Acts 26 32

Acts 26:32 kjv

Then said Agrippa unto Festus, This man might have been set at liberty, if he had not appealed unto Caesar.

Acts 26:32 nkjv

Then Agrippa said to Festus, "This man might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar."

Acts 26:32 niv

Agrippa said to Festus, "This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar."

Acts 26:32 esv

And Agrippa said to Festus, "This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar."

Acts 26:32 nlt

And Agrippa said to Festus, "He could have been set free if he hadn't appealed to Caesar."

Acts 26 verses

Acts 26 32 Meaning

Acts 26:32 articulates a clear verdict of Paul's legal innocence from the perspective of both Roman authority (Festus) and an expert on Jewish affairs (Agrippa). It explicitly states that had Paul not exercised his right as a Roman citizen to appeal his case directly to Caesar, he would have been eligible for immediate release, as no crime deserving of imprisonment or death was found against him. This verdict underscores that Paul's "offense" was theological rather than criminal in nature, arising from religious disputes concerning Jewish law and the resurrection, not rebellion against Rome or any secular crime.

Acts 26 32 Context

Acts 26:32 concludes Paul's defense before King Agrippa II and the Roman procurator Festus in Caesarea Maritima. Festus, recently arrived in Judea (Acts 24:27), had inherited Paul's unresolved case from Felix. Seeking clarity, especially regarding the religious intricacies beyond Roman law, Festus presented Paul to Agrippa, who possessed extensive knowledge of Jewish customs and scriptures. Paul seized this opportunity to share his personal testimony of conversion and resurrection hope, which formed the core of his message. Throughout Paul's trials, despite vehement Jewish accusations of sedition and desecration, Roman officials consistently found no evidence of civil wrongdoing. This verse comes after Agrippa has listened attentively to Paul's articulate defense, confirming that even the king finds Paul innocent according to Roman legal standards and recognizes that the real issue is theological, not criminal. The appeal to Caesar, made earlier by Paul to escape plots against his life and to pursue his divine commission to bear witness in Rome (Acts 25:9-12), became the overriding factor determining his continued detainment and journey.

Acts 26 32 Word analysis

• Then Agrippa said to Festus: This highlights the immediate culmination of their discussion after hearing Paul. King Agrippa, having greater familiarity with Jewish matters, gives his conclusive assessment to the Roman governor Festus. This serves to validate Paul's innocence from two distinct authoritative perspectives: the Jewish King and the Roman Procurator.
• “This man”: Refers to Paul. The simple address underscores the objective, legal assessment of his character and actions in relation to Roman law.
• could have been set free: The Greek word is ἀπολελύσθαι (apolelysthai), a perfect infinitive. This indicates a state of being released or acquitted, emphasizing Paul's legal blamelessness concerning any Roman crimes. It signifies that from a juridical standpoint, there was no lawful reason to hold him captive. This is a crucial point for early Christianity's standing within the Roman Empire: its core message and practice were not inherently criminal.
• if he had not appealed to Caesar”: The Greek for "appealed" is ἐπεκέκλητο (epekéklēto), also a perfect tense form. This denotes a past action with ongoing, definitive results. Paul's appeal (Acts 25:11) was a legitimate right for a Roman citizen (provocatio ad Caesarem). Once invoked, it transferred the jurisdiction of his case directly to the emperor’s court in Rome, superseding any local or provincial judgment. This meant that even if Festus and Agrippa found him innocent, their power to release him was removed the moment Paul exercised this imperial right.

Acts 26 32 Bonus section

The consistent declarations of Paul's innocence by various Roman officials (Gallio in Acts 18, Claudius Lysias in Acts 23, Festus in Acts 25, and now Festus and Agrippa in Acts 26) laid a de facto legal precedent for early Christianity. It demonstrated to Roman courts and administrators that being a Christian or proclaiming Christ did not inherently equate to criminal activity against the state or its laws. This established a critical distinction, at least in the earlier decades of the Roman Empire, between Christians and genuine insurrectionists. This unofficial "innocence verdict" became a valuable defense for early believers, arguing that they were not lawbreakers but peaceable citizens who were being persecuted for religious beliefs, not crimes. This stance contributed to the relatively swift, though challenging, spread of Christianity within the Roman world, as it often appeared not as a political threat, but a spiritual one to established religious systems.

Acts 26 32 Commentary

Acts 26:32 stands as a monumental statement in the narrative of Paul's life and the early spread of Christianity. It definitively establishes Paul's legal innocence in the eyes of Roman authority. Both Festus, representing the judicial might of Rome, and Agrippa, intimately acquainted with Jewish law and customs, agree there is no crime deserving of death or even imprisonment. The entire accusation leveled by Paul's Jewish adversaries (Acts 24:5-6) falls apart under objective scrutiny. Paul is not a revolutionary, not a cult leader inciting rebellion, nor a temple desecrator, but a man proclaiming a message of resurrection, which, while controversial to some, is not a criminal offense under Roman law.

This verdict is pregnant with divine irony and purpose. While humanly Paul could have gained his freedom, his appeal, seemingly a desperate measure for survival, became the very means by which God's foreordained plan to send Paul to Rome was actualized (Acts 23:11; 19:21). His continued captivity was not due to guilt but due to his exercising a lawful Roman right. Paul's imprisonment in Rome would, in turn, facilitate the proclamation of the Gospel to imperial officials (Phil 1:12-14), fulfill the commission given to Ananias about Paul (Acts 9:15), and demonstrate the power of God to preserve His witnesses despite opposition. Thus, a legal nuance ensured the divine destiny of a powerful missionary.