Acts 5:29

Context

In Acts 4, the council (the Sanhedrin), the highest Jewish governing body, ordered Peter and John not to speak in the name of Jesus. In chapter 5, the high priest and the Sadducees put the apostles in prison, but after their release the apostles continued teaching in the temple. When the apostles again stood before the council, the high priest confronted them: "Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name?" (5:28). This verse is their answer. The apostles then went on to testify to the death and resurrection of Jesus (5:30-32). Because Gamaliel, a Pharisee and teacher of the law, counseled restraint, they escaped death, but they were beaten and released. Afterward the apostles continued teaching daily, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name (5:41-42).

The Greek verb translated "obey" (peitharcheō) means to follow the commands of one in authority. The same word appears in 5:32 in the phrase "them that obey him."

Interpretation

• As a basis for the right of resistance: The Reformation tradition has cited this verse as grounds for refusing to comply when secular authority commands something contrary to the will of God. John Calvin quoted it in the closing section of the Institutes of the Christian Religion, which deals with obedience to magistrates. There Calvin wrote that obedience to rulers must never lead us away from obedience to God.
• As a narrowly bounded statement: Many evangelical commentators emphasize that these words were spoken in the specific situation of an order prohibiting the preaching of the gospel. On this reading, the verse does not call for rejecting authority in general. It is limited to cases in which a clear command of God and a human command are in direct conflict. These interpreters hold that it should be read together with 1 Peter 2, in which the same Peter urges submission to authorities, and with Romans 13.
• As nonviolent suffering: The peace church tradition, including the Anabaptists, notes that although the apostles did not comply with the order, they did not resist by force but accepted the beating. This tradition reads the passage as teaching that the manner of disobedience must also be nonviolent and willing to endure suffering.

Questions of Application

The central issue is which commands count as "commands contrary to God," and who makes that judgment. When the verse is invoked broadly—to reject rules unrelated to faith or to justify decisions within the church—critics point out that it is being quoted out of context.

In the Korean Church

The verse is frequently cited to explain the faith of those who refused compulsory Shinto shrine worship during the Japanese colonial period. Sermons and writings on the martyrdom of Joo Ki-chul also commonly connect his witness to this verse. During the COVID-19 pandemic, some appealed to this verse in disputes over restrictions on in-person worship. Others countered that public health measures differed in nature from a ban on preaching the gospel. These events reportedly prompted renewed discussion of the relationship between church and politics.

Related Passages

• Acts 4:19-20 — Peter and John's first reply before the same council
• Daniel 3:24-28 — Daniel's three friends, who refused the command to worship the golden image
• Mark 12:13-17 — the things that are Caesar's and the things that are God's
• 1 Peter 2:13-17 — Peter's exhortation to submit to every ordinance of man
• Romans 13:3-4 — authority as the minister of God