What is the meaning of Acts 26:9? So then – “So then” connects Paul’s present testimony with the evidence he has just laid out before King Agrippa (Acts 26:2-8). – It signals a logical conclusion: because Paul once shared the same skepticism Agrippa feels, his coming change of heart carries weight (cf. Acts 22:3-5; Galatians 1:13-14). – Like Stephen’s “therefore” in Acts 7:51, Paul uses the phrase to bridge past Jewish history with the gospel’s present claims. I too was convinced – Paul admits he was “convinced,” not merely curious. His certainty mirrored the Sanhedrin’s certainty (Acts 23:6-9). – Philippians 3:4-6 shows how credentials fed that conviction: Hebrew of Hebrews, Pharisee, zealous for the Law. – His confession underscores that sincere belief can still be sincerely wrong (John 16:2). that I ought to do all I could – “Ought” speaks of moral duty; Paul believed persecution was service to God (John 16:2; Galatians 1:13). – “All I could” reveals the exhaustive measures he took: • Voting for executions (Acts 26:10). • Imprisoning saints (Acts 8:3). • Traveling to foreign cities (Acts 26:11). – His zeal sets up the magnitude of grace later displayed (1 Timothy 1:13-14). to oppose the name – “The name” stands for the person and authority of Jesus (Acts 4:12; Colossians 3:17). – Opposition to the name equals opposition to God’s redemptive plan (Acts 5:38-39). – Paul’s fury against believers (Acts 9:1) shows sin’s hostility toward Christ’s lordship (Romans 8:7). of Jesus of Nazareth – Using the earthly identifier “Nazareth” highlights how skeptics viewed Jesus as merely a Galilean (John 1:46). – For Paul, the title once summarized perceived blasphemy; after conversion it became the proclamation of Messiahship (Acts 9:20-22). – The contrast mirrors Nathanael’s surprise in John 1:49 and forecasts every believer’s confession that “Jesus Christ is Lord” (Philippians 2:11). summary Acts 26:9 records Paul’s candid admission that he once saw militant opposition to Jesus as a sacred duty. His former certainty, grounded in religious zeal and tradition, magnifies the grace that later transformed him. By tracing each phrase, we see how earnest conviction, when misaligned with God’s truth, leads to opposition against the very Savior who offers redemption. |
    |