Acts 5:33-39. This sermon was preached by Pastor Marty Bonner on October 16, 2022.
Last week we looked at Peter’s powerful defense of their actions, and their preaching of the Gospel of Jesus. Peter ended with a powerful conviction of the religious leaders of Israel for murdering Jesus in the face of what God was doing- see last week’s sermon regarding why it is presented as murder. This sets us up for the reaction from the Council.
It is easy to become angry with a human being. Even the best believers have flaws that can be used to discount them, or even attack them. However, we must always remember that this is unwise. You will not be judged by Jesus on whether you were more flawless than those you disagreed with. Rather, you will be judged by what the Spirit of God was trying to say to you, or through you. Thus, we need to be careful in how we respond to one another. This is a serious area in which we are easily tripped up by the enemy.
Let’s get into the passage.
Though Peter’s speech is much the same as it was the first time he spoke to the council (Acts chapter four), it seems that the council’s response is far more furious this time. That makes some sense because this time they have disregarded the council’s earlier command.
Yet, it is not Peter that is bothering them, but rather, it is the Gospel Truth that Jesus has given to the apostles, the fact that they are faithfully speaking with boldness, and the clear presence of the Holy Spirit’s power. They would have typically dispatched Galilean fishermen with ease, but these guys were not typical.
Some translations say that they were “cut to the heart.” The word literally means “to be sawn in two.” Any English speaker would recognize right away that the intent of the original language is far more vehement than “cut to the heart” elicits. Thus, the term “furious” is used. They have been forced to hear the truth that they have been avoiding with such shocking force that they are beside themselves with rage and indignation.
We should see a contrast between this reaction and the reaction of the crowd on the Day of Pentecost. It is a contrast between Israel’s leaders and the average Judean (Jew). In Acts 2, the word of God from Peter is more of a piercing of their heart, rather than a sawing in two. Being pierced by God’s word stirs up remorse and godly sorrow within many in the crowd (of course not all).
It is the same word that Peter is preaching, but it has a different effect on different hearts. Of course, there is even a third response that can be described as apathy. How am I responding to the Gospel Truth of Jesus Christ? I am not just talking about sinners who are not believers, but also about those who are supposed to be believers. There comes a time when God refuses to wink at sin any more. He then sends a polarizing event, situation, or person to force us off of the fence, one way or another.
This is where many in the council are. They are responding with vehemence against the Gospel Truth. They are on a course to do the same thing to the apostles that they had done with Jesus. However, God had a different plan! Yes, the apostles would give their lives for the Gospel, but not at this time.
At this point, a respected teacher named Gamaliel steps in to dissuade the council from the direction that they are headed in. So, what do we know about this Rabbi?
We do not have a lot of source documents from that time period to give us information on him. He is mentioned twice in Acts and a couple of times in the Talmud (a collection of Jewish law and traditions). He seems to have lived from about 10 BC to c. AD 55-65. He served as the “Prince” (Nasi) of the Sanhedrin during these years and was a Pharisee, which means that he wasn’t aligned with the high priest.
In those days, there were two mainstream schools of interpretation referred to by their founding rabbis: Hillel and Shammai. Gamaliel is the grandson of Rabbi Hillel. It has been pointed out that Hillel and Shammai could have been present at the temple when the twelve-year-old Jesus was teaching and amazing them. Of course, we cannot know this side of heaven.
Gamaliel had the honor of a familial connection to Hillel, but had also proven to be a wise teacher, having a respect on his own merits.
Gamaliel argues for leaving the apostles alone, which causes some to question why he didn’t do so with Jesus. We do not have enough information to figure that out, so silent we should remain. It is possible he was not able to attend the trial of Jesus for some reason. It is also possible that he went along with the death of Jesus, but now feels executing 12 of top disciples- who were proving to be quite popular with a large number of people- is a bridge too far, and will cause riots. This is all speculation.
Regardless, this story has more to do with God’s purpose for the apostles than it does with Gamaliel. He simply becomes a means for God’s purpose to be worked out like Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, or even Judas.
Gamaliel has them put the apostles outside of the chamber so that they can discuss without being overheard. It is interesting to note that Nicodemus would have most likely been there. This account in Acts is the only surviving evidence of this trial.
When he is able to speak freely, Gamaliel warns the council that they need to be careful in what they do with these men. The heated anger within the group was not carrying them in a good direction. He argues against putting the men to death, which tells us what he didn’t want to happen. However, an argument is always crafted to be persuasive to others, and doesn’t always represent the main thinking of the person making it.
At the least, Gamaliel represents a cooler head, which is a hallmark of wiser notion. Still, we should be careful of turning Gamaliel into more than he is. He too was kicking against the goads of the Holy Spirit, along with his disciple Paul (see Acts 22:3). He is trying to find a middle road in a situation in which God is not allowing there to be a middle road. As I said earlier, there are times where God brings everything to a head and forces people to get off the fence. He uses circumstances like a bulldozer to remove that fence out from under us. How important it is for us to see that the issue is not wise sounding words, but knowing the Word of God, knowing what He is doing in the now. In this case, not even Gamaliel had the wisdom of these fishermen and their friends, in the same way that Pharaoh did not have the wisdom of the slaves before him.
Gamaliel reminds the council of two recent examples of insurrections that were led by messiah-figures. Each of these are of a person who gathered a large following, had a level of success, was struck down, and then their followers dispersed. We have no evidence outside of the Bible for these two insurrections. There are some passages in Josephus that are close, but they do not fit these details. In fact, there were many insurrections and rising of messiah-figures within Israel. The most famous of that period, other than Jesus, would come in AD 135 as the Romans crushed the Simon BarKochba Revolt. He had been backed as messiah by Rabbi Akiva, the top Hillel scholar of that time. So, it is little wonder that these two events, which were recent to the council at that time, would not be recorded elsewhere.
The first example is of a man named Theudas. He gathered up to 400 men, and yet, he was slain. This sounds like a military death, so it seems likely they tested their metal against the Romans. Regardless, his followers dispersed and nothing more came of it.
Similarly, a man named Judas (Judah) of Galilee rose up during the days of the census. There were several censuses in those decades, but it is likely that “the census” is a reference to the census by Caesar Augustus during the birth of Jesus. This Judas also rose up, drew many people after him, and then perished. His followers dispersed and nothing more came of it.
Gamaliel’s argument comes down to this. These apostles are either doing a work of men, a human source, or they are doing a work of God. If it is a work of men, then it will fail and come to nothing, like the two examples he gave. However, if it is of God, then they won’t be able to fight it because no man can fight God and win.
I would say up front that it would be reading too much into the argument to believe that Gamaliel was thinking God might be behind the apostles, though that is a possibility. However, it seems most likely that he is logically boxing them into the course of action that he wishes them to take. There is no way the council will accept that these men are doing God’s work- they were the ones “doing God’s work.”
There are two sides to Gamaliel’s argument. The side about God is absolutely true. When God is doing a work, not even the great armies of the world can stop it. Yet, there is a fallacy on the human side. Yes, all human endeavors done without God’s help will fail, but there are other factors. How long will it take to come to nothing? And, how much damage will it do until it fails? What about Islam? Does God want Arabs worshipping a false god in a false religion? Of course, He doesn’t. Yet, due to their choices, God has worked it into His plan. There will come a day when Islam is no more. What about Mormonism? They have been quite successful in numbers of people and money spent on a mission that is not a work of God. However, these things are worked into God’s plan as a judgment upon Christianity and its lack of fervor in His things.
We might also say that this is not the counsel of Jesus. “Beware of false prophets…” It is not the council of the Apostle Paul who jealously defended the churches that he started from false teachers and false prophets. He didn’t just ignore them.
We must always understand that sometimes God brings situations that force us to make a choice. It polarizes, and there is no middle position. O Christian, let us be a work of God who is working with God in His work! If we are only a Christian looking work of man, then we are of most people to be pitied, for we will one day stand before him and hear the fateful words, “Depart from me. I never knew you!”