Expositor's Bible Commentary Commentary Acts 5:38

"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 be overthrown:" — Acts 5:38 (ASV)

It has frequently been claimed that the words of Gamaliel here are “a historical mistake,” for they are not in character with what we know of Pharisaism. But Josephus himself informs us that whereas the Sadducees were rather boorish in their behavior, the Pharisees were affectionate, interested in harmonious relations among the Jews, and often lenient in matters of punishment. Many of them were content to allow history to be the final judge of whether something was of God or not. Of course, later on in Acts (cf. 8:1, 3; 9:1–2), Saul of Tarsus, who was trained under Gamaliel I (cf. 22:3), takes a very different attitude toward the Christians, joining with the Sadducees and obtaining the high priest’s authorization to track them down and imprison them. But between Gamaliel’s advice in Ac 5 and Saul’s action in Ac 8–9, there arose from the depths of Christian conviction what the Pharisees as well as the Sadducees could only have considered to be a threat of Jewish apostasy. Before Gamaliel’s counsel of moderation, the central issues of the church’s proclamation had been the messiahship, lordship, and saviorhood of Jesus of Nazareth—his heavenordained death, his victorious resurrection, and his present status as exalted Redeemer. To the Sadducees who instigated the early suppressions, such teaching not only upset orderly rule but, more important, impinged upon their authority. To the more noble of the Pharisees, however, the Jerusalem Christians were yet within the scope of Judaism and not to be treated as heretics. The divine claims for Jesus as yet lay in the subconsciousness of the church, and those who were his followers showed no tendency to relax their observance of the Mosaic law because of their new beliefs. Between Gamaliel’s advice and Saul’s action, however, there arose within Christian preaching something that could only be viewed within Jerusalem as a real threat of Jewish apostasy. In Ac 6–7 Stephen began to apply the doctrines of Jesus’ messiahship and lordship to traditional Jewish views regarding the land, the law, and the temple. Moreover, he is seen as beginning to reach conclusions that related to the primacy of Jesus’ messiahship and lordship and the secondary nature of Jewish views about the land, the law, and the temple (see comments on ch. 7). For Stephen this was a dangerous path to tread, particularly in Jerusalem —a path even the apostles seemed unwilling to take at that time. Stephen’s message was indeed Jewish apostasy. Had Rabbi Gamaliel the Elder faced this feature of Christian proclamation in the second Sanhedrin trial of the Jerusalem apostles, his attitude would undoubtedly have been different.