Sermon Tone Analysis

PRAY

INTRO: We live in an age where information is fast and furious.

Some of that information is about as useless, as much a waste of time and money as the movie franchise by that same name.

(My insincere apologies to fans eagerly waiting for Fast and Furious… X!) But really, with internet and media, and polarized politics, we have to work extra hard to sift through the information we are given to determine if it is true or if it warrants our time and attention at all.

Many times we might have to admit that we don’t have enough evidence to be conclusive, or that we need to do a lot more work to investigate and get to the other side of the information maze.

But not everything in life is that uncertain or untrustworthy.

Some things have hard evidence that demands our attention.

The claims of Christ recorded in Scripture pass the test of historical reliability, despite postmodern cries to the contrary.

The evidence is strong and demands that we make a decision about Jesus.

In part two of a section in Acts 4 where Peter and John are bold witnesses under examination by the Sanhedrin, we see how those who oppose Christ are faced with hard evidence that Jesus is still at work through his followers.

Their Jesus problem isn’t going away; it’s growing.

But for Christ’s followers, opposition to Jesus by the religious leadership in Israel now becomes opposition to the Apostles and Christ’s growing church.

So Peter and John are arrested and jailed overnight for healing a man and preaching Christ publicly in the temple.

The next day, they are interrogated by the Sanhedrin, and Peter, filled with the Spirit, gives an astonishingly bold and clear proclamation of the gospel.

Then this is what follows:

We have two major themes working in tandem.

There is a continuation of this theme of the Apostles being bold under pressure, and there is a second theme of how the obvious evidence about the continued work of Jesus becomes a significant challenge for those who would oppose him.

But even these opponents must admit what we discussed last week, which is the…

The Boldness of Peter and John (v.

13)

… to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ even when they are being threatened by the highest court in the land, the very same Sanhedrin that had Jesus killed.

The word translated as boldness (in v. 13) to describe Peter and John is exactly what you would expect it to mean.

It is a confidence and courage, “the trait of being willing to undertake activities that involve risk or danger; especially [in] being honest and straightforward in attitude and speech.”

(Bible Sense Lexicon, Logos Bible Software)

We as followers of Jesus Christ immediately see something here in these two Apostles that we should desire to emulate: this boldness.

What do we learn from this verse and context about what it takes to be courageous for Christ?

What does it NOT take to be a bold witness for Christ?

The text tells us that the religious elite were “astonished” by their boldness bc they “perceived that they were uneducated” and “common.”

To think that they were uneducated and common isn’t to say that they were stupid and illiterate.

It is the simple recognition that these men are not formally training in the advanced rabbinic schools.

Again, there’s nothing inherently wrong or right about being ordinary, any more than there is anything inherently wrong or right about having a superior intellect.

We trust God with the way he has made us in this life.

And there certainly isn’t anything wrong with receiving extended training and education; see the life and experience of the Apostle Paul.

There’s nothing wrong with being educated or uncommon, but such isn’t a requirement for being used of God to boldly proclaim Christ.

What does it take to be a bold witness for Christ?

“And they recognized that they had been with Jesus.”

Their knowledge had come in the school of 24/7 ministry with Jesus for three years—his teaching, trials, prayer, compassion—and then witnessing his death, resurrection, appearances, and ascension.

The fact that they personally knew Jesus and had been changed by him was evident in their scriptural knowledge, bold proclamation, and spiritual clarity.

It requires being in Christ and learning from Christ.

Like their education, the Apostles’ authority to speak so boldly was literally derived from Jesus.

This is authority by association and commission.

When we are saved and restored to God through faith in Christ, we are adopted as sons of God and become his ambassadors to the world.

Knowing Christ transforms our identity and our mission, our purpose.

But, I think it would be silly for us to assume that they are bold in spite of ignorance.

Again, I mentioned last week that we have another word for ignorantly courageous: foolishness.

Peter and John are not ignorant; they learned from the Master.

Ignorance isn’t a virtue.

Humble dependence and hard work in study and in service are virtues.

How will we grow in confidence of our standing in Christ, and courageous that he has given us authority, and bold and clear in our declaration of the gospel?

We must draw near to God by the ordinary means of his grace to us: listening to him (through personal study of the word and through sound teaching), communing with him in prayer, fellowshipping with his people (in service to one another and in advancement of the gospel), and experiencing God prove himself as we obey the command of Christ.

By doing these things, we abide in Jesus and learn from him.

Here are some other implications from the surrounding text as well, most of these connected in some way to what we just pointed out from v. 13:

It requires being controlled by the Spirit (in fellowship with and dependence on God).

Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders, -Acts 4:8 (ESV)

Spiritual courage isn’t conjured up by hype; it comes from being controlled by the Holy Spirit.

Secondly, what do I always say is the primary evidence of our dependence on God? Prayer.

We see this take place in the very next section of this chapter when the disciples gather after Peter and John are released:

So too being a bold witness...

It requires a willingness to trust God in spite of the risk.

Since this Sanhedrin is the very same that tried and had Jesus crucified, the most bold among the new covenant community will also be perceived as the greatest threat to their power and authority and become a target.

Peter and John are in their crosshairs.

But who is sovereign over all his enemies?

Jesus, who is Lord.

As we said last week, being opposed for the sake of Christ is in fact confirmation that we are following in our Lord’s footsteps.

It requires an obedience to pursue and to seize opportunities.

I find it highly unlikely that the summary statement in verse 4, of their now being more than 5,000 men among the converts, is solely due to the two sermons Peter has preached.

The new community in Christ is undoubtedly pursuing public and private opportunities to proclaim Jesus to everyone their lives touch.

And what did Peter and John do when their compassionate healing of a man lame from birth drew a crowd?

They preached Christ.

And what did they do when interrogated by the Sanhedrin about their authority for such things?

They preached Christ.

It requires crystal clear proclamation of the gospel.

We’ve seen the clarity of Peter’s first two sermons in chapter 2 and chapter 3, even taking into account his Jewish audience and that Luke undoubtedly summarizes what was longer teaching.

And then here again, before the highest court in Israel, Peter boldly declares the crux of the gospel:

We’ll continue to talk about the need for this kind of clear gospel proclamation as we continue in v. 14, so let’s move forward.

Those who oppose the Apostles have an... Evidence Problem.

The Opposition’s Evidence Problem (vv.

14-16, 22)

Please look back with me at the text.

Verse 14 shows they cannot deny that the healed man is literally “standing beside them,” and Ac 3:10 reminds us that people clearly recognized him as the lame man who begged at the Beautiful Gate, and v. 22 here confirms that God miraculously healed this man who had been an invalid for more than forty years!

So they remove Peter and John and everybody else in order to discuss in private what to do.

(By the way, this means that at some point there was a source passed down to Luke, or maybe even whom Luke personally interviewed, who was an insider among the Sanhedrin.

Nicodemus or another sympathizer or convert to Christianity.)

Anyway, in v. 16 the opposing leaders, admit with perfect clarity: [reread v. 16].

So here’s my summary of their evidence problem:

Miraculous transformation speaks for itself and silences rational opposition.

The miraculous transformation, this man’s healing, speaks for itself.

But that alone is not sufficient to bring clarity to the gospel.

So too do creation and human conscience declare the existence and glory of God (Rom 1), and are sufficient to convict us of refusing to seek God.

But creation and conscience alone do not proclaim the gospel.

If they did, people could be saved without ever hearing of Jesus.

That is contrary to the plain teaching of Scripture.

God has providentially determined that that the gospel of Jesus Christ must be declared and then received.

Even our transformed lives are evidence of the power of Jesus, but that alone does not clarify the holiness of God, and the sinfulness of man, and the perfection and sacrifice of Christ, his resurrection and exaltation, and the need for repentance and faith to be saved.

While miraculous transformation doesn’t proclaim the whole gospel, it does silence rational opposition.

“They had nothing to say in opposition.”

In other words (applying this to more than just the miraculous healing), godly living makes it such that persecution must have ulterior motive and false accusation.

Here are a couple of good scriptural reminders for us:

Just so, the religious leaders in Acts 4 find themselves in a pickle.

‘How can our Jesus problem be growing only bigger with him gone?’

As verse 16 shows, in spite of their private deliberation, the evidence problem really leaves the council with no good legal recourse or socially acceptable option, bc both they and everybody can see the evidence.

So what do they have left to do?