Acts 26:9-18

CRITICAL REMARKS

Acts 26:9. Commences the second part of Paul’s apology. Paul would not despair of converting his countrymen from doubt to belief, since he himself had undergone a similar mental revolution, and had become a believer in, and a preacher of, the resurrection of Jesus. I ought.—Paul acted from what he deemed a sense of duty when he “persecuted the Church of God” (1 Corinthians 15:9), which may be taken as his interpretation of the clause, doing many things “contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.”

Acts 26:10. The saints.—This designation, intelligible only to Christians (see Acts 9:13), Paul did not use when addressing the Jews, but now employs before Agrippa, perhaps because he deemed caution no longer necessary, and wished both to put honour on the followers of the Nazarene and to aggravate his own guilt (compare Birk’s Horæ Apostolicæ vii. viii.). The disciples of the Crucified were “the ‘holy ones of God’s people, Israel—what the Chasidim, or ‘devout ones’ (the ‘Assideans’ of 1Ma. 7:13; 2Ma. 14:6), had been in an earlier generation” (Plumptre). I gave my voice—lit., I cast my voting stone, calculum adjeci, against them.—Whether this should be taken literally, as signifying that Paul actually voted against the Christians (Conybeare and Howson, Alford, Holtzmann, Hausrath, Plumptre), or figuratively (Bengel, Kuinoel, De Wette, Meyer, Lechler, Zockler, Hackett, Stier), that he assented to their condemnation, is debated. If the former interpretation be the right one, then the probability is that Paul had been a member of the Sanhedrim, and over thirty years of age, as well as married and the father of a family. As, however, Paul’s age at the time of Stephen’s murder is uncertain, and as Scripture does not mention either wife or child of the apostle (but see Hints on Acts 26:10), it is held by others that the latter interpretation should be preferred.

Acts 26:11. I … compelled them.—Lit., I was compelling them—i.e., I strove to make them—blaspheme.—It does not follow that he succeeded, though “that among the many who suffered this violence, every one preserved his fidelity, it would be unreasonable to affirm” (Hackett). Pliny (Ep., x. 97) speaks of ordering the Bithynian Christians—maledicere Christo—but adds that it could not be done—quorum nihil cogi posse dicuntur qui sunt revera Christiani. Strange cities were foreign cities, outside of Palestine, like Damascus.

Acts 26:12. Whereupon.—Lit., in which (persecutions) being engaged. Compare Acts 24:18.

Acts 26:13. At midday.—A note, omitted in Luke’s narration (Acts 9:3) but corresponding to Paul’s previous statement “about noon” (Acts 22:6). A light from heaven.—As in Acts 9:3; spoken of as great in Acts 22:6, to which corresponds the next clause, above the brightness of the sun.—This light is now said to have encompassed, not Paul alone (Acts 9:3; Acts 22:6), but his companions as well

Acts 26:14. Remarks that these companions, as well as the apostle, were all struck to the ground in terror, though they appear to have recovered from their fright earlier than he (Acts 9:7). The voice which Paul heard, Luke says they also heard (Acts 9:7), though Paul affirms they heard it not (Acts 22:9), as conversely Luke reports they saw no man (Acts 9:7), while Paul asserts they beheld the light (Acts 20:9). On these supposed contradictions see Acts 9:7, and Acts 22:6, and compare Daniel 10:7; 3Ma. 6:18, and John 12:29, which all seem to imply that heavenly voices and visions are understood and seen only by those for whom they are intended. Paul mentioned that the voice spoke to him in the Hebrew tongue, because he was then himself speaking in Greek, not in Hebrew, as in 22 (see Hints on Acts 26:14). It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.—Or, goads. The meaning was that his resistance to the cause and will of Christ would be foolish and unavailing, as well as painful to himself. The ox-goad, six or eight feet long, and pointed with iron, was held by the Oriental ploughman in one hand, while the other grasped the one-handled plough. The refractory animal, when pierced or pricked with the iron-pointed goad, would, of course, kick against it. Examples of this proverb have been produced from Greek and Latin writers (see Æschylus, Agam., 1624: πρὸς κέντρα μὴ λάκτιζε; and Terence, Phormio, I. ii. 27: “Nam quæ inscitia est advorsum stimulum oalces”).

Acts 26:16. Which thou halt seen.—According to the best authorities this should be wherein thou hast seen Me.

Acts 26:18. To turn them should be that they may turn from darkness to light, the verb being intransitive (see Acts 26:20; Acts 14:15).

HOMILETICAL ANALYSIS.—Acts 26:9

Paul’s Rehearsal of An Old Story; or, the Secret of his Conversion Explained

I. The character of his pre-Christian life.—Briefly, one of opposition to the name of Jesus, and to all who bore it.

1. Conscientious. Paul distinctly claimed that at that time he was as truly conscientious as he had been since his conversion. He imagined, ignorantly of course (1 Timothy 1:13), that in so opposing, hindering, persecuting, and destroying Christians, he was actually doing God service. He did not avow that, though acting, as he believed, from conscientious motives, he was thereby free from guilt; otherwise he could not have written, “Howbeit I obtained mercy.” Paul had by this time arrived at the perception of this fundamental principle in morals, that while man is responsible for acting in accordance with conscience, he is no less accountable for the education and enlightenment of his conscience. It is only conscience enlightened by the word of God which is an absolutely safe guide for the Christian.

2. Active. His hostility towards the name of Jesus and its bearers was not confined to the region of sentiment and feeling, but was no sooner formed than translated into word and deed. Having concluded in the court of conscience that he ought to harry out the Christians from Jerusalem and Judæa, and hunt them, if that were possible, from off the face of the earth, he adopted every method in his power to give effect to his ferocious purpose. Armed with authority from the chief priests, he became a furious inquisitor, persecutor, and oppressor—

(1) shutting up the saints in prison wherever and whenever they fell into his clutches;
(2) voting against them when they were put to death, either actually, as a member of the Sanhedrim, or metaphorically, by mentally assenting to their condemnation, thus constituting himself participem criminis, or (to use a Scottish law phrase) “art and part,” a sharer in the wickedness of shedding their innocent blood;

(3) punishing them in every synagogue in which they were found, in order to make them blaspheme that holy name wherewith they were called (James 2:7); and even

(4) following them to strange cities, such as Damascus, in order to arrest them and fetch them, bound, to Jerusalem.
3. Passionate. Nor was it merely as an unpleasant task that this ferocious and bloody occupation was undertaken and carried through by him, but as a business into which he had enlisted all the energy and enthusiasm of his soul, and from which he derived the most intoxicating and fiendish delight. He was mad exceedingly, and, as Luke reports, breathed out threatenings and slaughter against them.

4. Extensive. His efforts were not restricted to Jerusalem or Judæa, but passed beyond the limits of the Holy Land, even to foreign cities. From Paul’s description of his early career we can see that Luke’s account (Acts 9:1) is in no degree exaggerated, while Agrippa might have inferred, had he wished, that something extraordinary must have happened to produce the change in Paul which he and all men beheld—a something hardly less supernatural than that which Paul next proceeded to relate—viz., the appearance to him of the risen Christ.

II. The story of his miraculous conversion—

1. The place where it occurred. In the vicinity of that very Damascus to which he had been journeying on the unhallowed errand just described. Paul was not likely to forget a spot so sacred as that on which he passed so suddenly, completely, and for ever from the darkness of sin and Satan into God’s own marvellous light. It can hardly be supposed that the Eunuch would ever cease to remember the desert road to Gaza, where he met with Philip the evangelist and found the key to the Bible in the person of the Saviour (Acts 8:26); or that Lydia would ever become unmindful of the place of prayer by the river side in Philippi, where the Lord opened her heart to attend unto the things that were spoken by Paul (Acts 16:13). 2 The time when it happened. “At mid-day, O king.” This also was engraven ineffaceably on the tablets of his memory, as was the tenth hour on the memory of Andrew (John 1:39). Many who have undergone the same spiritual change as Paul, the change of conversion, find it difficult to state precisely the moment when the blinding scales of ignorance and unbelief fell from their eyes, and the light of saving truth flashed in upon their understandings. But no such uncertainty could exist with Paul, any more than with the just named Lydia (Acts 16:14), or with the Philippian gaoler (Acts 16:34).

3. The instrumentality that effected it. “A light from heaven.”

(1) That this was no mere flash of lightning or other natural phenomenon, but a supernatural illumination, is proved by four things: its splendour, which was above the brightness of the sun; its time, which was mid-day, when the sun is at its brightest, and lightning, should it occur then, is scarcely visible; its locality, which was not the broad expanse of the firmament, but the vicinity of the apostle and his companions—the light shone round about them; its effect—it hurled the apostle and his companions to the ground, probably threw them from the beasts on which they rode, filling the apostle’s companions with terror, and striking the apostle himself with blindness (Acts 9:7), though the apostle does not now deem it necessary to introduce these details into his speech.

(2) That the light was the glory nimbus of the exalted Saviour is apparent from the circumstances next narrated by Paul—that he heard a voice issuing from it which he afterwards recognised to be that of Jesus, whom he had been persecuting, and that he carried on a conversation with that same Jesus, whose glorified form he discerned in the midst of the light.
4. The power that wrought it. This was not the light, which was simply the radiant symbol of Jesus presence, or the alarm into which he, no less than his companions, had been thrown, since, though fear may awaken conviction, it cannot convert; but the grace of Him who had, in this mysterious fashion, appeared to him on the way. “It is the Spirit (of Christ) that quickeneth” (John 6:63). Souls are born again, “not of flesh or of blood, or by the will of man, but by the power of God” (John 1:13).

5. The process by which it was completed. The conversation carried on by Christ with his soul.

(1) The double form of address—“Saul! Saul!”—indicative of earnestness; the pathetic interrogation—“Why persecutest thou Me?”; and the solemn declaration, “It is hard for thee to kick against the goads”;—made it evident that he was standing before One who not only knew his name and the details of his past career, but was acquainted with the interior history of his soul, and understood the moods of mind through which he had been passing on the road to Damascus, and probably ever since he had witnessed the trial and execution of Stephen. If Paul on that day remembered the words of Scripture at all, it is far from unlikely that these were the words which instinctively leapt into his thoughts: “O Lord, Thou hast searched me and known me.…” (Psalms 139:1).

(2) The answer returned by Christ to his question, “Who art Thou, Lord?”—“I am Jesus, whom thou persecutest”—must have discovered to his mind three things of which he had been previously unaware, and up to that moment had presumably not imagined could be true: that Jesus of Nazareth was no longer dead, but risen, as the Christians affirmed, and was the Messiah; that his conception of himself and his past career as highly pleasing to God was fundamentally and totally wrong; and that in persecuting the followers of the Way he was practically fighting against God. All which must have humbled him in the dust of penitence and self-abasement.
(3) The command of Jesus that he should rise, stand upon his feet, and proceed upon a different mission—not against, but for, the cause he had been seeking to destroy—could not fail to inspire within him hopes of pardon and acceptance, notwithstanding his heinous wickedness and sin. When Paul found that Jesus did not strike him into death, confound him with terrors, or declare against him bitter and relentless enmity, what could he conclude but that Jesus was willing to forgive the past? If doubt lingered in his soul, it must have been for ever banished when Christ proceeded to talk about employing him as a preacher of the faith?

III. The tenor of his apostolical commission.—This was—

1. Based upon the fact that Christ had now appeared to him, as to all the other apostolic persons. Paul afterwards relied on this as a sufficient guarantee of his apostolical authority (1 Corinthians 9:1; 1 Corinthians 15:8).

2. Defined as a witness-bearing about the things in which Christ both had appeared and would appear to him. In conformity with this Paul constantly claimed that his gospel had not been derived indirectly from man, but had been communicated to him directly by Christ (Galatians 1:12).

3. Directed to the Gentiles—not exclusively, but ultimately and chiefly. It is not in accordance with fact that Paul originally did not contemplate a Gentile mission (Baur, Hausrath), but was only reluctantly compelled by circumstances to adopt this, because of the refusal of his countrymen, the Jews, to hear the gospel (Acts 13:47). That Paul did not start at once with a Gentile mission constituted no proof that that formed not his intention from the first, or that he was not aware of his Divine designation for such an enterprise, but only attested his wisdom in

(1) waiting for heavenly leading to open up his path, and
(2) seeking a point of connection for himself and his gospel with the heathen, through the synagogues, in which these mingled as proselytes with the Jews. Besides, had Paul not commenced with the Jews he would have both given to his hearers an erroneous impression of his gospel, which was no entirely new religion, but the necessary, because Divinely arranged, development of the old faith of the Hebrews, and would have lacked a congenial soil for it to fix its first roots in.
4. Designed for the salvation of the heathen: by

(1) opening their eyes—i.e., imparting to them spiritual illumination (Luke 1:79; Ephesians 1:18);

(2) turning them, as the result of such enlightenment, from darkness unto light (Ephesians 5:11; Colossians 1:13; 1 Peter 2:9), and from the power of Satan unto God (Ephesians 2:2; Romans 16:20);

(3) bestowing on them forgiveness—i.e., remission of sins (Romans 3:25); and

(4) securing for them an inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith in Christ (Acts 20:22; Ephesians 1:11; Ephesians 1:14; Ephesians 1:18; Colossians 1:12; 1 Peter 1:4). “An excellent description of St. Paul’s commission to preach, by the five ends or effects of it, viz., conversion, faith, remission of sins, sanctification, salvation” (Trapp).

5. Accompanied by a promise of protection against the machinations of both Jews and Gentiles, a promise which his past history and present position showed had been marvellously fulfilled.

Learn—

1. That to follow conscience (unless it is enlightened) is no guarantee that one will not commit sin and incur guilt.
2. That men have justified the greatest wickedness by appealing to the dictates of conscience.
3. That men’s judgments on their characters and lives differ greatly according to the standpoints from which they are pronounced.
4. That Divine grace can change the worst of sinners.

5. That nothing transpiring on earth is or can be hid from the eyes of Jesus Christ (Hebrews 4:13; Revelation 1:14).

6. That when Christ appoints a messenger He gives him a message.

7. That the grand end of the ministry is the salvation of them that hear (1 Corinthians 1:21; 1 Timothy 4:16).

HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS

Acts 26:9. Paul’s Mistaken Thoughts.

I. That Jesus of Nazareth was an imposter.—Not a few regard Christ in this light still. Many consider Him to have been a mere man, and Divine in no sense, in which others may not also be Divine.

II. That the followers of Jesus should be persecuted and put to death.—This opinion is not yet extinct. Many who would tolerate Christianity hold that other religions should be put down and their professors suppressed by force. To punish men for their religious views, besides being a blunder, is a sin.

III. That the favour of Heaven could be secured only by them who obeyed the law, and observed the ritual, of Moses.—Thousands still hold that none can be saved outside of their sect, and thousands more that salvation is possible only to them who seek it through the works of the law—both of which opinions are delusions.

IV. That the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth was a fiction.—So numerous unbelievers still hold. But as Paul was undeceived on this point, so will they eventually be.

Acts 26:10. Was Paul a Member of the Sanhedrim?—The answer to this question largely turns on the other, Was Paul married? That he was, Luther and the Reformers generally inferred from 1 Corinthians 7:8: “But I say to the unmarried and to widows, It is good for them, if they abide even as I.” “That the unmarried are widowers is clear from this, that Paul has already spoken to the unmarried (Acts 26:1), and married (Acts 26:7), and now comes to the widowed (Acts 26:8). Accordingly, the apostle appears to reckon himself in the category of widowers, and already Luther’s sound judgment has discerned that directions concerning the married life, such as are given immediately before Acts 26:8, are suitable only in the mouth of a man who is, or was, married, and who knows from his own experience that of which he speaks. An impartial reading of 1 Corinthians 6:12; 1 Corinthians 7:10, cannot but confirm this judgment of Luther’s; and many other passages in the Pauline letters, as, e.g., 1 Thessalonians 2:7; 1 Thessalonians 5:4; 1 Corinthians 3:2; 1 Corinthians 4:15; 1 Corinthians 7:14, manifest so deep a feeling for the family life, and so rich experiences out of the same, that this impression is only confirmed” (Hausrath, Der Apostel Paulus, p. 47).

Acts 26:13. Memorable Moments.—Paul never forgot the hour when the glorified Redeemer first appeared to him, shattered with a glance and a word the entire superstructure of his past life, and transformed him into a new man.

I. Such moments occur in the lives of men.—Such are those, e.g., in which Christ, through His word and by His Spirit, for the first time looks in upon a soul, awakening within it a sense of sin, shining into it with His gracious countenance, translating it out of darkness into light, and turning it from Satan to serve the living and true God.

II. Such moments should not be forgotten.—Should be remembered by men rather—

1. For the eternal praise of the Lord whose grace has been so signally displayed in them.
2. For the continual instruction of themselves, reminding them of the grace they have received and the gratitude they should feel.
3. For a permanent memorial to the world, to rebuke them in their sins and call them to the way of salvation.

Acts 26:14. Did Christ speak Hebrew?—Compare Christ’s words to Paul in Acts 9:4. That on this occasion He did, Paul distinctly states. Whether this was Christ’s language on earth is debated. The probability is that He could use both Greek and Hebrew. Brought up, as He had been, in a Jewish household, it is hardly supposable that He could not think, read, write, and speak, in Hebrew. It is even likely that when He taught in the synagogues, the language used by Him was Hebrew. Occasionally when working miracles, as the Gospel records show, He used Aramaic terms, such as “Talitha cumi,” “Ephatha”; while on the cross He cried: “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabacthani.” At the same time, as Greek was at this period commonly spoken in all those countries which were washed by the Mediterranean waters, it is just as reasonable to conjecture that Christ could speak Greek. Whether He employed this tongue in ordinary intercourse with His countrymen will most likely never be determined. Nor is it of much consequence. The instance here given of Christ speaking from heaven to a mortal is a solitary one, and not much can be founded on it in the way of argument for one conclusion or another. Some think that John’s revelations were given to him in Hebrew. But this is, of course, conjectural.

Acts 26:16. True Ministerial Ordination.—Illustrated in the case of Paul.

I. Proceeds from Christ.—Prayer and the imposition of hands, whether by bishop or presbytery, does not make an unconverted man a minister of Jesus Christ.

II. Appoints to personal service.—Not to temporal or ecclesiastical dignities, or even to wealth and comfort, but to lowly labour in witness-bearing for Jesus Christ.

III. Guarantees spiritual illumination.—When Christ ordains a man to be His witness He reveals Himself to that man’s soul, not only at the beginning, and as a necessary condition of being ordained as a minister, but from time to time, as his work of witness-bearing requires.

IV. Promises adequate protection.—As Christ shielded Paul from his adversaries, so can and will He guard His faithful minister and witness so long as his service is required.

V. Contemplates lofty aims.—

1. The enlightenment of souls—“to open their eyes.”
2. The conversion of sinners—“that they may turn from darkness to light.”
3. The bestowment of pardon—“that they may receive remission of sins.”
4. The preparation of those who are enlightened, converted, pardoned for glory—“that they may receive an inheritance among them that are sanctified.”
5. The implantation of faith—“through faith that is in Me.”

Acts 26:18. The Way to The Inheritance.

I. No inheritance without sanctification.—(See Acts 20:32, and compare Hebrews 12:14). “Follow holiness,” or, the sanctification without which “no man shall see the Lord.”

II. No sanctification without faith.—Since justification must precede, and justification is impossible without faith (Galatians 2:16), while Christ can be made of God sanctification only to them who believe (1 Corinthians 1:30).

III. No faith without Christ.—I.e., without the crucified, risen, and glorified Christ, who alone is the proper, personal object of faith (Acts 20:21; Colossians 2:7; 1 John 3:23).

Faith in Christ.

I. The object of faith.—Christ: Christianity not merely a system of truths about God, nor a code of morality deducible from these, but the affiance of the whole spirit fixed upon the redeeming, revealing Christ.

II. The nature and the essence of the act of faith.—Faith is not merely the assent of the understanding to certain truths, or the persuasion of the reality of unseen things; it is not even merely the confident expectation of future good; it is the personal relation of him that believes to the living person its object; in other words, faith is trust.

III. The power of faith.—

1. We are saved—i.e., justified and sanctified—by faith. But

2. The power that saves comes, not from the faith, but from the Christ in whom faith trusts. It is Christ’s blood, Christ’s sacrifice, Christ’s life, Christ’s intercession, that saves. Faith is the channel through which the Divine fulness flows over into the soul’s emptiness.

IV. The guilt and criminality of unbelief.—

1. Because, assuming that God is to be the author of salvation, no other way can be conceived in which the Divine fulness should pass over into the soul than that of receiving what God has provided.
2. Because the difficulties in the way of exercising faith are not intellectual, but moral, and lie, not in the region of the understanding, but in that of the heart.
3. Because the fact that a man will not believe proves his nature to be turned or turning away from, and setting itself in rebellion against, God’s love.—Alexander Maclaren, D.D.

A Sermon on Conversion.

I. How it is effected.—

1. By the grace of God.
2. Through the instrumentality of the Word.
3. With the active concurrence of the human will.

II. What it implies.—A turning.

1. From darkness to light.
2. From the power of Satan unto God.

III. What it secures.—

1. Remission of sins.
2. Inheritance among the sanctified.

“Faith that is in Me.” Saving Faith is Faith in Christ.—

1. It is faith in Christ as a Person. There is assent to a proposition, an acknowledgment of its truth. There is reliance on a Person as able and willing to do what He has undertaken. Saving faith is such a belief of the inspired testimony concerning the Person as leads to sincere trust in Him for salvation.
2. It is faith in Christ as a Person who has accomplished a work. Christ has not only delivered a system of theological and ethical doctrines. He has done something. It is what He has done—His sufferings and death—that constitutes Him the proper object of saving faith. It contemplates Him, not as a Teacher, but as a Saviour.

3. It is faith in Christ as a Person who has accomplished a work which has a Godward aspect. True it is that His work has a manward aspect—exercises a moral influence on men, as drawing them to God. But it has also a Godward aspect—has a legal value, as satisfying the claims of the Divine government. Take away the latter, and you remove the basis of the former.
4. It is faith in Christ as a Person who, after having accomplished by His death a work which has a Godward aspect, is now alive. There may be a dead faith in a dead Saviour. There may be a dead faith in a living Saviour. There ought to be a living faith in a living Saviour.—G. Brooks.