“Then went the captain with the officers, and brought them without violence: for they feared the people, lest they should have been stoned. 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 Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us” (Acts 5:26-28.) “Then went the captain with the officers, and brought them without violence: for they feared the people, lest they should have been stoned.” Another irony: the Captain Of The Guard must now be obsequious, almost begging the apostles to come with him because the people he imagines he is protecting will stone him if he interrupts the message. Would that we Americans listened to a Bible preacher with the same devotion to protecting the exposition of God’s word . . . and the expositor. But we should notice the influence the apostles had which they fear. Naturally, they envy anyone who has that much popularity: who doesn’t want that kind of power? Thus we see the heart of all anti-religionists and anti-Christians: envy. They want the sort of influence the Holy Spirit has. “And when they had brought them, they set them before the council: and the high priest asked them” is when the priests purport to interrogate the accused; meanwhile, God actually interrogates them thru the words and miracles the apostles have worked. These are the same people who already had a man lame-from-birth healed so well that he’s leaping in praise to Yehovah. The problem the apostles have is that they keep attaching the gospel and teaching of Jesus Christ to these miracles, a message that antagonizes the government in “authority.” On the other hand, Jesus “went around doing good” (Acts 10:38), and there is no record of His ever refusing a requested healing (while there are records of His interrupting things to provide a healing unlooked, unasked for, such as in Luke 7:12-15.) They got rid of Him, too (so they thought.) Both Jesus and His apostles illustrate a common human failing of wanting all sorts of blessings from God with none of the obedience God demands—we all want to sit down to eat our yummy cake and then find it still in the refrigerator tomorrow morning. Fact is, we are all—each of us—thieves. God made this universe and this world, and put this world exactly where it would most promote life. God then filled this planet with life, installing many things that contribute to our continued existence here (as opposed to our existing there, in hell.) We humans then take these things. They belong to God: He made them and He put them there. We don’t ask God, we don’t thank God, we merely take and then whine like toddlers when there isn’t any more of what we’ve stolen . . . as if God owes us anything more than judging us for stealing from Him. On occasion, another wants to take what we planned to take, and we fight and kill over who gets the privilege of being the thief who steals that object. Thieves and murderers, and we then are angry when God makes any demands of us such as glorifying Him for being a God Who is both generous and powerful. Thank God? Be serious. Even when it isn’t something we’ve explained away with so-called science (1 Timothy 6:20) but something undeniably GOD’S WORK and miraculous, humans look at it, and become both angry and jealous. We’re jealous we can’t do that, get that cachet and influence (Acts 8:18), and angry that this “God” person is holding out on us, refusing to give us what we consider our “right.” Or do you imagine you’d not react like these Sadducees, given their current “authority”? “Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.” Well, yes, you did command us (Acts 4:18) to not preach nor teach in Jesus’ name. But we answered you then what we thought of your command: “But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard” (Acts 4:19-20.) Note that when the apostles first replied to this ridiculous command, they didn’t say “may not” but “can not.” Annas and his Sadducees are declaring that they are withdrawing permission from the apostles to teach on this subject anymore. The apostles’ reply is that permission isn’t the issue at all here: they have the Holy Spirit in them and that Holy Spirit kicks the whole issue to CANNOT (Jeremiah 15:16 + Jeremiah 20:9.) Thus, these authoritative Sadducees (the politically-liberal of 1st century Judea) are not asking for someone to help with their memory but speaking in Greek a common Hebraism: the rhetorical question. An answer “Yes” self-convicts . . . usually. This time, the fact that they ask this question condemns them for they certainly remember that they so ordered the apostles and why: “And beholding the man which was healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it” (Acts 4:14.) They double-condemn themselves by trying to give this order again even tho they again have nothing they can say against these men being miraculously sprung from prison. And then one of the most ironic statements in the Bible: “and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.” A man died. How did he die? Crucifixion, conning Romans into nailing Him to a crossbeam to hang between heaven and earth while nail and spear holes slowly drain His blood. How was that arranged? You—all of you—so voted for His death and then so conned the Romans into doing your dirty work because they wouldn’t let you merely stone Him (John 19:6-7.) That He didn’t resist, but went as a lamb to the slaughter not 1 whit lifts from you the guilt of sending that MAN to the slaughter and murdering Him. You know that “trial” was illegal, yet said nothing because of your anxiousness for his death. You are guilty, yet in your guilt, rather than repent and apologize, you try to jail or kill any who calls you on this crime. “Intend to bring this man’s blood on us”? It’s already there; we’re merely pointing out to everyone how this emperor has no covering for the blood he parades around in (of course everyone in Jerusalem knows what happened, how it happened, and who made it happen.) Much of the apostles’ success in preaching is exactly that they are bold enough to tell the truth everyone else already knows. When the church joins politics, duck.
Posted on: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 16:31:26 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015