Gamaliel - Acts 5:34-42

Peter stands before the Jewish leadership and boldly testifies that Jesus is the Christ, and as the council decides to kill the apostles, it appears that there is only one clear head in the entire room. A man “a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in reputation among all the people,” stood up and said, “Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what ye intend to do as touching these men.” I take that to mean, “You are supposed to represent the true and living God, what do you think you are doing?”

I’ve asked before when situations spiral out of control, “are we at the point of ridiculousness yet?” Like when Laman and Lemuel tie up Nephi and leave him to die in the desert because they are mad at him, you have to stop and think, “wait, can everyone just chill out for 2 minutes and not kill anybody?” I think that Gamaliel has gotten to that point right now, “can everybody just chill out for a sec?” Basically, what he’s trying to say is “refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrown it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.”
The IM introduces Gamaliel saying, “Gamaliel was the grandson of the famous rabbi Hillel, He was a member of the Sanhedrin and a distinguished scholar of Jewish law. Paul was tutored by this famous master of the law. Gamaliel had a reputation for being tolerant and kind, relaxing the standards of the Sabbath observance so they were no so rigorous and encouraging more humane treatment of women in divorce laws. His wise counsel likely saved the lives of the Apostles, who had been brought again before the Jewish council after being released from prison by an angel.” I was very intrigued when I read that he was a humanitarian, and even though it doesn’t appear that he is secretly converted to Christ, he is taking a levelheaded approach to the situation of men (the apostles) preaching about Christ in the streets.
Gamaliel gives two examples to illustrate the point that he is going to make, and I wonder if this is the manner of speaking that ancient Jews used, because I would probably make my point and then support it, but Gamaliel is apparently supporting his claim and then making it. The first example is of “Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered and brought to nought.” The IM explains, “the first (example) was a Jewish uprising against the Romans that was led by a man called Theudas, who had gained about 400 followers before he was slain and his followers scattered. The second occurred in about A.D. 6, when Judas of Galilee and a band of followers revolted against Roman taxation; in the ensuing violence, Judas died and his followers were dispersed.”
It took me a while to think through why Gamaliel would use these situations as examples of his point, because to me, from the outside, it just appeared that the two incidents cited were political rebellions and the apostles were engaged in a spiritual revolution. The other two revolts consisted of violence against Rome, and the disciples consisted of miracles and healings and peaceful preaching. It took me some time to realize that the only reason why this comparison was blatantly different was because I knew how it all worked out. I know that the apostles preached peacefully and served missions throughout the world and eventually were almost all martyrs rather than turn violent for Christ’s sake, but these chief priests wouldn’t have known that.
Let’s also remember that 99% of the Jews still expected a militant Messiah to come and save them from Roman rule. So of course they were expecting these men (the apostles) to try to start a war against Rome, and it occurred to me that Jewish revolts against Rome, like the ones Gamaliel mentioned, probably had a religious component to it. The revolts probably started by some person “boasting himself to be somebody,” thought that they had been called of God to free the Jewish people or something like that.
The chief priests weren’t concerned with a spiritual revolution, they were concerned about a political revolution, both of the church leadership and the Roman governance, and they had spent a lot of time perfecting that relationship so that it was as beneficial to them as possible. Not even those who were actively looking for the Messiah (the apostles) expected Christ to come with a message of peace and forgiveness and repentance, so it why would those not actively looking for Him (the Jewish leadership) recognize him when he got here.
As far as the Gamaliel could see at the time, here was another group of men preaching a different type of belief system. They persisted even though their leader had just been murdered, and historically, he could see this turn out two ways. This movement could turn violent and the Romans will crush it just like they had so many times before, or these men could truly be messengers on an errand for God in which case, nothing can stop it, especially corrupt religious leaders. I think that there is such power to this that we don’t consider so much of the time. If something is not of God, then it will fizzle out or be suppressed. But if something is of God, then it will work out no matter what.
It’s like looking back at Church history. The beginnings of the Church and how everything worked out and became established, with Joseph Smith being who he was and the persecutions and expulsions of people from their homes and their farms and their businesses, with everything that happened, the gospel persisted and even grew. Being an early member of the Church was not easy, in fact, looking at it, you could say that it almost seemed like trials arose to specifically weed out those who were not willing to die for the cause. The early saints sacrificed so much, they left their lives so many times and suffered extremes, not so that they could find gold out west or seek adventure.
There was a choice involved with all the other pioneers, such as those on the Oregon trail or those going out to California, there was excitement and hope of a better physical life and more opportunities. But those in the early church were slowly weeded out through hardship until only those who lived and breathed for the gospel were left. They didn’t leave their homes in the middle of the night in the dead of winter for better opportunities or adventure; they suffered with bleeding, frozen feet and hunger because they refused to renounce the Savior. So many people left the Church, even still, but the work persists. Gamaliel was right, if this work was not of God, it would have come to nothing so long ago. But because it is of God, there has been no challenge nor obstacle that has interfered with God’s will. God is capable of doing his own work, but he allows us to help out so that we can be blessed and so that we can become truly converted.