Act 5:36-39, 1Jo 4:1 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 36. For before these days . The advice of Gamaliel was to suffer these men to go on. The arguments by which he enforced his advice were, (1.) that there were cases or precedents in point, ( ;) and, (2.) that if it should turn out to be of God, it would be a solemn affair to be involved in the consequences of opposing him. How long before those days this transaction occurred cannot now be determined, as it is not certain to what case Gamaliel refers. Rose up . That is, commenced or excited an insurrection. Theudas , This was a name quite common among the Jews. Of this man nothing more is known than is here recorded. Josephus (Antiq. b. xx. chap. v.) mentions one Theudas , in the time of Fadus the procurator of Judea, in the reign of the emperor Claudius, (A.D. 45 or 46,) who persuaded a great part of the people to take their effects with him, and follow him to the river Jordan. He told them he was a prophet, and that he would divide the river, and lead them over. Fadus, however, came suddenly upon them, and slew many of them. Theudas was taken alive, and conveyed to Jerusalem, and there beheaded. But this occurred at least ten or fifteen years after this discourse of Gamaliel. Many efforts have been made to reconcile Luke and Josephus, on the supposition that they refer to the same man. Lightfoot supposed that Josephus had made an error in chronology. But there is no reason to suppose that there is reference to the same event; and the fact that Josephus has not recorded the insurrection referred to by Gamaliel, does not militate at all against the account in the Acts. For (1.) Luke, for anything that appears to the contrary, is quite as credible an historian as Josephus. (2.) The name Theudas was a common name among the Jews; and there is no improbability that there were two leaders of an insurrection of this name. If it is improbable, the improbability would affect Josephus's credit as much as that of Luke. (3.) It is altogether improbable that Gamaliel should refer to a case which was not well authenticated; and that Luke should record a speech of this kind unless it was delivered, when it would be so easy to detect the error. (4.) Josephus has recorded many instances of insurrection and revolt. He has represented the country as in an unsettled state, and by no means professes to give an account of all that occurred. Thus he says, (Antiq. xvii. x. 4,) that there were "at this time ten thousand other disorders in Judea;" and (&8) that "Judea was full of robberies." When this Theudas lived cannot be ascertained; but as Gamaliel mentions him before Judas of Galilee, it is probable that he lived not far from the time that our Saviour was born--at a time when many false prophets appeared, claiming to be the Messiah. Boasting himself to be somebody . Claiming to be an eminent prophet probably, or the Messiah. Obeyed him . The word used here is the one commonly used to denote belief . As many as believed on him, or gave credit to his pretensions. (1) "these days" "In the third year before the account called A. D." (2) "obeyed" "believed"

Acts 5:36-39

Verse 36. For before these days. The advice of Gamaliel was to suffer these men to go on. The arguments by which he enforced his advice were,

(1.) that there were cases or precedents in point, (Acts 5:36,37;) and,

(2.) that if it should turn out to be of God, it would be a solemn affair to be involved in the consequences of opposing him. How long before those days this transaction occurred cannot now be determined, as it is not certain to what case Gamaliel refers.

Rose up. That is, commenced or excited an insurrection.

Theudas, This was a name quite common among the Jews. Of this man nothing more is known than is here recorded. Josephus (Antiq. b. xx. chap. v.) mentions one Theudas, in the time of Fadus the procurator of Judea, in the reign of the emperor Claudius, (A.D. 45 or 46,) who persuaded a great part of the people to take their effects with him, and follow him to the river Jordan. He told them he was a prophet, and that he would divide the river, and lead them over. Fadus, however, came suddenly upon them, and slew many of them. Theudas was taken alive, and conveyed to Jerusalem, and there beheaded. But this occurred at least ten or fifteen years after this discourse of Gamaliel. Many efforts have been made to reconcile Luke and Josephus, on the supposition that they refer to the same man. Lightfoot supposed that Josephus had made an error in chronology. But there is no reason to suppose that there is reference to the same event; and the fact that Josephus has not recorded the insurrection referred to by Gamaliel, does not militate at all against the account in the Acts. For

(1.) Luke, for anything that appears to the contrary, is quite as credible an historian as Josephus.

(2.) The name Theudas was a common name among the Jews; and there is no improbability that there were two leaders of an insurrection of this name. If it is improbable, the improbability would affect Josephus's credit as much as that of Luke.

(3.) It is altogether improbable that Gamaliel should refer to a case which was not well authenticated; and that Luke should record a speech of this kind unless it was delivered, when it would be so easy to detect the error.

(4.) Josephus has recorded many instances of insurrection and revolt. He has represented the country as in an unsettled state, and by no means professes to give an account of all that occurred. Thus he says, (Antiq. xvii. x. 4,) that there were "at this time ten thousand other disorders in Judea;" and (&8) that "Judea was full of robberies." When this Theudas lived cannot be ascertained; but as Gamaliel mentions him before Judas of Galilee, it is probable that he lived not far from the time that our Saviour was born--at a time when many false prophets appeared, claiming to be the Messiah.

Boasting himself to be somebody. Claiming to be an eminent prophet probably, or the Messiah.

Obeyed him. The word used here is the one commonly used to denote belief. As many as believed on him, or gave credit to his pretensions.

(1) "these days" "In the third year before the account called A. D." (2) "obeyed" "believed" Verse 37. Judas of Galilee. Josephus has given an account of this man, (Antiq. b. xvii. chap. x. 5,) and calls him a Galilean. He afterwards calls him a Gualonite, and says he was of the city of Gamala, (Antiq. xviii, i. 1.) In this place, he says that the revolt took place under Cyrenius, a Roman senator, who came into "Syria to be judge of that nation, and to take account of their substance." "Moreover," says he, "Cyrenius came himself into Judea, which was now added to the province of Syria, to take an account of their substance, and to dispose of Archelaus's money." "Yet Judas taking with him Saddouk, a Pharisee, became zealous to draw them to a revolt, who both said that this taxation was no better than an introduction to slavery, and exhorted the nation to assert their liberty," etc. This revolt, he says, was the commencement of the series of revolts and calamities that terminated in the destruction of the city, temple, and nation.

In the days of the taxing. Or, rather, the enrolling, or the census. Josephus says, it was designed to take an account of their substance. Comp. Lk 2:1,2.

(*) "taxing" "enrollment" (a) "he also perished" Lk 13:1,2 (b) "let them alone" Prov 21:30, Isa 8:10, Mt 15:13 Verse 38. Refrain from these men. Cease to oppose them, or to threaten them. The reason why he advised this, he immediately adds: that if it were of men, it would come to nought; if of God, they could not overthrow it.

This counsel. This plan, or purpose. If the apostles had originated it for the purposes of imposture.

It will come to nought. Gamaliel inferred that from the two instances which he specified. They had been suppressed without the interference of the sanhedrim; and he inferred that this would also die away if it was a human device. It will be remembered that this is the mere advice of Gamaliel, who was not inspired; and that this opinion should not be adduced to guide us, except as it was an instance of great shrewdness and prudence. It is, doubtless, right to oppose error in the proper way and with the proper temper--not with arms, or vituperation, or with the civil power, but with argument and kind entreaty. But the sentiment of Gamaliel is full of wisdom in regard to error. For,

(1.) the very way to exalt error into notice, and to confirm men in it, is to oppose it in a harsh, authoritative, and unkind manner.

(2.) Error, if left alone, will often die away itself. The interest of men in it will often cease as soon as it ceases to be opposed; and having nothing to fan the flame, it will expire. It is not so with truth.

(3.) In this respect the remark may be applied.to the Christian religion. It has stood too long, and in too many circumstances of prosperity and adversity, to be of men. It has been subjected to all trials from its pretended friends and real foes; and it still lives as vigorous and flourishing as ever. Other kingdoms have changed; empires have risen and fallen since Gamaliel spoke this; systems of opinion and belief have had their day, and expired; but the preservation of the Christian religion, unchanged through so many revolutions, and in so many fiery trials, shows that it is not of men, but of God. The argument for the Divine origin of the Christian religion from its perpetuity, is one that can be applied to no other system that has been, or that now exists. For Christianity has been opposed in every form. It confers no temporal conquests, and appeals to no base and strong native passions. Mohammedanism is supported by the sword and the state; paganism relies on the arm of the civil power and the terrors of superstition, and is sustained by all the corrupt passions of men; atheism and infidelity have been short-lived, varying in their forms--dying today, and tomorrow starting up in a new form--never organized, consolidated, or pure, and never tending to promote the peace or happiness of men. Christianity, without arms or human power, has lived, holding its steady and triumphant movements among men, regardless alike of the opposition of its foes, and of the treachery of its pretended friends. If the opinion of Gamaliel was just, it is from God; and the Jews particularly should regard as important an argument derived from the opinion of one of the wisest of their ancient Rabbins.

(b) "let them alone" Prov 21:30, Isa 8:10, Mt 15:13 Verse 39. But if it be of God. If God is the Author of this religion. From this it seems that Gamaliel supposed that it was at least possible that this religion was Divine. He evinced a far more candid mind than did the rest of the Jews; but still it does not appear that he was entirely convinced. The arguments which could not but stagger the Jewish sanhedrim, were those drawn from the resurrection of Jesus, the miracle on the day of Pentecost, the healing of the lame man in the temple, and the release of the apostles from the prison.

Ye can not overthrow it. Because

(1) God has almighty power, and can execute his purposes;

(2.) because he is unchanging, and will not be diverted from his plans, Job 23:13,14. The plan which God forms must be accomplished. All the devices of man are feebleness when opposed to him, and he can dash them in pieces in an instant. The prediction of Gamaliel has been fulfilled. Men have opposed Christianity in every way, but in vain. They have reviled it; have persecuted it; have resorted to argument and to ridicule, to fire, and fagot, and sword; they have called in the aid of science; but all has been in vain. The more it has been crushed, the more it has risen, and still exists with as much life and power as ever. The preservation of this religion amidst so much and so varied opposition, proves that it is of God. No severer trial can await it than it has already experienced; and as it has survived so many storms and trials, we have every evidence that, according to the predictions, it is destined to live, and to fill the world. Mt 16:18; Isa 54:17, 55:11, Dan 4:35.

Lest. That is, if you continue to oppose it, you may be found to have been opposing God.

Haply. Perhaps. In the Greek this is lest at any time; that is, at some future time, when too late to retract your doings, etc.

Ye be found. It shall appear that you have been opposing God.

Even to fight against God. Greek, θεομαχοι. The word occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. To fight against God is to oppose him, or to maintain an attitude of hostility against him. It is an attitude that is most fearful in its character, and will most certainly be attended with an overthrow. No condition can be more awful than such an opposition to the Almighty; no overthrow more terrible than that which must follow such opposition. Comp. Acts 9:5, 23:9. Opposition to the gospel, in the Scriptures, is uniformly regarded as opposition to God, Mt 12:30, Lk 11:23. Men may be said to fight against God in the following ways, or on the following subjects:

(1.) When they oppose his gospel, its preaching, its plans, its influence among men; when they endeavour to prevent its spread, or to withdraw their families and friends from its influence.

(2.) When they oppose the doctrines of the Bible. When they become angry that the real truths of religion are preached; and suffer themselves to be irritated and excited, by an unwillingness that those doctrines should be true, and should be presented to men. Yet this is no uncommon thing. Men by nature do not love those doctrines, and they are often indignant that they are preached. Some of the most angry feelings which men ever have arise from this source; and man can never find peace until he is willing that God's truth should exert its influence on his own soul, and rejoice that it is believed and loved by others.

(3.) Men oppose the law of God. It seems to them too stern and harsh. It condemns them; and they are unwilling that it should be applied to them. There is nothing which a sinner likes less than he does the pure and holy law of God.

(4.) Sinners fight against the providence of God. When he afflicts them, they rebel. When he takes away their health, or property, or friends, they murmur. They esteem him harsh and cruel; and, instead of finding peace by submission, they greatly aggravate their sufferings, and infuse a mixture of wormwood and gall into the cup, by murmuring and repining. There is no peace in affliction but in the feeling that God is right. And until this belief is cherished, the wicked will be like the troubled sea, which cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt, Isa 57:20. Such opposition to God is as wicked as it is foolish. The Lord gave, and has a right to remove our comforts; and we should be still, and know that he is God.

(5.) Sinners fight against God when they resist the influences of his Spirit; when they oppose serious thoughts; when they seek evil or gay companions and pleasures rather than submit to God; and when they resist all the entreaties of their friends to become Christians. All these may be the appeals which God is making to men to be prepared to meet him. And yet it is common for sinners thus to stifle conviction, and refuse even to think of their eternal welfare. Nothing can be an act of more direct and deliberate wickedness and folly than this. Without the aid of the Holy Spirit none can be saved; and to resist his influences is to put away the only prospect of eternal life. To do it, is to do it over the grave; not knowing that another hour or day may be granted; and not knowing that, if life is prolonged, the Spirit will ever strive again with the heart.

In view of this verse we may remark,

(1.) that the path of wisdom is to submit at once to all the requirements of God. Without this, we must expect conflicts with him, and perils and ruin. No man can be opposed to God without endangering himself every minute.

(2.) Submission to God should be entire. It should extend to every doctrine and demand; every law, and every act of the Almighty. In all his requirements, and in all afflictions, we should submit to him, and thus only shall we find peace.

(3.) Infidels and scoffers will gain nothing by opposing God. They have thus far been thwarted and unsuccessful; and they will be still. None of their plans have succeeded; and the hope of destroying the Christian religion, after the efforts of almost two thousand years, must be vain, and will recoil with tremendous vengeance on those who make them.

1 John 4:1

ANALYSIS OF CHAPTER IV.

THERE are two principal subjects discussed in this chapter:--

I. The method by which we may determine that we have the Spirit of God, 1Jn 4:1-6. The apostle had said (1Jn 3:24) that it could be determined that God dwells in them by the Spirit which he has given them; but as it is probable that the teachers of error, the persons whom John regarded as "antichrist," (1Jn 2:18,19,) would lay claim to the same thing, it was important to know how it could be ascertained that the Spirit of God had been really given to them, or how it could be determined that the spirit that was in them was not the spirit of antichrist, the very thing against which he would guard them. In doing this, he

(1.) cautions them against trusting to every kind of spirit, or supposing that every spirit which animated even the professed friends of religion was the Spirit of God, 1Jn 4:1; and

(2.) he shows them how it might be determined that they had really the Spirit of God, or what would, be the effect of the influences of the Spirit on the mind. This evidence consisted of the following things:

(a.) they had the Spirit of God who confessed that Jesus Christ had come in the flesh, 1Jn 4:2;

(b.) they who denied that, had not the Spirit of God, and the denial of this was the real spirit of antichrist, 1Jn 4:3;

(c.) they who had the Spirit of God had not the spirit of this world, 1Jn 4:4,5; and

(d.) they who had the Spirit of God would hear those who were his apostles, or who were sent by him, 1Jn 4:6.

II. The duty, power, and influence of love, 1Jn 4:7-21. This is a favourite subject with John, and he here considers it at length, as a subject that was essential in determining the evidences of piety. The duty and value of love are enforced by the following considerations:

(1.) Love has its origin in God, and every one who has true love is born of God, 1Jn 4:7,8.

(2.) God has shown his great love to us by having given his Son to die for us; and as he has so loved us, we ought also to love one another, 1Jn 4:9-11.

(3.) If we love one another, it furnishes the best evidence that God dwells in us, 1Jn 4:12-15.

(4.) God is love, and if we have true love we dwell in him, and he dwells in us, 1Jn 4:16.

(5.) Love will furnish us great advantage in the day of judgment, by giving us confidence when we come before him, 1Jn 4:17.

(6.) Love will cast out all fear, and will make our minds calm in view of the events which are to come, 1Jn 4:18.

(7.) The very fact that he has first manifested his love to us should lead us to the exercise of love, 1Jn 4:19

(8.) A man cannot truly love God and yet hate his brother, 1Jn 4:20; and

(9.) it is the solemn command of God that he who loves God should love his brother also.

Verse 1. Beloved, believe not every spirit. Do not confide implicitly in every one who professes to be under the influences of the Holy Spirit. Comp. Mt 24:4,5. The true and the false teachers of religion alike claimed to be under the influence of the Spirit of God, and it was of importance that all such pretensions should be examined. It was not to be admitted because any one claimed to have been sent from God that therefore he was sent. Every such claim should be subjected to the proper proof before it was conceded. All pretensions to Divine inspiration, or to being authorized teachers of religion, were to be examined by the proper tests, because there were many false and delusive teachers who set up such claims in the world.

But try the spirits whether they are of God. There were those in the early Christian church who had the gift of "discerning Spirits," (1Cor 12:10,) but it is not certain that the apostle refers here to any such supernatural power. It is more probable, as he addresses this command to Christians in general, that he refers to the ability of doing this by a comparison of the doctrines which they professed to hold with what was revealed, and by the fruits of their doctrines in their lives. If they taught what God had taught in his word, and if their lives corresponded with his requirements, and if their doctrines agreed with what had been inculcated by those who were admitted to be true apostles, (1Jn 4:6,) they were to receive them as what they professed to be. If not, they were to reject them, and hold them to be impostors. It may be remarked, that it is just as proper and as important now to examine the claims of all who profess to be teachers of religion, as it was then. In a matter so momentous as religion, and where there is so much at stake, it is important that all pretensions of this kind should be subjected to a rigid examination. No man should be received as a religious teacher without the clearest evidence that he has come in accordance with the will of God, nor unless he inculcates the very truth which God has revealed. Isa 8:20, and Acts 17:11.

Because many false prophets are gone out into the world. The word prophet is often used in the New Testament to denote religious instructors or preachers. Rom 12:6. Compare 2Pet 2:1. Such false teachers evidently abounded in the times here referred to. 1Jn 2:18. The meaning is, that many had gone out into the world pretending to be true teachers of religion, but who inculcated most dangerous doctrines; and it was their duty to be on their guard against them, for they had the very spirit of antichrist, 1Jn 4:3.

(a) "Believe not" Jer 29:8, Mt 24:4 (b) "try the spirits" 1Thes 5:21, Rev 2:2