CHAPTER 4
The priests and the captain of the temple guard and the Sadducees came up to Peter and John while they were speaking to the people. Acts 4:1
While Peter and John were in the midst of their great ministry, they were rudely interrupted by an official group of priests and Sadducees (Gk. Saddoukaioi). This group was led by the temple guard. This official, called in Greek the strategos, was captain of the temple police, and was also of the Sadducee party. He was like the right hand man of the high priest and charged with keeping order in the temple precincts (cf. Lk. 22:4, 52; Acts 5:24, 26).
The priestly families were Sadducees, including the high priest. They were the wealthy aristocrats of Israel who were eager collaborators with the Romans. They had no interest in the Messiah, for they felt the Messianic age had already begun with the Maccabean rulers.1 They were secular materialists who did not believe in the spiritual world of angels or demons. They certainly did not believe in the resurrection that Peter was preaching (cf. Mk. 12:18). Unlike the Pharisees, they did not believe in the Oral Law.2 Their great fear was that someone or some group would upset the status quo. The apostles had done just that.
“They were greatly disturbed because the apostles were teaching the people, proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection of the dead” (4:2). As we have mentioned, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, so they were particularly disturbed by the preaching of Peter and John. Other translations note that they were “much annoyed” (NRSV) or even “extremely annoyed” (NJB). We remember how Jesus once dumbfounded the Sadducees on this very question of the resurrection (Mk. 12:18-27).
“They seized Peter and John and, because it was evening, they put them in jail until the next day” (4:3). This event took place sometime after the evening hour of prayer and sacrifice. According to Jewish law it was not permitted to hold a trial after twilight.3 We cannot help but remember that this same group broke the law and held the trial of Jesus at night. Luke had recorded in his gospel the predictions of Jesus that his disciples would be insulted, hated and rejected (Lk. 6:22, 26), tried before rulers and authorities (Lk. 12:11), persecuted and imprisoned because of Jesus’ name (Lk. 21:12ff.).4
“But many who heard the message believed; so the number of men who believed grew to about five thousand” (4:4). We cannot but be amazed at the power of Peter and John’s preaching. Although they did not get to finish their message, a very large group eagerly accepted their word and became believers. Barnes comments: “This was one of the instances, which has since been so often repeated, in which persecution is seen to have a tendency to extend and establish the faith which it was designed to destroy. It finally came to be a proverb that ‘the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church.’” 5
From what we can tell, an additional 2,000 souls were added to the church that day. With the 120 original followers, plus the 3,000 at Pentecost the number was now around 5,000. The total may have been much more, for it seems that only the men were counted. Bruce says that the number of the men alone would have totaled 5,000.6 Wiersbe notes, “When God cannot rule, he overrules…” 7
PETER AND JOHN BEFORE THE RULERS
The next day the rulers, the elders and the teachers of the law met in Jerusalem. Annas the high priest was there, and so were Caiaphas, John, Alexander and others of the high priest’s family. Acts 4:5-6
What an imposing group met together that day. Barclay speaks of Peter’s message to them: “It was spoken to an audience of the wealthiest, the most intellectual and the most powerful in the land, and yet Peter, the Galilean fisherman, stands before them rather as their judge than as their victim. Further, this was the very court which had condemned Jesus to death. Peter knew that he was taking his life in his hands.” 8
Annas and Caiaphas were there just as they were in the trial of Jesus. The priesthood had fallen a long way from the days of Aaron, when the position was for life. Barclay continues to describe the group: “…in the Roman times the office was the subject of intrigue, bribery and corruption and high priests rose and fell so that between 37 BC and AD 67 there were no fewer than 28. But even after a high priest had been deposed, he often remained the power behind the throne…” 9
Just as was the case in Jesus’ trial, Annas was the power behind the throne here. He was selected as the high priest by the Romans from AD 6-15, and then deposed by them. However the high priestly power remained in his family for many years. Five of his sons and one son-in-law held the office.10 We remember that his son-in-law, Caiaphas held the position at the trial of Christ, with much input from Annas of course.
We need to remember that this was a meeting of the great Sanhedrin, the 71 member supreme court of the land, with Israel’s high priest presiding over it. They sat in their customary semi-circle with the two disciples before them. It appears that the once lame man was also there. Perhaps he had been summoned to appear, although he was like “Exhibit A” for the two disciples.
Scholars have guessed at the identities of John and Alexander and have come up with no positive proof as to who they were. However, it was an impressive crowd with several from the priestly family. Bruce comments, “… the presence of so many senior members indicates the seriousness with which they viewed the situation.” 11
“They had Peter and John brought before them and began to question them: ‘By what power or what name did you do this?’” (4:7). It is of note that the Sanhedrin seemed to have no interest in the fact that a great miracle had been performed, nor did they deny the miracle. They were only interested in the authority behind the miracle. That was the real challenge to their vested interests (cf. Matt. 21:23).
“Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them: ‘Rulers and elders of the people! If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a man who was lame and are being asked how he was healed, then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed” (4:8-10). We notice that Peter, for this occasion, is filled with the Spirit once more. This refilling of the Spirit is greatly needed when we all face difficult tests. It seems to come at the sovereign direction of God, through prayer, particularly corporate prayer, from unity of purpose and from standing squarely on God’s word.
While Peter showed the proper respect, he asked a question with piercing logic, “why are we on trial for a good deed?” 12 Peter nevertheless continued to declare before this group and the whole nation of Israel that the authority was in the name of Jesus of Nazareth. Just as he had done before the people, he now does before the priests and rulers. He tells them plainly that they were guilty of crucifying Christ. He shows them the blood on their own hands. What a scene this was! Utley says: “These leaders could not keep Christ in the tomb and they could not deny the healed man standing in front of them!…’ this man ‘stands here.’ This is a word play on ‘stands.’ The lame man stands up and stands before them.” 13
Peter continues, saying: “Jesus is ‘the stone you builders rejected, which has become the cornerstone’” (4:11). There was a great deal of teaching regarding Jesus as the stone, as well as the cornerstone in early Christianity. This picture was formed from scriptures like Psalm 118:22-23; Isaiah 28:16; Daniel 2:34-35. Isaiah even says that the choice cornerstone would become a stone of stumbling for the whole house of Israel (Isa. 8:14-15). When Jesus told the leaders the Parable of the Vineyard, he spoke of himself as the stone that the builders rejected (Matt. 21:42; Lk. 20:17).
Apparently there was an old tradition circulating about the cornerstone that was not recognized by the builders. Stedman relates it:
… during the building of the temple, a great rock was quarried out and shaped by the stone mason, and sent up, but the builders could find no place to put it. It did not seem to fit in any of the blueprints they were working from, and so they left it on the side. It sat there for some time. Then, as it seemed to be in the way, someone pushed it over the edge and it rolled down into the valley of the Kidron and was lost in the bushes. When the time came to put in the cornerstone, the great square rock that held everything else in place, they sent word for the cornerstone to be sent up. The quarrymen sent back word that it had already been sent up some time before. They looked around for it, and no one could find it. Then somebody remembered the great rock which had been pushed over the edge. Down they went to the valley of the Kidron and found it in the bushes. With great effort they raised it again and brought it to the top and fitted it into place. It fit perfectly— the cornerstone of the temple.14
The concepts of the “stone” and “cornerstone” would continue in the teaching of the church as we see in Romans 9:33; Ephesians 2:20; and 1 Peter 2:4-6. From Ephesians we learn of a wonderful new house that becomes a holy temple. It is made up of redeemed Jews and redeemed Gentiles, built upon the foundation of apostles and prophets with Jesus Christ as the chief cornerstone. The Venerable Bede says, “God by himself placed this [stone] at the chief position in the corner, so that from two Testaments and two peoples there might rise up a building of one and the same faith.” 15
“Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved” (4:12). This finale of Peter’s sermon shocked the Sanhedrin and would certainly shock the politically correct establishment of our day. Utley says: “This is a strong double negative…This has often been called the exclusivistic scandal of Christianity. There is no middle ground here. This statement is true or Christianity is false!..” 16 Jesus said: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (Jn. 14:6).
We might ask how Israel must relate to this exclusiveness. Were they not the chosen people of God before Jesus came on the scene? In Romans 3:25, Paul says an amazing thing. He declares, “…because of his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished.” In a real sense God had looked over the sins of the Old Testament period until the proper redemption could come in Jesus the Messiah. The Bible does say in Hebrews 10:4, “It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.” In Hebrews 9:15 we read: “…Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance— now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.” Also in Hebrews 11:40 it is said: “…God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.”
Simply put, the Old Testament people were waiting on the Messiah to come. Their offerings were only types and patterns of the real offering that would be made by Jesus.
Bede said: “If the salvation of the world is in no other but in Christ alone, then the fathers of the Old Testament were saved by the incarnation and passion of the same Redeemer, by which we also believe and hope to be saved.” 17
MEN WHO HAD BEEN WITH JESUS
When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus. Acts 4:13
Obviously, both Peter and John were speaking with courage and the elders could not help but be impressed. Both these disciples, as well as all the others, were Galileans. They suffered the disadvantage of being looked down upon by others in Israel, as being crude and uncultivated (Matt. 26:73).18 In addition, they were plainly unschooled (Gr. agrammatoi) and ordinary men (Gk. idiotai). In other words, they had no training in Rabbinic theology and they were non-professionals.19 “The wonder was that they showed such mastery of biblical argument.” 20 They were forced to conclude that these men possessed knowledge and skill from having been with Jesus. After all, Jesus had promised them: “For I will give you words and wisdom that none of your adversaries will be able to resist or contradict” (Lk. 21:15).
Bede remarks: “Unlettered men were sent to preach, so that the faith of those who believed would not be thought to have come about by eloquence and teaching instead of by God’s power.” 21 Pierson says, “Men are too anxious to be ranked with scholars; and so when error, however deadly, wears the glittering serpent-skin of scholarship, it insinuates itself into the very chair of the teacher, and the pulpit of the preacher, and no one seems to dare to smite it with a bold blow!” 22
“But since they could see the man who had been healed standing there with them, there was nothing they could say” (4:14). Today, we live in a time when true miracles are often denied. Instead of the Lord being praised, often people are found praising the doctors, the advances in medical science or some wonder drug. This was not the case in those days. This man stood before the Sanhedrin miraculously restored and the only explanation was the power of Jesus Christ. Their mouths were shut. As the great English minister and scholar F. B. Meyer says, “It was as impossible to stay the effect of that miracle as to bid the sun cease shining.” 23
“So they ordered them to withdraw from the Sanhedrin and then conferred together. ‘What are we going to do with these men?’ they asked. ‘Everyone living in Jerusalem knows they have performed a notable sign, and we cannot deny it. But to stop this thing from spreading any further among the people, we must warn them to speak no longer to anyone in this name’” (4:15-17). It is clear that a sense of panic and hopelessness was settling in upon the leaders of Israel. At least theoretically, these men were committed to the word of God and to truth. But practically speaking, “The council did not seek for truth, but rather sought for some way to avoid the truth!” 24
Some have wondered how Luke knew all the conversation that went on in this secret council. We already know from the trial of Jesus that there were people in the council who were sympathetic to the gospel, people like Nicodemus (Jn. 3:1ff.) and Joseph of Arimathea (Mk. 15:43). Perhaps there were many others, especially as the gospel net drew in thousands of Israelites, including many priests and others who were zealous for the law (Acts 6:7; 21:20). Saul may well have been a member of the council and may later have passed the information on to Luke, 25 for they often worked together. It has even been suggested that Gamaliel, Paul’s teacher, may have transmitted this information to Paul.
It seems that the leaders were at wits end to think of some solution to deal with this growing and nagging problem. They decided upon the plan of strictly threatening the disciples, though in the back of their minds they probably realized how Peter and John would answer to them.
THREATS AND MORE THREATS
Then they called them in again and commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John replied, “Which is right in God’s eyes: to listen to you, or to him? You be the judges! As for us, we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard.” Acts 4:18-20
The leaders of Israel were in an impossible situation. We might call it today a conundrum or a “catch 22.” Given their self-imposed parameters, there was no way the problem could be solved. Peter and John would not stop spreading the gospel, and the elders for fear of the people were powerless to stop them.
Pett comments: “Regularly would witnesses in the court be admonished to ‘speak only those things which they had seen and heard.’ And yet here was the court forbidding them to do so. They were forbidding them to declare the facts, to reveal the truth of what really happened. Could they really believe their ears? Was the court really then telling them not to be honest witnesses?” 26
Today this passage confronts us with the problem of how and when it is permissible to disobey those who are given legal authority over us. In the last century Brother Andrew defied the Soviet laws and smuggled thousands of Bibles into many Communist countries. Was that the right thing to do? Others have stood against laws in many countries, laws that they have deemed against the statutes of God. How far can we go in this delicate area? We know that a number of the prophets stood against the evil kings of Israel and many paid with their lives for their stand. Were they disobedient?
Can a Christian disobey a law that violates his or her conscience? It is true that governments and authorities are established by God (Rom. 13:1-7), and we are charged to be obedient to them. We have to take this much more seriously when we realize that evil Nero was in power as Paul gave this advice. It is clear that the authorities established by God can sometimes work against God. There are times when the establishment can be wrong and when we in good conscience, and standing on the word of God, must resist, just as Peter and John did.27 It is not an easy decision but it sometimes must be made. Strangely, it was the philosopher Voltaire who said, “It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.”
“After further threats they let them go. They could not decide how to punish them, because all the people were praising God for what had happened. For the man who was miraculously healed was over forty years old” (4:21-22). The people no doubt knew that this was a true miracle because the man was past the age when problems in the body could easily correct themselves. Pfeiffer and Harrison say, “the Sanhedrin dared not risk stirring up the anger of the people by punishing them. Furthermore, the Sadducees did not have the support of the people as did the Pharisees, and they had to be careful of public opinion.” 28
THE CHURCH AT PRAYER AND PRAISE
On their release, Peter and John went back to their own people and reported all that the chief priests and the elders had said to them. Acts 4:23
There is a great deal of excitement expressed here both from Peter and John as well as from the church. This was nothing less than a great victory report. The two disciples had declared the gospel to Israel on the very temple grounds and had witnessed astounding results. They had also fearlessly declared the same gospel to the rulers of Israel and had escaped by the grace of God. They had paid no attention to the Sanhedrin’s command to speak no more. Barclay says, “Once the papal envoy threatened Martin Luther with what would follow if he persisted in his course and warned him that in the end he would be deserted by all his supporters. ‘Where will you be then?’ demanded the envoy. ‘Then as now,’ Luther answered, ‘in the hands of God.’” 29
Pett describes this group saying: “They have left the company that represented old Israel, and joined up with the company that represents new Israel. This was where the future lay… There is surprisingly no reference to the Scribes and Pharisees. It would seem that they had remained in the background in the Council. In Acts, they tend to be more favorable towards the infant church (Acts 5:33-40; Acts 23:9).” 30
“When they heard this, they raised their voices together in prayer to God. ‘Sovereign Lord,’ they said, ‘you made the heavens and the earth and the sea, and everything in them’” (4:24). Barker and Kohlenberger comment, “Luke has evidently taken pains to give us this prayer so that it might serve as something of a pattern to be followed in our own praying.” 31 What an awesome and powerful corporate prayer this is! They address God as “Sovereign Lord.” This unusual Greek word is despota and it speaks of one who is “Master,” “Sovereign,” and one who rules with unchallengeable power.32 When we as a church body can come before the Lord with such unity, accord, deep respect and fear, we too can see great advances in the kingdom of God.
“You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David: ‘Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth rise up and the rulers band together against the Lord and against his anointed one’” (4:25-26). Here the church is quoting from Psalm 2:1-2. This must have been a very popular psalm for the early Christians because it spoke of their very situation. It seems that sometime before the Christian period this passage was seen in Jewish circles as a Messianic psalm.33
How true are the words of this psalm today as nations, rulers, kings, governments are uniting with one voice to speak against the Lord Jesus. In similar fashion, all these are quick to speak against the little nation of Israel, that people whom God has formed for himself; the people whom he sees as “his treasured possession” (Psa. 135:4).
“Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed. They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen” (4:27-28). In all the raving of these kings against Jesus they, “…were simply carrying out ‘God’s appointed counsel and foreknowledge…’” 34 It is always interesting how God uses the plans of his enemies in order to bring about his own plan. We see his teaching on predestination in several places like Romans 8:28-30, Romans 9 and Ephesians 1:3-14. We must remember that God always sees the end from the beginning (Isa. 46:10).
PRAYING FOR BOLDNESS
Now, Lord, consider their threats and enable your servants to speak your word with great boldness. Stretch out your hand to heal and perform signs and wonders through the name of your holy servant Jesus.” Acts 4:29-30
This is probably a prayer that few of us pray, although we need boldness today as never before, especially as we are face to face with an anti-Christian society. We wonder what would happen in our lethargic churches if we started to pray this way. How often do we ask God to stretch out his hand and heal, or perform signs and wonders through Jesus? Guzik says, “Their boldness was a gift from God, received through prayer. It was not something that they tried to work up in themselves.” 35
There are a lot of Christians who do not believe in miracles but I do, since I have personally witnessed a good number of them. I would like to see many more. Some folks think that miracles should be every-day occurrences. However, it seems that if that would happen, they would almost cease to be miracles. Stott says that miracles by their very definition are “abnorms” and not “norms.” He notes how in the Bible miracles seem to be clustered around great times of revelation, like in the days of Moses, Elijah and Elisha or Jesus.36 He concludes, “We will neither describe miracles as ‘never happening’, nor as ‘everyday occurrences,’ neither as ‘impossible’ nor as ‘normal’. Instead we will be entirely open to the God who works both through nature and through miracle.” 37
“After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly” (4:31). We cannot get over the impression that God really liked that kind of praying, and he let it be known. As Chrysostom said, “… the place…was shaken, and that made them the more unshaken…” 38 God spoke of such through Haggai: “This is what the LORD Almighty says: ‘In a little while I will once more shake the heavens and the earth, the sea and the dry land. I will shake all nations, and what is desired by all nations will come, and I will fill this house with glory, ‘ says the LORD Almighty’” (Hag. 2:6-7). In Psalm 104:32, it describes God as, “he who looks at the earth, and it trembles, who touches the mountains, and they smoke.”
LIFE TOGETHER
All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. Acts 4:32
This beautiful passage is very similar to the one in 2:41-47. By comparing both passages we get quite a clear picture of life in the earliest church. First of all, there was great unity and the people had one heart and one mind. Then, they shared their possessions with one another. Once again, here we see a derivative of the beautiful Greek word koinōniāi as we saw in 2:42-43. This sharing together of property was, as we have mentioned, a voluntary thing. Calvin said of this, “…love made each man’s own possessions common property for those in need…” 39
There were no doubt reasons why these early Christians felt it necessary to share with one another. Jerusalem, at least the center of town, was and still today is quite poor. Devout people, who were often impoverished, seemed to be drawn to Jerusalem. Some came to the city to die and be buried in the holy precincts. We know from the sixth chapter that there were many widows in the city who were in need of help. The new Hebrew believers often found themselves cut off from the normal synagogue help.40 Also, new believers in Christ then and today often find themselves discriminated against in the workplace. No doubt, many early believers had to take lesser jobs or settle for no jobs at all.
In short, the church at Jerusalem was a loving, sharing fellowship. Augustine (354-430), said of it: “If love made one soul of so many souls and one heart of so many hearts, how great must be the love between the Father and the Son!” 41 Pett calls it “a spontaneous ‘togetherness’… ‘a growing together in love.’” 42 Apparently this love and sharing had affected the whole group of Christians and not just the original few. It probably affected a lot of others as well, even unbelievers. Jesus said, “By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another” (Jn. 13:35).
“With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all” (4:33). Sometimes we wonder why our churches are so bereft of power today. Here we see that power seems to spring out of an environment of love and sharing together. They had an abundance of God’s grace poured out upon them. Stedman gives us a little acrostic that illustrates this grace:
“G – God’s
R— Riches
A— At
C— Christ’s
E— Expense” 43
Luke goes on saying, “that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need” (4:34-35). This was not something that was done all the time, but from “time to time” as needs arose. Barker and Kohlenberger add: “…Luke suggests that they were exceptional and were not meant to be normative for the church…” 44 In other words, we are not seeing here some early form of Christian Communism as some have thought. Private property still remained in private hands, as we will see illustrated clearly in the next chapter.
Concerning this giving up of property, Jerome (c. 347-420) makes an interesting remark. He says, “believers sold their possessions and brought the prices of them and laid them down at the apostles’ feet: a symbolic act designed to show that people must trample on covetousness.” 45 We will see in chapter 6 that eventually the church established a group of deacons who were chosen to care for the many needs and make fair distribution to the needy in the congregation.
“Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means ‘son of encouragement’), sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles’ feet” (4:36-37). Barnabas played an important role in the early church. Acts 11:24, pictures him as a good man who was full of the Holy Spirit. This good man had fully introduced Paul to the church at Jerusalem (9:26-27). Later he searched for Paul and brought him into the growing evangelistic work at Antioch (11:22-26). The two then brought alms to the people of Jerusalem, who were suffering from famine (11:27-30), and later they joined together in the First Missionary Journey to the Gentiles (13:2-3).46
Barnabas was a Jew and a Levite from the island of Cyprus. We are told that this good man sold a field, but we are not told where the field was located. It even could have been located in Cyprus. Commentators have wondered why the Levite Barnabas owned a field in the first place. We learn from Numbers 18:20 and Deuteronomy 10:9 that Levites were not permitted to own land. However, we are told in Jeremiah 32:7-12 that Jeremiah, who was of a priestly family, was instructed of the Lord to purchase a field. We have even pointed out how the Sadduceean priests were quite wealthy. So it seems that this restriction was eventually relaxed. Barnabas sold his field and brought the proceeds of his sale, laying the money at the apostle’s feet.
This great act of benevolence sets the stage for one of the most disastrous and disappointing stories in the New Testament. Satan was intent on attacking the newly emerging church. Stott sees that there were three points to his attack— “physical (persecution), moral (subversion) and professional (distraction).” 47 The church had already experienced the first attack of persecution. Satan had not done so well at that. Now the church was about to experience an attack against its morals. This was, of course, an attack from the inside. In chapter 6, there would be an attack designed to weaken and frustrate the ministry itself.