Become A Christian? (part 3 of 3)

In attempting to understand the wider implications of this package, Christians, or “kristianos” in the Greek, were being identified as such, in contrast to those that were identified as “kaisarianos,” or “Caesar-people.”  In that day, “Christian” was every bit as much a religious title as it was a political identification.  Naturally, there were no delineations between “church” and “state,” and one’s religion was not a private matter of personal conviction.  A Christian was somebody that looked to Jesus of Nazareth, the One that had been crucified on a Roman cross, as Messiah and Lord and King and Son of God. 

Not only was this contrary to all reason (crucified Jews are most assuredly NOT the messiah), but even more importantly, especially as it relates to Paul’s query and Herod’s response, “Lord” and “King” and “Son of God”  were all titles of Caesar, as the Caesar-cult held him up and worshiped him as the son of god (among other things, including master, savior, the one who brought light into a dark world, and order into chaos).  In this situation, it is highly probable that Agrippa’s statement to Paul should be understood along these lines.    

It is quite likely that Agrippa would have been more than aware that proclamations concerning Jesus, by His followers, included the claim that He was the true King and Ruler of the world, and that even Caesar was subject to Him.  It was counter-imperial and subversive statements such as these that would and did get people crucified or thrown to the lions.  At the same time, this also causes the reader to reflect on Paul’s statement about the Messiah being a light to both Israel and the Gentiles, as Caesar Augustus was hailed as the man who had brought the world out of darkness, while the darkness was kept at bay by the “pax Romana” (Roman peace) that was presumed to continue to suffuse light through the world under the dominion of the Caesar’s that followed. 

This created dangerous territory for Agrippa, as he sits here next to the Rome-appointed governor as the Rome-appointed, Rome-supported client-king (one of three in the land of Palestine).  A confession by Agrippa of anything that remotely resembled a belief that what Paul was saying about Jesus was true, was going to be very bad for him, as it could be looked upon as treasonous.  Agrippa could certainly not afford to be identified as a Jesus-person, in contrast to a Caesar-person.  Paul, in what appears to be an understanding of Agrippa’s situation, responds by saying, “I pray to God that whether in a short or a long time not only you but also all those who are listening to me today could become such as I am, except for these chains” (26:29).  “Yes,” Paul says, “I believe everybody should submit to this message of the Gospel, recognizing Jesus as Lord and King.” 

As this story comes to an end, “the king got up, and with him the governor and Bernice and those sitting with them” (26:30).  Understandably, this engagement has given them much to ponder, so “as they were leaving they said to one another, ‘This man is not doing anything deserving death or even imprisonment’.” (26:31)  In this, and in what follows, as “Agrippa said to Festus, ‘This man could have been released if he had not appealed to Caesar’” (26:32), one can almost hear a tacit agreement, from the mouth of Agrippa, with the claims that Paul has made.           

Become A Christian? (part 2 of 3)

Though Paul’s message and its context would most likely not have been unfamiliar to Agrippa, it may very well have been so for Festus.  So he “exclaimed loudly, ‘You have lost your mind, Paul!  Your great learning is driving you insane!’” (26:24b)  Not only does this serve to point out that Paul had a reputation as a learned and well-studied man, which says something for the persuasive power of the case for the Resurrection of Jesus and of the Gospel message itself, but it also points out that all of this talk of the hope in God’s promise, the resurrection of the dead, and of the messiah, was completely lost on this Roman governor.  He was not able to operate inside a 1^st century Jewish mindset that was familiar with all of these terms.  Unfortunately, this is not unlike those in the present time that too often suffer from the same malady in their attempts to correctly approach and understand the message of the New Testament. 

Nevertheless, and undaunted by Festus’ insistence (and attempt at shaming Paul---ironic, as Paul appears to be wholly unconcerned with the honor and shame paradigm and struggle as it related to himself following his Damascus experience) Paul replies, “I have not lost my mind, most excellent Festus” (the use of which could make one think about the “most excellent Theophilus” to whom Luke & Acts are addressed, and thus providing an idea as to the status of the recipient of Luke’s two-part series), “but am speaking true and rational words” (26:25). 

Likewise, keeping in mind that Acts was a literary narrative that was designed to be read as a unit that is consistently and continually building on itself, Paul’s insistence on the fact that his words are both “true and rational” points to the “many convincing proofs” of the third verse of the first chapter of Acts.  The words used for “convincing proofs” imply evidence that could be presented in a courtroom setting as irrefutable proof of the facts of a case.  True and rational indeed.

Paul goes on to add, “For the king knows about these things, and I am speaking freely to him, because I cannot believe that any of these things has escaped his notice, for this was not done in a corner” (26:26).  So not only is Agrippa familiar with the terminology and substance of the things about which Paul is speaking, but Paul implies that Agrippa is also aware of what happened to Jesus, what is being said about Him, and about the violent vendetta that is being pursued against His ever-increasing band of followers and confessors. 

Paul continues and says, “Do you believe the prophets, King Agrippa?  I know that you believe” (26:27).  This would have been standard rhetorical practice in that day, and it works to successfully put Agrippa on the spot.  With this reference to the prophets and Agrippa’s presumed belief in what has been written, it seems that Paul might have some inside information about Agrippa’s stance concerning the claims being made about Jesus.  Agrippa, perhaps taken aback by what Paul has said, defensively and perhaps even nervously replies, “In such a short time are you persuading me to become a Christian?” (26:28) 

This is quite the interesting statement/question that emanates from Paul, and it carries with it some dramatic implications.  This is not about whether Paul was trying to get Agrippa to confess Jesus and so be saved, or to have a personal religious experience, or to convert to a new religion.  This use of “Christian” by Agrippa would probably have caused Festus to perk up his ears.  Christian?  This word was not used to identify someone’s religion or set of privately held beliefs in the hope of the afterlife.  This word was used in a political context.  In that day, the term would identify a person’s loyalties.  It could be a dangerous association. 

Become A Christian? (part 1 of 3)

Agrippa said to Paul, “In such a short time are you persuading me to become a Christian?” – Acts 26:28  (NET)

The setting for this passage is the occasion at which the Apostle Paul is “on trial” in Caesarea.  At this point, he has been there for quite some time.  As Acts informs the reader, Paul had been taken prisoner while in Jerusalem, and later transferred to Caesarea, into the custody of the Roman governor named Felix, with whom Paul seemed to enjoy a cordial relationship.  Felix had been succeeded in his position by a man named Festus. 

Sometime after taking his position, Festus was in Jerusalem.  There, according to Luke’s presentation of the Paul narrative, “the chief priests and most prominent men of the Jews brought formal charges against Paul to him…they urged Festus to summon him (Paul) to Jerusalem, planning an ambush to kill him along the way” (25:2b, 3b).  However, “Festus replied that Paul was being kept at Caesarea, and he himself intended to go there shortly.  ‘So,’ he said, ‘let your leaders to down there with me, and if this man has done anything wrong, they may bring charges against him’.” (25:4-5)  When the accusations and charges were then leveled against Paul in Caesarea, he replied by stating that “I have committed no offense against the Jewish law or against the temple or against Caesar” (25:8).  It should be noted that Paul makes it a point to reference Caesar in relation to the accusations against him.   

While Festus was in Caesarea, “King Agrippa and Bernice arrived…to pay their respects” (25:13b).  This “Agrippa” was “Herod Agrippa,” one of the Idumean, Roman-sanctioned kings of a large region of Palestine.  He was also the final member of the Herodian dynasty.  Undoubtedly finding the situation of Paul to be an interesting one, “Festus explained Paul’s case to the king to get his opinion” (25:14b).  Upon hearing the story, “Agrippa said to Festus, ‘I would also like to hear the man myself’.” (25:22a)   This gives an insight into the mindset and attitude of Agrippa, as it also effectively sets the stage for the events that followed.

Entering upon the scene and taking up a position as a member of the audience of this event, an observer would see that “Agrippa said to Paul, ‘You have permission to speak for yourself’.” (26:1a)  Paul, not surprisingly, seized upon this opportunity to preach the message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ (Jesus is Lord of all).  He spoke of the “hope in the promise made by God to our ancestors” (26:6b), and posed the question of “Why do you people think it is unbelievable that God raises the dead?” (26:8).  This question concerning the raising of the dead makes sense in light of the fact that this hope of resurrection itself was part of the great hope held by the people of Israel.  This is why Paul poses the question in such a way, doing so in relation to his insistence that Jesus was raised from the dead.  Following that, Paul offers testimony concerning his own experience while on his way to Damascus, as he had been on his way to imprison and sentence to death those who were proclaiming this message about Jesus (He was raised from the dead and is Lord of all). 

As one bears in mind that Paul is presenting his case to a king in the Herodian line, at least one of whom (in that line) had proclaimed himself as Israel’s messiah, it is well to remember that Agrippa would have had a more than passing understanding of messianic expectations and their implications.  Therefore, it is easy to understand why Paul says, “so I stand testifying to both small and great, saying nothing except what the prophets and Moses said was going to happen: that the Christ was going to suffer and be the first to rise from the dead, to proclaim light both to our people and to the Gentiles” (26:22b).  This calling of Jesus “Christ” or “Messiah” was significant, in that Agrippa was well aware what was implied by such a title, especially in relation to the proclamation of a resurrection, as in the minds of many, it pointed to the exaltation of Israel and its messiah above all nations, including Rome and its Caesar.