Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 5:40
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.
40. and when they had called the apostles ] i.e. back again to the judgment-hall.
and beaten them ] As the guilty parties in the controversy (see Deu 25:1-3).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And to him they agreed – Greek: They were persuaded by him; or they trusted to him. They agreed only so far as their design of putting them to death was concerned. They abandoned that design. But they did not comply with his advice to let them entirely alone.
And beaten them – The usual amount of lashes which were inflicted on offenders was 39, 2Co 11:24. Beating, or whipping, was a common mode of punishing minor offences among the Jews. It was expressly foretold by the Saviour that the apostles would be subjected to this, Mat 10:17. The reason why they did not adopt the advice of Gamaliel altogether doubtless was, that if they did, they feared that their authority would be despised by the people. They had commanded them not to preach; they had threatened them Act 4:18; Act 5:28; they had imprisoned them Act 5:18; 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 triumphed over the Sanhedrin. It is probable, also, that they were so indignant, that they could not suffer them to go without the gratification of subjecting them to the public odium of a whipping. People, if they cannot accomplish their full purposes of malignity against the gospel, will take up with even some petty annoyance and malignity rather than let it alone.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 40. To him they agreed] That is, not to slay the apostles, nor to attempt any farther to imprison them; but their malevolence could not be thus easily satisfied; and therefore they beat them-probably gave each of them thirty-nine stripes; and, having commanded them not to speak in the name of Jesus, they let them go. It was of JESUS they were afraid: not of the apostles. They plainly saw that, if the doctrine of Christ was preached, it must prevail; and, if it prevailed, they must come to nought. It was a wise saying of the popish bishops in the time of Queen Mary-If we do not put down this PRINTING, it will put us down: They laboured to put down the printing, but they could not; and, under God, the printing, by exposing the wickedness of their doctrine and practices, and especially by multiplying copies of the New Testament, did most effectually put them down.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
To him they agreed; they yielded to his reason and argument, being persuaded and convinced by it.
Beaten them; this was what our Saviour had foretold them, Mat 10:17; and thus the husbandmen took the householders servants and beat them, Mat 21:35. They had power yet left them by the Romans to punish offenders in their synagogues, but not capitally nor publicly. In this they left the good advice of Gamaliel, who had warned them not to fight against God.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
40-42. beaten themfordisobeying their orders (compare Lu23:16).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And to him they agreed,…. They were convinced and persuaded by his reasonings, approved of his advice, and agreed to follow it:
and when they had called the apostles; into the council again, having sent their servants for them, or ordered them to be brought in:
and beaten them; or scourged and whipped them with forty stripes save one, whereby was fulfilled what Christ had foretold, Mt 10:17
they commanded they should not speak in the name of Jesus; as they had strictly commanded them before, Ac 4:18. Perhaps both in this, as well as in bearing the apostles, they did not closely attend to Gamaliel’s counsel, who advised them to keep their hands off of them, and not hinder them, but let them alone in what they were about: but this might be thought by them not to their reputation, nor sufficiently asserting their authority, to dismiss them, without saying or doing anything to them:
and let them go; from the council to their own company: they released them, and loosed them from their bonds; they set them at liberty, and let them go where they would; and so far they followed Gamaliel’s advice.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
To him they agreed ( ). First aorist passive indicative of , to persuade, the passive to be persuaded by, to listen to, to obey. Gamaliel’s shrewd advice scored as against the Sadducaic contention (verse 17).
Not to speak ( ). The Sanhedrin repeated the prohibition of 4:18 which the apostles had steadily refused to obey. The Sanhedrin stood by their guns, but refused to shoot. It was a “draw” with Gamaliel as tactical victor over the Sadducees. Clearly now the disciples were set free because only the Sadducees had become enraged while the Pharisees held aloof.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Beating of the Apostles, V. 40-42
1) “And to him they agreed,” (epeithesan de auto) “Then they were persuaded to (respond to) him,” to his reasoning and appeal; Gamaliel’s influence prevailed in the Sanhedrin council that day, even over the high priest, the presiding officer of the council, Act 5:17-18; Act 5:27-28; Act 5:33.
2) “And when they had called the apostles,” (kai proskalesamenoi rous apostolous) “And when they had called the apostles back into the council to face them,” from the nearby holding place they had sent them for detainment while the council heard Gamaliel and considered the matter of killing them, Act 5:34.
3) “And beaten them, they commanded,” (deirantes parengeilan) “While beating them they charged, threatened;” To their former threats they then added the public whipping or beating, Act 4:17-18; Act 4:21. Their Lord had endured such humiliation before them and foretold theirs, Mat 10:17; Mat 27:26; Joh 15:20. For what were they beaten? For His namesake.
4) “That they should not speak in the name of Jesus,” (me lalein epi to onomati tou lesou) “That they were not to speak thereafter in the name or upon the authority of Jesus,” what Jesus had told them to do after they were or had been empowered by the Holy Spirit, Luk 24:49; Act 1:8; Mat 28:18-20; Act 4:17-18; Act 4:21; Col 3:17; Act 4:12.
5) “And let them go,” (kai apelusan) “And they (the Sanhedrin council) released them,” set them free or let them go from their arrest and detainment to exercise their freedom and liberty in Christ, Joh 8:36; Gal 5:13.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
40. Having beaten them, they commanded. He saith that Gamaliel’s counsel was allowed; yet the apostles are beaten, and forbidden to preach. (293) Hereby we gather how great the rage of the enemies was, who being now pacified, or at least mitigated, do yet, notwithstanding, rage immoderately. (294) And it appeareth also what evil success those doubtful counsels have, wherein men alone are respected, and the truth of God set aside. Gamaliel obtaineth thus much, that the lives of the apostles may be saved; (295) but, in the mean season, the Son of God is blasphemed and slandered in their person; the truth of the gospel is buried in eternal silence, so much as in the enemies lieth, God surely doth by this means wonderfully spread abroad his word; yet that counsel ceaseth not to be evil. Which we must note for this cause, because most men at this day do think, that they do not a little obey God, if they save the lives of those men which come in hazard for the doctrine of the gospel, or somewhat appease (296) the enemies who are otherwise bloody. In the mean season, they are not afraid to drive them unto the wicked denial of Christ, the confessing of whom is far more precious in the sight of God than the life of all men. But what could they do who, casting away all care of godliness, go about to redeem God’s favor with the duty of courtesy? (297)
(293) “ Docere,” to teach.
(294) “ Adeo tamen intemperanter se gerunt,” yet conduct themselves to intemperately.
(295) “ Parcatur,” may be spared.
(296) “ Flectant ad lenitatem.” incline to lenity.
(297) “ Humanitatis officio se qpud Deum redimere volunt,” would purchase the favor of God to themselves by an act of humanity.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(40) And to him they agreed.The Sadducees, after their manner, would probably have preferred a more violent course, but the Pharisees were strong in the Sanhedrin, and the via media recommended by Gamaliel was, under such circumstances, likely to command a majority, and was, therefore, apparently accepted without a division.
And beaten them.Here we trace the action of Caiaphas and the priests. They were not content without some punishment being inflicted, and the party of Gamaliel apparently acquiesced in this as a compromise in the hope of averting more violent measures. And this is accordingly to be noted as the first actual experience of persecution falling on the whole company of the Twelve, and not on Peter and John only. They were probably convicted of the minor offence of causing a disturbance in the Temple, though dismissed, as with a verdict of not proven, on the graver charge of heresy. The punishment in such a case would probably be the forty stripes save one, of Deu. 25:3 and 2Co. 11:24.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
40. To him they agreed Doubtless from the self-possession of Gamaliel, as well as his affording the Sadducees a mode of compromising the matter with the popular party.
Beaten them In contradiction to the advice of Gamaliel, which they had accepted. But it was still politic compromise. They had yielded their surrender to Gamaliel’s party; they must claim the prerogative to beat the apostles as their own compensation.
Should not speak They here repeat that order which they very well knew the apostles had promised to disobey, and which they afterward very faithfully disobeyed according to promise.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And to him they agreed, and when they had called the apostles to them, they beat them and charged them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go.’
His wiser counsels prevailed and the Sanhedrin agreed that that was what they would do. The chief priests were overruled. But in order to ensure good behaviour, and because it was recognised that they were in breach of the order previously given, the Apostles were beaten. Then they were reminded of the embargo put on them and warned that they must cease speaking in the name of Jesus. Thus honour was satisfied, while the Apostles were left free to carry on with their lives.
The beating would be a severe one, but it is questionable whether it would have been of the maximum allowed of thirty nine stripes. We may naturally be surprised at the beating of innocent men, but in those days the beating of innocent men was seen by courts as simply a method of ensuring continued good behaviour. Ordinary people were not looked on as very important. And in this case there was the added reason that they had disobeyed the previous injunction of the council.
Such a beating was with rods as the victim lay on the ground. It had to be carried out in the presence of the judges. Any such punishment had to be reasonable and controlled. If a man was to be beaten the judge must cause him to lie down, and then he would be beaten in his presence, probably with a rod (Exo 21:20), the number of stripes determined by what was seen as his deserts. But the number of stripes must not be more than forty under any circumstances (see Deu 25:2-3).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
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.
Ver. 40. And to him they agreed ] So did the enraged people to the elders, alleging the example of Micah the Morasthite, Jer 26:18 . See the use and efficacy of history, which hath its name, say some, , of stopping the stream of violence.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
40. ] See Deu 25:2 , for disobedience to their command.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 5:40 . : whatever scruples Gamaliel may have had in pressing matters against the Apostles, or even if the teaching of Christ, as some have conjectured, with much of which he might have sympathised as a follower of Hillel, had influenced his mind, or if, like Joseph of Arimathea, he too had not consented to the counsel and will of his fellow-Sanhedrists, there is no reason to suppose (see above) that he ever advanced beyond the compromise here suggested. It may be that Neander was right in his judgment that Gamaliel was too wise a man to render a fanatical movement more violent still by opposing it. Others however see in his words a mere laisser-aller view of matters, or a timid caution which betokened a mere waiter upon Providence. But at the same time there are occasions when Gamaliel’s advice may not be out of place, see Bengel on Act 5:38 , and Farrar, St. Paul , i., 110 ff. , Deu 25:3 , 2Co 11:24 : the punishment was for minor offences, and it was now inflicted upon the Apostles because they had trangressed the command enjoined upon them previously, Act 4:18 . The Pharisees, probably by their superior number in the Sanhedrim (Jos., Ant. , xiii., 10, 6), were able to secure the following of Gamaliel’s advice, and to prevent extreme measures against the Apostles, but they were not prepared to disregard the previous injunction of the Council which bade the Apostles refrain from uttering a word in the name of Jesus. But the Apostles themselves must have seen in the punishment a striking fulfilment of their Lord’s words, as in the closing hours of His earthly life He foretold their future sufferings for His Name. The penalty which must have been a very painful one, although the command not to exceed forty stripes often led to its mitigation, was often inflicted by the synagogues, and not only by the great Sanhedrim, for all kinds of offences as against heretics and others. These Act 5:40-42 , with the exception of the words , were referred by Jngst to the redactor on the ground that they do not fit in well after Gamaliel’s speech, and that the Apostles would have been at once released, but the Apostles were punished for a transgression of the command previously laid upon them in Act 4:18 . According to Jngst, who here follows Spitta, the original conclusion of the narrative is to be found in inserting after Act 5:39 , chap. Act 6:7 ! Here we are told is a notice, which is quite out of place where it now stands, that a great number of the priests were obedient to the faith: this was the result of the speech of Gamaliel, and his warning not to be found “fighting against God”; a speech delivered in the Sanhedrim in the midst of the priests!
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Act 5:40-42
40They took his advice; and after calling the apostles in, they flogged them and ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and then released them. 41So they went on their way from the presence of the Council, rejoicing that they had been considered worthy to suffer shame for His name. 42And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they kept right on teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.
Act 5:40 “They took his advice” This phrase is included in Act 5:39 in some translations (cf. NRSV) and in Act 5:40 in others (cf. NASB, NKJV). The TEV and NJB keep it in Act 5:39, but start a new paragraph.
“flogged” This was not the same as the Roman flogging (mastix, cf. Act 22:24-25), which Jesus endured. This referred to the Jewish beating with rods (cf. Deu 25:3; i.e., der, Luk 12:47-48; Luk 20:10-11; Luk 22:63). It was very painful, but not life-threatening.
The interpretive problem is that these two Greek terms are often used interchangeably. The Septuagint of Deu 25:3 has mastix, but it refers to a Jewish punishment. Luke regularly uses der for this Jewish synagogue beating (literally “skinning an animal”).
“and ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus” This same Council had done this earlier (cf. Act 4:17; Act 4:21). This time they beat them and repeated the warning.
Act 5:41 Jesus had predicted this type of treatment (cf. Mat 10:16-23; Mar 13:9-13; Luk 12:1-12; Luk 21:10-19; Joh 15:18-27; Joh 16:2-4).
“rejoicing that they had been considered worthy to suffer shame for His name” This seems surprising to us today because we live in a society where physical persecution is so rare, but this has not been the case for the vast majority of believers through the centuries.
Jesus plainly said that His followers would suffer. Please read Mat 5:10-12; Joh 15:18-21; Joh 16:1-2; Joh 17:14; Act 14:22; Rom 5:3-4; Rom 8:17; 2Co 4:16-18; Php 1:29; 1Th 3:3; 2Ti 3:12; Jas 1:2-4. Also notice how in 1 Peter Jesus’ suffering (cf. Act 1:11; Act 2:21; Act 2:23; Act 3:18; Act 4:1; Act 4:13; Act 5:1) is to be emulated by His followers (cf. Act 1:6-7; Act 2:19; Act 3:13-17; Act 4:1; Act 4:12-19; Act 5:9-10).
Act 5:42 “every day, in the temple” These early witnesses of Jesus refused to be silenced, even in the very heart of Judaism, the temple in Jerusalem.
“from house to house” The early church had their meetings in private homes spread throughout the city (cf. Act 2:46). There were no church buildings until several hundred years later.
NASB, NKJV”the Christ”
NRSV, TEV,
REB”the Messiah”
In this Jewish setting the title “Messiah” (see Special Topic at Act 2:31) is more appropriate (cf. Act 2:31; Act 3:18; Act 5:42; Act 8:5; Act 9:22), as Peter used in Mat 16:16. When Paul preached to Jews he also used this as a reference to the promised, anointed One (cf. Act 17:3; Act 18:5; Act 18:28).
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS FOR Acts 3-5
This is a study guide commentary, which means that you are responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.
These discussion questions are provided to help you think through the major issues of this section of the book. They are meant to be thought-provoking, not definitive.
1. Why did the Apostles stay within Judaism so long?
2. List the titles of Jesus and their meanings which are used in Acts 3.
3. What are the two minimal requirements in salvation?
4. Why is Moses quoted so often in the New Testament?
5. What is the significance of the Abrahamic covenant to the NT church?
6. Why were Peter and John arrested?
7. Outline Peter’s third sermon.
8. What is significant about the prayer of Act 4:24-31?
9. To be truly New Testament must one be communistic? (cf. Act 4:32)
10. List the reasons why Luke included the account of Ananias and Sapphira.
11. Did Ananias realize that he was filled with Satan? Did he realize that he had lied to God?
12. Why was God seemingly so harsh?
13. What about miracles (especially healings) in our day?
14. Why were the Sadducees so mad?
15. Why did the angel release the Apostles from prison?
16. Outline Peter’s fourth sermon. List the common elements between his other recorded sermons in Acts.
17. Who was Gamaliel?
18. Why should Christians rejoice in suffering?
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
agreed, as Act 5:36.
beaten. Compare Deu 25:1-3. Mar 13:9.
let them go. See on Act 4:21.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
40. ] See Deu 25:2,-for disobedience to their command.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Act 5:40. ) They agreed or assented, viz. so far as that they did not kill the apostles: for the members of the council did not adopt a better tone of mind.-, having beaten them) This had not as yet been done by the Jews, who were afterwards about to inflict severer punishments. Even the world proceeds by successive steps, either as their hatred increases, or else under the show of equity [or leniency].
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
when: Act 4:18
beaten: Pro 12:10, Mat 10:17, Mat 23:34, Mar 13:9, Luk 20:10, Joh 19:1-4, 2Co 11:24
they commanded: Act 5:28, Act 4:17-21, Isa 30:10, Amo 2:12, Mic 2:6
Reciprocal: Deu 25:2 – General Job 36:21 – this Son 5:7 – took Jer 20:2 – smote Jer 29:27 – therefore Jer 36:19 – General Jer 37:15 – the princes Dan 6:10 – as he Amo 7:13 – prophesy Mat 5:10 – are Mat 22:6 – the remnant Mat 23:13 – for ye shut Mat 24:9 – shall they Mat 28:12 – General Luk 11:52 – for Luk 21:12 – before Luk 23:16 – General Joh 9:22 – he should Act 4:7 – by what name Act 4:21 – when Act 8:1 – there Act 16:22 – the magistrates Act 16:35 – General Act 21:32 – beating 2Co 6:8 – honour Phi 1:28 – in Heb 11:36 – and scourgings
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
0
Act 5:40. The leaders of the Sanhedrin accepted the advice of Gamaliel, not to do anything too rash against the apostles. It was not because of any just feeling of righteousness or fair consideration for the prisoners, for they just could not stand to let them go until they had given them a parting threat accompanied with a beating.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Act 5:40. And to him they agreed. How bitterly many of that council must have reproached themselves for the past! The present vote, which dismissed the apostles with a comparatively light penalty, silently condemned the crucifixion of the apostles Master as a mistake, perhaps as an awful crime.
And beaten them. The Sanhedrim thus declining to pronounce any decisive judgment on the real question before them, they inflicted scourging as a penalty for disobedience to their commands. This cruel punishment was inflicted on the naked back of the sufferer. The scourge which was used generally consisted of two lashes knotted with bronze, or heavy indented circles of bronze, or terminated by hooks; it was looked upon by Romans as so shameful a chastisement that it was forbidden to be inflicted on a Roman citizen. This torture was endured by our blessed Saviour.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
The Council Actions and the Apostles’ Response
Having accepted Gamaliel’s council as good advice, the council called for the apostles to be brought back into their chambers. They had them beaten and “commanded that they should not speak in the name of Jesus.” Then, they released them. The response of the apostles to being beaten and coming so close to being killed is remarkable. They rejoiced “that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for His name.” Perhaps that is, in part, because they knew how much Jesus had suffered for them on Calvary and they felt that this was a small thing to do in contrast to such a great act of love. Peter certainly saw it as a sign that they Spirit of God was with the one suffering and God’s name would be glorified ( 1Pe 4:14-16 ). So, every day the apostles continued to teach Jesus as God’s anointed in the temple and from house to house ( Act 5:40-42 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
Act 5:40. And to him they agreed Acknowledging his advice to be safe and wise. They, therefore, dropped the design of putting the apostles to death; yet they could not forbear giving vent to their rage, (so outrageous was it,) in a most unjust and cruel manner, and as evidently contrary to the conviction of their judgments and consciences, as it was to Gamaliels counsel, which was to let them alone. For when they had called them in, they beat them That is, stripped and scourged them as malefactors. Thus they thought to make them ashamed of preaching, and the people of hearing them; as Pilate scourged our Saviour to expose him to shame, when he declared he found no fault in him. And, added to this, they renewed their prohibition of speaking any more in the name of Jesus. This they did in order that, if they could find no other fault with their preaching, they might, at least, have this reason for reproaching it, that it was against law; and not only without the permission, but against the express order of their superiors.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
40. There was no opposition to Gamaliel’s advice. (40) “And they obeyed him; and having called the apostles, and scourged them, they commanded them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go.” Scourging was so common in the Roman empire, even of men untried and uncondemned, and was so common a fate of Christians at the time Luke was writing, that he mentions it here rather as a matter of course. It is the first time, however, that it was experienced by the apostles, and was, probably, harder to endure than it ever was afterward.
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Verse 40
To him they agreed; that is, so far as to spare the lives of their prisoners.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
Gamaliel convinced his fellow Sanhedrin members. They decided to settle for flogging the apostles, probably with 39 lashes (Deu 25:3; Act 22:19; 2Co 11:24). The Mishnah contains a description of how the Jews normally did this. [Note: Mishnah Makkoth 3:10-15a.] This flogging was for disobeying their former order to stop preaching (Act 4:18). This is the first instance of Christians receiving a physical beating for witnessing that Luke recorded in Acts. The rulers also threatened the apostles again and then released them (cf. Act 4:21). The official ban against preaching in Jesus’ name remained in force.