But seeing the boldness of Peter and John, and perceiving that they were unlettered and uninstructed men, they wondered; and they recognised them that they were with Jesus.
Peter and John stand before the same council that had condemned Jesus. The rulers see two things at once — bold speech and no credentials — and the verse records the only explanation they could find.
The words are the court's verdict, measured by their own standards of schooling. Older translations read "unlearned and ignorant." One writer explains what the label does and does not claim:
"Unlearned and ignorant" does not mean "without education." The point is that they had no special training for public work. In modern language, they were not university men. But these humble preachers had something far better. They knew God and His Son in their hearts, and the Holy Spirit lived in them.
The label was true on a human level. But the judges who handed it down — Caiaphas, Annas and the rest — lacked what mattered most:
It was not that they were unlearned in the Scriptures. It was Caiaphas and Annas and these others who were unlearned in the Scriptures. But judged by the mere human standard of education and letters, Peter and John were without doubt ignorant and unlearned men. And the fact that they were filled with the Holy Spirit, I repeat, did not set this aside at all. It did what was infinitely better. It showed the power and the grace of God, so to speak, made perfect in weakness.
Peter had not always spoken like this. Something had happened between his denial of Jesus and this hearing:
There was a total difference in them before and after Pentecost. They then preached Jesus crucified. Were they afraid? No. Peter charges those who had denied Him with being guilty of a damning sin. Yet Peter had done the same thing himself, and in a much worse way, because he had been His companion. How could he do this? His own conscience was now cleansed, for Christ had died in the meantime, and God had given the Holy Spirit... As we see all through the Acts, the boldness in which the apostles spoke and acted was not the boldness of the flesh, but that of the Spirit of God in them.
That courage was not improvised. Jesus had promised His disciples the words for such a moment:
This fulfilled the words the Lord had spoken to His disciples. He said, "Settle it therefore in your minds not to meditate beforehand how to answer, for I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which none of your adversaries will be able to withstand or contradict" (Luke 21:14-15). No wonder the elite of Israel's religious schools marvelled.
Their lack of polish did not hide the Spirit's power. It displayed it:
The Spirit's power shines most clearly in those who can boast of none of this world's advantages. Both high and low praise the learning of the schools. The high do so to make the most of what they have enjoyed. The low usually do so to excuse what they lack, and they overvalue what they do not have. But in the things of God nothing has power like faith in the God who is glorifying Christ. And when someone leans on learning as an object, it is no help at all. It easily becomes a real hindrance and a snare. But God's ways are not like ours. He was pleased to humble man, not only by Christ crucified, but by choosing the foolish things of the world to put the wise to shame.
The council's own words point to the school these men had attended:
The great secret of their boldness, and of their being able to speak with divine conviction, was their having been with Jesus. Their school of learning far surpassed every school that had trained the high priest, the scribes and the elders. In the company of the Son of God they had learned the secrets of God. They gained divine knowledge in which the great men of Israel, and of the world, were "uninstructed."
No one today has walked with Him as the disciples did — yet the principle still stands:
True, we have not been with Jesus in the literal way the disciples were, walking with Him from the beginning of His ministry. Still, it remains true in a moral sense: if we are to bear witness for Christ before others, we too must be with Christ in secret.
- Company — The enemies themselves named the cause: time spent with Jesus. Public boldness grows out of private company with Him.
- Emptiness — The label meant no training for public work, not stupidity. The Spirit did not erase that lack. He shone through it.
- Power — The gift of the Spirit, not personality, explains the change. One Peter denied Christ; the same Peter now accuses a court.
- Reach — God humbles man by choosing those with nothing to boast in. Learning leaned on as an object becomes a snare, not a help.
- Result — The trained, hostile judges could not answer these men or explain them. They could only marvel and see whose company they had kept.
And beholding the man who had been healed standing with them, they had nothing to reply;
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
but having commanded them to go out of the council they conferred with one another,
Jerusalem's ruling council has just questioned Peter and John. Now the judges order the two men outside so they can talk in private. Scripture takes us through that closed door. It reports what the rulers said once the prisoners could no longer hear.
The order to withdraw was not a sign of strength. The apostles had spoken plainly. The healed man was standing right there. The council had no reply left.
The apostles stood there clothed with the unstoppable might of the Lord. Beside them stood the man whose healing quietly proved that might, even in his body. So the council could only order them outside while they talked together. A guilty conscience shows its own weakness, however stubborn it is. God always gives enough testimony to condemn man.
The rulers cleared the room to keep their talk private. Scripture records it anyway.
The council had heard the defence. Then came the discussion. First they ordered the apostles to go outside and wait until they were told the decision. But we are allowed, as it were, to sit in on that discussion. We know what was said inside the council chamber.
That record exposes settled resistance, not confusion.
Here the unfailing word of God exposes how hardened feeling works among His enemies, with no conscience at all. And none are so bitter, none so stubborn, as those who are responsible as His people to do His will, yet have made up their mind to do their own.
Inside, they admitted the sign in the healed man was real. That admission did not change them.
At that very moment they admit there is a clear sign in the man who was healed. This they could not deny, but they would not believe. So they stayed in the dark. They did not see how wicked it was to force silence about the Messiah, whose loving-kindness was better than life to His servants.
Three admissions in this chapter show how their case collapsed.
They longed to discredit its witness. Yet (1) "they had nothing to say in opposition" (Acts 4:14); (2) they had to confess, "we cannot deny it" (Acts 4:16); (3) they found "no way to punish them" (Acts 4:21).
The private discussion aimed at one target. Peter and John claimed nothing for themselves. The council's quarrel was with the name they preached.
They are well aware that "these men" claim nothing for themselves, and assert nothing but the name of Jesus. But this is the very name they themselves most fear and would banish for ever if they could. How vainly! This is the day above all others for bearing witness to Jesus.
Refusing evidence was a deliberate act, not an accident of ignorance.
But the will of men did not move, though they had nothing to say against the facts. The power of God was there. No one could refute the testimony. Still they refused to accept testimony from God.
The private conference produced no charge — only threats.
The arrest had clearly been a great mistake, for they found they could do nothing to the apostles. Judicial power can never afford to take up a case rashly and then find it must drop it... Yet what had they done? They had kept two men in custody for a whole night for a good deed done to a helpless man!... They had to keep up some appearance of authority, so they decided to threaten them. But why threaten people who admittedly had only done a good deed? These teachers and rulers looked foolish indeed.
So what did all this conferring achieve?
Their discussion only confirms how powerless they were, for no one makes any real suggestion of what they should do. The facts were plain: a remarkable miracle had been done in the name of Jesus. They would have liked to deny it, but that was impossible... Sad is the stubbornness of men who are determined not to admit their plainly shown guilt! To defend themselves they demand that God keep silence!
- Silenced — The apostles spoke, and the healed man stood there. The council had no answer, so it sent the witnesses out of the room.
- Exposed — Scripture records what the rulers said in private. The closed door hid nothing from God.
- Unwilling — They could not deny the sign, but they would not believe it; the barrier was the will, not the evidence.
- Threatened — They had no charge, so they fell back on threats. In effect they demanded that God stop speaking.
- Unstoppable — They wanted the name of Jesus buried. But this is the day above all others for bearing witness to Him, and their efforts failed.
saying, What shall we do to these men? for that indeed an evident sign has come to pass through their means is manifest to all that inhabit Jerusalem, and we cannot deny it.
The scene is a closed meeting of Israel's ruling council, held after they sent Peter and John out of the room. The judges are not asking whether the healing happened — they are asking what to do about a fact they cannot deny but will not believe.
The man healed that day was not an unknown face. His age, his history and the crowd who knew him all made the case easy to check.
The next chapter tells us that this man was forty years old... Everyone knew him. He was no longer a child, and he was in a condition that no one could meet or reach. Now the power of the Name of Jesus has met him. Forty years old, and well known — no one could dispute the fact that he was healed. A notable miracle was to be done, and God takes care to have it well attested.
The place mattered as much as the cure. It happened in the temple courts, in the name of the One this same council had condemned.
This happened in the courts of the Lord's house, and He never gave His glory to another. A miracle was done openly in the name of Him whom the council had judged, not long before, to be a blasphemer who deserved death. The controversy about His claim to be a Divine Person was more than settled, but in a way the Jews never expected... A miracle done somewhere else would have been a wonderful event. But this one was done only in the name of Jesus Christ, and in the court of the Lord's house. It was evidence that could not be answered — evidence of the truth of the Lord's claim, while He was on earth, to be equal with God.
Their own word choice gives them away. They called it a sign, not just a miracle.
They knew perfectly well the remarkable deed the apostle had just done. They recognised it as not merely a miracle but "a sign". Yet they strengthened themselves against the Almighty... They are well aware that "these men" claim nothing for themselves, assert nothing but the name of Jesus. But this is the very name they themselves most fear and would banish for ever if they could.
Their problem is not a lack of evidence. One writer finds the same refusal in people in general.
Man cannot deny that things come from heaven; but he will not believe. He may bring out his hard questions, like those of old, but with no real desire for the truth. What his conscience cannot deny, he will neither allow nor act upon.
With no case to argue, the council turns to threats.
Their consultation only confirms their weakness, for they have no concrete suggestion about what to do. The facts were plain: a notable miracle had been done in the name of Jesus. They would have liked to deny it, but this was impossible. Yet they agree to threaten Peter and John, demanding that they stop speaking to anyone in the name of Jesus. Sad is the stubbornness of men who are determined not to admit their plainly shown guilt! To defend themselves they demand that God keep silence!
Their question shows how little power they hold over what God is doing.
The rulers of Israel could crucify the Saviour when God permitted it, to carry out His own gracious purposes. But they could not keep Him in the tomb. The precautions they took to keep Him there only made the power of His resurrection more obvious. When the disciples healed the crippled man through the power of the name of Jesus, the rulers had to confess their helplessness. Such a testimony pointed to the very One they had crucified.
Read across the chapter, the council concedes ground three times: "they could say nothing against it" (v. 14), "we cannot deny it" (v. 16), and they found "nothing how they might punish them" (v. 21) — an escalating confession that this healing "was a notable ratification of the resurrection" (F. B. Hole).
- Cannot dispute — a man lame for forty years, known to everyone, healed in public. God made sure the evidence would hold up in a hostile court.
- Cannot explain — it happened in the temple, in the name of the One they had condemned. That settled who Jesus is, in a way they never expected.
- Cannot deny — they called it a sign, so they knew it pointed beyond itself. Conscience granted what the will refused.
- Cannot silence — with no argument left, they turned to threats. In effect they demanded that God keep silent.
- Cannot stop — the rulers who crucified Him could not keep Him in the tomb. Their resistance only made the power of His resurrection plainer.