Acts 26:28

ἐν ὀλίγῳ με πείθεις Χ. γένεσθαι, see critical note, “with but little persuasion thou wouldest fain make me a Christian,” R.V. reading ποιῆσαι, and πείθεις being used de conatu (so Zockler in his 2nd edition); cf. προσήλυτον ποιεῖν, Matthew 23:15. Schmiedel, Encycl. Bibl., i., 754, inclines to explain the phrase Χ. ποιῆσαι as a Latinism: Christianum agere, to play the part of a Christian. Weiss sees in the words a gentle irony, as if Agrippa would answer St. Paul's appeal to his belief in the prophets by intimating that it was not so simple a matter to become a Christian, even if one, as a Jew, believed in the prophets. Or we may regard Agrippa as rejecting, not so much in banter as in cold disdain, the enthusiasm of the orator, and adopting the tone of a certain Jewish orthodoxy (Zockler), not, i.e., the indifference of the Roman, but that of the Sadducees to the prophets. The A.V. “almost” must be abandoned, even if we retain γενέσθαι, for ἐν ὀλίγῳ cannot be so rendered, either here or elsewhere in the N.T.; παρʼ ὀλίγον, or ὀλίγου or ὀλίγον δεῖ would be required as the classical expression for “almost”. The best parallel is Ephesians 3:3, ἐν ὀλίγῳ : “in a few words”: so A. and R.V. (cf. 1 Peter 5:12). But if in the next verse we read μεγάλῳ instead of πολλῷ, so R.V. (see critical note), it seems best to understand πόνῳ with ὀλίγῳ, as this noun could fitly stand with both μεγάλῳ and ὀλίγῳ = with little trouble, with little cost. The R.V. rendering of the two verses reads as if πολλῷ was retained in Acts 26:29, whereas μεγάλῳ is the reading adopted in R.V. text. So far as N.T. usage is concerned, ἐν ὀλίγῳ might be rendered “in a short time” (cf. James 4:14; 1 Peter 1:6; Revelation 17:10, so in classical Greek), but this rendering also is excluded by ἐν ὀλίγῳ καὶ ἐν μεγάλῳ in the next verse. Wendt maintains that ἐν ὀλίγῳ may still be rendered “almost”; the phrase is instrumental, as if expressing the thought contained in ὀλίγου δεῖ, and meaning that a little was wanted to attain the aim = almost; so St. Chrysostom, St. Cyril of Jerusalem; Luther, Beza, Grotius = propemodum. The answer of Agrippa, therefore, need not be taken ironically, as by most moderns, but in earnest (cf. Acts 26:32, where his favourable opinion supports this view), although Wendt acknowledges that his confession was only half-hearted, as is seen by his desire to conclude the interview (Wendt, 1888, note, p. 530, and 1899, p. 400, to the same effect, so too Schürer, Jewish People, div. i., vol. ii., p. 198, note). If we read πείθῃ, see critical note, we render “with but little thou art persuading thyself that thou canst make me a Christian,” taking up πείθομαι of Acts 26:26. This reading is adopted by Blass and Belser, but the former takes ἐν ὀλίγῳ as meaning brevi tempore in this verse (so in Plato, Apol., 22 B), but in Acts 26:29 he takes it as = facile, whilst ἐν μεγάλῳ (which he reads) = difficile. Belser, however, takes the phrase ἐν ὀλίγῳ in the same sense in both verses, “with little trouble or pains”. St. Chrysostom thought that the phrase ἐν ὀλίγῳ was used by Agrippa in one sense and by St. Paul in another (so too Lewin, cf. Grimm-Thayer and Plumptre); Blass apparently obliges us to adopt the same view, but there is nothing in the context to support it (Wendt, Belser). Χριστ.: there is nothing strange in this use of the word by Agrippa; he may have become acquainted with it in his knowledge of the Christian movement (see above), and the term could easily have spread from Antioch over the district which he ruled. It is difficult to say in what sense he used the term; and no doubt the shade of meaning which we attach to his employment of it will depend upon the meaning which we give to the rest of his answer a meaning earnest or contemptuous. Thus on the former supposition it is possible that he may have used the word instead of the despised “Nazarene,” to indicate his half-friendly attitude towards Christianity, and his relative recognition of it by connecting it with the name which was cherished by every Jew, although the context shows that he had no intention whatever of allowing Paul's persuasive powers further scope; see Wendt (1899), who points out as against Lipsius that there is nothing unhistorical in the introduction of the name here, as if the writer presupposed that it would be familiar to every Jew. On the other hand, although a Jew, Agrippa, before such an audience, might well have used a term with which the Romans also would probably have been familiar, and if he spoke contemptuously (so Blass, Rendall) he would naturally employ a title which had been given in scorn, and which apparently at this period even the Christians themselves had not accepted; see below, and note on Acts 11:26.