Verse 1 of Chapter 4 consists of a transitional statement (the fact that Peter and John were still speaking to the people) and the arrival of those who were concerned about what was happening in the temple.

There is a problem with regard to the statement Peter and John were still speaking to the people, since this might imply in some languages that Peter and John were both saying exactly the same thing, or that they were both speaking at the same time but saying something different. Since the preceding discourse has been attributed directly to Peter, some languages require some such statement as “Peter was still speaking to the people with John at his side” or “Peter, with John helping him, was still speaking to the people.”

Though in the Greek text this transitional material is in a participial construction and the following clause is the independent clause, it is quite necessary in a number of instances to shift the structure of the Greek sentence and make the initial portion the independent sentence, while the second clause becomes the dependent portion. There are important stylistic reasons for this type of shift, for if the first clause began with “when,” it would seem to imply that something was anticipated.

Some manuscripts read, “chief priests” (see New English Bible) rather than priests. However, the word for “chief priest” occurs 122 times in the New Testament, while the word for “priest” is used only 31 times. Accordingly, it is more likely that a scribe would substitute the more frequently used word for the less frequent word. Moreover, the reading “chief priests” seems to be an attempt by a scribe to heighten the seriousness of the persecution.

A number of different expressions for priest are used in various languages. The important thing is that this be a term to designate a professional religious functionary. All so-called “world religions” have their priestly castes or groups. In so-called animistic societies there may, however, be difficulty in obtaining a satisfactory word for priest. In some instances the closest equivalent is the shaman or the medicine man. In other instances it may be important to have some type of descriptive phrase as “the one who sacrifices” or “the one who functions in the house of God.”

The officer in charge of the temple guards was himself a priest and the highest officer in the temple, ranking second only to the High Priest. In many languages the equivalent of temple guards is simply the “policemen of the temple.”

The Sadducees (mentioned also in 5.17 and 23.6, 7, 8) were a religious party among the Jews composed largely of priests. They were in some respects a very conservative group, and, as the text indicates, did not believe in the resurrection of the dead. For the term Sadducees it is essential that some type of transliteration be employed. However, a brief explanation of the sect of the Sadducees should be contained in a glossary.

In some languages great care is exercised in indicating the composition of a group. For example, if one says “the priests” and “the Sadducees” this would mean all the priests and all the Sadducees. One must, therefore, employ a type of partitive construction in some languages and say “some of the priests” and “some of the Sadducees.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Acts of the Apostles. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .