–16.] PROGRESS OF THE FAITH MIRACULOUS POWER AND DIGNITY OF THE APOSTLES. Verse 13 13

Verse 13

Verse 14

Verse 15

κατὰ τὰς πλ.] down the streets, i.e. in the line of the streets,—see Winer, edn. 6, § 49, d.

κλιν. κ. κραβ.] Kuinoel’s distinction, that the latter is a poor and humble bed, the former a couch of richer character, appears to be unfounded. (So also Bengel.)

πέτρου] As the greatest, in pre-eminence and spiritual energizing, of the Apostles. Now especially was fulfilled to him the promise of Matthew 16:18 (see note there):—and even the shadow of the Rock (Isaiah 32:2, Heb., and E.V., spoken primarily of His divine Master) was sought for. We need find no stumbling-block in the fact of Peter’s shadow having been believed to be the medium (or, as is surely implied, having been the medium) of working miracles. Cannot the ‘Creator Spirit’ work with any instruments, or with none, as pleases Him? And what is a hand or a voice, more than a shadow, except that the analogy of the ordinary instrument is a greater help to faith in the recipient? Where faith, as apparently here, did not need this help, the less likely medium was adopted.

See, on the whole, ch. Acts 19:12, and note: and remark that only in the case of our Lord (Luke 8:46 ⁽³⁹⁾) and His two great Apostles in the N. T.,—and of Elisha in the O. T., have we instances of this healing virtue in the mere contact with or accessories of the person. But what a fertile harvest of superstition and imposture has been made to spring out of these scanty examples!

Verse 16

Verse 17

ὁ ἀρχ.] Annas,—ch. Acts 4:6, and note on Luke 3:2.

οἱ σὺν αὐτῷ] those who were with him (see ch. Acts 4:13; Acts 19:38; Acts 22:9). Not the members of the Sanhedrim: but the friends and kindred (ch. Acts 4:6) of the H. P.: see Acts 5:21; Kuinoel’s ‘qui a partibus ejus stabaut’ is too definite (De W.): it was so, but this meaning is not in the words.

ἡ οὖσα] attr., but implying more than οἱ ὄντες ἐξ αἱρέσεως τ. σ.:—the movement extended through the whole sect. On αἵρ. τ. σ., see Matthew 3:7, note. The passage of Josephus, Antiq. xx. 9. 1, is worth transcribing: πέμπει δὲ καῖσαρ (Nero) ἀλβῖνον εἰς. τὴν ἰονδαίαν ἔπαρχον, φήστου τὴν τελευτὴν πυθόμενος. ὁ δὲ βασιλεὺς ἀφείλετο μὲν τὸν ἰώσηπον τὴν ἀρχιερωσύνην, τῷ δὲ ἀνάνου παιδί, καὶ αυτῷ ἀνάνῳ λεγομένῳ, τὴν διαδοχὴν τῆς ἀρχῆς ἔδωκε. τοῦτον δέ φασι τὸν πρεσβύτατον ἄνανον εὐτυχέστατον γενέσθαι· πέντε γὰρ ἔσχε παῖδας, καὶ τούτους πάντας συνέβη ἀρχιερατεῦσαι τῷ θεῷ, αὐτὸς καὶ πρότερον τῆς τιμῆς ἐπὶ πλεῖστον ἀπολαύσας, ὅπερ οὐδενὶ συνέβη τῶν παρʼ ἡμῖν ἀρχιερέων. ὁ δὲ νεώτερος ἄνανος … θρασὺς ἦν τὸν τρόπον, καὶ τολμητὴς διαφερόντως· αἵρεσιν δὲ μετῄει τῶν σαδδουκαίων, οἵπερ εἰσὶ περὶ τὰς κρίσεις ὠμοὶ παρὰ πάντας τοὺς ἰουδαίους, καθὼς ἤδη δεδηλώκαμεν. This shews that the family of Annas, if not he himself, were connected with the sect of the Sadducees. They (see ch. Acts 4:1, note) were the chief enemies of the Apostles, for teaching the resurrection.

Verses 17-42

17–42.] IMPRISONMENT, MIRACULOUS LIBERATION, EXAMINATION BEFORE THE SANHEDRIM, AND SCOURGING OF THE APOSTLES.

Verse 18

Verse 20

The deliverance, here granted to all the Apostles, was again vouchsafed to Peter in ch. 12, and is there related more in detail. It is there a minute touch of truth, that he should mistake for a dream (Acts 5:9) what he saw: having lain so long in prison, and his mind naturally dwelling on this his former miraculous liberation.

Verse 21

21.] ὑπὸ τ ὄρθρ., at daybreak: see reff.

παραγενόμενος] to the ordinary session chamber in the Temple, on the south side of it (Winer, Realw.): and therefore, if the Apostles were teaching in Solomon’s porch (Acts 5:12), not in their immediate vicinity. Perhaps the παραγενόμενος … συνεκάλεσαν …, implying that the summons was not issued till after the arrival of the H. P. and his friends, may point to a meeting of the Sanhedrim hurriedly and insufficiently called, for the purpose of ‘packing’ it against the Apostles. If so, they did not succeed, see Acts 5:40; perhaps on account of the arrival of some who had been listeners to the Apostles’ preaching.

πᾶσαν τ. γερουσίαν] Probably the πρεσβύτεροι, including perhaps some who were not members of the Sanhedrim; the well-known foes of Jesus and his doctrine. The expression π. τ. γερους. τῶν υἱ. ἰσραήλ, common in the LXX, is perhaps translated from the form of words in which they were summoned. γερουσία, being the ordinary word for the πρεσβύτεροι, would be the Hellenistic formal expression.

Verse 23

Verse 24

On ὁ στρατ. τ. ἱερ., see note, ch. Acts 4:1. He appears to have been summoned to meet the Sanhedrim, perhaps as the offence had taken place within his jurisdiction. But he was probably one of the ἀρχιερεῖς (see Winer, Realw., Tempel, end). These latter were the titular High Priests, partly those who had served the office, partly the presidents of the twenty-four courses, partly the kindred of the H. P. (see Matthew 2:4.)

αὐτῶν] ‘The Apostles,’ the αὐτούς of Acts 5:22; not ‘these words,’ as would appear at first sight.

τί ἂν γέν. τοὺτο] To what this would come; ‘whereunto this would grow,’ E. V.:—not ‘quomodo factum sit,’ as Kuin.,—nor ‘quid hoc esset rei’ ( τί ὂν εἴη, as ch. Acts 10:17), as Grot. and others.

Verse 26

26.] [ ἵνα] μὴ λιθ. depends upon οὐ μετὰ βίας, not upon ἐφοβ. If, however, ἵνα be omitted, then this latter is the case.

Verse 28

ἐπαγ. ἐφʼ ἡμᾶς] not meaning, that divine vengeance would come on them for the murder of Jesus: but with a stress on ἡμᾶς—that the people would be incited to take vengeance on them, the Sanhedrim, for that murder. The preceding clause ( πεπληρ. κ. τ. λ.) shews this to be their thought. Compare the pointed address of Peter to the Sanhedrim, ch. Acts 4:8-12, and the distinction between them and the people in Acts 4:21. This being so, the resemblance between this expression and the imprecation of the people in Matthew 27:25 must not be too closely pressed, though the coincidence is too striking to escape notice.

Verse 29

29.] Peter, by word of mouth; the Apostles, as a body, by assent, implied in his own utterance and their silence. There is no ellipse of ἄλλοι before ἀπόστ.

This defence of Peter divides itself into the propositions of an ordinary syllogism—(1) The statement of the general truth that we must obey God rather than men: (2) The reduction of the present circumstances under that general truth, as being the work of the God of their Fathers—shewn in his having raised and glorified Jesus, for a definite purpose, to give, &c. (3) The identification of themselves with the course of action marked out by the πειθαρχεῖν δεῖ … in that they were bearing witness to God’s work, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit given them as men obedient to God.

The whole is a perfect model of concise and ready eloquence, and of unanswerable logical coherence; and a notable fulfilment of the promise, δοθήσεται ὑμῖν ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ὥρᾳ τί λαλήσητε (Matthew 10:19).

πειθαρχεῖν] much stronger than ἀκούειν, ch. Acts 4:19,—as their conduct, in persisting after prohibition, had been more marked and determined. That was a mere ‘listening to’ the proposition then made to them: this, a course of deliberate action, chosen and entered on.

θεῷ—opposed to τῆς διδ. ὑμῶν of the H. P.; and to ἀνθρώπου τούτου. In the background, there would be the command of the angel, Acts 5:20; but it is not alleged: the great duty of preaching the Gospel of Christ is kept on its highest grounds.

Verse 30

ἤγειρεν] both from the emphatic position of the verb, and from the context, it must refer to the resurrection, not merely, as in Matthew 11:11, Luke 1:69, Judges 3:9, to raising up in the ordinary sense.

ὑμεῖς, answering to the ἐφʼ ἡμᾶς of the H. P.

ἐπὶ ξύλου] compare reff. and the similar contrast in ch. Acts 3:14-15. The manner of death is described thus barely and ignominiously, to waken compunction in the hearers, to whom the expression was well known as entailing curse and disgrace on the victim.

Verse 31-32

31, 32.] ἀρχηγ. κ. σωτ., not, ‘to be a Prince and a Saviour:’ but the words are the predicate of τοῦτον—as a P. and a S.

ἀρχηγόν, as ch. Acts 3:15, which see. κ. σωτ. not = τῆς σωτηρίας. Jesus was to be King and Captain of Israel, and also their Saviour. The two offices, though inseparably connected in fact, had each its separate meaning in Peter’s speech: a Prince, to whom you owe obedience—a Saviour, by whom you must be saved from your sins.

τῇ δεξιᾷ, by (not to) His right hand, as in ch. Acts 2:33, where see note. The great aim here, as there, is to set forth God as the DOER of all this.

δοῦναι, in his Kingly prerogative; μετ. κ. ἄφ. ἁμ., to lead to salvation ( εἰς σωτηρίαν, as 2 Corinthians 7:10; εἰς ζωήν, as ch. Acts 11:18) by him as a Saviour. Somewhat similarly Bengel: ‘ μετ., qua Jesus accipitur ut Princeps: ἄφες. qua accipitur ut Salvator.’

The key to this part of the speech is Luke 24:47-49, where we have, in our Lord’s command to them, the same conjunction of μετ. κ. ἄφες. ἁμ.—and immediately follows, as here, ὑμεῖς μάρτυρες τούτων, appointing them to that office which they were now discharging,—and, corresponding to τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγ. of our text, ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἐξαποστέλλω τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πατρός μου ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς. By conjoining the Holy Ghost, as a witness, with themselves,—they claim and assert the promise of John 15:26-27; see also the apostolic letter of ch. Acts 15:28. When we remember, how much of the apostolic testimony was given in writing, as well as by word of mouth, this declaration of Peter becomes an important datum for judging of the nature of that testimony also. See a very similar conjunction, 1 John 5:9.

They were God’s witnesses, in the things which they had seen and heard as men: the Holy Ghost in them was God’s Witness, in purifying and enlarging by His inspiration that their testimony to facts, and in unfolding, from (and as inseparable from) these witnessed facts,—the things which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard. And in the Scripture THESE SAME TESTIMONIES are conjoined; that of the Apostles, holy men under the guidance and reminding of the Holy Spirit, faithfully and honestly reporting those things which fall under human observation: and that of God the Spirit Himself, testifying, through them, those loftier things which no human experience can assure, nor human imagination compass.

ῥημάτων] histories, things expressed in words: see note on Luke 1:4.

τοῖς πειθ.] Not ἡμῖν, which might make an unreal distinction between the Apostles and the then believers, and an implied exclusion of the hearers from this gift,—but generally, to all the πειθαρχοῦσιν αὐτῷ, by this word recalling the opening of the speech and binding all together. So that the sense of the whole is, ‘We are acting in obedience to God, and for the everlasting good of our common Israel: and otherwise we cannot do.’ And a solemn invitation is implied. ‘Be ye obedient likewise.’ It is remarkable that a similar word, ὑπήκουον τῇ πίστει, is used of the multitude of converted priests, ch. Acts 6:7.

Verse 33

ἐβουλεύοντο] they were purposing, ‘taking counsel with the intent,’ see reff.

Verse 34

34.] γαμαλιήλ = גַּמְלִיאֵל, (see Numbers 1:10 ; Numbers 2:20,) is generally, and not without probability, assumed to be identical with the celebrated Rabban Gamaliel, הַזָּקֵן (the old man), one of the seven, to whom, among their Rabbis, the Jews give this title Rabban (= ῥαββουνί, John 20:16), a wise and enlightened Pharisee, the son of Rabban Symeon (traditionally the Symeon of Luke 2:25) and grandson of the famous Hillel. His name often appears in the Mischna, as an utterer of sayings quoted as authorities. He died eighteen years before the destruction of the city. (See Lightf. Centuria Chorogr. Matth. præmissa, ch. 15) He was the preceptor of St. Paul (ch. Acts 22:3). Ecclesiastical tradition makes him become a Christian and be baptized by Peter and John (Phot⁽⁴¹⁾ cod. 171, vol. iii. p. 118 b. Winer, Realw.), and in the Clementine Recognn. (i. 65, p. 1242), he is stated to have been at this time a Christian, but secretly. The Jewish accounts do not agree, which make him die a Pharisee, with much more probability. Nor is the least trace of a Christian leaning to be found in his speech: see below [on Acts 5:39]. And considering that he was a Pharisee, opposing the prevalent faction of Sadducæism in a matter where the Resurrection was called in question,—and a wise and enlightened man opposing furious and unreasoning zealots,—considering also, that when the anti-pharisaical element of Christianity was brought out in the acts and sayings of Stephen, his pupil Saul was found the foremost persecutor,—we should, I think, be slow to suspect him of any favouring of the Apostles as followers of Jesus. (See particulars respecting Gamaliel collected in Conybeare and Howson’s St. Paul, edn. 2, vol. i. p. 69, f.) He does not here appear as the president of the Sanhedrim, but only as a member.

ἔξω ποιῆσαι] see reff. to put out—‘cause to withdraw.’ They are recalled in Acts 5:40.

Verse 35

35.] The words ἐπὶ τ. ἀνθρ. τούτ. may be joined either with προσέχ. ἑαυτ., or with τί μέλ. πράσς. The latter would give the more usual construction: and the transposition of words is not unexampled in the Acts, see ch. Acts 1:2; Acts 19:4.

Verse 36

The λέγων εἶναι of our text is curiously related to the ἔλεγεν εἶναι of Josephus.

ὡς τετρακοσίων hardly agrees with the τὸν πλεῖστον ὄχλον of Josephus above, and confirms the idea that different events are pointed at in the two accounts. But the Jewish historian speaks very widely about such matters: see note on ch. Acts 21:38.

Verse 37

ἀπώλετο] Not related by Josephus.

διεσκορπίσθησαν] Strictly accurate—for they still existed, and at last became active and notorious again, under Menahem, son of Judas τοῦ καλουμένου γαλιλαίου, ὃς ἦν σοφιστὴς δεινότατος, καὶ ἐπὶ κυρηνίου ποτὲ ἰουδαίους ὀνειδίσας. (B. Jud. ii. 17. 7; see also Antt. xx. 5. 2.)

Verse 38

Or perhaps the indicative is used in the second place, because that is the case assumed, and on which the advice is founded [at all events the distinction ought to be preserved, which is not done in E. V.].

ἡ βουλή] The whole plan—the scheme, of which this ἔργον, the fact under your present cognizance, forms a part.

Verse 39

καί] Opponents not only to them, but also to God:—‘even,’ in E. V., does not give the sense. As regards Gamaliel’s advice, we may remark that it was founded on a view of the issues of events, agreeing with the fatalism of the Pharisees: that it betokens no leaning towards Christianity, nor indeed very much even of worldly wisdom;—but serves to shew how low the supreme council of the Jews had sunk both in their theology and their political sagacity, if such a fallacious laissez-aller view of matters was the counsel of the wisest among them. It seems certainly, on a closer view, as if they accepted, from fear of the people (see Acts 5:26), this opportunity of compromising the matter, which Gamaliel had designedly afforded them.

Verse 40