ACTS 4 COMMETARYEDITED BY GLE PEASE

Peter and John Before the Sanhedrin

1 The priests and the captain of the temple guard and the Sadducees came up to Peter and John while they were speaking to the people.

BARES, "The priests - It is probable that these priests were a part of the Sanhedrin, or Great Council of the nation. It is evident that they claimed some authority for preventing the preaching of the apostles.

The captain of the temple - See the Mat_26:47; Luk_22:4 note. This was the commander of the guard stationed chiefly in the tower Antonia, especially during the great feasts; and it was his duty to preserve order and prevent any tumult. He came at this time to prevent a tumult or suppress a riot, as it was sup posed that the teaching of the apostles and the crowd collected by the healing of the lame man would lead to a tumult.

And the Sadducees - See the notes on Mat_3:7. One of the doctrines which the Sadducees maintained was, that there was no resurrection of the dead. Hence, they were particularly opposed to the apostles for preaching it, because they gave so clear proof that Jesus had risen, and were thus spreading the doctrine of the resurrection among the people.

Came upon them - This expression implies that they came in a sudden and violent manner. See Luk_20:1.

CLARKE, "The priests - These persons had evidenced the most implacable enmity against Christ from the beginning.

The captain of the temple - See this office particularly explained in the note on Luk_22:4 (note).

The Sadducees -Whose whole system was now in danger by the preaching of the resurrection of Christ; for they believed not in the immortality of the soul, nor in any future world. These made a common cause with the priests, etc., to suppress the evidence of Christ’s resurrection, and silence the apostles.

GILL, "And as they spake unto the people,.... For though only mention is made of Peter's preaching in the preceding chapter, yet doubtless John preached as well as he;

either in turn, or to a part of the people at some distance: and this shows their diligence, faithfulness, and integrity, in the ministration of the word; and it is recorded to their honour, that whilst they were about their master's business, and discharging the duty of their office,

the priests, and the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees came upon them; by agreement, with great violence, and at unawares: the "priests" might be those who kept the watch in the temple; for

"in three places the priests kept watch, in the house of the sanctuary; in the house of Abtines, in the house of Nitsots, and in the house of Moked, and the Levites in one and twenty places (p).''

And it now being eventide, they might be about to take their stands; "and the captain of

the temple" might be he, whom they call, איש�הר�בית, "the man of the mountain of the

house"; who was שר, a ruler, or governor, and ממונה, a president over all the wards (q); he

is sometimes called ראש�משמר, "the head of the ward" (r); and of him it is said (s),

"the man of the mountain of the house goes his round through every ward, with burning torches before him; and every ward that does not stand (is not on his feet), the man of the mountain of the house, says to him, peace be to thee; and if he observes that he is asleep, he strikes him with his staff, and he has power to burn his garments.''

The Vulgate Latin and the Oriental versions read in the plural number, as in See Gill on Luk_22:4, Luk_22:52. The Sadducees were a sect among the Jews, that denied the resurrection of the dead; of their rise, name, and tenets; see Gill on Mat_3:7.

HERY, "We have here the interests of the kingdom of heaven successfully carried on, and the powers of darkness appearing against them to put a stop to them. let Christ's servants be ever so resolute, Satan's agents will be spiteful; and therefore, let Satan's agents be ever so spiteful, Christ's servants ought to be resolute.

I. The apostles, Peter and John, went on in their work, and did not labour in vain. The Spirit enabled the ministers to do their part, and the people theirs.

1. The preachers faithfully deliver the doctrine of Christ: They spoke unto the people,to all that were within hearing, Act_4:1. What they said concerned them all, and they spoke it openly and publicly. They taught the people, still taught the people knowledge;taught those that as yet did not believe, for their conviction and conversion; and taught those that did believe, for their comfort and establishment. They preached through Jesus the resurrection from the dead. The doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, (1.) Was verified in Jesus; this they proved, that Jesus Christ had risen from the dead, as the first, the chief, that should rise from the dead, Act_26:23. They preached the resurrection of Christ as their warrant for what they did. Or, (2.) It is secured by him to all believers. The resurrection of the dead includes all the happiness of the future state. This they preached through Jesus Christ, attainable through him (Phi_3:10, Phi_3:11), and through him only. They meddled not with matters of state, but kept to their business, and preached to the people heaven as their end and Christ as their way. See Act_17:18.

JAMISO, "Act_4:1-13. Peter and John before the Sanhedrim.

the captain— of the Levitical guard.

of the temple— annoyed at the disturbance created around it.

and the Sadducees— who “say that there is no resurrection” (Act_23:8), irritated at the apostles “preaching through (rather, ‘in’) Jesus the resurrection from the dead”; for the resurrection of Christ, if a fact, effectually overthrew the Sadducean doctrine.

CALVI, "1.And as they spoke Hereby it appeareth how watchful the wicked be,

because they are always ready at an inch to stop the mouth of the servants of Christ.

And, undoubt edly, they came together, as it were, to quench some great fire; which

thing Luke signifieth, when as he saith that the ruler or captain of the temple came

also; and he addeth, moreover, that they took it grievously that the apostles did

teach. Therefore, they came not upon them by chance, but of set purpose, that,

according to their authority, they might restrain the apostles, and put them to

silence. And yet they have some show of law and equity; for if any man did rashly

intrude himself, it was the office of the high priest to repress him; and also in like

sort, to keep the people in the obedience of the law and the prophets, and to prevent

all new doctrines. Therefore, when they hear unknown men, and such as had no

public authority, preaching unto the people in the temple, they seem, according as

their office did require, and they were commanded by God, to address themselves to

remedy this. And surely, at the first blush, it seemeth that there was nothing in this

action worthy of reprehension, but the end doth at length declare that their counsel

was wicked, and their affection ungodly.

Again, it was a hard matter for the apostles to escape infamy and reproach, because

they, being private and despised persons, did take upon them public authority; to

wit, because, when things are out of order, many things must be essayed to [against]

the common custom, and especially, when we are to avouch and defend religion and

the worship of God, and the ringleaders themselves do stop all ways, and do abuse

that office against God, which was committed unto them by God. The faithful

champions of Christ must swallow up and pass through this ignominy in [under]

Popery. For a thousand summers will go over their heads before any reformation or

amendment will wax ripe amongst them for the better. Therefore, Luke standeth

upon this point, when as he saith that they were grieved because the resurrection

was preached in the name of Christ. For hereupon it followeth that they did hate the

doctrine before they knew the same. He expresseth the Sadducees by name, as those

which were more courageous (202) in this cause. For they were almost [usually] a

part of the priests; but because the question is about the resurrection, they set

themselves against the apostles more than the rest. Furthermore, this was most

monstrous confusion amongst the Jews, in that this sect, which was profane, was of

such authority. For what godliness could remain, when as the immortality of the

soul was counted as a fable, and that freely? But men must needs run headlong after

this sort, when they have once suffered pure doctrine to fall to the ground amongst

them. Wherefore, we must so much the more diligently beware of every wicked

turning aside, lest such a step do follow immediately.

Some men think that the ruler of the temple was chosen from among the priests, but

I do rather think that he was some chief captain of the Roman army; for it was a

place which was fortified both naturally and artificially. Again, Herod had built a

tower there, which was called Antonia; so that it is to be thought that he had placed

there a band of soldiers, and that the Roman captain had the government of the

temple, lest it should be a place of refuge for the Jews, if they had stirred up any

tumult, which we may likewise gather out of Josephus. And this agreeth very well,

that the enemies of Christ did crave the help of the secular power, under color of

appeasing some tumult. In the mean season, they seek favor at the hands of the

Romans, as if they were careful to maintain the right of their empire.

COFFMA, "The glorious success of the gospel at Pentecost and for some time

afterward could not last. The mighty dragon who had attempted to devour the

Christ, who had been "caught up unto God, and unto his throne" (Revelation 12:5),

then turned the full strength of his fury against the Woman, that is, the church of

our Lord Jesus Christ. The inherent hatred of truth and righteousness on the part

of the powers of darkness was quickly manifested in the bitter opposition

encountered by the apostolic preachers of the gospel. The first move against the

church came suddenly.

And as they spake unto the people, the priests and the captain of the temple and the

Sadducees came upon them. (Acts 4:1)

Peter's sermon was interrupted by those inveterate enemies of Christ, the

Sadducees, who descended upon the apostles in sufficient strength to stop their

preaching and cast them into prison. Significantly, the Pharisees were not a part of

the arresting party; and, as Dummelow noted:

It is a mark of historic truth that the chief opposition to the apostles is here assigned

to the Sadducees, who denied the resurrection. The Pharisees, who affirmed it, were

comparatively friendly; and not a few of them became Christians (Acts 15:5).[1]

SADDUCEES

This Jewish sect was composed of proud, secular materialists who denied the

existence of a spiritual world, holding that neither angels nor demons existed,

denying any such thing as the resurrection, and rejecting the Old Testament

Scriptures, except for parts of them which had political utility, and also refusing the

traditions of the elders. Through wealth and political power they had gained control

of the religious apparatus which ran the temple, the office of the high priest being

regularly filled from this group. Their pipe-dream of having silenced forever the

claims of Jesus Christ by their wanton murder of him was rudely shattered by the

incident recorded in the last chapter. ot only was Christ alive, but he had ascended

to the right hand of God, had poured out the marvelous power of the Holy Spirit

upon the Twelve; and the astounding miracles that had accompanied the personal

ministry of Christ were continuing through the apostles who wrought such signs "in

the name of" that same Christ!

The captain of the temple ... This officer was of high rank, coming "from one of the

chief-priestly families, ranking next to the high priest, commanding the temple

guard of a picked body of Levites,"[2] and presumably being the one who

commanded the sentries stationed at the tomb of Jesus (Matthew 27:65ff). More

than one man held this rank (Luke 22:4,52); and it is likely that they rotated with

one another in the discharge of their official duties. Whichever "captain" was in this

arresting party, it is certain that he, as well as all the group, knew for a certainty

that the resurrection of Christ had occurred.

Luke's purpose in his unfolding narrative was correctly noted by Harrison:

One of the main purposes of Acts is to show that the Jews who rejected and

crucified Jesus continued their rebellion against God by rejecting the gospel of the

resurrected and ascended Jesus proclaimed by the apostles.[3]

Even the wicked Sadducees, however, were to have an other opportunity to be

saved. Their rejection of Christ, although grossly wicked, was not the final

rejection; for they could yet have obeyed the gospel and have received the gift of

eternal life. As Wesley observed:

So wisely did God order that they should first hear a full testimony to the truth in

the temple, and then in the great council; to which they (the apostles) could have

had no access, had they not been brought before it as criminals.[4]

[1] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (ew York: The Macmillan

Company, 1937), p. 823.

[2] F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans,

Publishers, 1954), p. 95.

[3] Everett F. Harrison, Wycliffe Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p.

395.

[4] John Wesley, ew Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker

Book House, n.d.), in loco.

COKE, "Acts 4:1-2. The priests, and the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees,

&c.— These three kinds of men,on different accounts, were prejudiced against the

apostles.

The priests were offended, because the apostles, whom they looked upon only as

private men, undertook to teach publicly; the Sadducees were displeased, because,

in testifying the resurrection of Christ, they effectually preached that doctrine which

they disclaimed and detested, the doctrine of the resurrection from the dead: and

the captain, who was placed with a band of soldiers near the temple, in order to

guard it, seeing such a crowd of people gathered together about the apostles, began

to apprehend a tumult.

ELLICOTT, "(1) The priests, and the captain of the temple.—For the first time in

this book, we come across the chief agents in the condemnation passed on our Lord

by the Sanhedrin. A few weeks or months had gone by, and they were

congratulating themselves on having followed the advice of Caiaphas (John 11:48).

They knew that the body of Jesus had disappeared from the sepulchre, and they

industriously circulated the report that the disciples had stolen it (Matthew 28:13-

15). They must have heard something of the Day of Pentecost—though there is no

evidence of their having been present as spectators or listeners—and of the growth

of the new society. ow the two chief members of the company of those disciples

were teaching publicly in the very portico of the Temple. What were they to do? The

“captain of the Temple” (see ote on Luke 22:4) was the head of the band of Levite

sentinels whose function it was to keep guard over the sacred precincts. He, as an

inspector, made his round by night, visited all the gates, and roused the slumberers.

His presence implied that the quiet order of the Temple was supposed to be

endangered. In 2 Maccabees 3:4, however, we have a “captain,” or “governor of the

Temple” of the tribe of Benjamin.

The Sadducees.—The higher members of the priesthood, Annas and Caiaphas, were

themselves of this sect (Acts 5:17). They had already been foremost in urging the

condemnation of Christ in the meetings of the Sanhedrin. The shame of having been

put to silence by Him (Matthew 22:34) added vindictiveness to the counsels of a

calculating policy. ow they found His disciples preaching the truth which they

denied, and proclaiming it as attested by the resurrection of Jesus. Throughout the

Acts the Sadducees are foremost as persecutors. The Pharisees temporise, like

Gamaliel, or profess themselves believers. (Comp. Acts 5:34; Acts 15:5; Acts 23:7.)

BARCLAY, "ARREST (Acts 4:1-4)

4:1-4 While they were speaking to the people, the priests, the superintendent of the

Temple and the Sadducees came upon them. They were annoyed because they were

teaching the people, and proclaiming, through Jesus, the resurrection from the

dead. So they laid hands upon them and put them under arrest until the next day,

for by this time it was evening. But many who heard the word believed; and the

number of the men was about five thousand.

The healing of the lame man had taken place within a part of the Temple area

which was continually thronged with people. The spotlight of publicity was

inevitably focused upon the incident.

The Gate Beautiful was the gate which led from the Court of the Gentiles into the

Court of the Women. The Court of the Gentiles was at once the largest and the

busiest of all the Temple Courts, for into it anyone of any nation could come so long

as he observed the ordinary laws of decency and decorum. It was there that the

money-changers had their booths and the sellers of sacrificial victims their stalls.

Round the outer boundary of the Temple area ran two great colonnades meeting at

a right angle in the corner of the Court of the Gentiles. The one was the Royal

Porch, the other Solomon's Porch. They, too, were crowded with people who had

come to worship, to learn and to sightsee. Clearly the whole series of events would

gain the widest publicity.

Into this crowded scene came the priests, the superintendent of the Temple and the

Sadducees. The man whom the King James Version calls the captain of the Temple

was an official called the Sagan. He was the High Priest's right-hand man. In

particular he had the oversight of the good order of the Temple. When the crowd

had gathered it was inevitable that he and his Temple police should arrive on the

scene. With him came the Sadducees who were the wealthy, aristocratic class. There

were not many of them but they were rich and of great influence. The whole matter

annoyed them very greatly for two reasons. First, they did not believe in

resurrection from the dead; and it was this very truth that the apostles were

proclaiming. Second, just because they were wealthy aristocrats, the Sadducean

party was collaborationist. They tried to keep on friendly terms with the Romans in

order that they might retain their wealth and comfort and prestige and power. The

Roman government was very tolerant; but on public disorder it was merciless. The

Sadducees were sure that, if the apostles were allowed to go on unchecked, riots and

civil disorder might follow, with disastrous consequences to their status. Therefore

they proposed to nip this movement in the bud; and that is why Peter and John were

so promptly arrested. It is a terrible example of a party of men who, in order to

retain their vested interests, would not themselves listen to the truth or give anyone

else a chance to hear it.

COSTABLE, "Evidently John spoke to the people as did Peter ("they"). Three

separate though related (Acts 5:17) individuals and groups objected to Peter and

John addressing the people as they did. Jesus had also encountered opposition from

leaders who questioned His authority when He taught in the temple (Mark 11:27-28;

Luke 20:1-2). The captain (Gr. strategos) of the temple guard was the commanding

officer of the temple police force. The Talmud referred to this officer as the Sagan.

This individual was second in command under the high priest. [ote: Josephus,

Antiquities of ..., 20:6:1; 20:9:3; idem, The Wars ..., 2:17:1; 6:5:3).] He apparently

feared that this already excited throng of hearers might get out of control. The

Sadducees were Levitical priests who claimed to represent ancient orthodoxy. They

opposed any developments in biblical law, and they denied the doctrine of bodily

resurrection (Acts 23:8) and so disagreed with Peter's teaching on that subject (cf.

John 12:10). They believed that the messianic age had begun with the Maccabean

heroes (168-134 B.C.) and continued under the Sadducees' supervision, so they

rejected Peter's identification of Jesus as the Messiah. [ote: See Steve Mason,

"Chief Priests, Sadducees, Pharisees and Sanhedrin in Acts," in The Book of Acts in

Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp.

147-56.]

"For them the Messiah was an ideal, not a person, and the Messianic Age was a

process, not a cataclysmic or even datable event. Furthermore, as political rulers

and dominant landlords, to whom a grateful nation had turned over all political and

economic powers during the time of the Maccabean supremacy, for entirely

practical reasons they stressed cooperation with Rome and maintenance of the

status quo. Most of the priests were of Sadducean persuasion; the temple police

force was composed entirely of Levites; the captain of the temple guard was always

a high-caste Sadducee, and so were each of the high priests." [ote: Longenecker, p.

301.]

Verses 1-4

The arrest of Peter and John 4:1-4

In chapters 4-7 there is a series of similar confrontations with each one building up

to the crisis of Stephen's death and the persecution that followed. The first four

verses of chapter 4 conclude the incident recorded in chapter 3 ("as they were

speaking," Acts 4:1), and they introduce what follows in Acts 4:5-31.

HOLE 1-37, "AS WE READ the opening verses we find the answer to this offer,

which was given by the official heads of the nation. The offer being based on the

resurrection of the Lord Jesus, it was particularly obnoxious to the Sadducees and

to the priests, who were of that party. They gave it an unqualified rejection by

arresting the apostles. The work of God, in converting power, went on however, as

verse Acts 4:4 records; and the next day, when examined before the council, Peter

found fresh opportunity for testimony, in answering their question as to the power

and ame in which he had acted.

The ame and power was that of Jesus Christ of azareth, whom they had crucified

and whom God had exalted. Psalms 118:22 had been fulfilled in Him, and Peter

proceeded to widen out the testimony from that which was particular to that which

is universal. The power of the ame was right before their eyes in the particular

case of the lame man healed: it was no less potent for the salvation of men

universally. The physical healing of the man was just a sign of the spiritual healing

which the ame of Jesus brings. The despised Jesus of azareth is the only door

into salvation.

Verses Acts 4:13-22, show most strikingly how Peter’s testimony was vindicated.

The apostles were unlearned and ignorant according to worldly standards, yet they

had been with Jesus and were bold, and this impressed the council, who would fain

have condemned them. Three things hindered however:

(1) “They could say nothing against it” (verse Acts 4:14);

(2) They had to confess, “we cannot deny it” (verse Acts 4:16);

(3) They found “nothing how they might punish them” (verse Acts 4:21).

When men wish to discredit anything, they usually in the first place deny it, if that

be at all possible. If that be not possible, they find some way of speaking against it,

misrepresenting it, if need be. Lastly, if that be not possible, they attack the persons

involved in the thing, blackening their characters and punishing them. These three

well-known devices were in the minds of the council, but all failed them since they

were fighting against God. They could merely threaten them and demand that they

ceased to proclaim the name of Jesus. Peter repudiated their demand, since

God had commanded them to preach in the name of Jesus, and as He was infinitely

the higher Authority, they must obey Him rather than them.

There follows, verses Acts 4:23-37, a beautiful picture of the early church in

Jerusalem. Released by the council, the apostles went to “their own company.” This

shows us that at the outset the church was a “company” distinct and apart from the

world, even from the religious world of Judaism. This point needs much emphasis in

days when the world and the church have so largely been mixed together.

The early church found its resource in prayer. In the emergency they turned to God

and not to men. They might have wished for a council less Sadducean in character

with more liberality and breadth of outlook, but they did not agitate to get it; they

simply sought the face of God, the sovereign Ruler of men.

In their prayer they were led to the Word of God. Psalms 2:1-12 shed its light on the

situation that confronted them. The interpretation of it would refer it to the last

days, but they saw the application of it which referred to their days. The early

church was marked by subjection to the Word, finding in it all the light and

guidance they needed. This also is a very important and instructive feature.

They were marked too by far more concern for the honour of the ame of Jesus

than for their own ease and comfort. They did not request a cessation of persecution

and opposition, but that they might have boldness in speaking the word, and that

miraculous support which would exalt His ame. The church is the place where

that ame is held dear.

As a result of this there was an exceptional manifestation of the power of the Spirit.

All of them were filled with Him; the very building where they met was shaken, and

their prayer for especial boldness was instantly answered. And not only this, that

which they had not requested was granted to them, they all were “of one heart and

of one soul.” This of course flowed out of the fact that the “one Spirit” was filling

every one of them. If all believers today were filled with the Spirit oneness of mind

and heart would mark them. It is the only way in which such oneness can be

brought to pass.

Out of this flowed the next feature which verse Acts 4:33 mentions. There was great

power in the Apostles’ testimony to the world. The church did not preach, but filled

with grace and power it supported those who did. The preaching then, as always,

lay in the hands of those called of God to do it, but the power with which they did it

was largely influenced by the state that characterized the whole church.

The closing verses show that just as there was powerful testimony flowing without

so there was the circulation of love and care within. The Christian communism,

mentioned at the end of chapter 2, still continued. The distribution was made to

each, “according as he had need.” ot people’s wants, but their needs were met, and

so nobody lacked. At a later date Paul could say, “I am instructed both to be full

and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need” (Philippians 4:12), but at this

time such experiences were unknown by the saints in Jerusalem. Whether, by

escaping such experiences, they profited more than Paul did, by having them, may

be an open question, though we incline to think they did not. At any rate, the action

of Barnabas was very beautiful, and the love and care found in the church then

should be known today, though there may be some variation in the exact mode of

expressing it.

BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR, "And as they spake unto the people, the priests, and the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees, came upon them.

The captain of the temple

was an officer of a sort which Luke mentions in the plural in his Gospel (Luk_22:4), and is several times mentioned in the Old Testament, as in Jer_20:1. This officer, with his subordinates, had charge of the Levites, especially of those who kept the night watch in the temple. A hint at the forms and ceremonies which accompanied his duties may be obtained, perhaps, from Psa_134:1-3, in which verses 1 and 2 are supposed to be the address of these strategoi, or captains or archons of the temple, and verse 3 the response of the Levite watchers. The talmudical name for this captain appears to have been the “man of the mountain of the house [of the Lord],” and he is frequently mentioned in ancient Jewish writings. A little quotation will show a part of his duties: “The man of the mount of the house [or temple] used to make his rounds among the several watches, with burning torches before him. If he found any of the watch not standing on his feet, he said to him, ‘Peace be to thee.’ But if he observed one asleep, he struck him with his staff, and then was at liberty to set on fire his garments. And when he was asked by others, ‘What is the noise in the court?’ he answered, ‘the cry of a lazy Levite, whose clothes have been burned, because he slept on guard.’ Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob said, ‘Once they found my mother’s brother asleep, and burned his garment.’“ It is most probable that this custom is alluded to in Rev_16:15, “Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked” etc. An official of corresponding power, but, of course, different duties, has charge of the temple enclosure in Jerusalem to-day. He is the “Sheikh of the Sanctuary”; and in addressing him the proper form is” Ya Sheikh,” or “O Elder.” (Prof. I. H. Hall.)

Peter and John before the council

1. The name of Jesus was the power that wrought the miracle; or to use the incomparable language of the preacher himself, “by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by Him doth this man stand here before yon whole.” By the name we are to understand all the powers and prerogatives that centre in the Person. An ambassador borrows all his authority from the name of his sovereign. Paul, in the provincial court at Philippi, saved himself by invoking the name of Caesar. The inquisitors before whom Peter stood on this occasion supposed that Jesus was dead. It was, indeed, true that bodily He had vanished from the sight of men; but He had left behind Him a name in which resided the tremendous power of His spiritual presence, which was destined thereafter to be the working force in history until the whole world should be subjugated to God. For want of ability to discern this fact, Hume and Gibbon and all other undevout historians have been at their wits’ end. They have marked the

operations of a mysterious force, working like a magnet, and leading the nations on toward a brighter, better day; but for the most part they have frankly acknowledged their inability to locate or characterise it. The name of Jesus is this unnamed factor in universal history.

2. The name of Jesus, though despised by these inquisitors, has taken precedence of all others in heaven or on earth. Or, again to quote the preacher, “This is the stone which was set at naught of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.” Christ dead? Ah, no! Could these ecclesiastics have looked forward through the centuries they would have seen His name written on all scrolls of honour, His Cross glowing on innumerable spires that were to point, like index-fingers, to His throne in heaven, and His kingdom spreading like a vast tabernacle to enfold the world. In vain do kings of the earth set themselves and rulers take counsel together against this Jesus.

3. The name of Jesus alone has power to save; in Peter’s words, “Neither is there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven, given among men, whereby we must be saved.” Among those who listened to the apostle that day there was probably not one who did not cherish some sort of hope of salvation; but if these words were true they were all leaning on broken reeds.

(1) No doubt there were rabbis there who congratulated themselves on their acquaintance with current theology. They knew the technics of the argument between the schools of Shammai and Hillel, and were thoroughly adept in the traditions of the elders. But, without desiring to belittle the importance of dogma, it is right to say that the brain is a good way from the heart, and there is a vast difference between theology and religion. Many a man has, intellectually, a faultless creed who is nevertheless an utter stranger to vital godliness. But souls are not saved that way. A man may know all about the Nicene and the Ante-Nicene fathers, and all about creeds and symbols and theological systems, but if he has not made the acquaintance of Jesus Christ as a personal Saviour, he shall not enter into life.

(2) Then, doubtless, there were others in Peter’s audience who hoped to be saved for their devotion to the Church. We cannot dispense with the Church; nor dare we cast reproach upon it, for it is the bride of Jesus Christ; nevertheless, to rely upon externals for salvation is to face an awful disappointment at the great day. This was the trouble with the Pharisees.

(3) No doubt there were moralists also in this company, and, if so, Peter’s word ruled them out of heaven. For morality, as such, however admirable, has no saving virtue in it. Emerson objects to the use of the term “mere morality,” but what else shall we call that sort of legalism which takes no cogni-sance of the Lawgiver? The trouble with “mere morality” is that it leaves uncancelled the mislived past; it has no power to atone for a single sin, while it ignores the claims of Jehovah. In saying that we say nothing against morality, for the law is good; but the atoning power must be sought for elsewhere. Peter’s sermon had a remarkable effect upon the minds of his distinguished hearers.

(a) They marvelled that “unlearned and ignorant men” should have such forensic power. Bat they knew nothing of the influence of the Holy Ghost that rested upon them.

(b) They “took knowledge of these men that they had been with Jesus.” The ground of that conclusion lay in the fact that they had manifestly caught His

Spirit. (D. J. Burrell, D. D.)

Peter and John before the council

A notable miracle had been wrought at the gate of the temple, and a notable sermon had been preached to the assembled crowd, who were filled with wonder and amazement. It is the sequel of that which had been thus done and said which furnishes our present theme. We notice—

I. The offence of the apostles. It was not that they had been the means of bringing healing and health to a disabled man. Most sympathetic souls doubtless were glad. Others, probably (are there not always such?), after a little, began to question this way of coming to his health. It was not according to the regular practice. It was a reflection upon the professed practitioners of the healing art. But this was not the grievance to those with whom the two disciples of Jesus are brought into speedy conflict. These were the ruling class, the Sadducees, of whom were also the officials, both ecclesiastical and civil, who arrested Peter and John and locked them up for more deliberate examination. These were the rulers of the Church in that day; but they were by no means the religious class. The offence of the apostles was not that they had healed the lame man, or even that they had been disciples of Jesus, but that “they taught the people and proclaimed in Jesus the resurrection from the dead.” It was an offence of doctrine rather than of deed which excited the opposition of these Sadducean rulers. It was the offence of supernaturalism. But there was something more than this in it. Men oppose teachings often because the teachings conflict with the lives which they prefer to live. Supernaturalism always has its foes, for it implies a present God—a God who works, who sees and will judge. Ours is a Sadducean age. Natural science has engrossed the attention of the learned class to a large degree. They will accept mind cure or hypnotism, but not the healing touch of God. They will allow the inspiration of the poet, but not of the prophet. The offence of the Cross is not the only one which stirs up hostility. The offence of supernaturalism is now equally cause of anger and derision as it was in the days of Peter and John.

II. The defence of the apostles. Thus arraigned and thus accused, the two disciples are put in ward until the morrow. This was the very time for which they bad been prepared—the very time to exercise their gift to be witnesses here in the very court of Israel. And that is what they were: not defenders of themselves, but sturdy, truthful, uncompromising witnesses to Jesus and the resurrection. So they rehearse the facts. “You ask us who has done this good deed to the helpless man? Jesus has done it; Jesus the Christ, the Messiah for whom Israel has looked and longed. Nay, you know Him well, Jesus of Nazareth, the Man whom you so lately condemned to death, yes, ‘whom ye crucified’—He is the Author of this cure. For God undid your murder and raised Him from the dead.” So they bore testimony to the thing which had been done. But now they testify to the greater things which He can do. “He is the only One by whom we can be saved. We disciples or your priests and Sadducees can be safe and be saved alone by Him whose name and power has wrought this cure.” The defence of those who believe in supernaturalism is not argument. You cannot reason about the particulars in a sphere which men refuse to recognise. What can you do? You can oppose your faith to their unbelief, your confidence to their incredulity. You can give your ringing testimony to what you know. Testimony will win the day for Christ sooner and more surely than reasoning; for it will secure a hearing for the reasons of the faith that is in the disciples. Witnesses are more important than advocates. A hundred reasons why it should be so

are not half as strong as one “It is so.”

III. The change of the judges. After this form of a trial, the accusation and the defence, the court retires to consult. They cannot deny the facts. Facts are unfortunately stubborn things. What shall they do? “Let us silence them,” they say; and so they bring the two unlearned men before them, and charge them, with all the authority they have, and with what dignity they can, “not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus.” How well they were able to enforce their command the further record tells. It is not the last time in the history of the world that men of deep convictions have been met with a similar command. Right or wrong, it is impossible to correct men’s thinking, or, for very long, their speaking, by the mere command or compulsion to be silent. The very command is a confession of weakness. To ask your foe not to strike again is to acknowledge your fear of him. You cannot silence witnesses. The fire which is in men’s hearts cannot be smothered by the authority of courts, civil or ecclesiastical. The truth of God will overcome all lies at last in the kingdom of the truth, h the hot fires of experience the dross will be run off and the pure silver reflect the image of its Maker. All through this passage the name of Jesus is set forth as the source of power, of salvation, and of Divine teaching. (Geo. M. Boynton.)

Bigotry

I was once driven upon an Irish jaunting-car with a little child of four years of age. It began to rain, and a hood was placed over the child’s head. I heard her mutter, “That is such a pretty view.” I said, “How can that be when your head is covered?” “Oh,” she replied, “I see my knees, my shawl, and my pretty little feet.” A good illustration of people who cannot see farther than the extremity of their own beautiful selves. (J. Alexander, D. D.)

Ecclesiasticism has no exclusive rights

The Church ecclesiastical is like a vast water company chartered to supply the Church spiritual from the great river of the water of life. But how absurd it would be for a water company to claim the right to interdict rain from heaven, or to say to the inhabitants of a particular district, “You shall receive no water except it pass through the hydraulic machinery which I have constructed.” (General Gordon.)

The first persecution of the apostles

To the tempter God said, “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed.” But the hatred reigns in the breasts of the children of the devil, “he that is born after the flesh persecutes him that is born after the Spirit,” while those who are “counted to the Saviour as a seed” are told to love their enemies. The first-fruit of the enmity was the murder of Abel. The first-fruit of this enmity towards the Apostolic Church was the imprisonment of Peter and John. But it belongs to the disciples of a crucified Saviour to do good and receive evil.

I. The imprisonment of the apostles (verses 1-4). Peter had said to Christ, “I will go with Thee to prison “ etc., and our Lord had said to the sons of Zebedee, “Ye shall, indeed, drink of the cup that I drink of.” And now we see—

1. The first act of violence, which was the arrest of Peter and John. “While they were speaking to the people” gracious words there was a rush in the assembly, and an iron hand was laid on the preachers, not by “rude fellows of the baser sort,” but the priests, of whom Hosea said, “As troops of robbers wait for a man, so the company of the priests murder in the way by consent.” The Sadducees were then in possession of authority, which they employed to indulge in the enjoyment of this life, as they believed in no other, and were cruel to all who disturbed their ease. They were, therefore, “vexed that the apostles preached, through Jesus, the resurrection from the dead.” For if He who was known to have been put to death was alive again, He was that “Man by whom came the resurrection of the dead.” What was there in this to grieve any one? Is the present life so long that we should not wish for another? Or were these rulers so wicked that they suspected a future life must be to them a state of punishment? To wish to die like a dog belongs to those who wish to live like a dog. But, whatever men might think or say of the Resurrection, the question with magistrates should have been, What injury will this do to society? Will men be worse neighbours, or subjects, for believing that, after this life, they will rise, and be judged for the deeds done in the body? And yet, how many have felt the rude hand of violence for no other crime than preaching, through, Jesus the resurrection from the dead!

2. The first night which the apostles passed in prison is full of interest. See them led along to where criminals are lodged, the healed man following, not leaping for joy, but asking in sorrow, “Is it a crime, then, that they have made me walk?” Arrived at the gaol, the authorities demand entrance for two prisoners, who have done—what? good to body and to soul. Shall we pity them? No; save your pity for their persecutors. For, if you say, “But what must it be for pious men to pass a first night in a gaol?” I answer, but they are in a good cause, with a good conscience, and in good company; and with these three attendants a man may lie easy on a cold, hard, stone floor; and in a dreary dungeon pass a pleasant night. For now Peter blesses his Lord, that, instead of denying Him, he can suffer for Him; and John feels that he is indeed the disciple whom Jesus so loved, as to hand from His own lips the cup of suffering, that His “beloved may drink also.” Call them not prisoners; their spirits are not imprisoned, but mount together to the mercy-seat, in prayer for grace to suffer well. And they knew that “the Word of God was not bound,” that the Church now numbered five thousand. If the apostles were kept from sleep, it was for joy of such triumphs. But “He giveth His beloved sleep,” which often refuses to shed its balm on royal eyelids, while it rests sweetly on theirs who, exhausted with labours and devotions, sink down, and, like Jacob, though with a stone for a pillow, see visions of God, heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending, in attendance on the:heirs of salvation. Thus Bunyan, passing through the wilderness, lighted on a den, where he slept, and saw what myriads have gladly kept awake to read.

II. Their coming forth and trial (verses5-22).

1. The court is particularly described, as of importance to the narrative. The great men lived in the suburbs, and now called a general meeting in the city. The rulers were probably the president and vice-president of the Sanhedrim; the elders the body of the council; and the scribes, the persons who acted as counsel, and clerks of the court. Annas was the high:priest, as Caiaphas had been. Alexander’s name intimates a heathenish Jew; but he was then a man of note. John is thought to have been the Ben Zacchai, celebrated in the Talmud, who, forty years before the destruction of the temple, saw the gates open spontaneously, and said, “I know thine end”; for Zechariah prophesied, “Open thy gates, O Lebanon, that the fire may

devour thy cedars.” “All the kindred of the high priest,” who were a species of nobles, were now assembled, as if their dignities were at stake. Listen to the examination: “By what power, or by what name, have you done this?—you?” For the last word stands as if it were uttered in scorn: “You, fellows, to have done this!” See how “God taketh the wise in their own craftiness, and turneth the counsel of the wicked headlong.” For they venture not to deny the fact. The more contemptuously they treat the apostles, as unequal to such a work, the more they glorify Christ. But who ever heard of trying men for the crime of healing in a moment? Who would think of accusing a physician for curing thoroughly and speedily? They ask, what name has done it; as if alluding to the Jews’ notion of a magic virtue in the name of Jehovah, which modern Jews have affirmed Jesus learned, and by it wrought His miracles. Had the apostles themselves dictated the examination, they could scarcely have made it more to their mind; for it elicited—

2. The defence which they made (verses 8-12). “It was done in the name of Jesus, the Messiah of Nazareth, whose name we pronounced ere we wrought the cure. You, indeed, condemned Him to die on the Cross; but God raised Him from the dead, of which the proof is before you.” The rulers had asked after the wonder-working name, and they now know more than they wished; for what a stab must this have been to their pride! What a thunder-bolt to their consciences I They, aware that Jesus promised to rise again, had set a guard to prevent, and now are told that a miracle has proved it true. But see how Peter turns their attention from healing bodies to salvation for the soul. Who sees not here the fulfilment of Christ’s promise to His apostles, “be not anxious what ye shall say, for the Holy Spirit shall teach you in the same hour what ye ought to say”?

3. The council’s embarrassment arose from the sight of the apostles and of the man they had cured. “Seeing the freedom of Peter and John,” who spoke like men at their ease, and “conceiving them illiterate and private” men, the rulers could not account for their unembarrassed air. They were not among the literati, nor in any public office, but in private secular life; and they were known to have been with Jesus, who was neither in high station Himself, nor attended by those who were; for it was asked, “Have any of the rulers or Pharisees believed on Him?” But the man who was healed was another embarrassing sight, to which the council had nothing to reply. This embarrassment induced them to order all others out of the hall, ashamed to say before them, “What shall we do to these men?” It is, indeed, difficult to know what to do with men who are tried for their good deeds; and still more with men who can work miracles. Often have persecutors seized their victims and then knew not what to do with them. Hence, with a confounding coolness, they plot to smother a miracle, that it may not spread further, as if it were an infectious plague. Thus commenced a long course of threats and orders, not less impious than vain. This was overruled, to bring out to view the great principle of religious liberty. From this time Christ is declared to be the paramount Ruler in religion. “It is impossible for us not to speak what we have seen and heard.” Not to speak at all to any man in the name of Jesus! Bid us, neither breathe nor think! A religion of ceremony may be put down by brute force; but to hide the love of Jesus is as impossible as to “hide the ointment of your right hand.” Having, therefore, threatened again, they let the apostles go; the people made it dangerous to punish (verse 21). Thus ended the first act of persecution, and thus commenced the triumph of religious freedom.

III. The liberty of the apostles was improved in a manner worthy of the men and of their cause. Earth and heaven exhibit scenes full of instruction.

1. On earth, the two confessors, “being let go, returned to their own company”(verses 23-30). A night in gaol, and fierce threats, had wrought no change, except to increase their attachment to a cause that could not be gainsaid; and when restraint was taken off, as the bird whose string is cut soars away to its nest, they returned to their own company. Of the sufferings of a night in gaol, they say, they think, nothing. The threats, however, call forth a united prayer to God, expressing their submission to His Sovereign pleasure, and their confidence in Him as the Almighty Creator. They had astonished the enemy by their very courage; but they knew themselves too well to trust to this; for he that was a hero in the last battle may turn coward in the next; and therefore they ask for boldness. “He giveth more grace”; and they who ask it are the men who endure to the end. The apostles ask that “God’s hand might still be stretched forth to heal”; though one such display of power had cost them one night in gaol. Attention to an apostolic prayer becomes us. Mark its Scriptural character; a large portion is the Word of God; its high rationality; for the Psalm quoted is not misapplied; its deep humility, with its lofty bearing; its superiority to self; with its consecration to the Divine honour; and then say whether these men were either deceivers or deceived? If we pray like apostles, shall we not wisely adapt our prayers to occasions as they arise?

2. Heaven responded to earth; for, they having thus prayed, a second Pentecost followed. As in the first, a mighty sound, like a roaring wind, roused attention; so now, an earthquake, which shook the place where they were assembled, spoke the descending God. They were all filled with the Holy Spirit, in new and more abundant measures. Rich recompense for bonds and imprisonments.

Conclusion:

1. Let their testimony sink into your hearts, that “there is salvation in no other name, but that of Jesus the Crucified.”

2. When you have believed, and found salvation in it, you will show the attraction of affinity as they did, who, “being let go, returned to their own company.”

3. Triumph is the testimony of Jesus against all the terrors of persecution; which is a blunt weapon, that has ever failed of its object, from the hour that these apostles were let go, to this moment. (J. Bennett.)

The first persecution of the Church

The authorities were offended because—

I. The apostles taught. This is emphatically true of the priests, who looked upon themselves as the only lawfully constituted teachers.

1. They considered that the apostles were not personally qualified (verse 13). “Unlearned” means they had not been trained in Rabbinical lore—they were not brought up to letters—they were agrammatoi. Men in every age lay undue stress upon “Grammar.” Not to have been trained in the public schools is of itself almost fatal to any man who aspires to the office of a teacher. But were not the priests right? It is necessary we should distinguish between scholarship and learning. Scholarship is proficiency in words and forms and opinions; learning is a large sympathy with life, and a deep insight into the eternal truth of things. In the priest we see scholarship; in the apostles learning; and the learning of the latter is infinitely preferable to the scholarship of the former. But the men of scholarship looked down

contemptuously upon the men of learning. Does that surprise you? It has been repeated over and over again in the history of our own country. Did not the clergy sneer at the ministers of Dissent—Bunyan and his contemporaries—whom they now indeed emulate each other to honour? The best thing is to honour the living prophets, the next best thing is to respect and perpetuate the memory of the dead. One fact the history of the Church has indisputably demonstrated—that scholarship alone, however valuable it may be as an accessory, is not a sufficient qualification to teach the people. But though scholarship alone is not a sufficient qualification, yet learning is; and better still to have both scholarship and learning. The ministry of the apostles was characterised by learning, the ministry of the middle ages by scholarship; let us hope Chat the ministry of the future will be distinguished for its happy combination of the two.

2. They considered that the apostles had no official right to teach. They were idiotai—men of no profession, private individuals, in a word, laymen. And the professionals were very indignant that parties outside the sacred pale of the sacerdotal order, and not commissioned, should set themselves up as teachers. Laymen were considered very ignorant men; the idiotai suggested idiots. The priests claimed an exclusive right to teach. This, however, had not always been the case in Jewry. The ceremonies of religion had been entrusted to the priests, the teaching of the people to the prophets. But prophecy had long died out, and the priesthood had stepped into its place; and having once possessed themselves of the power they guarded it most jealously. Does this seem strange? The same thing has occurred over and over again. The now famous pedlar of Elstow was charged with insolence, irreverence, and disloyalty for daring to stand up to deliver himself of the truths burning in his soul. The police came suddenly upon him and immured him in Bedford gaol for twelve long years. Why? What evil had he done? This—that he, a layman, one of the idiotai, should venture to trespass on the prohibited preserves of the priests! This mischievous spirit is still smouldering.

II. The apostles taught the people.

1. Some felt vexed on personal considerations, for the apostles, labouring to enlighten and convert the people, were indirectly undermining the power of the priests. The heyday of priestcraft is generally the “times of ignorance,” and it naturally desires the prolongation of those times. Peter and John held out the lamp of knowledge, and the authorities rushed upon the lamp-bearers and endeavoured to break the lamp. With what result? With the simple result of smashing the glass and letting the flame burn more intensely than before, and kindle five thousand other lamps.

2. Others felt annoyed on ecclesiastical grounds. The priests knew, through the instinct of self-preservation, that the enlightenment of the people meant virtually their deposition. The people had to receive implicitly and unquestioningly the word of priests and rabbis as to what the will of God was; or worse still, their interpretation of it. This monopoly plunged the people into an elaborate system of lifeless traditions and burdensome superstitions. And when the apostles demanded back the key of knowledge and desired to lead the people into the hidden dwelling place of truth, with what reward did they meet? They were cast into prison. Does that surprise you? No; for this history has been enacted over again in Christendom. The key of knowledge was taken away from Europe, and the Scriptures were allowed to lie in an unknown language. Luther on the Continent and Wycliffe in England endeavoured to unlock the treasures, to translate the Scriptures into the popular

language, and to scatter broadcast the knowledge of the Divine will; and they were vilified, excommunicated, and hunted about for their pains. Nevertheless the translation of the Bible caused the Papal hierarchy to topple to its ruin in Germany and England. Mark that well. Priests still forbid laymen to peruse and expound the Scriptures—they must believe on authority. The essence of Romanism is to believe on authority. The essence of Protestantism to believe on proof.

3. Others felt annoyed on civil grounds. They would say as all despots have in effect said—“Knowledge is power. If you educate the people you put into their hands a weapon which they have not the wisdom to use. What if they use it for revolution? To avert the evil, we will refuse the good.” That has always been the language of despotism; and forthwith it proceeds to fetter, and if need be, to kill the champions of popular education. No doubt knowledge is a tremendous power—especially religious knowledge; and often, alas! it has been converted to mean, vulgar ends. But are we to reject the use of a thing because of its abuse? Do not have fires, and you will have no conflagrations. Light, no doubt, does multiply the shadows; shall we on that account declaim against the sun?

III. They taught the people, through, Jesus the resurrection from the dead.

1. The teaching reflected deep discredit on the tribunals of the nation. The leading members of those courts had crucified Christ; but yet God had raised Him up from the dead. Now the Resurrection was a complete vindication of Christ’s character; but to vindicate His character was to brand the character of His judges. Therefore those judges were irritated beyond measure. In their furious madness the infant Church saw the fulfilment of the prophecy (verse 25). You have seen a spirited unmanageable horse snorting wildly and plunging desperately—his eyes flashing fire, his nostrils breathing thunders. That is the very figure used in this chapter to describe the raging of the Jewish authorities against the gospel—they were like wild beasts, filled with foolish and unreasonable fury.

2. The teaching was new. The Pharisees were very much in love with the old, and were deemed wiser than their descendants. The Pharisees were the champions of orthodoxy, and in confederacy with the other sections of the Jewish Church put the apostles on their trial for healing the lame man. The Sanhedrim assembled—the court had to decide between orthodoxy and heterodoxy. The miracle they could not deny. The question was, “By what power or by what name have ye done this?” The whole trial turned upon that hinge. Were the apostles orthodox, yea or no? You know the conclusion they arrived at—the apostles were branded as heretics, and forbidden to heal or to preach any more in the name of Jesus. We should never forget that the apostles and the Saviour Himself, were charged with heresy and persecuted to death on account of it. This teaches us two lessons.

(1) That we should be careful not to reject any doctrine because of its novelty, nor call the advocates of new opinions by bad, unpopular names. Every truth—of science as well as theology—was considered heresy on its first promulgation. The heterodoxy of one age is the orthodoxy, of the next. Truth is first crucified, then raised from the dead, then exalted to the throne and adored.

(2) Not to refute what we deem heresy by imprisonment. Jesus Christ argued with the people of Jerusalem, and they took up stones to cast at Him. It is a very easy but a very foolish way to meet an argument with a stone. And yet it has been the universal practice till recently. The Christians hold certain views concerning life and death, and the Jews persecute them. Among Christians again, certain

parties hold views different from the majority and they are burnt. Mankind are slow to learn than it is a cowardly thing to kill a man for an opinion.

3. Their teaching, moreover, flatly contradicted an influential section of the hierarchy. The Sadducees probably prided themselves on how little they believed. They would no doubt style themselves broad thinkers; but certainly they were not broad believers. Breadth of thought is in our time, too, preferred to breadth of faith. But there is something fundamentally wrong with the man whose broad thinking leads to narrow believing. Broad thinking should always lead to broad believing, and where the faith is feeble, it is to me a proof positive that the thinking is not broad, but lax. Anyhow, the Sadducees conspired to suppress the teaching of the apostles. In the Gospels the merciless hostility of the Pharisees is in the forefront; but in the Acts the fierce enmity of the Sadducees; for there the fact and the doctrine of the resurrection find a more prominent place. Scepticism knows how to imprison and behead its opponents as well as superstition. Unbelief, not faith, is the real source of persecution. Let men believe in God, and that He is stronger than the devil; in truth, and that it is more potent than error; in right, and that it will and must prove triumphant over might, and they can afford to be patient, they will see the futility of resorting to physical force. The truth of liberty is based in religion. What has unbelief done on behalf of liberty? It has written. What has Christianity done? It has bled. Infidels have pleaded for it, but Christians have died for it. Did their imprisonment check the mighty progress of the gospel? Nay, “many of them that heard the Word believed.” Times of persecution are generally times of much spiritual prosperity. Some of the early martyrs had for their mystic symbol a candle surrounded by a crowd of angry men puffing as hard as they could to blow it out; but the harder they puffed the more brightly burnt the candle. The English Reformers were sorely harassed, but did they abandon the cause of Protestantism? No; some of them devised an anvil for their coat of arms with the striking motto “This anvil hath broken many hammers.” “The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church.” (J. Cynddylan Jones, D. D.)

Typical religious persecution

I. The persecutors were typical—the “priests, and the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees.” Here we have—

1. Men whose tenets were discredited—the Sadducees.

2. Men whose prerogative was invaded—the priests.

3. The subordinate, notoriously accessible to bribes—“the captain of the temple,” the servant of the priests and the Sadducees, who would desire what would please them. Is there not here a type of the agency employed in all religious persecutions? Outraged orthodoxy, slighted privilege, and vile sycophancy have distinguished themselves in many ways and in various combinations in the attacks made on faithful reformers and evangelists from age to age.

II. The ground was typical. The persecutors were “annoyed.” God was not employing them. They were unable to give any explanation. And their own cherished notions were ceasing to command the respect of the people. Has it not been ever thus, when “unauthorised” teachers have been more welcome and more successful than the official representatives of the Church? But the will of the Lord be done.

III. The treatment was typical. They were—

1. Stopped in their preaching. But “the Word” had been effectually spoken. Those who wished and had determined to hinder were restrained until God’s own time.

2. Apprehended. Their reasons were not met with counter-reasons. To deal with truth by physical force! What a confession of ignorance and weakness!

3. Imprisoned. That they could do; but they could not imprison or bind the truth, nor prevent it becoming the instrument of spiritual freedom to those who received it.

IV. The encouragements were typical. The preachers—

1. Had remained at the post of duty until forced away. They had nothing to reproach themselves with on that account.

2. Had the pleasure of knowing that the good work had progressed.

3. Had a whole night for meditation and prayer. In like manner have the Lord’s persecuted servants been comforted and sustained since. (W. Hudson.)

Apostolic trials

Two men disclaiming all original power excited Jewish society by the performance of a miraculous deed. The excitement became in the long run bewilderment. The Jewish leaders were completely baffled. The facts of Christianity have been awkward stumbling-blocks in the way of unbelief. Opponents can see two sides to a theory, but to a fact it is vain to oppose a suggestion of fancy or a jeer of ill will.

I. On the side of the Jewish leaders there was—

1. Illiberality. “Being grieved that they taught the people.” The highest pre-Christian culture! Christ alone has shown Himself the friend of universal man—slave or king. Christianity has a universal appeal. It is not a taper, it is the sun.

2. Shortsightedness. They put the apostles in prison! Fools! They could not put God in prison! Had the apostles been original workers the imprisonment might have met the case. The apostles were put into prison because they did good to the diseased and instructed the ignorant. Christianity is still the physical and moral regenerator of the world. The only charge that can be brought against it is that it continually seeks to do good.

3. Impotence. “What shall we do?” etc. They “threatened” the apostles: that is, they shook their fists at the sun in order to darken the world! They stamped on the sea shore to repel the tide! They sent a message to the wind stating that they would henceforth be independent of air! We see how small men are when they set themselves against truth.

II. On the side of the apostles there was—

1. Complete intelligence within the sphere of their ministry. Though they were unlearned and ignorant men, yet within the compass of their work they were wise and efficient. This is the secret of success. Know what you do know. Do not venture beyond the line of your vocation. Every preacher is strong when he stands on fact and experience. Christians must not accept the bait which would draw them upon unknown or forbidden ground.

2. Unconquerable courage in narrating and applying facts. Look at—

(1) The dignity of the address.

(2) The calm and emphatic assertion of the name of Christ.

(3) The direct and special impeachment of the hearers. “Whom ye crucified.” “Set at nought of you builders.”

Dignity is proper in the preachers of truth. Christ is the life of Christianity—beware of lauding the system and forgetting the Man. Accusation is the work of every Christian evangelist. Prove the world’s crime.

3. Christian magnanimity in preaching the gospel (verse 12).

(1) Man needs saving.

(2) All men, even Christ’s murderers, may be saved.

(3) There is but one way of saving them.

4. Incorruptible loyalty to God and His truth (verse 19). “Things that we have seen and heard.” What a field! Missions at home and abroad—schools, labours, sacrifices, death-beds. (J. Parker, D. D.)

Teaching and persecution

1. Not only did Peter and John cure the lame man, they proceeded to “teach the people.” Herein was their greatest fault. Christianity is a teaching religion. It seeks out all the people, and speaks the popular tongue. It is just here that preachers may learn their most useful lesson. Our danger is that we speak to the classes; the apostles taught the masses. We can never get back to that universal speech unless those of you who are educated and highly refined will support us. You must be content to be partially neglected in so far as intellectual luxuries are concerned, and must assist us in providing good wholesome bread for the common people. That is precisely the difference between Christianity and every other religion. Others say, “Keep the people in the dark”; this, “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.” Others draw a screen, as Pythagoras lectured from behind a curtain to his disciples, and from behind they mutter their unintelligible incantations; this lifts its red banner, throws it out upon the willing wind, and on it is written, “This thing was not done in a corner.” Other religions are philosophies only; Christianity is a gospel as well.

2. A very marvellous thing occurs here, in a kind of parenthesis. The rulers put them in prison. “Howbeit”!—God has His finger in this! He comes through very narrow spaces, and seizes very transient opportunities. “Howbeit”—Wait there a while to get the full rush of this glorious announcement—“many of them which heard the Word believed.” Why should not that be the case now, so that whatever may happen to the preacher within the next hour be may know, as he goes to his account, that he has left behind him a harvest before the time?

3. The morning came, and justice must be done. This question was hurled at them, “By what power, or by what name, have ye done this?” Beware of turning your religion into a piece of metaphysical inquiry. It is at that point that Christianity is often defeated in her most beneficent purposes. The learned men wanted to analyse what we now call the modus operandi. Instead of accepting the man, the concrete,

positive, indisputable fact, they wanted to lure the apostles, and those who followed them, into metaphysical quagmires and difficulties. Preachers do not answer the “why” and the “how” of merely inquisitive minds. Have the man himself with you, and let him be your argument. Christianity rests on facts, not upon opinions. If the Church of Christ has not the Man with it, any amount of mere philosophical theorising and speculation will do harm rather than good. Where is the man you have saved? Produce him. Where are the hungry you have fed, the ignorant you have instructed, the enslaved you have emancipated? Produce them. This is a fact not a quibble. By whatever means it is done the effect is certain, and the cause of such an effect must itself be good.

4. Peter and John will surely stammer before this glittering assembly I The maid that taunted the rough-spoken Galilaean was too much for Peter; when he sees Annas, etc., there will be no spirit left in him. How does the narrative road? “Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost.” That is a thousand Peters: Peter multiplied by the very Deity. Peter?—a straw blown away by the mocking wind, by himself. But Peter “filled with the Holy Ghost” was a man of war clothed with heavenly panoply, eloquent with heaven’s thunder, gracious with heaven’s love. Have we received the Holy Ghost? The question is not, “Are we well trained intellectually?” “Have we read many books?” “Are we able to conduct very subtle arguments?” We shall know whether we have received the Spirit by the fire that is in us. We have received the first baptism, we have been “christened,” Christ-named, christianised in the sense of having been brought to the church, and had the initial water sprinkled upon our forehead; but have we received the Holy Ghost? There is no mistaking Him.

5. Peter having been challenged to give an account of the circumstance, made the eloquent reply which you find within verses 9 to 12 inclusive. Whenever Peter spake suddenly, on great subjects, he spake the very heart of God. How much he makes of Christ in the 10th verse! We seem hardly to have heard the whole style and title of Jesus before. We have them here. We have called the Saviour “Jesus,” sometimes we have called Him “Jesus Christ.” By some short indication of this kind we have made reference to the Redeemer. But how seldom have we given Him His full style and title!—“Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by Him.” There is no mistaking that address. What Christ do you preach? We have heard of the Christ of the painter—a figure tenderly coloured, set in wondrous lights and shades. We have stood before it, and sometimes we have thrilled in its presence, and felt the waters stealing into our eyes. But that Christ never saved the Soul, it is only a creation of art. We have heard of the Christ of the poet. Christ has been spoken of in flowing rhyme and stately blank verse; but that Christ never came from the intellect into the depths of the heart in its deadliest remorse on account of sin. We must go back to the apostolic Christ if we have to realise apostolic conceptions and to win apostolic successes in the ministry. Peter might well have ended by the statement contained in the 10th verse, but Peter often found it difficult to conclude when Christ was the theme. How can a river end except in the sea? The little pool, the purling rill, soon sinks in the sand; but the river—deep, broad, fluent—moves on through channelled rocks and shady woods, on, on to the solemn sea. Peter went onward. Said he, “This is the stone which was set at nought by you builders, which is become the head of the corner.” The place trembled under the vibration of that living voice! He might have ended there; but it was difficult, let us repeat, for Peter ever to end when Christ was the theme. So he continued, “Neither is there salvation in any other,” etc. The original question was not one of salvation, it was merely a question of healing a lame man. But you never find the

apostles confining themselves to the mere incident. Every miracle is only a text. Let an apostle heal a man’s ankle-bones, and from those ankle-bones he swings clear off to Christ’s world-saving Cross. “If we have healed your ankle-bones, we meant it to be symbolic of the greater healing of your soul.”

6. Now, it was the turn of the Sanhedrim to be shut up and put “in hold unto the next day,” and every day after that. When they saw the boldness of Peter and John “they marvelled.” Any man that can be accounted for will never influence his age. He will make a splash in the pool; but the bubbles will be seen a moment, then will sink for ever. You never can make out the secret of a Whitefield. You never can make out the secret power of any man who makes a whole world hear him. If you could account for him you would be as great as he is. What then did the wise and influential Jews do? “Threaten them.” You feel the difference of temperature between verses 11, 12, and verses 16-18. The apostles must not speak any morel There must be an end of this nuisance. Society is not to be disturbed by such propagandists. Peter, having heard the threatening, said unto them, “Whether it be right “ That is the word that makes history, that thrills the ages. And the apostles having received this threatening, “went to their own company, and reported,” etc. What a talk they had! How they reminded one another of the occasion of the movement! And when the company had heard it all “they lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said,… “They too became eloquent. And when they had prayed, “the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost.” Pentecost after Pentecost! Poor Church! Thou hast fallen upon empty times. They are but mean challenges that are addressed to us now. If we could be once more threatened with the prison and the stake, the rod of iron and the keen double-edged weapon, some of us might be heroes. At present we may be but common clay. (J. Parker, D. D.)

Peter and John examined

I. When God is carrying on any design for the manifestation of His glory great opposition will be made to it. Satan will not remain a quiet spectator, and his servants will be stirred up to his assistance. In this combination it ought not to surprise us to find, not only persons of profane principles and wicked lives, but some who, in consequence of their apparent attachment to religion, might have been expected to range themselves on the opposite side. When God way setting His Son on His holy hill of Zion, not only did the “heathen” rage, who were ignorant of prophecy, and had not seen the miracles of Jesus, but the favoured “people,” to whom the oracles of God were committed, and among whom the Messiah had appeared, “imagined a vain thing.”

II. God may expose his people to much discouragement when they are walking in his own way. The apostles preached Christ by express commission from heaven, and on their success depended the conversion of the world. Yet in the outset they were opposed by the supreme authority in the nation. In the course of their ministry they were subjected to danger and suffering, and most of them lost their lives in the cause. Superficial reasoners may conclude that God is at variance with Himself, retarding the execution of His own plans, and may complain that, instead of rewarding, He punishes men for their zeal and fidelity. “But the foolishness of God is wiser than men.” By such dispensations He exercises the faith of His servants, and makes known His power in carrying on His designs in spite of the utmost efforts of His adversaries; while in the behaviour of His people, such examples of courage, patience, and love are exhibited, as

afford no slight testimony to the truth of religion. Converts are made by the sufferings of the saints as well as by their doctrine.

III. Christ requires no service for which He does not furnish them with necessary aid. He is no hard taskmaster. As His commandments are reasonable, so His grace strengthens us to obey them. When Peter and John were called to plead His cause before the Jewish council, they were “filled with the Holy Ghost.” Hence did cowardly fishermen become undaunted apostles; hence have simple and uneducated men put learning to silence; hence have feeble and delicate women endured with unshaken firmness, cruel tortures, and death in its most terrible forms. “As thy day, so shall thy strength be.”

IV. Great is the truth, and it will prevail. It confounded and silenced the Jewish council; it made foolish the wisdom of the world, vanquishing its vain philosophy and sophistical eloquence by the plain doctrine of the Cross; it will, in like manner, triumph over infidelity, superstition, heresy, and licentiousness. From what it has already done we may calculate the effects which are yet to be expected from it (Psa_110:2-3).

V. Let us be careful to maintain a good conscience in our religious profession. This was the constant study of the apostles, and hence they considered not what was honourable in the eyes of the world, what was advantageous or safe, but solely what was right. It was God only whom they were resolved to obey, and they minded not the contrary commands and threatenings of men. You will never enjoy peace of mind, you will never act uprightly and consistently till you learn to regulate your conduct by the fixed standard of truth and rectitude, and not by the shifting opinions and fancies of men. Beware of the vain attempt to serve two masters. The result of such an attempt will be that you will serve neither of them fully, and will lose the reward promised by both. (J. Dick, A. M.)

Righteous boldness

Courage is of various sorts. Brazen courage is simply an outside affair, born of impudence. Many a timid soul will cower before it, but itself will always cower when rightly met. Physical courage is an affair of the body, born of mere brute force. There is a courage of love, conscience, conviction, action, repose. What is Christian courage? Let us to-day look back to the time when Christ’s disciples were first under the fire of persecution and see—

I. Its occasion. Peter and John had healed a lame man, and to the wondering crowd preached Jesus and His resurrection. Out of patience with this continued talk about Jesus—the priests, because Jesus had denounced their hypocrisy and formalism; the Sadducees, because in Jesus was set forth the resurrection, which they scouted and denied—had got the apostles arraigned before the Sanhedrim. In the presence of this august body they proved what stuff they were made of. They had no friends at this court. Wealth, learning, fashion, pride, numbers, and even piety and the national faith, and the very oracles of God, were arrayed against these poor disciples. Peter stood in view of them all, calm and confident, a splendid illustration of the truth that “the righteous are bold as a lion” (Pro_28:1), and made his reply.

II. Its secret. “Filled with the Holy Ghost.” This made the difference between Peter before the ascension and Peter after it. It was not natural courage, “to the manner born.” Peter’s impetuous ardour often got him into trouble, but his courage failed him when put to the test. He could use his sword under sudden impulse, but his temporary

boldness is followed by blank cowardice. He could leap from the ship in impulsive obedience, but he scarcely touches the waters before he cries out for fear. This is Peter by nature. But after Pentecost what granite-like firmness he exhibits! what courage of conviction! what unflinching loyalty to truth! what boldness in the rebuke of wrong! This is Peter by grace. The bank of sand is transformed into a rock of firmness. Impulse has given way to principle. Fear of man is exchanged for fear of God.

III. Its characteristics.

1. Courtesy. Peter gives the men of the court their appropriate titles, recognises their office and authority, and addresses them with deference and respect. Bravery does not consist in brusqueness and bravado and bluster. To speak the truth boldly one need not be a boor or a bear. There is a so-called maintaining one’s self-respect which is simply a manifesting one’s impudence. But the courtesy had no weakness in it. Where grace salts courage, the courage is not noisy or dogged or defiant, but marked by a quiet courtesy in the very repose of conscious power.

2. Prudence. The deed was “good,” and Peter reminds them of it. It is well-doing they are to be examined about, not evil-doing. Peter first turns attention from the method to the thing. The work itself could challenge only gratitude and joy. Of itself it could provoke no opposition. One would think the healing of a lifelong cripple to be a matter about which there could be no two opinions. How can a corrupt tree bring forth such good fruit? He made the most of his circumstances. So will the highest courage always. While scorning compromise of principle, it presses into service every alleviating circumstance. It does not court a tilt or invite a conflict.

3. Frankness. The council demanded by what authority or name they had done this. They got for instant answer, “By the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth.” Here Peter might have stopped. This was the truth, and nothing but the truth. But this was not the truth that put Peter in bonds. He knew he was a prisoner because of some other word that he had been bold enough to speak in the presence of the people, and in the frankness of righteous boldness that word must be spoken now in the presence of the court. “Whom ye crucified,” for this had stirred the priests against him; and, “whom God raised from the dead”; for this had stirred the Sadducees against him (verses 1, 2). This is simply another Daniel (see Dan_6:10). It was not necessary to pray with “his windows open”; but, having been open when he prayed in security, they must not be shut when the king’s decree threatens with a den of lions any man that prays. Christian courage will wear no masks. The temptation to be compromisingly politic at the point of real danger is most plausibly insidious and subtle, and a brave spirit gets here its sorest test. The man of real Christian courage will die rather than be sheltered behind a truth withheld.

4. Fidelity. Peter had fully stated the facts. But here was a rare opportunity to bring out also the meaning of the facts. Peter might never get such a hearing again. So he makes the rejected Christ the glorious and chief corner-stone in Zion (Psa_118:22; Eph_2:20). These trusters in Abraham and good works are thus told that there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby they must be saved. This was the top and crown of Christian courage. It was transforming the prisoner’s bar into a pulpit. This is another John the Baptist ready to lose his head rather than fail to testify that his hearers are wrong. A brave soul will preach the gospel as fearlessly to the Sanhedrim as to a mass-meeting. Opportunity is obligation.

IV. Its effects. “They marvelled.” The first effect was profound surprise. Then they came to recognise them as men they had seen before in the company of Jesus. And beholding

the cripple, a healed and living witness to the truth, “they had nothing to speak against.” They were silenced completely, just as Jesus had said they would be (Luk_21:15). So now—

1. Men wonder first at the boldness. They see nothing behind it, nothing to support it—no arms, government, material resource—and they are astounded. The world knows not its secret. The natural man has not entered into its hiding-place.

2. Then they have nothing to speak against. Christian courage has a wonderful way of disarming opposition. Opposition may still rage, as it did here, but it has no case, as it had not here.

Conclusion:

1. The Spirit of God can make the weakest saint bold.

2. We can afford to trust Christ.

3. Truth will sometimes smite to silence when it does not smite to heal. (Herrick Johnson, D. D.)

Christ the power of God

I. In times of trouble and persecution (verses 1-4) adding all the more to the Church.

II. In giving aid to His disciples (verses 5-8). Fulfilling the promise to Peter of courage and right words.

III. In the salvation of men (verses 9-12). The only name by which men can be saved is His.

IV. In changing character (verses 13, 14). Making His disciples like Himself. (Christian Age.)

The miracle at the Beautiful gate as an epoch

Peter’s discourse delivered on this text woke impulses and started efforts both amongst the adherents and opponents of the true religion that introduced a new order of things. Notice—

I. A new impulse to the world’s antagonism to Christianity. Observe—

1. The representatives of this antagonism—the world against the Church, the defenders of the false in theory and the corrupt in practice. Religion, “the priests”; politics, “the captain of the temple”; scepticism, “the Sadducees” conspired to crush the young Church. The hostile sections of a wicked world are ever ready to merge their differences in an attack on the Divinely pure and good. Pilate and Herod became friends on a similar occasion.

2. The reason of this antagonism. The priests were “grieved” because the apostles arrogated their teaching office; the captain because social tranquility was disturbed; the Sadducees because the resurrection was proclaimed. Wicked men hate truth for different reasons, and according to their passions and interests.

3. Its development. The persecutors

(1) Imprisoned the apostles.

(2) Arraigned them.

(3) Threatened them.

So the antagonism was strong in spirit, but futile in efforts. In sooth, all endeavours to crush truth are fruitless and self-confounding.

II. A new demonstration of God’s power in Christianity.

1. In multiplying its adherents (verse 4). Though the clouds gather, the sun rises. The tides flow, though the force of the mightiest tempest bears against them; and God’s truth moves on to universal empire, though earth and hell combine against it. “Howbeit,” aye, and not only despite it, but because of it. Persecution does two things which give an impulse to the course of the Christian martyr. It presents on the one side such a hideous manifestation of evil as produces a social recoil, and on the other such an exhibition of Christian goodness as awakens sympathy and admiration. As the aromatic plant emits its sweetest odours by pressure, so Christian character gains charm by suffering. As the stars only shine at night, so the brightest virtues can only shine in trial.

2. In strengthening its advocates. See how they heroically expound their cause.

(1) The miracle was wrought by Him whom they had crucified.

(2) He whom they had crucified had become pre-eminent in the universe. What they had rejected God had honoured. Observe—

(a) That men in their enterprises often reject the Divine.

(b) That though they reject the Divine, the Divine shall be honoured at last to their confusion.

(c) That He whom they had crucified was the only One that could save them.

3. In confounding its enemies.

(1) They were astonished, and two things would heighten the astonishment.

(a) The intellectual and social position of the men. Pedants in every age consider those illiterate who do not know exactly that branch of learning in which they pride themselves. The linguist, e.g., despises the man who does not understand languages, although he may know much better the wonders of God’s universe. So Peter and John were not up in Rabbinical lore, but were well acquainted with more important matters.

(b) Their connection with Christ, the carpenter’s son, and the crucified malefactor.

(2) They were silenced. Facts are stubborn things. The way to silence Christ’s enemies is to show them lame men walking.

3. They were perplexed. They felt that something must be done, but what they know not. Seventy of a nation’s magnates were confounded by two peasants. It is heaven’s law that the opponents of the truth shall involve themselves in inextricable bewilderment.

4. They were thwarted (verses 19, 20). Note here—

(1) That the will of God is the imperial rule of life, whether of monarch or slave.

(2) That universal conscience sanctions the supreme law. “Judge ye.”

(3) That gospel truth, when fully felt, is an irrepressible force. “We cannot but speak.” “Necessity is laid upon me.” Conclusion. Mark the difference in the effect of Peter’s discourse and that on Pentecost. None seem here to have been pricked to the heart, although the same truths were preached. Why? Doubtless because of the different character of the audiences. (D. Thomas, D. D.)

The four chief props of apologetics

Proof from—

1. Miracles—the lame man.

2. Prophecy and Scripture (verse 11).

3. History (verse 21).

4. The heart and experience (verse 13). (O. Smith, D. D.)

EBC, "THE FIRST PERSECUTION.

THE fourth chapter of the Acts brings the Apostles into their first contact with the Jewish state organisation. It shows us the secret springs which led to the first persecution, typical of the fiercest that ever raged against the Church, and displays the calm conviction and moral strength by which the Apostles were sustained. The historical and local circumstances narrated by St. Luke bear all the marks of truth.

I. The miracle of healing the lame man had taken place in Solomon’s porch or portico, which overlooked the Kedron valley, and was a usual resort as a promenade or public walk, specially in winter. Thus we read in Joh_10:22-23, that our Lord walked in Solomon’s porch and it was winter. Solomon’s porch looked towards the rising sun, and was therefore a warm and sunny spot. It was popular with the inhabitants of Jerusalem for the same reason which led the Cistercians of the Middle Ages, when building magnificent fabrics like Fountains Abbey, to place their cloister garths, where exercise was taken, on the southern side of their churches, that there they might receive and enjoy the heat and light of our winter sun.

The crowd which was collected by Peter soon attracted the attention of the Temple authorities, who had a regular police under their control. The Jews were permitted by the Romans to exercise the most unlimited freedom within the bounds of the temple to secure its sanctity. In ordinary cases the Romans reserved to themselves the power of capital punishment, but in the case of the temple and its profanation they allowed it to the Sanhedrin.

An interesting proof of this fact has come to light-of late years, attesting in a most striking manner the accuracy of the Acts of the Apostles. Josephus. in his "Antiquities," (15:11:5) when describing the Holy Place, tells us that the royal cloisters of the temple had three walks, formed by four rows of pillars, with which they were adorned. The outermost walk was open to all, but the central walk was cut off by a stone wall, on which were inscriptions forbidding foreigners-that is, Gentiles-to enter under pain of death. Now in the twenty-first chapter of the Acts we read that a supposed breach of this law

was the occasion of the riot against St. Paul, wherein he narrowly escaped death.

The Jews were actually about to kill St. Paul when the soldiers came upon them. To this fact, Tertullus the orator, when speaking before the governor Felix, alludes, and that without rebuke, saying of St. Paul, "Whom we took, and would have judged according to our law." (Act_24:6) Here comes in our illustration of the Acts derived from modern archaeological research. Some few years ago there was discovered at Jerusalem, and there is now laid up in the Sultan’s Museum at Constantinople, a sculptured and inscribed stone, containing one of these very Greek notices upon which the Apostles must have looked, warning Gentiles not to enter within the sacred bounds, and denouncing against transgressors the penalty of death which the Jews sought to inflict upon St. Paul. Now it was just the same about the other details of the temple worship. Inside the sacred area the Jewish law was supreme, and Jewish penalties were enacted. In order, therefore, that the temple might be duly protected the priests watched in three places, and the Levites in twenty-one places, in addition to all their other duties connected with the offering of the sacrifices and the details of public worship. These guards discharged the duties of a sacred or temple police, and their captain was called the captain of the temple, or, as he is denominated in the Talmud, "The ruler of the mountain of the House."

Much confusion has, indeed, arisen concerning this official. He has been confounded, for instance, with the captain of the neighbouring fortress of Antonia. The Romans had erected a strong, square castle, with lofty walls, and towers at the four corners, just north of the temple, and connected with it by a covered way. One of these flanking towers was one hundred and five feet high, and overlooked all the temple area, so that when a riot began the soldiers could hurry to quell it. The captain of the garrison which held this tower is called, in our version, the chief captain, or, more properly, the chiliarch, or colonel of a regiment, as we should put it in modern phraseology. But this official had nothing whatever to say to questions of Jewish law or ritual. He was simply responsible for the peace of Jerusalem; he represented the governor, who lived at Caesarea, and had no concern with. the disputes which might arise amongst the Jews. But it was quite otherwise with the captain of the temple. He was a Jewish official, took cognisance of Jewish disputes, and was responsible in matters of Jewish discipline which Roman law respected and upheld, but in which it did not interfere. This purely Jewish official, a priest by profession, appointed by the Jewish authorities, and responsible to them alone, appears prominently on three distinct occasions. In the twenty-second of St. Luke’s Gospel we have the account of the betrayal by the traitor Judas. When he was meditating that action he went first to the chief priests and the captains to consult with them. A Roman commander, an Italian, a Gaul, or possibly even a Briton, -as he might have been, for the Romans were accustomed to bring their Western legionaries into the East, as in turn they garrisoned Britain with the men of Syria, -would have cared very little whether a Galilean teacher was arrested or not. But it was quite natural that a Jewish and a temple official should have been interested in this question. While again on this occasion, and once more upon the arrest of the Apostles after the death of Ananias and Sapphira, the captain of the temple appears as one of the highest Jewish officials.

II. We see too the secret source whence the opposition to apostolic teaching arose. The priests and the captain of the temple and the Sadducees came upon them. The captain was roused into action by the Sadducees, who were mingled in the crowd, and heard the words of the Apostles proclaiming the resurrection of Jesus Christ, "being grieved that they taught the people, and preached through Jesus the resurrection from the dead." It is noteworthy how perpetually the Sadducees appear as the special antagonists of Christianity during these earliest years. Our Lord’s denunciations of the Pharisees were

so often repeated that we are apt to think of them as the leading opponents of Christianity during the apostolic age. And yet this is a mistake. There was an important difference between the Master’s teaching and that of His disciples, which accounts for the changed character of the opposition. Our Lord’s teaching came specially into conflict with the Pharisees and their mode of thought. He denounced mere external worship, and asserted the spiritual and inner character of true religion. That was the great staple of His message. The Apostles, on the other hand, testified and enforced above everything else the risen, the glorified, and the continuous existence in the spirit world of the Man Christ Jesus. And thus they came into conflict with the central doctrine of Sadduceism which denied a future life. Hence at Jerusalem, at least, the Sadducees were ever the chief persecutors of the Apostles, while the Pharisees were favourable to Christianity, or at least neutral. At the meeting of the Sanhedrin of which we read in the fifth chapter, Gamaliel, a Pharisee, proposes the discharge of the imprisoned Apostles. In the twenty-third chapter, when St. Paul is placed before the same Sanhedrin the Pharisees take his side, while the Sadducees are his bitter opponents. We never read of a Sadducee embracing Christianity; while St. Paul, the greatest champion of the gospel, was gained from the ranks of the Pharisees. This fact sheds light on the character of the apostolic teaching. It was not any system of evanescent Christianity; it was not a system of mere ethical teaching; it was not a system where the facts of Christ’s life were whittled away, where, for instance, His resurrection was explained as a mere symbolical idea, typifying the resurrection of the soul from the death of sin to the life of holiness; for in that case the Sadducees would not have troubled themselves on this occasion to oppose such teaching. But apostolic Christianity was a system which based itself on a risen Saviour, and involved, as its fundamental ideas, the doctrines of a future life and of a spiritual world, and of a resurrection where body and soul would be again united.

Some strange representations have been from time to time put forward as to the nature of apostolic and specially of Pauline Christianity, but one of the strangest is what we may call the Matthew Arnold theory, which makes the apostolic teaching a poor, emasculated thing, devoid of any real foundation of historical fact. If Christianity, as proclaimed by St. Peter and St. Paul, was of this type, why, we ask, was it so bitterly opposed by the Sadducees? They at any rate understood the Apostles to teach and preach a Jesus Christ literally risen from the dead and ascended in the truth of human nature into that spiritual and unseen world whose existence they denied. For the Sadducees were materialists pure and simple. As such they prevailed among the rich. The poor, then as ever, furnished very few adherents to a creed which may satisfy persons who are enjoying the good things of this life. It has very few attractions, however, for those with whom life is dealing hardly, and to whom the world presents itself in a stern aspect alone. It is no wonder the new teaching concerning a risen Messiah should have excited the hatred of the rich Sadducees, and should have been welcomed by the poorer classes, among whom the Pharisees had their followers. The system of the Sadducees was a religion indeed. It satisfied a want, for man can never do without some kind of a religion. It recognised God and His revelation to Moses. It asserted, however, that the Mosaic revelation contained nothing concerning a future life, or the doctrine of immortality. It was a religion, therefore, without fear of a future, and which could never indeed excite any enthusiasm, but was very satisfactory and agreeable for the prosperous few as long as they were in prosperity and in health. Peter and John came preaching a very disturbing doctrine to this class of people. If Peter’s view of life was right, theirs was all wrong. It was no wonder that the Sadducees brought upon them the priests and the captain of the temple, and summoned the Sanhedrin to deal with them. We should have done the same had we been in their position. In every age, indeed, the bitterest

persecutors of Christianity have been men like the Sadducees. It has often been said that persecution on the part of a sceptic or of an unbeliever is illogical. The Sadducees were unbelievers as regards a future life. What matter to them was it, then, if the Apostles preached a future life, and convinced the people of its truth? But logic is always pushed impetuously aside when it comes in contact with deep-rooted human feeling, and the Sadducees instinctively felt that the conflict between themselves and the Apostles was a deadly one; one or other party must perish. And so it was under the Roman empire. The ruling classes of the empire were essentially infidel, or, to use a modern term, we should rather perhaps style them agnostic. They regarded the Christian teaching as a noxious enthusiasm. They could not understand why Christians should not offer incense to the deity of the emperor, or perform any act of idolatry which was commanded by state law, and regarded their refusal as an act of treason. They had no idea of conscience, because they were essentially like the Sadducees. So was it again in the days of the first French Revolution, and so we find it still. The men who reject all spiritual existence, and hold a Sadducean creed, fear the power of Christian enthusiasm and Christian love, and had they only the power would crush it as sternly and remorselessly as the Sadducees desired to do in Apostolic times, or as the Roman emperors did from the days of Nero to those of Diocletian.

III. The Apostles were arrested in the evening and put in prison. The temple had an abundance of chambers and apartments which could be used as prisons, or, as the Sanhedrin were accustomed to sit in a basilica erected in the court outside the Beautiful Gate, and inside Solomon’s porch or cloister, there was probably a cell for prisoners connected with it. The next morning St. Peter and St. John were brought up before the court which met daily in this basilica, immediately after the hour of the morning sacrifices. We can realise the scene, for the persons mentioned as having taken part in the trial are historical characters. The Sanhedrin sat in a semicircle, with the president in the centre, while opposite were three benches for the scholars of the Sanhedrists, who thus practically learned law. The Sanhedrin, when complete, consisted of seventy-one members, comprising chief priests, the elders of the people, and the most renowned of the rabbis; but twenty-three formed a quorum competent to transact business. The high priest when present, as Annas and Caiaphas both were on this occasion, naturally exercised great influence, though he was not necessarily president of the council. The sacred writer has been accused, indeed, of a historical mistake, both here and in his Gospel, (Joh_3:2) in making Annas high priest when Caiaphas was actually occupying that office, Annas, his father-in-law, having been previously deposed by the Romans. St. Luke seems to me, on the other hand, thus to prove his strict accuracy. Caiaphas was of course the legal high priest so far as the Romans were concerned. They recognised him as such, and delivered to him the high priest’s official robes, when necessary for the fulfilment of his great office, keeping them safe at other times in the tower of Antonia. But then, as I have already said, so long as the Roman law and constitutions were observed on great state occasions, they allowed the Jews a large amount of Home Rule in the management of their domestic religious concerns, and were not keen in marking offences, if only the offences were not thrust into public notice. Annas was recognised by the Sanhedrin and by the Jews at large as the true high priest, Caiaphas as the legal or official one; and they kept themselves on the safe side, as far as the Romans were concerned, by uniting them in their official consultations in the Sanhedrin. The Sadducees, doubtless, on this occasion made every effort that their own party should attend the council meeting, feeling the importance of crushing the rising sect in the very bud. We read, therefore, that with the high priest came "John and Alexander, and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest." The priestly families were at this period

the aristocracy of the Jews, and they all belonged to the Sadducees, in opposition to the democracy, who favoured the Pharisees. These latter, indeed, had their own representatives in the Sanhedrin, as we shall see on a later occasion, -men of light and leading, like Gamaliel; but the permanent officials of the Jewish senate were for the most part Sadducees, and we know how easily the permanent officials can pack a popular body, such as the Sanhedrin was, with their own adherents, when any special end is to be attained.

It was before such a hostile audience that the Apostles were now called to witness, and here they first proved the power of the Divine words, "When they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak." (Mat_10:19) St. Peter threw himself upon God, and found that his trust was not in vain. He was at the moment of need filled with the Holy Ghost, and enabled to testify with a power which defeated his determined foes. He had a special promise from the Master, and he acted upon it. But we must observe that this promise was a special one, limited to the Apostles and to those in every age placed in similar circumstances. This promise is no general one. It was given to the Apostles to free them from care, anxiety, and forethought as to the matter and form of the addresses which they should deliver when suddenly called to speak before assemblies like the Sanhedrin. Under such circumstances they would have no time to prepare speeches suitable for ears trained in all the arts of oratory as then practised amongst the ancients, whether Jews or Gentiles. So their Master gave them an assurance of strength and skill such as none of their adversaries could equal or resist. "It is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you." This promise has been, however, misunderstood and abused when applied to ordinary circumstances. It was good for the Apostles, and it is good for Christian men placed under similar conditions, persecuted for the sake of their testimony, and deprived of the ordinary means of preparation. But it is not a promise authorising Christian teachers, clerical or lay, to dispense with careful thought and industrious study when communicating the truths of Christianity, or applying the great principles contained in the Bible to the manifold circumstances of modern life. Christ certainly told the Apostles not to premeditate beforehand what they should say. When relying, however, upon the promises of God, we should carefully seek to ascertain how far they are limited, and how far they apply to ourselves; else we may be putting our trust in words upon which we have no right to depend. A presumptuous trust is next door to an act of rebellion, and has often led to unbelief. Our Lord said to the Apostles, "Provide neither gold nor silver nor brass in your purses," because He would provide for them; but He did not say so to us, and if we go out into life presumptuously relying upon a passage of Scripture that does not belong to us, unbelief may overtake us as a strong man armed when we find ourselves disappointed. And so, too, with this promise of supernatural guidance which the Apostles enjoyed, and which saints of every age have proved true when placed in similar circumstances; it is a special one for them, it does not apply to us. Christian teachers, whether in the pulpit, or the Sunday school, or the home circle, must still depend as completely as the Apostles did upon the Holy Ghost as the source of all successful teaching. But in the case of the Apostles the inspiration was immediate and direct. In the case of ordinary Christians like ourselves, placed amid all the helps which God’s providence gives, we must use study, thought, meditation, prayer, experience of life, as channels through which the same inspiration is conveyed to us. The Society of Friends, when George Fox established it, testified on behalf of a great truth when it asserted that the Holy Ghost dwelt still, as in apostolic times, in the whole body of the Church, and spake still through the experience of Christian people. Their testimony was a great truth and a much-needed one in the middle of the seventeenth

century, when Churchmen were in danger of turning religion into a great machine of state police, such as the Greek Church became under the earlier Christian emperors, and when Puritans were inclined to smother all religious enthusiasm beneath their intense zeal for cold, rigid scholastic dogmas and confessions of faith. The early Friends came proclaiming a Divine power still present, a Church of God still energised and inspired as of old, and it was a revelation for many an earnest soul. But they made a great mistake, and pushed a great truth to a pernicious extreme, when they taught that this inspiration was inconsistent with forethought and study on the part of their teachers as to the substance and character of their public ministrations. The Society of Friends teaches that men should speak forth to their assemblies just what the Holy Ghost reveals on the spot, without any effort on their own part, such as meditation and study involve. They have acted without a promise, and they have fared accordingly. That Society has been noted for its philanthropy, for the peaceful, gentle lives of its members; but it has not been noted for expository power, and its public teachers have held but a low place among those well-instructed scribes who bring forth out of God’s treasures things new and old.

Expositors of Scripture, teachers of Divine truth, whether in the public congregation or in a Sunday-school class, must prepare themselves by thought, study, and prayer; then, having made the way of the Lord clear, and removed the hindrances which barred His path, we may humbly trust that the Holy Ghost will speak by us and through us, because we honour Him by our self-denial, and cease to offer burnt sacrifices unto the Lord of that which cost us nothing.

IV. The address of St. Peter to the Sanhedrin is marked by the same characteristics as we find in those directed to the people. It is kindly, for though the Apostles could speak sternly and severely, just as their Master did at times, yet they have left in this special direction an example to public speakers and public teachers of truth in every age. They strove first of all to put themselves in sympathy as much as possible with their audience. They did not despise the art of the rhetorician which teaches a speaker to begin by conciliating the good feelings of his audience towards himself. To the people St. Peter began, "Ye men of Israel"; he recognises their cherished privileges, as well as their sacred memories, -"Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers." To the bitterly hostile audience of the Sanhedrin, where the Sadducees largely predominated, Peter’s exordium is profoundly respectful and courteous, "Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel." The Apostles and the earliest Evangelists did not despise human feelings or outrage human sentiment when setting out to preach Christ crucified. We have known men so wrong-headed that they were never happy unless their efforts to do good or spread their peculiar opinions eventuated in a riot. When evangelistic work or any kind of attempt to spread opinions evokes violent opposition, that very opposition often arises from the injudicious conduct of the promoters; and then when the opposition is once evoked or a riot caused, charity departs, passion and violent feelings are aroused, and all hope of good evaporates for the time. There was profound practical wisdom in that command of our Lord to His Apostles, "When they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another," Even taking the matter only from the standpoint of a man anxious to spread his peculiar sentiments.

The Apostles’ address was kindly, but it was plain-spoken. The Sanhedrin were sitting as a board of inquisitors. They did not deny the miracle which had been wrought. We are scarcely fit judges of the attitude of mind occupied by an Eastern, specially by an Eastern Jew of those earlier ages, when confronted with a miracle. He did not deny the facts brought under his notice. He was too well acquainted with magic and the strange performances of its professors to do so. He merely inquired as to the sources of the

power, whether they were Divine or diabolical. "By what power or by what name have ye done this?" was a very natural inquiry in the mouth of an ecclesiastical body such as the Sanhedrin was. It was disturbed by facts, for which no explanation such as their philosophy furnished could account. It was upset in its calculations just as, to this day, the performances of Indian jugglers or the weird wonders of hypnotism upset the calculations of the hard, narrow man who has restricted all his investigations to some one special branch of science, and has so contracted his horizon that he thinks there is nothing in heaven or in earth which his philosophy cannot explain. We should mark the expression, "By what name have ye done this?" for it gives us a glimpse into Jewish life and practice. The Jews were accustomed in their incantations to use several kinds of names; sometimes those of patriarchs, sometimes the name of Solomon, and sometimes that of the Eternal Jehovah Himself. Of late years vast quantities of Jewish and Gnostic manuscripts have come to light in Egypt and Syria containing various titles and forms used by the Jewish magicians and the earlier Christian heretics, who were largely imbued with Jewish notions. It is quite in keeping with what we know of the spirit of the age from other sources that the Sanhedrin should ask, "By what power or by what name have ye done this?" While again, when we turn to the book of the Acts of the Apostles itself we find an illustration of the council’s inquiry in the celebrated case of the seven sons of Sceva, the Jewish priest at Ephesus, who strove to use for their own magical purposes the Divine name of Jesus Christ, and suffered for their temerity. St. Peter’s reply to the question of the court proves that the Christian Church adopted in all its Divine offices, whether in the working of miracles then or of baptism and of ordination, as still, the invocation of the Sacred Name, after the Jewish model. The Church still baptises and ordains in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Christ Himself had adopted the formula for baptism, and the Church has extended it to ordination, pleading thus before God and man alike the Divine power by which alone St. Peter healed the cripple, and the Church sends forth its ministers to carry on Christ’s work in the world.

St. Peter’s address was, as we have already said, very kindly, but very bold and plain-spoken in setting forth the power of Christ’s name. He had learnt by his Jewish training the tremendous importance and solemnity of names. Moses at the bush would know God’s name before he went as His messenger to the captive Israelites. On Sinai God Himself had placed reverence towards His name as one of the fundamental truths of religion. Prophet and psalmist had conspired together to teach St. Peter that holy and reverend was the name of God, and to impress upon him thus the power and meaning which lies in Christ’s name, and indeed in all names, though names are things we count so trifling. St. Peter dwells upon this point all through his addresses. To the people he had said, "His name, through faith in His name, hath made this man strong." To the rulers it was the same. It was "by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, this man doth stand here before you whole." "There is none other name under heaven whereby we must be saved." The Sanhedrin understand the importance of this point, and tell the Apostles they must not teach in this name. St. Peter pointedly refuses, and prays, when come to his own company, "that wonders may be done through the name of Thy holy servant Jesus."

St. Peter realised the sanctity and the power of God’s name, whether revealed in its ancient form of Jehovah or its New Testament form of Jesus Christ. Well would it be if the same Divine reverence found a larger place amongst ourselves. Irreverence towards the sacred name is far too prevalent; and even when men do not use God’s name in a profane Way, there is too much lightness in the manner in which even religious men permit themselves to utter that name which is the expression to man of supreme

holiness, -"God bless us," "Lord help us and save." How constantly do even pious people garnish their conversations and their epistles with such phrases or with the symbols D. V, without any real feeling that they are thereby appealing to Him who was and is and is to come, the Eternal. The name of God is still holy as of old, and the name of Jesus is still powerful to calm and soothe and bless as of old, and Christian people should sanctify those great names in their conversation with the world.

St. Peter was bold because he was daily comprehending more and more of the meaning of Christ’s work and mission, was gaining a clearer insight into the dignity of His person and was experiencing in himself the truth of His supernatural promises. How could a man help being bold, who felt the Spirit’s power within, and really held with intense belief that there was salvation in none other save Christ? Personal experience of religion alone can impart strength and courage and boldness to endure, to suffer, and to testify. St. Peter was exclusive in his views. He would not have suited those easygoing souls who now think one religion just as good as another, and consequently do not regard it as of the slightest moment whether a man be a follower of Christ or of Mahomet. The earliest Christians had none of this diluted faith. They believed that as there was only one God, so there was only one Mediator between God and man, and they realised the tremendous importance of preaching this Mediator. The Apostles, however, must be cleared from a misconstruction under which they have at times suffered. St. Peter proclaims Christ to the Sanhedrin as the only means of salvation. In his address to Cornelius the centurion of Caesarea, he declares that in every nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted of Him. These passages and these two declarations appear inconsistent. Their inconsistency is only superficial, however, as Bishop Burnet has well explained in his exposition of the Thirty-Nine Articles, a book not read very much in these times. St. Peter taught exclusive salvation through Christ. Christ is the only means, the only channel and way by which God confers salvation. Christ’s work is the one meritorious cause which gains spiritual blessing for man. But then, while there is salvation only in Christ, many persons may be saved by Christ who know not of Him consciously; else what shall we say or think about infants and idiots? It is only by Christ and through Christ and for His sake that any soul can be saved. He is the only door of salvation, He is the way as well as the truth and the life. But then it ‘is not for us to pronounce how far the saving merits of Christ may be applied and His saving power extend. St. Peter knew and taught that Jesus Christ was the one Mediator, and that by His name alone salvation could be obtained. Yet he did not hesitate to declare as regards Cornelius the centurion, that in every nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted of Him. It ought to be sufficient for us, as it was for the Apostles, to believe that the knowledge of Christ is life eternal, while satisfied to leave all other problems in the hands of Eternal Love.

HAWKER 1-4, "And as they spake unto the people, the priests, and the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees, came upon them, (2) Being grieved that they taught the people, and preached through Jesus the resurrection from the dead. (3) And they laid hands on them, and put them in hold unto the next day: for it was now eventide. (4) Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand.

Reader! Mark in the awful characters of those men, the malice of hell, at the success of the Gospel. Can the imagination conceive any higher proof of the desperately wicked state of the human heart, than is here shewn? To imprison those Servants of the Lord, for so illustrious a miracle as Jesus had wrought, by their instrumentality. But, Reader!

you will stop at the surface of this matter, if the Lord the Spirit doth not lead you deeper, to see, that all men by nature, and unawakened by grace, are the same. Both Sadducees, and Pharisees; Priests of the law, and mere Professors of the Gospel, unacquainted with the plague of their own heart, are all the same. All such as are grieved, as well as those of old, whenever, and wheresoever salvation is freely and fully preached, in the alone name of Jesus, without complimenting their good works; but solely ascribing salvation by grace alone, to the Lord Jesus Christ.

But turn from such characters, to behold the blessedness of those servants, whom the Lord so highly honored. Oh! happy Peter, happy John ! surely your prison became a palace, and your chains, chains of gold, while the Lord was thus loading you with such distinguishing honors! I apprehend, that the five thousand, here said to have believed, were in addition to the three thousand, recorded on the day of Pentecost: so that both together, made eight thousand. Oh! the wonders of that wonder-working God the Holy Ghost? Well might the Evangelist close his Gospel with saying, that the Apostles went forth and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following, Mar_16:20. Reader! think what a melancholy contrast the present hour of the Church affords. Here we read but of two sermons, and what a harvest of souls were gathered in. And what multitudes of sermons are now preached, and no conversion follows. To what cause are we to ascribe it? Is it not because, unaccompanied with the ordination and blessing of God the Holy Ghost? And can it be otherwise? If the Holy Ghost be not honored. If men preach unsent by Him, and his presence be not implored, neither his blessing asked; no, nor his Almighty ministry acknowledged: can it be a matter of surprize, that Ichabod is on our Church doors, and the glory is departed from Israel? 1Sa_4:21. Oh! that the Lord the Spirit would give us a little reviving in our bondage; that he that hath ears to hear, may hear what the Spirit saith unto the Churches, Rev_2:29.

SBC 1-2, "And as they spake unto the people, the priests, and the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees, came upon them, (2) Being grieved that they taught the people, and preached through Jesus the resurrection from the dead. (3) And they laid hands on them, and put them in hold unto the next day: for it was now eventide. (4) Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand.

Reader! Mark in the awful characters of those men, the malice of hell, at the success of the Gospel. Can the imagination conceive any higher proof of the desperately wicked state of the human heart, than is here shewn? To imprison those Servants of the Lord, for so illustrious a miracle as Jesus had wrought, by their instrumentality. But, Reader! you will stop at the surface of this matter, if the Lord the Spirit doth not lead you deeper, to see, that all men by nature, and unawakened by grace, are the same. Both Sadducees, and Pharisees; Priests of the law, and mere Professors of the Gospel, unacquainted with the plague of their own heart, are all the same. All such as are grieved, as well as those of old, whenever, and wheresoever salvation is freely and fully preached, in the alone name of Jesus, without complimenting their good works; but solely ascribing salvation by grace alone, to the Lord Jesus Christ.

But turn from such characters, to behold the blessedness of those servants, whom the Lord so highly honored. Oh! happy Peter, happy John ! surely your prison became a palace, and your chains, chains of gold, while the Lord was thus loading you with such distinguishing honors! I apprehend, that the five thousand, here said to have believed, were in addition to the three thousand, recorded on the day of Pentecost: so that both

together, made eight thousand. Oh! the wonders of that wonder-working God the Holy Ghost? Well might the Evangelist close his Gospel with saying, that the Apostles went forth and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following, Mar_16:20. Reader! think what a melancholy contrast the present hour of the Church affords. Here we read but of two sermons, and what a harvest of souls were gathered in. And what multitudes of sermons are now preached, and no conversion follows. To what cause are we to ascribe it? Is it not because, unaccompanied with the ordination and blessing of God the Holy Ghost? And can it be otherwise? If the Holy Ghost be not honored. If men preach unsent by Him, and his presence be not implored, neither his blessing asked; no, nor his Almighty ministry acknowledged: can it be a matter of surprize, that Ichabod is on our Church doors, and the glory is departed from Israel? 1Sa_4:21. Oh! that the Lord the Spirit would give us a little reviving in our bondage; that he that hath ears to hear, may hear what the Spirit saith unto the Churches, Rev_2:29.

MACLARE, "THE FIRST BLAST OF TEMPEST

Hitherto the Jewish authorities had let the disciples alone, either because their attention had not been drawn even by Pentecost and the consequent growth of the Church, or because they thought that to ignore the new sect was the best way to end it. But when its leaders took to vehement preaching in Solomon’s porch, and crowds eagerly listened, it was time to strike in.

Our passage describes the first collision of hostile authority with Christian faith, and shows, as in a glass, the constant result of that collision in all ages.

The motives actuating the assailants are significantly analysed, and may be distributed among the three classes enumerated. The priests and the captain of the Temple would be annoyed by the very fact that Peter and John taught the people: the former, because they were jealous of their official prerogative: the latter, because he was responsible for public order, and a riot in the Temple court would have been a scandal. The Saddueees were indignant at the substance of the teaching, which affirmed the resurrection of the dead, which they denied, and alleged it as having occurred ‘in Jesus.’

The position of Sadducees and Pharisees is inverted in Acts as compared with the Gospels. While Christ lived, the Pharisees were the soul of the opposition to Him, and His most solemn warnings fell on them; after the Resurrection, the Sadducees head the opposition, and among the Pharisees are some, like Gamaliel and afterwards Paul, who incline to the new faith. It was the Resurrection that made the difference, and the difference is an incidental testimony to the fact that Christ’s Resurrection was proclaimed from the first. To ask whether Jesus had risen, and to examine the evidence, were the last things of which the combined assailants thought. This public activity of the Apostles threatened their influence or their pet beliefs, and so, like persecutors in all ages, they shut their eyes to the important question, ‘Is this preaching true or false?’ and took the easier course of laying hands on the preachers.

So the night fell on Peter and John in prison, the first of the thousands who have suffered bonds and imprisonment for Christ, and have therein found liberty. What lofty faith, and what subordination of the fate of the messengers to the progress of the message, are expressed in that abrupt introduction, in Act_4:4, of the statistics of the increase of the Church from that day’s work! It mattered little that it ended with the two

Apostles in custody, since it ended too with five thousand rejoicing in Christ.

The arrest seems to have been due to a sudden thought on the part of the priests, captain, and Sadducees, without commands from the Sanhedrin or the high priest. But when these inferior authorities had got hold of their prisoners, they probably did not quite know what to do with them, and so moved the proper persons to summon the Sanhedrin. In all haste, then, a session was called for next morning. ‘Rulers, elders, and scribes’ made up the constituent members of the court, and the same two ‘high priests’ who had tried Jesus are there, attended by a strong contingent of dependants, who could be trusted to vote as they were bidden. Annas was an emeritus high priest, whose age and relationship to Caiaphas, the actual holder of the post and Annas’s son-in-law, gave him an influential position. He retained the title, though he had ceased to hold the office, as a cleric without a charge is usually called ‘Reverend.’

It was substantially the same court which had condemned Jesus, and probably now sat in the same hall as then. So that Peter and John would remember the last time when they had together been in that room, and Who had stood in the criminal’s place where they now were set.

The court seems to have been somewhat at a loss how to proceed. The Apostles had been arrested for their words, but they are questioned about the miracle. It was no crime to teach in the Temple, but a crime might be twisted out of working a miracle in the name of any but Jehovah. To do that would come near blasphemy or worshipping strange gods. The Sanhedrin knew what the answer to their question would be, and probably they intended, as soon as the anticipated answer was given, to ‘rend their clothes,’ and say, as they had done once before, ‘What need we further witnesses? They have spoken blasphemy.’ But things did not go as was expected. The crafty question was put. It does not attempt to throw doubt on the reality of the miracle, but there is a world of arrogant contempt in it, both in speaking of the cure as ‘this,’ and in the scornful emphasis with which, in the Greek, ‘ye’ stands last in the sentence, and implies, ‘ye poor, ignorant fishermen.’

The last time that Peter had been in the judgment-hall his courage had oozed out of him at the prick of a maid-servant’s sharp tongue, but now he fronts all the ecclesiastical authorities without a tremor. Whence came the transformation of the cowardly denier into the heroic confessor, who turns the tables on his judges and accuses them? The narrative answers. He was ‘filled with the Holy Ghost.’ That abiding possession of the Spirit, begun on Pentecost, did not prevent special inspiration for special needs, and the Greek indicates that there was granted such a temporary influx in this critical hour.

One cannot but note the calmness of the Apostle, so unlike his old tumultuous self. He begins with acknowledging the lawful authority of the court, and goes on, with just a tinge of sarcasm, to put the vague ‘this’ of the question in its true light. It was ‘a good deed done to an impotent man,’ for which John and he stood there. Singular sort of crime that! Was there not a presumption that the power which had wrought so ‘good’ a deed was good? ‘Do men gather grapes of thorns?’ Many a time since then Christianity has been treated as criminal, because of its beneficence to bodies and souls.

But Peter rises to the full height of the occasion, when he answers the Sanhedrin’s question with the pealing forth of his Lord’s name. He repeats in substance his former contrast of Israel’s treatment of Jesus and God’s; but, in speaking to the rulers, his tone is more severe than it was to the people. The latter had been charged, at Pentecost and in the Temple, with crucifying Jesus; the former are here charged with crucifying the Christ. It was their business to have tested his claims, and to have welcomed the

Messiah. The guilt was shared by both, but the heavier part lay on the shoulders of the Sanhedrin.

Mark, too, the bold proclamation of the Resurrection, the stone of offence to the Sadducees. How easy it would have been for them to silence the Apostle, if they could have pointed to the undisturbed and occupied grave! That would have finished the new sect at once. Is there any reason why it was not done but the one reason that it could not be done?

Thus far Peter has been answering the interrogation legally put, and has done as was anticipated. Now was the time for Annas and the rest to strike in; but they could not carry out their programme, for the fiery stream of Peter’s words does not stop when they expected, and instead of a timid answer followed by silence, they get an almost defiant proclamation of the Name, followed by a charge against them, which turns the accused into the accuser, and puts them at the bar. Peter learned to apply the passage in the Psalm (Act_4:11) to the rulers, from his Master’s use of it (Mat_21:42); and there is no quaver in his voice nor fear in his heart when, in the face of all these learned Rabbis and high and mighty dignitaries, he brands them as foolish builders, blind to the worth of the Stone ‘chosen of God, and precious,’ and tells them that the course of divine Providence will run counter to their rejection of Jesus, and make him the very ‘Head of the corner,’-the crown, as well as the foundation, of God’s building.

But not even this bold indictment ends the stream of his speech. The proclamation of the power of the Name was fitly followed by pressing home the guilt and madness of rejecting Jesus, and that again by the glad tidings of salvation for all, even the rejecters. Is not the sequence in Peter’s defence substantially that which all Christian preaching should exhibit? First, strong, plain proclamation of the truth; then pungent pressing home of the sin of turning away from Jesus; and then earnest setting forth of the salvation in His name,- a salvation wide as the world, and deep as our misery and need, but narrow, inasmuch as it is ‘in none other.’ The Apostle will not end with charging his hearers with guilt, but with offering them salvation. He will end with lifting up ‘the Name’ high above all other, and setting it in solitary clearness before, not these rulers only, but the whole world. The salvation which it had wrought on the lame man was but a parable and picture of the salvation from all ills of body and spirit, which was stored in that Name, and in it alone.

The rulers’ contempt had been expressed by their emphatic ending of their question with that ‘ye.’ Peter expresses his brotherhood and longing for the good of his judges by ending his impassioned, or, rather, inspired address with a loving, pleading ‘we.’ He puts himself on the same level with them as needing salvation, and would fain have them on the same level with himself and John as receiving it. That is the right way to preach.

Little need be said as to the effect of this address. Whether it went any deeper in any susceptible souls or not, it upset the schemes of the leaders. Something in the manner and matter of it awed them into wonder, and paralysed them for the time. Here was the first instance of the fulfilment of that promise, which has been fulfilled again and again since, of ‘a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist.’ ‘Unlearned,’ as ignorant of Rabbinical traditions, and ‘ignorant,’ or, rather, ‘private,’ as holding no official position, these two wielded a power over hearts and consciences which not even official indifference and arrogance could shake off. Thank God, that day’s experience is repeated still, and any of us may have the same Spirit to clothe us with the same armour of light!

The Sanhedrin knew well enough that the Apostles had been with Jesus, and the

statement that ‘they took knowledge of them’ cannot mean that that fact dawned on the rulers for the first time. Rather it means that their wonder at the ‘boldness’ of the two drove home the fact of their association with Him to their minds. That association explained the marvel; for the Sanhedrin remembered how He had stood, meek but unawed, at the same bar. They said to themselves, ‘We know where these men get this brave freedom of speech,-from that Nazarene.’ Happy shall we be if our demeanour recalls to spectators the ways of our Lord!

How came the lame man there? He had not been arrested with the Apostles. Had he voluntarily and bravely joined them? We do not know, but evidently he was not there as accused, and probably had come as a witness of the reality of the miracle. Notice the emphatic ‘standing,’ as in Act_4:10,-a thing that he had never done all his life. No wonder that the Sanhedrin were puzzled, and settled down to the ‘lame and impotent conclusion’ which follows. So, in the first round of the world-long battle between the persecutors and the persecuted, the victory is all on the side of the latter. So it has been ever since, though often the victors have died in the conflict. ‘The Church is an anvil which has worn out many hammers,’ and the story of the first collision is, in essentials, the story of all.

JOHN DICK, PETER AND JOHN EXAMINED BY THE COUNCIL.

Chap. iv. 1-22.

"IN the last Lecture, I considered the miracle performed by the Apostles upon

a lame man, who lay at the gate of the temple called Beautiful, and

illustrated part of the discourse which they delivered, on that occasion, to

the people. Although the opportunity was tempting to vanity, as it would

have been easy to pass themselves for extraordinary persons upon the

wondering multitude; yet these honest and humble disciples of Jesus

disclaimed the honour of the cure, and transferred all the glory of it to

their Master. Their minds were too strongly convinced of his excellence and

dignity, and their hearts were too sensible of his love, to permit them to

harbour any purpose but that of exalting him in the eyes of their

countrymen, and gaining them over to his. religion. With this view, they

boldly affirmed, in the presence of his murderers, that he was the Holy One

and the Just; and called upon them to acknowledge him as the great Prophet,

whom the Church was bound implicitly to obey.

In the mean time, intelligence of these proceedings was conveyed to the men

in power, by some of their zealous partisans, who had mingled with the

crowd, and in whom the miracle and doctrine of the Apostles had awakened no

sentiments but those of hostility. Alarmed at the information, the priests,

the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees came in haste, and laid violent

hands upon Peter and John, and committed them to prison. The situation of

affairs was so serious as to call for some prompt and decisive measure. We

are told, that “they were grieved, because the Apostles taught the people,

and preached through Jesus the resurrection from the dead.” On looking back

to their discourse, we do not observe this doctrine mentioned; but the

resurrection of Jesus himself is expressly affirmed, and that of his

followers is an obvious and necessary inference from it. Both were alike

offensive to the rulers of the Jews; the one, because it disclosed a secret

which they had taken great pains to conceal, and defeated their design in

putting our Saviour to death; the other, because it was opposed to the

doctrine of the Sadducees, who maintained, that death terminates the

existence of man, and, consequently, that his body is consigned to the

grave, under a sentence of eternal imprisonment. It is not improbable that

Peter and John had introduced the latter subject in their address to the

people; for their discourses are not always given at full length, but, in

some cases at least, we have only the principal topics, or an abridgment of

what they delivered.

But the priests and Sadducees, although they hastened to the place with all

the speed of affronted pride, and irritated zeal, came too late to prevent

the effect which they dreaded. The seeds of heresy, as these churchmen would

have said, were already sown, and had taken deep root in the hearts of many

of the Jews. The Apostles had infused their own sentiments into the breasts

of their hearers. The word of God, delivered by these Galilean fishermen

with much simplicity, but with the earnestness of conviction, and in the

demonstration of the Spirit, had made an impression, which not all the arts

of sophistry, nor all the terrors of persecution, could afterwards erase.

“Howbeit, many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the

men was about five thousand.” This number is quite distinct from the three

thousand converted on the day of Pentecost; and it would be idle to spend

time in proving what is plain to every reader. These are all the remarks

which I think it necessary to make upon the four introductory verses. Let us

proceed to the account of the appearance of Peter and John before the

council.

“And it came to pass on the morrow, that their rulers, and elders, and

scribes, and Annas the high-priest, and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander,

and as many as were of the kindred of the high-priest, were gathered

together at Jerusalem.” This seems to be a description of the Sanhedrim, or

the supreme council of the Jewish nation, which was composed of the

High-Priest, as president, the Elders of the people, and the Scribes who

were learned in the law. As its jurisdiction extended to all causes relating

to religion, we perceive for what reason it was assembled on this occasion.

A new sect had appeared, which threatened to overthrow the established

faith, and purposed to erect upon its ruins the doctrines and institutions

of Jesus of Nazareth. When the members of this council condemned him to be

crucified, they flattered themselves that his cause would be buried in the

same grave with himself. But three full days had not elapsed, when the

report of his resurrection, brought by the very men whom they had stationed

to watch his sepulchre, filled them with perplexity and terror. Yet, instead

of yielding to the evidence, of which it was impossible to entertain any

suspicion, these obstinate sinners, resolved, it should seem, to brave

heaven itself, contrived a story, which, they hoped, would retain the people

in their error. “Say ye, His disciples came by night, and stole him away

while we slept.” Thus their minds were again at rest. At rest, did I say?

No; they might force their countenances to be cheerful, and repeat, with an

air of confidence, the charge of imposture against Christ; but their hearts

misgave them, and they secretly trembled at the name which they publicly

blasphemed.

The time passed on, and for several weeks nothing more was heard about him,

or his disciples, till suddenly it was rumoured abroad, that they had

appeared in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, and were addressing, in their

respective languages, strangers from every country under heaven. This

surprising information must have stirred up afresh all the fears of the

Sanhedrim, whose minds were ill at ease; but as we hear of no measure

adopted by them on the occasion, they perhaps persuaded themselves, that it

was only a sudden burst of zeal on the part of the followers of Jesus, which

had been magnified into a miracle by the credulity of the populace. But now,

finding that the Apostles persisted in maintaining the resurrection of their

Master, that they were attracting the attention of the public, that they

were becoming popular, that converts to their cause were fast multiplying,

and that they were actually performing miracles in confirmation of their

doctrine, they judged it high time to bestir themselves, and to make some

great effort to save their honour and interests, which were in imminent

danger.

The council was assembled; and Peter and John having been brought out of

prison, and placed at the bar, the president demanded, with a stern

countenance, we may presume, and in an authoritative tone, “By what power,

or by what name, have ye done this?” The question was not necessary for the

information of the judges, who knew well that they were disciples of Jesus;

but they wished to draw from their own lips a confession, upon which they

could found their proceedings; or they hoped, that overawed by the presence

of so high and venerable an assembly, they would make a retractation. And

had fear induced the Apostles to dissemble, and to attribute the miracle,

not to Jesus of Nazareth, but to the God of Israel, their declaration would

have been triumphantly published, as an everlasting check to the progress of

Christianity. But Peter and John were not to be intimidated, They knew that

they had truth on their side; and, according to the promise of their

Saviour, they received, on this trying occasion, extraordinary assistance.

“Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the

people, and elders of Israel, if we this day be examined of the good deed

done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole; be it known unto

you, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of

Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth

this man stand here before you whole.” “The question relates to the cure of

the lame man; and you inquire by what means it has been effected. Know,

then, that we have performed it by no power or holiness of our own, by no

demoniacal or magical influence, nor simply, like the Prophets, in the name

of Jehovah, the God of our fathers; but in the name, and by the authority,

of Jesus our Master, with a design to prove that he is the Son of God, and

the Messiah.” You observe no evasion in this answer, no reluctance to bring

out the truth, no attempt to palliate it, although Peter knew that it was in

the highest degree offensive to his audience. There is a studied plainness

and explicitness in his words, manifestly indicating a mind, which, instead

of being ashamed, gloried in the truth, and was careless of the personal

consequences which might flow from the publication of it. Not content with

simply avowing it, he ventures upon a direct accusation of his judges. It

was not a time to flatter: the glory of his Master, the dignity of the

Apostolical office, and the real interest of those whom he addressed,

forbade such complaisance. “Whom ye crucified.” “By that same man, with

whose innocent blood your hands are yet stained, has this incontrovertible

miracle been performed. We are only his ministers. In vain did you combine

against him. In vain, while Providence permitted you to carry your malice so

far, did you nail him to the cross. You could not defeat the purposes of

heaven, and prevent his entrance into his glory and his kingdom, The right

hand of his Father restored the life which you wickedly took away, and has

invested the insulted and rejected Saviour with all power in heaven and

earth,” Every word was a sharp arrow, piercing the hearts of those enemies

of the King. Oh! the torture which they must have felt, while those

contemptible men braved them to the face, and compelled them to hear their

own shame and condemnation. The order of things is reversed, The prisoners

at the bar are the accusers; and the judges on the bench are the

self-convicted criminals.

“This is the stone, which was set at nought of you builders, which is become

the head of the corner.” The priests and rulers had often sung these words

of the Psalmist, and felt, or thought that they felt, holy indignation

against the froward and impious men, whose conduct they describe. They never

suspected, that the portrait, which they surveyed with so much detestation,

was drawn for themselves. “But you,” said the Apostle, “are the builders,

who have refused to admit that stone which is now the head of the corner.”

It was incumbent upon them, as ministers of God, and workers together with

him, to contribute their endeavours to carry on that structure, which he

purposed to erect for the glory of his mercy and wisdom. In prosecution of

this design, they were required, when Jesus Christ, who was described in

prophecy as “the stone which God should lay in Zion,” came into the world,

to assign to him his proper place in the building, by acknowledging him to

be the Messiah, and calling upon the people to believe in him, and to submit

to his authority. But, without regarding the evidence of his divine mission,

and inquiring into his qualifications for saving them from sin and death,

they opposed his pretensions, because he wanted external splendour, because

he promised neither wealth nor worldly honours to his followers, because he

did not offer to deliver the nation from the Roman yoke, and to give them

the empire of the world. For these reasons the builders threw this stone

aside as useless. “But God’s thoughts were not as their thoughts; neither

were his ways as their ways.” The despised and neglected stone he raised to

the most elevated and important place in the building, Upon the crucified

Saviour he conferred glory and authority, constituting him the head of the

Church, the centre of union to his people, the bond which connects Jews and

Gentiles, and composes of both one holy temple in the Lord. “The man,” said

the Apostle, “whom you treated with contempt, and put to death in an

ignominious manner, is seated at the right hand of the Father, anti is

entitled to the homage and obedience of angels and men.”

It was manifest, then, that Jesus was the only Saviour; and, consequently,

that no person could reject him but at his peril. “Neither is there

salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given

among men, whereby we must be saved,” Some suppose the meaning of these

words to be, that the name of Jesus was the only name which had virtue, when

pronounced, to effect miraculous cures; and that there is a literal

reference to the question of the Sanhedrim, “By what name have ye done

this?” They think that the council in their question, and Peter in his

answer, had respect to a notion Which prevailed among the Jews, and other

nations that there was a power in certain names, to cure diseases. This

foolish opinion was adopted by some of the more superstitious Fathers of the

Church. [5] Although, however, it be true, that the use of any other name

than that of Jesus would have proved inefficient in an attempt to work a

miracle; yet I apprehend, that the words before us contain a higher and more

important sense. Salvation signifies something greater than deliverance from

bodily affliction, namely, the redemption of the whole man from sin and

death; and Peter declares that it is only through faith in Christ that this

salvation can be enjoyed. This is a truth, which, although opposed with

virulence by the Jews, is believed by Christians upon satisfactory evidence.

Disputes have arisen among us with respect to the extent of redemption, that

is, with respect to the situation and character of the persons to whom its

benefits are applied; but no doubt remains with those, who, in forming their

opinions, are determined by the express authority of Scripture, that the

future happiness of men must, in one way or other, be attributed to his

mediation. His name gives hope and joy to the guilty. It is in his blood

that we see the price of our pardon; in his grace, the means of our

restoration to the divine image; in his promises, the sure ground on which

we expect immortality. The gospel exhibits him alone as the object of our

faith; and no other was pointed out by the Prophets.

Let us consider the effect of Peters’s speech upon the council. The most

furious passions, we may well believe, boiled in their breasts; but such was

the force of truth, that they were confounded and silenced. “Now when they

saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned

and ignorant men, they marvelled, and they took knowledge of them that they

had been with Jesus. And beholding the man which was healed standing with

them, they could say nothing against it.” The men, whom our Saviour chose to

be the preachers of his religion, and the advocates of his cause, seemed,

from their want of natural and acquired qualifications, to be altogether

unfit for so important an office. They were acquainted with the subtilties

of logic, and the arts of eloquence. They could not compose discourses, in

which the artful disposition of the arguments, the plausible representation

of facts, and the beauties of style, should steal upon the hearers, and, ere

they were aware, disarm their resentment, and conciliate their good wills

The utmost of which publicans and fishermen were capable, was to speak a few

sentences, probably not well connected, and expressed in homely and

inaccurate language, They had never addressed magistrates and priests; they

had conversed only with their equals; and in the presence of persons

celebrated for their sanctity and learning, it should not have surprised us,

if they had been abashed and embarrassed, and had experienced a total

suspension of their powers. But our Lord promised “to give them a mouth and

wisdom, which all their adversaries should not be able to gainsay nor

resist.” He would supply, by the gifts of the Spirit, their want of talents

and education; he would inspire the ignorant with knowledge, and enable “the

tongue of the stammerer to speak plainly.” In the present case, we see this

promise performed. Peter and John now stood before the supreme council of

the nation, in which were present the high-priest with his attendants, the

principal persons in authority, and the scribes, well versed in the law, and

practised in the arts of perplexing an antagonist. Yet they retained perfect

composure of mind, and pleaded the cause of their master with such

precision, and energy, and boldness, that their judges were astonished.

It was evident that the Apostles were “unlearned and ignorant men,” not only

from their appearance, which discovered the meanness of their condition, but

likewise from their speech; for although our Lord promised to enable his

disciples to plead his cause with irresistible efficacy, yet he did not

promise to qualify them to speak their native language, or that of any

foreign country, with propriety and elegance. Accordingly, their writings

are not models of purity of style, and, in not a few instances, must have

offended the fastidious ears of a Greek. It was not by the wisdom of words

that the gospel was to be propagated. Their eloquence was the eloquence of

truth, delivered with authority and earnestness, but without the decorations

of art.

We are told, that “they took knowledge of them that they had been with

Jesus.” This remark has been understood to mean, that the rulers of the Jews

recognized them to be his disciples, or remembered to have seen them in

company with him; for some of the priests and great men occasionally

attended our Saviour as spies upon his conduct, and with a design to perplex

and ensnare him. I apprehend that something different is intended, namely,

that they perceived a resemblance between their manner and that of their

Master; the same intrepidity of spirit, the same dignity and energy of

address. And when they saw, at the same time, the lame man standing before

them, they were confounded. Not one in all the assembly could find any thing

to reply. A sullen silence reigned throughout the court; and the proud

doctors of Jerusalem felt their inferiority in the presence of two fishermen

of Galilee.

What was to be done in these humiliating circumstances? To confess before

the Apostles that they were vanquished, would have been mortifying in the

extreme; and to sit and say nothing, would have subjected them to contempt

and derision. They commanded the prisoners, therefore, to retire, that

without restraint they might consult together about some expedient for

extricating themselves from their present embarrassment. “But when they had

commanded them to go aside out of the council, they conferred among

themselves, saying, What shall we do to these men? for that a notable

miracle hath been done by them, is manifest to all them that dwell at

Jerusalem, and we cannot deny it. But, that it spread no further among the

people, let us straitly threaten them, that they speak henceforth to no man

in this name.” Here, my brethren, a very extraordinary scene is presented to

our view. We see an assembly of men, professors of the true religion, high

in office in the Church, and pretending to be animated with fervent zeal for

the glory of God, deliberating not how they shall prevail upon their

countrymen to embrace Christianity, of the divine origin of which they had

before them undeniable evidence, but what would be the most effectual

measure to hinder its reception. They do not startle at their own impiety;

they do not blush to reveal to one another their atrocious purpose. Not a

single voice is raised in behalf of the truth; there is not a Nicodemus to

speak a word, or even to suggest a doubt, in favour of the Messiah. Where

was conscience during this consultation? Was it silenced by the clamours of

passion? It was impossible that they should not have been conscious of the

wickedness of their design, and have experienced uneasiness from the

remonstrances of the inward monitor; but their example shows us the unhappy

and dangerous situation of men, who have openly and decidedly embarked in a

bad cause. Their passions are all interested in its success. Their pride is

engaged to go on; and they cannot recede without incurring the reproach of

inconsistence, and exposing themselves to the scorn and persecution of the

associates whom they have abandoned.

The resolution adopted by the council was to charge the Apostles, with

threatenings, “to speak henceforth no more to any man in this name.” And

they called them, and commanded them not to speak at all, nor teach in the

name of Jesus.” Foolish men! How could they persuade themselves, that they

should be able to stop the progress of the new religion which was patronised

by God himself? Could their devices baffle his wisdom? or their authority

prevail against his power? Upon the supposition that Peter and John had been

terrified into silence, was there no other disciple of a more undaunted

spirit, who would raise his voice in behalf of his Master? Although these

men had altogether held their peace, surely in such a cause “the very stones

would have cried out.” But the specimen which the council had already seen

of the character of the Apostles, afforded no reasonable hope that they

would pay any regard to their menaces. When they first came into the

presence of the Sanhedrim, they appeared to be superior to fear, and dared

to publish the truth in a manner the most offensive. It was vain to expect

that their courage would fail, after they had witnessed the confusion of

their judges; and that they would be intimidated by a command, which could

be considered in no other light, than as an ebullition of impotent rage, an

expression of obstinate but dismayed hostility.

Accordingly, when they. were again brought into court, their behaviour was

such as might have been looked for, in these circumstances, from men firm to

their purpose. “But Peter and John answered, and said unto them, Whether it

be right in the sight of God, to hearken unto you, more than unto God, judge

ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.” This

is an explicit declaration that they would not obey them; and in

justification of this refusal, they appeal to their judges themselves. God

is the supreme lawgiver, the King of kings, and the Lord of lords, by

delegation from whom earthly rulers hold that authority which they lawfully

exercise over their subjects. There can be no power, therefore, against the

truth, but for the truth. In the empire of the universe, as in the kingdoms

of men, a deputy has no right to repeal the laws of the sovereign, and to

call upon the people to engage in acts of rebellion and treason. From that

moment conscience ceases to recognise him as a representative of the

monarch, and can regard him only as an usurper. We perceive, therefore, the

limits of the obedience which we owe to our superiors in Church and State.

In those cases which are agreeable to the laws of heaven, made known by the

light of nature, and by revelation, or which, at least, are not inconsistent

with those laws, we are bound; but in every other case we are free. God has

a prior claim to our obedience, which no human interference, no relation

which may be formed between us and others, no promise or contract can

invalidate. Those, therefore, who refuse to comply with the unlawful orders

of their superiors, are not disobedient subjects. In such cases they are not

subject. Their refusal may indeed be stigmatized as criminal, and punished

by tyrants and wicked rulers, who can brook no opposition to their imperious

mandates; but God approves of it, and it will be applauded by good men as a

noble stand for the rights of truth and conscience.

The principle which we are now considering is so obviously just, that we may

submit to the most partial judges, whether it ought not to be steadily acted

upon, on all occasions, in which the authority of God and that of man

interfere. It is a principle, which the light of nature teaches; and we find

Socrates declaring to his judges, that he would not, to save his life,

desist from fulfilling the will of God, by teaching philosophy. “O

Athenians, I will obey God rather than you.” [6] It may indeed be alleged in

defence of the most irregular and unjustifiable actions. Enthusiasm may

fancy, and hypocrisy may pretend, a divine commission for the wildest

excesses. The clearest and most valuable principles are liable to be abused.

But in the present case, the Jewish rulers themselves could not question the

application of it. What had the Apostles done? They had not taught a set of

notions calculated to excite tumult and insurrection among the people; nor

promulgated a system of impious and extravagant doctrines, for which they

could produce no satisfactory evidence, They had spoken “the things which

they had seen and heard.” Fully assured of the truth of the religion which

they preached, they could give indubitable proof of it, and had given such

proof, by the miracle performed upon the impotent man. To be silent,

therefore, would have been to offer violence to their convictions, to

conceal from others what they were interested to know, and to betray the

trust reposed in them, when they were appointed to the Apostolical office.

This bold answer, which must have been regarded by the council as an open

contempt of their authority, was sufficient to have roused their anger to

fury, and to have prompted them to adopt violent measures. For the present,

however, they contented themselves with renewing their threatenings, not

from real moderation, or an aversion to proceed to extremities, but because

they were apprehensive, that a more severe exercise of their authority would

be attended with danger. The truth of the miracle performed upon the lame

man was manifest beyond contradiction. He had passed his fortieth year, when

the disorder in his joints, although it could have been remedied at an

earlier period, was become incurable by human means. The people glorified

God, by acknowledging the cure to be an immediate effect of his power; and

regarded with reverence and affection, the Apostles, as his favourites and

ministers. At this crisis it would have been hazardous to punish them. The

populace, capable of being easily inflamed, and hurried on to the most

dreadful outrages, might have forgotten their usual respect for their

rulers, and have sacrificed them in a paroxysm of rage. For this reason, the

council dismissed Peter and John, although they knew that they would return

to their former employment, and preach, through Jesus, the resurrection from

the dead with redoubled zeal and courage. “So when they had further

threatened them, they let them go, finding nothing how they might punish

them, because of the people; for all men glorified God for that which was

done. For the man was above forty years old, on whom this miracle of healing

was showed.” Thus did our Saviour deliver his faithful servants out of the

hands of their enemies; and preserve them for the important purposes which

they had yet to fulfil.

To this illustration of the passage I shall subjoin the following

observations.

First, When God is carrying on any design for the manifestation of his

glory, great opposition will be made to it. Satan, his implacable adversary

will not remain a quiet spectator; and the men, over whom his influence

extends, will be stirred up to his assistance. In this combination, it

should not surprise us, to find, not only persons of profane principles and

wicked lives, but some, who, in consequence of their apparent attachment to

religion, might have been expected to range themselves on the opposite side.

When God was setting his Son upon his holy hill of Zion, not only did the

“Heathen” rage, who were ignorant of prophecy, and had not seen the miracles

of Jesus, but the “people” imagined a vain thing; the favoured people to

whom the oracles of God were committed, and among whom the Messiah had

appeared. Both said “Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their

cords from us.”

In the second place, God may expose his people to much discouragement, when

they are walking in his own way, and when the undertaking, in which they are

engaged, is patronised by himself. The Apostles preached Christ in

consequence of an express commission from heaven; and upon their success

depended the accomplishment of the divine purposes relative to the

establishment of the Church, and the conversion of the world. Yet in the

outset they were opposed by the supreme authority in the nation. In the

course of their ministry, they were subjected to many dangers and grievous

sufferings; and most of them lost their lives in the cause. Superficial

reasoners may conclude, that God is at variance with himself, embarrassing

and retarding the execution of his own plans; and may complain, that,

instead of rewarding, he punishes men for their zeal and fidelity. “But the

foolishness of God is wiser than men.” By such dispensations, he exercises

the faith of his servants, and makes known the power of his arm, in carrying

on his designs in spite of the utmost efforts of his adversaries; while, in

the conduct of his people, such examples of courage, patience, and

disinterested love are exhibited, as afford no slight testimony to the truth

of religion. Thus he makes “the wrath of man praise him; and the remainder

of it he restrains.” Converts are made by the sufferings of the saints as

well as by their doctrine. It was a saying among the Christians of

antiquity, founded in experience, that “the blood of the martyrs was the

seed of the Church.”

In the third place, Jesus Christ requires no service from his disciples, for

which he does not furnish them with necessary assistance. He is not a hard

task master. “His yoke is easy, and his burden is light;” for as his

commandments are reasonable, so by his grace we are enabled to obey them.

When Peter and John were called to plead his cause before the Jewish

council, they were “filled with the Holy Ghost.” Hence cowardly fishermen

became undaunted Apostles; simple and uneducated men have put learning to

silence; and delicate women have endured, with unshaken firmness, cruel

tortures, and death in its most terrible forms. “As thy days, so shall thy

strength be.”

In the fourth place, Great is the truth, and it shall prevail. It confounded

and silenced the Jewish council; it made foolish the wisdom of the world,

vanquishing its vain philosophy and sophistical eloquence by the plain

doctrine of the cross; it will, in like manner triumph over the petulant and

malignant opposition of infidelity; and a future age shall see superstition

in all its modifications, delusions of every kind, enthusiasm, heresy,

error, and licentiousness, vanish before it, as the shade of night before

the sun. From what it has already done, we may calculate the effects which

are yet to be expected from it. “When the Lord shall send the rod of his

strength out of Zion, the people shall be willing in the day of his power;

and he shall rule in the midst of his enemies.”

Lastly, Let us be careful to maintain a good conscience in our religious

profession. This was the constant study of the Apostles, who considered not

what was honourable in the eyes of the world, and advantageous, and safe,

but solely what was right. It was God alone whom they had resolved to obey;

and they minded not the contrary commands and the threatenings of men. You

will not enjoy peace of mind, nor act uprightly and consistently, till you

have learned to regulate your conduct by the fixed standard of truth and

rectitude, and not by the shifting opinions and fancies of men. There is one

thing, in particular, of which you should beware; the vain attempt to serve

two Masters, God and the world, conscience and inclination. The result of

such an attempt will be, that you shall serve neither of them fully, and

shall lose the reward promised by both. Choose your side, and be honest and

uniform in adhering to it. “If the Lord be God, follow him; but if Baal,

then follow him.” Know neither father nor mother, neither sister nor

brother, in your choice of religion. “Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and

incline thine ear: forget also thine own people, and thy father’s house.”

This should be the language of our lips and our hearts. “Speak, Lord, for

thy servants hear. We renounce our own will; we desire only to know thine;

and through thy grace we will do it, without startling at the consequences.

Our souls and our bodies are thy property, for thou hast redeemed them; and

we therefore dedicate them to thy service. O Lord our God, other lords

besides thee have had dominion over us; but by thee only will we make

mention of thy name.”

STEDMA 1-4, "There is something strangely familiar to us about that, is there

not? It sounds most contemporary. Here were the apostles, speaking to the people

from the steps of the temple, and out in the crowd you can almost see banners and

signs proclaiming: POWER TO THE PEOPLE! DOW WITH THE

ESTABLISHMET! Here also was the presence of the police, and the

representatives of the establishment. The captain of the temple guard was there, and

the Sadducees, who were the ruling class in Jerusalem. And there was a tremendous

popular response to the message of Peter on that day. We are told that five thousand

men believed. (In that day they did not believe it was worth counting the women and

children. This is one of the things Christianity has done for the world -- it has made

women and children worth counting!) But there were women and children there

too, undoubtedly, and at least five thousand men who believed the message on that

day. In the midst of all this there was this sudden display of annoyed authority, of

authoritative, iron-fisted power, when the temple guard suddenly elbowed their way

through the crowd and, surrounding Peter and John, arrested them, dragged them

off, and put them in jail until the morrow. That sounds very familiar to us.

But the most remarkable thing about this occasion was the message. The message

was, as Luke tells us: They proclaimed in Jesus the resurrection from the dead.

ow, they did not proclaim the overthrow of the Roman government. Such a

reaction of authority might be expected if that were their message. But it was not.

They were not advocating the violent overthrow of the establishment. or were they

protesting against some of the social evils of the day. There is not a word of protest

raised against the widespread practice of slavery throughout the empire. Half of the

Roman empire at this time were slaves -- every other person was a slave. But

nothing is said about that. There is nothing said about the burdens of excessive

taxation which the Romans had placed upon this people. There is no such protest.

The message which was so threatening that the authorities regarded it as too radical

to tolerate was nothing more than the proclamation of Jesus and the resurrection

from the dead. For this, Peter and John were thrown into jail before they could even

finish the message. And yet, because of this message, five thousand men in that great

crowd in Jerusalem became believers in Jesus Christ.

ow, let me ask you: Do you think this could happen today? Would the authorities

oppose a message like this today? Well, the clear answer of current history is: Yes,

they would, and they do. As you well know there are several governments of great

nations of earth that are so fearful of this message that they fight with every weapon

at their command to keep this radical message from penetrating to their people. You

need only read the book, God's Smuggler, the story of Brother Andrew and his

attempts to smuggle Bibles behind the Iron Curtain, to see the hostility that can be

raised against the simple proclamation of the truth as it is in Jesus. It is very rare

that Christians are permitted in any of the countries behind the Iron Curtain today

to proclaim the gospel.

The fact that Don Rood, a man from our congregation who is a missionary, is in

Czechoslovakia today is testimony only to the overruling power of God, for it is a

very rare occasion when men are permitted there with this message. As you know,

the most populous nation in the world today, China, is utterly closed to this message.

For nothing is more threatening to totalitarian forces, to the dictatorships and

tyrannies of earth, than this radical message of Jesus and the resurrection.

Even here in Palo Alto this message is sometimes opposed. Recently we have been

having a wonderful spiritual awakening in our high schools. Scores of young high

school students have come to know Jesus Christ. Last Sunday we had one of the

most remarkable and unforgettable baptismal experiences I have ever attended,

where more than thirty high school kids told of their new-found faith in Jesus

Christ. And this was only a part of the number of kids who have become Christians.

Yet that awakening, that power which has turned these kids from drugs and from

emptiness and loneliness and a sense of inadequacy and futility, has been viewed

with suspicion and distrust by many people. There have been half-subtle attempts to

suppress and stifle the whole affair. Why is this? What are the elements of this

proclamation that are so disturbing to authority? What did these apostles say when

they proclaimed in Jesus the resurrection from the dead? Well, we can answer that.

There are other passages which make clear what they meant by this -- in detail.

There are at least three elements of the message Peter and John preached that day:

First, of course, they proclaimed the great and exciting fact that Jesus Christ had

himself risen from the dead -- only seven weeks before this event took place -- and

that they were witnesses to this fact. And not only Peter and John, but a band of a

hundred and twenty disciples could bear sterling witness to the fact that they had

seen the risen Lord -- not once, but many times. And so powerful was that

testimony, so convicting was that witness, that not one voice in all this vast crowd is

raised to protest or challenge it. Instead, five thousand are convinced of the truth of

it, as three thousand had been just a few days before, on the day of Pentecost. They

understand that this is true, that this dramatic event had occurred, that Jesus

Christ, the man of Galilee, the prophet from azareth, had solved man's most

difficult problem -- the problem of death.

Once in all history it had taken place. It had never occurred before; it has never

occurred since. Oh, it is true that some have been brought back from the dead

before by the power of God -- a handful or so in history. But they were only

returned to the same life they had before, and they died again. But here is One who

comes back to a different level of life, who is resurrected, not merely resuscitated.

He never dies again, and never will. This is the meaning of the resurrection of Jesus.

Here is a whole new level of life, a whole new realm of possibility for humanity. This

dramatic breakthrough, they declared, had occurred in their own city just a few

weeks earlier.

Second, they also preached the fact that the promise of the resurrection had been

extended by Jesus to others as well, that he himself had said, "I am the resurrection

and the life. He that believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live," {John 11:25}.

He said, "Because I live, you shall live also," {John 14:19}. And out of that open

tomb has arisen a blazingly radiant, flaming hope which has gripped and held the

hearts of thousands and millions since, through the centuries, who have had to face

the fact and the experience of death.

This last week I was at Mount Hermon, attending a Christian Writers' conference.

Among other speakers, we were privileged to listen to Joe Bayly, that puckish,

delightful author of the beautiful Christian satire, The Gospel Blimp, which you

may have read. Joe Bayly has had three sons who have died. One died at eighteen

days of age, one at five years, and one at eighteen years. He told us about the death

of the five-year-old boy, a victim of leukemia. In a moving account, fighting back the

tears, struggling to keep himself composed, he told us how, at about 5 a.m., the boy

began to bleed. othing they could do could stop it. All they could do was to take

Turkish towels and blot up the blood until the towels were sodden, wring them out,

and blot again. There was nothing they could say and nothing they could do that

would stop it. And at two o'clock that afternoon, his son died. He expressed to us the

anguish, the agony, the blackness, the bleakness of that moment. He and his wife

were not spared anything as they faced that together. And yet, as he told us of this,

there came across his face a sense of joy, an expression of peace and trust, as he

recounted how his faith could lay hold of the fact that, though his little boy was

gone, he would see him again. There was a resurrection from the dead. This has

been the central element in the celebration of Easter ever since as, all over the

world, Christians everywhere express on this day the glory of this remarkable

breakthrough: Jesus Christ has solved the problem of death.

Yet if that were all these apostles had to say, I do not think they would have created

quite the stir they did. Because Judaism had a hope beyond death, as well. This

crowd was made up mostly of Jews, and they already knew from the Old Testament

Scriptures that there was a hope beyond death. Pagan Romans and others were not

aware of this, but the Jews knew.

But there was a third element that Peter and John proclaimed on this day which

made all the difference in the world. It is the most dramatic element of all about the

truth of the resurrection of Jesus. They undoubtedly explained to these people that

the death of the body, some day, is strangely linked, in a way that we do not fully

comprehend, with the death which is at work in our inner lives, right now. That is,

death is all one thing, whether it takes place and affects the physical body some day,

or whether it is taking place within the spirit of man today. It is all of a piece. And

that inner death is what we experience in a thousand ways -- sometimes as

loneliness, sometimes as bitterness, sometimes as emptiness and despair, as

depression of spirit. Sometimes it is a boredom, sometimes it is hate, sometimes it is

malice and resentment and violence. Whatever it may be, it is not what God

intended for man. It is an enemy which has seized man and lives with him, sleeps

with him, and eats with him, and haunts him in everything he does. The glorious

proclamation of the truth as it is in Jesus, is that Jesus Christ, in dying and rising

from the dead, did something about this form of death as well, that he overcame it

by his risen power. And the result can be, and is, peace instead of restlessness,

acceptance rather than guilt, love in place of lust or hate, power to replace

weakness, joy for mourning, beauty for ashes, hope for despair, courage in place of

cowardice, and cleansing from all dirt and filth of spirit.

2 They were greatly disturbed because the apostles were teaching the people, proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection of the dead.

BARES, "Being grieved - The word thus translated occurs in only one other place in the New Testament Act_16:18. It implies more than simple sorrow; it was a mingled emotion of indignation and anger. They did not grieve because they thought it a public calamity, but because it interfered with their authority and opposed their doctrine. It means that it was painful to them, or they could not bear it. It is often the case that bigots, and people in authority, have this kind of grief, at the zeal of people in spreading the truth, and thus undermining their influence and authority.

That they taught the people - The ground of their grief was as much the fact that they should presume to instruct the people as the matter which they taught them. They

were offended that unlearned Galileans, in no way connected with the priestly office, and unauthorized by them, should presume to set themselves up as religious teachers. They claimed the right to watch over the interests of the people, and to declare who was authorized to instruct the nation. It has been no unusual thing for men in ecclesiastical stations to take exceptions to the ministry of those who have not been commissioned by themselves. Such men easily fancy that all power to instruct others is lodged in their hands, and they oppose others simply from the fact that they have not derived their authority from them. The true question in this case was whether these Galileans gave proof that they were sent by God. The working of the miracle in this case should have been satisfactory. We have here, also, a striking instance of the fact that men may turn away from evidence, and from most important points, and fix their attention on something that opposes their prejudices, and which may be a matter of very little moment. No inquiry was made whether the miracle had been really performed; but the only inquiry was whether they had conformed to their views of doctrine and order.

And preached through Jesus ... - The Sadducees would be particularly opposed to this. They denied the doctrine of the resurrection, and they were troubled that the apostles adduced proof of it so strong as the resurrection of Jesus. It was perceived that this doctrine was becoming established among the people; multitudes believed that he had risen; and if he had been raised up, it followed also that others would rise. The Sadducees, therefore, felt that their cause was in danger, and they joined with the priests in endeavoring to arrest its spread among the people. This is the account of the first opposition that was made to the gospel as it was preached by the apostles. It is worthy of remark that it excited so much and so speedily the enmity of those in power, and that the apostles were so soon called to test the sincerity of their attachment to their Master. They who but a few days before had fled at the approach of danger, were now called to meet this opposition, and to show their attachment to a risen Redeemer; and they did it without shrinking. They showed now that they were indeed the true friends of the crucified Saviour, and this remarkable change in their conduct is one of the many proofs that they were influenced from above.

CLARKE, "Being grieved - ∆ιαπονουµενοι, They were thoroughly fatigued with the continuance of this preaching; their minds suffered more labor, through vexation at the success of the apostles, than the bodies of the apostles did in their fatiguing exercise of preaching during the whole day.

GILL, "Being grieved that they taught the people,.... Any doctrine, and especially that which follows, and which particularly gave uneasiness to the Sadducees, they were exceedingly distressed by it; it pained them to the very heart, and they were filled with wrath and indignation:

and preached through, or in Jesus, the resurrection of the dead; they not only preached the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead in general, but gave an instance and proof of it in the resurrection of Christ, affirming that he was risen from the dead; and they also preached up the resurrection of the dead in his name, and asserted, that he would be the author of it, and it would be erected by his power: so that their doctrine was equally disagreeable to the Pharisees and Sadducees; to the Sadducees, who denied that there was, or would be any resurrection of the dead; and to the Pharisees, who though they believed it, yet were highly offended that it should be said, that Jesus was

risen from the dead; and that the general resurrection of the dead should be attributed to him.

COFFMA, "Being sorely troubled ... The word thus rendered occurs only here

and in Acts 16:18; and this is an inadequate translation. Alexander Campbell

translated it "indignant,"[5] far more accurately describing the attitude of the

priests. And indeed they must have been indignant. Sure enough, Christ was risen

from the dead; and that eventuality foreseen by them (Matthew 27:65) in which

"the last error was worse than the first" had truly come to pass. Moreover, the great

popularity of the gospel message threatened their political base, promised to hold

them up before the people as murderers, as ignoramuses concerning the Holy

Scriptures, and as deserving of universal contempt. To proud, arrogant men like

themselves, the situation had become intolerable; and their venomous hatred

overflowed against the apostles.

EDOTE:

[5] Alexander Campbell, Acts of Apostles (Austin: Firm Foundation, 1859), p. 25.

COSTABLE, "Two things disturbed these leaders. First, the apostles were

teaching the people. This was the Sadducees' function since they were the

recognized leaders of the Jews. Second, they were teaching that Jesus had risen

from the dead and that there was resurrection from the dead.

". . . a woman called and asked me to serve on a committee that was trying to clean

up downtown Los Angeles. I agreed it needed cleaning up, but I told her that I could

not serve on the committee. She was amazed. 'Aren't you a minister?' she asked.

'Aren't you interested in cleaning up Los Angeles?' I answered, 'I will not serve on

your committee because I don't think you are going about it in the right way.' Then

I told her what the late Dr. Bob Shuler had told me years ago. He said, 'We are

called to fish in the fish pond, not to clean up the fish pond.' This old world is a

place to fish. Jesus said He would make us fishers of men, and the world is the place

to fish. We are not called upon to clean up the fish pond. We need to catch the fish

and get the fish cleaned up.

"I have found that the biggest enemies of the preaching of the gospel are not the

liquor folk. The gangsters have never bothered me. Do you know where I had my

trouble as a preacher? It was with the so-called religious leaders, the liberals, those

who claimed to be born again. They actually became enemies of the preaching of the

gospel. It was amazing to me to find out how many of them wanted to destroy my

radio ministry." [ote: McGee, 4:526.]

Having worked with Dr. McGee in his church, I know that he sought to help people

physically as well as spiritually. His point here was that spiritual help is more

important than physical help.

3 They seized Peter and John and, because it was evening, they put them in jail until the next day.

BARES, "Put them in hold - That is, they took them into “custody,” or into safe keeping. Probably they committed them to the care of a guard.

Eventide - Evening. It was not convenient to assemble the council at night. This was, moreover, the time for the evening prayer or sacrifice, and it was not usual to assemble the Sanhedrin at that hour.

GILL, "And they laid hands on them,.... The Arabic version renders it, "on both"; on Peter and John; seized them by force, and drew them out of the temple:

and put them in hold unto the next day; not in the common public prison, as in Act_5:18 but they put them into the hands, and under the care and custody of a set of men, to keep and guard them; that they might not go away, until they had an opportunity of bringing them before the sanhedrim, to be examined and punished by them:

for it was now eventide; it was at the ninth hour, or about three o'clock in the afternoon, when Peter and John went up to the temple, where they healed the lame man; after which, both of them preached to the people; so that it must now be evening; at least, as the Syriac version renders it, "the evening was near", or was drawing on.

COFFMA, "As Walker said. "This jailing of the apostles was illegal; no charge

was placed against them; it was a highhanded abuse of authority."[6] In the light of

this, we should not make too much of the fact that, contrary to the night trial of

Jesus, which was also illegal, they did, on this occasion, defer the trial until daytime

on the morrow. This was not due to any concern for holy law, but they simply

needed time to figure out what they would do.

The unhappiness of the Sadducees over the fact of Jesus' resurrection and the

successful proclamation of the gospel was commented upon thus, by Scott:

Miserable is their case to whom the glory of Christ's kingdom is a grief; for, since

the glory of that kingdom is everlasting, it follows of course that their grief shall be

everlasting also.[7]

[6] W. R. Walker, Studies in Acts (Joplin, Missouri: College Press, n.d.), p. 30.

[7] Thomas Scott, The Henry-Scott Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker

Book House, 1960), p. 443.

COKE, "Acts 4:3. For it was now even-tide.— Or, evening. As Peter and John went

up to the temple at three in the afternoon, this expression makes it probable that

some hours might be spent in preaching to the people; and consequently, that what

we have in the former chapter, is only an abstract, or brief heads of the discourses

that they made on this occasion, which probably is the case in general with the

speeches recorded by the sacred historians, as well as by others.

COSTABLE,, "It was too late in the day to begin a hearing to examine Peter and

John formally, though this had not stopped the Sanhedrin from abusing Jesus (cf.

Luke 22:63-66). Therefore the temple officials arrested them and put them in jail,

probably the Antonia Fortress. Thus the Sadducees became the first opponents of

Christianity (cf. Acts 2:47).

4 But many who heard the message believed; so the number of men who believed grew to about five thousand.

BARES, "Howbeit - But; notwithstanding.

Many of them ... - This was one of the instances, which has since been so often repeated, in which persecution is seen to have a tendency to extend and establish the faith which it was designed to destroy. It finally came to be a proverb that “the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church”; and there is no lesson which men have been so slow to learn as that to oppose and persecute men is the very way to confirm them in their opinions and to spread their doctrines. It was supposed here that the disciples were few; that they were without power, wealth, and influence; and that it was easy to crush them at once. But God made their persecution the means of extending, in a signal manner, the truths of the gospel and the triumphs of his word. And so in all ages it has been, and so it ever will be.

And the number ... - It seems probable that in this number of 5,000 there were included the 120 persons who are mentioned in Act_1:15, and the 3,000 people who were converted on the day of Pentecost, Act_2:41. It does not appear probable that 5,000 would have been assembled and converted in Solomon’s porch Act_3:11 on occasion of the cure of the lame man. Luke doubtless means to say that, up to this time, the number of persons who had joined themselves to the apostles was about 5,000. On this supposition, the work of religion must have made a very rapid advance. How long this was after the day of Pentecost is not mentioned, but it is clear that it was at no very distant period; and the accession of near two thousand to the number of believers was a very striking proof of the power and presence of the Holy Spirit.

Of the men - Of the “persons.” The word “men” is often used without reference to

sex, Luk_11:31; Rom_4:8; Rom_11:4.

CLARKE, "The number - was about five thousand - That is, as I understand the passage, the one hundred and twenty which were converted before pentecost, the three thousand converted at pentecost, and one thousand eight hundred and eighty converted since the conversion of the three thousand; making in the whole five

thousand, or �σει about that number: there might have been more or less; the historian

does not fix the number absolutely. A goodly flock in one city, as the commencement of the Christian Church! Some think all the five thousand were converted on this day; but this is by no means likely.

GILL, "Howbeit, many of them which heard the word,.... The doctrine of the Gospel, preached by Peter and John:

believed; the report of it, and in Christ, as risen from the dead, which was the sum and substance of it: and this they did, notwithstanding the opposition made by the priests, the captain of the temple, and the Sadducces, and the violence they used to the apostles; for though they kept their persons in hold, they could not stop the free course of the word, which ran and was glorified:

and the number of the men was about five thousand; or "was five thousand", as the Alexandrian copy, the Vulgate Latin, and Ethiopic versions read; that is the number, not of the hearers, but "of them that believed", was so many; and so read the Arabic and Ethiopic versions: there were so many persons converted at this time; for this number does not include the three thousand that were converted under the first sermon, but regards those who now became true believers, and were added to the church; so that there were now eight thousand persons added to it; a great increase indeed! now had Christ the dew of his youth, and now were these fishermen fishers of men indeed: that our Lord's feeding five thousand men with five barley loaves and two fishes, should have any regard to the conversion of these five thousand men, is but a conceit.

HERY, "The hearers cheerfully receive it (Act_4:4): Many of those who heard the word believed; not all - perhaps not the most, yet many, to the number of about five thousand, over and above the three thousand we read of before. See how the gospel got ground, and it was the effect of the pouring out of the Spirit. Though the preachers were persecuted, the word prevailed; for sometimes the church's suffering days have been her growing days: the days of her infancy were so.

II. The chief priests and their party now made head against them, and did what they could to crush them; their hands were tied awhile, but their hearts were not in the least changed. Now here observe, 1. Who they were that appeared against the apostles. They were the priests; you may be sure, in the first place, they were always sworn enemies to Christ and his gospel; they were as jealous for their priesthood as Caesar for his monarchy, and would not bear one they thought their rival now, when he was preached as a priest, as much as when he himself preached as a prophet. With them was joined the captain of the temple, who, it is supposed, was a Roman officer, governor of the garrison placed in the tower of Antonia, for the guard of the temple: so that still here were both Jews and Gentiles confederate against Christ. The Sadducees also, who denied the being of spirits and the future state, were zealous against them. “One would wonder” (saith

Mr. Baxter) “what should make such brutists as the Sadducees were to be such furious silencers and persecutors. If there is no life to come, what harm can other men's hopes of it do them? But in depraved souls all faculties are vitiated. A blind man has a malignant heart and a cruel hand, to this day.” 2. How they stood affected to the apostles' preaching: They were grieved that they taught the people, Act_4:2. It grieved them, both that the gospel doctrine was preached (was so preached, so publicly, so boldly,), and that the people were so ready to hear it. They thought, when they had put Christ to such an ignominious death, his disciples would ever after be ashamed and afraid to own him, and the people would have invincible prejudices against his doctrine; and now it vexed them to see themselves disappointed, and that his gospel got ground, instead of losing it. The wicked shall see it, and be grieved, Psa_112:10. They were grieved at that which they should have rejoiced in, at that which angels rejoice in. Miserable is their case to whom the glory of Christ's kingdom is a grief; for, since the glory of that kingdom is everlasting, it follows of course that their grief will be everlasting too. It grieved them that the apostles preached through Jesus the resurrection from the dead. The Sadducees were grieved that the resurrection from the dead was preached; for they opposed that doctrine, and could not bear to hear of a future state, to hear it so well attested. The chief priests were grieved that they preached the resurrection of the dead through Jesus, that he should have the honour of it; and, though they professed to believe the resurrection of the dead against the Sadducees, yet they would rather give up that important article than have it preached and proved to be through Jesus. 3. How far they proceeded against the apostles (Act_4:3): They laid hands on them (that is, their servants and officers did at their command), and put them in hold, committed them to the custody of the proper officer until the next day; they could not examine them now, for it was even-tide, and yet would defer it no longer than till next day. See how God trains up his servants for sufferings by degrees, and by less trials prepares them for greater; now they resist unto bonds only, but afterwards to blood.

JAMISO, "the number of the men— or males, exclusive of women; though the word sometimes includes both.

about five thousand— and this in Jerusalem, where the means of detecting the imposture or crushing the fanaticism, if such it had been, were within everyone’s reach, and where there was every inducement to sift it to the bottom.

CALVI, "4.And many of them which heard The apostles are put in prison, but the

force of their preaching is spread far and wide, and the course thereof is at liberty.

Of which thing Paul boasteth very much, that the Word of God is not bound with

him, (2 Timothy 2:9.) And here we see that Satan and the wicked have liberty

granted them to rage against the children of God; yet can they not (maugre their

heads (203)) prevail, but that God doth further and promote the kingdom of his

Son; Christ doth gather together his sheep; and that a few men unarmed, furnished

with no garrisons, do show forth more power in their voice alone, than all the world,

by raging against them. This is, indeed, no common work of God, that one sermon

brought forth such plentiful fruit; but this is the more to be wondered at, that the

faithful are not terrified with the present danger, and discouraged from taking up

the cross of Christ together with the faith. For this was a hard beginning for novices.

Christ did more evidently declare by this efficacy and force of doctrine that he was

alive, than if he should have offered his body to be handled with hand, and to be

seen with the eyes. And whereas it is said that the number of those which believed

did grow to be about five thousand, I do not understand it of those which were

newly added, but of the whole church.

COFFMA, "That heard the word ... has "exclusive reference to the gospel of the

resurrection of Jesus Christ."[8] This use of "the word" as a designation of the

Christian gospel goes back to Christ himself (Matthew 13:23).

Believed ... As throughout the ew Testament, "believed" here stands not as the sole

condition of salvation, but as a synecdoche for all the preconditions of redemption in

Jesus' name; "This (believed) is a usual scriptural expression for the whole change

wrought by belief."[9]

About five thousand ... Some ambiguity exists with regard to understanding the

"five thousand" here as inclusive of the three thousand on Pentecost, or as an

additional five thousand; but, as Boles said, "The best scholarship is in favor of two

thousand being converted on this occasion, and so the number `came to be about

five thousand.'"[10]

Regarding the time-lapse since Pentecost to the time of this event, it was regarded by

Ramsay and others as being perhaps years; but Barnes is most likely correct when

he affirmed that: "It is clear that it was at no very distant period."[11]

[8] Alexander Campbell, op. cit., p. 25.

[9] B. W. Johnson, The ew Testament with Explanatory otes (Delight, Arkansas:

The Gospel Light Publishing Company, n.d.), p. 429.

[10] H. Leo Boles, Commentary on the Acts (ashville: Gospel Advocate, 1953), p.

64.

[11] Albert Barnes, otes on the ew Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker

Book House, 1953), p. 75.

COKE, "Acts 4:4. The number of the men was about five thousand.— Dr. Benson

concludes, that five thousand men were converted on this occasion, besides the three

thousand mentioned before, chap. Acts 2:41. If it had been said, as there, that so

many were added to the church, it would have determined the sense as he and

others understand it; but the use of the word εγενηθη here, became, favours the

interpretation,thatthewholenumber,includingthosewhohadbeenconverted before,

became about five thousand. See ch. Acts 1:15 in the Greek. It is hardly to be

thought, unless it were expressly asserted, that another day should be so much more

remarkable for its number of converts, than that on which the Spirit descended.

However, supposing only two thousand were now converted, it is a glorious proof of

the truth of Christianity; and no example can be given of the philosophers, or any

other teachers, succeeding so gloriously in making converts to such holy and self-

denying doctrines.

COSTABLE, "Belief was the key factor in many more becoming Christians (cf.

Acts 3:19), not believing and being baptized (Acts 2:38). ote that Luke wrote that

they "believed" the message they had heard. The total number of male converts in

Jerusalem now reached 5,000 (cf. Acts 1:15; Acts 2:41) because of Peter's message.

The Greek word andron specifies males rather than people. ormally most of the

people in the temple courtyard who would have witnessed these events would have

been males. Estimates of Jerusalem's total population range from 25,000 to 250,000,

though the lower figure seems more probable. [ote: Marshall, The Acts . . ., pp. 98-

99.] One writer argued for 60,000 or more inhabitants. [ote: Fiensy, p. 214.]

Another believed 100,000 to 120,000 people inhabited the city in the forties. [ote:

Wolfgang Reinhardt, "The Population Size of Jerusalem and the umerical Growth

of the Jerusalem Church," in The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4:

The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, p. 263.] Obviously there is a wide range

of speculation.

ELLICOTT, "(4) The number of the men was about five thousand.—Better,

became, or was made up to, about five thousand. It seems probable, though not

certain, that St. Luke meant this as a statement of the aggregate number of disciples,

not of those who were converted on that day. As in the narrative of the feeding of

the five thousand (Matthew 14:21), women and children were not included. The

number was probably ascertained, as on that occasion, by grouping those who came

to baptism and to the breaking of bread by hundreds and by fifties (Mark 6:40).

The connection in which the number is given makes it probable that it represents

those who, under the influence of the impression made by the healing of the cripple

and by St. Peter’s speech, attended the meetings of the Church that evening. The

coincidence of the numbers in the two narratives could scarcely fail to lead the

disciples to connect the one with the other, and to feel, as they broke the bread and

blessed it, that they were also giving men the true bread from heaven.

5 The next day the rulers, the elders and the teachers of the law met in Jerusalem.

BARES, "Their rulers - The rulers of the Jews; doubtless the members of the Sanhedrin, or Great Council of the nation. Compare Act_4:15. See the notes on Mat_2:4; Mat_5:22. The expression their rulers looks as if this book was written for the Gentiles, or Luke would have said our rulers.

Elders - Presbyters, or those who were chosen from among the people to sit in the Sanhedrin. It is probable that the rulers were those who held also some other office, but were also authorized to sit in the Great Council.

Scribes - See the notes on Mat_2:4.

And Annas ... - See the notes on Joh_18:13. It is by no means certain that Annas was at that time the high priest, but he had been, and doubtless retained the title. He was father-in-law to Caiaphas, the high priest; and from this fact, together with his former dignity, he is mentioned first.

Caiaphas - Son-in-law of Annas, and now exercising the office of the high priest, Joh_18:13.

John, and Alexander ... - Of these persons nothing more is known. It is clear that they were members of the Great Council, and the mention of their names shows that the men of chief authority and influence were assembled to silence the apostles. Annas and Caiaphas had been concerned in the condemnation of Jesus, and they would now feel a special interest in arresting the progress of the gospel among the people. All the success of the gospel reflected back light upon the wicked ness of the act of condemning the Lord Jesus. And this fact may serve, in part, to account for their strong desire to silence the apostles.

At Jerusalem - ε�ς eis. This was the usual place of assembling the Sanhedrin. But the

Jewish writers (see Lightfoot on this place) say that 40 years before the destruction of the city, on account of the great increase of crime, etc., the Sanhedrin was removed from place to place. The declaration of Luke that they were now assembled in Jerusalem, seems to imply that they sometimes met in other places. It is probable that the members of the Sanhedrin were not in the city at the time mentioned in Act_4:3, and this was the reason why the trial was deferred to the next day.

CLARKE, "Their rulers, and elders, and scribes - Those with the high priest Annas formed the Sanhedrin, or grand council of the Jews.

GILL, "And it came to pass on the morrow,.... The disciples being kept in custody all night:

that their rulers, and elders, and Scribes; that is, their ecclesiastical rulers; the chief priests, who, with the Scribes, and elders of the people, made up the great council at Jerusalem, consisting of seventy one persons, so they are called in Mat_26:3.

HERY, "We have here the trial of Peter and John before the judges of the ecclesiastical court, for preaching a sermon concerning Jesus Christ, and working a miracle in his name. This is charged upon them as a crime, which was the best service they could do to God or men.

I. Here is the court set. An extraordinary court, it should seem, was called on purpose upon this occasion. Observe, 1. The time when the court sat (Act_4:5) - on the morrow;not in the night, as when Christ was to be tried before them, for they seem not to have been so hot upon this prosecution as they were upon that; it was well if they began to relent. But they adjourned it to the morrow, and no longer; for they were impatient to get them silenced, and would lose no time. 2. The place where - in Jerusalem (Act_4:6); there it was that he told his disciples they must expect to suffer hard things, as he had done before them in that place. This seems to come in here as an aggravation of their sin, that in Jerusalem, where there were so many that looked for redemption before it came, yet there were more that would not look upon it when it did come. How is that faithful city become a harlot! See Mat_23:37. It was in the foresight of Jerusalem's standing in her own light that Christ beheld the city, and wept over it. 3. The judges of the court. (1.)

Their general character: they were rulers, elders, and scribes, Act_4:5. The scribes were men of learning, who came to dispute with the apostles, and hoped to confute them. The rulers and elders were men in power, who, if they could not answer them, thought they could find some cause or other to silence them. If the gospel of Christ had not been of God, it could not have made its way, for it had both the learning and power of the world against it, both the colleges of the scribes and the courts of the elders. (2.) The names of some of them, who were most considerable. Here were Annas and Caiaphas, ringleaders in this persecution; Annas the president of the sanhedrim, and Caiaphas the high priest (though Annas is here called so) and father of the house of judgment. It should seem that Annas and Caiaphas executed the high priest's office alternately, year for year. These two were most active against Christ; then Caiaphas was high priest, now Annas was; however they were both equally malignant against Christ and his gospel. John is supposed to be the son of Annas; and Alexander is mentioned by Josephus as a man that made a figure at that time. There were others likewise that were of the kindred of the high priest, who having dependence on him, and expectations from him, would be sure to say as he said, and vote with him against the apostles. Great relations, and not good, have been a snare to many.

JAMISO, "their rulers, etc.— This was a regular meeting of the Sanhedrim (see on Mat_2:4).

HAWKER 5-7, "And it came to pass on the morrow, that their rulers, and elders, and scribes, (6) And Annas the high priest, and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest, were gathered together at Jerusalem. (7) And when they had set them in the midst, they asked, By what power, or by what name, have ye done this?

What an awful Council this was become, composed of such awful characters. The Reader should be told, that this Council consisted, or ought to have consisted, of seventy Persons, the true Elders of Israel. It was first formed, by the Lord himself. See Num_11:16-17. But, now we find a motley crew; Scribes, and Pharisees, and Sadducees. For their character, as given by our Lord himself: See Mt 23 throughout: See also Act_23:8. Before such awful characters, the highly honored servants of the Lord Jesus Christ was brought. And I would have the Reader remark the blessedness of being so brought, because it afforded the opportunity for the Apostles to preach, and the Church, in all after ages, to read the record of what they said, under the teaching of God the Holy Ghost. And I beg the Reader to remark with me how upon numberless occasions the Lord permits, yea, appoints the malice of men, to proceed to a desperate length sometimes, for the greater manifestation of his glory, and his peoples’ good. If the Reader will turn to a single verse in one of the Psalms, and beg of the Almighty Author of Scripture, even God the Holy Ghost, to write it in the tablets of his heart, to have recourse to as may be needed; he will find great blessedness in it. The verse is Psa_105:25. He turned their heart to hate his people, to deal subtly with his servants. Oh! how often hath this sweet Scripture taught my soul to look through the cobweb malice of men; and to discern the hand of a gracious, wise, and love ordering Lord, Eze_1:26-28.

CALVI, "5.It is a thing worthy to be noted in this place, that the wicked do omit

no subtilty that they may blot out the gospel and the name of Christ, and yet do they

not obtain that which they hoped for; because God doth make their counsels

frustrate. For they make an assembly, wherein they do all things so tyrannously,

that yet, notwithstanding, lust beareth a show of right, and liberty is driven far

away, and at length the truth may seem to be condemned by good right. But the

Lord bringeth upon them a sudden fear, so that they dare not do that which they

can, and which they do most of all desire. Whatsoever the apostles shall bring in

defense of their cause, that shall remain buried and shut up with the walls, where

there is none which doth bear them any favor. And therefore there is no place left

for the truth. Yet we see how the Lord bringeth their counsel to nought, whilst that

being kept back with fear of the people, they stay themselves and bridle their fury,

to the end they may avoid envy. But I marvel much why Luke doth make Annas the

highest priest in this place, seeing that it appeareth by Josephus, that this honor was

not taken from Caiaphas until Vitellius had entered Jerusalem to bear rule, after

that Pilate was commanded to depart unto Rome. All men grant that the Lord was

crucified in the eighteenth year of Tiberius. And that empire [the reign of Tiberius]

did continue four years longer. And it must needs be, that there were three years

complete, after the death of Christ, before Pilate was put from the office of the pro-

consul. For when Tiberius was dead he came to Rome; so that Caiaphas was high

priest yet three years after the death of Christ. Wherefore it is to be thought, that

that whereof Luke speaketh in this place did not happen immediately after the

resurrection of Christ; although the doubt cannot thus be answered. (204) For

Josephus reporteth, that Jonathas was chosen into the place of Caiaphas; but

because this Jonathas was the son of Annas, it is a thing not unlike to be true, that

the son was called by the name of the father; as Caiaphas also had two names; for

they did also call him Joseph.

COFFMA, "This august assembly was known as the Sanhedrin, a form of Jewish

Supreme Court, composed of the presiding officer, who was the high priest, and

seventy others. It was the same body which had demanded and received the

crucifixion of Jesus. It was the historical successor to the board of judges appointed

by Moses (umbers 11:16-25).

In Jerusalem ... The council chamber in which they met was traditionally in the

temple; but about A.D. 30, they changed their meeting place "to a court on the east

side of the temple mount ... the meeting at the palace of the high priest (Matthew

26:56ff) was irregular."[12]

Annas the high priest ... The critics who make some big thing out of the various

references in the ew Testament to Caiaphas as high priest, or to Annas as high

priest, are only quibbling. Luke denominated both as holders of that office

concurrently, "in the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas" (Luke 3:2), hence it

was altogether correct to refer to either one of them as high priest. The

circumstances that brought this condition about are well known. Annas was

deposed from his high office by Tiberius in 14 A.D.,[13] a penalty incurred through

his excess in executing one of his enemies; but the Jews did not honor the Emperor's

deposition, still recognizing Annas as the rightful holder of the office; however,

Rome controlled the patronage, and the office was rotated among no less than five

of Annas' sons, with Caiaphas his son-in-law also holding it for a period of time. His

sons who held the office were: "Eleazar, Jonathan, Theophilus, Matthias, and

Ananus."[14]

John ... in Acts 4:6 is thought by some to have been the same "as Jonathan, son of

Annas, and successor to Caiaphas."[15]

The record of those who controlled the assembly in view here reveals them to have

been the hard cadre of Sadducean priests who sat at the heart of official Jewry.

They were as evil and unscrupulous a group as any that may be found in history, fit

architects indeed of the crucifixion of the Son of God.

[12] Robert Milligan, Analysis of the ew Testament (Cincinnati, Ohio: Bosworth,

Chase and Hail, Publishers, 1874), p. 325.

[13] F. . Peloubet, Bible Dictionary (Philadelphia: John C. Winston Company,

1025), under "Annas."

[14] A. C. Hervey, The Pulpit Commentary, Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B.

Eerdmans, Publishers, 1950), Vo1. 18, p. 123.

[15] John William Russell, Compact Commentary on the ew Testament (Grand

Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1964), p. 289.

BARCLAY 5-12, "The court before which Peter and John were brought was the

Sanhedrin, the supreme court of, the Jews. Even in Roman times it had the right of

arrest. The one thing it could not do was to pass the death sentence, except in the

single case of a Gentile who trespassed on the inner courts of the Temple.

The Sanhedrin had seventy-one members. The high priest was ex officio president.

In the Sanhedrin there were priests, practically all of whom were Sadducees. Their

one desire was to preserve the status quo that their own emoluments might not be

lessened. There were scribes, who were the experts in the traditional law. There

were Pharisees, who were fanatics for the law. There were elders, who were

respected men in the community.

There were also those described as being of "the priestly families"; these are the

same people who are sometimes called chief priests. They consisted of two classes.

First, there were ex-high priests. In the great days the high priesthood had been

hereditary and for life; but in the Roman times the office was the subject of intrigue,

bribery and corruption and high priests rose and fell so that between 37 B.C. and

A.D. 67 there were no fewer than 28. But even after a high priest had been deposed,

he often remained the power behind the throne. Second, although the high

priesthood had ceased to be hereditary, it was still the prerogative of a very few

families. Of the 28 high priests already mentioned all but 6 came from 4 priestly

families. The members of these families had a special prestige and it is they who

were known as the chief priests.

When we read Peter's speech, and remember to whom it was spoken, we recognize

one of the world's great demonstrations of courage. It was spoken to an audience of

the wealthiest, the most intellectual and the most powerful in the land, and yet Peter,

the Galilaean fisherman, stands before them rather as their judge than as their

victim. Further, this was the very court which had condemned Jesus to death. Peter

knew that he was taking his life in his hands.

There are two kinds of courage. There is the reckless courage which is scarce aware

of the dangers it is facing. There is the far higher, cool courage which knows the

peril in which it stands and refuses to be daunted. It was that second courage that

Peter demonstrated. When Achilles, the great warrior of the Greeks, was told that if

he went out to battle he would surely die, he answered in the immortal sentence,

"evertheless, I am for going on." Peter, in that moment, knew the peril in which he

stood; nevertheless, he, too, was for going on.

COSTABLE, "The "Council" (Acts 4:15) before which soldiers brought Peter and

John the next day was the Sanhedrin, which was the senate and supreme court of

Israel. It consisted of the high priest, who served as its presiding officer, and 70

other men. Its aristocratic members, the majority, were Sadducees, and its lay

leaders were Pharisees. Most of the experts in the Jewish law were Pharisees who

were also nationalistic, but the Sadducees supported Rome. The Sadducees were

more conservative, though rationalistic theologically, and the Pharisees were more

liberal since they accepted oral traditions as authoritative in addition to the Old

Testament.

The Sanhedrin normally held its meetings, including the one described in this

chapter, in a hall adjoining the southwest part of the temple courtyard, the

Chamber of Hewn Stone. [ote: Josephus, Antiquities of . . ., 5:4:2.] "Rulers" were

priests who represented the 24 priestly courses (cf. Acts 23:5; Matthew 16:21),

"elders" were tribal and influential family heads of the people, and "scribes" were

teachers of the law. Individuals from these three groups made up this body (cf. Luke

9:22). The rulers and elders were mainly Sadducees while most of the scribes were

Pharisees.

"The Sanhedrin was acting within its jurisdiction when it convened to examine

Peter and John. The Mosaic Law specified that whenever someone performed a

miracle and used it as the basis for teaching, he was to be examined, and if the

teaching were used to lead men away from the God of their fathers, the nation was

responsible to stone him (Deuteronomy 13:1-5). On the other hand, if his message

was doctrinally sound, the miracle-worker was to be accepted as coming with a

message from God." [ote: Kent, pp. 45-46.]

This is the first of four times some of Jesus' followers stood before the Sanhedrin

according to Acts. The others were Peter and the apostles (Acts 5:27), Stephen (Acts

6:12), and Paul (Acts 22:30).

ELLICOTT, "(5) And it came to pass on the morrow . . .—Better, that there were

gathered together the rulers, elders, and scribes in Jerusalem. The two last words

are misplaced in the English version by being transferred to the end of the next

verse. The later MSS. give, however, unto Jerusalem. The meeting was obviously

summoned, like that of Matthew 26:5, to consider what course was necessary in face

of the new facts that had presented themselves, and was probably the first formal

meeting of the Sanhedrin that had been held since the trial of our Lord. On its

constitution, see otes on Matthew 5:22; Matthew 26:57; Matthew 27:1. This

meeting would, of course, include the Pharisee section of the scribes as well as the

Sadducees.

STEDMA 5-12, "So desperate were these people, so tired of emptiness and of sin,

that five thousand of them leaped to believe, and they turned to Christ, risen from

the dead -- a risen Lord alive and in their midst, able to impart to them this risen

life. Five thousand on that day began a new life in Jesus Christ! ow, would you not

think that the authorities would be pleased with such a development? Would you

not think that the rulers of the city would be happy that men and women were

finding the answer to their life-long search? Why are they so irritated? Why are

they annoyed and threatened by this event? Well, it is clear that they sense

something about it is a threat to them. They feel it in their bones. They stop the

whole show till they can put their finger on what it is that is bothering them. All this

is brought out in the next section, beginning with Verse 5:

On the morrow their rulers and elders and scribes were gathered together in

Jerusalem, with Annas the high priest and Caiaphas and John and Alexander, and

all who were of the high-priestly family. And when they had set them in the midst,

they inquired, "By what power or by what name did you do this?" Then Peter,

filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, "Rulers of the people, and elders, if we are

being examined today concerning a good deed done to a cripple, by what means this

man has been healed, be it known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by

the name of Jesus Christ of azareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from

the dead, by him this man is standing before you well. This is the stone which was

rejected by you builders, but which has become the head of the corner. And there is

salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men

by which we must be saved." {Acts 4:5-12 RSV}

A tremendous declaration! You can see how seriously the authorities took all this by

Luke's careful list of those who were present. There was Annas, who was the

honorary high priest, the father of Caiaphas. Then there was Caiaphas, who was the

official high priest. And with them were gathered two of his brothers, John and

Alexander -- all of one family. This confirms what we know from secular history --

that this family of the high priest intermarried with one another and constituted a

ruling class in Jerusalem, controlling the vast wealth of the temple and certain

profitable monopolies connected with the sacrifices. So here was the class that sat in

power and authority in the city, who had great vested interests politically and

economically throughout this city. And they are disturbed. They sense a threat to

their power.

They are so disturbed, in fact, that without realizing what they are doing, they give

Peter an open door for testimony such as he never had before. They ask him, "Tell

us, by what power or what name have you done this thing?" This is just what Peter

is waiting for. He is delighted to tell them. And look how bold he is: "By the name of

the man whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead." What a contrast

with that cringing disciple who was afraid of a little maid in the high priest's

courtyard a few weeks earlier! When she asked if he were not part of the band of

Galilean disciples of Jesus, he denied it, said he never knew the man. Three times he

denied it before the cock crowed. ow there is a difference. He is filled with the

Holy Spirit. The life of Jesus is being imparted to him by that Holy Spirit.

This is what the Holy Spirit does. When he comes into a human heart, his business is

to take a risen Lord's life and give it to you, to empower you, to encourage you, to

strengthen you, to do whatever you need have done to make you adequate to cope

with life. This is the work of the Holy Spirit. So Peter, filled with the Spirit, is bold --

bold as a lion. He says, "We have done it in the name of the man whom you

crucified, whom God raised from the dead. By him this man is standing before you

well." Evidently the formerly lame man was right there with them, as well. In fact,

later on the account says so. He was "Exhibit A" of the power and authority of the

name of Jesus Christ. Then to drive the point home Peter quotes from Psalm 118:

"This is the stone which was rejected by your builders, but which has become the

head of the corner," {cf, Psa 118:22}. This is the prediction of the resurrection in

that amazing Psalm. It is where we get the verse we often quote:

This is the day which the Lord has made;

let us rejoice and be glad in it. {Psa 118:24 RSV}

What day? Why, the day of Christ's resurrection, when God took that Stone which

had been rejected by the builders, and made him the Head of the corner.

What both Peter and the Psalmist are referring to is the occasion of the building of

Solomon's temple. The Bible tells us that when Solomon built his temple, on the

place where the Dome of the Rock now stands in Jerusalem, there was no sound of

hammer or saw. The temple was erected in silence. The stones that formed the

temple were quarried from a rock quarry underneath where the temple stands. And

to this day in Jerusalem you can go down there and see what they call "Solomon's

stables," where Solomon kept his horses, and see that they were hewn from solid

rock. And from the stones removed from there the temple was built. It was built to

such exacting dimensions, according to blueprints provided, that the rock was fitted

perfectly before it ever left the quarry. Then it was sent up and put in place without

the sound of hammers or pounding of any kind.

And there is a Jewish tradition which says that during the building of the temple, a

great rock was quarried out and shaped by the stone mason, and sent up, but the

builders could find no place to put it. It did not seem to fit in any of the blueprints

they were working from, and so they left it on the side. It sat there for some time.

Then, as it seemed to be in the way, someone pushed it over the edge and it rolled

down into the valley of the Kidron and was lost in the bushes. When the time came

to put in the cornerstone, the great square rock that held everything else in place,

they sent word for the cornerstone to be sent up. The quarrymen sent back word

that it had already been sent up some time before. They looked around for it, and no

one could find it. Then somebody remembered the great rock which had been

pushed over the edge. Down they went to the valley of the Kidron and found it in the

bushes. With great effort they raised it again and brought it to the top and fitted it

into place. It fit perfectly -- the cornerstone of the temple.

That is what this Psalm meant, and that is what Peter means. God had designed that

Jesus of azareth would be the cornerstone of his government on earth, the rock

upon which all human government should rest, and from which it would take its

authority. But the builders of various nations have rejected the Cornerstone. This is

why no government can stand very long, why God's program through history has

been one of overturning, overturning, overturning, as Ezekiel says, until he shall

come whose right it is to reign. God has prepared a Cornerstone, and Peter's

accusation is, "You have rejected him when he came. You had the chance to build

the government of Jerusalem on the rock which God had ordained, but you rejected

it; you crucified him. But God has raised him from the dead nevertheless, and has

made him the head of the corner. Then he adds these amazing words:

And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given

among men by which we must be saved. {Acts 4:12 RSV}

This is a startling declaration! It says that there is no other who can fulfill the place

of being the cornerstone of authority in the world. o other name! one of the

religious leaders, none of the political leaders of all time could possibly do this work.

There is only One adequately equipped, qualified to be the foundation of human

government, the basis of human authority. You take all the religious names of

history -- Buddha, Mohammed, Confucius, Mahatma Gandhi, Ramakrishna, Joseph

Smith, Mary Baker Eddy -- whoever and whatever. The most that can be said of

these men and women is that they are moral teachers. The best we can say of them is

that they taught what is right. Many of them did. Christians are often accused of

being bigoted, of being intolerant of other faiths. There is a sense in which that

accusation is perfectly just. We are intolerant of other faiths, in the final analysis.

But this does not mean that Christians do not recognize that there is much truth in

other religions. Other great religious leaders have uttered fine moral teachings and

precepts which have helped people. But there is one thing they could not do: They

could tell us what was right; but they could not enable us to do it. That is the

difference between Jesus of azareth and any other name that can be named in this

world. That is why we can never consent to considering any other name to be equal

with that of Jesus of azareth. o other has solved the problem of death. o other

has broken through this ghastly terror that hangs over the human race -- only Jesus

of azareth. God has made him the head of the corner, and there is no other name

by which we can be saved.

You see, we do not need someone to tell us what to do; we know what to do. Most of

us know better than we are doing! As Mark Twain said, "I don't need anyone to tell

me what to do. I'm not doing half of what I know to do, now." This is exactly the

truth. What we need is One who will change us, give us a new motivation, make us

want to do what we ought to do, and make us over, give us a new heart, a new

outlook, a new ability, a new capacity, a new life. This is what Jesus of azareth

does again and again.

And this, my friends, is political heresy. Whenever this takes place it threatens all

oppression and tyranny and totalitarianism, wherever it may be established. The life

of Jesus Christ is never against government; but it is against oppressive government.

It is the foundation of Christian liberties, everywhere. There has never been a force

more powerful and more vital to assure the liberation of men and women from

oppression than this dramatic power of the resurrection. This is why it is hated by

the totalitarian forces of the day, wherever they may be.

But the glorious thing is: This is what God intends. This is what he is going to build

his kingdom on. Christ is the head of the corner. God, through the course of history,

behind the scenes, as it were, of all the tumultuous events of our own day, all the

tyranny and heartbreak and tears and anguish and sorrow that is going on all

around us in the world, behind that facade, God is working out his purposes. He is

building a new humanity. And everywhere he is inviting men and women to become

a part of it, by sharing in the risen life of Jesus Christ, and experiencing now the

glory of a life of peace and joy and rest and strength and adequacy and power and

meaning and fullness -- now. This is what the resurrection means. And not only did

this take place this way two thousand years ago, where five thousand men

responded to it, but it is taking place in our own day as well.

I think of Tom Skinner, that radical young black man, whose heart was filled with

hatred -- head of one of the gangs of Harlam, veteran of numerous raids and wars

and fights, filled with bitterness and rejection of society. Half-listening to a radio

broadcast one day, he heard some words about Jesus that caught his attention.

Though he had known all this, being the son of a minister, he had rejected it all his

life. But these words somehow got through to him, and he faced the fact that Jesus

Christ was indeed alive and could do something for him. He opened his life to Christ

right there, alone by himself, listening to the radio. And there came a change in his

life. He did not plan it, he did not direct it, but there it was. It forced him to go to his

gang and confront them with what had happened to him, at the risk of his own life.

It led him to become what he is now -- an evangelist to blacks and whites alike,

telling of the changing, transforming power of Jesus Christ, risen from the dead.

I ran across a testimony this week of the chaplain of Santa Clara Valley Medical

Center hospital, who says,

When I was nine months old the doctor said I had contracted muscular dystrophy,

which had invaded my entire body. They told my parents I would never be able to

walk. As I grew older and began to face life, I realized that I couldn't run and play

and fight as the other boys of my age. I remember how my folks would comfort me

with such thoughts as, "Some day you'll be able to run and play as other children do

-- if not on earth, certainly in heaven." This was good enough for me, and I was a

happy, well-adjusted child. As I grew older -- twelve or thirteen years -- I had an

electric cart to ride in. When the boys would play ball in the street, they would let

me play first base. The rules were that if the ball were thrown to me or at me, if it

fell anywhere within the cart, then the person was out. This acceptance and activity

fulfilled a vacant place in my life, and was very satisfying.

But then there came a day when I became interested in added social activities. For

the first time I found a real-life situation that no amount of conceptual thought

could comfort. I realized I was undesirable by the standards of the normal sixteen-

year-old girl. It was then, and only then, as I came to this crisis situation, that I

realized I could not compete with the world around me. And yet it was then that all

the concepts of Jesus Christ came into view. I was down, and I needed up. I was in

despair, and I needed purpose. I went to prayer, remembering that Jesus said, "I

will never leave you nor forsake you." I had a genuine encounter with Christ. From

that day forth he has given me purpose in life, and everything to live for.

And, still confined to a wheelchair, he is now the chaplain of this fine hospital,

bringing comfort and spiritual therapy to all the damaged, wounded, broken

patients who come in there. This is what Jesus can do. This is what overturns society

-- when this message is released and acted upon. Things happen -- remarkable

things, dramatic things, things that become the basis of human liberty, and which

ultimately threaten all the ensconced authority of totalitarianism, and yet which set

men free and able to be what God intended them to be.

ow, you will never know that kind of power, and that kind of joy and love and

peace, until you come to grips with Jesus Christ personally, yourself, until there

comes a time when you ask Jesus of azareth, risen from the dead, to come in and

be Lord of your life. When you do that, earnestly and sincerely, he comes in, and

you begin a new life in Jesus Christ. There is no other name -- there is no one else --

no other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved.

6 Annas the high priest was there, and so were Caiaphas, John, Alexander and others of the high priest’s family.

CLARKE, "Annas - Though this man was not now actually in the office of high priest, yet he had possessed it for eleven years, bore the title all his life, and had the

honor of seeing five of his sons fill that eminent place after him - an honor that never happened to any other person from the commencement of the Mosaic institution. He is the same who is called Ananus by Josephus, Ant. b. xx. c. 8.

And Caiaphas - He was son-in-law to Annas, Joh_18:13, was now high priest, and the same who, a short time before, condemned Christ to be crucified.

And John - Dr. Lightfoot conjectures, with great probability that this was Jochanan ben Zaccai, who was very famous at that time in the Jewish nation. Of him it is said in the Talmud, Jucas. fol. 60: “Rabbin Jochanan ben Zaccai the priest lived 120 years. He found favor in the eyes of Caesar, from whom he obtained Jafneh. When he died, the glory of wisdom ceased.” The following is a remarkable passage: Yoma, fol. 39: Forty years before the destruction of the city, (the very time of which St. Luke now treats), when the gates of the temple flew open of their own accord, Rab. Jochanan ben Zaccai said, “O temple! temple! why dost thou disturb thyself? I know thy end, that thou shalt be destroyed, for so the Prophet Zachary hath spoken concerning thee: open thy doors, O Lebanon! that the fire may devour thy cedars.” See Lightfoot and Schoettgen.

And Alexander - This was probably Alexander Lysimachus, one of the richest Jews of his time, who made great presents to the temple, and was highly esteemed by King Agrippa. See Calmet. He was brother to the famous Philo Judaeus, and father of Alexander Tiberius, who married Berenice, the daughter of Agrippa the elder, and was governor of Judea after Cuspius Fadus. See Josephus, Ant. l. xix. c. 5, s. 1.

Of the kindred of the high priest - Or rather, as Bp. Pearce renders it, “of the race of the high priests, i.e. of the family out of which the high priests were chosen.” It may, however, comprehend those who belonged to the families of Annas and Caiaphas, and all who were connected with the sacerdotal family. Luke distinctly mentions all these, to show how formidable the enemies were against whom the infant Church of Christ had to contend.

GILL, "And Annas the high priest,.... So called, either because he had been an high priest, though he was not now, but Caiaphas his son-in-law; or because he was the Sagan of the high priest, and had all the other priests under his government; and is mentioned first, because he was father-in-law to Caiaphas; See Gill on Luk_3:2 he could not be

called so, because he was נשיא, "prince", or president of the council; for not he, but Gamaliel, was president at this time. And

Caiaphas; who was properly high priest, and continued so for three years after the death of Christ:

and John; who is thought by Dr. Lightfoot to be the same with Jochanan, or John ben Zaccai; a famous Jewish Rabbi, who lived at this time, and until, and after the

destruction of Jerusalem: this Rabbi was כהן, "a priest" (t), as this John was, of the kindred of the high priest; he lived also at Jerusalem; for it is said of him (u), that he sat in the shadow of the temple, and expounded all the whole day; and a very remarkable story is told of him, which happened just about this time (w); which is, that

"forty years before the destruction of the temple--the doors of the temple opened of themselves, when Rabban Jochanan ben Zaccai reproved them, saying, O temple, temple, wherefore dost thou fright thyself? I know thee, that thine end shall be, to be destroyed; for so prophesied of thee Zechariah, the son of Iddo, Zec_11:1. "Open thy doors, O Lebanon", &c.''

The chief objection to him, as that learned writer observes, is, that he lived and died a Pharisee, whereas this John seems to have been a Sadducee; see Act_5:17. This puts me in mind of John the high priest, who ministered in the high priesthood fourscore years, and at last became a Sadducee (x): Beza's ancient copy reads "Jonathan: and Alexander"; whose surname was Lysimachus, and had the title of "Alabarcha"; he was a very rich man (y): after Alexander the great had been at Jerusalem, this name became frequent among the Jews; and it is said (z) to be promised him, and was fulfilled, that every son that was born to the priests that year he entered Jerusalem, should be called Alexander; and therefore it is no wonder to hear of an Alexander among the kindred of the high

priest; frequent mention is made of רבי�אלכסנדרי, "Rabbi Alexander", in the Jewish writings (a):

and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest; by whose means they were become members of the sanhedrim:

were gathered together at Jerusalem; where the great council only sat, until the destruction of it; it seems by this, that some of the members of it lived in the country; it may be in some of the villages adjacent, where they might be easily and quickly sent for, upon any occasion, as they very likely now were; the Syriac version leaves out the words "at Jerusalem".

JAMISO, "Annas ... and Caiaphas— (See on Luk_3:2).

John and Alexander— of whom nothing is known.

COKE, "Acts 4:6. And Annas the high-priest, and Caiaphas,— See the note on

Luke 3:2. John and Alexander were evidently persons of great note among the Jews

at this time; and it is not improbable, as Dr. Lightfoot and others suppose, that the

former might be the celebrated Rabbin Jochanan Ben Zaccai, mentioned in the

Talmud, the scholar of Hillel; and that the latter might be the Alabarch, or governor

of the Jews at Alexandria, brother to the famous Philo-Judaeus, and in great favour

with Claudius Caesar. Josephus mentions him often, and tells us among other

things, that he adorned nine gates of the temple with plates of gold and silver. Of the

kindred of the high-priest, is read by some, Of the pontifical family. Dr. Hammond

explains this of the twenty-four members of the Aaronic family, who presided over

the twenty-four courses; others refer it to those who were nearly related to Annas

and Caiaphas; but Grotius thinks that it includes the kindred of those who hadlately

been in the office of high-priest, which, he says, made them members of the

Sanhedrim. These were the very persons who had procured the death of the Lord

Jesus Christ. And therefore theythought themselves highly concerned to suppress

his disciples and their doctrine.

ELLICOTT, "(6) And Annas the high priest . . .—These are mentioned by

themselves as representing the section that had probably convened the meeting, and

came in as if to dominate its proceedings. The order of the first two names is the

same as in Luke 3:2, and as that implied in John 18:13; John 18:24. Annas, or

Ananus, had been made high priest by Quirinus, the Governor of Syria, filled the

office A.D. 7-15, and lived to see five of his sons occupy it after him. At this time,

Joseph Caiaphas was the actual high priest (see ote on John 11:49), having been

appointed in A.D. 17. He was deposed A.D. 37. He had married the daughter of

Annas; and the latter seems to have exercised a dominant influence, perhaps, as the

asi, the Prince, or President, of the Sanhedrin, during the remainder of his life. If

he presided on this occasion, it may explain St. Luke’s calling him “the high priest.”

John.—This may have been the Johanan ben Zaccai, who is reported by Jewish

writers to have been at the height of his fame forty years before the destruction of

the Temple, and to have been President of the Great Synagogue after its removal to

Jamnia. The identification is, at the best, uncertain; but the story told of his death-

bed, in itself full of pathos, becomes, on this assumption, singularly interesting. His

disciples asked him why he wept: “O light or Israel, . . . . whence these tears?” And

he replied: “If I were going to appear before a king of flesh and blood, he is one who

to-day is and to-morrow is in the grave; if he were wroth with me, his wrath is not

eternal; if he were to cast me into chains, those chains are not for ever; if he slay me,

that death is not eternal; I might soothe him with words or appease him with a gift.

But they are about to bring me before the King of kings, the Lord, the Holy and

Blessed One, who liveth and abideth for ever. And if He is wroth with me, His wrath

is eternal; and if He bind, His bonds are eternal; if He slay, it is eternal death; and

Him I cannot soothe with words or appease with gifts. And besides all this, there are

before me two paths, one to Paradise and the other to Gehenna, and I know not in

which they are about to lead me. How can I do aught else but weep?” (Bab-

Beracoth, fol. 28, in Lightfoot: Cent.-Chorogr., Acts 15)

Alexander.—This name has been identified by many scholars with Alexander, the

brother of Philo, the Alabarch, or magistrate of Alexandria (Jos. Ant. xviii. 8, § 1;

xix. 5, § 1). There is, however, not the shadow of any evidence for the identification.

As many as were of the kindred of the high priest.—The same phrase is used by

Josephus (Ant. xv. 3, § 1), and may mean either those who were personally related

by ties of blood with the high priest for the time being, or the heads of the four-and-

twenty courses of priests. (See otes on Matthew 2:4; Luke 1:5.) All these had

probably taken part in our Lord’s condemnation.

7 They had Peter and John brought before them and began to question them: “By what power or what name did you do this?”

BARES, "In the midst - In the presence of the Great Council.

By what power ... - A similar question was put to Christ in the temple, Mat_21:23.

By what name - That is, by whose authority. It is very probable that they expected to intimidate the apostles by this question. They claimed the right of regulating the religious affairs of the nation. They had vast power with the people. They assumed that all power to instruct the people should originate with them; and they expected that the apostles would be confounded, as having violated the established usage of the nation. It did not seem to occur to them to enter into an investigation of the question whether this acknowledged miracle did not prove that they were sent by God, but they assumed that they were impostors, and attempted to silence them by authority. It has been usual with the enemies of religion to attempt to intimidate its friends, and when argument fails, to attempt to silence Christians by appealing to their fears.

CLARKE, "By what power, or by what name, have ye done this? - It seems that this council were convinced that the lame man was miraculously healed; but it is very likely that they believed the whole to be the effect of magic; and, as all intercourse with familiar spirits, and all spells, charms, etc., were unlawful, they probably hoped that, on the examination, this business would come out, and that then these disturbers

of their peace would be put to death. Hence they inquired by what power, εν�ποι!�

δυναµει, by what supernatural energy; or in what name, by what mode of incantation;

and who is the spirit you invoke, in order to do these things? False prophets, reputed witches, wizards, etc., were to be brought before the sanhedrin, to be by them judged, acquitted, or condemned, according to the evidence. Some think the words should be thus understood: Who gave you authority to teach publicly! This belongs to the sanhedrin. What, therefore, is your authority, and who is he who gave it to you?

GILL, "And when they had set them in the midst,.... Of the assembly, as the Ethiopic version adds; in the middle of the sanhedrim, which sat in a semicircular form; or as the Jews express it, as the half of a round corn floor, or as a half moon, and not in a perfect circle; because it was necessary that the contending parties, and the witnesses, might go in and speak before them all (b); so that those that were set before them, were placed in the middle of them: and here Peter and John were set; so the Arabic version renders it, "when they set both": they sent for them out of the hold, or custody, where they had been all night, and ordered them to be brought before them, to be examined about their doctrine and practice:

they asked, by what power, or by what name have ye done this? they inquired of them, whether it was by a natural, or by a divine, or by a diabolical power, that they had wrought the cure upon the lame man? whether it was by the use of medicine, or by the help of magic art, and the assistance of the devil, which they were very ready to charge Christ and his disciples with? or whether they pretended to a divine and supernatural aid? and also what name they had made use of, and by whose authority they acted?

HERY, " The prisoners are arraigned, Act_4:7. 1. They are brought to the bar; they set them in the midst, for the sanhedrim sat in a circle, and those who had any thing to

do in the court stood or sat in the midst of them (Luk_2:46), so Dr. Lightfoot. Thus the scripture was fulfilled, The assembly of the wicked has enclosed me, Psa_22:16. They compassed me about like bees, Psa_118:12. They were seated on every side. 2. The question they asked them was, “By what power, or by what name, have you done this?By what authority do you these things?” (the same question that they had asked their Master, Mat_21:23): “Who commissioned you to preach such a doctrine as this, and empowered you to work such a miracle as this? You have no warrant nor license from us, and therefore are accountable to us whence you have your warrant.” Some think this question was grounded upon a fond conceit that the very naming of some names might do wonders, as Act_19:13. The Jewish exorcists made use of the name of Jesus. Now they would know what name they made use of in their cure, and consequently what name they set themselves to advance in their preaching. They knew very well that they preached Jesus, and the resurrection of the dead, and the healing of the sick, through Jesus (Act_4:2), yet they asked them, to tease them, and try if they could get any thing out of them that looked criminal.

III. The plea they put in, the design of which was not so much to clear and secure themselves as to advance the name and honour of their Master, who had told them that their being brought before governors and kings would give them an opportunity of preaching the gospel to those to whom otherwise they could not have had access, and it should be a testimony against them. Mar_13:19. Observe,

1. By whom this plea was drawn up: it was dictated by the Holy Ghost, who fitted Peter more than before for this occasion. The apostles, with a holy negligence of their own preservation, set themselves to preach Christ as he had directed them to do in such a case, and then Christ made good to them his promise, that the Holy Ghost should give them in that same hour what they should speak. Christ's faithful advocates shall never want instructions, Mar_13:11.

2. To whom it was given in: Peter, who is still the chief speaker, addresses himself to the judges of the court, as the rulers of the people, and elders of Israel; for the wickedness of those in power does not divest them of their power, but the consideration of the power they are entrusted with should prevail to divest them of their wickedness. “You are rulers and elders, and should know more than others of the signs of the times, and not oppose that which you are bound by the duty of your place to embrace and advance, that is, the kingdom of the Messiah; you are rulers and elders of Israel, God's people, and if you mislead them, and cause them to err, you will have a great deal to answer for.”

JAMISO, "By what power or ... name have ye done this— thus admitting the reality of the miracle, which afterwards they confess themselves unable to deny (Act_4:16).

COFFMA, "This shows that the Sanhedrin had not been able to formulate any

charge against the apostles; therefore the question was to induce them to talk in the

hope that they could turn some of their words into an indictment. However, both the

worldly antagonist and the holy apostles knew perfectly well why they were there;

and Peter at once launched into his message.

Have ye done this ... Bruce tells us that in the Greek, "There is a scornful emphasis

in the position of the pronoun (for "ye") at the end of Acts 4:7, meaning "people like

you."[16]

EDOTE:

[16] F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 99.

CALVI, "7.In what power They do yet seem to have some zeal of God. For they

feign that they are careful that the honor due unto God may not be given to any

other. ame is taken in this place for authority. In sum, they deal as if they were

most earnest defenders and maintainers of God’s glory. In the mean season, their

importunateness is wonderful, in that they go about to drive the apostles to make

denial, by asking many questions concerning a manifest matter, and to wring out by

fear some other thing than they had confessed. But God doth bring their crafty

wiliness to nought, and maketh them hear that which they would not.

COKE, "Acts 4:7. And when they had set them in the midst,— It was the custom for

the Sanhedrim to sit almost in a circle, or oval, and to set the prisoners in the midst

of them: St. Peter and St. John being so placed, the court demanded of them, "By

what power, human or diabolical, angelic or divine, have you cured this man; whose

name have you invoked to the working of this miracle; or from whom had you your

authority to preach so publicly to the people?—From us you had it not, though we

alone have the authority to give a commission to any man to do so?"

ELLICOTT, "(7) And when they had set them in the midst.—The Sanhedrin sat in

a semi-circle, the president being in the middle of the arc, the accused standing in

the centre.

They asked.—Literally, were asking. They put the question repeatedly, in many

varying forms.

By what power, or by what name, have ye done this?—Literally, By what kind of

power, or what kind of name? apparently in a tone of contempt. They admit the fact

that the lame man had been made to walk, as too patent to be denied. (Comp. Acts

4:16.) The question implied a suspicion that it was the effect of magic, or, as in the

case of our Lord’s casting out devils, by the power of Beelzebub (Luke 11:15; John

8:48). There is a touch of scorn in the way in which they speak of the thing itself.

They will not as yet call it a “sign,” or “wonder,” but “have ye done this?”

8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them: “Rulers and elders of the people!

BARES, "Filled with the Holy Ghost - See the notes on Act_2:4.

Ye rulers ... - Peter addressed the Sanhedrin with perfect respect. He did not call in question their authority to propose this question. He seemed to regard this as a favorable opportunity to declare the truth and state the evidence of the Christian religion. In this he acted on the principle of the injunction which he himself afterward gave 1Pe_3:15, “Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear.” Innocence is willing to be questioned; and a believer in the truth will rejoice in any opportunity to state the evidence of what is believed. It is remarkable, also, that this was before the Great Council of the nation - the body that was clothed with the highest authority. Peter could not have forgotten that before this very council, and these very men, his Master had been arraigned and condemned; nor could he have forgotten that in the very room where this same council was convened to try his Lord, he had himself shrunk from an honest avowal of attachment to him, and shamefully and profanely denied him.

That he was now able to stand boldly before this same tribunal evinced a remarkable change in his feelings, and was a most clear and impressive proof of the genuineness of his repentance when he went out and wept bitterly. Compare Luk_22:54-62. And we may remark here, that one of the most clear evidences of the sincerity of repentance is when it leads to a result like this. So deeply was the heart of Peter affected by his sin Luk_22:62, and so genuine was his sorrow, that he doubtless remembered his crime on this occasion, and the memory of it inspired him with boldness. It may be further remarked, that one evidence of the genuineness of repentance is a desire to repair the evil which is done by crime. Peter had done dishonor to his Master and his cause in the presence of the great council of the nation. Nothing, on such an occasion, would be more likely to do injury to the cause than for one of the disciples of the Saviour to deny him -one of his followers to be guilty of profaneness and falsehood. But here was an opportunity, in some degree, at least, to repair the evil. Before the same council, in the same city, and in the presence. of the same people, it is not an unnatural supposition that Peter rejoiced that he might have opportunity to bear his testimony to the divine mission of the Saviour whom he had before denied. By using the customary language of respect applied to the Great Council, Peter also has shown us that it is proper to evince respect for office and for those in power. Religion requires us to render this homage, and to treat men in office with deference, Mat_22:21; Rom_13:7; 1Pe_2:13-17.

CLARKE, "Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost -Which guided him into all truth, and raised him far above the fear of man; placing him in a widely different state of mind to that in which he was found when, in the hall of Caiaphas, he denied his Master, through fear of a servant girl. But now was fulfilled the promise of Christ, Mat_10:18-20; And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake; but take no thought how or what ye shall speak; for it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father that speaketh in you.

GILL, "Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost,.... At that very instant, having received a fresh measure of the gifts and graces of the Spirit, besides what he had poured forth upon him at the day of Pentecost; so that he had great courage and presence of

mind, and freedom of speech, as Christ had promised his disciples they should have, when they were brought before governors and magistrates, Mat_10:18. The case was much altered with Peter, he who but a little while ago was frightened by a servant maid, now stands before the Jewish sanhedrim, with undaunted courage and resolution:

and said unto them, ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel; he addresses them in a very handsome manner, and gives them their proper titles as magistrates; which ought to be done by men and Christians; honour should be given, to whom honour is due: the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions, and some copies, add "hear", which seems very necessary; he called for audience, or desired to be heard a few words, in the defence of himself and fellow apostle, and in answer to their questions.

JAMISO, "Then, filled with the Holy Ghost, said— (See Mar_13:11; Luk_21:15).

HAWKER 8-12, "Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel, (9) If we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole; (10) Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. (11) This is the stone which was set at naught of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. (12) Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

What a blessed discourse is here! Behold, Reader, the wonderful effects of the Spirit’s influence. This is the same Apostle, whose timidity was such, when only confronted by a poor servant maid, that he was tempted to deny his Lord; and now, boldly chargeth the whole Jewish Council with the murder of Christ. Can your heart desire a more decisive proof, that the change was wrought by God the Holy Ghost? See that Scripture, of Jesus’s promise, Mar_13:11. And observe how the Apostle, by that sweet figure of the Stone, Jehovah promised to lay in Zion, would lead them to their own Scriptures, in confirmation of the truth as it is in Jesus. See Isa_2:16; Mat_21:42; Psa_118:23. And observe how the Apostle intimates, by declaring that there is salvation in no other, that their rejection of Jesus will bring on, and fulfill, that other Scripture, to the same amount, where the Prophet declares, that he shall be a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence to both houses of Israel, Isa_8:14. Blessed Lord Jesus! do I not daily see thy solemn words concerning this Stone fulfilled? Whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder, Mat_21:44. Lord Jesus! do thou grant to my poor soul, that while thou art still a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, to many who call themselves Christians, after the holy Name, but have never felt the power of thy holy Spirit, teaching them the plague of their own heart; I may be enabled by thy grace, to build my whole hopes of salvation on thee, the Rock of ages: convinced, most fully convinced, that there is salvation in no other; neither any other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved!

CALVI, "8.Peter, being filled with the Holy Ghost It is not without great cause

that Luke addeth this, to the end we may know that Peter spake not with such a

majesty of himself. And surely, seeing he had denied his Master, Christ, being afraid

at the voice of a silly woman, (Matthew 26:70,) he should have utterly fainted in

such an assembly, when he did only behold their pomp, unless he had been

upholden by the power of the Spirit. He had great need of wisdom and strength.

(205) He excelleth in both these so much, that his answer is indeed divine. He is

another manner of man here than he was before. Furthermore, this profiteth us two

manner of ways. For this title, or commendation, is of no small force to set forth the

doctrine which shall follow immediately, when it is said that it came from the Holy

God, [Spirit.] And we are taught to crave at the hands of the Lord the Spirit of

wisdom and strength, when we make profession of our faith, to direct our hearts

and minds. The fullness of the Spirit is taken for a large and no common measure.

COFFMA, "Ye rulers of the people ... Peter's respectful language here teaches the

same deference and respect of public officials which are binding upon all

Christians; but, as Plumptre noted, there was a marked change in Peter:

A few weeks back he had quailed before the soldiers and servants in the palace of

the high priest. But now he stands before the Sanhedrin and speaks in the language

of respect ... but also that of unflinching boldness.[17]SIZE>

Regarding the profound and dramatic change discernible in the apostles of Christ

which began with the resurrection and was final after Pentecost, Barnes truly

declared that "It is not possible to account for this change except on the supposition

that this religion is true."[18]

Filled with the Holy Spirit ... Here began to be fulfilled the blessed promise of Jesus

to the Twelve that they should not be concerned about what they should say when

arraigned before earthly authorities, because the Holy Spirit in that hour would give

them the message they were to deliver (Matthew 10:17-19).

[17] E. H. Plumptre, Ellicott's Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan

Publishing House, 1959), p. 21.

[18] Albert Barnes, op. cit., p. 77.

COSTABLE, "Jesus had promised that when the disciples stood before hostile

adversaries God would give them the words to speak (Luke 21:12-15). This special

filling appears to be in view in this verse. Again, filling reflects control by the Holy

Spirit. The Holy Spirit filled (controlled) Peter as he served as a witness in

obedience to Jesus (Acts 1:8). The aorist passive participle plestheis ("filled")

indicates an act performed on Peter rather than a continuing state. Peter addressed

all the Sanhedrin members as "rulers and elders" of the Jews.

ELLICOTT, "(8) Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost.—The tense implies an

immediate sudden inspiration, giving the wisdom and courage and words which

were needed at the time. The promises of Matthew 10:19-20, Luke 21:14-15, were

abundantly fulfilled. The coincidence of names in the juxtaposition of the

representatives of the new and the older Israel is striking. On each side there was a

John; on each a Cephas, or Caiaphas, the two names possibly coming from the same

root, or, at any rate, closely alike in sound. A few weeks back Peter had quailed

before the soldiers and servants in the high priest’s palace. ow he stands before the

Sanhedrin and speaks, in the language of respect, it is true, but also in that of

unflinching boldness. We may, perhaps, trace a greater deference in the language of

the Galilean fisherman, “Ye rulers of the people,” than in the “Men and brethren”

of St. Paul (Acts 23:1; Acts 23:6), who was more familiar with the members of the

court, and stood in less awe of them.

9 If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a man who was lame and are being asked how he was healed,

BARES, "If we this day - If as is the fact; or since we are thus examined.

Examined - Questioned; if the purpose is to institute an inquiry into this case, or since it is the purpose to institute such an inquiry.

The good deed - The act of benevolence; the benefit conferred on an infirm man. He assumes that it was undeniable that the deed had been done.

To the impotent man - To this man who was infirm or lame. The man was then present, Act_4:10, Act_4:14. He may have been arrested with the apostles; or he may have been present as a spectator; or, as Neander supposes, he may have been summoned as a witness.

By what means - This was the real point of the inquiry. The fact that he had been made whole was not denied. The only question was whether it had been done by the authority and power of Jesus of Nazareth, as Peter declared it to be, Act_3:6, Act_3:16.

CLARKE, "The good deed done - Επι�ευεργεσι!, The benefit he has received in being restored to perfect soundness.

GILL, "If we this day be examined of the good deed,.... Or "seeing" we are; for it was not a matter of doubt, but a clear case, that they were brought into court, and were passing under an examination, about the cure of the lame man; which the apostle rightly calls a

good deed, it being done in faith, and to the glory of God, and for the good of the man; and hereby tacitly suggests, that they were dealt very hardly with, to be seized and kept in custody, and be called in question, for doing an action so beneficent and kind, as this was, which was

done to the impotent man; who could not help himself, nor get his bread any other way, than by begging:

by what means he is made whole; restored to perfect health, and the proper use of his limbs; that is, by what power, and in what name this was done; the answer is ready, and it is as follows.

CALVI, "9.If we be judged. Undoubtedly Peter layeth tyranny to the charge of the

priests and the scribes, because they examine them unjustly concerning a benefit

which deserveth praise, as if he and his fellow had committed some heinous offense.

If, saith he, we be accused for this cause, because we have made a sick man whole.

Peter hath in this place more respect unto the wicked affection of the mind than

unto the very order of the question. For if, under color of a miracle, the apostles

would have drawn away the people from the true and sincere worship of God, they

should have been worthily called to answer for themselves; because religion doth far

excel all the good things of this present life. But seeing they (having no cause at all)

did wickedly make an offense of that which they ought to have honored, Peter, being

supported with this confidence, doth at the first gird them wittily with a taunting

preface, because they sit as judges to condemn good deeds. Yet he toucheth this

point but lightly, that he may pass over unto the matter.

COFFMA, "Peter moved quickly to the attack, charging the Sanhedrin with

murdering the Son of God, and affirming that the great miracle in view had been

accomplished by the authority of that same Christ whom they had crucified.

In him doth this man stand ... If we may rely upon the English Revised Version

(1885) rendition here, it may be assumed that the man had been baptized into Christ

since the miracle was wrought; because the ew Testament reveals no other device

by which any man was accounted to be "in Christ." See Romans 6:3,1 Corinthians

12:13, and Galatians 3:27. If this is allowed, and we believe it should be, then Peter's

words emphasized the fact of the spreading kingdom and the multiplication of

disciples mentioned by Luke a bit earlier (Luke 4:4), This, of course, would have

further infuriated the Sadducees.

COSTABLE 9-10. "Peter referred to the "trial" as a preliminary hearing (Gr.

anakrinomai), which it was. Jewish law required that people had to be informed of

the consequences of their crime before being punished for it. [ote: Joachim

Jeremias, "Untersuchungen zum Quellenproblem der Apostelgeschichte,"

Zeitschrift für die eutestamentliche Wissenschrift 36 (1937):208-13.] Peter's

answer was straightforward and plain: the power of Jesus had benefited a sick man

by healing him. This was good news not only for the Sanhedrin but for all the people

of Israel. Peter used a Greek word that means saved (sothenai), which some English

translators have rendered "made well." His use of this word prepares for the use of

the same word in Acts 4:12 where it has a broader meaning. Peter's intent was

obviously to prick the consciences of these men too (cf. Acts 2:23; Acts 2:36; Acts

3:13-15). He laid the guilt for Jesus' death at their feet and gave witness that God

raised Him from the dead. The Sanhedrin did not now or at any later time attempt

to deny the fact that Jesus had arisen.

ELLICOTT, "(9) If we this day be examined.—The word is employed in its

technical sense of a judicial inter rogation, as in Luke 23:14. It is used by St. Luke

and St. Paul (Acts 12:19; Acts 24:8; 1 Corinthians 2:14-15; 1 Corinthians 4:3-4), and

by them only, in the ew Testament.

Of the good deed.—Strictly, the act of beneficence. There is a manifest emphasis on

the word as contrasted with the contemptuous “this thing” of the question. It meets

us again in 1 Timothy 6:2.

By what means he is made whole.—Better, this man. The pronoun assumes the

presence of the man who had been made able to walk. (Comp. John 9:15.) The verb,

as in our Lord’s words, “Thy faith hath made thee whole” (Mark 10:52; Luke 7:50),

has a pregnant, underlying meaning, suggesting the thought of a spiritual as well as

bodily restoration.

10 then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of azareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed.

BARES, "What the plea is: it is a solemn declaration,

(1.) That what they did was in the name of Jesus Christ, which was a direct answer to the question the court asked them (Act_4:9, Act_4:10): “If we this day be examined, be called to an account as criminals, so the word signifies, for a good deed (as any one will own it to be) done to the impotent man, - if this be the ground of the commitment, this the matter of the indictment, - if we are put to the question, by what means, or by whom, he is made whole, we have an answer ready, and it is the same we gave to the people (Act_3:16), we will repeat it to you, as that which we will stand by. Be it known to you all who pretend to be ignorant of this matter, and not to you only, but to all the people of Israel, for they are all concerned to know it, that by the name of Jesus Christ,that precious, powerful, prevailing name, that name above every name, even by him whom you in contempt called Jesus of Nazareth, whom you crucified, both rulers and people, and whom God hath raised from the dead and advanced to the highest dignity and dominion, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole, a monument of

the power of the Lord Jesus.” Here, [1.] He justifies what he and his colleague had done in curing the lame man. It was a good deed; it was a kindness to the man that had begged, but could not work for his living; a kindness to the temple, and to those that went in to worship, who were now freed from the noise and clamour of this common beggar. “Now, if we be reckoned with for this good deed, we have no reason to be ashamed, 1Pe_2:20; 1Pe_4:14, 1Pe_4:16. Let those be ashamed who bring us into trouble for it.” Note, It is no new thing for good men to suffer ill for doing well. Bene agere et male pati vere Christianum est - To do well and to suffer punishment is the Christian's lot. [2.] He transfers all the praise and glory of this good deed to Jesus Christ. “It is by him, and not by any power of ours, that this man is cured.” The apostles seek not to raise an interest for themselves, nor to recommend themselves by this miracle to the good opinion of the court; but, “Let the Lord alone be exalted, no matter what becomes of us.” [3.] He charges it upon the judges themselves, that they had been the murderers of this Jesus: “It is he whom you crucified, look how you will answer it;” in order to the bringing of them to believe in Christ (for he aims at no less than this) he endeavours to convince them of sin, of that sin which, one would think, of all others, was most likely to startle conscience - their putting Christ to death. Let them take it how they will, Peter will miss no occasion to tell them of it. [4.] He attests the resurrection of Christ as the strongest testimony for him, and against his persecutors: “They crucified him, but God raised him from the dead; they took away his life, but God gave it to him again, and your further opposition to his interest will speed no better.” He tells them that God raised him from the dead, and they could not for shame answer him with that foolish suggestion which they palmed upon the people, that his disciples came by night and stole him away. [5.] He preaches this to all the bystanders, to be by them repeated to all their neighbours, and commands all manner of persons, from the highest to the lowest, to take notice of it at their peril: “Be it known to you all that are here present, and it shall be made known to all the people of Israel, wherever they are dispersed, in spite of all your endeavours to stifle and suppress the notice of it: as the Lord God of gods knows, so Israel shall know, all Israel shall know, that wonders are wrought in the name of Jesus, not by repeating it as a charm, but believing in it as a divine revelation of grace and good-will to men.”

CLARKE, "By the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth - This was a very bold declaration in the presence of such an assembly; but he felt he stood on good ground. The cure of the lame man the day before was notorious; his long infirmity was well known; his person could be easily identified; and he was now standing before them whole and sound: they themselves therefore could judge whether the miracle was true or false. But the reality of it was not questioned, nor was there any difficulty about the instruments that were employed; the only question is, How have ye done this? and in whose name? Peter immediately answers, We have done it in the name of Jesus of Nazareth whom ye crucified, and whom God hath raised from the dead.

GILL, "Be it known unto you all,.... The members of the sanhedrim:

and to all the people of Israel; who might hear of this affair; for the apostle was not ashamed of what he had done, nor of the person in whose name he had done it:

that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth; by calling, on that name, and by making use of it, and by the power and authority of Jesus Christ, who by way of

contempt was called the

Nazarene: whom ye crucified; for though Pilate delivered him to be crucified, and the Roman soldiers did crucify him, yet this was at the request and instigation of the chief priests, Scribes, and elders; and therefore it is ascribed to them, who were bent upon his death; and no other would satisfy them, but the shameful and painful death of the cross:

whom God raised from the dead; of which the apostles were witnesses, having seen him and conversed with him after his resurrection; and this was the doctrine they were sent to publish, and for which they were apprehended and detained in custody; but this did not deter them from preaching it, no, not before the sanhedrim; which was an instance of great courage and faithfulness: and this is the rather mentioned; to show, that it was not by the name of one that was dead, but of one that was alive, that this cure was performed; as well as to observe to them, that their efforts against Christ were vain and fruitless:

even by him doth this man stand here before you whole; from whence it appears, as well as from Act_4:18 that the man that was healed, was now present: and either he was laid hold on, and detained in custody with the apostles, in hope to discover fraud if they could; or hearing that the apostles were before the sanhedrim, and examining on his account, might come of himself, in order to attest and prove the matter of fact, and to vindicate them.

HERY, "That what they did was in the name of Jesus Christ, which was a direct answer to the question the court asked them (Act_4:9, Act_4:10): “If we this day be examined, be called to an account as criminals, so the word signifies, for a good deed (as any one will own it to be) done to the impotent man, - if this be the ground of the commitment, this the matter of the indictment, - if we are put to the question, by what means, or by whom, he is made whole, we have an answer ready, and it is the same we gave to the people (Act_3:16), we will repeat it to you, as that which we will stand by. Be it known to you all who pretend to be ignorant of this matter, and not to you only, but to all the people of Israel, for they are all concerned to know it, that by the name of Jesus Christ, that precious, powerful, prevailing name, that name above every name, even by him whom you in contempt called Jesus of Nazareth, whom you crucified, both rulers and people, and whom God hath raised from the dead and advanced to the highest dignity and dominion, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole, a monument of the power of the Lord Jesus.” Here, [1.] He justifies what he and his colleague had done in curing the lame man. It was a good deed; it was a kindness to the man that had begged, but could not work for his living; a kindness to the temple, and to those that went in to worship, who were now freed from the noise and clamour of this common beggar. “Now, if we be reckoned with for this good deed, we have no reason to be ashamed, 1Pe_2:20; 1Pe_4:14, 1Pe_4:16. Let those be ashamed who bring us into trouble for it.” Note, It is no new thing for good men to suffer ill for doing well. Bene agere et male pati vere Christianum est - To do well and to suffer punishment is the Christian's lot. [2.] He transfers all the praise and glory of this good deed to Jesus Christ. “It is by him, and not by any power of ours, that this man is cured.” The apostles seek not to raise an interest for themselves, nor to recommend themselves by this miracle to the good opinion of the court; but, “Let the Lord alone be exalted, no matter what becomes of us.” [3.] He charges it upon the judges themselves, that they had been the murderers of this Jesus: “It is he whom you crucified, look how you will answer it;”

in order to the bringing of them to believe in Christ (for he aims at no less than this) he endeavours to convince them of sin, of that sin which, one would think, of all others, was most likely to startle conscience - their putting Christ to death. Let them take it how they will, Peter will miss no occasion to tell them of it. [4.] He attests the resurrection of Christ as the strongest testimony for him, and against his persecutors: “They crucified him, but God raised him from the dead; they took away his life, but God gave it to him again, and your further opposition to his interest will speed no better.” He tells them that God raised him from the dead, and they could not for shame answer him with that foolish suggestion which they palmed upon the people, that his disciples came by night and stole him away. [5.] He preaches this to all the bystanders, to be by them repeated to all their neighbours, and commands all manner of persons, from the highest to the lowest, to take notice of it at their peril: “Be it known to you all that are here present, and it shall be made known to all the people of Israel, wherever they are dispersed, in spite of all your endeavours to stifle and suppress the notice of it: as the Lord God of gods knows, so Israel shall know, all Israel shall know, that wonders are wrought in the name of Jesus, not by repeating it as a charm, but believing in it as a divine revelation of grace and good-will to men.”

JAMISO, "Be it known unto you ... and to all the people of Israel— as if emitting a formal judicial testimony to the entire nation through its rulers now convened.

by the name of Jesus, etc.— (See on Act_3:13, etc.).

even by him doth this man stand before you whole— for from Act_4:14 it appears that the healed man was at that moment before their eyes.

CALVI, "10.Be it known unto you. Peter might (as I have already said) have

turned aside unto many starting-holes, (206) if he would not have entered the cause;

(207) but because the miracle was wrought, to this end, that the name of Christ

might be glorified, he descendeth by and by unto this. For he knew that he was the

minister of such excellent power of God, that he might have a seal to confirm his

doctrine. In the meanwhile, the wicked, will they, nil they, are enforced to hear that

which they would have had buried full deep. When they have done what they can,

this is all; they cause Peter to avouch and object to their faces, that wherewith they

were so grieved, when it was spoken to others. And, first he maketh Christ the

author of the miracle. Secondly, because it seemed to be an absurd and incredible

thing, that a dead man should be endued with divine power, he testifieth that Christ

is alive, because God hath raised him up from the dead, howsoever they had

crucified him. So that the miracle giveth him occasion to preach the resurrection of

Christ. And by this testimony Peter meant to prove that he was the true Messias. He

saith that they had crucified him, not only to the end he may upbraid this unto

them, that they may acknowledge their fault; but also that they may understand

that they have in vain striven against God; and so, consequently, cease to rage so

unluckily and with such deadly success.

COKE, "Acts 4:10. By the name of Jesus, &c.— The time of Christ's resurrection

was that of the celebrating the passover, the most solemn festival of the Jews; the

scene was in Jerusalem, the metropolis of Judea, and at that time crowded with

Jews, who came thither from all parts of the earth, to keep the passover. The actors

and witnesses were the chief priests and elders, Pontius Pilate the Roman governor,

and the Roman soldiers who guarded the sepulchre. ow, if the account of guarding

the sepulchre had been false, it is not to be doubted, but the chief priests and elders,

who are said to have obtained the guard, and sealed the door of the sepulchre,

would, by some authentic act, have cleared themselves of the folly and guilt imputed

to them by the evangelist. All the several charges upon the whole government of

Judea, might have been answered at once by an attestation from the chief priests,

setting forth, that they never demanded a guard to be set at the sepulchre,

confirmed by the testimony of the Roman soldiers, (many of whom were probably at

Jerusalem when the gospel was written,) denying that they were ever upon that

guard. This, not only the reputation of the chief priests, but their avowed malice to

Christ, and aversion to his doctrine and religion, required; and this they would

probably have done at all events, had they been at liberty to propagate and invent

what lie they pleased. But that a guard was set at the sepulchre, was, in all

likelihood, by the dispersion and flight of the soldiers into the city, too well known in

Jerusalem for them to venture at denying it: for which reason they were obliged to

invent a lie consistent with that known fact, however absurd and improbable the lie

might appear, when it came to be considered. ow, as the report put into the

mouths of the Roman soldiers by the chief priests and elders, is no proof of the

falsehood of this fact, but rather of the contrary; so does the naming the scene, the

actors, and the witnesses, form a very strong proof of its being true, since no forger

of lies, willingly and wittingly, furnishes out the means of his own detection;

especiallywhen we consider that this account is related by that evangelist,who is said

to have composed his gospel forthose Christians who dwelt in Judea, many of whom

then living were probably at Jerusalem when this thing was done,—not to mention

again the absurdity of the report of the disciples coming by night, and stealing the

body, as it stands in the evangelist, and taking it, as it was afterwards prudently

amended by the Sanhedrim, and propagated by an express deputation from them to

all the synagogues of the Jews throughout the world; in which, without making any

mention of the Roman guard, they say no more than that the disciples came by

night, and stole away the body,—taking it, we say, in the manner in which these

wise counsellors were, on mature deliberation, pleased to put it, it may be sufficient

to observe, that the theft charged upon the disciples was so far from being proved,

that it was not so much as ever inquired into. And yet the accusers were the chief

priests and elders of the Jews; men in high reverence and authority with the people,

vested with all the power of the Jewish state, and consequently furnished with all

the means of procuring informations, and of gaining and extorting a confession.

And what were the accused? menof low birth, mean fortunes, without learning,

without credit, without support; and who, out of pusillanimity and fear, had

deserted their Master, upon the first occasion offered of shewing their fidelity and

attachment to him. And can it be imagined that the chief priests and council would

not have made inquiry into the fact, the belief of which they took so much pains to

propagate, had they themselves been persuaded of the truth of it? And had they

inquired into it, can it be supposed that out of such a number of mean persons as

must have been privy to it, no one, either from honesty, or religion, or fear of

punishment, or the hope of reward, would have betrayed the secret, and given them

such intelligence as might have enabled them to put the question ofthe resurrection

out of all dispute. For had it been once proved that the disciples stole away the body

of Jesus, their word would hardly have been taken for his resurrection. But how did

these poor men act? Conscious of no fraud or imposture, they remained in

Jerusalem a week or more, after the report of their having stolen their Master's

body was spread over the city, and in about a month returned thither again: not

long after which they asserted boldly, to the face of their powerful enemies and

accusers, the chief priests and elders, that God had raised from the dead that same

Jesus whom they had crucified. And what was the behaviour of these learned

rabbins, these watchful guardians of the Jewish church and state? Why, they

suffered the disciples of Jesus, charged by their order with an imposture tending to

disturb the government, to continue unquestioned at Jerusalem, and to depart

thence unmolested; and when, upon their return thither, they had caused them to be

seized and brought before them, for preaching through Jesus—the resurrection,

what did they say to them? Did they charge them with having stolen away the body

of their Master? othing like it: on the contrary, not able to gainsay the testimony

given by the apostles to the resurrection of Jesus, vouched by a miracle just then

performed by them in his name, they ordered them to withdraw, and conferred

among themselves what they should do with them.

ELLICOTT, "(10) By the name of Jesus Christ of azareth, whom ye crucified.—

The boldness of the declaration was startling. He does not shrink now from

confessing the azarene as the Messiah. He presses home the fact that, though Pilate

had given the formal sentence, it was they who had crucified their King. He

proclaims that He has been raised from the dead, and is still as a Power working to

heal as when on earth.

11 Jesus is ‘the stone you builders rejected, which has become the cornerstone.’[a]

BARES, "This is the stone - This passage is found in Psa_118:22. It is quoted, also, by our Saviour as applicable to himself. See the notes on Mat_21:42. The ancient Jews applied this to David. In the Targum on Psa_118:22, this passage is rendered, “The child who was among the sons of Jesse, and was worthy to be constituted king, the builders rejected.” The New Testament writers, however, apply it without any doubt to the Messiah. Compare Isa_28:16; Rom_9:33; Eph_2:20. And from this passage we may learn that God will overrule the devices and plans of wicked men to accomplish his own purposes. What people despise and set at naught, he esteems of inestimable value in his kingdom. What the great and the mighty contemn, he regards as the very foundation and cornerstone of the edifice which he designs to rear. Nothing has been more remarkable than this in the history of man; and in nothing is more contempt thrown on the proud

projects of people, than that what they have rejected God has made the very basis of his schemes.

CLARKE, "This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders - By your rejection and crucifixion of Jesus Christ, you have fulfilled one of your own prophecies, Psa_118:22; and, as one part of this prophecy is now so literally fulfilled, ye may rest assured, so shall the other; and this rejected stone shall speedily become the head stone of the corner. See the note on Mat_21:42.

GILL, "This is the stone,.... That is, this Jesus of Nazareth, by whose name the lame man was made whole, is that stone spoken of in Psa_118:22 by whom is meant the true Messiah, comparable to a stone, for his strength and duration, and usefulness, as a foundation and corner stone, in the spiritual building of the church; and yet notwithstanding is the stone

which was set at nought of you builders: the priests, elders, and Scribes; who were fond of being called builders, but made miserable work of it; despising and rejecting the stone of Israel, and instead of him as a foundation, built themselves, and others, on the traditions of the elders, and their own righteousness: but though Christ was rejected by them, both in person and in doctrine, and was ignominiously treated, and at last put to death, yet he was raised from the dead, and exalted at the right hand of God; and is the stone,

which is become the head of the corner; or the chief corner stone, that adorns, strengthens, knits, and keeps together, the whole building; in which Jews and Gentiles, saints in all ages and places, even all the elect of God, are united together; See Gill on Mat_21:42.

HERY, "That the name of this Jesus, by the authority of which they acted, is that name alone by which we can be saved. He passes from this particular instance to show that it is not a particular sect or party that is designed to be set up by the doctrine they preached, and the miracle they wrought, which people might either join with or keep off from at their pleasure, as it was with the sects of the philosophers and those among the Jews; but that it is a sacred and divine institution that is hereby ratified and confirmed, and which all people are highly concerned to submit to and come into the measures of. It is not an indifferent thing, but of absolute necessity, that people believe in this name, and call upon it. [1.] We are obliged to it in duty to God, and in compliance with his designs (Act_4:11): “This is the stone which was set at nought of your builders, you that are the rulers of the people, and the elders of Israel, that should be the builders of the church, that pretend to be so, for the church is God's building. Here was a stone offered you, to be put in the chief place of the building, to be the main pillar on which the fabric might entirely rest; but you set it at nought, rejected it, would not make use of it, but threw it by as good for nothing but to make a stepping-stone of; but this stone is now become the head of the corner; God has raised up this Jesus whom you rejected, and, by setting him at his right hand, has made him both the corner stone and the head stone, the centre of unity and the fountain of power.” Probably St. Peter here chose to make use of this quotation because Christ had himself made use of it, in answer to the demand of

the chief priests and the elders concerning his authority, not long before this, Mat_21:42. Scripture is a tried weapon in our spiritual conflicts: let us therefore stick to it. [2.]

JAMISO, "This is the stone which was set at naught of you builders, etc.—This application of Psa_118:22, already made by our Lord Himself before some of the same “builders” (Mat_21:42), is here repeated with peculiar propriety after the deed of rejection had been consummated, and the rejected One had, by His exaltation to the right hand of the Majesty on high, become “the head of the corner.”

CALVI, "11.This is the stone. He confirmeth by testimony of Scripture that it is no

new thing that the ringleaders (208) of the Church, which have glorious titles given

them, and have the chief room in the temple of God, have, notwithstanding,

wickedly rejected Christ. Therefore he citeth a place out of the 118th Psalm, (Psalms

118:22,) where David complaineth that he is rejected of the captains [leaders] of the

people, and yet, notwithstanding, he boasteth that he was chosen of God to have the

chief room. Moreover, he compareth the Church, or the state of the kingdom, by an

usual metaphor to a building, he calleth those which have the government the

masters of the work, (209) and he maketh himself the principal stone, whereon the

whole building is stayed and grounded. For that is meant by the head of the corner.

Therefore, this is David’s comfort, that howsoever the captains have rejected him, so

that they would not grant him even the basest place, yet did not their wicked and

ungodly endeavors hinder him from being extolled by God unto the highest degree

of honor. But that was shadowed in David which God would have perfectly

expressed in the Messias. Therefore Peter dealeth very aptly when as he citeth this

testimony, as being spoken before of Christ, as they knew full well that it did agree

properly to him. ow we know to what end Peter did cite the Psalm; to wit, lest the

elders and priests being unadvisedly puffed up with their honor, should take to

themselves authority and liberty to allow or disallow whatsoever they would. For it

is evident that the stone refused by the chief builders is placed by God’s own hand

in the chief place, that it may support the whole house.

Furthermore, this happeneth not once only, but it must be fulfilled daily; at least it

must seem no new thing if the chief builders do even now reject Christ. Whereby the

vain boasting of the Pope is plainly refuted, who maketh his boast of the bare title,

that he may usurp whatsoever is Christ’s. Admit we grant to the Pope and his

horned beasts that which they desire, to wit, that they are appointed to be ordinary

pastors of the Church, they can go no farther at length than to be called chief

builders with Annas and Caiaphas. And it is evident what account ought to be made

of this title, which they think is sufficient to mix heaven and earth together. ow let

us gather out of this place some things which are worth the noting. Forasmuch as

they are called master-builders who have government of the Church, the name itself

putteth them in mind of their duty. Therefore, let them give themselves wholly to the

building of the temple of God. And because all men do not their duty faithfully as

they ought, let them see what is the best manner of building aright, to wit, let them

retain Christ for the foundation; that done, let them not mix straw and stubble in

this building, but let them make the whole building of pure doctrine; as Paul

teacheth in 1 Corinthians 3:12. Whereas God is said to have extolled Christ, who

was rejected of the builders, this ought to comfort us, when as we see even the

pastors of the Church, or, at least, those which are in great honor, wickedly rebel

against Christ, that they may banish him. For we may safely set light by those visors

which they object against us; so that we need not fear to give Christ that humor

which God doth give to him. But if he wink for a time, yet doth he laugh at the

boldness of his enemies from on high, whilst they rage and fret upon earth.

Furthermore, though their conspiracies be strong and well guarded with all aids, yet

must we always assure ourselves of this, that Christ’s honor shall remain safe and

sound. And let the fruit of this confidence ensue also, that we be valiant and without

fear in maintaining the kingdom of Christ, whereof God will be an invincible

defender, as he himself affirmeth.

We have already spoken of Peter’s constancy, in that one simple man, having such

envious judges, and yet having but one partner in the present danger, showeth no

token at all of fear, but doth freely confess in that raging and furious company, that

thing which he knew would be received with most contrary minds. And whereas he

sharply upbraideth unto them that wickedness which they had committed, we must

let [seek] from hence a rule of speech when we have to deal with the open enemies of

the truth. For we must beware of two faults on this behalf, that we seem not to

flatter by keeping silence or winking; for that were treacherous silence, whereby the

truth should be betrayed. Again, that we be not puffed up with wantonness, or

immoderate heat as men’s minds do oftentimes break out more than they ought in

contention. Therefore, let us use gravity in this point, yet such as is moderate; let us

chide freely, yet without all heat of railing. We see that Peter did observe this order.

For at the first he giveth an honorable title; when he is once come to the matter he

inveigheth sharply against them; neither could such ungodliness as theirs was be

concealed. Those which shall follow this example shall not only have Peter to be

their guide, but also the Spirit of God.

COFFMA, "t is remarkable how true are the speeches of Peter recorded in Acts to

the epistles credited to this apostle in the ew Testament. Peter had been present

when the Lord first used this figure of himself (Matthew 21:42), and he developed

the idea further in 1 Peter 2:4-6. For a dissertation on "Christ the Living Stone," see

my Commentary on Romans, under Romans 9:33. Psalms 118:22 has a prophecy of

the rejected stone becoming the head of the corner; and it was founded upon an

incident connected with the building of the temple. The first stone that came down

from the quarry was most complicated, and the builders could not find a place for

it. It was dragged into a corner of the building area and in time covered with debris.

When the building was completed, there was no cornerstone until someone

remembered the rejected stone which fit perfectly. The Sanhedrin were the religious

builders who had rejected the head of the corner, Christ; and Peter hurled this

charge in their teeth.

COKE 11-12, "Acts 4:11-12. This is the stone, &c.— St. Peter's mentioning Christ

as the head of the corner, naturally led to the thought of a spiritual and eternal

salvation, which it was Christ's principal design to bring in; and with relation to

which alone this, and its kindred phrase, the chief corner-stone, are always used by

our Lord and his apostles: see Luke 20:17. Ephesians 2:21-22. 1 Peter 2:6-7. And

this spiritual benefit is called salvation about forty times in the ew Testament;

whereas I do not find, that it once uses the noun σωτηρια, salvation, for miraculous

cures; no, nor for any merely temporal deliverance at all, unless in Acts 7:25 where

Stephen says, that Moses supposed his brethren would have understood how that

God by his hand would deliver them; or, as it is in the Greek, would give salvation

to them: and even that deliverance might becalled by this name, because it was

typical of the more glorious one by Jesus Christ. And St. Peter here speaks of a

salvation which every one needs, including himself and all Israel: but surely it could

not be said of himself and the whole council, and of all the people of Israel, Acts 4:10

that they needed miraculous cures in the name of Christ, by which, in that respect,

they must be saved. I therefore can by no means think that this strong and lively

passage is to be sunk and restrained, as some contend it should, to the case of

working miracles: on the other hand, there seems to me to be a great beauty in the

occasion that the apostle took, and in the gradation which he made, from the

temporal deliverance which had been wrought in healing the poor cripple by the

power of Christ, to that of a much nobler and more important kind, which is

brought in by Christ to impotent and sinful souls; he therein following the

admirable custom of his great Lord and Master, who often took occasion from

earthly to speak of spiritual things; as particularly when, upon his having

mentioned the miracle of the loaves, he discoursed at large concerning himself as the

Bread of life. John 6:26-58. The 12th verse may be thus paraphrased: "or is the

spiritual and eternal salvation, to which his being the Head of the corner principally

refers, to be found in any one whatsoever besides himself: for there is no other

person of sufficient dignity, merit, and power, whose name can be pleaded or

depended upon for salvation; or whom God has graciously appointed or granted to

the men of this lower world, by whom, δει, it is fit, or meet and worthy of God, that

any of us should be saved; or by whom we ought to expect, or ever can have,

deliverance from sin and misery, from the curse of the law, and the wrath to come."

Raphelius, in a remarkable note on this text, endeavours, among other things, to

prove that Ονοµα, or the name of a person, was a manner of speaking used in

reference to one, regarded as God and the Author of salvation. See Raphel. ex

Herod. p. 329.

COSTABLE, "Peter showed that this teaching did not lead the people away from

God but rather fulfilled something that God had predicted. In quoting Psalms

118:22 Peter applied to Jesus Christ what David had said about the nation Israel (cf.

Matthew 21:42; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17). Israel's leaders had rejected Jesus as an

unacceptable Messiah, but He would prove to be the most important part of what

God was building.

Some scholars believe Peter meant that Jesus was the cornerstone, the foundation of

what God was building (cf. Isaiah 28:16; 1 Peter 2:7). Others believe he meant the

capstone, the final piece of what God was building (cf. Daniel 2:34-35). [ote: E.g.,

Longenecker, pp. 304-5.] If the former interpretation is correct, Peter was probably

anticipating the church as a new creation of God (cf. 1 Peter 2:4-8). In the latter

view, he was viewing the Messiah as the long-expected completion of the house of

David. Since Peter was addressing Israel's rulers, I think he probably meant that

Jesus was the capstone, their Messiah. These rulers, the builders of Israel, had

rejected their Messiah.

ELLICOTT, "(11) This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders.—

Better, of you, the builders. The members of the Council to whom Peter spoke had

heard those words (Psalms 118:22) quoted and interpreted before. (See otes on

Matthew 21:42-44.) Then they had thought, in their blindness, that they could defy

the warning. They, by their calling, the builders of the Church of Israel, did reject

the stone which God had chosen to be the chief corner-stone—the stone on which

the two walls of Jew and Gentile met and were bonded together (Ephesians 2:20).

Here again the Epistles of St. Peter reproduce one of the dominant thoughts of his

speeches (1 Peter 2:6-8), and give it a wider application. Thirty years after he thus

spoke, Christ was still to him as “the head of the corner.”

Set at nought.—St. Peter does not quote the Psalm, but alludes to it with a free

variation of language. The word for “set at nought” is characteristic of St. Luke

(Luke 18:9; Luke 23:11) and St. Paul (Romans 14:3; Romans 14:10, et al.).

12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.”

BARES, "Neither is there salvation - The word “salvation” properly denotes any “preservation,” or keeping anything in a “safe” state; a preserving from harm. It I signifies, also, deliverance from any evil of body or mind; from pain, sickness, danger, etc., Act_7:25. But it is in the New Testament applied particularly to the work which the Messiah came to do, “to seek and to save that which was lost,” Luk_19:10. This work refers primarily to a deliverance of the soul from sin Mat_1:21; Act_5:31; Luk_4:18; Rom_8:21; Gal_5:1. It then denotes, as a consequence of freedom from sin, freedom from all the ills to which sin exposes man, and the attainment of that perfect peace and joy which will be bestowed on the children of God in the heavens. The reasons why Peter introduces this subject here seem to be these:

(1) He was discoursing on the deliverance of the man that was healed - his salvation from a long and painful calamity. This deliverance had been accomplished by the power of Jesus. The mention of this suggested that greater and more important salvation from sin and death which it was the object of the Lord Jesus to effect. As it was by his power

that this man had been healed, so it was by his power only that people could be saved from death and hell. Deliverance from any temporal calamity should lead the thoughts to that higher redemption which the Lord Jesus contemplates in regard to the soul.

(2) This was a favorable opportunity to introduce the doctrines of the gospel to the notice of the Great Council of the nation. The occasion invited to it; the mention of a part of the work of Jesus invited to a contemplation of his whole work. Peter would not have done justice to the character and work of Christ if he had not introduced that great design which he had in view to save people from death and hell. It is probable, also, that he advanced a sentiment in which he expected they would immediately concur, and which accorded with their wellknown opinions, that salvation was to be obtained only by the Messiah. Thus, Paul Act_26:22-23 says that he taught nothing else than what was delivered by Moses and the prophets, etc. Compare Act_23:6; Act_26:6. The apostles did not pretend to proclaim any doctrine which was not delivered by Moses and the prophets, and which did not, in fact, constitute a part of the creed of the Jewish nation.

In any other - Any other person. He does not mean to say that God is not able to save, but that the salvation of the human family is entrusted to the hands of Jesus the Messiah.

For there is none other name - This is an explanation of what he had said in the previous part of the verse. The word “name” here is used to denote “the person himself” (i. e., There is no other being or person.) As we would say, there is no one who can save but Jesus Christ. The word “name” is often used in this sense. See the notes on Act_3:6, Act_3:16. That there is no other Saviour, or mediator between God and man, is abundantly taught in the New Testament; and it is, indeed, the main design of revelation to prove this. See 1Ti_2:5-6; Act_10:43.

Under heaven - This expression does not materially differ from the one immediately following, “among men.” They are designed to express with emphasis the sentiment that salvation is to be obtained in “Christ alone,” and not in any patriarch, or prophet, or teacher, or king, or in any false Messiah.

Given - In this word it is implied that “salvation” has its origin in God; that a Saviour for people must be given by him; and that salvation cannot be originated by any power among people. The Lord Jesus is thus uniformly represented as given or appointed by God for this great purpose Joh_3:16; Joh_17:4; 1Co_3:5; Gal_1:4; Gal_2:20; Eph_1:22; Eph_5:25; 1Ti_2:6; Rom_5:15-18, Rom_5:21; and hence, Christ is called the “unspeakable gift” of God, 2Co_9:15.

Whereby we must be saved - By which it is fit, or proper δε& dei, that we should be saved. There is no other way of salvation that is adapted to the great object contemplated, and therefore, if saved, it must be in this way and by this plan. The schemes of people’s own devices are not adapted to the purpose, and therefore cannot save. The doctrine that people can be saved only by Jesus Christ is abundantly taught in the Scriptures. To show the failure of all other schemes of religion was the great design of the first part of the Epistle to the Romans. By a labored argument Paul there shows Rom. 1 that the Gentiles had failed in their attempt to justify themselves; and in Rom. 2–3 that the same thing was true also of the Jews. If both these schemes failed, then there was need of some other plan, and that plan was that by Jesus Christ. If it be asked, then, whether this affirmation of Peter is to be understood as having respect to infants and the pagan, we may remark:

(1) That his design was primarily to address the Jews, “Whereby we must be saved.” But,

(2) The same thing is doubtless true of others. If, as Christians generally believe,

infants are saved, there is no absurdity in supposing that it is by the merits of the atonement. But for that there would have been no promise of salvation to any of the human race. No offer has been made except by the Mediator; and to him, doubtless, is to be ascribed all the glory of raising up even those in infancy to eternal life. If any of the pagan are to be saved, as most Christians suppose, and as seems in accordance with the mercy of God, it is no less certain that it will be in consequence of the intervention of Christ. Those who will be brought to heaven will sing one song Rev_5:9, and will be prepared for eternal union in the service of God in the skies. Still, the Scriptures have not declared that great numbers of the pagan will be saved who have not the gospel. The contrary is more than implied in the New Testament, Rom_2:12.

Neither has the Scripture affirmed that all the pagan will certainly be cut off. It has been discovered by missionaries among the pagan that individuals have, in a remarkable way; been convinced of the folly of idolatry, and were seeking a better religion; that their minds were in a serious, thoughtful, inquiring state; and that they at once embraced the gospel when it was offered to them as exactly adapted to their state of mind, and as meeting their inquiries. Such was extensively the case in the Sandwich Islands; and the following instance recently occurred in this country: “The Flathead Indians, living west of the Rocky Mountains, recently sent a deputation to the white settlements to inquire after the Bible. The circumstance that led to this singular movement is as follows: It appears that a white man (Mr. Catlin) had penetrated into their country, and happened to be a spectator at one of their religious ceremonies. He informed them that their mode of worshipping the Supreme Being was radically wrong, and that the people away toward the rising of the sun had been put in possession of the true mode of worshipping the Great Spirit. On receiving this information, they called a national council to take this subject into consideration. Some said, if this be true, it is certainly high time we were put in possession of this mode. They accordingly deputed four of the chiefs to proceed to Louis to see their great father, General Clark, to inquire of him the truth of this matter.

They were cordially received by the general, who gave them a succinct history of revelation, and the necessary instruction relative to their important mission. Two of them sunk under the severe toils attending a journey of 3,000 miles. The remaining two, after acquiring what knowledge they could of the Bible, its institutions and precepts, returned, to carry back those few rays of divine light to their benighted countrymen.” In what way their minds were led to this State we cannot say, or how this preparation for the gospel was connected with the agency and merits of Christ we perhaps cannot understand; but we know that the affairs of this entire world are placed under the control of Christ Joh_17:2; Eph_1:21-22, and that the arrangements of events by which such people were brought to this state of mind are in his hands. Another remark may here be made. It is, that it often occurs that blessings come upon us from benefactors whom we do not see, and from sources which we cannot trace.

On this principle we receive many of the mercies of life; and from anything that appears, in this way many blessings of salvation may be conferred on the world, and possibly many of the pagan be saved. Still, this view does not interfere with the command of Christ to preach the gospel, Mar_16:15. The great mass of the pagan are not in this state; but the fact here adverted to, so far as it goes, is an encouragement to preach the gospel to the entire world. If Christ thus prepares the way; if he extensively fits the minds of the pagan for the reception of the gospel; if he shows them the evil and folly of their own system, and leads them to desire a better, then this should operate not to produce indolence, but activity, and zeal, and encouragement to enter into the field white for the harvest, and to toil that all who seek the truth, and are prepared to embrace

the gospel, may be brought to the light of the Sun of righteousness.

CLARKE, "Neither is there salvation in any other - No kind of healing, whether for body or soul, can come through any but him who is called Jesus. The spirit of health resides in him; and from him alone its influences must be received.

For there is none other name - Not only no other person, but no name except that divinely appointed one, Mat_1:21, by which salvation from sin can be expected - none given under heaven - no other means ever devised by God himself for the salvation of a lost world. All other means were only subordinate, and referred to him, and had their efficacy from him alone. He was the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world; and no man ever came, or can come, to the Father but by him.

GILL, "Neither is there salvation in any other,.... Meaning not corporeal healing,

but spiritual and eternal salvation; the Syriac version renders it, neither is there פורקנא, "redemption in any other": Christ is the only Saviour and Redeemer, who was promised and prophesied of as such; who has saved and redeemed his people from the law, sin, and Satan; nor is salvation to be sought and hoped for from any other; not in a man's self, nor in any other creature, angels or men; not in and by his own works, and legal righteousness; not by obedience to the law of Moses, moral or ceremonial; nor by the light of nature, much less by an observance of the traditions of the elders:

for there is none other name; thing or person, be it ever so great, or whatever show of power and strength, of holiness and religion, it makes; as the name of kings, princes, and the great men in the world; or of ministers and preachers in the church; or even of Christians and believers, which may be only a name to live; none but the name of Jesus, his person, blood, and righteousness:

under heaven: throughout the whole earth, in all the nations and kingdoms of it; nor even in heaven itself, among all the mighty angels there, thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers; none but the Father and the Spirit, who are one with Christ: there is none but he

given among men; and he has been freely given by his Father, as an instance of his matchless love to the world; and also freely given by himself, to be a sacrifice for the sins of his people; and is freely preached among men, as the only Saviour of them; for there is no other,

whereby we must be saved: God resolved in his purposes and decrees, in his council and covenant, upon the salvation of his chosen people; and he appointed his Son to be the salvation of them, and determined he would save them by him, and by no other, and in no other way; wherefore, whoever are saved, must be saved by him, see Hos_1:7 the Arabic version adds, "unless by him only".

HERY, " We are obliged to it for our own interest. We are undone if we do not take shelter in this name, and make it our refuge and strong tower; for we cannot be saved but by Jesus Christ, and, if we be not eternally saved, we are eternally undone (Act_4:12): Neither is there salvation in any other. As there is no other name by which

diseased bodies can be cured, so there is no other by which sinful souls can be saved. “By him, and him only, by receiving and embracing his doctrine, salvation must now be hoped for by all. For there is no other religion in the world, no, not that delivered by Moses, by which salvation can be had for those that do not now come into this, at the preaching of it.” So. Dr. Hammond. Observe here, First, Our salvation is our chief concern, and that which ought to lie nearest to our hearts - our rescue from wrath and the curse, and our restoration to God's favour and blessing. Secondly, Our salvation is not in ourselves, nor can be obtained by any merit or strength of our own; we can destroy ourselves, but we cannot save ourselves. Thirdly, There are among men many names that pretend to be saving names, but really are not so; many institutions in religion that pretend to settle a reconciliation and correspondence between God and man, but cannot do it. Fourthly, It is only by Christ and his name that those favours can be expected from God which are necessary to our salvation, and that our services can be accepted with God. This is the honour of Christ's name, that it is the only name whereby we must be saved, the only name we have to plead in all our addresses to God. This name is given. God has appointed it, and it is an inestimable benefit freely conferred upon us. It is given under heaven. Christ has not only a great name in heaven, but a great name under heaven; for he has all power both in the upper and in the lower world. It is given among men, who need salvation, men who are ready to perish. We may be saved by his name, that name of his, The Lord our righteousness; and we cannot be saved by any other. How far those may find favour with God who have not the knowledge of Christ, nor any actual faith in him, yet live up to the light they have, it is not our business to determine. But this we know, that whatever saving favour such may receive it is upon the account of Christ, and for his sake only; so that still there is no salvation in any other. I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me, Isa_45:4.

JAMISO, "Neither is there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved— How sublimely does the apostle, in these closing words, shut up these rulers of Israel to Jesus for salvation, and in what universal and emphatic terms does he hold up his Lord as the one Hope of men!

SBC, "I. St. Peter here makes a positive assertion. He says that Jesus Christ—His name—that is, Himself, brings salvation. It is natural for us to ask, What kind of salvation? Salvation was already a consecrated word in the language of Israel. It meant very generally the deliverance of Israel from outward and inward enemies; it meant very frequently the deliverance of Israel as a whole; it meant especially national salvation. The political salvation implied, as in the last result it always does, a moral and spiritual salvation. The outward deliverance necessitated an inward one, and the only Saviour who could deal with the thoughts and wills of men, who could begin really from within, was He who had just now, though invisibly, healed the cripple. Israel must be saved by Him, or it would perish. And thus we are led on to perceive an unspeakably deeper sense of the Apostle’s words. Salvation really means here—it can mean no less—the saving from moral ruin and death of the separate souls of men.

II. Salvation in this sense was, it is plain, no monopoly of Israel. What in the world was Israel that it should claim the whole power of the saving name? The final, the absolute religion, could not but be—it lay in the nature of things—universal. The question of the Gentiles had not yet been raised as it was raised a few years later, but there was behind the Apostles the broad commission of Christ to go into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. And in this sense the word "salvation" has all the meaning for

you and for me that it had for St. Peter and the first Christians.

III. But the Apostle adds, "Neither is there salvation in any other." When we affirm that Christianity alone can save, we do not deny that other agencies beside Christianity may improve mankind. But such influences are bounded by the horizon of time; they have no effects in the great hereafter. At least, they do not save us. They are not opponents of the Church of Christ; they are not even her rivals. They move in a totally different sphere of action. They only embellish our outward life; they leave our real soul, our real self, untouched. The question which will alone interest every one of us a short century hence, when other human beings have taken our places, and we have passed away, will not be whether, during this short span of life, we have been improved, but whether we have been saved. There can be no doubt that this conviction was in the first days of Christianity, and has been since, a great motive power in urging devoted men to spread the religion of their Master; a motive only second in its power to the impulsive force of the love of Christ.

H. P. Liddon, Penny Pulpit, No. 658

CALVI, "12.either is there salvation in any other. He passeth from the species

[salvation] unto the genus, [or more particular,] and he goeth from the corporal

benefit unto perfect health, [or general.] And assuredly Christ had showed this one

token of his grace, to the end he might be known to be the only author of life. We

must consider this in all the benefits of God, to wit, that he is the fountain of

salvation. And he meant to prick and sting the priests with this sentence, when as he

saith that there is salvation in none other save only in Christ, whom they went about

to put quite out of remembrance. (210) As if he should say, that they are twice

damned who did not only refuse the salvation offered them by God, but endeavor to

bring the same to nought, and did take from all the people the fruit and use thereof.

And although he seemeth to speak unto deaf men, yet doth he preach of the grace of

Christ, if peradventure some can abide to hear; if not, that they may at least be

deprived of all excuse by this testimony.

either is there any other name He expoundeth the sentence next going before.

Salvation (saith he) is in Christ alone, because God hath decreed that it should be so.

For by name he meaneth the cause or mean, as if he should have said, forasmuch as

salvation is in God’s power only, he will not have the same to be common to us by

any other means than if we ask it of Christ alone. Whereas he saith under heaven,

they do commonly refer it unto creatures, as if he should say, that the force and

power to save is given to Christ alone. otwithstanding, I do rather think that this

was added, because men cannot ascend into heaven, that they may come unto God.

Therefore, seeing we are so far from the kingdom of God, it is needful that God do

not only invite us unto himself, but that reaching out his hand he offer salvation

unto us, that we may enjoy the same. Peter teacheth in this place, that he hath done

that in Christ, because he came down into the earth for this cause, that he might

bring salvation with him, either is that contrary to this doctrine, that Christ is

ascended above all heavens, (Ephesians 4:10.) For he took upon him our flesh once

for this cause, that he might be a continual pledge of our adoption. He hath

reconciled the Father to us for ever by the sacrifice of his death: by his resurrection

he hath purchased for us eternal life. And he is present with us now also, that he

may make us partakers of the fruit of eternal redemption; but the revealing of

salvation is handled in this place, and we know that the same was so revealed in

Christ, that we need not any longer to say, “Who shall ascend into heaven?”

(Romans 10:6.) And if so be this doctrine were deeply imprinted in the minds of all

men, then should so many controversies concerning the causes of salvation be soon

at an end, wherewith the Church is so much troubled. The Papists confess with us,

that salvation is in God alone, but by and by they forge to themselves infinite ways

to attain unto the same. But Peter calleth us back unto Christ alone. They dare not

altogether deny that we have salvation given us by Christ; but whilst they feign so

many helps, they leave him scarce the hundredth part of salvation. But they were to

seek for salvation at the hands of Christ wholly; for when Peter excludeth plainly all

other means, he placeth perfect salvation in Christ alone, and not some part thereof

only. So that they are far from understanding this doctrine.

COFFMA, "In none other is there salvation ... As McGarvey wrote:

This declaration is universal; and it shows that every human being who is saved at

all will be saved in the name of Christ. If any who do not know him or believe in him

are saved, still in some way their salvation will be in his name.[19]

Wherein we must be saved ... Concerning this clause Boles pointed out that:

In the Greek, the "we" is the last word of the Greek sentence; it means, "we priests,

elders, scribes, fishermen - all of us" must be saved by faith and obedience in the

Christ.[20]

Thus, Peter included his wicked judges in those invited to participate in the new life

in Christ. The priests, however, rejected the way of salvation taught by Jesus. They

were among those such as were mentioned by Walker:

Who imagine themselves so lovely in God's sight, that he simply could not afford to

damn them. Such loveliness may be either of character or culture; and both classes

of these self-righteous bigots are equally certain that heaven would be impoverished

without them. They feel that they need no forgiveness.[21]

Peter preached the same plan of salvation to the Sanhedrin which he had

proclaimed on Pentecost, and before the Gate Beautiful of the temple; but our own

age, no less than that, prefers some other way of salvation. For example:

Daniel Soper, speaking of the crowd whose questions he has sought to answer for so

many years, says, (men have) "no time for a religion which confines itself to the

work of converting individuals and has nothing authoritative to say about war or

unemployment."[22]

Soper certainly read the popular mind accurately; but the truth is that the church's

business is not concerned with social or political issues at all, except in a peripheral

sense. Like Christ himself, the church must teach men regarding the salvation of

their souls. Let churches leave the social problems to the government, which can

botch them up better than any church could! Loving concern for brothers and

sisters in the Lord is taught and is mandatory for Christians; but involvement in the

social issues of the times is always, for the church, a sacrifice of first priorities for

those which are secondary.

The unique and glorious message of salvation in Jesus' name, through faith and

obedience to the gospel, has no parallels.

The study of the history of religion has amassed countless "parallels and analogies"

to the message of Jesus ... Yet the more analogies we amass, the clearer it becomes

that there are no analogies to the message of Jesus.[23]

How precious, how glorious, how past all human ability fully to comprehend it, is

the name of Jesus!

The victory has been enshrined in a ame. All the power of the azareth victory,

and of the Wilderness victory, all the power of the great climax victory of Calvary,

and of the Resurrection morning - all is packed into one word, a ame, the ame of

Jesus![24]

[19] J. W. McGarvey, Commentary on Acts (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing

Company, 1892), p. 72.

[20] H. Leo Boles, op. cit., p. 68.

[21] R. E. Walker, op. cit., p. 33.

[22] Daniel Soper, as quoted by William Barclay, Turning to God (Philadelphia:

The Westminster Press, 1964), p. 102.

[23] Joachim Jeremias, translated by orman Perrin (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,

1964), p. 20.

[24] J. Hastings, Great Texts of the Bible (ew York: Charles Scribner's Sons,

1911), Acts and Romans, p. 79.

COKE, "Acts 4:13. Unlearned and ignorant men,— Illiterate men, and in private

stations of life; αγραµµατοι και ιδιωται, men of no education, nor in any public

rank of life, as the priests and magistrates were: And they took knowledge of them,

επεγινωσκον, would read more properly, and they knew them. Grotius observes,

that therulers,having often been present when Christ taught publicly, might have

seen Peter and John near him, though perhaps they might have observed them more

particularly the night that Jesus was taken, when they had attended their Lord to

the house of Caiaphas.

COSTABLE, "The verses immediately following Psalms 118:22 in the Book of

Psalms refer to Messiah's national deliverance of Israel. It seems that Peter was

referring to both national deliverance and personal salvation in this address, as he

had in the previous one. The former application would have been especially

appropriate in view of his audience here. The messianic age to which the Jews

looked forward could only come if Israel's leaders repented and accepted Jesus as

their Messiah.

Peter boldly declared that salvation comes through no one but Jesus, not the

Maccabean heroes or the Sadducees or anyone else. Zechariah (Luke 1:69), Simeon

(Luke 2:30), and John the Baptist (Luke 3:6) had previously connected God's

salvation with Jesus. Peter stressed that Jesus was a man: He lived "under heaven"

and "among men." Jesus, the Messiah, the azarene (Acts 4:10), is God's only

authorized savior. Apart from Him there is no salvation for anyone (cf. John 14:6; 1

Timothy 2:5).

"Peter (and/or Luke) is no advocate of modern notions of religious pluralism."

[ote: Witherington, p. 194.]

". . . when we read the speech of Peter, we must remember to whom it was spoken,

and when we do remember that it becomes one of the world's great demonstrations

of courage. It was spoken to an audience of the wealthiest, the most intellectual and

the most powerful in the land, and yet Peter, the Galilaean fisherman, stands before

them rather as their judge than as their victim. But further, this was the very court

which had condemned Jesus to death. Peter knew it, and he knew that at this

moment he was taking his life in his hands." [ote: Barclay, p. 36.]

ELLICOTT, "(12) either is there salvation in any other.—Here the pregnant force

of “hath been made whole,” in Acts 4:9, comes out; and St. Peter rises to its highest

meaning, and proclaims a salvation, not from disease and infirmity of body, but

from the great disease of sin. The Greek has the article before “salvation.” That of

which Peter spoke was the salvation which the rulers professed to be looking for.

Given among men.—Better, that has been given. The words must be taken in the

sense which Peter had learnt to attach to the thought of the ame as the symbol of

personality and power. To those to whom it had been made known, and who had

taken in all that it embodied, the ame of Jesus Christ of azareth was the one true

source of deliverance and salvation. Speaking for himself and the rulers, Peter

rightly says that it is the ame “whereby we must be saved.” Where it is not so

known, it rises to its higher significance as the symbol of a divine energy; and so we

may rightly say that the heathen who obtain salvation are saved by the ame of the

Lord of whom they have never heard. (Comp. 1 Timothy 4:13.)

GREAT TEXTS OF THE BIBLE

THE SAVIG AME.

And in none other is there salvation : for neither is there any other name

under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved.

Acts iv. 12.

THESE words were uttered by St. Peter, as representing the

young Church of Christ, when, for the first time after her

foundation, she stood fairly face to face with the hostile power

of the world. On the Day of Pentecost she had encountered

some playful or scornful mockery, which was silenced when

St. Peter came forward and explained the true cause of the

occurrences which excited it. But when the cripple was

healed on the Mount of the Temple, the Jewish world roused

itself in earnest. The miracle was performed in the most

public place in Jerusalem; and immediately afterwards St.

Peter had addressed a large multitude which gathered round

him. He pointed out that Jesus, by the might of His ame,

was the real worker of the miracle ; that His exaltation and

power were in accordance with prophecy; that it was a fact

of the utmost moment to every one of his hearers. Hereupon

three classes of persons became alarmed. The priests saw in

the Apostles of Christ dangerous rivals to their own office and

authority. The Sadducees the unbelieving section of the

literary class were angered at the public discussion of a

miracle, which, if true, condemned their own denial of a

resurrection, and which they would gladly have buried beneath

a contemptuous silence. The Captain of the Temple, as the

guardian of public order a sort of chief commissioner of

police was apprehensive that the excitement might lead to

disturbances. These several personages and classes might well

have taken the miracle to heart; they might at least have

asked the question why it had so impressive a significance for

an increasing section of the people. But questions of this

68 THE SAVIG AME

kind are not often considered in moments of passion. The

prejudices of the past, combined with fears and resentment,

carried the day ; and they cast the Apostles into prison.

This done, it became necessary that the Apostles should be

examined in court the Court of the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin

was solemnly convoked ; it had, according to the law of Deuter

onomy, to decide the point whether the Apostles were to be

regarded as true prophets or as seducers to idolatry. The

Court knew that the cripple had been healed by the Apostles

not in the ame of Jehovah, but in the ame of Jesus. And

this seemed to establish the charge of idolatry ; since nothing

could be plainer to the Jewish mind than the distinction

between Jesus the Crucified Prophet and the Almighty Jehovah,

The first question, therefore, which the Court asked the Apostles

was, By what power or by what name have ye done this ? The

Court, you will observe, does not enter upon the general question

of the Apostles teaching; it asks only who had been invoked

to work the miracle. And St. Peter, standing before men who

had his life in their hands, speaks directly to the point: "Ye

rulers of the people and elders of Israel, if we this day be

examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by

what means he is made whole ; be it known unto you all, and to

all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of

azareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead,

even by Him doth this man stand here before you whole. This

is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is

become the head of the corner." And then he adds, " either is

there salvation in any other : for there is none other name under

heaven given among men whereby we must be saved."

The text contains two important topics

I. Salvation.

II. The Saving ame.

L

SALVATIO.

What a great word that word " salvation " is ! It includes the

cleansing of our conscience from all past guilt, the delivery of our

ACTS iv. 12 69

soul from all those propensities to evil which now so strongly pre

dominate in us ; it brings in, in fact, the undoing of all that Adam

did. Salvation is the total restoration of man from his fallen

estate ; and yet it is something more than that, for God s salva

tion fixes our standing more securely than it was before we fell.

It finds us broken in pieces by the sin of our first parents,

defiled, stained, accursed : it first heals our wounds, it removes

our diseases, it takes away our curse, it puts our feet upon the

rock Christ Jesus, and having thus done, at last it lifts our heads

far above all principalities and powers, to be crowned for ever

with Jesus Christ, the King of Heaven. Some people, when they

use the word "salvation," understand nothing more by it than

deliverance from hell and admittance into heaven. ow, that is

not salvation : those two things are the effects of salvation. We

are redeemed from hell because we are saved, and we enter

heaven because we have been saved beforehand. Our everlast

ing state is the effect of salvation in this life. Salvation, it is

true, includes all that; but still it would be wrong for us to

imagine that that is all the meaning of the word. Salvation

begins with us as wandering sheep ; it follows us through all out

many wanderings ; it puts us on the shoulders of the shepherd ;

it carries us into the fold ; it calls together the friends and the

neighbours ; it rejoices over us ; it preserves us in that fold

through life ; and then at last it brings us to the green pastures

of heaven, beside the still waters of bliss, where we lie down for

ever in the presence of the Chief Shepherd, never more to be

disturbed.

Let us group the uses of the word "salvation" under these

three classes (i.) Salvation from physical infirmity ; (ii.) ational

Salvation ; (iii.) Salvation from Sin.

i. Salvation from Physical Suffering.

The healing of the cripple was on the face of it a physical

salvation. Bodily pain and discomfort, continued through many

years, unless it be transfigured by patience and resignation into a

consummate blessing, may crush out its very heart and hope from

a human life. And anyhow, pain is a disorder and anomaly in

nature. When it is inevitable, we may be sure that God haB

70 THE SAVIG AME

some high and merciful purpose in inflicting it. When it is not

inevitable, our business is, if we can do so, to cure it. Our Lord

worked then by the agency of the Apostles what He works now

by the generous hearts, and kind hands, and cultivated under

standings of those whom He guides, in hospitals and elsewhere,

to the relief and cure of bodily pain. His precepts, His charity,

His unseen but energetic Spirit, are the source of the best and

noblest inspirations of our modern philanthropy, even where the

cause is unrecognized or unsuspected. And as the result is, in its

degree, a salvation, so the inspiring force is the grace and charity

of the Saviour.

Tf Europe was thrilled by the story of the steamer Berlin

which fought its way from Harwich across the orth Sea to the

Hook of Holland in the teeth of a terrible gale. At half-past five

in the morning (February 20, 1907) it was dashed on the orth

Pier and broken up. The fore part of the steamer went under

and carried the greater part of the passengers and crew to death.

On the following day eleven survivors were rescued. Three

women remained behind, exposed to the biting cold and the

terrific lash of the breakers. It seemed impossible that the)

should survive the long and exhausting exposure, and hope of

their being saved almost died out. But Captain Sperling, aa

noble a hero as ever faced the perils of the deep, determined to

make an effort on their behalf. We are told he could not sleep

for thinking of the awful plight of these women, alone there or.

the wreck for two days and a night. And so he matured his

plans, and when the moment for action arrived dared everything,

swam through seething billows to the wreck, and passed the

women one by one along the rope to safety. And next day the

world rang with the news that the three women were saved by

the heroic deed of this noble man. Saved ! Yes, it was a real

salvation. There was no doubt about the meaning of the word

and the significance of the transaction. They were saved from

hunger, saved from cold, saved from death by exhaustion or by

drowning. We can all appreciate the nature of this salvation-

the saving of human lives from the angry sea. 1

ii. ational Salvation.

When St. Peter talked of " the salvation " in the Court of the

Sanhedrin, he would have meant and he would have been under

stood to mean something much greater in itself, and much wider

1 A. B. Henderson.

ACTS iv. 12 71

in its range of application, than any bodily cure ; something of

which a bodily cure was a mere figure and presentment.

1. Salvation was already a consecrated word in the language

of Israel. It had been so for centuries. It meant very generally

the deliverance of Israel from outward and inward enemies; it

meant the deliverance of Israel as a whole ; it meant especially a

national salvation. That was the point of St. Peter s reference to

Psalm cxviii., which was composed for the first observance of the

Feast of Tabernacles in the newly rebuilt Temple, after the return

from the Babylonish captivity. St. Peter quotes the famous lines

in which Israel, lately restored to the land of her ancestors, is

spoken of as a " stone which the builders rejected, and which had

been made the head of the corner." The new Temple would have

naturally suggested the figure. Israel, rejected and downtrodden

by the proud nations who aspired to build up the future of the

Eastern world, had been lifted by God into a place of honour:

Israel was to be in some way the corner-stone of that temple of

souls which God would build for the future of humanity.

2. The deeper Jewish commentators saw that the words must

really apply, not to Israel as a whole, since the nation had morally

fallen too low for such high distinction, but to the expected Messiah,

its ripe product and its splendid Representative. And accordingly

our Lord Jesus Christ, just after His public entry into Jerusalem,

when the people had saluted Him in other words of this Psalm,

applied to Himself what was said about the corner-stone ; He was

Himself the corner-stone; and Israel, in rejecting Him, was

repeating the crime of the Gentiles in rejecting Israel.

3. When, therefore, St. Peter, standing before the Court of the

Sanhedrin, said that Jesus was " the stone set at nought by you

builders," he was following His blessed Master s guidance. It had

been Christ s own way of saying as vividly as He could to His

countrymen, that although rejected and crucified, He was the true

Hope and Deliverer of Israel. And thus the salvation of which

St. Peter speaks was the salvation which Messiah was to bring.

It was the salvation to which Israel was looking forward. It was

the salvation of which the healing of the cripple had been a figure.

Israel was the real cripple after all, and her rulers knew it.

72 THE SAVIG AME

4. To the nation, then, St. Peter preaches that the present is a

time of repentance, during which God gives to Israel opportunity

to return to Him, and the Apostle consequently renews the call to

repentance given by Jesus Himself, promising to those who repent

and are baptized the advent of the great Messianic salvation. But

the repentance required is no longer only the general repentance

taught by Jesus. It is the specific wickedness of the Jewish

nation, misguided by their rulers, in crucifying Jesus, that requires

to be repented of ; and the positive side of this repentance is faith

in Jesus as the Messiah. He is proclaimed as the only Saviour in

the approaching day when those who reject Him will be cut off.

iii. Salvation from Sin.

There is one theological word which has found its way lately

into nearly all the newer and finer literature of our country. It ie

not only one of the words of the literary world at present, it ib

perhaps the word. For it represents something, the reality of

which, its certain influence, its universality, have at last been

recognized; and in spite of its being a theological word it has

been forced into a place which nothing but its felt relation to

the wider theology of human life could ever have earned for a

religious word. That word, it need scarcely be said, is Sin. Even

in the lighter literature of our country, and this is altogether

remarkable, the ruling word just now is Sin. Years ago it was the

gay term Chivalry which held the foreground in poem and ballad

and song. Later still, the word which held court, in novel and

romance, was Love. But now a deeper word heads the chapters

and begins the cantos. A more exciting thing than chivalry is

descried in the arena, and love itself fades in interest before this

small word, which has wandered out of theology, and changed the

face of literature, and made many a new book preach.

Professor Henry Drummond says that there are three deadly

facts about sin its guilt, its stain, and its power ; and there are

three facts of salvation forgiveness, healing, redemption. These

facts are stated in Ps. ciii. 3, 4: "Who forgiveth all thine

iniquities ; who healeth all thy diseases ; who redeemeth thy life

from destruction."

1. The first deadly fact of sin is its guilt that is, the blame-

ACTS iv. 12 73

worthiness that follows the doing of it. When we say that the

sinner is guilty, we mean that he is to blame for his sin. The

responsibility for it abides on him. The wickedness of it is his.

And this guilt, this blameworthiness, is all the more terrible from

the fact that we are responsible to God. This is the most tragic

thing about sin. It is not merely a violation of our own nature

or a breaking of an abstract law. Sin is against something it is

a pushing of the will against something. Yes, against some one.

" Against thee, thee only, have I sinned," cries the Psalmist, and

all who have read deepest into the human heart agree with him.

Sin is against God. It is a violation, a setting aside of the will of

the living God, that will in which alone we can have eternal life.

God is absolutely holy and good. And sin is an offence against

Him, a disobedience to Him, a separation from Him, a breaking

up of the harmony that ought to be between man and God.

ow the question which we must ask in order to meet this

first fact of sin is, Where can I get pardon ? This is a question

asked by conscience, and the questions which conscience sends up

to us are always the deepest questions. The man who has never

sent up the question, " Where can I get pardon ? " has never been

into his conscience to find out the deepest want he has. It is not

enough for him to look lifeward; he must also look Godward.

And it is not enough to discover the stain of his past, and cry out,

"I have sinned." He must see the guilt of his life and cry,

"I have sinned against God" ow the punishment of sin is

death. " In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely

die." Therefore death is the punishment which must be in one of

the facts of salvation. It will not meet the case if the sinner

professes his penitence and promises humbly never to do the like

again. Death, and nothing less than death, must be in the fact of

salvation from the guilt of sin, if such salvation is to be. This

fact, this most solemn necessity, understood and felt, the rest is

plain. We all know who deserved to die. We all know who

did die. We know we were not wounded for our transgressions,

we were not bruised for our iniquities. But we know who was.

The Lord hath not dealt with us according to our iniquities ; but

we know with whom He has. We know who bare our sins in His

own body on the tree One who had no sins of His own. We

know who was lifted up like the serpent in the wilderness He

74 THE SAVIG AME

who died, the just for the unjust. If we know this, we know the

^reat fact of Salvation, for it is here.

2. The second fact about sin is its stain. The soul is defiled

by it. All sin is a defilement. Your most respectable sin leaves

a, mark on the soul. The soul is tainted by it as a glass of pure

water is tainted by a drop of ink. The virgin beauty of the soul

is lost. And sometimes the stain becomes so foul that we are

shocked by the uncleanness of the sinner s speech and taste and

actions. And the stain of sin, like the spot of blood on Lady

Macbeth s hand, is something that we cannot wash out.

What must I do to be saved from the stain of sin ? Gather

up your influence, and see how much has been for Christ. Then

undo all that has been against Him. It will never be healed till

then. This is the darkest stain upon your life. The stain of sin

concerns your own soul, but that is a smaller matter. That can

be undone in part. There are open sores enough in our past life

to make even heaven terrible. But God is healing them. He is

blotting them from His own memory and from ours. If the stains

that were there had lingered, life would have been a long sigh of

agony. But salvation has come to us. God is now helping ua

to use the means for repairing a broken life. He reetoreth thy

soul, He healeth all thy diseases. But thy brother s soul, and thy

brother s diseases ? The worst of our stains have spread far and

wide beyond ourselves ; and God will only heal them, perhaps,

by giving us grace to deal with them. We must retrace our steps

over that unburied past, and undo what we have done.

^[ A young man once lay upon his death-bed. He was a

Christian, but for many days a black cloud had gathered upon his

brow. Just before his last breath, he beckoned to the friends

around his bed. " Take my influence," he said, " and bury it with

me." 1

The lost days of my life until to-day,

What were they, could I see them on the street

Lie as they fell? Would they be ears of wheat

Sown once for food but trodden into clay ?

Or golden coins squander d and still to pay ?

Or drops of blood dabbling the guilty feet?

Or such spilt water as in dreams must cheat

The undying throats of Hell, athirst alway ?

1 Henry Druiuiuoud.

ACTS iv. 12 75

I do not see them here ; but after death

God knows I know the faces I shall see,

Each one a murder d self, with low last breath.

"I am thyself, what hast thou done to me?"

"And I and I thyself" (lo ! each one saith),

" And thou thyself to all eternity ! " l

3. The third deadly fact about sin is its power. The sinner

soon finds that he is in bondage to a habit. Sin has an enslaving

power. The tragedies that have arisen from this deadly fact of

sin ! The tyranny of evil that began with a single sinful act !

All human experience testifies to the fact that one sin makes

another sin easier. Each sin weaves another thread in the rope

that binds us, till liberty is lost, and sin s tyranny is complete,

and the sinner seems to have ceased to be masier in his house of

life.

The third fact of salvation which is to be brought to bear

upon this third great fact of sin is not our own efforts, our own

religiousness, our own doctrine, the Atonement, or the death of

Christ, but the power of the life of Christ. " He redeemeth my

life from destruction." How ? By His life. This is the fact of

salvation. It takes life to redeem life power to resist power.

Sin is a ceaseless, undying power in our life. A ceaseless, un

dying power must come against it. And there is only one such

power in the universe only one, which has a chance against Sin:

the power of the living Christ. " As many as received him, to

them gave he power to become the sons of God." "Power to

become the sons of God " the great fact of salvation. Receive

the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.

II.

THE SAVIG AME.

The words of St. Peter are emphatic. The clause blends

together two statements: (1) There is no other name in which

men can be saved, and (2) This is the name given in which men

must be saved.

1. Had St. Peter lived among us now, would he have put the

matter in this way ? Would he not have avoided any appearance

1 D. G. Eoasetti.

76 THE SAVIG AME

of comparison or rivalry between the Gospel and other religious

systems ? Would he not have said : " It is enough for me to

proclaim that there is salvation in Christ; I do not know, I

am not concerned to determine whether other prophets, other

doctrines, other agencies can save. I do not wish to claim foi

Him any monopoly of saving power; I have no inclination to

dispute the pretensions of Jewish rites or of Greek philosophies.

o doubt there is much to be said for every religion in the world,

and the professors of a religion have only to be sure that they

are consistent; that they are careful to fashion their lives

according to its law and the light of nature. It is enough for

me to say that the religion of Christ will save you if you

choose : I am not so illiberal as to maintain that you cannot be

sure of salvation without it " ? Why did not St. Peter say this ?

Why did he state the very converse of it "either is there

salvation in any other; for there is none other name under

heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved " ? It was

because he had in his heart and on his lips, not a human specula

tion or theory, but, as he held, the Truth the One, Final,

Absolute Truth. The proof of that to his mind, the overwhelming

proof, was the life and teaching of his Master, crowned, attested,

by the miracle the recent, the certain, the unassailable miracle

of the Eesurrection.

^[ We are able without confusion to associate faith in the

" All-Father " with much of the picturesque and poetic beliefs of

the ancient world. They, too, through the flimsy veil of grotesque

mythology, looked into the heavens, and believed God to reign

there, with power over human destiny, the Arbiter of fate and

the Rewarder of the righteous. They, too, felt beneath the out

spread beauty of the earth a living presence of God. " God is in

everything you see, the world is only the shrine of His presence

and the veil of His glory." So with many of the great systems of

nature-worship with which we are brought into contact to-day in

the march of our civilization: beneath them there is the sense

of an overshadowing majesty which can be used and elevated

and stripped of its superstitious adjuncts and purged from its

materialism. But " I believe in Jesus Christ, God of God, Light

of light, very God of very God, . . . being of one substance with

the Father, by whom all things are made," is at once to bring in a

different element altogether. This sad, attenuated figure, with

arms outstretched upon the Cross, seems at once to drive awaj

ACTS iv. 12 77

the nymphs from the fountains, the dryads from the groves, and

to pass like a cloud across the sun, "a Man of sorrows, and

acquainted with grief," crowned with thorns, not with roses ; out

cast, despised, rejected, crucified ; at one time enwrapped in the

miraculous, at another apparently overwhelmed with humanity

and its capacities for suffering. At once we introduce with this

Divine figure a history which is challenged at every step, a

history which cannot be dissolved into poetry, or relegated into a

mythology dear to the souls of those who think they can believe

and disbelieve at the same time. 1

2. If we believe in Christ only as our Teacher, although we

apoke of Him as the greatest of all Teachers the world has ever

had, we should stop short of the conclusion at which St. Peter

arrived. If we believe this, and observe all that this belief in His

teaching involves in our life and actions, it is much, but it is not

enough. We must believe in Jesus not only as our Teacher and

Master, but as our Saviour. May we not think that this is the

very ground reason which led St. Peter to put his proposition in

this form which has been called narrow and exclusive ? " either

is there any other name under heaven, that is given among men,

wherein we must be saved." We must be careful, while we call

Christ Jesus the Teacher, not to forget that He is also our

Saviour. That postulates a great truth which we cannot push

aside with the Athanasian Creed. We listen to Him, it may be,

as One who has said some very beautiful things and has given

us some very useful advice. Jesus Christ is placed, as we may see,

in a beautiful building near London, as one of the great teachers

of the world, with Socrates and Confucius and Buddha and

Muhammad. But it is not what Christ has taught us, but

what Christ has done for us, that the Church and our Bible put

before us as the object of our belief : " I believe in Jesus Christ

our Saviour " nothing short of this.

TJ The boldness of Peter and John in making this assertion

appears no less amazing to us, after these centuries have passed,

than it did to the men of their time. We can explain it only by

the statement in verse 8, that they were "filled with the Holy

Ghost." To venture on the morrow of a criminal s execution, in the

city where he was executed, and before the persons who had con

demned him, not only to vindicate his memory, and to assert hie

W. 0. E. ewbolt,

78 THE SAVIG AME

innocence, but to set him forward as the headstone of the corner

" the one man under heaven whereby we must be saved," argues

an inspiration from God. If there had been no truth in the

bold attribution, it would have been the raving of hallucina

tion, and the world would have heard no more of it. But, as

the claim has been in these nineteen centuries substantiated

by many and various evidences, we may be sure that a power

and knowledge more than human instructed the minds of the

Apostles. 1

^f Did you ever notice the intolerance of God s religion ? In

olden times the heathen, who had different gods, all of them

respected the gods of their neighbours. For instance, the king

of Egypt would confess that the gods of ineveh were true and

real gods, and the prince of Babylon would acknowledge that the

gods of the Philistines were true and real gods; but Jehovah,

the God of Israel, put this as one of His first commandments,

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me"; and He would

not allow them to pay the slightest possible respect to the gods

of any other nation : " Thou shalt hew them in pieces, thou shalt

break down their temples, and cut down their groves." All other

nations were tolerant the one of the other, but the Jew could not

be so. One part of his religion was, " Hear, Israel, the Lord

thy God is one " : and as the consequence of his belief that

there was but one God, and that that one God was Jehovah, he

felt it his bounden duty to treat all other gods with contempt.

ow the Christian religion, you observe, is just as intolerant as

this. If you apply to a Brahmin to know the way of salvation,

he will very likely tell you at once that all persons who follow

out their sincere religious convictions will undoubtedly be saved.

" Here," says he, " are the Muhammadans ; if they obey Muhammad,

and sincerely believe what he has taught, without doubt, Allah will

glorify them at last." And the Brahmin turns round upon the

Christian missionary, and says, " What is the use of your bringing

your Christianity here to disturb us ? I tell you our religion is

quite capable of carrying us to heaven, if we are faithful to it."

ow hear the text : how intolerant is the Christian religion !

"either is there salvation in any other." The Brahmin may

admit that there is salvation in fifty religions besides his own :

but we admit no such thing. There is no true salvation out of

Jesus Christ. The gods of the heathen may approach us with

their mock charity, and tell us that every man may follow out

his own conscientious conviction and be saved. We reply o

such thing : there is no salvation in any other ; " for there is none

1 E. F. Horton,

ACTS iv. 12 79

other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be

eaved." l

H Swami Vivekananda, the hero of the Chicago parliament of

religions, preaches to his fellow-countrymen the sinlessness of

man: "The worst lie that you ever told yourself was that you

were a sinner or a wicked man. ... It is the greatest of all lies

that we are men ; we are the god of the universe." Meanwhile

Krishna, the favourite god of India, is the incarnation of abandoned

immorality. When some Hindus were remonstrated with for

worshipping a being guilty of these shameless vices, they replied,

These are but his sports, you English have your sports, you

have the railway and the steamboat and the telegraph, and no

one blames you. Why should you blame Krishna for sporting in

his way?" 2

3. Why does St. Peter say, " There is no other name " ? Christ

Himself suggests to us the reason. When He said in His last

prayer, " I have manifested thy name to the men whom thou

gavesfc me," He did not mean that He had made known simply

what we call the name of God. Men already knew that. He

meant rather that He had revealed the fatherly character of God,

the eternal principles which the name of God represents. In

modern speech a name is merely a sort of tag or label. " A rose

by any other name would smell as sweet." In the Scriptures a

name connotes something characteristic of the thing or person

named. Thus Jesus helps us to the clue that leads out of all

misunderstanding of the Apostle s teaching. The name of Christ

is the saving name because it stands for the saving thing.

^[ The victory has been enshrined in a ame. All the power

of the azareth victory, and of the Wilderness victory, all the

power of the great climax victory of Calvary, and of the Besurrec-

tion morning all is packed into one word, a ame, the ame of

Jesus. There is far more, infinitely more, practical help and

power in that ame than we have dreamed of ; certainly far more

than we have ever used. The ame of Jesus is the most valuable

asset of the Christian life. 8

Tf I remember a young man coming up to me at the close of

a service in London. He told me how sorely he had been

tempted, how he seemed to make no headway against the struggle

in his Christian life, until the suggestion came to him of the

1 C. H. Spurgeon. s R. F. Horton.

1 S. D. Gordon, Quiet Talks about the Tempter, 202.

8o THE SAVIG AME

practical value of that ame above every name. Instantly he

began using it, reverently, prayerfully, eagerly, and relief and

victory came. And the look of eye and face revealed how real

was the victory and peace that had come to him. 1

In One AME I have found the all in all.

It is enough, and It will never fail.

Here on the height, or there within the vale,

In this my strength I shall not greatly fall.

If on the dark hills here thy fears appal,

thou mine Enemy ! or there assail

My fainting heart, yet shall they not prevail,

For on the AME thou dreadest I will call.

Oh then rejoice not ! for I shall arise,

And heavenly light shall stream across the gloom,

And heavenly music drown the voice of doom,

And a most blissful prospect cheer mine eyes:

All from that AME beloved and adored,

Thy sweet great AME, JESUS CHRIST, my Lord. 2

4. How shall we prove the truth of Christ s claim ? We shall

prove it in our life. As the Cross is the price of salvation, so, too,

a cross will mark ihe life of the Christian. The words of Jesus

are : " Whosoever shall lose his life for my sake shall find it."

Salvation from sin means power over sin, and this salvation Christ

gives in His name. But the distinguishing marks of Christianity

are sacrifice and struggle. A Christian will be known from a non-

Christian as one who, having taken a right view of life, knows

that it means a long struggle and perpetual sacrifice. Do not

make the mistake of thinking that Christianity means the pale

face and the lacerated body and the constant thwarting of desires.

If you cannot escape into life without these sacrifices, it does so

mean, but not otherwise. It means death to the lower that we

may live in the higher. It means a sacrifice of much which the

world values, because the Church has found something higher.

It means that the soul loves to be with God better than eating

the forbidden fruit. It means that the soul would rather be an

outcast with Christ than be popular without Him. A Christian is

one who is able to say with all his heart : " Thou art worthy . .

for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood."

1 S. D. Gordon, Quiet Talks about the Tempter, 203.

3 S. J. Stone, Poems and Hymns, 202.

ACTS iv. 12 8 1

Christ s Heart was wrung for me, if mine is sore ;

And if my feet are weary, His have bled;

He had no place wherein to lay His Head ;

If I am burdened, He was burdened more.

The cup I drink He drank of long before ;

He felt the unuttered anguish which I dread ;

He hungered who the hungry thousands fed,

And thirsted who the world s refreshment bore.

If grief be such a looking-glass as shows

Christ s Face and man s in some sort made alike,

Then grief is pleasure with a subtle taste:

Wherefore should any fret or faint or haste ?

Grief is not grievous to a soul that knows

Christ comes, and listens for that hour to strike. 1

5. And so the final thought is that this life of sacrifice is

maintained by looking unto Jesus. " Have this mind in you, which

was also in Christ Jesus " (Phil. ii. 5). It is " the mind that was

in Christ Jesus," when "for us men and for our salvation He

came down from heaven, and was made Man, and suffered for us."

Here was at once model and motive for the Philippian saints ; for

Euodia, and Syntyche, and every individual and every group.

othing short of the " mind " of the Head must be the " mind " of

the member ; and then the glory of the Head (so it is implied)

shall be shed hereafter upon the member too : " I will grant to

him to sit with me on my throne, even as I also overcame, and

am set down with my Father in his throne."

U Oh, reason of reasons, argument of arguments the Lord

Jesus Christ ! othing in Christianity lies really outside Him.

His Person and His Work embody all its dogmatic teaching. His

Example, " His Love which passeth knowledge," is the sum and

life of all its morality. Well has it been said that the whole

Gospel message is conveyed to us sinners in those three words,

"Looking unto Jesus." Is it pardon we need, is it acceptance,

free as the love of God, holy as His law ? We find it, we possess

it, " looking unto Jesus " crucified. Is it power we need, victory

and triumph over sin, capacity and willingness to witness and to

suffer in a world which loves Him not at all ? We find it, we

possess it, it possesses us, as we "look unto Jesus" risen and

reigning, for us on the Throne, with us in the soul. Is it rule

and model that we want, not written on the stones of Horeb only,

but " on the fleshy tables of the heart " ? We find it, we receive

1 Christina G. Ros.setti.

ACTS & ROM. 6

82 THE SAVIG AME

it, we yield ourselves up to it, as we " look unto Jesus " in His

path of love, from the Throne to the Cross, from the Cross to the

Throne, till the Spirit inscribes that law upon our inmost wills. 1

Jesus Christ, grow Thou in me,

And all things else recede ;

My heart be daily nearer Thee,

From sin be daily freed.

More of Thy glory let me see,

Thou Holy, Wise, and True;

1 would Thy living image be

In joy and sorrow too. 2

1 H. C. G. Moule, Philippics Studiet, 102,

3 From the German of .1. C. Lavater.

13 When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus.

BARES, "Boldness - This word properly denotes “openness” or “confidence in speaking.” It stands opposed to “hesitancy,” and to “equivocation” in declaring our sentiments. Here it means that, in spite of danger and opposition, they avowed their doctrines without any attempt to conceal or disguise them.

Peter and John - It was they only who had been concerned in the healing of the lame man, Act_3:1.

And perceived -When they knew that they were unlearned. This might have been ascertained either by report or by the manner of their speaking.

Unlearned - This word properly denotes “those who were not acquainted with letters, or who had not had the benefit of an education.”

Ignorant men - �δι*ται idiōtai. This word properly denotes “those who live in private, in contradistinction from those who are engaged in public life or in office.” As this class of persons is commonly also supposed to be less learned, talented, and refined than those in office, it comes to denote “those who are rude and illiterate.” The idea intended to be conveyed here is, that these men had not had opportunities of education (compare Mat_4:18-21), and had not been accustomed to public speaking, and hence, they were surprised at their boldness. This same character is uniformly attributed to the early preachers of Christianity. Compare 1Co_1:27; Mat_11:25. The Galileans were regarded by the Jews as particularly rude and uncultivated, Mat_26:73; Mar_14:17.

They marvelled - They wondered that men who had not been educated in the schools of the rabbis, and accustomed to speak in public, should declare their sentiments with so much boldness.

And they took knowledge - This expression means simply that riley knew, or that they obtained evidence that they had been with Jesus. It is not said in what way they obtained this evidence, but the connection leads us to suppose it was by the miracle which they had performed, by their firm and bold declaration of the doctrines of Jesus, and perhaps by the irresistible conviction that none would be thus bold who had not been personally with him, and who had not the firmest conviction that he was the Messiah. They had not been trained in their schools, and their boldness could not be attributed to the arts of rhetoric, but was the native, ingenuous, and manly exhibition of a deep conviction of the truth of what they spoke, and that conviction could have been obtained only by their having been with him, and having been satisfied that he was the Messiah. Such conviction is of far more value in preaching than all the mere teachings of the schools; and without such a conviction, all preaching will be frigid, hypocritical, and useless.

Had been with Jesus - Had been his followers, and had attended person ally on his ministry. They gave evidence that they had seen him, been with him, heard him, and were convinced that he was the Messiah. We may learn here:

(1) That if men wish to be successful in preaching, it must be based on deep and thorough conviction of the truth of what they deliver.

(2) They who preach should give evidence that they are acquainted with the Lord Jesus Christ; that they have imbibed his spirit, pondered his instructions, studied the evidences of his divine mission, and are thoroughly convinced that he was from God.

(3) Boldness and success in the ministry, as well as in everything else, will depend far more on honest, genuine, thorough conviction of the truth than on the endowments of talent and learning, and the arts and skill of eloquence. No man should attempt to

preach without such a thorough conviction of truth; and no man who has it will preach in vain.

(4) God often employs the ignorant and unlearned to confound the wise, 1Co_1:27-28. But it is not by their ignorance. It was not the ignorance of Peter and John that convinced the Sanhedrin. It was done in spite of their ignorance. It was their boldness and their honest conviction of truth. Besides, though not learned in the schools of the Jews, they had been under a far more important training, under the personal direction of Christ himself, for three years; I and now they were directly endowed by the Holy Spirit with the power of speaking with tongues. Though not taught in the schools, yet there was an important sense in which they were not unlearned and ignorant men. Their example should not, therefore, be pled in favor of an unlearned ministry. Christ himself expressed his opposition to an unlearned ministry by teaching them himself, and then by bestowing on them miraculous endowments which no learning at present can furnish. It may be remarked, further, that in the single selection which he made of an apostle after his ascension to heaven, when he came to choose one who had not been under his personal teaching, he chose a learned man, the apostle Paul, and thus evinced his purpose that there should be training or education in those who are invested with the sacred office.

(5) Yet in the case before us there is a striking proof of the truth and power of religion. These men had not acquired their boldness in the schools; they were not trained for argument among the Jews; they did not meet them by cunning sophistry; but they came with the honest conviction that what they were saying was true. Were they deceived? Were they not competent to bear witness? Did they have any motive to attempt to palm a falsehood onto people? Infidelity must answer many such questions as these before the apostles can be convicted of imposture.

CLARKE, "The boldness of Peter and John - Την�παρ1ησιαν, The freedom and

fluency with which they spoke; for they spoke now from the immediate influence of the Holy Ghost, and their word was with power.

That they were unlearned and ignorant men - Αγραµµατοι, Persons without

literature, not brought up in nor given to literary pursuits - and ignorant, ιδιωται, persons in private life, brought up in its occupations alone. It does not mean ignorance in the common acceptation of the term; and our translation is very improper. In no sense of the word could any of the apostles be called ignorant men; for though their spiritual knowledge came all from heaven, yet in all other matters they seem to have been men of good, sound, strong, common sense.

They took knowledge of them - Επεγινωσκον may imply that they got information,

that they had been disciples of Christ, and probably they might have seen them in our Lord’s company; for there can be little doubt that they had often seen our Lord teaching the multitudes, and these disciples attending him.

That they had been with Jesus - Had they not had his teaching, the present company would soon have confounded them; but they spoke with so much power and authority that the whole sanhedrin was confounded. He who is taught in spiritual matters by Christ Jesus has a better gift than the tongue of the learned. He who is taught in the school of Christ will ever speak to the point, and intelligibly too; though his words may not have that polish with which they who prefer sound to sense are often carried

away.

GILL, "Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John,.... With what courage and intrepidity they stood before them, the presence of mind they had, and the freedom of speech they used, as the word properly signifies: they observed their elocution, the justness of their diction, the propriety of their language, and the strength and nervousness of their reasoning; as well as their great resolution, constancy, and firmness of mind; not being afraid to profess the name of Christ, or to charge them with the murder of him; and that they seemed to be determined to abide by him, at all events; to assert him to be the true Messiah, though rejected by the Jewish builders; and that he was risen from the dead; and not only to ascribe unto him the miracle now wrought, but the salvation of men; and to declare, that there was none in any other but him: the Syriac version renders it, "when they heard the word of Simeon and John, which they spoke openly": and freely, without any reserve: they answered readily to the question, that it was by the name of Jesus of Nazareth that they had done this miracle; they dealt freely with the Jewish sanhedrim, and told them in so many words, that they were the crucifiers of Christ, and the rejecters of that stone, which God had made the head of the corner, and that there was no salvation for them in any other: it appears from hence, that John spoke as well as Peter, though his words are not recorded:

and perceived that they were unlearned ignorant men; not by what they now said, but by what they heard and understood of them before: they were informed that they were "unlearned" men, or who did not understand letters; not but that they had learned their mother tongue, and could read the Scriptures; but they had not had a liberal education; they had not been brought up at the feet of any of the doctors, in any of the schools and universities of the Jews; they were not trained up in, and conversant with, the nice distinctions, subtle argumentations, and decisions of the learned doctors, in the interpretation of the law of Moses, and the traditions of the elders: and

understood that they were also "ignorant" men, ιδιωται, "idiots", or private men; for men

might be unlearned, and yet not be such; it seems the high priests themselves were sometimes unlearned men: hence, on the day of atonement,

"they used to read before him, in the order of the day, and say to him, Lord high priest,

read thou with thine own mouth; perhaps thou hast forgot, or it may be, לא�למדת, "thou hast not learned" (c).''

The Jews have adopted the word here used into their language; and express by it, sometimes a man that is mean, abject, and contemptible: thus instead of "children of

base men", or "without a name", the Targumist on Job_30:8 reads, בני�הדיוטין, "the children of idiots", or "private men": and in the Targum on 1Sa_18:23 it is used for one lightly esteemed, and comparable to a flea: it sometimes designs persons in a private life, though men of learning and knowledge, in distinction from those that are in office; so we read (d), that

"three kings, and four הדיוטות, "private" persons, have no part in the world to come; the

three kings are Jeroboam, Ahab, and Manasseh; the four "idiots", or private men, are Balaam, Doeg, Ahithophel, and Gehazi.''

And so a bench of idiots, or private men, is distinguished from a bench of authorized and

approved judges (e); and sometimes the word is used of such, as are distinguished from doctors, or wise men; so when it is said (f),

"the command of plucking off the shoe, is done before three judges, and though the three are "idiots";''

the note of Maimonides upon it is,

"not wise men, but that know how to read the language,''

the Hebrew language: and such were the disciples, in every sense of the word; they were mean and abject, poor fishermen, men of no name and figure, that were in no office, and exalted station of life, nor versed in Jewish learning, but common private men: so that

they marvelled; the sanheddrim were astonished to hear them talk with so much fluency and pertinence:

and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus; looking wistly upon them, they knew them again, and remembered that; they were persons that were the disciples of Jesus, and whom they had seen in company with him; not in the high priest's palace, when Jesus was arraigned, examined, and condemned there; though Peter, and some think John was there at that time, yet not to be observed and taken notice of by the sanhedrim; but in the temple where Jesus taught, and where the chief priests, Scribes, and elders came, and disputed with him about his authority, and cavilled at him, Mat_21:15.

HERY, "The stand that the court was put to in the prosecution, by this plea, Act_4:13, Act_4:14. Now was fulfilled that promise Christ made, that he would give them a mouth and wisdom, such as all their adversaries should not be able to gainsay nor resist.

1. They could not deny the cure of the lame man to be both a good deed and a miracle. He was there standing with Peter and John, ready to attest the cure, if there were occasion, and they had nothing to say against it (Act_4:14), either to disprove it or to disparage it. It was well that it was not the sabbath day, else they would have had that to say against it.

2. They could not, with all their pomp and power, face down Peter and John. This was a miracle not inferior to the cure of the lame man, considering both what cruel bloody enemies these priests had been to the name of Christ (enough to make any one tremble that appeared for him), and considering what cowardly faint-hearted advocates those disciples had lately been for him, Peter particularly, who denied him for fear of a silly maid; yet now they see the boldness of Peter and John, Act_4:13. Probably there was something extraordinary and very surprising in their looks; they appeared not only undaunted by the rulers, but daring and daunting to them; they had something majestic in their foreheads, sparkling in their eyes, and commanding, if not terrifying, in their voice. They set their faces like a flint, as the prophet, Isa_50:7; Eze_3:9. The courage of Christ's faithful confessors has often been the confusion of their cruel persecutors. Now, (1.) We are here told what increased their wonder: They perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men. They enquired either of the apostles or themselves or of others, and found that they were of mean extraction, born in Galilee, that they were bred fishermen, and had no learned education, had never been at any university, were not

brought up at the feet of any of the rabbin, had never been conversant in courts, camps, or colleges; nay, perhaps, talk to them at this time upon any point in natural philosophy, mathematics, or politics, and you will find they know nothing of the matter; and yet speak to them of the Messiah and his kingdom, and they speak with so much clearness, evidence, and assurance, so pertinently and so fluently, and are so ready in the scriptures of the Old Testament relating to it, that the most learned judge upon the bench is not

able to answer them, nor to enter the lists with them. They were ignorant men - idiōtai, private men, men that had not any public character nor employment; and therefore they wondered they should have such high pretensions. They were idiots (so the word signifies): they looked upon them with as much contempt as if they had been mere naturals, and expected no more from them, which made them wonder to see what freedom they took. (2.) We are told what made their wonder in a great measure to cease: they took knowledge of them that they had been with Jesus; they, themselves, it is probable, had seen them with him in the temple, and now recollected that they had seen them; or some of their servants or those about them informed them of it, for they would not be thought themselves to have taken notice of such inferior people. But when they understood that they had been with Jesus, had been conversant with him, attendant on him, and trained up under him, they knew what to impute their boldness to; nay, their boldness in divine things was enough to show with whom they had had their education. Note, Those that have been with Jesus, in converse and communion with him, have been attending on his word, praying in his name, and celebrating the memorials of his death and resurrection, should conduct themselves, in every thing, so that those who converse with them may take knowledge of them that they have been with Jesus; and this makes them so holy, and heavenly, and spiritual, and cheerful; this has raised them so much above this world, and filled them with another. One may know that they have been in the mount by the shining of their faces.

JAMISO 13-17, "perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men—that is, uninstructed in the learning of the Jewish schools, and of the common sort; men in private life, untrained to teaching.

took knowledge of them that they had been with Jesus— recognized them as having been in His company; remembering possibly, that they had seen them with Him [Meyer, Bloomfield, Alford]; but, more probably, perceiving in their whole bearing what identified them with Jesus: that is, “We thought we had got rid of Him; but lo! He reappears in these men, and all that troubled us in the Nazarene Himself has yet to be put down in these His disciples.” What a testimony to these primitive witnesses! Would that the same could be said of their successors!

CALVI, "13.Here may we see an evil conscience; for being destitute of right and

reason, they break out into open tyranny, the hatred whereof they had essayed to

escape. Therefore, he doth first declare that they were convict, that it may appear

that they did war against God wittingly and willingly like giants. For they see a

manifest work of his in the man which was healed, and yet do they wickedly set

themselves against him. In as much as they know that Peter and John were men

unlearned and ignorant, they acknowledge that there was somewhat more than

belongeth to man in their boldness; therefore they are enforced to wonder whether

they will or no. Yet they break out into such impudence, that they fear not to seek

some tyrannous means to oppress the truth. When as they confess that it is a

manifest sign, they condemn themselves therein of an evil conscience. When they say

that it is known to all men, they declare that passing over God they have respect

unto men only. For they betray their want of shame thereby, that they would not

have doubted to turn their back if there had been any color of denial. And when

they ask what they shall do, they make their obstinate wickedness known unto all

men. For they would have submitted themselves unto God, unless devilish fury had

carried them away to some other purpose. This is the spirit of giddiness and

madness, therewith God doth make his enemies drunk. So when they hope shortly

after that they can by threatenings bring it about, that the same shall go no farther,

what can be more foolish? For after they have put two simple men to silence, shall

the arm of God be broken?

COFFMA, "Unlearned and ignorant ... This "does not refer to their intelligence or

literacy but to the fact that they were not schooled in the traditions of the

scribes."[25] "IGORAT should be translated PRIVATE PERSOS."[26] As De

Welt said:

Some men are prone to "set at naught all others" as ignorant and unlearned, who

have not been trained in just the way and manner they have. From all these things,

dear Lord, deliver us![27]

It is the smug and arrogant pride of the Sadducees which surfaces here, there being

utterly no reflection upon the intelligence and understanding of those great men

who were the apostles of the Son of God. Luke, in this place, was clearly giving not

his own evaluation of the Twelve, but that of the Sanhedrin.

[25] Everett F. Harrison, op. cit., p. 796.

[26] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 824.

[27] Don DeWelt, Acts Made Actual (Joplin, Missouri: College Press, 1958), p. 67.

BARCLAY 13-22, "Here we see very vividly both the enemy's attack and the

Christian defence. In the enemy's attack there are two characteristics. First, there is

contempt. The King James Version says that the Sanhedrin regarded Peter and

John as unlearned and ignorant men. The word translated unlearned means that

they had no kind of technical education, especially in the intricate regulations of the

law. The word translated ignorant means that they were laymen with no special

professional qualifications. The Sanhedrin, as it were, regarded them as men

without a college education and with no professional status. It is often difficult for

the simple man to meet what might be called academic and professional snobbery.

But the man in whose heart is Christ possesses a real dignity which neither

academic attainment nor professional status can give. Second, there are threats. But

the Christian knows that anything man does to him is but for a moment whereas the

things of God last forever.

In face of this attack Peter and John had certain defences. First, they had the

defence of an unanswerable fact. That the man had been cured it was impossible to

deny. The most unanswerable defence of Christianity is a Christian man. Second,

they had the defence of an utter loyalty to God. If it was a question of choosing

between obeying man and obeying God, Peter and John were in no doubt as to what

course to take. As H. G. Wells said, "The trouble with so many people is that the

voice of their neighbours sounds louder in their ears than the voice of God." The

real secret of Christianity lies in that great tribute once paid to John Knox--"He

feared God so much that he never feared the face of any man." But the third

defence was greatest of all, the defence of a personal experience of Jesus Christ.

Their message was no carried tale. They knew at first-hand that it was true; and

they were so sure of it that they were willing to stake their life upon it.

COSTABLE, "The Sanhedrin observed in Peter and John what they had seen in

Jesus, namely, courage to speak boldly and authoritatively without formal training

(cf. Matthew 7:28-29; Mark 1:22; Luke 20:19-26; John 7:15). They may also have

remembered seeing them with Jesus (John 18:15-16), but that does not seem to be

Luke's point here.

"They spoke of the men as having been with Jesus, in a past tense. What was the

truth? Christ was in the men, and speaking through the men; and the similarity

which they detected was not that lingering from contact with a lost teacher, but that

created by the presence of the living Christ." [ote: Morgan, p. 96.]

These powerful educated rulers looked on the former fishermen with contempt.

What a change had taken place in the apostles since Peter had denied that he knew

Jesus (Luke 22:56-60)! The rulers also observed facility in handling the Scriptures

that was extraordinary in men who had not attended the priests' schools. This

examining board could not dispute the apostles' claim that Jesus' power had healed

the former beggar. The obvious change in the man made that impossible. They had

no other answer. Unwilling to accept the obvious, the Sanhedrin could offer no

other explanation.

Several details in the stories of the apostles' arrests recall Jesus' teaching concerning

the persecution that the disciples would experience (cf. Luke 12:12 and Acts 4:8;

Luke 21:12 and Acts 4:3; Acts 5:18; Luke 21:13 and Acts 4:8-12; Acts 5:29-32; Luke

21:15 and Acts 4:13).

ELLICOTT, "(13) When they saw the boldness of Peter and John.—John, so far as

we read, had not spoken, but look and bearing, and, perhaps, unrecorded words,

showed that he too shared Peter’s courage. That “boldness of speech” had been

characteristic of his Lord’s teaching (Mark 8:32; John 7:13). It was now to be the

distinctive feature of that of the disciples: here of Peter; in Acts 28:31, 2 Corinthians

3:12; 2 Corinthians 7:4, of St. Paul; in 1 John 4:17; 1 John 5:14, of the beloved

disciple. It is, perhaps, characteristic that the last named uses it not of boldness of

speech towards men, but of confidence in approaching God. The Greek word for

“when they saw” implies “considering” as well as beholding; that for “perceived”

would be better expressed by having learnt, or having ascertained. The Greek verb

implies, not direct perception, but the grasp with which the mind lays hold of a fact

after inquiry. In Acts 25:5, it is rightly translated “when I found.”

Unlearned and ignorant.—The first of the two words means, literally, unlettered.

Looking to the special meaning of the “letters” or “Scriptures” of the Jews, from

which the scribes took their name (grammateis, from grammata), it would convey,

as used here the sense of “not having been educated as a scribe, not having studied

the Law and other sacred writings.” It does not occur elsewhere in the ew

Testament. The second word means literally, a private person, one without special

office or calling, or the culture which they imply: what in English might be called a

“common man.” It appears again in 1 Corinthians 14:16; 1 Corinthians 14:23-24,

with the same meaning. Its later history is curious enough to be worth noting. The

Vulgate, instead of translating the Greek word, reproduced it, with scarcely an

alteration, as idiota. It thus passed into modem European languages with the idea of

ignorance and incapacity closely attached to it, and so acquired its later sense of

“idiot.”

They took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.—Better, they began to

recognise. The tense is in the imperfect, implying that one after another of the rulers

began to remember the persons of the two Apostles as they had seen them with their

Master in the Temple. These two, and these two alone, may have been seen by many

of the Council on that early dawn of the day of the Crucifixion in the court-yard of

the high priest’s palace (John 18:15).

SBC, "I. We must be with Jesus, if we would bear a good testimony for Him in the presence of the world. To have heard of Him, to have read of Him, is not enough: we must be with Him; walk with Him in a consenting will, love Him as having first loved us, be joined to him in one spirit. Thus alone can consistent testimony be borne to Him by His people. They who have been with Jesus fear not the pomp, nor the scoffs, nor the threats of men.

II. But we stand not merely in the presence of foes without, we have other and more powerful foes within. Many a man could bear testimony for Christ, before a world in arms, who yet is hushed into ignominious silence in the council chamber of his own heart. Would you find a remedy for this? Would you uplift the spiritual part of a man, so that it may give bold testimony for Christ within him, assert Christian motives, press Christian rules of action, put forward Christ as His pattern? Then must that man be with Jesus; Christ must dwell in that heart by faith. Till that is so, while Christ is absent, heard of, read of, talked of, but not present, there will be no testimony at the heart’s fountain, no Christ in the thoughts, words, actions.

III. Yet again, we all have to grapple with sorrows. Ere we have gone on long in life, they stand thick around us: hopes betrayed, fears realised, joys dashed with bitterness—these are every man’s companions by the way. Would you arm the man for a successful conflict with adversity? Would you enable him to bear a consistent testimony in the presence of sorrow? Once more, he must be with Jesus. Here, above all, he requires his Saviour’s presence.

IV. There will come a day when each one will be called on to wrestle with the last foe; to bear in the presence of his past life, and in the presence of those who are to outlive him,

his witness to Christ. Would we meet death fearless, and in humble assurance that we have a part in One who has robbed him of his terrors? There is but one way, and that way is to have been with Jesus during our lives here.

H. Alford, Quebec Chapel Sermons, vol. ii., p. 77.

HAWKER 13-22, "Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marveled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus. (14) And beholding the man which was healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it. (15) But when they had commanded them to go aside out of the council, they conferred among themselves, (16) Saying, What shall we do to these men? for that indeed a notable miracle hath been done by them is manifest to all them that dwell in Jerusalem; and we cannot deny it. (17) But that it spread no further among the people, let us straitly threaten them, that they speak henceforth to no man in this name. (18) And they called them, and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus. (19) But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. (20) For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard. (21) So when they had further threatened them, they let them go, finding nothing how they might punish them, because of the people: for all men glorified God for that which was done. (22) For the man was above forty years old, on whom this miracle of healing was showed.

I pray the Reader never to lose sight of that most precious doctrine, that it was God the Spirit speaking in the Apostles, and by them: for without this steady eye to the Lord, we shall be apt to ascribe the boldness of the servants, to their own strength; and forget the source from whence they derived it. I admire the different apprehension of words in the world’s dictionary, from that of grace. Those doctors of the law, it is said, perceived that those Apostles were unlearned and ignorant men. Yes! In relation to human sciences, and vain philosophy, falsely so called, Peter and John had received no education. But the Holy Ghost, in giving his testimony, concerning that wisdom which is from above, and which maketh wise unto salvation through the faith which is in Christ Jesus; speaks very differently. He saith, that the precious things of his inspired word, and which to carnal men are hard to be understood, it is the unlearned and unstable, (that is, in divine science,) wrest as they do also the other Scriptures to their own destruction, 2Pe_3:16. And here was a striking proof of it! For while those great men stood confounded and ashamed, unable to say anything in their own justification; the poor Apostles silenced, and overawed them all! Reader! doth not the same doctrine, and from the same cause, operate in the present hour? The weapons of our warfare (said Paul,) are not carnal, but mighty through God, to the pulling down of strong holds, 2Co_10:4. And how otherwise should it be, that we sometimes see weak things of the world confound the things which are mighty, and foolish things confound what the world esteems wise; were it not that God hath chosen such for his instruments, to make manifest, that the excellency is of God, and not of men. Oh! the blessedness when men, taught and influenced by God the Spirit, come forth in the Lord’s name, sent by the Lord’s ordination, and crowned with the Lord’s blessing upon their labors! 1Co_1:27.

Reader! it is sometimes profitable, to get behind the curtain of carnal men’s council, not indeed to learn their works, but to see how dreadfully alarmed they are. And here the

Holy Ghost hath given us a short, but full relation, what frequently passeth there. For be assured, the conference of those convicted minds, as here represented, is a true statement of what every day, more or less, passeth among the unawakened in the world. They could not deny the miracle as a matter of fact, neither disprove the greatness of it. And one might have thought, that with such a conviction before their eyes, they would have embraced the Apostles, and sought mercy from the Lord. Ah, No! the thing was impossible. Yea, so impossible, that God the Holy Ghost hath caused the reason to be recorded no less than seven times in his sacred word, Isa_6:9-10; Mat_13:14; Mar_4:12; Luk_8:10; Joh_12:40; Act_28:26; and Rom_9:8. And the same holds good forever. And the Lord, at the very beginning of his Scriptures, with the first dawn of revelation, writes down, as with a pen of iron, and the point of a diamond, the unalterable cause: I will put enmity between thee and the woman: and between thy seed and her seed, Gen_3:15; Joh_8:43-44; 1Jn_3:8.

STEDMAN 13-16, "This is a remarkable picture of the perversity of human hearts. I am sure these men, high priests, rulers of the city, would have prided themselves on being logical, reasonable, consistent men, acting on the basis of facts. We always think of ourselves this way. But this account makes very clear that they were utterly self-deceived. Though they thought they were acting from reason, they were actually operating contrary to reason.

Note how Dr. Luke develops this to reveal their utter inconsistency. He points out that they first noted an unexpected boldness in Peter and John, a note of authority in their voice, a poise, a confidence, an assurance that was very evident to these rulers who were not used to having men stand so calmly and appear so untroubled in their presence. They normally associated this kind of authority with the results of having been to school, having been trained, educated, skilled. Yet they also noted from the dress of the apostles that these were untrained, common men. In the language of the New English Bible, they were "untrained laymen" {Acts 4:13 NEB}, and these Jewish rulers were at a loss to understand this. How could these uneducated, common men have such poise and confidence? The conclusion they came to is most remarkable. Their own explanation was that these men had been with Jesus.

These Jewish rulers had had difficulty with Jesus. They had noted that whenever they had anything to do with Jesus, he evidenced a remarkable poise; nothing they said or did to him ever seemed to trouble him. Here were men who were reflecting the same spirit. They had doubtless become aware of the fact that anyone who had anything to do with Jesus for very long began to act differently -- he became a different person, and manifested an obvious confidence, an air of boldness and quiet authority. These Jewish rulers concluded therefore that these men had been with Jesus.

The second thing they noticed, which Dr. Luke brings out, was the continuous evidence of the man made whole. The former lame man was standing there before them, along with Peter and John. Clearly, the rulers could not find charges to bring against them. It is evident that no crime had been committed; it is no crime to heal a sick man. A good deed had been done, and they could not deny it. They were, therefore, at a loss to know what to do with these men, what charge they could bring against them.

The third point Dr. Luke records is that they admitted to themselves, after the apostles had been sent out, that the nature of this act of healing was a sign. These men were acquainted with the meaning and value of signs. They were the rulers of a nation which had a unique relationship to God, a relationship which, throughout the course of their history, had been characterized by the giving of signs. God had frequently manifested his presence in an unmistakable manner and confirmed his message by accompanying signs. As long as the gospel was being proclaimed largely to Jews there was an appearance of signs, wonders, and miracles, because this people, throughout their history, had been dealt with by God in this manner. These men admit that this is a sign, and it is a sign which they knew was manifest to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the nature of which they cannot deny. Now the reasonable, logical, sensible reaction to that kind of evidence would be to acknowledge the sign as from God and support these men in their cause.

14 But since they could see the man who had been healed standing there with them, there was nothing they could say.

BARES, "They could say nothing ... - The presence of the man that was healed was an unanswerable fact in proof of the truth of what the apostles alleged. The miracle was so public, clear, and decisive; the man that was healed was so well known, that there was no evasion or subterfuge by which they could escape the conclusion to which the apostles were conducting them. It evinced no little gratitude in the man that was healed that he was present on this occasion, and showed that he was deeply interested in what befell his benefactors. The miracles of Jesus and his apostles were such that they could not be denied, and hence, the Jews did not attempt to deny that they performed them. Compare Mat_12:24; Joh_11:45-46; Act_19:36.

CLARKE, "They could say nothing against it - They could not gainsay the apostolic doctrine, for that was supported by the miraculous fact before them. If the doctrine be false, the man cannot have been miraculously healed: if the man be miraculously healed, then the doctrine must be true that it is by the name of Jesus of Nazareth that he has been healed. But the man is incontestably healed; therefore the doctrine is true.

GILL, "And beholding the man which was healed,.... Who either was taken into custody, and brought before the sanhedrim, along with the apostles; or rather, who came here of his own accord to be witness for them: for he was

standing with them; in company with them, and close by them, and on their side; and so they could, and did point and appeal unto him, who was ready to justify, that it was not by the use of medicine, or of magic art, or in the name of Satan or Beelzebub, but by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, that his cure was wrought:

they could say nothing against it; they could not gainsay the fact, for the man was before them, perfectly well, whom they personally knew, by his lying so long at the gate of the temple; they knew that he had been lame from his mother's womb, who was now above forty years of age; and they could say nothing against the manner of his cure, who was present to attest it; nor could they say anything against them; the apostles, as the Syriac, Arabic, and Ethiopic versions read; they could not blame them for doing it, it being a good deed, nor charge them with fraud and imposture.

HERY, "They could not deny the cure of the lame man to be both a good deed and a miracle. He was there standing with Peter and John, ready to attest the cure, if there were occasion, and they had nothing to say against it (Act_4:14), either to disprove it or to disparage it. It was well that it was not the sabbath day, else they would have had that to say against it.

2. They could not, with all their pomp and power, face down Peter and John. This was a miracle not inferior to the cure of the lame man, considering both what cruel bloody enemies these priests had been to the name of Christ (enough to make any one tremble that appeared for him), and considering what cowardly faint-hearted advocates those disciples had lately been for him, Peter particularly, who denied him for fear of a silly maid; yet now they see the boldness of Peter and John, Act_4:13. Probably there was something extraordinary and very surprising in their looks; they appeared not only undaunted by the rulers, but daring and daunting to them; they had something majestic in their foreheads, sparkling in their eyes, and commanding, if not terrifying, in their voice. They set their faces like a flint, as the prophet, Isa_50:7; Eze_3:9. The courage of Christ's faithful confessors has often been the confusion of their cruel persecutors. Now, (1.) We are here told what increased their wonder: They perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men. They enquired either of the apostles or themselves or of others, and found that they were of mean extraction, born in Galilee, that they were bred fishermen, and had no learned education, had never been at any university, were not brought up at the feet of any of the rabbin, had never been conversant in courts, camps, or colleges; nay, perhaps, talk to them at this time upon any point in natural philosophy, mathematics, or politics, and you will find they know nothing of the matter; and yet speak to them of the Messiah and his kingdom, and they speak with so much clearness, evidence, and assurance, so pertinently and so fluently, and are so ready in the scriptures of the Old Testament relating to it, that the most learned judge upon the bench is not

able to answer them, nor to enter the lists with them. They were ignorant men - idiōtai, private men, men that had not any public character nor employment; and therefore they wondered they should have such high pretensions. They were idiots (so the word signifies): they looked upon them with as much contempt as if they had been mere naturals, and expected no more from them, which made them wonder to see what freedom they took. (2.) We are told what made their wonder in a great measure to cease: they took knowledge of them that they had been with Jesus; they, themselves, it is probable, had seen them with him in the temple, and now recollected that they had seen them; or some of their servants or those about them informed them of it, for they would not be thought themselves to have taken notice of such inferior people. But when they

understood that they had been with Jesus, had been conversant with him, attendant on him, and trained up under him, they knew what to impute their boldness to; nay, their boldness in divine things was enough to show with whom they had had their education. Note, Those that have been with Jesus, in converse and communion with him, have been attending on his word, praying in his name, and celebrating the memorials of his death and resurrection, should conduct themselves, in every thing, so that those who converse with them may take knowledge of them that they have been with Jesus; and this makes them so holy, and heavenly, and spiritual, and cheerful; this has raised them so much above this world, and filled them with another. One may know that they have been in the mount by the shining of their faces.

COFFMA, "Had this wonder been performed on the sabbath day, they might have

charged the apostles with breaking the sabbath, as they had so often falsely charged

the Lord; but Peter's choice of the issue which he would defend was truly inspired.

He said, in effect, "I suppose you wish to examine us regarding the good deed which

has been done to the impotent man." Such a thesis was truly inspired. There was not

a thing which those hypocrites could say against it; therefore, they decided to have a

caucus about it.

15 So they ordered them to withdraw from the Sanhedrin and then conferred together.

BARES 15-18, "What shall we do to these men? - The object which they had in view was evidently to prevent their preaching. The miracle was performed, and it was believed by the people to have been made. This they could not expect to be able successfully to deny. Their only object, therefore, was to prevent the apostles from making the use which they saw they would to convince the people that Jesus was the Messiah. The question was, in what way they should prevent this; whether by putting them to death, by imprisoning them, or by scourging them; or whether by simply exerting theft authority and forbidding them. From the former they were deterred, doubtless, by fear of the multitude; and they therefore adopted the latter, and seemed to suppose that the mere exertion of their authority would be sufficient to deter them from this in future.

The council - Greek: The “Sanhedrin.” This body was composed of 71 or 72 persons, and was entrusted with the principal affairs of the nation. It was a body of vast influence and power, and hence they supposed that their command might be sufficient to restrain ignorant Galileans from speaking. Before this same body, and probably the same men, our Saviour was arraigned, and by them condemned before he was delivered to the Roman governor, Mat_26:59, etc. And before this same body, and in the presence of the same men, Peter had just before denied his Lord, Mat_26:70, etc. The fact that the disciples had fled on a former occasion, and that Peter had denied his Saviour, may hate

operated to induce them to believe that they would be terrified by their threats, and deterred from preaching publicly in the name of Jesus.

A notable miracle - A known, undeniable miracle.

That it spread - That the knowledge of it may not spread among them any further.

Let us straitly threaten them - Greek: “Let us threaten them with a threat.” This is a “Hebraism” expressing intensity, certainty, etc. The threat was a command Act_4:18not to teach, implying their displeasure if they did do it. This threat, however, was not effectual. On the next occasion, which occurred soon after Act_5:40, they added beating to their threats in order to deter them from preaching in the name of Jesus.

GILL, "But when they had commanded them,.... That is, when the sanhedrim had ordered the apostles; or "commanded that both", as the Arabic version reads, both Peter and John; and, it may be, the man that was healed too:

to go aside out of the council; or place where the council, or sanhedrim sat; which, whether it was in the chamber "Gazith", in the temple where they used to sit (g), or in the shops, or in the city, whither they removed, is not certain. We are told (h), that

"the sanhedrim removed from the chamber Gazith, to the shops, and from the shops to Jerusalem, and from Jerusalem to Jabneh;''

that is, after the destruction of the city. And the first remove was much about this time; for it is said (i), that

"forty years before the destruction of the temple, the sanhedrim removed, and sat in the shops.''

Not in the shops where things were sold for the use of the temple, but in a court adjoining to them, which took its name from them.

They conferred among themselves; what was proper to be done, the apostles being withdrawn.

HERY, "We have here the issue of the trial of Peter and John before the council. They came off now with flying colours, because they must be trained up to sufferings by degrees, and by less trials be prepared for greater. They now but run with the footmen;hereafter we shall have them contending with horses, Jer_12:5.

I. Here is the consultation and resolution of the court about this matter, and their proceeding thereupon.

1. The prisoners were ordered to withdraw (Act_4:15): They commanded them to go aside out of the council, willing enough to get clear of them (they spoke so home to their consciences), and not willing they should hear the acknowledgements that were extorted from them; but, though they might not hear from them, we have them here upon record. The designs of Christ's enemies are carried on in close cabals, and they dig deep, as if they would hide their counsels from the Lord.

2. A debate arose upon this matter: They conferred among themselves; every one is desired to speak his mind freely, and to give advice upon this important affair. Now the scripture was fulfilled that the rulers would take counsel together against the Lord, and

against his anointed, Psa_2:2. The question proposed was, What shall we do to these men? Act_4:16. If they would have yielded to the convincing commanding power of truth, it had been easy to say what they should do to these men. They should have placed them at the head of their council, and received their doctrine, and been baptized by them in the name of the Lord Jesus, and joined in fellowship with them. But, when men will not be persuaded to do what they should do, it is no marvel that they are ever and anon at a loss what to do. The truths of Christ, if men would but entertain them as they should, would give them no manner of trouble or uneasiness; but, if they hold them or imprison them in unrighteousness (Rom_1:18), they will find them a burdensome stone that they will not know what to do with, Zec_12:3.

COFFMA, "The utter bankruptcy of the Sanhedrin's position is plain in these

verses. As Scott said:

We do not find that the council gave any reason why the doctrine of Christ must be

suppressed; they could not say that it was either false or dangerous, or of any evil

tendency; and they were ashamed to own the true reason, that it testified against

their hypocrisy, wickedness and tyranny.[28]

What the Sanhedrin did not do is of epic significance. They did deny the

resurrection of Jesus Christ, a fact Peter had boldly affirmed in their presence; and

the conclusion must be allowed that the resurrection of Christ was in the same

category as the healing of the impotent man before them. They could not deny it!

Can any man believe that those unscrupulous unbelievers would not have denied it

if there had been any rational basis under heaven for their doing so?

They conferred among themselves ... Commentators who raise a question as to how

Luke knew what is related here overlook two things, (1) the Holy Spirit's guidance

of the inspired evangelist, and (2) the fact that many of the Pharisees obeyed the

gospel and had long been faithful Christians at the time of Luke's probable

interview of them (Acts 6:1; 15:5, etc.). We may be certain that what is here related

occurred exactly as it is written. Therefore, it is not necessary, as did Bruce, to

suggest that "The decision by the Sanhedrin in the absence of Peter and John would

be readily inferred from what they said when Peter and John were brought

back."[29]

The admissions of the Sanhedrin in these verses "show that in their public

proceedings they had been utterly hypocritical and heartless. How they could now

look one another in the face is a moral puzzle."[30]

[28] Thomas Scott, op. cit., p. 444.

[29] F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 103.

[30] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 73.

COSTABLE, "Evidently someone in the Sanhedrin, or someone else present in the

room who was then or later became a Christian, reported the information in these

verses to Luke. Perhaps Gamaliel told Paul, and Paul told Luke. Perhaps

icodemus or some other believing member of the Sanhedrin was the source of this

information. The most the Sanhedrin felt it could do was to warn and try to

intimidate the apostles. The Sanhedrin members acknowledged that a miracle had

taken place.

It seems clear that the Jewish leaders could not disprove the miracle. They were

completely silent about the apostles' claims that Jesus was alive. After all, the

simplest way to discredit the apostles would have been to produce Jesus' body or in

some other way prove to the people that Jesus had not risen.

16 “What are we going to do with these men?” they asked. “Everyone living in Jerusalem knows they have performed a notable sign, and we cannot deny it.

CLARKE, "A notable miracle hath been done - A miracle has been wrought, and this miracle is known, and acknowledged to be such; all Jerusalem knew that he was lame - lame from his birth, and that he had long begged at the Beautiful gate of the temple; and now all Jerusalem knew that he was healed; and there was no means by which such a self-evident fact could be disproved.

GILL, "Saying, what shall we do to these men?.... Whether they should punish them by scourging them, or detain them longer in custody, or commit them to prison, or dismiss them:

for that indeed a notable miracle hath been done by them: they were convicted that a miracle was wrought; that it was a clear case, a well known thing, of which there was no room to doubt, and that it was done by the apostles; but this was not all the difficulty, had it been a thing only within their knowledge, and which they could have concealed, it would have given them no uneasiness; but, as they observe,

it is manifest to all them that dwell in Jerusalem: for the man having been so long lame, and had lain so long at the temple, where all the inhabitants frequently went, he was known and took notice of by them; and his cure being wrought so openly, and in such a miraculous way, it was the common talk of the city: so that there was no smothering it:

and we cannot deny it; the fact is so certain and evident; nor hide it, as the Ethiopic

version renders it, it being so notorious and public.

HERY, "Saying, what shall we do to these men?.... Whether they should punish them by scourging them, or detain them longer in custody, or commit them to prison, or dismiss them:

for that indeed a notable miracle hath been done by them: they were convicted that a miracle was wrought; that it was a clear case, a well known thing, of which there was no room to doubt, and that it was done by the apostles; but this was not all the difficulty, had it been a thing only within their knowledge, and which they could have concealed, it would have given them no uneasiness; but, as they observe,

it is manifest to all them that dwell in Jerusalem: for the man having been so long lame, and had lain so long at the temple, where all the inhabitants frequently went, he was known and took notice of by them; and his cure being wrought so openly, and in such a miraculous way, it was the common talk of the city: so that there was no smothering it:

and we cannot deny it; the fact is so certain and evident; nor hide it, as the Ethiopic version renders it, it being so notorious and public.

JAMISO, "a notable miracle ... done by them is manifest to all ... in Jerusalem; and we cannot deny it— And why should ye wish to deny it, O ye rulers, but that ye hate the light, and will not come to the light lest your deeds should be reproved?

ELLICOTT, "(16) What shall we do to these men?—The question now debated was

clearly one that never ought to have been even asked. They were sitting as a Court

of Justice, and should have given their verdict for or against the accused according

to the evidence. They abandon that office, and begin discussing what policy was

most expedient. It was, we may add, characteristic of Caiaphas to do so (John 11:49-

50).

A notable miracle.—Literally, sign.

We cannot deny it.—The very form of the sentence betrays the will, though there is

not the power.

17 But to stop this thing from spreading any further among the people, we must warn them to speak no longer to anyone in this name.”

CLARKE, "But that it spread no farther - Not the news of the miraculous healing of the lame man, but the doctrine and influence which these men preach and exert. More than a thousand people had already professed faith in Christ in consequence of this miracle, (see Act_4:4), and if this teaching should be permitted to go on, probably accompanied with similar miracles, they had reason to believe that all Jerusalem (themselves excepted, who had steeled their hearts against all good) should be converted to the religion of him whom they had lately crucified.

Let us straitly threaten them - Απειλ7�απειλησωµεθα, Let us threaten them with

threatening, a Hebraism, and a proof that St. Luke has translated the words of the council into Greek, just as they were spoken.

That they speak ...to no man in this name - Nothing so ominous to them as the name of Christ crucified, because they themselves had been his crucifiers. On this account they could not bear to hear salvation preached to mankind through him of whom they had been the betrayers and murderers, and who was soon likely to have no enemies but themselves.

GILL, "But that it spread no further among the people,.... Meaning not in Jerusalem; for the fame of this miracle was spread among all the inhabitants of that city; but in other parts of the nation:

let us straitly threaten them; or "in threatening threaten them"; that is, severely threaten them with imprisonment, or with the scourging of forty stripes save one, or with death itself.

That they speak henceforth to no man in this name; which through indignation and contempt they do not mention, but mean the name of Jesus: and their sense is, that the apostles, from this time forward, should not teach, or preach the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, or any other doctrine of the Gospel, in the name of Jesus, to any man, Jew or Gentile; or perform any miracle in his name, or call upon his name, and make use of it, for the healing of any person, or doing any miraculous work. The Ethiopic version is a very odd one, and quite contrary to the sense of the sanhedrim, "that they should not speak any more but in the name of the man Jesus".

HERY, "That it was nevertheless necessary to silence them for the future, Act_4:17, Act_4:18. They could not prove that they had said or done any thing amiss, and yet they must no more say nor do what they have done. All their care is that the doctrine of Christ spread no further among the people; as if that healing institution were a plague begun, the contagion of which must be stopped. See how the malice of hell fights against the counsels of heaven; God will have the knowledge of Christ to spread all the world over, but the chief priests would have it spread no further, which he that sits in heaven laughs at. Now, to prevent the further spreading of this doctrine, [1.] They charge the apostles never to preach it any more. Be it enacted by their authority (which they think every Israelite is bound in conscience to submit to) that no man speak at all nor teach in the

name of Jesus, Act_4:18. We do not find that they give them any reason why the doctrine of Christ must be suppressed; they cannot say it is false or dangerous, or of any ill tendency, and they are ashamed to own the true reason, that it testifies against their hypocrisy and wickedness, and shocks their tyranny. But, Stat pro ratione voluntas -They can assign no reason but their will. “We strictly charge and command you, not only that you do not preach this doctrine publicly, but that you speak henceforth to no man, not to any particular person privately, in this name,” Act_4:17. There is not a greater service done to the devil's kingdom than the silencing of faithful ministers; and putting those under a bushel that are the lights of the world. [2.] They threaten them if they do, strictly threaten them: it is at their peril. This court will reckon itself highly affronted if they do, and they shall fall under its displeasure. Christ had not only charged them to preach the gospel to every creature, but had promised to bear them out in it, and reward them for it. Now these priests not only forbid the preaching of the gospel, but threaten to punish it as a heinous crime; but those who know how to put a just value upon the world's threatenings, though they be threatenings of slaughter that it breathes out, Act_9:1.

JAMISO, "But that it spread no further ... let us straitly— strictly.

threaten ... that they speak henceforth to no man in this name— Impotent device! Little knew they the fire that was burning in the bones of those heroic disciples.

CALVI, "17.In threatening let us threaten. Here may we see what a deadly evil

power void of the fear of God is. For when that religion and reverence which ought

doth not reign, the more holy the place is which a man doth possess, the more boldly

(211) doth he rage. For which cause we [should] always take good heed that the

wicked be not preferred unto the government of the Church. And those which are

called to this function must behave themselves reverently and modestly, lest they

seem to be armed to do hurt. But and if it so happen they abuse their honor, the

Spirit declareth there, as in a glass, what small account we ought to make of their

decrees and commandments. (212) The authority of the pastors hath certain bounds

appointed which they may not pass. And if they dare be so bold, we may lawfully

refuse to obey them; for if we should, it were in us great wickedness, as it followeth

now.

COFFMA, "Truth was no consideration to the Sanhedrin. They were determined

to oppose the teaching of the apostles, and the best thing they could think of, at the

moment, was to threaten them. In view of the weakness of the apostles during the

Passion, they might have supposed they could intimidate them. That failing, they

were prepared to use methods of violence; but the popularity of the new faith made

the murder of the Twelve inexpedient at the moment.

ELLICOTT, "(17) Let us straitly threaten them.—The Greek gives literally, let us

threaten them with threats. The phrase gives the Hebrew idiom for expressing

intensity by reduplication, as in “blessing I will bless thee” (Genesis 22:17), “dying

thou shalt die” (Genesis 2:17, marg.), and, as far as it goes, indicates that St. Luke

translated from a report of the speech which Caiaphas had delivered in Aramaic. It

is a perfectly possible alternative that the High Priest, speaking in Greek,

reproduced, as the LXX, often does, the old Hebrew formula.

18 Then they called them in again and commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus.

CLARKE, "Not to speak ...nor teach in the name of Jesus - Any other doctrine, and any other name, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites and infidels will bear, but the doctrine which is according to godliness, proclaiming salvation through the blood of Christ crucified, they will not bear. If their doctrine were not the truth of God it could not be so unpopular; there is such an enmity in human nature against all that is good and true, that whatever comes from God is generally rejected by wicked men.

GILL, "And they called them,.... From the apartment where they were; or ordered their servants to call them in to them:

and commanded them not to speak at all; either privately or publicly, in the ministry of the word, or in working of miracles, in the city, or in the country:

nor teach in the name of Jesus; any doctrine whatever; or "the name of Jesus", as the Arabic version reads; that is, the doctrine of Jesus, that which respects his person, his carnation, his offices, his sufferings, death, and resurrection from the dead.

COFFMA, "This same Sanhedrin had once hailed the man born blind before their

council; and throughout the proceedings the name of Jesus was not mentioned, in all

probability because they had forbidden it; but Peter and John had boldly flaunted

the name of Jesus before them, and their strategy here was to impose upon the holy

apostles the same restriction they had for a while imposed upon the man born blind.

The reply of the apostles served fair notice that the old strategy would no longer

work. It was a new day, and the gospel of Jesus Christ would be preached if all hell

barred the way. Boles said, "The original conveys the idea that they were not to let

the name of Jesus pass their lips again;"[31] but these men would persevere unto

death, shouting that Jesus is risen from the dead; Jesus is Lord of all; there is

salvation in no other name under heaven; Jesus is coming again, etc.

EDOTE:

[31] H. Leo Boles, op. cit., p. 70.

COSTABLE 18-20, "The Sanhedrin ordered the apostles not to speak or teach at

all as Jesus' spokesmen. This order provided a legal basis for further action should

that be necessary (cf. Acts 5:28). Peter and John saw the command of the Sanhedrin

as contradicting the command that Christ had given them (Acts 1:8; Matthew 28:19-

20). They could not obey both, so they had to obey God (cf. Jeremiah 20:9). This is

the only basis for civil disobedience that Scripture permits. In all other matters we

must obey those in authority over us (Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-17). [ote: See

Charles C. Ryrie, "The Christian and Civil Disobedience," Bibliotheca Sacra

127:506 (April-June 1970):153-62. This article was reprinted with minor changes in

idem, You Mean the Bible Teaches That ..., pp. 11-22.] Speaking what one has seen

and heard (Acts 4:20) is the essence of witnessing (Acts 1:8). Contempt and threats

have silenced many witnesses, but these tactics did not stop the Spirit-filled apostles.

[ote: See Barrett, p. 238.]

19 But Peter and John replied, “Which is right in God’s eyes: to listen to you, or to him? You be the judges!

BARES, "Whether it be right ... - The apostles abated nothing of their boldness when threatened. They openly appealed to their judges whether their command could be right. And in doing this, they expressed their full conviction of the truth of what they had said, and their deliberate purpose not to regard their command, but still to proclaim to the people the truth that Jesus was the Messiah.

In the sight of God - That is, whether God will judge this to be right. The grand question was how God would regard it. If he disapproved it, it was wrong. It was not merely a question pertaining to their reputation, safety, or life; it was a question of conscience before God. We have here a striking instance of the principle on which Christians act. It is, to lay their safety, reputation, and life out of view, and bring everything to the test whether it will please God. If it will, it is right; if it will not, it is wrong.

To hearken - To “hear” and to “hearken” are often used to denote to “obey,” Joh_5:24; Joh_8:47, etc.

Judge ye - This was an appeal to them directly as judges and as men. And it may be presumed that it was an appeal which they could not resist. The Sanhedrin acknowledged itself to have been appointed by God, and to have no authority which was

not derived from his appointment. Of course, God could modify, supersede, or repeal their authority; and the abstract principle that it was better to obey God than man they could not call in question. The only inquiry was whether they had evidence that God had issued any command in the case. Of that the apostles were satisfied, and that the rulers could not deny. It may be remarked that this is one of the first and most bold appeals on record in favor of the right of private judgment and the liberty of conscience. That liberty was supposed in all the Jewish religion. It was admitted that the authority of God in all matters was superior to that of man. And the same spirit manifested itself thus early in the Christian church against all dominion over the conscience, and in favor of the right to follow the dictates of the conscience and the will of God. As a mere historical fact, therefore, it is interesting to contemplate this, and still more interesting in its important bearings on human liberty and human happiness. The doctrine is still more explicitly stated in Act_5:29, “We ought to obey God rather than man.”

CLARKE, "Whether it be right in the sight of God - As if they had said: Worldly prudence and a consideration of our secular interests would undoubtedly induce us to obey you; but acting as before God, and following the dictates of eternal truth and justice, we dare not be silent. Can it be right to obey men contrary to the command and will of God? When he commands us to speak, dare we hold our tongue? We have received our authority from God through Christ, and feel fully persuaded of the truth by the Holy Spirit which now dwells in us; and we should be guilty of treason against God, were we on any consideration to suppress his testimony. Your own consciences testify that we should be sinners against our heavenly King, were we to act according to your orders; and the conclusion is, that we cannot but speak what we have seen and heard.

GILL, "But Peter and John answered and said unto them,.... With great boldness and courage, and without any fear of man, but in the true fear of God

whether it be right in the sight of God; who is omniscient, and sees, and knows all things, all the actions of men, and the springs of them; who is holy, just, and true, and sits and judges among the gods, that which is right:

to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye: it is not denied that magistrates are to be hearkened to, and obeyed: but not more than God, or in things that are contrary to his nature, will, law, honour, and glory: whatever is agreeable to the law and will of God, commanded by magistrates, should be attended to, and cheerfully obeyed; but what is not should be disregarded, whatever follows upon it: and this was so just and reasonable, that the apostles appeal to the sanhedrim, or council itself, to determine.

HERY, "Here is the courageous resolution of the prisoners to go on in their work, notwithstanding the resolutions of this court, and their declaration of this resolution, Act_4:19, Act_4:20. Peter and John needed not confer together to know one another's minds (for they were both actuated by one and the same Spirit), but agree presently in the same sentiments, and jointly put in the answer: “Whether it be right in the sight of God, to whom both you and we are accountable, to hearken unto you more than unto

God, we appeal to yourselves, judge you; for we cannot forbear speaking to every body the things which we have seen and heard, and are ourselves full of, and are charged to publish.” The prudence of the serpent would have directed them to be silent, and, though they could not with a good conscience promise that they would not preach the gospel any more, yet they needed not tell the rulers that they would. But the boldness of the lion directed them thus to set both the authority and the malignity of their persecutors at defiance. They do, in effect, tell them that they are resolved to go on in preaching, and justify themselves in it with two things: - 1. The command of God: “You charge us not to preach the gospel; he has charged us to preach it, has committed it to us as a trust, requiring us upon our allegiance faithfully to dispense it; now whom must we obey, God or you?” Here they appeal to one of the communes notitiae - to a settled and acknowledged maxim in the law of nature, that if men's commands and God's interfere God's commands must take place. It is a rule in the common law of England that if any statute be made contrary to the law of God it is null and void. Nothing can be more absurd than to hearken unto weak and fallible men, that are fellow-creatures and fellow-subjects, more than unto a God that is infinitely wise and holy, our Creator and sovereign Lord, and the Judge to whom we are all accountable. The case is so plain, so uncontroverted and self-evident, that we will venture to leave it to yourselves to judge of it, though you are biassed and prejudiced. Can you think it right in the sight of God to break a divine command in obedience to a human injunction? That is right indeed which is right in the sight of God; for his judgment, we are sure, is according to truth, and therefore by that we ought to govern ourselves. 2. The convictions of their consciences. Even if they had not had such an express command from heaven to preach the doctrine of Christ, yet they could not but speak, and speak publicly, those things which they had seen and heard. Like Elihu, they were full of this matter, and the Spirit within them constrained them, they must speak, that they might be refreshed, Job_32:18, Job_32:20. (1.) They felt the influence of it upon themselves, what a blessed change it had wrought upon them, had brought them into a new world, and therefore they could not but speak of it: and those speak the doctrine of Christ best that have felt the power of it, and tasted the sweetness of it, and have themselves been deeply affected with it; it is as a fire in their bones, Jer_20:9. (2.) They knew the importance of it to others. They look with concern upon perishing souls, and know that they cannot escape eternal ruin but by Jesus Christ, and therefore will be faithful to them in giving them warning, and showing them the right way. They are things which we have seen and heard, and therefore will be faithful to them in giving them warning, and showing them the right way. They are things which we only have seen and heard, and therefore, if we do not publish them, who will? Who can? Knowing the favour, as well as the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; for the love of Christ and the love of souls constrain us, 2Co_5:11, 2Co_5:14.

CALVI, "19.Whether it be right. Let us remember to whom they make this

answer. For this council did undoubtedly represent the Church; but because they do

abuse their authority, the apostles say flatly that they are not to be obeyed. And (as

men use to do in an evident matter) they refer over the judgment unto their

adversaries for a reproach unto them. Furthermore it is worth the noting, that they

set the authority of God against their decrees; which thing should be done out of

season, unless they were the enemies of God, who notwithstanding, were otherwise

the ordinary pastors of the Church. Moreover, the apostles express a farther thing

also to wit, that the obedience which men use toward evil and unfaithful pastors,

howsoever they hold the lawful government of the Church, is contrary to God. This

question doth the Pope answer pleasantly, (213) because he saith that all those

things are divine oracles whatsoever it hath pleased him to blunder out un-

advisedly. (214) By this means the danger of contrariety is taken away. But the

bishops can challenge no more at this day than God had given then to the order of

the priests. Therefore, this is a toy too childish, [viz.] that they can command

nothing but that which is agreeable to the commandment of God. (215) Yea, rather

the thing itself declareth evidently that there shall be no conflict then if they suffer

their vain and unbridled lust to range freely, having vanquished and renounced the

doctrine of Christ.

Therefore, by what title soever men be called, yet must we hear them only upon this

condition, if they lead us not away from obeying God. So that we must examine all

their traditions by the rule of the Word of God. We must obey princes and others

which are in authority, yet so that they rob not God (who is the chief King, Father,

and Lord) of his right and authority. If we must observe such modesty in politic

[civil] government, it ought to be of far more force in the spiritual government of the

Church. And lest, according to their wonted pride, they think that their authority is

abated, when God is extolled above them, Peter draweth them away from such

pleasant flattering of themselves, telling them that this matter must be determined

before the judgment-seat of God; for he saith plainly before [in the sight of] God;

because, howsoever men be blinded, yet will God never suffer any man to be

preferred before him. And surely the Spirit did put this answer in the mouth of the

apostles, not only to the end he might repress the furiousness of the enemies, but

that he might also teach us what we ought to do, so often as men become so proud,

that having shaken off the yoke of God, they will lay their own yoke upon us.

Therefore, let us then remember this holy authority of God, which is able to drive

away the vain smoke of all man’s excellency.

COKE, "Acts 4:19. Whether it be right in the sight of God— As they professed to

believe the being, and infinite perfections of God, they must, on their own principles,

easily see the absurdity of expecting obedience to their commands from good men,

who believed themselves divinely commissioned. There is a passage which bears

some resemblance to this in the apology of Socrates, as recorded by Plato. When

they were condemning him to death for teaching the people, he said, "O ye

Athenians, I embrace and love you; but I will obey God rather than you; and if you

would dismiss me, and spare my life, on condition that I should cease to teach my

fellow-citizens, I would rather die a thousand times, than accept the proposal."

What are ten thousand subtilties of the antient philosophers, when compared with a

sentiment like this. See Plato, Socrat. Apol. p. 23.

ELLICOTT, "(19) Whether it be right in the sight of God . . .—The words assert the

right of conscience, recognising a divine authority, to resist a human authority

which opposes it. In theory, as the appeal “judge ye” showed even then, the right so

claimed is of the nature of an axiom. In practice, the difficulty rises in the question,

Is there the divine authority which is claimed? And the only practical answer is to

be found in the rule, that men who believe they have the authority are bound to act

as if they had it. If the Lord God hath spoken to them, they can but prophesy (Amos

3:8). In cases such as this, where the question is one of witness to facts, they must

not tamper with the truth, if they believe themselves commissioned by God to

declare the facts, for fear of offending men. When they pass from facts to doctrines

inferred from facts, from doctrines to opinions, from opinions to conjectures, the

duty of not saying that which they do not believe remains the same, but there is not

the same obligation to proclaim what they thus hold in various stages of assent.

There may be cases in which reticence is right as well as politic. And even in regard

to facts, the publication—as law recognises in relation to libels—must not be

gratuitous. There must be an adequate authority, or an adequate reason for

disobedience to the human authority, which is binding until it is superseded by that

which is higher than itself. And the onus probandi rests on the man who asserts the

higher authority. Intensity of conviction may be enough for himself, but it cannot be

expected that it will be so for others. In the absence of signs and wonders the

question must be discussed on the wide ground of Reason and of Conscience, and

the man who refuses to enter into debate on that ground because he is certain he is

right is ipso facto convicted of an almost insane egotism. The words have clearly no

bearing on the “froward retention” of a custom which God has not enjoined and a

lawful authority has forbidden.

MACLARE, "OBEDIENT DISOBEDIENCE

The only chance for persecution to succeed is to smite hard and swiftly. If you cannot strike, do not threaten. Menacing words only give courage. The rulers betrayed their hesitation when the end of their solemn conclave was but to ‘straitly threaten’; and less heroic confessors than Peter and John would have disregarded the prohibition as mere wind. None the less the attitude of these two Galilean fishermen is noble and singular, when their previous cowardice is remembered. This first collision with civil authority gives, as has been already noticed, the main lines on which the relations of the Church to hostile powers have proceeded.

I. The heroic refusal of unlawful obedience.

We shall probably not do injustice to John if we suppose that Peter was spokesman. If so, the contrast of the tone of his answer with all previously recorded utterances of his is remarkable. Warm-hearted impulsiveness, often wrong-headed and sometimes illogical, had been their mark; but here we have calm, fixed determination, which, as is usually its manner, wastes no words, but in its very brevity impresses the hearers as being immovable. Whence did this man get the power to lay down once for all the foundation principles of the limits of civil obedience, and of the duty of Christian confession? His words take rank with the ever-memorable sayings of thinkers and heroes, from Socrates in his prison telling the Athenians that he loved them, but that he must ‘obey God rather than you,’ to Luther at Worms with his ‘It is neither safe nor right to do anything against conscience. Here I stand; I can do nothing else. God help me! Amen.’ Peter’s words are the first of a long series.

This first instance of persecution is made the occasion for the clear expression of the great principles which are to guide the Church. The answer falls into two parts, in the first of which the limits of obedience to civil authority are laid down in a perfectly general form to which even the Council are expected to assent, and in the second an irresistible compulsion to speak is boldly alleged as driving the two Apostles to a flat refusal to obey.

It was a daring stroke to appeal to the Council for an endorsement of the principle in Act_4:19, but the appeal was unanswerable; for this tribunal had no other ostensible reason for existence than to enforce obedience to the law of God, and to Peter’s dilemma only one reply was possible. But it rested on a bold assumption, which was calculated to irritate the court; namely, that there was a blank contradiction between their commands and God’s, so that to obey the one was to disobey the other. When that parting of the ways is reached, there remains no doubt as to which road a religious man must take.

The limits of civil obedience are clearly drawn. It is a duty, because ‘the powers that be are ordained of God,’ and obedience to them is obedience to Him. But if they, transcending their sphere, claim obedience which can only be rendered by disobedience to Him who has appointed them, then they are no longer His ministers, and the duty of allegiance falls away. But there must be a plain conflict of commands, and we must take care lest we substitute whims and fancies of our own for the injunctions of God. Peter was not guided by his own conceptions of duty, but by the distinct precept of his Master, which had bid him speak. It is not true that it is the cause which makes the martyr, but it is true that many good men have made themselves martyrs needlessly. This principle is too sharp a weapon to be causelessly drawn and brandished. Only an unmistakable opposition of commandments warrants its use; and then, he has little right to be called Christ’s soldier who keeps the sword in the scabbard.

The articulate refusal in Act_4:20 bases itself on the ground of irrepressible necessity: ‘We cannot but speak.’ The immediate application was to the facts of Christ’s life, death, and glory. The Apostles could not help speaking of these, both because to do so was their commission, and because the knowledge of them and of their importance forbade silence. The truth implied is of wide reach. Whoever has a real, personal experience of Christ’s saving power, and has heard and seen Him, will be irresistibly impelled to impart what he has received. Speech is a relief to a full heart. The word, concealed in the prophet’s heart, burned there ‘like fire in his bones, and he was weary of forbearing.’ So it always is with deep conviction. If a man has never felt that he must speak of Christ, he is a very imperfect Christian. The glow of his own heart, the pity for men who know Him not, his Lord’s command, all concur to compel speech. The full river cannot be dammed up.

II. The lame and impotent conclusion of the perplexed Council.

How plain the path is when only duty is taken as a guide, and how vigorously and decisively a man marches along it! Peter had no hesitation, and his resolved answer comes crashing in a straight course, like a cannon-ball. The Council had a much more ambiguous oracle to consult in order to settle their course, and they hesitate accordingly, and at last do a something which is a nothing. They wanted to trim their sails to catch popular favour, and so they could not do anything thoroughly. To punish or acquit was the only alternative for just judges. But they were not just; and as Jesus had been crucified, not because Pilate thought Him guilty, but to please the people, so His Apostles were let off, not because they were innocent, but for the same reason. When popularity-hunters get on the judicial bench, society must be rotten, and nearing its dissolution. To ‘decree unrighteousness by a law’ is among the most hideous of crimes. Judges ‘willing to wound, and yet afraid to strike,’ are portents indicative of corruption. We may remark here how the physician’s pen takes note of the patient’s age, as making his cure more striking, and manifestly miraculous.

III. The Church’s answer to the first assault of the world’s power.

How beautifully natural that is, ‘Being let go, they went to their own,’ and how large a

principle is expressed in the naive words! The great law of association according to spiritual affinity has much to do in determining relations here. It aggregates men, according to sorts; but its operation is thwarted by other conditions, so that companionship is often misery. But a time comes when it will work unhindered, and men will be united with their like, as the stones on some sea-beaches are laid in rows, according to their size, by the force of the sea. Judas ‘went to his own place,’ and, in another world, like will draw to like, and prevailing tendencies will be increased by association with those who share them.

The prayer of the Church was probably the inspired outpouring of one voice, and all the people said ‘Amen,’ and so made it theirs. Whose voice it was which thus put into words the common sentiment we should gladly have known, but need not speculate. The great fact is that the Church answered threats by prayer. It augurs healthy spiritual life when opposition and danger neither make cheeks blanch with fear nor flush with anger. No man there trembled nor thought of vengeance, or of repaying threats with threats. Every man there instinctively turned heavenwards, and flung himself, as it were, into God’s arms for protection. Prayer is the strongest weapon that a persecuted Church can use. Browning makes a tyrant say, recounting how he had tried to crush a man, that his intended victim

‘Stood erect, caught at God’s skirts, and prayed,

So I was afraid.’

The contents of the prayer are equally noteworthy. Instead of minutely studying it verse by verse, we may note some of its salient points. Observe its undaunted courage. That company never quivered or wavered. They had no thought of obeying the mandate of the Council. They were a little army of heroes. What had made them so? What but the conviction that they had a living Lord at God’s right hand, and a mighty Spirit in their spirits? The world has never seen a transformation like that. Unique effects demand unique causes for their explanation, and nothing but the historical truth of the facts recorded in the last pages of the Gospels and first of the Acts accounts for the demeanour of these men.

Their courage is strikingly marked by their petition. All they ask is ‘boldness’ to speak a word which shall not be theirs, but God’s. Fear would have prayed for protection; passion would have asked retribution on enemies. Christian courage and devotion only ask that they may not shrink from their duty, and that the word may be spoken, whatever becomes of the speakers. The world is powerless against men like that. Would the Church of to-day meet threats with like unanimity of desire for boldness in confession? If not, it must be because it has not the same firm hold of the Risen Lord which these first believers had. The truest courage is that which is conscious of its weakness, and yet has no thought of flight, but prays for its own increase.

We may observe, too, the body of belief expressed in the prayer. First it lays hold on the creative omnipotence of God, and thence passes to the recognition of His written revelation. The Church has begun to learn the inmost meaning of the Old Testament, and to find Christ there. David may not have written the second Psalm. Its attribution to him by the Church stands on a different level from Christ’s attribution of authorship, as, for instance, of the hundred and tenth Psalm. The prophecy of the Psalm is plainly Messianic, however it may have had a historical occasion in some forgotten revolt against some Davidic king; and, while the particular incidents to which the prayer alludes do not exhaust its far-reaching application, they are rightly regarded as partly fulfilling it. Herod is a ‘king of the earth,’ Pilate is a ‘ruler’; Roman soldiers are Gentiles;

Jewish rulers are the representatives of ‘the people.’ Jesus is ‘God’s Anointed.’ The fact that such an unnatural and daring combination of rebels was predicted in the Psalm bears witness that even that crime at Calvary was foreordained to come to pass, and that God’s hand and counsel ruled. Therefore all other opposition, such as now threatened, will turn out to be swayed by that same Mighty Hand, to work out His counsel. Why, then, should the Church fear? If we can see God’s hand moving all things, terror is dead for us, and threats are like the whistling of idle wind.

Mark, too, the strong expression of the Church’s dependence on God. ‘Lord’ here is an unusual word, and means ‘Master,’ while the Church collectively is called ‘Thy servants,’ or properly, ‘slaves.’ It is a different word from that of ‘servant’ (rather than ‘child’) applied to Jesus in Act_4:27-30. God is the Master, we are His ‘slaves,’ bound to absolute obedience, unconditional submission, belonging to Him, not to ourselves, and therefore having claims on Him for such care as an owner gives to his slaves or his cattle. He will not let them be maltreated nor starved. He will defend them and feed them; but they must serve him by life, and death if need be. Unquestioning submission and unreserved dependence are our duties. Absolute ownership and unshared responsibility for our well-being belong to Him.

Further, the view of Christ’s relationship to God is the same as occurs in other of the early chapters of the Acts. The title of ‘Thy holy Servant Jesus’ dwells on Christ’s office, rather than on His nature. Here it puts Him in contrast with David, also called ‘Thy servant.’ The latter was imperfectly what Jesus was perfectly. His complete realisation of the prophetic picture of the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is emphasised by the adjective ‘holy,’ implying complete devotion or separation to the service of God, and unsullied, unlimited moral purity. The uniqueness of His relation in this aspect is expressed by the definite article in the original. He is the Servant, in a sense and measure all His own. He is further the Anointed Messiah. This was the Church’s message to Israel and the stay of its own courage, that Jesus was the Christ, the Anointed and perfect Servant of the Lord, who was now in heaven, reigning there. All that this faith involved had not yet become clear to their consciousness, but the Spirit was guiding them step by step into all the truth; and what they saw and heard, not only in the historical facts of which they were the witnesses, but in the teaching of that Spirit, they could not but speak.

The answer came swift as the roll of thunder after lightning. They who ask for courage to do God’s will and speak Christ’s name have never long to wait for response. The place ‘was shaken,’ symbol of the effect of faithful witness-bearing, or manifestation of the power which was given in answer to their prayer. ‘They were all filled with the Holy Ghost,’ who now did not, as before, confer ability to speak with other tongues, but wrought no less worthily in heartening and fitting them to speak ‘in their own tongue, wherein they were born,’ in bold defiance of unlawful commands.

The statement of the answer repeats the petition verbatim: ‘With all boldness they spake the word.’ What we desire of spiritual gifts we get, and God moulds His replies so as to remind us of our petitions, and to show by the event that these have reached His ear and guided His giving hand.

MARTYN LLOYD JONES, "May we all learn the lesson of this old incident. Let us meet with this Jesus and listen to Him, and soon we, too, will become phenomena. We will become men and women who are enigmas to everybody else. They will not understand us; they will object to us because, without our openly condemning them, we do condemn them by being what we are and by baffling their great intellects. But, thank God, by the

acknowledgement of our sinfulness and our unworthiness and our helplessness, we will have opened our hearts to the radiance of the face of God in Jesus Christ. The power of the Spirit will have come upon us, will have made us anew, made us children of God, and will be preparing us for the beatific vision and the joys of an eternal bliss.

6. The Eyewitnesses

But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard. —Acts 4:19–20

The account of the healing of the lame man is a rich story that brings us face to face with the great fundamentals of Christianity. What is the message of the church? This question is clearly basic, because if there is any doubt about this, then there will be doubt all along the line. To put it another way: What is it that makes someone a Christian? What is our authority? What is our sanction? What are our reasons for believing this message? Why, indeed, should anyone believe it? These are the things about which we must be clear. These are the great questions, I think, that agitate the minds of so many people, and the answer is given here as simply as one could ever desire. It is we who always add the complications.

Here is the simple beginning of the church. These verses illustrate what the church is meant to be, but people have added their traditions, their points of view, and their philosophies until it has become the most complicated thing in the world. Indeed there are those who say that the common people are not meant to understand Christianity, but only the priests, or the bishops, or the Popes, and so we must listen to their interpretations. But that is not what we find here in Acts.

No, what stands out here first and foremost is that when we want to know what Christianity is, we must look at the message preached by the first apostles. Now this is a quite basic proposition. The apostle Paul says in his letter to the Ephesians that the church is “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets” (Eph. 2:20). There is the foundation, the beginning. The only message that I have to present is the message of the apostles, which I find in this book.

These points are crucial. If you want to know what Christianity is, you do not start by buying a textbook on philosophy; you start by reading the Bible. You do not go out into libraries and search the vast wisdom of men. You come straight to this book. John Wesley, who used to read many books, said that after his conversion, he had become “a man of one Book.” Why? Because the Bible is the only book that speaks with authority on these matters. What do we know about Christianity apart from what we are told by these apostles, these first preachers? These are the witnesses; our Lord appointed them as such, and He told them that that was to be their task: “Ye shall

STEDMAN 19-22, "Now the inconsistency of these Jewish rulers led to what was basically an illegal act. They were the representatives of God to this nation and as such they were ostensibly committed to doing the will and purpose of God. Yet here, in spite of the evidence they had received of what God wanted done, they directly opposed the will and word of God, and forbade these apostles to speak in the name of Jesus. The disciples, very wisely and courteously, declined to obey this command. They pointed out that they had no choice, they "cannot but speak the things they have seen and heard." The message they declared was so challenging, so transforming in its implications, both

to the nation and to the world, that they cannot be silent and still be true to their relationship to God. It was a message desperately needed, so powerful in its implications and its effect that they cannot, out of sheer humanity, maintain silence. They therefore respectfully declined to obey what these rulers commanded. The priests can only bluster and threaten them because they feared the people, for the apostles had the support of the populace.

At this point the whole question of civil disobedience comes into view. Here is a clear case of it. These apostles were forbidden by the properly constituted authorities (the establishment, we would call them), to preach in the name of Jesus. The apostles told them to their faces that they would not obey the rule. This incident had been used through the centuries since, and especially in our own day, to justify many activities such as racial strife, draft evasion, violent demonstration, boycotts, strikes, etc. We cannot read this account without the question being raised, and quite properly: Is it right for a Christian to disobey a law because of a conscientious scruple? The clear answer of this account is, "Yes!" There are times when it is necessary, when it is right to disobey properly constituted authority. The establishment can be wrong as well as right.

But it is important also to notice from this account that civil disobedience occurs here only because the conscience of these men rested directly on a clear and unmistakable word of God which contravened the human law. That is most important to notice. The issue is so clear here that Peter actually calls on the rulers to be the judges as to what the apostles should do. He says, "Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge." You are religious men, he implies, you know which is the higher authority. This issue is so clear that we must choose between one or the other; you tell us, which should we obey, God or you? God or man? The matter was so clear that these authorities cannot say a word. In the face of the evidence, the only thing they could say was, "Obey God rather than us." But they do not want to say that so the only alternative is to threaten and bluster and try to maintain control by the threat of force. They feared the people who were convinced that this was a remarkable sign from God.

Here then are the biblical grounds for civil disobedience. The Scriptures are very clear that governments are given by God. Romans 13:1-7 makes that unmistakable. Paul says there that government authorities are the servants of God. It is instructive to note that the emperor on the throne when Paul wrote those words was none other than Nero, a wicked, vile, and godless man, and one of the worst emperors the Roman empire every had. Yet Paul could write that the governing authorities were the servants of God and those who resist them resist what God has ordained. He acknowledges that governments have certain powers, derived not from the people but from God -- the power to tax, the power to keep law and order, the power to punish evildoing, even to the point of death. The Scriptures make perfectly clear that all this is right and ordained of God, and believers are exhorted to obey the authorities.

From this we can conclude that the human conscience, operating alone, unsupported by a word of revelation, is not enough grounds to disobey the law. The law of man, even bad law, is superior to conscience unless that conscience rests upon a direct word of God.

That is what this account makes clear.

Conscience is not intended to tell us right from wrong. Consciences can be wrong as well as right. In fact, apart from the help of revealed truth, everyone's conscience would be wrong and would lead us all astray. Let me share a quotation from a very clear-thinking writer, H. C. Trumball,

Conscience is not given to a man to instruct him in the right, but to prompt him to choose the right instead of the wrong when he is instructed as to what is right. It tells a man that he ought to do right, but does not tell him what is right. And if a man has made up his mind that a certain wrong course is the right one, the more he follows his conscience the more hopeless he is as a wrongdoer. One is pretty far gone in an evil way when he serves the devil conscientiously.

The clear instruction of Scripture is that conscience is not to be followed unless it is based upon the Word of God, a clear and unmistakable command of God. When the issue is in doubt, then the law is superior to conscience. It is only when there is a clear-cut case of conflict between the word and will of God, and the word and will of man (as in this case) that conscience is superior to law. But notice now the action of the apostles, and where it is they go for redress and support:

When they were released they went to their friends and reported what the chief priests and the elders had said to them. And when they heard it, they lifted their voices together to God and said, "Sovereign Lord, who didst make the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, who by the mouth of our father David, thy servant, didst say by the Holy Spirit,

'Why did the Gentiles rage,

and the peoples imagine vain things?

The kings of the earth set themselves in array,

and the rulers were gathered together,

against the Lord and against his Anointed' --

for truly in this city there were gathered together against thy holy servant Jesus, whom thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever thy hand and thy palm had predestined to take place." {Acts 4:23-28 RSV}

These apostles did not go out to organize a revolutionary committee to overthrow the Sanhedrin. They did not even try to arouse a popular march or demonstration. The clear evidence of this passage is that they had popular support. The people were behind them, and the high priests were afraid because the people supported the apostles. But the apostles do not rely for even one minute upon political or popular pressure. They cast themselves upon the unique resource of the church in any age, which, when it forgets it, becomes nothing more than an instrument of distortion. They cast themselves wholly

upon the sovereign power of God at work in history. That is the greatest force to alter a power structure that the world has ever seen. It has been ignored by the church many times and thus Christians have frittered away their efforts in relatively useless activities which make a lot of noise and smoke but never accomplish anything.

The apostles found encouragement in two things: First, the sovereignty of God, his overruling control of human events. The very first word of their prayer recognizes this, "Sovereign Lord." The word in Greek is in the word from which we get our word, despot. "O Mighty Despot, [Tyrant, Ruler over men], who didst make the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them." God holds the world in the palm of his hand, and is intimately involved in every human event. They found great consolation in that, but I find many Christians have forgotten it. A year or so ago I brought a message on the war in Viet Nam, and spoke of what God was doing in that situation. After the meeting a young man came up to me, livid with rage. He said, "I'm so angry I can hardly contain myself!" I said, "What about?" He replied, "The idea that you suggested, that God is involved in the war in Viet Nam." I asked him, "Are you a Christian?" He said, "Yes, I am. I will admit that the Bible teaches that God involves himself occasionally in human affairs, but he certainly has nothing to do with the war in Viet Nam!"

That is certainly a badly distorted and mistaken concept of history. These disciples had no such idea. They openly recognized that God had even predicted the very opposition they faced. They quoted the second Psalm in support of it. They had clearly been doing what Christians ought to do under pressure: They had gone to the Scriptures. They had found in the second Psalm the prediction of the actual opposition they were facing. The psalm said,

'Why did the Gentiles rage,

and the peoples [the Israelites]imagine vain things?

The kings of the earth set themselves in array,

and the rulers were gathered together,

against the Lord and against his Anointed' -- {Acts 4:25b-26 RSV}

When they read that they said to themselves, "There, that's exactly what has happened. Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the others, the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, have set themselves against the Lord Jesus. We saw it happen right in this very city. It's not surprising, not unexpected; it's exactly what God said would happen." They found great encouragement in the fact that this event was not beyond divine control; the opposition they were facing was anticipated for no human event gets out of hand, as far as God is concerned. He has power to overrule in any situation, and that is what they counted on. They did not try to arouse a popular uprising because that only creates violence --violence begets violence. But they relied upon a God who works in strange and unusual ways through human events to change them without violence.

This second thing they saw is what we might call, the mystery of history. You can see it

in the last sentence of the account. "Herod and Pontius Pilate and the Gentiles and the people of Israel were gathered together to do whatever thy hand and thy plan had predestined to take place." Did you get that? In other words, the God of history uses the very opposition to accomplish his purposes! That is what they saw. God worked through the free will of man. These people opposed the plan of God. They tried to thwart God's purposes. They tried to derail his program. But God operates in such a marvelous way that he uses even this opposition to accomplish his will. That is the story of the cross and of the resurrection of Jesus.

That principle is what these Christians reckoned upon. They recognized a principle at work in human affairs which is the most powerful force known to man, and which the church frequently ignores to its peril. There is a striking passage I ran across this week in reading the New English Bible. Let me share it with you. It is found in the twelfth chapter of Job.

In God's hand are the souls of all that live,

the spirits of all humankind.

Wisdom and might are his;

with him are firmness and understanding.

If he pulls down, there is no rebuilding;

if he imprisons, there is no release.

If he holds up the waters, there is drought;

if he lets them go, they turn the land upside down.

Strength and success belong to him,

deceived and deceiver are his to use.

He makes counselors behave like idiots,

and drives judges mad;

he looses the bonds imposed by kings,

and removes the girdle of office from their waists;

he makes priests behave like idiots,

and overthrows men long in office;

those who are trusted he strikes dumb,

he takes away the judgment of old men;

he heaps scorn on princes

and abates the arrogance of nobles.

He leads peoples astray, and destroys them,

he lays them low, and there they lie.

He takes away their wisdom from the rulers of the nations

and leaves them wandering in a pathless wilderness;

they grope in the darkness without light,

and are left to wander like a drunkard.

He uncovers mysteries deep in obscurity,

and into thick darkness he brings light. {Job 12:10-22 NEB}

That is the overruling power of God. That is what these Christians relied on. This is the true strength of the church. It is the weapon of faith-prayer; tremendous in its possibilities. Resting upon this, these disciples now make their request.

20 As for us, we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard.”

BARES, "For ... - This is given as a reason why they should obey God rather than man. They had had so clear evidence that God had sent the Messiah, and they had received a direct and solemn command Mar_16:15 to preach the gospel, that they could not be restrained. There was a necessity laid on them to preach. See 1Co_9:16. Compare Jer_20:9; Act_18:5; Job_32:18-19; Psa_39:1-3.

It has already been remarked that these two verses contain an important principle in favor of religious liberty the liberty of conscience and of private judgment. They contain the great principle of Christianity and of the Protestant religion, that the responsibility of men for their religious opinions is direct to God, and that other men have no power of control. The opposite of this is tyranny and oppression. It may be proper, in addition, to present some further remarks, involved in the principle here stated:

(1) Religion, from the beginning, has been favorable to liberty. There was no principle more sacred among the Jews than that they were to be independent of other nations. Perhaps no people have ever been so restive under a foreign yoke, so prone to rebel, and so difficult to be broken down by oppression and by arms, as were the Jews. So true was this, that it appeared to other nations to be mere obstinacy. They were often subdued, but they rose against their oppressors and threw off the yoke. No people have been found who were so difficult to be reduced to slavery. It is well known that the Romans were accustomed to subject the captives taken in war to perpetual servitude; and commonly the spirit of the captive was broken, and he remained quietly in bondage. But not so the Jew. Nothing ever tamed his spirit. No bribes, or threats, or chains could induce him to violate the laws of his religion. Even in captivity, we are told that the Jewish slaves at Rome would observe the Sabbath; would keep the feasts of their nation, and would never conform to the customs of an idolatrous people. To the Romans this

appeared to be mere obstinacy. But it was the genius of their religion. The right of liberty of thought was one which they would not surrender. The spirit of the patriarchs was favorable to liberty, and implied responsibility only to God. Familiarity with the sacred books had taught them these lessons, and neither time nor distance could obliterate them. In the time of Christ, the great mass of the nation were evidently opposed to the tax paid to the Roman nation, and sighed under this burden, until they rose and attempted to assert their rights; and their city, and temple, and land were sacrificed rather than yield this great principle.

(2) This same principle was evinced by the apostles and by the early Christians. With this doctrine fresh upon their hearts, they went forth to other lands. They maintained it at the expense of their blood, and thousands fell as martyrs in the cause of liberty and of private judgment in religion. No one ever defended liberty more firmly than the early martyrs; and each one that died, died in defense of a principle which is now the acknowledged right of all people.

(3) The designs of tyranny and superstition have been to destroy this principle. This was the aim of the Sanhedrin; and yet, when Peter and John appealed to their consciences, they did not dare to avow their purpose. This has been the aim of all tyrants, and this the effect of all superstition. Hence, the Church of Rome has taken away the Scriptures from the people, and has thus furnished incontestable evidence that in its view the Bible is favorable to liberty. For centuries, tyranny reigned in one black flight over Europe; nor was the darkness dispelled until the Bible, that taught people the principles of freedom, was restored to them.

(4) The effect of the principle avowed by the apostles had been uniform. Luther began the reformation by finding in a monastery a copy of the Bible, a book which until that time - when more than twenty years of age - he had never seen. The effect on the liberties of Europe was immediately seen. Hume admitted that whatever liberty England possessed was to be traced to the Puritans. Our own land (America) is a striking instance of the effect of this great principle, and of its influence on the rights of man. And just in proportion as the New Testament is spread abroad will people seek for freedom and break the chains of oppression. The best way to promote universal liberty is to spread the Bible to the ends of the earth. There is not a precept in it that is not favorable to freedom. It tends to enlarge and liberalize the mind; to teach people their rights; to put an end to ignorance, the universal stronghold of superstition and tyranny; and to diffuse the love of justice, truth, and order. It shows man that he is responsible to God, and that no one has a right to ordain anything which contravenes the liberty of his fellow.

If it be asked here what the principle is, I answer:

(1) That people have a right to their private judgment in matters of religion, subject only to God. The only restraint which, it is now settled, can be imposed on this, is, that no man has a right, under pretence of conscience, to injure or molest his fellow-men, or to disturb the peace and harmony of society.

(2) No magistrate, church, council, or parent, has a right to impose a creed on others, and to demand subscription to it by mere authority.

(3) No magistrate, church, or parent, has a right to control. the free exercise of private judgment in this case. The power of a parent is to teach, advise, and entreat. The duty of a child is to listen with respect; to examine with candor; to pray over the subject, and to be deliberate and calm, not rash, hasty, impetuous, and self-willed. But when the child is thus convinced that his duty to God requires a particular course, then here is a higher obligation than any earthly law, and he must obey God rather than man, ever a father or a mother, Mat_10:37-38.

(4) Every man is responsible to God for his opinions and his conduct. Man may not control him, but God may and will. The great question before every man is, What is right in the sight of God? It is not, What is expedient, or safe, or pleasurable, or honorable among people? but, What is right in the sight of God? Neither in their opinions nor their conduct are people free from responsibility. From this whole subject we see the duty of spreading the Bible. If we love liberty; if we hate tyranny and superstition; if we wish to extend the knowledge of the rights of man, and break every arm of oppression, let us spread far and wide the Book of God, and place in every palace and every cottage on the globe a copy of the sacred Scriptures.

GILL, "For we cannot but speak,.... It was not physically, but morally impossible; or it was not lawful, and therefore they would not speak any other, and they could not avoid speaking, say they,

the things which we have seen and heard; as the miracles and doctrines of Christ, his resurrection from the dead, of which they were eye and ear witnesses. This shows their great fidelity and integrity, their inviolable attachment to Christ, and their fearlessness of the displeasure and wrath of men.

JAMISO, "For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard— There is here a wonderful union of sober, respectful appeal to the better reason of their judges, and calm, deep determination to abide the consequences of a constrained testimony, which betokens a power above their own resting upon them, according to promise.

CALVI, "20.For we cannot Many things which are found out by hearing and

seeing may, yea, ought to be concealed, when as the question is concerning the

redeeming of peace. For this is a point of discourtesy and of wicked stubbornness to

move and raise a tumult about unnecessary matters; but the apostles do not speak

generally, when as they say they cannot but speak. For the gospel of Christ is now in

hand, wherein consisteth both the glory of God and the salvation of men. It is an

unmeet thing, and sacrilegious wickedness, that the same should be suppressed by

prohibitions and menacings (216) of men; for God commandeth that his gospel be

preached, especially since they did know that they were chosen to be witnesses and

preachers of Christ, and that God had opened their mouth. Therefore, whosoever

putteth them to silence, he endeavoreth so much as he is able to abolish the grace of

God, and fordo [destroy] the salvation of men. And if so be that a prohibition so

wicked do stop our mouths, woe be to our sluggishness. ow, let all men see what

confession God requireth at their hands, lest, when they keep silence because of

men, they hear a fearful voice proceed out of the mouth of Christ, whereby their

unfaithfulness shall be condemned. And as for those which are called unto the office

of teaching, let them be terrified with no threatenings of men, with no color of

authority, but let them execute (217) that office which they know is enjoined them

by God. Woe be unto me, saith Paul, if I preach not the gospel, because the function

is committed unto me, (1 Corinthians 9:10.) either ought we only to set this

commandment of God against the tyrannous commandments of men, but also

against all lets which Satan doth oftentimes thrust in to break off and hinder the

course of the gospel. For we have need of a strong buckler to bear off such sore

assaults, which all the ministers of Christ do feel; but howsoever we speed, this is a

brazen wall, that the preaching of the gospel doth please God, and therefore that it

can for no cause be suppressed.

21 After further threats they let them go. They could not decide how to punish them, because all the people were praising God for what had happened.

BARES, "Finding nothing ... - That is, not being able to devise any way of punishing them without exciting a tumult among the people, and endangering their own authority. The Sanhedrin was frequently influenced by this fear; and it shows that their own authority was much dependent on the caprice of the multitude. Compare Mat_21:26.

All men - That is, the great mass or body of the people.

Glorified God - Praised God for the miracle. This implies:

(1) That they believed that the miracle was genuine.

(2) That they were grateful to God for so signal a mercy in conferring health and comfort on a man who had been long afflicted. We may add further, that here is the highest evidence of the reality of the miracle. Even the Sanhedrin, with all their prejudice and opposition, did not call it in question; and the common people, who had doubtless been acquainted with this man for years, were convinced that it was real. It would have been impossible to impose on keensighted and jealous adversaries in this manner if this had been an imposture.

CLARKE, "When they had farther threatened them - Προσαπειλησαµενοι, When they had added to their former threatenings, repeating the former menaces, and adding new penalties.

Finding nothing how they might punish them - Or, as the Codex Bezae reads,

µηε:ρισκοντες�αιτιαν,�πως�κολασωνται, not finding a cause why they might punish them.

This reading is supported by the Syriac and Arabic. Bp. Pearce says, “This is better sense and better Greek.”

Because of the people - The people saw the miracle, confessed the finger of God, believed on the Lord Jesus, and thus became converts to the Christian faith; and the

converts were now so numerous that the sanhedrin was afraid to proceed to any extremities, lest an insurrection should be the consequence.

GILL, "So when they had further threatened them,.... Either repeated the same, as before; or added some more severe ones, to terrify them, if possible; not being able to answer their arguments, or invalidate their reasoning:

they let them go; they did not acquit them as innocent persons, but dismissed them from custody:

finding nothing how they might punish them; not being able, though they sought most diligently for it, to fix anything upon them, which might be a cause, or occasion, or pretence of inflicting any punishment upon them:

because of the people: they would not have stuck at the injustice of it, or have been under any concern about offending God; but they were afraid of the people, of losing their credit among them, and lest they should rise up against them, and on the side of the apostles:

for all men glorified God for that which was done; they saw the hand of God in it, and ascribed it to his mercy, goodness, and power, and gave him the glory of it; and therefore to punish the instruments of so great and good a work, would have been esteemed barbarous and wicked, and would have been highly resented by them; since, on the contrary, they judged them worthy of great honour and respect.

HERY, "Here is the discharge of the prisoners (Act_4:21): They further threatened them, and thought they frightened them, and then let them go. There were many whom they terrified into an obedience to their unrighteous decrees; they knew how to keep men in awe with their excommunication (Joh_9:22), and thought they could have the same influence upon the apostles that they had upon other men; but they were deceived, for they had been with Jesus. They threatened them, and that was all they did now: when they had done this they let them go, 1. Because they durst not contradict the people, who glorified God for that which was done, and would have been ready (at least they thought so) to pull them out of their seats, if they had punished the apostles for doing it. As rulers by the ordinance of God are made a terror and restraint to wicked people, so people are sometimes by the providence of God made a terror and restrain to wicked rulers.

JAMISO, "finding nothing how they might punish them, because of the people— not at a loss for a pretext, but at a loss how to do it so as not to rouse the opposition of the people.

CALVI, "21.And when they had threatened them. And here is the end of sedition,

that the wicked cease not to breathe out their fury, yet are they bridled by the secret

power of God, so that they cannot tell how to do any hurt. (218) How is it that being

content with threatenings, they do not also rage against their bodies, save only

because the power of God doth bind them as a chain? ot that the fear of God doth

prevail with them, for it is the regard of the people alone which hindereth them; but

the Lord doth bind them with his bonds, though they be ignorant thereof. Luke

commendeth unto us the providence of God in preserving his children; and though

it be hidden from the wicked, yet we may behold the same with the eyes of faith,

Furthermore, the wonderful counsel of God doth show itself here, in that the glory

of Christ is furthered by those which are his most deadly enemies. For whereas the

priests do assemble themselves together, it is not done without great rumor. All men

wait for some rare and singular event; the apostles depart, being let loose and

acquitted. Therefore, the adversaries are not only vanquished, but they confirm the

gospel against their will. otwithstanding, it is expedient for us to mark again, that

the faithful do so get the victory, that they are always humbled under the cross. For

they are threatened again, and straitly charged, that they teach not henceforth in the

name of Christ. Therefore, they do not so get the upper hand that they do not

triumph, save only under the reproach of the cross. Whereas Luke saith that they

did all glorified God, he noteth the fruit of the miracle now the second time,

although it may be that they were not all brought unto the perfect end. For that man

which is touched with the feeling of the power of God, and doth not come unto

Christ, neither hath his faith confirmed by the miracle he stayeth, as it were, in the

midway. Yet this was some thing, though not all, that the power of God was

acknowledged in the healing of the man, so that the adversaries being ashamed, did

cease off from their fury, or at least give back a little.

COFFMA, "Further threatened them ... These were not idle threats. Later, the

apostles were arrested and beaten (Acts 5:17-40); and still later, Stephen was stoned

to death for preaching the gospel (Acts 6:8-7:60). There is a progression in this

inspired history toward that murderous fury which at last signaled official Israel's

total rejection of Jesus Christ. For the moment, the popularity of the apostles with

the people prevented all but the threats.

Forty years old ... Luke added this bit of information regarding the age of the man

who was healed, making the marvel of the miracle all the greater.

COKE, "Acts 4:21. They let them go, &c.— This dismission was not intended as an

acquittal; for it was customary among the Jews to try any accused person after his

discharge, when new proofs started up against him. The threatening mentioned in

the foregoing sentence, might possibly have included some declaration of this sort.

Dr. Heylin reads the last clause, Who all glorified God, &c. So much wiser were the

people than those who were over them. othing could contribute more to illustrate

the miracle, than the circumstance mentioned, Acts 4:22. It shews that the man's

case was desperate, and that his disorder was so inveterate and confirmed, as to be

beyond the reach of medicine; yet was he in one moment completely cured by the

word of the apostles.

Who, after reading this account of the manner in which the rulers treated these

apostles, could ever imagine that the disciples stolethe body of Jesus, or that the

chief priests and elders themselves believed they did? But it may perhaps be

objected, that this account comes from Christian writers;—and could the objectors

expect to meet with it in Jewish writers?—We might expect indeed to find in their

writings some proofs of this charge upon the disciples; and had there been any, the

chief priests, the adversaries of Christ, would doubtless not have failed to produce

them. But the progress which Christianity made at that time in Jerusalem, is a

stronger argument than even their silence, that no proof of this charge either was, or

could be made. Could the apostles have had the imprudence to preach, and could so

many thousand Jews have been weak enough to believe upon their testimony, that

Christ was risen from the dead, had it been proved that the disciples had stolen

away his body? An infidel may, if he pleases, believe this; but let him account for it

if he can.

22 For the man who was miraculously healed was over forty years old.

BARES, "For the man ... - The age of the man is mentioned to show the certainty and greatness of the miracle. If it had been a man who had been lame but a few years, or if it had been a child or a very young man, the case would not been so remarkable. But after a continuance of 40 years, all hope of healing him by any ordinary means must have been abandoned, and all pretence that this was jugglery or deception must have been absurd.

CLARKE, "The man was above forty years old - The disease was of long standing, and consequently the more inveterate; but all difficulties, small or great, yield equally to the sovereign power of God. It is as easy with God to convert a sinner of forty or four-score, as one of ten years old. But he who now refuses to obey the call of God has neither reason nor revelation to support himself even in the most distant hope that he shall get, in a future time, the salvation which he rejects in the present.

GILL, "For the man was above forty years old,.... So that the miracle was the greater, that a man born lame, and who had been so above forty years, should have a cure; and he was the more known to the people, and his testimony met with more credit:

on whom this miracle of healing was showed; both for the good of men, for the glory of God, and for the confirmation of the Gospel of Christ.

HERY, " Because they could not contradict the miracle: For (Act_4:22) the man was above forty years old on whom this miracle of healing was shown. And therefore, (1.) The miracle was so much the greater, he having been lame from his mother's womb,Act_3:2. The older he grew the more inveterate the disease was, and the more hardly cured. If those that are grown into years, and have been long accustomed to evil, are

cured of their spiritual impotency to good, and thereby of their evil customs, the power of divine grace is therein so much the more magnified. (2.) The truth of it was so much the better attested; for the man being above forty years old, he was able, like the blind man whom Christ healed, when he was asked, to speak for himself, Joh_9:21.

The Believers Pray

23 On their release, Peter and John went back to their own people and reported all that the chief priests and the elders had said to them.

BARES, "Their own company - They joined the other apostles and Christians, Act_2:44-45.

And reported ... - It doubtless became a subject of interesting inquiry what they should do in this case. They had been threatened by the highest authority of the nation, and commanded not to preach again in the name of Jesus. Whether they should obey them and be silent, or whether they should leave Jerusalem and preach elsewhere, could not but be an interesting subject of inquiry, and they very properly sought the counsel of their brethren, and looked to God for direction, an example which all should follow who are exposed to persecution, or who are in any perplexity about the path of duty.

CLARKE, "They went to their own company - This was properly the first persecution that had been raised up against the Church since the resurrection of Christ; and as the rest of the disciples must have known that Peter and John had been cast into prison, and that they were to be examined before the sanhedrin, and knowing the evil disposition of the rulers toward their brethren, they doubtless made joint supplication to God for their safety. In this employment it is likely Peter and John found them on their return from the council, and repeated to them all their treatment, with the threats of the chief priests and elders.

GILL, "And being let go,.... Or dismissed from custody, by the order of the sanhedrim:

they went to their own company; or "to their own men", as the Ethiopic version reads; or "to their own brethren", as the Syriac; either to the other ten apostles; or to the hundred and twenty, who first met together; or the whole multitude of them that believed, Act_4:32 the eight thousand that had been added to them, the whole church.

Saints love to be together, and delight in the company of each other; and especially when they have anything to communicate, that may be for their mutual good, or for the honour of God:

and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said unto them; what commands and injunctions they had lain upon them, and what threatenings they had given them, and, no doubt likewise, what answers they had returned to them.

HERY, "We hear no more at present of the chief priests, what they did when they had dismissed Peter and John, but are to attend those two witnesses. And here we have,

I. Their return to their brethren, the apostles and ministers, and perhaps some private Christians (Act_4:23): Being let go, they went to their own company, who perhaps at this time were met together in pain for them, and praying for them; as Act_12:12. As soon as ever they were at liberty, they went to their old friends, and returned to their church-fellowship. 1. Though God had highly honoured them, in calling them out to be his witnesses, and enabling them to acquit themselves so well, yet they were not puffed up with the honour done them, nor thought themselves thereby exalted above their brethren, but went to their own company. No advancement in gifts or usefulness should make us think ourselves above either the duties or the privileges of the communion of saints. 2. Though their enemies had severely threatened them, and endeavoured to break their knot, and frighten them from the work they were jointly engaged in, yet they went to their own company, and feared not the wrath of their rulers. They might have had comfort, if, being let go, they had retired to their closets, and spent some time in devotion there. But they were men in a public station, and must seek not so much their own personal satisfaction as the public good. Christ's followers do best in company, provided it be in their own company.

II. The account they gave them of what had passed: They reported all that the chief priests and elders had said to them, adding, no doubt, what they were enabled by the grace of God to reply to them, and how their trial issued. They related it to them, 1. That they might know what to expect both from men and from God in the progress of their work. From men they might expect every thing that was terrifying, but from God every thing that was encouraging; men would do their utmost to run them down, but God would take effectual care to bear them up. Thus the brethren in the Lord would wax confident through their bonds, and their experiences, as Phi_1:14. 2. That they might have it recorded in the history of the church, for the benefit of posterity, particularly for the confirmation of our faith touching the resurrection of Christ. The silence of an adversary, in some cases, is next door to the consent and testimony of an adversary. These apostles told the chief priests to their faces that God had raised up Jesus from the dead, and, though they were a body of them together, they had not the confidence to deny it, but, in the silliest and most sneaking manner imaginable, bade the apostles not to tell any body of it. 3. That they might now join with them in prayers and praises; and by such a concert as this God would be the more glorified, and the church the more edified. We should therefore communicate to our brethren the providences of God that relate to us, and our experience of his presence with us, that they may assist us in our acknowledgment of God therein.

III. Their address to God upon this occasion: When they heard of the impotent malice of the priests, and the potent courage of the sufferers, they called their company together and went to prayer: They lifted up their voice to God with one accord, Act_4:24. Not that it can be supposed that they all said the same words at the same time (though it was possible they might, being all inspired by one and the same Spirit), but one in the name

of the rest lifted up his voice to God and the rest joined with him, humothumadon -with

one mind (so the word signifies); their hearts went along with him, and so, though but one spoke, they all prayed; one lifted up his voice, and, in concurrence with him, they all lifted up their hearts, which was, in effect, lifting up their voice to God; for thoughts are as words to God. Moses cried unto God, when we find not a word said. Now in this solemn address to God we have,

JAMISO, "Act_4:23-37. Peter and John dismissed from the Sanhedrim, report the proceedings to the assembled disciples - They engage in prayer - The astonishing answer and results.

being let go, they went to their own company— Observe the two opposite classes, representing the two interests which were about to come into deadly conflict.

CALVI, "23.Furthermore when they were let go. It shall appear by and by to what

end they declared to the other disciples what things had befallen them, to wit, that

they might be the more emboldened and encouraged by the grace of God hereafter;

secondly, that they might arm themselves with prayer against the furious

threatenings of their enemies; and thus must the children of God do, one must prick

forward another, and they must join hand in hand, that they may vanquish the

common adversary fighting under Christ’s banner. They consider (219) with

themselves what dangers hang over their heads, to the end they may be the more

ready to enter (220) the same, although they see their enemies press sore upon them;

yet lest it should grieve them (221) to have a new combat ever now and then, they

assure (222) themselves that they shall be invincible (223) through the same power

of God whereby they got the victory before. And it is to be thought (although Luke

makes no mention thereof) that the apostles being contented with their former

answer, did not contend with those furies, [furious men;] and yet we must persuade

ourselves that they were not so forgetful of their former constancy that they did

submit themselves unto their ungodly decree like slaves. (224)

COFFMA, "Having been threatened by the hierarchy, the apostles might have

been expected, by those who threatened, to flee from the area; but instead, they,

together with the whole Christian community, went to their knees in prayer to

Almighty God. o, they would not flee - yet. The battle for the soul of secular Israel

would be continued for forty years; THE the Christians would flee from

Jerusalem, and the accumulated wrath of centuries would humble forever that city

which rejected Jesus.

BARCLAY 23-31, "In this passage we have the reaction of the Christian Church in

the hour of danger. It might have been thought that when Peter and John returned

with their story a deep depression would have fallen on the Church, as they looked

ahead to the troubles which were now bound to descend upon them. The one thing

that never even struck them was to obey the Sanhedrin's command to speak no

more. Into their minds at that moment came certain great convictions and into their

lives came a tide of strength.

(i) They had the conviction of the power of God. With them was he who was creator

and sustainer of all things. Once the papal envoy threatened Martin Luther with

what would follow if he persisted in his course and warned him that in the end he

would be deserted by all his supporters. "Where will you be then?" demanded the

envoy. "Then as now," Luther answered, "in the hands of God." For the Christian,

they that are for us are always more than they that are against us.

(ii) They had the conviction of the futility of man's rebellion. The word translated

rage is used of the neighing of spirited horses. They may trample and toss their

heads; in the end they will have to accept the discipline of the reins. Men may make

their defiant gestures against God; in the end God must prevail.

(iii) They set before themselves the remembrance of Jesus. They remembered how

he suffered and how he triumphed; and in that memory they found their confidence,

for it is enough for the disciple that he be as his Lord.

(iv) They prayed for courage. They did not pretend that they could face this in their

own strength; they turned to a power that was not their own.

(v) The result was the gift of the Spirit. The promise was fulfilled; they were not left

comfortless. So they found the courage and the strength they needed to witness

when their witness might well mean their death.

COSTABLE 23-28. "After hearing the apostles' report, the Christians sought the

Lord (Gr. Despota, sovereign ruler) in prayer.

"Three movements may be discerned in this prayer of the early church: (1) God is

sovereign (Acts 4:24). (2) God's plan includes believers' facing opposition against

the Messiah (Acts 4:25-28). (3) Because of these things they petitioned God to grant

them boldness to preach (Acts 4:29-30)." [ote: Toussaint, "Acts," p. 364.]

The believers contrasted God's position with that of His servants David (Acts 4:25),

Jesus (Acts 4:27; Acts 4:30), and themselves (Acts 4:29). The word translated

"servant" (pais), used of David and Jesus, contrasts appropriately with the word

rendered "bond-servants" (doulos), used of the disciples.

The opening reference to God's creative power in the disciples' prayer (Acts 4:24)

has many parallels in other Old Testament prayers (e.g., Exodus 20:11; ehemiah

9:6; Psalms 146:6; Isaiah 42:5; cf. Acts 14:15; Acts 17:24). This was a common and

appropriate way to approach God in prayer, especially when a request for the

exercise of that power followed, as it did here (cf. 2 Kings 19:15-19; Isaiah 37:15-20).

ote the testimony to the divine inspiration of Psalms 2 contained in Acts 4:25. God

is the author of Scripture who has worked through human instruments to announce

and record His revelations (cf. 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:21).

The believers saw a parallel to Jesus' crucifixion in the psalmist's prophecy that

Messiah would experience opposition from Gentiles and leaders. This prophecy will

find its fullest fulfillment in events still future from our time in history. God

anointed Jesus at His baptism (cf. Acts 10:38). David's references to Gentiles, the

peoples, kings, and rulers (Acts 4:25-26) applied to the Roman Gentiles, the

Israelites, Herod, and Pontius Pilate (Acts 4:27). However the believers saw God's

sovereign hand (the ultimate effective cause) behind human actions again (the

secondary instrumental cause, Acts 4:28; cf. Acts 2:23 a; Acts 3:18).

"They see in this beginning of persecution the continued fulfilment [sic] of Scripture

which had been evident in the Passion of Jesus." [ote: eil, p. 91.]

HAWKER 23-30, "And being let go, they went to their own company, and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said unto them. (24) And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is: (25) Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? (26) The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. (27) For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, (28) For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done. (29) And now, Lord, behold their threatenings: and grant unto thy servants, that with all boldness they may speak thy word, (30) By stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.

What a beautiful and lovely picture is here drawn, of the primitive Church! Reader! do observe the expression; their own company. Yes! The whole Church is One, and so the Great Head of the Church describes her, Son_6:9. And contrast this, to the account given of Judas the traitor, whose fall is immediately followed with the consequence, that he might go to his own place, Act_1:25.

And I pray the Reader to notice the grace, which instantly appeared in this assembly of the faithful: the Lord the Spirit led their minds out in prayer. And what a Scriptural prayer it was? The Lord be praised, who caused it to be recorded, for the comfort and edification of the Church in all ages. Here is a double proof of the Almighty ministry of the Holy Ghost, in that He who guided David’s pen to write, taught their tongues and hearts to speak. A plain proof that the same Almighty Lord presided over the Church in Old Testament days, as well as under the New Testament dispensation. And let not the Reader overlook, how uniformly those holy men of old, both in their prayers to the Lord, and their conversation with men, kept always in view, the Lord’s purposes and decrees concerning the redemption by Jesus, Act_2:23; Act_5:30; Act_10:38.

And is not this prayer more immediately directed to the Person of the Holy Ghost, in his Office-character; and though (as all prayer are,) offered up to the whole Persons of the Godhead, through the Mediator, yet with a special eye to the office-work of the Holy Ghost. Let it be remembered, that I do not decidedly say as much: I only ask the question. But, as we are told, that no prophecy came in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, 2Pe_1:21: and the Lord is here addressed as speaking those words by the mouth of his servant David; Psa_2:1-2, it should seem, to have been immediately a prayer to the Holy Ghost. Moreover, the Apostles, in this prayer, particularly dwell upon the Person of the holy Child Jesus; and his being anointed: both which were the special acts of the Holy Ghost. See Luk_1:35

and Luk_4:18. And therefore, it was from God the Spirit, who, but a few days, before, had baptized them, and called them by ordination to their ministry, that they now looked for all suited supplies of grace, to give them boldness, and to seal their authority, by the confirmation of miracles. Whether I am correct or not in this opinion, certain it is, that to God the Holy Ghost the Apostles looked for the success of their labors. And it may serve to shew, how necessary it must be, in all the under pastors in the ministry of the Church, both to be satisfied that they have their commission from him; and to him to commit all their services.

AROT, EVERY CREATURE AFTER ITS KID.

" And being let go, they went to their own company, and reported all that

the chief priests and elders had said unto them. " ACTS iv. 23.

A SECRET, mysterious, reciprocal attraction drew Peter

and John together, although the two men were by no

means similar in character. They were companions in

their visit to the empty sepulchre, and companions in

the dangerous duty of preaching Christ in Jerusalem

immediately after the Pentecost. Perhaps the differ

ence, or even the contrast between them in natural

disposition, rendered them more suitable to each other

for mutual help. As a man s strength and a woman s

gentleness bind two into one in married life, the robust

impetuous Peter clung to the calm, self-possessed ten

derness of John; and John, in his weakness, was fain

to lean on Peter s strength.

This noble pair of brothers, when their own love was

warm, and the hatred of their enemies sharp, stood

side by side in the courts of the temple and in the

streets of the city, charging home upon the Jewish ru

lers and people with the terrible indictment, "Ye have

crucified the Lord;" ready, whenever the sword of the

Spirit should pierce the conscience of the hearers, to

run in and apply for healing the blood of atonement.

Grieved that these two witnesses should teach the

people, through the risen Jesus, the resurrection of the

dead, the Sanhedrim had arrested Peter and John at

the close of their day s labor, and shut them in prison

for the night.

How the two prisoners spent the night \ve are not

informed. Perhaps they sang praises, like Paul and

Silas at a later date; or perhaps they were not yet so

far advanced. It may be they could not do more than

secretly cast their burden on the Lord, without being

able as yet to glory in tribulation.

ext day the Council called the prisoners and ex

amined them. Having heard from Peter more of plain

truth than was pleasant to their taste, they ordered

the panels to be removed from the bar, and consulted

privately regarding the case.

The aim of the judges was not to arrive at the

truth, but to crush the witnesses. There was not

much debate, and their resolution was quickly taken.

They recalled the prisoners, and straitly threatened

them that they should speak thenceforth to no man in

the name of Jesus. Lame and impotent conclusion !

They omitted the main element from their calculation.

They knew not the fire that the love of Christ had

kindled in the hearts of those two men.

Suppose that some savages have seen a cannon

charged and discharged. Suppose that when they

saw it charged a second time, dreading the conse

quences, they should gather stones and clay, and

therewith ram the cannon full to the muzzle, by way

of shutting in the shot, and securing the safety of the

neighborhood. They know not the power of gunpow

der when it is touched by a spark. This is the sort of

blunder into which the Sanhedrim fell. They thought

they could stifle the testimony of the apostles by ram

ming a threat of punishment down their throats. They

knew not the power of faith in Christ, when it is kin

dled by a spark from heaven.

Peter and John did not deceive their judges. With

beautiful simplicity and sublime courage they answered,

"Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken

unto you more than unto God, judge ye." These Jew

ish rulers have committed a blunder. They have

summoned the sea into their presence, and proclaimed

to it, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further !

"We cannot but speak the things which we have

seen and heard." It is by no means a universal rule

that every man is bound to proclaim all that he has seen

and heard. Many things that we see and hear it is both

our inclination and our duty to conceal. It is the pecu

liar nature of the message which these men have received

that lays an obligation on them to make it known. The

condition on which any one receives mercy in the cove

nant is that he should hasten to publish the glad tidings

abroad. When a polished gem receives a sunbeam on

its surface, it is under a natural necessity of spreading

out the light in all directions; and so a human soul that

receives the light of life from the face of Jesus is under

law to let that light shine before men: " Freely ye have

received, freely give."

After another interdict against preaching Christ, the

prisoners were dismissed from the bar. It is intimated

that the Court would willingly have adopted a severer

measure, but were restrained by a fear of the people.

This is an illustrious specimen of special providence.

When God has given out his decree, "Touch not mine

anointed, and do my prophets no harm," he has suitable

instruments always at hand to execute his will. The

people, as such, would be a broken reed for any perse

cuted witness to lean upon. At the next turn of the

tide it might become necessary that a military chief

should rescue an apostle from a mob that were ready to

tear him limb from limb. This is the doing of the Lord.

The shields of the earth are his: now with one and now

with another he covers his servants heads in the day

of battle.

Accordingly, the two apostles were dismissed; "and

being let go, they went to their own company." Be

hold a particular fact occurring under the operation of

a general law. Like draws to like. When an evil deed

was about to be done, the persecutors assembled and

laid their heads together: when the Christian mission

was about to issue from Jerusalem upon the world, the

disciples of Christ congregated in an upper room for

prayer. Birds of a feather flock together; and if one

bird has been for a time imprisoned separated from its

companions it is beautiful to see, when the cage is at

length opened, how straight and quick is its course

through the air to the place where it left its mates and

expects to find them again. On this principle proceeds

the pigeon-telegraph, which has been long known in

the world, but never attained the magnitude of a great

national institute till the necessities of the siege forced

it to the front in Paris.

The instincts of animals are like the laws of inanimate

matter perfect in their kind. When one lamb is caught

and kept for a time separate from the fold.it submits only

to superior force. As soon as it regains liberty, it bounds

across the plain, and never halts till, with beating heart

and panting breath, it has pressed into the midst of

the flock again.

With equal exactness in an opposite direction, the

sow that was washed returns to wallow with her fellows

in the mire. Thus suddenly and surely did a worldling,

who had for a time been arrested by the discourses of

Jesus, leap back into his element of filthy lucre. As

soon as a pause in the sermon let him go, he went to

his own. When the Lord had finished one of his les

sons in the midst of a promiscuous audience, one of the

company cried out, " Master, speak to my brother, that

he divide the inheritance with me." The word of Him

who spake as never man spake had fascinated even this

man, and for a moment separated him from his chosen

company and conversation. But the word that arrests

attention does not always renew the heart. As soon

as the voice of the preacher relaxed, and let go the

momentarily entranced listener, he bounded back into

his element. He rushed after his covetousness, as water

flows down when some interrupting barrier has been

removed.

An example of the opposite tendency in a renewed

heart is exhibited in the experience of the possessed

man whom the Lord delivered at Gadara. Satan had

bound him soul and body, and separated him from all

good; but when the chain was broken by the Re

deemer s word, the liberated man ran to his deliverer,

and sat at his feet, clothed and in his right mind. Being

let go, he too went to his own to his own Saviour

and his own fellow-disciples. It is good when the

spring in the heart is sound, and a Christian, by a

strong instinct of the new nature, as soon as he is

freed from alien entanglements, bounds back into con

genial company and congenial employment.

It is sometimes remarked, that when persons who

at home maintained a Christian profession, have gone

abroad gone to a distant colony where ordinances

were wanting, or to a Papal country where ordinances

were superstitious, they have left their religion behind

them, and abandoned themselves to godless pleasures

or godless gains. In these cases, as the result proves,

the religion was an external thing from the first. It

was of the nature of a bondage. At home the cords

of the general Christian profession of the country were

sufficiently strong to keep the man away from the em

ployments and company that he secretly loved; but

when these cords were broken by the simple fact. of

his removal from home, he was a free man, and like

other creatures, animate and inanimate, when he was

let go he went unto his own. Thus worthless, in the

last resource, is the Christianity which acts as a re

straint to prevent a man from following his own incli

nations: beyond expression precious is the faith in Je

sus which takes the inclinations and changes them so

that they instinctively seek the pure. This false re

ligion of bondsis the direct contrary of the true. Christ s

work is a redemption; Christ is a^Redeemer. Pie sets

the captive free. " If the Son make you free, ye shall

be free indeed." This glorious grace turns upside down

the world which blindly counts religion so much re

straint, to which some men prudently submit, with a

view to a larger return in a future life. The man who

only submits to the restraints of religion, runs wild in

all evil when these restraints are removed "Create

in me a clean heart, O God." "Thy people shall be

willing m the day of thy power." " I will run in the

way of thy commandments, when thou hast enlarged

my heart."

A young man has been accustomed from childhood

to the order and sobriety of a Christian household. As

the lines of restraint were laid on him while he was an

infant, and have never been removed throughout his

youth, he is not very vividly conscious that they are only

external bands that confine him within the course of a

well-favored morality. The time arrives at last when

he must leave his father s roof and be lost to view in a

great metropolis, like a drop of rain when it falls into

the lake. ow is the moment of danger to that youth;

now, if ever, for him is the hour and the power of dark

ness. He feels himself alone as if he were in the heart

of an American forest. If his religion has been only a

cord round his neck, like the bit and bridle with which

a horse is held, he is now free from his religion. If his

religion is a thing that can let him go, he will depart to

his own: he will seek the company and occupation of

the careless, it may be of the profane.

Cords of this sort were fastened on Judas, and as

long as they remained they confined his evil practices

within very narrow limits; but when at last he was let

go, what a fearfully sudden leap he made to his own

his own course, his own company, and his own place.

Demas was brought and kept for a time under the

mighty influence of Paul. But the hold which even

such a natural leader took, could not always be main

tained. It gave way one day, and to the present world,

his own chosen portion, gravitated Demas, as a stone

sinks to the earth when you let it go in the air. The love

of Paul could not hold him Paul was not crucified for

him. The love of God shown to men in the gift of his

Son, a bond soft and silent, but omnipotent, like that

which keeps the planets in their places, when once it

is folded round you, cannot be wrenched away.

But we may find many bright examples of the same

principle on the opposite side. The new creature acts

after its kind, as well as the old; when the chains of

bondage are broken, the captive returns to his Father s

house.

A youth who has already gotten a new heart and

enjoys a blessed hope, has been sent as an apprentice

into a great engineering establishment, where several

hundred men are employed. His lot is cast in a corner

of the huge workshop occupied by a group that have

grown old and bold in profanity and licentiousness,

in the first hour they discover that a saint is among

them, and with a malignity altogether devilish, they

gloat in anticipation over their prey. The ribaldry and

blasphemy are increased: they do everything that in

genuity can suggest to rub off the youth s religion, and

make him such as one of themselves. If his religion

had been a conventional gilding on the surface, it would

have been rubbed off in the first week; but as it was

all steel, the more roughly it was rubbed the brighter

it grew.

The first day wore on towards evening: at six o clock

the bell, in a small tower over the gateway, was rung,

and every man threw aside his tools and hastened away.

The apprentice engineer, articled by an eternal cove

nant to Christ his Saviour, and thereafter indentured

to a master engine-maker, was at length let go. L el

go, he went to his own: to the fields, the flowers, the

birds, with which he had been wont to keep company

at home; then to his food, which he enjoyed with the

fresh relish of a laborer, and the fresher relish of a child

of God constantly getting daily bread from a Father s

hand; then to the Bible, his own book, the gift of God

to him; then to his own Saviour, in faith s confiding

prayer. A whole legion of devils, or wicked men, will

not overcome this youth. The anchor of his soul is

sure and steadfast within the veil. God will shield

him at first, so that the fiery darts shall not hurt him,

and after a little put a sword in his hand the Sword

of the Spirit, which is the Word of God; and this wea

pon he will wield aggressively, so as to subdue some

of these enemies, and lead them captive unto Christ.

Yet another lesson. The grave has a greedy ap

petite, and a firm grasp. It takes many, and keeps

what it gets. Deep in the earth, and deeper in the

sea, lie the bodies of those who have been redeemed

by the blood of Christ. A strange place for Christ s

members to be in ! But there they shall not always

be. They must one day be let go; and when let go;

they will return to their own their own Redeemer,

and their own rest.

An atomofatmosphericairmayhavebeen imprisoned

in some strong vessel at the bottom of the sea for ages.

After thousands of years, that vessel at last gives way

and breaks up. The atom of air, although it has been

long an exile, has not forgotten its home, and will not

miss its way. Whenever it is released, it rises in a

sheer straight line through the thick heavy waters

rises a little air-bell, nor halts in its course, until,

emerging from the sea with a gentle joyful bursting

sound, it reaches its own, the heaven, the home

which it left many ages before.

Be of good cheer, disciples of the Lord Jesus. Ye

are of more value than many atoms of air. Doth God

in nature care for the birds of the air and the flowers

of the field, and the elements of matter; and how much

more shall he clothe and house you, O ye of little faith.

The grave must relax its grasp. Its stubborn nature

has been already tamed into obedience. The Lord has

risen, and become the first-fruits of them that slept.

The way by which he went stands open, and through

it all his members will return to him. Earth and sea

must give up their dead, and the released prisoners

will unerringly find their way home. According to

the power and the constancy of ature, which is the

power and constancy of God, like will draw to like at

last, the living to the living, the living saved to the

Living- Saviour.

24 When they heard this, they raised their voices together in prayer to God. “Sovereign Lord,” they said, “you made the heavens and the earth and the sea, and everything in them.

BARES, "They lifted up their voice - To lift up the voice, among the Hebrews, was a phrase denoting either an “address” to the people Jdg_9:7, or a phrase expressive of “weeping” Gen_29:11; Jdg_2:4; Rth_1:9; 1Sa_24:16, or of “prayer.” To lift up the voice to God means simply they prayed to Him.

With one accord - Unitedly. Properly, with one mind or purpose. See notes on Act_1:14. The union of the early Christians is often noticed in the Acts of the Apostles. Thus far, there was no jar or dissension in their society, and everything has the appearance of the most entire affection and confidence.

Lord - Greek: ∆έσποτα Despota - “Despota.” From this word is derived the word

“despot.” This is not the usual word employed by which to address God. The word

commonly translated “Lord” is Κυρίος Kurios. The word used here denotes “one who rules over others,” and was applied to the highest magistrate or officer. It denotes “authority; power; absoluteness in ruling.” It is a word denoting more authority in ruling than the other. That more commonly denotes a property in a thing; this denotes “absolute rule.” It is applied to God in Luk_2:29; Rev_6:10; Jud_1:4; to Jesus Christ, 2Pe_2:1; to masters, 1Ti_6:1; Tit_2:9; 1Pe_2:18; to husbands, 1Pe_3:6; and to a possessor or owner, 2Ti_2:21.

Thou art God - This ascription of praise seems to have been designed to denote their sense of his power to deliver them, and of his right to dispose of them. They were employed in his service; they were encompassed with dangers; and they acknowledged him as their God, who had made all things, and who had an entire right to direct, and to dispose of them for his own glory. In times of danger and perplexity we should remember that God has a right to do with us as he pleases; and we should go cheerfully, and commit ourselves into his hands.

Which hast made ... - Gen. 1: This passage is taken directly from Psa_146:6. Compare Rev_14:7.

CLARKE, "Lord, thou art God - ∆εσποτα,�συ�H�Θεος, Thou God art the sovereign Lord. Thy rule is universal, and thy power unlimited; for thou hast the heaven and its glories, the earth and the sea, and their endlessly varied and numerous inhabitants, under thy direction and control.

GILL, "And when they heard that,.... The whole of the report the apostles made; and which they heard with patience, and without making any unworthy reflections upon the sanhedrim; and being, on the one hand, not over much terrified, and cast down, and, on the other hand, not sluggish, careless, and secure; they betake themselves, not to plots, conspiracies, and seditions; nor to arms to defend and avenge themselves, though their numbers were large; but to prayer, that they might not be deterred by threatenings, from speaking boldly the word of the Lord:

they lift up their voice to God with one accord; being inspired by the Holy Ghost, they not only agreed in the matter of their petitions, which agreement is of great avail with God; for whatever two or more agree in to ask of God, shall be given to them; but also in the very words which were vocally expressed by them, and that in a very loud and sonorous way, to signify the vehemency and ardour of their minds and affections:

and said, Lord, thou art God; or, as in one of Beza's copies, "Lord our God"; or, as in the Ethiopic version, "Lord, thou art our God"; addressing God, the Father of Christ, as appears from Act_4:27 as their own God, their covenant God and Father in Christ, from whom they might hope for help, and in whom they might expect safety, and every supply of grace:

which hast made heaven and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is; and which is a full proof of the omnipotence of God; an attribute of singular use to the saints in distressed circumstances; for what is it he cannot do, who made all things that are? and what is it he will not do for his saints, for the accomplishment of his purposes, the making good of his covenant and promises, the fulfilment of prophecies; the good of his people, and the glory of his name?

HERY, " Their adoration of God as the Creator of the world (Act_4:24): With one mind, and so, in effect, with one mouth, they glorified God, Rom_15:6. They said, “O

Lord, thou art God, God alone; Despota, thou art our Master and sovereign Ruler” (so

the word signifies), “thou art God; God, and not man; God, and not the work of men's hands; the Creator of all, and not the creature of men's fancies. Thou art the God who hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, the upper and lower world, and all the creatures that are in both.” Thus we Christians distinguish ourselves from the heathen, that, while they worship gods which they have made, we are worshipping the God that made us and all the world. And it is very proper to begin our prayers, as well as our creed, with the acknowledgement of this, that God is the Father almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. Though the apostles were at this time full of the mystery of the world's redemption, yet they did not forget nor overlook the history of the world's creation; for the Christian religion was intended to confirm and improve, not to eclipse nor jostle out, the truths and dictates of natural religion. It is a great encouragement to God's servants, both in doing work and suffering work, that they serve the God that made all things, and therefore has the disposal of their times, and all events concerning them, and is able to strengthen them under all their difficulties. And, if we give him the glory of this, we may take the comfort of it.

JAMISO, "they lifted up their voice— the assembled disciples, on hearing Peter’s report.

with one accord— the breasts of all present echoing every word of this sublime prayer.

Lord— (See on Luk_2:29). Applied to God, the term expresses absolute authority.

God which hast made heaven and earth— against whom, therefore, all creatures are powerless.

CALVI, "We are taught by this example what is our duty to do when our

adversaries do imperiously threaten us; for we must not carelessly laugh in time of

danger, but the fear of danger ought to drive us to crave help at the hands of God,

and this is a remedy to comfort and set us up on foot, lest, being terrified with

threatenings, we cease off from doing our duty. Here is a double fruit of this history,

that the disciples of Christ do not jest when they hear that their enemies do threaten

them so sore and press so sore upon them, as careless and sluggish men use to do;

but being touched with fear, they fly to seek help at the hands of God; and again,

they are not terrified, neither yet do they conceive any immoderate fear; (225) but

crave of God (226) invincible constancy with right godly petitions.

24.Thou art God, which hast created. Although this title and commendation of

God’s power be general, yet it ought to be referred unto the present matter, for they

do in such sort acknowledge the power of God in the creation of the whole world,

that they apply the same therewithal unto the present use. In like sort, the prophets

do oftentimes commend the same, to the end they may redress that fear which

troubleth us when we behold the power of our enemies; secondly, they add

thereunto the promise, and they make these two foundations of their boldness

whereby they are emboldened to pray. And surely our prayers are such as they

ought to be, and acceptable to God only then, when as staying ourselves upon his

promises and power, we pray with certain hope to obtain that for which we pray,

for we cannot otherwise have any true confidence unless God do will us to come

unto him, and promise that he is ready to help us; and, secondly, unless we

acknowledge that he is able enough to help us; wherefore let the faithful exercise

themselves in this double meditation so often as they address themselves unto

prayer. Furthermore, we gather hereby after what sort we ought to consider the

creation of the world; to wit, that we may know that all things are subject to God,

and ruled by his will, and when that the world hath done what it can, there shall no

other thing come to pass but that which God hath decreed; yea, that the wantonness

of the wicked is monstrous, as if the clay should resist the potter; for this is the

meaning of the faithful generally, that whatsoever dangers hang over their heads,

yet can God prevent the same infinite ways, forasmuch as all things are in his hand,

and that he is able to make all the parts of heaven and earth (which he hath created)

to obey him.

COFFMA, "The Christians met the crisis through resort to prayer, and the prayer

here recorded is remarkable in several particulars.

With one accord ... This expression occurs eleven times in the Acts, and only once

elsewhere in the ew Testament (Romans 15:6).[34] It stresses the unity of the

Lord's followers, and thus reveals one of the great secrets of the success of

Christianity during those first years.

O Lord ... The holy reverence of prayers recorded in the Bible is notable and, in all

ages, a loss of reverence in prayers has proved to be a loss of effectiveness. "Lord"

in this place is from the Greek term meaning "Master" (English Revised Version

margin); and, coupled with the reference to creation, it has the force of

acknowledging God's unlimited power over all that he made. "The church in danger

finds support and solace in the thought of God's absolute sovereignty."[35]

Thou art he that did make ... is preferable to the English Revised Version (1885)

rendition and is given as a permissible reading in the margin.

[34] A. C. Hervey, op. cit., p. 124.

[35] Ibid., p. 125.

COSTABLE, "The effect of opposition during Cyrus' reign 4:24

The reference in this verse to the work stopping indicates that at this point, the

writer returned to the opposition he had been describing earlier (Acts 4:1-5). Acts

4:6-23 are parenthetical. They record later events and simply illustrate the

continuing antagonism of Israel's enemies in the years that followed the main event

in view in this chapter. [ote: H. H. Rowley, "ehemiah's Mission and Its

Background," Bulletin of the John Rylands Library of the University of Manchester

37:2 (March 1955):540-43.]

Work on the temple ceased in 536 B.C., as the writer noted here. The workers had

only completed the foundation. Construction did not recommence until 520 B.C., 16

years later.

"Even when they [the restoration Jews] strove to again lay the foundations of that

most important symbol of the presence of God, their sanctuary, discouragement

took its toll; and the whole project came to a complete stop for sixteen long years

(Ezra 4:24). Everything was wrong: they lacked the means, then the inclination, and

finally even the will to build the temple; for their every attempt met with constant

opposition both from within the small group and from the outside (Ezra 3:12-13;

Ezra 4:1-22). So it would have remained had not God graciously sent the prophets

Haggai and Zechariah (Ezra 5:1)." [ote: Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Toward an Old

Testament Theology, p. 250.]

ELLICOTT, "(24) They lifted up their voice to God with one accord.—The phrase

seems to imply an intonation, or chant, different from that of common speech (Acts

14:11; Acts 22:22). The joint utterance described may be conceived as the result

either (1) of a direct inspiration, suggesting the same words to all who were present;

(2) of the people following St. Peter, clause by clause; (3) of the hymn being already

familiar to the disciples. On the whole, (2) seems the most probable, the special

fitness of the hymn for the occasion being against (3), and (1) involving a miracle of

so startling a nature that we can hardly take it for granted without a more definite

statement. The recurrence of St. Luke’s favourite phrase (see ote on Acts 1:14)

should not be passed over.

Lord.—The Greek word is not the common one for Lord (Kyrios), but Despotes, the

absolute Master of the Universe. It is a coincidence worth noting that, though but

seldom used of God in the ew Testament, it occurs again, as used by the two

Apostles who take part in it, as in 2 Peter 2:1, and Revelation 6:10. (See ote on

Luke 2:29.) In the Greek version of the Old Testament it is found applied to the

Angel of Jehovah in Joshua 5:14, and to Jehovah Himself in Proverbs 29:25. The

hymn has the special interest of being the earliest recorded utterance of the praises

of the Christian Church. As such, it is significant that it begins, as so many of the

Psalms begin, with setting forth the glory of God as the Creator, and rises from that

to the higher redemptive work. More strict, “the heaven, the earth, and the sea,”

each region of creation being contemplated in its distinctness.

AROT, THE PRAYER OF THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH.

" And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God with one

accord, and said, Lord, than art God, which hast made heaven, and earth,

and the sea, and all that in them is: who by the month of thy servant Da

vid hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain

things ? The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered to

gether against the Lord, and against his Christ, for of a truth against

thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed; both Herod , and Pontius

Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,

for to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.

And now, Lord, behold their threatenings: and grant unto thy servants,

that with all boldness they may speak tliv word. ACTS IV. 24-29.

PETER and John, providentially delivered from the

hands of the persecutors, plunged into a meeting of

their fellow-disciples, and forthwith reported all that

had happened. The company as soon as they heard

of the danger that had threatened, and the deliverance

that had been wrought, forthwith "lifted up their voice

to God " and prayed. They were neither cast down

nor uplifted. They did not propose to try this meth

od or that method of improving their circumstances.

They proposed no plan. They lacked wisdom and

strength, and in their need applied to God by prayer.

Prayer is not the origin of a movement. It is the

result of one that preceded. You stand on the mar-

gin of a Highland lake, and hear a mysterious but dis

tinctly articulate sound coming from the dead wall of

a gray, ruined castle that stands on a miniature island

not far from the shore. The sound, however, was not

generated in that ruin. It could not generate a voice.

The words of a living man on the shore, wafted over

the still water, struck the old silent keep, and its wall

gave back the echo. If that living voice had not struck

the wall, the wall would have remained dumb.

Prayer man s cry to God is the second of a series

of vibrations. The voice of prayer, on earth, is an echo

awakened in ruined, dumb humanity, by God s sweet

promise coming down from heaven. In general, prayer

is the echo of a promise; in particular, we may discover

the specific promise to which this prayer replies (Isa.

xl. 26, 27).

What a sublime position these suppliants occupy !

They are admitted into the Divine counsel. " The

secret of the Lord is with them that fear him." They

knew that all these events were foreseen, and would be

overruled for good. They were able to mark in the Scrip

tures the precise spot they had reached in the scheme

of Providence, as a shipmaster marks his latitude on his

chart. In the quiet confidence of faith they realize

and confess that the combination of princes and peoples

of Jews and Gentiles to put to death the holy child

Jesus, only accomplished the gracious purpose of God.

These principalities and powers of the world imagined

that they were quenching the kingdom of Christ in its

infancy; whereas they were the unconscious instruments

of laying its foundations deep, and spreading its influ

ence through the world.

ow, in verse 29th, comes the most important of

all their requests. Petitions sent to Parliament are

sometimes of considerable length. There may be a

narrative of facts, long and intricate; there may be the

citation of precedents; there may be arguments and

pleas; but it is common to pass over all these when

the document is presented, and read only what is de

nominated " the prayer of the petition" that is, the

clause at the end which declares articulately what the

petitioners want what they wish to be done for them,

or given to them. Verse 29th contains the prayer of

the petition. It expresses what the petitioners desire

what they would be at, if they had their will.

It is most interesting and instructive to mark what they

really crave. ot a word of vengeance upon their en

emies. In the recital they have clearly described the

cruel injustice of their adversaries; but they do not fol

low up that recital by a request for punishment. either

do they plead for immunity from danger for themselves.

There is a recital of their danger; but not a petition for

safety. The request is, not that they may be shielded

from persecution, but that they may have grace to be

faithful under it. " Grant unto thy servants, that with

all boldness they may speak thy word."

It is a beautiful example of distrust of themselves

and confidence in God combined. They feared lest

the danger which threatened their persons should in

timidate them in their work. Their anxiety was lest

their natural shrinking from suffering should tempt them

to conceal the pungent parts of their testimony in order

to shield themselves from persecution. They were jeal

ous over themselves with a godly jealousy. They were

conscious that nature within them shrank instinctively

from pain and shame. They knew that to proclaim

the whole counsel of God would gall the men who had

the power of life and death in their hands. They feared,

accordingly, lest they should be tempted to make the

gospel more pleasant for the sake of peace.

The application of this Scriptural example to our

own circumstances is attended with some difficulty;

and yet it may be made with certainty and success.

It is difficult to clear our way here, but not impossible.

The circumstances of our place and time seem to be

so diverse from those of the first preachers, that no di

rect lesson from their experience can be transferred to

ours. o persecutor dare raise a hand against a min

ister here and now, to prevent him from declaring the

Gospel in all its fullness. We are free: and yet the

pressure which tempts to timid unfaithfulness is only

removed from one side and applied to another. The

fear of man bringeth a snare; and ever since Peter said,

" I know not the man," the feet of even true witnesses

have, in all generations, been often entangled miser

ably in its toils. But snares are not all of one shape

or of one material either the bodily snares of the fowler,

or the snares set for the spirit by the wiles of the wicked

one. They may be of iron or of silk. They may be

varied indefinitely in matter, form, and position, ac

cording to the character of the victim, and the oppor

tunities of the ensnarer. A force that is diffused and

soft, may exercise a greater pressure than one that is

sharp and hard, as the atmosphere over a man s body

lies heavier on him than any other burden he ever bore.

. To threaten a witness for Christ with the prison or

the scaffold is one way of turning him aside from faith

fulness; to set before him the favor of a polished but

worldly circle is another. You may, if you please, pro

nounce that the man who should weakly yield to these

soft seducements is a far less noble specimen of human

ity than those men who quailed before a scaffold, and

held their peace to save their lives; although, even here,

something might be said on the other side. But the

distinction is of no practical importance. If the se

ductions of modern society do, in point of fact, deflect

the compass of the witness as far aside as the ancient

persecutions, the difference in the character of the in

strument makes nothing in the result.

If two ships are lost at sea by the false pointing of

their compasses, it will make no difference either as to

the loss of property or the loss of life, that the compass

of the one ship was prevented from pointing truly by a

nail that fastened it to the deck, and the compass of

the other ship secretly drawn aside by a mass of iron

concealed in the hold. In both cases, and in both

alike, the compass failed to declare the truth, and that

faithlessness caused the loss of the ships. Thus an an

cient minister of the gospel who held back the truth

for fear of the dungeon, and a modern minister who

softens and disguises the truth because a gay, worldly,

critical congregation listen to the Word, must stand side

by side, repenting and pleading for the pardon of their

unfaithfulness. On the other hand, an ancient minister

who proclaimed the whole truth with a halter round

his neck, and a modern minister who, fearing God and

having no other fear, declares the whole counsel of God

to every class and every character, will stand together

at the great account to hear the approving sentence,

"Well done, good and faithful servants: enter ye into

the joy of your Lord."

The request is simple, specific, and full: " Grant unto

thy servants that with all boldness they may speak thy

word."

i. That they may speak, and not be dumb. Speech

is a chief gift of God, a chief prerogative of man. Where

there is a living spring, it finds or makes a channel

through which it may flow; and where there is a living

soul, it finds or makes an avenue of egress. A soul can

not be imprisoned in a body of flesh, as a spring cannot

be imprisoned among the mountains. Either life, ac

cording to its nature, must have a means of outflow.

On the other hand, where there is no spring, no chan

nel is needed, and none is found. Among living crea

tures, accordingly, where there is not a soul, there is

not speech; but in that one creature who was made in

the image of God into whom God breathed a living

soul there is speech, the open channel for its forth-

going. Reverence human speech. It is the mark of a

being who has been made, and may be re-made, a child

of God. Reverence human speech, for it is a divinely

formed capacity for a divinely prescribed use. Dread

false speech, proud speech, impure speech, profane

speech, for these are the bright weapons with which

the King has accoutred us wielded against the King.

High treason !

"That they may speak;" for why should they be

silent who have tasted that the Lord is gracious ?

Let them tell to all who are willing to listen what the

Lord hath done for their souls. Let the compressed

love which glows in renewed hearts find utterance in

spoken praise. Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget

not all his benefits !

In another aspect it behoves all who hear to speak.

Silence is sin, if your cry might prevent a neighbor

from stumbling over a precipice. Silence is sin, if

neighbors are treading the broad path that leadeth to

destruction, and your word might lead their steps into

the way of life. Silence is sin, if a believing brother is

sliding back, while your loving reproof might become

to him a healing balm. Silence is sin, if a believing

brother is oppressed with doubts and fears, while your

lips might pour the consolations of God into his weary

heart.

The prayer points mainly to a public ministry, and

yet nothing is said about sermons nothing said even

about preaching: " Grant unto thy servants that they

may speak." Whether the address be long or short,

whether the audience be many or few, whether the

style be eloquent or stammering, the pith and marrow

of the whole matter is, that one man, hoping in Christ

and loving his neighbor, speaks to that neighbor about

Christ s redeeming love. All preaching may be re

duced to this. Out of this, as the germ, all true

preaching springs. If its whole mass were by some

chemical process reduced to its elements, this would

be found the essential residuum remaining indestructi

ble after all ornaments and accessories had been melted

away. I suppose Philip preached pretty fully to the

anxious Ethiopian in the desert; but the Spirit in the

Word performs that chemical analysis which we have

imagined, and retains only that ultimate and inde

structible essence of the discourse, which is small in

bulk and easy of transmission Philip "preached unto

him yes us."

2. The prayer of these primitive Christians is " that

they may speak thy word The word of God supplies

alike the authority and the material of preaching.

The seed is the word: the sower need not scatter any

other in his field. This alone is vital this alone will

grow.

3. Their ambition is to speak the word of God

" with boldness" Let no man assume too readily that

he has attained this qualification of a witness. In this

department, all is not gold that glitters. Beware of

counterfeits in these payments, for a considerable quan

tity of base coin is in circulation. To rasp like a file on

other people s tender points, because you have no ten

der points of your own, is not the boldness for which

these disciples prayed. In that species* of courage

some of the inferior creatures greatly excel us.

An essential constituent of courage is tenderness.

In feudal times, when military valor held the supreme

place in universal opinion, the prevailing conception,

although disfigured by some foolish and grotesque fea-

tures, contained a basis of truth. Battle courage was

held to be only one half of a knightly bearing; the

other half consisted of a tenderness, in some cases al

most feminine. Tenderness is as essential to spiritual

as to secular heroism. The boldness of speech which

costs the speaker nothing is neither beautiful in itself

nor successful in its object. It is like a stroke on hol

low wood; instead of penetrating the beam, it rebounds

in the face of the operator.

Paul was a bold man, but he was not an unfeeling

one. It was a bold word that he addressed to certain

professors at Philippi, and he spoke it once and again

" Ye are enemies of the cross of Christ;" but he wept as

he spoke. These tears did more to make a way for the

reproving word into the joints and marrow of the cul

prits than all the sharpness of the reproof itself. Ob

serve a mechanic boring through a bar of iron. He has

a properly-formed instrument of steel. . This he turns

quickly round, under a strong pressure, upon the bar

which he desires to perforate. But this is not enough.

If only on the hard beam of iron a harder point of steel

were pressed and turned, they would set each other on

fire. But the skilful operator quietly drops oil on the

point of contact, while he plies his task. This anointing

keeps the instrument from heating, and carries it through.

These tears of Paul served the same purpose for the Phil-

ippian backsliders that the mechanic s oil-drops served

for the iron beam. Human tenderness baptized by the

Spirit poured on the point of contact, when the sharp

sword of the Word is pressed against a brother s heart,

prevents the pressure from begetting a burning heat,

and carries the weapon home.

To my mind there is hardly a more melancholy spec

tacle in this world than that of a man, orthodox in faith

but coarse in the natural grain, who rattles out his

censures on all and sundry who differ from himself

without an effort and without a pang; looking down,

meanwhile, with contempt on men of greater modesty

as unfaithful to the truth. The stream of words that

condemns a neighbor, without scalding the speaker s

own skin as it flows, is like the clack of a windmill set

up to frighten birds as hard and as wearisome, and as

powerless. The greater the boldness any man ventures

to exercise, the greater tenderness he needs to attain.

The boldness which those primitive confessors asked

and obtained was saturated with a sanctified human

tenderness; and this was the secret of their power.

4. In their eagerness for effective work, they desire

to speak with all boldness. Even courage maybe partial

and one-sided. This virtue vanishes whenever it begins

to show respect of persons. That is not true courage

which is severe to the poor but quails before the rich.

As the water of a reservoir will be completely lost unless

the circle of its lip be kept whole on all sides, all the

dignity and power of boldness vanishes when it fails on

one point.

Perhaps the weakest point of all the circle for every

man is himself. If courage is needed to speak the truth

to a neighbor, it is still more needed in dealing with

ourselves. A surgeon needs firmness. If he faint at

the sight of blood, he has mistaken his profession. He

needs a stout heart when he is called to operate on

other men; but he is much more liable to flinch if he

need to operate upon himself. Alas ! we lack courage

to press the sword of the Spirit home to the root of the

ailment when it is seated in our own souls. Strike, and

spare not for the patient s crying. This old prayer is a

word in season still: grant unto thy servants boldness.

erve this arm to strike this blow.

25 You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the

mouth of your servant, our father David:“‘Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain?

BARES, "Who by the mouth ... - , Psa_2:1-2. This is a strong, solemn testimony to the inspiration of David. It is a declaration of the apostles, made in solemn prayer, that God himself spake by the mouth of David. This is the second part of their prayer. In the first, they acknowledge the right of God to rule; in this, they appeal to a prophecy; they plead that this was a thing foretold; and as God had foreseen it and foretold it, they appealed to him to protect them. The times of tumult and opposition which had been foreseen, as about to attend the introduction of the gospel, had now come. They inferred, therefore, that Jesus was the Messiah; and as God had designed to establish his kingdom, they appealed to him to aid and protect them in this great work. This passage is taken from Psa_2:1-2, and is an exact quotation from the Septuagint. This proves that the Psalm had reference to the Messiah. Thus, it was manifestly understood by the Jews; and the authority of the apostles settles the question. The Psalm was composed by David, but on what occasion is not known; nor is it material to our present purpose. It has been a matter of inquiry whether it referred to the Messiah primarily, or only in a secondary sense. Grotius supposes that it was composed by David when exposed to the hostility of the Assyrians, the Moabites, Philistines, Amalekites, etc.; and that, in the midst of his dangers, he sought consolation in the purpose of God to establish him and his kingdom. But the more probable opinion is, that it referred directly and solely to the Messiah.

Why did the heathen - The nations which were not Jews. This refers, doubtless, to the opposition which would be made to the spread of Christianity, and not merely to the opposition made to the Messiah himself, and to the act of putting him to death.

Rage - This word refers to the excitement and tumult of a multitude; not a settled plan, but rather the heated and disorderly conduct of a mob. It means that the progress of the gospel would encounter tumultuous opposition, and that the excited nations would rush violently to put it down and destroy it.

And the people - The expression “the people” does not refer to a class of people different essentially from the pagan. The “pagan,” Hebrew and Greek, “the nations,” refer to people as organized into communities; the expression the people is used to denote the same persons without respect to their being so organized. The Hebrews were in the habit, in their poetry, of expressing the same idea essentially in parallel members of a sentence; that is, the last member of a sentence or verse expressed the same idea, with some slight variation, as the former. (See Lowth on the sacred poetry of the Hebrews.)

Imagine - The word “imagine” does not quite express the force of the original. The Hebrew and the Greek both convey the idea of meditating, thinking, purposing. It means that they employed “thought,” “plan,” “purpose,” in opposing the Messiah.

Vain things - The word used here κενά kena is a literal translation of the Hebrew רק

rēyq, and means usually “empty,” as a vessel. which is not filled; then “useless,” or what

amounts to nothing, etc. Here it means that they devised a plan which turned out to be

vain or ineffectual. They attempted an opposition to the Messiah which could not succeed. God would establish his kingdom in spite of their plans to oppose it. Their efforts were vain because they were not strong enough to oppose God; because he had purposed to establish the kingdom of his Son; and because he could overrule even their opposition to advance his cause.

CLARKE, "By the mouth of thy servant David hast said - Several add, but

impertinently, δια�πνευµατος�Oγιου, by the Holy Spirit; but it is sufficient that God has said it; and thugs we find that David spoke by the inspiration of God; and that the second Psalm relates to Jesus Christ, and predicts the vain attempts made by Jewish and heathen powers to suppress Christianity.

GILL, "Who by the mouth of thy servant David has said,.... In Psa_2:1 from whence we learn, that that psalm, though it is without a title, and does not bear David's name, yet is one of his and so Kimchi says, that David composed it at the beginning of his reign; though Aben Ezra thinks, that it was composed by one of the singers for him, on the day he was anointed; yet he afterwards seems to doubt of it, and on Psa_2:7 says, they are the words of David, or the words of the singer. And certain it is, that in the apostles' time this psalm was reckoned to be David's by the Jews in common; and therefore they speak of it as such: and it was the sense of the ancient doctors of the synagogue, that this psalm is to be understood of the Messiah. Jarchi says, our Rabbins expound the business (of this psalm) concerning the King Messiah; and Kimchi observes, that there are some that interpret this psalm of Gog and Magog (k), and the Messiah, or anointed, that is the King Messiah; though one of these writers was of opinion, that it is best to understand it of David himself; and Aben Ezra says, that it was composed either for David, or for the Messiah, and to understand it of the Messiah, the thing is more clear. The verses Psa_2:7 are particularly applied to the Messiah in some of their most ancient writings (l), and also in modern ones (m), as is Psa_2:2 to Messiah ben Joseph (n): and indeed the whole psalm belongs to the Messiah, as appears from the express mention of him, and the vain attempts of the kings of the earth against him; from the decree and resolution of God to make and declare him king of Zion, notwithstanding their utmost efforts; from his having the Gentiles for his inheritance, which is true of no other; and especially from that reverence, adoration, and worship, which were to be given to him, and that trust and confidence to be placed in him, which can by no means agree with David, nor with any mere creature. The Syriac version reads, "who in the Holy Ghost, by the mouth", &c. and so read Beza's most ancient copy, and five other manuscripts of his; and the Vulgate Latin, and Ethiopic versions, read, "who in the Holy Ghost, by the mouth of our father David", &c. and the Alexandrian copy, but does not seem to be a genuine reading; since the Jews were not used to call David, but Abraham, their father; nor is it, with propriety, expressed, that God the Father said in, or by the Spirit, what follows,

why did the Heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? that is, the Gentiles, and the people of the Jews, Pilate, and his council, with the Roman soldiers, and the Jewish sanhedrim, with the common people; who raged against Christ, seized him in a furious manner, led him as a malefactor, and hurried him from bar to bar, in a tumultuous way, and with great noise and clamour urged the crucifixion of him; nor did their rage cease until they had put him to death: yet it was a vain thing in them to

imagine he should be held under the power of death; or that this would put a stop to the spread of his doctrine, and the enlargement of his kingdom and interest; since he rose from the dead, as a triumphant conqueror, over all his enemies, and pouring forth his Spirit, in an extraordinary way, he spread his Gospel, and his glory throughout the earth.

HERY, "Their reconciling themselves to the present dispensations of Providence, by reflecting upon those scriptures in the Old Testament which foretold that the kingdom of the Messiah would meet with such opposition as this at the first setting of it up in the world, Act_4:25, Act_4:26. God, who made heaven and earth, cannot meet with any [effectual] opposition to his designs, since none dare [at least, can prevailingly] dispute or contest with him. Yea, thus it was written, thus he spoke by the mouth, thus he wrote by the pen, of his servant David, who, as appears by this, was the penman of the second psalm, and therefore, most probably, of the first, and other psalms that are not ascribed to any other, though they have not his name in the title. Let it not therefore be a surprise to them, nor any discouragement to any in embracing their doctrine, for the scripture must be fulfilled. It was foretold, Psa_2:1, Psa_2:2, (1.) That the heathen would rage at Christ and his kingdom, and be angry at the attempts to set it up, because that would be the pulling down of the gods of the heathen, and giving a check to the wickedness of the heathen. (2.) That the people would imagine all the things that could be against it, to silence the teachers of it, to discountenance the subjects of it, and to crush all the interests of it. If they prove vain things in the issue, no thanks to those who imagined them. (3.) That the kings of the earth, particularly, would stand up in opposition to the kingdom of Christ, as if they were jealous (though there is no occasion for their being so) that it would interfere with their powers, and intrench upon their prerogatives. The kings of the earth that are most favoured and honoured by divine Providence, and should do most for God, are strangers and enemies to divine grace, and do most against God. (4.) That the rulers would gather together against God and Christ; not only monarchs, that have the power in their single persons, but where the power is in many rulers, councils, and senates, they gather together, to consult and decree against the Lord and against his Christ - against both natural and revealed religion. What is done against Christ, God takes as done against himself. Christianity was not only destitute of the advantage of the countenance and support of kings and rulers (it had neither their power nor their purses), but it was opposed and fought against by them, and they combined to run it down and yet it made its way.

JAMISO, "by the mouth of ... David— to whom the Jews ascribed the second Psalm, though anonymous; and internal evidence confirms it. David’s spirit sees with astonishment “the heathen, the people, the kings and princes of the earth,” in deadly combination against the sway of Jehovah and His Anointed (his Messiah, or Christ), and asks “why” it is. This fierce confederacy our praying disciples see in full operation, in the “gathering together of Herod and Pilate, the Gentiles (the Roman authority), and the people of Israel, against God’s holy Child (‘Servant’) Jesus.” (See on Act_3:13). The best ancient copies read, after “were gathered together,” “in this city,” which probably answers to “upon my holy hill of Zion,” in the Psa_2:6.

CALVI, "25.Who by the mouth of David. They descend now into the second

member, that they ask nothing but that which God hath promised to perform, so

that his will and power are joined together, to the end they may fully assure

themselves that they shall obtain their requests; and because the kingdom of Christ

is now in hand, they make rehearsal of the promise of God, wherein he promiseth to

defend and maintain the same, so that when the whole world hath done what it can

to overthrow it, yet all shall be in vain; and herein their godliness and sincere zeal,

in that they are not so much careful for their own safety, as for the increasing and

advancement of the kingdom of Christ.

Why have the Gentiles raged? We must need confess that David speaketh of himself,

who after he was chosen king by the Lord, and anointed by Samuel the prophet, did

enjoy the kingdom very hardly, (227) because his enemies withstood him on every

side. We know how the rulers and people conspired together with Saul and his

family; after that the Philistines, and other strange enemies, despising him when he

came newly to the crown, made war against him, striving who should begin first,

wherefore it is not without cause that he complaineth that the kings rage and take

counsel together, and that the people do go about divers things; nevertheless,

because he knew that God was the supporter of his kingdom, he derideth their

foolish enterprises, and affirmeth that they are vain; but because his kingdom was

established, that it might be a figure or image of the kingdom of Christ, David doth

not stay still in the shadow itself; but he apprehendeth the body, yea, the Holy

Ghost, as the apostles do truly repeat the same, doth sharply reprove the foolish and

ridiculous madness of the world, in that they dare invade the kingdom of Christ

which God had esta-blished, as well in the person of David as of Christ himself. And

this is a singular comfort, in that we hear that God is on our side, so long as we go

on warfare under the kingdom of Christ. Hereby we may persuade ourselves, that

howsoever all men, both high and low do wickedly conspire together against this

kingdom, yet shall they not prevail, for what is all the whole world compared with

God? But we must first of all know and assure ourselves of this, that God will

continually maintain the kingdom of his Son, whereof he himself is the author, so

that we may set his decree (which shall not be broken) against the rashness of men,

that trusting to the help of his hand, we may not doubt to despise all the preparation

and furniture of men, though they be terrible; and he doth diligently express how

great the bands of the adversaries are; he saith, that they attempt all things, he doth

also reckon up their counsels, lest any of these do terrify us. Furthermore, when as

the Psalm teacheth, that the kingdom of Christ shall endure, maugre the heads of

the adversaries, it doth also show that there shall be many adversaries, which shall

endeavor to overthrow the same. On the one side, he bringeth in the kings raging, on

the other, the people all out of quiet, (228) whereby he signifieth that all estates shall

be offended at it; (229) and no marvel, because nothing is more contrary to the flesh

than the spiritual sword of the gospel wherewith Christ killeth us, that he may make

us obey him, (Romans 15:16.) Therefore, we must know this for a surety, that the

kingdom of Christ shall never be quiet in the world, lest when we are to fight, we be

afraid as at some strange thing.

COFFMA, "Plainly taught here is the fact that the early disciples regarded the

Psalms as inspired; and, to them, inspiration was not mere genius, or literary skill,

or prudent foresightedness; it was an impartation of the Holy Spirit which endowed

the author of Scripture. Thus his words were true and accurate and his commands

authoritative.

ELLICOTT, "(25) Who by the mouth of thy servant David . . . .—The older MSS.

present many variations of the text. It probably stood originally somewhat in this

form: “Who through the Holy Ghost, by the mouth of David our father, thy

servant,” and was simplified by later copyists. In the citation from Psalms 2 we have

another lesson from the Apostles’ school of prophetic interpretation. The Psalm is

not cited in the Gospels. Here what seems to us the most striking verse (Acts 4:7) of

it is passed over, and it does not appear as referred to Christ till we find it in

Hebrews 1:5; Hebrews 5:5.

Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine . . .?—either noun has the

article in the Greek or in the Hebrew. Why did nations rage and peoples imagine . .

.? The word for “rage” is primarily applied to animal ferocity, especially to that of

untamed horses.

26 The kings of the earth rise up and the rulers band togetheragainst the Lord and against his anointed one.[b]’[c]

BARES, "The kings of the earth - The Psalmist specifies more particularly that kings and rulers would be opposed to the Messiah. This had occurred already by the opposition made to the Messiah by the rulers of the Jewish people, and it would be still more evinced by the opposition of princes and kings as the gospel spread among the nations.

Stood up - The word used here παρίστηµι paristēmi commonly means “to present

oneself, or to stand forth, for the purpose of aiding, counseling,” etc. But here it means that they “rose,” or “presented themselves,” to evince their opposition. They stood opposed to the Messiah, and offered resistance to him.

The rulers - This is another instance of the Hebrew parallelism. The word does not denote another class of people from kings, but expresses the same idea in another form, or in a more general manner, meaning that all classes of persons in authority would be opposed to the gospel.

Were gathered together - Hebrew, consulted together; were united in a consultation. The Greek implies that they were assembled for the purpose of consultation.

Against the Lord - In the Hebrew, “against Yahweh.” This is the special name which

is given in the Scriptures to God. They rose against his plan of appointing a Messiah, and against the Messiah whom he had chosen.

Against his Christ - Hebrew, against his Messiah, or his Anointed. See the notes on Mat_1:1. This is one of the places where the word “Messiah” is used in the Old Testament. The word occurs in about 40 places, and is commonly translated “his anointed,” and is applied to kings. The direct reference of the word to the Messiah in the Old Testament is not frequent. This passage implies that opposition to the Messiah is opposition to Yahweh. And this is uniformly supposed in the sacred Scriptures. He that is opposed to Christ is opposed to God. He that neglects him neglects God. He that despises him despises God, Mat_10:40; Mat_18:5; Joh_12:44-45; Luk_10:16, “He that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me.” The reasons of this are:

(1) That the Messiah is “the brightness of the Father’s glory, and the express image of his person,” Heb_1:3.

(2) He is equal with the Father, possessing the same attributes and the same power, Joh_1:1; Phi_2:6.

(3) He is appointed by God to this great work of saving people. To despise him, or to oppose him, is to despise and oppose him who appointed him to this work, to contemn his counsels, and to set him at naught.

(4) His work is dear to God. It has engaged his thoughts. It has been approved by him. His mission has been confirmed by the miraculous power of the Father, and by every possible manifestation of his approbation and love. To oppose the Messiah is, therefore, to oppose what is dear to the heart of God, and which has long been the object of his tender solicitude. It follows from this, that they who neglect the Christian religion are exposing themselves to the displeasure of God, and endangering their everlasting interests. No man is safe who opposes God; and no man can have evidence that God will approve him who does not embrace the Messiah, whom He has appointed to redeem the world.

CLARKE, "Against the Lord and against his Christ - Κατα�του�Χριστου�αυτου

should be translated, against his Anointed, because it particularly agrees with Hν�εχρισας, whom thou hast Anointed, in the succeeding verse.

GILL, "The kings of the earth stood up,.... Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee, sometimes called a king, Mar_6:14 and Pilate the Roman governor, who represented his master Caesar; these stood, or rose up in an hostile manner, and set themselves against, and opposed themselves to the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth:

and the rulers were gathered together; the Jewish rulers, Annas, Caiaphas, and the rest of the members of the sanhedrim, who met together more than once; and particularly at the high priest's palace, to consult how they should take Jesus and put him to death; and who also gathered together at the same place, when he was taken, to arraign, examine, and condemn him. And this opposition, and these conspiracies and consultations, were

against the Lord: Jehovah, the Father of Christ, who sent him, and anointed him; so that what was done against Christ, was done against the Lord, their views and designs,

their interest and glory, being the same:

and against his Christ; or anointed one, who was anointed by him, with the Holy Ghost, from his birth, and at his baptism, to be prophet, priest, and King.

CALVI, "6.Against the Lord, and his Christ. The Spirit teacheth by this word,

that all those do make war against God which refuse to submit themselves to Christ;

they do full little think this oftentimes, notwithstanding it is so that because God will

reign in the person of his Son alone, we refuse to obey him so often as we rebel

against Christ, as the Lord himself saith in John, “He which honoreth not the Son,

honoreth not the Father.” Wherefore let the hypocrites profess a thousand times

that they mean nothing less than to make war against God, yet shall they find this

true, that God is their open enemy, unless they embrace Christ with his gospel. The

use of this doctrine is double, for it armeth us against all the terrors of the flesh,

because we must not fear, lest they get the victory of God which withstand the

gospel. Again, we must beware, lest, through the contempt of godly doctrine, we

advance ourselves against God to our own destruction.

ELLICOTT, "(26) And against his Christ.—The question whether the word

“Christ” should be used as a proper name, or translated, is commonly answered by

accepting the former alternative. Here, perhaps, to maintain the connection with the

Psalm and with the verb in the next verse, it would be better to say, “against His

Anointed.” The “Lord” stands, of course, for the Supreme Deity of the Father.

27 Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed.

BARES, "For of a truth - Truly; in reality.

Thy holy child Jesus - The word “child” is commonly applied to infants, or to sons

and daughters in very early life. The word which is used here πα&ς pais is different from

what is commonly applied to the Lord Jesus υRός huios. The latter expresses sonship without respect to age. The word which is here used also sometimes expresses sonship with out any regard to age, and the word “son” would have been a more happy

translation. Thus, the same word is translated in Act_3:13, Act_3:26. In Act_20:12, it is translated “youngman.”

Both Herod ... - Luk_23:1-12.

With the Gentiles - The Romans, to whom he was delivered to be crucified.

The people of Israel - The Jews, who were excited to this by the rulers, Mat_27:20.

CLARKE, "There is a parenthesis in this verse that is not sufficiently noticed: it should be read in connection with Act_4:28, thus: For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, (for to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done), both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and people of Israel, were gathered together.

It is evident that what God’s hand and counsel determined before to be done was not that which Herod, Pontius Pilate, the Gentiles, (Romans), and the people of Israel had done and were doing; for, then, their rage and vain counsel would be such as God himself had determined should take place, which is both impious and absurd; but these gathered together to hinder what God had before determined that his Christ or Anointed should perform; and thus the passage is undoubtedly to be understood.

Were gathered together - Εν�τ7�πολει�ταυτ7, In this very city, are added by ABDE, and several others; all the Syriac, the Coptic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Slavonian, Vulgate, Itala, and several of the primitive fathers. This reading Griesbach has received into the text. This makes the words much more emphatic; in this thy own city, these different and in all other cases dissentient powers are leagued together against thine Anointed, and are determined to prevent the accomplishment of thy purpose.

GILL, "For of a truth, against thy holy child Jesus,.... This is the interpretation of the above passages in Psa_2:1 and the application of them to Jesus; who is called the "child" of God, because the human nature of Christ was taken into union with the second person, who is the Son of God: unless the word should rather be rendered "servant", as it is in Act_4:25 and which is a character that belongs to Christ, and is often given him as Mediator, who, as such, is God's righteous servant; and he is called "holy", because he was so in his conception and birth, and in his life and conversation, being free both from original sin, and actual transgression; and which is an aggravation of the sin and guilt of these men, that they should rise up, and gather together against him; and yet it was a clear case, a notorious fact, a certain truth, that could not be denied: and for the further aggravation of their crime, as well as for the sake of explaining the phrase "his, Christ", it is added,

whom thou hast anointed; with the oil of gladness, above his fellows. Christ was, in some sense, anointed to be prophet, priest, and King, from eternity, being so early set up as Mediator, or called unto, and invested with that office; see Pro_8:22 and he was anointed in time, both at his incarnation and baptism, having the Spirit without measure given unto him, which is that anointing, that teacheth all things.

Both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together. This Herod was Herod Antipas, the son of Herod the great, and who beheaded John the Baptist; and Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of

Judea, at the time of Christ's death; the Gentiles were those of Pilate's council, and the Roman soldiers;

and the people of Israel, were the Jews, both the rulers, and the common people; the Syriac version renders it, "the synagogue of Israel": and these, though they were of different nations, and of different interests, yea enemies to one another, as the Jews and Gentiles in general were; and as were Herod and Pontius Pilate in particular; yet all gathered, consented, and agreed together to mock, scourge, and crucify this innocent and holy person. The Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions add, "in this city"; and so the above copies of Beza's, and others; meaning, in the city of Jerusalem, where the apostles now were, and where the above persons met together, and from whence a prophet could only perish. The Alexandrian copy reads, "in this thy city": which was called the city of God, and the holy city; and yet in this was this wicked convention, and all this wickedness done.

HERY, " Their representation of the present accomplishment of those predictions in the enmity and malice of the rulers against Christ. What was foretold we see fulfilled, Act_4:27, Act_4:28. It is of a truth - it is certainly so, it is too plain to be denied, and in it appears the truth of the prediction that Herod and Pilate, the two Roman governors, with the Gentiles (the Roman soldiers under their command), and with the people of Israel (the rulers of the Jews and the mob that is under their influence), were gathered together in a confederacy against thy holy child Jesus whom thou has anointed. Some

copies add another circumstance, en�tē�polei�sou�tautē - in this thy holy city, where, above

any place, he should have been welcomed. But herein they do that which thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done. See here (1.) The wise and holy designs God had concerning Christ. He is here called the child Jesus, as he was called (Luk_2:27, Luk_2:43) in his infancy, to intimate that even in his exalted state he is not ashamed of his condescensions for us, and that he continues meek and lowly in heart. In the height of his glory he is the Lamb of God, and the child Jesus. But he is the holy child Jesus (so he was called, Luk_1:35, that holy thing), and thy holy child; the word signifies both a

son and a servant, paida�sou. He was the Son of God; and yet in the work of redemption

he acted as his Father's servant (Isa_42:1), My servant whom I uphold. It was he whom God anointed, both qualified for the undertaking and called to it; and thence he was called the Lord's Christ, Act_4:26. And this comes in as a reason why they set themselves with so much rage and violence against him, because God had anointed him, and they were resolved not to resign, much less to submit to him. David was envied by Saul, because he was the Lord's anointed. And the Philistines came up to seek David when they heard he was anointed, 2Sa_5:17. Now the God that anointed Christ determined what should be done to him, pursuant to that anointing. He was anointed to be a Saviour, and therefore it was determined he should be a sacrifice to make atonement for sin. He must die - therefore he must be slain; yet not by his own hands -therefore God wisely determined before by what hands it should be done. It must be by the hands of those who will treat him as a criminal and malefactor, and therefore it cannot be done by the hands either of angels or of good men; he must therefore be delivered into the hands of sinners as Job was, Job_16:11. And as David was delivered to Shimei to be made a curse (2Sa_16:11): The Lord has bidden him. God's hand and his counsel determined it - his will, and his wisdom. God's hand, which properly denotes his executive power, is here put for his purpose and decree, because with him saying and doing are not two things, as they are with us. His hand and his counsel always agree; for whatsoever the Lord pleased that did he. Dr. Hammon makes this phrase of God's hand

determining it to be an allusion to the high priest's casting lots upon the two goats on the day of atonement (Lev_16:8), in which he lifted up the hand that he happened to have the lot for the Lord in, and that goat on which it fell was immediately sacrificed; and the disposal of this lot was from the Lord, Pro_16:33. Thus God's hand determined what should be done, that Christ should be the sacrifice slain. Or, if I may offer a conjecture, when God's hand is here said to determine, it may be meant, not of God's acting hand, but his writing hand, as Job_13:26, Thou writest bitter things against us;and God's decree is said to be that which is written in the scriptures of truth (Dan_10:21), and in the volume of the book it was written of Christ, Psa_40:7. It was God's hand that wrote it, his hand according to his counsel. The commission was given under his hand. (2.) The wicked and unholy instruments that were employed in the executing of this design, though they meant not so, neither did their hearts think so. Herod and Pilate, Gentiles and Jews, who had been at variance with each other, united against Christ. And God's serving his own purposes by what they did was no excuse at all for their malice and wickedness in the doing of it, any more than God's making the blood of the martyrs the seed of the church extenuated the guilt of their bloody persecutors. Sin is not the less evil for God's bringing good out of it, but he is by this the more glorified, and will appear to be so when the mystery of God shall be finished.

CALVI, "27Have met together in this city. They declare that this prophecy was

proved to be true by the event, to the end they may believe the same more assuredly,

for the sense is, Lord, thou hast spoken it and we have in truth tried [experienced]

the same to be true; and they call to mind that which was done four years before, or

thereabout. In like sort, it is expedient for us to apply the events of things which are

foretold to the confirmation of our faith; but because it might seem that the matter

fell out far otherwise then than the Psalm pronounceth, forasmuch as they raged not

in vain, neither were the assaults of the enemies frustrate when they had put Christ

to death; and their violence went further afterwards after a fearful manner. The

faithful remove this offense, and say that the enemies could do no more than God

had appointed; therefore, howsoever the wicked did suppose that Christ was quite

taken away by death, and did now vainly triumph, yet the faithful confess that their

rage was all but vain. But here may a question be moved, why he calleth them the

Gentiles and people of Israel, seeing there was but one body? I think that the

diversity of countries is noted in this place, out of which the Jews came together to

the feast, as if they should have said, that the Jews which were born in divers places,

having made, as it were, a concourse, did assault the kingdom of Christ, yet was

their fury frustrate and of none effect.

Thy holy Son Jesus. The Grecians use the very same word which I translated even

now, servant, when mention was made of David, for they call [ πᾶιδα ] sometimes a

servant sometimes a son; and David is so called, because he was the minister of God,

as well in ruling the people as in the office of a prophet; but this word, son, agreeth

better with the person of Christ, unless some man had liefer take it thus, that Luke

meant to allude unto that likelihood [resemblance] which David had with Christ

when he setteth down a word of a double signification. It is expressly said, that God

hath anointed his Son, that that may truly agree to him which is in the Psalm, for in

anointing him God made him a King, and yet we must note therewithal what

anointing this was, for we know that he was not anointed with visible oil, but with

the Holy Ghost.

COFFMA, "Thy holy Servant Jesus ... Certain critics have attempted to deny that

Jesus identified himself with the suffering Servant of Isaiah; but, as Hunter

declared:

The key to most of the (ew Testament) theology is in the Old Testament, especially

in the Servant Songs of Isaiah and the seventh chapter of Daniel ... Jesus clearly saw

his Messianic ministry from Jordan to Golgotha, as a fulfilling of the prophecies of

the Servant of the Lord.[36]

Thus, it is no surprise that in the very beginning of the gospel proclamation by the

apostles strong emphasis upon the role of Jesus' sufferings should appear.

We find Peter four times in the early chapters of Acts (Acts 3:13,26; 4:27,30) calling

Jesus "God's Servant." A little later, Philip expressly tells the Ethiopian eunuch

that Jesus is the fulfillment of Isaiah 53 (Acts 8:26-40).[37]

The fulfillment of the prophecy from Psalms 2:1,2, as quoted in this prayer, is

declared by this verse. Herod and Pilate were representatives of kings and rulers

who would oppose the Lord, and they were Gentiles. The implication, although not

stated so bluntly, is that the Jewish religious leaders in the Sanhedrin were

representatives of other rulers and of the children of Israel.

Regarding the question of why the mighty men such as rulers and kings and priests

would with nearly unanimous hatred of the Christ unite their efforts to oppose and

destroy Jesus and his teaching, the reason for it was deeply embedded in human

nature. The Jewish rulers were mortified, disgusted and outraged that one so poor

and lowly would claim to be the Messiah. Their pride, ambition and selfishness

simply could not accept Jesus as the fulfillment of an expectation they had so long

cherished of some spectacular leader on a white horse who would overthrow the

power of Rome and restore the defunct Solomonic empire. In the case of the

Romans, human nature at last turned upon the new faith with the fury of a vicious

animal; and, although at first not opposed to Christianity (because they did not

understand it), when it finally became clear to Roman authorities that the new

religion was not merely seeking a place ALOG WITH OTHER RELIGIOS, but

was exclusive in its claims, the Gentile authorities launched the great persecutions in

the hope of exterminating Christianity.

[36] Archibald M. Hunter, Introducing ew Testament Theology (Philadelphia: The

Westminster Press, 1957), p. 23.

[37] Ibid., p. 37.

COKE 27-28. "Acts 4:27-28. For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, &c.— We

must here observe, that the hand of God most frequently in the Old Testament

relates not so much to his power, as to his wisdom, and providential dispensations.

So Job 27:11. I will teach you by the hand of God, that is, by his wisdom, in his

providential dispensations. Ecclesiastes 2:24. That a man should enjoy good in his

labour. This also I saw, that it was from the hand of God: here the hand of God, is

his favour, or gracious providence. See also Ezra 7:9; Ezra 8:18; Ezra 8:22.

ehemiah 8:18. The phrase being here joined with God's counsel, and applied to

what was done by Pontius Pilate and the Roman soldiers, and also by the Jews,

toward the crucifixion of the holy Jesus,—to which actions so highly displeasingto

God, his power could not actually concur, or effectively incline them,—we have

great reason here to prefer this import of the phrase before the other; and then the

meaning of the words will be, that Jews and Gentiles were assembled to accomplish

those sufferings of our Saviour for mankind, which God had foretold, and by

foretelling had determined should come to pass, according to those words of St.

Paul, Acts 13:27. They that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew

him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets,—have fulfilled them, in condemning

him, fulfilling all that was written of him, Acts 4:29. As therefore St. Peter and St.

Paul, by calling the Jews to repentance for this sin in crucifying the Lord of life,

evidence that their sin was not the less, because they did by it fulfil the counsel of

God's holy will and kind intentions to mankind, so do they consequently evidence,

that God's foreknowledge and determination of a thing future, does not impair the

liberty of men's wills in the accomplishment of it; as all the antient fathers have

declared in this particular. At the same time we fully grant, that it is grace alone

which gives to man the will or power to think, speak, or do any thing that is good.

ELLICOTT, "(27) Of a truth. . . .—Many of the better MSS. add the words “in this

city.”

Against thy holy child Jesus.—Better, as before, Servant. (See otes on Acts 3:13)

The word is the same as that used of David in Acts 4:25.

Both Herod, and Pontius Pilate.—The narrative of Herod’s share in the proceedings

connected with the Passion is, it will be remembered, found only in Luke 23:8-12. So

far as the hymn here recorded may be considered as an independent evidence, the

two present an undesigned coincidence.

With the Gentiles, and the people of Israel.—Even here the nouns are, in the Greek,

without an article. The “peoples” (the Greek noun is plural) are rightly defined,

looking to the use of the Hebrew word, as those of Israel.

28 They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.

BARES, "For to do ... - See the notes on Act_2:23; Act_3:18. The facts which are brought to view in these verses are among the most remarkable on record. They are briefly these:

(1) That the Jewish rulers were opposed to the Messiah, and slew him.

(2) That the very people to whom he came, and for whose benefit he labored, joined in the opposition, so that it became the act of a united people.

(3) That the Romans, who were there as a sort of representation of all pagan nations, were easily prevailed on to join in the persecution, and to become the executioners.

(4) That thus opposite factions, and dissimilar and prejudiced people, became united in opposing the Messiah.

(5) That the rulers of the Roman people, the emperors, the statesmen, the philosophers, and the rulers of other nations, united to oppose the gospel, and brought all the power of persecution to stay its progress.

(6) That the people of the empire, the mass of people, were easily prevailed upon to join in the persecution, and to endeavor to arrest its progress. It may be added,

(7) That the gospel has encountered similar difficulties and opposition wherever it has been faithfully presented to the attention of people. It has become a very serious question why this has been; on what pretence this opposition has been vindicated, or how it can be accounted for - a question which it is of as much importance for the infidel as for the Christian to settle. We know that accusations of the corrupt lives of the early Christians were freely circulated, and that most gross accounts of their scandalous conduct were propagated by those who chose to persecute them. (See Lardner’s “Credibility.”) But such accounts are not now believed, and it is not certain that they were ever seriously believed by the rulers of the pagan people. It is certain that it was not on things account that the first opposition arose to Christ and his religion.

It is not proper here to enter into an examination of the causes of this opposition. We may state the outlines, however, in few words:

(1) The Jewish rulers were mortified, humbled, and moved with envy, that one so poor and despised should claim to be the Messiah. They had expected a Messiah of a different rank and character; and all their prejudices rose at once against his claims to this high office, Mat_27:18; Mar_15:10.

(2) The common people, disposed extensively to acknowledge his claims, were urged on by the enraged and vindictive priests to demand his death, Mat_27:20.

(3) Pilate was pressed on against his will by the impetuous and enraged multitude to deliver one whom he regarded as innocent.

(4) The Christian religion, in its advances, struck at once at the whole fabric of superstition in the Roman empire and throughout the world. It did not, like other religions, ask a place amidst the religions already existing. It was exclusive in its claims. It denounced all other systems as idolatry or superstition, and sought to overthrow them. Those religions were interwoven with all the habits of the people; they were connected with all the departments of the state; they gave occupation to a vast number of priests and other officer who obtained their livelihood by the existing superstitions, and who brought, of course, all the supposed sacredness of their character to support them. A religion which attempted to overthrow the whole fabric, therefore, at once excited all their malice. The monarchs whose

thrones were based on the existing state of things, and the people who venerated the religion of their ancestors, would be opposed to the new system.

(5) Christianity was despised. It was regarded as one form of the superstition of the Jews, and there were no people who were regarded with so much contempt by other nations as the Jews. The writings of the Romans on this point are full proof.

(6) The new religion was opposed to all the crimes of the world. It began its career in a time of eminent wickedness. It plunged at once into the midst of that wickedness; sought the great cities where crimes and pollutions were concentrated, and boldly reproved every form of prevailing impiety. At Athens, at Corinth, at Ephesus, at Rome itself, it denounced the judgment of God against every form of guilt. Whatever may be charged on the apostles, it will not be alleged that they were timid in denouncing the sins of the world. From all these causes it is not wonderful that the early Christians were persecuted. If it be asked.

(7) Why the same religion meets with opposition now in lands that are nominally Christian, it may be remarked:

(a) That the human heart is the same that it always was, opposed to truth and righteousness;

(b) That religion encounters still a host of sins that are opposed to it - pride, envy, malice, passion, and the love of the world;

(c) That there has always been a special opposition in the human heart to receiving salvation as the gift of God through a crucified Redeemer; and,

(d) That all the forms of vice, and lust, and profaneness that exist in the world, are opposed, and ever will be, to a religion of purity, self-denial, and love.

On the whole, we may remark here:

(1) That the fact that Christianity has been thus opposed, and has triumphed, is no small proof of its divine origin. It has been fairly tried, and still survives. It was well to put it to the rest, and to bring to bear on it everything which had a tendency to crush it, and thus to furnish the highest proof that it is from God.

(2) This religion cannot be destroyed; it will triumph; opposition to it is vain; it will make its way throughout the world; and the path of safety is not to oppose what God is intending to establish in the earth. Sinners who stand opposed to the gospel should tremble and be afraid, for sooner or later they must fall before its triumphant advances. It is not safe to oppose what has already been opposed by kings and rulers in every form, and yet has triumphed. It is not wise to risk one’s eternal welfare on the question of successful opposition to what God has, in so many ages and ways, pledged himself to protect; and when God has solemnly declared that the Son, the Messiah, whom he would set on his holy hill of Zion, should “break” his enemies “with a rod of iron, and dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel,” Psa_2:9.

GILL, "For to do whatsoever thy hand,.... It was not the end of their gathering together against Christ, or it was not their intention and design, to fulfil the purposes and decrees of God, but to fulfil their own lusts, and satiate their rage and malice against him; but it was so in the event, according to the wise disposal of providence, that by their gathering together, by their consultations and conspiracies, they brought about what God in his everlasting council had decreed. By "the hand" of the Lord here is not meant, the grace and favour of God; or the power and providence of God; or his word of precept, his revealed will; but his secret will, the counsel of his will, the hidden purpose of his

heart, the wise consultation of his mind, which is formed according to his infinite wisdom: so in 2Sa_14:19 it is said, "is not the hand of Joab with thee in all this?" that is,

the head of Joab, the wise counsel of Joab; and so the Jewish writers interpret it, עצתו, "his counsel" (o): and so the word is explained here immediately; for it follows,

and thy counsel determined before to be done: God's decrees are from eternity; there is nothing comes to pass in time but what he has beforetime determined should be done, either by effecting it himself, or doing it by others, or suffering it to be done, as in the case here. Whatever was done to Christ, either by Jews or Gentiles, by Herod or Pontius Pilate, was according to the secret will of God, the covenant he made with Christ, and the council of peace that was between them both: what they wickedly did, God designed for good, and hereby brought about the redemption and salvation of his people: this neither makes God the author of sin, nor excuses the sinful actions of men, or infringes the liberty of their wills in acting.

JAMISO, "thy hand and thy counsel determined ... to be done— that is, “Thy counsel” determined to be done by “Thy hand.”

CALVI, "28.That they might do. I have already declared to what end this is

spoken; that the kingdom of Christ was so far from being overrun by that

conspiracy, that in truth it did then flourish. otwithstanding herein is contained a

singular doctrine, that God doth so govern and guide all things by his secret counsel,

that, he doth bring to pass those things which he hath determined, even by the

wicked. ot that they are ready willingly to do him such service, but because he

turneth their counsels and attempts backward; so that on the one side appeareth

great equity and most great righteousness; on the other appeareth nought but

wickedness and iniquity. Which matter we have handled more at large in the second

chapter. Let us learn here, by the way, that we must so consider the providence of

God, that we know that it is the chief and only guider of all things which are done in

the world, that the devil and all the wicked are kept back with God’s bridle, lest

they should do us any harm; that when they rage fastest, yet are they not at liberty

to do what they list, but have the bridle given them, yet so far forth as is expedient to

exercise us. Those men which do acknowledge the foreknowledge of God alone, and

yet confess not that all things are done as it pleaseth him, are easily convict by these

words, That God hath appointed before that thing to be done which was done. Yea,

Luke being not contented with the wordcounsel, addeth also hand, improperly, yet

to the end he might the more plainly declare that the events of things are not only

governed by the counsel of God, but that they are also ordered by his power and

hand.

COFFMA, "Perhaps the profoundest question in theology appears in what is

stated here. This is the same problem on a cosmic scale that appears in the more

limited instance of Judas' fulfilling prophecy by his betrayal of Jesus. Did God's

foreordaining such rebellion against his authority become, in any sense, the cause of

it? There are mysteries here beyond any complete human understanding of them;

but any solution of the problem must take account of the freedom of the human will,

either to obey or disobey God. Any resolution of the question that denies such

freedom must be rejected.

In the case in hand, God desired the salvation of men through the death of Christ;

but it was the wickedness of evil men which became an instrument of the fulfillment.

That fact stands in bold relief in this apostolic prayer. God "foreordained" the

sufferings and death of the Saviour of the world. We may only bow the head and say

with the incomparable Paul, "How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways

past tracing out" (Romans 11:33).

ELLICOTT, "(28) To do whatsoever thy hand. . . .—The great problem of the

relation of the divine purpose to man’s free agency is stated (as before in Acts 1:16;

Acts 2:23), without any attempt at a philosophical solution. o such solution is

indeed possible. If we admit a Divine Will at all, manifesting itself in the government

of the world, in the education of man kind, in the salvation of individual souls, we

must follow the example of the Apostle, and hold both the facts of which

consciousness and experience bear their witness, without seeking for a logical

formula of reconciliation. In every fact of history, no less than in the great fact of

which St. Peter speaks, the will of each agent is free, and he stands or falls by the

part he has taken in it; and yet the outcome of the whole works out some law of

evolution, some “increasing purpose,” which we recognise as we look back on the

course of the events, the actors in which were impelled by their own base or noble

aims, their self-interest or their self-devotion. As each man looks back on his own

life he traces a sequence visiting him with a righteous retribution, and leading him,

whether he obeyed the call, or resisted it, to a higher life, an education no less than a

probation. “Man proposes, God disposes.” “God works in us, therefore we must

work.” Aphorisms such as these are the nearest approximation we can make to a

practical; though not a theoretical, solution of the great mystery.

29 ow, Lord, consider their threats and enable your servants to speak your word with great boldness.

BARES, "Behold their threatenings - So look upon them as to grant us deliverance. They did not purpose to abandon their undertaking; they resolved to persevere; and they expected that this purpose would involve them in danger. With this purpose they implored the protection of God; they asked that he would not suffer them to be deterred from speaking boldly; and they sought that constant additional proof might be granted of the presence and power of God to confirm the truth of their

message.

And grant ... - This is an instance of heroic boldness, and a determination to persevere in doing their duty to God. When we are assailed by those in power; when we are persecuted and in danger, we should commit our way unto God, and seek his aid, that we may not be deterred from the path of duty.

CLARKE, "And now, Lord, behold their threatenings - It is not against us, but against thee, that they conspire: it is not to prevent the success of our preaching, but to bring to nought thy counsel: the whole of their enmity is against thee. Now, Lord, look upon it; consider this.

And grant unto thy servants -While we are endeavoring to fulfill thy counsels, and can do nothing without thee, sustain our courage, that we may proclaim thy truth with boldness and irresistible power.

GILL, "And now, Lord, behold their threatenings,.... Meaning not with his eye of omniscience, which he could not but do; but that he would so take notice of them, as in his providence to rebuke them for them, or restrain them, or make them fearless of them:

and grant unto thy servants; the apostles, and all the ministers of the word, who are the servants of the most high God, and who serve him in the Gospel of his Son, with great cheerfulness and faithfulness:

that with all boldness they may speak thy word; and not their own, or another's; the Gospel, which is God's speech, or a word, a message of grace and mercy from him to sinful creatures. The request of the whole church is, that the ministers of the word might not be intimidated by the menaces of the sanhedrim; but go on to declare it with all freedom of expression, with all boldness, courage, and intrepidity of mind, and all openness and faithfulness, and in the most public manner. And such a petition shows, that as it is gift of God to speak his word, or preach his Gospel, so it also is, to speak it freely, boldly, and faithfully, as it should be spoken.

HERY, "Their petition with reference to the case at this time. The enemies were gathered together against Christ, and then no wonder that they were so against his ministers: the disciple is not better than his Master, nor must expect better treatment; but, being thus insulted, they pray,

(1.) That God would take cognizance of the malice of their enemies: Now, Lord, behold their threatenings, Act_4:29. Behold them, as thou art said to behold them in the psalm before quoted (Psa_2:4), when they thought to break his bands asunder, and cast away his cords from them; he that sits in heaven laughs at them, and has them in derision;and then the virgin, the daughter of Zion, may despise the impotent menaces even of the

great king, the king of Assyria, Isa_37:22. And now, Lord; ta�nun there is an emphasis

upon the now, to intimate that then is God's time to appear for his people, when the power of their enemies is most daring and threatening. They do not dictate to God what he shall do, but refer themselves to and him, like Hezekiah (Isa_37:17): “Open thine eyes, O Lord, and see; thou knowest what they say, thou beholdest mischief and spite(Psa_10:14); to thee we appeal, behold their threatenings, and either tie their hands or

turn their hearts; make their wrath, as far as it is let loose, to praise thee, and the remainder thereof do thou restrain,” Psa_76:10. It is a comfort to us that if we be unjustly threatened, and bear it patiently, we may make ourselves easy by spreading the case before the Lord, and leaving it with him.

(2.) That God, by his grace, would keep up their spirits, and animate them to go on cheerfully with their work: Grant unto thy servants that with all boldness they may speak thy word, though the priests and rulers have enjoined them silence. Note, In threatening times, our care should not be so much that troubles may be prevented as that we may be enabled to go on with cheerfulness and resolution in our work and duty, whatever troubles we may meet with. Their prayer is not, “Lord, behold their threatenings, and frighten them, and stop their mouths, and fill their faces with shame;” but, “Behold their threatenings, and animate us, open our mouths and fill our hearts with courage.” They do not pray, “Lord, give us a fair opportunity to retire from our work, now that it is become dangerous;” but, “Lord, give us grace to go on in our work and not to be afraid of the face of man.” Observe, [1.] Those that are sent on God's errands ought to deliver their message with boldness, with all boldness, with all liberty of speech, not shunning to declare the whole counsel of God, whoever is offended; not doubting of what they say, nor of being borne out in saying it. [2.] God is to be sought unto for an ability to speak his word with boldness, and those that desire divine aids and encouragements may depend upon them, and ought to go forth and go on in the strength of the Lord God. [3.] The threatenings of our enemies, that are designed to weaken our hands and drive us off from our work, should rather stir us up to so much the more courage and resolution in our work. Are they daring that fight against Christ? For shame, let not us be sneaking that are for him.

JAMISO, "now, Lord, behold their threatenings— Recognizing in the threatenings of the Sanhedrim a declaration of war by the combined powers of the world against their infant cause, they seek not enthusiastically to hide from themselves its critical position, but calmly ask the Lord of heaven and earth to “look upon their threatenings.”

that with all boldness they may speak thy word— Rising above self, they ask only fearless courage to testify for their Master, and divine attestation to their testimony by miracles of healing, etc., in His name.

CALVI, "29.And now O Lord. They do very well extend that unto themselves

which they cited concerning Christ; because he will not, be separated from the

gospel; yea, what trouble so ever befalleth his members, he applieth that to his own

person. And they crave at God’s hands that he will beat down the cruelty of the

adversaries; yet not so much for their own sake that they may live quietly and

without vexation, as that they may have liberty to preach the gospel in all places.

either was it for them to desire a life which they might spend idly, having forsaken

their calling. For they add, “Grant unto thy servants, O Lord, that they may speak

boldly.” And by the way we must note this speech, that the Lord would behold their

threatenings. For seeing it belongeth properly to him to resist the proud, and to

throw down their lofty looks; the more proudly they brag and boast, the more do

they undoubtedly provoke God to be displeased with them, and it is not to be

doubted but that God, being offended with such indignity and cruelty, will redress

the same. So Ezechias, to the end he may obtain help in extremity, declareth before

the Lord the arrogancy of Sennacherib and his cruel threatenings, (Isaiah 37:14 and

17.) Wherefore let the cruelty and reproaches of our enemies rather stir up in us a

desire to pray, than any whit discourage us from going forward in the course of our

office.

COFFMA, "This is reminiscent of Hezekiah's prayer (2 Kings 19:14ff) in which he

spread the insulting letter of Sennacherib before the Lord in the temple, pleading

with God "to see and hear the words of Sennacherib." The praying saints did not

propose any solution, leaving the matter wholly in the hands of the Lord; but their

petition was concerned with their own basic need of power to "speak the word with

boldness."

COSTABLE 29-30. "The disciples called on God to note the threats of the

Sanhedrin. They may have done so to stress their need for more of His grace rather

than to call down His wrath on those rulers. The will of God was clear. The disciples

were to witness for Christ (Acts 1:8; Matthew 28:19-20). Consequently they only

needed enablement to carry out their task. They did not assume that God would

automatically give them the courage to witness boldly, as He had done in the past.

They voiced a fresh appeal for this grace since additional opposition and

temptations lay ahead of them (cf. Mark 9:29). They also acknowledged that God,

not they, was doing a spiritual work. In these respects their prayer is a helpful

model for us.

"Prayer is not an escape from responsibility; it is our response to God's ability.

True prayer energizes us for service and battle." [ote: Wiersbe, 1:416.]

"It might have been thought that when Peter and John returned with their story a

deep depression would have fallen on the Church, as they looked ahead to the

troubles which were now bound to descend upon them. The one thing that never

even struck them was to obey the Sanhedrin's command to speak no more. Into

their minds at that moment there came certain great convictions and into their lives

there came a tide of strength." [ote: Barclay, p. 39.]

It is noteworthy that these Christians did not pray for judgment on their

persecutors, nor freedom from persecution, but for strength and enablement in their

persecution (cf. Isaiah 37:16-20). They rightly

ELLICOTT, "(29) And now, Lord, behold their threatenings.—The context shows

that the prayer of the Church is addressed to the Father. The Apostles, who had

shown “boldness of speech” (Acts 4:13), pray, as conscious of their natural

weakness, for a yet further bestowal of that gift, as being now more than ever

needed, both for themselves and the whole community.

30 Stretch out your hand to heal and perform

signs and wonders through the name of your holy servant Jesus.”

BARES, "By stretching forth thine hand ... - The apostles not only desired boldness to speak, but they asked that God would continue to work miracles, and thus furnish to them, and to the people, evidence of the truth of what they delivered. They did not even ask that he would preserve their lives, or keep them from danger. They were intent on their work, and they confidently committed their way to God, making it their great object to promote the knowledge of the truth, and seeking that God would glorify himself by establishing his kingdom among people.

Signs and wonders -Miracles. (See the notes on Act_2:43.

CLARKE, "By stretching forth thine hand to heal - Show that it is thy truth which we proclaim, and confirm it with miracles, and show how highly thou hast magnified thy Son Jesus, whom they have despised and crucified, by causing signs and wonders to be wrought in his name.

Thy holy child Jesus - Του�Oγιου�παιδος�σου should be translated, thy holy Servant,

as in Act_4:25. ∆αβιδ�παιδος�σου, thy servant David, not thy Child David: the word is the same in both places.

GILL, "By stretching forth thine hand to heal,.... That is, by exerting his power in healing sicknesses, diseases, and lameness, as in the above instance, by the hands of the apostles; which, as it would be contrary to the schemes of the Jewish sanhedrim, and would confirm the doctrines of the Gospel; so it would animate the preachers of the word to preach it with more readiness, cheerfulness, and firmness of mind;

and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus; as had been done already, and by whose name particularly the lame man at the temple had received a cure, and in whose name the sanhedrim had forbid the apostles to preach, or to make use of it, in doing any other miracle.

HERY, "That God would still give them power to work miracles for the confirmation of the doctrine they preached, which, by the cure of the lame man, they found to contribute very much to their success, and would contribute abundantly to their further progress: Lord, grant us boldness, by stretching forth thy hand to heal.Note, Nothing emboldens faithful ministers more in their work than the tokens of God's presence with them, and a divine power going along with them. They pray, [1.] That God would stretch forth his hand to heal both the bodies and souls of men; else in vain do they stretch forth their hands, either in preaching (Isa_65:2), or in curing, Act_9:17. [2.] That signs and wonders might be done by the name of the holy child Jesus, which would be convincing to the people, and confounding to the enemies. Christ had promised them a power to work miracles, for the proof of their commission (Mar_16:17,

Mar_16:18); yet they must pray for it; and, though they had it, must pray for the continuance of it. Christ himself must ask, and it shall be given him. Observe, It is the honour of Christ that they aim at in this request, that the wonders might be done by the name of Jesus, the holy child Jesus, and his name shall have all the glory.

SBC, "The Child Christ

I. The day which beheld our Lord in the Temple among the doctors was no doubt the close of a wondering and inquiring time. I conceive of that moment that it gave point and purpose to a long series of internal questions and wondering visions. Here, I conceive, He was attempting to unseal the meaning of His own mission; and can we not conceive how, as the Eternal Wisdom spoke through Him, He would perplex the lawyers; and, perhaps, even compel some with wonder to exclaim—"A greater than Moses is here." One conceives the embarrassment of the learned doctors, the masters of tradition, before the Divine simplicity of the Holy Child Jesus.

II. But it was very significant that it was after this eventful period in the Temple that we read more expressly of the humiliation of the Child Christ. "He went down into Nazareth with His parents, and was subject unto them." It is easy to see that, as gradually He was putting off His childhood, He was putting off His happiness. To become conscious is to become unhappy. Christ, I conceive, bade farewell to the enjoyment of life after that visit to the Temple; henceforth He was haunted and oppressed by the work given Him to do.

III. We have no knowledge who were the companions of the Child Christ. It is not, perhaps, unreasonable to suppose that some of those who became His apostles were His fellow-villagers in those days. Certainly they were all growing into maturity—to be, to do, and to suffer with Him. He is a Child round whom, as the central figure, however humble and lowly, all the disciples, from so many quarters of the land—nay, the world, are to group; all developing for eternity, saved or lost by their acceptance or rejection of that Child.

IV. The infant nature of Christ is the power by which God has moved the world. The Holy Child Jesus. Before that birth the world had only known what evil could be enclosed in man; how vile and worthless, how low and dark. But this Child—all the same faculties, all the same powers—shows to us human nature, with God as the Divine Artificer. Christ has consecrated childhood.

E. Paxton Hood, Sermons, p. 19.

CALVI, "30.Grant unto thy servants. Seeing that one miracle had stinged the

enemy so sore how is it that these holy men do desire to have new miracles done

daily? Therefore we gather that hence which I have already touched, that they make

so great account of the glory of God, that in comparison of this, they set light by all

other things. They have respect unto this one thing only, that the power of God may

be declared by miracles, which the godly ought always to desire, although the

adversaries burst, and all the whole hell do rage. The same must we also think of

boldness to speak. They knew that the wicked could abide nothing worse than the

free course of the gospel; but because they know that that is the doctrine of life

which God will have published whatsoever befall; they do undoubtedly prefer the

preaching thereof before all other things, because it is acceptable to God. And we

are taught that we do then rightly acknowledge the benefits of God as we ought, if

by this occasion we be pricked forward to pray, that he will confirm that which he

hath began. The apostles had showed a token of heroic fortitude; now again they

pray that they may be furnished with boldness. So Paul desireth the faithful to pray

unto the Lord that his mouth may be opened, whereas, notwithstanding, his voice

did sound everywhere (Ephesians 6:19.) Therefore, the more we perceive ourselves

to be holpen by the Lord, let us learn to crave at the hands of God that we may go

forward hereafter; and especially seeing the free confession of the gospel is a

singular gift of God, we must continually beseech him to keep us in the same.

COFFMA, "This was a petition that God would continue to perform the great

signs and wonders such as the healing of the impotent man; but the apostles

accurately read the connection between such signs and the preaching of the word;

for, in the previous verse, they had prayed first that they themselves should not

flinch in the proclamation of the truth.

Holy Servant Jesus ... See under Acts 4:27, above.

ELLICOTT, "(30) By stretching forth thine hand to heal.—There seems something

like an intentional assonance in the Greek words which St. Luke uses—iâsis

(healing) and Jesus (pronounced Iesus)—as though he would indicate that the very

name of Jesus witnessed to His being the great Healer. A like instance of the nomen

et omen idea is found in the identification by Tertullian (Apol. c. 3) of Christos and

Chrestos (good, or gracious), of which we have, perhaps, a foreshadowing in 1 Peter

2:3. (Comp. also Acts 9:34.)

Thy holy child Jesus.—Better, as before, Servant. (See ote on Acts 3:13.)

31 After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly.

BARES, "And when they had prayed - The event which followed was regarded by them as an evidence that God heard their prayer.

The place was shaken - The word which is translated “was shaken” commonly denotes “violent agitation,” as the raging of the sea, the convulsion of an earthquake, or trees shaken by the wind, Mat_11:7; Act_16:26; Heb_12:26. The language here is suited to express the idea of an earthquake. Whether the motion was confined to the house

where they were is not said. They probably regarded this as an answer to their prayer, or as an evidence that God would be with them:

(1) Because it was sudden and violent, and was not produced by any natural causes;

(2) Because it occurred immediately, while they were seeking divine direction;

(3) Because it was an exhibition of great power, and was an evidence that God could protect them; and,

(4) Because a convulsion so great, sudden, and mighty was suited at that time to awe them with a proof of the presence and power of God. A similar instance of an answer to prayer by an earthquake is recorded in Act_16:25-26. Compare Act_2:1-2. It may be added, that among the Jews an earthquake was very properly regarded as a striking and impressive proof of the presence of Yahweh, Isa_29:6; Psa_68:8, “The earth shook, the heavens also dropped at the presence of God; even Sinai itself was moved at the presence of God, the God of Israel.” See also the sublime description in Hab. 3, particularly Act_4:6-11. Compare Mat_27:54. Among the pagan, an earthquake was regarded as proof of the presence and favor of the Deity. (See Virgil, Aeneid, 3:89.)

They were all filled ... - See the notes on Act_2:4. Their being filled with the Holy Spirit here rather denotes their being inspired with confidence or boldness than being endowed with new powers, as in Act_2:4.

CLARKE, "The place was shaken - This earthquake was an evidence of the presence of God, and a most direct answer to their prayer, as far as that prayer concerned themselves. The earthquake proclaimed the stretched-out arm of God, and showed them that resistance against his counsels and determinations must come to nought.

And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost - And, in consequence of this, they spake the word of God with boldness; a pointed answer to a second part of their request, Act_4:29. A right prayer will always have a right and ready answer. Though these disciples had received the Holy Spirit on the day of pentecost, yet they were capable of larger communications; and what they had then received did not preclude the necessity of frequent supplies, on emergent occasions. Indeed, one communication of this Spirit always makes way and disposes for another. Neither apostle nor private Christian can subsist in the Divine life without frequent influences from on high. Had these disciples depended on their pentecostal grace, they might have sunk now under the terror and menaces of their combined and powerful foes. God gives grace for the time being, but no stock for futurity, because he will keep all his followers continually dependent on himself.

With boldness - Παντι�τX�θελοντι�πιστευειν, To all who were willing to believe, is added by DE, two others, Augustin, Irenaeus, and Bede.

GILL, "And when they had prayed,.... Either while they were praying, or as soon as they had done; for sometimes, as here, prayer is immediately heard, and an answer is returned, whilst the saints are speaking, or as soon as prayer is ended:

the place was shaken where they were assembled together; which, whether it

was a private house, or the temple, is not certain: the latter seems more probable, because their number was so great, that no private house could hold them; and since this was the place where they used to assemble; this was now shaken with a rushing mighty wind, as on the day of Pentecost, and was a symbol of the divine presence, and a token that their prayers were heard, and an emblem of the shaking of the world by the ministry of the apostles:

and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost; with the gifts of the Holy Ghost, even with extraordinary ones, such as speaking with divers tongues, as before on the day of Pentecost; see Act_2:4 and this was the case not only of the apostles, but of the other ministers of the word, and it may be of the whole church:

and they spoke the word of God with all boldness; that is, the apostles, and preachers of the Gospel, spoke it with great freedom, and without fear, not only privately, in their community, but publicly, in the temple: this was what was particularly prayed for, and in which they had a remarkable answer.

HERY, "The gracious answer God gave to this address, not in word, but in power. 1. God gave them a sign of the acceptance of their prayers (Act_4:31): When they had prayed (perhaps many of them prayed successively), one by one, according to the rule (1Co_14:31), and when they had concluded the work of the day, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; there was a strong mighty wind, such as that when the Spirit was poured out upon them (Act_2:1, Act_2:2), which shook the house,which was now their house of prayer. This shaking of the place was designed to strike an awe upon them, to awaken and raise their expectations, and to give them a sensible token that God was with them of a truth: and perhaps it was to put them in mind of that prophecy (Hag_2:7), I will shake all nations, and will fill this house with glory. This was to show them what reason they had to fear God more, and then they would fear man less. He that shook this place could make the hearts of those who threatened his servants thus to tremble, for he cuts off the spirit of princes, and is terrible to the kings of the earth. The place was shaken, that their faith might be established and unshaken. 2. God gave them greater degrees of his Spirit, which was what they prayed for. Their prayer, without doubt, was accepted, for it was answered: They were all filled with the Holy Ghost, more than ever; by which they were not only encouraged, but enabled to speak the word of God with boldness, and not to be afraid of the proud and haughty looks of men. The Holy Ghost taught them not only what to speak, but how to speak. Those that were endued habitually with the powers of the Holy Ghost had yet occasion for fresh supplies of the Spirit, according as the various occurrences of their service were. They were filled with the Holy Ghost at the bar (Act_4:8), and now filled with the Holy Ghostin the pulpit, which teaches us to live in an actual dependence upon the grace of God, according as the duty of every day requires; we need to be anointed with fresh oil upon every fresh occasion. As in the providence of God, so in the grace of God, we not only in general live, and have our being, but move in every particular action, Act_17:28. We have here an instance of the performance of that promise, that God will give the Holy Spirit to those that ask him (Luk_11:13), for it was in answer to prayer that they were filled with the Holy Ghost: and we have also an example of the improvement of that gift, which is required of all on whom it is bestowed; have it and use it, use it and have more of it. When they were filled with the Holy Ghost, they spoke the word with all boldness;for the ministration of the Spirit is given to every man, to profit withal. Talents must be traded with, not buried. When they find the Lord God help them by his Spirit, they know they shall not be confounded, Isa_50:7.

JAMISO 31-37, "place was shaken— glorious token of the commotion which the Gospel was to make (Act_17:6; compare Act_16:26), and the overthrow of all opposing powers in which this was to issue.

they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and spake, etc.— The Spirit rested upon the entire community, first, in the very way they had asked, so that they “spake the word with boldness” (Act_4:29, Act_4:31); next, in melting down all selfishness, and absorbing even the feeling of individuality in an intense and glowing realization of Christian unity. The community of goods was but an outward expression of this, and natural in such circumstances.

HAWKER, "And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness.

Reader! let you and I attend to the blessed contents of this verse, as not simply referring to the Church then in being, but to the Church of God in all ages. Surely such a testimony was designed to tell all the praying seed of Jacob; that the Lord, who is a prayer-awakening, is also a prayer-hearing, and a prayer-answering God, See Isa_65:24. And every child of God should learn from hence, that the Lord’s presence is always with his people, though the tokens of that presence be not shewn in the same way, of miraculously shaking the place of assembly. And as the company then present are said to have been all filled with the Holy Ghost; so such renewings of the Spirit were intended to teach the Church, that as the Holy Ghost’s baptism of the Apostles at Pentecost did not supersede the necessity of fresh effusions of grace, so neither doth the regeneration of his people now render unnecessary constant supplies from the Lord. See Tit_3:4-6. Oh! for the daily refreshings of the Spirit upon ministers and people!

CALVI, "31.And when they had prayed. Luke declareth now that God did not

only hear this prayer, but did also testify the same by a visible sign from heaven. For

the shaking of the place should, of itself, have done them small good; but it tendeth

to another end, that the faithful may know that God is present with them. Finally, it

is nothing else but a token of the presence of God. But the fruit followeth, for they

are all filled with the Holy Ghost, and endowed with greater boldness. We ought

rather to stand upon this second member. For whereas God did declare his power

then by shaking the place it was a rare and extraordinary thing; and whereas it

appeared by the effect, that the apostles did obtain that which they desired, this is a

perpetual profit of prayer, which is also set before us for an example.

COFFMA,"The place ... was shaken ... God gave this visible sign that his promise

of miraculous power to the Twelve would continue to be honored.

Filled with the Holy Spirit ... This was not a repetition of the wonder at Pentecost,

but a continuation in the apostles of that power "from on high" which had been

promised, the result of which (their speaking the word with boldness) was also a

proof of the purpose of such a gift.

COKE, "Acts 4:31. And when they had prayed, &c.— God of old testified his

acceptance of the sacrifices or prayers of the pious by sending down fire from

heaven, or by appearing after some peculiar manner in the cloud of glory: but now

the token of acceptance was, that the house where they were assembled was again

shaken, and there was a second effusion of the Holy Spirit, perhaps attended with

the like sound, and with the like appearance of a glory, as there had been at first on

the day of Pentecost. It does not appear that they had by this second effusion any

further knowledge

communicated;buttheywereherebycomfortedafterthediscouragements which they

had met with from the Sanhedrim; and as they had prayed for fortitude, and a

power ofworking more miracles, their prayer was heard, fresh courage infused, and

further miraculous powers conferred, to assist them in their work, and to enable

them to proceed cheerfully, and with an undaunted steadiness and resolution.

COSTABLE, "It is not clear whether we should understand the shaking of the

place where the disciples had assembled literally or metaphorically (cf. Exodus

19:18; 1 Kings 19:11-12; Isaiah 6:4; Acts 16:26). In either case those assembled

received assurance from this phenomenon that God was among them and would

grant their petition.

"This was one of the signs which indicated a theophany in the Old Testament

(Exodus 19:18; Isaiah 6:4), and it would have been regarded as indicating a divine

response to prayer." [ote: Marshall, The Acts . . ., p. 107.]

The same control by the Spirit that had characterized Peter (Acts 4:8) and the

disciples earlier (Acts 2:4) also marked these Christians. They now spoke boldly

(Gr. parresias, with confidence, forthrightly; cf. Acts 4:13; Acts 4:29) as witnesses,

as Peter had done. ote that tongues speaking did not occur here. This was not

another baptism with the Spirit but simply a fresh filling.

"In Luke 22:39-46, just before Jesus' arrest and just after Peter's assertion of

readiness to suffer, Jesus urged the disciples to pray in order that they might not

enter into temptation. Instead, the disciples fell asleep and were unprepared for the

following crisis. In Acts 4:23-31 Jesus' followers are again confronted with the

dangerous opposition of the Sanhedrin. ow they pray as they had previously been

told to do. As a result they receive power from God to continue the mission despite

the opposition. We have already noted that Peter's boldness before the Sanhedrin in

Acts contrasts with his denial of Jesus in Luke. The church in Acts, finding power

for witness in prayer, also contrasts with the disciples who slept instead of praying

in Luke. These contrasts contribute to the narrator's picture of a dramatic

transformation in Jesus' followers." [ote: Tannehill, 2:71-72.]

ELLICOTT, "(31) The place was shaken. . . .—The impression on the senses was so

far a renewal of the wonder of the Day of Pentecost, but in this instance without the

sign of the tongues of fire, which were the symbols of a gift imparted once for all,

and, perhaps also, without the special marvel of the utterance of the tongues. The

disciples felt the power of the Spirit, the evidence of sense confirming that of

inward, spiritual consciousness, and it came in the form for which they had made a

special supplication, the power to speak with boldness the word which they were

commissioned to speak.

AROT, POWER TO BE WITESSES. 31-35

THESE feeble Christians in the upper room moved the

Hand that moves the world. The place was shaken,

but not the people. The ground trembled, but

they had found another resting-place. God is our

refuge.

" When they had prayed, the place was shaken."

It is after, and in answer to the prayers of his people,

that the Lord arises to shake the earth. Quick and

strong vibrations have of late been felt in the political

sphere. Some mighty thrones have fallen under the

shock, especially the anomalous throne of Peter s pre

tended successor at Rome. The supports of the Pope s

temporal power in Austria and France were succes

sively undermined, and the kingdom that leant on

them has accordingly fallen. Prayers have long been

ascending to the Lord of hosts for the downfall of that

great tyranny, and at last the sword that has often

been stained with the blood of saints has been wrenched

from the usurper s hand.

The shaking of the ground after the prayer of this

persecuted company was a sign that their prayer had

been heard. They had expressly acknowledged God

as the maker of heaven and earth. In answer to this

portion of their prayer, he gives them a token that al

mighty power is at hand for their protection. The

commotions of our day are encouraging rather than

otherwise to the disciples of Christ: " He that believ-

eth shall not make haste." Hollow hypocrisies are

shaken down, in order that the things that cannot be

shaken may remain erect (Heb. xii. 27).

But besides this symbol of power, a more specific

answer was given to their request; for "they were all

filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word

with boldness." They did not fear their enemies, but

they distrusted themselves; They dreaded not dan

ger, but they dreaded lest danger should shake them

from their steadfastness. ow they have obtained

what they asked, and they are at ease at ease as is

the magnet of the compass on board ship in a surging

sea steady when all else is moving fixed because

loose fixed to its pole in the distant heavens, and all

its holds slackened from below. The steadiest thing

on a shaking world is a disciple whose life is hid with

Christ in God, and whose heart is loosened from its

cleaving to the dust. His weight hangs on heaven,

and the shaking of the earth under his feet does not

imperil his position, or disturb his repose.

The apostles stood forth as leaders. They were en

dued with great power; and yet all that was required

of them was to be witnesses of a fact. Their power

was exerted in giving " witness of the resurrection of

the Lord Jesus." Christ had specially promised them

power to be his witnesses, and now that promise was

fulfilled. Peter has recovered from his weakness now.

It is no more " I know not the man."

The main characteristic of their witnessing was not

great eloquence, or great learning, but great power.

When you travel by night through a mining district,

you see mighty volumes of flame throbbing fitfully from

the mouth of lofty furnaces, and illuminating for miles

around the nocturnal sky. This phenomenon is the

ordinary accompaniment of power, but it is not the

power. You must approach the bottom of the furnace,

and examine whether miniature streams of white hot

lava are coursing forth in prepared channels along the

smoking ground. This this is power. The heat in

the heart of the furnace is melting the ore, and the

metal, separated from its dross, is flowing out pure.

The great flickering flame is not by itself the proof of

power. In like manner there is often a blaze issuing

from a really effective ministry of the gospel, which

attracts the gaze of a miscellaneous multitude; but

there is also sometimes such flame flung up against the

clouds where there is no melting heat below. We

should not despise the conspicuous and dazzling ac

companiments, for they may be the sparks that nat

urally and necessarily rise from a melting heat; but

neither should we trust in them, for they may be

the pithless flash from blazing straw. God grant the

great power in secret, with or without the visible

demonstration.

The power seems to have been a special gift be

stowed upon the apostles, but a suitable portion was

imparted also to the whole company, "great grace

was upon them all." A specific example of the grace

displayed by the disciples is immediately recorded

the grace of liberality and brotherly love. This is a

great grace, and, like other great things, rare.

They abandoned themselves at that time to a ruling

passion. They did out-of-the-way things; they were

singular people. If they turned the world upside down,

they had themselves first of all undergone the same

change. Instead of the native and habitual greed of

the old man, gravitating to self as matter gravitates

to the ground, there appeared the self-sacrificing love

of the new man the man created anew in Christ Jesus

for the very purpose of producing fruits like these. In

this new appetite the new man takes after Christ. Ev

ery creature after his kind, and the new creature too.

It is good to be singular in the world, when the singu

larity consists in greater conformity to the Saviour s

will and way. ot singularity for its own sake that

is a contemptible thing; but the courage to obey the

law of Christ, although obedience should make you

singular.

The disciples now experienced the truth of the Mas

ter s prediction, " In the world ye shall have tribula

tion." o promise had been given of exemption from

danger. The world was not so changed that the dis

ciples should not need defence; but they were so

changed that they possessed within their own souls a

complete defence against the world s assault. L Their

protection consisted of these two wove*nifcto^ ckl&

namely, courage to bear witness of Christ, and brotherly

love among themselves. Towards those who werc\

without, unflinching courage; towards those who w.ojre -

within, open-handed charity. The fejorld had cause

to say two things with equal emphasis regarding them

first, behold how these Christians defy us; and, second^

behold how these Christians love each otr\or,

Alas for the Church in our day! Surely ^ Wfe , are

weak on the two points where they were strong cour

age to bear witness for Christ, and fervent charity

among ourselves. The atmosphere of the society in

which Christians live seems to have grown thicker in

these last days. It is like a frozen sea, in which all

things grow hard and cold. The breath of life seems

to freeze. A melting is needed the baptism of fire.

STEDMA, "God answered that prayer in a three-fold way: First, he shook the

place in which they were praying. In Acts there is a frequent use of symbolic actions

on God's part. Remember on the Day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was given

there were three symbols connected with it: The mighty rushing of wind, the

appearance of tongues of fire, and the new languages that were spoken -- the gift of

tongues. Those were symbols expressive of the working of the Holy Spirit

throughout the whole age of the Spirit, the age in which we are yet living. Here also

is a symbolic act. This shaking of the place is God's symbolic answer to these

disciples' prayer. He is saying to them, in this figurative way, that he would shake

Jerusalem and the world by the message these disciples were proclaiming. Less than

forty years after this event the city of Jerusalem was surrounded by Roman armies;

the authority of the priests was broken in the city; and finally the entire nation, the

religious theocracy of Israel was shaken and the people were dispersed throughout

the nations of the world. For almost twenty centuries, two thousand years, Jewish

government was not permitted to come into power again. And within two hundred

years the empire was shaken to its core. The principles of Christianity penetrated

and permeated all strata of Roman society and changed them and transformed

them. In the fourth century it emerged as the state religion of the empire. I do not

think that was a triumph. When Constantine made Christianity the state religion it

was a trick of the enemy to destroy true faith and its effectiveness. It was a

counterattack by the enemy which proved greatly effective. But before that time

Christianity had greatly transformed the structure and power of the Roman empire.

ow what is all this saying to us in our day? Many young people are troubled by the

power structures, by the establishments. They see evil in them, and rightly so. They

see they are not doing what they were set up to do. Well, then, what does one do

about it? The answer of this account is: There is a mighty force, mightier than you

can ever dream, at work in society upon which you can rely to enable you to do

what these disciples did; to proclaim a message which is the most powerful

revolutionary message the world has ever seen; to speak the Word of God with

boldness in the filling of the Holy Spirit. To do this is to shake society to its very

core. That is what these disciples discovered.

The factor which produces righteousness, peace, order, prosperity, blessing and

happiness in a land is not the form of government which exists. It is not the

Constitution of the United States, or the Declaration of Independence, which is

preserving American liberty, even to the degree we still have it today. These are not

our guarantees; they cannot protect us. We ought to take careful note of the motto

of the new state of Hawaii which was adopted in the days of the missionaries in

1820. While still a territory this motto was adopted:

Ua mau ke ea o ka aina i ka pono

which means, "The life of the land is preserved by righteousness." It is not the

Constitution that preserves the United States. The Constitution can be twisted,

manipulated, distorted, and made to apply in a variety of ways, as the Supreme

Court has shown us many times in our history. The Constitution will not protect us

or preserve justice. What preserves justice? Righteousness! A people who are

dedicated to the will and purpose of God, and who recognize the life of God in their

midst. That is what preserves a land. That is the only thing that ever has or ever

will. The lack of righteousness has been the reason for the overturn of civilization

after civilization. Arnold Toynbee has counted some twenty-six civilizations that

have come and gone. They failed because they were not built upon righteousness.

Here, on almost the two hundredth birthday of the United States, it is well to

remember that the thing that has preserved us as a nation to this time and has

allowed what liberties we have or have ever had was not the wisdom of our

forefathers, or the documents by which they set this nation in motion, but the faith

that pervaded this land, the reality of righteousness in response to that faith, the life

of God at work in this country. And that is the way to preserve it, by a return to

righteousness.

ow this is the effect of the message of Jesus and the resurrection. It is to bring

again new life pouring from a living Christ into dying and dead people and

institutions, changing them, awakening them, arousing them again to righteousness,

to right living, living in accordance with reality. The only hope of this nation is the

proclamation of this message in every possible way in the fullness of the power of

the Holy Spirit. God has made provision that we might do as these disciples did.

Being filled with the Holy Spirit, "they spoke the word with all boldness." That has

a shaking effect upon all the structures of society.

The Believers Share Their Possessions

32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. o one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.

BARES, "And the multitude - The number of believers at this time had become large. In Act_4:4, it is said that it was five thousand, and the number was constantly increasing.

One heart - This expression denotes “tender union.” They felt alike, or were attached to the same things, and this preserved them from jars and dissensions.

One soul - This phrase also denotes “close and tender union.” No expression could

denote it more strikingly than to say of friends they have one soul. Plutarch cites an ancient verse in his life of Cato of Utica with this very expression - “Two friends, one soul” (Grotius). Thus, Diogenes Laertius also (5, Act_1:11) says respecting Aristotle, that “being asked what was a friend, answered that it was one soul dwelling in two bodies” (Kuinoel). The Hebrews spake of two friends as being “one man.” There can be no more striking demonstration of union and love than to say of more than five thousand suddenly drawn together that they had one soul! And this union they evinced in every way possible - in their conduct, in their prayers, and in their property. How different would have been the aspect of the church if the union had continued to the present time!

Neither said ... - That is, I they did not regard it as their own, but to be used for the benefit of the whole society. See the notes on Act_2:44.

CLARKE, "The multitude of them that believed - The whole 5000, mentioned Act_4:4, and probably many others, who had been converted by the ministry of the other apostles since that time.

Were of one heart and of one soul -Were in a state of the most perfect friendship and affection. In all the 5000 there appeared to be but one heart and one soul; so perfectly did they agree in all their views, religious opinions, and holy affections. Some

MSS. add, και�ουκ�ην�διακρισις�εν�αυτοις�ουδεµια, and there was no kind of difference or dissension among them. This remarkable reading is found in the Codex Bezae, another of great authority, E, two others, Ambrose, Bede, Cyprian, and Zeno. Diogenes Laertius

relates of Aristotle, ερωτηθεις,�τι�εστι�φιλος; being asked, What is a Friend? εφη,�µια�ψυχη�

δυο�σωµασιν�ενοικουσα answered, One soul dwelling in Two bodies. This saying has been justly celebrated: but what would this wonderful philosopher have thought and said, had he seen these disciples of Jesus, and friends of mankind: one soul dwelling in 5000 bodies!

They had all things common - See the notes on Act_2:44, where this subject is examined. See below, Act_4:34.

GILL, "And the multitude of them that believed,.... The Gospel, and in Christ, the substance of it; and a multitude they were, for they were now about eight thousand persons. And though their number was so great, they

were of one heart and of one soul; there was an entire consent and agreement in doctrine, in matters of faith they were all of one mind and judgment, and there was a perfect harmony in their practice, they all performed the same duties, and observed the same commands and ordinances; and all pursued the same interest, and had the same ends and views; and there was a strict union of their affections to each other; their souls were knit to one another; so that there was, but as it were, one soul in this large body of Christians. Aristotle, being asked what a friend was, answered, one soul dwelling in two

bodies (p): and so the Jews say, it is fit and proper that lovers or friends should be בלב�

of one heart, as one man" (q); and such friends and hearty lovers were" ,אחד�כאיש�אחד

these.

Neither said any of them, that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; though he had a peculiar right unto them, yet he did not claim that right, nor insist on it, nor so much as speak of it, nor make use of his substance as if it was his own, reserving it for himself, or even disposing of it himself; but exposed it to the free use of the whole body, to enjoy it equally with himself:

but they had all things common; which was what they were not obliged to, but it was a free and voluntary action of their own, and so is not binding on others; nor indeed is their practice to be imitated, in the direct manner in which they did it, for their case was peculiar. They were not only every day liable to persecutions and to have their possessions seized, and their goods confiscated; but they also knew, that in process of time, Jerusalem would be destroyed, and they could not tell how soon; and therefore judged it right to sell off their possessions, and throw the money into one common stock, for their mutual support, and for the carrying on the common cause of Christ.

HERY 32-37, "We have a general idea given us in these verses, and it is a very beautiful one, of the spirit and state of this truly primitive church; it is conspectus saeculi - a view of that age of infancy and innocence.I. The disciples loved one another dearly. Behold, how good and how pleasant it was to see how the multitude of those that believed were of one heart, and of one soul (Act_4:32), and there was no such thing as discord nor division among them. Observe here, 1. There were multitudes that believed; even in Jerusalem, where the malignant influence of the chief priests was most strong, there were three thousand converted on one day, and five thousand on another, and, besides these, there were added to the church daily;and no doubt they were all baptized, and made profession of the faith; for the same Spirit that endued the apostles with courage to preach the faith of Christ endued them with courage to confess it. Note, The increase of the church is the glory of it, and the multitude of those that believe, more than their quality. Now the church shines, and her light is come, when souls thus fly like a cloud into her bosom, and like doves to their windows, Isa_60:1, Isa_60:8. 2. They were all of one heart, and of one soul. Though there were many, very many, of different ages, tempers, and conditions, in the world, who perhaps, before they believed, were perfect strangers to one another, yet, when they met in Christ, they were as intimately acquainted as if they had known one another many years. Perhaps they had been of different sects among the Jews, before their conversion, or had had discords upon civil accounts; but now these were all forgotten and laid aside, and they were unanimous in the faith of Christ, and, being all joined to the Lord, they were joined to one another in holy love. This was the blessed fruit of Christ's dying precept to his disciples, to love one another, and his dying prayer for them, that they all might be one. We have reason to think they divided themselves into several congregations, or worshipping assemblies, according as their dwellings were, under their respective ministers; and yet this occasioned no jealousy or uneasiness; for they were all of one heart, and one soul, notwithstanding; and loved those of other congregations as truly as those of their own. Thus it was then, and we may not despair of seeing it so again, when the Spirit shall be poured out upon us from on high.

HAWKER 32-37, "And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that aught of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. (33) And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. (34) Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, (35) And laid

them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. (36) And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, (37) Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet.

What a golden age to the Church must this have been! How sweetly the love of God in Christ wrought upon the heart, when the streams of such a fountain diffused themselves in all directions! And how graciously the Lord gave testimony to the word of his grace, when the Apostles were enabled to shew miracles in witness of the truth; and the people with one heart and soul shewing forth no less the miracle of mercy wrought in them by the Holy Ghost. Oh! for the renewal of such Pentecost seasons, if it were the Lord’s will and pleasure! Oh! for many, many such as Barnabas to arise, as sons of consolation, in the distressing times of the present day. And, oh! that the Lord the Spirit would return to this our sinful land, and thereby fulfill that sweet promise, that by a pure language his people might all call upon the name of the Lord, to serve him with one consent, Zep_3:9. Nothing short of this can do to restore health to Zion. No arm, but the arm of Jehovah the Spirit, can cut Rahab, and wound the dragon, Isa_51:9. Without the outpouring of the Spirit, no heart of stone can be softened, nor the Christ-despising generation in which we dwell be removed. But, if the Lord in rich mercy will pour out of his holy Spirit upon us from on high, then will our wilderness be a fruitful field, and the fruitful field be counted for a forest, Isa_32:15. Reader! shall we not then say to the Holy Ghost, in his own most blessed words, Awake! awake! put on strength, 0 arm of the Lord! Awake, as in the ancient days, in generations of old, Isa_2:9.

CALVI, "32.And the multitude. In this place there are three things commended;

that the faithful were all of one mind; that there was a mutual partaking of goods

amongst them; that the apostles behaved themselves stoutly in announcing the

resurrection of Christ. He saith that the multitudehad one heart; because this is far

more excellent than if a few men should have a mutual consent. And heretofore he

hath declared, that the Church did grow to be about five thousand. And now he

saith that there was wonderful concord in so great a multitude, which is a very hard

matter.

And surely where faith beareth the chief sway, it doth so knit the hearts of men

together, that all of them do both will and nill one thing. For discord springeth

hence because we are not all governed with the same Spirit of Christ. It is well

known that by these two words, heart and soul, he meaneth the will. And because

the wicked do oftentimes conspire together to do evil, this concord was laudable and

holy therefore because it was amongst the faithful.

And no man did say. This is the second member; that they coupled this love with

external benefits. But we shall see anon, after what sort they had their goods

common. This is now worth the noting in the text of Luke that the inward unity of

minds goeth before as the root, and then the fruit followeth after. And surely even

we ought to observe the same order, we must love one another, (230) and then this

love of ours must show itself by external effects. (231) And in vain do we boast of a

right affection, unless there appear some testimony thereof in external offices.

Moreover, Luke declareth therewithal, that they were not of one mind for any

respect of their own commodity, forasmuch as the rich men, when they did liberally

bestow their goods, sought nothing less than their own gain.

COFFMA, "This is not a reference to another manifestation of the event narrated

in Acts 2:43ff, but another reference to that same event, introduced here by Luke as

preliminary to the happenings regarding Ananias and Sapphira. The custom of

having all things common which began shortly after Pentecost had continued until

the time of these events; but Luke's reference to it here sheds new light upon it.

The things which he possessed ... Thus it is clear that private property had not been

abolished. What is taught here is not that the institution of private possessions had

been abolished, but that the Christians held their possessions, not as their own, but

as subject to the will of God in the use of them for the relief of the needy. "This was

an emergency, and all were willing and anxious to use whatever they possessed for

the common good."[38] In the fact of the "emergency" mentioned by Boles and so

many others, there is a clue suggesting that all of the events mentioned thus far in

Acts occurred within a very short space of time after Pentecost; because the most

logical reason for any emergency, which is actually inferred rather than plainly

stated, lies in the fact that vast throngs in Jerusalem for Pentecost, after obeying the

gospel, continued to remain in Jerusalem for a time in order to hear the preaching

of the apostles, and perhaps to aid in evangelism. aturally, such a situation would

terminate after a while; and the extreme generosity of the Christians prolonged it as

long as possible.

EDOTE:

[38] H. Leo Boles, op. cit., p. 75.

BARCLAY 32-37, "In this new paragraph there is a sudden change which is typical

of Christianity. Immediately before this all things were moving in the most exalted

atmosphere. There were great thoughts of God; there were prayers for the Holy

Spirit; there were exultant quotations from the Old Testament. ow without

warning the narrative changes to the most practical things. However much these

early Christians had their moments on the heights, they never forgot that someone

had not enough and that all must help. Prayer was supremely important, the witness

of words was supremely important, but the culmination was love of the

brotherhood.

Two things are to be noted about them. (i) They had an intense sense of

responsibility for each other. (ii) This awoke in them a real desire to share all they

had. We must note one thing above all--this sharing was not the result of legislation;

it was utterly spontaneous. It is not when the law compels us to share but when the

heart moves us to share that society is really Christian.

COSTABLE, "As was true of Israel when she entered Canaan under Joshua's

leadership, failure followed initial success in the early church. The source of that

failure lay within the company of believers, not their enemies.

"The greater length of the story of Ananias and Sapphira should not lead to the

conclusion that it is the important incident, the preceding section being merely an

introduction to give it a setting; on the contrary, it is more likely that Acts 4:32-35

describes the pattern of life, and is then followed by two illustrations, positive and

negative, of what happened in practice." [ote: Marshall, The Acts . . ., p. 108.]

The unity of the believers extended beyond spiritual matters to physical, material

matters (cf. Matthew 22:37-39). They owned personal possessions, but they did not

consider them private possessions. Rather they viewed their belongings as common

(Gr. koina, cf. koinonia, "fellowship") property. Customarily they shared what they

had with one another (cf. Acts 2:44; Acts 2:46; Deuteronomy 15:4). Their unity

manifested itself in a sense of responsibility for one another. Love, not law,

compelled them to share (cf. 1 John 3:17-18).

"Their generosity sprang not from coercive legislation (as modern Socialists and

Marxists demand) but from a true union of hearts made possible by regeneration."

[ote: Kent, p. 50. Cf. Witherington, p. 206.]

The economic situation in Jerusalem was deteriorating at this time due to famine

and political unrest. [ote: Jeremias, Jerusalem in ..., pp. 121-22.] Employment

opportunities were declining, and unsaved Jews were beginning to put economic

and social pressure on the Christians.

Verses 32-35

The unity of the church 4:32-35

This brief pericope illustrates what Luke wrote earlier in Acts 2:44-46 about the

early Christians sharing and selling their possessions as well as giving verbal

witness. Luke recorded this description to emphasize the purity and unity in the

church that resulted from the Spirit's filling (Acts 4:31).

EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE 32-35, "THE community of goods and its results next claim

our attention in the course of this sacred record of primitive Church life. The gift of

tongues and this earliest attempt at Christian communism were two special features

of apostolic, or perhaps we should rather say of Jerusalem, Christianity. The gift of

tongues we find at one or two other places, at Caesarea on the first conversion of the

Gentiles, at Ephesus and at Corinth. It then disappeared. The community of goods

was tried at Jerusalem. It lasted there a very short time, and then faded from the

ordinary practice of the Christian Church. The record of this vain attempt and its

manifold results embodies many a lesson suitable to our modern Christianity.

I. The book of the Acts of the Apostles in its earliest chapters relates the story of the

triumph of the Cross; it also tells of the mistakes made by its adherents. The

Scriptures prove their Divine origin, and display the secret inspiration and guidance

of their writers, by their thorough impartiality. If in the Old Testament they are

depicting the history of an Abraham or of a David, they do not, after the example of

human biographies, tell of their virtues and throw the mantle of obscurity over their

vices and crimes. If in the ew Testament they are relating the story of apostolic

labours, they record the bad as well as the good, and hesitate not to tell of the

dissimulation of St. Peter, the hot temper and the bitter disputes of a Paul and a

Barnabas.

It is a notable circumstance that, in ancient and modern times alike, men have

stumbled at this sacred impartiality. They have mistaken the nature of inspiration,

and have busied themselves to clear the character of men like David and the holy

Apostles, explaining away the plainest facts, -the lie of Abraham, the adultery of

David, the weaknesses and infirmities of the Apostles. They have forgotten the

principle involved in the declaration, "Elijah was a man of like passions with

ourselves"; and have been so jealous for the honour of scriptural characters that

they have made their history unreal, worthless as a living example. St. Jerome, to

take but one instance, was a commentator upon Scripture whose expositions are of

the greatest value, specially because he lived and worked amid the scenes where

Scripture history was written, and while yet living tradition could be used to

illustrate the sacred narrative. St. Jerome applied this deceptive method to the

dissimulation of St. Peter at Antioch of which St. Paul tells us in the Galatians;

maintaining, in opposition to St. Augustine, that St. Peter was not a dissembler at

all, and that the whole scene at Antioch was a piece of pious acting, got up between

the Apostles in order that St. Paul might have the opportunity of condemning

Judaising practices. This is an illustration of the tendency to which I am referring.

Men will uphold, not merely the character of the Scriptures, but the characters of

the writers of Scripture. Yet how clearly do the Sacred Writings distinguish between

these things; how clearly they show that God imparted His treasures in earthen

vessels, vessels that were sometimes very earthy indeed, for while in one place they

give us the Psalms of David, with all their treasures of spiritual joy, hope, penitence,

they in another place give us the very words of the letter written by King David

ordering the murder of Uriah the Hittite. This jealousy, which refuses to admit the

fallibility and weakness of scriptural personages, has been applied to the doctrine of

the community of goods which finds place in the passage under review. Some

expositors will not allow that it was a mistake at all; they view the Church at

Jerusalem as divinely guided by the Holy Spirit even in matters of temporal policy;

they ascribe to it an infallibility greater and wider than any claimed for the Roman

Pontiff. He claims infallibility in matters pertaining to faith and morals, when

speaking as universal doctor and teacher of the Universal Church; but those writers

invest the Church at Jerusalem with infallibility on every question, whether

spiritual or temporal, sacred or secular, because the Holy Ghost had been poured

out upon the twelve Apostles on the day of Pentecost. ow it is quite evident that

neither the Church of Jerusalem nor the Apostles themselves were guided by an

inspiration which rendered them infallible upon all questions. The indwelling of the

Holy Spirit which was granted to them was a gift which left all their faculties in

precisely the same state as they were before the descent of the Spirit. The Apostles

could make moral mistakes, as Peter did at Antioch; they were not infallible in

forecasting the future, as St. Paul proved when at Ephesus he told the Ephesian

elders that he should not again visit the Church, while, indeed, he spent much time

there in after years. The whole early Church was mistaken on the important

questions of the calling of the Gentiles, the binding nature of the Levitical law, and

the time of Christ’s second coming. The Church of Jerusalem, till the conversion of

Cornelius, was completely mistaken as to the true nature of the Christian

dispensation. They regarded it, not as the new and final revelation which was to

supersede all others; they thought of it merely as a new sect within the bounds of

Judaism.

It was a similar mistake which led to the community of goods. We can trace the

genesis and upgrowth of the idea. It cannot be denied that the earliest Christians

expected the immediate return of Christ. This expectation brought with it a very

natural paralysis of business life and activity. We have seen the same result

happening again and again. At Thessalonica St. Paul had to deal with it, as we have

already noted in the second of these lectures. Some of the Thessalonians laboured

under a misunderstanding as to St. Paul’s true teaching: they thought that Jesus

Christ was immediately about to appear, and they gave up work and labour under

the pretence of preparing for His second coming. Then St. Paul comes sharply down

upon this false practical deduction which they had drawn from his teaching, and

proclaims the law, "If any man will not work, neither shall he eat." We have

already spoken of the danger which might attend such a time. Here we behold

another danger which did practically ensue and bring forth evil fruit. The first

Christian Pentecost and the days succeeding it were a period of strained

expectation, a season of intense religious excitement, which naturally led to the

community of goods. There was no apostolic rule or law laid down in the matter. It

seems to have been a course of action to which the converts spontaneously resorted,

as the logical deduction from two principles which they held; first, their

brotherhood and union in Christ; secondly, the nearness of Christ’s second advent.

The time was short. The Master had passed into the invisible world whence He

would shortly reappear. Why should they not then, as brethren in Christ, have one

common purse, and spend the whole time in waiting and watching for that loved

presence? This seems a natural explanation of the origin of a line of policy which

has been often appealed to in the practical life of modern Europe as an example for

modern Christians; and yet, when we examine it more closely, we can see that this

book of the Acts of the Apostles, while it tells of their mistake, carries with it the

correction of the error into which these earliest disciples fell. The community of

goods was adopted in no other Church. At Corinth, Ephesus, Rome, we hear

nothing of it in those primitive times. o Christian sect or Church has ever tried to

revive it save the monastic orders, who adopted it for the special purpose of cutting

their members off from any connection with the world of life and action; and, in

later times still, the wild, fanatical Anabaptists at the Reformation period, who

thought, like the Christians of Jerusalem, that the kingdom of God, as they fancied

it, was immediately about to appear. The Church of Jerusalem, as the apostolic

history shows us, reaped the natural results of this false step. They adopted the

principles of communism; they lost hold of that principle of individual life and all

exertion which lies at the very root of all civilisation and all advancement, and they

fell, as the natural result, into the direst poverty. There was no reason in the nature

of its composition why the Jerusalem Church should have been more poverty-

stricken than the Churches of Ephesus, Philippi, or Corinth. Slaves and very

humble folk constituted the staple of these Churches. At Jerusalem a great company

of the priests were obedient to the faith, and the priests’ were, as a class, in easy

circumstances. Slaves cannot at Jerusalem have constituted that large element of the

Church which they did in the great Greek and Roman cities, simply because slavery

never reached among the Jews the same development as in the Gentile world. The

Jews, as a nation, were a people among whom there was a widely diffused comfort,

and the earliest Church at Jerusalem must have fairly represented the nation. There

was nothing to make the mother Church of Christendom that pauper community we

find it to have been all through St. Paul’s ministry, save the one initial mistake,

which doubtless the Church authorities found it very hard afterwards to retrieve;

for when men get into the habit of living upon alms it is very difficult to restore the

habits of healthy independence.

II. This incident is, however, rich in teaching for the Church of every age, and that

in very various directions. It is a significant warning for the mission field.

Missionary Churches should strive after a healthy independence amongst their

members. It is, of course, absolutely necessary that missionaries should strive to

supply temporal employment to their converts in places and under circumstances

where a profession of Christianity cuts them off at once from all communication

with their old friends and neighbours. The primitive Church found it necessary to

give such temporal relief, and yet had to guard against its abuse; and we have been

far too remiss in looking for guidance to those early centuries when the whole

Church was necessarily one great missionary organisation. The Apostolic Canons

and Constitutions are documents which throw much light on many questions which

now press for solution in the mission field. They pretend to be the exact words of the

Apostles, but are evidently, the work of a later age. They date back in their present

shape, at latest, to the third or fourth century, as is evident from the fact that they

contain elaborate rules for the treatment of martyrs and confessors, -and there were

no martyrs after that time, -directing that every effort should be made to render

them comfort, support, and sympathy. These Constitutions prove that the Church in

the third century was one mighty co-operative institution, and an important

function of the bishop was the direction of that co-operation. The second chapter of

the fourth book of the Apostolic Constitution lays down, "Do you therefore, O

bishops, be solicitous about the maintenance of orphans, being in nothing wanting

to them; exhibiting to the orphans the care of parents; to the widows the care of

husbands; to the artificer, work; to the stranger, a house; to the hungry, food; to the

thirsty, drink; to the naked, clothing; to the sick, visitation; to the prisoners,

assistance." But these same Constitutions recognise equally clearly the danger

involved in such a course. The wisdom of the early Church saw and knew how easily

alms promiscuously bestowed sap the roots of independence, and taught therefore,

with equal explicitness, the absolute necessity for individual exertion, the duty of

Christian toil and labour; urging the example of the Apostles themselves, as in the

sixty-third Constitution of the second book, where they are represented as

exhorting, "Let the young persons of the Church endeavour to minister diligently in

all necessaries; mind your business with all becoming seriousness, that so you may

always have sufficient to support yourselves and those that are needy, and not

burden the Church of God. For we ourselves, besides our attention to the Word of

the Gospel, do not neglect our inferior employments; for some of us are fishermen,

some tent-makers, some husbandmen, that so we may never be idle." In the modern

mission field there will often be occasions when, as in ancient times, the profession

of Christianity and the submission of the converts to baptism will involve the loss of

all things. And, under such circumstances, Christian love, such as burned of old in

the hearts of God’s people and led them to enact the rules we have now quoted, will

still lead and compel the Church in its organised capacity to lend temporal

assistance to those that are in danger of starvation for Christ’s sake; but no

missionary effort can be in a healthy condition where all, or the greater portion, of

the converts are so dependent upon the funds of the mission that if the funds were

withdrawn the apparent results would vanish into thin air. Such missions are

utterly unlike the missions of the apostolic Church; for the converts of the apostolic

age were made by men who went forth without purse or scrip, who could not give

temporal assistance even had they desired to do so, and whose great object ever was

to develop in their followers a healthy spirit of Christian manliness and honest

independence.

III. Then, again, this passage teaches a much-needed lesson to the Church at home

about the methods of poor relief and almsgiving. "Blessed," says the Psalmist, "is he

that considereth the poor." He does not say, "Blessed is he that giveth, money to the

poor," but, "Blessed is he that considereth the poor." Well-directed, wise, prudent

almsgiving is a good and beneficial thing, but indiscriminate almsgiving, almsgiving

bestowed without care, thought, and consideration such as the Psalmist suggests,

brings with it far more evil than it prevents. The Church of Jerusalem very soon

had experience of these evils. Jealousies and quarrels soon sprang up even where

Apostles were ministering and supernatural gifts of the Spirit were present, -

"There arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews because their

widows were neglected in the daily ministrations"; and it has been ever Since the

experience of those called to deal with questions of temporal relief and the

distribution of alms, that no classes are more suspicious and more quarrelsome than

those who are in receipt of such assistance. The chaplains and managers of

almshouses, asylums, charitable funds, and workhouses know this to their cost, and

ofttimes make a bitter acquaintance with that evil spirit which burst forth even in

the mother Church of Jerusalem. Time necessarily hangs heavy upon the recipients’

hands, forethought and care are removed and cease to engage the mind, and people

having nothing else to do begin to quarrel. But this was not the only evil which

arose: hypocrisy and ostentation, as in the case of Ananias and Sapphira, deceit,

thriftlessness, and idleness showed themselves at Jerusalem, Thessalonica, and other

places, as the Epistles of St. Paul amply testify. And so it has been in the experience

of the modern Church. I know myself of whole districts where almsgiving has quite

demoralised the poor and eaten the heart out of their religion, so that they value

religious ministrations, not for the sake of the religion that is taught, but solely for

the sake of the temporal relief that accompanies it. I know of a district where, owing

to the want of organisation in religious effort and the shattered and broken

character of Protestant Christianity, the poor people are visited and relieved by six

or seven competing religious communities, so that a clever person can make a very

fair income by a judicious manipulation of the different visitors. It is evident that

such visitations are doing evil instead of good, and the labour and money expended

are worse than useless. The proper organisation of charitable relief is one of the

desirable objects the Church should set before it. The great point to be aimed at

should be not so much the ministration of direct assistance to the people as the

development of the spirit of self-help. And here comes in the action of the Christian

state. The institution of the Post Office Savings Bank, where the State guarantees

the safety of the depositor’s money, seems a direct exposition and embodiment of the

principle which underlay the community of goods in the apostolic Church. That

principle was a generous, unselfish, Christlike principle. The principle was right,

though the particular shape which the principle took was a mistaken one.

Experience has taught the Church of Christ a wiser course, and now the system of

State-guaranteed Savings Banks enables the Church to lead the poor committed to

her care into wiser courses. Parochial and congregational Savings Banks ought to be

attached to all Christian organisations, so as to teach the poor the industrial lessons

which they need. We have known a district in a most thriftless neighbourhood

where immense sums used to be wasted in indiscriminate almsgiving, and yet where

the people, like the woman in the Gospels, were never one whit the better, but rather

grew worse. We have seen such a district in the course of a few years quite

regenerated in temporal matters, simply by the action of what is called a parochial

Penny Savings Bank. Previously to its institution the slightest fall of snow brought

heartrending appeals for coal funds, blankets, and food; while a few years of its

operation banished coal funds and pauperism in every shape, simply by teaching the

people the magic law of thrift, and by developing within them the love and the

power of self-respecting and industrious independence. And yet efforts in this

direction will not be destructive of Christian charity. They tend not to dry up the

springs of Christian love. Charity is indeed a blessing to the giver, and we should

never desire to see the opportunity wanting for its display. Ill indeed would be the

world’s state if we had no longer the poor, the sick, the needy, with us. Our sinful

human nature requires its unselfish powers to be kept in action, or else it quickly

subsides into a state of unwholesome stagnation. Poor people need to be taught

habits of saving, and this teaching will require time and trouble and expense. The

clergy and their congregations may teach the poor thrift by offering a much higher

interest than the Post Office supplies, while, at the same time, the funds are all

deposited in the State Savings Bank. That higher interest will often demand as much

money as the doles previously bestowed in the shape of mere gifts of coal and food.

But then what a difference in the result! The mere dole has, for the most part, a

demoralising tendency, while the money spent in the other direction permanently

elevates and blesses.

IV. But there is a more important lesson still to be derived from this incident in the

apostolic Church. The community of goods failed in that Church when tried under

the most favourable circumstances, terminating in the permanent degradation of the

Christian community at Jerusalem; just as similar efforts must ever fail, no matter

how broad the field upon which they may be tried or how powerful the forces which

may be arrayed on their behalf. Christian legislatures of our own age may learn a

lesson of warning against perilous experiments in a communistic direction from the

disastrous failure in Jerusalem; and there is a real danger in this respect from the

tendency of human nature to rush to extremes. Protestantism and the Reformation

accentuated the individual and individual independence. The feeling thus taught in

religion reacted on the world of life and action, developing an intensity of

individualism in the political world which paralysed the efforts which the state alone

could make in the various matters of sanitary education and social reform. In the

last generation Maurice and Kingsley and men of their school raised in opposition

the banner of Christian socialism, because they saw clearly that men had run too far

in the direction of individualism, -so far, indeed, that they were inclined to forget the

great lesson taught by Christianity, that under the new law we are members one of

another, and that all members belong to one body, and that body is Christ. Men are

so narrow that they can for the most part take only one view at a time, and so now

they are inclined to push Christian socialism to the same extreme as at Jerusalem,

and to forget that there is a great truth in individualism as there is another great

truth in Christian socialism. Dr. ewman in his valuable but almost forgotten work

on the Prophetical Office of the Church defined the position of the English Church

as being a Media Via, a mean between two extremes. Whatever may be said upon

other topics, the office of the Christian Church is most certainly a Via Media, a

mean between the two opposite extremes of socialism and individualism. Much good

has been effected of late years by legislation based upon essentially socialistic ideas.

Reformatory and industrial schools, to take but one instance, are socialistic in their

foundations and in their tendencies. The whole body of the state undertakes in them

responsibilities and duties which God intended individuals to discharge, but which

individuals persistently neglect, to the injury of their innocent offspring, and of

society at large. Yet even in this simple experiment we can see the germs of the same

evils which sprang up at Jerusalem. We have seen this tendency appearing in

connection with the Industrial School system, and have known parents who could

educate and train their children in family life encouraged by this well-intentioned

legislation to fling their responsibilities over upon the State, and neglecting their

offspring because they were convinced that in doing so they were not only saving

their own pockets, but also doing better for their children than they themselves

could. It is just the same, and has ever been the same, with all similar legislation. It

requires to be most narrowly watched. Human nature is intensely lazy and intensely

selfish. God has laid down the law of individual effort and individual responsibility,

and while we should strive against the abuses of that law, we should watch with

equal care against the opposite abuses. Foundling hospitals as they were worked in

the last century, for instance, form an object-lesson of the dangers inherent in such

methods of action. Benevolent persons in the last century pitied the condition of

poor children left as foundlings. There was, some sixty years ago, an institution in

Dublin of this kind, which was supported by the state. There was a box in which an

infant could be placed at any hour of the day or night; a bell was rung, and by the

action of a turn-stile the infant was received into the institution. But experience soon

taught the same lesson as at Jerusalem. The Foundling Hospital may have

temporarily relieved some deserving cases and occasionally prevented some very

painful scenes, but the broad results upon society at large were so bad, immorality

was so increased, the sense of parental responsibility was so weakened, that the state

was compelled to terminate its existence at a very large expense. Socialism when

pushed to an extreme must necessarily work out in bad results, and that because

there is one constant and fixed quantity which the socialist forgets. Human nature

changes not; human nature is corrupt, and must remain corrupt until the end, and

so long as the corruption of human nature remains the best-conceived plans of

socialism must necessarily fail.

Yet the Jerusalem idea of a voluntary community of goods was a noble one, and

sprang from an unselfish root. It was purely voluntary indeed. There was no

compulsion upon any to adopt it. "ot one of them said that aught that he possessed

was his own," is St. Luke’s testimony on the point. "While it remained did it not

remain thine own? And after it was sold was it not in thy power?" are St. Peter’s

words, clearly testifying that this Christian communism was simply the result and

outcome of loving hearts who, under the influence of an overmastering emotion, had

cast prudence to the winds. The communism of Jerusalem may have been unwise,

but it was the proof of generous and devout spirits. It was an attempt, too, to realise

the conditions of the new life in the new heaven and the new earth wherein dwelleth

righteousness, while still the old heaven and the old earth remained. It was an

enthusiasm, a high, a holy, and a noble enthusiasm; and though it failed in some

respects, still the enthusiasm begotten of fervent Christian love succeeded in another

direction, for it enabled the Apostles "with great power to give witness to the

resurrection of the Lord Jesus." The union of these two points in the sacred

narrative has profound spiritual teaching for the Church of Christ. Unselfishness in

worldly things, enthusiasm about the kingdom of Christ, fervent love to the

brethren, are brought into nearest contact and united in closest bonds with the

possession of special spiritual power over the hearts of the unbelievers.

And then, again, the unselfishness existed amongst the body of the Church, the mass

of the people at large. We are sure that the Apostles were leaders in the acts of self-

denial. o great work is carried out where the natural and divinely-sent leaders

hang back. But it is the love and enthusiasm of the mass of the people which excite

St. Luke’s notice, and which he illustrates by the contrasted cases of Barnabas and

Ananias; and he connects this unselfish enthusiasm of the people with the possession

of great power by the Apostles. Surely we can read a lesson suitable for the Church

of all ages in this collocation. The law of interaction prevails between clergy and

people still as it did between the Apostles and people of old. The true minister of

Christ will frequently bear before the throne of God those souls with whom the Holy

Ghost has entrusted him, and without such personal intercession he cannot expect

real success in his work. But then, on the other hand, this passage suggests to us that

enthusiasm, fervent faith, unselfish love on the people’s part are the conditions of

ministerial power with human souls. A people filled with Christ’s love, and

abounding in enthusiasm, even by a mere natural process produce power in their

leaders, for the hearts of the same leaders beat quicker and their tongues speak

more forcibly because they feel behind them the immense motive power of hallowed

faith and sacred zeal. But we believe in a still higher blessing. When people are

unselfish, brimming over with generous Christian love, it calls down a supernatural,

a Divine power. The Pentecostal Spirit of love again descends, and in roused hearts

and converted souls and purified and consecrated intellects rewards with a blessing

such as they desire the men and women who long for the salvation of their brethren,

and are willing, like these apostolic Christians, to sacrifice their dearest and their

best for it.

ELLICOTT, "(32) And the multitude of them that believed.—Literally, And the

heart and the soul of the multitude of those that believed were one. Of the two words

used to describe the unity of the Church, “heart” represented, as in Hebrew usage,

rather the intellectual side of character (Mark 2:6; Mark 2:8; Mark 11:23; Luke

2:35; Luke 3:15; Luke 6:45, et al.), and “soul,” the emotional (Luke 2:35; Luke

12:22; John 12:27, et al.). As with most like words, however, they often overlap each

other, and are used together to express the totality of character without minute

analysis. The description stands parallel with that of Acts 2:42-47, as though the

historian delighted to dwell on the continuance, as long as it lasted, of that ideal of a

common life of equality and fraternity after which philosophers had yearned, in

which the rights of property, though not abolished, were, by the spontaneous action

of its owners, made subservient to the law of love, and benevolence was free and full,

without the “nicely calculated less or more” of a later and less happy time. The very

form of expression implies that the community of goods was not compulsory. The

goods still belonged to men, but they did not speak of them as their own. They had

learned, as from our Lord’s teaching (Luke 16:10-14), to think of themselves, not as

possessors, but as stewards.

EBC 32-37, "THE COMMUNITY OF GOODS

THE community of goods and its results next claim our attention in the course of this sacred record of primitive Church life. The gift of tongues and this earliest attempt at Christian communism were two special features of apostolic, or perhaps we should rather say of Jerusalem, Christianity. The gift of tongues we find at one or two other places, at Caesarea on the first conversion of the Gentiles, at Ephesus and at Corinth. It then disappeared. The community of goods was tried at Jerusalem. It lasted there a very short time, and then faded from the ordinary practice of the Christian Church. The record of this vain attempt and its manifold results embodies many a lesson suitable to our modern Christianity.

I. The book of the Acts of the Apostles in its earliest chapters relates the story of the triumph of the Cross; it also tells of the mistakes made by its adherents. The Scriptures prove their Divine origin, and display the secret inspiration and guidance of their writers, by their thorough impartiality. If in the Old Testament they are depicting the history of an Abraham or of a David, they do not, after the example of human biographies, tell of their virtues and throw the mantle of obscurity over their vices and crimes. If in the New Testament they are relating the story of apostolic labours, they record the bad as well as the good, and hesitate not to tell of the dissimulation of St. Peter, the hot temper and the bitter disputes of a Paul and a Barnabas.

It is a notable circumstance that, in ancient and modern times alike, men have stumbled at this sacred impartiality. They have mistaken the nature of inspiration, and have busied themselves to clear the character of men like David and the holy Apostles, explaining away the plainest facts, -the lie of Abraham, the adultery of David, the weaknesses and infirmities of the Apostles. They have forgotten the principle involved in the declaration, "Elijah was a man of like passions with ourselves"; and have been so jealous for the honour of scriptural characters that they have made their history unreal, worthless as a living example. St. Jerome, to take but one instance, was a commentator

upon Scripture whose expositions are of the greatest value, specially because he lived and worked amid the scenes where Scripture history was written, and while yet living tradition could be used to illustrate the sacred narrative. St. Jerome applied this deceptive method to the dissimulation of St. Peter at Antioch of which St. Paul tells us in the Galatians; maintaining, in opposition to St. Augustine, that St. Peter was not a dissembler at all, and that the whole scene at Antioch was a piece of pious acting, got up between the Apostles in order that St. Paul might have the opportunity of condemning Judaising practices. This is an illustration of the tendency to which I am referring. Men will uphold, not merely the character of the Scriptures, but the characters of the writers of Scripture. Yet how clearly do the Sacred Writings distinguish between these things; how clearly they show that God imparted His treasures in earthen vessels, vessels that were sometimes very earthy indeed, for while in one place they give us the Psalms of David, with all their treasures of spiritual joy, hope, penitence, they in another place give us the very words of the letter written by King David ordering the murder of Uriah the Hittite. This jealousy, which refuses to admit the fallibility and weakness of scriptural personages, has been applied to the doctrine of the community of goods which finds place in the passage under review. Some expositors will not allow that it was a mistake at all; they view the Church at Jerusalem as divinely guided by the Holy Spirit even in matters of temporal policy; they ascribe to it an infallibility greater and wider than any claimed for the Roman Pontiff. He claims infallibility in matters pertaining to faith and morals, when speaking as universal doctor and teacher of the Universal Church; but those writers invest the Church at Jerusalem with infallibility on every question, whether spiritual or temporal, sacred or secular, because the Holy Ghost had been poured out upon the twelve Apostles on the day of Pentecost. Now it is quite evident that neither the Church of Jerusalem nor the Apostles themselves were guided by an inspiration which rendered them infallible upon all questions. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit which was granted to them was a gift which left all their faculties in precisely the same state as they were before the descent of the Spirit. The Apostles could make moral mistakes, as Peter did at Antioch; they were not infallible in forecasting the future, as St. Paul proved when at Ephesus he told the Ephesian elders that he should not again visit the Church, while, indeed, he spent much time there in after years. The whole early Church was mistaken on the important questions of the calling of the Gentiles, the binding nature of the Levitical law, and the time of Christ’s second coming. The Church of Jerusalem, till the conversion of Cornelius, was completely mistaken as to the true nature of the Christian dispensation. They regarded it, not as the new and final revelation which was to supersede all others; they thought of it merely as a new sect within the bounds of Judaism.

It was a similar mistake which led to the community of goods. We can trace the genesis and upgrowth of the idea. It cannot be denied that the earliest Christians expected the immediate return of Christ. This expectation brought with it a very natural paralysis of business life and activity. We have seen the same result happening again and again. At Thessalonica St. Paul had to deal with it, as we have already noted in the second of these lectures. Some of the Thessalonians laboured under a misunderstanding as to St. Paul’s true teaching: they thought that Jesus Christ was immediately about to appear, and they gave up work and labour under the pretence of preparing for His second coming. Then St. Paul comes sharply down upon this false practical deduction which they had drawn from his teaching, and proclaims the law, "If any man will not work, neither shall he eat." We have already spoken of the danger which might attend such a time. Here we behold another danger which did practically ensue and bring forth evil fruit. The first Christian Pentecost and the days succeeding it were a period of strained expectation, a

season of intense religious excitement, which naturally led to the community of goods. There was no apostolic rule or law laid down in the matter. It seems to have been a course of action to which the converts spontaneously resorted, as the logical deduction from two principles which they held; first, their brotherhood and union in Christ; secondly, the nearness of Christ’s second advent. The time was short. The Master had passed into the invisible world whence He would shortly reappear. Why should they not then, as brethren in Christ, have one common purse, and spend the whole time in waiting and watching for that loved presence? This seems a natural explanation of the origin of a line of policy which has been often appealed to in the practical life of modern Europe as an example for modern Christians; and yet, when we examine it more closely, we can see that this book of the Acts of the Apostles, while it tells of their mistake, carries with it the correction of the error into which these earliest disciples fell. The community of goods was adopted in no other Church. At Corinth, Ephesus, Rome, we hear nothing of it in those primitive times. No Christian sect or Church has ever tried to revive it save the monastic orders, who adopted it for the special purpose of cutting their members off from any connection with the world of life and action; and, in later times still, the wild, fanatical Anabaptists at the Reformation period, who thought, like the Christians of Jerusalem, that the kingdom of God, as they fancied it, was immediately about to appear. The Church of Jerusalem, as the apostolic history shows us, reaped the natural results of this false step. They adopted the principles of communism; they lost hold of that principle of individual life and all exertion which lies at the very root of all civilisation and all advancement, and they fell, as the natural result, into the direst poverty. There was no reason in the nature of its composition why the Jerusalem Church should have been more poverty-stricken than the Churches of Ephesus, Philippi, or Corinth. Slaves and very humble folk constituted the staple of these Churches. At Jerusalem a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith, and the priests’ were, as a class, in easy circumstances. Slaves cannot at Jerusalem have constituted that large element of the Church which they did in the great Greek and Roman cities, simply because slavery never reached among the Jews the same development as in the Gentile world. The Jews, as a nation, were a people among whom there was a widely diffused comfort, and the earliest Church at Jerusalem must have fairly represented the nation. There was nothing to make the mother Church of Christendom that pauper community we find it to have been all through St. Paul’s ministry, save the one initial mistake, which doubtless the Church authorities found it very hard afterwards to retrieve; for when men get into the habit of living upon alms it is very difficult to restore the habits of healthy independence.

II. This incident is, however, rich in teaching for the Church of every age, and that in very various directions. It is a significant warning for the mission field. Missionary Churches should strive after a healthy independence amongst their members. It is, of course, absolutely necessary that missionaries should strive to supply temporal employment to their converts in places and under circumstances where a profession of Christianity cuts them off at once from all communication with their old friends and neighbours. The primitive Church found it necessary to give such temporal relief, and yet had to guard against its abuse; and we have been far too remiss in looking for guidance to those early centuries when the whole Church was necessarily one great missionary organisation. The Apostolic Canons and Constitutions are documents which throw much light on many questions which now press for solution in the mission field. They pretend to be the exact words of the Apostles, but are evidently, the work of a later age. They date back in their present shape, at latest, to the third or fourth century, as is evident from the fact that they contain elaborate rules for the treatment of martyrs and

confessors, -and there were no martyrs after that time, -directing that every effort should be made to render them comfort, support, and sympathy. These Constitutions prove that the Church in the third century was one mighty co-operative institution, and an important function of the bishop was the direction of that co-operation. The second chapter of the fourth book of the Apostolic Constitution lays down, "Do you therefore, O bishops, be solicitous about the maintenance of orphans, being in nothing wanting to them; exhibiting to the orphans the care of parents; to the widows the care of husbands; to the artificer, work; to the stranger, a house; to the hungry, food; to the thirsty, drink; to the naked, clothing; to the sick, visitation; to the prisoners, assistance." But these same Constitutions recognise equally clearly the danger involved in such a course. The wisdom of the early Church saw and knew how easily alms promiscuously bestowed sap the roots of independence, and taught therefore, with equal explicitness, the absolute necessity for individual exertion, the duty of Christian toil and labour; urging the example of the Apostles themselves, as in the sixty-third Constitution of the second book, where they are represented as exhorting, "Let the young persons of the Church endeavour to minister diligently in all necessaries; mind your business with all becoming seriousness, that so you may always have sufficient to support yourselves and those that are needy, and not burden the Church of God. For we ourselves, besides our attention to the Word of the Gospel, do not neglect our inferior employments; for some of us are fishermen, some tent-makers, some husbandmen, that so we may never be idle." In the modern mission field there will often be occasions when, as in ancient times, the profession of Christianity and the submission of the converts to baptism will involve the loss of all things. And, under such circumstances, Christian love, such as burned of old in the hearts of God’s people and led them to enact the rules we have now quoted, will still lead and compel the Church in its organised capacity to lend temporal assistance to those that are in danger of starvation for Christ’s sake; but no missionary effort can be in a healthy condition where all, or the greater portion, of the converts are so dependent upon the funds of the mission that if the funds were withdrawn the apparent results would vanish into thin air. Such missions are utterly unlike the missions of the apostolic Church; for the converts of the apostolic age were made by men who went forth without purse or scrip, who could not give temporal assistance even had they desired to do so, and whose great object ever was to develop in their followers a healthy spirit of Christian manliness and honest independence.

III. Then, again, this passage teaches a much-needed lesson to the Church at home about the methods of poor relief and almsgiving. "Blessed," says the Psalmist, "is he that considereth the poor." He does not say, "Blessed is he that giveth, money to the poor," but, "Blessed is he that considereth the poor." Well-directed, wise, prudent almsgiving is a good and beneficial thing, but indiscriminate almsgiving, almsgiving bestowed without care, thought, and consideration such as the Psalmist suggests, brings with it far more evil than it prevents. The Church of Jerusalem very soon had experience of these evils. Jealousies and quarrels soon sprang up even where Apostles were ministering and supernatural gifts of the Spirit were present, - "There arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews because their widows were neglected in the daily ministrations"; and it has been ever Since the experience of those called to deal with questions of temporal relief and the distribution of alms, that no classes are more suspicious and more quarrelsome than those who are in receipt of such assistance. The chaplains and managers of almshouses, asylums, charitable funds, and workhouses know this to their cost, and ofttimes make a bitter acquaintance with that evil spirit which burst forth even in the mother Church of Jerusalem. Time necessarily hangs heavy upon the recipients’ hands, forethought and care are removed and cease to engage the mind, and people

having nothing else to do begin to quarrel. But this was not the only evil which arose: hypocrisy and ostentation, as in the case of Ananias and Sapphira, deceit, thriftlessness, and idleness showed themselves at Jerusalem, Thessalonica, and other places, as the Epistles of St. Paul amply testify. And so it has been in the experience of the modern Church. I know myself of whole districts where almsgiving has quite demoralised the poor and eaten the heart out of their religion, so that they value religious ministrations, not for the sake of the religion that is taught, but solely for the sake of the temporal relief that accompanies it. I know of a district where, owing to the want of organisation in religious effort and the shattered and broken character of Protestant Christianity, the poor people are visited and relieved by six or seven competing religious communities, so that a clever person can make a very fair income by a judicious manipulation of the different visitors. It is evident that such visitations are doing evil instead of good, and the labour and money expended are worse than useless. The proper organisation of charitable relief is one of the desirable objects the Church should set before it. The great point to be aimed at should be not so much the ministration of direct assistance to the people as the development of the spirit of self-help. And here comes in the action of the Christian state. The institution of the Post Office Savings Bank, where the State guarantees the safety of the depositor’s money, seems a direct exposition and embodiment of the principle which underlay the community of goods in the apostolic Church. That principle was a generous, unselfish, Christlike principle. The principle was right, though the particular shape which the principle took was a mistaken one. Experience has taught the Church of Christ a wiser course, and now the system of State-guaranteed Savings Banks enables the Church to lead the poor committed to her care into wiser courses. Parochial and congregational Savings Banks ought to be attached to all Christian organisations, so as to teach the poor the industrial lessons which they need. We have known a district in a most thriftless neighbourhood where immense sums used to be wasted in indiscriminate almsgiving, and yet where the people, like the woman in the Gospels, were never one whit the better, but rather grew worse. We have seen such a district in the course of a few years quite regenerated in temporal matters, simply by the action of what is called a parochial Penny Savings Bank. Previously to its institution the slightest fall of snow brought heartrending appeals for coal funds, blankets, and food; while a few years of its operation banished coal funds and pauperism in every shape, simply by teaching the people the magic law of thrift, and by developing within them the love and the power of self-respecting and industrious independence. And yet efforts in this direction will not be destructive of Christian charity. They tend not to dry up the springs of Christian love. Charity is indeed a blessing to the giver, and we should never desire to see the opportunity wanting for its display. Ill indeed would be the world’s state if we had no longer the poor, the sick, the needy, with us. Our sinful human nature requires its unselfish powers to be kept in action, or else it quickly subsides into a state of unwholesome stagnation. Poor people need to be taught habits of saving, and this teaching will require time and trouble and expense. The clergy and their congregations may teach the poor thrift by offering a much higher interest than the Post Office supplies, while, at the same time, the funds are all deposited in the State Savings Bank. That higher interest will often demand as much money as the doles previously bestowed in the shape of mere gifts of coal and food. But then what a difference in the result! The mere dole has, for the most part, a demoralising tendency, while the money spent in the other direction permanently elevates and blesses.

IV. But there is a more important lesson still to be derived from this incident in the apostolic Church. The community of goods failed in that Church when tried under the most favourable circumstances, terminating in the permanent degradation of the

Christian community at Jerusalem; just as similar efforts must ever fail, no matter how broad the field upon which they may be tried or how powerful the forces which may be arrayed on their behalf. Christian legislatures of our own age may learn a lesson of warning against perilous experiments in a communistic direction from the disastrous failure in Jerusalem; and there is a real danger in this respect from the tendency of human nature to rush to extremes. Protestantism and the Reformation accentuated the individual and individual independence. The feeling thus taught in religion reacted on the world of life and action, developing an intensity of individualism in the political world which paralysed the efforts which the state alone could make in the various matters of sanitary education and social reform. In the last generation Maurice and Kingsley and men of their school raised in opposition the banner of Christian socialism, because they saw clearly that men had run too far in the direction of individualism, -so far, indeed, that they were inclined to forget the great lesson taught by Christianity, that under the new law we are members one of another, and that all members belong to one body, and that body is Christ. Men are so narrow that they can for the most part take only one view at a time, and so now they are inclined to push Christian socialism to the same extreme as at Jerusalem, and to forget that there is a great truth in individualism as there is another great truth in Christian socialism. Dr. Newman in his valuable but almost forgotten work on the Prophetical Office of the Church defined the position of the English Church as being a Media Via, a mean between two extremes. Whatever may be said upon other topics, the office of the Christian Church is most certainly a Via Media, a mean between the two opposite extremes of socialism and individualism. Much good has been effected of late years by legislation based upon essentially socialistic ideas. Reformatory and industrial schools, to take but one instance, are socialistic in their foundations and in their tendencies. The whole body of the state undertakes in them responsibilities and duties which God intended individuals to discharge, but which individuals persistently neglect, to the injury of their innocent offspring, and of society at large. Yet even in this simple experiment we can see the germs of the same evils which sprang up at Jerusalem. We have seen this tendency appearing in connection with the Industrial School system, and have known parents who could educate and train their children in family life encouraged by this well-intentioned legislation to fling their responsibilities over upon the State, and neglecting their offspring because they were convinced that in doing so they were not only saving their own pockets, but also doing better for their children than they themselves could. It is just the same, and has ever been the same, with all similar legislation. It requires to be most narrowly watched. Human nature is intensely lazy and intensely selfish. God has laid down the law of individual effort and individual responsibility, and while we should strive against the abuses of that law, we should watch with equal care against the opposite abuses. Foundling hospitals as they were worked in the last century, for instance, form an object-lesson of the dangers inherent in such methods of action. Benevolent persons in the last century pitied the condition of poor children left as foundlings. There was, some sixty years ago, an institution in Dublin of this kind, which was supported by the state. There was a box in which an infant could be placed at any hour of the day or night; a bell was rung, and by the action of a turn-stile the infant was received into the institution. But experience soon taught the same lesson as at Jerusalem. The Foundling Hospital may have temporarily relieved some deserving cases and occasionally prevented some very painful scenes, but the broad results upon society at large were so bad, immorality was so increased, the sense of parental responsibility was so weakened, that the state was compelled to terminate its existence at a very large expense. Socialism when pushed to an extreme must necessarily work out in bad results, and that because there is one constant and fixed quantity which the socialist forgets. Human nature changes not;

human nature is corrupt, and must remain corrupt until the end, and so long as the corruption of human nature remains the best-conceived plans of socialism must necessarily fail.

Yet the Jerusalem idea of a voluntary community of goods was a noble one, and sprang from an unselfish root. It was purely voluntary indeed. There was no compulsion upon any to adopt it. "Not one of them said that aught that he possessed was his own," is St. Luke’s testimony on the point. "While it remained did it not remain thine own? And after it was sold was it not in thy power?" are St. Peter’s words, clearly testifying that this Christian communism was simply the result and outcome of loving hearts who, under the influence of an overmastering emotion, had cast prudence to the winds. The communism of Jerusalem may have been unwise, but it was the proof of generous and devout spirits. It was an attempt, too, to realise the conditions of the new life in the new heaven and the new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness, while still the old heaven and the old earth remained. It was an enthusiasm, a high, a holy, and a noble enthusiasm; and though it failed in some respects, still the enthusiasm begotten of fervent Christian love succeeded in another direction, for it enabled the Apostles "with great power to give witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus." The union of these two points in the sacred narrative has profound spiritual teaching for the Church of Christ. Unselfishness in worldly things, enthusiasm about the kingdom of Christ, fervent love to the brethren, are brought into nearest contact and united in closest bonds with the possession of special spiritual power over the hearts of the unbelievers.

And then, again, the unselfishness existed amongst the body of the Church, the mass of the people at large. We are sure that the Apostles were leaders in the acts of self-denial. No great work is carried out where the natural and divinely-sent leaders hang back. But it is the love and enthusiasm of the mass of the people which excite St. Luke’s notice, and which he illustrates by the contrasted cases of Barnabas and Ananias; and he connects this unselfish enthusiasm of the people with the possession of great power by the Apostles. Surely we can read a lesson suitable for the Church of all ages in this collocation. The law of interaction prevails between clergy and people still as it did between the Apostles and people of old. The true minister of Christ will frequently bear before the throne of God those souls with whom the Holy Ghost has entrusted him, and without such personal intercession he cannot expect real success in his work. But then, on the other hand, this passage suggests to us that enthusiasm, fervent faith, unselfish love on the people’s part are the conditions of ministerial power with human souls. A people filled with Christ’s love, and abounding in enthusiasm, even by a mere natural process produce power in their leaders, for the hearts of the same leaders beat quicker and their tongues speak more forcibly because they feel behind them the immense motive power of hallowed faith and sacred zeal. But we believe in a still higher blessing. When people are unselfish, brimming over with generous Christian love, it calls down a supernatural, a Divine power. The Pentecostal Spirit of love again descends, and in roused hearts and converted souls and purified and consecrated intellects rewards with a blessing such as they desire the men and women who long for the salvation of their brethren, and are willing, like these apostolic Christians, to sacrifice their dearest and their best for it.

MACLARE, "THE WHEAT AND THE TARES

Once more Luke pauses and gives a general survey of the Church’s condition. It comes in appropriately at the end of the account of the triumph over the first assault of civil

authority, which assault was itself not only baffled, but turned to good. Just because persecution had driven them closer to God and to one another, were the disciples so full of brotherly love and of grace as Luke delights to paint them.

I. We note the fair picture of what the Church once was.

The recent large accessions to it might have weakened the first feelings of brotherhood, so that it is by no means superfluous to repeat substantially the features of the earlier description (Act_2:44-45). ‘The multitude’ is used with great meaning, for it was a triumph of the Spirit’s influence that the warm stream of brotherly love ran through so many hearts, knit together only by common submission to Jesus. That oneness of thought and feeling was the direct issue of the influx of the Spirit mentioned as the blessed result of the disciples’ dauntless devotion (Act_4:31). If our Churches were ‘filled with the Holy Ghost,’ we too should be fused into oneness of heart and mind, though our organisations as separate communities continued, just as all the little pools below high-water mark are made one when the tide comes up.

The first result and marvellous proof of that oneness was the so-called ‘community of goods,’ the account of which is remarkable both because it all but fills this picture, and because it is broken into two by Act_4:33, rapidly summarising other characteristics. The two halves may be considered together, and it may be noted that the former presents the sharing of property as the result of brotherly unity, while the latter traces it (‘for,’ Act_4:34) to the abundant divine grace resting on the whole community. The terms of the description should be noted, as completely negativing the notion that the fact in question was anything like compulsory abolition of the right of individual ownership. ‘Not one of them said that aught of the things which he possessed was his own.’ That implies that the right of possession was not abolished. It implies, too, that the common feeling of brotherhood was stronger than the self-centred regard which looks on possessions as to be used for self. Thus they possessed as though they possessed not, and each held his property as a trust from God for his brethren.

We must observe, further, that the act of selling was the owners’, as was the act of handing the proceeds to the Apostles. The community had nothing to do with the money till it had been given to them. Further, the distribution was not determined by the rule of equality, but by the ‘need’ of the recipients; and its result was not that all had share and share alike, but that ‘none lacked.’

There is nothing of modern communism in all this, but there is a lesson to the modern Church as to the obligations of wealth and the claims of brotherhood, which is all but universally disregarded. The spectre of communism is troubling every nation, and it will become more and more formidable, unless the Church learns that the only way to lay it is to live by the precepts of Jesus and to repeat in new forms the spirit of the primitive Church. The Christian sense of stewardship, not the abolition of the right of property, is the cure for the hideous facts which drive men to shriek ‘Property is theft.’

Luke adds two more points to his survey,-the power of the Apostolic testimony, and the great grace which lay like a bright cloud on the whole Church. The Apostles’ special office was to bear witness to the Resurrection. They held a position of prominence in the Church by virtue of having been chosen by Jesus and having been His companions, but the Book of Acts is silent about any of the other mysterious powers which later ages have ascribed to them. The only Apostles who appear in it are Peter, John, and James, the last only in a parenthesis recording His martyrdom. Their peculiar work was to say, ‘Behold! we saw, and know that He died and rose again.’

II. The general description is followed by one example of the surrender of

wealth, which is noteworthy as being done by one afterwards to play a great part in the book, and also as leading on to an example of hypocritical pretence. Side by side stand Barnabas and the wretched couple, Ananias and Sapphira.

Luke introduces the new personage with some particularity, and, as He does not go into detail without good reason, we must note his description. First, the man’s character is given, as expressed in the name bestowed by the Apostles, in imitation of Christ’s frequent custom. He must have been for some time a disciple, in order that his special gift should have been recognised. He was a ‘son of exhortation’; that is, he had the power of rousing and encouraging the faith and stirring the believing energy of the brethren. An example of this was given in Antioch, where he ‘exhorted them all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord.’ So much the more beautiful was his self-effacement when with Paul, for it was the latter who was ‘the chief speaker.’ Barnabas felt that his gift was less than his brother’s, and so, without jealousy, took the second place. He, being silent, yet speaketh, and bids us learn our limits, and be content to be surpassed.

We are next told his rank. He was a Levite. The tribe to which a disciple belongs is seldom mentioned, but probably the reason for specifying Barnabas’ was the same as led Luke, in another place, to record that ‘a great company of the priests was obedient to the faith.’ The connection of the tribe of Levi with the Temple worship made accessions from it significant, as showing how surely the new faith was creeping into the very heart of the old system, and winning converts from the very classes most interested in opposing it. Barnabas’ significance is further indicated by the notice that he was ‘a man of Cyprus,’ and as such, the earliest mentioned of the Hellenists or foreign-born and Greek-speaking Jews, who were to play so important a part in the expansion of the Church.

His first appearance witnessed to the depth and simple genuineness of his character and faith. The old law forbidding Levites to hold land had gradually become inoperative, and perhaps Barnabas’ estate was in Cyprus, though more probably it was, like that of his relative Mary, the mother of Mark, in Jerusalem. He did as many others were doing, and brought the proceeds to the assembly of the brethren, and there publicly laid them at the Apostles’ feet, in token of their authority to administer them as they thought well.

III. Why was Barnabas’ act singled out for mention, since there was nothing peculiar about it?

Most likely because it stimulated Ananias and his wife to imitation. Wherever there are signal instances of Christian self-sacrifice, there will spring up a crop of base copies. Ananias follows Barnabas as surely as the shadow the substance. It was very likely a pure impulse which led him and his wife to agree to sell their land; and it was only when they had the money in their hands, and had to take the decisive step of parting with it, and reducing themselves to pennilessness, that they found the surrender harder than they could carry out. Satan spoils many a well-begun work, and we often break down half-way through a piece of Christian unselfishness. Well begun is half-but only half-ended.

Be that as it may, Peter’s stern words to Ananias put all the stress of the sin on its being an acted lie. The motives of the trick are not disclosed. They may have been avarice, want of faith, greed of applause, reluctance to hang back when others were doing like Barnabas. It is hard to read the mingled motives which lead ourselves wrong, and harder to separate them in the case of another. How much Ananias kept back is of no moment; indeed, the less he retained the greater the sin; for it is baser, as well as more foolish, to do wrong for a little advantage than for a great one.

Peter’s two questions bring out very strikingly the double source of the sin. ‘Why hath Satan filled thy heart?’-an awful antithesis to being filled with the Spirit. Then there is a real, malign Tempter, who can pour evil affections and purposes into men’s hearts. But he cannot do it unless the man opens his heart, as that ‘why?’ implies. The same thought of our co-operation and concurrence, so that, however Satan suggests, it is we who are guilty, comes out in the second question, ‘How is it that thou hast conceived this thing in thy heart?’ Reverently we may venture to say that not only Christ stands at the door and knocks, but that the enemy of Him and His stands there too, and he too enters ‘if any man opens the door.’ Neither heaven nor hell can come in unless we will.

The death of Ananias was not inflicted by Peter, ‘Hearing these words’ he ‘fell down and’ died. Surely that expression suggests that the stern words had struck at his life, and that his death was the result of the agitation of shame and guilt which they excited. That does not at all conflict with regarding his death as a punitive divine act.

One can fancy the awed silence that fell on the congregation, and the restrained, mournful movement that ran through it when Sapphira entered. Why the two had not come in company can only be conjectured. Perhaps the husband had gone straight to the Apostles after completing the sale, and had left the wife to follow at her convenience. Perhaps she had not intended to come at all, but had grown alarmed at the delay in Ananias’ return. She may have come in fear that something had gone wrong, and that fear would be increased by her not seeing her husband in her quick glance round the company.

If she came expecting to receive applause, the silence and constraint that hung over the assembly must have stirred a fear that something terrible had happened, which would be increased by Peter’s question. It was a merciful opportunity given her to separate herself from the sin and the punishment; but her lie was glib, and indicated determination to stick to the fraud. That moment was heavy with her fate, and she knew it not; but she knew that she had the opportunity of telling the truth, and she did not take it. She had to make the hard choice which we have sometimes to make, to be true to some sinful bargain or be true to God, and she chose the worse part. Which of the two was tempter and which was tempted matters little. Like many a wife, she thought that it was better to be loyal to her husband than to God, and so her honour was ‘rooted in dishonour,’ and she was falsely true and truly false.

The judgment on Sapphira was not inflicted by Peter. He foretold it by his prophetic power, but it was the hand of God which vindicated the purity of the infant Church. The terrible severity of the punishment can only be understood by remembering the importance of preserving the young community from corruption at the very beginning. Unless the vermin are cleared from the springing plant, it will not grow. As Achan’s death warned Israel at the beginning of their entrance into the promised land, so Ananias and Sapphira perished, that all generations of the Church might fear to pretend to self-surrender while cherishing its opposite, and might feel that they have to give account to One who knows the secrets of the heart, and counts nothing as given if anything is surreptitiously kept back.

33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all

BARES, "And with great power - See Act_1:8. The word “power” here denotes “efficacy,” and means that they had “ability” given them to bear witness of the resurrection of the Saviour. it refers, therefore, I rather to their preaching than to their miracles.

Gave the apostles witness - The apostles bore testimony to.

The resurrection of the Lord Jesus - This was the main point to be established. If it proved that the Lord Jesus came to life again after having been put to death, it established all that he taught, and was a demonstration that he was sent from God. They exerted, therefore, all their powers to prove this, and their success was such as might have been expected. Multitudes were converted to the Christian faith.

And great grace ... - The word “grace” means “favor.” See the notes on Joh_1:16. The expression here may mean either that the favor of God was remarkably shown to them, or that they had great favor in the sight of the people. It does not refer, as the expression now does commonly, to the internal blessings of religion on a man’s own soul, to their personal advancement in the Christian graces, but to the favor or success that attended their preaching. The meaning probably is, that the “favor” of the “people” toward them was great, or that great success attended their ministry among them. Thus, the same word grace (Greek) is used in Act_2:47. If this is its meaning, then here is an instance of the power of the testimony of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus to impress the minds of people. But this is not all, nor probably is it the main idea. It is that their union, their benevolence their liberality in supplying the needs of the needy, was a means of opening the hearts of the people, and of winning them to the Saviour. If we wish to incline others to our opinions, nothing is better adapted to it than to show them kindness, and even to minister to their temporal needs.

Benevolence toward them softens the heart, and inclines them to listen to us. It disarms their prejudices, and disposes them to the exercise of the mild and amiable feelings of religion. Hence, our Saviour was engaged in healing the diseases and supplying the needs of the people. He drew around him the poor, the needy, and the diseased, and supplied their necessities, and thus prepared them to receive his message of truth. Thus, God is love, and is constantly doing good, that his goodness may lead people to repentance, Rom_2:4. And hence, no persons have better opportunities to spread the true sentiments of religion, or are clothed with higher responsibilites, than those who have it in their power to do good, or than those who are habitually engaged in bestowing favors. Thus, physicians have access to the hearts of people which other persons have not. Thus, parents have an easy access to the minds of children. for they are constantly doing them good. And thus Sunday-school teachers, whose whole work is a work of benevolence, have direct and most efficient access to the hearts of the children committed to their care.

CLARKE, "With great power gave the apostles witness - This power they

received from the Holy Spirit, who enabled them, µεγαλ7�δυναµει, with striking miracles,

to give proof of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus; for this is the point that was particularly to be proved: that he was slain and buried, all knew; that he rose again from the dead, many knew; but it was necessary to give such proofs as should convince and confound all. This preaching and these miracles demonstrated this Divine truth: Jesus died for your sins - he rose again for your justification; behold what God works in confirmation of these glorious truths; believe therefore in the Lord Jesus, and ye shall not perish, but have everlasting life.

Great grace was upon them all - They all received much of the favor or grace of God; and they had much favor with all who feared God. In both these ways this clause

may be understood; for χαρις means favor, whether that be evidenced by benevolence or

beneficence, or by both. The favor of God is the benevolence of God; but his benevolence is never exerted without the exertions of his beneficence. Hence the grace or favor of God always implies a blessing or gift from the hand of his mercy and power. The favor or benevolence of men may exist without beneficence, because it may not be in their power to communicate any gift or benefit, though they are disposed to do it; or, 2dly. the persons who enjoy their favor may not stand in need of any of their kind acts; but it is not so with God: his good will is ever accompanied by his good work; and every soul that is an object of his benevolence stands in the utmost need of the acts of his beneficence. Hence, as he loved the world, he gave his Son a ransom for all. All needed his help; and, because they all needed it, therefore all had it. And truly we may say of the whole human race, for whom the Son of God tasted death, that great grace was upon all; for All have been purchased by his sacrificial death. This by the way.

GILL, "And with great power,.... Either in a very powerful way, with great fervency of spirit, and ardour of mind, and uncommon zeal; or with great efficacy on the souls of men; or with many miracles, and powerful operations in healing the sick, casting out devils, &c.

gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus; which they were chosen to be witnesses, and were eyewitnesses of; and which is a fundamental article of the Gospel, and was what the Sadducees were particularly disturbed at, and on account of which they forbade them to preach any more in Christ's name.

And great grace was upon them all; not only upon the apostles and ministers, but upon the whole church: and which may be understood either of the large gifts of the Spirit of God, which were poured out upon them, and plentifully bestowed on them; or of the gracious protection of God over them, preserving them from the rage and malice of men; or of that grace and favour which they had among thee people in common; or of that charity, liberality and beneficence, which were among them, which sense is confirmed by what follows; though it may be all these senses may be taken in.

HERY, "The ministers went on in their work with great vigour and success (Act_4:33): With great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus.The doctrine they preached was, the resurrection of Christ: a matter of fact, which served not only for the confirmation of the truth of Christ's holy religion, but being duly explained and illustrated, with the proper inferences from it, served for a summary of all the duties, privileges, and comforts of Christians. The resurrection of Christ, rightly

understood and improved, will let us into the great mysteries of religion. By the great power wherewith the apostles attested the resurrection may be meant, 1. The great vigour, spirit, and courage, with which they published and avowed this doctrine; they did it not softly and diffidently, but with liveliness and resolution, as those that were themselves abundantly satisfied of the truth of it, and earnestly desired that others should be so too. Or, 2. The miracles which they wrought to confirm their doctrine. With works of great power, they gave witness to the resurrection of Christ, God himself, in them, bearing witness too.

III. The beauty of the Lord our God shone upon them, and all their performances:

Great grace was upon them all, not only all the apostles, but all the believers, charis�

megalē - grace that had something great in it (magnificent and very extraordinary) was

upon them all. 1. Christ poured out abundance of grace upon them, such as qualified them for great services, by enduing them with great power; it came upon them from on high, from above. 2. There were evident fruits of this grace in all they said and did, such as put an honour upon them, and recommended them to the favour of God, as being in his sight of great price. 3. Some think it includes the favour they were in with the people. Every one saw a beauty and excellency in them, and respected them.

IV. They were very liberal to the poor, and dead to this world. This was as great an evidence of the grace of God in them as any other, and recommended them as much to the esteem of the people.

1. They insisted not upon property, which even children seem to have a sense of and a jealousy for, and which worldly people triumph in, as Laban (Gen_31:43): All that thou seest is mine; and Nabal (1Sa_25:11): My bread and my water. These believers were so taken up with the hopes of an inheritance in the other world that this was as nothing to them. No man said that aught of the things which he possessed was his own, Act_4:32. They did not take away property, but they were indifferent to it. They did not call what they had their own, in a way of pride and vainglory, boasting of it, or trusting in it. They did not call it their own, because they had, in affection, forsaken all for Christ, and were continually expecting to be stripped of all for their adherence to him. They did not say that aught was their own; for we can call nothing our own but sin. What we have in the world is more God's than our own; we have it from him, must use it for him, and are

accountable for it to him. No man said that what he had was his own, idion - his peculiar; for he was ready to distribute, willing to communicate, and desired not to eat his morsel alone, but what he had to spare from himself and family his poor neighbours were welcome to. Those that had estates were not solicitous to lay up, but very willing to lay out, and would straiten themselves to help their brethren. No marvel that they were of one heart and soul, when they sat so loose to the wealth of this world; for meum -mine, and tuum - thine, are the great makebates. Men's holding their own, and grasping at more than their own, are the rise of wars and fightings.

JAMISO, "with great power— effect on men’s minds.

great grace was upon them all— The grace of God copiously rested on the whole community.

SBC, "The Resurrection of Christ Historic

The fact of the resurrection is a fact quite capable of proof. There is no difficulty in imagining it to have occurred. There are no invincible laws against it. All that can be

averred is that it is not in the line of our usual experiences, but it is not a thing, in its nature, which any one would be unable to believe, if it were only substantiated by proper and sufficient evidence. The fact must be substantiated in the same way and according to the same principles of evidence which command belief in other spheres of human experience. Let us see, briefly, how the matter stands in these respects.

I. How many witnesses are there to this fact of the resurrection? One? Two? That might have been testimony much too feeble on which to hang so stupendous and unparalleled a fact. But the truth is that we have multitudinous and overwhelming testimony. We have the testimony of the four evangelists, and of James, Peter and Paul—to what? not only to what they themselves saw and heard, on which they speak distinctly, but to the fact that a great many others saw and heard with them, and there is no denial from any of these.

II. What character do the witnesses bear? Are they honest men? The answer to these questions needs to be but brief. Let any one read the Gospels and see what kind of men the writers are. True and simple and honest-hearted are they, if ever such men were in the world. Scepticism does not now fling against them the old rude charges of knavery and dishonesty.

III. Next, as to their soundness of mind. Where is there any sign of weakness or of hallucination in these Gospels, or in the Epistles, from first to last? It is impossible to conceive evidence more perfectly given.

IV. As to their opportunities for ascertaining the truth. They saw their risen Lord many times and in many places. They heard Him speak; they talked with Him; they touched Him.

V. Remember how their testimony was received, how undoubtingly it was accepted by men of their own generation. Remember the wonderful effects this belief produced; peace, and love, and joy in individual hearts, and new societies, and new nations in the world; and it has gone on, from age to age, producing the same results—think of this and of the other reasons adduced, and say if it be not legitimate to declare that the resurrection of Christ is the best authenticated fact in the history of the world.

A. Raleigh, From Dawn to the Perfect Day, p. 178.

CALVI, "33.And with great power. This third member appertaineth to doctrine.

For Luke doth signify that the zeal which the apostles had to preach the gospel was

so far from being diminished, that they were rather endowed with new power.

Whereas he doth only name the resurrection of Christ, it is synecdoche; for this part

is put for the whole gospel. But Luke maketh mention of the resurrection alone,

because it is, as it were, the furnishing or fulfilling of the gospel; and, secondly,

because they had endured a sore combat for the same, and the Sadducees were sore

grieved at it, who aid then bear the chief swinge, [sway.]

And great grace was He signifieth that this served not a little to the spreading

abroad of doctrine, in that, by helping the poor so bountifully, they found favor at

the hands of strangers. For he saith that they were beloved, because they were

beneficial. (232) Therefore, there is a showing of a reason in these words, o man

amongst them did lack. Although we need not doubt of this, but that their honesty,

and temperance, and modesty, and patience, and other virtues, did provoke many to

bear them good-will. He declareth (233) afterward, after what sort they had their

goods common, which he had touched before, to wit, that the rich men sold their

lands and houses, that they might relieve the poverty of the poor,

COFFMA, "Great grace was upon them all ... The result of such overflowing

generosity was that the effectiveness of the apostles' message was multiplied, and

what might be called a revival of the most fantastic proportions ensued.

Possessors of lands or houses ... As Lange observed:

We are authorized by the literal import of the text to assume that all the owners of

real estate who belonged to the church, sold property, but not that they sold ALL

the real estate of which they were the possessors. Each one contributed a certain

portion, but it is not said here that each one disposed of his whole property; we are

not even distinctly told that a single individual relinquished all that he owned.[39]

To each, according as any one had need ... "This shows that only the needy received

anything, and that those who were not needy were the givers."[40] As McGarvey

further noted:

This church was not at this time a commune, or a socialistic club, as many

interpreters have fancied. There was no uniform distribution of the property of all

among the members; neither was the property of all held and administered by the

apostles.[41]

Upon Luke's first mention of this matter of "all things common". (Acts 2:43), the

comment was made that it was the result of no clear commandment of either Christ

or the apostles; and while this is true enough, there yet remains the overwhelming

impact of this generosity of the first Christians as an example for the church of all

ages; and we believe that McGarvey was correct in thus assessing the import of the

events here recorded:

In reality this church was setting an example for all other churches in all times, by

showing that true Christian benevolence requires that we shall not let our brethren

in the church suffer for food, even if those of us who have houses and lands can

prevent it only by the sale of our possessions. It teaches that we should share the last

crust of bread with our brother.[42]

Before leaving this, the comment of Root is noted: "It was not a matter of providing

for the whole church, but of supplying the needs of those who lacked."[43]

Despite McGarvey's comment, above, it is nevertheless true that the scheme of

having all things common was not long continued, nor is there any evidence that it

became a policy of the apostolic church. Perhaps, in the event about to be related,

Luke intended that we should behold the failure of the experiment. Walker believed

that the scheme did not originate with the apostles and that they permitted rather

than encouraged it, stating that "the scheme was never tried elsewhere."[44]

Ramsay pointed out that:

o universal selling of property is mentioned, and no general instructions were

issued that members of the church ought to distribute to the poor all that they

possessed ... Many of the owners of property, of their own free will, from love of the

brethren, used from time to time to sell their property and bring the proceeds to the

apostles.[45]

[39] John Peter Lange, Commentary on Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan

Publishing House, 1866), p. 81.

[40] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 80.

[41] Ibid.

[42] Ibid., p. 81.

[43] Orin Root, Acts (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1966), p. 34.

[44] W. R. Walker, op. cit., pp. 36,37.

[45] Sir William M. Ramsay, Pictures of the Apostolic Church (Grand Rapids,

Michigan: Baker Book House, 1959), p. 29.

COKE, "Acts 4:33. And with great power gave the apostles, &c.— The word

απεδιδουν, rendered gave, signifies the restoring of something which is given as a

charge, or intrusted to another. If it be taken in that sense here, it may serve to

illustrate what is said, Acts 4:20. Several commentators understand the last clause of

this verse, of the grace or favour which they had among the people, on account of

their love, charity, zeal, and good conduct. See the note on ch. Acts 2:47. Diodati

explains the word χαρις, "by the blessing of God, and the good will of the people."

COSTABLE, "The power in the witness of the believers was their love for one

another (cf. John 13:35), not just their rhetorical (homiletical) and miraculous

power. otice the central place the resurrection of Jesus occupied in their witness.

His resurrection fulfilled prophecy and identified Jesus as the Messiah (cf. Acts

2:29-32). The abundant grace that rested upon these Christians was the divine

enablement that God granted them to speak and to live as they did. This grace was

on the young church as it had been on the young Jesus (cf. Luke 2:40).

ELLICOTT, "(33) With great power gave the apostles witness.—The Greek verb

implies the idea of paying or rendering what was due, as in Matthew 22:11. They

were doing that which they were bound to do.

Great grace was upon them.—The words may stand parallel with Luke 2:40 as

meaning that the grace of God was bestowed upon the disciples in full measure, or

with Acts 2:47 as stating that the favour of the people towards them still continued.

There are no sufficient data for deciding the question, and it must be left open. The

English versions all give “grace,” as if accepting the highest meaning, as do most

commentators.

34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales

BARES, "That lacked - That was in want, or whose needs were not supplied by the others.

As many as ... - The word used here is employed in a large, indefinite sense; but it would be improper to press it so as to suppose that every individual that became a Christian sold at once all his property. The sense doubtless is, that this was done “when it was necessary:” they parted with whatever property was needful to supply the needs of their poor brethren. That it was by no means considered a matter of “obligations,” or enjoined by the apostles, is apparent from the case of Ananias, Act_5:4. The fact that “Joses” is particularly mentioned Act_4:36 shows that it was by no means a universal practice thus to part with all their possessions. He was “one” instance in which it was done. Perhaps there were many other similar instances; but all that the passage requires us to believe is, that they parted with whatever was “needful” to supply the needs of the poor. This was an eminent and instructive instance of Christian liberality, and of the power of the gospel in overcoming one of the strongest passions that ever exist in the human bosom - the love of money. Many of the early Christians were poor. They were collected from the lower orders of the people. But “all” Were not so. Some of them, it seems, were people of affluence; but the effect of religion was to bring them all, in regard to feeling, at least, on a level. They felt that they were members of one family, and they therefore imparted their property cheerfully to their brethren. Besides this, they were about to go to other lands to preach the gospel, and they cheerfully parted with their property that they might go and proclaim the unsearchable riches of Christ. See the notes on Act_2:44.

CLARKE, "Neither was there any among them that lacked - It was customary with the Jews to call the poor together, to eat of the sacrifices, but as the priests, etc., were incensed against Christ and Christianity, consequently the Christian poor could have no advantage of this kind; therefore, by making a common stock for the present necessity, the poor were supplied; so there was none among them that lacked. This provision therefore of the community of goods, which could be but temporary, was made both suitably and seasonably. See Bp. Pearce, and see the note on Act_2:44.

GILL, "Neither was there any among them that lacked,.... Bread to eat, or clothes to wear, or any of the necessaries of life; which shows their great charity, and gives a reason why they were in so much favour with the people, because they took so much care of their poor; and this flowed from the grace of God bestowed upon them:

for as many as were possessors of lands and houses; or "vineyards", as the Ethiopic version reads, whether in Jerusalem or elsewhere;

sold them and brought the prices of the things that were sold; whether lands, houses, or vineyards.

HERY, "Neither was there any among them that lacked,.... Bread to eat, or clothes to wear, or any of the necessaries of life; which shows their great charity, and gives a reason why they were in so much favour with the people, because they took so much care of their poor; and this flowed from the grace of God bestowed upon them:

for as many as were possessors of lands and houses; or "vineyards", as the Ethiopic version reads, whether in Jerusalem or elsewhere;

sold them and brought the prices of the things that were sold; whether lands, houses, or vineyards.

CALVI, "34.For so many as were. Although this be an universal speech, yet is it

all one as if it were indefinite. And assuredly it is to be thought that there were

many which did not diminish their possessions, and that may be gathered out of the

text, [context.] For when he speaketh of Joses anon, undoubtedly he meant to note a

notable example, passing all others. Therefore he saith, that all did that which many

did every where; neither doth this disagree with the common use of the Scripture.

Again, he meaneth not that the faithful sold all that they had, but only so much as

need required. For this is spoken for amplification’s sake, that the rich men did not

only relieve the poverty of their brethren of the yearly revenue of their lands, but

they were so liberal, that they spared not their lands. And this might be, though they

did not rob themselves of all, but only a little diminish their revenues; which we may

gather again out of the words of Luke, for he saith that this was the end, that no

man might lack. He showeth further, that they used great wisdom, (234) because it

was distributed as every man had need. Therefore the goods were not equally

divided, but there was a discreet distribution made, lest any should be out of

measure oppressed with poverty. And, peradventure, Joses hath this commendation

given him by name, because he sold his only possession. For by this means he passed

all the rest.

Hereby it appeareth what that meaneth, that no man counted anything his own, but

they had all things common. For no man had his own privately to himself, that he

alone might enjoy the same, neglecting others; but as need required, they were

ready to bestow upon all men. And now we must needs have more than iron bowels,

seeing that we are no more moved with the reading of this history. The faithful did

at that day give abundantly even of that which was their own, but we are not only

content at this day wickedly to suppress that which we have in our hands, but do

also rob others. They did and faithfully bring forth their own; we invent a thousand

subtile shifts to draw all things unto us by hook or by crook. They laid it down at

the apostles’ feet, we fear not with sacrilegious boldness to convert that to our own

use which was offered to God. They sold in times past their possessions, there

reigneth at this day an insatiable desire to buy. Love made that common to the poor

and needy which was proper to every man; such is the unnaturalness of some men

now, that they cannot abide that the poor should dwell upon the earth, that they

should have the use of water, air, and heaven. (235)

Wherefore, these things are written for our shame and reproach. Although even the

poor themselves are to blame for some part of this evil. For seeing goods cannot be

common after this sort, save only where there is a godly agreement, and where there

reigneth one heart and one soul; many men are either so proud or unthankful, or

slothful, or greedy, or such hypocrites, that they do not only so much as in them

lieth quite put out the desire to do well, but also hinder ability. And yet must we

remember that admonition of Paul, that we be not weary of well-doing, (Galatians

6:9.) And whereas, under color of this, the Anabaptists and fantastical [fanatical]

men have made much ado, as if there ought to be no civil property of goods amongst

Christians, I have already refuted this folly (236) of theirs in the second chapter. For

neither doth Luke in this place prescribe a law to all men which they must of

necessity follow, while that he reckoneth up what they did in whom a certain

singular efficacy and power of the Holy Spirit of God did show itself; neither doth

he speak generally of all men, that it can be gathered that they were not counted

Christians which did not sell all that they had.

COSTABLE, "The voluntary sharing described in Acts 4:32 seems to have been

customary, but the occasional selling mentioned here was evidently exceptional (cf.

Acts 2:45). The imperfect tense verbs here imply "from time to time" (IV). The

apostles were in charge of distributing help to those in need (cf. Acts 6:1-4). The

Christians were witnessing with their works (Acts 4:32; Acts 4:34-35) as well as with

their words (Acts 4:33).

Sincerity or insincerity could motivate these magnanimous deeds. An example of

each type of motivation follows.

ELLICOTT, "(34) either was there any among them that lacked.—Better,

perhaps, any one in need.

Sold them, and brought the prices.—Both words imply continuous and repeated

action. It is possible that besides the strong impulse of love, they were impressed, by

their Lord’s warnings of wars and coming troubles, with the instability of earthly

possessions. Landed property in Palestine was likely to be a source of anxiety rather

than profit, As Jeremiah had shown his faith in the future restoration of his people

by purchasing the field at Anathoth (Jeremiah 32:6-15), so there was, in this sale of

their estates, a proof of faith in the future desolation which their Master had

foretold (Matthew 24:16-21).

35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.

BARES, "And laid them down ... - That is, they committed the money received for their property to the disposal of the apostles, to distribute it as was necessary among the poor. This soon became a burdensome and inconvenient office, and they therefore appointed men who had special charge of it, Act_6:1-2, etc.

CLARKE, "Laid ...down at the apostles’ feet - To show how cordially and entirely they parted with them. And they entrusted the management of the whole to those men to whom they found God had entrusted the gifts of his Holy Spirit, and the doctrine of the kingdom of heaven.

GILL, "And laid them down at the apostles' feet,.... Showing great veneration and respect to the apostles, and a sort of neglect and contempt of their worldly substance; and signifying that they entirely delivered them to the apostles, and subjected them to their disposal:

and distribution was made unto every man, according as he had need; though they had all things in common, yet there was an order observed; a man might not go to the common stock and take out of it what he would; but as all was committed to the care of the apostles, and was in their power; the distribution was made by them, to every man, to the original proprietors, as well as to others, and that not as much as a man would have, or he might crave; but as much as he needed, for the present, of which the apostles were the judges.

HERY, "We are here told what they did with the money that was so raised: They laid it at the apostles' feet - the left it to them to be disposed of as they thought fit; probably they had their support from it; for whence else could they have it? Observe, The apostles would have it laid at their feet, in token of their holy contempt of the wealth of the world; they thought it fitter it should be laid at their feet than lodged in their hands or in their bosoms. Being laid there, it was not hoarded up, but distribution was made, by proper persons, unto every man according as he had need. Great care ought to be taken in the distribution of public charity, [1.] That it be given to such as have need; such as are not able to procure a competent maintenance of themselves, through age, infancy, sickness, or bodily disability, or incapacity of mind, want either of ingenuity or activity, cross providences, losses, oppressions, or a numerous charge. Those who upon any of these accounts, or any other, have real need, and have not relations of their

own to help them - but, above all, those that are reduced to want for well doing, and for the testimony of a good conscience, ought to be taken care of, and provided for, and, with such a prudent application of what is given, as may be most for their benefit. [2.] That it be given to every man for whom it is intended, according as he has need, without partiality or respect of persons. It is a rule in dispensing charity, as well as in administering justice, ut parium par sit ratio - that those who are equally needy and equally deserving should be equally helped, and that the charity should be suited and adapted to the necessity, as the word is.

JAMISO, "laid ... at the apostles’ feet— sitting, it may be, above the rest. But the expression may be merely derived from that practice, and here meant figuratively.

COKE, "Acts 4:35. And laid them down, &c.— Orobio the Jew, in his conference

with Limborch, has meanly insinuated, that it was no small advantage to poor

fishermen to be treasurers of so considerable a bank; and some of our late infidels

have hence in a more indecent manner taken occasion to asperse the apostles of our

Lord, as if their conduct was influenced byworldly motives, and temporal views;

and as if they greatly advanced their circumstances in life by turning apostles. But

their whole character,—their upright, generous, and disinterested behaviour, their

readiness to sacrifice their lives for the sake of truth and the welfare of mankind,

shew that they were far above falsifying such a trust as this, for the sake of a little

money. Accordingly, they very willingly transferred the management of this affair to

other hands, ch. Acts 6:2-3, &c. But we ought to take the whole history together;

and then, besides the honourable testimony given to them bySt. Luke in this verse,

namely, that they distributed unto every man, of that charity, according as he had

need; we must further consider, that God continued to them the power of working

numerous, astonishing, and beneficent miracles; and that he enabled one of them to

strike two of the members of the church dead upon the spot, for treachery and

dissimulation, with respect to this very charity. And can we suppose that God would

continue to shew such peculiar regard to men, who would embezzle part of a public

charity, or make a bad use of any part of it? It must raise in every honest mind a

just indignation to see such ungenerous reflections thrown out against the apostles

of our blessed Lord, who patiently endured poverty and reproach, hunger and

thirst, cold and nakedness, bonds, scourgings, and imprisonments, and, after all, a

violentdeath, to promote truth and righteousness on the earth. One can hardly help

suspecting, that they themselves are men of extraordinarily bad hearts, who are so

ready to charge others upon all occasions with dishonest designs and corrupt views;

and it seems to intimate, what some men would have done upon the like occasion.

Where is the infidel to be found, who ever gave such proofs of his honesty as the

apostles, of our Lord have done! Men of that stamp, we know, have generally chosen

to fall in with the established religion, and not to suffer any thing for their

particular sentiments, how contrary soever to those of professed Christians around

them.

ELLICOTT,"(35) And laid them down at the apostles’ feet,—The words are a vivid

picture of one phase of Eastern life. When gifts or offerings are made to a king, or

priest, or teacher, they are not placed in his hands, but at his feet. The Apostles sat,

it would seem, in conclave, on their twelve seats, as in the figurative promise of

Matthew 19:28, and the vision of Revelation 4:4.

36 Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means “son of encouragement”),

BARES, "And Joses -Many manuscripts, instead of “Joses,” here read “Joseph.” The reasons why this individual is selected and specified particularly were, doubtless, because he was a foreigner; because it was a remarkable instance of liberality; and because he subsequently distinguished himself in the work of the ministry. He gave himself, his property, his all, to the service of the Lord Jesus, and went forth to the self-denying labors of the gospel. He is mentioned elsewhere with honor in the New Testament Act_11:24, Act_11:30, and usually as the companion of the apostle Paul. The occasion on which he became connected with Paul in the ministry was when he himself was sent forth by the church at Jerusalem to Antioch. There, it seems, he heard of the fame of Paul and went to Tarsus to seek him, and brought him with him to Antioch, Act_11:22-26. Before this he had been acquainted with him, and had introduced him to the other apostles at a time when they were afraid of Paul, and unwilling to acknowledge him as an apostle, Act_9:26-27. At Antioch, Barnabas was led into dissimulation by Peter in regard to the Gentiles, and was reproved by his friend and companion, Paul, Gal_2:13. He and Paul continued to travel in fellowship until a dispute arose at Antioch about Mark, and they separated, Paul going with Silas through Syria and Cilicia, and Barnabas, with Mark, sailing for his native place, Cyprus, Act_15:35-41. See the following places for particulars of his history: Act_11:22, Act_11:25, Act_11:30; Act_12:25; Act_13:1-2, Act_13:50; Act_14:12; Act_15:12; 1Co_9:6; Gal_2:1, Gal_2:9.

Who by the apostles was surnamed ... - The practice of giving surnames, as expressive of character, was not uncommon. Thus, Simon was called Peter, or Cephas, Joh_1:44; and thus James and John were surnamed Boanerges, Mar_3:17.

Barnabas, which is ... - This word properly denotes “the son of prophecy.” It is compounded of two Syriac words, the one meaning “son,” and the other “prophecy.” The

Greek word which is used to interpret this παράκλησις paraklēsis, translated “consolation,” means properly exhortation, entreaty, petition, or advocacy. It also means “consolation or solace”; and from this meaning the interpretation has been given to the word “Barnabas,” but with evident impropriety. It does not appear that the name was bestowed on account of this, though it is probable that he possessed the qualification for administering comfort or consolation in an eminent degree, but on account of his talent for “speaking,” or “exhorting” the people to holiness, and his success in preaching. Compare Act_11:23.

A Levite - One of the descendants of Levi employed in the lower services of the

temple. The whole tribe of Levi was set apart to the service of religion. It was divided into priests and Levites. The three sons of Levi were Gershon, Kohath, and Merari. Of the family of “Kohath” Aaron was descended, who was the first high priest. His oldest son succeeded him, and the remainder of his sons were “priests.” All the others of the tribe of Levi were called “Levites,” and were employed in the work of the temple, in assisting the priests in performing sacred music, etc., Num. 3; Deu_12:18-19; Deu_18:6-8; 1Ch_23:24.

Of the country of Cyprus - Cyprus is the largest island in the Mediterranean; an island extremely fertile, abounding in wine, honey, oil, wool, etc. It is mentioned in Act_13:4; Act_15:39. The island is near to Cicilia, and is not far from the Jewish coast. It is said by Dion Caccius (lib. 68, 69) that the Jews were very numerous in that island -Clark. Barnabas afterward became, with Paul, a distinguished preacher to the Gentiles. It is worthy of remark, that “both” were born in pagan countries, though by descent Jews; and as they were trained in pagan lands, they were better suited for their special work. The case of Barnabas is that of a man who had property when he entered the ministry, and who gave up all for the Lord Jesus. The great mass of ministers, like very many who have been distinguished in other professions, have been taken from among the poor, and from humble ranks in life. But all have not been. Many have been wealthy, and have devoted all to Christ; and in regard to others, it is to be remarked, that a very considerable proportion of them could have gained more “wealth” in some other profession than they do in the ministry. The ministry is a work of self-denial, and none should enter it who are not prepared to devote all to the service of the Lord Jesus Christ.

CLARKE, "Joses - Or, Joseph, as many excellent MSS. read; but who he was, farther than what is here said, we know not.

Surnamed Barnabas - Or, Barsabbas, according to the Coptic.

The son of consolation - ΥRος�παρακλησεως; As παρακλησις signifies exhortation, as well as consolation, and is indeed distinguished from the latter, 1Co_14:3, the original

name was probably בר�נבא Bar�naba, or בר�נביא Bar�nebia, which signifies the son of prophecy or exhortation; and this is certainly one sense which prophecy has in the New Testament; and in this way Barnabas distinguished himself among the apostles. See Act_11:23. And Barnabas Exhorted them all that with purpose of heart they should cleave unto the Lord.

A Levite, and of the country of Cyprus - Cyprus is an island in the Mediterranean Sea, off Cilicia, and not very distant from the Jewish coast. The Jews were very numerous in that island: see Dion. Cas. lib. 68, 69. Though he was a Levite, he might have had land of his own by private purchase. The Levites, as a tribe, had no land in Israel; but the individuals certainly might make purchases any where in the country: but, as Barnabas was of Cyprus, his land probably lay there; and as it is likely that he was one of those strangers that came up to Jerusalem to the late feast, and was there converted, he might have sold his land in the island to some of his own countrymen who were at Jerusalem at this time; and so, being called to the work of the ministry, continued to associate with the apostles, travelling every where, and preaching the Gospel of the kingdom of God. He was the constant companion of St. Paul, till the separation took place on account of John Mark, mentioned Act_15:36-39.

It is worthy of remark that the two apostles of the Gentiles, though of Jewish extraction, were both born in Gentile countries; Paul in Cilicia, Barnabas in Cyprus: this

gave them many advantages; served to remove prejudices from the heathens; and gave them no doubt much facility in the Greek tongue, without which they could have done but little in Asia Minor, nor in most parts of the Roman empire where they traveled. How admirably does God determine even the place of our birth, and the bounds of our habitation! When under the influence of the grace of Christ, every thing is turned to a man’s advantage. The man whom he calls to his work he will take care to endue with every necessary qualification. And is it too much to say that God never did call a man to preach the Gospel whom he did not qualify in such a manner that both the workman and the work should appear to be of God?

Some have said that ignorance is the mother of devotion. Devotion and religion are both scandalized by the saying. Enlightened piety has ever been the most sincere, steady, and active. God makes those wise who turn unto him; and by experimental religion all the powers of the mind are greatly improved. Every genuine minister of Christ has an enlightened heart; and, to this, it is his duty to add a well-cultivated mind. Ex quovis ligno Mercurius non fit: A blockhead never did, and never can, make a minister.

GILL, "And Joses,.... The Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions, read "Joseph", and so do Beza's most ancient copy, and two of his manuscripts, and the Alexandrian copy, and others; for "Jose", or "Joses", is only an abbreviation or contraction of "Joseph"; though according to others it is the same with "Josiah": there is one of this name, who was the sort of Alphaeus, and brother to two of the apostles, James and Jude, Mat_13:55 and another called "Joses Barsabas"; and it may be to distinguish the one from the other this is called "Joses Barnabas"; for so it follows,

who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas: his name before his conversion was "Joses", or "Joseph", or "Josiah"; and afterwards, or at least after he came to be acquainted with the apostles, and to be in their company, they called him "Barnabas", The Arabic and Ethiopic versions read, "who was of the apostles"; and so Barnabas is spoken of as if he was an apostle, 1Co_9:5

which is, being interpreted, the son of consolation; or "of exhortation"; from the excellent gift and talent he had at exhorting; see Act_11:23 and from the use he was of

for the comforting of distressed minds; for נבא, "Naba, to prophesy", includes both exhortation and comfort; and he having the gift of prophecy or preaching the Gospel,

was called ברנבא, "Barnabas", a son of comfort, or a comforter, or an exhorter: and so

Jerom (r) interprets it, "the son of a prophet". Drusius conjectures that his right name

was בר�נחמא, "Bar Nachama", and by contraction "Barnama", and with a Greek

termination "Barnamas"; which properly signifies, in the Chaldee and Syriac languages, "the son of consolation", as it is here interpreted; and he observes, that the letters "M" and "B" are sometimes used one for an other: thus one and the same man is called "Berodach" and "Merodach", 2Ki_20:12 and the same river is called "Abana", 2Ki_5:12and in the margent "Amana"; but others think he had his name from the same word that Noah had his, and which signifies rest and comfort, as appears from the reason of his name. "This same shall comfort us", &c. And so the name of this man in the Chaldee or

Syriac language was בר�נח�אבא, which may be literally rendered "the son of the fathers'

rest", or "comfort". And this man is said to be

a Levite; of the tribe of Levi, and of the priestly race:

and of the country of Cyprus; or "by birth", or "nation, a Cyprian"; for though he was a Jew, as is clear from his being of the tribe of Levi, and was born of Jewish parents, yet in Cyprus, and so was a native of that place. The Ethiopic version renders it, "of the city of Cyprus"; but Cyprus was not a city, but a country; wherefore the Syriac version renders it, "of the place, or country of Cyprus", as we do: it was an island in the further part of the Mediterranean sea; it had its name from the plant Cyprus, and is now by the Turks called "Kibris". According to Pliny (s), it lay to the east and west of Cilicia, and was opposite Syria, and was formerly the seat of nine kingdoms; its circumference was three hundred and seventy miles, and had been called by various names; as Acamantis, Cerastis, Aspella, Amathusia, Macaria, Crypton, and Colinia; in it were fifteen towns or cities, which wcre Paphos, Palsepaphos, Curias, Citium, Corineum, Salamis, Amethus, Lapethos, Solce, Tamaseus, Epidarum, Chytri, Arsinoe, Carpasium, and Golgi. According to the same writer (t), it was by an earthquake divided from Syria; and that part of it which lay to the east from Syria, is said to be less than a hundred miles distant from it. And according to Mela (u), its chief cities were Salamis and Paphos, mentioned in Act_13:5. And according to Ptolomy (w), it had on the west Pamphylia, on the south the Egyptian and Syrian seas, and on the east the Syrian sea, and on the north the straits of Cilicia: it was inhabited by people of various nations, and, among the rest, by Jews; and R. Benjamin makes mention of Jewish Rubbans in Cyprus, in his time (x).

HERY, "Here is one particular person mentioned that was remarkable for this generous charity: it was Barnabas, afterwards Paul's colleague. Observe, [1.] The account here given concerning him, Act_4:36. His name was Joses; he was of the tribe of Levi, for there were Levites among the Jews of the dispersion, who, it is probable, presided in their synagogue - worship, and, according to the duty of that tribe, taught them the good knowledge of the Lord. He was born in Cyprus, a great way off from Jerusalem, his parents, though Jews, having a settlement there. Notice is taken of the apostles' changing his name after he associated with them. It is probable that he was one of the seventy disciples, and, as he increased in gifts and graces, grew eminent, and was respected by the apostles, who, in token of their value for him, gave him a name, Barnabas - the son of prophecy (so it properly signifies), he being endued with extraordinary gifts of prophecy. But the Hellenist Jews (saith Grotius) called praying

paraklēsis, and therefore by that word it is rendered here: A son of exhortation (so some),

one that had an excellent faculty of healing and persuading; we have an instance of it, Act_11:22-24. A son of consolation (so we read it); one that did himself walk very much in the comforts of the Holy Ghost - a cheerful Christian, and this enlarged his heart in charity to the poor; or one that was eminent for comforting the Lord's people, and speaking peace to wounded troubled consciences; he had an admirable facility that way. There were two among the apostles that were called Boanerges - sons of thunder (Mar_3:17); but here was a son of consolation with them. Each had his several gift. Neither must censure the other, but both case one another; let the one search the wound, and then let the other heal it and bind it up. [2.] Here is an account of his charity, and great generosity to the public fund. This is particularly taken notice of, because of the eminency of his services afterwards in the church of God, especially in carrying the gospel to the Gentiles; and, that this might not appear to come from any ill-will to his own nation, we have here his benevolence to the Jewish converts. Or perhaps this is mentioned because it was a leading card, and an example to others: He having land,whether in Cyprus, where he was born, or in Judea, where he now lived, or elsewhere, is not certain, but he sold it, not to buy elsewhere to advantage, but, as a Levite indeed,

who knew he had the Lord God of Israel for his inheritance, he despised earthly inheritances, would be encumbered no more with them, but brought the money, and laid it at the apostles' feet, to be given in charity. Thus, as one that was designed to be a preacher of the gospel, he disentangled himself from the affairs of this life: and he lost nothing upon the balance of the account, by laying the purchase-money at the apostles' feet, when he himself was, in effect, numbered among the apostles, by that word of the Holy Ghost, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them, Act_13:2. Thus, for the respect he showed to the apostles as apostles, he had an apostle's reward.

JAMISO, "Joses, etc.— This is specified merely as an eminent example of that spirit of generous sacrifice which pervaded all.

son of consolation— no doubt so surnamed from the character of his ministry.

a Levite— who, though as a tribe having no inheritance, might and did acquire property as individuals (Deu_18:8).

Cyprus— a well-known island in the Mediterranean.

SBC, "Barnabas is described as a "good man, full of the Holy Ghost and of faith." Goodness, the Holy Ghost, faith—these are the materials out of which sons of exhortation must be made if they would have the equivalent reading, "sons of consolation" registered against their names in the margin.

I. It is notable how Barnabas, after his great success at Antioch, goes to seek for Paul, and brings him there to join in the great harvest. No jealousy, you see, of St. Paul’s superior gift. The son of consolation seems to have been absolutely free from all kinds of jealousy and envy; indeed, those people at Lystra were somehow impressed with his dignity and with his majestic bearing, for, though they valued Paul as the chief speaker, they identified Barnabas with Jupiter himself. The simple-minded, humble, unselfish man who perceives the great qualities of other men, and desires to turn those qualities to account for the glory of God, and who has no feeling of envy or jealousy in his own heart—this is the highest type of man; at least, I know of nothing better, grander, or more Divine. There is in reality something gentle and lovable in the character of Barnabas, as it shows itself in the passage in his life, which seems open to criticism and blame. He quarrelled for a time, as we know, with St. Paul, and we may not positively say that he was right and Paul wrong; but certainly if Barnabas did err, it was because of his loving feeling towards one who was not unworthy of his love.

II. What Christian name could any one desire more distinctive, more honourable, more full of the spirit of the Gospel of Christ than "the son of consolation." Was it not as the son of consolation that the Son of God came down from heaven in the likeness of human flesh. And though to be a son of consolation is undoubtedly the supreme prerogative of the incarnate Son of God Himself, still in this as in other things, men redeemed by Christ and regenerated by the Holy Ghost, may follow at a distance and try to imitate their Lord. To preach glad tidings to the poor, to proclaim deliverance to the captives, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, to do those things which in the synagogue of Nazareth, Jesus Christ declared that He had been appointed to do—who cannot follow Christ in doing acts at least something like these, and men who do these things are sons of consolation.

Bishop Harvey Goodwin, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxi., p. 369.

COFFMA, "It should be noted that not a word is here given to the effect that

Barnabas "sold all that he had," there being no evidence at all that he did any such

thing. Then, there is the further consideration that the sister of Barnabas, Mary, the

mother of John Mark, appears in Acts 12 as the owner of a large residence in

Jerusalem, capable of housing a considerable portion of the church for a prayer

meeting, the house having a courtyard and a gate which was attended by the serving

girl, Rhoda. It was not the practice of those early disciples to make a total

liquidation of their assets in order to distribute all to the poor.

Son of Exhortation ... contrasts with "Son of Consolation" as in the KJV and the

English Revised Version (1885) margin, both meanings being in the original.

Barnabas ... This was the faithful and distinguished Christian who accompanied

Paul on the first missionary journey.

Having related the example of the generosity of Barnabas, Luke would at once

relate the story of Ananias and Sapphira and their scheme of imposing upon the

Twelve apostles. This incident, about to be narrated in Acts 5, has the utility of

shedding even more light on the so-called "Christian communism" of Acts.

ELLICOTT, "(36) And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas.—The

better MSS. give the name as Joseph. It is possible, as Rabbinic writers often give

Jose for Joseph, that both were but different forms, like Simon and Simeon, of the

same name. The later friendship between the Levite of Cyprus and St. Paul makes it

probable that there had been some previous companionship (see otes on Acts 9:27;

Acts 11:25), and it may well have been that he was sent from Cyprus to receive his

education in the famous schools of Tarsus, or practised with Saul in early life the

craft of tent-making, for which Tarsus was famous, and in which they were

afterwards fellow-labourers (1 Corinthians 9:6). As a Levite he had probably taken

his place in the ministries of the Temple, and may, therefore, have been among our

Lord’s actual hearers. His relation Mary, the mother of John surnamed Marcus,

was, we know, living at Jerusalem. (See ote on Acts 12:12; Colossians 4:10.) A

tradition, as early as Clement of Alexandria (Strom. ii. § 116), makes him one of the

Seventy, and this agrees with the prophetic character which we have seen reason to

think of as attaching to that body. (See. ote on Luke 10:1.) The new name which

the Apostles gave him, literally, if we look to its Hebrew etymology, The son of

prophecy, or, taking St. Luke’s translation, The son of counsel, implies the

possession of a special gift of persuasive utterance, in which the Apostles recognised

the work of the Spirit. The Paraclete had endowed him with the gift of paraclesis, in

the sense in which that word included counsel, comfort, admonition, application of

divine truth to the spiritual necessities of men. (See Excursus G. on St. John’s

Gospel.) In Acts 11:23, we find him exhorting the Gentile converts at Antioch, the

verb being that from which paraclesis is derived. He was, i.e., conspicuous for the

gift of prophecy as that gift is described in 1 Corinthians 14:3. The several stages in

his life come before us later. An Epistle bearing his name, and recognised as his by

Clement of Alexandria and Origen, is still extant, but its authenticity is, to say the

least, questionable. It consists mainly of allegorical interpretations of Old Testament

narratives. Some critics have assigned the Epistle to the Hebrews to his authorship,

as the expounder of St. Paul’s thoughts. It should be noted that a little further on his

kinswoman Mary’s house is the chief meeting-place of the Church of Jerusalem

(Acts 12:12), and that her son John, surnamed Mark, is mentioned by St. Peter

(“Marcus my son,” 1 Peter 5:13) in words which make it almost certain that he was

converted by that Apostle.

COKE 36-37, "Acts 4:36-37. Joses,—surnamed Barnabas,— Considering how

common the names of Joses and Joseph were, there seems no just reason to

conclude, as some have done, that this was the Joseph mentioned ch. Acts 1:23 nor

does there seem any reason to conclude that this Joses was called a son of

consolation, to express the great consolation the brethren received from the sale of

his estate. The name seems rather to refer to his extraordinary abilities for the

ministerial work, and to those gifts of the Spirit, whereby he was enabled both to

comfort and exhort; for the word παρακλησις implies both. See ch. Acts 11:23. As

Barnabas was a Levite, he could not have sold or alienated his paternal inheritance;

(see Leviticus 25:34.) but the land or estate here spoken of might either have been

some bequest made by will, or some purchased land in Judea, to which he might

have a title tillthe next jubilee; or perhaps some land in Cyprus: and we may

suppose it mentioned either as the first foreign estate sold, or as of some

extraordinary value.

Inferences.—In the instance before us in the former part of this chapter, we may

observe the natural but detestable effects of a proud, bigoted, overbearing temper,

even where it seems least excusable. The Sadducees themselves, though they believed

no future state of retribution, yet persecuted the apostles as eagerly, as if they, like

some other Jews, had expected to merit heaven by their severity to them. Compare

John 16:2.

On the other hand, it is delightful to observe the zeal and courage with which Peter

and John defended the cause of their crucified Redeemer, even in the presence of

those by whom he had so lately been condemned. Thus can God give power to the

feeble, and increase the strength of them that have no might, Isaiah 40:29.

The testimony which they bore is well worth our regard: There is salvation in no

other; neither is there any other name under heaven given among men, whereby we

must be saved. O that the ends of the earth might hear and reverence that name!

That millions to whom it is yet unknown, may learn to build upon it all their hopes

of salvation! May we never be ashamed to own it, nor afraid to adhere to it! but

speak of it with such a favour, and defend it with such a zeal, that they who are

round about us may take knowledge of us, that we have been with Jesus, and trace

the genuine effects of our intimate acquaintance with him.

ever was there an instance of a more memorable combat between the force of

evidence and of prejudice; nor a more impudent attempt to bear down the cause of

unquestionable truth by brutal violence, than that which this chapter holds out to

us. But great is the truth, and it will prevail. May the ministers of the gospel never

want that courage in the defence of it, which these holy men expressed; but always

judge it infinitely more reasonable, more safe, and more necessary to obey God than

man! ever may we be ashamed to profess our reverence and love to him, who is

our supreme ruler, and our most bountiful friend! and may he give us such an

inward and heart-influencing sense of the worth and sweetness of his gospel, as may

effectually prevent our betraying or neglecting it.

The present season was indeed the golden age of the church; and it is impossible to

trace the memoirs of it, if we love the cause of Christ, without a secret complacency

and exultation of mind. How amiable and how venerable do the apostles and

primitive converts appear in the native simplicity of the Christian character! And

what a glory did the grace and Spirit of God put upon them; far beyond all that

human establishments, splendid dignities, or ample revenues, could ever give to

those who have succeeded them! while the multitude of them had one heart and one

soul; and each was ready to impart to his brethren whatever he himself possessed.

How high a relish of pleasure must they have received, and how must their joys have

been multiplied by each of their number!

Thus does divine grace, when once it powerfully enters into the heart, open it into

sentiments of generosity and love. Thus does it conquer that selfish temper which

reigns so frequently in the minds of sinful men, and makes them like wild beasts,

rather than like brethren to each other. Providence does not indeed call us entirely

to give up our possessions, or to introduce a community of goods among Christians,

in circumstances so different from those which we have now been surveying. Yet

surely it is always our duty, and will be our highest interest, to remember, that we

are not original proprietors of what we possess, but stewards, who are to manage

what is entrusted to our care, for the honour of our great Master, and the good of

his family here on earth; continually ready to resign any part, or even the whole of

it, whenever these important ends shall require such a resignation.

In the mean time, it behoves us frequently to lift up our hearts to the great and ever

blessed God, who hath made heaven and earth, and the sea, and all that is in them,

that he would support and extend the progress of that gospel in the world, which he

hath so graciously begun to plant. Kings may still set themselves, and rulers take

counsel against it; but he knows how to turn their counsels into foolishness, and

their rage into shame. He hath anointed Jesus his holy Son with the oil of gladness,

and placed him on his throne in heaven; and all the united malice and fury of his

enemies can do no more, than what shall make part of his wise and gracious scheme

for the government of his faithful people. Let us then pray that he would give

freedom of speech to all who are employed in pleading his cause, and that he will

plentifully anoint them with the effusion of his Spirit! or let the signs and wonders

which were done by the name of Jesus in former ages, fail to encourage us in the

hope, that he will never desert a scheme which he once so illustriously interposed to

establish; and, consequently, let them animate us to exert ourselves in its service,

whatever labours, threatenings, or dangers, may meet us in our way.

REFLECTIOS.—1st, The success of the gospel could not but provoke Satan's

enmity; and the inveterate enemies of the name of Christ cannot be expected long to

be at rest.

1. The apostles continued to teach the people, and, as their grand subject, preached

through Jesus the resurrection from the dead. They both testified the certainty of

his resurrection, and affirmed, that he was raised up for this purpose, to be the

author of spiritual and eternal life to all his believing persevering people, who

should be raised up by him at the last day, to a glorious immortality.

2. Multitudes of their hearers believed: five thousand converts were added to the

church, notwithstanding the enmity to which they saw their preachers exposed; so

mightily grew the word of God, and prevailed. ote; Where the gospel meets with

the greatest opposition, it is usually attended with the most remarkable success.

3. The priests, the captain of the temple, who presided over the watches, and the

Sadducees, grieved and vexed to the heart, that the doctrine of Jesus, which they

had taken such pains to suppress, should now spread with such amazing rapidity;

and that he whom they had ignominiously crucified, should be exalted as the

resurrection and the life, as the author of all blessedness in time and eternity;

rushed upon the apostles suddenly, seized them as criminals, and committed them to

safe custody for the night, it being eventide, that they might be brought before the

Sanhedrim the next day. ote; They who preach Christ faithfully, must prepare to

suffer for him.

2nd, o sooner was the morning returned, than we have,

1. The court assembled to try the innocent prisoners; but little justice can be

exposed, when their judges are known to be their avowed and inveterate enemies.

The rulers, elders, and scribes, the high-priest Annas, who now enjoyed that dignity,

with Caiaphas, who had sat in the chair the year preceding, with John and

Alexander, persons of distinguished note, and others of the high priest's kindred,

were all leagued against two poor fishermen, to try if their power could not

intimidate, or their learning confute, or their authority silence them.

2. The prisoners are arraigned. They set them in the midst, to answer before their

judges the interrogatories which they chose to put to them, and haughtily

demanded, by what power, human, divine, or diabolical; or by what name, by virtue

of whose authority, or by the invocation of what name, have ye done this?

3. Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, endued with singular boldness, and directed by

the immediate influence of the Spirit, according to Christ's promise, (Mark 13:11.)

said unto them respectfully, addressing them as magistrates and men of rank, Ye

rulers of the people, and elders of Israel, if we be examined as criminals, this day, of

the good deed done to the impotent man; and you demand information, by what

means such an act of mercy and power was performed, and he is made whole; we

with pleasure appear to give you the fullest satisfaction. Therefore, be it known unto

you all, and to all the people of Israel, whom it highly concerns, that by the name,

the precious, powerful, all-prevailing name of Jesus Christ of azareth, whom ye

have treated with the highest contempt, and most ignominiously crucified, but

whom God raised from the dead, disappointing the impotent malice of his

murderers: even by him, by this once despised, but now glorified Jesus, and by no

power of our own, by no magic charm, but by faith in him alone, doth this man

stand here before you whole. This Jesus is the stone spoken of Psalms 118:22 which

was set at nought of you, who by station and office should be builders of God's

spiritual temple, but which is now exalted of God, and become the head of the

corner, by which the church of God is supported and knit together. either is there

salvation in any other; there is no spiritual or eternal salvation out of him, by the

deeds of the law, or by any human power whatsoever; for there is none other name

under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved; God having appointed

him to be the only Redeemer from sin, death, and hell; and all who believe not in

him, must therefore perish everlastingly. ote; (1.) Salvation is every sinner's great

concern. (2.) Of ourselves we have nothing but misery, sin, and wrath, and have no

power of ourselves by nature to help ourselves. (3.) Christ alone can save a sinful

soul, by the merit of his blood, and by the operation of his divine Spirit. (4.) God

freely offers him in the gospel to the miserable, and invites all men to believe on him

to the saving of their souls. (5.) They must inevitably and eternally perish, who

neglect so great a salvation.

4. Such an answer quite confounded the court. When they saw the boldness of Peter

and John, their undaunted courage, their readiness of speech, and powerful

elocution; and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, had been

brought up at none of the public seminaries, at the feet of none of their rabbins, nor

had ever the least advantages of education; they marvelled at the intrepidity,

wisdom, and eloquence which appeared in them; and they took knowledge of them

that they had been with Jesus, in whose company they recollected they had seen

them formerly; and beholding the man which was healed standing with them, who

probably came ready to bear testimony for them, and to do honour to his

benefactors, to whatever danger it might expose him, they could say nothing against

it; the miracle was too notorious to be contradicted. ote; (1.) In Christ's cause,

even before the greatest, we may well boldly stand forth; he will bear us through.

(2.) They who have been with Jesus, will carry the marks of it visibly about them:

like Moses on the mount, their faces will shine, and their holy and heavenly

conversation proclaim their Master's glory.

3rdly, How to punish those against whom they had no charge to lay, they knew not;

yet fain would they brand them, if possible, with some mark of infamy.

1. In order to consult upon the case the more freely, they commanded the apostles to

be led out of the council-chamber, while they conferred among themselves, saying,

what shall we do to these men? our difficulties are greater than ever; for that indeed

a notable miracle hath been done by them is manifest to all them that dwell at

Jerusalem, and we cannot deny it; so that to attempt it, would but expose our own

characters: but, that it spread no further among the people, neither the fame of the

miracle, nor the doctrine of Christ, in confirmation of which it was wrought, let us

straitly threaten them, on pain of our highest displeasure, and at the peril of

suffering the punishment due to their contumacy, that they speak henceforth to no

man in this name. Thus they hope, by silencing the ministers, to suppress the

doctrines of the gospel. And they called them, and commanded them not to speak at

all, nor teach in the name of Jesus; breathing forth their impotent malice. ote; (1.)

The enemies of the gospel often join in close cabal how to suppress the growing

progress of the truth; but he who sitteth on the heavens, laughs them to scorn. (2.)

Many faithful ministers of Jesus, for the truths which they have maintained, have

met the frowns and threatenings of proud priests and prelates, who would fain

intimidate and silence them, that they should speak no more in the name of Jesus;

but they despise their menaces; they are prepared to suffer, but will not be silent.

2. The prisoners give in their answers; they needed no premeditation to reply, and

said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God, to hearken unto you more

than unto God, judge ye. Can it be possible we should be silent, when acting under

his express injunctions; or how can we thus acquit ourselves to our consciences, or

mankind, for whose sake we preach this salvation of Jesus? Your commands

therefore being incompatible with the superior obedience that we owe to God,

cannot possibly be observed; for we cannot but speak the things which we have seen

and heard; a necessity is laid upon us, and woe unto us if we preach not the gospel.

ote; (1.) Where the injunctions of men are contrary to the word of God, we must

not hesitate a moment which we shall obey. (2.) They who have experimentally

known the salvation which is in Jesus, and tasted its sweetness, cannot but delight to

spread the savour of his name, and to make all men, as far as their influence

reaches, know the grace which is in him.

3. Unable to fix the least accusation against the apostles, they were compelled

reluctantly to let them go, repeating their former threatenings, to try if that would

intimidate them, and finding nothing how they might punish them, as they earnestly

wished to do—because of the people, who would have risen up against them for such

a flagrant act of injustice; for all men glorified God for that which was done; the

multitude in general were convinced that this was the finger of God, and could not

but adore him who had enabled these men to perform this act of power and mercy;

for the man was above forty years old, on whom this miracle of healing was shewed,

and had been so long known by the people, that the cure was rendered thereby the

more singular and astonishing. ote; (1.) God can put his restraints upon

persecutors, and prevent them, by various considerations, from doing all the

mischief to which they are inclined. (2.) They who in old age are cured by the gospel

word, are more eminent monuments of divine mercy.

4thly, o sooner were the two apostles dismissed than,

1. They returned to their own company, not ashamed or afraid to join them,

notwithstanding all the threatenings of the priests; and reported all that the chief

priests and elders had said unto them, and most probably their reply. ote; We

must never desert the society of our brethren. The world has its end, if it can confine

our religion to our closets, and prevent our open profession of it, by joining those

who appear on the Lord's side.

2. When they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God, in prayer and praise,

with one accord, under the influence of the Holy Ghost, speaking as if animated by

one soul, and said, Lord thou art God, infinite in power, which hast made heaven

and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is; the great Creator and governor, in

whose hands are the hearts of all men, and all events directed by thy providence and

under thy controul; who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the

heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things, endeavouring to suppress the

glorious gospel of Jesus? The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were

gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ.

And now this prophesy is eminently fulfilled; for of a truth against thy holy child

Jesus, whom thou hast anointed as the true Messiah promised so long before, both

Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered

together, conspiring to destroy the adorable Redeemer; but, in the execution of their

barbarous and malicious design, thou didst overrule their wickedness for to do

whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done, bringing to

thyself the greatest glory, to the Redeemer the greatest honour, and to lost souls a

free and full salvation. And now, Lord, behold their threatenings, restrain and

disappoint their rage and malice; and grant unto thy servants, that with all boldness

they may speak thy word, openly and zealously preaching thy gospel, in nothing

dismayed by their adversaries; and own them in their testimony, by stretching forth

thine hand to heal: and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy

child Jesus; by the authority derived from this thy incarnate Son, and to the glory of

his great name. ote; (1.) In all our dangers, we should make application to him

who is able to help us. (2.) All the wickedness and wrath of man shall turn to God's

praise, and the remainder of that wrath he will restrain. (3.) The sin of persecutors

is not the less malignant, because God overrules it to subserve purposes of his own

glory. (4.) God takes cognizance of all the malice of his people's foes, and hears their

threatenings; therefore we need not fear them. (5.) They who are to preach the

gospel to a gainsaying world, need to be often secretly looking up to God for

boldness, that they may not, through fear or shame, be unfaithful to men's souls. (6.)

Tokens of God's blessing and presence with us, are comfortable encouragements to

us to persevere, even through much tribulation.

3. Their prayer receives an immediate answer from God. When they had prayed, the

place was shaken where they were assembled together, as a sensible token of the

divine presence in the midst of them; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost,

feeling a growing ardour in their souls, experiencing fresh measures of strength,

courage, and consolation communicated to them; and they spake the word of God

with boldness. ote; When God is for us, we need neither fear nor care who are

against us.

5thly, How beautiful is the scene presented to us in the concluding paragraph of the

chapter! how unlike the schisms and divisions which have since unhappily rent the

church of Christ!

1. The multitude of them that believed, vast as the accessions lately made had been,

were of one heart, knit together in love, united in sentiment, and seemed as it were

actuated by one soul.

2. With great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus,

proving the fact by incontestable evidence, and enforcing the truths connected

therewith, confirming their testimony, with signs and wonders, and preaching with

the most intrepid boldness and zeal the glorious gospel committed to them; and

great grace was upon them all, the most evident tokens of the divine favour rested

upon them; and the effects of it were an entire contempt of the world, and most

fervent love and charity towards all men.

3. They had all things common, and none said that ought of the things which he

possessed, was his own, but freely gave up all for the general service; hence there

was not any among them that lacked, the poorest being equally supported out of the

common stock, while the richer members of the church, as many as were possessors

of lands or houses, sold them, and of their own accord freely brought the prices of

the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet, as trustees for the

goods of the community; and distribution was made unto every man, by these

faithful stewards, according as he had need. And Joses, who by the apostles was

surnamed Barnabas (which is, being interpreted, the son of consolation), probably

from the admirable faculty that he possessed of speaking peace to wounded

consciences; a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, having land, either in Judea or

in his own country, sold it, and brought the purchase money, which seems to have

been very considerable, and laid it at the apostles' feet; a noble instance of enlarged

and disinterested charity deserving a particular memorial. ote; (1.) What we have

in the world is not our own, but God's; and, whenever he is pleased to call for it,

should be employed in his service. (2.) If we are not called now to the same exercise

of charity as in those days of the church's infancy, yet the rich must remember that

they are still but God's almoners, and should approve themselves faithful stewards

of the gifts entrusted to them. (3.) Objects of real need have a title to our relief

according to our ability, especially those that are of the household of faith. (4.) One

bright example provokes the zeal of others; and none who shew themselves faithful

to Jesus and his cause, shall be forgotten by him.

COSTABLE, "His given Jewish name was Joseph, but people called him by his

Jewish nickname (cognomen), Barnabas, which means "Son of Encouragement"

(Gr. huios parakleseos). The Jews often called a person "son of ___" to denote his or

her characteristics (e.g., "son of Beliel"). They probably did so because Barnabas

was a constant positive influence on those around him, as further references to him

in Acts will demonstrate (cf. Acts 9:27; Acts 11:22-30; Acts 13:1 to Acts 14:28; Acts

15:2-4; Acts 15:12; Acts 15:22; Acts 15:36-41; 1 Corinthians 9:6). [ote: See Michael

Pocock, "The Role of Encouragement in Leadership," in Integrity of Heart,

Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 301-7.] Luke probably mentioned that he was a Levite

just to identify him more specifically, not to throw a cloud of suspicion over him.

The Mosaic Law forbade Levites from owning property in the Promised Land

(umbers 18:24).

". . . the rule was no longer rigidly adhered to, and would not have applied to those

living overseas." [ote: eil, p. 94. Cf. Jeremiah 1:1; 32:6-15.]

Levites had connections to the temple, but not everyone with temple connections

opposed the apostles (cf. Acts 4:1). Barnabas had lived on the island of Cyprus at

some time, though he had relatives in Jerusalem, namely, John Mark, Mark's

mother, and perhaps others (cf. Acts 12:12; Colossians 4:10).

EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE 36-37, "HOESTY AD PRETECE I THE

PRIMITIVE CHURCH

Acts 4:36-37; Acts 6:1-6

THE exact period in the history of the apostolic Church at which we have now

arrived is a most interesting one. We stand at the very first origin of a new

development in Christian life and thought. Let us observe it well, for the whole

future of the Church is bound up with it. Christianity was at the beginning simply a

sect, of Judaism. It is plain that the Apostles at first thus regarded it. They observed

Jewish rites, they joined in the temple and synagogue worship, they restricted

salvation and God’s favour to the children of Abraham, and merely added belief in

Jesus of azareth as the promised Messiah to the common Jewish faith. The spirit

of God was indeed speaking through the Apostles, leading them, as it led St. Peter

on the day of Pentecost, to speak words with a meaning and scope far beyond their

thoughts. They, like the prophets of old, knew not as yet what manner, of things the

Spirit which was in them did signify.

"As little children lisp, and tell of Heaven, So thoughts beyond their thought to

those high bards were given."

Their speech had a grander and wider application than they themselves dreamt of;

but the power of prejudice and education was far too great even for the Apostles,

and so, though the nobility and profuseness of God’s mercy were revealed and the

plenteousness of His grace was announced by St. Peter himself, yet the glory of the

Divine gift was still unrecognised. Jerusalem, the Temple, the Old Covenant, Israel

after the flesh, -these things as yet bounded and limited the horizon of Christ’s

Church. How were the new ideas to gain an entrance? How was the Church to rise

to a sense of the magnificence and universality of its mission? Joseph, who by the

Apostles was surnamed Barnabas, emerges upon the scene and supplies the answer,

proving himself in very deed a son of consolation, because he became the occasion of

consoling the masses of mankind with that truest comfort, the peace of God which

passes all understanding. Let us see how this came about.

I. The Christian leaders belonged originally to the extreme party in Judaism. The

Jews were at this time divided into two sections. There was the Hebrew party on the

one hand; extreme ationalists as we might call them. They hated everything

foreign. They clung to the soil of Palestine, to its language and to its customs. They

trained up their children in an abhorrence of Greek civilisation, and could see

nothing good in it. This party was very unprogressive, very narrow-minded, and,

therefore, unfit to recognise the developments of God’s purposes. The Galileans

were very prominent among them. They lived in a provincial district, remote from

the influences of the great centres of thought and life, and missed, therefore, the

revelations of God’s mind which He is evermore making through the course of His

providential dealings with mankind. The Galileans furnished the majority of the

earliest Christian leaders, and they were not fitted from their narowness to grasp

the Divine intentions with respect to Christianity and its mission. What a lesson for

every age do we behold in this intellectual and spiritual defect of the Galileans. They

were conscientious, earnest, devout, spiritually-minded men. Christ loved them as

such, and devoted Himself to their instruction. But they were one-sided and illiberal.

Their very provincialism, which had sheltered them from Sadduceism and unbelief,

had filled them with blind prejudices, and as the result had rendered them unable to

read aright the mind of God and the development of His purposes. Man, alas! is a

very weak creature, and human nature is very narrow. Piety is no guarantee for

wisdom and breadth, and strong faith in God’s dealings in the past often hinders

men from realising and obeying the Divine guidance and the evolution of His

purposes amid the changed circumstances of the present. The Galilean leaders were

best fitted to testify with unfaltering zeal to the miracles and resurrection of Christ.

They were not best fitted to lead the Church into the possession of the Gentiles.

There was another party among the Jews whom God had trained by the guidance of

His providence for this purpose. The Acts of the Apostles casts a strong and

comforting light back upon the history of the Lord’s dealings with the Jews ever

since the days of the Babylonish Captivity. We can see in the story told in the Acts

the reason why God permitted the overthrow of Jerusalem by the hands of

ebuchadnezzar, and the apparent defeat for the time of His own designs towards

the chosen people. The story of the dispersion is a standing example how

wonderfully God evolves good out of seeming ill, making all things work together

for the good of His Church. The dispersion prepared a section of the Jews, by travel,

by foreign civilisation, by culture, and by that breadth of mind and sympathy which

is thereby produced, to be mediators between the Hebrew party with all their

narrowness and the masses of the Gentile world whom the strict Jews would fain

have shut out from the hope of God’s mercy. This liberal and progressive party is

called in the Acts of the Apostles the Hellenists. They were looked at askance by the

more old-fashioned Hebrews. They were Jews, children of Abraham indeed, of the

genuine stock of Israel. As such they had a true standing-ground within the Jewish

fold, and as true Jews could exercise their influence from within much more

effectually than if they stood without; for it has been well remarked by a shrewd

observer, that every party, religious or political, is much more powerfully affected

by movements springing from within than by attacks directed from without. An

explosive operates with much more destructive force when acting from within or

underneath a fortification than when brought into play from outside. Such was the

Hellenistic party. o one could deny their true Jewish character, but they had been

liberalised by their heaven-sent contact with foreigners and foreign lands; and

hence it is that we discern in the Hellenistic party, and specially in Joseph, who by

the Apostles was surnamed Barnabas, the beginnings of the glorious ingathering of

the Gentiles, the very first rift in the thick dark cloud of prejudice which as yet kept

back even the Apostles themselves from realising the great object of the gospel

dispensation.

The Hellenists, with their wealth, their culture, their new ideas, their sense and

value of Greek thought, were the bridge by which the spiritual life, hitherto

wrapped in Jewish swaddling clothes, was to pass over to the masses of the Gentile

world. The community of goods led Joseph Barnabas to dedicate his substance to

the same noble cause of unselfishness. That dedication led to disputes between

Hellenists and Hebrews, and these disputes occasioned the election of the seven

deacons, who, in part, at least, belonged to the more liberal section. Among these

deacons we find St. Stephen, whose teaching and martyrdom were directly followed

by St. Paul and his conversion, and St. Paul was the Apostle of the Gentiles and the

vindicator of Christian freedom and Christian liberty. St. Barnabas and his act of

self-denial and self-sacrifice in surrendering his landed estate are thus immediately

connected with St. Paul by direct historic contact, even if they had not been

subsequently associated as joint Apostles and messengers of the Churches in their

first missionary journeys; while again the mistaken policy of communism is

overruled to the world’s abiding benefit and blessing. How wonderful, indeed, are

the Lord’s doings towards the children of men!

II. We have thus suggested one of the main lines of thought which run through the

first half of this book of the Acts. Let us now look a little more particularly at this

Joseph Barnabas who was the occasion of this great, this new departure. We learn

then, upon consulting the sacred text, that Joseph was a Levite, a man of Cyprus by

race; he belonged, that is, to the class among the Jews whose interests were bound

up with the maintenance of the existing order of things; and yet he had become a

convert to the belief proclaimed by the Apostles. At the same time, while we give full

credit to this Levite for his action, we must not imagine that either priests or Levites

or Jews at that period fully realised all the consequences of their decisions. We find

that men at every age take steps blindly, without thoroughly realising all the results

which logically and necessarily flow forth from them. Men in religious, political,

social matters are blind and cannot see afar off. It is only step by step that the

purposes of God dawn upon them, and Joseph Barnabas, the Levite of Cyprus, was

no exception to this universal rule. He was not only a Levite, but a native of Cyprus,

for Cyprus was then a great stronghold and resort of the Jewish race. It continued

to be a great centre of Jewish influence for long afterwards. In the next century, for

instance, a great Jewish rebellion burst forth wherever the Jews were strong

enough. They rose in Palestine against the power of the Emperor Hadrian, and

under their leader Barcochba vindicated the ancient reputation of the nation for

desperate and daring courage; while, in sympathy with their brethren on the

mainland, the Jews in Cyprus seized their arms and massacred a vast multitude of

the Greek and Roman settlers, numbering, it is said, two hundred and forty

thousand persons. The concourse of Jews to Cyprus in the time of the Apostles is

easily explained. Augustus Caesar was a great friend and patron of Herod the

Great, and he leased the great copper mines of the island to that Herod, exacting a

royalty upon their produce as we learn from Josephus, the well-known Jewish

historian (‘Antiqq.,’ 16. 4:5). It was only to be expected, then, that when a Jewish

monarch was leasehoulder and manager of the great mining industry of the island,

his Jewish subjects should flock thither, and it was very natural that amongst the

crowds who sought Cyprus there should be found a minister of the Jewish faith

whose tribal descent as a Levite reminded them of Palestine, and of the City of God,

and of the Temple of Jehovah, and of its solemn, stately worship. This residence of

Barnabas in Cyprus accounts for his landed property, which he had the right to sell

just as he liked. A Levite in Palestine could not, according to the law of Moses when

strictly construed, possess any private landed estate save in a Levitical city. Meyer, a

German commentator of great reputation, has indeed suggested that Jeremiah 32:7,

where Jeremiah is asked to redeem his cousin’s field in the suburbs of Anathoth,

proves that a member of the tribe of Levi could possess landed estate in Palestine.

He therefore concludes that the old explanation that the landed property of

Barnabas was in Cyprus, not in Palestine, could not stand. But the simple fact is

that even the cleverest German expositors are not familiar with the text of their

Bibles, for had Meyer been thus familiar he would have remembered that Anathoth

was a city belonging to the priests and the tribe of Levi, and that the circumstance of

Jeremiah the priest possessing a right to landed property in Anathoth was no proof

whatsoever that he could hold landed property anywhere else, and, above all,

affords no ground for the conclusion that he could dispose of it in the absolute style

which Barnabas here displayed. We conclude then that the action of Barnabas on

this occasion dealt with his landed estate in Cyprus, the country where he was born,

where he was well-known, and where his memory is even still cherished on account

of the work he there performed in conjunction with St. Paul.

III. Let us see what else we can glean concerning this person thus prominent in the

early Church, first for his generosity, and then for his missionary character and

success. It is indeed one of the most fruitful and interesting lines upon which Bible

study can be pursued thus to trace the scattered features of the less known and less

prominent characters of Scripture, and see wherein God’s grace specially abounded

in them.

The very personal appearance of Barnabas can be recalled by the careful student of

this book. Though it lies a little out of our way, we shall note the circumstance, as it

will help us to form a more lively image of Barnabas, the Son of Consolation. The

two Apostles, Paul and Barnabas, were on their first missionary tour when they

came to the city of Lystra in Lycaonia. There the multitude, astonished at the

miracle wrought upon the cripple by St. Paul, attempted to pay. divine honours to

the two Christian missionaries. "They called Barnabas Jupiter, and Paul Mercurius,

because he was the chief speaker." It must have been their physical characteristics

as well as the mode of address used by the Apostles which led to these names; and

from the extant records of antiquity we know that Jupiter was always depicted as a

man with a fine commanding presence, while Mercury, the god of eloquent speech,

was a more insignificant figure. Jupiter, therefore, struck the Lycaonian people as

the fittest name for the taller and more imposing-looking Apostle, while St. Paul,

who was in bodily presence contemptible, was designated by the name of the active

and restless Mercury. His character again shines through every recorded action of

St. Barnabas. He was a thoroughly sympathetic man, and, like all such characters,

he was ever swept along by the prevailing wave of thought or action, without

allowing that supreme place to the judgment and the natural powers which they

should always hold if the feelings and sympathies are not to land us in positions

involving dire ruin and loss. He was carried away by the enthusiasm for Christian

communism which now seized upon the Jerusalem Church. He was influenced by

the Judaising movement at Antioch, so that "even Barnabas was carried away with

the Petrine dissimulation." His sympathies got the better of his judgment in the

matter of St. Mark’s conduct in abandoning the ministry to which St. Paul had

called him. His heart was stronger, in fact, than his head. And yet this very

weakness qualified him to be the Son of Consolation. A question has, indeed, been

raised, whether he should be called the Son of Consolation or the Son of

Exhortation, but practically, there is no difference. His consolations were

administered through his exhortations. His speech and his advice were of a

consoling, healing, comforting kind. There are still such men to be found in the

Church. Just as all other apostolic graces and characteristics are still manifested, -

the eloquence of a Paul, the courage of a Peter, the speculative flights of a John, - so

the sympathetic power of Barnabas is granted to some. And a very precious gift it is.

There are some good men whose very tone of voice and bodily attitudes-their heads

thrown back and their arms akimbo and their aggressive walk-at once provoke

opposition. They are pugnacious Christians, ever on the lookout for some topic of

blame and controversy. There are others, like this Barnabas, whose voices bring

consolation, and whose words, even when not the clearest or the most practical,

speak counsels of peace, and come to us thick-laden with the blessed dews of charity.

Their advice, is not, indeed, always the wisest. Their ardent cry is always, Peace,

peace. Such a man on the political stage was the celebrated Lucius Carey, Lord

Falkland, in the days of the great civil war, who, though he adhered to the royalist

cause, seemed, as the historian tells us, to have utterly lost all heart once that active

hostilities commenced. Men of this type appear in times of great religious strife.

Erasmus, for instance, at the time of the Reformation, possessed a good deal of this

spirit which is devoted to compromise, and ever inclined to place the interests of

peace and charity above those of truth; and principle, just as Barnabas would have

done at Antioch were it not for the protest of his stronger and sterner friend St.

Paul. And yet such men, with their sympathetic hearts and speech, have their own

great use, infusing a healing, consoling tone into seasons of strife, when others are

only too apt to lose sight of the sweet image of Christian love in pursuit of what they

consider the supreme interests of religious or political truth. Such a man was

Barnabas all his life, and such we behold him on his first visible entrance upon the

stage of Church history, when his sympathies and his generosity led him to

consecrate his independent property in Cyprus to his brethren’s support, and to

bring the money and lay it down at the Apostles’ feet.

IV. ow for the contrast drawn for us by the inspired pen of St. Luke, a contrast we

find oft repeating itself in Church history. Here we have the generous, sympathetic

Son of Consolation on the one side, and here, too, we have a warning and a type for

all time that the tares must evermore be mingled with the wheat, the false with the

true, the hypocrites with real servants of God, even until the final separation. The

accidental division of the book into chapters hinders casual readers from noticing

that the action of Ananias and his wife is set by the writer over against that of

Barnabas. Barnabas sold his estate and brought the price, the whole price, and

surrendered it as an offering to the Church. The spirit of enthusiastic giving was

abroad, and had seized upon the community; and Barnabas sympathised with it.

Ananias and Sapphira were carried away too, but their spirits were meaner. They

desired to have all the credit the Church would give them for acting as generously as

Barnabas did, and yet, while getting credit for unselfish and unstinting liberality, to

be able to enjoy in private somewhat of that which they were believed to have

surrendered. And their calculations were terribly disappointed. They tried to play

the hypocrite’s part on most dangerous ground just when the Divine Spirit of

purity, sincerity, and truth had been abundantly poured out, and when the spirit of

deceit and hypocrisy was therefore at once recognised. It was with the Apostles and

their spiritual natures then as it is with ourselves and our physical natures still.

When we are living in a crowded city we notice not strange scents and ill odours and

foul gases: our senses are dulled, and our perceptive powers are rendered obtuse

because the whole atmosphere is a tainted one. But when we dwell in the pure. air of

the country, and the glorious breezes from mountain and moor blow round us fresh

and free, then we detect at once, and at a long distance, the slightest ill-odour or the

least trace of offensive gas. The outpoured presence of the Spirit, and the abounding

love which was produced thereby, quickened the perception of St. Peter. He

recognised the hypocrisy, characterised the sin of Ananias as a lie against the Holy

Ghost; and then the Spirit and Giver of life, seconding and supporting the words of

St. Peter, withdrew His support from the human frame of the sinner, and Ananias

ceased to live, just as Sapphira, his partner in deceit, ceased to live a few hours later.

The deaths of Ananias and Sapphira have been ofttimes the subject of much

criticism and objection, on the part of persons who do not realise the awfulness of

their position, the full depths of their hypocrisy, and the importance of the lesson

taught by their punishment to the Church of every age. Their position was a

specially awful one, for they were brought into closest contact, as no Christian can

now be brought, with the powers of the world to come. The Spirit was vouchsafed

during those earliest days of the Church in a manner and style which we hear

nothing of during the later years of the Apostles. He proved His presence by

physical manifestations, as when the whole house was shaken where the Apostles

were assembled; a phenomenon of which we read nothing in the latter portion of the

Acts. By the gift of tongues, by miracles of healing, by abounding spiritual life and

discernment, by physical manifestations, the most careless and thoughtless in the

Christian community were compelled to feel that a supernatural power was present

in their midst and specially resting upon the Apostles. Yet it was into such an

atmosphere that the spirit of hypocrisy and of covetousness, the two vices to which

Christianity was specially opposed, and which the great Master had specially

denounced, obtruded itself as Satan gained entrance into Eden, to defile with their

foul presence the chosen dwelling-place of the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost

vindicated His authority therefore, because, as it must be observed, it was not St.

Peter sentenced Ananias to death. o one may have been more surprised than St.

Peter himself at the consequences which followed his stern rebuke. St. Peter merely

declared his sin, "Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God"; and then it is

expressly said, "Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost." It

was a stern action indeed; but then all God’s judgments have a stern side. Ananias

and Sapphira were cut off in their sins, but men are every day summoned into

eternity in precisely the same state and the same way, and the only difference is that

in the case of Ananias we see the sin which provoked the punishment and then we

see the punishment immediately following. Men object to this narrative simply

because they have a one-sided conception of Christianity such as this period of the

world’s history delights in. They would make it a religion of pure, unmitigated love;

they would eliminate from it every trace of sternness, and would thus leave it a poor,

weak, flabby thing, without backbone or earnestness, and utterly unlike all other

dispensations of the Lord, which have their stern sides and aspects as well as their

loving.

It may well have been that this incident was inserted in this typical church history to

correct a false idea which would otherwise have grown up. The Jews were quite well

accustomed to regard the Almighty as a God of judgment as well as a God of love.

Perhaps we might even say that they viewed Him more in the former light than in

the latter. Our Lord was obliged, in fact, to direct some of His most searching

discourses to rebuke this very tendency. The Galileans, whose blood Pilate mingled

with their sacrifices, the men upon whom the tower of Siloam fell-neither party were

sinners above all that were at Jerusalem, or were punished as such. Such was His

teaching in opposition to the popular idea. The Apostles were once quite ready to

ascribe the infirmity of the man born blind to the direct judgment of the Almighty

upon himself or upon his parents. But men are apt to rush from one extreme to

another. The Apostles and their followers were now realising their freedom in the

Spirit; and some were inclined to run into licentiousness as the result of that same

freedom. They were realising, too, their relationship to God as one of pure filial love,

and they were in great danger of forgetting that God was a God of justice and

judgment as well, till this stern dispensation recalled them to a sense of the fact that

eternal love is also eternal purity and eternal truth, and will by no means clear the

guilty. This is a lesson very necessary for every age of the Church. Men are always

inclined, and never, perhaps, so much as at the present time, to look away from the

severe side of religion, or even to deny that religion can have a severe side at all.

This tendency in religious matters is indeed simply an exhibition of the spirit of the

age. It is a time of great material prosperity and comfort, when pain is regarded as

the greatest possible evil, softness, ease, and enjoyment the greatest possible good.

Men shrink from the infliction of pain even upon the greatest criminals; and this

spirit infects their religion, which they would fain turn into a mere matter of weakly

sentiment. Against such a notion the judicial action of the Holy Ghost in this. case

raises an eternal protest, warning the Church against one-sided and partial views of

truth, and bidding her never to lower her standard at the world’s call. Men may

ignore the fact that God has His severe aspect and His stern dispensations in nature,

but yet the fact remains. And as it is in nature so is it in grace: God is. merciful and

loving to the penitent, but towards the hypocritical and covetous He is a stern judge,

as the punishment of Ananias and Sapphira proved.

V. This seems one of the great permanent lessons for the Church of every age which

this passage embodies, but it is not the only one. There are many others, and they

most important. An eminent modern commentator and expositor has drawn out at

great length, and with many modern applications and illustrations, four great

lessons which may be derived from this transaction. We shall just note them, giving

a brief analysis of each.

(1) There is such a thing as acting as well as telling a falsehood. Ananias did not say

that the money he brought was the whole price of his land; he simply allowed men

to draw this conclusion for themselves, suggesting merely by his conduct that he was

doing exactly the same as Barnabas. There was no science of casuistry in the

apostolic Church, teaching how near to the borders of a lie a man may go without

actually being guilty of lying. The lie of Ananias was a spiritual act, a piece of

deception attempted in the abyss of the human soul, and perpetrated, or attempted

rather, upon the Holy Spirit. How often men lie after the same example. They do not

speak a lie, but they act a lie, throwing dust into the eyes of others as to their real

motives and objects, as Ananias did here. He sold his estate, brought the money to

the Apostles, and would fain have got the character of a man of extraordinary

liberality and unselfishness, just like others who truly sacrificed their all, while he

enjoyed in private the portion which he had kept back. Ananias wished to make the

best of both worlds, and failed in his object. He sought to obtain a great reputation

among men, but had no regard to the secret eye and judgment of the Almighty.

Alas! how many of our actions, how much of our piety and of our almsgiving are

tainted by precisely the same vice. Our good. works are done with a view to man’s

approbation, and not as in the sight of the Eternal God.

(2) What an illustration we find in this passage of the saying of the Apostle, "The

love of money is the root of all evil; which while some coveted after, they have erred

from the faith, and pierced themselves with many sorrows!" The other scriptures

are full of warnings against this vice of covetousness; and so this typical history does

not leave the Church without an illustration of its power and danger. Surely if at a

time when the supernatural forces of the unseen life were specially manifested, this

vice intruded into the special sphere of their influence, the Church of every age

should be on its perpetual guard against this spirit of covetousness which the Bible

characterises as idolatry.

(3) What a responsibility is involved in being brought near to God as members of

His Son’s Church below! There were hypocrites in abundance at Jerusalem at that

time, but they had not been blessed as Ananias had been, and therefore were not

punished as he. There is a reality in our connection with Christ which must tell

upon us, if not for good, then inevitably for evil. Christ is either the savour of life

unto life or else the savour of death unto death unto all brought into contact with

Him. In a far more awful sense than for the Jews the words of the prophet Ezekiel

are true, "That which cometh into your mind shall not be at all, that ye say, We will

be as the heathen, as the families of the countries, to serve wood and stone";

[Ezekiel 20:32] or as the poet of the "Christian Year" has well put it in his hymn for

the eighteenth Sunday after Trinity:-

"Fain would our lawless hearts escape, And with the heathen be, To worship every

monstrous shape In fancied darkness free."

"Vain thought, that shall not be at all, Refuse we or obey; Our ears have heardth’

Almighty’s call, We cannot be as they."

"We cannot hope the heathen’s doom To whom God’s Son is given, Whose eyes

have seen beyond the tomb, Who have the key of Heaven."

(4) Lastly, let us learn from this history how to cast out the fear of one another by

the greater and more awful fear of God. The fear of man is a good thing in a degree.

We should have respect to the opinion of our fellows, and strive to win it in a

legitimate way. But Ananias and his consort desired the good opinion of the

Christian community regardless of the approval or the watchful eye of the Supreme

Judge, who interposed to teach His people by an awful example that in the new

dispensation of Love, as well as in the old dispensation of Law, the fear of the Lord

is the beginning of wisdom, and that they and they alone have a good understanding

who order their lives according to that fear, whether in their secret thoughts or in

their public actions.

AROT 36-37, "A SO OF COSOLATIO.

AOTHER outburst of generous love occurred in the

form of selling their property and distributing the pro

ceeds. This law and its limitation were noticed in con

nection with an earlier example. But now, besides the

general intimation, two specific examples are submitted

a true and a false. Barnabas and Ananias are photo

graphed in the Word, that all generations may learn,

by specimen as well as by description, the difference

between genuine and counterfeit charity.

The name of this good man was Joses, and the name

Barnabas, by which he is now universally known, was

attached to him by the apostles, in order to express

the character which he displayed. This name was given

to indicate a nature. They called him the Son of Con

solation because he was a succorer of many, and a

comforter of the downcast.

He was a Levite, and yet he possessed land. This

is contrary to the old economical law in Israel; but

probably at that period, on account of frequent and

great political changes, it was found impossible to main

tain the ancient constitution in its integrity.

Barnabas, is indeed a good name when you learn

wfeat it means. Alas ! how rife is its opposite the

Son of Complaint of gloom. To such a man every

thing appears in its darkest colors. He looks at the

earth and the sky through a yellow glass. He sees

no green on the earth, and in the heavens no blue. It

is not so easy to remove the jaundiced glasses from the

eyes of the mind as to take away the colored medium

which impeded your enjoyment of the landscape. Func

tional derangements of the body through disease some

times also supervene to tinge still further the atmos

phere through which the spirit looks.

Barnabas, we may be well assured, did not grudge

A Son of Consolation. 103

his gifts. He was not grieved when a call for another

contribution came. He was a great giver, and yet he

was a cheerful giver. The Lord loved Barnabas.

I conclude that Barnabas had much comfort him

self, for he had much to bestow on others. If we see

streams flowing from the well s brim to refresh the

neighborhood, we may be assured that the well itself

is full.

The great contributions which he made did not em

bitter his spirit. The flow of bounty from that man s

hand acted as the flow of water from the drain on the

ploughed field it sweetened and made fertile the whole

breadth of his life. It is the gorging up of the water

for want of outlet that makes the land sour, and leaves

it barren; and it is the habit of holding in all for self

that spoils the pleasure and profit of a life.

A Son of Consolation is a fine character. He who

has consolation gives it; and he that gives it, has it.

The more of it you have, the more you give; and the

more you give to others, the more you retain for your

own use. This is not one of the things that perish in

the using. Like the bread in the hands of Jesus, it

multiplies as it is given out. It increases by expend

ing, and diminishes by hoarding. In the matter of

comfort, or consolation, " there is that scattereth and

yet increaseth; but he that withholdeth more than is

meet, it tendeth to poverty."

To possess consolation is to give it, and to give it

is to possess it. This circle, when it is set agoing, moves

perpetually, like the sea giving out its waters to the

sky, and the sky sending back the boon by the rain

and the rivers to the sea again. or is the consoler

cut short in his labors for lack of supply. As the

trouble graws greater, the corresponding comfort in

creases. However deep the distress may be, he has

a heaven above his head deeper than the abyss below,

to fill it all with joy. His resources consist of " the

fulness of the Godhead bodily," and in that ocean he

will never touch the ground.

Barnabas was a Levite; but why take note of his

pedigree, since all are one in Christ ? There is a reason.

In estimating character and giving each his due, there

are two opposite extremes, into one or other of which

IO4 The Church in the House.

human judgments, under the influence of various preju

dice, continually tend to fall. Men err sometimes on

this side, sometimes on that: the Word of God marches

in the midst and holds the balance even. It throws out

an arm to uphold him who is ready to stumble, now on

the right side, now on the left.

The priests and their order, supported by the Phari

sees, counted themselves righteous and despised others.

Speaking for their reproof and instruction, the Lord,

in the parable of the Good Samaritan, represented the

priest and the Levite as self-pleasing and unloving

consulting their own ease, and refusing to help one who

was ready to perish. This he did in order to show them

that a sound creed and a scrupulous ritual could not

compensate for the neglect of charity. He taught them

that although they were of the family of Levi, and en

rolled in the ranks of the hereditary priesthood, if they

had not charity, their privileges profited them nothing

their profession was as sounding brass and a tinkling

cymbal.

But the Lord did not teach that all the Levites were

hard-hearted; for here, by the pen of the same historian,

Luke, the hedge is planted on the other side of the path.

There were then, and there are to-day, certain persons

and classes who entertain strong prejudices against all

ministers of religion. They seem to have persuaded

themselves, or, at least, try to persuade themselves, that

ministers as a rule are hypocrites. Accordingly, they

delight to tell or to hear stories in which ministers of

religion are represented in an odious or ridiculous light.

This result is extremely natural: we have no reason to

expect that it should be otherwise. The hypocrites, of

course, deserve to be so treated; and the true cannot

altogether escape, because their testimony. really gives

discomfort to people who do not yield to it. To put

the witness in the wrong feels like putting themselves

right, as the sight of a.train running backwards on a

near and parallel line of rails, beguiles you into the be

lief that your train is running forward.

Barnabas was a Levite a religious teacher. The

profane of his day would have been comforted if they

had been able to quote the parable of the Samaritan to

show that the Levites were all sneaking, selfish fellows.

The Beacon: Ananias. 105

But the Lord comes in to protect the innocent. Bar

nabas was a Levite, but he was not cold and cruel. The

opposite graces grew in his life, thick and fruitful like

wheat in a harvest field. This passage is the counterpart

of the parable the hedge on the other side of the road.

He was of the country of Cyprus, an island in the

Mediterranean. Even at that date the Jews were dis

persed; yet they endeavored in their exile to maintain

the distinction of tribes. In respect to his birth-place,

he came out of a bad nest. Cyprus was occupied by

Greeks, and latterly had been subdued by the Romans.

But as it lay near the eastern shore, its people partook

of the Phoenician and Oriental character. They were

heathen, and more. The worship that prevailed was

abominable even among heathen systems. Their re

ligion consisted in the consecration of vice. As a Jew,

Barnabas in his youth must have been carefully kept

apart from these profligate rites; but still he was brought

up in an atmosphere of extreme and exceptional wicked

ness. Can any good thing come out of Cyprus ? In the

Master s experience, the servants may obtain ground

of hope. othing is too hard for the Lord. He can

bring a clean thing out of an unclean. As the sun draws

up pure water to the sky out of stagnant pools, cleansing

it in the act of drawing it out; so the Lord by the beam

ing of his love can bring a bright witness to himself from

amongst the most degraded population. Barnabas was

of the country of Cyprus.

37 sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles’ feet.

GILL, "Having land, sold it,.... Whether this was in Cyprus, or in Judea, is not certain; nor how he came by it, whether he had bought it, as the priests and Levites might, and as Jeremiah, who was of the priests, bought a field at Anathoth, Jer_32:9 or, whether it was his wife's dowry; for the Levites had nothing by inheritance: they had forty two cities, and the six cities of refuge to dwell in, and the field of the suburbs of these cities; which field or land was never to be sold, but to be a perpetual possession, Lev_25:34 but now the ceremonial law was abolished, and this precept was not attended to, if the land was of this sort. Moreover, the Jewish doctors interpret the above law otherwise; and understand it only of changing, and not of selling, which they allow of; one of their canons runs thus (y),

"the priests and Levites, מוכרים, "sell" always, and redeem always, as it is said, Lev_

25:32, "the Levites may redeem at any time".''

Upon which canon, one of their commentators (z) says,

"they sell always; and not as an Israelite, who cannot sell less than two years before the jubilee;--but these "sell" even near the jubilee; "and they redeem always": if they sell houses in walled towns, they are not confirmed at the end of the year, as the houses in the walled towns of Israelites; and if "they sell fields", it is not necessary that they should remain in the hands of the buyer two years, but they may redeem them immediately, if they will.''

And another of them (a) has this observation,

"all agree that the Levites may not change a city, or suburb, or field, which are theirs, because it is said, Lev_25:34 "but the field of the suburbs of their cities may not be sold"; and the wise men of blessed memory say, the meaning of it is, it shall not be changed, for they do not change anything from what it was before.''

And agreeably to this is what Maimonides (b) elsewhere says,

"they do not make in the cities of the Levites a city a suburb, or a suburb a city, or a suburb a field, or a field a suburb, as it is said, Lev_25:34 "but the field of the suburbs of their cities shall not be sold"; from report (or tradition) we learn, that that is said, "shall not be sold", means, shall not be changed; but the field, suburbs, and city, everyone of these three shall be as they are for ever. Priests and Levites who "sell" a field, of the fields of their cities, or an house of any of the houses of their walled towns, do not redeem according to this order (i.e. as the other Israelites), but "they sell fields"; and even near to the jubilee, and redeem them immediately.''

So that if this land of Barnabas lay in Judea, as is most likely, it might be sold, and much more, if in Cyprus. But, be it what and where it will, he sold it:

and brought the money; from Cyprus or Judea, or that part of the land of Canaan where it lay, and where he had sold it:

and laid it at the apostles' feet; perhaps he might be the first person that did so, and set an example which was universally followed; however, he is particularly mentioned, being a man of note among the apostles, and of great usefulness in after times, and of whom frequent mention is made in other places.

HAWKER, "REFLECTIONS

Let us ponder well those precious things contained in this Chapter, which are so freely given to us of God! And let us particularly keep in remembrance, that all that is here recorded of the prosperity of the Church, arose from the blessed Person and Office-work of God the Holy Ghost! We behold him here, under many of those most gracious characters in which the Lord Jesus promised him before his departure. As the Lord the Spirit is the Founder, so is He the Governor, Preserver, Teacher, Comforter, Sanctifier of the Church in all ages. In every individual instance of blessing both ministers and people, his is to manifest the gracious act, and in glorifying Jesus, to take of the Lord Jesus, and to make known to his disciples. And amidst all the diversities of gifts, and all differences of administrations, and all diversities of operations, all these worketh that One and the self-same Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will!

Oh! blessed and eternal Spirit, do thou now, as thou didst then, manifest thy love to the Church of Jesus! Come, Lord, into the midst of thy Zion, though the builders have set at nought the chief corner stone! Raise up a faithful ministry, who, receiving their ordination from thee, may as faithfully dispense thy word to the people. Let the sweet ascension-gifts of our risen and exalted Savior, again come down to enlighten our Churches, and let that precious Scripture be again fulfilled in our day and generation, where it is said, that He gave some Apostles, and some Prophets, and some Pastors and Teachers, and all for the perfecting of the Saints, for the work of the ministry, for the

edifying of the body of Christ. Lord, in mercy hear and do it; defer not, 0 my God! till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ.

COSTABLE, "Luke now gave a specific instance of what he had just described in

Acts 4:34-35. This reference to Barnabas is significant because it introduces him to

the reader. Barnabas becomes an important character in Acts later, mainly as a

missionary (apostle) and preacher. [ote: See S. Jonathan Murphy, "The Role of

Barnabas in the Book of Acts," Biblitheca Sacra 167:667 (July-September

2010):319-41.] Furthermore Barnabas provides a vivid contrast to Ananias in

chapter 5.

Verse 37

Barnabas evidently sold some of his land-where it was we do not know-to provide

cash for the needs of the church members. He humbly presented the proceeds of the

sale to the apostles for their distribution.

"Barnabas is a first example in Acts of the tendency to introduce an important new

character first as a minor character, one who appears and quickly disappears.

Philip (Acts 6:5) and Saul (Acts 7:58; Acts 8:1; Acts 8:3) are similarly introduced

before they assume important roles in the narrative. This procedure ties the

narrative together, and in each case the introductory scene contributes something

significant to the portrait of the person." [ote: Tannehill, 2:78.]

ELLICOTT, "(37) Having land, sold it.—Better, perhaps, having a farm. (See otes

on Mark 5:14; Mark 6:36; Mark 6:56.) In the original polity of Israel the Levites

had cities and land in common, but no private property (umbers 18:20-21;

Deuteronomy 10:8-9, et al.), and depended for their support upon the tithes paid by

the people. The case of Jeremiah, however (Jeremiah 32:7-12), shows that there was

nothing to hinder priest or Levite from becoming the possessor of land by purchase

or inheritance. The position of Barnabas’s sister Mary shows that she, also, was

wealthy, and, though she did not sell her house, she, too, did not call it her own, but

gave it up for the public use of the community. The self-chosen poverty of Barnabas

led him afterwards to act as St. Paul did in working for his livelihood (1 Corinthians

9:6). It will not be out of place on this first mention of the name of a new disciple to

note a few others whose membership of the Church dated probably from this

period; Mnason, the “old disciple” of Acts 21:16, of Cyprus, and probably,

therefore, a friend of Barnabas; Andronicus and Junia (or, more probably, Junias,

as a man’s name), in some sense kinsmen of St. Paul, who were “in Christ” before

him (Romans 16:7), and whom we find afterwards at Rome; the seven who in Acts

6:5 are prominent enough to be chosen as representatives of the Hellenistic members

of the Church; Agabus (Acts 11:28), Judas, and Silas (Acts 15:32). The last three,

however, as being “prophets,” may have been among the number of the Seventy;

and, possibly, if we follow a fairly early tradition, Stephen and Philip among the

Seven. (See ote on Luke 10:1.) We again note the absence of any measure of the

interval between the events of this chapter and the history that follows. The picture

of the peaceful expansion of the Church’s life implies, probably, as in Acts 2:41-47,

one of several months.