The Jews at Jerusalem, his persecutors, knew this .'if they would testify ' this was recounted his conversion manner of life as a Pharisee. This Paul told Agrippa, but he left no question in Agrippa's mind regarding what 'hope' it was to which he referred this was the hope of the resurrection of the dead.
The Jewish sect is known as the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead, but the Pharisees did; and since Paul had been an ardent Pharisee, there seems little doubt that in the year prior to his conversion he had been an able protagonist of this glorious doctrine of the scriptures. His contemporaries would know this.
How logical, then, and to the point, was his question, "why should it be thought a thing "incredible "with you, that God should raise the dead? He asked Agrippa certainly it should not have been considered" incredible" by Pauls former associates, the Pharisees. but he was not so much concerned with this now as he was in presenting an effective witness to Agrippa personally.
The doctrine of the resurrection is, of course, thought to be "a thing incredible " by practically the whole world, even to this day of all religion of the earth, Christianity is the only one that teaches the resurrection.
Certainly, the teaching of the resurrection should not be thought a thing incredible, not when we take into consideration that it is the great creator of all life who has promised to raise the dead. but for some reason, it seems to be easier for most people to believe that a person doesn't really die at all when he seems to die than to accept the reality of death and believe that the great God of the universe will restore life.
