A Study of the Book of Acts
Sermon # 8
“Standing for Jesus: A Word on Social Responsibility”
Acts 4:13-22
The Christians in the early church made a tremendous impact upon the society in which they lived. There were some things that stood out about them and marked them as the saints of God in their day. What was characteristic of them, when they had been with Jesus, should be true of me and you today. Time does not change what the Holy Spirit brings about in us, when we are surrendered and dependent upon Him.
It is high time that the people of God begin to rise up and take their rightful place as children of the King of glory. It is time to get off the spiritual roller coaster and get committed to the cause of Christ. It is time for Christians in America to stand up and be counted. If you will allow Him, Jesus will begin to develop commitment and dedication in your life.
We last left the apostles Peter and John, they had been hailed into court before the Sanhedrin, the Jewish rulers of Jerusalem. With them was the former lame man who had been made whole. Peter had said to him, "Silver and gold have I none, but such as I have give I unto you; in the name of Jesus of Nazareth, rise up and walk!" (3:6). Peter and John had been arrested because they had used the occasion to preach Jesus and the resurrection.
The Jewish religious leaders found this preaching about Jesus and the resurrection threatening and was the cause of them sending the authorities to arrest them and bring them before the Jewish court. Once there Peter boldly charged these men with the death of Jesus and declared to them a magnificent truth. "There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved," (4:12 RSV) No other savior has ever been provided for men anywhere in the world, in any age or time, than Jesus. That is the great message Peter preached. Now Dr. Luke takes up the account, beginning with verse thirteen of chapter four:
“Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated and untrained men, they marveled. And they realized that they had been with Jesus. (14) And seeing the man who had been healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it. (15) But when they had commanded them to go aside out of the council, they conferred among themselves, (16) saying, “What shall we do to these men? For, indeed, that a notable miracle has been done through them is evident to all who dwell in Jerusalem, and we cannot deny it. (17) But so that it spreads no further among the people, let us severely threaten them, that from now on they speak to no man in this name.” (18) So they called them and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus. (19) But Peter and John answered and said to them, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge. (20) For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.” (21) So when they had further threatened them, they let them go, finding no way of punishing them, because of the people, since they all glorified God for what had been done. (22) For the man was over forty years old on whom this miracle of healing had been performed.” Acts 4:13-22 (NKJV)
I. THE DEFENSE OF THE GOSPEL 4:5-12
Peter, John and the healed lame man were put in the center, of the assembled Sanhedrin and demanded to answer, “by what power, or in what name, have you done this?” The issue is a familiar one—that of authority (v.7). As the highest religious body in the land, the Sanhedrin felt they should authorize all teaching and ministry in their midst, especially that which was done in the precincts of the temple. Just who did these two “nobody’s” think they were, going into the temple as if they owned the place, doing and teaching whatever they wished?
Peter’s response to this challenge was incredibly short and to the point. It was a response empowered by the Holy Spirit (v. 8). He begins by pointing out that, far from doing any evil, a sick man has been made well (verse 9). This can hardly be a crime. And as to the power through which this benevolent deed was accomplished, it was that of Jesus the Christ, Jesus the Nazarene, the very One they had rejected and put to death, but whom God had raised from the dead (verse 10). In rejecting Jesus of Nazareth, these leaders fulfilled the prophecy which foretold that the very cornerstone of God’s building would be rejected by the builders (verse 11, cited from Psalm 118:22). This cornerstone must be accepted, and those who rejected Him must repent, if they would be saved, for it was only through this name that one can be saved (verse 12). Jesus was the name by which the man was healed and through which the apostles ministered. Jesus was the only name by which any person could be saved.
II. THE DILEMMA OF THE RULERS 4:13-18
A. THEIR CONFUSION (vv. 13-14)
“Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated and untrained men, they marveled. And they realized that they had been with Jesus. (14) And seeing the man who had been healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it.”
How could these uneducated, common men have such poise and confidence? The conclusion they came to is most remarkable. Their explanation was that these men had been with Jesus. Verse 13 says, “they saw….and perceived” carry the meaning to “direct special attention to the fact as an important piece of relevant evidence and then concluded..”
The seventy-one members of the Sanhedrim were amazed at the courage of the apostles. Then it dawned on them. These men had been with Jesus. They remembered how Jesus also spoke with authority, even though he was unschooled and unlettered. Additionally, they remembered how Jesus performed miracles. Jesus was the reason for their courage.
B. THEIR CONFERENCE (vv. 15-16)
“But when they had commanded them to go aside out of the council, they conferred among themselves, (16) saying, “What shall we do to these men? For, indeed, that a notable miracle has been done through them is evident to all who dwell in Jerusalem, and we cannot deny it.”
Peter and John, along with the healed man, were sent out of the room. The leaders knew that they could not deny the lame man had been healed. To do this would have made them the laughingstock of Jerusalem. Verse 14 says, “And seeing the man who had been healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it.” It is hard to miss that Luke uses the word “standing” intentionally, for emphasis and perhaps for irony.
Notice that not even once did they deliberate as to what “the truth” of the matter might be. They did not ask if they could have been wrong, and Jesus (and now His disciples) could have been right. They did not even discuss the resurrection of Jesus and whether or not it was true. They could not deny the fact that a most significant miracle had been performed. The whole council were convicted that a miracle had taken place; that it was a clear case, a well-known thing, and it was done by the apostles.
They did not want the truth they knew the truth. What they wanted was to suppress the truth (Romans 1:18). “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress (KJV – hold down) the truth in unrighteousness,” Romans 1:18 (NKJV)
C. THEIR CONCLUSION (v. 17)
“But so that it spreads no further among the people, let us severely threaten them, that from now on they speak to no man in this name.”
All they did was to consider the “consequences” of letting this movement continue. Whenever a person clings to falsehood and unbelief in the face of convincing evidence it is a tragedy. These seventy-one men, who sit on the highest judicial court in their nation, are given repeated evidence, which demand faith in Christ and yet they reject them outright.
Can you see how tragic their decision is? They refused to repent of their wrong-doing in putting to death God’s Son.
They decided that they must do whatever they can to contain the damage to their position by a raw exercise of power.
D. THEIR COMMAND (v. 18)
“So they called them and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus.”
They turned to Peter and John, and they said, do not “speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus.” We must note here that the Sanhedrin had to threaten these apostles to try to make them stop speaking about Jesus Christ, but today no one has to threaten us. Seduced by the world, by pleasure, by material possessions, many of us have already been silenced in our witness of Christ, to our shame, and no government action is necessary.
Their tactic was simple, and it is still the tactic the world uses today: If you can’t ignore the Christians, intimidate them. The goal, of course, is to get these Christians to cool it when it comes to living out biblical Christianity. Notice that the religious leaders were willing to let them both believe anything they chose. What they were not willing to let them do was to act on what they believed. That is precisely what the world tells us today. "We respect your right to your religious belief, just don’t impose that belief on anyone else." The fact of the matter is that we can’t impose our beliefs on anyone. But that’s not what they mean. What they mean is that they do not want us acting on what we believe. They don’t want us talking about what we believe. They certainly don’t want us trying to influence other people to believe what we believe. And when we live out what we believe and stand up for what we believe, they are threatened, so they seek to threaten us. They just want us to calm down, to lay low, and to blend in.
When the state tells us, “You can be religious, but you must do it privately,” it is doing exactly what was done in the Soviet Union under Communism. The Soviet state tolerated religion, but it had to be practiced privately. In the Soviet state the parents could not even teach religious practices to their own children. Unless something is done in this country we are on the same path.
III. THE DETERMINATION OF THE
DISCIPLES 4:19-22
“But Peter and John answered and said to them, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge. (20) For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.” (21) So when they had further threatened them, they let them go, finding no way of punishing them, because of the people, since they all glorified God for what had been done. (22) For the man was over forty years old on whom this miracle of healing had been performed.”
Peter’s answer is a vitally important one, for it points the way to all who are forced to choose between obeying God or men. The choice between “right” and “wrong” is not left to Israel’s leaders. Peter’s words indicate that the ultimatum given them forced them to choose between obeying their authority or God’s (verse 19). And the inference of Peter’s words is that regardless of their decision, Peter and John would persist in preaching the gospel. When man’s authority over men contradicts obedience to God, men must disobey men and obey God.
When the state forbid the apostles from doing something that God had told them to do, Peter and John refused. They did not deny the states authority. The state had the right to make whatever laws it saw fit. In fact, Peter and John acknowledge their authority when they said, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge” (v. 19).
They said, If you think that it is right to listen to you rather than obey God, you will have to judge. But as far as we are concerned, God has told us something to do and we are going to do it regardless of what you say.
We find glimpses of this abuse of authority even in the United States where the authorities are determined to eliminate the influence of the true gospel from the marketplace of ideas. In the modern society, everything is acceptable except the gospel. In the educational system, everything is allowed except the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. In our media every kind of filth can be paraded, but the righteousness of the gospel is forbidden.
As we stand on the eve of another national election it is fitting, that we have here a lesson on social responsibility, that we be reminded of our civic responsibilities as Christian’s.
Often today in the belief that we are refusing to cooperate with an evil worldly system we, as Christian’s have withdrawn from the political arena. We have said, “I’m not interested in voting because, after all, politicians are all equally bad. None of them stand for anything, unless it is wrong. I am going to stay home, got to church, raise my children and ignore the world.”
But we can’t do that!!! This morning I want to close by sharing with you your five duties as a citizen.
Application
Mark Twain, although not himself a Christian, understood a Christian’s responsibility for he wrote, “ A Christian’s first duty is to God. It then follows, as a matter of course, that it is his duty to carry his Christian code of morals to the polls and vote them…If Christian’s should vote their duty to God at the polls, they would carry every election, and do it with ease…..it would bring about a moral revolution that would be incalculably beneficent. It would save the country.”
Your Five Duties As A Christian Citizen
1. Pray. Pray that God will send a great spiritual awakening to our country. God is the only one that can save America from it downward spiral, no matter what the politicians may say.
2. Register to Vote. Voting is a another area of our stewardship to God. Yet millions are qualified voters are not even registered to vote.
3. Become Informed. Learn what the current political problems and issues are and how each of the candidates stand on those issues.
4. Help Elect Godly People. The most effective way to restore Godly rule in American is to quit electing ungodly candidates to office.
5. Vote. It believed in this country that decisions are made
by the majority of the people, that is not so!!! Decisions
are made by a majority of those who vote.
Noah Webster said it well when he said, “ In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate…look at his character…It is alleged by men of loose principles, or defective views of the subject, that religion and morality are not necessary or important qualifications for political stations. But the Scriptures teach a different doctrine. They direct that rulers should be men who rule in the fear of God, able men, such as fear God, men of truth,…
When a citizen gives his vote to a man of known immorality, he abuses his civic responsibility; he sacrifices not only his own interest, but that of his neighbor; he betrays the interest of his country.”
