---

Note here —

I. Good oratory neutralised by a corrupt audience.

1. The speaker.

(1) His ability and position. Some suppose him to be the son of Simeon, who took the infant Jesus in his arms, and the grandson of Hillel, both famous Jewish doctors. The exalted title of Rabban was given him for his great wisdom. He had been president of the Sanhedrin, and was the tutor of St. Paul. He was popular too — "had in reputation among all the people." All this would give weight to his oratory, which would be wanting in a less distinguished man.

(2) The course he recommended. Had he urged some abstract proposition, or a difficult or dangerous course of action, one need not have wondered at the ineffectiveness of his address; but the course he recommended was most reasonable and easy, "Refrain from these men," etc.

(3) The argument he employed.

(a) If the movement was undivine, opposition was unnecessary — it would come to nought of itself. In support of this, first, he gives facts referring to Theudas and Judas. Secondly, he states a principle — viz., that the human would perish and the Divine flourish. The argument is ad hominem, his hearers on their own principles were bound to take his advice. They professed to regard the new religion as an undivine thing and therefore need not take the trouble of opposing it.

(b) If the movement was of God, opposition would be futile and impious. Attempts to crush the cause of God are as futile as attempts to roll back the tides of the ocean, or reverse the course of the planets — worse than futile, it is fighting against God.

(4) The impression he produced — "To him they agreed." They could not but feel the force of his arguments.

2. So far, Gamaliel's speech seems powerful, and one might have thought that he would have gained his end. But no; they pursued their course of persecution (ver. 40). What rendered this oratory so ineffective? The character of the audience. Prejudice warped their judgment and malice inspired their hearts. The eloquence of a discourse depends upon the mind of the auditory. Hence what is felt to be eloquence in one audience would not be in another. He is the most eloquent man in his sphere who advocates the wishes of his hearers: otherwise, though he reasons with the logic of Aristotle, and declaims with the power of Demosthenes, his eloquence will not be felt. Paul was a babbler at Athens. Let, then, hearers who would benefit free their minds from prejudice and listen with candour; and let speakers be above pandering to low tastes and sectarian sympathies.

II. CULPABLE INDIFFERENCE JUSTIFYING ITSELF BY PLAUSIBLE LOGIC. The non-intervention here recommended may in some aspects admit of justification. Statesmen, e.g., have no right to interfere with the religious opinions and movements of the people, so long as there is no infringement of the rights of others. The conscience is sacred to God. Men may argue, but not coerce. Again, the advice may be justified on the ground of social philosophy, supposing Gamaliel believed Christianity to be an imposture. The way to give social power to error is to persecute it. But looking at it in a broad light the councillor displayed a reprehensible moral indifference. Because —

1. As a man, he was bound to satisfy himself whether the apostles' cause was of man or of God by honest investigation.

2. He had abundant evidence to satisfy himself on the question.

3. If it was the work of God he was bound to go heart and soul into it. We cannot therefore but regard his argument as formularised to apologise for his indifference. In this respect he is a type of a large class whose policy is to allow things to take their course and settle themselves whether true or false.

III. A TEST BY WHICH THE DIVINITY OF CHRISTIANITY IS ESTABLISHED. "If it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it." Christianity has not been overthrown, but has gone on conquering and to conquer.

IV. AN EXAMPLE OF THE ALL-CONQUERING SPIRIT OF GENUINE RELIGION (vers. 40-42). Observe —

1. Their exultation in ignominious suffering which can only be accounted for by —

(1)  A consciousness of rectitude.

(2)  A supreme affection for Christ. Love rejoices to suffer for its object.

(3)  A recollection that their Master suffered in the same way.

(4)  A fresh assurance of their genuine interest in Christ. He had told them that they should suffer (Matthew 5:11, 12; Matthew 10:17-22).

2. Their invincibility in prohibited labour. No power could break down their holy purpose.

(D. Thomas, D. D.)

---

---

KJV: When they heard that, they were cut to the heart, and took counsel to slay them.

WEB: But they, when they heard this, were cut to the heart, and determined to kill them.