THE BOOK OF ACTS
Lesson 14, Chapter 5 continued
Amidst the incredible outpouring of God’s Spirit through the miraculous works and deeds of
the disciples, what we see in Acts Chapter 5 is a rising level of tension and conflict between
the followers of Yeshua and the local Jewish Temple authorities. At first it was warnings from
the High Priest Caiaphas to stop healing in the name of Yeshua. When this warning wasn’t
heeded it followed with floggings. And in the next chapter the tension spills over to the
Synagogue and thus is taken up by the population of Jerusalem at large. That is, at first it was
those whose livelihoods and status centered on the Temple (the Sadducees, Priesthood and
Sanhedrin) that had issues with Peter and the Believers; and interestingly these issues were
mostly about a perceived threat to their personal power and authority, although the sticky
matter of resurrection also played a role. But then in Chapter 6 we will see the Synagogue take
up the persecution of Believers for mostly theological reasons that primarily interested the
Pharisees. And these theological issues were less about Holy Scripture and much more about
Synagogue customs and traditions.
From a broad panoramic view we see that the spiritual change in Believers brought about by
the advent of Christ, and the subsequent empowerment by the Holy Spirit, cannot help but
affect the tangible physical world we live in. The notion that our faith can be separated from our
daily lives, behaviors, decisions and activities is not feasible if true and sincere faith actually
exists within us. The effects of our salvation change everything in us and how we relate to
everything around us. Thus while a political philosophy can indeed call for a separation
between faith and state, in practice for the true Believer this is an impossibility. This reality
automatically brought Peter and the 11 disciples (as well as their followers) into unavoidable
direct confrontation with the powers-that-be.
I don’t recall who said it, but I once heard a person insist that if a Believer isn’t a pariah to the
world then they aren’t trying hard enough. All throughout the Scriptures we are presented with
a mental picture of a wide, yawning chasm between the ways of the World versus those who
put their trust in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. “What has light to do with darkness?”,
Yeshua asks His disciples. Therefore persecution of Believers by the World is inevitable and
we should not be surprised that when we come to faith it not only involves incalculable gain but
also loss in the form of relationships and perhaps other things that have meant so much to us
in our past but are now incompatible with our new life. Peter’s admonishment is that since this
fact is inescapable, why not consider it joy if you are being persecuted (experiencing loss) for
your faith in Yeshua because in persecution and suffering there can be no better concrete
proof that you are firmly on the side of divine righteousness and holiness?
So it is an irony that a religion of peace and love was born and will remain in confrontation, if
not battle, with the World until Messiah returns to take charge. This confrontation is what we’re
seeing in the Book of Acts, and it ought to be what we’re experiencing in our own lives. Since
this is the case, then last week we discussed the thorny issue of what we should do when our
1 / 8

government installs immoral laws and insists that we obey them. And here in Acts we find
Peter making the decision that when God orders one thing and human government the
opposite our pathway is clear: obey God, and let the chips fall where they may. This brought us
to the matter of civil disobedience, which from the Believer’s perspective I would define as
knowingly and openly choosing to disobey immoral manmade laws in order to be obedient to
the Lord. We’ll not review that conversation from last week, but I will sum it up by saying that
the answer is that yes, if civil disobedience is our only avenue to obey God, then as Believers
we must take it. And that may well mean we pay a price for it that includes loss of personal
property, fines, or perhaps going to jail. What I’m proposing is not hypothetical or something
that belongs in fiction books; it is here and upon us now. A few weeks ago in America’s
northwest a Christian bakery refused to create a wedding cake for a gay couple. The local
government is currently trying to put them out of business. In France, just this week, a political
leader has been indicted on hate crime charges for saying that Islam is a religion of violence
and it worships a false god. I told you the story in our last lesson of a Canadian minister who
spent 3 months in jail for teaching from the Bible about homosexuality; not publically but inside
the walls of his own church, to his own congregation. If this sort of thing is not already
happening where you are, it soon will be so it is better to decide now what you will do.
As we left off last week, Peter and the disciples had been arrested (again) by the Sadducees
and the Sanhedrin for healing the sick in the name of Yeshua and spreading the Gospel of
Salvation in Messiah. While they were in jail an angel of God broke them out in some
miraculous way such that when the prisoners were found missing, prison officials found the
locks were still intact and the guards were still on duty; but the jail cell was empty. God had
once again overruled that which man had decided, but was against God’s will.
Let’s re-read part of Acts chapter 5.
RE-READ ACTS CHAPTER 5:17 – end
Through His angel God told the disciples to return to the Temple Mount and continue to speak
about this new life. The new life was referring mainly to the eternal life given to Believers
through faith in Yeshua. They entered the Temple grounds at daybreak meaning that their
escape from jail had been during the night. No doubt they went immediately there and had not
returned to their homes, yet. The Temple grounds closed at dark and didn’t open again until
daybreak. Since it was morning the High Priest arrived to his post and convened the
Sanhedrin. It seems their first order of business was to deal with these radicals who refused to
stop healing in name of, and speaking about, their dead Master, Yeshua. So they told the
prison guards to go and get the men from their cell and bring them. Dumbfounded the prison
officer said that even though everything was secure and the guards were at their posts, the
holding cell was empty.
Escapes like this just didn’t happen, and especially when the guards had shown no signs of
being derelict of their duties; in fact there is not even a hint of accusation that the guards had
fallen down on their jobs. Thus the result was that the Captain of the Guards and the High
Priest were perplexed as this simply made no sense. But suddenly some unnamed person
comes and tells the High Priest that these escaped disciples are right back at the Temple and
2 / 8

teaching the people! Luke doesn’t tell us who this informant is, but no doubt he was in the
employ of the Sanhedrin because he was aware that the disciples should have been in jail and
now back up on the Temple Mount in defiance of the local authorities. The Captain himself
went up with a contingent of Levite guards to the Temple Mount and sure enough there they
were. Apparently the Captain went out of his way to treat these disciples respectfully because
he didn’t want a riot on his hands. After all, people were getting healed right and left and those
who were afflicted were anxiously waiting and hoping that they too would be healed. Roughing
up the healers wouldn’t sit well. So now again standing in front of the Sanhedrin Caiaphas, the
High Priest and President of the Sanhedrin began to interrogate them.
Recall that the first time Peter and John were arrested, they were let go because they had
violated no law. But before they were released the High Priest told them they were not to teach
or heal in the name of Yeshua henceforth. He had essentially made new law (and had the
authority to do so) and Peter and John were acutely aware of it. The High Priest now reminds
them of this so that no excuse of ignorance of the law could be claimed. But then the real
cause of concern for Caiaphas slips out; “moreover, you are determined to make us
responsible for this man’s death” (this man referring to Christ). What this passage actually
says is that “you are determined to bring this man’s blood upon us”. Bringing blood upon
someone means to accuse them of unjust killing; murder. Shedding innocent blood, dam
naki in Hebrew, is a grievous sin for which there is no atonement in the Law of Moses.
This statement of Caiaphas about the disciples trying to pin the crime of blood upon him
directly ties to a passage from Matthew 27.
Matthew 27:20-26 CJB
20
But the head cohanim persuaded the crowd to ask for Bar-Abba's release and to have
Yeshua executed on the stake.
21
"Which of the two do you want me to set free for you?" asked the governor. "Bar-
Abba!" they answered.
22
Pilate said to them, "Then what should I do with Yeshua, called 'the Messiah'?" They
all said, "Put him to death on the stake! Put him to death on the stake!"
23
When he asked, "Why? What crime has he committed?" they shouted all the louder,
"Put him to death on the stake!"
24
When Pilate saw that he was accomplishing nothing, but rather that a riot was
starting, he took water, washed his hands in front of the crowd, and said, "My hands are
clean of this man's blood; it's your responsibility."
25
All the people answered, "His blood is on us and on our children!"
26
Then he released to them Bar-Abba; but Yeshua, after having him whipped, he handed
over to be executed on a stake.
3 / 8

Notice that it was the head cohanim, head priest Caiaphas, who persuaded the crowd to
beseech Pilate to let the murderer Bar-Abba go and instead to crucify the innocent Yeshua. Let
me say this way: it was the chief religious leader of the Jews who insisted that the people
convict Jesus and pardon Bar-Nabba. So what were the common people to do if the head of
their religion insisted that it was the godly thing to do to choose a certain way? Thus in verse
25 when the crowd followed their High Priest and carelessly said that Yeshua’s blood would
be upon them and their children, then the one who bore most responsibility was Caiaphas.
Now, perhaps 3 months later, Caiaphas is furious and defensive when Peter tells him that
indeed the blood of the Son of God is upon him. And for this there is no atonement, no escape.
The High Priest is not used to being talked to like this.
So in Acts 5 verses 29 – 32 Peter answers Caiaphas’s question about why they were back at
the Temple doing what he had expressly told them not to do. He says, “We must obey God
rather than men”. Peter isn’t using the words, of course, but he is speaking of justifiable civil
disobedience. My fellow Believers he is speaking to us as much as he was to the High Priest.
In today’s world we (and by we I mean YOU and I) are being battered and threatened with
Biblically immoral demands from our civil authorities (and sometimes from our religious
authorities) to do things that God expressly forbids. From Gay marriage, to homosexual
ministers, to a casual acceptance of a woman’s right to kill her unborn child, to insisting that
we back the corrupt UN and a non-people who call themselves the Palestinians; and instead
we are to boycott and in every way possible stand against God’s people Israel. We are not to
pray at government functions; we cannot let our children wear a Jesus Loves You shirt to
school. We must accept and embrace adherents to Islam as a show of love and tolerance.
Peter is showing us the way to respond; but do we have the fortitude and courage to do it? I
can guarantee you that you will be called backward, a hater, ignorant, a fundamentalist, and a
heretic is you do respond. Not too long from now I think the word terrorist will be added to that
list. So far, I don’t see very many who are willing to brave the accusations of men and stand
up for what is right. Earlier in Acts 5 we read of Believers who were too afraid to go and stand
with Peter at Solomon’s Portico in defiance of the civil authorities’ order to not preach the
truth of Messiah. So fear of the repercussions of disobeying people in authority in order to obey
God is not a new phenomenon or challenge for Believers. It is something that we shall face
nearly daily until we depart this earth or until Messiah makes His return.
If ever you are looking for a brief summation of the Gospel to tell friends and family who won’t
give you anything but a few moments of their time, simply copy word for word verses 30 – 32. I
mean that quite literally; write it down, copy it, reduce it in size, and stick it in you wallets. Let’s
go through Peter’s Gospel step by step. First he identifies who God is: He is the “God of our
Fathers”. Who are the Fathers of the Jews? The Patriarchs: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. This
is as important in our time as it was back then. The peoples of the earth worship no fewer gods
today than in Peter’s day; so for someone to say that they worship god only has meaning
when their god is positively identified. And the God that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
worshipped is the God of the Israel, YHWH; there is no other. This is why (to the shock and
anger of many) I openly and firmly say that the God of Islam is a false god; He is not the same
as the God of the Bible. This verse, among many others, is proof. Islam says that their god is
the god of Abraham and Ishmael. Ishmael worshipped the moon god and before God chose
4 / 8

Abraham, so did Abraham worship the moon god along with a few others. The God of the Jews
is the God of the Tanakh, the Old Testament. The god of Islam is the god of the Koran, the
Islamic holy book. Thus Peter identifying the true God as the God of Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob makes a distinction between Him and all other gods.
The next point is that God exalted Yeshua whereas Caiaphas and his crew had Him killed.
Saying Yeshua was raised up is meant both in the sense of resurrection and glorification by
placing Christ at God’s right hand in Heaven. As I’ve mentioned before; God’s decision about
Yeshua was the opposite of men’s decision, so He simply overturned the decision to kill Jesus
and un-killed Him.
How Messiah was killed also matters; He was hanged on a stake. Hanged doesn’t mean to
place a rope around the neck; it means to impale on wood. Of course what this is referring to is
Yeshua’s crucifixion. This matters because several Messianic prophecies call out various
elements of Messiah’s execution. We find these in Isaiah 50 and 53, Psalms 22, 34, and 69,
and a few other OT passages. So Yeshua’s death fulfilled the ancient prophecies in detail.
After that, Peter says that Yeshua is Ruler and Savior. That is, He is not only the Messiah in
the sense of being a sacrifice for sins. He is also God’s chosen ruler over mankind; Christ has
authority.
And why did God make Him Ruler and Savior? Verse 31 says it is so that Israel would do
t’shuvah (Hebrew for repent). Stop and think: so that WHO would repent did God make
Yeshua Savior? Israel! So once again the Two-Covenant Theology that the Law of Moses is
for Israel and Christ is for gentiles is shot down. In fact, notice something I’ve mentioned a
couple of times; Peter has so far shown no interest in gentiles (as relates to Christ and the
Gospel). In fact it will take a particular incident that is recorded in Acts chapter 10 before God
gets the message across to a reluctant Peter that Yeshua is for all peoples, not just Jews.
And, Peter says that “we” (meaning the 12 Disciples plus others) are witnesses to all this.
They physically and tangibly saw these things with their own eyes. But finally, Peter states that
God gives the Holy Spirit to everyone who obeys Him. Not to some of whom obey Him; and
not to those who do NOT obey Him. In this context obeying God means to welcome His
Messiah, Yeshua, and to follow His instructions. So the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is a key
element, and is part and parcel, of salvation.
Let’s sum up Peter’s Gospel presentation in 7 points:
1.God is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
2.Yeshua was executed by humans on a Cross, thereby fulfilling the OT prophecies
about Him
3.God resurrected Yeshua from the dead
4.God exalted Yeshua and has placed Him at His right hand, in Heaven
5.Yeshua is not only Savior, He is Ruler.
6.Repentance of our sins that comes from the knowledge of Yeshua is required for
forgiveness of our sins
5 / 8

7.All who Believe and obey God are given the Holy Spirit to indwell them
Then verse 33 gives us the response from the members of the Sanhedrin to Peter’s Gospel
presentation. And what we hear is about what happens when people hear the Gospel; they
react in one of two ways. Either they are cut to the quick, feel convicted and open their hearts
to it; or they are cut to quick and react in anger and reject it. The Sanhedrin was so hostile to
the Good News that the consensus was to put Peter and the disciples to death.
The only thing that stood between the deaths of Peter and the disciples was a man named
Gamaliel. One of the few Pharisees in the Sanhedrin, he was known at that time as perhaps
the greatest Torah teacher in the Holy Land. The Apostle Paul was trained up in Gamaliel’s
teaching academy. Gamaliel cautioned a much more measured approach to this problem.
Before we discuss what he said, let’s see who Gamaliel is.
Gamaliel was a member of the most prestigious Pharisee family in the Holy Land. He was
considered as unrivaled in His knowledge of the Torah. He was also known as Gamaliel the
Elder, which helps to distinguish him from a grandson named after him (Gamaliel II) who was
part of the council of Yavneh that some years after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem
finalized the OT canon as we know it today. Gamaliel II also helped to revise the Synagogue
and Rabbinical systems more or less as has come down to us in our time. It is so very
important to our understanding of the New Testament to grasp that Gamaliel the Elder, and
Paul, were products of the Synagogue and not of the Temple. The Synagogue was run by the
Pharisees, and their doctrines and teachings revolved around Oral Torah, also known as
Tradition. We’ll talk much more about this at a later time because we must understand that the
same term (such as the word “law”) can mean different things depending on whether one is
operating within the principles of the Synagogue or operating within the principles of the
Temple. This is why, I might add, Paul trips up scholars and laymen alike in trying to
understand his writings.
So Gamaliel the Elder makes an eloquent speech to the Sanhedrin, not so much on behalf of
the disciples but rather out of enlightened self interest as well as personal religious doctrine.
He takes the tact that before the Sanhedrin acts harshly it should consider what happened to
other recent movements of radicals and zealots and he offers two well-known examples. The
first is of a man named Todah who convinced people that he was a special person that ought
to be followed (and no doubt this involved some sort of rebellion against the Roman
occupation). About 400 men became dedicated followers. However when Todah was arrested
and executed, his movement ended.
Then there was the case of Judas the Galilean who led another uprising against the Romans
about 30 years earlier. Apparently the catalyst for his cause was the Roman census taken for
tax purposes. But as soon as he was captured and killed, his movement also disintegrated and
caused no further trouble. So the lesson, says Gamaliel, is that if a political or religious
movement is a strictly human endeavor then when its founder and leader is killed, his followers
will soon grow disheartened and fall away on their own.
His conclusion is that since in all likelihood this will be the same case with these Yeshua
6 / 8

followers, then no action at all is probably the best policy. However, if in the off chance this
movement really is God-ordained, then no action is also the best policy otherwise the
Sanhedrin would find themselves fighting against God.
Very smart man. But, let us also remember something else: the Pharisees were generally
sympathetic to their own Jewish people, whether radicals or ordinary citizens, and were
strongly against the Roman occupation. So while the Sadducees were beholden to the
Romans and always co-operative with them, it was against the law of the Synagogue (run by
Pharisees) to turn Jews over to the Romans. Because before his speech the Sanhedrin
wanted to have Peter and the disciples executed, that would necessarily mean Roman
involvement since Jews were not allowed to carry out their own capital punishment. The
Sadducees had no issue with that, but as a Pharisee and leader in the Synagogue system,
even the thought of turning Jews over to the Romans to be killed went against Gamaliel’s
convictions.
The Sanhedrin took Gamaliel’s advice. After the deliberation the disciples were called in and
once again ordered to stop healing and teaching in the name of Yeshua, and then released.
But not before they were flogged. Why were they flogged? Because they indeed were guilty of
breaking the law. The law they broke had been established just a few days earlier when Peter
and John were arrested and plainly told that they could not preach, heal, and teach in the
name of Yeshua. So some punishment had to happen or the Sanhedrin would look weak.
Obviously the flogging was not extreme as they returned back to their fellow Believers
immediately afterward.
What a victory for the followers of Christ! They had stood up to the Sanhedrin and not given in
on their faith. This would set the tone for years to come that Believers were willing to suffer
anything to obey Messiah and take the Good News to everyone regardless of opposition. The
CJB says that they were actually overjoyed at being seen as worthy to suffer “disgrace” for the
sake of Yeshua. The Greek word being translated as disgrace is atimazo. Atimazo most
literally means shame in the sense of loss of one’s honor. Among Middle Easterners while the
pain of flogging was certainly a major part of the purpose for flogging, every bit as important
was that culturally flogging brought shame upon the victim. Shame doesn’t mean ashamed
like we think of today in the West whereby guilt is the result. Shame was not a feeling of guilt; it
was a demeaning social status. A person who was shamed was looked down upon by his
family, friends and countrymen. It was a very undesirable social stigma because honor was the
status that all people wanted to maintain.
Thus when one was shamed, it became that person’s sole goal in life to do whatever it took to
recover his or her honor. Different Middle Eastern societies vary a little in how shame was
resolved and honor recovered. But often this included killing the person who inflicted the
shame. Thus even today we’ll hear of the term “honor killing”. This is a killing for the purpose
of recovering an individual’s or a family’s honor. In fact, shame and honor was the point of
Christ’s famous turn the other cheek statement in Matthew 5:39. And the idea was that as
horrible as being shamed was in Jewish society, one should be willing to suffer it for the sake
of the Kingdom of God, and not lash out.
7 / 8

Thus if you were a Jewish Believer and saw Peter acting joyfully after his flogging and now in
his condition of cultural shame, it would have caught you off guard. Thus the final statement
that ends this chapter that says that the disciples who still bore their flogging marks went right
on teaching and proclaiming the Gospel both in private in people’s homes, and in public at the
Temple, has a much greater meaning than it does to modern day Believers. This is because
shamed people were shunned; they weren’t invited into other people’s homes. And shamed
people hid themselves; they certainly didn’t go out in public on their own volition and draw a
crowd to boot, or they would have been publically ridiculed. And yes, of course they were
continuing in their civil disobedience as they defied the court order to stop teaching and healing
in the name of Our Savior Yeshua.
We’ll begin Acts chapter 6 next time that prepares for the story of the first Christian martyr,
Stephen.

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
8 / 8