Acts 1--4 or 'the apostles teaching'

D

Decoder

This study's name is slightly loose. I don't think we'd even have the expression 'the apostles teaching' (in ch 4) without connection to the 40 days summarized in Luke 24. But after chapter 4 there is not the 'groundsetting' teaching that you have here in the first 3 speeches.

In 7, Stephen's talk moves in a slightly different realm--the current parallels or deja-vu from Israel's ancient history. In 10-11 are the first-hand and reflective remarks by Peter about being sent to talk to Gentiles. These are not the weighty declarations made about...what exactly is going on here as the apostles begin speaking.

In connection with the apostles teaching and the 40 days in another way, there is a bit of a detour for us after starting out. That is to set up a system that organizes how the apostles quoted the OT. The summary of Luke 24 says that Jesus taught them from many sources in the OT, spotlighting that Christ would make a sacrificial sacrifice, and would be glorified.

That system is needed out to Acts 15, where important OT quotes basically stop because the action of Acts itself: Paul seems to deliberately get in an entanglement with Jerusalem Judaism because God has told him he will be taken to the attention of Caesar. From Acts 1-15, there are 20 passages expounded on, and that is the clearest source of what was taught in the 40 days, what was important, and what exact passages.

What I have noticed is that a number of things have been "lodged" in these opening Acts passages. Some of these block the meaning, others are like trailmarkings but have been switched to the opposite, some are simply not seen.

I hope you will join in an attentive and remarkable study.

As the material is first of all very important historic statements, you may not find attention to practical things for yourself. That is a later concern when the source documents are this weighty.

Perhaps the study will deal with a question that you didn't know was there: why is the message of the apostles different from the more direct moral appeal of Christ? Did something change? This have even bothered some believers, as though something foreign was being introduced.

The first questions are very broad, actually 1 question 4 times: summary each chapter in a single line. Imagine each one is a photograph and you are across the room. You want to touch the main features, but maybe a minor one needs to be mentioned:

1:
2:
3:
4:
 
Here are some suggested titles, see the question that ends the post above:
1: Why Acts was written and why there needed to be another apostle
2: The enthroned King's Spirit kickstarts His mission
3: A miracle from the enthroned King to compel Israel to work in His mission, not be ruined through neglect of that mission
4: Thousands believe in spite of opposition to the King by rulers and authorities

*It helps to keep tying the opening of Acts to the mission of the King/kingdom.

Read ch 1.

v1-4. Whoever needed Acts needed to know an all around description and history of the movement, which we call the church . It is not just written directly to you the reader, to help you believe. It is a step detached from that, even though it tells you all you need on that.

From my research (Regent College, Vancouver Canada), I came to the conclusion that Theophilus was going to be representing Paul in Roman, and maybe Judean, hearings. I don't think they knew where exactly by the time it was finished. In ch 16, Luke starts speaking as though part of Paul's traveling ministry. The burning issue to the two kinds of administrators was slightly different. In Judea, it would be whether Paul was tearing down the Law (13:45), but they had some concern that he was also a poor representative of Jews and possibly ruining Jews' place in the Roman world. They went along with Caesar-theology, and hissed that Paul said there was another king (17:7).

For Rome, what would their concern be? It was whether Paul was part rumors of Jewish revolt. (21:38). These would be the current or recent ones, starting with the Galilean uprising about the census (5:37), not a century earlier resulting in a hired kings (the Herods) to run the territory and keep up a central temple.

1:7--8. These rumors of revolt should provide us a clue as to what is setting right inside the opening exchanges of Acts, which is that Jesus hushed any talk of a kingdom in Israel. (1:7) This was important because the text would mentioned a Roman administrative term 'authority' which was to be handed over to the Twelve. Rome wanted to know what that was about.

1:9--11. Likewise it is important to see that when the disciples stall as Christ leaves, it is because they expected something to happen. But the angels tell them He would be back the same way--seamlessly, unexpected. There is nothing in this line that hints of overwhelming force against Rome. It doesn't have anything in it about the 2nd coming. But they were supposed to be together back in the city, waiting for that hand-over of authority. That hand-over would launch the mission.

OT quotes
In the opening post, I mentioned there are some 20 OT quotes by the time you get through Acts 15. That's the episode where the group nearly breaks in two. These quotations show us what exactly was taught during the 40 days from the Resurrection to Pentecost, summarized in Lk 24:25+ as the topics 'the suffering of Christ for the forgiveness of sins and His being preached to the nations.' There is no way to understand the Christian movement without completely absorbing what happened there. The result may be a different message about Christ than you expected.

So keep this in mind: even after all the ministry and statements by Jesus, there is a 40 day period of teaching without much detail. (The details come later).

The first quote however is only about the issue of the replacement of the loss of Judas. It turns out even that detail was mentioned in OT passages, which would be assuring to the Eleven about such things.


Discuss:
1. why did it matter where the Christian movement sat among all the other groups and events of the day?
2. Is there any other source for what Jesus taught for the 40 days--other than the earliest teachings of the apostles in Acts?
 
Discuss:
1. why did it matter where the Christian movement sat among all the other groups and events of the day?
2. Is there any other source for what Jesus taught for the 40 days--other than the earliest teachings of the apostles in Acts?

1. It's very important to know 'who's who' in the 1st century world. We would want to know what relation Jesus had to those seeking the violent overthrow of Roman occupation. We would want to know that Acts is a vital document because monitoring revolt was a real question in most border states of Rome.

2. There is one other source--the difficult pieced-together chronology of Paul. The best answer from him is the 13 years spent in isolation, much of that in Arabia. But then how would we know whether he was that similar to the apostles? We would find his earliest material and compare. This is Galatians 3-4 and Acts 13's sermon and its dozen quotes. We find that these are actually quite similar choices to the apostles in Acts 2--4.

Paul may have been present when all the events of Christ came to a head (2 Cor 5:16--he already knew of Christ in the ordinary sense, the chronological events). And he was around for Pentecost, and of course for the death of Stephen.

But I think when Paul heard Peter (or bits of) he was stunned by the way the OT was quoted. This is what had to be re-set, re-programmed. When the council says of the apostles that 'these were unschooled men,' it is not quite what is meant. They had definitely been trained! That meant 'no one here knows which of our rabbis had trained these guys; they have been trained by someone outside our usual circles.' Exactly. It was extremely difficult for the council to realize that there was a work-up of OT quotes outside their system, and Christocentric.

I recently heard another NT scholar (in a secular setting) say nothing about the 40 days. He 'works' in the literary issues of a text. But the 40 days was not a factor at all as he spoke of how the NT was assembled.

Categorizing OT quotes
Read Acts 2

We now want to do a bit of housekeeping because OT quotes are going to start coming fast and thick.

My class on this material uses the following chart, which I will try to attach.
It has these column headings:
OT QuoteIn Acts# timesMeaning

You will need a version that marks OT quotes clearly. NIV, NET. The footnotes tell you where they came from.

Here are 4 that fail: ESV, NKJV, NRSV, NASB 1995. This last one does still use the CAPS for OT quotes, but doesn't tell you where in footnotes, at least not online. (These failed ones may work in print versions.)

The first column is just a number count. There will be 19. This is number 1.
The "OT Quote" is where you would write the reference from the OT. I suggest get familiar enough with the passage that you know it just by title and chapter #. The first will be Joel 2. You don't need the verses.
The "In Acts" column is where this is used in Acts. The first several will be Acts 2. Again planning on getting familiar enough that you are 'seeing' this each time you read. The verse details are not important, as much as the summary, which is a creative task that can keep improving.
The "# of times" will usually be once, but it's important to know those that repeat. Roman numerals would help. Joel 2 is just once.
The "meaning" is best done in pencil if you are not filling in online. It is a very important skill--to say something exact in limited space. A good summary so far: We are in the last days. You aren't trying to summarize all of Acts 2 here, just what meaning the Joel 2 quote has--what did it contribute?

Discuss:
1. If you were going to mention the Spirit in the summary, what would you say?
2. One modern Bible teacher said Peter was mistaken here. What does that mean?
3. What difference does the 40 days make about the "apostle's teaching"?
 

Attachments

  • NT use of OT sheet.pdf
    71.9 KB · Views: 0
Discuss:
1. If you were going to mention the Spirit in the summary, what would you say?
2. One modern Bible teacher said Peter was mistaken here. What does that mean?
3. What difference does the 40 days make about the "apostle's teaching"?

1. Here's one example: "The Spirit is poured out as prophets said of the last days."
2. The teacher thought that the events of Pentecost, of Acts 2--4, were not the coming of the kingdom. He thought that Jesus was offering a kingdom of Israel, if they accepted it, but that by ch 4 you can tell from quoting Ps 2, that Israel had not accepted. So Peter was wrong in the sense of being pre-maturely excited. I do not think this is what happened, but the desire to 'fit in a kingdom for Israel' is very strong; it's even in the minds of the disciples! (1:7).
3. The apostle's teaching was formed there. The 20 passages they will quote were learned from Jesus during that. They are mostly not taught that way elsewhere/earlier by Jesus. Most of them are also what Paul will teach, as we see from Gal 3 and Acts 13's sermon.

Joel 2 according to Peter in Acts 2
Read the part of Acts 2 that quotes or explains Joel 2

Peter gives us a heads up what Joel 2 means. It means that the Spirit came as one of several passages by the prophets said. The day when God would pour out His Spirit had now come as part of the end of time.

Before we check into what that means, let us notice one other thing about the unusual event that is not often mentioned. If you had 120 people all speaking at one time but in some 20 languages, and they are up on a 2nd story, and the audience is those walking by below, the normal result would be a cacophany of sound. So go back in the description, and you will find the initial sound is not the languages first. It is a violent wind from heaven.

It is miraculous enough that the various languages were heard distinctly. But let's not forget this part of the miracle: that all there was was a violent wind, and God communicated with each person in his own language. This event was thus the undoing of what happened at Babel. The content of this message about Jesus Christ was so important that the first message to all the world at once was being given by God through the Spirit: that Christ had sacrificed for sins and been raised to the status of Lord and Messiah, the one honored as the Son in Psalms yet to be mentioned. This was a remarkable day.

There are then other things to notice about Peter identifying this as the pouring out. It is also a time of certain cataclysms as signs although not as destructions. He mentions clouds, fires, earthquakes. These things were indeed taking place through this time period of the climax of Christ's ministry and now after the resurrection. And more were to come. At the end of ch 4's prayer, the ground was shaken.

Those who had the Spirit in this time would see visions and prophesy (the act of). We can also find these things in Acts.

All of the above were meant to result in one thing it seems: to cause people to call upon the Lord so that they would be saved. In other words, they were meant to break down the hardness of heart in people so that they would not ignore God at work outside of normal daily events, but realize He wanted their attention and new things were underway.


Discuss:
1. Babel was the last event before the Bible focused on Abraham and his descendants out of all the various descendants of Noah. Their languages were confused. This event of Pentecost is the first event since that time for all the world. How was the language-curse overcome and what does that mean for the world?
2. Is there anything about this event that 'terminates' only in Israel? Or do you see anything that shows that it was meant to spread everywhere?
 
(If you feel like this study is pretty deep water, just read the section 5x and then come back to the comments and questions).
 
Discuss:
1. Babel was the last event before the Bible focused on Abraham and his descendants out of all the various descendants of Noah. Their languages were confused. This event of Pentecost is the first event since that time for all the world. How was the language-curse overcome and what does that mean for the world?
2. Is there anything about this event that 'terminates' only in Israel? Or do you see anything that shows that it was meant to spread everywhere?

1. The language curse was overcome by the Spirit of God. Now that Christ was raised and enthroned, God was rewarding Christ with something that would publicize him around the world. The visitors in Jerusalem who came to the Pentecost feast would return home all around the Roman empire. It wouldn't take long before the unusual event of Pentecost was a topic, and soon after, the sacrifice of Christ. We are simply told that there was a sound of a rushing wind and out of that all these people could hear the message, and additionally that each individual would hear it in their own native language.

2. The visitors would have gone home, all around the Roman empire, and spoken of it. But we sort of knew that from the descriptions of the Christian mission's scope in Luke 24 or Matthew 28 or again in Acts 1--the Jerusalem to Samaria to Judea and the ends of the earth sequence. And it did. It was certainly kick-started and that's why we have today's churches as well.

The Undefeatable Holy One
Read Acts 2:22--28

Well, we now know that Peter had explained the unusual event, now he has to back up to why the Spirit was doing this--spreading a message all around the world. So he takes on the next important passage from the 40 days, Ps 16. This is a description of God's anointed Servant who could not be decayed by death. He had been a human and righteous substitute, and for that, he was raised up safely from death.

Individual believers will also be raised from death, but in this case there was a person acting as substitute for us all. He was at God's side to start and he would be restored to that.

There are many Psalms which should be read this way. Ps 22--24 are 3 in 3 stages of Christ's suffering and glory. We might even hazard some self-pity if we think they are about us first, about our suffering.

Many of these are by David, and God was giving him insight into Christ through them. Yet Peter knows that he must distinguish between David as the subject of such Psalms and as the writer. That's the next thing Peter will do when speaking of this feature of the Psalms.
 
Last edited:
So Ps 16 is #2 of some 20 passages which the apostles referenced when they spoke. You can enter this on the spreadsheet attached. The summary or meaning is that Christ was the righteous person whom death could not defeat.

Peter's multiple attention to proof
Read 2:22--36

In this reading, we will not pay attention to the action, or even the OT quotes. Instead, let's notice something else addressed numerous times by Peter. It is called proof or demonstration: I will list the 1st and then you can find others. By the end, you might even think Peter was obsessed with proof! No need for complete sentences here, just phrases that pertain to proof about Christ. HInt: there are 4 in a row, and then you have to go do down several verses for the next one.

#1: v22: "a man clearly attested to you."
#2:
#3:
#4:
#5:
#6:

Now let's notice something about the overall soundness or rationality of the apostle's teaching. Obviously the 40 Days is where it all came from. They did not derive their teachings by just isolated prayer on their own. They didn't invent anything. It was all a matter of accounting for what had just taken place.

Now here is Peter also appealing to people rationally: he points 6 times to things they all knew had just taken place, including the immediate use of the "wind" of the Spirit. This is going to be quite important, because the next major doctrine that Peter will unload on his listeners is not visible. Certainly the resulting work of the Spirit is (it just took place), as he said in v33. That 'pouring out' is the sign in this world that something had just taken place in heaven, which will be our next lesson.
 

Attachments

  • NT use of OT sheet.pdf
    71.9 KB · Views: 0
Yesterday's assignment was to find expressions about proof in Acts 2:22--36. Starting with
#1: v22: "a man clearly attested to you."

The hint was there would be 4 in a row, and they are all in v 22.

#2: by powerful deeds, wonders and signs.
You could say this is the same as above, but Peter found it necessary to elaborate.

#3: that God performed among you.
By this time, you might say, 'well, obviously' but again Peter found it necessary to add this on to the two above.

#4: just as you yourselves know
We made it through v22! Now Peter has really closed the loop! There is a rabbinnic saying that to truly know what one person is saying to another, it has to be said 3x and asked about each time, 'what do you mean?' It would seem Peter has done this, telling the listeners that they know all this is true.

All of this is very different from 'people have to work out their own truth.' Peter was saying this was the objective truth of Christ; that there was only one explanation for what happened recently with Christ and now the Spirit. But there is more!

#5: v32: 'we are witnesses of this fact.'
The apostles were witnesses of the empty tomb of Christ, that there was no human power that overcame the sentry of 4 soldiers who stood to lose their lives for failure to guard the tomb. But there is more to what Peter is saying. Let us also note that 'witnessing' in modern times is first thought of as an activity for people able to stir up lots of will-power. This is not what Peter meant, and we could be weakening our effect. The first sense is that we have a collection of astonishing information. We have looked at the original questions and it lines up to one explanation. It also provides the listener with justification from their sins, for which each of our neighbors stands in need.

Peter is not simply saying the body is raised. Vs 30-31 are an explanation that when David spoke of the future enthronement, he meant the resurrection. This involves 2 OT passages for our list, and we will return to that. Simply put: David foresaw the enthronement and spoke of the resurrection. This has further proof because the Spirit was given, which is the publicity of the successful enthronement.

#6: v33 'the Spirit, which you both see and hear.'
We can now say the question of the event of the Spirit is now a closed matter. What began with people complaining about drinking way too early in the day, was now concluded to be the publicizing agent that Jesus Christ had been enthroned as the ancient texts had said, because the Spirit was a gift to Christ to honor him. Those were actual languages from all over the earth, and there was a way that each person became dialed in. 'You both see and hear this.' This is important as I said above because no one can see Christ seated on the throne of heaven. While the apostle's teaching is highly rational on many things, this is not something humans can see. But they can see the broadcasting technique ordained by God and now underway: the Spirit event will be talked about all through the world where all these visitors return.

Discuss:
1. A statement by Jesus in John 13-17 says 'the Spirit will not speak of himself, but will take of my things and glorify Me.' What does that mean?
2. In v33: who received the promise of the Spirit?
 
Discuss:
1. A statement by Jesus in John 13-17 says 'the Spirit will not speak of himself, but will take of my things and glorify Me.' What does that mean?
2. In v33: who received the promise of the Spirit?

1. The role of the Spirit is not attention to himself! The problem today is we are rather carefree and general excitement for God is considered 'the Spirit.' So we have dozens of Christian 'hit' songs that call for the Spirit to work, or claim the Spirit's work, but the lyrics do so apart from 'my things' (the accomplishment of God in Christ). Or the historic accomplishments are not meant; what is meant is some recovery from an addiction, for ex.

Another guidance on this comes from Galatians 3's opening: Did the Spirit work among you because the Gospel was preached or because of your keeping the law/Torah? Here we see that there is a telltale connection between the declaration of the historic truths (Christ was graphically presented to you) and the Spirit's work.

My task in this study of Acts 1--4 is to clear up many mis-connections and mis-understandings that are very popular. I have collected 5-10 'explanations' of the 40 Days by national radio teachers, etc., yet they differ signficantly from what Acts actually says. The same is true of the Spirit. I have come to the conclusion that there is almost no interest in what actually happened! The modern belief is that God just 'works.'

2. This question is not a departure from above. If we look carefully at what Acts is saying, we might be astonished to learn that the essential idea of the Spirit's coming is not to us--only because it is a gift to Christ, an award to Him, to publicize Him around the world.

The subject of v32 is Christ. Christ received the gift of the Spirit which declares and exhibits Him to the world. I am aware of 'I will give you another comforter' yet this is not the uppermost understanding of what happened in Pentecost. To 'pour out' a gift is to share freely in a celebration of a victory (compare 'to break out the champagne') and this is because most of what we will find in Acts 2--4 is about the ongoing celebration of the victorious accomplishment of Christ.

This will be such an important 'vision' of heaven, that when Peter announces that God wants to send Jesus to Israel, he means the Spirit's work, because he says that and follows with Jesus must be honored and celebrated. Peter did not set up a contradiction but a completion. This is a teaser of what is coming in next lessons.


The Enthronement
Read 2:30-31

It is very important to either diagram these two verses or know what questions there are to be diagrammed.

It starts with a passage from Samuel. If you have an NET open, it will not be formally in bold, but it is in italics. The notes tell you this is Ps 132:11 and 2 Sam 7:12-13. So those are you next two entries in your spreadsheet. They are both about the coming Davidic king (you might say one is saying David 'prefigures' Christ). Prefigures are not always exact.

This is a very important point. Simply because there is an announcement of a a future king like David does not mean identicality. We find this Daniel 2 about the kingdom of God. It is said to arrive in the Roman period, but it is not said to be a kingdom like any of the other structures in the vision. In fact, it does not even have the form of a man (notice the bizzarre reaction of the Babylonian king immediately after this is to try to build an image 10x normal human size--of a human form). Instead it is an accumulation of soil or dirt 'that becomes the largest mountain in the world.' In terms of the vision, this is a total departure. You might even say it is a reconstitution of the preceding kingdoms because they are all smashed to dust in the process. This is the happy news of God's wonderful kingdom which has arrived in Christ.

In this same shift of structure, Peter says David foresaw this arrival, and spoke of the resurrection of Christ. The "this" which was foreseen was the seating or enthronement. It was now fulfilled in Christ--in his resurrection, to be exact. This raised Christ in victory and celebration, and was the completion of Ps 110 about David's 'my Lord' who was granted the right hand of God, and a footstool under his feet, destined to be destroyed one day.

Discuss:
1. Read the two verses several times until the 'diagram' (inner connections) are all settled in your mind. They do not refer to anything outside or future. All the connections are clarified: David saw something future; he was speaking of Christ's resurrection; the verses used above from Ps 16 will be re-used.
 
Discuss:
1. Read the two verses several times until the 'diagram' (inner connections) are all settled in your mind. They do not refer to anything outside or future. All the connections are clarified: David saw something future; he was speaking of Christ's resurrection; the verses used above from Ps 16 will be re-used.

A diagram of 30-31 is essentially:
Subject: Verb: Direct Object(s)
David Spoke (Us)
\being a prophet \Of Christ's Resurrection
\Foresaw enthronement \neither abandoned in Hades
\nor decayed bodily


OT Quote Chart Update
Ps 132, 2 Sam 7 and Ps 16 all need to be listed as the next OT Quotes by the Apostles on your charts. The first pair about declarations that a king would be enthroned. Ps 16 was used earlier: the Righteous One from God overcame death and was honored by God for His victory.

The Apostle's Paradigm
Read 2:33--36

A paradigm shift is when a fundamental reality is so altered for a population that all their thinking must be reset. Modern historians act this way about Darwin's thesis, but it was a flawed fraud. The modern environmental movement said that only when photographs came back to earth from Apollo missions did the world start to think of 'saving' the earth. These are not differences of efficiency. For example, books were hand-copied until Gutenberg, but they were still books whether Gutenberg could produce 1000 per week or only 1. These are differences of thinking.

What the apostles said was a paradigm shift for Judaism as well as the world. It was a conception of the world about which neither Judaism nor Roman 'theology' (beliefs about its divine Caesars) had any recourse. The apostle's said this world was now Christ's because God had made Jesus Christ and Lord. They weren't asking anyone. They weren't offering this to you to "help" you in your life. This was now the utmost fact of the world. If Christians mention these titles or terms in any other sense (as though it was a private question), they are not representatives of Christ, His kingdom nor his mission.

C. S. Lewis once wrote: "Many preachers sound as though they were offering to the world the latest patent medicine; but the Christian message is actually a delivery of facts about the world, whether it helps the person or not." --"Man or Rabbit" in GOD IN THE DOCK.

The declaration had "teeth" to it, and this is introduced by Ps 110, perhaps the most important Messianic declaration of the Bible. We are told that because of His accomplishment, Messiah gets to sit down at the side of God and await the day when His enemies are made a foot cushion. So we now want to add Ps 110 to our OT quotes chart.

How did this touch on the messianic beliefs of Judaism at the time? Very simply, those in Jerusalem and those in Galilee had opposing beliefs about the same outcome. In Jerusalem, people connected with Herod's temple operations wanted eventual relief from Roman occupation, but believed it to be entirely miraculous. Generally the wealthier Jews there had this mindset. They tolerated the paganism of Rome to secure the temple as is. They 'worshipped God day and night, awaiting the promise,' Acts 26.

The Galileans followers of Judaism were generally disapproving of Herod's temple, of Roman occupation, and of a passive/miraculous view of messianic answers. They believed in action. You may have noticed that Jesus reached out to include a couple of them to change them. When you read passive language by Jesus (blessed are the meek), it is mostly directed to these people. When you read that people in Jerusalem are concerned about there being Galileans in the city or following Jesus, they are concerned about confrontations with Rome. At the time of the census (6 AD) there was a failed uprising by a Judas the Galilean, so if you were named Judas and Galilean and following Jesus, you were a liability twice.

So what the apostles said in Acts 2 was a challenge to both groups or sides. And its affect on Rome was yet to be tapped.

Discuss:
1. Can you put the Lewis quote in your own words? Have you evaluated your teachers as to whether they 'limit' their teaching to what helps people, or do they lead people toward that which is true simply because it extols Christ the King?
2. Find details in Jesus' ministry episodes that are examples of the temple faith vs the rebellious faith of those outside Jerusalem.
 
Discuss:
1. Can you put the Lewis quote in your own words? Have you evaluated your teachers as to whether they 'limit' their teaching to what helps people, or do they lead people toward that which is true simply because it extols Christ the King?
2. Find details in Jesus' ministry episodes that are examples of the temple faith vs the rebellious faith of those outside Jerusalem.

1. Speaking of Lewis/Narnia... LW&W essentially tells us that this place is Christ's, that those who believe otherwise are perpetuating rumors... In my exposure to national Christian radio teachers/speakers, it has been years since I heard someone proclaim that this world belongs to Christ; they would much rather make a qualification, or tell you about a future day (a millenium), or say 'Christ reigns in heaven' (as though that meant very much to the operators of our government institutions.).

2. Jn 11:47--57. It certainly seems that Caiaphas only meant that the temple faith could get rid of a person who hazarded the whole temple arrangement with Rome, but then John clearly says it was a death for the salvation of all who would believe, throughout the world, and a prophecy of that. Notice the remarks about people from the countryside, the tension between their excitement and the temple staff.

Jn 12:34. Notice here that what Jesus says is a challenge to the crowds from the country. They expected a king who would stay forever, not one who was lifted up in a crucifixion. This was not the first time people from the country said this, and the temple leaders had already said 'this crowd knows nothing at all.' Cp. 6:14, 15.


Inventory of the Apostles' Teaching through the End of the 1st Public Statement
Please see your chart of OT Quotes By the NT. You should now have 5 summary statements about the meaning of such quotes.

The quotes are:
Joel 2
Ps 16
Ps 132 with 2 Samuel 7
Ps 16 again
Ps 110

Here is a combined summary altogether in a paragraph:
The recent events of the amazing signs and wonders and now the Spirit of God mean these are the end of time the prophets spoke about. God's promised Righteous One came, died and has been raised from death for all who believe. The raising or resurrection was expected in Psalms and the prophet Samuel. It was the enthronement moment of Israel's King--even expected by David the king and prophet. Only the 'Righteous One' could be this King; David's body is in a tomb in Jerusalem. This enthronement (seating ceremony by God the Father) was a declaration in Christ's honor. All his enemies will one day be smashed and made his foot cushion. The Spirit is already making these announcements throughout the world.

Let's do all this another way, taking the last statement by Peter and working backward. "God has made Jesus...Lord and Christ/Messiah." Here we have the Father doing something in human space and time (he resurrected Christ). This resurrection 'made' (amounted to, declared) that Jesus (who had been brutally rejected) was the 'Lord' figure of Ps 110, and thus was the Messiah who was meant to reign.

It is very important to see that these are the settled apostle's doctrines right out of the chute. They might supply some more details, but these will all be there, going forward. More miracles might be mentioned by Jesus, before and after his death. Also the blame for his death will be laid at both Judaism's and Rome's feet. But these do not change what we have above.

Discuss:
1. Do you find any emphasis by the apostles that any external sign means a kingdom is in place? That is, do they 'claim a building' or an office or even claim to be a replacement government?

2. In v38 the gift of the Spirit is now offered in a more individual sense. So far, the Spirit's work had been explained as part of the fame-spreading of Jesus. What do you think the 3000 who believed expected of the Spirit?
 
Discuss:
1. Do you find any emphasis by the apostles that any external sign means a kingdom is in place? That is, do they 'claim a building' or an office or even claim to be a replacement government?

2. In v38 the gift of the Spirit is now offered in a more individual sense. So far, the Spirit's work had been explained as part of the fame-spreading of Jesus. What do you think the 3000 who believed expected of the Spirit?

1. One element the apostles seem to have shared with Pharisees was legit: God would act in his own time. See the reminder of this by Gamaliel in Acts 5. He told the temple leaders not to fight the apostles at risk of fighting God. If a "kingdom" was going to take place, God would institute it. That is, a government. But that is not what the kingdom of God was about. Besides, the apostles had been corrected about this already in 1:8. They already asked about a kingdom of Israel, and were told it was none of their business, and that royal authority was being given to them. We will study some of these markers in today's lesson. They kept meeting at the temple compound (a huge area) and waited and prayed, speaking to the 3000 new believers about the above doctrines.

2. The activity of the Spirit would be to communicate with those whose 1st language was not Aramaic. (Just to review: written materials were generally in Greek throughout the Rome federal system. In Judea, the Jews had communicated in Aramaic since Babylon. In their synagogues, there was some Hebrew spoken and Scriptures were Hebrew. ) It would be hard to imagine any other 'work' of the Spirit at this point. This has an important OT reference: Isaiah 28 had explained at the future day of the Lord that God would speak to Israel through the languages of other nations. This is found in I Corinthians 14. At first this can seem backward to Pentecost, where Jews were the conduits to other nations. But he means that the miracle of it would be witnessed by Israel as an important sign to them, even though failure was predicted. It is also this quote which Paul uses to sort out anything that is confusing at Corinth about the phenomenon there. He reminds them that this activity is actually loaded with Messianic significance to Israel, to help it see that the time of Messiah's mission had come, in which they were meant to work.


Important 'Markers' Mentioned from the Event of the Resurrection to the 2nd Speech by Peter
Read Luke 24:13--53, Acts 1:1-11, 2:30-31, 3:12--21

Here is a list of waymarkers in the post-Resurrection narrative of Luke that serve as important guides about what is there, and each one will be followed by some examples of unfortunate departure from them, commonly used today.

1. The 40 days were intensive study about OT referring to Christ's suffering that produced forgiveness of sins, and its being preached to the nations. Notice that at the end of this is the endowing with power that would move it along through the Spirit, in both Lk 24 and Acts 1.

What we should notice here is that they were to study, and the Spirit would come at the end. They were not to seek the Spirit at the beginning, without the study. There is not really 'seeking' anyway.
We should also notice that a 'corner' has been turned in Christ's message. You could go through his longer talks in the Gospels and find him dwelling on this or that ethical problem. But now the suffering, death and resurrection have occurred. They are now a package to be delivered all over the world.

Misguidances: 1. I have heard very good speakers say 'we don't really know what they did all during these 40 days.' One of them might have been making the additional mistake of trying to answer 'how you get the Spirit to do things.' We should remember that Acts is a narrative of set events. Its first use is not a manual as to how we are to do things.

2. Other very good speakers have basically skipped all of Lk 24, Acts 1, and most of 2 and gone right to the list of results in 2:42+. Oddly enough, the teacher thought it was very important to feature preaching to have 'a church with New Testament results present.' But not what Peter preached! Hard to figure out that one.

Pursuit of 'the plan' for Israel. 1:6 tells us the apostles asked about that, but Jesus was brisk and immediately directed them to the kingdom that was almost there. To be clothed with power, and to be given power, were clearly kingdom activities. They were to pay attention to that, not their questions about Israel.

There is very little else that would be an answer they wanted in Acts. We will see how Acts 3 (the next time Peter talks) is not that. Acts 13 does not provide any. And Acts 26 shows us a temple system trying hard to see a hope fulfilled which is already present in the resurrection of Christ.

Misguidance: It would not line up with this correction by Jesus to spend much time on the question. In the mid-70s, I was able to meet Dr. John Walvoord of Dallas Theological Seminary and ask him why he spent so much time trying to figure out when and how Israel's kingdom was coming (it was the topic of his talk that night) when Acts 1:6-8 directs us otherwise. He said it couldn't possibly mean not to try to find out. I do not agree.

The movement of Jesus in and out of human view. Starting with Lk 24, there are several times when Jesus moves back and forth from heaven to earth. In Acts 1:9, he leaves again, having made a final reminder (now at the end of 40 days of study) that the Spirit's 'clothing' (royal apparel) was just about to arrive. Of course, the 'clothing' was an action, not an object. In fact, many things about the new work of the apostles was that way. You could even say that about "Israel."

But when he leaves again in 1:9, the apostles are 'clingy' expecting something else to happen. Perhaps we can understood that. But the various comings and goings are meant to show us that Jesus has total freedom of movement between spheres. He truly could be there at any time, but did not need to be. And it was about time for the Spirit, who was said to be an additional comforter. So Jesus had every intention of continuing to do things, and having the Spirit's work, and the apostles own work was now just about to start.

The manner. The coming and going of Jesus was just as the previous ones after the Resurrection. He could just appear and could just depart. There is no noise, no cataclysm, no flash of light.

Misguidance: 1:9 is about the 2nd coming. This is driven by the misplaced interest mentioned above. Maybe even the apostles thought a '2nd coming' (of finality) was going to take place! But the angels correct this. They were simply to wait in prayer and celebration of Christ for the moment of the Spirit. 'Looking up at heaven' would not help.

The Enthronement festivities in heaven. The previous lesson on 2:30-31 clearly shows that the resurrection is the seating of Christ in honor and celebration, all prepared for by the Father, filling heaven with music and spectacle about the accomplishment of the Son. 2:32 says the Father exalted him to that throne, and sent out announcement of this accomplishment back to earth through the Spirit. You should see an important theme here: that heaven and earth are being inched closer and closer together so that the apostles and the believers live in terms of the noisy celebration of Christ above, more and more conscious of that as they go about things on earth.

Misguidance: the passage is about a future millenial kingdom. Once again we see a tendency to leave what is throbbing in the passage and detach it to a distant future. It is often said David's kingdom has to be re-instituted as the previous one was, etc. This breaks the power and meaning of the passage. No one listening and impacted by Peter was thinking it meant anything like that.

Because of the length of this study, the more involved markers in 3:20-21 will be in the next lesson, where there is one of the strangest translation confusions I know of.


Discuss:
1. Is any description of the 2nd coming of Christ that of a calm, silent event?

2. True or false: Jesus did many of the same things after the Resurrection as before it, but he didn't walk there (to meet the apostles) or leave the usual way; he just appeared and vanished.
 
Discuss:
1. Is any description of the 2nd coming of Christ that of a calm, silent event?

2. True or false: Jesus did many of the same things after the Resurrection as before it, but he didn't walk there (to meet the apostles) or leave the usual way; he just appeared and vanished.

1. I don't know of any that are calm and silent. Among the features usually listed are:
*the sun will be darkened,
*and the moon will not give its light;
*the stars will fall from heaven,
*and the powers of heaven will be shaken.[ap]
*30 Then[aq] the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven,[ar] and[as] all the tribes of the earth will mourn.
*They[at] will see the Son of Man arriving on the clouds of heaven[au] with power and great glory.
*31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet blast,
--Matthew 24
Just looking quickly, none of this can take very long, either. But clearly it is not the silent appearance or disappearance as Jesus is doing since the Resurrection, and meant to be seen worldwide.

*16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven
*with a shout of command,
*with the voice of the archangel,[t]
*and with the trumpet of God,
*and the dead in Christ will rise first.
--I Thessalonians 4
Obviously, it is not silent, and meant to be witnessed by all the earth.


2. Of course, Jesus did meet up with some disciples in the Luke 24 scene. To "approach and began to accompany them" is not to meet or face them from the opposite, but to catch up. But we are not told that he came from a specific location. And he vanishes at the end. This pretty much matches any other description that is found in the post-resurrection months. Cp. Jn 21, where he is there during a failed fishing outing. Or Acts 9 where we have a light from heaven and then clear instructions in normal language. A flash of light might remind us of the lists above, but otherwise not. Or Acts 23 where the Lord stands by Paul in the middle of the night to support Him.

Review of Acts 2-3s Events
*The Spirit is poured out so that all types of visitors to the festival in Jerusalem can understand the Gospel event (the suffering and resurrection of Christ).
*Jesus has been declared Lord and Messiah by the resurrection. To see how this is a standard priority doctrine of Paul, notice this expression as Romans starts: "Christ was appointed the Son of God in all authority by the resurrection." If your explanation of Christ is not of and through the resurrection, you are misrepresenting HIm.
*Israel is asked to join in this mission of Christ, not to the neglect of 'those far away' but because Peter is standing smack in the middle of Judaism, and the temple. And as Christ said, the mission would move out from there.
*So far 5 OT passages have been expounded, and this leads to much discussion so that the first 3000 believers can understand. This group becomes one of many who gather in the huge Herodian Temple complex (sometimes described as a shopping mall) and they share food, songs, encouragement, listen to further teaching, meet other needs, and also meet in some smaller groups for meals and fellowship at home.

So far we should notice that there is no response from Judaism's leaders. Nor has there been a direct appeal. The apostles did not plan anything; it was simply the work of the Spirit to spread to those visiting the festival.

*A paralyzed person is healed in the temple area and this comes to the attention of many at the temple, because he was a donation target when they went. Now he was gone and bringing further attention to the apostles. What Peter notices is that everything thinks the apostles have special powers. That is not the sort of attention Peter wants; he re-directs them all back to Christ.
*Peter then resumes the usual skeletal description of the Gospel event:
The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,[ah] the God of our forefathers,[ai] has glorified[aj] his servant[ak] Jesus,
whom you handed over and rejected[al] in the presence of Pilate after he had decided[am] to release him.
14 But you rejected[an] the Holy and Righteous One and asked that a man who was a murderer be released to you.
15 You killed[ao] the Originator[ap] of life, whom God raised[aq] from the dead. To this fact we are witnesses![ar]
16 And on the basis of faith in Jesus’[as] name,[at] his very name has made this man—whom you see and know—strong.

Now recall the end of Peter's speech in ch 2: there is an appeal to Israel to repent of wrongdoing, but also to join the group, which is to say, join the mission--because the apostles never think of their group as a 'destination' but rather as a thing that was going to expand everywhere. We find this in the next verses. And it should be encouraging for them (Jews) to know that God knew this rejection would happen and could be reversed.

If they positively respond to this, to these messages, God will send Jesus. It is quite clear from the information we have so far about the overall mission of the apostles, that such a sending is not the "2nd coming." Once again, that has far too much of our attention. Instead this 'sending' results in 'times of refreshing' for Israel because it actually accomplishes what the prophets said was the mission all along.

The mission to the nations was never some 'hidden' message that no one knew about. Judaism even had missionaries! (Matt 23). But no one in Judaism knew quite how the thing was to get going. Well, they should now!

Back to the sending, we can see from this verb and the next that we have to combine or dovetail two things that look different at first--but that's just a translation problem. "God will send Jesus...who must be honored until all things are restored..." This is very important and strange (the translation problem is strange) and I will take time to make it clear.

Please recall from ch 2 that the honoring of Jesus is a huge theme in what Peter said. He picks out some verbs from the OT quotes he uses, but also the Spirit event itself is a publicizing of Christ. The Spirit was a gift from the Father to Christ to honor Christ all through the world for his abusive suffering--for his resilience through it all.

So now we can turn to 'dexasthai' in v21. Its cognate form is 'dechomai' to recieve, accept, welcome. Notice the agent that is acting in the sentence: heaven. Peter means the whole ensemble up there has to hold a party or reception in honor of Jesus Christ. As you may have noticed, the Christian fellowship was mirroring that! It comes with an endpoint that was already mentioned in Ps 110: 'be enthroned beside me until I make your enemies your footrest.' So Christ now sits in honor as agent for the Father, and one day (on earth) the enemies of Christ will be smashed and subject to him so he can rest his legs.

If we reduced 'dechomai' to bare roots, it is means to be placed on the right ('dex'), just like the alternate line in Ps 110 had said: 'sit at my right hand/place of honor.' In Acts 7:59, Stephen is honored by being taken up in Christ's arms. When people believe the Gospel, they 'dechomai' it. Paul was so honored ('dechomai) by the Galatians, they treated him like an angel, 4:4.

There is one satirical instance: 2 Corinthians 11:16. They had accepted pseudo-apostles. They should not have. But they honored, celebrated, feted them. That's 'dechomai.'

Review: God will send Jesus' times of refreshing to Israel if they join his mission, for Jesus must be honored in a party in heaven until the end of time. This is what Peter is telling the audience.

A horrible misleading line. Somehow among many translations 'dechomai' has been used to mean to keep or restrain. You can go through several translations and see for yourself: some kind of idea that Christ is confined in heaven for a time period is painted. It is nonsense. How does God 'send' Jesus (a direct offer) if he has to be kept away?

There is one sense in which you could restrict or confine: you could say Christ alone is to be honored, that honor must only be given to Christ alone. But none of this comes through in the translations. It is as though Christ is being kept in heaven away from everyone until a future time.

No, Christ is entirely available and does many things to help his mission workers in their work, all through time, too, not just in Acts. God seeks to send Jesus to those in his mission because heaven is honoring him in its loud celebration until the end of time. Indeed the goal is to spread this same mindset all across earth.


Discuss:
1. In 3:13 there is an OT line used commonly in talking about Israel's past. Why would Peter mention it here?

2. The next time after 3:21 'dechomai' is used in Acts is 7:59. Who 'welcomed in honor' whom? Where was the greater person when he welcomed the lesser?
 
Thanks to all for the 500 views, as of today!

Discuss:
1. In 3:13 there is an OT line used commonly in talking about Israel's past. Why would Peter mention it here?

2. The next time after 3:21 'dechomai' is used in Acts is 7:59. Who 'welcomed in honor' whom? Where was the greater person when he welcomed the lesser?

1. The line is "The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob..." As you may know from the OT, this title is always employed when there is an extremely important moment in Israel's history. Especially in Genesis. So again, we must think of the overall remarks of the apostles in these first 3 speeches as foundational for the new act or kingdom or mission of God, not just a one-off evangelistic effort as we might have today with a special speaker.

2. Stephen's speech to Israel's leaders in ch 7 was to draw unfortunate parallels between their rejection of the apostles and ancient failures in Israel. He was treated to piles of rocks. The last thing he saw as a mortal was Jesus Christ standing up (interrupting the big party in heaven...) to welcome him home!

The OT Quotes In Acts 3's Speech
The previous lesson concentrated on the term 'dechomai' (to receive someone in honor and recognition). In v19 God wants to send Jesus the captain of the new mission to the world, because He must be honored down through time, until all his enemies are crushed on the last day. In other words, God is trying to continue what was just started through the Spirit. (This further answers the question about the Spirit offered in 2:38: God is seeking to continue what began in the Spirit, to go to Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and beyond.)

The odd translations of 'dechomai' as 'restrain/keep/hold' are nonsense. This is one of several locations in Lk 24--Acts 4 which are very badly done by many well-known Christian teachers and speakers:
1. The total of 40 days that was spent studying the OT is just as important as all the accounts of Christ's life and miracles etc. Yet almost nothing is made of it.
2. The interest in Israel's kingdom is clipped and replaced by the kingdom authority that will be demonstrated as the apostles speak. This new direction is called 'being clothed' with priestly or royal apparel.
3. The departure of Jesus in 1:9 is not similar to the 2nd coming in any sense, except surprise. The reappearing referred to by the angels there is to the many instances in Acts and beyond of Christ
leveraging his mission work for greater effect.
4. The Davidic enthronement is the resurrection that David saw coming, of which his own was a fading shadow. There is no other grammatical conclusion and there is no future event intended. The proof in our world (since heaven cannot be seen, humanly) is the celebratory spreading of the Spirit which just occurred, which is otherwise inexplicable.

We now list the OT passages Peter will use here.
1. The patriarchal title in 3:13,
2. The new Moses in v22 with its terminal warning.
3. The highly quoted Abrahamic blessing about the Seed.

1. See above for the significance of referring to 'Abraham, Isaac and Jacob...' This event (this launching of the kingdom and mission) was that level, nothing less.

2. We have mentioned that the 'clothing' and 'endowing' images have been used by Christ about the events here. Now we learn that something as great as Moses has come and has made declarations that cannot be ignored. That would be Christ. There are actually two passages used: Deuteronomy 18 and Leviticus 23.

Deuteronomy is a re-telling of the Law, but we should not miss that it also predicts certain things about the faith community of Israel. For ex., the failure to keep Torah will result in horrible conditions and captivity. The new Moses theme builds on all that. It is saying that there will be another Moses come and a generation will either follow or not, and if they don't follow, there will be a repeat of all the hideous losses. This is an important theme at this time, because Jesus made several declarations about his generation.

The upshot of Jesus' declarations about his generation is the risk of being utterly cut off: 'humiliatingly disinherited' might do for the term at the end of v23. That is a worthwhile side-study for the motivated. See below at 'Discuss.'

V24 is telling us that Israel has been forewarned about the consequence of this generation (the apostles) since the beginning: from Samuel on (for some reason not repeating Moses, earlier than Samuel, here).

3. The blessing of the Seed. It is very important again to Peter to tie what is going on right now back to the very roots of Israel. He's named the patriarchs, mentioned Moses, referred to Samuel to warn this generation, and now he seizes the line from Abraham's blessing that scholars source 4 times in the Abraham accounts. "In the Seed, all the nations of the earth would be blessed." So if we are going to fill this line with the meaning intended from these two speeches so far, it is clearly that this generation of Israel should move into the mission work of the Gospel, to an ever-expanding list of locations.

We must see that this is especially for 'this generation of Israel' because of the last line of Peter's talk. God sent this son (think of the last representation of the owner, as in the vineyard parable, Matt 21), first to Israel to bless it (Israel) to turn them from evil ways. Twice now Peter has ended rather sharply, and in connection with the nations in view. First was the line in ch 2 that 'this promise (the Spirit) was for those of you who are close and those far away, which the Lord would call.' This is followed by 'save yourselves from this perverse generation.' Now he mentions the target of the nations and turning from wicked ways.

In Matt 23, we are told that Jesus was quite distressed by the 'missionaries' of Judaism. They were actually a net loss. But now in Peter was have two clear appeals to all present join this Christian group, to study the apostles teaching, and to become part of what will spread to the earth. 5000 men were now subscribing, not counting family. Obviously, if it is not certain points of practice of the Torah that are evil, it is the fact that it actually produces an almost-sealed-off state that is very hard for the Gentiles to enter.

There is no underestimating this theme in Acts. It nearly causes the early church to break into two. In 11:1, 2, there is huge disapproval by young believers in Jerusalem about Peter having dinner with Gentiles. Even worse is the introduction to ch 15, which is that those young believers are saying a person cannot be saved without being uncircumcised. They are prepared to create a separate 'Christian' church.

Discuss:
1. What do some of these special notices to 'this generation' mean?
Mt. 11:16
Mt 12:42 (2)
Luke 11:50 (2)
Luke 21:32

2. In Galatians 3:15, there is a very important distinction made about the Seed of Abraham, while quoting the same Genesis line here. What does Paul mean?
 
Discuss:
1. What do some of these special notices to 'this generation' mean?
Mt. 11:16
Mt 12:42 (2)
Luke 11:50 (2)
Luke 21:32

2. In Galatians 3:15, there is a very important distinction made about the Seed of Abraham, while quoting the same Genesis line here. What does Paul mean?

1. All of these regard this generation of Israel to be at the most important crossroads of the nation's life. It is just as important as the generation made to wander for 40 years, but this time there is the knowledge of that generation (a whole chapter of Hebrews explains this). There is also the eerie warning of a repeat destruction. In 586, Jerusalem fell to Babylon's army, and there are warnings this could repeat.

There are also several reminders that a figure greater than (Moses, Solomon, Jeremiah) is here.

In Lk 21, the warning of the coming wrath on Israel is combined with some instructions what to do. But it is called the 'fulfillment of all that is written'--it has been known down through all of Israel's time that this could happen.

Some readers are puzzled that Jesus would say 'all these things will be fulfilled in this generation.' But as we have seen from the other passages, that was the plan. The end of the world and its judgement are expected everywhere in the NT to be right after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD--unless God delayed to save more people. Which He did. The things about Israel took place; 1 Thess 2:14--17 puts this in past tense, even though the destruction has not yet happened. The kingdom came. Yet God decided to delay the final judgement.

2. In Gal 3:9, 'all nations will be blessed through you' is the Gospel as preached to Abraham. He believed God and that was credited to him as righteousness. But the question is the exact meaning of 'you.' The Biblical structure, you might say, diverges here between Judaism and Christian faith. If 'you' is the mass of descendants, then the Bible has "2 programs" as the Dispensationalists say, and Chafer and Ryrie would further say they are 'ever twain'--they do not meet or sync.

So it is very important to see that Paul is aware of this, and explains further in v14+. First we read that the blessing of Abraham comes by Jesus Christ, and that the blessing is the Spirit of God which further extends the Gospel to the nations. You might say the promise to Abraham always had a life of its own! It's not just getting the Spirit and its not the land of Israel. It is the evangelistic mission of the Gospel. So Paul explains further that the original text of Genesis did say 'to or through your seeds'--meaning many people. It was the singular Seed, which is Christ, and through that conduit or channel, it gets to many people. This is the difference between Christian doctrine on one hand, and Judaism--Dispensationalism on the other.


The Christian Mission Now Faces Public Challenge
Read Acts 4

So far, there have not been many statements to the leaders of Judaism. You can recall just 3:17 where Peter, who had put the fault of Christ's death at the feet of the general audience attending the festival, now says the leaders joined in. But that's Judaism's leaders, he hasn't mentioned others.

I make attention to this because both Ps 2 (about to be used) and 110 have things to say to all rulers of the world. In fact, the Christian faith is going to be expressed very universally in another way shortly. This means the apostles are well aware that the whole world is the domain of Christ's, that all people, the least to the greatest are answerable to Him, now. Ps 110 especially is dire. The kings of the 'great lands' will be crushed. So much for Rome thinking it could produce its own theology simply by seizing all the land from Britain to Arabia.

So now we have the leaders of Judaism revisiting the question: where do you get authority? This is a tacit realization that the thing is bigger than them. This term authority is exactly what they had been granted in the coming of the Spirit, in the obvious success of the movement, the 5000 men, not counting family members.

So let us understand an expression down in v13 about uneducated, because there is a nuance. The NET note (aj) is helpful in that these men were able to read, but that meant synagogue Hebrew. What Judaism is actually saying is 'these men had not been trained under one of our teachers.' They had training, yes (the 40 days), but the credential was not recognized around Jerusalem. It is extremely unfortunate and weakening that many national teachers today think Christians are supposed to be uneducated, and at the same think the 40 days means almost nothing!

Usually this recognition was conveyed by Shammai or Hillel, and the subsequent leader of the Hillel school, Gamaliel, who is in the next chapter of Acts, v34.

The statement that they are ordinary is that they are not 'positioned' teachers found around Jerusalem who earned their money that way. They have their various trades as their work. An important part of this is the clothing worn, which is why Lk 24 and Acts 1, it is so important that Jesus said they would be 'clothed' with power. Those were priest or scribe clothes, but in spiritual meaning.

You may recall that when Paul moved to Jerusalem as a student, he had to find his mentor and become a teacher of Judaism with such a position.

So the auspices of the apostles are quite alarming to the leaders, in addition to the sparkling events of the Spirit and the miracle that just happened to a person everyone knew who came to Temple.

You may recall that when faced with the same question as we have here ('by whose auspices?'), Jesus counter-questioned the leaders about John. They refused to answer because of the consequences about the authority of the scribe-training system. It was embarrassing to have 5000 men and their families not attached to registered scribes--or attached to an unregistered mentor!

At the end of the sermon on the mount, we read that Jesus spoke with authority, not as the scribes. This had to do with the directness of the appeal of Jesus, in which he did not quote one of the previous mentors like Shammai or Hillel. (He did use a line from Hillel in positive form: love your neighbor as yourself). The Temple leaders were now encountering the same thing, not just the miracle and the Spirit but the quotes of the OT.

So Peter very efficiently repeats the historic Gospel, in one line, v10. "Jesus...whom you crucified...whom God raised from the dead..." It took several lines to cover that in the previous speeches! But he has something else he wants to accomplish. It is to go on to the next important quote as learned in the 40 days: Ps 118.

Discuss:
1. How exactly did Jesus end the question of authority issue in Mt 21:23? What did the apostles do different from that here in Acts 4?

2. What OT quotes are coming in Acts 4? Update your chart.
 
(After this study covers Acts 4, I will work through the two earliest letters to Thessalonians. But I plan to come back and complete the rest of the 1st 20 OT quotes in Acts, which means study through Acts 15).
 
Discuss:
1. How exactly did Jesus end the question of authority issue in Mt 21:23? What did the apostles do different from that here in Acts 4?

2. What OT quotes are coming in Acts 4? Update your chart.

1. Jesus only countered with refusal. "Neither will I tell you." However, notice the next 2 scenes; Ps 118 comes up. This makes for an underlying unity between Mt 21 and Acts 4.

2. The last one from Acts 3 was:
3:25 / Gen 12, 18, 22, 26 / The Seed would bless the nations
4:11 / Ps 118 / the rejected Cornerstone is how the new Temple starts
4:24 / Ex 20, Ps 146 / God the Creator of all has made these recent events come to pass
4:25 / Ps 2 / all of earth's authorities reject God and the true King Christ

The New Temple is Started
Read Ps 118

This amazing psalm is used several times in NT scenes. For one, it contains the line 'blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.' In the original setting, this was a welcome call to all who were coming to worship at the temple, possibly at one of the 3 annual festivals. But we also know that this came to a climax because of a parade or procession as Jesus entered Jerusalem the last time.

We should notice the comment by John about all this. The psalm is quoted, but the use of the psalm took the disciples by surprise and 'they did not understand these things at the time.' So this means it was on the level of the death and resurrection itself. Along with this is that the King of a Zechariah vision, who is on merely a donkey's colt is taking place.

Now an intriguing thing is also added here by John. Lazarus is in the crowd. So this is actually a procession all the way from that event to the gate of Jerusalem. Now Ps 118:17 has an additional flavor: Lazarus had not died, but lives, so who better to have in the parade?

This is what has the temple leadership flummoxed. It is obvious that there is overwhelming force walking right into the city, telling everyone they encountered that they had seen Lazarus resurrected.

Details of the singing procession are added from elsewhere:
Hosanna to the Son of David
Blessed is He that comes in the name of the Lord
Hosanna in the highest!
Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!

So the temple staff tell Jesus to tell the crowd to knock it off, because this is really language "they shouldn't be using." The answer of Jesus is that if they don't, the stones of the city will cry out. There was no need for this to happen, but it does speak to something just around the corner when the stones of the city would be torn down.

The line 'blessed is He...' is used again in a day or two when Jesus declares that the temple religion is pretty much a lost cause. He is referring back to this processional singing, which most of Jerusalem had witnessed. He says the only way for those in Judaism, who he had just fully criticized, to see him was to say 'blessed is He...' In other words, they were being asked to join the 'procession' not condemn it. Mt 23:39, Mk 11:10, Lk 19:38.

In the middle of this, yet another astounding thing happens. A group of Greek people find out that all this is going on, and ask to see Jesus. Remember, Jesus is now 'seated' on the colt, somewhere between the gate and the 'court of the Gentiles,' beyond which the Greeks could not go. That was their intended destination; they had come to worship. But instead Jesus explains that he is going to sacrifice for all the world. He calls out to the Father to glorify His name (the Fathers). The voice from heaven confirms this, so that the world would know what kind of event was about to take place.

All this to say, we can now understand why the vivid language is in Ps 118 about the persecution, death and resurrection of Christ. It is worth repeating: we often think of these kinds of psalms about ourselves, but should think of Christ first. He is truly where they find their reality and fulfillment, not in our experience. We don't want to think too much of ourselves, nor be disappointed by a rejection.

The gate of the city has been opened to the righteous King (118:19). It is probably this line, more than all the others that chafed the temple leaders.

This King is now called a cornerstone (v22), the stone that gets set and is the alignment for all 3 dimensions of a building. So Jesus is somewhere just outside the temple surrounded by all these singing followers.

I mention all this detail because this event was only a month back or so when we come to Acts 4 and Peter asserts that the Ps 118 line has taken place. The temple staff could not have forgotten such an unusual event as the entry of Jesus. A new temple is being built, not made with human hands. It is for the whole world--there is no other name by which we can be saved. So again, like the surprise incident of the Greeks who ask to see Jesus, there is not a shred of a question that this new 'place' (the new Temple) is for the whole world. The navigation markers have been set. The question is whether the staff of the old temple would come along.

In Acts 3, Peter had mentioned the new Moses. If a person did not adhere, they would be violently disinherited from God's people. Now we have a temple, and this temple has people singing the praises of the son of David, because this was a theme in Acts 2, the David saw the resurrection as the enthronement of the King from his line.

The temple leaders in Acts 4 now 'restrict free speech' about all that has happened. Peter and John simply resist, and are released. They know that the power of the kingdom has brought them to this place, and they are sad that the temple staff have refused to join in.

Next we will see how the apostles prayed as they segued into the new stage of tension with public leaders.
 
Discuss:
1. What is the meaning of riding a donkey's colt? What would it look like to officials?

2. Find an OT passage in which the 'trees shall clap their hands.' This tradition was used in ancient Israel on inauguration days, but Israel had not celebrated a king of its own since the Maccabeans. This is probably what 'waving palm branches' meant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top