BiblicalInsights.net

In Acts 5:33-40, the Sanhedrin convenes to attempt to stop the apostles from preaching in the name of Jesus.  Earlier, they had imprisoned the apostels and forbade them from teaching in the name of Jesus (Acts 4:3,18).  However, the apostles were let go and continued their work and ministry.  The apostles were imprisoned again (Acts 5:18), but, they were miraculously delivered by an angel of the Lord (Acts 5:19).  They went to the temple and continued preaching the gospel.
The Sanhedrin met and sent for the apostles to appear before them.  They found out that the apostles had been freed from prison (Acts 5:25) and were teaching in the temple.  The captain of the temple with his officers went to the temple and brought the apostles to the council (Acts 5:27).  An exchange of words occurred between Peter and the high priest.  Peter resisted the authority of the council and boldly declared that the apostles would obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29).  The council was infuritated and took counsel to kill the apostles (Acts 5:28-32).
At this time, Gamaliel stood up to give his advice to the council.  Gamaliel was a Pharisee.  The Pharisees were a Jewish sect that insisted on the strictest observance of legal regulations and, also, the traditions that added a mass of regulations to the Mosaic Law.  Gamaliel was a teacher of the law of  Moses and was held in honor by all the people.  Saul (Paul) studied under him in Jerusalem (Acts 22:3).  Gamaliel was a member of the Sanhedrin.  The Sanhedrin was the highest Jewish court comprised of 70 members who belonged to the Sadducees (another Jewish sect that denied the existence of angels and  the resurrection) and Pharisees.
Gamaliel addressed the court without the apostles being present.  First, he related two historical incidents of uprisings and, then, he made an application to the present situation.
The two historical cases of uprisings that Gamaliel mentioned involved men by the name of Theudas and Judas.  Theudas was a man of self-proclaimed importance.  He had a following of 400 men.  But, they were all dispersed and came to naught following his death.  Judas (Acts 5:37) was a Galilean who made an uprising in the days of the enrollment for taxation (Luke 2:1-2).  His rebellion was greater than that of Theudas, but, he, too, perished and his followers dispersed.
Gamaliel made an application to the present circumstances involving the followers of Jesus Christ (Acts 5:38).  He said, “And as to now…”  His application is faulty for the primary reason that neither Theudas nor Judas arose from the dead.  But, Jesus did!  The historical incidents are not parallel to the present circumstances.
Gamaliel made two conditional statements.  The first statement was, “If this counsel or work be of men, it will come to nought.”  This is a third class conditional statement and indicates that Gamaliel felt it was very unlikely.  The second statement was, “If it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.”  This statement is a first class conditional statement and is the more likely to be true.
Every religion built by men will be overthrown.  This is true, but when?  It may be that it would not be overthrown in their lifetimes and so the truthfulness or falsity of the religion would be undecided.  Can we sit down in indecision until this final proof is produced?  Is there a better way to detemine whether a religion is true or false?  The second alternative also is flawed.  If it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it.  If they wait until the final proof is made according to time, then, they may miss the blessings of believing.  The waiting game puts their own souls in jeopardy.  The implication of Gamaliel’s counsel is that God has not provided enough information to determine the truth about Christianity.  We must wait and see the fate of any religion before we can determine whether or not it is of God.  Gamaliel belongs to that class of men where the most convincing evidence is unconvincing.  He belongs to the class of unbelievers.  He knows Jesus was resurrected from the dead!  Yet, he is still in denial.
Gamaliel’s counsel is the counsel of indecision because it is based on unbelief.
Time will tell or truth will tell?  Truth is a better basis upon which to decide the legitimacy of any religion.  Deciding for Jesus is evidence of an authentic faith rooted and grounded in truth.  Have you decided?

Complicity is a doctrine that operates to hold persons criminally responsible for the acts of others.  Complicity encompasses assessorial and conspiratorial liability.  Assessorial liability is frequently referred to as accomplice liability.  An accomplice is a person who helps another person commit a crime.  Accomplice liability involves primary actors who actually participate in the commission of the crime and secondary actors who aid or encourage the primary actors.  The aid can be either physical or psychological.  The secondary actors are called accomplices (Wikipedia-8-13-13).
For example, the driver of a get-away car in a bank robbery is an accomplice.  A co-conspirator in a bank robbery is an accomplice.  In regards to crime, we understand what “complicity” means.
Is it possible to be complicit in sinful conduct?  The answer from God’s Word is, “yes.”  Consider the following biblical examples.
1.  Saul consented unto the death of Stephen (Acts 7:58, 8:1).  Saul held the clothing of those who stoned Stephen, a Christian, to death.  Saul may not have thrown a stone, but he was an accomplice to the sin.  The word “consenting” means “to take pleasure with others in anything” (Vine, I, 229).  Saul agreed with the act of stoning Stephen and consequently, he was guilty of sin.  Later, after becoming a Christian himself, Saul (or Paul) confessed this fact (I Tim. 1:13-14).
2.  In II John 9-10, we are warned about helping false teachers.  John writes, “Neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.”  To bid someone God speed is to endorse that person.  To be a partaker of his evil deeds means that we have a share with, take part in his evil.  We may not be the one who teaches error, but we can aid and abet someone who does.  There are different ways that we might do this.  We might financially support a false teacher.  Or, we may speak well of him.  In Matt. 7:15, Jesus warned about false teachers who come to us in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravening wolves.  If we speak well of a false teacher or a false religionist, we help the wolf with his disquise!  We make him look like a sheep whenever he really is a wolf.  When we recharacterize evil men, we sin.  We become a party to a deception.
3.  In Acts 3:12-19, Peter states that the Jews killed the Prince of life (Jesus Christ).  “But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you; and killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.”  We know that the Jews did not have the power of capital punishment and could not execute a person without the Roman governments’ consent.  The Jews went to Pilate, the Roman governor, in order to have Jesus crucified.  They called for Jesus to be crucified.  They leveled false charges against Him.  While the Jews did not actually drive the nails into Jesus’ hands nor pierce His side with a spear, they were accomplices in killing Jesus as Peter said.  They were complicit in the sin of murdering Jesus, an innocent man.  Later, Peter commands these same individuals to repent and turn to God that their sins may be blotted out (Acts 3:19).
Christians do not want to aid, help, fellowship, endorse, recharacterize evil men, or in any way promote sin.  It is a sin to do so.

A lengthy dispute over how to convey the Trinity to Muslims led two denominations to threaten boycotts of Wycliffe Bible Translators.  The disupte began in 2011.  Wycliffe’s partner SIL International halted seven translation projects in 2011 until a 14-member panel convened by the World Evangelical Alliance (WEA) could assess the debate.
The dispute focused on how to translate phrases like “God the Father” and “Son of God” in predominantly Muslim nations.  The problem is the Quran’s teaching on the subject of the Triune God.  Muslims do not believe in the diety of Jesus Christ and consequently, they do not believe in a Triune God (God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit).  While Muslims are monotheistic, their god Allah, is not the one, true and living God.
The Quran teaches: 5:116, “And behold! God will say, “O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, “Worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of God?”  17:111, “Praise be to God, Who begets no son, and has no partner in (His) dominion: Nor (needs) He any to protect Him from humiliation, yea, magnify Him for His greatness and glory.”  19:88-92, “They say: ‘(God) Most Gracious has begotten a son!’ Indeed ye have put forth a thing most monstrous!  At it the skies are ready to burst, the earth to split asunder, and the mountains to fall down in utter ruin, That they should invoke a son for (God) Most Gracious.  For it is not consonant with the majesty of (God) Most Gracious that he should beget a son.”
The idea of God begetting a son (assumed in a physical sense) is misunderstood by Muslims.  The Virgin Birth will have to be explained to Muslims.  But, God’s Word should not be changed to accommodate their misunderstandings.  We cannot compromise the truth in the way the Bible is translated.  Political correctness should not enter into Bible translation.
Some of the transational changes involved the following:
-Reference to “God the Father” are replaced by the Arabic word for god, “Allah.”  (But, Allah and the Triune God of the Bible are not the same).
-References to Jesus as the “Son of God” are replaced with “Messiah”, thus eliminating references to Jesus as the Son of God and thus destroying the relationship between the Father and the Son in Scripture.
-In Matthew 18:19, “Baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost” becomes “Cleanse them by water in the name of Allah, His Messiah, and His Holy Spirit.”
Most will be able to see the translational problems involved with these changes and the doctrinal import of each.  The WEA established a 14-member panel to address the translational issues.  It produced a report in April, 2013.  The report includes ten guidelines that address the translational issues.  It may be obtained at www.worldevangelicals.org/translation-review/.
Christianity Today had an article addressing this issue titled, “Translation Tension” by Ruth Moon in the July/August, 2013 issue.  The tension points up the difficulty encountered in Bible translation when one of the motivating factors is political correctness.  There will always be tension and conflict when truth meets error.