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

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

‘the stone that was rejected byyou, the builders;    it has become the cornerstone.’

12 “There is salvation in no oneelse, for there is no other name under heaven given among mortals by which wemust be saved.”

                **************

                Thefirst reading as defined by the Revised Common Lectionary once again takes usto the Book of Acts. Once again, the text centers on the proclamation ofChrist’s resurrection. The reading for the previous week came from Acts3:12-19, where we read of Peter’s sermon after the healing of the lamebeggar in the entrance to the Temple. That sermon, which actually ran to verse26 of Acts 3, caught the attention of the religious authorities. That may havebeen due to the fact that Peter was not very kind when speaking of theauthorities, blaming them for Jesus’ death and calling on them (and all thepeople) to repent. Not only did Peter and John challenge the authorities, butthey were doing a pretty good job making converts of the people. So, theleaders had them arrested (Acts 4:1-4).

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

When the trial began with Peter andJohn standing before this group of religious leaders, the two apostles wereasked: “By what power or by what name did you do this?” That questionopened the doors for Peter to launch into another sermon, with the goal ofdemonstrating the nature of their authority to speak as they did. At least inthe early going, it appears that Peter is willing to take whatever opportunitygiven to him to bear witness to Jesus and his resurrection. This occasion wasno different. The question was asked, and Peter had an answer.

Here in the Book of Acts, the HolySpirit is the guiding force in the church’s mission. When Jesus ascended afterthe resurrection, he commissioned his followers to be his witnesses, taking themessage 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 HolySpirit who would empower their work (Acts 1:8). The Spirit fell on the day ofPentecost, and the Spirit-empowered church, at least Peter and John, was emboldenedto preach the Gospel to any who would listen. Now, it would be the religiousleadership’s turn to hear the message. Although they were on trial, Peterdidn’t hold back.

The event that precipitated thearrest and subsequent defense was the healing in the Temple. So, Peter remindsthem that they were being questioned because they had done a good deed byhealing this man, a healing that led to a sermon. As for the power or authorityto 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 religiousauthorities or the Jews (as in John) crucified Jesus. In making thisaccusation, Peter essentially turns the tables on his judges. Rather than Peterbeing on trial, Peter is about to put them on trial for having Jesus executed. Peteraccuses these Jewish leaders of crucifying Jesus, although actually, it was theRomans who executed Jesus. As for certain religious leaders, they might havebeen complicit in Jesus’ execution, even as they sought to protect theirposition and perhaps whatever autonomy and self-rule granted to the people, by collaboratingwith the Romans. We must be careful here because passages like this have led toJews being Christ killers. When it comes to Peter’s rebuke of the religiousleaders, we can understand the rationale, but history requires that we addressthis problematic effort by Peter to blame the Jewish leadership.

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

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

We might need to separate out thetwo audiences involved in this story. There is Peter’s audience, which isJewish, and more specifically a Jewish audience that rejects both Jesus’authority and the resurrection. Then there is Luke’s audience who might beGentile. So, at one level this is an intra-family debate with two groups ofJews discussing the role Jesus plays in their respective visions of Judaism.So, is Peter asking his accusers to embrace his message of Jesus’ resurrectionas 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? Ofcourse, 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 forsalvation used here, sodzo, also can be translated as to heal. So, thelame man was “saved,” that is, “healed” in the name of Jesus.

This passage raises significantissues that a preacher might want to address, including questions about whatLuke had in mind here. As Ron Allen points out “Luke did not think about thesematters in the same terms as early twenty-first-century systematic theologianspuzzling over whether to invite their Jewish, Muslim, and Buddhist neighbors tobecome Christians” [Acts of the Apostles, p. 47]. In other words, must Iinvite my Hindu, Muslim, and Jewish friends to come to Jesus lest they sufferin hell for eternity? That I’ve not made that request suggests that’s not myway of thinking. With that in mind, we can ask another question. Again, I turnto Ron’s reading of Acts, who raises the question as to whether, whateverLuke’s belief on this matter, should “the church today insist thatpeople become Christians to be saved? Or, can the church acknowledge other waysto salvation, and even the possibility of universal salvation?” [Acts of the Apostles, p. 47]. These are questions worth pondering because they’re onthe hearts and minds of many, especially since for many the question ofsalvation is connected to one’s eternal destiny. We would be wise to heed the commentsmade by Fred Craddock and Eugene Boring, who suggest that “on the basis of thistext, Christians ought to say neither than only Christians shall ultimately besaved nor that people can be saved through a variety of saviors. Christiansshould 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 assavior, we would also be wise to ponder what salvation means not only to Lukebut to us. It is much more than simply purchasing a one-way ticket to heavenupon our deaths. The concept of salvation has several connotations and nuances,especially healing. Healing takes place in a variety of ways, includingphysically, spiritually, and emotionally. Salvation also speaks ofreconciliation, such that in Christ broken relationships are restored. As Paulwrites in 2 Corinthians 5:  

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

                Eastertideis a season in which we continue to celebrate resurrection, which in its ownway is an invitation to experience the new creation in Christ. That comes to usthrough God’s reconciling grace that is poured out on us through Christ. Letus, therefore, embrace Peter’s invitation to experience wholeness by embracingChrist the risen Lord and Savior. As for the question of authority, Peter makesit fairly clear that the invitation comes to us from the one who has beenraised from the dead.