Acts 26:9Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Then he tells how he persecuted the Christians, and this confirms what he has said. He calls the high priests and foreign cities as witnesses. "I myself," he says, "thought that I ought to do many things against the name of Jesus of Nazareth." That is, he thought he should act in this way because he was not among Christ's disciples, but among His enemies. This witness is therefore all the more trustworthy. He used countless means against the believers, compelled them to blaspheme, and armed everything against them, both cities and rulers. Yet after doing this himself, he suddenly changed. He tells how he persecuted, and he speaks in detail. He brings the priests as witnesses, and says that this even happened in foreign cities.

The speech of the Apostle Paul at this trial, in the presence of King Agrippa, is likewise a defense, just as his speech before the Jews on the steps of the Jerusalem fortress was. But now the Apostle spoke with greater freedom than he had then, before a crowd of fanatics. Since he was not interrupted and could speak fully, he defended himself in such a way that he also bore solemn witness to Christ. He testified that Christ had died and risen, according to the prophecy of Moses and the other ancient prophets. He also called his hearers to repentance and conversion to God.

Therefore he asked them to hear him patiently, and once more recounted the well-known story of his conversion. He had turned from being a strict and fanatical Pharisee to faith. He declared that his people's messianic hope had already truly been fulfilled in Jesus the Nazarene. At first he had fiercely persecuted His followers. But Christ personally revealed His glory to him and brought him to know that He had risen from the dead. Why might this faith have seemed implausible even to his hearers? At first it had seemed so to him as well. Yet how could he withstand the personal testimony of Christ Himself? How could he disobey the heavenly voice? That voice sent him to open the eyes of both Jews and Gentiles, so that they might turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God. Thus, through faith in Jesus, they might receive forgiveness of sins and a portion among the saints. He was not disobedient to this command; for detailed interpretation, see Acts 22:3-21.

In the question, "Is the resurrection of the dead incredible?" the Apostle again takes up the interrupted thread of his account. He returns to the manner of his life and activity before his conversion to Christ, and to the conversion itself. It is true, I myself never believed that Jesus of Nazareth had risen from the dead and was the promised Messiah. He does not mean that he had never believed that almighty God could raise the dead. He always held that faith as a strict Pharisee; see verse 5 and Acts 25:6ff. Because of this unbelief, I thought, or it seemed to me, that I was obliged to act much against the name of Jesus of Nazareth. I thought this was my direct duty: to oppose the confession of His name; cf. the note on Acts 4:10. I opposed Him as Messiah, as Lord and God.

The abrupt transition to the name of Jesus of Nazareth shows that the Apostle had spoken of Him earlier, when he spoke of the resurrection. Now he begins to speak of his former hostile relation to Christ. Through his own example, he wished to bring his hearers nearer to a possible reception of faith in Christ Jesus. He emphasizes the special fury of his persecution, evidently to show that every kind of distance from Christ can pass away. This happens when people desire it, and when the Lord blesses them to become His own. According to the explanation of blessed Theophylact, the Apostle speaks as though saying: "Incited by the devil and the demons, many, like madmen, did many absurd things. But perhaps I was more possessed than they, when by my own will I did evil.