Obeying God Rather Than Men: The Apostles Before the Sanhedrin

Commentary 10 on the Acts: Acts 5:27-33

This week’s text and commentary are closely linked to last week’s extract. The apostles were brought before the Sanhedrin without any violence because the temple police were afraid that it could lead to social disorder. As the apostles stood before the Sanhedrin, the high priest, as president of the council, began the interrogation by reminding the apostles of the council's order for them to be silent, which obviously had not been complied with. It is uncertain whether Luke had in mind Annas or Caiaphas as leading the interrogation; while the latter was officially the high priest at the time, the former is assumed in the NT to have been the real power behind the throne and continued to be called the high priest (cf. Lk 3:2; Jn 18:13-24). Formally, the high priest's interrogation contained no question at all but only pointed to the apostles' refusal to obey the Sanhedrin's order (i.e., a charge of "contempt of court"). He also objected to their insistence on blaming the council for Jesus' death (cf. 4:10, "whom you crucified"). For the Sadducean leadership of the council, the uncontested charge of contempt of court was sufficient legal warrant for taking action against the apostles. With their vested interests, the Sadducees wanted only to preserve their own authority and put an end to the rising disturbance among the people. They evidently had no interest in determining the truth or falsity of the Christian’s claims. Their hardened attitude was manifest in their refusal to mention the name of Jesus "in this name," rather than "in the name of Jesus," and in their spitting out the epithet "this man" when they had need to refer to him directly. By saying "Peter and the other apostles replied," Luke suggests Peter was the spokesman for the group of apostles on trial, with the others in some way indicating their agreement. Their response is hardly a reasoned defense but simply a reaffirmation of their position. As at the first trial (4:19), here they voice even more succinctly the guiding principle "We must obey God rather than men." And also, as at the first trial, the focus was on Jesus.

"By hanging him on a tree" was a reference to the crucifixion and stemmed from Deuteronomy 21:22-23. While the Greek word xylon was used in antiquity and in the Septuagint variously for "a tree," "wood" of any kind, "a pole," and various objects made of wood, including "a gallows," it is also used in the NT for the cross of Jesus. The titles "Prince" and "Saviour" are Christological terms rooted in the confessions of the early church and particularly associated with the NT themes of exaltation and Lordship.

Because the apostles obey God they can act by the Holy Spirit, whereas the authorities who do not obey God, cannot do so. The ill-will of the Sanhedrin is evident in their antipathy to the sincere witness of the apostles. Instead of responding to it in an open

and sincere way, they desire to kill the apostles, just as they have already demanded the execution of Jesus. As we mentioned in a previous Lectio, the Jews didn’t have a right in roman law to execute anyone. Nevertheless, one gets the impression that they were close to lynching the apostles. 

Nowadays many people find that the prospect of engaging in evangelisation of any kind is intimidating. Some people are naturally shy, they may feel that they don’t have the skill to initiate conversations on religious topics. Because others feel that religion is a private matter, they think it would be too intrusive to talk to others about faith issues. Frank Duff, founder of The Legion of Mary, spoke about this phenomenon in The Legion Handbook. He says that many would-be evangelisers are scared by the prospect "of a few jeers, or angry words, or criticism, or even amused looks, or from a fear that he or she may be thought to be preaching or making an affectation of holiness. . . This timidity, is commonly called human respect . . . For different people the latter assumes different labels: "common prudence," "respect for the opinion of others," "hopelessness of the enterprise," "waiting for a lead," and many other plausible phrases, all of which lead to inaction.” He warned, that, “An inert laity is only two generations removed from non-practice. Non-practice is only two generations away from non-belief.”