Sunday School Lesson
June 30
Lesson 5 (KJV)
Fearless Witness
Devotional Reading: Philippians 3:1–14
Background Scripture: Acts 26:1–11
Acts 26:1–11
1 Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Thou art permitted to speak for thyself. Then Paul stretched forth the hand, and answered for himself:
2 I think myself happy, king Agrippa, because I shall answer for myself this day before thee touching all the things whereof I am accused of the Jews: 3 Especially because I know thee to be expert in all customs and questions which are among the Jews: wherefore I beseech thee to hear me patiently. 4 My manner of life from my youth, which was at the first among mine own nation at Jerusalem, know all the Jews;
5 Which knew me from the beginning, if they would testify, that after the most straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee.
6 And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers:
7 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.
8 Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?
9 I verily thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.
10 Which thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them.
11 And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.
Key Text
Now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers:—Acts 26:6
Hope in the Lord
Unit I: Experiencing Hope
Lessons 1–5
Lesson Aims
After participating in this lesson, each learner will be able to:
1. Summarize Paul’s actions (as Saul) before his conversion.
2. Explain why Paul characterized the Pharisees as a “sect.”
3. Identify the most important “takeaway” from the lesson to practice personally.
How to Say It
Caesarea Maritima Sess-uh-ree-uh Mar-uh-tee-muh.
Gamaliel Guh-may-lih-ul or Guh-may-lee-al.
Herodians Heh-roe-dee-unz.
Introduction
A. The Rules of Debate
The rules of debate team were simple: one team defended a stated proposition while the other team opposed it. The rules prevented either side from changing an argument or modifying a position. A team could bring more evidence to support a position, but an unsupported argument was not to deter the debaters. By pointing out the other side’s weaknesses, a team could put points on the board and hope to sway the judge’s decision in its favor. It was unthinkable for a team to admit that its perspective had changed because the other team had a stronger argument! Ultimately, debate team was not about which side was “right”; rather, it was about debating skills as they contributed to winning or losing.
We often see the same focus in today’s debates, which frequently come in the form of point-counterpoint sound bites on the evening news. If such “debates” ever change the mind of someone prominent, that person is dismissed as having “flip-flopped.” Yet it should not be disqualifying to admit when we have changed our minds based on changed awareness of facts. If anything, the person who has shifted away from a certain viewpoint is demonstrating an openness to new information. The apostle Paul was such a person.
B. Lesson Context
The book of Acts relates one of the most significant mindset changes made by an individual throughout history. That change involved a man named Saul, who was a deadly enemy of Christianity at first (Acts 7:60b–8:3). But after an encounter with the risen Lord, Saul became Christianity’s chief proponent. The specifics of how the change came about are recorded in Acts 9:1–19; 22:3–21; and 26:12–18. Today’s lesson is the preface to the third of these accounts.
Saul was converted to Christianity in about AD 34. He subsequently traveled around the Mediterranean world on three missionary journeys, as recounted in Acts 12:25–14:28; 15:36–18:22; and 18:23–21:9. Perhaps desiring to leave his old identity in the past, Saul became known as Paul early in these journeys (13:9). Shortly after the third journey ended in Caesarea Maritima, Paul traveled down to Jerusalem. There he was sighted by enemies who incited a riot to silence him (21:17–29). Paul’s subsequent arrest undoubtedly saved his life (21:30–36). The year was probably AD 58.
After another riot or near-riot, Paul used his Roman citizenship to avoid being flogged (Acts 22:22–29). An inquest and a murder plot ensued (22:30–23:22), so Paul was transferred under heavy guard to Caesarea Maritima—about 75 miles road distance from Jerusalem—for trial under Governor Felix (23:23–24:26). That trial was inconclusive, and Paul was held in prison for two years until Governor Festus replaced Felix (24:27).
That change in leadership resulted in another trial (Acts 25:1–9), Paul’s appeal to Caesar (25:10–12), high-level consultation (25:13–22), and appearance before King Agrippa II (25:23–27). That’s the immediate backdrop to today’s lesson; the year was about AD 60.
I. Paul Begins His Defense
(Acts 26:1–8)
A. What Agrippa Knew (vv. 1–3)
1. Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Thou art permitted to speak for thyself. Then Paul stretched forth the hand, and answered for himself.
Agrippa is short for Herod Agrippa II, the last of the line of Herodian kings. They ruled Judea as the clients of Rome. Paul had reason to fear this king: his father, Herod Agrippa I, had arrested and killed the apostle James (Acts 12:2).
But Paul was no novice at interacting with authorities. By this time, his 26 years as Christianity’s chief proponent had made him a seasoned debater (examples: Acts 9:29; 13:45; 17:1–5, 16–34; 18:4–6; 19:8–10). Thus, he was practiced in the habits of defending his actions, counteracting personal attacks, and dividing his opposition (23:6–10).
Paul’s case was difficult for civic authorities to grapple with, somewhat like the case of Jesus was 30 years earlier. The authorities were primarily interested in maintaining law and order. But how was order to be maintained when it involved bodily harm due to issues of personal religious belief and practice? Should the authorities insert themselves into such disputes, or should they leave it up to the Jews and their own religious authorities to sort things out (compare John 18:31; Acts 18:14–17; 25:18–21)?
Paul was well aware of this point of tension, and he used his Roman citizenship as leverage in his defense on at least two occasions (Acts 16:37–38; 22:23–23:30). We also see a personal characteristic of Paul at this point as he gestures with his hand in some way to open his defense (compare 13:16; 21:4).
What Do You Think?
Do Christians need to wait for an authority to give permission to talk about our faith? Why or why not?
Digging Deeper
What attitude(s) might make others curious to hear what you have to say, whether or not you have “permission” to speak?
2. I think myself happy, king Agrippa, because I shall answer for myself this day before thee touching all the things whereof I am accused of the Jews.
Exhibiting deference to a judge is wise, and Paul indicates that he is happy to do so. (We note that the word translated “happy” is more often translated “blessed.”) His defense will comprehensively address all the things the Jews have accused him of. Those charges to this point in the narrative are that Paul has (1) been causing divisions among the Jews and (2) desecrated the temple (Acts 24:5–6). More accusations will be mentioned below.
3. Especially because I know thee to be expert in all customs and questions which are among the Jews: wherefore I beseech thee to hear me patiently.
Paul acknowledges Agrippa’s familiarity with Jewish matters, as Paul does again in Acts 26:26. Herod’s family was outwardly Jewish. They made a point of following aspects of the Law of Moses. But it was equally obvious they were more interested in being loyal to Rome.
Even so, Paul showed him respect and asked politely to be heard. Paul probably knew that Agrippa’s marriage to that man’s own sister was not lawful. That sister, Bernice, is mentioned in Acts 25:13, 23; 26:30; therefore, she was present to hear Paul. Years earlier, Herod Antipas had had John the Baptist beheaded, at the instigation of his wife Herodias, because of John’s declaration of the immoral nature of their marriage (Matthew 14:1–12). Paul does not travel down this same road!
What Do You Think?
What can be learned from Paul’s defense of himself about the importance of being able to give a clear explanation of one’s faith?
Digging Deeper
What opportunities do you have to practice communicating your faith with respect and humility?
B. What the Jews Knew (vv. 4–5)
4–5. My manner of life from my youth, which was at the first among mine own nation at Jerusalem, know all the Jews; which knew me from the beginning, if they would testify, that after the most straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee.
Paul’s manner of life in being brought up as a Jewish boy was beyond reproach. A detailed account of that upbringing is found in Philippians 3:5–6. By mentioning his upbringing in Jerusalem, Paul noted his previous status as an “insider.” He had been zealous for his faith (Galatians 1:14). Although born in Tarsus in Cilicia, Paul was “brought up in [Jerusalem] at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers” (Acts 22:3). Furthermore, Paul described himself as a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee (23:6).
The word translated sect is something of a chameleon, able to “change color” depending on the context. The word in the original language appears nine times in the New Testament, and it may take on a positive, neutral, or negative overtone in its various possible meanings of “faction,” “sect,” “school,” or “heresy.” Along these lines, the first-century Jewish historian Josephus mentions five branches of Judaism of his day: Pharisees (right-wing formalists), Sadducees (left-wing aristocrats), Essenes (ultra-right-wing purists), Zealots (militants), and Herodians (supporters of the Herods).
What Do You Think?
What are some examples of hopes and dreams your ancestors passed on to you?
Digging Deeper
How can you pass along your hope and faith to future generations?
C. What the Accusation Was (vv. 6–8)
6–7. 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.
What Paul is referring to in his three uses of the word hope in these two verses is found in Acts 23:6–8; 24:15: The hope of the promise is the resurrection of the dead. The fathers are the patriarchs: Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. According to Hebrews 11:10, 13, their faith in things far off was an example of faith. Resurrection was viewed as a reward that Jews were seeking, which is why they gave such devoted service to God day and night (Hebrews 11:35). Since what Paul is being accused of by the Jews is part of Jewish belief, there is no wrongdoing—at least from the viewpoint of the Pharisees’ doctrine (Acts 23:8). What drew the ire of the Pharisees is Paul’s claim that the resurrection of Jesus is the basis of the future resurrection of people (1 Corinthians 15).
8. Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?
This rhetorical question binds together even tighter the “hope” of the previous two verses with belief in resurrection. Again, the basis of Paul’s claim is the fact that the resurrection of Jesus anticipates and guarantees our own (compare Acts 25:19). In this light, Paul could mean, “Since you, King Agrippa, accept that God will raise the dead, why is it so strange that God started with Jesus?” Or perhaps Paul is still referring to a belief in the general resurrection. In any case, Paul is seeking common ground with his audience, which is an important strategy when trying to persuade.
What Do You Think?
How does your hope in the resurrection help you face the future with optimism and peace?
Digging Deeper
How could you respond to someone who finds it difficult to believe in the resurrection of the dead?
II. Paul Summarizes His Error
(Acts 26:9–11)
A. Opposed the Name (v. 9)
9. I verily thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.
The designation Jesus of Nazareth occurs more than a dozen times in the New Testament. Indeed, Jesus identified himself this way to Paul (as Saul) on the road to Damascus (Acts 22:8). People who lived in ancient times did not have last names, so they had to be identified in other ways, particularly if a person’s name was common. The name Jesus was fairly common, being an adaptation of the Old Testament name Joshua, meaning “save”—thus the need to use other methods to distinguish one person from another who had the same name (compare Matthew 27:56; John 14:22). The designator used for Jesus was a fulfillment of prophecy (Matthew 2:23).
Designators can be used to cast something or someone in a positive or negative light. In the case of Jesus, the designator “of Nazareth” was probably used by opponents in a negative, dismissive sense, given the poor reputation of that town (compare John 1:46; 19:19; Acts 6:14). We might also propose that believers embraced the designator as a term of honor and devotion (3:6; 4:10). There’s also the use of this designator by a third category of people: those who think they’re on Jesus’ side, but are not (Luke 21:8).
We may also see a negative use of the name of the town of Nazareth applied to Christians in general in Acts 24:5. There, Paul’s opponents label him as “a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.” Believers, however, seemed to have preferred to be known as “Christians” (Acts 11:26) or “this way” (9:2; 19:9, 23; 24:22).
B. Persecuted Christians (vv. 10–11)
10. Which thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them.
There is a subtle connection between this verse and the one just before it that we should not miss. In the previous verse, Paul spoke of having done “many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth”; that is what he is referring to when he admits the actions we see in the verse before us. To persecute or neglect Jesus’ followers is to persecute or neglect Jesus personally (compare Matthew 25:45; Acts 22:7–8; 26:14–15).
Prior to his experience on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:1–9), Paul (as Saul) was eager to defend the Jewish faith against the supposed threat of Christians (7:60b–8:3). The arrest and crucifixion of Jesus had been an attempt to protect vested interests (see especially John 11:48). Additionally, a pagan attempt to maintain a status quo is seen Acts 19:23–41. Human nature seems rather predictable when vested interests are threatened! Paul’s persecution of Christians was so notorious that his infamous reputation had spread at least as far as Damascus (Acts 9:13–14; compare 11:19), a road distance of some 225 miles from Jerusalem. Earlier, Paul had publicly admitted his culpability in the stoning death of Stephen (22:19–20; compare 7:54–60).
The phrase I gave my voice against them would seem to imply that Paul (as Saul) possessed voting authority concerning punishments meted out, even though he was “young” (Acts 7:58). On the other hand, this phrase could be a rhetorical device to indicate Paul’s sense of responsibility in intending to highlight his role. In either case, the phrase received authority from the chief priests lines up with Acts 9:1–2 in leaving no doubt that Paul had been authorized to stamp out this new belief system.
Tact—The Lost Art?
A dictionary definition of the word tact is “the ability to do or say things without offending or upsetting other people.” This ability seems to be something of a lost art today. This seems particularly true of posts on social media.
Influencing or correcting others is tricky, particularly regarding those who have more power and authority than we do. We want to speak the facts truthfully but do so in a way that gains us a hearing. The axiom “It’s not what you say, but how you say it” applies, although the word just should be added before the word what.
Paul’s interaction with King Agrippa illustrates this. Paul waited for permission to speak rather than interrupting. He acknowledged the king’s authority and knowledge of Jewish customs. Paul spoke with humility, admitting his own mistakes. How might you apply this example in your life? —A. W.
11. And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.
To his horror, Paul had been harming people who were in the right. He was so threatening that many could not believe his change of heart at first (Acts 9:26). Paul carried the weight of this sin for the rest of his days (1 Corinthians 15:9).
This admission reveals the extent of the Jewish leaders’ plan to root out Christians; to be punished in synagogues was a continuing fulfillment of what Jesus predicted in Matthew 10:17. For Christians to attend synagogue shows they still considered themselves Jewish, even while accepting Jesus as Messiah.
The author does not clarify the meaning of blaspheme as used here. But examining the Greek word’s approximately 35 uses in the New Testament, we get the idea that it is equivalent to our modern word slander. Such speech results in the slandered person being reviled or defamed. Forcing a Christian to deny Christ was undoubtedly one of the goals of the persecution campaign of Paul (as Saul). We note in passing that the phrase strange cities refers to foreign cities; compare how the words strangers and foreigners are used almost as parallel terms in Ephesians 2:19.
We may think that Paul had an odd way of defending himself before King Agrippa! What good did it do to admit to the bloody and oppressive details of his former way of life? But this method of beginning his defense at trial served an important purpose—a purpose Paul had two years to perfect (Acts 24:27). That purpose seems to have been to convince Herod Agrippa that a man who would admit doing such horrible things wouldn’t be lying about anything else.
As Agrippa listened to Paul, one cannot help but imagine that the testimony brought up memories of the persecution of Christians conducted by his father, King Herod Agrippa I, about 16 years prior (Acts 12:1–4). The son knew all too well the blood on his father’s hands. And now here was someone by the name of Paul admitting to doing much the same thing!
This fact introduced complications. If it had been OK for his father to do such things, was it not permissible for Paul to have done so as well, as long as he didn’t violate Roman law (compare John 18:31)? But more importantly, what could have accounted for such a massive change of heart—a change so profound that Paul’s men who were once colleagues were now his deadly enemies? Paul hinted at the answer in Acts 26:8 (see comments on which above). He explains the reason in the text that follows the passage of today’s lesson: Paul’s intent is to vindicate himself and evangelize (Acts 26:28–29).
On Being an Extremist
A radio commentator was heard to remark that politics in the democracy of his country was fought “between the 40-yard lines.” By this, he was using imagery from American football to illustrate the point that extremists usually don’t win elections and don’t have much influence. The area between the 40-yard lines is midfield. It is the area of “the moderates.” To engage in the political struggle in this area is to make modest, incremental changes, not drastic ones. The majority of voters usually fear extremists and won’t elect them.
Indeed, history witnesses to the failure of many extremists (examples: Acts 5:36–37). Some extremists succeed for a while as they do a great deal of harm; that was Saul before he became Paul. But some extremists do a massive amount of good; that was the renamed and recommissioned Paul.
The currents of history sometimes work against change (Amos 5:13). But sometimes they demand it (1 Chronicles 12:23, 32). When such times come, every Christian must be ready to do his or her part, whether big (as in Esther 4:14) or small (consider Jason in Acts 17:7). How are you preparing for your part? And how will you know that the timing is right in that regard? —R. L. N.
Conclusion
A. Greatest Shame, Greatest Strength
All believers who have turned to God were once God’s enemies (Romans 5:10). This means having opposed what God was doing. God desires to make peace, find reconciliation, and move forward in life’s newness. Unlike participating on the debate team mentioned earlier, we should seek reconciliation rather than victory. And we don’t have to look very hard to find it—it’s right there in the Bible. See Romans 5:11; 2 Corinthians 5:18–20; Ephesians 2:14–22; and Colossians 1:19–23. Paul, the onetime deadly enemy of the church, wrote all those texts on reconciliation.
Though Paul was ashamed of his past behavior, this did not hinder his ministry. One result was a certain set of sad ironies in that ministry. He who had had blindness inflicted upon him (Acts 9:8–9) found it necessary to inflict it on another in turn (13:11). He who beat others (22:19) was in turn beaten (16:22). He who imprisoned others (8:3) was himself imprisoned—more than once (16:23; etc.). He who approved the death of others (8:1) was eventually executed for that same faith.
Through it all, he followed the call of God to bring the gospel to the ends of the earth. In what ways can you follow in Paul’s footsteps?
What Do You Think?
When have you acted out of deep conviction only to repent of your deeds later?
Digging Deeper
What did you learn from the experience that helps you avoid a repeat offense?
B. Prayer
Father in Heaven, we were once Your enemies, but You sent Jesus to die for our sins. Make us skillful in communicating Your reconciliation to others. Make us eager to make disciples rather than to win arguments. We pray this in Jesus’ name. Amen.
C. Thought to Remember
If God is for us, no one can stand against us!
Standard Publishing. KJV Standard Lesson Commentary® 2023-2024 (pp. 1011-1032). David C Cook. Kindle Edition.