And beholding the man which was healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it.
And beholding the man which was healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it.
And seeing the man that was healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it.
And, seeing that the man who had been made well was there with them, they were not able to say anything against it.
And beholding the man who was healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it.
Seeing the man who was healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it.
And seeing the man which was healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it.
They could say nothing against it - They could not gainsay the apostolic doctrine, for that was supported by the miraculous fact before them. If the doctrine be false, the man cannot have been miraculously healed: if the man be miraculously healed, then the doctrine must be true that it is by the name of Jesus of Nazareth that he has been healed. But the man is incontestably healed; therefore the doctrine is true.
They could say nothing ... - The presence of the man that was healed was an unanswerable fact in proof of the truth of what the apostles alleged. The miracle was so public, clear, and decisive; the man that was healed was so well known, that there was no evasion or subterfuge by which they could escape the conclusion to which the apostles were conducting them. It evinced no little gratitude in the man that was healed that he was present on this occasion, and showed that he was deeply interested in what befell his benefactors. The miracles of Jesus and his apostles were such that they could not be denied, and hence, the Jews did not attempt to deny that they performed them. Compare Matthew 12:24; John 11:45-46; Acts 19:36.