Acts 5:28
Saying, Did not we straightly command you that you should not teach in this name? and, behold, you have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood on us.
5:26-33 Many will do an evil thing with daring, yet cannot bear to hear of it afterward, or to have it charged upon them. We cannot expect to be redeemed and healed by Christ, unless we give up ourselves to be ruled by him. Faith takes the Saviour in all his offices, who came, not to save us in our sins, but to save us from our sins. Had Christ been exalted to give dominion to Israel, the chief priests would have welcomed him. But repentance and remission of sins are blessings they neither valued nor saw their need of; therefore they, by no means, admitted his doctrine. Wherever repentance is wrought, remission is granted without fail. None are freed from the guilt and punishment of sin, but those who are freed from the power and dominion of sin; who are turned from it, and turned against it. Christ gives repentance, by his Spirit working with the word, to awaken the conscience, to work sorrow for sin, and an effectual change in the heart and life. The giving of the Holy Ghost, is plain evidence that it is the will of God that Christ should be obeyed. And He will surely destroy those who will not have Him to reign over them.Straitly command you - Did we not command you with a "threat?" Acts 4:17-18, Acts 4:21.

In this name - In the name of Jesus.

Ye have filled Jerusalem - This, though not so desired, was an honorable tribute to the zeal and fidelity of the apostles. When Chastens are arraigned or persecuted, it is well if the only charge which their enemies can bring against them is that they have been distinguished for zeal and success in propagating their religion. See 1 Peter 4:16, "If any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glory God on this behalf"; also Acts 5:13-15.

Intend to bring this man's blood upon us - To bring "one's blood" upon another is a phrase signifying to hold or to prove him guilty of murdering the innocent. The expression here charges them with desiring 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 Sanhedrin; and also to prove that they were guilty, and were exposed to the divine vengeance for having put the Messiah to death. Compare Acts 2:23, Acts 2:36; Acts 3:15; Acts 7:52. 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 no thing 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 accessory to the crime of the rulers," Acts 2:23, Acts 2:36. 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.

Saying, did not we straitly command you,.... Or give you strict orders, with severe threatenings,

that you should not teach in this name? the Ethiopic version reads, "in the name of Jesus"; which is what is meant, but was not expressed by the sanhedrim; see Acts 4:17

and behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine; they disregarded the council, and its orders, its commands and threatenings, and preached the doctrines of the Gospel; and particularly that concerning the resurrection of Christ, and through him the resurrection of all the dead; and with such success, that great part of the inhabitants of Jerusalem received it; at least there were great numbers in all parts of the city which attended to it, and embraced it: and this they represent as a novel doctrine, devised by the apostles, and peculiarly theirs; and which Moses, and the prophets, were strangers to:

and intend to bring this man's blood upon us; by charging us with the murder of him, and representing us as guilty of shedding innocent blood, and so stirring up the people, and the Romans against us, to take vengeance on us for it: this, as if they should say, seems to be the intention and design of your ministry, particularly in asserting, that Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified, is now risen from the dead, and was a holy, innocent, and righteous person, as his resurrection shows; and therefore, as we have been guilty in shedding his blood, the punishment of it will, one day or other, be inflicted on us; as it accordingly was, and as they themselves imprecated in Matthew 27:25. It is to be observed, that they do not mention the name of Jesus, only by way of contempt, call him "this man", as it is usual with the Jews to do, when they speak of him. So a commentator (q) on Genesis 27:39 says of some,

"they believed in a man whom they set up for God; and Rome believed, in the days of Constantine, who renewed all that religion, and put upon his banner the form , "of that man":''

and so another of their writers (r) uses the phrase several times in a few words. Judah ben Tabai fled to Alexandria,

"that they might not make him president, and in the way, with one disciple; as it happened to Joshua ben Perachiah, with , "that man"; and ye may receive it for a truth, that "that man" was his disciple--and the truth is, that "that man" was born in the fourth year of the kingdom of Jannai the Second.''

So an heretic is said to be one that confesses "that man"; and heretics are the disciples of "that man", who turned to evil the words of the living God (s). Thus blasphemously and contemptuously do they speak of Christ.

(q) Aben Ezra, Vid. ib. in Dan. xi. 14. (r) Juchasin, fol. 16. 2.((s) Migdal Oz & Hagehot Maimoniot. in Maimon. Teshuba, c. 3. sect. 7.

{9} 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 {k} to bring this man's blood upon us.

(9) It is the characteristic of tyrants to set down their own commandments as right and proper, be they ever so wicked.

(k) Make us guilty of murdering that man whom yet they will not condescend to name.

Did not

The best texts omit οὐ, not, and the question.

We straitly charged

So Rev. (παραγγελίᾳ παρηγγείλαμεν). Lit., we charged you with a charge. See on Luke 22:15, with desire I have desired.

Intend (βούλεσθε)

Or ye want. See on willing, Matthew 1:19.

This man's

The phrase is remarkable as furnishing the first instance of that avoidance of the name of Christ which makes the Talmud, in the very same terms, refer to him most frequently as Peloni equals , "so and so."

28. intend to bring this man's blood upon us—They avoid naming Him whom Peter gloried in holding up [Bengel]. In speaking thus, they seem to betray a disagreeable recollection of their own recent imprecation, His blood be upon us," &c. (Mt 27:25), and of the traitor's words as he threw down the money, "I have sinned in that I have betrayed innocent blood" (Mt 27:4).Did not we straitly command you - Ου παραγγελιᾳ παρηγγειλαμεν, With commanding did we not command you; a Hebraism - another proof of the accuracy and fidelity of St. Luke, who seems always to give every man's speech as he delivered it; not the substance, but the very words. See Acts 4:17.

Not teach in this name? - That is, of Jesus as the Christ or Messiah. His saving name, and the doctrines connected with it, were the only theme and substance of their discourses.

Intend to bring this men's blood upon us - You speak in such a way of him to the people as to persuade them that we have crucified an innocent man; and that we must on that account fall victims to the Divine vengeance, or to the fury of the people, whom, by your teaching, you are exciting to sedition against us.

5:28 Did not we strictly command you, not to teach? - See the poor cunning of the enemies of the Gospel. They make laws and interdicts at their pleasure, which those who obey God cannot but break; and then take occasion thereby to censure and punish the innocent, as guilty. Ye would bring the blood of this man upon us - An artful and invidious word. The apostles did not desire to accuse any man. They simply declared the naked truth. 5:28 Did not we straitly command you, etc. He charges (1) that they had disregarded the authority of the Sanhedrin; (2) they had filled Jerusalem with their doctrine; (3) they would work up the people to indignation against the rulers for condemning Christ.
Acts 5:27
Top of Page
Top of Page