paul had finished, but in order to cut short the apostle’s word that so sorely tried the king’s conscience, Agrippa rises, and behind him the governor and all “those sitting with them.” However that may be, the general impression of the apostle’s defense remained favorable. It is curious that Festus and Agrippa, having acknowledged that Paul had done nothing deserving not only of death but even of “chains,” nonetheless send him to Caesar, citing the fact that Paul “had appealed” to Caesar’s judgment. But this appeal had force only as long as Paul was found guilty. Now that this guilt was solemnly removed from Paul, he had a right to freedom, without being sent to Caesar. Evidently both Festus and Agrippa did not sincerely wish Paul’s release, or at least showed themselves to be soulless and petty formalists, strictly observing the law — which here too could easily have been turned to Paul’s favor; one only needed to ask the latter whether he insisted on Caesar’s judgment, now that the procurator’s court was quite ready to release him. The answer would of course have been: there is no reason to insist — simply release me. “Withdrawing to one side” — αναχωρήσαντες, withdrawing, departing — obviously into another room, and not merely to one side of the hall where the assembly was held. “Is doing nothing deserving death or chains.” The present tense — “is doing” — expresses an evaluation of all Paul’s activity so long as he acts according to the religious principles he has stated. An important and valuable acknowledgment, which makes all the more inconsistent the dispatch of Paul to Caesar’s judgment.