Acts 26:30-32 30Then the king rose and the governor and Bernice and those who were sitting with them. 31And after they had withdrawn, they said to one another, “This man is doing nothing worthy of death or imprisonment.” 32And Agrippa said to Festus, “This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.”
Undoubtedly, Paul had more he could have said about Jesus, but Agrippa cut the meeting short once Paul confronted him with the crucial question about whether he would accept the gospel. Agrippa had listened closely and understood all that Paul was saying but would not accept the premise. He was also not in the position to make a legal judgment about Paul, since that was Festus’ prerogative, and the decision had already been made to send Paul to Caesar, as Paul had requested in appeal. Agrippa had heard enough to know that Paul was innocent and understood enough to help Festus prepare his report. The conclusion was obvious to everyone that Paul was innocent of what the Jews accused him of, at least innocent in the eyes of the Romans. Because Agrippa was king of the Jews and representative of the Jewish people, his conclusion about Paul’s innocence only further pointed out the failure of the legalistic Asian Jews and the Jerusalem Sanhedrin to accept the truth about their Messiah.
Agrippa may have had some council or advisors sitting with him and Bernice. As they all left, they came to the same conclusion that Paul did not deserve imprisonment or death. Paul had already be proclaimed as innocent by the Pharisees (23:9), the Roman tribune Lysias (23:29), and then twice by the governor Festus (25:18–19, 25). Festus had his information to send with Paul’s appeal. Festus was still trapped by the appeal process, as was Agrippa. Paul could have been released except that the legal process had to continue. The Roman legal process could be accredited for some degree of justice, as both leaders wanted to keep a good reputation before their subordinates, peers, and the leadership in Rome. Paul was no ordinary prisoner because he had already impacted an untold number of people across the empire, all the way to Macedonia. He had just about caused a civil war in Jerusalem. Yet, he was a simple, highly articulate man who spoke boldly about Jesus of Nazareth.
Both Festus and Agrippa may have still perceived the potential conflict and unrest they would face from the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem and other areas if they released Paul, if they could even legally do that. It was easier for them to send Paul on to Rome—out of sight, out of mind. Peace could return to Judea. Paul was actually a minor issue in the larger politics of the time. The unrest of the Jews against the Romans would only increase over the next several years until it reached the explosive point of open rebellion. Paul was not the problem, but his message was the solution. No one would listen, neither Romans nor Jews. The implication for the readers of Acts is that we know the answer and must also make a decision whether to accept the truth Luke has clearly laid out in the stories of so many witnesses.