Acts 5:39Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

If he persuaded them, someone will ask, why then did they have the apostles scourged? They could not resist the irrefutable justice of his words. Nevertheless, they satisfied their rage. Besides, they again hoped in this way to frighten the apostles.

It aided him greatly in persuading them that he said this in the apostles’ absence. The sweetness of his words and the justice of what was said persuaded them.

He was almost a preacher of the gospel to them. Or rather, it is as if he addresses them with this reasoning: you have been persuaded that you cannot overthrow it. Why, then, have you not believed?

Their preaching is so great that it receives testimony even from enemies. There, four hundred men rose up, and then many people. Here, at the beginning, there were only twelve. Therefore you need not fear the multitude attacking you.

“If this work is from men, it will be overthrown.” He could also have pointed to another Egyptian agitator, but it would have been unnecessary to speak of him.

Do you see how he frightened them at the end of his speech? For this reason he does not state his own opinion directly, lest he seem to be a defender of the apostles. Instead, he draws his conclusion from the results of the work.

He did not dare to say directly that this work was human, or that it was from God. If he had said it was from God, they would have contradicted him. If he had said it was human, they would immediately have risen up again.

Therefore he advises them to wait for the end, saying, “Keep away from these men and leave them alone.”

Do you see what boldness Gamaliel had when he said that it was “from God,” since he had already persuaded them of this from the works themselves? Truly, great was his boldness and great his impartiality.

They were not asked how they had come out of prison. They were asked why they preached about Him Whose name was hateful to them. But the apostles, without hesitation, said that one must obey God rather than men. They preached the resurrection of Jesus and the witness of the Holy Spirit.

The Sadducees could bear this no longer. They wanted to kill the apostles. But the voice of the learned Pharisee Gamaliel, respected by all the people, served the work of God. They were only punished and released.

He reminds the judges of two popular uprisings and their instigators. One was a certain Theudas, a person not definitely known from history. The other was Judas the Galilean, who stirred up revolt during and because of the census.

This was the census that the Roman emperor Augustus ordered Quirinius, the Syrian governor, to carry out in Judea. Because of it the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ took place in Bethlehem (Lk 2:2).

Since the apostles’ work seemed dangerous in the eyes of the Sanhedrin because it was growing more and more (v. 28), Gamaliel reminds them that the mentioned agitators also had success at first. They too drew hundreds of people after themselves.

But, he says, since their work was not the work of God, they themselves perished, and their followers were scattered and vanished.

“And now, I say to you, keep away from these men and leave them alone. For if this plan and this work are from men, it will be overthrown. But if it is from God, you cannot overthrow it. Take care lest you also be found fighters against God.”

The comparison of the apostles with popular agitators seems to show that Gamaliel personally did not hold a high opinion of Christ’s preachers.

Yet the counsel that Gamaliel then gave to the Sanhedrin reflects a favorable view of Christianity. He allows the possibility that the apostles’ work is the work of God. He warns men lest they be found fighters against God.

But can truly Orthodox people defend the Stundists, who themselves began the struggle against Orthodoxy and strive to tear the Church’s children away from her?

Gamaliel was probably among those rulers of whom the Evangelist John says that they believed in the Lord Jesus, but did not confess Him, “lest they should be put out of the synagogue” (12:42).

So too, if falsehood may be compared with truth, in relation to Stundism. For a son of the Orthodox Church not to struggle against it is the same as secretly believing or sympathizing with its false teaching.

This principle is true in general, but when applied to human activity and to people’s relation to events, it cannot always be unconditionally true.

If it were applied absolutely, people would not have to struggle against the development of evil principles in life, which God sometimes permits. That is contrary to the laws of conscience and to the law of God.

Yet in the mouth of a man inclined to see God’s power in Christianity, this principle has its full force. It assumes that God’s power here will necessarily become clearer in later events, in a more visible and convincing way.

In this case Gamaliel’s conscience loses the character of indifferentism and frivolous treatment of events, for which it makes no difference whether something is so or not so.

In any case, Gamaliel’s counsel unquestionably shows a favorable attitude toward Christianity; compare Chrysostom and Theophylact.

This is also evident from Gamaliel’s further strong warning to the members of the Sanhedrin that they might be found fighters against God.

The Greek word is stronger and means fighters against God, men rising up against God and waging war against Him.

This warning and counsel show that Gamaliel, if he was not yet a Christian, was on the firm path toward Christianity. This is also confirmed by Church tradition.

“True in general, this principle cannot always be unconditionally true when applied to human activity and to people’s relation to events. If applied absolutely, people would not have to struggle against the development of evil principles in life, which God sometimes permits. That is contrary to the laws of conscience and to the law of God.”

In Gamaliel’s mouth, however, his counsel had full force. First, besides the internal government of the people, there was then Roman government in Judea. It could prevent the apostles from any external violations of law.

They neither intended to commit such violations nor could do so according to their faith.

Second, their work was from God. Gamaliel himself evidently believed this, and therefore did not keep silent about the God-opposing malice and rebellion of the Sanhedrin’s members.

If he partly put Theudas and Judas the Galilean on a level with the apostles, this was an argument adapted to those who could not, and did not wish to, distinguish men incomparable in the essence of their convictions and life.

They had only certain similarities in external circumstances and situations.