I therefore being in a doubt of this manner of question, asked him whether he would go to Jerusalem and there be judged of these things.
απορουμενος δε εγω την περι τουτου ζητησιν ελεγον ει βουλοιτο πορευεσθαι εις ιερουσαλημ κακει κρινεσθαι περι τουτων
5 Church Fathers comment on this verse
The word ego, “I,” is used emphatically. Zetesis, “inquiry,” means a judicial investigation. Compare NewDocs 4.20, p. 86, which cites part of an edict of Marcus Aurelius found in the marketplace at Athens. It contains many legal terms that occur in Acts, including this one.
King Herod Agrippa was Herod Agrippa II, son of Herod Agrippa I; see Acts ch. 12. He possessed, with the title of king, the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias; Lk 3:1. He was the last king of the Herodian family, with whom that royal line came to an end.
Being in a vassal relationship to Rome, he considered it his duty to congratulate Festus on his new appointment. For this purpose he came to Caesarea soon after Festus entered upon the office of procurator of Judea.
Wishing to show courtesy to his guest, Festus proposed that Herod hear Paul's case. Herod also professed the Hebrew faith and therefore was more capable of understanding the matter than Festus, the Roman procurator. As Festus observed, Paul's accusers disputed with him over certain questions of their own worship of God; vv. 13-27.
During this visit of Agrippa, Festus brought to the attention of his distinguished guest the difficult case of the prisoner Paul. He told Agrippa about the fury aroused throughout the Jewish people at the mere mention of this man’s name, and about the fruitlessness of the trial just concluded. However much the Jews tried to distort the essence of the matter, it was clear that it consisted in subtleties of the Mosaic law. It also concerned the question of “a certain Jesus who had died, whom Paul affirmed to be alive,” and, in general, matters that did not fall under Festus’s jurisdiction.
“Being at a loss how to decide this question,” and so forth. Wishing to present himself in a better light before Agrippa, the procurator speaks falsely. He proposed that Paul be tried in Jerusalem not for this reason, but because he wished to do the Jews a favor (v. 9). Paul understood this and made the procurator understand it (v. 10 ff.).
The statement about Festus's difficulty in deciding the substance of Paul's case is just. Yet it is doubtful that he proposed trial in Jerusalem precisely because he was perplexed, for he did not say this to Paul. One may think it was evident to him that even there, in Jerusalem, Paul's case could not be examined with proper correctness, especially on so great a question: is Jesus alive or not?
This question remains a question for unbelievers even to this day. Even Thomas, the Apostle of Christ, was tormented by it until the Lord Himself assured him. Paul too was tormented by this question until Christ appeared to him and he became Christ's servant.
He said, "Being perplexed about the inquiry concerning this matter," because the examination of such cases truly exceeds the understanding of such a judge. "But if you are perplexed," says Saint John Chrysostom, "why do you send him to Jerusalem?"
"Wishing to present himself in a better light before Agrippa, the procurator tells an untruth. He proposed that Paul be tried in Jerusalem not because he was perplexed, but because he wished to please the Jews; v. 9. Paul understood this and made the procurator understand it; v. 10."
Passages read together with this verse.
Greek text, 17 words with lemma, transliteration and Strong’s number. Tap to expand.
THEOSIS