Acts 5

H. Leo Boles Commentary On Acts 5 ANANIAS AND Acts 5:1-11 1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife,—Luke now turns to the dark side of the picture in the his¬tory of the early church; he selected two illustrations of those who sold lands and possessions; he has just described what Barnabas did, and now turns to another case which is put in contrast. “ A certain man named Ananias” and his wife Sapphira sold a piece of land. “ Ananias” was a name very familiar among the Jews; it means “ the grace of the Lord.” “ Sapphira” means “ beautiful” ; her name is mentioned twice in connection with the sin. “ With Sapphira his wife” is the way Luke presents her. The two illus-trations here were intended to be brought in contrast, as the con¬junction “ but” introduces this sentence; these illustrations lose some of their force by the division into chapters; this division was not made by Luke. 2 and kept back part of the price,—Ananias took the lead in this sin, but his wife knew of it and entered into the sin with him; they pretended to deliver up the entire amount which they had re¬ceived for the land. His wife was fully acquainted with his pur¬pose and agreed to join him in practicing the deception. The praise that Barnabas received for what he had done was too much for Ananias; he wanted to obtain the same praise, but he was not willing to make the sacrifice that Barnabas made; he wanted praise for giving all while he had given only a part. He started “ the Ananias Club” which has given a different meaning to his name—“ Jehovah hath been gracious.” 3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thy heart—This is the first sin recorded against any member of the church; it may not be the first sin that any of them committed, but it is the first one of which we have a record. We do not know how old the church was at this time, since we do not know how long it had been since Pentecost. We are not told how Satan filled the heart of Ananias to “ lie to the Holy Spirit.” We do know that Ananias permitted Satan to fill his heart; Ananias was held responsible for what he did, and therefore, he permitted Satan to prompt him to do the evil. There seems to be an inspiration of the devil as well as an inspiration of the Holy Spirit. We may infer here that Satan is a real being acting upon and influencing men to do evil; that An¬anias had the power to resist Satan’ s influence, or he should not have been punished. Peter accused him of lying by keeping back a part of the price, and attempting to deceive; he thus attempts to deceive the Holy Spirit, since the apostles were filled with the Holy Spirit. 4 While it remained, did it not remain thine own?—It was the property of Ananias and his wife; they volunteered to sell it; the price was in their hands, and they could do with it what they pleased. This shows that the disciples who owned property were not forced or commanded to dispose of that property; those who did so showed liberality and charity. Peter impresses upon him that he had not “ lied unto men, but unto God.” The community of goods was not compulsory; it was permitted and encouraged be¬cause of the emergency of the case; Peter does not say that Ana¬nias had not lied unto men at all, but that the gravity of his offense was that he thought to deceive God. 5-6 And Ananias hearing these words—Ananias died by the special visitation of God as a punishment for his hypocrisy and his attempt to deceive men in whom the Holy Spirit eminently dwelt, and thus attempting to deceive the Holy Spirit and God. “ Great fear came upon all that heard it.” This statement of Luke does not have reference merely to the time between the death of Ananias and Sapphira, but was made by the historian to show the effect that the death of Ananias had on all of the disciples. Some of the “ young men arose” and carried the body of Ananias out and buried it. The circumstances required a speedy burial; neither the place nor the circumstance would admit of much formal preparation for a funeral. It was customary among the Jews to bury on the same day that death occurred; coffins or caskets were not in use at that time, and they simply “ wrapped him round” with possibly his mantle that he had worn. This was done without delay and with¬out sending his wife word. It is very likely that all was done under the direction of the apostle Peter.

The age and ability of the younger men made them suitable persons to bury the body. Some think that Luke described the wrapping with bandages as a physician would bandage a broken limb; however, others think that the young men used their own mantles in preparing the body for this speedy burial. 7 And it was about the space of three hours—It would seem strange that the death of the husband and the burial of his body should take place and his wife, Sapphira, not know anything about it. The custom, hot climate, and the strong sense of defilement from contact with a dead body would all tend to hasten burial, be¬sides the sense of awe caused by the manner of his death. The three hours would give time for the burial and for the young men to return from the burial. His wife came in about this time. We do not know where they were at this time, but probably in some well-known meeting place in Jerusalem. 8 And Peter answered unto her,—It seems that before she had learned of the death of her husband Peter asked her if the land had been sold for a certain price; he very likely specified the price that Ananias had mentioned. Sapphira answered the question and designated that price. “ Yea, for so much/’ Peter may have pointed to the pile of money that Ananias brought in when he asked her the question. Peter’ s question would awaken her con¬science and prompt her to tell the truth; but instead of confessing her sin she confirmed the lie told by Ananias. 9 But Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together—Sapphira was given the opportunity to confess her wrong and correct it, but she persisted in the sin. Peter then asked why she had agreed with Ananias “ to try the Spirit of the Lord.” Here Peter refers to “ the Holy Spirit” as “ the Spirit of the Lord,” because the Lord had sent the Holy Spirit. He then called her attention to the fact that the young men who had buried her husband had just returned, and that “ they shall carry thee out.” It seems that this case, whether intentional or not, was to “ try the Spirit of the Lord,” or put the Holy Spirit to the test to see whether the apostles or Holy Spirit could detect any hypocrisy or deception. Such was the nature of their conduct that it in¬volved a doubt whether their sin would ever be known, or a dis¬belief as to the knowledge and holiness of God. So deep was their sin, so utterly regardless were they of the presence of God, that they committed this crime against the Holy Spirit. Peter announced to her that her death would immediately take place. 10 And she fell down immediately at his feet,—Very close to the place where her husband had died and close to the place where the money was piled, Sapphira died. Her death, like that of An¬anias, was regarded as supernatural. The young men who had bur¬ied her husband came in and “ found her dead,” and carried her out and “ buried her by her husband.” Literally, they buried her “ face to face to her husband.” The swift judgment of God was visited upon her, thus impressing upon all in the church the fearfulness of sin. 11 And great fear came upon the whole church,—The church was purified of this awful sin. “ If any man destroyeth the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, and such are ye.” (1 Corinthians 3:17.) Fear came upon “ the whole’church.” Here for the first time in Acts we find “ ekklesia,” from which we get the word church. The word is used twice in Matthew (16: 18) where it is used to designate all believers in Christ and (18: 17) where it is used to designate the local body. In Acts 7:38 it is used to designate the whole congregation of Is¬rael, while in Acts 19:32 it is used to designate a public assembly in Ephesus; but in Acts 8:3 it is applied to the church which Saul was persecuting in their homes when not assembled.

SIGNS AND WONDERS Acts 5:12-16 12 And by the hands of the apostles—Frequently we have the signs and wonders attributed to “ the hands of the apostles.” The awful judgment upon Ananias and Sapphira was followed by “ many signs and wonders” which were “ wrought among the peo¬ple.” Just as the exclusion of Achan was followed by victories of Israel at Ai (Joshua 7, 8), so these signs and wonders followed the cleansing of the church by the death of Ananias and Sapphira. “ Signs and wonders”— in Acts 2:43 it is put “ wonders and signs.” Miracles in the New Testament are described by four names— “ signs,” “ works,” “ wonders,” and “ powers.” They are “ signs” of the presence and power of God, of the truth of divine revelation; “ works” include all the doings of God which are supernatural; “ wonders” give the astonishing manifestations of God, attracting men’ s attention to him; “ powers” because they reveal the almighty power of God to help and save. Again we find the disciples “ all with one accord in Solomon’ s porch.” They assembled here when attracted by the healing of the lame man a few days before this. (Acts 3:11.) 13 But of the rest durst no man join himself—The miracles of the apostles had such an effect on the multitude that “ no man” attempted to “ join himself to them.” Who are meant by “ the rest” ? It seems to stand in contrast with “ all” in verse 12. If it does, then “ the rest” might refer to Pharisees, rulers, and the crowd generally; but others think that it has reference to the apos¬tles, and that the other disciples stood in awe of them and did not come near them. Christians and others were smitten with terror at the death of Ananias and Sapphira; and awed by the power of the apostles to know the secret thoughts of persons as shown by Peter discerning their falsehood, and seeing they were putting the Holy Spirit to the test in planning to deceive him, felt afraid to come near the apostles, and kept at a distance from them. While the people feared to join themselves to their company, yet they magni¬fied them for the superhuman knowledge and power they showed. 14 and believers were the more added to the Lord,—“ Prosetithento” is the Greek from which we get “ added” ; “ mallon” is the Greek for “ more.” It means literally that believers “ kept being added.” “ Both of men and women” describes the “ believers” ; only believers were added to the Lord; no infants or irresponsible persons were added to the Lord. The distinction between “ andres” and “ gunaikes,” or “ men and women,” may be considered in con¬nection with “ andres” in Acts 4:4. To be added “ to the Lord” is to be “ added to the church” ; and “ to be added to the church” is to be “ converted” ; hence, only converted ones were added to the church. 15 insomuch that they even carried out the sick—This verse seems to look back to verses 12 and 13, which show that the mem¬bership increased, together with the influence of the church, as the “ many signs and wonders” were wrought. Miracles were wrought, the disciples met together as a distinct body in Solomon’ s porch, the membership was much increased, so that they brought forth the sick for miraculous healing by the apostles. The places of public resort were not sufficient to accommodate the great num-ber that came for healing. They carried their sick “ into the streets, and laid them on beds and couches,” so that as Peter passed by, “ at the least his shadow might overshadow some one of them,” and they be healed. In his daily passing to and fro they hoped to be healed even by his shadow; that is, the power of the Holy Spirit would heal them through even Peter’ s shadow. This shows the great fear and reverence that the people had for the apostles who could work such miracles; it also shows the faith that they had in God through the preaching of Peter and John. 16 And there also came together the multitude—Not only were the sick brought to the apostles from Jerusalem, but the “ multitude from the cities round about Jerusalem” brought their sick and those who were vexed with “ unclean spirits,” and “ they were healed every one.” This states more clearly and fully the de¬tails of what had been stated in verse 12. It was a manifestation “ of signs and wonders” greater than any before mentioned in the history of the church thus far. Jesus had said: “ He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto the Father.” Here was a fulfillment of this promise by Jesus. “ Unclean spirits” mean those who are possessed with demons. Some think that they were fallen angels who, being depraved themselves, seek to make others depraved. (Zechariah 13:2; Luke 4:33.) The sick and the demoniacs are here as in Luke 6:18 distinguished. The demoniacs may be associated with the sick as they usually are, for one possessed of a demon suffered bodily from the possession, and was relieved when the demon was cast out. It is noted that there were no favors, but all were cured.

PETER AND JOHN AGAINAct_5:17-25 17 But the high priest rose up,—Here we see another step taken by the enemies of the early church. Peter and John had been thrust into prison overnight to await their trial in the morn¬ing. (Acts 4:3.) The “ high priest” was probably Annas, who is named as high priest (Acts 4:6), or it may have been Caiaphas, who was acting high priest at the time by Roman authority. According to the law, Annas was high priest until his death. (Numbers 35:25 Numbers 35:28 Numbers 35:32.) “ Rose up” has been variously inter¬preted ; some think that it simply means to rise from one’ s seat or bed (Matthew 9:9; Mark 1:35; Luke 4:29); others give it a figura¬tive meaning as to be raised from the dead (Matthew 17:9; Mark 6:14; Luke 9:8); still others give it the meaning to follow a course without giving some reason for doing so. It seems here that this is the meaning; Annas with the Sadducees, who were opposed to the resurrection from the dead, began anew the persecution of the apostles. “ Sect of the Sadducees” means those who taught against the resurrection and held to other tenets of faith. “ Sect” comes from “ hairesis,” which means “ to choose an opinion, parties, fac¬tions.” (1 Corinthians 11:19; Galatians 5:20.) It is also applied to the Pharisees (Acts 15:5 Acts 26:5) and to Christians (Acts 24:5-14 Acts 28:22). 18 and laid hands on the apostles,—Peter and John were ar¬rested and this time they were put “ in public ward” ; that is, in the public prison. They were not put in prison for punishment, but for detention until they could be examined; however, they were made to associate with all sorts of criminals in this prison. The arrest is described in the same words as before—“ laid hands” on them. (Acts 4:3.) 19 But an angel of the Lord by night—This is put in con¬trast with what the high priest and Sadducees did for them; they put them in prison, but “ an angel of the Lord” visited, comforted, and delivered them. There are at least six distinct acts ascribed to angels by Luke in the Acts. (5: 19; 8: 26; 10: 3; 12: 7, 23; 27: 23.) “ Angel” is found twenty times in Acts. The angel here opened the prison doors and released the apostles. This act on the part of the angel gave courage and confidence to the apostles; it astonished, perplexed, and awed the Sadducees and prepared the way for the release of the apostles; it confirmed the faith of the disciples and held the favor of the people. The “ angel” did more than merely open the prison door; he “ brought them out” and gave them a command. 20 Go ye, and stand and speak in the temple—The angel commanded them, after releasing them from prison, to go and “ stand and speak in the temple.” That is, they were to take their places as usual, and with courage stand and teach. They were not to linger, but go at once; they were to go to the temple and speak “ to the people all the words of this Life.” They were to speak the words of eternal life which Christ revealed; speak the words of the resurrection life, which the Sadducees denied. Peter once had said of Jesus: “ Thou hast the words of eternal life.” (John 6:68.) These words were committed to the apostles, and the angel now bids them speak these words to all the people. Jesus not only had the words of eternal life, but he gives life to those who obey him. (2 Timothy 1:10; 1 John 5:11.) “ I am the way, and the truth, and the life,” said Jesus. (John 14:6.) “ In him was life; and the life was the light of men.” (John 1:4.) 21 And when they heard this, they entered into the temple— The apostles did not delay; they went early, “ about daybreak,” and began teaching those who came to the temple at that early hour. They had been forbidden by the Sanhedrin to speak any more in the name of Christ, but seemingly in defiance to all authority of men they continue to preach the resurrection. The high priest assembled the Sanhedrin and “ called the council together, and all the senate of the children of Israel,” and made ready to try the apostles. The high priest came, and “ they that were with him,” meaning the Sadducees; men of influence were also invited to be present; it seems that they wanted to have a strong and influential meeting. “ The senate” is from the Greek “ ten gerou sian,” and means the old men. After the council with its promi¬nent men had assembled they “ sent to the prison-house” to have the apostles brought to them. All things were ready for the trial, but the presence of the prisoners; hence, they sent for them. 22-23 But the officers that came found them not—The officers must have been greatly surprised when they came to the prison and found the prison doors closed and fastened as the guard had left them, but no prisoners within. It must have been a foolish feeling for them to be guarding an empty prison, or to go for prisoners who were already free and publicly preaching in the temple. These “ officers” were not Roman soldiers, but Jewish civil officers or servants of the Sanhedrin. There were no marks of prison doors being broken nor the walls battered; everything was in good order, but the prisoners were absent. It seems that the angel had miraculously opened the prison doors and brought the prisoners out without the guards or keepers knowing anything about it. 24 Now when the captain of the temple—The Standard Version omits “ high priest,” and mentions only the “ captain of the temple and the chief priests” ; the “ captain” was the ruler of the house of God; he was not a military officer, but had charge of the guard of priests and Levites who watched the temple at night. “ The chief priests” were the heads of the classes or courses of the priests. There were twenty-four divisions of priests and each divi¬sion had its “ chief.” The Sanhedrin was composed of chief priests, elders, and scribes. All were confused as well as perplexed about the affair; they did not know how the prisoners had escaped, but that which concerned them most was what would be the final outcome of preaching the name of Jesus. 25 And there came one and told them,—As the Sanhedrin was thrown into a state of confusion and astonishment when the report that the prisoners were gone reached it, there came another report which added to the state of perplexity; this report was that the apostles were “ in the temple standing and teaching the people.” They had been put in prison for preaching Christ; an angel had released them without the authorities knowing it; and now to their great surprise the apostles were in the temple doing that which they had been forbidden to do and in seeming defiance of the au¬thority of the Sanhedrin. The apostles were at their old work, fearlessly teaching the people in the temple. The fearless apostles were too powerful to be roughly treated and the Sanhedrin did not know what to do.

PETER’ S ADDRESS TO THE Act_5:26-32 26 Then went the captain with the officers,—The apostles were rearrested by the captain and officers, and “ without violence” brought before the Sanhedrin. They did not bind the apostles, but with all consideration for them they brought them before the coun¬cil. There were at this time several thousand Christians; nearly all of these were still in Jerusalem, and the Sanhedrin was in the minority, and “ feared the people” ; they were afraid that the people would stone them. This shows the great influence that the number of disciples had over the Jewish authorities. Peter and John not only stood very high in the estimation of the people, but they were quite popular at this time. The officers and Sanhedrin were not concerned about what was right, but rather what was expedient. 27-28 And when they had brought them,—Peter and John were not afraid to be brought before the Sanhedrin; they knew that they had followed a course that seemed to defy the authority of the council, but they knew that they were in the right; this made them bold to continue their course. When they were brought before the Sanhedrin, they were “ set” in the place of the accused in the presence of the Sanhedrin. The accused usually stood in the semicircle and made their defense. The spokesman for the Sanhedrin, probably the high priest, said: “ We strictly charged you not to teach in this name.” The apostles knew the charge, but knew that God was with them in what they were doing. Instead of obeying the charge of the council, they were now charged with having “ filled Jerusalem” with their teaching. So many had heard and obeyed the gospel that they could truly say that Jerusalem had been filled with the teachings of Jesus.

They further explained to the apostles or charged them that they in¬tended “ to bring this man’ s blood upon us.” The blood of Jesus was already upon them; the Sanhedrin had condemned him to death and had asked Pilate to confirm its decision; it now feels the guilt, but is not ready to repent. The simple and obvious answer is that the teachings of the apostles, in view of the Sanhedrin, tended to arouse the people, so that they would avenge the death of Jesus upon their rulers. They were ready enough to accept that responsibility before Pilate (Matthew 27:25), but now they are not willing to accept the responsibility. Caiaphas, or the high priest, did not mention the name of Jesus, but spoke of him as “ this man.” 29 But Peter and the apostles answered—It seems from this that there were other apostles than Peter and John, but no others have been mentioned. Peter, speaking for the apostles and for all disciples, said: “ We must obey God rather than men.” Here Peter, as in Acts 4:19, states the principle that should govern all Christians. When there is a conflict between the authority of God and men, we must obey God; God comes first; obedience to his authority takes precedence over all other authorities. Here the conflict is between obedience to the Sanhedrin or obedience to God. Peter, without any evading or equivocation, states positively, clearly, and emphatically that he and the other apostles are going to obey God. 30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus,—Again there is brought in sharp contrast what the rulers had done to Jesus and what God had done; they had falsely charged him, mockingly con¬demned him, and shamefully crucified him, but God had raised him from the dead. “ Epixulou” is the Greek for “ tree” ; it originally meant “ wood, timber.” (Luke 23:31; Acts 5:30 Acts 10:39; 1 Peter 2:24.) The term “ slew,” in the original, means “ to take in hand, manage, to lay hands on, manhandle, kill.” He was put to death by crucifixion on the cross. This describes what man had done to him. 31 Him did God exalt with his right hand—To continue the description as to what God had done for him, he has been exalted and is now at the right hand of God as “ a Prince and a Saviour.” “ A Prince,” as having authority and so must be obeyed; he has all authority in heaven and on earth; as “ a Saviour,” he uses his au¬thority to give salvation unto all who obey him. Jesus is now Prophet, Priest, and King; he is a Savior to those only who accept him as their Lord. He gives “ repentance to Israel, and remission of sins.” Repentance is given by teaching them to turn from their sins and by granting the opportunity unto them; remission of sins is granted to those who obey his will. Jesus has been raised from the dead and exalted to the right hand of God that he might be the King and Savior of those who put their trust in him. 32 And we are witnesses of these things;—The apostles were witnesses of the crucifixion, the resurrection, and the ascension; these three main topics were emphasized in the preaching of the apostles. Peter also states that the Holy Spirit is also witness of the things which they preached, “ whom God hath given to them that obey him.” The Holy Spirit is given to those only who obey him. This is the conclusion of Peter’ s second address to the council. So we have the Holy Spirit and the apostles as witnesses for Christ and against the Sanhedrin. The three lines of his de¬fense were as follows: (1) We must obey God; (2) the facts in the life of Jesus show that we have not obeyed God; (3) the Holy Spirit is witness with us of all these things. Hence, if the apostles were wrong, the Holy Spirit was wrong.

SPEECH OF Acts 5:33-42 33 But they, when they heard this, were cut to the heart,—This expresses the effect that Peter’ s address had on the council; instead of being convinced and turning from their evil course, they were “ cut to the heart,” but not of the conviction of their sins. Instead of blessing the apostles for speaking to them the word of life, or preaching to them the gospel, they were “ minded to slay them.” The original, “ dieprionto,” means “ to saw into, to cut into, to saw asunder” ; here it is rage that cuts into their hearts, not conviction of their sins as in Acts 2:37. There is one other use of this term, in the speech of Stephen (Acts 7:54) we have the same expression. 34 But there stood up one in the council,—There are four things said about Gamaliel here: (1) He was one of the council, a member of the Sanhedrin; (2) he was a Pharisee; if not the most influential, he was a leader among the Pharisees, while many of the other members were Sadducees; (3) he was a doctor of the law, or a teacher of the law; (4) he was respected and honored by all the people. The council feared the people, and as Gamaliel had such influence with the people it was prudent for them to hear him; hence, he asked that the apostles be put out so that he could address the council himself in the absence of the apostles. 35 And he said unto them, Ye men of Israel,—Gamaliel ad¬dressed them as “ men of Israel” ; these were common words of ad¬dress to the council. Gamaliel proceeded then to give a timely warning as to what should be done with the apostles. He calls upon them to take heed to themselves as to what they were about to do. This does not mean that some danger is about to befall them, but that they should be careful or cautious about reaching a decision. 36 For before these days rose up Theudas,—Gamaliel now shows his wisdom by reminding them of some illustrations that mere pretenders will come to nought. Much discussion has been raised as to who Theudas was and what he did. It does not mat¬ter who he was; they were familiar with him and knew just what he had done. Josephus mentions a Theudas, who was a leader in an insurrection, but he could not have been this Theudas, for his rebellion was fifteen years later than this time. The times were full of revolts and rebellions, and as not less than three insurrec-tionary leaders were called Judas, and four Simon, there may have been two of the name of Theudas. This Theudas led about four hundred off, and was finally slain with his company. 37 After this man rose up Judas of Galilee—This Judas was one of those who led an insurrection about the time of the “ taxing” or “ enrolment.” Josephus mentions a Judas of Galilee who made a revolt against the Roman enrollment which was ordered while Cyrenius or Quirinus was governor; he also mentions that his sons were executed, but does not tell what became of Judas; however, Gamaliel says here that “ he also perished,” and all that were with him were either killed or scattered abroad. 38-39 And now I say unto you,—Gamaliel, after reciting these illustrations of those who had failed in their efforts to reform or rebel, gives his advice. He now says, “ Let them alone” ; that is, literally, “ stand off” or “ aloof and suffer them” to go on. He gives his reasons or argument for his advice. He advises that their work can be left to the dealing of God, which, in case of Theudas and Judas, as cited, had brought the wicked counsels to nought. Furthermore, if these men were doing the work of God, they would be fighting against God to oppose them. This was a shrewd argument for Gamaliel, and was suited to the critical case of the apostles; Gamaliel does not imply that he was a secret disciple of Jesus or that he leaned toward the apostles. Gamaliel’s reasoning seems to be clear; from the cases mentioned he inferred that if these apostles had no other basis but such as those that Theudas and Judas had, they would come to nought and the Sanhedrin would have no use to oppose them; but on the other hand, if the work that the apostles were doing was of God, it would be vain for the council to oppose it— nay, worse, for it would be in vain, and even worse than that, they would be found fighting against God. 40 And to him they agreed:—The argument of Gamaliel had influence on the Sanhedrin; the council yielded; the apostles were recalled; to give vent to their malice, and perhaps in their thought, to atone somewhat for this concession to moderate measures, they beat the apostles, and then repeated their futile injunction to speak no more in the name of Jesus; then they let them go. This Gamaliel was the same one who had taught Saul of Tarsus. Some think that Saul was present; if so, what did he think of the counsel of his old professor? The members of the Sanhedrin may have felt that their honor was at stake, and that, if the apostles departed untouched, they themselves would be regarded as having proceeded against innocent men; hence, to save their honor and the honor of the court, and to make the impression that the apostles were guilty of some offense, they were scourged. This was a frequent, though a very disgraceful, punishment among the Jews. Jesus had warned his apostles of such treatment. (Matthew 10:17.) 41 They therefore departed from the presence of the council,^—The apostles considered it an honor to be followers of Jesus “ by evil report and good report." (2 Corinthians 6:8.) Jesus had pre¬pared them to meet ill treatment. (John 15:20.) The apostles departed from the Sanhedrin “ rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the Name." No greater indignity could be put upon them than to be subjected to judicial scourging; such treatment would fill many with indignation, anger, or grief over the terrible injustice they suffered; but the apostles counted themselves fortunate, and they considered it an honor to suffer for Christ. 42 And every day, in the temple and at home,—The apostles continued to disregard the authority of the Sanhedrin and to obey God; they continued to teach in the temple and in every house. The two fields of apostolic work here mentioned are the public teaching at the temple, and the private teaching at home. Where crowds gathered and the disciples met, they continued to teach. The mission of the church is to carry the gospel to those who do not have it, and to edify itself in the things of God. This may be done by teaching “ from house to house" (Acts 20:20) and publicly in the temple. “ Teach" and “ preach" are used here to describe the nature of the work of the apostles; “ didaskontes" is the original for “ teaching,” and “ euaggelizomenoi” is the original for “ preaching” or “ evangelizing.” This is the first use of the specific word for “ preach” in the Acts; it is the same word from which the English term “ evangelize” comes, and means to proclaim good news. It is used frequently by Luke and Paul. (See Luke 2:10 Luke 9:6; 1 Thessalonians 3:6; Romans 1:15; 1 Corinthians 15:1; Galatians 1:23; Ephesians 2:17.) From the scourging the apostles went to preach Christ as the Savior of the world.

J.W. McGarvey Commentary On Acts 5Acts 5:1-2. In close connection with this unprecedented liberality of the brethren, we are now introduced to a remarkable case of corruption, of which it was the occasion. The praise always lavished on disinterested benevolence sometimes prompts illiberal men to make a pretense of liberality. But the mere desire of praise is incapable of subduing selfishness, so as to make a truly liberal heart; for it is itself a species of selfishness. In contrast with the course of Barnabas, we are told: (1) “But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession, (2) and kept back part of the price, his wife being also privy to it, and brought a certain part and laid it at the feet of the apostles.” This language implies, what is distinctly avowed by the wife below, that this part was represented as the whole price of the possession. Acts 5:3-4. “But Peter said, Ananias, why has Satan filled thy heart, to lie to the Holy Spirit, and to keep back part of the price of the land? (4) While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why hast thou put this thing in thy heart? Thou hast not lied to men, but to God.” Here Peter brings together the influence of Satan, and the free agency of the tempted, just as he had, in former discourses, the free agency of men, and the purposes of God. He demands of Ananias, “ Why has Satan filled thy heart to lie to the Holy Spirit,” and, in the same breath, “ Why hast thou put this thing in thy heart?” The existence and agency of the tempter are distinctly recognized, yet it is not Satan, but Ananias who is rebuked; and he is rebuked for doing the very thing that Satan had done, showing that he is as guilty as though Satan had no existence. Indeed, he is rebuked for what Satan had done.

The justice of this is manifest from the fact that Satan had no power to fill his heart with evil, without his co-operation. That he had rendered this co-operation, threw the responsibility upon himself. Peter’s knowledge of the deception was the result not of human information, but of the insight imparted to him by the Holy Spirit. This is necessary to the significance of the entire incident, as well as to the purport of Peter’s own words. Acts 5:5. The exposure of Ananias was very surprising, but neither the audience, nor perhaps Peter, was prepared by it for the event which immediately followed. (5) “And Ananias, hearing these words, fell down and expired. And great fear came upon all who heard these things.” There is no evidence that Peter had any will of his own in this matter; but it was an act of divine power exerted independent of the apostolic agency. The responsibility, therefore, attached not to Peter as an officer of the Church, but to God as the moral governor of the world. The propriety of the deed may be appreciated best by supposing that Ananias had succeeded in his undertaking. His success would not only have turned the most praiseworthy feature of the new Church into a source of corruption and hypocrisy, but it would have brought discredit upon the inspiration of the apostles, by showing that the Spirit within them could be deceived.

Thus the whole fabric of apostolic authority, which was based upon their inspiration, would have fallen, and precipitated the entire cause into hopeless ruin. The attempt, therefore, presented a crisis of vital importance, and demanded some such vindication of their inspiration as could neither be mistaken nor forgotten. The immediate effect of the event was just the effect desired: “ great fear came upon all who heard these things.” Acts 5:6. The scene was too awful for lamentation, or for needless funeral services. As when Nadab and Abihu fell dead at the door of the tabernacle with strange fire in their censers, there was no weeping nor delay. All were stricken with horror, as they saw the curse of God fall upon the wretch. (6) “And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him.“ Acts 5:7. Sapphira was not present. (7) “And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in.” How she remained so long ignorant of the fate of her husband, we are not informed, though it is a most extraordinary circumstance. He had died suddenly, in a manner which had excited everybody; had been buried; and three hours had passed; yet his wife, who must have been in the vicinity, has no intimation of it, but comes into the very assembly where it had occurred, without a word reaching her ear upon the subject. There is no way to account for this, but by the supposition that there was a concerted determination on the part of the whole multitude to conceal the facts from her. This was a most unnatural determination, and one difficult of execution, except on the further supposition that Peter commanded the multitude to restrain their natural impulses, and let her know nothing until he himself was ready to reveal it to her. This course was necessary in order to effectually expose her. Acts 5:8-10. She came in prepared to act out fully the part which she had agreed upon with her husband. (8) “Then Peter answered her, Tell me whether you sold the land for so much? She said, Yes; for so much. (9) Then Peter said to her, Why is it that you have agreed together to put to proof the Spirit of the Lord? Behold, the feet of them who have buried thy husband are at the door, and they shall carry thee out. (10) Then she immediately fell at his feet and expired: and the young men coming in found her dead, and carried her out, and buried her by her husband.” In her case, Peter knew what was about to take place, and declared it; but there is no indication that he exerted his own will or miraculous power to cause her death. We regard her death, like that of Ananias, as a miracle wrought independent of the power lodged in the apostles. In the question, “ Why have you agreed together to put to proof the Spirit of the Lord?” Peter expresses the result of their agreement, though it may not have been what they had in view. They did put the Spirit to proof, by testing his powers. If he had failed under the test, the consequences, as we have suggested above, would have been disastrous. But now that the test applied has triumphantly vindicated the fullness of apostolic inspiration, it was not likely that such another attempt could be made. Acts 5:11. The failure of the plot proved as propitious to the cause of truth as its success would have been disastrous. (11) “And great fear came upon all the Church, and upon all who had heard these things.” This fear was excited, not only by the sudden and awful fate of the guilty pair, but also by the fearful nature of that spirit-searching knowledge imparted to the apostles. The disciples were now filled with more just conceptions than before of the nature of inspiration, and the unbelieving masses who heard of the event were awed into respect and reverence. Acts 5:12-13. Increased activity of the apostles followed, and their office was still further magnified. (12) “And through the hands of the apostles many signs and wonders were done among the people. And they were all, with one accord, in Solomon’s Portico, (13) and of the rest no man dare join himself to them, but all people magnified them.” It was the apostles alone who were in Solomon’s Portico, as is evident from the fact that the term apostles, in the first clause of the 12th verse , furnishes the only antecedent to the pronoun they, in the statement, “ they were all, with one accord,” etc. This being so, “ the rest,” who dared not join themselves to them, must include other disciples, as well as the unbelieving multitude. It need not be concluded, from this, that the disciples stood off at the same fearful distance with unbelievers; but that they were so filled with awe by the exhibition connected with the fate of Ananias and Sapphira, that they dare not approach the apostles with the familiarity which had marked their former intercourse with them. Such a feeling was at first experienced by the apostles themselves in the presence of Jesus, and was well expressed by Peter, when he and his companions made the first miraculous draught of fishes: falling down at the knees of Jesus, he exclaimed, “ Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord.” That such a feeling was also experienced by the whole Church, at this time, has just been stated by the historian, in verse 11 , where he says, “ Great fear came upon all the Church.” Acts 5:14. The statement just made, that “ of the rest no man dared to join himself to them,” can not mean that persons dared not join the Church, for the reverse is now stated. (14) “And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women.” The increased awe in the presence of the apostles, with which the people were inspired, made them listen with increased respect to their testimony concerning Jesus, and brought them in greater numbers to obedience. Acts 5:15-16. The connection of Luke’s next statement, introduced by the adverb so that, is somewhat obscure: but I presume he intends to state a result of all the facts just mentioned. Signs and wonders were done by the apostles; the people magnified them, and believers were the more added to the Lord. (15) “So that they brought forth the sick into the streets, and laid them on beds and couches, that at least the shadow of Peter passing by might overshadow some of them. (16) There came also a multitude out of the cities round about to Jerusalem, bringing the sick and those vexed by unclean spirits, who were all healed.“ Acts 5:17-18. The excitement which now prevailed throughout Jerusalem and the neighboring villages, and found utterance in the most enthusiastic praise of the apostles, was too much for the equanimity of the dignitaries who had so strictly forbidden them to preach or teach in the name of Jesus. (17) “Then the high priest rose up, and all who were with him, being the sect of the Sadducees, and were filled with zeal, (18) and laid their hands on the apostles, and put them in the public prison.” Here we have the same Sadducees at work who had arrested and threatened Peter and John. They were “ filled with zeal;” but it was a zeal inspired less by love for their own cause, than by hatred for that which was triumphing over it. The advocates of error will generally appear quite easy, and sometimes, even generous, when their cause is merely standing still; but their zeal is always kindled when the truth begins to make inroads upon them. The zeal of these Sadducees was fanned to its fiercest heat by recent events, and they determined to execute the threats with which they had recently dismissed two of the apostles, making all the twelve their present victims. Acts 5:19-21. When they were all seized and cast into prison together, the apostles could but expect that they would now feel the entire weight of the wrath which was treasured up against them. (19) “But an angel of the Lord opened the prison doors in the night, and led them forth, and said, (20) Go stand in the temple, and speak to the people all the words of this life. (21) And having heard this they entered into the temple early in the morning, and taught. But the high priest came, and those who were with him, and called together the Sanhedrim, and all the eldership of the children of Israel, and sent into the prison to have them brought.” The apostles were already in the temple, teaching the early worshipers as if nothing unusual had occurred, when the Sanhedrim met and sent to the prison for them. Acts 5:22-23. After some delay, the officers returned into the presence of the Sanhedrim without their prisoners. (22) “But when the officers arrived, and did not find them in the prison, they returned and announced, (23) saying, The prison we found closed with all safety, and the guards standing before the doors; but when we opened them, we found no one within.” This appalling circumstance would have been sufficient, with less determined men, to stay all hostile proceedings, and even to disperse the court who had assembled for the trial for the apostles. Acts 5:24-26. The startling announcement was not without serious effect even upon the stubborn Sadducees. They were staggered by it, and knew not at first what to do or think. (24) “Now when the high priest and the captain of the temple, and the chief priest heard these words, they were perplexed concerning them, what this might come to. (25) But some one came and announced to them, Behold, the men whom you put in prison are standing in the temple and teaching the people.” This announcement relieved the perplexity of the Sanhedrim, by enabling them to proceed with business, and relieving them from the unpleasant necessity of dispersing without a good excuse. They now dispatch a more honorable guard after the apostles than they had, at first; for the captain of the temple himself takes command. (26) “Then the captain went with the officers, and brought them without violence, for they feared the people, lest they should be stoned.” The clause, “ lest they should be stone,” is so arranged as to furnish a reason for both the preceding statements, that they “feared the people,” and that they “ brought them without violence.” The enthusiasm of the people had been much increased, no doubt, by the angelic deliverance, which was by this time well known about the temple. Acts 5:27-28. We have now a very lively and graphic description of the arraignment and trial of the apostles. (27) “And having brought them, they placed them in the Sanhedrim, and the high priest asked them, (28) saying, Did we not strictly command you not to speak in this name? And behold, you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.” These words contain two specific charges against the apostles, disobedience to the Sanhedrim, and an effort to bring upon them the blood of Jesus. Acts 5:29-32. To these charges the apostles candidly and fearlessly respond. (29) “Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.” This answers the first charge. They plead guilty, but justify themselves by the authority of God. Peter and John had left the Sanhedrim before, with the words, “ Whether it is right in the sight of God to hearken to men more than to God, do you judge.” Now, as if that question was decided, they declare, “ We ought to obey God rather than men.” They then answer the second charge by a restatement of the facts: (30) “The God of our fathers had raised up Jesus, whom ye slew, having hung him on a tree. (31) This man has God exalted to his own right hand, a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and remission of sins. (32) And we are his witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him.” This was repeating, with terrible emphasis, the very thing which was charged against them as a crime. In the declaration that Jesus had been exalted a Prince and a Savior, “ to grant repentance to Israel and remission of sins,” it is implied that repentance, as well as remission of sins, is in some sense granted to me. But to grant repentance can not mean to bestow it upon men without an exercise of their own will; for repentance is enjoined upon men as a duty to be performed by them. How, then, can that which is a duty to be performed, be said to be granted to us? We will readily perceive the answer to this question, by remembering that repentance is produced by sorrow for sin, and that it belongs to God to furnish men with the facts which will awaken this sorrow. Without revelation, men would never be made to feel that sorrow for sin which works repentance; but in the revelation of Jesus Christ we are furnished with the chief of these motives, and because of this, he is said to grant repentance. Acts 5:33. The Sanhedrim had been astonished at the boldness of Peter and John on their former trial, but had contented themselves with severe threatenings. Now, both their commands and their threats, having been despised, and the bold innovators daring to defy them once more, they lost, for a moment, all the restraint which had been imposed by the fear of the multitude. (33) “Now when they heard this, they were exasperated, and determined to slay them.“ Acts 5:34-39. At this crisis the madness of the Sadducees was suddenly checked by the prudent counsel of one of the opposite party. The Pharisees were less exasperated, because their leading dogma was sustained by the apostles, and they saw that any imprudent proceedings were likely to involve the whole Sanhedrim in trouble, without regard to party; therefore, Gamaliel interposes his advice. (34) “But a certain Pharisee in the Sanhedrim, named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, honored by all the people, arose and commanded to put the apostles out for a little while.” This removal of the prisoners, like that of Peter and John before, was designed to prevent them from taking encouragement from any admissions which might be made during the pending discussion. They were, accordingly, withdrawn. (35) “And he said to them, Men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what you are about to do respecting these men; (36) For before these days, Theudas arose, declaring himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, attached themselves; who was slain, and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered and brought to nothing. (37) After this man, Judas the Galilean rose up, in the days of the enrollment, and drew away many people after him. He also perished, and all, as many as obeyed him, were dispersed. (38) And now I say to you, refrain from these men, and let them alone; for if this purpose or this work is from men, it will be destroyed; (39) but if it is from God, you are not able to destroy it; lest you even be found to fight against God.” A question has been raised as to whether Luke is not guilty of an anachronism in this report of Gamaliel’s speech, by making him refer to a Theudas, who is mentioned by Josephus, and who flourished many years later, under the reign of Claudius Cæsar. Such a reference could not possibly be made by Gamaliel; and if it was made by Luke, he is not only guilty of the anachronism, but, what is far worse, of giving a false report of Gamaliel’s speech. Rather than admit a hypothesis involving such consequences in reference to a historian of unimpeached veracity, we must suppose that some impostor by the name of Theudas did flourish at the time here alluded to by Gamaliel. Judas the Galilean is also mentioned by Josephus, whose account of him agrees with this given by Gamaliel. The enrollment is most likely the same referred to in Luke 2:1 . Upon the fate of these two impostors, Gamaliel bases his advice to the Sanhedrim, in reference to the apostles. The moral merits of this advice may be differently estimated, according to the point of view from which he contemplate it. If we regard it as a general rule of procedure in reference to religious movements, it must be regarded as a mere time-serving policy. Instead of waiting to see whether such a movement is going to prove successful or not, before we take ground in reference to it, the lover of truth will promptly investigate and decide its merits without regard to public opinion. But if we regard Gamaliel as only giving a reason why men should not persecute a cause which they are not prepared to accept, it was certainly most judicious advice. When we have decided against a cause, we should render a reason for our decision, and then leave it to the developments of Providence, well assured that whatever is not from God will come to nothing without any violent agency on our part. We should also be afraid to resist with violence or passion any thing bearing a semblance to truth, lest we fight against God, and be ourselves overthrown. The last clause in Gamaliel’s speech, “ Lest you be found even to fight against God,” indicates a suspicion, on his part, that such a result was by no means impossible. In view of the many miracles which had been wrought by the apostles, and their miraculous deliverance from prison the very night before, it is strange that something more than a suspicion to this effect did not possess the mind of Gamaliel, and of all the Sanhedrim. It was, doubtless, owing to serious misgivings on this point, that the embittered Sadducees yielded so readily to advice from the opposite party. Acts 5:40. There was no opposition to Gamaliel’s advice. (40) “And they obeyed him; and having called the apostles, and scourged them, they commanded them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go.” Scourging was so common in the Roman empire, even of men untried and uncondemned, and was so common a fate of Christians at the time Luke was writing, that he mentions it here rather as a matter of course. It is the first time, however, that it was experienced by the apostles, and was, probably, harder to endure than it ever was afterward. Acts 5:41-42. However painful the scourging was, it did not cause any resentful manifestations on the part of the sufferers, but they bore it cheerfully. (41) “Then they departed from the presence of the Sanhedrim, rejoicing that they were thought worthy to be dishonored for his name. (42) And every day, in the temple, and from house to house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ.” The Sanhedrim had now tried both threats and scourging upon the apostles without checking their activity, and as there was nothing further for them to try but death, which they were not yet prepared to inflict, they relinquished for awhile their efforts. In this first contest, therefore, the apostles were completely victorious, and compelled their adversaries to abandon the field. The apostles taught and preached not only publicly in the temple, but “ from house to house.” In this they give an example to the ministry of all ages, which is well worthy of imitation. Private instruction and admonition bring the teacher and the taught into closer contact, and secure an individuality of effect not attainable in a public assembly. It can not, therefore, be well dispensed with; but he who employs it most diligently will, other things being equal, employ his energies most successfully.

“ACTS OF THE "

Chapter Five IN THIS CHAPTER

1. To examine the sin of Ananias and Sapphira in lying to the Holy Spirit

2. To note the amazing signs and wonders that were done by the apostles, in which all were healed

3. To consider the apostles’ response when government seeks to stifle the preaching of the gospel

SUMMARY In contrast to the remarkable liberality in the church as described in the previous chapter, we are now told of the example of Ananias and Sapphira. A husband and wife who sold a possession, they tried to mislead the apostles that they were giving the entire proceeds. Confronted one at a time by Peter and found guilty of lying against the Holy Spirit, they both fall dead, bringing great fear upon all (Acts 5:1-11).

Highly esteemed among the people, the apostles continue doing many signs and wonders among the people and in the temple (Solomon’s Porch). Believers were added to the Lord in increasing numbers, who then brought the sick out into the streets on beds and couches, that perhaps the shadow of Peter might fall on some of them. A multitude from the surrounding cities brought those who were sick and tormented, and everyone was healed (Acts 5:12-16).

Once again the high priest and those of Sadducees are filled with anger. They have the apostles placed into custody. During the night, an angel of the Lord frees them and commands the apostles to continue to teach in the temple. In the morning when the council convenes, the prison is found secure but empty. When told that the apostles are teaching in the temple, officers are sent to bring the apostles peacefully to the council. When the high priest charges them of disobeying the command not to teach in the name of Jesus (cf. Acts 4:18), the apostles reply “We ought to obey God rather than man.” They further proclaim that God raised Jesus (whom the council had murdered) and has exalted Him to be Prince and Savior who offers repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. To this the apostles claim to be witnesses, along with the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey Him (Acts 5:17-32).

Infuriated, the council plots to kill the apostles. However, one in the council, a Pharisee and highly respected teacher of the law by the name of Gamaliel (cf. Acts 22:3), advises the council to leave the apostles alone. Based upon the history of other “movements” that had failed, Gamaliel reasons that if the apostles were doing the work of men, it would come to naught. But if it was the work of God, the council could do nothing to stop it and would only be fighting against God. The council is willing to heed his advice, though the apostles are beaten and charged not to speak in the name of Jesus before being released. The apostles leave the council rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame in the name of Jesus, and continue right on teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ every day in the temple and in every house (Acts 5:33-42).

OUTLINE I. ANANIAS AND (Acts 5:1-11) A. THEIR PLOT TO DECEIVE (Acts 5:1-2)1. They sold a possession, but kept back part of the proceeds 2. Ananias brings a part to the apostles, Sapphira aware of his intention to deceive

B. THE DEATH OF ANANIAS (Acts 5:3-6)1. Peter challenges Ananias a. Why has he allowed Satan to enter his heart to lie to the Holy Spirit?

1. The land was his to use
2. The money was his to control b. He has not lied to men, but to God!

2. Ananias drops dead a. Upon hearing the words of Peter b. Creating great fear on those who heard c. Carried out by young men and buried

C. THE DEATH OF (Acts 5:7-11)1. Peter confronts Sapphira a. She enters three hours later, unaware b. Did she sell the land for a certain amount? Yes, she answers c. Why did she agree with her husband to the test the Spirit? d. Those who buried her husband are ready to carry her out 2. Sapphira falls dead a. Immediately at the feet of Peter b. Carried out by young men and buried by her husband c. Creating great fear upon all the church and all who heard

II. THE POWER OF THE (Acts 5:12-16) A. WITH ONE ACCORD IN SOLOMON’S PORCH (Acts 5:12-13)1. Many signs and wonders were done by the apostles among the people 2. While none dared join them, they were esteemed highly

B. HEALING ALL WHO BROUGHT TO THEM (Acts 5:14-16)1. Believers were increasingly added to the Lord 2. They brought the sick out on the street a. Laying them on beds and couches b. That at least the shadow of Peter passing by might fall on them 3. A multitude gathered from the cities surrounding Jerusalem a. Bringing the sick and those tormented by unclean spirits b. They were all healed

III. THE OF THE (Acts 5:17-42) A. , THEN FREED (Acts 5:17-21)1. The apostles put into the common prison a. By the high priest and those of the sect of the Sadducees b. For they were filled with indignation 2. The apostles freed by an angel of the Lord a. Who came at night, opened the prison doors, and brought them out b. Who charged them to return to the temple and speak the words of life c. Which they did, entering the temple in the early morning

B. BEFORE THE COUNCIL (Acts 5:21-33)1. The council calls for the apostles to be brought from the prison a. The officers are unable to do so, for the apostles are not there! b. Despite the secure doors, and guards standing outside 2. The council has the apostles brought from the temple a. The council is informed that the apostles are teaching the temple b. The apostles are brought to the council peacefully, for fear of the people 3. The high priest challenges the apostles a. Were they not strictly commanded to teach in Jesus’ name? b. You have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, intending to bring this Man’s blood on us! 4. Peter and the apostles respond a. We ought to obey God rather than man b. God has raised Jesus, whom you murdered c. God has exalted Jesus to His right hand

1. To be Prince and Savior
2. To give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins d. We are witnesses to these things
3. And so is the Holy Spirit
4. Whom God has given to those who obey Him

5. The council’s immediate reaction a. They were furious b. They plotted to kill the apostles

C. THE ADVICE OF (Acts 5:34-39)1. Gamaliel stands up in the council a. A Pharisee, a teacher of the law b. Held in respect by all the people c. Who commands the apostles be put outside for awhile 2. Gamaliel cautions the council a. To be careful what they do with the apostles b. Remember what happened to Theudas

1. A man claiming to be someone, joined by 400 men
2. He was slain, and those who obeyed him came to nothing c. Remember what happened to Judas of Galilee in the days of the census
3. He drew away many people after him
4. He also perished, and those who obeyed him dispersed d. His advice regarding the apostles: leave them alone
5. If their work is of men, it will come to nothing
6. If it is of God, it cannot be overthrown and you will be fighting against God

D. THE ’ (Acts 5:40-42)1. The council’s decision a. They agree with Gamaliel to let the apostles go b. But first beat them and command them not to speak in the name of Jesus 2. The apostles’ reaction a. They depart rejoicing they were counted worthy to suffer shame for His name b. They continued to teach and preach Jesus daily in the temple and in every house

REVIEW FOR THE CHAPTER

1. What are the main points of this chapter?- Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11)

• The power of the apostles (Acts 5:12-16)
• The persecution of the apostles (Acts 5:17-42)

2. Who is introduced as having sold a possession? (Acts 5:1)- Ananias and Sapphira, husband and wife

3. What did the husband do? Was the wife aware of it? (Acts 5:2)- He kept back part of the proceeds and brought a part to the apostles; yes, she was

4. What did Peter charge the husband of doing? In what way? (Acts 5:3)- Lying to the Holy Spirit

• By keeping back part of the price (but implying he was giving all of it)

5. Who did Peter say he had lied to? (Acts 5:4)- Not to men but to God

6. What happened when the man heard this? What was the reaction of those who heard? (Acts 5:5)- He fell down and breathed his last; great fear come upon all who heard

7. How long before the wife came in? Was she aware of what happened? (Acts 5:7)- Three hours; no

8. Did she attempt to mislead Peter also? (Acts 5:8)- Yes

9. What did Peter charge her with being guilty of doing? (Acts 5:9)- Agreeing with her husband to test the Spirit of the Lord

10. What then happened? What was the reaction upon those who heard? (Acts 5:10-11)- She fell dead, and was buried by her husband; great fear came upon them

11. What was being done by the apostles? (Acts 5:12)- Many signs and wonders among the people

12. How did the people regard the apostles? (Acts 5:13)- None dared join them, but did esteem them highly

13. Did this hinder the growth of the church? (Acts 5:14)- No, believers were being increasingly added to the Lord

14. What did the believers do? Why? (Acts 5:15)- They brought the sick out into the street on beds and couches

• That the shadow of Peter passing by might fall on them

15. Who else were bringing sick people? (Acts 5:16)- A multitude from the surrounding cities

16. Of those sick and tormented brought to the apostles, who were healed? (Acts 5:16)- They were all healed

17. Who was filled with indignation and had the apostles put into custody? (Acts 5:17-18)- The high priest and those of the sect of the Sadducees

18. Who freed the apostles during the night? What were they told to do? (Acts 5:19-20)- An angel of the Lord; to go to the temple and speak to the people all the words of this life

19. What was discovered when the apostles were sent for from prison? (Acts 5:21-23)- The prison was secure with the guards standing outside, but no one was inside

20. When told that the apostles were teaching in the temple, what did the council do? (Acts 5:24-26)- Sent the officers to bring the apostles without violence, for they feared the people

21. What three charges did the high priest make against the apostles? (Acts 5:27-28)- Did we not command you not teach in this name?

• You have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine
• You intend to bring this Man’s blood on us!

22. What was the initial response of Peter and the apostles to these charges? (Acts 5:29)- We ought to obey God rather than man

23. What else did the apostles proclaim on this occasion? (Acts 5:30-32)- God raised up Jesus whom they murdered by hanging on a tree

• God exalted Him to His right hand to be Prince and Savior
• To give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins
• We are witnesses to these things, as is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey Him

24. What was the council’s initial reaction? What were they planning to do? (Acts 5:33)- They were furious; they plotted to kill the apostles

25. Who in the council stood up? Who was he? What did he command? (Acts 5:34)- A Pharisee named Gamaliel

• A teacher of the law held in respect by all the people
• That the apostles be put outside for a while

26. What were his initial words to the council? (Acts 5:35)- Take heed what you intend to do regarding these men

27. What two examples does he give of ‘failed movements’? (Acts 5:36-37)- Theudas and his followers who came to nothing when he died

• Judas of Galilee and those who followed him, who were dispersed when he died

28. What counsel does Gamaliel then offer? Why? (Acts 5:38-39)- Keep away from the apostles and leave them alone

• If their work is of men, it will come to nothing; but if it is of God, they will be fighting against God and cannot overthrow it

29. What was the council’s response to Gamaliel? Yet what did they still do? (Acts 5:40)- They agreed with him

• They beat the apostles, commanded them not to speak in the name of Jesus, then let them go

30. How did the apostles’ respond as they left the council? (Acts 5:41)- Rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for the name of Jesus

31. What did the apostles continue to do? Where? (Acts 5:42)- Teach and preach Jesus as the Christ; daily in the temple, and in every house Verse 1 This chapter recounts the tragic fall of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11), the continued success and popularity of the apostolic mission (Acts 5:12-16), the renewed opposition of the Sanhedrin with another arraignment of the apostles before them (Acts 5:17-32), the purpose of the Sanhedrin to slay the apostles thwarted by Gamaliel, and the beating of the Twelve by the Jewish authorities (Acts 5:33-42). But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession. (Acts 5:1) ANANIAS AND But … This word clearly connects the event of Barnabas’ generous action which had just been narrated, with what ensues here. As Boles noted, “The two illustrations here were intended to be brought in contrast, as the conjunction but' introduces the sentence."[1]The parallel with the conquest of Canaan in the Old Testament is evident in this event, this story being to the book of Acts what the story of Achan is to the book of Joshua. "In both, an act of deceit interrupts the victorious progress of the people of God."[2] (<a href="/bible/parallel/JOS/7/1" class="green-link">Joshua 7:1</a> ff). Ananias and Sapphira ... The first of these names means "Jehovah hath been gracious," and "If is Greek, it means ; if Aramaic, it means ."[3] How tragic is the contrast between these lovely names and what befell those who wore them. Sold a possession ... This does not mean that they sold all that they had, or that they had been commanded to sell anything at all. The event about to be related was a dramatic change from the wonderful miracles of mercy and healing which, until then, had marked the deeds of the apostles; but it was necessary that the severity of God, as well as his mercy, should be stressed. And, just as Jesus had withered the fig tree, there appeared here "an instance of severity, following the instances of goodness: God is to be both loved and feared."[4]The truth of the narrative of Ananias and Sapphira is guaranteed by its painful character. No historian would have gone out of his way to invent it.[5]As Ramsay saw this narrative, "It is a moral apologue, not as invented to embody a moral, but as remembered because it did so."[6]DeWelt was correct in making this wonder the first of a class: We have witnessed in the past record the evil forces from without, but this chapter opens with the account of the first marks of the evil one within the fold.[7]Wesley, however, it seems to us, was wrong in his view of this incident as "the first attempt to bring propriety of goods into the Christian Church."[8] Very few scholars have ever agreed with Wesley on this. See under <a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/5/4" class="green-link">Acts 5:4</a>. [1] H. Leo Boles, Commentary on Acts (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1953), p. 77. [2] F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, Publishers, 1954), p. 110. [3] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 824. [4] Thomas Scott, Henry-Scott Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1960), p. 447. [5] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 825. [6] Sir William M. Ramsay, Pictures of the Apostolic Church (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1959), p. 35. [7] Don DeWelt, Acts Made Actual (Joplin, Missouri: College Press, 1958), p. 73. [8] John Wesley, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House), in loco. Verse 2 And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet."This means that they secretly kept back a part, while professedly devoting all to God."[9] Their sin was that of pretending to a degree of generosity higher than they actually possessed, a pretense which they had determined to support with falsehood. The excessive enormity of this sin, in context, was that it placed in jeopardy the entire Christian movement. As Lange said, "It involved the whole church in very great danger."[10]The apostles of Christ, after their baptism in the Holy Spirit, were inspired men, able to perform miracles and to discern the thoughts of men. They claimed infallibility, as having been guided into all truth by the blessed Spirit in them; and, if such a fraud as that undertaken by Ananias and Sapphira had been successful, it would have discredited the central authority of God's church upon the earth. The sale of a piece of land, as well as the price paid and received, could not long have been concealed, since such things have been in the public records of every generation; and, if the deception had succeeded, the word of the apostles themselves would have been suspect. There was no way that God could have permitted such a discreditation of his foreordained witnesses of the resurrection. Nor is this the only miracle that guarded the witness of the apostles. Herod was stricken to death (<a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/12/23" class="green-link">Acts 12:23</a>); angels repeatedly intervened upon their behalf; and it is in this frame of reference that the significance of this frightful wonder appears. [9] Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1953), p 93 [10] John Peter Lange, Commentary on Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1866), p. 85. Verse 3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thy heart to lie to the Holy Spirit, and to keep back part of the price of the land?As Boles said, "This is the first sin recorded against any member of the Church."[11] It might not be the first ever committed by a member, but it is the first one mentioned in the New Testament. Why hath Satan filled thy heart to lie ... The malignant personality of the evil one is affirmed by this apostolic question; but it should be noted that, although instigated by Satan, the sin was still reckoned as the responsibility of Ananias. Thus yielding to evil desires. Note also that the sin was not in keeping back part of the price of the land, but in his doing so while pretending that he was giving all of it to the work of the Lord. Both of these facts were pointed out by Peter in the very next verse. To lie to the Holy Spirit ... How was it that this sin was a lie to the Holy Spirit? Many have supposed that this came about through the fact of the apostles' having been baptized in the Holy Spirit; but there is more to it than that. As Scott said: It is true that Ananias laid his money at the feet of the apostles, but he had not these alone in view at the time; he intended to influence the opinion and judgment of the whole church; and the Holy Spirit dwells in the whole church.[12][11] H. Leo Boles, op. cit., p. 78. [12] Thomas Scott, op. cit., p. 87. Verse 4 While it remained, did it not remain thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thy power? How is it that thou hast conceived this thing in thy heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.This verse is the emphatic declaration that there was no compulsion whatever upon Ananias, either to sell his land or to give the money afterward. As Barnes expressed it, "This verse proves that there was no obligation imposed on the disciples to sell their property; those who did it did it voluntarily."[13] Indeed, these words can hardly be understood in any other way. Peter's rebuke of Ananias was administered in the Holy Spirit; and there is not the slightest hint that Peter struck Ananias dead, or even that God had told Peter that such a thing would occur. Like the shaking of the house when they all prayed (<a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/4/31" class="green-link">Acts 4:31</a>), this was something God did independently of any apostolic volition. We must disagree with all those commentators who, like Bruce, seem to be outraged by the marvel of this double death. He said, "Try how we may, we cannot imagine Christ acting toward sinners as St. Peter is here represented as doing."[14]Well, why not? Did not Christ say of himself, and represent himself as saying, "But those mine enemies that would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me!" (<a href="/bible/parallel/LUK/19/27" class="green-link">Luke 19:27</a>). Men simply do not like to think of God or Christ as a being whom they should fear; and such a narrative as this was designed to correct such an inadequate conception of deity. [13] Albert Barnes, op. cit., p. 94. [14] F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 112. Verse 5 And Ananias hearing these words fell down and gave up the ghost: and great fear came upon all that heard it.This sudden physical death of Ananias and his wife (a little later) has been taken by some to imply also their loss eternally; and, while not pretending to know if this is true or not, this writer inclines toward the possibility suggested by Bruce: It may have been an act of mercy as well, if we think of the incident in the light of Paul's words about another offender against the Christian community: "Deliver such a one unto the destruction of the flesh, that the Spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus" (<a href="/bible/parallel/1CO/5/5" class="green-link">1 Corinthians 5:5</a>).[15]Those who view this act of divine judgment against this couple as some kind of vindictive and spiteful punishment inflicted by the apostle Peter are totally wrong. It was not Peter, but God, who executed this extreme penalty; and the contrast of it with the longsuffering and forbearance of the Father concerning the sins of the whole race leads to the conclusion that there were the most weighty reasons for what God did here. Great fear came upon all ... Many no doubt had been tempted like Ananias and Sapphira to pretend a holiness they did not possess; and this sudden judgment led to the widespread conclusion among them to the effect that "There but for the grace of God am I." This divine act, therefore, had the consequence of impressing upon the young church the awful reprobacy of sin, and of warning non-Christians of the danger of associating themselves with the new and popular movement for purely selfish motives. This great fear upon both Christians and outsiders was "precisely the effect desired."[16][15] Ibid., p. 114. [16] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 85. Verse 6 And the young men arose and wrapped him round, and then carried him out and buried him.Sapphira was not notified; no mourning was mentioned; no delay was made; and, in such circumstances, apostolic authority must be assigned as their cause. The natural thing, upon the death of Ananias, would have been the seeking and informing of his wife; but no such amenity was permitted. The apostles accepted the occurrence as a divine judgment against sin, remembering no doubt that "severe examples had also occurred"[17] in the days of Moses, as in the cases of Nadab and Abihu (<a href="/bible/parallel/LEV/10/1" class="green-link">Leviticus 10:1-2</a>) and of Achan (<a href="/bible/parallel/JOS/7/16" class="green-link">Joshua 7:16-25</a>). ENDNOTE: [17] B. W. Johnson, The New Testament with Explanatory Notes (Delight, Arkansas: Gospel Light Publishing Company, n.d.), p. 434. Verse 7 And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in. And Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much. And she said, Yea, for so much.However the divine judgment must have shocked and surprised Peter, in the case of Ananias, he could not have been unaware of the judgment that would befall Sapphira in case she was guilty. What a dreadful fear must have fallen upon the assembly as Sapphira made her entry. "Can you imagine the silence as her examination proceeded? Her unhesitating reply proved they had conspired together."[18]Sold the land ... This is the first intimation that identifies the property sold as "land." As Ramsey observed: The whole circumstances are not explained at the outset. The reader learns them piecemeal, as the spectators learned them. Such an account is clearly marked as resting on eyewitness. We have a real occurrence remembered and described as it happened.[19][18] W. R. Walker, Studies in Acts (Joplin, Missouri: College Press, n.d.), p. 39. [19] Sir William Ramsay, op. cit., p. 33. Verse 9 But Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to try the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them that have buried thy husband are at the door, and they shall carry thee out.Peter knew that the same penalty of death which befell Ananias would also fall upon Sapphira; and the timing of the young men's return from the burial of Ananias further confirmed Peter's certainty of what would ensue. Try the Spirit of the Lord ... It is significant that three different expressions appear in this narrative as being synonymous: "Lie to the Holy Spirit" ... <a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/5/3" class="green-link">Acts 5:3</a>. "Lied not unto men, but unto God" ... <a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/5/4" class="green-link">Acts 5:4</a>. "Try the Spirit of the Lord" ... <a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/5/9" class="green-link">Acts 5:9</a>. Verse 10 And she fell down immediately at his feet, and gave up the ghost: and the young men came in and found her dead, and they carried her out and buried her by her husband. And great fear came upon the whole church, and upon all that heard these things.The proper understanding of this was outlined by McGarvey thus: We regard her death, like that of her husband, wrought independently of the power lodged in the apostle; and it seems to have been so regarded by the authorities in Jerusalem ... no charge of murder was preferred, as might have been the case if the act had been understood differently.[20]Fear came upon the whole church ... See under <a href="/bible/parallel/ACT/5/5" class="green-link">Acts 5:5</a>. "The occurrence of the word church’ in Acts 5:11 is its first occurrence in the original text of Acts."[21] The fear, mentioned twice in this narrative, came not only upon Christians, but upon all who heard what had happened. Dummelow is also among those writers who are unwilling to accept a judgment of eternal damnation upon this unfortunate couple. He said, “It is not necessary to suppose that Ananias and Sapphira were eternally lost. After this terrible punishment, they may have been forgiven."[22] However, this writer believes that such a speculation is dangerous. It is best to leave unresolved those questions upon which there is not a clear word from the Lord. [20] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 86. [21] F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 116. [22] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 825. Verse 12 And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people: and they were all with one accord in Solomon’s Porch.THE SUCCESS OF THE MISSIONTwo results of the utmost importance came from the mighty signs and wonders done by the Twelve, these being (1) their power and authority were vastly strengthened; and (2) the forward thrust of Christianity was greatly augmented. We agree with Hervey who noted that the miracles were wrought “exclusively by the hands of the apostles."[23] The recurrence of the phrase, “by the apostles” or “by the hands of the apostles,” affords positive proof that the one hundred disciples mentioned in the first chapter had no part in the baptism of the Holy Spirit which endowed the Twelve with the fantastic powers visible in the book of Acts. ENDNOTE: [23] A. C. Hervey, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, Publishers, 1950), Vol. 18, p. 158. Verse 13 But of the rest durst no man join himself to them: howbeit the people magnified them.The rest … refers to the non-Christian community, who, although afraid to unite with the community of faith, nevertheless praised and lauded the holiness preached and practiced among them. Join himself … This makes “joining the church” a Scriptural phrase, as further corroborated by Acts 9:26. Hervey said that “The expression, `join himself’ occurs ten times in the New Testament, of which seven are in Luke or the book of Acts."[24]ENDNOTE: [24] Ibid. Verse 14 And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women.Both men and women … From the very first, the church operated upon the principles later enunciated by Paul, “that there is neither male nor female in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28). Also, as Root noted: The membership in the apostolic church was of adult believers exclusively; children below the age of responsibility could be neither “believers” nor “men and women."[25]ENDNOTE: [25] Orin Root, Acts (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1966), p. 37. Verse 15 Insomuch that they even carried out the sick into the streets, and laid them on beds and couches, that, as Peter came by, at the least his shadow might overshadow some of them.The sacred author does not tell us that any of the people upon whom Peter’s shadow fell were healed; and from this it would appear that the purpose of including this is to emphasize the overwhelming popularity that attached to the Twelve. Adam Clarke took the view that: I cannot see all the miraculous influence here that others profess to see … It does not appear that the persons who thus thought and acted were converts already made to the faith of Christ; nor does it appear that any person was healed in this way.[26]Likewise, Lange refused the premise that people were healed by Peter’s shadow, saying: Luke testified, particularly at the close of Act 5:16, that Peter performed many miracles of healing, but he does not describe the mode … It is, however, also possible that in some instances, sick persons, whose faith had prepared them to receive the gift of health, were restored without their actually having been touched by Peter.[27][26] Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: T. Mason and G. Lane, 1937), Vol. V, p. 717. [27] John Peter Lange, op. cit., p. 90. Verse 16 And there also came together the multitude from cities round about Jerusalem, bringing sick folk, and them that were vexed with unclean spirits: and they were healed every one.Every one … There were no failures among the cures wrought by the Twelve, thus making it clear that the phenomenon in view here was in no manner akin to the faith healing crusades of our own day, in which failure is their principal feature and the “cure” is always questionable. Verse 17 But the high priest rose up, and all they that were with him (which is the sect of the Sadducees), and they were filled with jealousy, and laid hands on the apostles, and put them in the public ward. OF THE As Campbell said: The Sadducees saw in Christ’s resurrection the refutation of their system; and therefore they violently seized the apostles, because their preaching that doctrine was fatal to their distinguishing tenets.[28]Put them in public ward … has the meaning of “put them in the common jail.” ENDNOTE: [28] Alexander Campbell, Acts of Apostles (Austin, Texas: Firm Foundation Publishing House, 1859), p. 33. Verse 19 But an angel of the Lord by night opened the prison doors, and brought them out, and said, Go ye, and stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this Life.An angel of the Lord … This is another of the supernatural wonders that attended the inception of Christianity. In the very nature of things, the new faith could never have been established without the providence of God. Jesus had promised that he would be “with you always, even unto the end of the world” (Matthew 28:20); and of course he was. All of the powers of hell would be frustrated in the establishment of the true faith on earth. All the words of this Life … This means all the words relative to the eternal life in Jesus Christ. A similar meaning is in John 6:68, in which is recorded Peter’s words, “Thou only hast the words of eternal life.” As Plumptre pointed out: The “life in Christ” which the apostles preach is that eternal life which consists in knowing God (John 17:1), and in which the angels are sharers.[29]ENDNOTE: [29] E. H. Plumptre, Ellicott’s Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959), Acts, p. 29. Verse 21 And when they heard this, they entered into the temple about daybreak, and taught, But the high priest came, and they that were with him, and called the council together, and all the senate of the children of Israel, and sent to the prison-house to have them brought.They entered … and taught … The purpose of the heavenly intervention on behalf of the Twelve is noted below. The council … and the senate … The supposition of some scholars, as mentioned by Russell, seems the best explanation of this unusual word “senate” He said: Some scholars have suggested that “senate of the children of Israel” was added by Luke for the benefit of Theophilus to whom he wrote and who, though a Roman official, was probably a Greek by birth and would more readily understand the nature of the Jewish Sanhedrin by speaking of it as a senate.[30]The above supposition appears reasonable, and we therefore view the words “council” and “senate” as synonyms for “Sanhedrin.” Others suppose that the reference is to a group of elders, or leading citizens, who were associated with the Sanhedrin on special occasions in the decision of unusually heavy matters; but nothing of this kind is mentioned in the Scriptures. The particular session in view here, however, was to be the occasion of quite a surprise. One may only imagine the discomfiture of the high priest upon sending for the prisoners to learn that they had escaped the maximum security prison. The purpose of the angelic rescue of the Twelve from prison was in no wise connected with their personal safety; for the angel’s directive still left them vulnerable to the persecution of the priests. It must be concluded, then, that the purpose of their release was to procure the continuation of their preaching of the word of God to the people. None of the miracles wrought upon the apostles, or through them, or upon their behalf should be viewed as anything other than God’s working with them for the preaching of the gospel. ENDNOTE: [30] John William Russell, Compact Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1964), p. 29. Verse 22 But the officers that came found them not in the prison; and they returned and told, saying, The prison-house we found shut in all safety, and the keepers standing at the door; but when we opened, we found no man within. Now when the captain of the temple and the chief priests heard these words, they were much perplexed whereunto this would grow.“Sign after sign was given the hard-hearted leaders of Israel, but they remained adamant."[31] Under the circumstances, they could not have failed to know that God was with the apostles of Christ, but they were determined to carry forward their opposition. Perplexed … The reason for this perplexity does not seem to be any doubt of how the apostles escaped, but rather a perplexity regarding the rapid spreading of the kingdom, which had already grown far beyond anything they could have thought possible. It seems to have been utterly beyond their comprehension that God would remove their whole nation rather than allow them permanently to block the world-wide proclamation of the faith in Christ. Captain of the temple … See note on this official under Acts 4:1. ENDNOTE: [31] W. R. Walker, op. cit., p. 45. Verse 25 And there came one and told them, Behold, the men whom ye put in prison are in the temple standing and teaching the people. Then went the captain with the officers, and brought them, but without violence; for they feared the people, lest they should be stoned. And when they had brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest asked them.Lest they should be stoned … The popularity of the new faith was such, at the moment, that the Sadducean priests simply did not dare to arouse the anger of the Jerusalem mob. It is not to be thought that the Christians would have stoned the officers, although some of the new converts might have joined in such a resistance, but rather that the non-Christians whose sympathies were all with the disciples might have broken into violence if provoked. Verse 28 Saying, We strictly charged you not to teach in this name: and behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.In this name … It is nearly incredible, the hatred which the Jewish religious hierarchy had for the blessed name of Jesus, which name they simply would not pronounce under any circumstances, saying “this name,” as here, instead, and always referring to him as “this man” or “that man.” In this narrative of the apostles’ escape from prison, just related, some critics have found what they believe to be a somewhat stereotyped “form” of such escape episodes in ancient classical literature, claiming from this, of course, that the episode before us is questionable. However, the form-critical approach to the New Testament is by far the weakest criticism ever alleged against it, being totally unworthy of any particular attention. As Bruce warned: In this as in all form-critical studies it must be remembered that the material is more important than the form; meat pies and mud pies may be made in pie-dishes of identical shape, but the identity of shape is the least important consideration in comparing the two kinds of pies![32]Bring this man’s blood upon us … What a monstrous protest was this! These were the men who screamed, “His blood be upon us and upon our children!” but now they are very unwilling to face the guilt they incurred. As Scott noted: See how those who with presumption will do an evil thing, yet cannot bear to hear of it afterward, or to have it charged upon them. They could cry daringly enough, “His blood be on us”; but now they take it as a heinous affront to have Christ’s blood laid upon them.[33][32] F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 120. [33] Thomas Scott, op. cit., p. 450. Verse 29 But Peter and the apostles answered and said, We must obey God rather than men.There was no device by which the powerful priestly enemies of the Lord and his apostles could intimidate the witnesses of his resurrection. They were here bluntly told by the apostles that they were subject to God’s orders, rather than to the Sanhedrin’s prejudice. A new age had dawned, and the religious leaders could not prevent it. Verse 30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew, hanging him on a tree.In this verse appears another instance of Peter’s speeches, as recorded by Luke, stressing the same thought and expressing it in terminology similar (see 1 Peter 2:24) to that in Peter’s epistles. Twice in Acts (Acts 5:30 Acts 10:39) Jesus’ death is significantly called “hanging on a tree.” This phrase points back to the Jewish belief that a man “hanged on a tree” was a man “accursed by God” (Deuteronomy 21:22 f). Anyone who so described Christ’s death had not only seen the “scandal” of the cross but had somehow divined that he bore the cross for others.[34]DeWelt pointed out that Peter’s speech here has the effect of replying to the Sadducees’ protest in Acts 5:28 against bringing “this man’s blood upon us,” and carries the meaning of “We intended to convey the thought that the blood of Jesus is upon your heads; for you slew him and hanged him on a tree."[35][34] Archibald M. Hunter, Introducing New Testament Theology (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1957), p. 74. [35] Don DeWelt, op. cit., p. 81. Verse 31 Him did God exalt with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance to Israel, and remission of sins.It is implied that repentance as well as remission of sins is a gift; but to give repentance cannot mean to bestow it without an exercise of our own will; for repentance itself is an act of our will.[36]Repentance to Israel … This statement that Israel needed to repent was totally unacceptable to the Sanhedrin. That they, the religious leaders of the people, needed to repent was preposterous in their eyes. As Walker said: They were as much incensed as a body of bishops would be today, if the same charge should be made against them. They had absolute confidence that their descent from Abraham guaranteed them complete possession of every promise of the Old Testament.[37]Prince and a Saviour … The word “prince” has the meaning of “Author,” as in the “Author of eternal Life,” being the same word as in Acts 3:15. [36] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 95. [37] W. R. Walker, op. cit., p. 47. Verse 32 And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God hath given to them that obey him.In the history of holy truth, there has never been any such thing as God’s giving the Holy Spirit to men in order to make them obedient, or to make them sons, or to save them, or to procure the remission of their sins, or any such thing. On Pentecost, Peter had commanded believers to repent and be baptized with the promise that those who did so, receiving the remission of their sins subsequently to their obeying those commands, would also receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. “Obey,” as used here, indicates that “a lifelong obedience to God."[38] was a continuing condition to be fulfilled by those desiring to enjoy the continuing gift of the Holy Spirit. See Galatians 4:6, where it is declared that the Holy Spirit is given to men, not to make them sons, but as a consequence of their already being sons. The popular notion to the effect that God sends the Holy Spirit with the purpose of making men desire to serve God is totally wrong. ENDNOTE: [38] Orin Root, op. cit., p. 40. Verse 33 But they, when they heard this, were cut to the heart, and were minded to slay them. THE CAUSEThe sermon the apostles had just given was identical in all essentials to the one delivered on Pentecost; but the results produced by the declaration of the gospel were opposite in kind. On Pentecost the people were pricked in the heart, which means they believed; and here the priests were cut to the heart, which means they were infuriated and filled with murderous thoughts. Even the apostles seemed to marvel at such a thing; for it was made the subject of Paul’s comment that the gospel saved some and destroyed others, was an odor of life to some and an odor of death to others (2 Corinthians 2:15-16). “It is the set of the sail, and not the gale, that determines the way we go.” Verse 34 But there stood up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in honor of all the people, and commanded to put the men forth a little while.Regarding Gamaliel: Josephus the Jewish historian tells us that the party of the Pharisees was small in number but commanded such popularity and influence among the people that the Sadducees dared not take any action that the Pharisees opposed. The influence of Gamaliel’s advice reflects that situation.[39]Furthermore, Gamaliel himself was a man of heroic stature among the Jews of that generation. Saul of Tarsus had been his pupil. (Acts 22:3); and he was widely hailed as the greatest teacher of the Law in his day. Lightfoot further embellished the reputation of Gamaliel by affirming that he was the son of that Simon who took the Saviour in his arms (Luke 2), and the grandson of the famous Hillel. He is said to have died eighteen years after Jerusalem was destroyed, and that he died, as he had lived, a Pharisee.[40]It is a mistake to view Gamaliel as any true friend of the apostles, his advice in the instance before us being founded utterly upon policy, rather than upon any belief of the truth which the apostles proclaimed. [39] Everett J. Harrison, op. cit., p. 401. [40] Albert Barnes, op. cit., p. 104. Verse 35 And he said unto them, Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves as touching these men, what ye are about to do. For before these days rose up Theudas, giving himself out to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were dispersed, and came to naught.Theudas … The fact that the historian Josephus records the uprising led by a Theudas as occurring about fifteen years following the date of Gamaliel’s speech in this passage has been cited by some scholars as an anachronism; but the dogmatic prejudice of critics on this point is based upon the very weakest of arguments, the most notable of which is that, in the case of conflicting dates, Josephus is more trustworthy than Luke. It is quite the opposite; it is not Luke but Josephus who is wrong in this instance, as in so many others. As Lewis pointed out, there is also the possibility that different incidents were referred to in Acts and in Josephus, there having been many uprisings during the period of which Gamaliel spoke, “providing the possibility that another Theudas may have led one of them."[41] Furthermore, regarding the “unlikelihood” that two men named Theudas could have led uprisings, there are entirely too many examples of such things in history to justify the notion that it could not have happened here. McGarvey mentioned two rebellions in Ireland in 1848,1891, both being led by a William Smith O’Brien, and two other disturbances in Great Britain in 1800 and in 1890, both of which were led by a Parnell.[42] If a similar thing did not occur in the event mentioned here, and if it could be proved that Gamaliel and Josephus were speaking of the same episode, such would be proof that Josephus erred in his chronology, an error that J.B.

Lightfoot did not hesitate to attribute to him, saying, “Josephus has made a slip in his chronology."[43]The point of Gamaliel’s appeal to the example of Theudas was simply that God did not bless his efforts and that all came to naught, with the application that without God’s blessing, the work of the apostles would also fail. He then gave another example of the same thing. [41] Jack P. Lewis, Historical Backgrounds of Bible History (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1971), p. 170. [42] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 99. [43] Adam Clarke, op. cit., p. 721. Verse 37 And after this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the enrollment, and drew away some of the people after him: he also perished; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered abroad.Judas … was said to have been “of Galilee,” because that was the seat of his insurrection against Rome; he was also called the Gaulonite, derived from Gamala, his native city in Gaulonitis. The days of the enrollment … Gamaliel mentioned this, not, because of the enrollment that led to the birth in Bethlehem, but because Judas “was the leader of the Jewish uprising which opposed the census ordered by Augustus, after the deposition of Archelaus."[44] The enrollment here, as well as the one that led to Joseph and Mary’s trip to Bethlehem, was also carried out by Quirinius. The point, exactly like that in the narration about Theudas, was that God did not bless the insurrection; and, therefore, it failed. ENDNOTE: [44] A. C. Hervey, op. cit., p. 162. Verse 38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will be overthrown; but if it is from God, ye will not be able to overthrow them; lest haply ye be found even to be fighting against God.As Lange pointed out, the counsel of Gamaliel may prove wise or unwise, depending upon the circumstances of its application. Thus:

I. It is unwise if A. Made an excuse for judging purely upon the basis of what succeeds or fails, or B. Made an excuse for deferring a decision that should be made immediately. II. It is wise A. If used to inculcate humility in the judgment of others, or B. Leads to the gentle treatment of those who differ from us in matters of judgment.[45]In the present instance, God used the counsel of Gamaliel to blunt the murderous intention of the Sanhedrin. ENDNOTE: [45] John Peter Lange, op. cit., p. 101. Verse 40 And to him they agreed: and when they had called the apostles unto them, they beat them and charged them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go.They beat … There was nothing mild about such a punishment. They were brutally beaten with “forty stripes save one, a penalty inflicted upon Paul five times (2 Corinthians 11:24)."[46] The excuse for such punishment was the apostles’ disobedience of the Sanhedrin’s injunction against teaching in the name of Jesus, an injunction they issued once more in connection with the punishment. The fierce Sadducees would have resorted to murder, except for the danger of alienating the Pharisees; and thus it may not be supposed that they were impressed with Gamaliel’s suggestion that they might be fighting against God. Gamaliel’s speech, under the circumstances, “was little less than a guarded admission of the truth”;[47] but the concern of the Sadducees did not relate to what was true, but to what was popular, or expedient. [46] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 825. [47] John William Russell, op. cit. p. 295. Verse 41 They therefore departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the Name. And every day, in the temple and at home, they ceased not to teach and to preach Jesus as the Christ.Rejoicing … What a remarkable occasion for rejoicing was this! It was coming to pass exactly as Jesus had prophesied, saying: They will deliver you up to councils, and in their synagogues they will scourge you … and ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake (Matthew 10:17 Matthew 10:22). The Name … means the name of Christ and is here used for the whole corpus of the New Testament teaching regarding salvation in his holy name. Ceased not to teach and to preach … Teaching and preaching, while similar in the function of conveying information and making arguments, are different in that preaching is “public” teaching, this distinction appearing here in the words “in the temple and at home.” They taught privately and in homes where they had opportunity; but they also proclaimed publicly in the temple the wonderful message of Jesus the Christ. Question by E.M. Zerr For Acts Chapter 51. What certain man is introduced? 2. Relate his business transaction. 3. Then relate his religious transaction. 4. Who was associated with him in the act ? 5. Who filled the heart of Ananias? 6. With what did he fill it? 7. Before whom was the lie of Ananias considered ? 8. Was the sale of land required? 9. Was all the money required? 10. In what did the sin consist ? 11. State what happened to Ananias. 12. How did this affect those who heard of this? 13. What was done by the young men? 14. Who came in a few hours afterward? 15. Of what was she unaware? 16. State Peter’ s question and the answer. 17. Of what conspiracy was she accused? 18. Is it possible to tempt God? 19. Tell the announcement made to Sapphira. 20. What happened to her then? 21. How was her body disposed of? 22. What came upon the church at this time? 23. State what was now done by apostles’ hands. 24. At what place were they gathered? 25. What now happened to the community of goods? 26. State the frame of mind of the people. 27. Who were added to the Lord? 28. From what ranks and ages? 29. How did they demonstrate their faith? 30. From what communities were the sick brought? 31. How many of them were healed? 32. Who rose up at this time? 33. With what were they filled? 34. What was done with the apostles? 35. Explain meaning of “ common” prison. 36. What officer released them? 37. State his orders to them. 38. To what does “ this life” refer in 20th verse ? 39. How did the apostles respond to the command ? 40. Who were unaware of their escape at this time ? 41. What activities did they perform while unaware? 42. State the report brought to their ears. 43. How did it affect them? 44. What further report was then brought them? 45. In what manner were the apostles brought to them? 46. Was this because of friendliness for the apostles ? 47. Before what body were the apostles placed? 48. With what had they filled Jerusalem? 49. What guilt did the Jews fear would come upon them ? 50. Repeat the answer of Peter and the other apostles. 51. What fact did they attribute to God? 52. What fact did they attribute to the Jews? 53. To what was Christ exalted? 64. Tell what he was to give to Israel. 55. By whom is this witnessed? 56. To what class was the Holy Ghost given? 57. How did all this affect the minds of the Jews ? 58. What did they prepare to do? 59. Who dissuaded them from it? 60. What did this man see and do among Ihe people? 61. What did he insist should be done with the apostles? 62. With what argument did he support his advice? 63. State his reasoning as to the work of God or man. 64. Why would such reasoning be wrong today? 65. How did the Jews receive the advice? 66. In what manner were the apostles released? 67. What command was given them? 68. Hid they obey it ? 69. In what did they rejoice? 70. When, where, and what did they teach and preach?

Acts 5:1-42

Acts 5:22-23 : In another case where Peter was miraculously released from prison (chapter 12:19), the keepers were put to death; we are not told why it was not done in this instance. An angel may be invisible if he wishes to be, but that was not indicated here, for no uncertainty was manifested by the apostles about whether they had actually seen or heard anyone speaking to them. The only explanation that can be offered is that some kind of miracle was performed that prevented the keepers from seeing what was done. The men were not taken out through some “hole in the wall” at the rear of the building, for the account states that the angel opened the prison doors, the very spot where the keepers were found standing faithfully attending to their duty. It was a demonstration that God is able to care for his own, even in circumstances where “no earthly help is nigh.”

Acts 5:2

2Act 5:2. Kept back part of the price. There was no wrong in this for the whole system was voluntary to begin with. This item will be noticed again in a later verse. Being privy to it. This phrase is from which Thayer defines, “To see (have seen) together with others.” The Englishman’s Greek New Testament renders it, “being aware of it.” The husband doubtless took the lead in the transaction, but the wife’s knowledge of what was being done made her a full partaker in the deed.

The whole family of Achan was stoned because the goods was stored in the tent, so that they had knowledge of it (Joshua 7:21). If a person has knowledge of an evil deed and does not object to it, he is thereby made as guilty as the actual perpetrator. However, the wife of Ananias went further than guilty knowledge as we shall soon learn.

Acts 5:3

3Act 5:3. Jesus said that the devil is the father of lies (John 8:44), hence Peter told Ananias that Satan had caused him to lie. Keeping back part of the money is mentioned again in connection with the sin of Ananias, but that is still not what constituted his sin. The mere fact of retaining part of the money would not be a lie, but the cause of his guilt will be shown before the case is finished.

Acts 5:4

4Acts 5:4. This verse clearly shows that Ananias could have kept possession of his land and not been blamed. And even after he sold it, he could have kept all of the money and still been guiltless, since no divine command had been given for any of this arrangement. Not only so, but Ananias could have brought a part of the money only and have been accepted. The sin is mentioned in the close of this verse, which was the committing of a lie as will be explained soon. And what made it all the more condemnable was their attempt to deceive man, thinking thereby to escape the judgment of God. But Peter informed Ananias that he had not lied to men (only) but unto God.

Acts 5:5

5Acts 5:5. Hearing these words. Even a human court of justice does not sentence and execute a prisoner without first informing him of the crime laid against him. Hence it was just for Ananias first to hear the accusation he was under, after which he was stricken with immediate death. Great fear means that a profound feeling of awe came over all the people by the mighty demonstration of the Lord’s wrath against sin. Peter never as much as touched Ananias, yet at his words of denunciation of the shameful attempt to deceive the Lord, he fell down dead as if by a stroke of lightning. The crowd was thus made to know that the Lord had sent the punishment.

Acts 5:6

6Acts 5:6. Wound him up means the young men drew his garments up close around him, which was the only burial shroud that was given this unworthy character. He was taken out for immediate burial, as it was sometimes the custom anyway to bury on the day of death.

Acts 5:7

7Acts 5:7. Had Ananias and his wife come together in the first place, she might have tried to change her story when she saw the fate of her husband. But that would have been a change outwardly only, and one born of terror and not from a godly sorrow. The text says only that she came in; nothing said about her having any of the money. Of course it would have been foolish for her to bring it, for her husband had already brought all of the amount they had received for the land according to the story in their conspiracy. So her presence at this time was only to confirm the statement of her husband.

Acts 5:8

8Acts 5:8. For so much. This phrase is all from which Thayer defines at this place, “For so much,” just as it is in the text. Robinson combines his definition and explanation in one sentence and gives us, “Of a specific amount, so much and no more.” The necessary conclusion is that when Sapphira came into Peter’s presence, he named the amount that her husband had brought, then asked her if that was exactly the price they had received for their property. She confirmed it by repeating the very word the apostle had used. This was the first time that the lie of which they were accused of doing was directly stated as far as the record informs us.

But Peter did not have to hear the falsehood verbally for his own information; he was being informed by the Holy Spirit. The statement was drawn from her so that all could know about the wicked attempt of this couple to practice deception.

Acts 5:9

9Acts 5:9. It is always bad for men to commit wrong when they act individually, but worse when they conspire with others in the act. The daughters of Zelophehad made this point in their plea for their fathers’ estate (Numbers 27:1-7), and the Lord accepted their reasoning. Peter charged Ananias and his wife with agreeing together in their covetous lie. He accused them of trying to tempt the Spirit of the Lord, and such a sin was condemned even in the Old Testament (Deuteronomy 6:16). The text does not inform us directly as to any instructions previously given to these burial servants.

However, the necessary inference is that they were told to “stand by” and complete their task when it was ready for them. In compliance with such an understanding, they were at that very moment at the door, waiting to perform their duty in the sad affair.

Acts 5:10

0Acts 5:10. Yielded up the ghost means her spirit left her body as was done in the case of her husband. This gives us another instance that proves there is something in a human being besides his body and that they separate when death occurs. This woman’s body was buried in the same tomb as that of her husband.

Acts 5:11

1Act 5:11. This was the same kind of fear that is mentioned in verse 5, except that with the church it would include a feeling of reverence for the majesty of the Lord.

Acts 5:12

2Act 5:12. There was a continual need for the evidence of signs and wonders at that time, because the New Testament had not been composed and the people did not have any written instructions. But when the apostles performed the miracles it proved them to be the true servants of God. When they spoke to the multitudes, therefore, they were heard as the authentic representatives of the Lord. At the time of these events the assembly of all the people in general was in Solomon’s porch, the same place where they saw the lame man who had been healed (chapter 3:11).

Acts 5:13

3Act 5:13. The rest refers to unconverted persons, but not to all such, for it immediately says the people magnified them. Hence the rest must refer especially to those not favorably disposed toward the apostles and other faithful disciples. They would not join themselves to them means they stayed away from the assembly. But some others were sufficiently interested to remain in the gathering, and even mag’n’ified (lauded or admired) the apostles.

Acts 5:14

4Acts 5:14. The aforesaid conclusion is justified by this verse which says that believers were added to the Lord.

Acts 5:15

5Acts 5:15. Insomuch should be connected with the statement in verse 12, about the “signs and wonders” that were performed by the apostles. Those wonders had produced so much interest among the people that they began to bring their sick folks into the vicinity. They had so much faith in the work of the apostles that even the presence of Peter was thought by them to be sufficient to heal them. Such an act was like those performed by the woman. in Mark 5:27, and the men in Matthew 14:36.

Acts 5:16

6Acts 5:16. This verse tells us that the people were not disappointed in their efforts recorded in the preceding one, for they were healed every one. The healing was done by the Lord as a reward for the faith that had been shown by their actions. Vexed with unclean spirits is the same as being possessed of devils. (See the note on the subject of being possessed of devils at Matthew 8:28.)

Acts 5:17

7Acts 5:17. The Sadducees are mentioned especially as being in sympathy with the high priest in ooposition to the apostles. That is understandable because they were disbelievers in the resurrection, which was the outstanding fact that the apostles had been stressing in their work in connection with the story of Christ.

Acts 5:18

8Acts 5:18. It has been a prominent weakness of man from the beginning that if he does not like the teaching someone is giving, the way to stop it is by persecuting the teacher. Jeremiah was put into a dungeon because the king did not like his teaching (Jeremiah 38:6), and John the Baptist was imprisoned and slain because of his teaching that was objectionable to some wicked people (Matthew 14:1-11). The Sadducees thought they could stop the preaching of a resurrection by imprisoning the apostles. Common prison means one “belonging to the people or state, public.” It was the kind of detention place where captives in time of war were locked up.

Acts 5:19

9Acts 5:19. The tomb of Joseph that had been sealed with a Roman stamp was no hindrance to the act of an angel in opening the place (Matthew 28:2). Likewise, the Lord’s angel was able to open the door of this public prison and free the apostles.

Acts 5:20

0Acts 5:20. The angel did not tell them to “make good their escape” and flee while they had a chance. That is what he would have done, had his purpose been only to help them to avoid further persecution. Instead, he told them to go into the temple, the most public place in the city, and resume their preaching of the same facts that had got them into trouble in the first place. Life is from ZOE, which Thayer defines at this place, “Real life after the resurrection.” Robinson defines it, “Eternal life, salvation.” Since the Greek word generally means life of any kind, we can understand why the angel specified this life in his instruction to the apostles. The great issue at that time was the question of the resurrection which the Sadducees denied. That would make it especially appropriate for them to emphasize the truth of the resurrection, even in the face of possible further and more bitter persecution.

Acts 5:21

1Act 5:21. This “jail delivery” by the angel was made in the night, and the apostles made no delay in carrying out the instructions of the angel, but entered the temple early tin the morning and taught All of this was unknown to the Jews, who called a meeting of the Sanhedrin in the morning to handle the case of the apostles, and sent officers to the prison to bring the captives into court.

Acts 5:24

4Acts 5:24. Doubted is from a word that means to wonder or be perplexed. Grow is from GINOMAI, which has such a wide range of meanings that it would be hard to settle on a definite one in any one place. Some idea of the word may be gathered from the fact that in the King James Version, the word is translated by 39 different terms; one of them is “be,” used 249 times. The verse simply means the captain and chief priests did not know what to make of the situation revealed by the report.

Acts 5:25

5Acts 5:25. It would be difficult to imagine the surprise these Jewish leaders must have felt upon the news of this verse. They were already perplexed over the mere absence of the apostles from the prison, with the parts of the building intact and the keepers at their post of duty. They might finally have recomposed themselves and made further investigation with a view of discovering some unfaithfulness in the keepers. But before they had time for anything of the kind, here came the officers with this strange report. That would shut out any surmise of crookedness on the part of the keepers, for had the apostles been able and disposed to bribe the keepers, it would have been from a motive of cowardice, and in that case they would have fled from the city.

Acts 5:26

6Acts 5:26. In view of the foregoing considerations, they could but conclude that some unseen power stronger than theirs was working on behalf of the apostles, and that it would be dangerous for them to mistreat their prisoners. Without violence means they did not use or even threaten to use physical force upon the apostles. Had they done so, public sentiment that was on the side of the apostles was so strong, that the officers would have suffered violence from the people.

Acts 5:27

7Acts 5:27. The council was the Sanhedrin, the highest court the Jews were allowed to have in the time of Christ and the apostles. It had the power to arrest a man and examine him, and pass its own judgment upon the case. But if it passed a verdict of capital punishment, the case had to be taken before the secular court that operated under the Romans before it could be executed.

Acts 5:28

8Acts 5:28. The faithfulness of the apostles in preaching the Gospel of Christ was proved by the statement of these enemies, that they had filled Jerusalem with it. Bring this man’s blood upon us. These rulers knew that if the people were fully informed of the story of Jesus as he was dealt with in Jerusalem, they would hold them (the Jewish rulers) responsible for His death. In a threatening attitude, they reminded the apostles of their order not to teach in the name of Christ.

Acts 5:29

9Acts 5:29. We ought to obey God rather than men. This is one of the most important sentences in the New Testament concerning the conduct of man. It states a rule or principle that should be observed whenever two or more requirements are made on one that conflict with each other, and yet where they come from sources that are supposed to have authority to command. For instance, children are commanded to obey their parents in all things (Colossians 3:20); wives are commanded to submit themselves unto their husbands (Ephesians 5:22), and Christians are commanded to be subject unto the higher powers or laws of the land (Romans 13:1). If any one of these sources of authority should give a command that would interfere with one’s duty to God, then that child or wife or disciple should refuse to obey it, regardless of the possible consequences.

Acts 5:30

0Acts 5:30. Having made the reply shown in the preceding verse, the apostles began to preach to these wicked Jews the very doctrine they had forbidden them to preach anywhere. As was always the case, they began their story with the resurrection of Jesus. But they also connected that subject with the guilt of their hearers in the death of the One in whose name they were preaching.

Acts 5:31

1Act 5:31. Exalted with his right hand. Other translations word it “at” or “to” his right hand, and likewise the lexicon so defines it. The word right in this place comes from DEXIOS, which never means “right” in contrast with “wrong,” but always means the right hand instead of the left, and hence has no moral significance. It is the rule for men to use their right hand in their one-handed manual activities, while it is an exception to use the left. When such an exception exists the writer will generally call attention to it (Judges 3:15 Judges 20:16).

There is no information in the Bible why God created man thus, we only know it is so. And the fact has been a source of some figurative uses of the word, meaning the more exalted or honorable place with reference to the person of God or Christ or any other being of dignity. God overruled the wicked purposes of the Jews and exalted his Son to be a Prince (leader) and a Saviour for all who would accept him. Give repentance means to give Israel the chance to repent (reform) their lives, with the promise that their sins would be forgiven.

Acts 5:32

2Act 5:32. We are his witnesses. This denotes that the apostles were witnesses to the fact that Jesus had risen from the dead. So is also the Holy Ghost. Jesus had said (John 16:7) that if he did not go away (back to Heaven) the Comforter (Holy Ghost) would not come. Therefore, the fact that He did come and was possessed by disciples, was a proof (witness or testimony) that Jesus had arisen from the dead and had ascended to his Father. As to how or when the gift of the Holy Ghost was received, see the comments on chapter 2:38.

Acts 5:33

3Act 5:33. Cut is from DIAPRIO, which Thayer defines at this place, “to be sawn through mentally,” and explains it to mean, “to be rent with vexation.” This was different from the case in chapter 2:37, which says they were “pricked in their heart,” which means they were overwhelmed with a conviction of guilt. In the present instance the Jewish leaders were overcome with anger, because they realized that everything the apostles said was true, yet they were not in a penitent frame of mind. Instead of wanting to do the right thing as did the ones on Pentecost, they plotted to bring violence upon the apostles. Took counsel denotes that they held a consultation to decide on some means by which they could have the apostles slain. They knew they would have to do some kind of scheming to get it done, for they could not lawfully slay anybody (John 18:31).

Acts 5:34

4Acts 5:34. Gamaliel was a member of the Sanhedrin, the man referred to by Paul in Chapter 22:3. He was a doctor or teacher of the law of Moses. We know nothing about his qualifications of education in the branches of secular learning. The frequent expressions that represent him as a “professor” in the sense that term is used in connection with schools of literary training are only guesswork. But he did have a good reputation among the people, and his advice was regarded with respect.

Acts 5:35

5Acts 5:35. Gamaliel advised the council to be careful how they proceeded against the apostles. But he did not ask them to act solely on his general suggestion; he proposed to support it with some facts with which they were evidently acquainted, or at least which they accepted as true due to their respect for Gamaliel.

Acts 5:36

6Acts 5:36. Funk and Wagnalls New Standard Bible Dictionary says the following about this Theudas: “A Jewish revolutionist in the reign of Augustus [Caesar] who instigated a political uprising in Palestine that came to an inglorious end.” We may also read the account of Josephus in his Antiquities, Book 20, Chapter 5, Section 1, as follows: “Now it came to pass, while Fadus was procurator [agent] of Judea, that a certain magician, whose name was Theudas, persuaded a great part of the people to take their effects with them, and follow him to the river Jordan; for he told them he was a prophet, and that he would, by his own command, divide the river, and afford them an easy passage over it; and many were deluded by his words. However, Fadus did not permit them to make any advantage of his wild attempt, but sent a troop of horsemen out against them; who, falling upon them unexpectedly, slew many of them and took many of them alive. They also took Theudas alive, and cut off his head, and carried it to Jerusalem.” Some historians question whether this is the same Theudas as the one Luke writes about, while others say he is the same. All agree, however, that the account in Josephus is true, and we know it corresponds with the description as Gamaliel gave it.

Acts 5:37

7Acts 5:37. I shall quote from Jo-sephus, Wars. Book 2, Chapter 8, Section 1:“Under his [Coponius, an agent] administration it was that a certain Galilean, whose name was Judas, prevailed with his countrymen to revolt; and said they were cowards if they would endure to pay a tax to the Romans, and would, after God, submit to mortal men as their lords. This man was a teacher of a peculiar sect of his own, and was not at all like the rest of those their leaders.” As a further support of the account of Gamaliel touching the downfall of the claims of Judas, I shall quote Jo-sephus, Antiquities, Book 20, Chapter 5, Section 2: “And besides this, the sons of Judas of Galilee were now slain; I mean of that Judas who caused the people to revolt, when Cy-renius came to take account of the estates of the Jews” [for the purpose of taxing them].

Acts 5:38-39

9Acts 5:38-39. Gamaliel based his reasoning on the outcome of the historic cases to which he referred. He was considering the subject very much along the line of some familiar sayings that “history repeats itself,” or that “time will tell.” On that principle, he thought these Jewish leaders need not be so concerned about the activities of the apostles. He was correct in saying that if their work was of God, they would not be able to overthrow it. This passage has been used by professed disciples today, to show that we should not oppose any new doctrine or institution that might appear among us, but should let time decide whether it is right or wrong. There are at least two phases of this reasoning that shows it to be a perversion.

Gamaliel was only a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin, and had no special authority that we know of. The most that could be said about his speech was that it was his personal judgment as to the better procedure to follow toward the apostles, and hence it was no authentic principle on which to handle the question of conduct in the affairs of the church.

Again, even if it had been a statement produced by approval of the Lord, that would not make it a proper rule today. The New Testament was not in existence at that time, and hence there was no written document by which to test new teachers or new propositions. Today we have the completed book given to the church by the inspired apostles. If something appears among us that is new (to us), and that could easily occur, we do not have to wait until experience has tested it, but can learn at once whether it is “of God,” by examining it in the light of the New Testament. (See 1 Peter 4:11.)

Acts 5:40

0Acts 5:40. The leaders of the Sanhedrin accepted the advice of Gamaliel, not to do anything too rash against the apostles. It was not because of any just feeling of righteousness or fair consideration for the prisoners, for they just could not stand to let them go until they had given them a parting threat accompanied with a beating.

Acts 5:41

1Act 5:41. It was and still is an honor to suffer persecution for the name of Jesus (1 Peter 4:16): it indicates that one is living a godly life (2 Timothy 3:12).

Acts 5:42

2Act 5:42. Their persecutions did not intimidate the apostles, even to the extent of decreasing the amount or frequency of their preaching, but they preached daily. Neither did they seek for private spots or places of safety to do their work. They preached in the temple, the most public building, and in every private house, where they ran a risk constantly of coming in contact with some telltale member of the Sanhedrin.