Acts 4:14Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

There sat the same Annas and Caiaphas who had also judged Jesus. The apostles were asked, "By what power, or by whose name, have you done this?" Perhaps they did not expect them to dare speak before the Sanhedrin as openly as before the common people.

Yet the apostles declared without hesitation that the lame man who had lain at the temple had been raised up by them in the name of Jesus. He had been crucified by them, that is, according to the Sanhedrin's decree.

They added that this Jesus, as He Himself had declared to them, is truly the stone rejected by the builders, yet become the head of the corner.

They recognized them. John was known to one of the chief priests. Their boldness amazed the members of the Sanhedrin. Yet the miracle could not be denied. The people were on their side, since they were not disposed toward the Sadducees.

Therefore they resolved only to forbid them to preach any more to anyone "in this name." Peter and John answered that they must obey God rather than men. They were only threatened and released with the same command.

But the healed man, who was there with the apostles, stood as a silent and irrefutable confirmation of the truth of apostolic testimony.

Then, after sending the accused out, they took counsel about what to do. Christ's opponents openly admitted to themselves that the truth was on the side of the accused.

Nevertheless, after calling the apostles back, they strictly forbade them to speak and teach in the name of Jesus. But the apostles answered: "Judge whether it is right before God to listen to you rather than to God.

We cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard" (vv. 19-20). The apostles had received directly from Christ Himself the appointment to be His witnesses in all the world, and first of all in Jerusalem.

Yet Christ Himself once said, "The scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses' seat. Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, observe and do" (Mt 23:2-3).

Thus, not only in the name of their former purely Jewish notions and beliefs, but also on the basis of this teaching of the Lord, the apostles owed obedience to the Sanhedrin.

For the Lord had taught that the Old Testament order of things would continue for a time, even at the opening of the New Testament. The Sanhedrin was the guardian of this order.

Thus the apostles were required to fulfill two duties at the same time. These duties stood in such relation that by fulfilling one, they would violate the other.

The apostles, however, did not hesitate over how to escape this difficulty. Calmly and firmly they declared that in this case they could not obey.

They had to fulfill the higher command, the command of God Himself. On the other hand, their own conscience did not allow them to keep silent, or to hide the truth about that of which they were firmly and undoubtedly convinced by experience.

The members of the Sanhedrin could easily notice the apostles' lack of rabbinic schooling from their simple and guileless speech. Rabbinic education taught artificiality and intricate weaving in speech.

"Simple" (ἰδιώται) means men from the common people, who were always considered dark and ignorant.

"It is possible to be unlettered and not simple, and simple yet not unlettered. But here both coincided. Therefore the members of the Sanhedrin marveled when Peter and John spoke and discoursed" (Theophylact).

"They recognized them," and so forth: the Lord and His disciples often visited the temple in Jerusalem. There the members of the Sanhedrin, at least some of them, could have seen them.

Now, looking closely at them, they truly recognized in them Jesus' disciples. By this they became certain that these men truly continued their Teacher's work.

That work was so hateful to the whole Sanhedrin, especially to its chief members, who had delivered the Lord to death.

Their amazement would probably have resulted in an accusation of the Lord's disciples for a religious and political crime. Yet the presence of the healed lame man together with the apostles sealed their lips with silence.

They could say nothing against the explanation of this miracle offered by the apostle, namely, that the miracle had been done in the name of Jesus the Messiah.

How did the healed man come into the Sanhedrin? Probably by order of the authorities themselves. They hoped somehow to force from him a denial of the miraculous character of his healing.

They had done the same with the man born blind, whom the Lord healed (Jn 9). But now, as then, the members of the Sanhedrin not only erred in their calculations.

The presence of those healed served to their own harm.