Acts 5:17-32 Freedom and Confrontation

Acts 5:17-20 Peter is arrested by the high priest and freed by an angel of The Lord. We should not be surprised at the priesthood's reaction to the church's growth. The apostles had been warned not to preach or teach in the name of Jesus. They had decided that they they would obey God rather than men. (Acts 4:18-20, 5:29) I still have to wonder why the High Priest was a member of the sect of the Sadducees. But it is obvious that for a man who on theological grounds believes there is no resurrection from the dead, the proclamation of Jesus' resurrection would be a poke in the eye. In this case, we find out that very night an angel came and freed Peter from prison and told him to continue preaching. This is the first of three such incidents recorded in Acts. (See also Acts 12:7-11, 16:25-26)  Jesus had told Peter that one day he would give his life for the gospel (John 21:18-19) but that day was not yet.

Acts 5:21-25 The Temple guards search for Peter and find him teaching in the Temple. I am certain that the priests had not had any inkling that God would supernaturally free Peter from prison. In all cases in which the apostles were freed from jail miraculously, people were astonished at God's supernatural deliverance. In this case, the priests were astonished to find Peter in the Temple teaching the people, in direct defiance of their commands to him, and not in prison where they thought he had to be.

Acts 5:26-32 The high priest and Peter confront each other about Peter's teaching. The logical next step. The high priest didn't really question Peter so much as repeat his threat. In this case he adds the comment that Peter's teaching is intended to bring Jesus' blood on their head. Obviously they could not deal with the concept of the resurrection, because they were Sadducees. And apparently they had made no real effort to understand Peter's teaching, that it was every single person for whom Christ died, and that the Jews of Jerusalem had all been part of putting Jesus to death, and that He had voluntarily laid down His life to redeem mankind.  But Peter repeats the basics of the plan of redemption anyway.

Acts 5:12-16 The hands of the apostles

Acts 5:12-16 Innumerable miracles occur, people are brought from the surrounding area to be healed, and the church continues to grow. This follows after the great fear that arose from what happened to Ananias and Sapphira. Signs and wonders continue to take place at the hands of the apostles, people hold them in high esteem and fear to associate with them. There is nothing that says that people were healed by Peter's shadow, but apparently they thought they would be.

          In the modern church, there are answers to prayer for healing, but they are usually isolated. Occasionally there will be itinerant evangelists with healing ministries that pray for people who line up, often hundreds of them in a single meeting. But the key aspect of this ministry seems to be that it was part of the organic ministry of the church. People from the outside came to be healed because they recognized that healing flowed from that body of believers who named the name of Christ. Peter had a unique place as the pastor of the first church of Jerusalem, yet the text says the signs and wonders took place at the hands of the apostles (plural). 

          In the modern world, the explosive power of God's healing does not seem to be manifested in the church. Traveling evangelists such as Kathryn Kuhlman and Oral Roberts, perhaps, but I cannot recall ever hearing about a stampede of sick people rushing to church to be healed. They go the ER instead. There are two possible views of this. One is that this type of sign and wonder ministry was confined to the early church and is no longer needed since the church has been established. The season of great works of power was needed then but is not needed now, as God has other priorities for the modern church, such as discipleship and spiritual formation. The other point of view is that this is missing because the church is missing the power of the Holy Spirit flowing through apostolic leadership. The test of the latter view would be if a church (any church, any denomination) were to be so led by the Holy Spirit that its leadership would go and pray for people and they would be healed so routinely that they would be sought out by unbelievers, not because they wanted to be saved, but simply because they wanted to be healed and believed that the church leadership had the authority to heal them in Jesus' name. What would this look like? Hard to say, but it would be different from the church services and ministries that we have now.

Acts 4:32-5:11 Ananias & Sapphira

Acts 4:32-37 The congregation is unified, the apostles exhibit great power, and members continue to generously donate the proceeds of the sale of property to the community. We now see that this outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the 8,000 or so early Christians continued to result in a community with common property and great generosity. This seems to be an expansion of the initial community property arrangement discussed above, in connection with Acts 2:44-45. Acts 4:33 makes it clear that this is one with the power of the gospel witness and the grace of God upon them all (all 8,000). The poor were taken care of, because anyone with property would sell them and give the proceeds to the apostles to distribute to the needy. This was not based on a human principle, for example, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Rather, this was a fulfillment of an Old Testament command. (e.g. Deuteronomy 15:7-8) And so the same warning should be applied to this example. No one can take a Biblical example of a social or governmental structure or system, wrench it from its Biblical roots, and apply it in the world without the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit, and have it succeed. The early church succeeded because they manifested God's power, and this was possible only through the indwelling (and obeyed) Holy Spirit. 

Acts 5:1-11 The sad story of Ananias and Sapphira: Joseph, also called Barnabas, donated the proceeds from selling land to the church. (Acts 4:36-37) This lines up with earlier descriptions of the common property arrangement in the early church.  But Ananias and Sapphira held back part of the proceeds and laid the rest at the apostles' feet. Peter's interrogation zeroes in on the fact that it wasn't their failure to donate 100% of the proceeds to the church that caused their harsh judgment, but their lies in claiming that they had. Peter said that they had lied to the Holy Spirit. And so they fell down dead, and were buried (immediately, it seems).

          There seems to parallel here to the case of Achan recorded in Joshua 7. In both cases, the people of God were entering into a new life. The unity of the community in pursuing God's plan according to His command was paramount. In the case of Joshua, the people were to conquer the land and utterly annihilate the inhabitants. The commands were very specific, that if they allowed them to continue in the land, they would be a snare to Israel. (Deut. 7: 16 & 25; Joshua 23:13) And in fact they were. (Judges 2:1-5) So it was important that they meticulously follow the commands of God as given through Moses and then through Joshua. Since Moses had commanded them to destroy their gods, Achan's disobedience as a result of greed at the very outset (the first real battle, at Jericho) threatened to undermine the basis of the new community.

          In the birth of the church as recorded in Acts, God was establishing a community whose existence would be defined by the presence of the Holy Spirit and His work in the lives of the individual members, moment by moment leading and guiding them. So the key disobedience was that Ananias and Sapphira lied to the Holy Spirit. They thought they could get away with pretending to be completely obedient to the leading of The Lord when in fact they were not. The Holy Spirit is God, and so this shows us that at the very inception of the community of Christians - the church - He was establishing that one cannot lie to the Holy Spirit. He knows. And there are consequences. We might lie to people and get away with it. They may or may not ever find out. But the Holy Spirit knows. We should not even try to pretend He does not know. And without the Holy Spirit we cannot be part of this community. So Ananias and Sapphira were in a sense an object lesson for this principle. 

          Who among us can live up to this standard? Who is so filled with the Holy Spirit that they never err? Obviously, in this life, none of us. But the key point here is honesty and humility. Instead of pretending that we are walking in the spirit, we need to own up to the truth. When we fall short of a 100% Holy Spirit anointing, let's not pretend otherwise. It is exactly the same way Jesus treated the Pharisees. They were claiming to be followers of Moses and fully obedient to the law as given through Moses, but it was a sham - they weren't and they knew it, but they couldn't or wouldn't admit it.

          This is confirmed in 2 Corinthians 9:6-7. "Now this I say, he who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver." There was never a compulsion - God want hearts that generously give, and do so cheerfully. Ananias and Sapphira could have honestly sowed sparingly, and the only drawback would have been that they would have reaped sparingly. And this principle applies to all aspects of God's kingdom, not just money. It is just that money is an overt and open way in which our commitment to The Lord and our walk in the Holy Spirit can be seen. But Ananias and Sapphira failed on a more fundamental level than sowing sparingly. They did not understand the fundamental principle above, that it is impossible to lie to the Holy Spirit.

Acts 4:23-31 The believers prayed ...

Acts 4:23-31 Next, the apostles and believers hold a prayer meeting and the place was shaken. They have a unified prayer meeting. The apostles and their companions considered the threats and warnings of the Jewish leaders, and prayed, firstly Psalm 146:6, recollecting God's power demonstrated in creation, and secondly Psalm 2:1-2, David's prophecy or statement of fact regarding the rage of the worldly governments against the Messiah of God. They recalled God's sovereignty. And then they prayed, not that they would be protected from evil governments or kept safe from persecution, but that they would be granted boldness and confidence to proclaim God's message with signs and wonders following. 

          Verse 31 is the capstone of this prayer meeting. The place where they gathered was shaken and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak the word of God with boldness. There is no further information on what kind of shaking took place. Perhaps there was an earthquake. Or perhaps the people were so overcome by the Holy Spirit that their spirit and soul were shaken. But that the result of being filled with the Holy Spirit was not that they spoke in tongues, or prophesied, but that they spoke God's word with boldness, suggests that at least those who were companions of the apostles, and we have no information as to how many were present at this prayer meeting, received the promise of Acts 2:38-39, the Holy Spirit now infused all who were present.  But the phenomenon accompanying this filling was speaking the word of God with boldness.

          There is perhaps a fitness to the way God works. On Pentecost, Jews from all over the world were present, and the Holy Spirit empowered the disciples to speak in languages that they would all understand. On this occasion, they had been threatened about speaking about Jesus, His crucifixion and resurrection, and salvation in His name - the stuff of the scriptures. And so the Holy Spirit empowered them - perhaps involuntarily - to speak the word of God boldly. If nothing else, this is confirmation that the apostles and the early church (all 8,000 of them, perhaps?) were approved by God to go ahead and ignore the Jewish leadership's warning not to speak in Jesus' name, but instead to proclaim it. And in later passages, the presence of the Holy Spirit is manifested in other types of phenomena, to make specific points that are directly germane to the circumstances.

Acts 4:1-22 The apostles on trial

Acts 4:1-7 The priests, temple guard, and the Sadducees arrest some of the apostles. Since Peter and John were mentioned in 3:11, it seems likely they were the ones arrested. They spent the night in jail, but the rest of the church must have been busy, because there were five thousand converts as a result of this incident and sermon. The next day, what must have been a very large group of senior Jewish leaders gathered, since it mentions the elders and scribes, and then by name Annas, Caiaphas, John, and Alexander, and adds, "...all who were of high priestly descent." Although Jesus had done similar miracles, He was gone and the Jewish leadership probably couldn't miss the fact that 5,000 Jews, presumably devout enough to be in the temple, had all converted to believe in Jesus.

          The question asked in verse 7, "By what power or in what name have you done this?" sounds very much like a trial lawyer questioning a hostile witness in court. They could not have been unaware that Peter had preached a message about Jesus, whom they recently had the Romans dispose of. So this was the opening line of questioning to bring into court first-hand testimony. Peter obliged them.

Acts 4:8-12 Peter gives a short sermon. Boiled down to the basics. They had asked in what name and Peter responded, Jesus Christ the Nazarene; then to be sure they knew who he was talking about, he brought up His crucifixion by them, and His resurrection by God. That Jesus. He quoted Psalm 118:22, gave an altar call. Be saved in His name.

Acts 4:13-22 The priests consider this and decide to threaten and release the apostles. God had placed the senior Jewish leadership in a dilemma. The miracle was undeniable (4:14, 16, & 22), but at the same time, they could not acknowledge Jesus in any way, or else their own places of power & privilege would be at risk. So they warned and threatened the apostles, they got the response which seems almost rebellious. The apostles simply said that they could not stop speaking about what they had seen and heard. But they had committed no crime under Jewish law or Roman law, and at least 5,000 people were witnesses to the miraculous healing, so the Jewish leaders could do nothing further.

          There is often a dilemma on the part of believers about the extent to which we should be subject to the governing authorities (Romans 13:1-7) and when we should disobey. The apostles established a standard, and this was two-fold. Firstly, they were operating under the authority of the Holy Spirit, which no human government can regulate. Secondly, they were in effect being told to deny the truth, the things they saw and heard. It was not that they were being argued out of believing that Jesus had been responsible for the healing, it was that they were being told just to shut up about it. Governments since then have tried to suppress the gospel. They have for a period succeeded in driving the church underground, but the power of the Holy Spirit so permeates the persecuted church that sooner or later, He and it both emerge into the light of day. We shall see wise counsel is given to the leadership in Acts 5:38-39. It was ultimately ignored.

          The problem is that there is a built-in, permanent conflict between the world and the gospel. It can never be reconciled.  And so any government that buys into the world system will eventually find itself in conflict with the gospel. Just as there is a conflict between the world and the gospel in the life of each individual, until they take a stand to reject the world's way of looking at life, accepting not only the good news that Jesus died to save them, but the good news that God provides both the guidance and the power to live life His way. 

Acts 3:1-26 Peter and John went to pray; they met a lame man on the way

Acts 3:1-10 A lame man is healed at the Temple when Peter prays for him. I have to wonder, was this lame man laying there when Jesus walked by, and Jesus didn't heal him? We have record in Luke 5:18-26 and John 5:1-9 of Jesus' healing of the lame. Perhaps this man's time had not yet come - Jesus was leaving this one for Peter. Verse 10 implies that he had been begging at the beautiful gate of the temple for some time.

          In verse 6, Peter says he had no silver and gold. It was just recorded in Acts 2:45 that in the new Christian community they were selling their goods and giving to anyone who had need, Perhaps this sharing was limited to those within community, so Peter was not free to share community generosity with non-members.

          And when he got up, he was walking and leaping. This seems incredible, since he had been lame from his mother's womb. He had never learned to walk as a child. But now that he was healed, he immediately had the balance and coordination to walk and to leap. According to verses 9-10, all the people had the same reaction as they were filled with wonder and amazement.

Acts 3:11-16 Peter's impromptu sermon, reiterating that it was in the name of Jesus that the miracle occurred. Peter is quick to state that the glory for this miracle goes to Jesus, who is the servant of the God of Abraham. In this message addressing the Jews in the Temple, most likely including the priests, scribes, and Pharisees who were present, he bluntly accuses them of being worse than Pilate, in stating that they, his listeners, delivered Jesus up and disowned Him in the presence of Pilate who had decided to release Him (Luke 23:16-25). They put to death the author of life, an interesting juxtaposition - how could they kill the one who created life in the first place? Obviously they couldn't, the resurrection proves it. And for those who perhaps did not see Jesus after His resurrection, they have the evidence right in front of them in the man who was born a cripple and was now able to run and leap, in Jesus' name.

Acts 3:17-26 Peter concludes his sermon with an altar call based on the Pentateuch. Peter repeats his call for his listeners to repent and be saved. In this case, although he cites the prophets as being fulfilled in Jesus' suffering, in this case instead of quoting Isaiah, he quotes Moses, two sections from Deuteronomy (18:15-18 and 15:19) and Genesis 12:3. In this part of the sermon Peter switches from the atonement through Christ's death and his resurrection to a different theme. He is now making the case that Jesus was the promised Messiah, and urging them receive God's blessing by turning from wickedness to God's Servant, Jesus.

          It would be possible to discuss in depth the logic underlying Peter's hermeneutics, but I think it is safer to say that Peter was operating in the power of the Holy Spirit. Besides recognizing that people need to hear different aspects of the gospel, specific aspects of the message will speak to the hearts of people differently. And so in this case the Holy Spirit led Peter down this path. The key point in this whole sermon is that we again see that the proper use of Scripture, which in Peter's case meant the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, is to bring life to listeners by connecting them to God through experiential faith.

Acts 2:41-47 Organizing the first mega-church

Acts 2:41-47 About 3,000 people are saved and the early church is established with daily communion in various houses and meetings in the Temple. It must have been quite a service, as 3,000 were baptized. One has to wonder how many of the apostles were involved in doing the baptizing to get through it before dark. Even starting shortly after 9AM, assuming a twelve hour day, that leaves only nine hours of daylight, which would require baptizing over 300 people per hour. We don't know where they did it, but the Jordan River is approximately 30 km, which would have taken most of a day to walk.

          Organizing this flood of converts must have been a challenge. Even with twelve apostles and 108 deacons, 120 in all, there would still been approximately 25 new converts per leader, assuming that all 120 who were in the upper room (Acts 1:1) were qualified as leaders. But those who were added to the church devoted themselves to the apostle' teaching, fellowship, the breaking of bread, and prayer. We have the elements of the first meetings, which we still find in most church services today. However, in this case, they were continually devoting themselves to these things. Perhaps these were not formally organized meetings, they may have spontaneously decided to eat meals together, to go to each other’s' houses for fellowship and prayer. They were often at the temple as well, all 3,000 of them, most likely to hear the apostles teach. If this was the case, it would likely have been more than a minor annoyance to priests and scribes for whom the Temple was the center of Jewish worship. Although at this point the early Christians were evidently all of Jewish background, the circumstances of the death of Jesus would have caused significant tension between new Christians and the Jewish authorities. This conflict continued.

          The early church also experienced many signs and wonders through the apostles. Interestingly, although Peter said that all who believed and were baptized would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, evidently at this stage miraculous works occurred only through the apostles. Perhaps the new believers needed some instruction in how to cooperate with the Holy Spirit. But they did immediately begin to exhibit unprecedented generosity, having all things in common. There is an interesting socio-religious question here. As far as I know, this is the first occurrence of communism on a large scale in history. What is the difference between having all things in common in a family, where presumably the father and mother handle finances and are in charge, and in a larger community, in which elected or appointed leaders are in charge? What is the largest scale on which this kind of common property arrangement will work? In the twentieth century, grand experiments on a national scale tried to implement common property in numerous countries. They were all social and economic disasters. One can point to many reasons for their failure, but one of the key differences is that in the early church, all were subject to Christ and therefore the Holy Spirit was behind it all, and both leaders and members were in constant contact with God through the Holy Spirit. The 20th century national experiments in Communism explicitly rejected God and religion in any and all forms, largely due to Karl Marx' influence on the political structure. Curiously, however, that seems to be a common attribute of all forms of political organization that fail; even democracy based on rejection of God seems doomed to failure. We might also point to other problems, such as the overarching egos of key leaders versus the humility of the apostles, but the one point that history seems to teach is that we cannot take a Biblical event as a basis for a political or social norm and expect it to work after we have wrenched or surgically excised it from the context of God's continuing presence with His people.

          The key point is this. God came to bring spiritual and eternal life to His people. Politicians who want to make things fair, or promote altruism as a moral basis for organizing society, have neither the desire nor the ability to bring these people eternal life. And so their social and political initiatives, however well-intentioned, are doomed to fail.

Acts 2:37-40 The gospel

Acts 2:37-40 Peter exhorts his listeners to repent, be saved, and be baptized in water and in the Holy Spirit. Verse 37 reports that the Jews who heard this were pierced to the heart and cried out 'What shall we do?' Peter's response has since become the standard for altar calls since that time. The listeners who were convicted of their own sin should (1) repent, (2) be baptized in the name of Jesus, and (3) receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. And then Peter goes on to say, that this altar call is expansive in both time and space, as it includes all the descendants of his hearers, and all who are in far off lands. It applies to anyone The Lord calls. There is no limitation to Jews, or to people who are in Jerusalem (perhaps reflecting Jesus' words in Acts 1:8), and no limitation in time. The end times have begun, and although we may not know when they will be completed or consummated, in the meantime, this is what God is doing. He calls people; if they respond in repentance, they are to be baptized in the name of Jesus, and they are to accept the gift of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit then pours forth that which they both saw and heard.

          Baptism in water as practiced by John is here being repurposed. John the Baptist had baptized people for repentance from sin. Those who respond to God's call and are baptized in the name of Jesus for the forgiveness of sins receive far more than making a symbolic act of repentance, they are receiving forgiveness. Forgiveness from God far transcends mere repentance, and is only possible through identification with Jesus' death. How this identification results in forgiveness remains a mystery. How can God take the guilt of our sin and put it on Jesus on the cross, and then take the righteousness of Christ and put it on us? That it happens is confirmed to us through both the Scriptures and personal experience. But the means of this miracle transcend my feeble understanding.

          The overall message that Peter gave on the day of Pentecost is the epitome or archetype of presenting the gospel message. There are multiple instantiations of the gospel, including the four books written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and several other messages recorded in Acts, and Paul's explanation in various epistles. But what is its essence, the underlying and unifying theme of the gospel?

          Certainly one key element is the atoning death of Christ on the cross and the forgiveness of sins to those who repent and receive Him. But Peter and others did not present this in isolation. A much more inclusive version of the story seems to have the theme that God is about the business of establishing His kingdom on the earth, and that Jesus has come to reign as king over that kingdom. A key element of God's kingdom on earth is that He has appointed humankind to act as His representatives, ambassadors as it were, to the earth, which includes those people who are separated from Him, and the physical planet including both plants and animals. This describes His dealings with Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and David, the kingdom of Israel and Judah, and the Jewish people. But humans up to the time of Christ had failed. And so God's ultimate consummation of His plan was to send the Son of God, Jesus, who was the promised Jewish Messiah, and took care of the sin problem in two ways. The penalty for sin was paid through His death, and the power to actually live the way God commands (including doing all of the impossible things Jesus taught and commanded in the Sermon on the Mount) was imparted through the agency of the Holy Spirit. And the good news is ultimately the promise that one day Jesus will return in power to judge the earth and establish God's eternal kingdom on earth. And it will be glorious! Humankind will live in full and continuous communion with and obedience to God, exhibiting His nature and character of love and holiness, and rule the earth as God's representatives. The good news is that God invites every person to join in this kingdom-building right now.

          A significant question is how much of the context, scope, and balance of the different aspects of the gospel are essential to its presentation. The context of God's dealings with humankind before Christ seems to have been included to some degree in virtually every gospel presentation recorded in Acts, although the specifics vary from message to message. That is, in every case, it appears that the apostles discussed either the Old Testament efforts to build the kingdom of God, or the law and the prophets which Jesus came as direct fulfillment of. As regards scope, in every case, it appears that the gospel presentation included some aspect of the purpose or outcome of a person becoming a Christian as it would affect their daily life on earth. In other words, receiving Christ was never presented as simply how to get to heaven. The scope of the gospel includes what it means to be a Christian in this life, on earth. And the role of entering the Kingdom of God as part of the good news seems to be included in most messages. Balance in the presentation of the gospel is hard to judge from the gospel accounts, because it is most likely that what is recorded are summaries or highlights of the actual sermons that were given. Acts 2:40 alludes to additional things that Peter said that are not recorded here. So the most we can infer about balance is that which is contained within the Bible as a whole. 

Acts 2:22-36 Apologetics - the case for Christ

Acts 2:22-32 Peter testifies of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, quoting Psalms. He follows a brief summary of the events that have just transpired with a quote from Psalm 16:8-11. Again, Peter is appealing to his audience; in this case that Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecy by rising from the dead. He points out that David died and was buried so that this prophecy of God's Holy One not seeing decay could not have been autobiographical on David's part. Peter further elaborates that God's oath that one of David's descendants would be seated on his throne (2 Samuel 7:12) is now fulfilled. From the Jewish perspective, that promise was fulfilled in Solomon who built the Temple, per 2 Samuel 7:13, but Peter is implying (without offending the audience) that Solomon was not the complete fulfillment of the prophecy given to David through Nathan. We can in retrospect recognize the Solomon's kingdom was not established forever as Nathan said (2 Samuel 7:13&16), as Jeremiah's curse on Jeconiah shows (Jeremiah 22:28-30). But this eternal kingdom was being established through Jesus, to finally fulfill the promise to David.

Acts 2:33-36 Peter makes the case that Jesus' resurrection proves that He was the Messiah and Lord. Peter's conclusion quotes Psalm 110:1 to the effect that God has promised his (David's and Peter's) Lord that He will sit at God's right hand and God will make His enemies a footstool to rest His feet upon. And so Peter is here saying to the Jews - those who rejected Christ and cried out for His crucifixion on the day before Passover (Luke 23:21&23) - that God raised Him from the dead and then raised Him into heaven where is is now seated at God's right hand.

Acts 2:14-21 A sign of the beginning of the end

Acts 2:14-21 Peter begins his sermon, quoting Joel to explain the phenomena to the Jews. Peter begins by denying that he and his compatriots were drunk, on the grounds that it was too early in the day to have drunk enough wine to be drunk. He then goes on to quote Joel 2:28-32. In this eschatological prophecy, Joel enumerates several things that God says will happen. The very first is the pouring out of His Spirit upon all mankind.  The result of His Spirit being poured out would be children prophesying, young men seeing visions, old men dreaming. Then there would be signs in the physical universe before the great and glorious day of The Lord. And finally, Joel says that everyone who calls on the name of The Lord will be saved.

          The context of this passage in Joel is a much longer end-times prophecy, speaking of the immanence of the day of The Lord. Joel 2:11 speaks of the coming of a great and mighty people, with a description of just how they will terrify those in rebellion against God. Joel 2:12-17 calls for repentance. Joel 2:18-27 promises deliverance and restoration for the Jews. Joel 3:1-17 describes God's judgment of the nations who have preyed on His people.

          In the milieu of the first century, with the Jews under Roman domination, there was a recurrent expectation among the Jews that the glorious victories of the Maccabees would be repeated, and that The Lord would send a deliverer to bring military victory and free the Jews from foreign domination. And Jewish prophets testified of this deliverance, besides this passage in Joel. So Peter is saying that the end times have begun and this Spirit outpouring is evidence of that; the manifestation of the Holy Spirit in the behavior of God's people marks the beginning of the end times. Note that Peter did not cite all of the rest of Joel's prophecy, regarding nations being judged by God. In so doing, Peter implicitly says that the whole of the end time prophecy is not yet being fulfilled; but the end is already begun. Neither he nor we know when the end times will be consummated. But Peter's statement about prophecy is repeated in that after he quotes Joes 2:29, he repeats the clause about prophecy from the previous verse. The pouring forth of the Spirit has resulted in prophetic words in this rather unprecedented way - God's glory is being spoken of by people in languages that they do not know, and evidently in a manner that is highly excited.

          So Peter's opening remarks in this sermon are an appeal to his listeners to recognize that what they are seeing is the fulfillment of a promise from one of the Old Testament prophets, and what this event signifies.

Acts 2:5-13 They spoke with other tongues

Acts 2:5-13 The reaction of people in Jerusalem to the phenomena of tongues-speaking. Perhaps the biggest miracle in the Holy Spirit manifestation of speaking in tongues is that the disciples were understood by Jews from every part of the world. The disciples were speaking in languages which they had no knowledge of, and were speaking of the mighty deeds of God. At least fifteen different languages are mentioned. The claim by mockers that they were full of wine implies that this was an excited utterance, not just a calm discussion being carried on in another language. But although some thought they were babbling nonsense because they were drunk, the miracle is that the words they were speaking were being understood by foreigners.

          Jerusalem was the focal point for Jewish worship and some effort must have been expended by Jews from every part of the known world to travel there for the major feasts. Deuteronomy 16:16  commanded them to appear for the Feast of Weeks and even from great distances they came, having been born in lands where other languages were spoken. And so God enabled the disciples, who by and large had lived in Judea their whole lives speaking either Aramaic or Hebrew, to speak to those in the dispersion in their native tongues. Although they or their ancestors had been exiled, God had neither forgotten nor forsaken them, and was now going to reach out to them with power. Later we will see that The Lord sent the apostles as missionaries to gentiles in those lands, but that would be impressed on them when Peter visited Cornelius (Acts 10:44-48).

Acts 2:1-4 Baptism with wind and fire

Acts 2:1-4 Pentecost, the Holy Spirit descends on the disciples. We have here three phenomena: wind, fire, and speaking in tongues. Firstly we have the rushing mighty wind. The Holy Spirit is pneumatos hagiou, the holy breath. When Jesus breathed on the disciples and said, "receive the Holy Spirit" (John 20:22), it was just a hint of the true power of the Holy Spirit that carries the full presence of God almighty into the world. As we observe mighty winds in nature, such as tornadoes, hurricanes, derechos, we see destruction. This mighty wind came from God to bring life and power - literally the revelation of God dwelling with His people. And this breath transcended the life the God breathed into Adam (Genesis 2:7), as the Holy Spirit gave spiritual life to the disciples (I Corinthians15:45). A power greater than hurricanes and tornadoes unleashed in the spiritual realm, not to destroy, but to empower God's people for holiness.

          Tongues of fire are perhaps symbolic, as fire is symbolic in several respects of what God does. In Exodus 3:2, Moses saw the bush that burned with fire, yet the bush was not consumed, a type of grace. In Luke 3:16, John the Baptist made the baptism in the Holy Spirit almost synonymous with baptism in fire, and went on to elaborate that Jesus would burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire. Perhaps his listeners thought this referred to disposing of unbelievers in hell, but it seems much more consistent with the rest of the New Testament that he was referring to the work of the Holy Spirit in incinerating the chaff in our lives. At least, this would be consistent with I Corinthians 3:15. Revelation 4:5 also links the Holy Spirit with fire but in this passage there is no obvious context to interpret except, perhaps, the fire that burned in the Tabernacle.  As the Israelites journeyed through the wilderness, a pillar of fire gave them light by night. (Exodus 13:21) Isaiah 10:16-17 uses a similar metaphor to that employed by John, and may in fact have been in his mind when he prophesied about Jesus' ministry of baptizing with the Holy Spirit and fire. In John 8:12, Jesus said that He was the light of the world, although this did not connect immediately to fire.

Acts 1:15-26 Who is Matthias?

Acts 1:15-26 Matthias is selected to replace Judas as a disciple. Peter quotes Psalm  69:25 and Psalm 109:8 as a basis for choosing a replacement for Judas Iscariot, who had betrayed Jesus and died. We might quibble about whether they should have waited until after the Holy Spirit came in order to make this decision, and whether or not the true twelfth disciple was Paul, not Matthias. Nevertheless, Peter set some criteria and then, with two qualified candidates, the disciples cast lots. I think that most modern churches would be uncomfortable with this procedure, but it is not clear that it is any worse than an election. If both men truly met Peter's criteria, than either would have been a good choice, and absent Holy Spirit guidance, Peter chose the only means he could think of to get God's will, as he clearly states in Acts 1:24. And not without precedent ... in Joshua 7:14-18 Achan was identified by the use of lots; Proverbs 16:33 says that every decision cast by lots is from The Lord. (See also Lev 16:8, Joshua 18:6-10, I Sam 14:42, I Chronicles 24:32, 25:8, 26:13-14, Nehemiah 10:34 & 11:1.) However, we see in Esther 3:27 & 9:4 and Jonah 1:7 that pagans also cast lots to get decisions, so there is some baggage with this approach. Luke 23:34 shows that even the Roman soldiers use the casting of lots to decide who should get Jesus' inner garment. Does Proverbs 16:33 give divine sanction to this method, or is it simply a reflection of the common belief in Solomon's time?

          Thank God, He has provided in the Holy Spirit a better means of selecting leaders, apostles, elders, pastors, and so forth. We will encounter this in action in Acts  6:3-5 and 13:2, as well as in the epistles (e.g. Titus 1:5-9). Peter had part of the process - he knew they should carefully examine the candidates, and that they should pray. And we shouldn't be too hard on him about not waiting for the Holy Spirit, because he did not yet at that time understand what the indwelling Holy Spirit would do. But we should recognize that in the era in which the Holy Spirit is poured out on, and indwells God's people, the process must hinge on His guidance. 

Acts 1:12-14 Waiting

Acts 1:12-14 The disciples gather while they wait as Jesus commanded. The remaining eleven disciples were present, as well as the women. Presumably these were the same women that were mentioned in Luke 23:49. They prayed and they waited.

          Waiting seems to be a frequent theme in Luke's writings. Elizabeth and Mary waited to deliver their children. John the Baptist waited to begin His ministry. The disciples now are waiting and praying. As people of the modern world, we have become extremely impatient. This is readily evident to anyone who drives in rush hour traffic. Although only a small fraction of the drivers are aggressive to the point of cutting people off in order to get ahead, a large fraction, probably the majority, drive well above the speed limit if conditions permit. Almost no one waits for marriage anymore. It is common for people to borrow so much money to get things they want, which they can never hope to repay, that personal bankruptcy has become an industry. But God will not be hurried and we cannot appropriate His blessings ahead of schedule. To get God's best, we must wait for His timing. He desires deeply to bless us but His blessing comes on His terms. If He says to wait for His provision, we must wait, or do without. We can provide for ourselves in the natural realm. But if we seek to provide for ourselves in the spiritual realm, we repeat Adam's mistake and miss the incredible blessings that God has prepared for us. Fortunately, the disciples and the women camp followers did wait.

Acts 1:9-11 Jesus' return to the Father

Acts 1:9-11 Jesus ascends into heaven. The angels give the promise that Jesus will return in exactly the same way that He ascended. We have other promises of the return of Jesus. Perhaps we should wonder why heaven should be visualized as being above us, in the clouds, or perhaps in the stars. After all, all of Jesus' teaching regarding the Kingdom of God emphasized that He had come to bring it to earth, here and now, among people who would believe in and obey Him. And He had also explained that after He left, He and the Father and the Holy Spirit would continue to be present with His people. So why did He ascend into heaven? Most likely, it was a concession to human frailty. The worship by the angels in heaven is unveiled in Revelation, as well as various Old Testament prophecies. But the cry of the heart on earth is often 'where is God when I hurt?' or 'where is God when I need Him?' This passage suggests He is in heaven and will return one day. Contrast this with John 16:5-7 promises the coming of the Holy Spirit to be with the disciples (and us). John 14:16-18 promises both the Holy Spirit and Jesus Himself will be with us. John 14:23 promises that the Father Himself will come with Jesus to abide with us. So why this ascent into heaven? It seems to be intimately bound up with the preparation of the coming of the Holy Spirit, which is described in Acts 2. As long as the disciples were physically with Jesus in the flesh, they could never enter into Holy Spirit-empowered lives. To transcend the limitations of mere bodily existence, to live in the realm of the Spirit of God, they had to be deprived of the crutch of Jesus' physical presence.

          This creates a challenge for many having an intense desire to touch Jesus physically today. He tells us that everything that He is, is present in the Holy Spirit. (John 16) But we still live in physical human bodies. Especially in times of trial, emotional distress, and loss, we want the comfort of physical touch. God's provision in that case is the church - the fellowship of His people - to provide that physical ministry. But the key bottom line is that in order for us to become His people, we must become people of the Spirit - those who value and depend on the Holy Spirit and recognize the primacy of Spiritual things over natural things. (Philippians 3:3) And it appears that this can only be learned through trials and tribulations.

          The ascent of Jesus into heaven made it possible for the Holy Spirit to be sent (John 16:7). So although it seems to us that His departure leaves us wondering if we are forsaken, Jesus' plan and purpose was to send the Holy Spirit and thereby give us the means of spiritual life.

Luke 24:50-Acts 1:8 The Great Commission

Luke 24:50-53 The ascension of Jesus into heaven. Mark 16:19 is the only other mention of Jesus' ascension.  Details are sparse. While He was blessing them, He was raised up into heaven. Of course God's presence is most likely in a different realm than our space-time continuum. Metaphorically God is above us, which is reflected in several Old Testament visions of God. So the disciples would certainly have understood the symbolism of Jesus rising into heaven as His ascending to the Father. The concept of heaven as being another state of existence was communicated via some of the OT prophets, but with little explanation.

          We are dealing here with spiritual mysteries here. And the outpouring of the Holy Spirit that we shall see in Acts does not resolve any of them. We will be entering a new state of life on this earth (not in heaven) in which Holy Spirit-empowered believers will live with the power of heaven in the midst of a fallen earth. And so Luke's account of the events surrounding the life of Jesus Christ on the earth, that he had carefully researched, (Luke 1:1-4) comes to a close. The sequel picks up here, with a parting commission from Christ before He ascends. (Luke 24:49-51, repeated in Acts 1:8-9)

Acts 1:1-8 Jesus' parting words to the disciples are designed to link this manuscript to the gospel of Luke, by reference to it explicitly, and to the intended addressee, that lover of God, Theophilus. Luke mentions the many proofs that Jesus gave His disciples that He was alive, but does not elaborate on what they were. After forty days, suffice it to say, they believed.

          Jesus then gave them a very specific command: wait in Jerusalem for the Holy Spirit. He did a contrast with the baptism of John. The baptism of the Holy Spirit could not possibly have been understood by them at that time, but Jesus wanted them to recognize it when it happened. In the case of the baptism of John, the Greek word baptizo was borrowed, normally meaning to dip or dye, as when one is immersing a garment in a vat of colored liquid in order to impart color to it. John's baptism was more symbolic of washing, as he baptized people for the repentance from sin. When the disciples were immersed with the Holy Spirit, they took on the color of God, so to speak, going far beyond repenting and being washed, but being God-filled in their spirit. So when this happened as recorded in Acts 2, Peter immediately recognized it and put words to it. (Acts 2:38-39)

          At this time, the disciples were still a bit stuck in their Maccabean heritage, and asked if it was now that Jesus would be restoring the kingdom of Israel. Jesus very gently told them that they were not privy to God's timetable, but that when this event happened, it did mean one specific thing: they would be His witnesses to the ends of the earth. It is not clear if this was intended as a command or a simple statement of fact. When the Holy Spirit came on them, they would be impelled by His inner prompting so that they would have no choice but to be His witnesses. And it would be to the gentiles, although they quite possibly thought He was referring to the Jews of the dispersion.

          Matthew's account of the great commission (Matthew 28:18-20) gives a slightly different emphasis. In that account, Jesus instructed His disciples to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them, and teaching them to observe everything that He commanded. This contrasts to Luke's account in Acts, in which Jesus said they would be witnesses to the ends of the earth. There is a difference. The concept of making disciples and teaching people to observe everything Jesus commanded involves more than witnessing to them, and having them come to a statement of faith in Christ. What we will find later in the New Testament is that although Paul was the apostle of grace, it is through his epistles that the instructions for obeying Christ's commands and discipling ourselves as we follow Christ are fleshed out. (I Cor 9:27, I Tim 4:7-8).

          In self-examination, one of my fears is that I worry too much about times and epochs, to the detriment of doing what the Holy Spirit impels me to do. How can I be a witness to the remotest parts of the earth? If I cannot go, or if I am not gifted or called to travel to foreign lands, how can I be a witness to the many lost people I meet each day, and how can I support and further the work of God in those remote countries? 

Luke 24:36-49 I believe in the resurrection of the body

Luke 24:36-49 Jesus appears to the disciples in a room. Parallel passages Mark 16:14-18 , John 20:19-25. Matthew says that they all went to Galilee in response to the angel's statement, but Luke's account suggests that they were still in Jerusalem when Jesus first appeared to them. In this account, Jesus demonstrates to them that He is risen and present in a physical body, explains them how all that happened was according to Old Testament prophecy, and commissions them.

          The physical resurrection of the body is one of the key elements of Christianity, being included in the Apostles and Nicene Creeds, among other places. There are heresies that attack this doctrine. Yet Jesus went to some length to demonstrate to the disciples this physical reality of His resurrection, not just as a disembodied spirit or ghost. From these accounts we know that He ate food, that He could be touched, and yet that He could appear and disappear at will, and ultimately that He could rise into the air. Are these attributes going to be present in the bodies of all resurrected saints, or are they unique to Jesus because He was God? Paul indicated (I Corinthians 15:35-49) that the resurrection body is not like the body we live in now, that our current body is like a seed that is sown, and that the resulting plant or tree is the resurrection body. His point is that just as we now bear the image of the earthly, that is Adam, so in the resurrection we shall bear the image of the heavenly, that is, Jesus. He goes on to explain that at the rapture, those who have not yet died shall also be changed but his key point is that the perishable, that is our earthly bodies, cannot inherit the imperishable, which is heaven. That is, these new bodies will not waste away or decay, because that does not happen in heaven.

          How is this possible? The power of God manifest in Jesus must also be manifest in our resurrection bodies. And that is how we will bear the image of God. The exact mechanism by which this occurs is not told us, and we would probably not be able to understand it if it was. Only that there is a physical reality to the Holy Spirit-empowered life that is eternal and imperishable. The second law of thermodynamics evidently does not apply to this state of life. Death is defeated because God is the author of life and His power is able to overcome and essentially give life continuously.

          The Scriptures that Jesus explained to the disciples as pertaining to Him were from the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms (Luke 24:44). Almost the entire Old Testament.

•   The Law refers to Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. We previously saw in the discussion of the Last Supper (Luke  22:14-20), which took place on the celebration of the Passover, that the Passover Lamb is a picture of Christ. He is the perfect Lamb who was slain for the sins of the whole world. The Law also gives a detailed description of the Tabernacle, the details of which speak of the character and work of Jesus.

•   The Prophets refer primarily to Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel, although the minor prophets are also included.  As an example, Isaiah 53 paints a detailed picture of the suffering servant, as mentioned above (Luke 8:35-43).

•   The Psalms refer inclusively to the books of poetry in the Old Testament including Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon. As previously mentioned (Luke 8:35-43) Psalm 22 is a prayer of one suffering alone, and it is possible that Jesus uttered this prayer as He was hanging on the cross. Psalm 118's fulfillment is discussed above with respect to Luke 19:28-40

          On the other hand, perhaps He was much more focused in explaining to His disciples the same things that He had told them previously that they had not understood. That is, in order for God's plan to rescue man from sin, it was necessary for Him, as the Son of God, to be present with man in the body, to live as a man yet without sin, and then be offered as a sacrifice to propitiate for the sins of men (Luke 24:46). Luke says that He opened their minds. Yet the Holy Spirit still was not in them, so it is not clear how much they really grasped. Perhaps this was simply a good teacher repeating a lesson for slow students, knowing that when the Holy Spirit was given, He would bring it all to life for them.

          The great commission is also mentioned in Matthew 28:19-20, Mark 16:15-18, John  20:21-23. However, only Luke records that Jesus told them to wait in Jerusalem for the Holy Spirit to fall on them. Other accounts mention signs that would accompany the preaching of the gospel, and/or baptizing in the name of the Holy Spirit. Only Luke lays the foundation for the day of Pentecost that is recorded in Acts 2. This sending forth, which was previously foreshadowed in Luke 9 and 10, now truly makes them apostollos. Paul will ultimately epitomize the one sent out, being the apostle who carries the gospel to the known world, and who will, in his writings, emphasize the centrality of the Holy Spirit to the process of spreading the gospel.

Luke 24:13-35 The road to warm baths with the son of a renowned Father

Luke 24:13-35 Jesus appears to two disciples on the Emmaus Road.  This story is unique to Luke's account, except for a brief summary in Mark 16:12-13. Cleopas (Greek 2810: of a renowned father) is named as one of the travelers, the other is not named, and the Bible does not mention Cleopas anywhere else. Jesus talks with them yet they do not recognize him. He explains to them how all the scriptures (presumably the Old Testament in its entirety) pertained to Him. Their eyes are opened only when He blesses the meal, and then He vanishes. The two disciples immediately return to Jerusalem to tell the others.

          Why this cat and mouse game? Perhaps it is an example of how easy it is for us to not recognize the presence of God in our lives. He may be working through others, or through circumstances, or speaking to us through the Holy Spirit, and yet we do not realize it.  We have a renowned Father in heaven, and yet when He sends us the work of His Son, we attribute it to the natural workings of the world, to man's wisdom and activity, cause and effect, or some other source. Anything but Him. And yet, in the disciples' lives (as is shown in Acts), and in retrospect on our own lives, God is continuously acting on a personal and interpersonal basis with us. And it is on His initiative that our eyes are opened to this and we recognize Him. What does the breaking of bread symbolize? Perhaps it is the Lord's Supper, the first time after the resurrection that He participates in the breaking of bread since the Passover just before His arrest. Can we recognize Jesus at work in our lives in the simplest of daily activities, such as eating a meal?

Luke 23:50-24:12 Bereavemant & Amazement

Luke 23:50-56 Jesus is buried. Parallel passages Matthew 27:57-61; Mark 15:42-47; John 19:38-42. Two principle events. First, Joseph of Arimathea obtains permission to take Jesus' body and then buries it in his own tomb. Second, the women camp followers watch where Jesus' body is buried. Probably, if Joseph had not stepped forward, Jesus would have been buried in a common grave for paupers. It seems unlikely that His disciples would have had the nerve to step forward. And how would anyone have been able to prove or dispute Jesus' resurrection if His body had been in a common grave? He only needed to borrow it for three days.

          Luke does not mention, but Matthew 27:62-66 records that the chief priests asked for permission to put a guard on the tomb to prevent Jesus' body from being stolen by His disciples.  Why the priests thought that the disciples would have the nerve to do something like that is unknowable, given their state of fright. They based their request solely on Jesus' statement before His death that He would rise from the grave. Since in their view (being Sadducees apparently) it was impossible for someone to rise from the dead (despite Jesus having raised several people during His ministry), their only concern was that someone would try to fake it.

Luke 24:1-12 The disciples visit the empty tomb looking for Jesus' body. Parallel passages Matthew 28:1-7, Mark 16:1-8 , John 20:1-18.  John's account includes some details not present in the others.  We don't have any account of the actual event of Jesus rising from the dead. But when the Sabbath was over, Jesus' disciples, starting with the women camp-followers, worked up the courage to go to His grave. The body of Jesus was gone, the stone was rolled away, and then an angel appeared to them and asked, "Why do you seek the living among the dead?" The reference to Galilee varies among the accounts. Matthew & Mark report that the angel told them that He would go and meet them in Galilee while Luke's account has the angel telling them to remember what Jesus had told them while they were still in Galilee.

          Sometimes, when God acts in power, it is so far outside of our experience or expectations that we don't know what to make of it. When someone tells us that they have seen a miracle, and an angel has spoken to them, most of us would be pretty skeptical. The women's words appeared to the disciples to be nonsense, and they did not believe. And, in Peter's case, because of his denial of Christ before the crucifixion, and then seeing Jesus die on the cross, it seems likely that he was totally drained. He had no hope of seeing Jesus again. Even if it were true that He had risen from the dead, would He even want to see Peter again?  In any event, after the women told the disciples what had happened, Peter went to check it for himself. He did not see the angel, but did find the empty tomb, and he was amazed.

Luke 23:33-49 The crucifixion of Jesus

Luke 23:33-49 The crucifixion. Parallel passages Matthew 27:33-56, Mark 15:22-41, John 19:17-30. Luke records three scenes, each with a statement Jesus made on the cross. In the first scene (23:33-38), Jesus prays to the Father to forgive them because they did not know what they were doing. Pilate had put a sign up saying "the king of the Jews". But the religious leaders of the Jews mocked Him, as did the soldiers. One wouldn't expect anything else from Roman soldiers, but the religious leaders mocked His ability to save anyone since He was helpless on the cross.  It seems that they had no concept of God's plan of salvation. Or of God's ways, His nature, or His character. And yet Jesus asked the Father to forgive all of them.

          In the second scene (23:39-43) the thieves who are being crucified next to Jesus talk to Him. A clear contrast as one mocks Jesus, and the other has at least a good picture of truth. The thieves were being crucified because they were guilty of theft, but Jesus was being crucified even though He was innocent. And so the second thief had faith because he asked Jesus to remember him when He came into His kingdom. Since all three were dying on crosses, it is an indication that this second thief believed that there is life after death and that Jesus was going to establish His kingdom there. And Jesus' response to him was that that very day (before dark) he (the thief) would be with Him (Jesus) in Paradise. For a person in that situation, that must have been an incredible promise.  But the question we might ponder is how we respond when trouble befall us, troubles of our own making. Do we curse God and blaspheme, or question His ability to save? Or do we recognize our own culpability and please for mercy?

          The third scene (Like 23:44-49) records the final three hours from noon to 3PM, when there was darkness on the land, and then the end, Jesus quotes from Psalm 31:5. The veil of the temple was torn in two. And Jesus dies. The centurion is recorded as saying "Truly this man was innocent." Matthew 27:54 records that the centurion said, "Truly this man was the son of God." Perhaps he said both. The manner in which Jesus died, and the signs accompanying it, were enough to impress even the hardened gentile solider who witnessed it. And we are told, many other people, including many women, were also present and witnessed Jesus' death. The crowds who gathered to witness the spectacle were beating their breasts, but His followers, both disciples and women, watched from a distance.

          John 19:31-37 (but not Luke) records that the Jews asked Pilate to make sure the criminals were dead so that they would not be hanging on their crosses during the Passover. The basic idea was that if their legs were broken, they wouldn't be able to support their weight so they would hang their whole weight by their hands. This would result in suffocation. But when the soldiers came to Jesus they found that He was already dead and did not break His legs. This was a fulfillment of two prophecies. No bone of Him would be broken (Psalm 34:20). They will look on Him whom they pierced (Zechariah 12:10). So the Roman army attested to the death of Christ and put to rest any claims that He only passed out and was revived after resting a few days. Roman soldiers would have paid with their own lives if they had made a mistake in regard to this, and were unlikely to risk error.

          The bottom line on this, as far as we are concerned, is given in I Corinthians 11:26: "For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes." We were not there physically, but we give witness to these events when we partake of the Lord's Supper in faith. And 1 John 1:7:  "If we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin." This is the defining moment in eternity. Both our cleansing in our daily walk and our place in eternity are determined by how we respond to this event.

          There is a theological question that comes up in my mind. How is it possible for Jesus' righteousness to be transferred to us, and the guilt for our sins to be transferred to Him? This propitiation is pictured in the Old Testament through the animal sacrifices that were commanded in the Mosaic law. (e.g. Leviticus 4:32-35) The blood of bulls and goats could never take away sins (Hebrews 10:4), but the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin (I John 1:7). How? I think there is a spiritual transaction that takes place that is indescribable. But the essence seems to be that we are identified with Christ on the cross, and therefore we died with Him as a punishment for sin, and we also are raised with Him. (2 Corinthians 5:14-15) And this is only possible if we are in Him. How are we in Him when He is on the cross? This identification (this word actually falls far short of being "in" Him) may take many forms, but most likely these outward forms - public confession, baptism, participating in the Lord's Supper - are an expression and result of an inward decision and choice to identify with, accept, receive, surrender to Christ. 

Luke 23:26-32 The cross is a green tree

Luke 23:26-32 Walking the road with the cross and the condemned to the place of execution. Parallel passages Matthew 27:32, Mark 15:21, John  19:17. Simon of Cyrene was pressed into service to bear the cross because by this time, it is quite likely that Jesus had been so badly abused that He was physically unable to carry it. This was probably pretty scary for Simon because normally a prisoner would carry his own cross, and what would happen if the soldiers got confused and thought he was the one who had been condemned to death?

          As they were going a great multitude of people were following, and women who were mourning and lamenting Him. Jesus turned and gave them a very scary warning. In the future would come days when they will say blessed are those who never had children, because of the terrifying things that will happen. People will call for the mountains and hills to fall on them and protect them. An enigmatic statement in verse 31: "If they do these things in the green tree, what will happen in the dry?"

          Jesus' warning about the terrifying day to come parallels His words in Luke 21:23 and Matthew 24:19. That day would come about 40 years later, when Titus destroyed the Temple and Jerusalem was savaged. Calling for the mountains to fall on them is a reference to Isaiah 2:19, Hosea 10:8, and is repeated in Revelation 6:15-16. Since this warning is repeated in Revelation, which was penned after the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, it seems clear that Jesus' warning is to a yet future event. Revelation indicates this is in the context of the breaking of the sixth seal (Rev 6:12) accompanied by worldwide cataclysm, and the prayer for the mountains to fall on them and hide them is accompanied with the request that the mountains hide them from the presence of Him who sits on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb. Jesus is of course the Lamb in both contexts. In Luke He is being led away to slaughter (Isaiah 53:7), but in Revelation He returns to bring justice to the earth.

          Luke 23:31 therefore seems likely to mean that Jesus was saying, this is the day of grace, the tree is green and putting forth its blossoms. There will come a day of justice, when judgment will be administered, and the tree will be dry. In the day of grace, God will carry the penalty for sin, but in the Day of Judgment, those who reject God's provision will face that penalty without any mediation.

Luke 23:13-25 Jesus' second trial before Pilate

Luke 23:13-25 Jesus before Pilate part II. Parallel passages Matthew 27:11-26, Mark 15:1-15, John 18:28-29:16. Having failed to avoid responsibility for dealing with Jesus, Pilate now had to make a decision. Luke records Pilate's attempt to use a customary once-a-year pardon of a prisoner in an effort to get Christ released. This custom in itself has little explanation - why was Pilate obliged to release one prisoner to the Jews? Perhaps it was a Roman means of pacifying an occupied people, to let them think that they had some humaneness or mercy in their administration of the occupied territories. Pilate perhaps thought that the people would want Jesus released and he would thereby have some cover for refusing the priests' desire to have Jesus executed. It didn't work - most likely the priests had foreseen this possibility and worked out in advance how to get the people to ask for the release of Barabbas. From a strictly political view, Barabbas was probably more dangerous to the Romans, as a fomenter of rebellion, than Jesus, a teacher of unorthodox religion. So executing Barabbas and freeing Jesus would have been Pilate's preference. This gambit did not work.

          Matthew records some details not in Luke's account. Pilate's wife sent him a message telling him not to have anything to do with Jesus' death. (Matthew 27:19) The extent to which Pilate weighed his wife's concerns against his political duties is not told, only that the political necessities outweighed her advice. How often do we find ourselves in a situation where the advice of our spouse runs directly counter to what the world is telling us? How do we weigh conflicting advice? How often do we make the wrong decision?

          Matthew also records Pilate's ceremonial washing of his hands of the blood of Jesus. This was such a hypocritical farce that 'washing one's hands of the matter' is to this day a euphemism for trying to escape the responsibility for something that one has control of and refuses to accept responsibility. The peoples' response? “His blood shall be on us and on our children!” And to this day many Christians believe that the Jews are guilty of crucifying Christ. The point, of course, is that we must have the blood of Christ on us if we are to be freed from the guilt of our sins. In this sense, we are all guilty of His blood because all of us have sinned. (See Hebrews 9:14, one of several relevant verses.)

          John records a conversation between Jesus and Pilate about Jesus' royalty. Jesus quickly turns it to a discussion about truth. Pilate, being a politician and a pragmatist, simply had no belief that truth has any meaning. (John 18:38) It's all relative. It's all about what works.  Expediency. Of course he had no idea that a few hours earlier Jesus had explained to His disciples that He was the way, the truth, and the life. (John 14:6). And here Jesus also explains the consequences of accepting or rejecting the truth.

          In the end, Pilate delivered Jesus to their will. Whether his reluctance to execute Jesus had come from a genuine desire for justice or from political pragmatism is in the end irrelevant. He was out-maneuvered by the priests, who had whipped the crowd into a frenzy. And Pilate reckoned that a frenzied crowd and populace was more dangerous to Roman occupation than a miscarriage of justice.

          How often do people get pressured by the opinions and verbal protestations of those that they theoretically are leaders of? Does that really matter? Pharaoh was apparently not subject to any public pressure, but he served God's purpose by hardening his own heart. So Pilate served God's purpose here. These two examples might lead us to a kind of extreme Calvinism, that we are God's puppets and have no say in the matter. Jesus' words in John 19:11 suggest that, but Jesus only said that God had given Pilate authority; He did not say that God had forced Pilate to use his authority in a particular way.  That was up to Pilate. Yet in God's foreknowledge, He knew what Pilate would do with the authority he was given.