they have been distinguished for zeal and success in propagating their religion. See 1 Pet. iv. 16, "If any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God on this behalf." Also ver. 13-15. Intend to bring this man's blood upon us.-To bring one's blood upon another, is a phrase denoting to hold or to prove him guilty of murdering the innocent. The expression here charges them with designing to prove that they had put Jesus to death when he was innocent; to convince the people of this, and thus to enrage them against the sanhedrim; and also to prove that they were guilty, and were exposed to the divine vengeance for having put the Messiah to death. Comp. chap. ii. 23-36; iii. 15; vii. 52. That the apostles did intend to charge them with being guilty of murder, is clear; but it is observable that on this occasion they had said nothing of this; and it is further observable that they did not charge it on them except in their presence. See the places just referred to. They took no pains to spread this among the people, except as the people were accessary to the crime of the rulers. (Chap. ii. 23-36.) Their consciences were not at ease, and the remembrance of the death of Jesus would occur to them at once at the sight of the apostles.

Raised up Jesus.--This refers to his resurrection. Hanged on a tree.-That is, on the cross. (Gal. iii. 13. 1 Pet. ii. 24. Acts x. 39; xiii. 29.) This is the amount of Peter's defence. He begins with the great principle (ver. 29) which they could not gainsay, that God ought to be obeyed rather than man. He then proceeds to state that they were convinced that God had raised up Jesus from the dead. And as they had such decisive evidence of that, and were commanded by the authority of the Lord Jesus to be witnesses of that, and had constant evidence that God had done it, they were not at liberty to be silent. They were bound to obey God rather than the sanhedrim, and to make known every where the fact that the Lord Jesus was risen. mark that God had raised up Jesus whom they had slain, does not seem to have been made to irritate or to reproach them, but mainly to identify the person that had been raised. It was also a confirmation of the truth and reality of the miracle. Of his death they had no doubt, for they had been at pains to certify it. (John xix. 31-34.) It is certain, however, that Peter did not shrink from charging on them their guilt; nor was he at any pains to soften or mitigate the severe charge that they had murdered their own Messiah.

The re

h

VER. 31. Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a & Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

ƒ Phil. ii. 9. g Isa. ix. 6. h Matt. i. 21. Him hath God exalted.--See Note, chap. ii. 33. To be a Prince, doxnyòv.-See Note, Acts iii. 15. In that place he is called "the Prince of life." Here it means that he is actually in the exercise of the office of a prince or a king, at the right hand of his Father. The title Prince, or King, was one which was well known as applied to the Messiah. It denotes that he has dominion and power, especially the power which is needful to give repentance and the pardon of sins. A Saviour.-See Note, Matt. i. 21. To give repentance. The word "repentance" here, is equivalent to reformation, and a change of life. The expression here does not differ from what is said in chap. iii. 26. To Israel. This word properly denotes the Jews; but his office was not to be confined to the Jews. Other passages show that it would be also extended to the Gentiles. The reasons why the Jews are particularly specified here are, probably, (1.) Because the Messiah was long promised to the Jewish people, and his first work was there; and (2.) Because Peter was addressing Jews, and was particularly desirous of leading them to repentance. Forgiveness of sins.-Pardon of sin; the act which can be performed by God only. (Mark ii. 7.)

If it be asked, in what sense the Lord Jesus gives repentance, or how his exaltation is connected with it, we answer, (1.) His exaltation is evidence that his work was accepted, and thus a foundation is laid by which repentance is avail- 1 able, and may be connected with pardon. Unless there was some way of forgiveness, sorrow for sin would be of no value, even if exercised. The relentings of a culprit condemned for murder, would be of no avail unless the executive can consistently pardon him; nor would relentings in hell be of avail, for there is no promise! of forgiveness. But Jesus Christ by his death has laid a foundation by which repentance may be accepted. He is intrusted with all power in heaven and earth with reference to this, to apply his work to men; or in other words, to bring them to repentance. See John xvii. 2. Matt. xxviii. 18. (3.) His exaltation is immediately | connected with the bestowment of the Holy Spirit, by whose influence men are brought to repentance. (John xvi. 7-11.) The Spirit is represented as being sent by him as well as by the Father. (John xv. 26; xvi. 7.) (4.) Jesus has power in this state of exaltation over all things that can affect the mind. He sends his ministers; he directs the events of sickness or disappointment; of health or prosperity; that will influence the heart. There is no doubt that he can so recall the sins of the past life, and refresh the memory, as to overwhelm the soul in the consciousness of guilt. Thus also he can appeal to man by his goodness, and by a sense of his mercies; and especially he can so present a view of his life and death as to affect the heart, and show the evil of the past life of the sinner. Knowing the heart, he knows all the avenues by

which it can be approached; and in an instant he can overwhelm the soul with the remembrance of crime.

It was proper that the power of pardon should be lodged with the same Being that has the power of producing repentance. Because, (1.) The one appropriately follows the other. (2.) They are parts of the same great work, the work which the Saviour came to do, to remove sin with all its effects from the human soul. This power of pardon Jesus exercised when he was on the earth; and this he can now dispense in the heavens. (Mark ii. 9—11.)

And from this we may learn, (1.) That Jesus

Christ is divine. It is a dictate of natural religion that none can forgive sins against God, but God himself. None can pardon but the Being who has been offended. And this is also the

dictate of the Bible. The power of pardoning sin is one that God claims as his prerogative: and it is clear that it can appertain to no other. See Isa. xliii. 25. Dan. ix. 9. Psa. cxxx. 4. Yet Jesus Christ exercised this power when on earth; gave evidence that the exercise of that power was one that was acceptable to God by working a miracle, and removing the consequences of sin with which God had visited the sinner, (Matt. ix. 6;) and exercises it still in heaven. He must therefore be divine. The sinner is dependent on him for the exercise of repentance, and forgiveness. (3.) The proud sinner must be humbled at his feet. He must be willing to come and receive eternal life at his hands. No step is more humiliating than this for proud and hardened men; and there is none which they are more reluctant to do. We always shrink from coming into the presence of one whom we have offended; we are extremely reluctant to confess a fault; but it must be done, or the soul must be lost for ever. (4.) Christ has power to pardon the greatest offender. He is exalted for this purpose; and he is fitted to his work. Even his murderers he could pardon; and no sinner need fear that he who is a Prince and a Saviour at the right hand of God, is unable to pardon every sin. To him we may come with confidence; and when pressed with the consciousness of the blackest crimes, and when we must feel that we deserve eternal death, we may confidently roll all on his arm. VER. 32. And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

i Luke xxiv. 47. j Chap. ii. 4.

Per

And we are witnesses.-For this purpose they had been appointed. (Chap i. 8, 21, 22; ii. 32; iii. 15. Luke xxiv. 48.) Of these things.-Particularly of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and of the events which had followed it. haps, however, he meant to include every thing pertaining to the life, teachings, and death of the Lord Jesus. And so is also, &c.-The descent of the Holy Ghost to endow them with remarkable gifts, (chap. ii. 1-4,) to awaken and convert such a multitude, (chap. ii. 41; iv. 4; v. 14,) was an unanswerable attestation of the truth of these doctrines, and of the Christian religion. So manifest and decided was the presence of

God attending them, that they could have no doubt that what they said was true; and so open and public was this attestation, that it was an evidence to all the people of the truth of their doctrine.

VER. 33. When they heard that, they were cut to the heart, and took counsel to slay them. k Chap. vii. 54.

When they heard that.-That which the apostle Peter had said, to wit, that they were guilty of murder; that Jesus was raised up; and that he They were cut to the still lived as the Messiah. heart. The word used here properly denotes "to cut with a saw;" and as applied to the mind, it means to be agitated with rage and indignation, as if wrath should seize upon the mind as a saw does upon wood, and tear it violently, or agitate with the heart, and means that the heart is it severely. It is commonly used in connexion violently agitated, and rent with rage. chap. vii. 54. It is not used elsewhere in the New Testament. The reasons why they were thus indignant were, doubtless, (1.) Because the apostles had disregarded their command; (2.) Because they charged them with murder; (3.) Because they affirmed the doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus, and thus tended to overthrow the sect of the Sadducees. The effect of the doc

See

trines of the gospel, is often to make men

enraged.

Took counsel.-The word rendered "took counsel," denotes commonly to will; then to deliberate; and sometimes, to decree, or to determine. It doubtless implies here, that their minds were made up to do it; but probably the formal decree was not passed to put them to

death.

VER. 34. Then stood there up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in reputation among all the people, and commanded to put the apostles forth a little space;

35. And said unto them, Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what ye intend to do as touching these men.

7 Chap. xxii. 3.

There stood up one.-He rose, as is usual in deliberative assemblies, to speak. In the council.In the sanhedrim. (Chap. iv. 15.) A Pharisee. -The high-priest and those who had been most active in opposing the apostles were Sadducees. The Pharisees were opposed to them, particularly on the doctrine in regard to which the apostles were so strenuous, the resurrection of the dead. See Note, Matt. iii. 7. Comp. Acts xxiii. 6. Gamaliel.-This name was very common among the Jews. Dr. Lightfoot says that this man was the teacher of Paul, (Acts xxii. 3,) the son of the Simon who took the Saviour in his arms, (Luke ii.) and the grandson of the famous Hillel, and was known among the Jews by the title of Rabban Gamaliel the elder. There were other men of this name, who were also eminent among the Jews. This man is said to have died eighteen years before the destruction of Jerusalem,

and he died as he had lived, a Pharisee. There is not the least evidence that he was a friend of the Christian religion; but he was evidently a man of far more liberal views than the other members of the sanhedrim. A doctor of the law. That is, a teacher of the Jewish law; one whose province it was to interpret the laws of Moses, and probably to preserve and transmit the traditional laws of the Jews. See Note, Matt. xv. 3. So celebrated was he, that Saul of Tarsus went to Jerusalem to receive the benefit of his instructions. (Acts xxii. 3.) Had in reputation among all the people.-Honoured by all the people. His advice was likely, therefore, to be respected. To put the apostles forth.-This was done, doubtless, because if the apostles had been suffered to remain, it was apprehended that they would take fresh courage, and be confirmed in their purposes. It was customary, besides, when they deliberated, to command those accused to retire. (Chap. iv. 15.) A little space.-A little time. (Luke xxii. 58.)

VER. 36. For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as" obeyed him, were scattered and brought to nought.

m In the third year before the account called A.D.
n Or, believed.

For before those 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, (ver. 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. 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.

But this

For (1.) Luke, for any thing 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.

VER. 37. After this man, rose up Judas of Galilee, in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.

66

o Luke xiii. 1, 2.

Judas of Galilee.-Josephus has given an account of this man, (Antiq. b. xvii. chap. x. sec. 5,) and calls him a Galilean. He afterwards calls him a Gaulonite, 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," &c. 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. designed to take an account of their substance Josephus says it was Comp. Luke ii. 1, 2.

VER. 38. And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel, or this work, be of men, it will come to nought:

p Prov. xxi. 30. Isa. viii. 10. Matt. xv. 13.

sented 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 can

not rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt. (Isa. lvii. 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.

VER. 40. And to him they agreed: and when they had called the apostles, and beaten them,

they commanded that they should not speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go.

s Matt. x. 17. t Chap. iv. 18.

suaded by him; or they trusted to him. They And to him they agreed.-Greek, they were peragreed only so far as their design of putting them design. But they did not comply with his adto death was concerned. They abandoned that vice to let them entirely alone. And beaten them.-The usual amount of lashes which were inflicted on offenders was thirty-nine. (2 Cor. xi. 24.) Beating, or whipping, was a common mode of punishing minor offences among the that the apostles would be subjected to this. Jews. It was expressly foretold by the Saviour (Matt. x. 17.) The reason why they did not adopt the advice of Gamaliel altogether, doubtauthority would be despised by the people. They less was, that if they did, they feared that their had commanded them not to preach, they had threatened them; (chap. iv. 18; v. 28;) they had imprisoned them; (chap. v. 18;) and now if they suffered them to go without even the appearance of punishment, their authority, they feared, would be despised by the nation; and it would be supposed that the apostles had triumphthey were so indignant, that they could not suffer ed over the sanhedrim. It is probable also that them to the public odium of a whipping. Men, them to go without the gratification of subjecting if they cannot accomplish their full purposes of malignity against the gospel, will take up with than let it alone. even some petty annoyance and malignity, rather

VER. 41. And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing " that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name.

u Matt. v. 12. 2 Cor. xii. 10. Phil. i. 29. James i. 2. 1 Pet. iv. 13-16.

If

Rejoicing.-Nothing to most men would seem more disgraceful than a public whipping. It is a punishment inflicted usually not so much because it gives pain, as because it is esteemed to be attended with disgrace. The Jewish rulers doubtless desired that the apostles might be so affected with the sense of this disgrace as to be unwilling to appear again in public, or to preach the gospel any more. Yet in this they were disappointed. The effect was just the reverse. it be asked why they rejoiced in this manner, we may reply, (1.) Because they were permitted thus to imitate the example of the Lord Jesus. He had been scourged and reviled, and they were glad that they were permitted to be treated as he was. Comp. Phil. iii. 10. Col. i. 24. 1 Pet. iv. 13, "Rejoice inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings." (2.) Because, by this, they had evidence that they were the friends and followers of Christ. It was clear they were engaged in the same cause that he was; enduring the same sufferings; and striving to advance the same interests. As they loved the cause, therefore they would rejoice in enduring even the shame and sufferings which the cause, of necessity, involved. The kingdom of the Redeemer was an object so