But Peter and John answering said to them, If it be righteous before God to listen to you rather than to God, judge ye;
Peter and John had healed a man who could not walk. The council then ordered them never to speak again in the name of Jesus. Instead of arguing, the two men handed the question back to their judges.
The command came from the rulers with the highest religious authority in the nation. That made it worse, not better.
The council ordered Peter and John not to speak at all or teach in the name of Jesus. That charge was as bold as it was wicked, and worse still because it came from rulers claiming the highest authority in religion. How solemn to think that they were treating their own Messiah this way without realising it! And why did they not realise it? Was the light God had given them through the prophets useless? At that very moment they admitted a clear sign in the man who was healed. They could not deny it, yet they would not believe. None are so bitter and stubborn as those who, responsible as His people to do His will, have made up their mind to do their own.
The apostles do not argue their own case. They ask the council to measure its own order by the standard a ruler is meant to keep.
This reply put the case with unanswerable plainness and moral power. A ruler, especially a religious one, must uphold what is righteous before God. Their charge amounted to listening to themselves instead of to God. They demanded not one more word in the name of Jesus, though God had just honoured that name openly and unmistakably.
Note who the apostles were refusing. These were religious leaders, not the civil government.
These religious leaders of men were opposed to Christ. The apostles were not setting themselves up against the civil power. That a Christian must never do. But Judaism was a religious system, judged by God and set aside, and here it was acting against Christ.
The word of God tells believers to obey those in authority. There is one exception, and it is narrow.
Obedience to the governing authorities is the plain direction of the word of God for His people (Rom. 13:1; Titus 3:1; 1 Peter 2:13-17). It is not for us to ask how that authority came to power, or what kind of person holds it. Our part is to obey. But sometimes the will of man clashes with the word of God and tries to force that will on our consciences. Then we must obey God rather than man.
Saying no to a command is one thing; fighting back is another. Commentators are careful to separate the two.
It is our duty to obey them and submit to them in all things. This holds as long as they do not call on us to disobey God or act against our conscience. If they do that, we must — what? Resist? No, but suffer.
Later the rulers had the apostles whipped for this obedience. Here is how they took it.
We may suffer for obeying God, but then this is an honour. The apostles were whipped because they were determined to obey God, and they bore the consequence humbly. For a Jew, a whipping in the council counted as a great disgrace. But they bore it quietly, and went out rejoicing that they were counted worthy to be dishonoured for the Name. This was not "passive resistance" but holy obedience — suffering the consequence without a complaint and full of joy.
Where did such boldness come from? Not from the men themselves.
The rulers did not know the presence of that Spirit who fills the weakest with a boldness no one can deny. Not for one moment would the apostles give way to man when God was in question. Nothing can intimidate the Holy Spirit, and when someone speaks as He leads, he has all the power of God on his side. What are chief priests and scribes and elders to one who has the Spirit of God with him?
- Judge — Peter does not lecture the council. He asks them to apply their own standard. A ruler must uphold what is right before God, and their order collapses under that test.
- Deny — The rulers had a healed man standing in front of them. They could not deny the sign; they simply would not believe it, and silenced the name instead.
- Submit — Outside this one point, the plain instruction is to obey those in authority. We do not weigh how they came to power or what kind of people they are.
- Refuse — Only one thing crosses the line: human will pressing against God's word to bind the conscience. Then the answer is no — never armed resistance, but willingness to suffer.
- Rejoice — When the beating came, they took it quietly and went out glad to be shamed for the Name. That is obedience carried through, and the courage for it came from the Spirit of God, not from the men themselves.
for as for us *we* cannot refrain from speaking of the things which we have seen and heard.
The council had just ordered Peter and John never to speak in the name of Jesus again. This verse is their refusal. It raises two questions the church has faced ever since. When may a believer disobey those in charge? And what is a witness bound to say?
The apostles did not argue about the council's right to sit as a court. They simply held that a prior order already covered the matter.
Now Peter and John allow no ambiguity about their course. God had commanded them to preach Christ; the prohibition of man had no weight with them. "We cannot," they say, "but speak of what we have seen and heard." What a position for the rulers of the people! A testimony like this shows that the leaders of Israel had fallen from their place as interpreters of God's will. The apostles do not drive them away or attack them: God would judge them. But they act at once on God's behalf, and they set aside the council's authority completely in the work God had given them. The testimony of God was with the apostles, not with the rulers of the temple.
Scripture elsewhere tells believers to obey their rulers. So where does that stop? At the conscience.
The word of God plainly tells His people to obey the governing authorities (Rom. 13:1; Titus 3:1; 1 Peter 2:13-17). We are not to ask how that authority came to be, or what kind of person holds it. Our part is to obey. But sometimes the will of man clashes with the word of God and tries to force that will on our consciences. Then we must obey God rather than man.
The words are not a boast about courage. They describe an inability to stay quiet, and several things together produced it.
Several things worked together to open the apostles' lips in testimony and praise to Christ: faith in Him, love for souls, a special call, God-given authority, and devotion to His glory. What they had seen and heard was tied to the honour due to God and to His Anointed. It was tied as well to the believer's blessing and the unbeliever's misery. So it would be a terrible thing for them to stay silent! A necessity rested on them, just as it later rested on Paul (1 Cor. 9:16).
The Greek wording carries a detail the English cannot show.
The Greek uses two different tenses here. It is striking to compare the "We have seen and heard" of 1 John 1 with the "We saw and heard" of Acts 4:20. The first is doctrinal. The second testifies to the reality of their historical experience. Note too the special emphasis on the pronoun: "We saw and heard."
The same limit shapes every servant. A witness passes on only what he has received.
Moses had to build the tabernacle to the pattern God showed him on the mountain. In the same way, Paul could preach only what he had seen and heard — what he had received from the Lord. Even the Lord, as a witness in this world, placed Himself under the same conditions. He said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen" (John 3:11). It is the same for every servant and witness (see Acts 4:20; 1 John 1:3).
The Peter who speaks here is the same man who once broke down in front of a servant girl. What accounts for the change?
What a difference between the man who sat by the fire in the high priest's hall and the man who takes the lead in Acts 4! One fell before the attack of a servant girl; the other makes a nation tremble with his appeals. How do we account for the difference? The presence and power of an ungrieved, unquenched Holy Spirit explains it fully. And the weakness or power of many today comes from the same principle.
Commentators apply the verse beyond the apostles. Deep conviction is what makes silence impossible.
Peter and John were deeply convinced of the importance of the facts of the gospel. So when they were told to proclaim them no more, they replied: "We cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard." You might as well tell the sun to stop shining and the river to stop flowing as tell such men to be quiet. Every Christian should be able to say the same words.
- Seen — a witness passes on only what he has received. The wording points back to real events they lived through, not to theory.
- Compelled — those facts touched God's glory and people's misery. Silence was not an option. A necessity rested on them.
- Obedient — saying no to the council was obedience, not rebellion. A higher command already stood. Obedience to rulers ends where they claim the conscience.
- Empowered — the Peter who once broke down before a servant girl now faces the nation's court. The difference is the ungrieved Holy Spirit. The same principle explains weakness or power today.
- Shared — the apostles saw and heard for themselves, yet every Christian should be able to say the same words.