Act 4:7-10, 7:27 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 7. In the midst . In the presence of the great council. By what power , etc. A similar question was put to Christ in the temple, . By what name . That is, by whose authority. It is very probable that they expected to intimidate the apostles by this question. They claimed the right of regulating the religious affairs of the nation. They had vast power with the people. They assumed that all power to instruct the people should originate with them; and they expected that the apostles would be confounded, as having violated the established usage of the nation. It did not seem to occur to them to enter into an investigation of the question, whether this acknowledged miracle did not prove that they were sent by God; but they assumed that they were impostors, and attempted to silence them by authority. It has been usual with the enemies of religion to attempt to intimidate its friends, and, when argument falls, to attempt to silence Christians by appealing to their fears. (c) "By what power"

Acts 4:7-10

Verse 7. In the midst. In the presence of the great council.

By what power, etc. A similar question was put to Christ in the temple, Mt 21:23.

By what name. That is, by whose authority. It is very probable that they expected to intimidate the apostles by this question. They claimed the right of regulating the religious affairs of the nation. They had vast power with the people. They assumed that all power to instruct the people should originate with them; and they expected that the apostles would be confounded, as having violated the established usage of the nation. It did not seem to occur to them to enter into an investigation of the question, whether this acknowledged miracle did not prove that they were sent by God; but they assumed that they were impostors, and attempted to silence them by authority. It has been usual with the enemies of religion to attempt to intimidate its friends, and, when argument falls, to attempt to silence Christians by appealing to their fears.

Ye rulers, etc. Peter addressed the sanhedrim with perfect respect. He did not call in question their authority to propose this question. He seemed to regard this as a favourable opportunity to declare the truth, and state the evidence of the Christian religion. In this he acted on the principle of the injunction which he himself afterwards gave, 1Pet 3:15, "Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear." Innocence is willing to be questioned; and a believer in the truth will rejoice in any opportunity to state the evidence of what is believed. It is remarkable, also, that this was before the great council of the nation; the body that was clothed with the highest authority. And Peter could not have forgotten that before this very council, and these very men, his Master had been arraigned and condemned. Nor could he have forgotten that in the very room where this same council was convened to try his Lord, he had himself shrunk from an honest avowal of attachment to him, and shamefully and profanely denied him. That he was now able to stand boldly before this same tribunal evinced a remarkable change in his feelings, and was a most clear and impressive proof of the genuineness of his repentance when he went out and wept bitterly. Comp. Lk 22:54-62. And we may remark here, that one of the most clear evidences of the sincerity of repentance is when it leads to a result like this. So deeply was the heart of Peter affected by his sin, Lk 22:62, and so genuine was his sorrow, that he doubtless remembered his crime on this occasion; and the memory of it inspired him with boldness. It may be further remarked, that one evidence of the genuineness of repentance is a desire to repair the evil which is done by crime. Peter had done dishonour to his Master and his cause, in the presence of the great council of the nation. Nothing, on such an occasion, would be more likely to do injury to the cause than for one of the disciples of the Saviour to deny him--one of his followers to be guilty of profaneness and falsehood. But here was an opportunity, in some degree at least, to repair the evil. Before the same council and the same men, in the same city, and in the presence of the same people, it is not an unnatural supposition that Peter rejoiced that he might have opportunity to bear his testimony to the Divine mission of the Saviour whom he had before denied. By using the customary language of respect applied to the great council, Peter also has shown us that it is proper to evince respect for office, and for those in power. Religion requires us to render this homage, and to treat men in office with deference, Mt 22:21, Rom 13:7, 1Pet 2:13-17.

(d) "filled with the Holy Ghost" Acts 7:55 (+) "Holy Ghost" "Spirit" Verse 9.

(+) "impotent man" "Infirm" (&) "whole" "Hath been restored" Verse 10. Be it known, etc. Peter might have evaded the question, or he might have resorted to many excuses and subterfuges, (Calvin,) if he had been desirous of avoiding this inquiry. But it was a noble opportunity for vindicating the honour of his Lord and Master. It was a noble opportunity also for repairing the evil which he had done by his guilty denial of his Lord. Although, therefore, this frank and open avowal was attended with danger, and although it was in the presence of the great and the mighty, yet he chose to state fully and clearly his conviction of the truth. Never was there an instance of greater boldness; and never could there be a more striking illustration of the fitness of the name which the Lord Jesus gave him, that of a rock, Jn 1:42, Mt 16:17,18. The timid, trembling, yielding, and vacillating Simon, he who just before was terrified by a servant girl, and who on the lake was afraid of sinking, is now transformed into the manly, decided, and firm Cephas, fearless before the great council of the nation, and in an unwavering tone asserting the authority of Him whom he had just before denied, and whom they had just before put to death. It is not possible to account for this change except on the supposition that this religion is true. Peter had no worldly motive to actuate him. He had no prospect of wealth or fame by this. Even the hopes of honour and preferment which they had cherished before the death of Jesus, and which might have been supposed to influence them then, were now abandoned by the apostles. Their Master had died; and all their hopes of human honour and power had been buried in his grave. Nothing but the conviction of the truth could have wrought this change, and transformed this timid disciple to a bold and uncompromising apostle.

By the name. By the authority or power, Acts 3:6.

Of Jesus Christ. The union of these two names would be particularly offensive to the sanhedrim. They denied that Jesus was the Christ, or the Messiah; Peter, by the use of the word Christ, affirmed that he was. In the language then used, it would be, "By the name of Jesus, the Messiah."

Of Nazareth. Lest there should be any mistake about his meaning, he specified that he referred to the despised Nazarene; to him who had just been put to death, as they supposed, covered with infamy. Christians little regard the epithets of opprobrium which may be affixed to themselves or to their religion.

Whom ye crucified. There is emphasis in all the expressions that Peter uses. He had before charged the people with the crime of having put him to death, Acts 2:23, 3:14,15; but he now had the opportunity, contrary to all expectation, of urging the charge with still greater force on the rulers themselves, on the very council which had condemned him and delivered him to Pilate. It was a remarkable providence that an opportunity was thus afforded of urging this charge in the presence of the sanhedrim, and of proclaiming to them the necessity of repentance. Little did they imagine, when they condemned the Lord Jesus, that this charge would be so soon urged. This is one of the instances in which God takes the wise in their own craftiness, Job 5:13. They had arraigned the apostles; they demanded their authority for what they had done; and thus they had directly opened the way, and invited them to the serious and solemn charge which Peter here urges against them.

(a) "that by the name" Acts 3:6,16 (*) "whole" "well"

Acts 7:27

Verse 27. But he that did, etc. Intent on his purpose, filled with rage and passion, he rejected all interference, and all attempts at peace. It is usually the man that does the injury that is unwilling to be reconciled; and when we find a man that regards the entreaties of his friends as improper interference, when he becomes increasingly angry when we exhort him to peace, it is usually a strong evidence that he is conscious that he has been at fault. If we wish to reconcile parties, we should go first to the man that has been injured. In the controversy between God and man, it is the sinner who has done the wrong that is unwilling to be reconciled, and not God.

His neighbour. The Jew with whom he was contending.

Who made thee, etc. What right have you to interfere in this matter? The usual salutation with which a man is greeted who attempts to prevent quarrels.