In Caesarea, at his final defense before he was taken to be tried before Caesar in Rome, Paul testified before King Agrippa, Bernice, the chief captains, the principal men of the city, and the governor, Festus (Acts 25:23-26:32).He concluded his testimony before them by saying, “I would to God, that not only thou, but also all that hear me this day, were both almost, and altogether such as I am, except these bonds” (26:29). Does all mean all in this statement?

Several commentators believe that Paul desired that his entire audience would become Christians. Bock remarks:

In verse 29 Paul’s reply is that whether it takes a short or a long time . . . , he would pray that all who are listening to him might become a Christian as he is, with one exception, namely, that they not share his chains of imprisonment. The reference to prayer indicates that Paul desires to intercede on behalf of all the audience to become Christians. . . . The reply clearly expresses his heart.

—Darrell L. Bock, Acts in ECNT, 723

Polhill comments:

His real prayer was that not just Agrippa but everyone in the audience room would become a Christian believer. At this point Paul may have made several gestures, turning and directly addressing all in the room.

—John B. Polhill, Acts in NAC, 509

Peterson says:

Paul expresses his desire to Agrippa in very personal terms . . . In so doing, he consciously widens his appeal to everyone present. Previously, he acknowledged that many in his audience might be skeptical about talk of resurrection of the dead (v. 8). However, just as in Athens he preached about ‘Jesus and the resurrection’ to Jews and Gentiles alike (17:18), so now he addresses all together.

—David G. Peterson, Acts in PNTC, 676.

In agreement with the views of these scholars, taking Paul’s use of all to mean the totality of his hearers on this occasion seems clearly to be the only natural reading of the text.

Given the composition of his audience on this occasion, Paul’s statement is thus striking because we do not read of any previous evangelistic encounters that he had had with authority figures and other prominent people that would have given him hope that all his present audience might become Christians (see Acts 17:32-34 for an example of an encounter with authorities that did not result in the salvation of his entire audience). Even so, Paul still desired that they would.

We should learn from Paul’s example here that in spite of our previous negative experiences and regardless of the seemingly unlikely-to-become-Christians composition of an audience whom we are evangelizing, we should desire that they all would become Christians.

Paul repeatedly teaches that salvation is not earned through works that people do (Rom. 4:4-8; Eph. 2:8-10; Titus 3:5-6). A focus on this teaching, however, has led many to overlook an equally important Pauline evangelistic teaching concerning works: Paul emphasized that in his evangelism of all people everywhere, he challenged them that sinners must “do works meet for repentance” (Acts 26:20).

Peterson explains this emphasis well:

Paul recalls the geographical scope of his mission, ‘first to those in Damascus’ (cf. 9:20-25), ‘then to those in Jerusalem’ (cf. 9:26-30) ‘and in all Judea, and then to the Gentiles’. He indicates that he conveyed the same message to all, declaring (apēngellon, ‘reporting’, ‘announcing’, ‘proclaiming’) ‘that they should repent and turn to God and demonstrate their repentance by their deeds’ (cf. 20:21). Challenged to preach repentance for the forgiveness of sins and a share in the messianic salvation …, Paul was as serious as John the Baptist in calling for deeds to demonstrate the genuineness of repentance (cf. Lk. 3:8; Acts 20:21). He understood conversion ‘not only in terms of forgiveness and faith, but also in terms of a full ethical transformation’

—David. G. Peterson, The Acts of the Apostles in PNTC, 670

Based on Paul’s testimony to this crucial emphasis that he had in his evangelism, we should be diligent to challenge the people to whom we witness “that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance” (Acts 26:20).

The gospel is theological. This is a short-hand way of affirming two things. First, as 1 Corinthians 15 repeatedly affirms, God raised Christ Jesus from the dead (e.g. [1]5:15). More broadly, New Testament documents insist that God sent the Son into the world, and the Son obediently went to the cross because this was his Father’s will. It makes no sense to pit the mission of the Son against the sovereign purpose of the Father. If the gospel is centrally Christological, it is no less centrally theological.

—D. A. Carson, <em>The Gospel of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1 — 19)</em>, 3

In Psalm 119:64, the Psalmist communicates his remarkable practice of praising the Lord in a statement that deserves closer attention to what it specifically says:

 ^KJV Seven times a day do I praise thee because of thy righteous judgments.

 ^LXE Seven times in a day have I praised thee because of the judgments of thy righteousness.

 ^NAU Seven times a day I praise You, Because of Your righteous ordinances.

 ^NET Seven times a day I praise you because of your just regulations.

 ^NKJ Seven times a day I praise You, Because of Your righteous judgments.

 ^ESV Seven times a day I praise you for your righteous rules.

He thus praised God seven times a day for His Word because of His righteous judgments that it reveals.

An article in the New Open Bible: Study Edition helpfully explains the word used by the Psalmist here:

 Judgment (mishpāt, v. 7) is derived from the verb shāphat, “judge” or “govern,” and occurs about four hundred times in the Old Testament, sixteen times in Psalm 119 alone. The general idea is one of justice, or specific ordinances to promote justice. There are many distinct usages of the noun in both secular and religious law. Each specific ordinance of the Pentateuch is called a mishpāt (Lev. 9:16; Deut. 33:21, e.g.).

“The LORD is a God judgment” (Is. 30:18) and “loveth judgment” (Ps. 37:28). His “judgments are a great deep” (Ps. 36:6). Because God is just in His judgments, so should we His people be.”

—The Word of the Lord, 690; bold words are in italics in the original

The Psalmist’s statement thus expresses that he would praise the Lord seven times a day for His righteous judgments, which point to His glory as the righteous Lawgiver and Judge. How often, by contrast, do we praise God in a day for His glorious revelation of His righteous judgments?

Let us praise God, the righteous Lawgiver and Judge, daily for His righteous judgments!

In a section entitled, The Triunity of the Godhead, Fruchtenbaum, a believing Jewish scholar, brings out some helpful points concerning the OT teaching about the Angel of Jehovah:

The Expression Malach YHVH

The second divine personality is the Angel of Jehovah – but who is He? The Angel of Jehovah is not to be taken as a title, but, following Hebrew grammar, it always functions as a proper name. This individual is always considered distinct from all other angels and is unique. It never appears in the plural. Nowhere in Scripture are the phrases “the angels of Jehovah” or “the angels of the God,” but rather there are three, and only three, different expressions which are used:

1. the Angel of Jehovah – Malach YHVH, always singular.
2. the Angel of the God – Malach Ha-Elohim, always singular with the definite article.
3. the angels of God – Malachei Elohim, plural, and is never used with the definite article.

The third of these expressions is used in general terms of ordinary angels. The first two expressions are both used to describe a very special and distinct individual – the Angel of Jehovah. We can see this in Judges 6:20-21, where the same Person is described first, in verse 20, as “the Angel of the God” and then, in verse 21, as “the Angel of Jehovah.” This is also brought out in Judges chapter 13; in verse 3, there is a reference to “the Angel of Jehovah” and later, in verse 9, this same individual is called “the Angel of the God.”

Consistently, throughout the Hebrew text, there is a distinction made between ordinary angels and this unique Person referred to as both “the Angel of YHVH” and “the Angel of the God.” The Angel of Jehovah is clearly revealed as being different in stature, nature, person and essence from ordinary angels.

—Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, Messianic Christology: A Study of Old Testament Prophecy Concerning the First Coming of the Messiah, 109-110; bold is in italics in the original

“Let’s take the more than 500 witnesses who saw Jesus alive after His death and burial and place them in a courtroom. Do you realize that if each of these 500 people were to testify only six minutes each, including cross-examination, you would have an amazing 50 hours of firsthand eyewitness testimony? Add to this the testimony of many other eyewitnesses and you could well have the largest and most lopsided trial in history.”

—Josh McDowell, The Resurrection Factor, 71-72