should it be thought = is it judged. Greek. krino , as in Acts 26:6 . incredible . Greek. apistos. Only occurs in Acts. Elsewhere translated "faithless", "unbelieving", &c. that = if. App-118 . should raise = raises. Greek. egeiro. App-178 . the dead = dead persons. Greek. nekros. App-139 . Compare Acts 26:23 . read more
verily = therefore indeed. to = unto. Greek. pros. App-104 . the name . See Acts 2:38 . Jesus . App-98 . of Nazareth = the Nazarene. See Acts 2:22 . This is the seventh and last occ of the title in Acts. read more
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... read more
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... read more
Acts 26:8. Why should it be thought a thing incredible, &c.— Beza, with the Greek scholiast, would place a mark of interrogation after the word τι, and read it, What? is it thought incredible, &c.? which is indeed well suited to the animated manner of St. Paul's speaking. read more
8. 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... read more
9-15. (See on :-, c. and compare Acts 22:4, &c.) read more
Paul’s speech to the dignitaries 26:1-23Paul was not on trial here. When he had appealed to Caesar (Acts 25:11), he had guaranteed that his next trial would be before the emperor. This was just a hearing designed to acquaint Agrippa with Paul’s case so Agrippa could give Festus help in understanding it and communicating it to the emperor."This testimony of Paul is not a defense of himself. It is a declaration of the gospel with the evident purpose of winning Agrippa and the others present to... read more
Paul’s reference to the resurrection was appropriate because Jesus’ identification as the Messiah depended on His resurrection. None of Paul’s hearers could reasonably doubt the resurrection of the dead since God had raised Jesus from the dead. Furthermore, why could not an all-powerful God raise the dead? read more
Get Bible verse every day in your inbox
Read on Mobile
Bridgeway Bible Commentary - Acts 26:1-32
Paul again declared innocent (25:13-26:32)Among those who came to Caesarea to pay their respects to the new governor was Herod Agrippa II. This man was the son of Herod Agrippa I (the governor mentioned in 12:1-4,20-23) and the brother of Bernice and Drusilla (13; cf. 24:24; see ‘The New Testament World’). He was Rome’s appointed ruler over certain areas in the far north of Palestine, but he had no power in the region governed by Festus. He was, however, an expert on Jewish affairs (see... read more