This year I have travelled the road with one church as they have journeyed through the Acts of the Apostles. I did some preaching training with their preaching group in preparation for preaching on Acts and have contributed two sermons to their series.
Acts 26 finds Paul in Jerusalem speaking at a pre-trial before the Festus, the Roman Governor of Judea, and King Agrippa (grandson of Herod the Great).
What is surprising about the Acts of the Apostles is that the book is full of speeches!
I guess we should not be surprised about this because Luke begins his account:
“In my former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach until the day he was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen.” (Acts 1:1–2)
The implication is that Luke’s record in Acts will continue to provide examples of what Jesus will continue to do and teach through the disciples.
In Acts 26 we have the third telling of Paul’s conversion story. In our culture a good book might become a stage play, a film and a musical. A good story always warrants multiple re-telling.
When reading Acts and the New Testament it seems that Paul’s conversion story is constantly bubbling under the surface. The DNA of Paul’s dramatic conversion shapes so much of what we know about the gospel story.
One of the things that interests me as a preacher is how the three accounts of the Paul’s conversion in Acts (9, 22 and 26) are targeted at different audiences.
Acts Chapter 9 seems to be written for a Christian audience to reassure them that the person who had persecuted them had genuinely changed.
Acts Chapter 22 has been written for a Jewish audience. Luke highlights twice that Paul communicates in Aramaic (21:40; 22:1). Here is Paul’s story for the Jews communicated in their common language and thought forms, which would resonate with the people he was addressing.
In Acts 26 Paul is addressing a Roman governor and the king of Judea. This third telling of the story has something more of a general appeal about it. Paul intentionally addresses the scepticism around the subject of the resurrection of Jesus.
David Gooding captures well the mood of the address: “Paul knew exactly the incredulity Agrippa was now feeling at the mention of the resurrection of Jesus; and he wanted him to know that he too had experienced that same incredulity. And a much stronger dose of it than Agrippa was experiencing.”
Hearing Paul’s story is like looking at a gigantic crater in the desert. Something must have made that dent in the ground. Perhaps a fiery asteroid that entered the earth’s atmosphere and exploded on impact?
“Paul is keen to show that he is not a gullible fanatic swept up in this new Christian movement … (he) is begging the question for the audience, ‘What must have happened for Paul to have completely changed his mind about Jesus?’”(Martin Salter)
That is what good preaching is like: plain testimony about Christ that leaves people with intriguing questions.
Photo by Towfiqu barbhuiya on Unsplash