What does Acts 26:5 mean?
Paul is explaining why the Sanhedrin hates him, to an audience in Caesarea Maritima. His critics claim Paul teaches that Jews do not have to circumcise their sons, that he desecrated the temple by inviting a Gentile to enter, and that he causes riots (Acts 21:20–21, 27–30). Both Paul and Governor Festus know the Sanhedrin has no proof or witnesses and that Paul is innocent (Acts 25:5–7, 18–20).The real problem has its roots in Paul's early life. Although born in Tarsus, he was raised in Jerusalem under the tutelage of the famous Pharisee rabbi Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). As a Pharisee, Paul grew up believing that the dead would be raised at judgment. As a devout Pharisee, Paul carefully followed the Mosaic law as well as the extra-biblical regulations. He even violently suppressed the new church, hunting Jesus-followers wherever they may go (Acts 8:1–3; 9:1–2).
It was on one of those hunting expeditions that Jesus revealed Himself to Paul and claimed him to spread His message of forgiveness to Jews and Gentiles (Acts 9:3–19). Now, Paul preaches not just the future general resurrection, but the past physical resurrection of the Sanhedrin's mortal enemy: Jesus of Nazareth. Paul, the Sanhedrin's attack dog, has betrayed them.
Acts 26:1–11 contains Paul's account of his life before encountering Jesus Christ. He speaks to Governor Festus, King Agrippa II, and the military and civil leadership of Caesarea Maritima. Before conversion, Paul absorbed training as a devout Pharisee, including passionate devotion to the Mosaic law. His beliefs led him to zealously hunt Jesus-followers, even voting that they be executed if they did not deny Christ. Everything changed when he tracked Christians to Damascus.
Acts 26 records Paul's testimony before the noblemen of Caesarea Maritima, as well as their reactions. He explains that Jewish leaders want him dead because he once persecuted the church, but now believes Jesus rose from the dead and has been spreading that message. Governor Festus thinks Paul has gone mad. King Agrippa II, however, finds his story compelling. They realize that had Paul not appealed to a higher Roman court, they could have let him go.
