CHAPTER 4
Verse 1. The Priests. It is probable that these priests were a
part of the sanhedrim, or great council of the nation. It is evident
that they claimed some authority for preventing the preaching of the
apostles. And the whole transaction seems to show that they did not
come upon them in a tumultuous manner, but as keepers of the peace.
The captain of the temple. See Barnes "Matthew 26:47".
See Barnes "Luke 22:4". This was the commander of the guard stationed
chiefly in the tower Antonia, especially during the great feasts;
and it was their duty to preserve order, and prevent any tumult. The
captain of the temple came at this time to prevent a tumult or suppress
a riot, as it was supposed that the teaching of the apostles, and the
crowd collected by the healing of the lame man, would lead to a tumult.
And the Sadducees. See Barnes "Matthew 3:7". One of the doctrines
which the Sadducees maintained was, that there was no resurrection of
the dead. Hence they were particularly opposed to the apostles for
preaching it, and because they gave so clear proof that Jesus had risen,
and were thus spreading the doctrine of the resurrection among the
people.
Came upon them. This expression implies that they came in a sudden
and violent manner. See Luke 20:1.
{1} "Captain of the temple" "ruler"
{e} "came upon them" Matthew 22:23; Acts 23:8
Verse 2. Being grieved. The word thus translated occurs but in one
other place in the New Testament, Acts 16:18. It implies more
than simple sorrow; it was a mingled emotion of indignation and
anger. They did not grieve because they thought it a public calamity,
but because it interfered with their authority, and opposed their
doctrine. It means that it was painful to them, or they could
not bear it. It is often the case that bigots, and men in authority,
have this kind of grief at the zeal of men in spreading the truth,
and thus undermining their influence and authority.
That they taught the people. The ground of their grief was as much
the fact that they should presume to instruct the people, as the
matter which they taught them. They were offended that unlearned
Galileans, in no way connected with the priestly office, and unauthorized
by them, should presume to set themselves up as religious teachers.
They claimed the right to watch over the interests of the people,
and to declare who was authorized to instruct the nation. It has been no
unusual thing for men in ecclesiastical stations to take exceptions to
the ministry of those who have not been commissioned by themselves. Men
easily fancy that all power to instruct others is lodged in their hands;
and they oppose others simply from the fact that they have not derived
their authority from them. The true question in this case was,
whether these Galileans gave proof that they were sent by God. The fact
of the miracle in this case should have been satisfactory. We have here,
also, a striking instance of the fact that men may turn away from
evidence, and from most important points, and fix on something that
opposes their prejudices, and which may be a matter of very little
moment. No inquiry was made whether the miracle had been really
wrought; but the only inquiry was, whether they had conformed to their
views of doctrine and order.
And preached through Jesus, etc. The Sadducees would be particularly
opposed to this. They denied the doctrine of the resurrection, and they
were troubled that the apostles adduced proof of it so strong as the
resurrection of Jesus. It was perceived that this doctrine was becoming
established among the people; multitudes believed that he had risen;
and if he had been raised up, it followed also that others would rise.
The Sadducees, therefore, felt that their cause was in danger; and they
joined with the priests in endeavouring to arrest its spread among the
people. This is the account of the first opposition that was made to the
gospel as it was preached by the apostles. It is worthy of remark, that
it excited so much and so speedily the enmity of those in power; and
that the apostles were so soon called to test the sincerity of their
attachment to their Master. They who but a few days before had fled at
the approach of danger, were called to meet this opposition, and to show
their attachment to a risen Redeemer; and they did it without shrinking.
They showed now that they were indeed the true friends of the crucified
Saviour: and this remarkable change in their conduct is one among the
many proofs that they were influenced from above.
Verse 3. Put them in hold. That is, they took them into
custody, or into safe keeping. Probably they committed them to the
care of a guard.
Eventide. Evening. It was not convenient to assemble the council at
night. This was, moreover, the time for the evening prayer or
sacrifice, and it was not usual to assemble the sanhedrim at that hour.
{*} "put them in hold" "In prison"
{+} "eventide" "Evening"
Verse 4. Howbeit. But; notwithstanding.
Many of them, etc. This was one of the instances which has since
been so often repeated, in which persecution has only had a
tendency to extend and establish the faith which it was designed to
destroy. It finally came to be a proverb, that "the blood of the
martyrs is the seed of the church ;" and there is no lesson which men
have been so slow to learn, as that to oppose and persecute men is
the very way to confirm them in their opinions, and to spread their
doctrines. It was supposed here that the disciples were few, that they
were without power, wealth, and influence, and that it was easy to
crush them at once. But God made their persecution the means of
extending, in a signal manner, the truths of the gospel and the
triumphs of his word. And so in all ages it has been, and so it ever
will be.
And the number, etc. It seems probable that in this number
of five thousand there were included the one hundred and twenty who are
mentioned in Acts 1:15, and the three thousand who were converted on
the day of Pentecost, Acts 2:41. It does not appear probable that
five thousand should have been assembled and converted in Solomon's
porch, (Acts 3:11,) on occasion of the cure of the lame man. Luke,
doubtless, means to say that, up to this time, the number of persons
who had joined themselves to the apostles was about five thousand. On
this supposition, the work of religion must have made a very rapid
advance. How long this was after the day of Pentecost is not
mentioned; but it is clear that it was at no very distant period; and
the accession of near two thousand to the number of believers was a
very striking proof of the power and presence of the Holy Spirit.
Of the men. Of the persons. The word men is often used
without reference to sex, Luke 11:31; Romans 4:8; 11:4.
{+} "Howbeit" "Nevertheless"
{a} "many of them" Acts 28:24
Verses 5, 6. Their rulers. The rulers of the Jews; doubtless the
members of the sanhedrim, or great council of the nation. Comp.
Acts 4:15. See Barnes "Matthew 2:4 5:22". The expression their rulers,
looks as if this book was written for the Gentiles, or Luke would have
said our rulers.
Elders. Presbyters; or those who were chosen from among the people
to sit in the sanhedrim. It is probable that the rulers were those who
held also some other office, but were also authorized to sit in the
great council.
Scribes. See Barnes "Matthew 2:4".
And Annas, etc. See Barnes "John 18:13". It is by no means
certain that Annas was at that time the high priest, but he had been,
and doubtless retained the title. He was father-in-law to Caiaphas the
high priest; and from this fact, together with his former dignity, he
is mentioned first.
Caiaphas. Son-in-law of Annas, and now exercising the office of the
high priest, John 18:13.
John, and Alexander, etc. Of these persons nothing more is known.
It is clear that they were members of the great council, and the
mention of their names shows that the men of chief authority and
influence were assembled to silence the apostles. Annas and Caiaphas
had been concerned in the condemnation of Jesus, and they would now
feel a special interest in arresting the progress of the gospel among
the people. All the success of the gospel reflected back light upon the
wickedness of the act of condemning the Lord Jesus. And this fact may
serve, in part, to account for their strong desire to silence the
apostles.
At Jerusalem. \~eiv\~. This was the usual place of assembling
the sanhedrim. But the Jewish writers (see Lightfoot on this place)
say, that forty years before the destruction of the city, on account of
the great increase of crime, etc., the sanhedrim was removed from place
to place. The declaration of Luke, that they were now assembled
in Jerusalem, seems to imply that they sometimes met in other places.
It is probable that the members of the sanhedrim were not in the city at
the time mentioned in Ac 4:3, and this was the reason why the
trial was deferred to the next day.
{b} "Annas the High Priest" John 18:13
Verse 6. No Barnes text on this verse.
Verse 7. In the midst. In the presence of the great council.
By what power, etc. A similar question was put to Christ in the
temple, Matthew 21:23.
By what name. That is, by whose authority. It is very probable that
they expected to intimidate the apostles by this question. They
claimed the right of regulating the religious affairs of the nation.
They had vast power with the people. They assumed that all power to
instruct the people should originate with them; and they expected that
the apostles would be confounded, as having violated the established
usage of the nation. It did not seem to occur to them to enter into an
investigation of the question, whether this acknowledged miracle did
not prove that they were sent by God; but they assumed that they were
impostors, and attempted to silence them by authority. It has been
usual with the enemies of religion to attempt to intimidate its
friends, and, when argument falls, to attempt to silence Christians by
appealing to their fears.
{c} "By what power" Matthew 21:23
Verse 8. Filled with the Holy Ghost. See Barnes "Acts 2:4".
Ye rulers, etc. Peter addressed the sanhedrim with perfect
respect. He did not call in question their authority to propose this
question. He seemed to regard this as a favourable opportunity to
declare the truth, and state the evidence of the Christian religion. In
this he acted on the principle of the injunction which he himself
afterwards gave, 1 Peter 3:15, "Be ready always to give an answer
to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with
meekness and fear." Innocence is willing to be questioned; and a
believer in the truth will rejoice in any opportunity to state the
evidence of what is believed. It is remarkable, also, that this was
before the great council of the nation; the body that was clothed with
the highest authority. And Peter could not have forgotten that before
this very council, and these very men, his Master had been arraigned
and condemned. Nor could he have forgotten that in the very room where
this same council was convened to try his Lord, he had himself
shrunk from an honest avowal of attachment to him, and shamefully and
profanely denied him. That he was now able to stand boldly before this
same tribunal evinced a remarkable change in his feelings, and was a
most clear and impressive proof of the genuineness of his repentance
when he went out and wept bitterly. Comp. Luke 22:54-62. And we
may remark here, that one of the most clear evidences of the sincerity
of repentance is when it leads to a result like this. So deeply was the
heart of Peter affected by his sin, Luke 22:62, and so genuine was
his sorrow, that he doubtless remembered his crime on this occasion;
and the memory of it inspired him with boldness. It may be further
remarked, that one evidence of the genuineness of repentance is a
desire to repair the evil which is done by crime. Peter had done
dishonour to his Master and his cause, in the presence of the great
council of the nation. Nothing, on such an occasion, would be more
likely to do injury to the cause than for one of the disciples of the
Saviour to deny him--one of his followers to be guilty of
profaneness and falsehood. But here was an opportunity, in some
degree at least, to repair the evil. Before the same council and the same
men, in the same city, and in the presence of the same people, it is not
an unnatural supposition that Peter rejoiced that he might have
opportunity to bear his testimony to the Divine mission of the Saviour
whom he had before denied. By using the customary language of respect
applied to the great council, Peter also has shown us that it is proper
to evince respect for office, and for those in power. Religion requires
us to render this homage, and to treat men in office with deference,
Matthew 22:21; Romans 13:7; 1 Peter 2:13-17.
{d} "filled with the Holy Ghost" Acts 7:55
{+} "Holy Ghost" "Spirit"
Verse 9. No Barnes text on this verse.
{+} "impotent man" "Infirm"
{&} "whole" "Hath been restored"
Verse 10. Be it known, etc. Peter might have evaded the question, or
he might have resorted to many excuses and subterfuges, (Calvin,)
if he had been desirous of avoiding this inquiry. But it was a noble
opportunity for vindicating the honour of his Lord and Master. It
was a noble opportunity also for repairing the evil which he had
done by his guilty denial of his Lord. Although, therefore, this
frank and open avowal was attended with danger, and although it
was in the presence of the great and the mighty, yet he chose to
state fully and clearly his conviction of the truth. Never was there
an instance of greater boldness; and never could there be a more
striking illustration of the fitness of the name which the Lord Jesus
gave him, that of a rock, John 1:42; Matthew 16:17,18. The timid,
trembling, yielding, and vacillating Simon, he who just before was
terrified by a servant girl, and who on the lake was afraid of sinking,
is now transformed into the manly, decided, and firm Cephas,
fearless before the great council of the nation, and in an unwavering
tone asserting the authority of Him whom he had just before denied,
and whom they had just before put to death. It is not possible to
account for this change except on the supposition that this religion
is true. Peter had no worldly motive to actuate him. He had no
prospect of wealth or fame by this. Even the hopes of honour and
preferment which they had cherished before the death of Jesus, and
which might have been supposed to influence them then, were now
abandoned by the apostles. Their Master had died; and all their
hopes of human honour and power had been buried in his grave.
Nothing but the conviction of the truth could have wrought this
change, and transformed this timid disciple to a bold and
uncompromising apostle.
By the name. By the authority or power, Acts 3:6.
Of Jesus Christ. The union of these two names would be particularly
offensive to the sanhedrim. They denied that Jesus was the Christ,
or the Messiah; Peter, by the use of the word Christ, affirmed that
he was. In the language then used, it would be, "By the name of Jesus,
the Messiah."
Of Nazareth. Lest there should be any mistake about his meaning, he
specified that he referred to the despised Nazarene; to him who had
just been put to death, as they supposed, covered with infamy.
Christians little regard the epithets of opprobrium which may be
affixed to themselves or to their religion.
Whom ye crucified. There is emphasis in all the expressions that
Peter uses. He had before charged the people with the crime of having
put him to death, Acts 2:23; 3:14,15; but he now had the
opportunity, contrary to all expectation, of urging the charge with
still greater force on the rulers themselves, on the very council
which had condemned him and delivered him to Pilate. It was a
remarkable providence that an opportunity was thus afforded of urging
this charge in the presence of the sanhedrim, and of proclaiming
to them the necessity of repentance. Little did they imagine,
when they condemned the Lord Jesus, that this charge would be so soon
urged. This is one of the instances in which God takes the wise in their
own craftiness, Job 5:13. They had arraigned the apostles; they
demanded their authority for what they had done; and thus they had
directly opened the way, and invited them to the serious and solemn
charge which Peter here urges against them.
{a} "that by the name" Acts 3:6,16
{*} "whole" "well"
Verse 11. This is the stone. This passage is found in
Psalms 118:22. It is quoted also by our Saviour, as applicable to
himself. See Barnes "Matthew 21:42". The ancient Jews applied this to
David. In the Targum on Psalms 118:22, this passage is rendered,
"The child who was among the sons of Jesse, and was worthy to be
constituted King, the builders rejected." The New Testament writers,
however, apply it without any doubt to the Messiah. Comp.
Isaiah 28:16; Romans 9:33; Ephesians 2:20. And from this passage we may learn,
that God will overrule the devices and plans of wicked men, to
accomplish his own purposes. What men despise and set at nought,
he esteems of inestimable value in his kingdom. What the great
and the mighty contemn, he regards as the very foundation and
corner-stone of the edifice which he designs to rear. Nothing has
been more remarkable than this in the history of man; and in nothing
is more contempt thrown on the proud projects of men, than that
what they have rejected he has made the very basis of his schemes.
{b} "the stone" Psalms 118:22; Isaiah 28:16; Matthew 21:42
{+} "at nought" "rejected"
Verse 12. Neither is there salvation. The word salvation
properly denotes any preservation, or keeping anything in a safe state;
a preserving it from harm. It signifies, also, deliverance from any
evil of body or mind; from pain, sickness, danger, etc., Acts 7:25.
But it is in the New Testament applied particularly to the work which the
Messiah came to do, "to seek and to save that which was lost,"
Luke 19:10. This work refers primarily to a deliverance of the
soul from sin, Matthew 1:21; Acts 5:31; Luke 4:18; Romans 8:21; Galatians 5:1. It then
denotes, as a consequence of freedom from sin, freedom from all the
ills to which sin exposes man, and the attainment of that perfect peace
and joy which shall be bestowed on the children of God in the heavens.
The reasons why Peter introduces this subject here seem to be these:
(1.) He was discoursing of the deliverance of the man that was
healed--his salvation from a long and painful calamity. This
deliverance had been accomplished by the power of Jesus. The mention of
this suggested that greater and more important salvation from
sin and death which it was the object of the Lord Jesus to effect. As it
was by his power that this man had been healed, so it was by
his power only that men could be saved from death and hell.
Deliverance from any temporal calamity should lead the thoughts to that
higher redemption which the Lord Jesus contemplates in regard to the
soul.
(2.) This was a favourable opportunity to introduce the doctrines of the
gospel to the notice of the great council of the nation. The occasion
invited to it; the mention of a part of the work of Jesus invited to
a contemplation of his whole work. Peter would not have done justice
to the character and work of Christ, if he had not introduced that great
design which he had in view to save men from death and hell. It is
probable, also, that he advanced a sentiment in which he expected they
would immediately concur, and which accorded with their well-known
opinions, that salvation was to be obtained only by the Messiah. Thus
Paul Acts 26:22,23 says that he taught nothing else than what was
delivered by Moses and the prophets, etc. Comp. Acts 23:6; 26:6. The
apostles did not pretend to proclaim any doctrine which was not
delivered by Moses and the prophets, and which did not in fact constitute
a part of the creed of the Jewish nation.
In any other. Any other person. He does not mean to say that God is
not able to save, but that the salvation of the human family is
entrusted to the hands of Jesus the Messiah.
For there is none other name. This is an explanation of what he had
said in the previous part of the verse. The word name here is used
to denote the person himself; there is no other being, or
person. As we should say, there is no one who can save but Jesus
Christ. The word name is often used in this sense.
See Barnes "Acts 3:6,16". That there is no other Saviour, or
Mediator between God and man, is abundantly taught in the New Testament;
and it is indeed the main design of revelation to prove this. See
1 Timothy 2:5,6; Acts 10:43.
Under heaven. This expression does not materially differ from the one
immediately following, "among men." They are designed to express with
emphasis the sentiment that salvation is to be obtained in
Christ alone, and not in any patriarch, or prophet, or teacher, or
king, or in any false Messiah.
Given. In this word it is implied that salvation has its origin
in God; that a Saviour for men must be given by him; and that
salvation cannot be originated by any power among men. The Lord Jesus
is thus uniformly represented as given, or appointed by God for this
great purpose, John 3:16; 17:4; 1 Corinthians 3:5; Galatians 1:4; 2:20; Ephesians 1:22; 5:25;
1 Timothy 2:6; Romans 5:15-18; 6:23 and hence Christ is called the "unspeakable
gift" of God, 2 Corinthians 9:15.
Whereby we must be saved. By which it is fit, or proper
--\~dei\~-- that we should be saved. There is no other way of salvation
that is adapted to the great object contemplated; and therefore, if
saved, it must be in this way, and by this plan. All other schemes by
men's own devices are not adapted to the purpose, and therefore
cannot save. The doctrine that men can be saved only by Jesus Christ
is abundantly taught in the Scriptures. To show the failure of all other
schemes of religion was the great design of the first part of the Epistle
to the Romans. By a laboured argument Paul there shows Romans 1 that
the Gentiles had failed in their attempt to justify themselves; and
in Romans 2, Romans 3, that the same thing was true also of the Jews.
If both these schemes failed, then there was need of some other
plan; and that plan was that of salvation by Jesus Christ. If it be
asked,
then, whether this affirmation of Peter is to be understood as having
respect to infants and the heathen, we may remark,
(1.) that his design was primarily to address the Jews, "Whereby we must
be saved." But
(2) the same thing is doubtless true of others. If, as Christians
generally believe, infants are saved, there is no absurdity in supposing
that it is by the merits of the atonement. But for that, there would
have been no promise of salvation. No offer has been made except by the
Mediator; and to him doubtless is to be ascribed all the glory of raising
up even those in infancy to eternal life. If any of the heathen are to be
saved, as most Christians suppose, and as seems in accordance with the
mercy of God, it is no less certain that it will be in consequence of
the intervention of Christ. Those who will be brought to heaven will
sing one song, Revelation 5:9, and be prepared for eternal union in the
service of God in the skies. Still, the Scriptures have not declared
that great numbers of the heathen will be saved, who have not the
gospel. The contrary is more than implied in the New Testament,
Romans 2:12. Neither has the Scripture affirmed that all the heathen
shall certainly be cut off. It has been discovered by missionaries among
the heathen that individuals have, in a remarkable way, been convinced
of the folly of idolatry, and were seeking a better religion; that their
minds were in a serious, thoughtful, inquiring state, and that they
at once embraced the gospel when it was offered to them, as
exactly adapted to their state of mind, and meeting their inquiries.
Such was extensively the case in the Sandwich Islands; and the following
instance recently occurred in this country: "The Flat-head Indians
living west of the Rocky Mountains, recently sent a deputation to
the white settlements to inquire after the Bible. The circumstance
that led to this singular movement is as follows: It appears that a
white man (Mr. Catlin) had penetrated into their country, and
happened to be a spectator at one of their religious ceremonies. He
informed them that their mode of worshipping the Supreme Being
was radically wrong, and that the people away towards the rising of
the sun had been put in possession of the true mode of worshipping
the Great Spirit. On receiving this information, they called a
national council to take this subject into consideration. Some said,
If this be true, it is certainly high time we were put in possession of
this mode. They accordingly deputed four of the chiefs to proceed
to St. Louis, to see their great father, general Clark, to inquire of
him the truth of this matter. They were cordially received by the
general, who gave them a succinct history of Revelation, and the
necessary instruction relative to their important mission. Two of
them sunk under the severe toils attending a journey of three
thousand miles. The remaining two, after acquiring what knowledge
they could of the Bible, its institutions and precepts, returned to
carry back those few rays of Divine light to their benighted
countrymen." In what way their minds were led to this state we cannot
say; or how this preparation for the gospel was connected with the
agency and merits of Christ, we perhaps cannot understand. But
we know that the affairs of this entire world are placed under the
control of Christ, John 17:2; Ephesians 1:21,22, and that the arrangements
of events by which they were brought to this state of mind
are in his hands. Another remark may here be made: it is, that it
often occurs that blessings come upon us from benefactors whom we
do not see, and from sources which we cannot trace. On this principle
we receive many of the mercies of life; and from anything that
appears, in this way many blessings of salvation may be conferred
on the world, and possibly many of the heathen be saved. Still,
this view does not interfere with the command of Christ to preach
the gospel, Mark 16:15. The great mass of the heathen are not in
this state: and this fact, so far as it goes, is an encouragement to
preach the gospel to the entire world. If Christ thus prepares the
way; if he extensively fits the minds of the heathen for the
reception of the gospel; if he shows them the evil and folly of their own
system, and leads them to desire a better, then this should operate
not to produce indolence, but activity, and zeal, and encouragement
to enter into the field white for the harvest, and to toil that all
who seek the truth, and are prepared to embrace the gospel, may be
brought to the light of the Sun of righteousness.
{c} "for there is" Acts 10:43; 1 Timothy 2:5,6
{d} "other name" Psalms 45:17
Verse 13. Boldness. This word properly denotes openness or
confidence in speaking. It stands opposed to hesitancy, and to
equivocation in declaring our sentiments. Here it means that, in
spite of danger and opposition, they avowed their doctrines without any
attempt to conceal or disguise them.
Peter and John. It was they only who had been concerned in the
healing of the lame man, Acts 3:1.
And perceived. When they knew that they were unlearned. This
might have been ascertained either by report or by the manner
of their speaking.
Unlearned. This word properly denotes those who were not acquainted
with letters, or who had not had the benefit of an education.
Ignorant men--\~idiwtai\~--. This word properly denotes those who live
in private, in contradistinction from those who are engaged in
public life, or in office. As this class of persons is commonly also
supposed to be less learned, talented, and refined than those in office,
it comes to denote those who are rude and illiterate. The idea intended
to be conveyed here is, that these men had not had opportunities of
education, (comp. Matthew 4:18-21,) and had not been accustomed to
public speaking, and hence they were surprised at their boldness. This
same character is uniformly attributed to the early preachers of
Christianity. Comp. 1 Corinthians 1:27; Matthew 11:25. The Galileans were
regarded by the Jews as particularly rude and uncultivated,
Matthew 26:73; Mark 14:70.
They marvelled. They wondered that men who had not been
educated in the schools of the Rabbins, and accustomed to speak, should
declare their sentiments with so much boldness.
And they took knowledge. This expression means simply that they knew,
or that they obtained evidence, or proof, that they had been with Jesus.
It is not said in what way they obtained this evidence; but the
connexion leads us to suppose it was by the miracle which they had
wrought; by their firm and bold declaration of the doctrines of
Jesus; and perhaps by the irresistible conviction that none would
be thus bold who had not been personally with him, and who had not
the firmest conviction that he was the Messiah. They had not been
trained in their schools, and their boldness could not be attributed
to the arts of rhetoric, but was the native, ingenuous, and manly
exhibition of deep conviction of the truth of what they spoke; and
that conviction could have been obtained only by their having been
with him, and having been satisfied that he was the Messiah. Such
conviction is of far more value in preaching than all the mere
teachings of the schools; and without such a conviction, all
preaching will be frigid, hypocritical, and useless.
Had been with Jesus. Had been his followers, and had attended
personally on his ministry. They gave evidence that they had seen him,
been with him, heard him, and were convinced that he was the Messiah.
We may learn here,
(1.) that if men wish to be successful in preaching, it must be based on
deep and thorough conviction of the truth of that which they deliver.
(2.) They who preach should give evidence that they are acquainted with
the Lord Jesus Christ; that they have imbibed his Spirit, pondered his
instructions, studied the evidences of his Divine mission, and are
thoroughly convinced that he was from God.
(3.) Boldness and success in the ministry, as well as in everything
else, will depend far more on honest, genuine, thorough conviction of
the truth, than on all the endowments of talent and learning, and all
the arts and skill of eloquence. No man should attempt to preach
without such a thorough conviction of truth; and no man who has it will
preach in vain.
(4.) God often employs the ignorant and unlearned to confound the wise,
1 Corinthians 1:27,28. But it is not by their ignorance. It was not the
ignorance of Peter and John that convinced the sanhedrim. It was done
in spite of their ignorance. It was their boldness, and their
honest conviction of truth. Besides, though not learned in the schools
of the Jews, they had been under a far more important training, under
the personal direction of Christ himself for three years; and now they
were directly endowed by the Holy Ghost with the power of speaking
with tongues. Though not taught in the schools, yet there was an
important sense in which they were not unlearned and ignorant
men. Their example should not, therefore, be pleaded in favour of
an unlearned ministry. Christ himself expressed his opposition to
an unlearned ministry, by teaching them himself, and then by
bestowing on them miraculous endowments which no learning at present can
furnish. It may be remarked, further, that in the single selection which
he made of an apostle after his ascension to heaven, when he came to
choose one who had not been under his personal teaching, he chose
a learned man, the apostle Paul, and thus evinced his purpose that
there should be training or education, in those who are invested
with the sacred office.
(5.) Yet in the case before us there is a striking proof of the truth
and power of religion. These men had not acquired their boldness in the
schools; they were not trained for argument among the Jews; they did
not meet them by cunning sophistry; but they came with the honest
conviction that what they were saying was true. Were they deceived?
Were they not competent to bear witness? Had they any motive to
attempt to palm a falsehood on men? Infidelity must answer many
such questions as these before the apostles can be convicted of
imposture.
{a} "unlearned" Matthew 11:25; 1 Corinthians 1:27
{*} "ignorant" or, "obscure"
Verse 14. They could say nothing, etc. The presence of the man that
was healed was an unanswerable fact in proof of the truth of what
the apostles alleged. The miracle was so public, clear, and decisive;
the man that was healed was so well known, that there was no
evasion or subterfuge by which they could escape the conclusion to
which the apostles were conducting them. It evinced no little
gratitude in the man that was healed that he was present on this
occasion, and showed that he was deeply interested in what befell
his benefactors. The miracles of Jesus and his apostles were such
that they could not be denied; and hence the Jews did not attempt
to deny that they wrought them. Comp. Matthew 12:24; John 11:45,46;
Acts 19:36.
{+} "healed" or "cured"
{b} "say nothing" Acts 19:36
Verses 15-18. What shall we do to these men? The object which
they had in view was evidently to prevent their preaching. The miracle
was wrought; and was believed by the people to have been wrought.
This they could not expect to be able successfully to deny. Their
only object, therefore, was to prevent the apostles from making the
use which they saw they would, to convince the people that Jesus
was the Messiah. The question therefore was, in what way they
should prevent this; whether by putting them to death, by
imprisoning them, or by scourging them; or whether by simply exerting
their authority and forbidding them. From the former they were
deterred, doubtless, by fear of the multitude. And they therefore
adopted the latter, and seemed to suppose that the mere exertion of
their authority would be sufficient to deter them from this in future.
The council. Greek, The sanhedrim. This body was composed of
seventy-one or seventy-two persons, and was entrusted with the principal
affairs of the nation. It was a body of vast influence and power; and
hence they supposed that their command might be sufficient to restrain
ignorant Galileans from speaking. Before this same body, and probably
the same men, our Saviour was arraigned; and by them condemned before he
was delivered to the Roman governor, Matthew 26:59, etc. And before
this same body, and in the presence of the same men, Peter had just
before denied his Lord, Matthew 26:70, etc. The fact that the disciples
had fled on a former occasion, and that Peter had denied his Saviour,
may have operated to induce them to believe that they would be terrified
by their threats, and deterred from preaching publicly in the name of
Jesus.
A notable miracle. A known, undeniable miracle.
That it spread. That the knowledge of it may not spread among them
any further.
Let us straitly threaten them. Greek, Let us threaten them with
a threat. This is a Hebraism, expressing intensity,
certainty, etc. The threat was a command Acts 4:18 not to
teach, implying their displeasure if they did do it. This threat,
however, was not effectual. On the next occasion, which occurred soon
after, Acts 5:40, they added beating to their threats, in order
to deter them from preaching in the name of Jesus.
{*} "out of the council" "Withdraw from"
Verse 16. No Barnes text on this verse.
{a} "What shall we do to" John 11:47
{+} "notable miracle" "Signal"
Verse 17. No Barnes text on this verse.
{&} "straitly threaten" "Strictly"
{b} "they speak henceforth" Acts 5:40
Verse 18. No Barnes text on this verse.
Verse 19. Whether it be right, etc. The apostles abated nothing of
their boldness when threatened. They openly appealed to their judges
whether their command could be right. And in doing this, they
expressed their full conviction of the truth of what they had said,
and their deliberate purpose not to regard their command, but still
to proclaim to the people the truth that Jesus was the Messiah.
In the sight of God. That is, whether God will judge this to be
right. The grand question was, how God would regard it. If he
disapproved it, it was wrong. It was not merely a question pertaining to
their reputation, safety, or life; but it was a question of
conscience before God. And we have here a striking instance of
the principle on which Christians act. It is to lay their safety,
reputation, and life out of view, and to bring everything to this test,
WHETHER IT WILL PLEASE GOD. If it will, it is right; if it will not,
it is wrong.
To hearken. To hear and to hearken are often used
to denote to obey, John 5:24; 8:47, etc.
Judge ye. This was an appeal to them directly as judges, and as
men. And it may be presumed that it was an appeal which they could not
resist. The sanhedrim acknowledged itself to have been appointed by
God; and to have no authority which was not derived from his
appointment. Of course God could modify, supersede, or repeal their
authority; and the abstract principle, that it was better to obey God
than man, they could not call in question. The only inquiry was,
whether they had evidence that God had issued any command in the case.
Of that the apostles were satisfied; and that the rulers could not
deny. It may be remarked, that this is one of the first and most
bold appeals on record in favour of the right of private judgment and
the liberty of conscience. That liberty was supposed in all the Jewish
religion. It was admitted that the authority of God in all matters was
superior to that of man. And the same spirit manifested itself thus
early in the Christian church against all dominion over the conscience,
and in favour of the right to follow the dictates of the conscience and
the will of God. As a mere historical fact, therefore, it is interesting
to contemplate this; and still more interesting in its important bearings
on human liberty and human happiness. The doctrine is still more
explicitly stated in Acts 5:29--"We ought to obey God rather than men."
{c} "hearken unto you more" Acts 5:29
Verse 20. For, etc. This is given as a reason why they should obey
God rather than man. They had had so clear evidence that God
had sent the Messiah, and they had received so direct and solemn
a command (Mark 16:15) to preach the gospel, that they could
not be restrained. There was a necessity laid on them to preach
the gospel. See 1 Corinthians 9:16; comp. Jeremiah 20:9; Acts 18:5; Job 32:18,19;
Psalms 39:1-3.
It has already been remarked, that these two verses contain an
important principle in favour of religious liberty --the
liberty of conscience, and of private judgment. They contain the
great principle of the Christian, and of the Protestant religion,
that the responsibility of men for their religious opinions is direct
to God, and that other men have no power of control. The opposite of
this is tyranny and oppression. It may be proper, in addition, to
present some further remarks, involved in the principle here stated.
(1.) Religion, from the commencement, has been favourable to liberty.
There was no principle more sacred among the Jews, than that they
were to be independent of other nations. Perhaps no people have ever
been so restive under a foreign yoke, so prone to rebel, and so
difficult to be broken down by oppression and by arms, as were the
Jews. So true was this, that it appeared to other nations to be
mere obstinacy. They were often subdued, but they rose against
their oppressors, and threw off the yoke. No people has been
found who were so difficult to be reduced to slavery. It is well
known that the Romans were accustomed to subject the captives
taken in war to perpetual servitude; and commonly the spirit of the
captive was broken, and he remained quietly in bondage. But not
so the Jew. Nothing ever tamed his spirit. No bribes, or threats,
or chains could induce him to violate the laws of his religion. Even
in captivity, we are told that the Jewish slaves at Rome would
observe the Sabbath, would keep the feasts of their nation, and never
would conform to the customs of an idolatrous people. To the
Romans this appeared to be mere obstinacy. But it was the genius
of their religion. The right of liberty of thought was one which
they would not surrender. The spirit of the patriarchs was favourable to
liberty, and implied responsibility only to God. Familiarity
with the sacred books had taught them these lessons; and neither
time nor distance could obliterate them. In the time of Christ, the
great mass of the nation were evidently opposed to the tax paid to
the Roman nation, and sighed under this burden, until they rose
and attempted to assert their rights; and their city, and temple, and
land were sacrificed, rather than yield this great principle.
(2.) This same principle was evinced by the apostles and by the early
Christians. With this doctrine fresh upon their hearts, they went
forth to other lands. They maintained it at the expense of their
blood; and thousands fell as martyrs in the cause of liberty and of
private judgment in religion. No men evermore firmly defended
liberty than the early martyrs; and each one that died, died in defence
of a principle which is now the acknowledged right of all men.
(3.) The designs of tyranny and superstition have been to destroy
this principle. This was the aim of the sanhedrim; and yet, when
Peter and John appealed to their consciences, they did not dare to
avow their purpose. This has been the aim of all tyrants; and
this the effect of all superstition. Hence the church of Rome has
taken away the Scriptures from the people; and has thus furnished
incontestable evidence that in its view the Bible is favourable to
liberty. For centuries tyranny reigned in one black night over
Europe; nor was the darkness dispelled until the Bible, that taught
men the principles of freedom, was restored to them.
(4.) The effect of the principle avowed by the apostles has been
uniform. Luther began the Reformation by finding in a monastery a copy
of the Bible, when himself more than twenty years of age--a book which
till that time he had never seen. The effect on the liberties of Europe
was immediately seen. Hume admitted, that whatever liberty England
possessed was to be traced to the Puritans. Our own land is a striking
instance of the effect of this great principle, and of its influence on
the rights of man. And just in proportion as the New Testament is
spread abroad will men seek for freedom, and break the chains of
oppression. The best way to promote universal liberty is to spread
the Bible to the ends of the earth. There is not a precept in it that
is not favourable to freedom. It tends to enlarge and liberalize the
mind; to teach men their rights; to put an end to ignorance, the
universal stronghold of superstition and tyranny; and to diffuse the
love of justice, truth and order. It shows man that he is responsible
to God, and that no one has a right to ordain anything which contravenes
the liberty of his fellow.
If it be asked here what the principle is, I answer,
(1.) that men have a right to their private judgment in matters of
religion, subject only to God. The only restraint which, it is now
settled, can be imposed on this is, that no man has a right, under
pretence of conscience, to injure or molest his fellow-men, or to
disturb the peace and harmony of society.
(2.) No magistrate, church, council, or parent has a right to
impose a creed on others, and to demand subscription to it by mere
authority.
(3.) No magistrate, church, or parent has a right to control the
free exercise of private judgment in this case. The power of a
parent is to teach, advise, and entreat. The duty of a child is to
listen with respect, to examine with candour, to pray over the subject,
and to be deliberate and calm, not rash, hasty, impetuous, and
self-willed. But when the child is thus convinced that his duty to God
requires a particular course, then here is a higher obligation than
any earthly law and he must obey God rather than man, even a father or a
mother, Matthew 10:37,38.
(4.) Every man is responsible to God for his opinions and his conduct.
Man may not control him, but God may and will. The great question before
every man is, What is right in the sight of God? It is not what is
expedient, or safe, or pleasurable, or honourable among men; but what is
right in the sight of God. Neither in their opinions nor their conduct
are men free from responsibility. From this whole subject we see the duty
of spreading the Bible. If we love liberty; if we hate tyranny and
superstition; if we wish to extend the knowledge of the rights of man,
and break every arm of oppression, let us spread far and wide the Book
of God, and place in every palace and every cottage on the globe a copy
of the sacred Scriptures.
{d} "For we can not but speak" Jeremiah 20:9
{e} "which we have seen and heard" Acts 22:15; 1 John 1:1,3
Verse 21. Finding nothing, etc. That is, not being able to devise any
way, of punishing them, without exciting a tumult among the people,
and endangering their own authority. The sanhedrim was frequently
influenced by this fear; and it shows that their own authority was much
dependent on the caprice of the multitude. Comp. Matthew 21:26.
All men. That is, the great mass or body of the people.
Glorified God. Praised God for the miracle. This implies,
(1.) that they believed that the miracle was genuine.
(2.) That they were grateful to God for so signal a mercy in conferring
health and comfort on a man who had been long afflicted. We may
add further, that here is the highest evidence of the reality of the
miracle. Even the sanhedrim, with all their prejudice and opposition,
did not call it in question. And the common people, who had
doubtless been acquainted with this man for years, were convinced
that it was real. It would have been impossible to impose on
keen-sighted and jealous adversaries in this manner, if this had been
an imposture.
{a} "because of the people" Matthew 21:25; Acts 5:26
Verse 22. For the man, etc. The age of the man is mentioned to
show the certainty and greatness of the miracle. If it had been a man
who had been lame but a few years, or if it had been a child or a
very young man, the case would not have been so remarkable.
But, after a continuance of forty years, all hope of healing him by
any ordinary means must have been abandoned; and all pretence
that this was jugglery or deception must have been absurd.
Verse 23. Their own company. They joined the other apostles and
Christians, Acts 2:44,45.
And reported, etc. It doubtless became a subject of interesting
inquiry, what they should do in this case. They had been threatened
by the highest authority of the nation, and commanded not to preach
again in the name of Jesus. Whether they should obey them and be silent,
or whether they should leave Jerusalem and preach elsewhere, could not
but be an interesting subject of inquiry; and they very properly sought
the counsel of their brethren, and looked to God for direction; an
example which all should follow who are exposed to persecution, or
who are in any perplexity about the path of duty.
{b} "went to their own company" Acts 2:44-46
Verse 24. They lifted up their voice. To lift up the voice, among
the Hebrews, was a phrase denoting either an address to the people,
Judges 9:7, or a phrase expressive of weeping, Genesis 29:11;
Judges 2:4; Ruth 1:9; 1 Samuel 24:16, or was expressive of prayer.
To lift up the voice to God means, simply, they prayed to
him.
With one accord. Unitedly. Properly with one mind, or purpose.
See Barnes "Acts 1:14". The union of the early Christians
is often noticed in the Acts of the Apostles. Thus far there was no
jar or dissension in their society, and everything has the appearance
of the most entire affection and confidence.
Lord. Greek, \~despota\~. From this word is derived the word
despot.
This is not the usual word employed by which to address God. The word
commonly translated Lord is \~Kuriov\~. The word here used denotes
one who rules over others, and was applied to the highest magistrate or
officer. It denotes authority, power, absoluteness in ruling. It is
a word denoting more authority in ruling than the other. That more
commonly denotes a property in a thing; this denotes absolute rule.
It is applied to God, in Luke 2:29; Revelation 6:10; Jude 1:4 to Jesus
Christ, 2 Peter 2:1; to masters, 1 Timothy 6:1; Titus 2:9; 1 Peter 2:18;
to husbands, 1 Peter 3:6; and to a possessor or owner,
2 Timothy 2:21.
Thou art God. This ascription of praise seems to have been
designed to denote their sense of his power to deliver them; and
his right to dispose of them. They were employed in his service; they
were encompassed with dangers; and they acknowledged him as their
God, who had made all things, and who had an entire right to direct,
and to dispose of them for his own glory, in times of danger and
perplexity we should remember that God has a right to do with us as he
pleases; and we should go cheerfully and commit ourselves into his hands.
Which hast made, etc. Genesis 1. This passage is taken directly from
Psalms 146:6; comp. Revelation 14:7.
{c} "Lord, thou art God" 2 Kings 19:15
Verse 25. Who by the mouth, etc. Psalms 2:1,2. This is a strong,
solemn testimony to the inspiration of David. It is a declaration of the
apostles made in solemn prayer, that God spake himself by the
mouth of David. This is the second part of their prayer. In the
first, they acknowledge the right of God to rule; in this, they appeal
to a prophecy. They plead that this was a thing foretold; and as
God had foreseen it and foretold it, they appealed to him to protect
them. The times of tumult and opposition which had been foreseen,
as about to attend the introduction of the gospel, had now come.
They inferred, therefore, that Jesus was the Messiah; and as God
had designed to establish his kingdom, they appealed to him to aid
and protect them in this great work. This passage is taken from
Psalms 2:1,2, and is an exact quotation from the Septuagint. This
proves that the Psalm had reference to the Messiah. Thus it was
manifestly understood by the Jews; and the authority of the
apostles settles the question. The Psalm was composed by David; on
what occasion is not known; nor is it material to our present purpose.
It has been a matter of inquiry whether it referred to the
Messiah primarily, or only in a secondary sense. Grotius
supposes that it was composed by David when exposed to the hostility of
the Assyrians, the Moabites, Philistines, Amalekites, etc.; and that, in
the midst of his dangers, he sought consolation in the purpose of
God to establish him and his kingdom. But the more probable
opinion is, that it referred directly and solely to the Messiah.
Why did the heathen. The nations which were not Jews. This refers,
doubtless, to the opposition which would be made to the spread of
Christianity; and not merely to the opposition made to the Messiah
himself, and to the act of putting him to death.
Rage. This word refers to the excitement and tumult of a
multitude; not a settled plan, but rather the heated and
disorderly conduct of a mob. It means, that the progress of the
gospel would encounter tumultuous opposition; and that the excited
nations would rush violently to put it down and destroy it.
And the people. The expression, "the people," does not refer to a
class of men different essentially from the heathen. The "heathen"--
Hebrew and Greek, "the nations" --refer to men as organized
into communities; the expression, the people, is used to denote the
same persons without respect to their being so organized. The Hebrews
were in the habit, in their poetry, of expressing the same idea
essentially in parallel members of a sentence; or the last member of a
sentence or verse expressed the same idea, with some slight variation,
as the former. (See Lowth on the Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews.)
Imagine. The word imagine does not express quite the force of
the original. The Hebrew and the Greek both convey the idea of
meditating, thinking, purposing. It means that they employed
thought, plan, purpose, in opposing the Messiah.
Vain things. The word here used \~kena\~ is a literal
translation of the Hebrew--\^HEBREW\^--and means usually empty,
as a vessel which is not filled; then useless, or that which amounts
to nothing, etc. Here it means that they devised a plan which
turned out to be vain, or ineffectual. They attempted an opposition
to the Messiah which could not succeed. God would establish his kingdom
in spite of their plans to oppose it. Their efforts were vain,
because they were not strong enough to oppose God; because he had
purposed to establish the kingdom of his Son; and he could overrule
even their opposition to advance his cause.
{d} "Why did the heathen rage" Psalms 2:1,2
Verse 26. The kings of the earth. The Psalmist specifies more
particularly that kings and rulers would be opposed to the
Messiah. This had occurred already by the opposition made to the Messiah
by the rulers of the Jewish people; and it would be still more evinced by
princes and kings, as the gospel should spread among the nations.
Stood up. The word here used \~paristhmi\~ commonly means, to
present one's self, or to stand forth, for the purpose of aiding,
counselling, etc. But here it means that they rose, or presented
themselves, to evince their opposition. They stood opposed to the
Messiah, and offered resistance to him.
The rulers. This is another instance of the Hebrew parallelism.
The word does not denote another class of men from kings, but expresses
the same idea in another form, or in a more general manner, meaning
that all classes of persons in authority would be opposed to the
gospel.
Were gathered together. Hebrew, consulted together; were
united in a consultation. The Greek implies that they were
assembled for the purpose of consultation.
Against the Lord. In the Hebrew, "against Jehovah." This is the
peculiar name which is given in the Scriptures to God. They rose
against his plan of appointing a Messiah, and against the Messiah whom
he had chosen.
Against his Christ. Hebrew, against his Messiah, or his Anointed.
See Barnes " :". This is one of the places where the word
Messiah is used in the Old Testament. The word occurs in about forty
places, and is commonly translated his anointed, and is applied to
kings. The direct reference of the word to the Messiah in the Old
Testament is not frequent. This passage implies that opposition to the
Messiah is opposition to Jehovah. And this is uniformly supposed
in the sacred Scriptures. He that is opposed to Christ is opposed to God.
He that neglects him neglects God. He that despises him despises God,
Matthew 10:40; 18:5; John 12:44,45; Luke 10:16, "He that despiseth me despiseth
him that sent me." The reasons of this are,
(1.) that the Messiah is "the brightness of the Father's glory, and the
express image of his" subsistence, Hebrews 1:3.
(2.) He is equal with the Father, possessing the same attributes, and
the same power, John 1:1; Philippians 2:6, etc. To despise him, therefore,
is to despise God.
(3.) He is appointed by God to this great work of saving men. To
despise him, or to oppose him, is to despise and oppose him who
appointed him to this work, to contemn his counsels, and to set him at
nought.
(4.) His work is dear to God. It has engaged his thoughts. It
has been approved by him. His mission has been confirmed by the
miraculous power of the Father, and by every possible manifestation
of his approbation and love. To oppose the Messiah is, therefore, to
oppose that which is dear to the heart of God, and which has long been
the object of his tender solicitude. It follows from this, that they
who neglect the Christian religion are exposing themselves to the sore
displeasure of God, and endangering their everlasting interests. No man
is safe who opposes God; and no man can have evidence that God will
approve him, who does not embrace the Messiah whom he has appointed to
redeem the world.
Verse 27. For of a truth. Truly; in reality.
Thy holy child Jesus. The word child is commonly applied to
infants, or to sons and daughters in very early life. The word which is
used here \~paiv\~ is different from that which is commonly applied to
the Lord Jesus, \~uiov\~. The latter expresses sonship, without respect
to age. The word which is here used also sometimes expresses sonship
without any regard to age; and the word son would have been a more happy
translation. Thus the same word is translated in Acts 3:13,26.
In Acts 20:12, it is translated "young man."
Both Herod, etc. Luke 23:1-12.
With the Gentiles. The Romans, to whom he was delivered to be
crucified.
The people of Israel. The Jews, who were excited to this by the
rulers, Matthew 27:20.
{a} "both Herod, and Pontus Pilate" Luke 23:1-8
{+} "together" "combined"
Verse 28. For to do, etc. See Barnes "Acts 2:23";
See Barnes " :". The facts which are brought to view in
these verses are among the most remarkable on record. They are briefly
these:
(1.) That the Jewish rulers were opposed to the Messiah, and slew
him.
(2.) That the very people to whom he came, and for whose benefit he
laboured, joined in the opposition, so that it became the act of a
united people.
(3.) That the Romans who were there, as a sort of representation of all
pagan nations, were easily prevailed on to join in the persecution, and
to become the executioners.
(4.) That thus opposite factions, and dissimilar and prejudiced people,
became united in opposing the Messiah.
(5.) That the rulers of the Roman people, the emperors, and statesmen,
and philosophers, and the rulers of other nations, united to oppose the
gospel, and brought all the power of persecution to stay its progress.
(6.) That the people of the empire, the mass of men, were easily
prevailed upon to join in the persecution, and endeavour to arrest its
progress. And,
(7.) that the gospel has encountered similar difficulties and opposition
wherever it has been faithfully presented to the attention of men. It has
become a very serious question why this has been; or on what pretence
this opposition has been vindicated; or how it can be accounted for. A
question which it is of as much importance for the infidel as for the
Christian to settle. We know that accusations of the corrupt lives of the
early Christians were freely circulated, and the most gross accounts
given of their scandalous conduct were propagated by those who chose to
persecute them. (See Lardher's Credibility.) But such accounts are not
now believed; and it is not certain that they were ever seriously
believed by the rulers of the pagan people. It is certain that it was not
on this account that the first opposition arose to Christ and his
religion.
It is not proper here to enter into an examination of the causes of this
opposition. We may state the outlines, however, in few words.
(1.) The Jewish rulers were mortified, humbled, and moved with envy,
that one so poor and despised should claim to be the Messiah. They had
expected a different monarch; and all their prejudices rose at once
against his claims to this high office, Matthew 27:18; Mark 15:10.
(2.) The common people, disposed extensively to acknowledge his claims,
were urged on by the enraged and vindictive priests to demand his death,
Matthew 27:20.
(3.) Pilate was pressed on against his will by the impetuous and enraged
multitude to deliver one whom he regarded as innocent.
(4.) The Christian religion in its advances struck at once at
the whole fabric of superstition in the Roman empire, and throughout
the world. It did not, like other religions, ask a place amidst the
religions already existing. It was exclusive in its claims. It
denounced all other systems as idolatry or superstition, and sought
to overthrow them. Those religions were interwoven With all the habits of
the people; they were connected with all the departments of the state;
they gave occupation to a vast number of priests and other officers, who
obtained their livelihood by the existing superstitions, and who
brought, of course, all the supposed sacredness of their character to
support them. A religion which attempted to overthrow the whole fabric,
therefore, at once excited all their malice. The monarchs, whose thrones
were based on the existing state of things; and the people, who
venerated the religion of their ancestors, would be opposed to the new
system.
(5.) Christianity was despised. It was regarded as one form of the
superstition of the Jews. And there was no people who were regarded with
so much contempt by all other nations as the Jews. The writings of the
Romans, on this point, are full proof.
(6.) The new religion was opposed to all the crimes of the world. It
began its career in a time of eminent wickedness. It plunged at once into
the midst of this wickedness; sought the great cities where crimes and
pollutions were condensed; and boldly reproved every form of prevailing
impiety. At Athens, at Corinth, at Ephesus, at Rome itself, it denounced
the judgment of God against every form of guilt. Whatever may be charged
on the apostles, it will not be alleged that they were timid in
denouncing the sins of the world. From all these causes, it is not
wonderful that the early Christians were persecuted. If it be asked
(7.) why the same religion meets with opposition now in lands that are
nominally Christian, it may be remarked,
(a) that the human heart is the same that it always was, opposed to truth
and righteousness;
(b) that religion encounters still a host of sins that are opposed to
it--pride, envy, malice, passion, the love of the world, and shame of
acknowledging God;
(e) that there has always been a peculiar opposition in the human
heart to receiving salvation as the gift of God through a crucified
Redeemer; and
(d) that all the forms of vice, and lust, and profaneness that exist in
the world, are opposed, and ever will be, to a religion of
purity, and self-denial, and love.
On the whole, We may remark here,
(1.) that the fact that Christianity has been thus opposed, and has
triumphed, is no small proof of its Divine origin. It has been
fairly tried, and still survives and flourishes. It was well to put
it to the test, and to bring to bear on it everything which had a
tendency to crush it, and thus to furnish the highest proof that it is
from God.
(2.) This religion cannot be destroyed; it will triumph; opposition to
it is vain; it will make its way throughout the world; and the path of
safety is not to oppose that which God is intending to establish in
the earth. Sinners who stand opposed to the gospel should tremble and be
afraid; for sooner or later they must fall before its triumphant
advances. It is not SAFE to oppose that which has already been opposed by
kings and rulers in every form, and yet has triumphed. It is not wise to
risk one's eternal welfare on the question of successful opposition to
that which God has, in so many ages and ways, pledged himself to
protect; and when God has solemnly declared that the Son, the Messiah,
whom he would set on his holy hill of Zion, should "break" his enemies
"with a rod of iron," and "dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel,"
Psalms 2:9.
{b} "For to do whatsoever" Acts 3:18
{c} "determined before to be done" Proverbs 21:30; Isaiah 46:10; 53:10
Verse 29. Behold their threatenings. So look upon them as to grant
us deliverance. They did not purpose to abandon their undertaking;
they resolved to persevere; and they expected that this purpose
would involve them in danger. With this purpose they implored
the protection of God; they asked that he would not suffer them to
be deterred from speaking boldly; and they sought that constant
additional proof might be granted of the presence and power of God
to confirm the truth of their message.
And grant, etc. This is an instance of heroic boldness, and a
determination to persevere in doing their duty to God. When we are
assailed by those ill power, when we are persecuted and in danger, we
should commit our way unto God, and seek his aid, that we may not be
deterred from the path of duty.
{a} "boldness" Acts 4:13,21; 14:3; 28:31; Ephesians 6:19
Verse 30. By stretching forth thine hand, etc. The apostles not only
desired boldness to speak, but they asked that God would continue to work
miracles, and thus furnish to them, and to the people, evidence of
the truth of what they delivered. They did not even ask that he
would preserve their lives, or keep them from danger. They were
intent on their work, and they confidently committed their way to
God, making it their great object to promote the knowledge of the
truth, and seeking that God would glorify himself by establishing
his kingdom among men.
Signs and wonders. Miracles. See Barnes "Acts 2:43".
{b} "Signs and wonders" Acts 2:43; 5:12
{c} "child" "son"
Verse 31. And when they had prayed. The event which followed was
regarded by them as an evidence that God heard their prayer.
The place was shaken. The word which is translated "was shaken,"
commonly denotes violent agitation, as the raging of the sea, the
convulsion of an earthquake, or trees shaken by the wind,
Matthew 11:7; Acts 16:26; Hebrews 12:26. The language here is fitted to
express the idea of an earthquake. Whether the motion was confined to
the house where they were, is not said. They probably regarded this as
an answer to their prayer, or as an evidence that God would be with them,
(1.) because it was sudden and violent, and was not produced by any
natural causes;
(2.) because it occurred immediately, while they were seeking Divine
direction;
(3.) because it was an exhibition of great power, and was an evidence
that God could protect them; and
(4) because a convulsion so great, sudden, and mighty, was fitted at
that time to awe them with a proof of the presence and power of God. A
similar instance of an answer to prayer by an earthquake is recorded in
Acts 16:25,26. Comp. Acts 2:1,2. It may be added, that among the
Jews an earthquake was very properly regarded as a striking and
impressive proof of the presence of Jehovah, Isaiah 29:6; Psalms 68:8,
"The earth shook, the heavens also dropped at the presence of God: even
Sinai itself was moved at the presence of God, the God of Israel." See
also the sublime description in Habakkuk 3:6-11. Comp. Matthew 27:54.
Among the heathen, an earthquake was regarded as proof of the presence
and favour of the deity. (See Virgil, AENid 3.89.)
They were all filled, etc. See Barnes "Acts 2:4".
Their being filled with the Holy Ghost, here, rather denotes
their being inspired with confidence or boldness, than being endowed
with new powers, as in Acts 2:4.
{c} "had prayed" Acts 2:2,4; 16:26
{+} "Holy Ghost", "Spirit"
{d} "they spake the word" Acts 4:29
Verse 32. And the multitude. The number of believers at this tune had
become large. In Acts 4:4, it is said that it was five thousand;
and the number was constantly increasing.
One heart. This expression denotes tender union. They felt
alike, or were attached to the same things, and this preserved them from
jars and dissensions.
One soul. This phrase also denotes close and tender union. No
expression could denote it more strikingly than to say of friends they
have one soul. Plutarch cites an ancient verse in his life of Cato of
Utica, with this very expression, "Two friends, one soul."
(Grotius.) Thus Diogenes Laertius also (5 i. 11) says respecting
Aristotle, that "being asked what was a friend, answered, that it was
one soul dwelling in two bodies." (Kuin”el.) The Hebrews spake of two
friends as being "one man." There can be no more striking demonstration
of union and love than to say of more than five thousand suddenly
drawn together, that they had one soul! And this union they evinced in
every way possible; in their conduct, in their prayers, and in their
property. How different would have been the aspect of the church, if
the union had continued to the present time!
Neither said, etc. That is, they did not regard it as their own, but
to be used for the benefit of the whole society. See Barnes "Acts 2:44".
{e} "one heart" Romans 15:5,6; 2 Corinthians 13:11; Philippians 2:2; 1 Peter 3:8
{f} "but they" Acts 1:8
Verse 33. And with great power. See \\Ac 1:8\\. The word power
here denotes efficacy; and means that they had ability given
them to bear witness of the resurrection of the Saviour. It refers,
therefore, rather to their preaching, than to their miracles.
Gave the apostles witness, etc. The apostles bore testimony to
the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. This was the main point to be
established. If it was proved that the Lord Jesus came to life again
after having been put to death, it established all that he taught, and
was a demonstration that he was sent from God. They exerted, therefore,
all their powers to prove this; and their success was such as might
have been expected. Multitudes were converted to the Christian faith.
And great grace, etc. The word grace means favour.
See Barnes "John 1:16". And the expression here may mean either that
the favour of God was remarkably shown to them, or that they had
great favour in the sight of the people. It does not refer, as the
expression now does commonly, to the internal blessings of religion on a
man's own soul; to their personal advancement in the Christian
graces of humility, etc.; but to the favour or success that
attended their preaching. The meaning probably is, that the favour
of the people towards them was great; or that great success attended
their ministry among them. Thus the same word grace (Greek) is used
in Acts 2:47. If this is its meaning, then here is an instance of the
power of the testimony of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus to impress
the minds of men. But this is not all, nor probably is it the main idea.
It is that their union, their benevolence, their liberality in supplying
the wants of the needy, was a means of opening the hearts of the people,
and of winning them to the Saviour. If we wish to incline others to our
opinions, or to bring them to be Christians, nothing is better adapted
to it than to show them kindness, and even to minister to their
temporal wants. Benevolence towards them softens the heart, and
inclines them to listen to us. It disarms their prejudices, and
disposes them to the exercise of the mild and amiable feelings of
religion. Hence our Saviour was engaged in healing the diseases, and
supplying the wants of the people. He drew around him the poor,
the needy, and the diseased, and supplied their necessities, and
thus prepared them to receive his message of truth. Thus God is love,
and is constantly doing good, that his goodness may lead men to
repentance, Romans 2:4. And hence no persons have better
opportunities to spread the true sentiments of religion, or are clothed
with higher responsibilities, than those who have it in their power to do
good; or than those who are habitually engaged in bestowing favours.
Thus physicians have access to the hearts of men which other persons
have not. Thus parents have an easy access to the minds of
children, for they are constantly doing them good. And thus Sunday-school
teachers, whose whole work is a work of benevolence, have direct and
most efficient access to the hearts of the children committed to their
care.
{g} "power" Acts 1:8
{h} "witness of the resurrection" Luke 1:48,49; Acts 1:22
{i} "great grace" John 1:16
Verse 34. That lacked. That was in want; or whose wants were not
supplied by the others.
As many as, etc. The word used here is employed in a large,
indefinite sense; but it would be improper to press it so as to suppose
that every individual that became a Christian sold at once all his
property. The sense doubtless is, that this was done when it was
necessary; they parted with whatever property was needful to supply
the wants of their poor brethren. That it was by no means considered a
matter of obligation, or enjoined by the apostles, is apparent from
the case of Ananias, Acts 5:4. The fact that Joses is
particularly mentioned, Acts 4:36, shows that it was by no means a
universal practice thus to part with all their possessions. He was
one instance in which it was done. Perhaps there were many other
similar instances; but all that the passage requires us to believe is,
that they parted with whatever was needful to supply the wants of
the poor. This was an eminent and instructive instance of Christian
liberality, and of the power of the gospel in overcoming one of the
strongest passions that ever exist in the human bosom--the love of money.
Many of the early Christians were poor. They were collected from the
lower orders of the people. But all were not so. Some of them, it
seems, were men of affluence. The effect of religion was to bring them
all, in regard to feeling at least, on a level. They felt that they were
members of one family; belonging to the same Redeemer; and they therefore
imparted their property cheerfully to their brethren. Besides this, they
were about to go to other lands to preach the gospel. They were to leave
their native country; and they cheerfully parted with their lands, that
they might go and proclaim the unsearchable riches of Christ.
See Barnes "Acts 2:44".
{*} "lacked" "wanted"
Verse 35. And laid them down, etc. That is, they committed the money
received for their property to the disposal of the apostles, to
distribute it as was necessary among the poor. This soon became a
burdensome and inconvenient office, and they therefore appointed
men who had especial charge of it, Acts 6:1,2, etc.
{a} "laid them down" Acts 4:37
{b} "distribution" Acts 2:45; 6:1
Verse 36. And Joses. Many manuscripts, instead of Joses,
here read Joseph. The reasons why this individual is selected and
specified particularly were, doubtless, because he was a foreigner;
because it was a remarkable instance of liberality; and because he
subsequently distinguished himself in the work of the ministry. He gave
himself, his property, his all, to the service of the Lord Jesus, and
went forth to the self-denying labours of the gospel. He is elsewhere
mentioned with honour in the New Testament, Acts 11:24,30;
and usually as the companion of the apostle Paul. The occasion on
which he became connected with Paul in the ministry was, when
he himself was sent forth by the church at Jerusalem to Antioch.
There, it seems, he heard of the fame of Paul, and went to Tarsus
to seek him, and brought him with him to Antioch, Acts 11:22-26.
Before this, he had been acquainted with him, and had introduced
him to the other apostles at a time when they were afraid of Paul,
and unwilling to acknowledge him as an apostle, Acts 9:26,27.
At Antioch, Barnabas was led into dissimulation by Peter in regard
to the Gentiles, and was reproved by his friend and companion Paul,
Galatians 2:13. He and Paul continued to travel in fellowship until a
dispute arose at Antioch about Mark; and they separated, Paul going
with Silas through Syria and Cilicia, and Barnabas with Mark sailing
for his native place, Cyprus, Acts 15:35-41. See the following
places for particulars of his history: Acts 11:22,25,30; 12:25;
Acts 13:1,2,50; 14:12; 15:12; 1 Corinthians 9:6; Galatians 2:1,9.
Who by the apostles was surnamed, etc. This name was doubtless given
by the apostles. The practice of giving surnames, as expressive of
character, was not uncommon. Thus Simon was called Peter, or
Cephas, John 1:42; and thus James and John were surnamed
Boanerges, Mark 3:17.
Barnabas, which is, etc. This word properly denotes the son of
prophecy. It is compounded of two Syriac words, the one meaning
son, and the other prophecy. The Greek word which is used to
interpret this, \~paraklhsewv\~, translated consolation, means properly
also, exhortation, entreaty, petition, or advocacy. It also means
consolation, or solace; and from this meaning the
interpretation has been given to the word Barnabas, but with
evident impropriety. It does not appear that the name was bestowed on
account of this; though it is probable that he possessed it
in an eminent degree; but on account of his talent for speaking, or
exhorting the people to holiness, and his success in preaching.
Comp. Acts 11:23,24.
A Levite. One of the descendants of Levi, employed in the lower
services of the temple. The whole tribe of Levi was set apart to the
service of religion. It was divided into Priests and Levites. The three
sons of Levi were Gershon, Kohath, and Merari. Of the family of
Kohath. Aaron was descended, who was the first high priest, His
eldest son succeeded him, and the remainder of his sons were priests.
All the others of the tribe of Levi were called Levites, and were
employed in the work of the temple, in assisting the priests in
performing sacred music, etc., Numbers 3; Deuteronomy 12:18,19; 18:6-8;
1 Chronicles 23:24.
Of the country of Cyprus. Cyprus is the largest island in
the Mediterranean; an island extremely fertile, abounding in wine,
honey, oil, wool, etc. It is mentioned in Acts 13:4; 15:39. The
island is near to Cilicia, and is not far from the Jewish coast. It is
mentioned by Dion Cassius, (lib. 68, 69,) that the Jews were very
numerous in that island.--Clark.
Barnabas afterwards became, with Paul, a distinguished preacher to the
Gentiles. It is worthy of remark, that both were born in heathen
countries, though by descent Jews; and as they were trained in heathen
lands, they were better fitted for their peculiar work. The case of
Barnabas is that of a man who had property, who entered the ministry,
and gave up all for the Lord Jesus. The great mass of ministers, like
very many who have been distinguished in other professions, have been
taken from the poor, and from humble ranks in life. But all have not
been. Many have been wealthy, and have devoted all to Christ; and in
regard to others, it is to be remarked, that a very considerable
proportion of them could have gained more wealth in some other
profession than they do in the ministry. The ministry is a work of
self-denial; and none should enter it who are not prepared to devote
all to the service of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Verse 37. No Barnes text on this verse.
Printer friendly version
HOME
TOP