Who Authorized Your Ministry? —Lectionary Reflection for Easter 4B (Acts 4)

Acts 4:5-12 New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

⁵ The next day their rulers, elders, and scribes assembled in Jerusalem, ⁶ with Annas the high priest, Caiaphas, John, and Alexander, and all who were of the high-priestly family. ⁷ When they had made the prisoners stand in their midst, they inquired, “By what power or by what name did you do this?” ⁸ Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders, ⁹ if we are being questioned today because of a good deed done to someone who was sick and are being asked how this man has been healed, ¹⁰ let it be known to all of you, and to all the people of Israel, that this man is standing before you in good health by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead. ¹¹ This Jesus is

‘the stone that was rejected by you, the builders;

    it has become the cornerstone.’

¹² “There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among mortals by which we must be saved.”

                **************

                The first reading as defined by the Revised Common Lectionary once again takes us to the Book of Acts. Once again, the text centers on the proclamation of Christ’s resurrection. The reading for the previous week came from Acts 3:12-19, where we read of Peter’s sermon after the healing of the lame beggar in the entrance to the Temple. That sermon, which actually ran to verse 26 of Acts 3, caught the attention of the religious authorities. That may have been due to the fact that Peter was not very kind when speaking of the authorities, blaming them for Jesus’ death and calling on them (and all the people) to repent. Not only did Peter and John challenge the authorities, but they were doing a pretty good job making converts of the people. So, the leaders had them arrested (Acts 4:1-4).

The reading for the Fourth Sunday of Easter picks the story up at the trial before the Council that takes place the day after the arrests. Luke suggests that the rules, elders, and scribes gathered in Jerusalem with Annas, the High Priest, and his family (Caiphas, John, and Alexander) in attendance. It should be noted here that the High Priest and most of the leadership in attendance would have been members of the party of the Sadducees, a conservative party that rejected the resurrection and collaborated with the Romans. Seemingly absent here are members of the party of the Pharisees, who like Jesus’ followers, believed in the resurrection.

When the trial began with Peter and John standing before this group of religious leaders, the two apostles were asked: “By what power or by what name did you do this?” That question opened the doors for Peter to launch into another sermon, with the goal of demonstrating the nature of their authority to speak as they did. At least in the early going, it appears that Peter is willing to take whatever opportunity given to him to bear witness to Jesus and his resurrection. This occasion was no different. The question was asked, and Peter had an answer.

Here in the Book of Acts, the Holy Spirit is the guiding force in the church’s mission. When Jesus ascended after the resurrection, he commissioned his followers to be his witnesses, taking the message of the resurrection from Jerusalem to the ends of the earth. However, he told them to wait until the Holy Spirit came upon them, for it was the Holy Spirit who would empower their work (Acts 1:8). The Spirit fell on the day of Pentecost, and the Spirit-empowered church, at least Peter and John, was emboldened to preach the Gospel to any who would listen. Now, it would be the religious leadership’s turn to hear the message. Although they were on trial, Peter didn’t hold back.

The event that precipitated the arrest and subsequent defense was the healing in the Temple. So, Peter reminds them that they were being questioned because they had done a good deed by healing this man, a healing that led to a sermon. As for the power or authority to do all of this, it came from Jesus, whom, according to Peter they crucified. Now, we need to stop for a moment and address the accusation that the religious authorities or the Jews (as in John) crucified Jesus. In making this accusation, Peter essentially turns the tables on his judges. Rather than Peter being on trial, Peter is about to put them on trial for having Jesus executed. Peter accuses these Jewish leaders of crucifying Jesus, although actually, it was the Romans who executed Jesus. As for certain religious leaders, they might have been complicit in Jesus’ execution, even as they sought to protect their position and perhaps whatever autonomy and self-rule granted to the people, by collaborating with the Romans. We must be careful here because passages like this have led to Jews being Christ killers. When it comes to Peter’s rebuke of the religious leaders, we can understand the rationale, but history requires that we address this problematic effort by Peter to blame the Jewish leadership.

Not only did they (the religious authorities) participate in the crucifixion of Jesus, but God reacted to their actions by raising Jesus from the dead. That action on God’s part authorized their activity by healing the man as well as raising Jesus. Therefore, Peter calls Jesus the “stone that was rejected by you, the builders, it has become the cornerstone.” This accusation is based on a modified version of Psalm 118:22. Peter modifies it by making his accusers the builders who rejected Jesus, the cornerstone of, one must assume, the Temple.

With that Peter addresses the question of salvation. It’s a declaration that appears rather exclusivist and has been used as a prooftext in defending the premise that no one can receive salvation without confessing faith in Jesus. After all, it seems rather clear that “there is no other name under heaven given among mortals by which we must be saved.”  The question is, what is Peter up to here? Remember that he’s been calling for repentance on the part of those who are complicit in the death of Jesus. Thus, this statement invites us to ponder what Peter means by salvation and how Jesus’ name is involved. Does he mean that a person’s eternal destiny hinges on their confession of faith in Jesus? That is one interpretation that is often heard. The question is must we read this in this way or might we read it more inclusively?

We might need to separate out the two audiences involved in this story. There is Peter’s audience, which is Jewish, and more specifically a Jewish audience that rejects both Jesus’ authority and the resurrection. Then there is Luke’s audience who might be Gentile. So, at one level this is an intra-family debate with two groups of Jews discussing the role Jesus plays in their respective visions of Judaism. So, is Peter asking his accusers to embrace his message of Jesus’ resurrection as a way of reconciling? That is, since his judges insist that Jesus is dead, is Peter asking them to let go of their skepticism and embrace his vision? Of course, Peter extends this by insisting that there is no other name but Jesus’ upon which mortals can be saved. Let us remember that the Greek word for salvation used here, sodzo, also can be translated as to heal. So, the lame man was “saved,” that is, “healed” in the name of Jesus.

This passage raises significant issues that a preacher might want to address, including questions about what Luke had in mind here. As Ron Allen points out “Luke did not think about these matters in the same terms as early twenty-first-century systematic theologians puzzling over whether to invite their Jewish, Muslim, and Buddhist neighbors to become Christians” [Acts of the Apostles, p. 47]. In other words, must I invite my Hindu, Muslim, and Jewish friends to come to Jesus lest they suffer in hell for eternity? That I’ve not made that request suggests that’s not my way of thinking. With that in mind, we can ask another question. Again, I turn to Ron’s reading of Acts, who raises the question as to whether, whatever Luke’s belief on this matter, should “the church today insist that people become Christians to be saved? Or, can the church acknowledge other ways to salvation, and even the possibility of universal salvation?” [Acts of the Apostles, p. 47]. These are questions worth pondering because they’re on the hearts and minds of many, especially since for many the question of salvation is connected to one’s eternal destiny. We would be wise to heed the comments made by Fred Craddock and Eugene Boring, who suggest that “on the basis of this text, Christians ought to say neither than only Christians shall ultimately be saved nor that people can be saved through a variety of saviors. Christians should confess their faith that the God revealed in Christ is the only Savior, without claiming that only those who respond in faith will be saved” [The People’s New Testament Commentary, p. 378].

As we confess faith in Jesus as savior, we would also be wise to ponder what salvation means not only to Luke but to us. It is much more than simply purchasing a one-way ticket to heaven upon our deaths. The concept of salvation has several connotations and nuances, especially healing. Healing takes place in a variety of ways, including physically, spiritually, and emotionally. Salvation also speaks of reconciliation, such that in Christ broken relationships are restored. As Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 5:  

¹⁷So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; look, new things have come into being! ¹⁸ All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and has given us the ministry of reconciliation; ¹⁹ that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us. ²⁰ So we are ambassadors for Christ, since God is making his appeal through us; we entreat you on behalf of Christ: be reconciled to God. (2 Cor 5:17-20).

                Eastertide is a season in which we continue to celebrate resurrection, which in its own way is an invitation to experience the new creation in Christ. That comes to us through God’s reconciling grace that is poured out on us through Christ. Let us, therefore, embrace Peter’s invitation to experience wholeness by embracing Christ the risen Lord and Savior. As for the question of authority, Peter makes it fairly clear that the invitation comes to us from the one who has been raised from the dead.