Studies in the Acts of the Apostles

[Resource Manager]

16. Peter and John arrested (4:1–12)

 

Evidently there were leading men of the Sadducee party in the crowd listening to Peter, and his claim that all the great Promises of the Old Testament related to Jesus of Nazareth was more than they could stomach. So they had the captain of the temple, an official second only to the high priest himself, bring his Levite guard to arrest the apostles, who found themselves interrupted (s.w.6:12) before ever they could reach the climax of their message to the multitude. For good measure, the man they had healed was "picked up" also, he nothing loth, for he had every confidence of security with the men who had healed him (4:9RV, 14).

 

It is noteworthy that the earliest hostility to the Faith came from the Sadducees (4:1–21; 5:24–41; 6:12). There were two reasons for this. The unflagging apostolic emphasis on the resurrection of Jesus was a great offence to Sadducee belief that there is no life after death. It needed only one clear example to the contrary, and their dogma was in ruins. Also, there is fair evidence in the gospels that the words and works of Jesus had split the party of the Pharisees down the middle (see "Gospels", p.445). So, being divided in their attitude, they found it politic to offer publicly neither praise nor blame. Their turn would come.

 

There was serious worry that the movement might spread, and not wilt away as they hoped. There was also pique that untrained men such as the apostles (v.13) should assume the right to teach in the temple court as though they were rabbis. And doubtless there was high indignation at the inflam­matory denunciations which Peter's speech had included (e.g. 3:14–17).

 

The discourse, of which 3:12–26 is only a précis, must have gone on for at least two hours, for it was "already evening." There is a touch of apostolic surprise about this phrase, as though expressing wonder at the way the hours had flown by. So, since the chief priests were about to settle down to a protracted meal after their twenty–four–hour Day–of–Atonement fast, the three prisoners were thrown in jail for the night.

 

That day Cephas and Caiaphas (the names are essentially the same) had used their keys in dramatically different ways!

 

Before the Sanhedrin

 

Next morning there was a formal enquiry before a fully–convened Sanhedrin, the same assembly which had condemned Jesus, and which was by and by to take action against the whole group of apostles, and was later to condemn Stephen. Almost certainly Saul of Tarsus was one of the number. In later days that Sanhedrin was to try Saul himself.

 

It has been suggested that the account of what follows was derived by Luke from the apostle John. It could well be so. The Greek of this section lacks something of the elegance with which Luke wrote, and it bears several characteristics resembling John's writing.

 

Because of the Day of Atonement the leading Sadducee caucus – the family of Annas – were all present. Naturally they were anxious to repress this Nazarene movement, but with the caution of men of their stamp they moved carefully lest they estrange the multitude which now tended to be on the side of the disciples. The number of converts in Jerusalem was very soon to reach the five thousand mark.

 

It was the duty of the Sanhedrin to investigate all new teachers and to pronounce, for the guidance of the nation, on their trustworthiness. Such investigation had been made regarding John the Baptist (Jn. 1:19) – but no pronouncement made! – and also re­garding Jesus (Lk. 5:17; 20:1, 2).

 

There was, as yet, no definite charge: "By what power, or by what name, have ye done this?" The questions were put repeatedly, in different forms, with the skilled interrogator's technique of exposing inconsistencies in the story told. There could be no doubting that the man had been healed (cp. v.16), for over the years he had become a well–known character and now here he was, standing by, as fit and sound as any of them. Rather remarkably, the charge against Peter and John did not concern what they had been teaching but the healing that had taken place. There was an attempt to imply the use of some kind of magic (cp. 19:13).

[Resource Manager]

Peter's inspiration

 

The apostles were in no way overawed by this august and hostile assembly. Peter, who formerly had flinched before a serving maid (Lk. 22:31,32) was now filled yet again with a surge of Holy Spirit power, precisely as his Lord had promised: "And when they bring you before … magistrates and powers, be not anxious how or what he shall answer, or what ye shall say. For the Holy Spirit shall teach you in that very hour what is necessary for you to say" (Lk. 12:11, 12).

 

It is interesting to note the stages in Peter's endowment with the Spirit:

 

a. When, with the rest of the Twelve, he was sent out preaching (Mk. 6:7).

b. The inspiration behind his great confession (Mt. 16:17).

c. On the day of the Lord's resurrection: "He breathed on them, and said, Ye are receiving the Holy Spirit" (Jn. 20:22).

d. Pentecost: tongues and preaching (Acts 2:4 etc.).

e. The healing of the lame man (3:7).

f. And now his witness before the Sanhedrin (4:8).

 

Apparently, there were different gifts at different times, according to need. Paul was to experience a similar progressive endowment (9:17, 22; 13:2, 3, 9).

 

Peter's speech

 

With some deference Peter began his defence, soon to become attack: "Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel." But as their attitude hardened, so also did his (v.19). The same features are readily traceable in Stephen's speech before the same assembly. At first, "Men, brethren, and fathers;" but he ended with: "Ye uncircumcised in heart and ears ..." (7:2, 51).

 

Peter's respectful address did not exclude irony: "If we this day be examined concerning a good deed done to an impotent man ..." Are good rulers to be a terror to good works? The man has been healed, permanently healed (Gk. perfect tense); more than that, he is saved (here Peter was emulating the example of his Master in employing a word of double meaning)

Nor was this marvel to be attributed to either apostle, but to Jesus of Nazareth – the Christ! – whom that very Council had condemned to death and who would now Iike to do the same to his two witnesses before them. They had enquired: "in whom" was this healing done (v.7)? Peter's direct answer was: "in him (Jesus)" (v.10).

 

This Jesus God had raised from the dead. Why had there never been any Sadducee disproof of the claim? And now in this miracle there was further evidence for them to cope with, for dead men don't heal lame men! Let all that venerable Council, and indeed the entire nation of Israel ('we mean to tell everybody!') face this unique challenge.

 

Peter went on, with all the assurance of a long–established rabbi: 'You are all familiar with this prophecy which comes in our Hallel, repeated at both Passover and Tabernacles: The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner. Jesus himself quoted these words to you and you had no answer for him (Mt. 21:42). Instead, you set him at nought. It was you rulers who crucified him. You can't put the blame on the Romans! Now that

 

Scripture is more powerful than ever. Indeed, the entire psalm has become a prophecy not to be gainsaid. Only in this risen Jesus is there the Messianic salvation you look for. No other leader (not even Moses!) can offer the fulness of forgiveness and blessing which comes through him. His Name itself means Salvation. You look in vain for any other Messiah. The future can bring you no–one to compare with him. And now all Israel, yourselves included, are under obligation to seek humbly the salvation offered in him' (Is. 49:6, 8; 52:10).

[Resource Manager]

A prophetic Scripture

 

The passage quoted by Peter (Ps. 118:22), when studied in depth, proves to be an amazingly appropriate Messianic prophecy, relevant to the sacrificial death of the Lord Jesus and his ultimate vindication. The Stone — a "chief corner stone"–is also a "foundation stone" (Is. 28:16), and a "stone of stumbling" (Is. 8:14). ("The Stone of Stumbling," by H.A.W.)

 

It can only have been inspiration (or his Master's instruction during the forty days) that took Peter to this psalm, for phrase after phrase in it proves to be relevant to that situation in which he, along with the lame man, now found himself:

Psalm 118	Acts 3; 4
26. The Name of the Lord.	3:6. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth ...
14. The Lord is my strength and song, and is become my salvation.	3:7. His feet and ankle bones received strength. 4:12: Neither is there salvation in any other.
15. The right hand of the Lord.	3:7. He took him by the right hand.
19. Open to me the gates of righteous­ness: I will go into them, and I will praise the name of the Lord.	3:2. At the gate of the temple. 3:8. He entered with them into the temple ... praising God
21. Thou art become my salvation. 25. Save now.	4:12. Neither is there salvation in any other
23. This is the Lord's doing: it is marvellous in our eyes.	4:16. A notable miracle. 3:11. All the people, greatly wondering.
26. We have blessed you ...	3:26. Sent him to bless you.
3. Let the house of Aaron now say, that his mercy endureth for ever.	4:6. Annas ... Caiaphas ... as many as were of the kindred of the high priest.
2. Let Israel now say ...	4:10. Be it known to all the people of Israel.
24. The Day which the Lord hath made.	The Day of Atonement (com­monly referred to as The Day; e.g. Heb. 10:25).

 

Peter concluded very boldly: "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby it is necessary for us to be saved."

 

Their Day of Atonement was declared a futility. Their Mosheh was no longer a moshiya. Jesus, and Jesus only, has been given – appointed (a Hebraism) – for all time, as the Saviour of the people; and all Israel in every generation needs to recognize their present estrangement and their moral obligation ("must"!) to seek the salvation he offers.

 

Notes: 4:1–12

2. Grieved. Literally: 'much troubled'.

They taught. So John, as well as Peter, shared in the witness that day.

The resurrection from the dead. The Gk. phrase implies the resurrection of some, not of all. So also 1 Pet. 1:3.

3. Laid hands on them. cp. the arrest of Paul: 26:27–36. Contrast Peter's action 3:7.

6. Annas had five sons who all followed him in the high priesthood. The last of them had James, the Lord's brother, clubbed to death.

Gk: into Jerusalem. Many of the men of the Sanhedrin would have fine homes in the country outside the city.

John may have been Johanan ben Zaccai who, years later, was president of the Great Synagogue and who coaxed out of Vespasian permission for many Jews to settle in Jamnia when Jerusalem was in ruins.

Alexander may have been the leader of the million Jews in Alexandra.

7. Power. In the NT. this word nearly always means divine power.

Ye could be here in expression of contempt.

8. Contrast Paul's bold riposte: 23:1,6.

9. By what means. Or: in whom.

11. Stone– in Hebrew there is a not infrequent play on the resemblance to "Son."

This Scripture would be brought forcibly to their minds only four days later when the Hallel was sung at the Feast of Tabernacles.

12. Other ... other Different words in Greek, implying: Neither anyone similar to Jesus nor anyone markedly different.

[Resource Manager]

17. Set free (4:13–22)

 

Set in the midst of the great semi–circle of the Sanhedrin the three men found themselves subject to intense and continuing scrutiny, the more so because they seemed quite unabashed by their overnight imprisonment or by the awesome assembly before which they now found themselves. The Greek text implies that this boldness was specially evident in the demeanour of Peter.

 

"Unlearned and ignorant men"

 

This puzzled the rulers, for now, at last, they grasped what ordinary men, both socially and academically, they had to deal with. The word "unlearned" implies a lack of anything beyond the ordinary elementary synagogue–school educa­tion (Jn. 7:15). Yet these men had shown themselves able to handle the Scriptures like experts – indeed, better! "Ignorant" really describes status – they were mere laymen, with no official standing. The word was used for ordinary Jews, by contrast with priests and high religious authorities (note 2 Cor. 11:6).

 

Now the men of the Sanhedrin were able to recognize, and check, that they had actually seen these prisoners before – at the time of the arrest of Jesus of Nazareth. But then, what a difference in their demeanour! This Cephas had used a sword, and then had fled for his life; and there were witnesses that, later, in the palace yard, he had lacked the courage of a mouse! Yet see the difference in him now!

 

And there, too, stood the man who had been healed, manifestly fit and well, and all unperturbed by all this priestly fuss. Like the Gadarene demoniac and blind Bartimaeus, this man also was eager to continue with the one who had healed him.

 

Of course they'd had him carefully examined, to ensure that there was nothing fraudulent about this business, and were assured that the "facts" were facts.

 

The whole thing was inexplicable, and these men of learning were undis­guisedly amazed — and they continued to show it.

 

Perplexity and deliberation

 

So the jailer was bidden remove his prisoners again, so that the judges might deliberate. Their real problem was: What policy to adopt towards these disciples of Jesus? "What shall we do?" Nine months before, when there was a wild claim that Lazarus of Bethany had been raised from the dead, there had been the same perplexity: "What do we (i.e. now)?" (Jn. 11:47). With the crucifying of Jesus of Nazareth the problem had not gone away. Evidently it was going to rear its head again and again. So they must settle how best to cope with it.

 

The trouble was that they were up against an unbudgeable fact. It was no rumour or opinion. The healing had been done, and much as they would like to issue a public denial (what a court of justice!), they dared not try that. It would only provoke a roar of derision from the common people (cp. Lk. 20:6), for this healing was generally accepted as a miracle; it had sent Nazarene popularity soaring.

 

'The less this is talked about, the better! Then why do we not scare them into silence with strong threats about what will happen to them if they come before us again? Left to itself this trouble will spread into the people (Gk.) like a summer fire on a hillside or like a cancer in a human body. So, shut their mouths! Forbid their propaganda, whether in public or in private. Give the crowd time to forget about them.'

 

Why, it may be asked, was the precept of Moses' Law not brought into operation?:

 

"The prophet which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak ... even that prophet shall die" (Dt. 18:20).

 

It may be fairly confidently assumed that had they dared, the Sanhedrin would have followed this lead with no small enthusiasm, but they feared the people. For these Sadducees, who were poli­ticians more than they were men of God, vox populi was always vox Dei (v.21; 5:26).

 

The important Bezan text plainly implies that there were stubborn divided counsels in the debate concerning these two "unlearned and ignorant men," for it inserts: "When they had all consented to this opinion."

 

However, at last common ground was reached. The three were brought in again and were given, to their faces (Gk.), a strong dressing–down. No more of this inflammatory talk in the name of Jesus of Nazareth. All activities, both public and private, must cease forthwith.

 

 

[Resource Manager]

Unabashed

 

The apostles were undismayed. It was a strange situation–bold prisoners confronting fearful uneasy men of power.

 

With fine irony Peter and John set their policy over against that of the rulers: "Whether it is a righteous thing in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye (perhaps they could manage such a judgement better than the decision they had just taken!), for we are not able not to speak the things which we have seen and heard" (cp. Jn. 1:14; 1 Jn. 1:2).

 

Whereupon the prisoners were hustled out of the chamber, and set at liberty. This first taste of persecution had been relatively mild. The mercy of God was enabling them to become acclima­tised by stages to such hardships. Now, unwearied, they ran with the footmen. Soon they must contend with horses (Jer. 12:5).

 

Notes: 4:13–22

13. Boldness. A surprisingly common NT. word, used to describe the demeanour of Jesus and of his apostles.

Men – anthropoi, slightly contemptuous; cf. andres (3:12), more respectful.

Took knowledge, implies recognition; s.w. Lk. 24:16,31; Acts 3:10. Was Malchus, the high–priest's secretary, one of these? Jn. 18:10.

With Jesus. And the man with them (v.14)

14. Could say nothing. The Gk. tenses imply: they kept on trying, but could not say a single thing against the miracle.

16. Done by them is, literally: 'through them'. Thus they inadvertently concede that Peter and John were only agents.

17. Spread. 2 Tim. 2:17 has a cognate word.

Threaten – Literally: 'Let us threaten them a threatening' – a common intensive form in Hebrew. Threatening is always a sign of weakness. The form of the verb implies this to be done for their own selfish ends, not in justice. Cp. Jn. 9:22; 12:42.

18. Speak. There is a lovely double meaning here. They meant it in the sense of 'prate'. But elsewhere in Scripture it means 'speak withdivine authority! Ps. 78:2; 119:172; Am. 1:2; 2 Pet. 2:16,18; and the cognate word: Acts 2:4.14; 26:25; (a claim to inspiration!) Dt. 32:2; Ez. 13:9,19.

This ruling very quickly became a dead letter v.31; 5:12,21,42.

20. Seen and heard; cp. 1:8; Jn. 1:14; 1 Jn. 1:1,2.

22. Luke professionally notes ages and duration of sickness: 9:33; 14:8; Lk. 8:42,43; 13:11. But why is this verse inserted here? Out of place, surely.

[Resource Manager]

18. Thanksgiving and boldness (4:23–31)

 

Peter and John, set free, quickly made their way to where they would find the other apostles (see v.23, 31), who – as in Peter's later experience (12:12) – were no doubt offering sustained prayer for their well–being. These "perceiving the working of God" (Codex D etc.), the two reported all that had happened to them, and the threats of the rulers. Thereupon they all gave themselves to prayer afresh, led in this perhaps by James the Lord's brother or by Peter himself, and, when he came to his citation of the Second Psalm, they all joined in fervently in the reciting of the familiar words.

 

The early part of the prayer was a remarkable amalgam of two other Scriptures – Psalm 146 and Jeremiah 32:

Psalm 146	Acts 4
3. Put not your trust in princes In whom is no salvation.	5, 8. The rulers (s.w. LXX) 12. Neither is there salvation in any other.
6. Which made heaven and earth and the sea, and all that therein is	24. (Quoted exactly.)
7–9. (The marvels of God's handiwork)	(The ministry of Jesus?)
7. Which looseth the prisoners	21. They let them go.
9. The way of the wicked he maketh crooked.	Contrast the lame man's crooked limbs made straight.
10. The Lord shall reign for ever ... O Zion.	Ps. 2:6: My king upon my holy hill of Zion.
Jeremiah 32
16. I prayed saying ... The great and mighty God.	24. They lifted up their voice to God: Lord (Despot), thou art God.
17. Thou hast made the heaven and the earth by thy great power.	Which hast made heaven and earth ...
Thy stretched out arm.	30. By stretching forth thine hand to heal.
19. Great is counsel.	28. Whatsoever thy hand and counsel ...
Mighty in working.	24. Perceived the working of God (Codex D)
20. Signs and wonders.	30. Signs and wonders.
20. Hast made thee a name.	The name of thy holy servant Jesus.

 

In their prayer the parallel between present experience and the Second Psalm was worked out in some detail:

 

"Why do the Gentiles (Pontius Pilate), rage, and the peoples (the people of Israel) imagine a vain thing? The kings of the Land (Herod) stood up, and the rulers are gathered together (the Sanhedrin – same words exactly in v.5, 6), against the Lord and against his Christ (thy holy Servant Jesus, whom thou hast anointed) ... Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion (in this city – v.28, the best MSS).

 

Similarly, in Heb. 5:5, Psalm 2 is given an application to the resurrection of Jesus. Yet, no less than three times, the Apocalypse applies it to the Second Coming (2:27; 12:5; 19:15). This last day reference of the psalm so familiar to modern believers, is actually hinted at here also, for the plurals "Gentiles" and "kings" have only singulars – Pontius Pilate, Herod — to match with them in this first–century fulfilment.

[Resource Manager]

It is interesting to follow through the detailed early fulfilment of the rest of this prophecy.

4. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.	4:31 The place was shaken where they were assembled together (it is the derisive laughter of God at the futile opposition of the Sanhedrin).
5. Then shall he speak to them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.	7:51. Ye uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Spirit.
7. The decree.	Rom. Declared to be the Son of God 1:4 with power ... by the resurrection from the dead.
8. Ask of me and I shall give thee the Gentiles for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.	7:55. Jesus standing on the right hand of God (to ask: 'Give me the Gentiles'. Appropriately, the psalm goes on to the conversion of Saul to be an apostle to Gentiles).
10. Be instructed, ye judges of the Land.	The conversion of Saul, one of the judges (26:10 RV).
11. Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling.	9:6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord ...
12. Kiss the Son (Gentile word for 'Son'; LXX: accept correction) lest ... ye perish in the way.	9:9 (Saul a "dead" man till the third day).
Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.	(Paul's gospel of justification by faith). 4:31: To all who wanted to believe (Codex D).

 

The apostles prayed for no drastic divine action against their powerful adversaries, but simply that God would look on the hostility of these men. For the brethren it was sufficient that God should know of the despite done to His servants. Positively, all they asked for was that they be given "boldness to speak the word". (Who would have thought that they needed now to ask for that?), and that acts of power should vindicate the despised name of Jesus (cp. Lk. 11:13).

 

The earthquake, which doubtless scared everyone else in Jerusalem merely gave them further confidence. It was the only one of the great signs given to Elijah at Horeb (1 Kgs. 19:11, 12) which they had not experienced as yet. Mow it was as though the walls of another Jericho were being brought down before the invincible ranks of the New Israel.

 

Paul was to have a like experience (16:25, 26), also as a result of prayer, when he came to his first Gentile city.

 

Notes: 4:23–31

23. Chief priests and elders. Sadducees and Pharisees; the latter dominated the Sanhedrin.

25. The best Greek text reads: The Holy Spirit, the mouth of our father David.

Rage. This word describes the snorting of excited, unruly horses.

Peoples. In the OT. this word commonly refers to Israel (the twelve tribes).

Stood up. Rather stood by (to give assistance).

Against his Christ. And against his Holy Spirit anointing the apostles.

27. RV adds: In this city. Cp. Jn. 1:11; Lk. 13:33.

28. Determined before to be done. Peter's ready emphasis on the fore–ordained purpose of God: 2:23; 10:42; 1 Pet 1:2, 20

29. Threatenings, v.21. Contrast Mt. 23:3; Acts 23:5.

Boldness, v.31, 33; Jn. 14:13. Slaves with boldness – what a paradox!

31. Filled is aorist. Spake is continuous.

[Resource Manager]

19. "All things common" (4:31–37)

 

The healing of the lame man and the apostles' renewed witness, more boldly than ever, after they had been arrested and then set free, meant a vast amount of publicity before the people of Jerusalem. As a result, "many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand" (4:4), that is, a further two thousand since Pentecost (2:41).

 

The tone of this young and thriving Jerusalem ecclesia was all that could be desired: "The heart and soul of the multitude of them that believed was one." Here, as uniformly throughout Scripture, "heart" does not carry an emotional connotation, but refers rather to their thinking. Here was unanimity, primarily, of conviction. And "soul" in the New Testament commonly describes the natural man and his ordinary everyday activities and instincts. Accordingly, the record goes on to re–emphasize a selfless willingness to "have all things common." And, Codex D adds, "there was among them no division (i.e. discrimination, class distinction; or, possibly, disputation)."

 

The Holy Spirit at work

 

The apostles concentrated on their main duty of preaching: "With great power they gave witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus," that word "power"– dunamis, dynamite! – implying a vigorous activity of the Holy Spirit, for this is its meaning in scores of other places. Day after day they "gave back" their witness – it is a word which implies either fulfilment of a duty, or a ready response to any sign of hostile criticism.

 

But besides this specialized activity, "great grace was upon them all." Here, as one man, the commentators miss the point and drift into vague generalities about the favourable opinion of the populace or of undefined divine blessings. This woolliness arises through missing the early church's idiomatic use of "grace" (Charis) as a synonym for a gift (charisma) of the Holy Spirit.

 

Gifts for all, but not always

 

Here, then, is a further indication that the gifts of the Spirit were not restricted to the apostles, or even to them and other holders of office in the ecclesia. They were, apparently, available to all believers.

 

The evidence for this — fairly sub­stantial – has been compiled by E.W.

 

1. Sons and daughters, old men and young men are included in Joel's prophecy of the Spirit (Acts 2:17), "even

as many as

the Lord our God shall call" (2:39).

 

2. In the house of Cornelius, "the Holy Spirit fell on

all them which heard the word"

(10:44) –"as on us at the beginning" (11:15).

 

3. "For by one Spirit are

we all

baptized into one body ... and have been

all

made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Cor 12:13). "There are diversities of working (i.e. different gifts of the Spirit), but it is the same God that worketh all (these things) in all (members of the church)" (12:6).

 

4. "Unto

every one of us

was given (Gk. aorist) grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ" (Eph. 4:7). Here the context (v.8–11) plainly shows that the "grace" referred to is the Holy Spirit, in one of its partial gifts (see "Studies in the Gospels", H.A.W., p.44).

 

5. And so also in this Acts picture of the church in Jerusalem: "and great grace was upon them

all

" (4:33).

 

6. "The Holy Spirit which God hath given to them that obey him" (5:32).

 

However, it needs to be recognized that this enjoyment of spirit gifts was only intermittent as the details regarding both Peter and Paul (and such repetitious passages as 2:4; 4:31) seem to indicate (see. ch.16).

[Resource Manager]

Faith and Self Denial

 

One of the gifts listed by Paul is that of "faith" (1 Cor. 12:9). This can hardly be the faith in Christ that was common to all believers, and a necessary prelude to baptism (2:38). So it must surely refer to a special endowment of faith to enable a man to achieve what of himself he would never be able to rise to – in this instance, a willingness to let go wealth for the benefit of one's brethren and to depend in faith on the providence of God:

 

"As many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them at the apostles' feet, and distribution was made to every man according as he had need." The phrasing of the Greek text here might well imply that this was a continuing practice whenever there was an emergency, and specially regarding inherited property, that is, that those who already had adequate home and livelihood and found themselves inheriting real estate, which was not needed forthwith contributed it to the common fund.

 

They did this the more readily out of a conviction that the coming of the Lord was not far away. (Twentieth century disciples believe the same, but act differently). It is useful to ask what would have happened to all that property if, instead, the believers had chosen to keep their houses and lands in the family for another forty years!

 

It is intriguing to note that no less than three times in the space of five verses Luke records that the proceeds of these sales were "laid at the apostles' feet", for all the world like soldiers making surrender and laying down their arms. Why this uncharacteristic repetitious­ness? There was a similar, yet different, sacrifice years later in Ephesus, when books of magic worth al least half a million pounds(in modern inflation) were publicly burned (19 .19). Two kinds of witchcraft, both of them deleterious to faith!

 

In modern times a daily distribution to all in need has been gravely frowned upon as a form of "buying" converts and as liable to create all kinds of problems. The apostles, even if not aided by the Holy Spirit's wisdom, were level–headed enough to foresee that this was bound to happen (as indeed it did: 5:1–11; 6:1). But evidently it was not their method to refrain from good lest evil should come in its train.

 

Joseph Barnabas

 

One of the outstanding examples of this self–sacrificing faith was that of Joseph Barnabas, a Levite of Cyprus, who contributed the proceeds from the sale of an estate. Identification with the rich young ruler (Lk. 18:18ff) has been worked out at length in "Studies in the Gospels," ch.148. Only a few of the details are mentioned here. The Law had assigned no inheritance to Levites: "The Lord is his inheritance” (cp. Num 18:20–24 etc). It would seem that one of the sophistries by which Levites of those days got round the letter of the Law was by investing acquired wealth in property outside the Holy Land! Now, by the gift of faith through the Holy Spirit (11:24), Joseph sold up, and brought the money (s.w. riches; Lk. 18:24) to the apostles, who thereupon gave him his new name. Not that his original name was inappropriate, for the first Joseph had been a man of great wealth, yet not afraid to acknowledge his humbler brethren.

 

"Barnabas" has presented problems to the interpreters, but the identification suggested here smoothes away the difficulties, for "Son of consolation" is equally well "Son of exhortation" (as RV), that is, 'the man who did what he was told to do', namely, "Sell all that thou hast, and distribute (4:35 s.w.) to the poor ... and come, follow me" (Lk. 18:22). There must have been much inward wrestling before the decision of complete surrender was made. "With men it is impossible," Jesus had said about this young man, but not with God: for with God all things are possible" (Mk. 10:27). And the context here in Acts 4 (and 11:24) strongly suggests that that decision was only achieved through the godly impulse of the Holy Spirit.

 

"Barnabas" has been a problem because no amount of Hebrew or Aramaic can turn it into "Son of exhortation." "Bar" is certainly the Gentile word for "son” (as in Ps. 2:12 – but not 2:7). It was appropriate as emphasizing how this Levite was at last abandoning reliance on works of the Law ("What shall I do to inherit eternal life?"; Lk. 18:18). But the rest of the name means "prophecy," not "exhortation." The allusion is, of course, to the veiled prophecy made about him by Jesus that God can save even a man who turned away, saying: 'No, I can't do it. You are asking too much.' "The things that are impossible with men are possible with God" (Lk. 18:27).

 

 

Notes: 4:32–37

32. Not one (RV), among so many!

All things common. Cp. 2 Cor. 8:14,15, where an extension of this philanthropy is compared to Israelites in the wilderness sharing out manna. James 1 .5–12 is a passage deserving much careful study with primary reference to this situation in Jerusalem. ("The Epistle of James," by H.A.W.) It needs also to be borne in mind that this early charity was not used to encourage idleness: 2 Th. 3:10; Eph. 4:28. Later poverty in Jerusalem is often blamed on this first burst of benevolence. This is a mistake. Consider, rather, Acts 8:1–3; 22:4; 26:10, 11; Heb. 10:34.

33. Why did the Twelve not go preaching far and wide? The early church had a tradition (dependable?) that the Lord had commanded them to stay twelve years in Jerusalem. A later rationalisation, perhaps.

34. That lacked. LXX s.w. Dt. 15:7. By derivation, Gk. = needing to beg.

35. At the apostles' feet. Contrast 7:58.

According as. NT. usage suggests a specially emphatic "because".

36. A Levite. Jer. 32:7–15 presents a problem. But this property of Jeremiah's was in a priestly town. Num. 18 prohibited the owning of land outside the priestly and Levitical cities.

Consolation; Gk. paraklesis, exhortation – as in 13:15; 2 Cor. 1:5; 8:17; Heb. 12:5; 13:22.

37. This verse puts point to 1 Cor. 9:6.

[Resource Manager]

20. Ananias and Sapphira (5:1–11)

 

Not for nothing does this paragraph in Acts begin with "But". Thus it points not only to a continuation of the idea of having all things common, but also to a sharp contrast in the tone of the narrative. This picture of the early church makes no attempt to idealise the first believers any more than the gospels seek to present the apostles as anything but the spiritually immature men that they then were.

 

The Son of man had sowed good seed in his field. Now, as the passing of time was to make more and more evident, tares began to grow up also:

 

5:1, 2:

The deceit of Ananias and Sapphira.

 

6:1

Grumbling.

 

15:1

Judaism.

 

Gal. 2:11–14

Weakness in withstanding it.

 

15:39.

Missionary quarrelling.

 

Just as the covetousness of Achan brought trouble in Israel at the beginning of their new life in Canaan, so also now the same sin bade fair to spread rottenness in the New Israel. The two stories have the same elements — not only covetousness, but also a "keeping back" (s.w. Josh. 7:1), and collusion, divine discernment, judicial death, and the spread of a great fear.

 

Motives

 

There is an irony about the name of Ananias (= the Lord's grace or gift) (see 4:33, and ch.19). It may be that he sold his property for the benefit of the brethren as a result of an impulse of Holy Spirit guidance. If this were so, it would not only add meaning to Peter's accu­sation about lying to the Holy Spirit but would also explain the extraordinary severity of the divine judgement.

 

It is perhaps possible also to infer (v.1: Gk. aner) that Ananias had already acquired some prominence in the ecclesia at Jerusalem, and so felt goaded to live up to a reputation he took pride in but did not deserve. This too would merit severe judgement. "Whoso boasteth himself of a false gift is like clouds and wind without rain" (Prov. 25:14; and cp. Jude 12).

 

Apparently Sapphira was no better than her husband. Her name, which she would fain have been seen to deserve, means Beautiful (s.w. Dan. 4:12, 21: "fair"). Significantly enough, it has been found by the archaeologists on an ancient burial urn in Jerusalem. Hers?

 

These two, who should have been each other's spiritual reinforcement against temptation, actually encouraged each other in evil. Indeed, it is not unlikely that when Peter accusingly asked: "Why hath Satan filled thine heart ...?", the Satan he meant was Sapphira.

 

From the start it was a paltry sordid business, for it would be possible for Ananias to understate the selling price of the property by only a small proportion, or the figure specified to Peter would have seemed most unrealistic. Yet he and his wife evidently lacked the faith to believe that their Lord would see them adequately provided for. The assurance and comfort imparted by "that which is seen," even though carefully hidden away from the eyes of their brethren, was more real to them than "that which is not seen." (2 Cor. 4:18).

 

The narrative seems to imply that Ananias came to present the money to the apostles (all of them being present?) at a formal meeting of the ecclesia. The kudos that came from such prominence and approval was sweet to this deceiver — precisely what he loved and had aimed at.

[Resource Manager]

Judgement

 

But he had forgotten that the risen Lord had imparted to his apostles the authority to "remit" and "retain" (Jn. 20:22, 23) — to forgive and to censure – and this Peter now proceeded to do publicly. He used his Master's highly effective method of rebuke–by–question­ing: "Whiles it remained, did it not remain thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? (here is plain proof that there was no command­ment or compulsion about this practice). Why hast thou put this thing in thine heart (i.e. thought it out and approved it; cp. Mal. 2 .2cGk.)? Thou hast not lied (i.e. not only) unto men, but unto God." Peter's "Why?" probed at the motive for the deceit.

 

And Ananias collapsed forthwith and very soon died (1 Tim. 5:24) — for none that "make a lie" are to have their part in God's heavenly Jerusalem (Rev. 21:27; 22:15). Luke's description employs a specialised medical term, and judging from its use with reference to Herod Agrippa 1 (12:23), a particularly miserable death may be implied.

 

At this cataclysmic happening, which came about without any direct exercise of apostolic power, all present, including the apostles, were startled and fearful. What a contrast this situation made with the idyllic happy fellowship there had been hitherto! It is not unlikely that even Peter was taken completely by surprise when Ananias collapsed.

 

After the assembly had recovered from the initial shock, certain minor officers of the ecclesia — called "the younger" in contrast to the elders–came forward and wrapped the body tidily in its own robes, just as the sacrilegious sons of Aaron had been after the judgement on their presumptuous sin (Lev. 10:4, 5), and took it away for burial (Dt. 21:23). Not improbably the interment took place in Acaldama, the graveyard which had been bought with the thirty pieces of silver brought back by covetous Judas. Speedy burials are common in tropical countries. Edersheim has assembled evidence that this was normal in ancient Jerusalem.

 

Sapphira

 

Some three hours later Sapphira came into that tense assembly, now made yet more tense by her presence. It is inconceivable that no one had as yet informed her of her husband's death, but it is much less likely that the details of Peter's charge against Ananias had been told.

 

Now she was comforting herself, doubtless, that, although widowed, she had some of the proceeds of the recent sale to help provide her with a reasonable subsistence. Indeed the narrative may imply–by that word "answered", in v.8 — that she even made bold to ask that the money Ananias had brought might be returned to her as a needful aid in her widowhood.

 

The apostle's indirect answer was: "Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much?" —indicating as he spoke the money which still lay undisturbed on a near–by table. He was deliberately providing an opportunity for repentance and frank confession (cp. Gen. 3:9). But the appeal fell on deaf ears, because the heart was hard.

 

Sapphira looked carefully, and answered: "Yea, for so much."

 

Why did she not stop to remind herself of the plain warning in the Law? "If anyone sin in that he heareth the voice of adjuration, he being a witness, whether he hath seen or known, if he do not utter it, then he shall bear his iniquity" (Lev. 5:1 RV).

 

That bland reply, repeating the lie of her husband, brought her sin on her own head.

 

"How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord?" — testing whether the Spirit in the apostles could be hood–winked, and whether she and her husband could refuse the directive of the Holy Spirit in themselves and get away with it (Rom 12:9).

 

"Behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out."

 

And as those solemn–faced brethren walked to their usual places in the assembly, Sapphira slumped down on the floor at Peter's feet, just where, three hours earlier, her husband had laid that money of deceit.

[Resource Manager]

Reaction in the ecclesia

 

As word about this judgement from heaven went round, a shock wave of fear went through everyone. The entire ecclesia was stunned by such a blunt reminder that the most intimate concerns of their lives were under the direct scrutiny of their Lord. There, but for the grace of God, go I! "Thou, God, seest me." The One who walked in the midst of the candlesticks, with eyes as a flame of fire, would one day be the Judge of quick and dead. But such is his power and authority, he need not wait until that day of reckoning!

 

Word of these momentous happen­ings would soon reach the chief priests, for there is reason to believe that those evil men had lost no time in planting their secret agents in the new ecclesia (e.g. Gal. 2:4). Then what was the reaction of those spies? One can imagine them asking for a fresh assignment!

 

Why was Peter not arraigned on a charge of murder? Wasn't this a fine opportunity for the rulers to bring the apostles into discredit? But what concrete evidence did they have? And in any case, would it be wise to add to the publicity these men of Jesus of Nazareth had had already?

 

What happened to that money? Would it be used? Two precedents — Judas's thirty pieces of silver (Mt. 27:7), and the tokens of the rebellion of Korah (Num. 16:37–40) – suggest that Ananias's money would be assigned for some useful purpose, if only that of providing a burial fund for poor brethren.

 

How like the first failure in Eden all this was! – a man and a woman in conspiracy against known duty, a ruinous lie, clear options of good and evil, fearful sinners given an opportunity to confess; and the outcome a mortal judgement.

[Resource Manager]

Additional Note

 

An alternative and drastically different interpretation of this incident is perhaps worth mentioning.

 

From the very first, according to the Lord's own prophecy (Mt. 13:24ff – the tares), the Jewish adversaries of the gospel made serious efforts to wreck the early church by infiltrating agents into the ranks of the believers. Gal. 2:4 is quite explicit about this.

 

If Ananias and Sapphira were among the first of these dissimulators, several details take on a sharper meaning:

 

1. If the deception had proved successful, how much easier it would have been thereafter to discredit the apostles.
    
   
2. The remarkably drastic judgement meted out is now more readily seen to be appropriate to the situation. The two were condemned not just because of an ingrained spirit of money–grubbing or peculation, common to many people, but as the exposure of a deliberate evil spirit of anti–Christ.
    
   
3. "Why hath Satan filled thine heart ...?" now takes on an even more pointed meaning.
    
   
4. In the normal course of things the "coincidence" of two people dropping dead at the word of Peter would surely have provoked an official enquiry. But on this hypothesis, a full investigation of the circumstances is about the last thing the hostile rulers would want.
    
   
5. The apparent omission of funeral rites is striking. Were there no friends and relations to lament the sudden death of these two?
    
   
6. The strange phrase: "And of the rest durst no man join himself to them (the believers?)" is a statement wondrously difficult to make sense of. The rest of whom? Joined to whom? The commentaries vary considerably here. But if "the rest" means "other would–be infiltrators" planning to insinuate themselves into the ecclesia, the sequence of ideas is much easier. Apart from this reading of the situation, there is a shouting contradiction between this v.13 and the next verse: "And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women."
    
   
7. The allusion to Solomon's porch (v.12) is surely intended to remind readers of Jesus in Solomon's porch (Jn. 10:23, 24) dexterously using the wisdom of Solomon to cope with an evil attempt to entrap him with a tricky dilemma (see ch.21).
    
   
8. The high indignation of the Jewish rulers (v.17) is perhaps more readily seen as a reaction to the sudden death of Ananias, their "agent", than as a symptom of envy or political apprehension.

 

 

Notes: 5:1–11

1. With. Gk: sun, not meta.

2. Kept back. The same word is used in Tit. 2:10 of slaves misappropriating what is their master's. Cp. also Gehazi: 2 Kgs. 5:20–27; and the Unjust Steward: Lk. 16:6. The evil influence of money comes out pointedly in Acts 5:1,2; 6:; 8:20; 16:19; 19:25–27; 24:26.

3. Cp. Num 30:2.

To lie. Yet Peter himself had lied and lied again; Mt. 26:74. Where lies the difference?

4. Lied ... unto God. This phrase and v.9: "to test the Holy Spirit," might imply that the two shared a scepticism about the divine authority of the apostles (Mt. 12:31).

5. Fear. Cp. 19:17.

6. Young men. Certain passages might suggest that here is a technical term for ecclesial officers: Lk. 22:26; 1 Pet. 5:5; 1 Tim. 5:1; Tit. 2:2, 6; 1 Jn. 2:13,14.

Buried him. "No more an Ananias (LXX) in the house of the Lord" (Zech. 14:21).

9. Why not the kind of judgement described in 1 Cor. 5:5,13?

10. The young men. Not s.w. as in v.6. The one describes age relative to the elders. The other is a technical term (see earlier note).

By her husband, in a tomb, not a grave.

11. Church. First occurrence in Acts of ekklesia (but Codex D has it at 2 .47). The Greek use of the term is illustrated by 19:32. But very often LXX (and 7:38) has ekklesia for the congregation of Israel (here, and in the rest of NT. the New Israel).

[Resource Manager]

21. The healing Christ! (5:12–16)

 

In the time of Moses, when judgement came on Korah and his fellow–rebels, the reaction was that "all the congregation ... murmured against Moses and against Aaron, saying, Ye have killed the people of the Lord" (Num. 16:41). But there was no such bitterness among the New Israel at the death of Ananias and Sapphira: "They were all with one accord in Solomon's porch." The spirit of unanimity so dominant immediately after Pentecost (2:42ff) still prevailed.

 

It is remarkable that the authorities permitted their thronged and enthus­iastic meetings in the temple area, but evidently popular acclaim was so marked at this time that, in spite of the earlier prohibition (4:18) persistently disregarded, the rulers deemed it politic to turn a blind eye, at any rate for a while.

 

The allusion to Solomon's porch is not without significance, for it was there (Jn. 10:23) where Jesus had one of his toughest encounters with the rulers. It was there where he appealed to the witness of his good works (v. 25, 32, 37) as his apostles were now able to do. There also he declared concerning his "sheep": "They shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand" (v.28) – the twelve would remem­ber this by and by, when they were arrested and then unexpectedly set free; what was written about their Lord proved true for them also: "Therefore they sought again to take him: but he escaped out of their hand" (v.39).

 

A problem phrase

 

The "signs and wonders" done by the apostles, and apparently by none of the other believers, continued to make a great impression on the multitude. The reputation of the brethren stood very high at this time. Yet, somewhat unexpectedly Luke adds: "Of the rest durst no man join himself to them."

 

This has been variously interpreted as meaning:

 

1. although the people admired the disciples, because of official disapproval they dare not give loyalty to the gospel (Jn. 7:28; 12:42; but note v.14);
    
   
2. the rest of the disciples, influenced by the Ananias incident, treated the apostles with even greater awe and circumspection; but more probably
    
   
3. since the Ananias story is really an exception and parenthesis, "the rest" alludes back to Barnabas the Levite – the rest of the Levites dared not, because of their official standing, openly follow their colleague's noble example of open discipleship; this conclusion is neatly supported by the use of the word "joined", with its clear allusion to the name Levi (Gen. 29:34). Later, after the advocacy of Gamaliel, scruples were thrust aside, and "and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith" (6:7).
    
   
4. For an alternative to this, consider again the Additional Note at the end of ch. 20.
   

[Resource Manager]

Popularity

 

Meantime, although certain segments of the populace felt discouraged, amongst others there was steady progress: "Believers were the more added to the Lord." This is really remarkable language, emphasizing the growth of the Body of Christ. It stands in sharp contrast to the earlier description that "the Lord added to the church daily" (2:47). Now the accession of converts warranted the use of the word "multi­tudes" – both men and women.

 

The exercise of the healing powers of the Holy Spirit soon brought fame to the apostles, and to Peter especially. In the city people took notice of his move­ments, and then brought out their sick folk on beds and mattresses in the hope that the apostle would pause to heal them or would at the very least pass so close that his shadow would linger over them, and bring healing (cp. 19:12; Lk. 8:44; Mk. 6:56), as though he were the Shekinah Glory of God (s.w. Lk. 1:35; 9:34).

 

And the disciples were reminded of an intriguing Messianic prophecy in Isaiah:

 

"Behold, a king (Jesus) shall reign in righteousness, and princes (his apostles) shall rule (the ecclesia) in judgement. And a man (the Messiah) shall be ... as the shadow of a rock (Peter) of glory in a thirsty land (Zion means 'dry place')" (32:1, 2). In later days there were to be plenty of examples of prophecies about Messiah being fulfilled by Messiah's men. The ensuing verses (v.3–8) are all appropriate to the stark contrast between apostolic power and preaching and the studied villainy of the rulers.

 

And of course these sick people were healed, even though the record does not explicitly say so (except in Codex D), and even though their attitude seems to the modern reader to be well–flavoured with superstition. If these sufferers were not healed, there would be no point whatever in including this remarkable detail in the narrative.

 

This rather pathetic enthusiasm spread. As the word went round, bad cases from towns well outside Jeru­salem were brought before Peter in the wistful hope that the carry–over of the power which men remembered in Jesus of Nazareth would operate as effectively through his men. And it did.

 

Yet there is no word of these marvellous healings leading to a further surge of conversions. But Jesus had been happy to help these stricken folk out of an overflow of compassion for them in their sufferings. And so also with the apostles.

 

 

Notes: 5:12–16

12–14. The sequence is worth noting:

v.12a. The apostles.

v.12b. The ecclesia.

v.13a. The rest.

v.13b. The people.

v.14. The new converts.

v.15. The sick in Jerusalem.

v.16. The sick from further afield.

15.Brought forth: v.10 s.w. A contrast!

Into the streets. But not to the meetings!

16. Vexed, healed. Two well–recognized medical terms. The first means, literally, "crowded". Legion! With the second contrast Mt. 17:16.

[Resource Manager]

22. More trouble with the rulers (5:17–32)

 

The exasperation and envy of the chief priests at the impressive preaching and healing by the apostles became explosive. The growing popularity of the Nazarene movement, together with the political danger that this enthusiasm might engender, really worried them. They could envisage a popular uprising against the power of Rome, bringing in its train an indescribable trail of ruin and misery, and for themselves an utter loss of authority (cp. Jn. 11:48).

 

Arrested – and freed, by whom?

 

So, one evening (as on an earlier occasion: 4:3), when the apostles were occupied with one of their meet­ings in Solomon's porch, they were rounded up and locked up in the com­mon prison, but apparently segregated from all the city riff–raff who were there.

 

But as dawn approached they found themselves unexpectedly — or perhaps not so unexpectedly! (Ps. 146:7; Acts 4:21) – set free by "an angel of the Lord." It has more than once been speculated that this "angel" was some official who was willing to take risks on their behalf. There are several hints in the early part of Acts that secret sympathizers kept the disciples informed of what went on in the high counsels of the rulers and were prepared to give what aid they could, provided this could be done without undue danger. Certainly it is rather remarkable that next day, when the apostles stood before the Sanhedrin, there was apparently no interrogation: "How did you get your freedom? Doors locked! Men ceaselessly on guard! And you walk out undeterred?" Surely this seeming deliberate silence about a startling jail–break is best explained as due to a suspicion that someone influential had been making good use of money and personal authority to bring the prisoners out.

 

If this approach is correct, then who was the "angel of the Lord?" Suspicion falls on Malchus, the officer of the high priest who was not only smitten but also miraculously healed within a minute. Is it not likely that for the rest of his days such a man would be anything but a disciple of Jesus, if only in secret?

 

Another suggestion is that the Theophilus for whom Luke wrote was one of the sons of Annas, a man who actually succeeded years later to the high priesthood, only to be put out of office by the Herod Agrippa (Jos. Ant. 19.6.2) who commented satirically on the witness made by Paul concerning the resurrection of Jesus.

 

Whether by human agency or not, God was certainly at work on behalf of the persecuted. More and more the apostles were being made to realise that divine power was at work to prosper the cause of the Son of God. So without hesitation they went into action, as they had been bidden by their deliverer, proclaiming the truth of Christ before the early worshippers soon after sunrise.

 

A startled Sanhedrin

 

Meantime, a full assembly of the Sanhedrin had been called for a formal trial of the offenders. It consisted of the small but immensely powerful priestly party, the Sadducees, and the more popular majority, the Pharisees.

 

This august assembly was utterly startled by the report that, in spite of locked doors and guards on duty, the prisoners had vanished. The news brought consternation in the minds of all. Was this another of the remarkable "signs and wonders" which were now always associated with the name of Jesus of Nazareth?

 

They were even more nonplussed when there came word that the very men they were concerned about were at that moment preaching and teaching in the temple court where, the evening before, they had been arrested. What was this but cool effrontery (4:17–21)?

 

The temple guard was instructed to arrest the men once again, but in as unprovocative a manner as possible. Any sharply hostile action might well touch off an uncontrollable riot (cp. Jn. 7:45).

 

What was the surprise of the officers when their first mild demand that the twelve attend the Sanhedrin meeting met with immediate compliance! There was no hint whatever of resentment or truculence. "It shall be given you in that hour what ye shall say," their Lord had assured them, and already they knew that this would be true.

[Resource Manager]

Charged! Undismayed!

 

Standing there before the great semicircle of reverend and influential men, the apostles heard themselves charged with two offences – first, dis­obedience of the Sanhedrin's earlier strict injunction (4:18) that they cease their propaganda; and second, that they were losing no opportunity to incite the crowd against their rulers: 'You are set on making us responsible for the putting to death of this man'. What a contrast with the cynical shout at the trial of Jesus:

 

"His blood be upon us, and upon our children" (Mt. 27:25). Now these rulers feared for their own skins.

 

Peter, if anything more confident than on the former occasion, was ready as spokesman of his brethren:

 

'Whom ought we to obey? – God or men? You know the answer to that! Our leader Jesus, the man whose name you are even afraid to mention, was raised up by God; but you, choosing to treat him as an impostor, had him put to death as a criminal of the worst sort. Nevertheless, God raised him from the dead, and has now exalted him at his own right hand. It is only in him that there is forgiveness of sins, and the necessary condition – yes, even for you governing elders of the nation! – is repentance. We who followed Jesus in his ministry are entrusted with this message, and we speak it with the Holy Spirit's authority just as much as did the prophets in ancient days. This is our duty, and we will fulfil it!'

 

 

Notes: 5:17–32

17. Which is the sect of the Sadducees. These words are literally true. The Sadducee party consisted only of the high–priestly families and their immediate friends and relations.

Indignation. More exactly, "jealousy."

20. The words of this life. Possibly put for "these words of life;" cp. 13:26; Rom. 7:24. Or, perhaps this is an early church technical term – like "The Way" (19:23), "The Truth" (1 Tim. 2:4).

21. Senate. Gk: Gerousia, which comes several times in Dt. 21:2LXX. Hence, perhaps, v.28 here. The entire passage is splendidly relevant to the death of Jesus.

23. What a contrast with 16:20.

26. And yet another contrast: 21:30–36.

28. This man's blood seems to imply that the crucifixion was quite recent – in which case Acts 5 must follow chronologically quite close on Acts 4.

Straitly charge. An emphatic Hebraism.

30. Hanged on a tree. Cp. Peter's words in 10:39; 1 Pet. 2:24. A neat harmony. Allusion to Dt. 21:22 (see note on v.21).

31. Prince and Saviour. Allusion to Joshua, who gave Israel their promised inheritance? The same word "exalted" comes in Josh. 3:7LXX. Peter's phrase: "hanged on a tree" might also echo Josh. 10:26 (Annas had five sons!).

[Resource Manager]

23. Gamaliel (5:33–42)

 

Peter's bold rejoinder to the strictures of high–priest Caiaphas did more than take the breath away from the assembled Sanhedrin; it riled them exceedingly. Luke's word means, literally: "they were sawn through" – a marked contrast with the crowd which had heard Peter at Pentecost, and were "cut to the heart" (2:37), that is, pricked in their conscience.

 

So these rulers "took counsel", i.e. decided (v.28s.w.), to have the apostles put to death. It was a reaction of anger which they wouldn't have dared carry out.

 

At that moment Gamaliel, the undisputed leader of the Pharisee majority party there, stood up to advise differently.

 

This Gamaliel was one of the greatest figures in first–century Jewry, the first to be given the honorific title of Rabban. He was descended from David, and therefore in some way related to the Lord Jesus, for the house of David was far from numerous in those days. There is a tradition that he was related to Nicodemus, and gave shelter in his country home to that worthy man when persecuted by the Jews for his declared faith in Christ. His grandfather was the prestigious Rabbi Hillel who in his time had led the Pharisee party rivalling that of Shammai the austere. It is probably true, though not certain, that Gamaliel's father was the saintly Simeon who had blessed the baby Jesus in the temple (Lk. 2:25ff). Indeed, he was himself old enough to have been personally present in the temple on that remarkable occasion when the boy Jesus amazed the learned assembly there with his understanding and answers. (Lk. 2:46).

 

At the time of this trial of the apostles, and for nearly twenty years more, Gamaliel was acknowledged to be the most illustrious Sanhedrist of his time.

 

So when this man of authority com­manded that the apostles be removed from the chamber, no–one demurred.

 

Subtle advocacy

 

Then began a remarkable piece of advocacy:

 

'Has the rising by Theudas been forgotten already? He claimed to be Messiah, and rallied a troop of four hundred men round him. Do you remember how he led them to Jordan, promising to part the waters as Joshua did? But before that or any other marvel could happen, they were cut to pieces by the cavalry of the Roman governor. And in the time of the census at the end of the reign of the first Herod, of execrated memory, there were many amazing happenings and startling stories, and one Judas of Gamala in Galilee took advantage of the excitement to assert that he was Messiah. But soon he was a dead Messiah, and his followers were scattered.'

 

What Gamaliel did not know at the time of this speech was that a few years later the sons of that Judas revived his movement so vigorously that, as the party of the Zealots, it continued right up to A.D.70 to be the most virile and violent faction in Israel.

 

Gamaliel's advice

 

However, he went on:

 

'So, I counsel you, learn the lessons of history and handle this situation with kid gloves. If it is a delusion and fraud, this Jesus — of — Nazareth movement will sooner or later collapse of its own accord. But if it is of God, nothing you may attempt will bring it down. Call to mind how you were once advised: "If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him ... it is expedient for us that one man should die for the people." So you did not leave him alone — and now, the problem is still with us. My advice, then, is this — that instead of making martyrs of these men, who in themselves are pretty insignificant, you hold back from any drastic action, and leave this movement to peter out, as it surely will if it is of no worth. On the other hand, if this new sect really is God–guided, would you wish to be found using all the strength of your authority against God?'

 

The superb cleverness behind this oration of Gamaliel's lies specially in this – that it was all spoken with tongue in cheek; he didn't believe his own arguments! Nevertheless he was able not only to carry his own party with him but also to make any possible objection from the Sadducees appear petty and niggling.

[Resource Manager]

Secret sympathiser?

 

Rackham has commented regarding this speech: "It is difficult to exclude the suggestion of policy;" But what policy?

 

To that question, the best available answer is that Gamaliel was using all his superb ability to defend the apostles and their movement without appearing to do so. It seems very likely that, influenced by Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, Gamaliel was a crypto — disciple. (There are indications that the early church firmly believed this to be a fact.) Carefully hiding his own personal convictions, he was doing everything in his power to save the followers of Jesus from the worst rigours of persecution.

 

Consider, first, how utterly incon­clusive his main argument was: If this is not a God–guided movement, nothing can make it prosper. If it is God–guided, you can do nothing to quell it.

 

One of Gamaliel's own examples undermined his thesis, for although Judas of Galilee was slain (as Jesus was), his party very soon developed an irrepressible vigour.

 

Again, apply the same argument to such movements as the papacy or communism, and the utter futility of it is seen in a moment. Apply it, conversely, to the gospel of Christ, and again Gamaliel is proved hopelessly wrong, for the massive evidence of the New Testa­ment is that even before the apostles had passed off the scene the Truth of Christ was being eroded at a phenomenal rate. Is the suspicion allowable that Saul of Tarsus, present in that assembly, saw through the speciousness of his venerable master's reasoning, but he respected him too much to offer oppo­sition or criticism? Instead, at the first opportunity, he showed publicly his disagreement by mounting a vicious persecution of those whom his teacher had cleverly shielded.

 

Further grounds for suspicion

 

Other details chime in with this conclusion about Gamaliel:

 

1. He spoke (v.37) about how Judas of Galilee "drew away" much people after him. But this, as Gamaliel must himself have been aware, was the very expression used in the Law about false teachers and false prophets (s.w. Dt. 18:10,13LXX). Yet that very Scripture demanded that the nation's leaders take the most drastic action possible to stamp out the evil. When Gamaliel used such tendentious language, the ice was very thin indeed!
    
   
2. When he said: "If this work be of men ... but if it be of God," he made a small but highly significant change in that word "be" (from subjunctive to indica­tive) which, if pondered, would surely have told the alert listener that the speaker's judgement was on the side of the disciples: "This movement is of God."
    
   
3. That concise phrasing: "of men ... of God," may well have been borrowed from Jesus himself, for in the great final dialectic in the temple court the Lord himself had asked: "From heaven, or of men?" (Lk. 20:4). And it seems highly probable that Gamaliel was involved in that encounter, for in later days he was known to use against the Sadducees the very argument to prove the resurrection which Jesus used with such force on the same occasion (Lk. 20:37; "Studies in the Gospels," ch.165).

 

Whether deservedly or not, the great rabbi carried the assembly with him, if only by virtue of his own massive personal prestige among the majority party of the Pharisees. Indeed his warning against being "found to fight against God" stuck in the minds of his hearers, for, years later, his words were quoted in a worse Sanhedrin wrangle as to how Paul should be judged (23:9).

[Resource Manager]

Freedom again

 

So the apostles were charged once again that they must cease all their propaganda and all their teaching concerning Jesus. Then, as punishment for their disobedience of the earlier veto (4:18), they were all given a flogging–"forty stripes save one" – and sent away. The reader is left wondering what sort of treatment would have been meted out to them if Gamaliel had counselled: "Do all you can to repress the activities of these men."

 

The apostles, quite unsubdued by their experience, remembered their Lord's exhortation:

 

"Rejoice, and be exceeding glad, for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you" (Mt. 5:11,12). They were suffering for "the Name"–that Name which was opprobrium on the lips of their adversaries (v.28; 4:17), but which they deemed to be their highest glory.

 

So the ministry continued unabated. In spite of the most stern prohibitions those open–air meetings in the temple area still went on. The apostles had the people on their side, and the rulers dare do nothing more against them.

 

But there were some of more timid spirit who were unhappy about risking another collision with the authorities. So for their sakes the ministry was also taken extensively into the homes of the brethren throughout the city.

 

 

Notes: 5:3–42

33. Cut to the heart; s.w. 7:54; 1 Chr. 20:3 where read: "caused them to cut with saws."

34. There were two Gamaliels in the line of the famous Hillel:

 

Hillel I

|

Simon I

|

Gamaliel I

(died 57 or 58)

|

Gamaliel II

 

35. Take heed to yourselves. The diplomatic appeal to self–interest. To do. The word suggests "policy".

36. Theudas. Because Josephus mentions a rising by one Theudas in A.D. 44–45, many critics accuse Luke of an anachronism here. But could there not have been an earlier Messianic movement by another Theudas (abbreviation of the very common Theodorus, Theodotus)? This seems likely, for Josephus mentions "a great multitude" of followers, as against Luke's "four hundred". It is useful to note also that Josephus mentions no less than four leaders of rebellion called Simon and three others called Judas, all within a period of ten years. One important rebel against Herod the Great in B.C4 was called Matthias, which is the Hebrew equivalent of Theudas.

Somebody. Avoidance of the title "Messiah"; cp. v.28.

Was slain. A tacit allusion to v.30 s.w.

Scattered, brought to nought. Contrast 8:4. This "scattered" (in v.37 also) is probably a deliberate tactful allusion to Num. 10:35.

38. Let them alone. Codex D adds: Not defiling your hands – perhaps alluding to Ecc. 7:18LXX: "By this defile not thy hand: for he that fears God shall come forth well in all respects."

This counsel, this work. Is this Jer. 32:19 (context), or Is. 8:10, 11, 14 (which Jesus and Peter had both used against the rulers)?

39. There is an ellipsis here. Supply: (I advise this), lest haply...

40. Beaten. Dt. 25:3; s.w. 2 Chr. 29:34LXX!

41. Worthy ... shame. A fine oxymoron; cp. 2 Cor. 6:10. See this theme expanded in 1 Peter 2:20, 21; 3:14, 17; 4:1, 12–19; 5:1, 10. And note the significant parallelism in Is. 48:9.

[Resource Manager]

24. Seven helpers (6:1–7)

 

The apostles "ceased not to teach and to preach Jesus as the Christ," continuing to do this "daily in the temple, and in every house" (5:42), so that "the number of the disciples was multiplied."

 

This word "disciple", so common­place in the gospels, and frequent also right through Acts, disappears completely from the epistles, its place being taken by "brethren," the cognomen used by Jesus on the morning of his resurrection (Jn. 20:17), and "saints", sometimes with special reference to Jewish (as distinct from Gentile) believers. So the frequency in Acts of "disciple," always implying Jesus as "teacher", may perhaps be taken as further small evidence that the author was a very early follower of the Lord.

 

By the use of "multiplied" Luke also steers his reader to a comparison with the multiplying of persecuted Israel in Egypt (Ex. 1:7,20). Now the New Israel was re–enacting that experience.

This resemblance shows through with remarkable clearness when this paragraph in Acts is set alongside the account of the people's murmuring about the manna and of how Moses was helped by having seventy elders, endowed with the Spirit:

 

Numbers 11

 

4. A multitude, mixed in character,

1. murmur

9. about daily manna

17. The leader, unable to bear the burden of the people,

16. is bidden appoint 70 helpers,

16. who are to stand there (s.w.6:6) before the Lord.

25. In them the Spirit is specially manifest,

26. and particularly in two who also "prophesy" away from the rest.

 

Class distinction

 

The Jews in Jerusalem fell into two main classes – "Hebrews," those who were sabras, born in the Land, and greatly proud of the fact, and "Grecians." This latter designation has often been taken to mean Greek–speaking. But all the people were that. It is more likely that they were members of the diaspora who had settled in the Land but still retained much of their cosmopolitan way of life.

 

The social strain created in Jewry by this distinction came through into the ecclesia also, and showed itself especially in the charity distributed to the poor believers. So the Grecian brethren fell to grumbling about this "class distinction," which was doubtless more accidental than designed. The apostles were just too busy to keep an eye on everything.

 

An urgent problem

 

Although Luke says the "widows" were being neglected, it seems likely that the term was intended to cover all the poor and needy, for the same term was apparently used with this general meaning by James–"to visit the fatherless and the widows" (1:27).

 

Jewry had a daily collection tor the poor, but the official distribution to the needy was only weekly, on Fridays. The brethren, knowing that their righteous­ness should exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, had instituted a daily ministration. It may well be that they had been driven to this by the exclusion of their widows from the distribution made out of temple funds (this kind of tactic would be a pointed way of applying discouragement to the poor who showed enthusiasm for Jesus of Nazareth).

 

Over against strong twentieth century trends, it is useful to note that in Acts the early church's main concern with social problems was inside the ecclesia.

 

Whether the distribution was made in the form of money or meals is not clear, for the phrase "serving tables" could mean either (nor is 2:45 decisive).

[Resource Manager]

Action taken

 

The apostles, realising that they must deal promptly with the problem of this "murmuring," called the multitude of the disciples together. When the growth of the ecclesia is taken into account, it is a problem to know how this could be done. Perhaps there was a series of meetings in certain synagogues specially favoured by the believers. It seems unlikely that a "domestic" question of this nature would be dealt with at a mass meeting in the temple court. Or were only delegates from various groups called together, as must have been the case with the later council at Jerusalem (chapter 15)?

 

It was immediately obvious that the apostles, whose main concern was public preaching, prayer, and instruction and exhortation of the flock, should not be saddled with such practical duties as the care of the poor: "It is not pleasing (to God) that we should forsake the word of God, and serve tables."

 

The Seven

 

So it was readily decided that a special committee of seven be appointed for this purpose; and even their work would be supervisory "over this need." The practical duties were probably left in the hands of capable dedicated women.

 

Why seven? Perhaps there were now seven distinct ecclesias in Jerusalem. Or maybe this was a deliberate imitation of a similar committee appointed by wise and zealous Hezekiah for the same sort of purpose in the time of his reformation (2 Chr. 31:14, 15).

 

The men appointed must be "of good report," that is, not only faithful and dependable brethren but by common consent recognized as such: men "full of the Holy Spirit and of wisdom," that is, their special charismatic gift(1 Cor.12:8) was a capacity for the wise handling of the affairs of the assembly, and particularly for the administration of ecclesial benevolence.

 

It is remarkable that, although the apostles were the best judges of character and ability (as the Ananias episode had shown), the selection of the seven was left to the assembly, with a confirmation (not necessarily automatic) added by the twelve.

 

That this was a special appointment to cope with a special problem is seen from the fact that nothing comparable to this "benevolent" committee of seven is to be found elsewhere in the New Testa­ment. When there was comparable work to be done, this was attended to by Paul and Barnabas and the elders of the ecclesia (11:30).

 

This arrangement left the Twelve free to concentrate on "the ministration of the Word" – a daily distribution of Bread of Life — whilst others saw to a more efficient "daily ministration" of practical aid and comfort. That word "daily" is one of Luke's medical terms, such as would be used today for "three times daily after meals."

 

The details about the seven are not without their interest. The names are all Greek, but this hardly proves that they were all Grecian Jews, for three (four) of the apostles bore Greek names but were certainly Jews born and bred in the Land.

 

It has been suggested, but without evidence, that these seven were made up of three Hebrews, three Grecian Jews and one Gentile proselyte – Nicholas of Antioch, the first non–Jew to be mentioned as coming into the faith, and he with full status as a Jew, a "proselyte of righteousness," not like such as Cornelius, "a proselyte of the gate".

 

Remarkably, nothing whatever is known about five out of the seven. But then, several of the apostles also are just names in the record.

[Resource Manager]

Stephen

 

Stephen was outstanding. Like Barnabas (11:24), he is described as "full of faith and of the Holy Spirit." Twice this is said of him. Then may it be inferred that, (by a special endowment of faith) he had been led, like Barnabas, to "sell all that he had and give to the poor" in order the better to serve and witness for Christ? If so — and this seems fairly likely – he was most suitably qualified to be concerned in welfare work of the kind now being undertaken.

 

Both Stephen and Philip were also quite outstanding preachers of the gospel. So evidently they were men of such burning zeal that they felt impelled to add copious other activities to this important responsibility now taken on.

 

Although the seven were selected by the ecclesia as a whole, it was still necessary to have apostolic approval. Presumably, the Twelve had a power of veto, though there is no evidence in the New Testament of such an exercise of authority.

 

The apostles now laid hands on the seven, it may be supposed to impart to each a further gift of Holy Spirit power in addition (chapter 4:31) to gifts already possessed – the gift of "helps" (1 Cor. 12:28)?

 

Thus another problem was resolved, and the main work of the gospel continued unhindered. "The word of God increased (this could mean that the Holy Scriptures were reinforced by inspired utterance and exposition); and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly." This development marked the climax of Christian popu­larity in Jerusalem. The insistence by the apostles that their main work suffer no interruption was thus fully vindicated. It is noteworthy that today welfare tends to usurp the priority which preaching and Bible study had in apostolic days.

 

Priestly converts

 

Most noteworthy of all in the gospel's progress was the beginning of a steady accession of priests as converts to the Faith. Apart from the power of the message itself, there were certain other considerations which had made a great impact on the priestly class. First, there was the impressive example of Joseph Barnabas the Levite, a former member of the Sanhedrin and a man of considerable wealth and social standing. But even more, the speech of the venerable Gamaliel before the Sanhedrin had flashed a green light which they now interpreted as meaning that priests could follow their convictions regarding Jesus of Nazareth without being called on to face persecution and without any risk of being banned from their cherished duties in the temple. Indeed, the way in which the believers continued to frequent the temple more assiduously than any others proclaimed clearly that there was no perceptible dissonance between temple and gospel.

 

So a steady stream of priests began to present themselves for baptism. In the time of Moses the appeal: "Who is on the Lord's side?" (Ex. 32:26), had brought the tribe of Levi loyally to the side of truth. And now again, the same cry, and the same response. These Bible–instructed priests were each girding his sword on his thigh. Their "obedience to the Truth" was thus described by Luke in a lovely phrase which he had learned from his friend Paul (Rom. 6:16, 17; 1:5; 10:16; 2 Th. 1:8) as a synonym for baptism.

 

Many of these priests would be in a poverty–stricken and socially degraded condition because of the callous and harsh treatment meted out to them by the imperious power–obsessed high priests (Jos. Ant. 20.9.2). The more humble of them were referred to by the rabbis as "priests of the people of the earth," but the gospel net gathered them in just the same. Had not Jesus said in one of his parables "fish of every sort"?

 

 

[Resource Manager]

Notes: 6:1–7

1. Multiplied, with 6:1, 7 compare 9:31; 12:24, and then Gen. 22:17.

Murmuring. Noun and verb come no less than seventeen times with reference to Israel in the wilderness. Extreme Judaist prejudices were at the back of this attitude, and they continued to make a more and more critical ecclesia in Jerusalem: 9:26; 11:2; 15:1,2; 21:21. Or does Gal. 2:4 supply the explanation of this phenomenon? Contrast 1:4.

Against the Hebrews. Greek implies a direct confrontation, not subterranean grumbling.

Ministration. Bezan text adds: "by the ministers of the Hebrews." The work had evidently got into the hands of brethren incapable of acting without prejudice.

2. The twelve. So Matthias was a true apostle; cp. 2:14.

3. Good report. Always necessary: 22:12; Tit. 1:6; 1 Tim. 3:7; 5:10; s.w. Heb. 11:39.

This business. In the New Testament this common Greek word nearly always means "need."

6. Laid their hands on them. The meaning of this simple ritual was not always the same. It might mean identification with a sacrifice (Lev. 1:4), the imparting of a blessing (Mk. 10:16), healing (Acts 28:8), or a gift of the Holy Spirit (19:6). But in at least one instance it was simply the outward sign of commission to begin a new work (13:1–3; yet note Gal. 1:1). Giving the right hand is not infrequently an equivalent.

7. The word of God increased. This is the second of the seven section–markers in Acts; see on 2:27.

In Jerusalem. Surely implying that there were also disciples outside the city but that it was in the capital where there was such a surge of progress.

[Resource Manager]

25. Stephen (6:8–15)

 

Luke was a matter–of–fact sort of historian. Even the experiences of his close friend Paul he set down in a detached well–balanced fashion with little indication of the intense personal enthusiasm and loyalty which he undoubtedly had for the great apostle.

 

Then what is to be said about Luke's admiration for Stephen, for regarding no other fellow–disciple is he so eulogistic.

 

Luke's eulogy

 

The piling up of phrases is remarkable:

 

1. "Full of faith and of the Holy Spirit" (v.5). But this is the description also of Barnabas (11:24), who is most probably described in this way, because by an extraordinary God–given exercise of faith he sold his estate and gave the proceeds to help his brethren (4:36,37). Then was Stephen noteworthy for a similar act of generosity? This would make him specially qualified for the welfare work he was appointed to.
    
   
2. "Full of grace (not 'faith' as AV) and power, he continued to do great wonders among the people" (v.8). But "power" (dunamis) is very frequently used of Holy Spirit power, and the context supports this reading here. Also, "grace" is used for a gift of the Spirit (see Notes and "Gospels," pp.44, 299).
    
   
3. "The wisdom and the Spirit by which he spake" (v.10). Another charismatic gift!
    
   
4. "His face as the face of an angel" (v.15). See later comment on this.
   

 

Clearly at this time Stephen outshone the apostles in all respects — and they were content that he should.

 

Contending for the Faith

 

The enemies of the gospel knew that their own reputation and influence were in the balance. Something must be done, for here, as it seemed to them, was almost a second Jesus of Nazareth. So they looked back and asked themselves what it was that had brought them success against the man they had crucified. Right at the last the turning point had been when they had got the multitude to believe that Jesus was a blasphemer against Moses and the temple. Then surely the same tactics could be made to work again! Get the crowd on their side!

 

Stephen was a man of such zeal and energy that he was not content to handle merely the responsibility lately handed to him of superintending the consider­able welfare activity in the ecclesia. In this he sets a pattern for the Lord's men of ability today. For such to be content to have only one iron in the fire is hardly a life of real dedication. "To whom much is given ...!"

 

Gospel propaganda had moved from the earlier open–air meetings in the temple court to public exposition and discussion in Jerusalem's many synagogues. Whatever the reason for the change–perhaps to avoid creating embarrassing situations for the many new brethren who were priests? – when­ever critics and enemies of the gospel were present, discussion turned to lively Biblical disputation. At this Stephen excelled. So in at least three synagogues which he attended – that of the Libertines (liberated slaves), the North Africans, and the Cilicians and Asians – there was constant high debate con­cerning Jesus the Christ and his relation to the Law and the Temple.

 

In all this excitement none was able to gainsay the power and force of the Biblical arguments used by Stephen. Even the brilliant young rabbi Saul of Tarsus—in—Cilicia was exposed as inadequate. There is most probably an allusion to him, in his pre–Christian days, in Jas. 2: 2, 3, 6, 7.