25
Acts
Introduction:
This
was the same court which had been responsible for the death of Jesus
Christ.
They had met in an illegal session before daylight and pronounced Jesus
worthy
of death. Then they had met after
daylight for a second session to
rubber-stamp
the earlier decision and give it some semblance of legality. Then
they carried Jesus off to the
Roman governor and pressured him into sentencing
Jesus to death by crucifixion.
I. Earlier Council action against the
apostles
This
was the same council which had arrested Peter and John after they had
been used of God in giving sight
to a blind man. They had commanded that
Peter
and John stop speaking in the
name of Jesus. Thus they forbid them to
perform
any more miracles in the name
of Jesus. They forbid them to tell
people that
Jesus is the Son of God and had been
raised from the dead. They forbid them
to
tell people that it was by the
power and authority of Jesus that they were able
to heal the sick. They threatened Peter and John with severe
punishment if they
were to disobey this
command. The response of Peter and John
to this command
had been to ask the counsel
whether they should obey man or God. In
other
words,
they had no intention of obeying this command.
It
was soon thereafter that all twelve of the apostles were in the temple
preaching
and teaching Jesus to the people and throughout the city of
they were healing great numbers
of sick and afflicted who were brought to them.
It
was the Sadducee wing of the Sanhedrin Council, along with the high
priest
who had arrested all twelve of the apostles on the day prior to this
court
session. They had arrested them intending
to bring them to court
before
a full session of the court
this very day.
They
had already met earlier in the morning and had sent for the apostles
to be brought before the
court, but the officers who were sent to bring them had
brought
news that all twelve of the prisoners were gone. To their dismay, they
discovered
that the apostles were in the temple doing the very thing that the
court
had told Peter and John not to do. They
were preaching and teaching that
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, the
Savior of men.
Furthermore they were
telling
the people that Jesus had risen from the dead and that it was through
His power that they, His apostles, were
able to perform miracles. So
they had
just sent officers to the temple
to arrest them again.
II. A question that needs to be answered
This
brings a question to our minds that needs to be
answered. The
question
is: What was the benefit of having the
angel set the apostles free
just to have them go to the
temple the very next morning to be arrested again
and brought to trial? It would appear at first glance is that all
that was
accomplished
was that they had a night of freedom and that the trial was delayed
perhaps
an hour or two.
I
said that at first glance, this was all that was accomplished. However,
when we take a second look, we
can see that a great deal more was accomplished.
For one thing, they had gotten to witness
to a great crowd of people in the
temple
under the very best of circumstances.
The people to whom they were
speaking
knew that they had been arrested on the previous day and they would
want to know what accounted for
them being free to come to the temple the very
next morning. This would give the apostles the opportunity
of telling the
people
about the angel of God which had come to the prison and had set them
free. This would be a very believable
explanation. The great miracles which
the apostles had been doing was
evidence that God was with them. They
would
find it easy for them to believe
the apostles when they said that an angel of
God had set them free from the
prison. It would also make their message
about
Jesus more believable to the people. It would make it easier for them to
believe
the apostles when they told the people that Jesus has been resurrected,
that Jesus is the promised
Christ of God, the coming King and the Savior of men.
So even though their trial had been
delayed only a short space of time yet their
deliverance
by the angel of God helped them to witness for Jesus in a much more
powerful
way and I am convinced that they were able to win many people to Jesus
in that short space of
time.
A
second thing that was accomplished by that very short reprieve was that
they would now have a much
greater support from the common people.
The members
of the Sanhedrin Council had a
high regard for public opinion. It had
been
their
fear of the general public that had caused them not to put Peter and John
to death when they had been
arrested. Instead of putting them to
death, the
Council members had just threatened them
and set them free. Now that the
apostles
had been in the temple speaking before a great crowd of people, public
opinion
would be on the side of the apostles, at least for a little while. That
would
most certainly be a deterrent to the Council members in their effort to
put a stop to the ministry of
these apostles.
A
third thing that must have been accomplished by the deliverance by the
angel
is that they must have been much more at ease when they were brought
before
the Sanhedrin Council. The appearance of
that angel and the fact that he
set them free even though it
had been only for a little while let them know that
the presence and power of God
would be with them now as they would stand before
this powerful court. The power of this court did not compare to
the power of
the angel of God nor did it
compare with the power of God who had sent the
angel. So they were not nearly as frightened as they
must have been after that
fist arrest.
III. On trial again before the Council
V.
27-28, “And when they had brought them, they set [them] before the council:
and the high priest asked them,
Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye
should
not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled
doctrine,
and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.”
Let
us first take a look at the question which the high priest asked the
apostles. He asked them if the Council had not already
instructed them not to
teach
any more in the name of Jesus. I can
just imagine some slick trial lawyer
of our day dealing with this
question. He would surely point out that
only the
Apostles Peter and John had been given
such instruction. He would point out
that the other ten apostles had
never been given such instruction. And I
strongly
suspect that such a technicality would prevail in today’s court. It
did not prevail, however, in
the Sanhedrin court. They knew full well
that only
Peter and John had been given such
command, but they meant for that command to
apply
to all Christians and that was that.
They
said, “You have ignored the decree of this court and you have filled
concerned,
this was a capital offense. It was
worthy of death and that is
exactly
what the Council members wanted to happen to the apostles.
V.
29, “Then Peter and the [other] apostles answered and said, We
ought to
obey God rather than men.” It seems that the Apostle Peter was the first
to
speak
in answer to the question and the charge by the high priest. When he and
John were before
this court earlier and had been commanded not to teach or speak
any more in the name of Jesus,
they at that time had give virtually the same
answer
as they gave now. The difference was
that they had been very mild with
their
answer at that time. On that occasion
they had said the court, “Whether
it would be right for us to
obey men rather than God, you be the judge.”
But
this time they spoke much more
forcefully. They said, “We ought to obey
God
rather
than men.” All of the other apostles
agreed with what Simon Peter said.
As for the charge that the apostles were
seeking to bring the blood of
Jesus upon the members of the Sanhedrin
Council, this charge was utterly false.
It is true that in speaking to the members
of the Sanhedrin Council the apostles
had accused them of killing the
Christ, the Son of God. They had made
this
accusation
against them in an effort to get them to see that they had committed
a dreadful sin in order that
they might repent of their sin and be forgiven.
But they had never up to this time gone
out to the general public trying to turn
the general public against the
Council members. They had never tried to
incite
a mob to take vengeance on
the Council members.
Instead,
it had been the Council members, themselves who had willingly
taken
upon themselves the guilt of shedding the blood of Jesus. When Jesus had
been on trial before Pilate,
Pilate said in effect. “I wash my hands of His
death. I am ordering His crucifixion at your
request. His blood will not be on
my hands.” The members of the Council said, “His blood
be on us and on our
children.” It is ridiculous that now they want to appear
to be free from that
guilt.
Then
once more the apostle witnessed to the men of the Sanhedrin Council
and once again the accusations
which them made against them were made in an
effort
to bring them to an awareness of their wrong doing and to bring them to
repentance
before God. V. 30, “The God of our
fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye
slew and hanged on a tree. Him hath God exalted with his right hand [to
be] a
Prince and a Saviour,
for to give repentance to
And we are his witnesses of these things;
and [so is] also the Holy Ghost, whom
God hath given to them that obey
him.”
V. 33, “When they heard [that], they were cut
[to the heart], and took
counsel
to slay them.” The apostles were trying
to reach the heart of these men
to bring them to
repentance. They reached their heart all
right, but their
words
did not bring them to repentance. Rather
it stirred their anger all the
more against the apostles and
made them more determined than ever to put them to
death. It seems impossible that religious leaders
could be so hard hearted.
IV. WHAT IF WE WERE ON TRIAL?
What
if it were us who is on trial? What if we were accused of speaking
up for Jesus? If you were brought before the court and were
charged of being a
follower
of Jesus, how would you plead? Would you
plead innocent or guilty?
What
if you were charged with witnessing for Jesus?
What if you were
being
charged with telling people that Jesus is the Son of God? What if you
were being charged with telling
people that Jesus has been raised from the dead?
What if you were being charged with
telling people that Jesus is the Savior of
the world, that Jesus is the
only hope of any man staying out of the fires of
hell and going to heaven? Would you plead innocent or guilty?
What
if you were being charged with filling the
and the cities around us with
the gospel of Jesus Christ and with its related
truths? Would you plead innocent or guilty?
When
was the last time that you ever spoke to anyone about Jesus Christ?
When was the last time that you bore
witness to a lost soul that Jesus has saved
you soul and that you are sure
He would same that person if he would only call
upon Jesus and ask Him to do
so?
If
you were charged before the court of being a Christian, would there be
enough
evidence to convict you?