Acts 25:26

Act 25:26. Τῷ κυρίῳ, to my lord) Cæsar. Lately this, appellation, Lord, had arisen.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Act_25:26-27. Ἀσφαλές τι] something trustworthy, whereby the emperor (ὁ κύριος, Dominus, the appellation declined by Augustus and Tiberius, but accepted by their successors, see Wolf and Wetstein, also Dougt. Anal. p. 96; Fincke, l.c.) may inform himself certainly concerning the state of matters. Such a fixing of the real αἰτία had not been possible for the procurator, who had to draw up the literae dimissoriae, so long as the proceedings were constantly disturbed and confused by intentional fabrications of the Jews.

ἀνακρίσ.] A preliminary examination, judicis edocendi causa, Grotius. See also Heind. ad Plat. Phaedr. p. 277 E; Hermann, Staatsalterth. § 141. 1.

In σχῶ τὶ γράψω (see the critical remarks) γράψω is the future (see on Php_1:22): what I am to write.

ἄλογον] unreasonable, absurd, Thuc. vi. 85. 1; Plat. Gorg. p. 519 E, Apol. p. 18 C. Without εἶναι: see Sauppe, and Kühner, ad Xen. Mem. i. 1. 5.

τὰς κατʼ αὐτοῦ αἰτίας] This was just the ἀσφαλές, which was still wanting to the procurator. Without having made himself clear as to the contents of the charges brought against Paul, he would have been obliged frankly to report to the emperor that he was in ignorance of them. Olshausen, however, is hasty in holding that, with the placing of the apostle before Agrippa the prediction of the Lord (Mat_10:18; Mar_13:9) was now for the first time fulfilled. We know far too little of the previous history of the other apostles to be able to take this ground. Perhaps the elder James and Peter had already stood before Herod (Agrippa I.), xii. 2, 3 f. But Paul stood here for the first time before a king, who, however, is by no means to be considered as the representative of the power of the heathen world (as Baumgarten supposes), as Agrippa was himself a Jew (see on Act_25:14), ruled over the Jews, was by Paul addressed as a Jew (Act_26:3; Act_26:27), and was, in fact, even regarded as representative of the Jews (see παρʼ ὑμῖν, Act_26:8).

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Act 25:26 . ἀσφαλές τι γράψαι , Dig. , xlix., 6. “Post appellationem interpositam litteræ dandæ sunt ab eo, a quo appellatum est, ad eum qui de appellatione cogniturus est, sive principem, sive quem alium, quas litt. dimissorias sive Apostolos appellant” (Wetstein and Blass). τῷ κυρίῳ : title refused by Augustus and Tiberius because it savoured too much of the relationship between a master and a slave, and perhaps because it seemed a title more fitting to God (as Wetstein explains it), cf. Suet., Aug [397] , 53, Tiber. , 27, and Tacitus, Ann. , ii., 87. It was accepted by Caligula and succeeding emperors ( cf. Pliny’s Letter to Trajan with the frequent Dominus ), although Alexander Severus forbade it to be applied to him; for other instances, and instances on inscriptions, see Wetstein, in loco , Deissmann, Neue Bibelstudien , 44, and Bibelstudien , 77, 78, and Tert [398] , Apol. , 34, Polyc., Martyr. , viii., 2, ix. 2, who refused to utter it with reference to Cæsar. For the due significance of the word in St. Luke, who uses it more frequently of Christ than the other Evangelists, see especially Wetstein, in loco . ἀνακρίσεως : here not in its strictly legal and judicial sense of a preliminary inquiry, but an inquiry into the case, cf. Act 25:22 (Act 4:9 ), with a view to sending a report to the emperor as judge, Renan, Saint Paul , p. 544, and Zöckler, in loco . Festus knew what the charges were, but not their significance, and he hoped to obtain some definite information from Agrippa or Paul he wanted something ἀσφαλές ; Paul had contradicted the charge of treason, and what was left, Act 25:19 , seemed full of obscurity and absurdity.

[397] Augustine.

[398]ert. Tertullian.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

To Augustus. Good Princes refused this name at the first, to wit, to be called Lords, but afterwards they admitted it, as we read of Traianus.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

I have no certain--"definite"

thing to write my lord--Nero. "The writer's accuracy should be remarked here. It would have been . . . a mistake to apply this term ("lord") to the emperor a few years earlier. Neither Augustus nor Tiberius would let himself be so called, as implying the relation of master and slave. But it had now come (rather, "was coming") into use as one of the imperial titles" [HACKET].

Next: Acts Chapter 26

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 26. I have no certain thing to write] Nothing alleged against him has been substantiated.

Unto my Lord] The title κυριος, Dominus, Lord, both Augustus and Tiberius had absolutely refused; and forbade, even by public edicts, the application of it to themselves. Tiberius himself was accustomed to say that he was lord only of his slaves, emperor or general of the troops, and prince of the senate. See Suetonius, in his life of this prince. The succeeding emperors were not so modest; they affected the title. Nero, the then emperor, would have it; and Pliny the younger is continually giving it to Trajan in his letters.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

26. That after examination had. We cannot tell whether the governor, in acquitting Paul before them, doth seek by this policy to entice him to let his appeal fall. For it was a thing credible that he might easily be persuaded to lay away fear, and to submit himself to the judgment and discretion of a just judge, especially if Agrippa should give his friendly consent. To what end soever he did it, he condemneth himself of iniquity by his own mouth, in that he did not let a guiltless man go free whom he is now ashamed to send unto Caesar, having nothing to lay against him. This did also come to pass by the wonderful providence of God, that the Jews themselves should give a former judgment on Paul’s side. Peradventure, the governor goeth subtilely to work, that he may pick out what the king and the chief men of Cesarea do think, that if it so fall out that Paul be set at liberty, he may lay the blame on their necks. For he would not have the priests to be his enemies for nothing, upon whom a good part of Jerusalem did depend, and that was the best way that he could take in writing to Caesar to intermingle the authority of Agrippa. But the Lord (to whom it belongeth to govern events contrary to man’s expectation) had respect unto another thing, to wit, that when the clouds of false accusations were driven away, Paul might more freely avouch sound doctrine.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(26) To write unto my lord.—The Greek corresponds to the title of “Dominus,” which, though declined by Augustus and Tiberius (Sueton. Octav. c. 53; Tiber. c. 27), had been assumed by Caligula and Nero. The first of the emperors had rejected it as an “accursed and ill-omened title,” and had not allowed it to be used even by his children or grand-children, either seriously or in play. The name “Augustus,” with its religious associations, was enough for him.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

26. unto my lord] Octavianus by an edict forbade the title “Lord” to be given to him. The practice had its rise from parasites. But you find “Dominus” often used in Pliny’s letters to Trajan. So that not many emperors were like Octavian.

before you] Spoken with a glance towards the chief priests and great persons who were present on the bench.

specially before thee] i.e. as one most likely to be able to clear up the difficulties which I feel about the prisoner.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Of whom I have no certain thing,.... No certain crime, charge, or accusation; nothing of any moment or consequence, no particular thing, nothing but a heap of confused notions, of I know not who or what:

to write unto my lord; meaning the Roman emperor, under whom he served as governor of Judea:

wherefore I have brought him before you; the whole company then present:

and especially before thee, O King Agrippa; as being not only a man of eminence, dignity, and authority, but of knowledge in such matters, which the Jews accused Paul of; see Act 26:2.

That after examination had; of Paul, and his case;

I might have somewhat to write; concerning him, and the charges exhibited against him to the emperor.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

26 Of whom I have no certain thing to write unto my lord. Wherefore I have brought him forth before you, and specially before thee, O king Agrippa, that, after examination had, I might have somewhat to write.

Ver. 26. To write unto my lord] Κυριος signifieth one that hath rule or dominion, being a word of relation, {a} This title was first affected by tyrants; but afterwards the good princes suffered it to be given unto them, as appeareth by Pliny’s Epistle to Trajan. The emperors disclaimed only the name of king, to avoid the hatred of the people, and yet sought the full right of kings, and to destroy the liberty of the people. But God calls them kings, 1Pe 2:13; 1Pe 2:17. God hateth hypocrisy in whomsoever; and will unmask even kings, if they dissemble.

{a} Deducitur a κυρος, authoritas.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Of whom - Respecting his character, opinions, and manner of life; and respecting the charges against him.

No certain thing - Nothing definite and well established. They had not accused Paul of any crime against the Roman laws; and Festus professes himself too ignorant of the customs of the Jews to inform the emperor distinctly of the nature of the charges and the subject of trial.

Unto my lord - To the emperor - to Caesar. This name Lord the Emperors Augustus and Tiberius had rejected, and would not suffer it to be applied to them. Suetonius (Life of Augustus, v. 53) says “the appellation of Lord he always abhorred as abominable and execrable.” See also Suetonius’ Life of Tiberius, v. 27. The emperors that succeeded them, however, admitted the title, and suffered themselves to be called by this name. Nothing would be more satisfactory to Nero, the reigning emperor, than this title.

I might have somewhat to write - As Agrippa was a Jew, and was acquainted with the customs and doctrine of the Jews, Festus supposed that, after hearing Paul, he would be able to inform him of the exact nature of these charges, so that he could present the case intelligibly to the emperor.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

To my lord. This was a title the emperors afterwards took, but which Augustus and Tiberius are said by Pliny, in his epistle to Trajan, and by Tertullian, to have refused, as too assuming and too high, ut nimis sublimem atque gloriosum. This was perhaps done, that none might hear the title at a time when the Lord of lords was to appear on the earth. (Tirinus) --- Whilst we can approve and admire the motives which actuated the emperors in refusing this title, we cannot go the lengths which some modern enthusiasts do, (mostly Americans, Quakers, &c.) who pretend it is blasphemy to call a mortal man a lord, as if that name were incommunicable to any but the Creator of the universe. Whence they derive this article of faith it will not be easy for us to guess; certainly not from Scripture, in which the word Dominus or Lord, applied to man, occurs almost as frequently as King. Certainly not from our Saviour’s words, who give both himself and others this title, (Mark xiv. 14. and other places.) nor from St. Paul’s doctrine, who also uses this word indiscriminately through his epistles, Galatians iv. 1; Ephesians vi. v.; &c. Hence we are justified in retaining this practice, in opposition to their cavils; and in treating that opinion as superstitious and void of foundation, which makes it a necessary part of religion to use no titles. (Haydock)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

My lord; Nero, the present emperor, whose deputy Festus was in this province; though some of the former emperors refused this name, as savouring of too much arbitratiness, the latter did accept of it.

Specially before thee; Agrippa, being brought up in the knowledge of the Jewish law, though it was not his business to judge Paul’s case, yet he might instruct and inform the judge about it.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

26. No certain thing to write—In case of an appeal the judge was by law required to transmit to the imperial court apostoli or literae dimissoriae, that is, a due record of the crime charged and the judicial proceedings taken.

My lord—My master, the emperor Nero. Here is another instance of Luke’s accuracy. Both the emperors Augustus and Tiberius rejected the title dominus, for which the word lord here stands, with disgust, as too servile for Romans to offer, too invidious for themselves to accept. Yet Caligula did not forbid it; and just at this time of which Luke writes the spirit of flattery was persisting in its use until it became a regular title under Domitian.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

King for O king, A.V.; may for might, A.V. My lord (tw kutiw). Suetonius tells us ("Life of Augustus," 53) that Augustus abhorred the title of "lord," and looked upon it as a curse and an insult when applied to himself. Tiberius also ("Life of Tiberius," 27), being once called "lord" (dominus) by some one, indignantly repudiated the title. But it was frequently applied to Trajan by Pithy, and the later emperors seem to have accepted it. It was likely to grow up first in the East. Examination; ajnakrisewv, here only in the New Testament; but it is found in RAPC 3Ma 7:4 in the same sense as here, viz. of a judicial examination (the complaintbeing that Jews were put to death aneu pashv ajnakrisewv kaisewv); specially the precious examination of the prisoner made for the information of the judge who was to try the case. At Athens the ajnakrisiv was a preliminary examination held to decide whether an action at law should be allowed. The verb ajnakrinw, to examine, occurs six times in the Gospel of St. Luke and the Acts (Luk_23:14; Act_4:9 Act_12:19, etc.) and ten times in St. Paul"s Epistles (see also Hist. of Susanna 48).

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

See notes on verse 23

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

26. τί γράψω with אABC. Vulg. ‘quid scribam.’

26. τῷ κυρίῳ, to my lord. Octavianus by an edict forbade the title ‘Lord’ to be given to him. The practice had its rise from parasites; but you find ‘Dominus’ often used in Pliny’s letters to Trajan, so that not many emperors were like Octavian.

ἐφ’ ὑμῶν, before you. Spoken with a glance towards the chief priests and great personages who were present on the bench.

καὶ μάλιστα ἐπὶ σοῦ, and especially before thee, i.e. as one most likely to be able to clear up the difficulties which I feel about the prisoner.

τῆς ἀνακρίσεως γενομένης, the examination having been made. The English of A.V. is very idiomatic, ‘after examination had.’ In classical Greek ἀνάκρισις is used of a preliminary examination of a cause before the Archon, to see whether there is ground for proceeding further. So Festus uses the technical term in its proper sense.

σχῶ τί γράψω, I may have somewhat to write. Lit. ‘what I may write.’ With this use of the interrogative τί, where in classical Greek a relative would have been used, cf. Mat 10:19, δοθήσεται ὑμῖν … τί λαλήσετε.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

26. ἀσφαλές] fixed, definite. The whole matter had been hitherto obscured by the exaggerations and fictions of the Jews.

τῷ κυρίῳ] viz. Nero. Augustus and Tiberius refused this title; Caligula and (apparently) all following bore it. “Thus Tertullian, Apol. xxxiv. vol. i. p. 450: ‘Augustus imperii formator ne dominum quidem dici se volebat;’ and Suet. 53: ‘Dominum se appellari ne a liberis quidem aut nepotibus vel serio vel joco passus est;’ ami Tib. 27: ‘Dominus appellatus a quodam denuntiavit ne se amplius contumeliæ causa nominaret.’ Caligula accepted the title, according to Victor, ap. Eckhel, viii. 364. Herod Agrippa had applied it to Claudius (Philo ap. Spanheim. Numism. ii. 482); but it was not a recognized title of any emperor before Domitian. Suet. Deu_13: ‘Martial,—Edictum Domini Deique nostri.’ ” Mr. Humphry.

γράψω has apparently been altered to γράψαι to suit the τί γράψαι above.

Olsh. remarks, that now first was our Lord’s prophecy Mat 10:18, Mar 13:9 fulfilled. But Meyer answers well, that we do not know enough of the history of the other Apostles to be able to say this with any certainty. James the greater, and Peter, had in all probability stood before Agrippa I. See ch. 12:2, 3.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Lord [κυριω] . An instance of Luke's accuracy. The title "Lord" was refused by the first two emperors, Augustus and Tiberius. The emperors who followed accepted it. In the time of Domitian it was a recognized title. Antoninus Pius was the first who put it on his coins.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.