Rather,
“We must,” with a sense of moral compulsion (cf.
ch. 1:16). This is an even plainer statement of the argument previously used by Peter and John (
ch. 4:19), with a yet greater stress upon the fact that they could not do other than choose to obey God, regardless of consequences. They had the command of Jesus in the Great Commission, and the challenge to be witnesses for Him (
ch. 1:8), and more lately, the explicit command of the angel (
ch. 5:20). Jesus had laid down the principle that both Caesar and God were to be obeyed. Caesar must be obeyed in respect to what is his due, and God in respect to what is His due (
Matt. 22:21). But the Christian cannot serve two masters (
Matt. 6:24; Luke 16:13). Since only one master can receive ultimate allegiance, that master must be God. This basic principle Peter is making very clear. Just as the leaders of the Sanhedrin had not deigned to mention the name of Jesus, so Peter does not set their names in the wording of this principle. He simply says
“men,” even such men of authority as those before whom he is standing. He regards the members of the Sanhedrin as men who once were agents of God, but who have now lost sight of their duty to God.