Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 26:30
And when he had thus spoken, the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat with them:
30. And when he had thus spoken ] The oldest MSS. omit these words.
they that sat with them ] i.e. the chief captains and the principal men of Csarea. (See Act 25:23.) The authorities withdrew to consult upon what they had heard.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Agrippa, Festus, and the queen, together with the governors council, although they had heard this excellent discourse from, the most learned apostle, like the blackamoor or leopard, they cannot change their spots, or skin, Jer 13:23; having sinned against former manifestations of Gods will, this, for aught we read, became ineffectual unto them.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
30-32. when he had thus spoken, theking rosenot over-easy, we may be sure.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And when he had thus spoken,…. These words are omitted in the Alexandrian copy, the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions:
the king rose up; from the judgment seat; that is, King Agrippa:
and the governor; the Roman governor, Festus:
and Bernice: the sister of King Agrippa:
and they that sat with them; either in council, or to hear; the chief captains, and principal inhabitants of Caesarea.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Rose up (). Second aorist active of (intransitive), agreeing only with “the king” ( ). The entertainment was over.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
The king, the governor, Bernice. Mentioned in the order of their rank.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
FINAL CONFERENCE AND CONCLUSION OF FELIX AND AGRIPPA ON THE CASE V. 30-32
1) “And when he had thus spoken,” (parektos ton desmon touton) “Having spoken the words – except these bonds (or chain-shackles),” which he perhaps raised and rattles while gesturing a final “that’s all” “I’m finished.” In a moment of high drama, perhaps with Agrippa on his feet, as he respectfully responded to Paul, Paul concluded his defence, rested his case; having fought with the sword of the Spirit, Eph 6:10-20; 1Ti 6:12; 2Ti 4:7-8.
2) “The king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice,” (aneste te ho Basileus kai ho hegemon he to Bernike) “Then the king, the governor, (Felix) and Bernice (the queen) rose up,” and left the theater, from where they had been sitting; They arose and led the way out of the amphitheater in Caesarea. The order of rank is maintained in leaving the chamber of the theater, the most honored leading the way.
3) “And they that sat with them: (kai hoi sugkathemenoi autois) “And the ones (officials) who sat with them,” as dignitaries of the day, from among both Roman and Jewish officials, Psa 1:1-3.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(30) And when he had thus spoken, the king rose up . . .The act indicated, as far as it went, that the Apostles words had made a favourable impression. This, they felt, was no common criminal, no fomenter of sedition. The question how he was to be dealt with was one that called for serious consideration; but the result showed that he was treated from this time forward with more respect and courtesy than before.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
30. Rose up There is some appearance of abruptness in this breaking up, but more probably it was a regular adjournment because the plea was closed. Judged as an intellectual performance, this speech must ever rank among the master-pieces of oratory.
King governor Bernice, and they In the order of honour.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they who sat with them, and when they had withdrawn, they spoke one to another, saying, “This man does nothing worthy of death or of bonds.” ’
Then the king stood up, the indication that the event was now at an end. And following his act the governor and Bernice stood along with him, followed by all the guests, and having left the room all agreed that Paul had done nothing worthy of either death or bonds. All had been gripped by his words, and all were satisfied as to his genuineness.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Act 26:30-32 The Verdict of King Agrippa Act 26:30-32 records the final verdict of King Agrippa in which he official the official decision to send Paul to Rome.
Act 26:30 Comments – Meyer notes that such a direct question from Paul to King Agrippa may have embarrassed him to the point of ending this meeting and departing. He also comments on the fact that those who had gathered to hear Paul now arose according to “the order of rank,” the king, then the governor, Bernice, then those who had accompanied them. [319]
[319] Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the Acts of the Apostles, trans. Paton J. Gloag, ed. William P. Dickson (New York: Funk and Wagnalis, 1884), 284.
Act 26:32 Comments – Both King Agrippa and Festus realized that Paul was not guilty of any offence worthy of death. The early Church tradition tells us that Paul stood before Caesar and was acquitted during his first Roman imprisonment. [320] King Agrippa’s advice gave Festus the authority needed to send Paul to Rome.
[320] Clement of Rome says Paul was “a teacher of righteousness unto the whole world” and that before Paul died, he “reached the furthest bounds of the West and bore testimony before the ruling powers.” ( 1 Clement 5:6-7) Eusebius says, “Festus was sent by Nero to be Felix’s successor. Under him Paul, having made his defense, was sent bound to Rome. Aristarchus was with him, whom he also somewhere in his epistles quite naturally calls his fellow-prisoner. And Luke, who wrote the Acts of the Apostles, brought his history to a close at this point, after stating that Paul spent two whole years at Rome as a prisoner at large, and preached the word of God without restraint. Thus after he had made his defense it is said that the apostle was sent again upon the ministry of preaching, and that upon coming to the same city a second time he suffered martyrdom. In this imprisonment he wrote his second epistle to Timothy, in which he mentions his first defense and his impending death.” ( Ecclesiastical History 2. 22.1-2)
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The end of the hearing:
v. 30. and when he had thus spoken, the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat with them
v. 31. and when they were gone aside, they talked between themselves, saying, This man doeth nothing worthy of death or of bonds.
v. 32. Then said Agrippa unto Festus, This man might have been set at liberty if he had not appealed unto Caesar. When Paul had made his last appeal, the king arose, this being the signal that he wished the hearing closed, and the governor, Bernice, and the rest of the invited. company that had sat beside them. Having left the hall, they retired to another chamber to exchange their ideas. And they all agreed in saying that this man, Paul, was doing nothing that merited either death or imprisonment. This much the open and fearless speech of Paul at least had shown them. And while Agrippa would not permit himself to be persuaded in favor of Christianity, he at least felt himself obliged to state to Festus that this man might well be released if he had not appealed to Caesar. But the appeal had now been made and accepted, and Paul must be sent to Rome. Very likely this opinion as rendered by Agrippa influenced the letter which Festus addressed to the imperial court in this matter and may thus account for the treatment of Paul upon his arrival at the capital. Note: In all these facts, as here presented, the guiding hand of the exalted Christ, the Head of His Church, is plainly seen: He wanted Paul to get to Rome, but He also protected him against all harm.
Summary. Paul makes his speech of defense at the hearing before King Agrippa, which moves the latter to declare that he is innocent of any crime, and that only his appeal caused his being sent to Rome.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Act 26:30-32 . Perhaps this bold, grand utterance of the singular man had made an impression on the king’s heart, the concealment of which might have occasioned embarrassment to him, had he listened any longer: Agrippa arose and thereby brought the discussion at once to a close. With him arose, in the order of rank, first the procurator, then Bernice, then all who sat there with them ( ). After they had retired from the audience chamber ( ), they communicated to each other their unanimous opinion, which certainly amounted only to the superficial political negative: this man (certainly by the most regarded as a harmless enthusiast) practises nothing which merits death or bonds. But Agrippa delivered specially to Festus his opinion to this effect: this man might (already) have been set at liberty , [165] if he had not appealed unto Caesar (by which the sending him to Rome was rendered irreversible, see Grotius).
] practises . Grotius rightly remarks: “agit de vitae institute:” hence in the present . Comp. Joh 3:20 ; Rom 1:32 , al .; Joh 7:51 .
The “recognition of the innocence of the apostle in all judicatures” (Zeller, comp. Baur) is intelligible enough from the truth of his character, and from the power of his appearance and address; and, in particular, the closing utterance of Agrippa finds its ground so vividly and with such internal truth in the course of the proceedings, that the imputation of a set purpose on the author’s part (“in order that, with the Gentile testimonies, Act 25:18 ; Act 25:25 , a Jewish one might not be wanting,” Zeller) can only appear as a frivolously dogmatic opinion, proceeding from personal prepossessions tending in a particular direction. The apostle might at any rate be credited, even in his situation at that time, with an . (1Co 2:4 ).
[165] Not: “ dimitti poterat,” Vulg. Luther, and others. See in opposition to this, and on the expression without , Buttmann, neut . Gr . pp. 187, 195 [E. T. 216, 226]. Comp. also Ngelsb. on the Iliad , p. 430, Exo 3 .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
And when he had thus spoken, the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat with them: (31) And when they were gone aside, they talked between themselves, saying, This man doeth nothing worthy of death or of bonds. (32) Then said Agrippa unto Festus, This man might have been set at liberty, if he had not appealed unto Caesar.
The great end the Lord the Spirit had appointed by this meeting, being now accomplished, (I pray the Reader not to lose sight of this,) the business is over. The several hearers have now heard for their life, or death. Paul’s sermon will at the last day be again brought forward, as the ministration of mercy or condemnation. The one class of mercy for the blessed opportunity, Heb 10:39 . The other of condemnation, Psa 1:6 .
And now the assembly is broken up, the congregation separate, and the prisoner is sent back to his prison. He might have been set at liberty, said Agrippa, if he had not appealed unto Caesar. No, Agrippa! that must not be, for the Lord had shewed his servant, that he must bear witness also at Rome, Act 23:11 . How little and contemptible would this whole assembly have appeared, even in their own eyes, amidst all their pomp and splendor, could they but have seen the parts they were then made to act for the divine glory. They were to hear for their own condemnation, if not made the savor of life unto life; and they were to prepare for the sending the Lord’s messenger and witness to Rome. Howbeit, (said the Lord of a similar character of old,) he meaneth not so, neither doth his heart think so, Isa 10:5-7 . It is truly blessed to a child of God, to trace the Lord’s hand in all the Lord’s appointments. My counsel shall stand, saith the Lord, and I will do all my pleasure, Isa 46:10 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
30 And when he had thus spoken, the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat with them:
Ver. 30. The king rose up and the governor ] A little of such sad discourse served their turn: they were soon sated, and ready to say as Antipater king of Macedonia did, when one presented him a book treating of happiness, he answered, , I have somewhat else to do than to learn or listen to such businesses; when perhaps they might never have the like opportunity of hearing such a persuasive preacher while they breathed again, as Paul was.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Act 26:30 . : of these words are not retained, see critical note, their omission seems to make the rising up more abrupt ( subito consurgit , Blass), and probably this is the meaning of the passage, although the order of rank is maintained in leaving the chamber. For the vividness of the whole narrative see Zckler and Wendt, and cf. McGiffert, Apostolic Age , p. 355. , Lucan, see on . Suet., Nero , 15; cf. Act 23:19 , and note on Act 25:12 .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Act 26:30-32
30The king stood up and the governor and Bernice, and those who were sitting with them, 31and when they had gone aside, they began talking to one another, saying, “This man is not doing anything worthy of death or imprisonment.” 32And Agrippa said to Festus, “This man might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.”
Act 26:30 How did Luke get this information? It was a private conversation between governmental leaders (and their families).
1. a servant have heard this and passed it on to Luke?
2. Luke assumes what they said by subsequent statements
3. Luke uses this opportunity to reinforce his literary purpose of showing that neither Paul or Christianity is a threat to Rome
Act 26:31-32 “This man might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar” This shows one of Luke’s major purposes in writing Acts, which was to show that Christianity was not treasonous to Rome. This is a second class conditional sentence which makes a false assertion to accentuate a truth. This man might have been set free (which he was not) if he had not appealed to Caesar (which he did).
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
And when, &c. All the texts omit.
king. Paul’s appeal had taken the case out of the hands of Festus; so this was not a court of justice, but an inquiry to please Agrippa, and to enable Festus to make his report to the Emperor. Agrippa was the chairman (verses: Act 26:1, Act 26:24, Act 26:26) and so gave the signal for closing the inquiry, probably afraid lest any more such searching questions should be put to him.
sat with them. Greek. sunkathemai. Only here and Mar 14:54.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Act 26:30. , rose up) They therefore had sat. A most precious moment (season) for Agrippa; which whether he used or not, we shall hereafter see.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
the king: Act 18:15, Act 28:22
Reciprocal: Luk 2:2 – governor Luk 3:1 – Pontius Pilate Joh 10:20 – why Act 4:15 – to go
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1
Act 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.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Act 26:30. And when he had thus spoken, the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat with them. Thus arising and leaving the court in order of their precedence. Such an exact detail evidently proceeds from one who had been an eye-witness of this days proceedings. They that sat with them were the council of the Procurator.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Observe here, How Agrippa, Festus, and the whole company, acquit the innocent apostle in their judgments and consciences, yea, with their tongues declare, that he deserves neither death nor bonds; yet at the same time that they acquit him, they discharged him not, but he is left in his enemies’ hands, and at last put to death by the Gentiles.
But how, may it be said, was God’s promises fulfilled then, I have appeared unto thee, to make thee a minister and a witness, and will deliver thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom I now send thee? Act 26:16-17
How did God deliver him from the Gentiles, when he was at last delivered into their hands, and put to death by the Gentiles?
Answer, As long as the wisdom of God saw it fit and convenient for the purposes of his glory, and as a real mercy conducing to the apostle’s good; as long as it was a true and beneficial deliverance, so long God wrought deliverance for him; nay, rather than fail, in a miraculous manner, no chains could bind him, no iron gates nor prison walls confine him. But when he had finished his course, run his race, fought the good fight of faith, and done the work which God set him about, it would not then have been a deliverance, but a real detriment, to have been kept longer from his reward.
Now might the apostle say, Give me my robes and my crown. God now made his word good to the apostle, to deliver him from the people and the Gentiles by making death his deliverer and deliverance.
Thus faithful is God in his promises to his people. He will deliver them in six troubles and in seven, in every danger, in every difficulty; but when death is the best deliverance, they shall have it as a covenant-mercy and blessing; for all things are ours, if we be Christ’s, whether life or death, 1Co 3:22.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Act 26:30-32. And when he had thus spoken That the impression Paul began to make upon the court might reach no further; the king rose up Thus neglecting to yield to conviction, and losing, perhaps for ever, an unspeakably precious moment. Whether the good impressions made were ever afterward laid to heart and improved, we shall see in the day of final accounts. And the governor, and Bernice, &c. On none of whom, it seems, Pauls discourse had much, if any, effect. They ought, in justice, to have asked the prisoner whether he had any more to say for himself; but, it seems, they thought he had said enough to make his case clear, and with that they contented themselves. And when they were gone aside Had withdrawn, to consult and know one anothers minds on the matter, they spoke one with another, all to the same purpose; saying, This man As is evident by his discourse, which has all imaginable marks of candour and sincerity; doeth nothing worthy of death or of bonds They appear to speak of his whole life, and not of what happened at Jerusalem only. And could ye learn nothing more than this from his discourse? A favourable judgment of such a preacher is not all that God requires. Then Agrippa Not in the least offended with Paul for having spoken to him so freely; said to Festus In the hearing of the whole assembly; This man might have been set at liberty, if he had not appealed unto Cesar Pauls appeal, however, was perfectly proper at the time he made it, seeing Festus had shown an inclination to gratify the Jews by proposing to judge him in Jerusalem. And now, although Agrippa, with the consent of Festus, had declared that Paul might have been set at liberty if he had not appealed to Cesar, Paul very prudently did not withdraw his appeal, because he fore- saw that, by the solicitations and threatenings of the chief priests and elders, Festus might be constrained, contrary to his inclination, to put him to death, even as Pilate formerly had been constrained, contrary to his conscience, to put Jesus to death. He might probably foresee, too, that his visiting Rome under the character of a prisoner, would be overruled by Providence to answer some important purposes, as is evident from Php 1:12-20, it was. We may add further here, though this declaration of Agrippa could not obtain Pauls deliverance, yet it might do him some service, that a testimony to his innocence was pronounced by so learned and honourable a person of the Jewish nation and religion. Festus would probably entertain a better opinion of him on this account, and would give directions to the officer who attended him to treat him with so much the greater regard. Thus it appears that, besides the defence which Paul made from the top of the stairs to the multitude in Jerusalem, he at four different times, before the highest courts of judicature in Judea, defended the gospel, and his own conduct in preaching it, in the most public manner; namely, 1st, Before the Jewish council, consisting of the high-priests, the chief priests, the whole estate of the elders, and the scribes; who all sat as his accusers. 2d, Before Felix the Roman governor, at whose tribunal the high-priest Ananias, and the elders from Jerusalem, were likewise his accusers, and employed a Roman orator to plead against him. 3d, Before Festus, the governor, on which occasion the Jews from Jerusalem stood forth, a third time, as his accusers. 4th, Before King Agrippa, Bernice, the tribunes, and the principal persons of Cesarea, with many others, in whose presence Paul boldly asserted his own innocence, with such strength of evidence that both Agrippa and Festus declared he might have been set at liberty if he had not appealed to the emperor. Macknight.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
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 Csar.” 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 Csar he must go. Whether Festus now knew any better than before what to write to Csar, Luke leaves to the imagination of the reader.
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Act 26:30-32. Result of the Hearing.
Act 26:30 scarcely suggests the deliberations of a court after the hearing.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
26:30 {10} And when he had thus spoken, the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat with them:
(10) Paul is solemnly acquitted, and yet not dismissed.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The verdict of Agrippa 26:30-32
By rising to his feet Agrippa signaled the end of the hearing. Everyone else rose out of respect for him. Luke implied that everyone present concurred that Paul was completely innocent. This had previously been the verdict of the Pharisees (Act 23:9), Claudius Lysias (Act 23:29), and Festus (Act 25:25). Now Agrippa, a Roman ruler with Jewish blood in his veins who was sympathetic to the Jews, voiced the same opinion (Act 26:32). In Agrippa’s opinion Paul did not even need to be in prison, much less die for what he had done.
"The effect of the scene as a whole is to emphasize the uprightness of Roman legal proceedings over against the partiality and injustice of the Jews, and to show that, when measured by Roman law, Paul’s behavior appeared to be free from any guilt; mad he might appear to be, but not a criminal. There is tremendous emphasis on the climax: ’This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.’" [Note: Marshall, The Acts . . ., p. 386.]
"It may finally be asked whether Luke was justified in devoting so much of his limited space to Paul’s examinations before the various tribunals of Rome. Paul’s case, it should be remembered, was a test case. If he was finally acquitted, and the Pastoral Epistles are solid evidence that he was, Luke’s final purpose is clear." [Note: Blaiklock, p. 186.]