Speaking of the traditional Synagogue, one should keep in mind that, both spiritually and religiously, it was by no means homogeneous. Evidence of this is the speech in the Sanhedrin by one of the most famous teachers of the Torah of that time...
Speaking of the traditional Synagogue, one should keep in mind that, both spiritually and religiously, it was by no means homogeneous. Evidence of this is the speech in the Sanhedrin by one of the most famous teachers of the Torah of that time, Gamaliel, who had many disciples, among whom, incidentally, was Shaul, or Saul, the future apostle Paul. Gamaliel belonged to the school of Hillel, one of the two main theological schools of that era; the second was the school of Shammai. Hillel, who lived about two centuries before the events described, focused chiefly on the experience of direct, immediate communion with God, which, as he taught, was available to every seeker, provided that seeker was ready to follow the Torah.
This concerned, of course, not only the external Torah, but also the inner Torah. Hillel was not a religious formalist. He considered thoughtful, prayerful reading of the Torah, continuous inner prayer, and attention to one's inner life, to the intentions that determine the quality and direction of a person's spiritual life, to be central in spiritual life. He certainly did not reject the traditional forms of the Jewish religion, but he regarded them only as a religious shell for the main thing, for spiritual life itself.
Gamaliel also belonged to this school and, judging by the testimony of contemporaries, had absorbed its best features. It was he who spoke in the Sanhedrin in defense of the new movement. Gamaliel himself, of course, was not a Christian, though later Christian circles circulated legends about his conversion to Christ. But he was spiritually sensitive enough to understand that what was involved here was possibly an act of God. And so he advised the temple leadership and the synagogue leaders not to hurry.
Simply leave these new messianists alone and see what would happen next. He also offered a weighty argument in favor of such a decision, pointing to other messianic movements that had come to nothing, and such movements often flared up in Judea in those days. For the authorities this was a no-lose option: if the new movement was like the former ones, it would end on its own; if not... well, then they would have to think about what to do next. For the moment, they did not need to worry. That is what they decided to do: the apostles were punished for formal disobedience to the Sanhedrin's ban on preaching the new sacred name and then released. And they began to watch what would happen next.
5
5:38 Let them alone - In a cause which is manifestly good, we should immediately join. In a cause, on the other hand, which is manifestly evil, we should immediately oppose. But in a sudden, new, doubtful occurrence, this advice is eminently useful. If this counsel or this work - He seems to correct himself, as if it were some sudden work, rather than a counsel or design. And so it was. For the apostles had no counsel, plan, or design of their own; but were mere instruments in the hand of God, working just as he led them from day to day.