In Acts 5:17 the High Priest is “filled with jealousy” and arrested the apostles. Like points out that these men were Sadducees and would immediately oppose the preaching of resurrection on doctrinal grounds. Since they do not believe in the resurrection, any teaching that said that the resurrection anticipated in the prophets was beginning would be considered wrong.
But there is more to this than a doctrinal difference – these are the men that killed Jesus in the first place. To claim that a man was executed as a false teacher and revolutionary (as Jesus was) has been raised form the dead by God is to declare that the men behind that execution are not only wrong, but “fighting against God.” Gamaliel will make this connection later in the passage.
Most English translations describe the High priest as “jealous,” a negative characteristic. But this word is often translated “zeal,” a positive characteristic. Paul uses the same word to describe his own advancement in Judaism prior to his encounter with the resurrected Jesus (Phil 3:4-6; Polhill, Acts, 165). Paul does not merely claim to be a Pharisee. He modifies this claim with the words “according to zeal, a persecutor of the church.” Paul as “zealous” to keep the law to the point that he as willing to persecute those that did not conform to the Law.
“Zeal” is one of those words that Christians have turned into a commitment for the Lord. (Or, sadly, a diet Christian product!) To be “zealous” means one is serving God wholeheartedly. This is certainly part of the meaning of the first century, but the High Priest to be“zealous” packs a bit more punch than that.
A jew inthe Second Temple period to say he was “a zealous keeper of the Law,” the Jewish listener in the first century may have thought of Judas Maccabees, the forefather of the Pharisees himself, and his zealous defense of things Jewish in the Revolt against Antiochus IV Epiphanes.
1 Maccabees 2:24-29 When Mattathias saw it, he burned with zeal and his heart was stirred. He gave vent to righteous anger; he ran and killed him on the altar. At the same time he killed the king’s officer who was forcing them to sacrifice, and he tore down the altar. Thus he burned with zeal for the law, just as Phinehas did against Zimri son of Salu. Then Mattathias cried out in the town with a loud voice, saying: “Let every one who is zealous for the law and supports the covenant come out with me!” Then he and his sons fled to the hills and left all that they had in the town. 29 At that time many who were seeking righteousness and justice went down to the wilderness to live there.
Zeal in the first century was, in the words of N. T. Wright, something that you did with a knife (What Saint Paul Really Said, 27). Along with Judas, Phineas (Num 25:1-18) and Elijah (1 Kings 19) were examples of Old Testament characters that burned with a zealous commitment to the Lord that expressed itself in a willingness to challenge the evil head on, killing those that practiced idolatry themselves if need be.
The High Priest in Acts 5:17 is not jealous that the Apostles are gaining followers; he is not envious of the Apostles. He believes that the preaching of the Apostles is a dangerous idea which could destabilize the core institutions of Judaism in the first century. While no one is talking about dispensing with the Law (yet), the High Priest strongly objects to the idea of a suffering Messiah who dies and is raised from the dead. He is therefore willing to physically punish those who are preaching the Resurrection.
How does this understanding of “zeal” anticipate what happens in Acts 6-7? Does this help understand Rabbi Saul’s passion in Acts 9?
13 comments
Comments feed for this article
January 30, 2013 at 9:22 am
nick_mascorro
Regarding the post and the statement from the High Priest, the translation and the meaning are eye opening. This is because before thoroughly examining the scripture I believed that the High Priest were indeed jealous of the Apostle and the miracles that God was performing through them, like Ananias and Sapphire (Acts 5:1-11). But similar to what is referenced in the post the High Priest were, “Not jealous that the Apostle were gaining followers,” but instead they were worried this could, “destabilize the core institution of Judaism.” This is so interesting because it is apparent to see that the High Priest knew how serious of a threat the Apostles were to the law, and how much God had his hand on what they were doing. This was so easy to see because when the High Priest heard Peter talk about how their power comes through from the Holy Spirit because of what Jesus had done on the cross, the High Priest became enraged. They immediately wanted to put them to death (Acts 5:33). This shows the true “zeal” and passion these High Priest had toward the Apostles because they seen the power of God through them and they knew that if the people seen this, the very law that they lived by would be questioned. This being said the High Priest reached their breaking point, they did not want to just silence them for a period but forever through death. Fortunately their zeal and passion against the Apostles did not lead to death but instead flogging and release (Acts 5:40). Which shows how God had his hand on the Apostles lives and would not leave them in time of trouble.
January 30, 2013 at 11:02 am
Nick Van Loo
The High priests were “Jealous with serious passion” in Acts 5:17 when they heard the Apostles preaching. Professor Long has gone into depth in his post explaining what they were really feeling (zeal, what zeal really meant, and the danger the apostles were in). I completely agree with this because this is what the scriptures say. However, I would like to offer an opinion on where this increased level of jealousy is stemming from.
In class on the 29th, I put myself in the priest’s position. Here they were, listening to a man saying they killed the son of God, when the high priests say that the priests are the ones that know the scriptures the best and follow every detail in them. Yet, the priests cannot deny what has happened. Jesus was powerful well he was alive and he did rise from the dead. There must have been a small voice in the back of their heads that could not have ignored the facts in front of their face. At least one of the priests must have been thinking “What if we really did kill the Messiah”. Usually, if there is an instance when I think I might have been wrong in a very important area, I respond with anger and probably with some zeal. Anxiety that the apostles were actually right probably sparked the passion and zeal in high priests. Innocent men act like they are innocent and guilty men act like they are guilty.
The zeal of the high priests was met with the holy zeal of Stephen in chapter 7. Stephen called them out in every instance that they might have had doubt in. Zeal met with zeal results in trouble. That is just what happened, Stephen was stoned because the High Priests could not shake the fact that he might actually have been right and they might actually have killed the son of God.
January 30, 2013 at 11:47 am
danpierpont
After reading and thinking a lot about the word “zeal” and what it actually meant back in the first century does have an effect on how I would read today. Growing up I always thought that this was referring to the High Priest jealousy of the Apostles crowd. As I though about this I thought to myself, what would I do if I was a pastor back in the first century, and a couple guys few guys start preaching against everything that I have believed and studied. It would have been very difficult. I would like to think that I would jump on board and start preaching the Gospel, but I can not say what i’d do. So with the word “zeal” I believe it portrays a better sense of a pastor, or high priest, trying to defend his faith. Someone that is passionate about God, but is just blind, and God hasn’t revealed himself to that priest/pastor just yet.
Now moving over to what happened in Acts 6. Stephen being stoned for his faith shows that he had zeal, obviously. At the same time Saul, “holding the coats” of those stoning Stephen, in a way approving of the death of Stephen, is showing zeal for what he thought to be what is right. What he thought was in order to honor the Lord. I just went up and read Nick’s post and it almost looks like we are thinking and writing the same thing. I like that Nick said, “…zeal met with zeal results in trouble”. I agree and think that this really does change the way I look at Saul in this passage.
January 30, 2013 at 3:25 pm
arenberg93
Whenever i read about the stoning of Stephen, I can only think “Was what he was saying that offensive to demand a stoning?” And to put it lightly, yes. Stephen basically calls out their whole lifestyle, he attacked the only thing that defined them: the law. They burned with this zeal, because what Stephen said could take everything away from them. And if it wasn’t bad enough to say that they killed the messiah, he said that they always reject the Holy Spirit, that they never listen to the will of God. This only sparked their anger more. These men were obviously very passionate about the law, as they followed so many rules and regulations to an incredible extent. We don’t really think about how dedicated you would have to be to follow and study the law as the pharisees did, and so you would already have a zeal for pursing it with your whole life. So Stephen’s word cut like a knife, provoking them to violence. And this is why Saul relentlessly pursued the early church! He would not have a bunch of misfit people threatening his lifestyle and religion, and so he hunted them as if it was a calling from God… until he actually received a call from God. This zeal is not a bad thing, and yet in the pharisees case we see it misdirected, and so we have the persecution of the church.
January 30, 2013 at 3:35 pm
heatherjoyy
As already mentioned, the term “zeal” refers to a strong committment to the Lord. This was most certainly expressed as the apostles continued to speak to the crowds about Jesus. I think that their is great significant between Stephan’s situation in Acts 6 and the apostle’s situation as expressed in Acts 5:17ff. if you think about it, the High priests (and other religious leaders) possessed a similar zealous passion. The difference is that the religious leaders were proclaiming a false doctrine. It makes me wonder whether the priests and religious leaders of that time would be willing to die for what they proclaim to be true. As we gather from the apostle’s proclaimation to the crowd, and Stephan’s proclaimation in Acts 6, the Truth cannot be stopped. No sane individual would willingly die for a lie; if the religous leaders of that time really believed that the apostle’s proclaimation of the Christ was a lie, I do not not think that Stephan would be willing to die for this truth, as expressed in Acts 6. I believe that is why the apostle’s held on their belief in Christ with such zealous passion, even among strong opposition from the religous leaders and priests of their time. Their proclaimation of the Truth would not hindered. As Isaiah 55:11 says, “God’s Word will not return void.”
January 30, 2013 at 4:06 pm
cbefus
This Post was extremely enlightening, I have read the story of Stephens stoning many times and never had a clear grasp of why the Priest got so angry at his words. It is clear now that Stephens words where extremely offensive to these men. “Was there ever a Prophet your ancestor’s did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him- you have received the law that was given through angels but have not obeyed it.” (Acts7:52-53) Stephen insulted everything these men believed in, their ancestor’s deeds, their disobedience to the law, and even the murdering of the Messiah. It is totally understandable why these men reacted the way they did. It is just sad to see how blind they are and makes me think of times I have been blind to advice given to me. I think many times humans make the mistake of being extremely head strong. These Sadducee’s where not going to change their beliefs if it meant killing many people. They had a zeal for the law that blinded them!
January 30, 2013 at 5:01 pm
Marc Mullenix
When I think of zeal, the word “jealous” comes to mind. The mind set of “man I can’t believe those guys are taking away our crowds. Darn that upsets me.” Kind of a Homer Simpson type of jelousy for Ned Flanders and the nice things he has. But when I read this post and think about the meaning of the word, I understand the kind of jelousy they are feeling. The fact that they go as far to defend their beliefs by stoning a man to death. For someone to come to me and tell me that all of these that I have been studying at Grace, would be enragging! Not to the point of killing someone, but I could see why they would feel that way. They basically had their world rocked with having the death of Christ, the Messiah put on their shoulders. Basically saying, man you guys are super bad! It would be an extremely horrific moment and would anger me to an in-numerable amount.
January 30, 2013 at 8:25 pm
jbefus
This definition of ‘zeal’ does shed a lot of light on Saul and why he persecuted the church to the extent that he did. 8:3 says, “But Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison.”. His zeal for the law and upholding what he was taught was so large that he would physically harm those who proclaimed the gospel. While I was reading Acts 5, it occurred to me that Gamaliel may be the same Pharisee that Saul studied under. This is where Saul learned and received some of that zeal for the Law. It is interesting though that Gamaliel, instead of having that zeal and physically harming the apostles, lets them go. However, Saul, his understudy, made it his goal to persecute the church. I wonder if Saul had a difference of opinion with Gamaliel, and that propelled him to become even more zealous and persecute the church. It does not seem that Saul took the same point of view as Gamaliel in letting the apostles do their thing. Instead, he felt threatened by the proclamation of the gospel, and so in his zeal he persecuted the church.
January 30, 2013 at 10:37 pm
nfisher2013
Due to the fact that Stephen was speaking to a group of Sadducees, it is not surprising that they reacted so violently. Like many have already pointed out, Stephen’s message was a direct affront to what the religious leaders believed. Not only did Stephen shoot down their beliefs, but he also claimed that they were directly responsible for murdering the Messiah. The violent reaction of killing Stephen would definitely fall under N.T. Wright’s definition of zeal. The Sadducees, or religious leaders in general, were completely devoted to obeying the Law. It was their entire life. Imagine someone coming to you, a devoted “follower of God,” and telling you that your entire life, from birth to present day, has been in opposition to God. Wow. What a bombshell that would be. It would definitely cause a feeling of anger towards that person but, of course, anger would be putting it mildly. Your “zeal” may cause you to want to harm that person. That is what happend to the religious leaders here. Now, in regards to Paul, his reaction, though violent, was based on different reasons. Paul, a Pharisee, did believe in the resurrection. However, he did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah. Why not? Because He did not follow the law like the Pharisees. He healed on the Sabbath. He ate with sinners. This is why Paul did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah. His reaction is evidence of his “zeal” for the law. It is amazing to think that one with such a zeal for the law could be turned around 180 degrees and have zeal for the Gospel.
January 30, 2013 at 10:48 pm
John Caprari
Josh has an interesting thought concerning Saul and Gamaliel. I never made this connection. Evidently, they were both Pharisees. And according to Acts 22:3 Paul did study under him, “I am a Jew3, Born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city. Under Gamaliel I was thoroughly trained in the law of our fathers and was just as zealous for God as any of you are today.” He proclaims this in his speech after almost being killed by the zealous mob. In Philippians 3:6 his testament to his zeal is his persecution of the church. It is almost like a measurement of his zeal. Obviously being a zealous Jew, committed to the Law, was a well respected thing. Is Gamaliel less zealous than Saul or other Jews because he persuaded the Sanhedrin? Not necessarily. His speech reveals that he is a good Jew who loved God. It seems like he knew the capability of God, “But if it is from GOd, you will not be able to stop these men” (Acts 5:39). This speech is very surprising and odd to hear out of the mouth of a Pharisee. Stereo-typically, Pharisees get a bad reputation from readers of the Bible today. And rightfully so. But Gamaliel shows something different than what we usually see from Pharisees. Having said that, he must have still been zealous because he was well respected and honored by all the people.
January 30, 2013 at 11:46 pm
denisenicole141
Thinking about the high priest and his reaction to the apostles in zeal for the law instead of jealously makes Acts 6-7 and 9 much simpler to understand. I used to think that the action of the high priest and those in 6-7 and 9 were unrelated as far as zeal went. Now I see that the anger of the high priest was not envy so much as it was passion for the law and what had always been taught to him and everything he believed. Josh Befus and others have talked about how this definition of zeal is enlightening. This zeal for the law was so strong that no one could argue against him or he would act out of zeal or passionate hatred. “8:3 says, “But Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison.”. His zeal for the law and upholding what he was taught was so large that he would physically harm those who proclaimed the gospel.” (Josh Befus) Understanding zeal makes me wonder if Stephen’s stoning should have been expected. When you speak passionately towards what you are feeling and an event like the Apostles being put in jail has happened recently, one would almost expect some kind of reaction that would not be pleasant. Saul’s conversion is also understood better when thought of as acting in zeal. Zeal reminds me of someone who is bipolar. A bipolar person is extremely happy and passionate about the positive they are currently involved in while on the flip-side completely depressed. Saul was completely for the destruction of churches and killing those who preached the gospel and then suddenly converted to being filled with the Holy Spirit and preaching the gospel himself. Because of the zeal that he possessed for Jesus and preaching His name, he didn’t hesitate is going out and sharing this realization. I love Acts 9:20 “At once he began to preach in the synagogues that Jesus is the Son of God.” Saul started preaching at once! What zeal he possessed in a positive way verses the negative way he did just days before.
January 30, 2013 at 11:58 pm
anthonybeaulieu
Zeal to me, is being envious or jealous of someone or something. But unlike jealousy or envy, zeal causes you to go to extreme measures to have something or take something from someone, or in other words, doing whatever you can to make the zeal go away. Zeal without a doubt helps us to understand Saul’s passion in Acts 9. Especially because in Paul’s books he talks about the zeal that he had and why he persecuted the church and God’s people. It’s true that they weren’t jealous about the apostles getting followers, but that the information that the apostles have has to do with the High Priest being in the wrong and killing the messiah and now trying to stop them from doing good in the name of Jesus. I can understand how they would be zealous at making sure they wouldn’t speak in the name of Jesus, and understanding of Saul’s zeal. Ultimately, it does help us to understand Saul’s zeal.
February 2, 2013 at 4:46 pm
lvinton
I really appreciated seeing the correlation between the language Paul used when he was describing himself as “zealous” and that it was the same word used to describe the Sadducees in Acts 5:17. I think that this made me see more clearly that because the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, it is understandable that they would go as far as to persecute those with opposing views. By seeing that there are different translations to the phrase “filled with jealousy” (Acts 5:17). The Sadducees would probably be despised if people came to think of them as “fighting against God” (Filled with Zeal). They would most likely be willing to do anything to protect their reputation and what they thought was right, which was to follow the Law. This new understanding of zeal anticipates what happens to Stephen in Acts 6-7 because Stephen is taken before the council where he was falsely testified against (6:12). Stephen tells the council that they who had received the Law did not keep it. This probably infuriated the council, and Stephen is stoned later in chapter 7. This post really made me see the Sadducees and Pharisees in a different light. Of course, I still wholeheartedly think they were wrong, but it made me understand that zeal in those days could be translated into something violent.