Acts 5 36

Acts 5:36 kjv

For before these days rose up 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.

Acts 5:36 nkjv

For some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody. A number of men, about four hundred, joined him. He was slain, and all who obeyed him were scattered and came to nothing.

Acts 5:36 niv

Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing.

Acts 5:36 esv

For before these days Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and a number of men, about four hundred, joined him. He was killed, and all who followed him were dispersed and came to nothing.

Acts 5:36 nlt

Some time ago there was that fellow Theudas, who pretended to be someone great. About 400 others joined him, but he was killed, and all his followers went their various ways. The whole movement came to nothing.

Acts 5 verses

Acts 5 36 Meaning

Acts 5:36 records Gamaliel, a respected Pharisee and teacher of the Law, recounting an earlier historical example of a leader named Theudas who rose up, claiming importance. He managed to gather about four hundred followers. However, Theudas was ultimately killed, leading to the dispersal of all his adherents and the complete collapse of his movement. This anecdote served as an illustration for Gamaliel's counsel to the Sanhedrin regarding the apostles: that human movements lacking divine origin eventually come to nothing, whereas divine movements cannot be overthrown.

Acts 5 36 Context

This verse is part of Gamaliel's counsel to the Sanhedrin in Acts 5. The apostles had been arrested again for continuing to preach Jesus after being forbidden. After a miraculous angelic release and their renewed public preaching, they were brought before the Jewish high court. Peter boldly declared that they must "obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). The Sanhedrin was infuriated and debated executing the apostles.

At this critical moment, Gamaliel, a respected teacher of the Law and a Pharisee (who famously taught Saul, later Paul), rose to speak. He urged caution, reminding them of historical precedents where popular movements, led by individuals claiming authority, ultimately failed after their leaders were removed. The case of Theudas is the first of two examples he cites (the other being Judas the Galilean in Acts 5:37) to support his main argument: "If this plan or this work is of men, it will come to nothing; but if it is of God, you cannot overthrow it; lest you even be found to fight against God" (Acts 5:38-39). This pragmatic counsel swayed the Sanhedrin, leading them to release the apostles after a scourging.

Historically, 1st-century Judea was ripe for messianic and nationalist movements against Roman occupation. Many individuals claimed leadership, promising liberation or new spiritual directions, only to be crushed by Roman authority. Gamaliel's examples were likely fresh in the collective memory of his audience.

Acts 5 36 Word analysis

• For before these days:
  • Signifies a preceding time, referring to a relatively recent past, within the memory of those present. It sets the historical stage for Gamaliel's examples, drawing lessons from prior, well-known events.
• rose up:
  • Greek: ἀνέστη (anestē). Imperfect tense of anistēmi. Meaning "stood up, arose, appeared," implying a sudden emergence into prominence, especially as a leader, rebel, or public figure. This suggests Theudas presented himself as having authority or a significant message.
• Theudas:
  • Greek: Θεοῦδας (Theoudas). A Hellenized form of a common Aramaic name, likely meaning "gift of God." Historically, Josephus mentions a Theudas (Antiquities of the Jews 20.97-99) who led a movement, was defeated, and killed, around AD 44-46. However, Gamaliel's speech occurred around AD 30-33. This apparent chronological discrepancy has been much discussed by scholars. Several explanations exist: multiple individuals named Theudas; Josephus's chronology for this particular event being less precise; or Luke (and Gamaliel) referring to an earlier, perhaps less well-documented, uprising. Regardless, the specific identity is less important to Gamaliel's argument than the pattern of a failed human movement.
• boasting himself to be somebody:
  • Greek: λέγων εἶναί τινα (legōn einai tina). Literally "saying to be a certain one" or "claiming to be someone significant." This points to Theudas's self-proclamation and self-exaltation. He did not point beyond himself, unlike true prophets or messianic figures appointed by God. This inherent pride is often a characteristic of false leaders or those not sent by God. It directly contrasts with Jesus' humility and reliance on the Father's validation.
• to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves:
  • The "four hundred" (τετρακοσίων, tetrakosíōn) indicates a significant but not overwhelming number of followers. It's enough to represent a real threat to stability in the region and to warrant Roman intervention. The phrase "joined themselves" (προσεκλίθη) implies a willing allegiance, drawn by Theudas's claims and promises. This shows the common yearning among the populace for a strong leader or deliverer in tumultuous times.
• who was slain:
  • Greek: ὃς ἀνῃρέθη (hos anērḗthē). "who was put to death, destroyed." The passive voice highlights the decisive action taken against him, likely by Roman authorities. This emphasizes the swift and brutal end to his personal leadership, a common fate for those who led insurrections against Rome.
• and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered:
  • Greek: διεδολίεθησαν (dievskorpisthēsan). Meaning "were scattered abroad, dispersed." This is a direct consequence of the leader's demise. The flock without the shepherd (see Zech 13:7) principle is at play. Their unity was solely dependent on Theudas's person, not on a divine foundation or enduring truth.
• and brought to nought:
  • Greek: καὶ ἐγένοντο εἰς οὐδέν (kai egenonto eis ouden). Literally "and came into nothing" or "became nothing." This encapsulates the ultimate failure and disappearance of the entire movement. It implies that their goals, plans, and impact utterly ceased to exist. This phrase underscores Gamaliel's central argument: movements born of human ambition and lacking divine backing will ultimately dissolve.

Acts 5 36 Bonus section

The "Theudas problem" related to the timing difference with Josephus highlights that Luke, the author of Acts, like other biblical writers, often prioritized the theological and narrative coherence of his message over strict chronological exactitude in recounting every detail of historical events. For Luke, Gamaliel's point about a self-proclaimed leader whose movement came to nothing was the crucial detail, not the precise date of Theudas's uprising relative to his speech. It shows Gamaliel's deep understanding of socio-political movements of his time and the spiritual principle that humanly-conrived plans against God's will are destined to fail. This demonstrates the wisdom (albeit from a secular viewpoint in Gamaliel's case) God allows even to those who may not fully grasp His overarching plan but nevertheless prevent them from acting rashly.

Acts 5 36 Commentary

Acts 5:36 is not merely a historical footnote but a critical element in Gamaliel's nuanced argument to the Sanhedrin. He employs this past event, along with that of Judas the Galilean, to counsel prudence over precipitous judgment. The rise and fall of Theudas illustrate a recurring pattern: ambitious leaders self-proclaim their greatness, gather a following drawn by the promise of change or liberation, but inevitably their efforts falter and disperse because they lack genuine divine authority.

The essence of Gamaliel's logic is a recognition that genuine spiritual movements are characterized by their enduring nature, while humanly-conceived movements inevitably collapse. The tragic end of Theudas—slain, with his followers scattered and their cause brought to nought—serves as a clear contrast to the resilient growth of the early Christian community, despite persecution. The outcome, Gamaliel suggests, is the ultimate arbiter of divine endorsement. This counsel implicitly challenged the Sanhedrin to observe, rather than prematurely obstruct, the work of the apostles. If it was merely human, it would vanish like Theudas's. If it was of God, opposition was futile and dangerous.

This verse emphasizes key biblical truths: the futility of human ambition against God's purposes (Psa 33:10), the divine resistance to pride (Prov 16:18, Jam 4:6), and the inherent test for spiritual authenticity through a movement's long-term fruit and ultimate success or failure (Mt 7:20, Jer 28:9). It advises discernment and patience when evaluating new religious or social phenomena, placing the burden of proof on the longevity and divine blessing upon the movement itself. The Theudas example is a vivid historical warning against leading movements based on personal claims rather than on God's truth.