And as they were speaking to the people, the priests and captain of the temple and the Sadducees came upon them,
Peter is still preaching in the temple when the officials arrive and arrest him and John. This is the first clash between the young church and the religious leaders, and it raises a question: why should a healed man and a risen Jesus lead to arrest?
The arrest did more than stop a sermon. It shut a door on Israel.
But while they were speaking, the priests, the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees came to lay hands on them. They were grieved that the apostles preached the resurrection, which their unbelief and their fixed system of doctrine did not accept. They put them in prison, for it was evening. The hope of Israel was set aside; the grace of God had spoken in vain, great and patient as it was. Many, however, believed their word: five thousand people already confessed the Lord Jesus.
The "captain of the temple" is an office, not a soldier's rank.
There was also a "captain of the temple" (in Greek, strategos). See Luke 22:4, 52; Acts 4:1; Acts 5:24, 26. The word literally means "the leader of an army," and Acts 16:20 uses it of magistrates. But the captain of the temple had charge of the priests and Levites, not of soldiers.
Two complaints brought this group together: one about who may teach, and one about the message itself.
Peter and John were teaching the people, a duty which belonged specially to the priests. They boldly proclaimed the Lord's resurrection from the dead. The Sadducees felt that one of their pet beliefs was touched.
The names in this verse mark a shift. During the Lord's ministry the opposition had a different face.
A new group now came forward. While the Lord lived and worked, they had stayed more in the background. Back then the Pharisees were His active enemies. They championed a defective, false righteousness, and they opposed the Righteous One. Now the enemy had another and very different group among the Jews ready: the Sadducees. A truth that exposed their complete unbelief stirred them out of their usual calm... But the resurrection, shown in the person of Jesus, was intolerable. And no one is so intolerant as the people who boast that they tolerate every shade of opinion — when the truth confronts them.
The change of opponents was no accident.
Satan had the Sadducees as his tools against the doctrine of the resurrection, just as he had the Pharisees as fitting tools against a living Christ. We must expect Satan's well-organised opposition to the truth.
The Sadducees taught that there is no resurrection. What alarmed them was not only that Jesus had risen, but where and when it had happened.
Their whole system of thought — their unbelief, to put it plainly — was in danger. At that time most of the leaders of Israel, though not the Pharisees, held that there was no resurrection... It was not only the resurrection. What made it worse was this: a resurrection that had brought the power of God into the world as it now is. A man was raised from the dead and gone into heaven right among them... Where had this mighty deed been done? Among them — in Jerusalem itself, in their own day. It was not done in a corner.
You might expect clear proof to win people over. Here it did the opposite.
From now on the Sadducees pushed hardest. For them, the resurrection of the Saviour overthrew their creed of denial. How happy they might have been to have their dreadful denials pierced by this glorious light from heaven! But in fact, the more complete the proof of the truth of the gospel, the more they were stirred up against it. If the proof had been weaker, they would surely have acted more gently. But once argument becomes impossible, the will hiding underneath comes out into the open with even more stubborn energy.
Locking up the preachers did nothing to the message they had already delivered.
The apostles went into custody that evening until the next day. But the word was not bound, and the true light was already shining. Many of those who heard believed. The number of men rose to about five thousand.
- Interrupted — Peter is stopped mid-sermon. The offer of blessing to Israel is cut short, and grace, in Darby's words, had spoken in vain.
- Officials — the captain of the temple led the priests and Levites, not troops. Teaching the people was a job the priests claimed as their own.
- Opponents — the Pharisees fought the Lord in His lifetime. Now the Sadducees step forward, because a risen Jesus destroys their denial of resurrection.
- Nearness — what enraged them was a resurrection that had happened in their own city, in their own day, not in a corner.
- Outcome — the arrest held the preachers, but not the word. The light was already shining, and the men who believed numbered about five thousand.
being distressed on account of their teaching the people and preaching by Jesus the resurrection from among [the] dead;
Peter and John were still teaching the crowd when the authorities arrested them. What made the rulers so angry, and why did the Sadducees react most of all?
Two things provoked them at once: who was teaching, and what was taught.
Peter and John were teaching the people, a duty which belonged specially to the priests. They boldly proclaimed the Lord's resurrection from the dead. The Sadducees felt that one of their treasured doctrines had been struck at.
The opposition had also changed hands. While Jesus walked on earth, a different party led the attacks.
This doctrine of the resurrection was recognised as the doctrine the apostles preached openly. It was not that the soul goes to heaven when a person dies. It was that the dead will live again. The Pharisees were the greatest enemies of the Lord while He was on earth. They were the falsely righteous ones, set against the truly Righteous One. In the same way, after His death, Satan raised up the Sadducees, who were enemies of the doctrine of the resurrection.
A risen Man left the Sadducees nothing to stand on. And it had happened where they could not dismiss it.
Their whole system of thought — their unbelief, to be exact — was in danger... They felt most deeply the proclamation of the truth that there was a man risen from the dead and gone to heaven. It overthrew their whole system... Where had this mighty deed been done? Among them — in Jerusalem itself, in their own day. It was not done in a corner. It was not done in some hidden place of the earth. It was not done where nobody had seen it and nobody had heard anything about it.
The wording matters. The apostles did not just say that the dead would rise one day. The Pharisees already believed that. They preached a resurrection out from among the dead, through the very Man these rulers had condemned. (Some translations render the phrase "the resurrection from among the dead.")
The expression is "in Jesus," and no doubt the resurrection of Jesus Himself was the great subject of the apostles' testimony. But the expression implies something more... They might have been grieved at their preaching "the resurrection of the dead." But they could hardly have laid hands on them for that. The Pharisees, a far larger group than themselves, held the same faith. What roused their fury and persecution was the exclusive resurrection — announced by Jesus, and now proclaimed through Him.
There was more to their fear than the report of a risen man. The hope preached with it drew the people.
It was not only the report of the resurrection that these Sadducees feared... They also feared the setting of such an attractive and winning hope before the people. It was a hope full of grace and blessedness: that God would grant those who followed the banner of Christ here below to rise first. The resurrection of the Lord Himself was a kind of pledge and pattern of it.
Their creed allowed nothing beyond the ordinary run of nature. One raised Man ended that.
The resurrection of Him whom man had just killed is the plain, conclusive and unanswerable proof of God's power according to His word. It is the most complete refutation of those who admit nothing beyond the natural course of things in this world. Nobody disputes the laws that govern that course. Nobody disputes the knowledge of those laws that men call science. But the resurrection proves One above those laws, which in no way control or limit His power.
A belief held in advance can shut a man's mind to evidence. The arrest that followed came too late.
Pre-conceived falsehood will blind a man with unreasoning prejudice. Peter and John were then imprisoned until the next day. However, their word had been most effective in the two hours or so they had been able to speak, and many believed.
- The offence — the apostles taught the people, work the priests claimed as their own. And they preached the one doctrine the Sadducees denied.
- The overthrow — a risen Man in heaven wrecked the whole Sadducee system. It had happened in their own city, in their own day, not in a corner.
- The precision — not the general resurrection the Pharisees also held, but resurrection from among the dead, through Jesus. That exclusive hope turned annoyance into arrest.
- The proof — resurrection shows a Power above the fixed course of nature. So it silences those who admit nothing beyond it.
- The outcome — they jailed two men for a night; in the two hours before that, many believed.
and they laid hands on them, and put them in ward till the morrow; for it was already evening.
Two men who had just healed a crippled man and preached in the temple end the day behind a locked door. The hour was late, so the officials held them overnight — and the arrest raises a question: who were they really fighting?
The officials seized Peter and John for what they had just said. One writer names the group behind the arrest and what stirred them:
Religious authority took offence. Who were these men to speak inside the temple? A mighty miracle had been done in public, and no one could deny it. But officials are sensitive to any invasion of their rights, and they tend to leave God out of the account. And now a group came forward that had stayed more in the background while the Lord lived and worked. Back then the Pharisees were His active enemies. They championed a defective and false righteousness, and they opposed the Righteous One. Now the enemy had another and very different body among the Jews ready: the Sadducees. A truth stirred them out of their usual calm. It convicted them of complete unbelief, and so of hostility to God and His word.
The account tells us what the officials did. It says nothing about how the two apostles reacted. That silence is itself telling:
The next step is the arrest and imprisonment of the two apostles. Rough hands seize them. Of the Apostles we read nothing else. They submitted. The power of the Holy Spirit now showed itself in a new way with them. They could suffer, and perhaps with great joy. In perfect peace they let themselves be taken away.
By morning the council had a problem. One writer looks in on their private discussion:
The arrest had evidently been a great mistake, for they found that they could do nothing to the Apostles. A court can never afford to take up a case in haste and then find it must drop it. That course is bound to bring it into disrepute and discredit before men. Yet what had they done? They had kept two men in custody for a whole night for a good deed done to a crippled man! That was the light in which Peter put it, and against which they could urge nothing.
The prison door closed on the preachers, but the sermon had already done its work. The very next verse counts the harvest of a message that was cut short:
The apostles were put in custody that evening till the next morning. But the word was not bound. The true light was already shining. Many of those who heard believed. The number of men rose to about five thousand.
The same pattern held later on. Another writer follows the work forward, to the point where the Jewish ruling council pressed harder:
Nothing could stop the work that had started this way. A little later the opposition of the Sanhedrin grew sharper. Even then the writer of Acts tells us how the work marched on: "And the word of God continued to increase, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests became obedient to the faith."
The apostles did not treat this arrest as a personal grievance. In prayer they named the real enemy and the real target:
Satan hates the One who captured him too much to stay hidden, so from time to time he comes out of ambush to give battle. The Lord's servants knew his schemes. They traced the effects back to the right cause. Crying to God, they owned that the opposition was aimed not at them, but at God's Christ.
For the nation, the evening arrest carried a heavier meaning. One writer reads it as the moment Israel's leaders answered the offer of mercy:
They put them in prison, for it was evening. The hope of Israel was set aside; the grace of God had spoken in vain, great and patient as it was. Many, however, believed their word: five thousand persons already confessed the Lord Jesus.
- Cause. The officials seized them for preaching a risen Jesus, not for healing a man. That truth exposed the Sadducees' unbelief and set them against God's word.
- Conduct. Rough hands seized them; they submitted. Suffering quietly was the new proof that the Spirit was at work in them.
- Custody. Evening stopped the sermon. The council held two men all night "for a good deed done to a crippled man," and could never justify it.
- Contrast. The preachers were bound; the word was not. Five thousand men believed from a message the authorities cut off.
- Consequence. Behind the priests stood an older enemy, aiming at Christ Himself. By refusing the messengers, Israel's leaders set aside the grace God still offered them.
But many of those who had heard the word believed; and the number of the men had become [about] five thousand.
Peter's sermon at the temple ends with an arrest. Luke closes the scene not with the prison door but with a count of new believers. So who decides what preaching achieves — the authorities who silenced the speakers, or God, who had already sealed their work?
The chapter opens with hostile officials seizing Peter and John. One writer sets the arrest and the harvest side by side:
Satan stirs up the same hatred of man that led to the crucifixion of Christ. In Acts 4 we find three sets of attackers coming against the men who preached Jesus... For that serious offence "they laid hands on them, and put them in custody until the next day." But God had put His seal on their ministry. And "many of those who had heard the word believed, and the number of the men came to about five thousand."
Another writer states the same contrast in one sentence:
But if the apostles were put in custody that evening until the next day, the word was not bound, the true light was already shining.
One writer points out what did this work, and where it happened:
In the very town where the Lord had been crucified so recently, the work of gathering together those who should be saved began (Acts 2:47); and the Word did it. The movement did not begin in some obscure village of Galilee and then show itself to the world once it could boast of numbers. Just six weeks after the crucifixion of the Lord, the words of life were spoken in the very centre of Judaism — in the capital city Jerusalem, under the shadow of the temple. Those words bowed hearts to confess the crucified One as their Saviour and their Lord. Nothing could stop the work that started this way.
At Pentecost Peter's hearers cried out in alarm. Here they believe instead. One writer traces the difference to what Peter said about the risen Christ each time:
In Acts 2 Peter lifts up the risen Christ as Moses brought in the budding rod in Numbers 17 to shame the people. There it is a startling object, full of judgement on a rebellious people. Israel cries out under the weight of this, "Brothers, what shall we do?"... In Acts 3 he publishes the name of the same risen Jesus for the healing of these people. That name is set for salvation, not for judgement... Under this preaching the people do not cry out. Instead, "many of those who had heard the word believed, and the number of the men came to about five thousand." Peter had declared that he preached Jesus for blessing.
The count is not a total of everyone present:
Many of those who heard believed. The number of men rose to about five thousand. This means there were also quite a few women and children present. There is no good reason to take "men" in any sense other than its usual exact one.
Read that way, the number marks real advance on Pentecost rather than a restatement of it:
Their word had been very effective in the two hours or so they were able to speak. Many believed, so that the number of men alone had become about 5000. That was a marked increase since the day of Pentecost, when 3000 souls came to faith — not men only.
The turning of these hearers drew a line through the nation. One writer follows the two sides:
The repentance of the Jews... made a clear division between them and the leaders of their nation. Those leaders held on to their unbelief, and soon began to persecute the followers of Jesus of Nazareth... Those who believed were "added to the church." Those who refused the offered forgiveness kept their place and position in the world that hated the Father and the Son.
- Bound — The authorities could lock up Peter and John. They could not stop the word already spoken, for God had set His seal on that ministry.
- Heard — Spoken words did all this, in the very city where Christ was crucified weeks before. Nothing could stop what they started.
- Believed — This message held out Jesus for blessing and healing, not for judgement. So the hearers did not cry out in alarm. They believed.
- Counted — "Men" means men, so women and children stand outside the five thousand. Set against Pentecost's three thousand souls, the numbers were climbing.
- Divided — God added the believers to the church. The leaders who refused forgiveness kept their standing in a world that hated the Father and the Son.
And it came to pass on the morrow that their rulers and elders and scribes were gathered together at Jerusalem,
The morning after the arrest, Israel's whole religious leadership meets in Jerusalem. Their business is two fishermen and one healed man. They meet as judges, and God turns their court into the place where the leaders of the nation hear the name of Jesus.
Rulers, elders and scribes together made up the governing body of the nation. The men in that room already knew this case. One commentator names them and shows what their meeting achieved without meaning to:
The arrest of Peter and John called for a large gathering of the Jewish rulers, elders and scribes, including Annas and Caiaphas (in practice a joint high priest with Annas). These were the same men who had condemned the Lord Jesus to death. Of course it was the preaching of Jesus risen from the dead that angered them. But they could not ignore the striking miracle of the healing of the lame man... So their gathering was a God-ordained means of their hearing the truth about Christ risen from among the dead — the truth they did not want to hear.
The word "elder" has a long history. Here it does not yet mean what it will later mean in the church.
The word "elder" comes down from the earliest family days of Israel (Ex. 3:16). The family was the model of government, and in the family the father, as the elder, had authority. The nation then took the same pattern: the heads of houses became the heads of the nation. In this sense the word appears often in the Gospels and Acts (Matt. 26:3, 47, 57, 59; Acts 4:5, 8). In Acts 11:30 we find the first use of the word for the leaders in the Church of God.
Two fishermen from Galilee had never stood in such a place. The size of the assembly may have been the point.
The two apostles were kept in custody for the night, since it was evening when they were arrested, and they were to appear before the council the next day. These two Galilean fishermen stood for the first time as defendants before the leading people of their nation... The sight of that assembly could well have overwhelmed the prisoners. Perhaps such a display was meant to intimidate them. But did it? Their position was new to them, yet the Lord had foreseen it. He had warned them that they would stand before kings and rulers for His sake. He had also encouraged them with the promise that the Holy Spirit would teach them what to say.
They called it a trial. It became a preaching platform. One commentator traces the order across the two chapters:
The common people had the Gospel presented to them in the third chapter, the leaders are going to get it now in the fourth.
The charge was absurd, and the best witness for the defence stood in the room:
But did you ever hear of such utter folly as putting a man in prison, and trying him for a good deed — healing a cripple? God brings the man in, as it were, to give witness to that council. I do not suppose the council invited him, for he was an awkward witness. Look at him now, whole!
Earlier Peter had allowed that ignorance played a part. Before these men he drops that word, and one commentator explains why:
Now that he has these guilty leaders in front of him, he does not say, "I know that through ignorance you did it." They were now making it perfectly clear that there was a will — a wicked will. So he allows no excuse, and it is always so with God. When He first meets souls, He meets them as they are, with nothing but grace. When they go on rejecting Christ, there is no use denying that there is a rebellious will.
One writer sums up the whole day, from the gathering to Peter's answer:
On the next day the religious authorities crowded together, from the highest down through every grade, and they challenged the two apostles. Peter answered in the power of the Spirit Who filled him. The good deed was done in the name of the One they had crucified, and God had raised Him from the dead. His word describes Him as the Stone, thrown aside by the builders, yet made the head of the corner — the rejected but exalted Messiah.
- Gathered against Him — the rulers, elders and scribes were the same men who had condemned Jesus to death. The case had reopened itself.
- Gathered by Him — they called it a trial. It became "a God-ordained means of their hearing the truth" they refused to hear.
- Gathered to intimidate — the crowded court may have been meant to frighten two fishermen. But the Lord had told them they would stand before rulers, and promised the Spirit to give them words.
- Gathered to be told — chapter 3 brought the good news to ordinary people. Chapter 4 brings it to the leaders, with the healed man standing there as an awkward witness.
- Gathered as builders — Peter allows them no excuse of ignorance. They are the builders who threw the Stone aside, and God has made it the head of the corner.
and Annas the high priest, and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as many as were of [the] high priestly family;
The morning after their arrest, Peter and John faced the men Luke names here — Annas, Caiaphas, John, Alexander, and the rest of the high priest's family. Why list a court that achieved nothing, and why call Annas high priest when he no longer held the office?
These men were not new opponents. One writer points out that their meeting served a purpose they never intended.
The arrest of Peter and John called for a large gathering of the Jewish rulers, elders and scribes. It included Annas and Caiaphas, who was almost a joint high priest with Annas. These were the same men who had condemned the Lord Jesus to death. What angered them was the preaching of Jesus risen from the dead. Yet they could not ignore the striking miracle of the healing of the lame man... So their gathering was God's own way of making them hear the truth about Christ risen from among the dead — the truth they did not want to hear.
Annas lost the office years before, yet Luke gives him the title first. Commentators differ on the reason. One answer is that the title stayed with him as an honour:
Annas became high priest in A.D. 7. Cyrenius, or Quirinus, the governor of Syria, appointed him. In the reign of Tiberius he lost the office, and four men followed him in quick succession, the last being Joseph Caiaphas, his son-in-law. It is thought that people still called Annas high priest out of courtesy, since he had once held the office.
Another writer would rather admit ignorance than correct Luke:
The Lord's questioning before Annas (John 18) shows that Annas still had authority in a moral sense, though not in fact. So people may have gone on calling him high priest (see Luke 3:2), because he had once held that office. We are sure that Luke writes about what he had searched out for himself. So if we cannot explain why Annas is called high priest here, it is because there is something we do not yet know. It is wiser to admit our ignorance and wait for fuller light than to accuse the historian of ignorance, until we are quite sure we know better than he did.
The confusion over titles points to a deeper disorder. Rome now decided who served as high priest. One writer traces this in the career of Caiaphas.
Caiaphas was a Sadducee. He received his office in A.D. 17 or 18 from the Roman governor Valerius Gratus, who made and unmade high priests, you might say, as he pleased... God's order in the high priesthood was set aside. It seems that a Gentile, Valerius Gratus, appointed whichever man of the house of Aaron he chose.
Nothing certain is known about John and Alexander. That silence carries its own lesson.
Everyone knows the names of the two men on trial, and Scripture keeps the record of their service forever. The story of John and Alexander was well known at the time, but it has almost completely faded away. The great people of the earth are often nearly forgotten, while God's servants of the same day are remembered and honoured.
Two fishermen now stood before the whole ruling family. The Lord had prepared them for this moment.
For the first time these two Galilean fishermen stood on trial before the leading men of their nation... The sight of that assembly could easily have overwhelmed the prisoners. Perhaps such a display was meant to frighten them. But did it? Their position was new to them, yet the Lord had foreseen it. He had warned them that men would bring them before kings and rulers for His sake. He had also encouraged them by promising the Holy Spirit, who would teach them what to say... Had these rulers stamped out the movement? It had taken new life since its Founder's death.
The council saw Peter and John as untrained men. One writer turns that verdict back on the judges.
They saw the boldness of these men, but they also saw that they were untrained and uneducated. It was not that Peter and John were ignorant of the truth. The judges were the ignorant ones. It was not that Peter and John knew little of the Scriptures. Caiaphas and Annas and the others were the ones who knew little of the Scriptures... It showed, so to speak, the power and the grace of God made perfect in weakness.
- Assembled — the same court that condemned Jesus now judges two of His followers.
- Appointed — Annas keeps the title without the office. Rome made and unmade high priests at will, and God's order in the priesthood was set aside.
- Arranged — the size of the court may have been meant to frighten. But the Lord had warned His disciples about rulers and promised the Spirit to teach them what to say.
- Answered — the men the council called untrained knew the Scriptures better than their judges. God's power was made perfect in weakness.
- Anonymous — John and Alexander were famous then and forgotten now. Scripture keeps the service of the two prisoners forever.
and having placed them in the midst they inquired, In what power or in what name have *ye* done this?
Two fishermen have spent the night in custody. Now they stand in the middle of the nation's top religious leaders, told to explain a healing. The question — by whose power, by whose name? — is an interrogation. It also hands Peter the one subject he most wants to speak about.
The men now questioning Peter and John were not strangers to the case. They had already condemned the One whose name lay behind the healing. Their own meeting then became the platform for the message they wanted silenced.
The arrest of Peter and John called for a large gathering of the Jewish rulers, elders and scribes. Annas and Caiaphas were among them, Caiaphas acting as almost a joint high priest with Annas. These were the same who had condemned the Lord Jesus to death. Of course it was the preaching of Jesus risen from the dead that angered them. But they could not ignore the striking miracle of the lame man's healing. So they question Peter and John about this first. They can expect only one answer to their question: by what power, or by what name, had they done this miracle? Their gathering was therefore God's way of making them hear the truth about Christ risen from among the dead — the truth they did not want to hear.
Notice what the question admits. By asking what power did this, the rulers grant that something real happened. How they word the second half is telling too.
A power had clearly been at work, and all the people had to admit it. Even the priests had to recognise it. They asked "by what power," and then, as if afraid to speak the Name, "by what name did you do this?" Here, then, is the promised power, shown in the miracle. But the miracle was only a picture of power that delivers from sin and everything else.
The charge exposes itself. Two men are on trial for healing a cripple, and the healed man in the room is a witness nobody called.
But did you ever hear of such utter folly as putting a man in prison, and trying him for a good deed — healing a cripple? God brings the man in, as it were, to give witness to that council. I do not expect he was invited by the council, for he was an awkward witness. Look at him now, whole! Yesterday he was a poor cripple until three o'clock, now he is a healthy man.
Peter's reply answers both halves of their question. The name is Jesus of Nazareth. The power is God's, shown in raising Him from the dead. In his earlier preaching Peter had allowed that people acted in ignorance. Before these leaders he drops that.
Filled with the Holy Spirit, he said... "in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead." And you will notice that he does not soften it here. Now these guilty leaders stand in front of him. He does not say, "I know that you did it in ignorance." By now they were making it perfectly plain that there was a will at work — a wicked will. So he allows no excuse, and it is always so with God. When He first meets souls, He meets them as they are, with nothing but grace. But when they go on rejecting Christ, it is no use denying that there is a rebellious will.
Peter had once failed when he leaned on his own strength. Here, under far heavier pressure, the result is the opposite. The difference is the Holy Spirit.
after
If Simon Peter, relying on his own strength, fell before the enemy, he did not fail when he relied on the help of his Master. The rulers, elders, scribes and all the high priest's family called Peter and John before them. But the Holy Spirit filled the two men. Instead of standing as the accused, they became the judges of the men they stood before.
The cure of one man was not the whole story. The same Name reaches further than that one case.
The power of the Name was right in front of their eyes in the case of the lame man healed. It was no less powerful for the salvation of people everywhere. The physical healing of the man was simply a sign of the spiritual healing which the Name of Jesus brings. The despised Jesus of Nazareth is the only door into salvation.
- The Name questioned. The rulers ask about power and name. By asking, they admit that a real power was at work — while seeming afraid to say the Name.
- The Name explained. Peter answers both halves. The name is Jesus of Nazareth. The power is God's, seen in raising the One they crucified.
- The Name unexcused. Earlier Peter allowed for ignorance. Before these men he allows none. Settled rejection shows a rebellious will.
- The Name defended. Filled with the Spirit, the accused became the ones asking the questions. A healed man stood in the room as a witness no one could answer.
- The Name offered. One lame man made whole is the sample; the same Name is the only door into salvation for everyone.
Then Peter, filled with [the] Holy Spirit, said to them, Rulers of the people and elders [of Israel],
The rulers had asked Peter and John by what power they healed the lame man. Peter answers filled with the Holy Spirit, and that phrase explains everything that follows.
The position was new to the apostles, but not to their Lord.
The sight of that assembly might naturally have overawed the prisoners. And perhaps such a display was meant to intimidate them. But did it? Their position was new to them, but the Lord had foreseen it. He had warned them that they would stand before kings and rulers for His sake. He had also encouraged them by the promise of the Holy Spirit to teach them what they should say.
Scripture uses two expressions about the Spirit. They do not mean the same thing.
"Full of the Holy Spirit" tells us, it seems, of what habitually or generally marked the person. So Stephen and Barnabas are described this way (Acts 6:5; 11:24)... "Filled with the Spirit," on the other hand, describes vessels God takes up for His service, for a longer or a shorter time.
The same man is filled again in verse 31, and the Spirit fills others at later moments.
In the Acts of the Apostles we find that on special occasions one or another were filled with the Spirit (Acts 4:8 and 31; Acts 7:55; Acts 13:9 and 52). He took possession of them with special completeness, so that they could meet the emergency in the full power of God.
Peter had preached to crowds before. This audience was different, and it would show where his power came from.
Now he stands with John before the leaders and rulers, the men of light and learning. They were a cold and critical audience, bitterly hostile to the men and their message. This was a great test. It would prove beyond doubt whether Peter was serving by the power of the Holy Spirit, or in his own natural energy... This was the man who had trembled with fear and denied his Lord at the taunt of a servant girl. Before an audience like this, he would have had little to say if he stood there in his own natural ability and strength of purpose.
The Lord had told His followers not to rehearse a defence. He promised them words in the moment instead.
The Lord had said to His disciples, "When they deliver you over, do not be anxious how you are to speak or what you are to say, for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour. For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you" (Matt. 10:19-20). That promise came true when the apostles were arrested and brought before the rulers of Israel... Those filled with the Holy Spirit can speak God's word with power, as seen in Acts 2. They can also meet their opponents without planning what they will say. They receive from the Lord, as shown here, "a mouth and wisdom" that none of their adversaries can withstand or contradict (Luke 21:14-15).
Peter's answer spares the rulers nothing. He deals with them one way and with the misled people another.
Peter, full of the Holy Spirit, announces it to all Israel with the utmost readiness and complete boldness. The healing was by Jesus, whom they had crucified, and whom God had raised from the dead. So the Spirit of God stated the question between God and the rulers of Israel in formal terms... He takes no care to avoid offending the adversaries and the rulers. With the people, ignorant and misled, he does everything to win them.
Peter's answer fits a pattern that began the day the Spirit came.
Notice this: the instant the Holy Spirit comes, everything these disciples do is in His power and under His control. They proclaim the good news, but it was "as the Spirit gave them utterance." In Acts 4:8... when opposition arose, it was met in the power of the Holy Spirit.
- Filled, not full. "Full of the Spirit" describes a settled character. "Filled with the Spirit" describes a vessel taken up for one service. That is Peter here.
- Filled for the emergency. The Spirit fills His servants for special occasions, so they can meet the moment in the full power of God.
- Filled to fulfil a promise. The Lord promised words in that hour. This is that hour, and Peter needs no prepared defence.
- Filled, so the test is passed. Natural eloquence could not move this hostile, learned council. Yet the man who once denied his Lord stands unshaken.
- Filled, so the issue is stated. By the Spirit, Peter states the question between God and Israel's rulers. He takes no care to avoid offending them.
if *we* this day are called upon to answer as to the good deed [done] to the infirm man, how *he* has been healed,
Peter and John spent a night in custody. The next day the rulers demanded to know what power had healed the lame man. Peter answers by restating the charge in his own words. The whole case, he says, is about a good deed done to a helpless man. That one sentence exposes both the court and the power behind the cure.
By calling the deed good, Peter puts the council in an impossible position. One writer names the absurdity of it:
But did you ever hear of such utter folly as putting a man in prison, and trying him for a good deed — healing a cripple?
The accused end up judging their judges:
When they were put on trial before the rulers, elders, scribes and all who belonged to the family of the high priest, Peter and John were filled with the Holy Spirit. Instead of standing as the accused, they were the judges of the men they stood before.
The rulers asked about power and name. Peter takes the question and answers it. His wording already carries the argument:
Filled with the Spirit of God, Peter speaks to them of "the good deed done to the crippled man," clearly implying that a good deed must have a good source. He declares this in plain terms, as a message for the leaders and for all the people of Israel: this was done by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom they crucified and whom God raised from the dead.
The word behind "healed" here is the everyday New Testament word for "save":
It is worth noticing that the word sozo, usually translated in the New Testament as "save," is used in its general sense of deliverance... of the crippled man at the temple gate, Acts 4:9; of the cripple at Lystra, Acts 14:9. In these instances the Greek word is translated "made whole," or "healed."
So one word covers both: a body made whole and a soul saved. What that name did for a man's legs pictures what it does for a soul.
Peter can point to "this man" because the man is standing there. He walked into the council with the apostles:
The next day, when Peter and John were arrested, this man goes boldly into the council. He stays silent, yet he becomes a witness to the power of the Name of Jesus, because he was the one who was healed.
A healed life argues for Christ without saying a word. The court could dispute Peter's theology; it could not dispute the man on his feet.
Peter is not improvising a legal defence. Writers connect this moment to a promise Jesus made to His followers about hostile courtrooms:
The Lord had said to His disciples, "When they deliver you over, do not be anxious how you are to speak or what you are to say, for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour. For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you" (Matt. 10:19-20). This came true when the rulers of Israel arrested the apostles and brought them in... Those who are filled with the Holy Spirit can speak out God's word with power, as seen in Acts 2. They can also meet their opponents without preparing what they will say. They receive from the Lord, as shown here, "a mouth and wisdom" which none of their adversaries is "able to withstand or contradict" (Luke 21:14-15).
- Deed — Peter calls the case what it is: a kindness done to a helpless man. The council is prosecuting mercy.
- Source — a good deed must have a good source, and Peter names it: the Jesus they crucified and God raised.
- Word — "made whole" translates the ordinary word for "save," so a healed body and a saved soul share one word.
- Witness — the healed man stands in court, silent, and no argument can undo him.
- Words — the Spirit fills Peter, and Jesus' promise of words no opponent can answer comes true in Israel's highest court.
be it known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that in the name of Jesus Christ the Nazaraean, whom *ye* have crucified, whom God has raised from among [the] dead, by *him* this [man] stands here before you sound [in body].
Peter and John stand under arrest. The same council that condemned Jesus now asks by what power a lifelong cripple can walk. Peter's answer names the one they killed, and points to the man standing in front of them as the evidence.
Peter had once denied his Master to a servant girl. One thing accounts for the difference now.
The secret of Peter's power here was that he was full of the Holy Spirit.
His own ability was not what carried him.
Faced with rulers like these, the man who had trembled with fear and denied his Lord at the taunt of a servant girl would have had little to say, if he stood there in his own natural ability and strength of purpose. But Peter neither trembles nor hesitates. He is the master in that assembly. He makes the truth known with the clearness of a trumpet. He exposes their folly and guilt. He states exactly the terrible question that lay between God and them, and he exalts the name of Jesus.
Peter does not drop the title men used to sneer at Him.
If this title is one of dishonour and disrepute among men, angels are not ashamed to use it. The angel at the tomb said to Mary Magdalene, "Do not be alarmed. You seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has risen; He is not here" (Mark 16:6). The apostles used this same name in their preaching. They testified to Jesus of Nazareth as the crucified but risen and glorified Messiah and Lord (Acts 2:22; Acts 3:6; Acts 4:10; Acts 10:38). More striking still, the exalted One Himself took that name of reproach. Speaking from the glory to Saul of Tarsus, that determined Jew and proud Pharisee, He said: "I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting" (Acts 22:8).
One name did the healing, and that name carries two verdicts.
And what had done it? The power of the Name of that Jesus "whom you crucified" — that was their guilt — "whom God raised from the dead" — there was God's righteousness.
Peter's answer also leaves the rulers themselves looking powerless.
These rulers of the people, with all their learning, had let the lame beggar lie at the gate of the temple. They made no effort to help him. For all their pride and pretension, they were the powerless men. But Jesus of Nazareth was not powerless, for by His name the helpless cripple was made completely sound. These rulers had crucified Him. If they had had their way, mankind would have lost forever the power that was in His name. They were His enemies, the ones who said, "When will He die, and His name perish?" (Ps. 41:5). But God had raised Him from the dead, plainly showing what He thought of their great sin, what He thought of Christ, and His way of blessing for men.
Peter's last words point to a living body in the room.
But then there is another thing. There was the very man who had been made strong, and they could not get rid of this evidence. They had him before them, but he was there as the witness of the power of God. "Seeing the man who was healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it." You see, it is not ignorance which is the terrible and damning thing in men's hearts. It is the will that wants to drive the testimony of God, the grace of God, and the power of God out of God's own world, if it could. That was their case. But God made them feel it.
Peter has now said the same thing three chapters in a row.
In Acts 2 we had Peter's testimony to the death and resurrection of Jesus as the only way of salvation for the remnant. In Acts 3 he brings the same testimony forward again, as the only way the blessings promised to the nation can reach them. In this fourth chapter, when they stand before the religious rulers, their testimony is the same. They present the miracle of the healed body of the man who had been lame as the witness to the grace of Him whom these builders in their folly had rejected.
- Filled — Peter's clarity was not natural nerve. He was full of the Holy Spirit, and so he mastered that courtroom.
- Guilt — "Whom you crucified" names their crime, and Peter says it to the rulers and to all Israel.
- Righteousness — "Whom God raised" is God's verdict. It reverses their plan and shows what He thinks of their sin and of His Son.
- Name — The healing came through a despised name. Even the risen Christ used it of Himself from the glory.
- Proof — The healed man was evidence they could not remove. Their problem was not missing facts but an unwilling heart.
*He* is the stone which has been set at nought by you the builders, which is become the corner stone.
Peter stands on trial before the council that condemned Jesus. Instead of defending himself, he quotes a line from Psalm 118 and tells them they are the builders in it.
The ESV says the builders "rejected" Him. Older translations read "set at nought." One writer traces that word through the Gospels:
He was "set at nought" by men (Mark 9:12); by Herod's men of war (Luke 23:11); and by the religious leaders in Acts 4:11. The verb here signifies "utterly worthless"; contemptible! So man, seeking his own glory, has no appreciation of One whose every motive, every word and every action had the glory of God in view.
Peter does not say "the builders." He says you builders. One writer explains what that job involves:
Religious teachers are builders, whether in Judaism or in Christendom. They construct what will either last or perish, as the Lord may judge later on (1 Cor. 3:9-17). God's foundation stone is Jesus; on Him alone can men safely build. But Israel's leaders had treated Him with contempt. God's answer to them was the exaltation of His Son. God has now made Him the Corner-stone of a new structure; so the office of Peter's opponents was gone, however fiercely they might contend for it.
Peter's charge rested on a scripture these men already knew:
The words of Peter in verses 10 to 12 certainly ought to have burned into the hearts and consciences of the council. No cunning lie could ever have given Peter such straightforward boldness. He preaches not himself, but Christ, the Stone despised by these very builders, but established by God as head of the corner. No doubt they knew this scripture (Psalm 118:22); and the application was so clear they could answer nothing to it.
One writer lays out the whole line the Stone follows:
There is first His relation to Israel. Then comes His rejection by the chiefs, and His exaltation despite it. Next is Jehovah's commendation of Him to the believer in the face of divine judgment. Last is His establishment of God's kingdom here below.
Rejection was not an oversight. It was a decision about what they wanted their structure to be.
The poor blind builders of the great world-system did not see the one stone they could not do without in Jesus. Or, if any light reached their minds, they saw this: if they accepted Him, they must stop their own building, admit their own ruin, and be born again. This they would not do. They could find no place in their building for Him, and so they cried, "Away with Him." There was room for Herod and Pilate, for Priests, Pharisees and people. There was room even for Barabbas, but none for Jesus in their building.
The title is not only an honour. It names a place in the building:
The rejected stone had become the corner stone. They had handed Him over and cast Him out. He received the prominent place of the corner stone. On Him, as the foundation stone, everything rests, and He unites the building.
The Stone Peter names is Christ in glory, and the same building goes on today:
And what was the stone? Christ, of course, but Christ in glory, as the Head Stone of the corner. Here Peter is in conflict with these poor, foolish builders, and there are plenty of them in our days, people who are building without Christ. The Lord had spoken of Himself as the Stone: "And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him" (Matt. 21:44). The corner stone that is about to fall is the exalted Christ. He is coming in glory later on, to destroy the godless Gentiles in the day of His wrath. Those who fell over the stone and were broken were the Jews, stumbling over Jesus in His humiliation.
Peter quotes Psalm 118 as already true of the exalted Christ. One writer notes the same psalm looks ahead to the day Israel sings it:
Here the nation of Israel welcome Him back. It fits that they welcome Him as the "head-stone of the corner," for that is what His earlier exaltation in heaven had made Him. (Acts 4:11) It is the language of Israel, ready at last for Jesus and His kingdom.
- Rejected. The word Peter uses means treated as worthless. Herod's soldiers showed that contempt, and so did the religious leaders.
- Reversed. God answered their contempt by exalting His Son and making Him the corner stone of a new structure. Their office as builders was gone.
- Refused. Their building had room for Herod, Pilate, even Barabbas. Accepting Jesus would have meant admitting their own ruin.
- Resting place. As corner stone He is the one on whom everything rests and who unites the whole building.
- Repeated. People still build without Christ. One day Israel will welcome as head-stone the very One they set aside.
And salvation is in none other, for neither is there another name under heaven which is given among men by which we must be saved.
Peter and John are on trial before the rulers who had condemned Jesus. They must explain what power made a lame beggar walk. Peter's answer moves from one healed man to the whole human race: salvation is found in one name, and nowhere else.
The tone here is not the same as before. One commentator explains what changed.
And you will notice that he does not soften it here. Now these guilty leaders stand in front of him. He does not say, "I know that you did it in ignorance." They were making it plain that there was a will behind what they did — a wicked will. So he allows no excuse, and it is always so with God. When He first meets people, He meets them as they are, with nothing but grace. But when they keep on rejecting Christ, there is no denying a rebellious will.
The picture behind this verse is a stone the builders threw away. The men judging Peter were putting up a building of their own, and it had no room for Jesus.
The blind builders of the great world-system could not see that Jesus was the one stone they had to have. And if any light did reach their minds, they saw the cost. To accept Him, they would have to stop their own building, admit their own ruin, and be born again. This they would not do. They could find no place for Him in their building. So they cried, "Away with Him." There was room for Herod and Pilate, for the priests, the Pharisees and the people. There was room even for Barabbas, but no room for Jesus.
God's reply to that rejection reached the men judging Peter.
God's foundation stone is Jesus; He is the only safe foundation to build on. But Israel's leaders had treated Him with contempt. God's answer to them was the exaltation of His Son. God has now made Him the cornerstone of a new building. Peter's opponents no longer held any office, however hard they argued for it.
The healing was a single, visible case. Peter turns it into a universal claim.
They had just seen the power of that Name in one case — the lame man healed. That same power saves people everywhere. The healing of his body was a sign of the healing of soul that the name of Jesus brings. The despised Jesus of Nazareth is the only door into salvation.
Commentators differ on how wide Peter meant these words to reach. One reads the immediate force of them as aimed at the nation Peter was addressing.
Above all, these words meant there was no other name for Israel. He alone was to be their Saviour and Restorer. As He had restored the lame man so that he leaped and rejoiced and praised God, so He alone could restore Israel. There is no other name.
The name belongs to a Man now in heaven, yet God has put it within reach of people on earth.
God has set Him at His own right hand in heaven. Yet He gives His name under heaven, among people on earth. What a blessing! It is the one name that saves us, if we are saved at all. We must be saved here and now, by grace and through faith. There is no other name — our own least of all; and no other way, for He is the way. Faith exalts the Saviour and the God who gave Him, and leaves no room for any good works of our own.
Peter says "we must be saved," not "you." His accusers are not outside the offer.
Peter closes with the statement that salvation is only in the One they had treated as worthless. There is no other name given to men by which a person can be saved, and that is the name of Him who had made this lame man whole. Salvation they all needed. They too — rulers, elders, chief priests — must be saved. But only in Him had God provided salvation, free and complete, for all who will have it by believing on Him.
People often wish the door were wider. The verse closes that wish.
Some people think God ought to have opened a dozen ways into His blessing, so they could pick the one that suited them best. They turn away from the blessing because they do not like the way to it. But there is no other way. God has bound up the blessing of sinners with the glory of His Son, and never will one of them be saved apart from Him... God has spoken, and His word is final.
One writer carries the same claim into our own day.
The faith of Christ, and the gospel which proclaims it, have today just this exclusive claim... It is this exclusive claim, inherent in the gospel, which provokes the opposition.
- Rejected. The builders found room for Barabbas but none for Jesus. They threw away the one stone their building had to have.
- Exalted. God answered their contempt. He raised Jesus and made Him the cornerstone of a new building, which left His judges with no office at all.
- Given. Though He is at God's right hand, His name is given under heaven among men, so salvation is by grace and faith, here and now.
- Offered. Peter says "we," and that includes the rulers in front of him. They needed saving too, and the salvation they had rejected was still open.
- Only. One healed body was the sign; one name is the door. God has tied every blessing for sinners to the glory of His Son. That exclusive claim is what the world still resists.