Then Agrippa said to Paul, You are permitted to speak for yourself. Then Paul stretched forth the hand, and answered for himself:…
I. WHAT AGRIPPA KNEW (ver. 3) — the questions concerning which Paul was accused. The first requisite in a judge is knowledge, without this sincerity, impartiality, etc., are wasted. It is not too much to demand, therefore, that those who sit in judgment on Christianity should first of all be sure of their facts. But how often is this requisite ignored.
II. WHAT THE JEWS KNEW. Paul's consistency (ver. 4, 5). It was a bold thing to draw upon the knowledge of his adversaries. But Paul was confident that from all they knew of him they could prefer no true charge against him. Our manner of life has been known for long by many — neighbours, friends, relatives. How many of us could make this bold appeal?
III. WHAT PAUL KNEW.
1. That he had met with Jesus.
2. That he was turned from darkness to light, from Pharisaism to Christianity.
3. That he received a worldwide mission.
4. That he was obedient to the heavenly call: These were not fancies, dreams, but facts of consciousness. The Christian argument is based upon experience. Other evidences stand in the second rank.
IV. WHAT FESTUS THOUGHT HE KNEW — that Paul was mad. Which was simply a confession of ignorance. He could have satisfied himself about what Paul stated, but did not care to trouble himself about "such manner of questions," consequently their strangeness to him suggested insanity on the part of the man who knew them true. A common trick today.
V. WHAT AGRIPPA MIGHT HAVE KNOWN — what it was to be a Christian; but like many others refused to embrace the opportunity.
VI. WHAT ALL WERE OBLIGED TO KNOW (ver. 31). What a testimony after these repeated investigations.
(J. W. Burn.)
Parallel VersesKJV: Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Thou art permitted to speak for thyself. Then Paul stretched forth the hand, and answered for himself: