Acts 26 31

Acts 26:31 kjv

And when they were gone aside, they talked between themselves, saying, This man doeth nothing worthy of death or of bonds.

Acts 26:31 nkjv

and when they had gone aside, they talked among themselves, saying, "This man is doing nothing deserving of death or chains."

Acts 26:31 niv

After they left the room, they began saying to one another, "This man is not doing anything that deserves death or imprisonment."

Acts 26:31 esv

And when they had withdrawn, they said to one another, "This man is doing nothing to deserve death or imprisonment."

Acts 26:31 nlt

As they went out, they talked it over and agreed, "This man hasn't done anything to deserve death or imprisonment."

Acts 26 verses

Acts 26 31 Meaning

Acts 26:31 records the private consensus among the Roman governor Festus, King Agrippa, and Bernice, along with their companions, following Paul's defense. After withdrawing to deliberate, they unanimously agreed that Paul was innocent of any crime under Roman law that would warrant a death sentence or even imprisonment. This verse marks a crucial legal pronouncement confirming Paul's civil blamelessness in the eyes of Roman authorities, distinguishing his case as a matter of religious dispute rather than a criminal offense.

Acts 26 31 Context

Acts chapter 26 records Paul's eloquent and passionate defense before King Agrippa II, Bernice, and the Roman governor Festus in Caesarea. Paul, previously brought before Governor Felix, and now Festus, has appealed his case to Caesar, necessitating this hearing to establish an official charge or reason for his transfer to Rome. Paul recounts his Jewish heritage, his zealous persecution of Christians, his dramatic conversion experience on the Damascus road, and his subsequent call by Jesus to be a witness to both Jews and Gentiles, proclaiming repentance and faith. He explains that his current imprisonment stems directly from this mission and his proclamation of Christ's resurrection. Festus, hearing of Paul's testimony concerning resurrection, famously interrupted, thinking Paul was mad. However, Paul calmly asserted his sanity, directing his message particularly to Agrippa, whose Jewish background made him more likely to understand the Messianic prophecies Paul referenced. This verse immediately follows Paul's direct challenge to Agrippa regarding the prophets. The context reveals a situation where the highest local Roman authorities and a client king are convinced of Paul's legal innocence concerning Roman law, contrasting sharply with the relentless and religiously motivated accusations from the Jewish leaders.

Acts 26 31 Word analysis

• And (καὶ, kai): A simple conjunction connecting the prior discussion to this ensuing action. It marks a shift from Paul's direct appeal and Agrippa's reaction to the private deliberation of the rulers.
• when they had withdrawn (ἀναχωρήσαντες, anachōrēsantes): An aorist participle meaning "having gone away," "having retired," or "having departed." It signifies their movement from the main assembly, allowing for a private consultation, free from the immediate presence of Paul or public scrutiny. This indicates a formal or semi-formal deliberation process.
• they spoke (ἐλάλουν, elaloun): Imperfect indicative, meaning "they were speaking" or "they began to speak." The imperfect tense suggests an ongoing, deliberative conversation among themselves, emphasizing the process of reaching a consensus.
• to one another (πρὸς ἀλλήλους, pros allēlous): Denotes mutual address, reinforcing the idea of a private discussion solely among the judicial and royal entourage present, as opposed to addressing Paul or the wider audience.
• saying (λέγοντες, legontes): Present participle, "saying," introduces the content of their conversation and decision.
• ‘This man (ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος, ho anthrōpos houtos): Literally "the man this," referring directly to Paul, who they had just heard. The demonstrative pronoun highlights their focus on him and his specific case.
• is doing (πράσσει, prassei): Present indicative, "he does" or "he practices/commits." The present tense signifies his ongoing state or actions that, according to them, do not meet the criteria for punishment.
• nothing (οὐδὲν, ouden): A strong negation meaning "absolutely nothing." It emphatically dismisses all accusations concerning civil offenses, demonstrating a complete lack of grounds for Roman legal action against Paul.
• to deserve (ἄξιον, axion): An adjective meaning "worthy of," "deserving," or "fitting." It implies a legal standard by which an action's consequence (death or imprisonment) is measured. Paul's actions do not meet this standard for the alleged crimes.
• death (θανάτου, thanatou): Genitive case of "death," indicating the gravest possible punishment under Roman law, a capital offense. This demonstrates the serious nature of the accusations Jewish leaders brought against Paul, despite their lack of validity.
• or (ἢ, ē): A disjunctive particle, presenting an alternative consequence.
• imprisonment (δεσμῶν, desmōn): Genitive plural of "bonds" or "chains," here used metonymically for imprisonment itself. It represents a lesser but still significant form of Roman punishment. The plural may suggest various forms of restraint or confinement.

Words-group by words-group analysis:

• "And when they had withdrawn": This phrase highlights the formal process of deliberation, separate from public view. It underscores the weight and seriousness with which Festus, Agrippa, and Bernice considered Paul's case, following standard judicial protocol to confer privately before delivering a verdict or making a judgment.
• "they spoke to one another, saying": This indicates a shared, collective dialogue. The group's discussion wasn't a debate, but an arriving at a common, unanimous understanding. This unanimity adds significant weight to their finding of Paul's innocence.
• "This man is doing nothing": A decisive statement of non-culpability. The focus on "this man" (Paul) ensures their judgment is personal and direct. "Nothing" unequivocally negates all civil charges leveled against him.
• "to deserve death or imprisonment": This directly addresses the two primary outcomes that Jewish accusers desired and Roman justice might apply. The specific mention of "death" signifies the gravity of the false charges, while "imprisonment" covers any lesser, but still severe, punishment. The absence of both legally exonerates Paul in the Roman context. This highlights the repeated pattern in Acts where Roman authorities find no criminal offense in the actions of Christ's followers.

Acts 26 31 Bonus section

This verse subtly reveals a key theme of Acts: the vindication of Christianity as a legitimate and non-seditious movement within the Roman Empire. Luke carefully constructs narratives where Roman officials, time and again, pronounce early Christian figures like Paul, and even Jesus himself (through Pilate's repeated declarations), innocent of crimes against Rome. This serves as an apologetic to Theophilus and other potential Roman readers, showing that their faith, while revolutionary in its spiritual claims, was not a political threat. The private nature of this consultation among the authorities ensures an honest assessment, devoid of public pressure or spectacle. Their collective judgment further isolated the conflict to theological disagreement rather than criminal activity, thereby facilitating Paul's appeal and eventual journey to the capital city, Rome, where the Gospel's message would be firmly established. This divine maneuvering through Roman bureaucracy highlights God's sovereignty over earthly powers, directing events to fulfill His ultimate purpose of global evangelization.

Acts 26 31 Commentary

Acts 26:31 offers a definitive, albeit private, verdict from high Roman and royal authorities regarding Paul's legal status. Festus, Agrippa, and Bernice, after listening to Paul's extensive defense, found no grounds under Roman law to accuse him of a capital crime or even a lesser offense warranting imprisonment. This statement is profoundly significant as it underscores the consistent position of Roman officialdom throughout Acts: the burgeoning Christian movement, as represented by Paul, did not pose a threat to the civil order or laws of the Roman Empire. The conflicts surrounding Paul were internal Jewish religious disputes, not criminal matters according to Roman jurisprudence. This verdict from such prominent figures—a Roman governor, a client king, and a queen—further legitimized Paul's appeal to Caesar and positioned Christianity as legally benign, contrary to the slander and accusations of his Jewish opponents. It serves as a vital piece of evidence for Luke's apologetic aim, demonstrating Christianity's innocence and securing Paul's trajectory toward Rome to preach the Gospel there.