Acts 26:8 Komentář

We left Paul at the bar, and Festus, and Agrippa, and Bernice, and all the great men of the city of Caesarea, upon the bench, or about it, waiting to hear what he had to say for himself. Now in this chapter we have, I. The account he gives of himself, in answer to the calumnies of the Jews. And in this, 1. His humble address to king Agrippa, and the compliment he passed upon him (Act 26:1-3). 2. His account of his origin, and education, his profession as a Pharisee, and his adherence still to that which was then the main article of his creed, in distinction from the Sadducees, the "resurrection of the dead," however in rituals he had since departed from it (Act 26:3-8). 3. Of his zeal against the Christian religion, and the professors of it, in the beginning of his time (Act 26:9-11). 4. Of his miraculous conversion to the faith of Christ (Act 26:12-16). 5. Of the commission he received from heaven to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (Act 26:17, Act 26:18). 6. Of his proceedings pursuant to that commission, which had given this mighty offence to the Jews (Act 26:19-21). 7. Of the doctrine which he had made it his business to preach to the Gentiles, which was so far from destroying the law and the prophets that it showed the fulfilling of both (Act 26:22, Act 26:23). II. The remarks that were made upon his apology. 1. Festus thought he never heard a man talk so madly, and slighted him as crazed (Act 26:24). In answer to him, he denies the charge, and appeals to king Agrippa (Act 26:25-27). 2. King Agrippa, being more closely and particularly dealt with, thinks he never heard a man talk more rationally and convincingly, and owns himself almost his convert (Act 26:28), and Paul heartily wishes him so (Act 26:29). 3. They all agreed that he was an innocent man, that he ought to be set at liberty, and that it was a pity he was provoked to put a bar in his own door by appealing to Caesar (Act 26:30-32).

Then Agrippa said unto Paul,.... After Festus had made the above speech to him, and to all present, and had introduced the affair of Paul, who now stood before them: thou art permitted to speak for thyself; which a prisoner might not do, until he had leave; and this leave was granted by Festus the Roman governor, who was properly the judge, and not Agrippa, though the permission might be by both; and so the Arabic and Ethiopic versions read, "we have ordered", or "permitted thee", &c. Then Paul stretched forth the hand; as orators used to do, when they were about to speak; or else to require silence; or it may be to show the freedom of his mind, and how ready he was to embrace the opportunity of pleading his own cause; being conscious to himself of his innocence, and relying on the ingenuity and integrity of his judge; and especially of the king, before whom he stood: and answered for himself; or made an apology, or spoke in vindication of himself, in order to remove the charges brought against him.

Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you,.... You Heathens and Sadducees; for the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead was thought an incredible doctrine by the Heathens in general, and therefore was laughed at by the Stoic and Epicurean philosophers at Athens, when preached by the apostle there; and by a particular sect among the Jews, the Sadducees; and the apostle may be thought either to address himself to Festus, the Roman governor, and to the chief captains, who were present, and, being Heathens, disbelieved this doctrine; or else to King Agrippa, who might be a Sadducee, and to such of the Sadducees as were in court, and expostulate with them, why it should be looked upon as a thing by no means to be credited, that God should raise the dead; which may be understood both of the particular resurrection of Christ from the dead, which was not believed, neither by the Romans nor by the Jews, and neither by Pharisees nor Sadducees; or of the general resurrection of the dead, which was judged from the nature of things to be impracticable, and impossible by the latter, as well as by the Heathens: but since God is omniscient and omnipotent, and just and true, knows where every particle of a dead body lies, and can gather all together, and inspire with life; which he can as easily do, as to form all things out of nothing, as he did; and his justice and veracity seem to require, that the same bodies which have been partners with their souls in sinning, or in sufferings should share with them in woe or in happiness; it can neither be absurd, unreasonable, nor incredible, to suppose that God will raise them from the dead.

"And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers: unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come. For which hope's sake, king Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews. Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?" Two arguments he lays down for the Resurrection: one, the argument from the prophets: and he does not bring forward any prophet in particular, but the doctrine itself as held by the Jews: the other and stronger one, the argument from the facts-especially from this, that Christ Himself held discourse with him. And he lays the ground for this by other arguments, relating accurately his former madness.

Then too, with high commendation of the Jews, he says, "Night and day," says he, "serving God look to attain unto." So that even if I had not been of unblemished life, it is not for this doctrine that I ought to be brought to trial:-"for which hope, king Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews." And then another argument "Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?" Since, if such an opinion had not existed, if they had not been brought up in these dogmas, but they were now for the first time brought in, perhaps some one might not have received the saying.

"Why is it considered incredible among you if God raises the dead?" He proposes two lines of argument about the resurrection: one derived from the prophets, and he does not dismiss the prophet, but rather the glory of the Jews, and another stronger one drawn from events, that Christ was reported to him as having risen from the dead. And he constructs this latter also from reasoning, recounting beforehand his former zeal. First argument: "Why is it considered incredible among you if God raises the dead?" and another: Would such glory have existed, unless they had been raised again in these doctrines? And when he introduced this, who would not have accepted the statement? "For this heresy," he says, "I am accused; and this is pressed upon them. On account of this they pray, on account of this they worship, that they may obtain this. And this I proclaim." [CHRYSOSTOM]

Paul answers for himself before Agrippa, to whom he pays a true compliment, in order to secure a favorable hearing, Act 26:1-3; gives an account of his education from his youth up, Act 26:4, Act 26:5; shows that the Jews persecuted him for his maintaining the hope of the resurrection, Act 26:6-8; states his persecution of the Christians, Act 26:9-11; gives an account of his miraculous conversion, Act 26:12-16; and of his call to the ministry, Act 26:16-18. His obedience to that call, and his success in preaching the doctrine of Christ crucified, Act 26:19-23. While he is thus speaking, Festus interrupts him, and declares him to be mad through his abundant learning, Act 26:24; which charge he modestly refutes with inimitable address, and appeals to King Agrippa for the truth and correctness of his speech, Act 26:25-27. On which, Agrippa confesses himself almost converted to Christianity, Act 26:28. Paul's affectionate and elegant address to him on this declaration, Act 26:29. The council breaks up, and they all pronounce him innocent, Act 26:30-32.

That God should raise the dead? - As Agrippa believed in the true God, and knew that one of his attributes was omnipotence, he could not believe that the resurrection of the dead was an impossible thing; and to this belief of his the apostle appeals; and the more especially, because the Sadducees denied the doctrine of the resurrection, though they professed to believe in the same God. Two attributes of God stood pledged to produce this resurrection: his truth, on which his promise was founded; and his power, by which the thing could be easily affected, as that power is unlimited. Some of the best critics think this verse should be read thus: What! should it be thought a thing incredible with you, if God should raise the dead?

PAUL'S DEFENSE OF HIMSELF BEFORE KING AGRIPPA, WHO PRONOUNCES HIM INNOCENT, BUT CONCLUDES THAT THE APPEAL TO CÆSAR MUST BE CARRIED OUT. (Acts 26:1-32) Agrippa said--Being a king he appears to have presided. Paul stretched forth the hand--chained to a soldier (Act 26:29, and see on Act 12:6).

Why should it be thought a thing incredible . . . that God should raise the dead?--rather, "Why is it judged a thing incredible if God raises the dead?" the case being viewed as an accomplished fact. No one dared to call in question the overwhelming evidence of the resurrection of Jesus, which proclaimed Him to be the Christ, the Son of God; the only way of getting rid of it, therefore, was to pronounce it incredible. But why, asks the apostle, is it so judged? Leaving this pregnant question to find its answer in the breasts of his audience, he now passes to his personal history.