<p>4:13 <i>Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and had perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they realised that they had been with Jesus<em>- </em></i>The Jews looked at Peter and John &ldquo;and they took knowledge of them i.e. recognized them, as the girl had recognized Peter, that they both had been with Jesus&rdquo;. This is the very language of those who accused Peter of having &lsquo;been with Jesus&rsquo;. John learnt his lesson, and came out more publicly, at Peter&rsquo;s side, inspired by his equally repentant friend. It&rsquo;s an altogether lovely picture, of two men who both failed, one publicly and the other privately, together side by side in their witness, coming out for the Lord. They saw their &ldquo;boldness&rdquo;, and realised they had been with Jesus; for the very same Greek word is used in description of the Lord&rsquo;s &ldquo;boldness&rdquo; in witness (Mk. 8:32; Jn. 7:26; 11:14; 16:25,29; 18:20), and on the cross (Col. 2:15). Peter was an uneducated fisherman. Who was he to appeal to Jerusalem&rsquo;s intelligentsia? He was mocked as speaking <em>a-grammatos</em>, without correct grammar and basic education even in his own language (Acts 4:13; AV &ldquo;unlearned&rdquo;). The way his two letters are so different in written style can only be because he wrote through a scribe (2 Peter is actually in quite sophisticated Greek). So most likely he couldn&rsquo;t write and could hardly read. So humanly speaking, he was hardly the man for the job of being the front man for the preaching of the new ecclesia. But not only did his Lord think differently, but his own depth of experience of God&rsquo;s grace and appreciation of the height of the Lord&rsquo;s exaltation became a motivating power to witness which could not be held in. We all know that the way God prefers to work in the conversion of men is through the personal witness of other believers. We may use adverts, leaflets, lectures etc. in areas where the Gospel has not yet taken root, with quite some success. But once a community of believers has been established, the Lord seems to stop working through these means and witness instead through the personal testimony of His people. We all know this, and yet for the most part would rather distribute 10,000 tracts than swing one conversation around to the Truth, or deliberately raise issues of the Gospel with an unbelieving family member. If we recognize this almost natural reticence which most of us have, it becomes imperative to find what will motivate us to witness as we ought, <em>a-grammatos</em> or not. The fact they spoke <em>a-grammatos</em>&nbsp;(Gk.), without proper grammar, the fact they weren't humanly speaking the right men for the job... all this meant nothing to them. The height of the Lord's exaltation and the salvation this enabled just had to be shared with others.</p><p>Peter&rsquo;s confidence in preaching to the wise of this world in his <em>a-grammatos</em> way is continued in the way his letters stress that the only true knowledge is that of Christ (2 Pet. 1:5,6; 3:18). He was writing in response to the Gnostic heresy that <em>gnosis</em>, knowledge, enlivens the eternal spark within man until a man&rsquo;s knowledge becomes his &lsquo;immortal soul&rsquo;. Peter didn&rsquo;t leave this for the more erudite to combat. Like an illiterate peasant farmer unashamedly challenging atheistic evolution, Peter powerfully made his point.</p><p>The credibility of a person depended not so much on them but upon their status and place in society- thus the witness of women, slaves, children and poor people was discounted. We see it happening in the way that the preaching of Peter and John was dismissed by the elders because they were of low social status (Acts 4:13). And yet these were the <em>very</em> types of people which the Lord Jesus used as His star and key witnesses in the very beginnings of Christianity</p><p>There was something about Peter and his fellow fishermen which made even the most unsympathetic make a mental note (&quot;took knowledge&quot; AV) that they had been with Jesus of Nazareth. This was the fulfilment of Jn. 13:35, which using the same root word, teaches that the (Jewish) world would &quot;know&quot; the twelve as the Lord's men <em>if they reflected His love</em>. So there must have been something in the love that somehow shone between those men as they stood there before that court, which in a manner impossible to describe, revealed them as Christ's. This same, difficult-to-describe sense will exude from every one who is the Lord's, in whatever context we are in.</p><p><em>&ldquo;Been with Jesus&rdquo; recalls </em>&ldquo;You also shall bear witness, because you have been with me from the beginning&rdquo; (Jn. 15:27). It was exemplified in Acts 4:13, where it was apparent from the nature of the disciples&rsquo; preaching that they &ldquo;had been with Jesus&rdquo;. To be with the Lord, to have experience of Him, meant that one would witness to Him; such is the true experience of Him that it is axiomatic that it issues in witness. All who have truly known the Lord will witness to Him. And if we don&rsquo;t... do we know Him, have we &ldquo;been with&rdquo; Him...?</p>