- Bible
- Acts
- Chapter 26
- Verse 9
“I verily thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.”
My Notes
What Does Acts 26:9 Mean?
Acts 26:9 is Paul's confession before King Agrippa — and it's the most honest description of sincere, devastating wrongness in the New Testament. "I verily thought with myself" — egō men oun edoxa emautō. Edoxa — I thought, I considered, I concluded through deliberation. Emautō — with myself, within myself. This wasn't an externally imposed conviction. It was Paul's own considered opinion. He reasoned his way into it. He persuaded himself.
"That I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth" — dein polla enantia praxai pros to onoma Iēsou tou Nazōraiou. Dein — I ought, I was obligated, it was necessary, it was my moral duty. The word describes binding obligation — Paul felt morally compelled to oppose Christ. Polla — many things. Not a few reluctant acts. Many — a comprehensive, enthusiastic, wide-ranging campaign. Enantia — contrary to, against, in opposition to. Pros to onoma — against the name. The name of Jesus of Nazareth — the specific, identifiable, historical person.
The confession is devastating because of the word ought. Paul didn't say: I wanted to persecute Christians. He said: I believed I should. He felt duty-bound. Conscience-driven. Morally obligated to oppose Jesus. His persecution wasn't malice — it was conviction. He was sincere. He was devout. He was wrong. And the sincerity amplified the wrongness rather than reducing it. A sincere person doing the wrong thing does it more thoroughly, more consistently, and more destructively than a person who knows they're wrong.
Paul's confession before Agrippa is a permanent warning: sincerity is not the same as accuracy. You can feel morally obligated to do exactly the wrong thing.
Reflection Questions
- 1.Have you ever been sincerely convinced about something that turned out to be completely wrong?
- 2.How does Paul's 'I thought I ought to' warn about the danger of acting on unexamined conviction?
- 3.What's the difference between sincerity and accuracy — and how do you test whether your conviction is aimed correctly?
- 4.If Paul's persecution was driven by the same zeal as his apostleship, what does that say about the importance of direction over intensity?
Devotional
I thought I ought to. That's the most dangerous sentence in the spiritual life.
Paul didn't persecute Christians because he was evil. He persecuted them because he was sincere. He deliberated — edoxa emautō, I reasoned with myself, I came to a considered conclusion. He felt morally obligated — dein, I ought, it was my duty. The violence against the church wasn't an impulse. It was a conviction. Paul believed — with his whole theological framework, his entire educational background, his complete devotion to God — that opposing the name of Jesus of Nazareth was the righteous thing to do.
He was wrong. Totally, catastrophically, completely wrong. And the sincerity didn't reduce the damage. It multiplied it. A person who does evil reluctantly does less of it. A person who does evil out of conviction does many things — polla, a comprehensive campaign, a thorough execution of the wrong conclusion. Sincerity turns error into a lifestyle. Conviction turns the wrong direction into a crusade.
The Damascus road didn't correct Paul's sincerity. It corrected his direction. He was just as sincere after the encounter as before. Just as driven. Just as thorough. The engine stayed the same. The compass changed. The man who "ought" to destroy the church became the man who "ought" to build it — with the same intensity, the same urgency, the same many things.
The warning is for anyone who's ever said: I feel like I should. Sincerity is necessary but not sufficient. You can feel morally obligated to do the exact wrong thing. The obligation is real. The feeling is genuine. And the direction might be dead wrong. Before you act on your conviction, make sure the conviction has been tested by the same light that knocked Saul off his horse.
Commentary
Trusted original commentary from respected historical Bible scholars and theologians.
I verily thought with myself,.... This seems to be a correction of himself, why he should wonder at their ignorance and…
I verily thought - I indeed μὲν men supposed. Paul here commences the account of his conversion, and states the…
Agrippa was the most honourable person in the assembly, having the title of king bestowed upon him, though otherwise…
contrary to the name i.e. to the faith of Jesus Christ, into whose name believers were to be baptized. Cp. Act 5:41,…
Cross References
Related passages throughout Scripture