Truth and Authority
Acts 5:33~42

June 14, 1970

John M. Buchanan

Gamalicl, descendent of the great Rabbi Hillel, Prosident of the
teietets, a revered teacher and interpreter of the Jewish law, is one of
those intriguing figures which emerges out of the Biblical narrative, about
which we know all too little. I've always felt that the words of Gamalicl
before the Sanhedrin, as recorded in the fifth chapter of acts, were extremely
significant, but I never could decide exactly why. To be sure, had Gamaliel
not said what he did, Peter and several other apostles well may have been
executed. But the significance I have felt in his words is lodged on a
deeper level than a mere stop-gap measure which prevented a hasty exeoution.
I've never used this text for a sermon before - because of my inablility
to get beyond my feeling that it was significant. This week I decided to
try, and I invite you to think with mo as we struggle together to hear the
word of God,

It is necessary, first, to understand the situation. The place is
Jerusalem: the time - several months after the death, resurrection and
ascension of Jesus. The few Christians in the city had become suddenly
aggressive: their love and care for each other was not only conspicuous,
but apparently very compelling to the casual observer. They told their
story at every opportunity, and as they did the constituted religious and
civil authorities got nervous. We must remember that several months prior
these same authorities had successfully concluded the case of "the people
v&, Jesus of Nazareth". ind now the friends of the man they had crucified
were gaining strength and support. So they arrested Peter, the chief
trouble-maker, along with several others and threw then in prison. When
the time came for them to appear before the body which was both court and
legislature - the Sanhedrin - they were gone. Something very strange was
_ happening. The prisoners had disappeared — but they hadn't gone far. They

ates
were found again teaching and telling their story in the temple. Again they
were arrested and brought before the court. Almost apologetically the
authorities reiterated the charges against them: they had persisted in
teaching false doctrine, and to make matters worse they were blaming the
authorities for the crucifixion of their dead hero. Peter's defense inalud—
ed the famous statement "We must obey God rather than men’, and proceeded
to repeat the offensive message” ‘You crucified God's son — we are the
witnesses — he is our Lord and Savior."

It is at this point that our scripture lesson begins. The Sanhedrin
was angry ~ the tension was very thick. These common Gallileans were
arrogantly flaunting every established authority. One solution was to
execute these men with dispatch, a course of action which is always suggested
whenever constituted authority is challenged. Then Gamali¢l rose and said
some very thoughtful and wise words: he counseled moderation: he pointed
out that other movements such as this had withered and died. "Keep olear
of these men. Let them alone. For if this idea of theirs or itsexecution
is of human origin, it will collapse; but if it is from God, you will never
be able to put them down, and you risk finding yourselves at war with God.”
[Acts 5238-39]

And so the Apostles were flogged and set free with the pathetic
reminder that they were still under injunction to cease speaking about Jesus.
Whereupon, Acts reports, "they went steadily on with their teaching in the
temple and in private houses, telling the good news of Jesus the Messiah.”

Now, that is what we might call Civil Disobedience, but it is not
what I would have us think about this morning. I am interested in the words
and position of Gamaliel - this philosophic and political Laissez faire
that would allow every idea the freedom to be expressed and tried in the
intellectual market place.

Gamaliel seemed to be saying that history will weed out its own errors;

that the truth or error of an idea will be proven, in time, by its reception

er rejection by people. And in fact, one of the compelling arguments for

the truth and validity of Christianity is simply that it has lived in the
market place of ideas for 2,000 years. Gamaliel may have been saying this
along ~ “let's wait and see."

But I have the feeling that there is a little more involved. What I
think I hear him saying at this point is that authority — political, moral
or religious authority is based on truth. And truth is determined by himan
experience. Another way of saying it is that the only authcrity that is
oath anything is authority that is voluntarily accepted because people have
seen and experienced its basis in truth. That has always been a radical
idea. It was eloquently voiced nearly 200 years ago when the colonists got
themselves together and declared their political independence on the basis
of “self-evident truths.

Let's assume that this is what Gamaliel meant and look,now at some of
the implications that present themselves. The noble end of all education
is the discovery of truth. What that means is that education is the business
of suggesting to people what their “authorities” should be. When truth is
discovered, some kind of authority is established. When scientists deter—
mined that the earth was round, and not flat, that became an euthoritarian
definition of truth on the basis of which men could begin to do certain
things - like sailing. into the ocean without the fear of falling off.

The trouble is that whenever men begin to search for the truth, the
constituted authorities automatically feel threatened. Their power is
dependent on the going concept of truth. If a new truth is discovered,
they may find themselves out of business. Thus the Chruch, in the middle
ages, excommunicated men for suggesting that the earth is round, that the
sun is at the center of the solar system and that gravity is a product of
that unique. relationship between a rotating earth revolving around a focal

) eee
a

sun. The’ Church opposed that kind of talk becouse its very suggestion meant
that truth just might be found somewhere outside the collected wisdom of-
the ecclesiastical minds - and that, in turn, meant that there was an
authority outside the jurisdiction of the Church.

You see, while men have suggested that authority is determined by truth -
for thousands of years, they have, in fact, usually ended up acting as if
the reverse were true: authority determines what is true. That was the
basic position of the Sanhedrin which Gamaliel succeeded‘in moderating.
They wes the authority: they would decide what is true. Peter represented
untruth - but more importantly a threat to their authority. °

Dictators know the value of this formula very well, If authority
determines what is true, political dictatorship is always possible. No one
ever understood that quite as thoroughly as Adolf Hitler. The Nazi movement
elevated the concept of authority and its correspondent, obedience, far
above all other virtues. Drawing on the historical German penchant for
authority the Nazi's simply drove it to its logical end. They had the power:
they would decide what is truth. The noblest thing a patriotic German could
do was to obey. Thus it became possible to rewrite history, to create a
new anthropology proving the inferiority of the Semitic race, to say that
Jesus was really the son of a Germanic Roman legionaire; to invade Poland,
Belgium, France, Czechoolovakia, Holland ~ and call it liberation. It
became expedient and quite possible to censor books, art,music - every
expression of the human spirit which did not conform to the authorities
definition of truth.

Communism does the same thing - because it has some philosophic base
as Fascisim, namely, that the man or group with authority, will determine
what is true. Thus the crime against Czechoslovakia again comes out looking
like a benevolent liberation: poets can be jailed or sent to Siberia

because their poetry critizes the system - thus being guilty of untruth.

dnd mo one says a word. Because a fatal philosophic corner has been turned:
the authorities have been given the responsibility of defining truth.

This is why, by the way, some of us get very concerned when politicians
begin to talk about censorship for the good of the people; or when the
government begins to critize the freest press the world has ever known for
not telling the truth. When men of authority and their institutions, their
courts, legislative bodies or churches assume the right to say what is true -—
on behalf of other men, something very precious is lost from the fundamental
concept of American Democracy. I have always felt that if we don't like
pornography, for instance, we should boycott those who sell it, pickett
the store, call the owner, complain to the publisher — but we ought to be
very, very careful about granting to someone else the power to determine
what - good, or true, for all the rest of us.

The early Apostles were dealing with a matter, ultimately, of religious
authority. They were nearly stopped by a political group that had assumed
the power to define the truth. They were set free by the very wise counsel
. of a man who recognized that if what they had to say had validity - it would |
be proven in the hot furnace of human experience. That is to say, if the
Christian Faith has any authority today, it is because it is true, and
whether or not it is true still is determined by human experience.

We live in a time when all kinds of authority finds itself called into
question. Parents, who once, in a long ago and far away world, had authority
over their children because they were parents, suddenly find that there is
no authority apart from truth. Political neti tutions are called into the
same kind of question, and basically it is a very healthy process, so long
as those who are doing the questioning don't assume that they, alone, have
all the truth. In other words, it is legitimate to question whether or not
a University's authority is properly based and properly exercised - but it

is not legitmate to assume that the answer is already known, and that a building

may then be burned down or a computer destroyed.

At the heart of the current authority crises and the mass rebellion
against any constituted authority, I believe, is a serious religious problem.
The Church, after all, claims that it has the truth and therefore an authority.
As individual Christians, we claim to know the truth about God and man, and
God's will for his creation. We further claim that this truth is an ultimate
kind of authority which judges all men whether they agree with it or not.

But is it really true? That is the question now being asked, and with which
we must come to grips.

All to frequently the Church, and individual Christians get nervous,
and threatened whenever anyone asks the question. In response we are inclined
to sing “Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible Tells me so.’ That's
very bad theology - and the fact that the Bible says Jesus loves me really
doesn't do much for the seeker of truth who will then ask - what's the Bible?

Where does religious authority come from? From your experience, and
mine, or it just doesn't exist. And all the talk in the world about God's
infallible word isn't going to make it exist unless you oer I have experienced
its truth in our own lives.

How do we know the Bible is the Word of God ~ and therefore true - and
therefore an authority for us? Not because a Sunday School teacher or
minister said it was, but only because we have found it to be so. Only
because we've stood alone in grief, and heard the words "nothing separates
us from the love of God" = and felt the truth of that. Only becruse we've
felt oppressed, or guilty, or betrayed and heard the words "Come unto me all
ye that lebor and are heavy laden and I will give you,rest," and felt the
truth of those words. Only because we've felt badly about something we've
done and encountered in the Bible the redemptive love of God that accepts
us in spite of what we've done.

How do we lmow that Jesus is the Devine Son of God and therefore the

the ultimate authority in our lives? Not because someone told us, but because
we've experienced it. Because we've looked at the record ~ examined the
alternatives ~— literally tried it on — and found that it was true.

Dr. Thomas Franllyn Hudson has said, "..the pursuit of truth is never
an easy matter. It is not an arm-chair discovery that we make sitting by
the fireside with our pipe <id bedroom slippers. It is wrought only by
struggle, prayer, faith and hard work."

If the Christian Faith has little real authority for you, and I would
submit that this is so for many, may I respectfully suggest that we have
simply assumed its truth wi thot "ever discovering it personally? We have
assumed that all religion means is acceptance of what someone else says is
true.

Our faith will have meaningful authority in our lives when we expose
it to human experience; when we simply —- try it. Gamaliel's words remain
terribly true —

7 VIf this idea is of human origin, it will collapse; but if it

is from God, you will never be able to put them down."

jimen.

Our Father, our faith is that you are the author of all truth. Grant
us the courage and deeper faith to live what we believe: to try our
convictions in our lives. Grant us the assurance that there is freedom

in truth — through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Amen.