THEN PETER STOOD up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: “Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say. 15These men are not drunk, as you suppose. It’s only nine in the morning! 16No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:
17“ ‘In the last days, God says,
I will pour out my Spirit on all people.
Your sons and daughters will prophesy,
your young men will see visions,
your old men will dream dreams.
18Even on my servants, both men and women,
I will pour out my Spirit in those days,
and they will prophesy.
19I will show wonders in the heaven above
and signs on the earth below,
blood and fire and billows of smoke.
20The sun will be turned to darkness
and the moon to blood
before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord.
21And everyone who calls
on the name of the Lord will be saved.’
22“Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 23This man was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. 24But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him. 25David said about him:
“ ‘I saw the Lord always before me.
Because he is at my right hand,
I will not be shaken.
26Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices;
my body also will live in hope,
27because you will not abandon me to the grave,
nor will you let your Holy One see decay.
28You have made known to me the paths of life;
you will fill me with joy in your presence.’
29“Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. 30But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. 31Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay. 32God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact. 33Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. 34For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said,
“ ‘The Lord said to my Lord:
“Sit at my right hand
35until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet.” ’
36“Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”
37When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”
38Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”
40With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” 41Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.
Original Meaning
PETER, NO LONGER afraid to own his Lord, stands up to speak to those gathered to witness the amazing phenomena that had been manifested (v. 14). But he stands up “with the Eleven,” which suggests that the other apostles are backing him. Ministry is almost always done as a team in Acts.1 But there may have been a deeper reason for all of them to stand up. The vacancy of the twelfth person, who had to be a witness to the resurrection, had been filled just prior to Pentecost. Peter’s speech will hinge upon the fact of the resurrection. When he says, “We are all witnesses of the fact” (2:32), he must have been referring to the Eleven standing beside him.
Robert Mounce presents what can be considered the common apostolic gospel (euangelion) or kerygma, containing three basic features found in Peter’s speech:
(1) a historical proclamation of the [I would add “life and ministry” here] death, resurrection and exaltation of Jesus, set forth as the fulfillment of prophecy and involving man’s responsibility; (2) a theological evaluation of the person of Jesus as both Lord and Christ; (3) a summons to believe and receive the forgiveness of sins.2
Explaining the Phenomena (2:14–21)
PETER LAUNCHES HIS message by connecting with his audience through something they can relate to: the mockers’ statement that they are drunk (v. 15). This is a wise method to win the attention of his audience insofar as it relates to something that the people are curious about. He points out the unlikeness of the charge: “It’s only nine in the morning!” (v. 15).3 Then he points to the real reason for the surprising phenomena they have witnessed: the fulfillment of a prophecy by Joel (Joel 2:28–32) that all devout Jews have been longing to see fulfilled (Acts 2:17a). At that time Peter may not have fully understood the full implications of what was meant by “all people” upon whom the Spirit will be poured out. But with hindsight Luke, who records this, knows that it includes Gentiles.
The expression “last days” in this prophecy includes two distinct periods; the start of the second one is separated from the start of the first by a long time. But in a way typical of the prophetic perspective, these two events are juxtaposed side by side by the prophet Joel. What the people are witnessing is the “beginning”4 of the last days, when people of all types and ages will prophecy (vv. 17b–18). At the “end”5 of the last days will be cosmic disturbances (vv. 19–20; cf. Rev. 6:12–14; 8:5, 7; 20:9), which will herald “the great and glorious day of the Lord” (v. 20b)—the day of judgment at the end of the world. For believers, this will not be a time to dread, for “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (v. 21).
Peter incorporates tongues here loosely under the idea of prophecy. This must be because the apostles are speaking here in recognizable languages, which is like prophecy in that it edifies the church (see 1 Cor. 14:1–5, 39).6 In the Old Testament the coming of the Spirit on persons for special purposes is often accompanied by their prophesying (Num. 11:26–29; 1 Sam. 10:6–12). The Jews came to believe that “with the passing of the last of the writing prophets in the early post-exilic period the spirit of prophecy had ceased in Israel.” But they “expected that with the coming of the Messianic age there would be a special outpouring of God’s Spirit, in fulfillment of Ezekiel 37, and that prophecy would once again flourish.”7 Peter is telling the people that this age of fulfillment for which they have been eagerly waiting has dawned. This point about fulfillment of prophecy was a key aspect of the kerygma of the early church.8
The Miracles and Death of Christ (2:22–23)
PETER’S PRESENTATION OF the gospel begins with a reference to the miracles of Christ as evidence that he was accredited by God (v. 22). Since Luke is only giving a summary of the speech,9 presumably Peter speaks at some length about Christ’s ministry.10 He points out that the hearers know these facts. In his Gospel, Luke quotes Jesus as saying: “But if I drive out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come to you” (Luke 11:20). Here too his miracles are presented as evidence that God has accredited him.
Next, Peter presents the death of Christ as having been caused by the audience, but also as being “by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge” (v. 23). We see here, as often in Scripture, the paradox between divine providence and human responsibility (4:27–28). While God planned for Christ to die on the cross, those who carried out this act were responsible for it. The idea that this was God’s plan was far from Peter’s mind when he first heard about Christ’s impending death (Matt. 16:22). But with the teaching of Jesus, especially through his explanations after the resurrection (Luke 24:27, 45–46), he realized that all of this was part of God’s plan. For this reason the Gospels often report that Christ’s death was according to God’s plan, having been predicted by the prophets (Luke 18:31; 24:25–26, 46). This is also a common theme in the evangelistic preaching of Acts (2:23; 3:18; 8:32–35; 13:27, 29).
This affirmation that the cross was a preplanned redemptive act of God was the Christian response to the fact that a crucified Messiah was a stumbling block to the Jews (see 1 Cor. 1:23). As Gordon Fee puts it, to the Jews “Christ Crucified is a contradiction in terms, of the same category as ‘fried ice.’ ”11 The first Christians must have thought hard about how to respond to this stumbling block in their evangelism with the Jews, and they came up with this strategy of presenting it as a triumph that God had planned from the beginning.
The Resurrection (2:24–32)
THE RESURRECTION OCCUPIES nine verses of Peter’s sermon. The language of verse 24 is graphic. The Bible often refers to the resurrection as an act of God (“God raised him”), which is in keeping with the fact that it was God’s accreditation of the person and work of Christ. “Freeing him from the agony of death” literally reads, “when he had loosed the pangs [odin] of death.”12 The word odin usually denoted the pains of childbirth. The next statement, “It was impossible for death to keep its hold on him,” clearly shows that Peter is using the resurrection as a validation of Jesus’ life and ministry. Because he is Messiah, he cannot remain dead. G. Bertram describes beautifully what Peter is saying: “The abyss can no more hold the Redeemer than a pregnant woman can hold the child in her body.”13
In verses 25–28 Peter quotes Psalm 16:8–11, where David anticipates a resurrection. Then he goes on to argue that, since David did not rise from the dead, this passage must be referring to David’s great Son, Jesus (vv. 29–31). Longenecker explains how the apostles followed the exegetical precedent set by Jesus in interpreting Psalm 110 as a messianic psalm (cf. Mark 12:35–37) as well as Psalm 16 (which has similar phrases). Presumably Jesus referred to this psalm in his post-resurrection explanations (cf. Luke 24:44). Peter clinches his argument for the resurrection with his claim: “We are all witnesses of the fact” (Acts 2:32).
The Exaltation (2:33–35)
PETER NEXT STATES that Jesus has been exalted to the right hand of the Father and connects the event of Pentecost with this exaltation. Jesus received the Holy Spirit from the Father and has poured out what they have just seen and heard (v. 33). While we often speak of the ascension of Christ, the scriptural term exaltation may be a more appropriate word since it implies the significance of the event. In the New Testament the resurrection and exaltation of Christ are held in close association with each other, almost as if they constituted a single event. Note Peter’s words here: “This Jesus God raised up again. . . . Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God . . .” (vv. 32–33, NASB).14
After his resurrection, Jesus met the disciples often, but we are not told how and where he spent the rest of his time. Was he already, in a sense, exalted? What we do know is that in his recording the ascension, Luke “was describing the cessation of the resurrection appearances of Jesus—‘an acted declaration of finality.’ ”15 He did appear in his exalted state one more time to Paul on the road to Damascus—an event that was more like a resurrection appearance than a vision (1 Cor. 15:8). G. E. Ladd feels that the resurrection appearances “were condescensions of the glorified Christ to convince them that he was really alive again.”16
As with the resurrection, Peter gives evidences for the exaltation of Christ. (1) He appeals to their experience of the Holy Spirit, which is proof that Jesus has indeed gone to heaven and sent the one he promised (v. 33). (2) He quotes from another Davidic psalm (Ps. 110) and, as before (vv. 29–31), claims that what David said there cannot apply to him: “David did not ascend to heaven” (vv. 34–35). This quotation also gives us a clue as to what Christ is doing now in his exalted state: He is seated at the right hand of God and bringing to pass the complete defeat of his enemies. The phrase “The Lord said to my Lord” is significant. While the same word is used in the Greek both times for “Lord,” the Hebrew of Psalm 110:1 reads, “Yahweh said to my Adonai.” Peter sees this as God speaking to Jesus, who is David’s Lord.
Lord and Christ (2:36)
PETER’S NEXT STATEMENT represents the second major feature of the apostolic kerygma: a theological evaluation of the person of Jesus. The words with which he begins his major affirmation, “Therefore let all Israel be assured of this,” are appropriate considering the convincing way he has argued his case up to now. His conclusion is clear: “God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”
Peter claims first that Jesus is “Lord.” With the resurrection and exaltation of Jesus, the disciples now fully understand the implications of who he is. G. E. Ladd comments on the use of the word kyrios (Lord) in Acts: “It is amazing to find the term used of both Jesus and God. Not only is Jesus, like God, kyrios; the term is used both of God and the exalted Jesus in practically interchangeable contexts.”17 In this speech kyrios is used for Jesus in ways that were used for God in the LXX (see vv. 20–21); moreover, Jesus as Lord has taken on divine functions, such as pouring out the Spirit (v. 33) and being the object of faith (v. 21). Note how in verse 36 Jesus is called Lord while in verse 39 God continues to be called Lord. Ladd concludes:
Here in the earliest Christology of the primitive church are the beginnings of Trinitarian theology, although they are not reflected upon. Implicit in the recognition of the Lordship of Jesus is the acknowledgment of his essential divinity.18
Thus, the kerygma of the early church included the Lordship of Christ; intimately associated with that was the reign of Christ, to which Peter has just referred (v. 34). Jesus is now enthroned and “has become the one by whom Jesus will bring under control every rebellious power in the world.”19 In his next speech Peter will say, referring to this same exalted reign, “He must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets” (3:21). Here is the answer to the disciples’ question about whether Christ will “restore the kingdom to Israel” (1:6). He will restore not only Israel, but everything. The process he began with his exaltation will climax in the great consummation, after “he has put all his enemies under his feet” and “God may be all in all” (1 Cor. 15:25, 28).20
The title “Christ” (i.e., Messiah, Anointed One) points to the hope of Israel for a deliverer. The early church understood the deliverance that Christ brought as being primarily a deliverance from sin and its effects rather than the political deliverance that the Jews were anticipating. In other words, while the title “Lord” emphasizes the sovereign kingship of Jesus, the title “Christ” emphasizes the salvation he brings.
A Summons to Repent and Receive Forgiveness (2:37–40)
THE THIRD FEATURE of the apostolic kerygma is a summons to respond to the message. It comes as a result of the inquiry of the audience, who, “cut to the heart,” ask, “Brothers, what shall we do?” (v. 37). Peter gives two stipulations and promises two blessings. They must repent and be baptized, and they will receive the forgiveness of sin and experience the Holy Spirit. As Lord, Jesus demands repentance and baptism, which is an outward expression of allegiance to him. As Savior, he offers the unmerited gift of forgiveness. There is no separation of the Lordship of Christ from his role as Savior here.
In this story, as in every story of conversion, the grace of God fills us with wonder. In his message, Peter has reminded these people that they put Jesus to death. Now this same Jesus offers them salvation. Peter is showing them how they can appropriate Christ’s plea on the cross for their forgiveness. David Gooding describes this “amazing grace” as follows:
They had murdered God’s Son; he was offering them his Spirit. They had crucified the second person of the Trinity; he was offering them the third. They had thrown God’s Son out of the vineyard in the hope of inheriting the vineyard themselves; now he was inviting them to receive God’s Spirit not just into their vineyard but into their very hearts, to be their undying life, to be the earnest and guarantee of an infinite and imperishable inheritance.21
Some have understood the statement, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins” (v. 38), as implying that baptism is a necessary requirement for salvation. But that interpretation reads too much into the text. In the home of Cornelius, those present received the Spirit and spoke in tongues before they were baptized (10:44–48). Bruce says, “It is against the whole genius of biblical religion to suppose that the outward rite would have any value except insofar as it was accompanied by the work of grace within.” He points to the similar situation in 3:19, where “the blotting out of the people’s sins is in direct consequence of their repenting and turning to God. . . . Nothing is said about baptism, although it is no doubt implied (the idea of an unbaptized believer does not seem to be entertained in the New Testament).”22 Peter’s message concludes with a more intense appeal to the will than before, including warning and pleading (v. 40).
The Response to the Message (2:41)
THE AMAZING RESPONSE of three thousand baptisms illustrates Jesus’ promise that with his going away and the Spirit’s coming, the disciples will do even greater works than he did (John 14:12). Some scholars have doubted the accuracy of the high figures of converts in Jerusalem; they maintain that it is unlikely that so many would have been converted in a city that did not have a large population. This interpretation has been based on population figures for Jerusalem ranging between 25,000 to 30,000.23 Recent studies, however, show that a population “figure of 60,000 to 120,000 seems realistic, and even the higher end of this scale [is] not impossible for the 30s of the 1st century.”24
Bridging Contexts
CHRISTIANITY IS CHRIST. It has been often said that “Christianity is Christ.” Peter’s message at Pentecost gives us an indication why we can make such a claim. Every step in Christ’s career opens the door to some facet of the faith and practice of the Christian.
This passage gives the first evangelistic sermon of the New Testament church. In terms of results it was eminently successful. When we realize the amount of space Luke devotes to this sermon, we can assume that he intended it as a model of evangelistic preaching in the early church. We can therefore expect to learn much about evangelistic preaching here.25 Each of the following points is vital in the Christian gospel and forms the basis of our proclamation. Our message too must focus on Christ.
• Jesus’ incarnation and ministry made it possible for him to be our Savior (v. 22). It showed that he was not a mere man; he was indeed God’s answer to the human dilemma.
• His death on the cross achieved salvation (v. 23).
• His resurrection confirmed the efficacy of and validated his work (vv. 24–32).
• His exaltation made it possible for him to send the Holy Spirit, who actualizes this salvation in our daily lives (vv. 33, 39).
• His present exalted state confirms his Lordship and messiahship and represents his reign, during which he will defeat all rebellion to God (vv. 34–36).
• His second coming will consummate his work (not explicitly stated, but implied in v. 35).
• In view of who Jesus is and what he has done, our salvation depends on him (vv. 36, 38). Our receiving of salvation involves admitting our need through repentance and accepting Jesus as Savior and Lord. It results in our reception of the Holy Spirit and is expressed in baptism in his name (v. 38).
Beginning with real questions. Peter began his speech by answering a real question being asked by the audience about the languages they were hearing (v. 15). This pattern we will see in every sermon in Acts. The evangelists do not launch into a proclamation of the gospel out of the blue, but begin with something the audience can relate to. Often, as here, the launching pad is a question they had about a miracle they have just seen (see also 3:12–16; 16:11–14). Sometimes, as in Athens, it is a felt need that the audience has expressed (17:22–23). Our evangelistic preaching too should start where people are, so that they can identify with our message. From there we can take them to the basic message we want to communicate.
The life of Christ and the evangelistic message. Peter began his exposition of the gospel by describing events out of the life of Christ. The life of Christ is a crucial resource in evangelism. As the name “Gospel” suggests, the first four books of the New Testament are actually evangelistic tracts. “Strictly speaking they are not biography, but testimony. They bear witness to Christ and to the good news of his salvation. Therefore the authors select, arrange and present their material according to their purpose as evangelists.”26 Concerning his Gospel, John writes, “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31).
In addition, in evangelism we are asking people to follow Jesus as Lord. Should we not tell people something about the nature of this person whom we are asking them to follow? And what better way to tell them about Jesus than to describe his life on earth? In other words, the life of Christ and the content of the four Gospels should be key features of our evangelistic message.27
The accreditation theme and persuasion. A key to understanding Peter’s speech is to grasp the fact that he was attempting to show the Jews from Scripture and from events that had taken place (especially the resurrection) that the gospel of Christ has been validated and accredited as true. He attempted to show incontrovertible evidence that Jesus is indeed the Messiah they were looking for. That Peter was successful in this attempt is evidenced by the amazing response to his message.
The phenomena that the people witnessed received confirmation through the prophecy of Joel (vv. 17–21). Jesus himself was accredited by miracles, wonders, and signs (v. 22) and by his resurrection (vv. 24–31, 34–35). The resurrection, in turn, was buttressed by the fact that the eleven people standing with Peter were eyewitnesses of it (v. 32), by the predictions about him in Scripture (vv. 25–28, 34), and by the coming of the Holy Spirit with the accompanying manifestations of his power (v. 33). All this evidence gave Peter the confidence to say that the one they crucified is “both Lord and Christ” (v. 36).
This emphasis on evidence and accreditation fits in with the practice of persuasion in evangelism in Acts, which we will examine in our study of 17:1–15.
The death of Christ as a victory. Christ’s death was a stumbling block to the Jews. The apostles responded to this issue by presenting it as a victory that had been planned by God. It was not the unfortunate defeat of a good man who had no power to save himself from such a death.
The New Testament is clear in this portrayal of the victory of Christ through his death. In his trial and crucifixion, Jesus marched on, amidst pain and humiliation, as a strong man who had the situation under his control! When he introduced himself to the guards in the garden, for example, they drew back and fell to the ground. He took time in the middle of his arrest to heal the ear of the high priest’s servant and to exhort Peter about the uselessness of using the sword. He also reminded Peter that twelve legions of angels were available for him to use if he wished to go free. He told the high priest about his return on the clouds from heaven. He told the women who were weeping for him not to do so, but rather to weep for themselves. From the cruelly painful cross he pronounced salvation to a thief, asked God to forgive his crucifiers, and made arrangements for his mother’s maintenance. Finally, he raised a cry of triumph, “It is finished.”
In the same way, in our witness for Christ today, we should seek to present Christ’s death not as a defeat or a great tragedy but as a triumph.
The reign of Christ. The reign of the exalted Christ, climaxing in the consummation when he will “restore” all things (cf. Matt. 17:11; Acts 3:21), was a regular feature of the apostolic kerygma. In the Roman empire, the famous affirmation was “Caesar is Lord.” When the Christians called Christ “Lord,” they were affirming that he was their king. The allegiance of the Christians to Christ was soon to be severely tested by the authorities—first in Jerusalem and finally in Rome itself. Belief in Christ’s sovereignty must have done much to sustain these believers as they faced the terror of opposition from their rulers. Interestingly, the first time they faced opposition, their prayer was an extended meditation on the sovereignty of God (Acts 4:24–28). This sovereign reign of Christ must be emphasized in our evangelism today too.
The personal appeal. An important feature of Peter’s message was its personal appeal. Peter did not hesitate to bring about conviction of personal sin. He reminded the people of their involvement in killing Christ (vv. 23, 36). This message caused the people to be “cut to the heart” and elicited the response, “Brothers, what shall we do?” (v. 37). Peter called on them to repent and be baptized, so that they might receive forgiveness of sins (v. 38). The apostle then combined pleading and warning in his statement: “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation” (v. 40). There was no skirting over the fact of sin in the lives of the hearers. The chart on “Evangelistic Preaching in Acts” in the Introduction shows that this emphasis on sin and repentance was a consistent theme in the evangelism of the early church. It must be so today too.
Peter’s transformation. Finally on principles we glean from the Pentecost story, I turn to the amazing transformation that took place in Peter’s life. When Peter had been warned of impending temptation, he felt confident of his ability to be faithful to Christ (Mark 14:27–29). But at the crucial moment of trial, not only did he deny his Master, he even began to curse and swear (Matt. 26:69–75). Yet Jesus went out of his way to restore this disciple, who was grief-stricken over denying his Master. Once restored, he gave himself to prayer in anticipation of the promised blessing of the fullness of the Spirit. Once that came to him, he was irrepressible, and God used him as the human instrument to usher in the great era of the church. This pattern has been repeated over and over in the history of the church and is still awaiting repetition.
Contemporary Significance
BEGINNING WITH THE questions of our audience. Unlike the New Testament evangelists, who invariably started their messages with questions that their audience was asking, evangelists and witnesses today sometimes start by talking about questions they feel people should be asking. True, it is our responsibility to lead people to come face-to-face with questions they should be asking. But if we start with those questions, they may never listen to us, because they may not be interested in them. We must start with questions that they are really asking; then, having won their attention in this way, we can lead them to the questions they should be asking.
Finding people’s questions and making the connection between them and the gospel is an art we must develop. It helps to study and meditate over the issues people face and to pray about them, yearning to see them come into line with God’s thinking. An even more important key is our personal ministry, which enables us to interact with people and thus informs our minds about how best to reach them. Failure may be an important aid here. We ask, “Why couldn’t I get through to him or her?” Such questioning teaches us a lot about how to minister to people. We can then extend to our public ministries what we have learned through personal ministry.
Using the life of Christ in evangelism. For many years in this century, evangelicals were reluctant to use the life of Christ in evangelism. This was in part a reaction to the liberal view that the heart of the Christian gospel was the example of Christ and not the salvation won through the atoning, substitutionary death of Christ. Evangelicals used Paul and the theological statements of John as their basic sources of evangelistic material. They were afraid of presenting the example of Jesus lest people think that salvation is achieved through following his example (i.e., salvation by works). Recently, however, there has been a change in this—a change that is surely in keeping with the Scriptures—for, as we have shown above, the Scriptures themselves use the life of Christ in evangelism.28
The life of Christ offers a great evangelistic appeal to our generation. This is evidenced by the unprecedented effectiveness of the film Jesus, distributed worldwide by Campus Crusade for Christ. I have seen Buddhists stand in the open air through the entire three hours that it takes to screen this film. Some refused to leave even when it started to rain. We are living in an age when many are disillusioned with their leaders and have come to believe that it is impossible for good people, people of integrity, to succeed in life. Most good people appear to them as unsuccessful in life and they wonder whether goodness and success can be combined. To this generation, groping to find a model of success that does not contradict the voice of conscience, we present Jesus: the good person, the perfect person, who started a movement so effective that in three centuries the mighty Roman empire had bowed its knee to him.29
Some who may be first repelled by the idea of a blood sacrifice needed to win the salvation of humanity (e.g., Buddhists, who oppose any form of killing animals) may become receptive to the gospel by observing the life of Jesus. My wife and I have worked with Buddhists, who were first attracted to the Christian way because of the life of Jesus and who later came to understand the liberating good news of salvation from sin through his atoning death. Missiologists have observed that Muslims too, who object to the idea of a prophet like Jesus being crucified, are immensely attracted to his life.30 Bishop Stephen Neill has pointed out that recent Muslim biographies of the prophet Mohammed have toned down some of his less agreeable features and presented him as a more Christ-like figure. This, says Neill, is evidence of the appeal of Christ’s life to Muslims.31 Thus, the life of Christ can, and in fact does, open those resistant to the gospel to hear and accept other aspects of the gospel to which they may have first been resistant.
The value of accreditation today. Acts gives a high place to the accreditation of the gospel through eyewitnesses of the events surrounding Christ’s life. This truth is particularly important today because many view Christianity only in subjective terms—in terms of the wonderful experience they have had (see comments on 1:1–8). A subjective experience of the risen Christ is an important key to understanding the nature of Christianity, and it has sometimes been neglected by evangelicals who regarded themselves as being very orthodox in their theology. Such an attitude is a betrayal of biblical Christianity. But so is an attitude that emphasizes experience so much that it neglects the objective facts of the Christian message.
Paul discussed practical experience extensively in 1 Corinthians. But when he came to describing the essence of the gospel he had preached to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 15:1)—the gospel by which they were saved (15:2)—he listed the sequence of events surrounding the death and resurrection of Jesus (15:3–7). He particularly stressed the appearances of the risen Christ (15:5–7). This was so important because, as he stated later, if Christ has not been raised, “our preaching is useless and so is your faith . . . your faith is futile; you are still in your sins” (15:14, 17).
No one can deny that many of the subjective experiences of Christianity have been duplicated by others. Recently we have seen Muslims, Jews, and New Agers all claiming to have had “born again” experiences. Moreover, Christians can go through dark periods, implying perhaps that non-Christians are better off than them. But our faith is not founded on our experiences; it is founded on the rock-solid facts of what Jesus has done on our behalf.
Craig Blomberg has said that “no religion stands or falls with a claim about the resurrection of its founder in the way that Christianity does.”32 Yet it may be true that not many people today come to Christ primarily because of a conviction about the objective truths of the gospel. In my informal surveys, I have discovered that most people come to Christ attracted by the fact that he meets their felt needs—things like Christ’s love and concern for individuals (especially seen in his dying for them on the cross), his power to heal, his ability to take away guilt, his comfort, and his control of the future. Only occasionally do I hear people saying that it was the resurrection that attracted them.
Consequently, the resurrection is not popular in evangelistic preaching today. It seems so out of step with the way people are thinking that we are tempted to leave it out of our presentation and to bring it up only later on, in the follow-up process. A quick look at some of the popular evangelistic counselor training materials in use today or the basic guides to helping people make a decision for Christ reveals that the resurrection does not have the important place it should have in our evangelism.
When people come to Christ in search of an answer to a felt need, they will be on an unstable footing unless they are quickly grounded in the truths of the gospel. They will find that Christ may not immediately answer a felt need the way they expect him to. He may not heal them at once from sickness or remove a difficult problem. I have seen recent converts to Christianity wilt under this strain and, in their desperation, go to other sources of help, such as medicine men, spirit channelers, mediums, astrologers, devil dancers, and shrines to supposedly powerful gods and saints. After twenty-one years of evangelistic ministry with non-Christians, I have come to the conclusion that most people come to Christ in order to have a felt need met, but they stay with Christ because they have come to believe that the gospel is true.
For these reasons, it would be wise for us to follow the example of the evangelists in Acts, who did not shrink from using the resurrection as the proof of the validity of their message (17:31) even though it met with strong negative reactions (as in Athens, 17:32). We must also remember that there are still people who find the evidence for the resurrection so compelling that they seek to know what their response to it should be. Of course, this also brings to us the challenge of presenting this message in a suitable way.
This emphasis on the facts of the gospel is particularly important in our pluralistic, postmodern age, where truth is viewed as something subjective. Pluralism denies that there is such a thing as absolute truth. Instead, truth is what people have discovered through their experience. It cannot be what Christians claim, something once-for-all revealed through certain saving acts of God. Hinduism is a pluralistic religion and in many ways the mother of the New Age movement, which is one of the most visible forms of modern-day pluralism. In Hinduism religious stories are vehicles that carry religious principles. To many devoted followers of Krishna it does not matter whether Krishna lived or not.
Bishop Lesslie Newbigin, formerly a missionary in India, mentions a conversation he had with a devout and learned teacher of the Hindu missionary movement, the Ramakrishna Mission. “I have never forgotten the astonishment with which [this Hindu] regarded me when he discovered that I was prepared to rest my whole faith as a Christian upon the substantial record concerning Jesus in the New Testament.” To this person “it seemed axiomatic that such vital matters of religious truth could not be allowed to depend upon the accidents of history.”33
Since pluralism views truth as subjective, it can take good points from all religions without attributing absolute uniqueness to any particular one. This is how the pluralist Mahatma Gandhi was able to hold Christ in such high esteem while rejecting his claims to uniqueness. He took from the life and teachings of Jesus those principles he found useful without bothering about those features of the Gospel records that seemed to suggest that Christ was unique. He downplayed the historical importance of the Gospels and therefore rejected those features he found offensive.34
But the Gospels give no room for such an approach to the life of Christ. They were written as history; they present Jesus as supreme, as the unique bearer of absolute truth, who won the salvation of humankind through his death and resurrection. Yet because pluralists regard the Gospels as subjective reflections of the early Christians rather than historical documents, they can reject their absolute claims as subjective musings, arising out of the experiences of people who had come to view Christ as their Lord. This is why one of the most important points in response to pluralism is the evidence for the objective historicity of the Gospels.35
The death of Christ as a victory. Just as the death of Christ was a stumbling block to the Jews in the first century, it remains a stumbling block to many today. We live in an age where the appearance of strength and of being in control is important. Leaders, especially candidates for political office, hire specialists to help project an image that they are “on top of things.” Thus, we should not be surprised if contemporary people find repulsive the idea that the person who claims our allegiance meekly submitted to so ignoble a fate as death by crucifixion. As mentioned earlier, the idea of a crucified Messiah was a contradiction in terms to the Jews. This is why there is such a strong emphasis in the speeches of Acts and in the Gospels on the death of Christ as planned by God and as a victory rather than the unexpected defeat of a good man.36
The Muslims respond to the idea of Christ’s death on the cross in a manner similar to the Jews and find it impossible to accept that one they regard as a prophet died in this way. So they propose alternate explanations to the story of the cross. A prominent Buddhist writer in Sri Lanka once told me that he regarded Christ as a failure because he was defeated by the very wickedness he sought to combat.
But Jesus was no weakling as he went to the cross. Rather, he manifested incredible strength, which people today try so hard to have. Using professionals to make one look good does not enable someone to feel good, for deep inside is that gnawing sense of insecurity that one cannot adequately face the challenges of life, especially the challenge of death. But in Jesus we see a man who was everything a leader wishes to be—one who did not fear any problem and had the strength to face any eventuality. Are not such people the happiest on earth—those who do not fear either life or death? Thus, Jesus’ death can be a potent evangelistic tool today. The more one studies him, the more one sees he was not a weakling but a source of great strength.
Furthermore, Jesus died his cruel death out of a commitment to us. In our selfish world, people suffer much from the effects of people who have broken their trust, who forsook them when the going got tough. By contrast, we proclaim the truth that the love of Christ for us exceeds our highest imaginations.
Let’s remember too what the cross achieved—the salvation of the world. Jesus was no failure, for he founded what can properly be called the most influential organization in the history of the world—the church. And the church has as its symbol, a cross! The favorite name given to the triumphant Christ in heaven in Revelation is Lamb,37 indicating that his triumph was achieved when he was slain. Indeed, as Paul says, “having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross” (Col. 2:15). We must remove misconceptions about the cross and show people what the cross really means—the greatest triumph in the history of the human race.
Proclaiming the reign of Christ today. One of the major obstacles that many have to becoming a Christian is the fear of reprisals—from other gods, from religious leaders, from government authorities, and from family, community and friends. They fear curses, persecution, ridicule, and discrimination. I know many Buddhists and Hindus who are convinced of the truthfulness of Christianity but who will not become Christians because of such fears. We need to show them that the only one really to fear is the supreme Lord of the universe, who will conquer all rebellion against him. The safest thing to do is to align ourselves with him.
When the church was asked not to preach in the name of Christ, they concluded that even though the authorities were able temporarily to show their power, ultimately they would have to bow to the will of God (cf. 4:25–28). Far too many people are so afraid of present threats that they ignore eternal threats. But we must show the world that the only one we ought to fear is the one who has the keys to eternity (Luke 12:4). We must proclaim the sovereign reign of Christ.
The reign of Christ is another feature of the evangelistic message that evangelicals have neglected in this century. This may again be because it seemed to take away from the emphasis on grace and because liberals used it in a way that devalued grace. Giving postmillennialism an unbiblical twist, liberal theologians anticipated that human progress would cause the evolution of an ideal society, when Christ’s rule would be fully realized. This hope was, of course, discredited by two devastating world wars.38 It is our hope that the idea of Christ as king will now make its return to the basic gospel proclaimed by the evangelical church.
Making the personal appeal today. Peter did not skirt the issue of the personal responsibility of his audience. He accused them of sin and called them to repent. There is some discussion today about whether it is essential to talk about sin in every evangelistic setting. Some feel that the opportunity to be heard will be lost if they make strong statements about sin. When John Wesley went to an area, he had a strategy of preaching “the law” so as to bring about the conviction of sin before emphasizing the gospel. “At our first beginning to preach at any place, after a general declaration of the love of God to sinners and his willingness that they should be saved, to preach the law in the strongest, the closest, the most searching manner possible; only intermixing the gospel here and there, and showing it, as it were, afar off.”39 Once people had been convicted of sin through the preaching of law, he went on to emphasize grace.
This method is disputed today. Many prefer to hold back any emphasis on sin until the person’s interest has been won. It is therefore possible that sin will not be even mentioned in the public meetings of some ministries today. It is true, of course, that one must be sensitive to one’s audience and adapt the unchanging message to it. But in so doing, we must ensure that those who come under the influence of any evangelistic ministry must at some time be confronted with the seriousness of sin and its consequences. We should not ask one to accept Christ as Savior until he or she has been told that this step involves repenting from sin, and that salvation is primarily salvation from sin. Thus, the attempt to bring conviction about sin, to warn about judgment, and to call people to repentance ought to be standard elements today, as they were in Acts.40
Jesus did not fear losing his audience by his hard sayings. In fact, he indicated that sometimes his teaching in parables was intended to close the minds of some while opening the minds of others (Mark 4:10–12). This sharp edge in our preaching will help people to realize that when they come to Christ, they are leaving sin behind and beginning a new life—one that includes a new lifestyle. If this is not clear, coming to Christ will, for many, not be the radical turnaround that the Bible states that it is. Unfortunately, there are indications that many members of evangelical churches today have not understood Christianity in this way.
A. Skevington Wood writes, in a study of John Wesley’s message, “Christianity is optimistic about grace, but pessimistic about human nature.” Such statements may not sit well with the way many think today. But unless we emphasize both features, we will seriously misrepresent the gospel and proclaim an anemic brand of Christianity.41 So, while we remain sensitive to felt needs in our preaching as described earlier, we also remain alert to warn people of the seriousness of sin.
While there was an appeal to personal sin in Peter’s message, there was also an appeal to the personal benefits of salvation: forgiveness of sins, the experience of the Holy Spirit, and a promise that extends to one’s children as personal blessings that come with the gospel. The bulk of Peter’s message, of course, argued for the validity of the Christian gospel. But from that foundation arose an offer of the personal blessings of salvation. Here is the biblical combination again—objective facts that give the foundation for blessed subjective experiences (see comments on 1:1–8).
The gospel is not something simply to be discussed. It is a message that demands a personal response, and we must always work towards provoking such a response, even if it means warning people and pleading with them (v. 40).
Transformed servants of God. Stories like that of Peter’s transformation have been repeated over and over in the history of the church. In 1935 Blasio Kigosi, a schoolteacher in Rwanda, Central Africa, was deeply discouraged by the lack of life in the church and the powerlessness of his own experience. He followed the example of the first Christians and closed himself for a week of prayer and fasting in his little cottage. He emerged a changed man. He confessed his sins to those whom he had wronged, including his wife and children. He proclaimed the gospel in the school where he taught, and revival broke out there, resulting in students and teachers being transformed. They were called abaka, meaning people on fire. Shortly after that, Blasio was invited to Uganda, to share with the leaders of the Anglican church there. As he called leaders to repentance, the fire of the Spirit descended again on the place, with similar results as in Rwanda.
Several days later, Blasio died of fever. His ministry lasted only a few weeks, but the revival fires sparked through his ministry swept throughout East Africa and continue to the present. Hundreds of thousands of lives have been transformed over the decades through this mighty East African revival. It all began with a discouraged Christian setting himself apart to seek the fullness of God’s Spirit.42