ONE DAY PETER and John were going up to the temple at the time of prayer—at three in the afternoon. 2Now a man crippled from birth was being carried to the temple gate called Beautiful, where he was put every day to beg from those going into the temple courts. 3When he saw Peter and John about to enter, he asked them for money. 4Peter looked straight at him, as did John. Then Peter said, “Look at us!” 5So the man gave them his attention, expecting to get something from them.
6Then Peter said, “Silver or gold I do not have, but what I have I give you. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk.” 7Taking him by the right hand, he helped him up, and instantly the man’s feet and ankles became strong. 8He jumped to his feet and began to walk. Then he went with them into the temple courts, walking and jumping, and praising God. 9When all the people saw him walking and praising God, 10they recognized him as the same man who used to sit begging at the temple gate called Beautiful, and they were filled with wonder and amazement at what had happened to him.
11While the beggar held on to Peter and John, all the people were astonished and came running to them in the place called Solomon’s Colonnade. 12When Peter saw this, he said to them: “Men of Israel, why does this surprise you? Why do you stare at us as if by our own power or godliness we had made this man walk? 13The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus. You handed him over to be killed, and you disowned him before Pilate, though he had decided to let him go. 14You disowned the Holy and Righteous One and asked that a murderer be released to you. 15You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this. 16By faith in the name of Jesus, this man whom you see and know was made strong. It is Jesus’ name and the faith that comes through him that has given this complete healing to him, as you can all see.
17“Now, brothers, I know that you acted in ignorance, as did your leaders. 18But this is how God fulfilled what he had foretold through all the prophets, saying that his Christ would suffer. 19Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord, 20and that he may send the Christ, who has been appointed for you—even Jesus. 21He must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets. 22For Moses said, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you must listen to everything he tells you. 23Anyone who does not listen to him will be completely cut off from among his people.’
24“Indeed, all the prophets from Samuel on, as many as have spoken, have foretold these days. 25And you are heirs of the prophets and of the covenant God made with your fathers. He said to Abraham, ‘Through your offspring all peoples on earth will be blessed.’ 26When God raised up his servant, he sent him first to you to bless you by turning each of you from your wicked ways.”
Original Meaning
LUKE HAS JUST given a summary description of the community life of the young church (2:42–47). Included in that description was the fact that “many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles” (2:43). Of these many miracles Luke mentions one that received much publicity and triggered a series of events involving serious opposition to the gospel. This story ends in 4:31 with the disciples’ prayer in response to the decree banning evangelism.
The Lame Man Healed (3:1–10)
THE STORY BEGINS during one of the daily visits (2:46) that Christians made to the temple (3:1). This visit was at 3:00 P.M., one of the Jewish times of prayer (the other two being 9:00 A.M. and 12 noon). As was common at entrances to places of worship, a man crippled from birth was begging at the temple gate called Beautiful (v. 2).1
Following his plea for money, “Peter looked straight at him, as did John” (v. 4). The reference to John alongside Peter, even though John plays no significant role in this story, has puzzled some commentators. Some suggest that the inclusion of John is an addition to the story, perhaps to provide two witnesses for the trial before the Sanhedrin later on. But, as Howard Marshall points out, the appearance of both apostles in this episode is in keeping with the fact that Peter and John were associates and that the early Christians were in the habit of working in pairs.2 The addition of John’s name in verse 4, where it is almost an afterthought, may indicate that, though Peter was the prominent member of the team, John had an important role. Luke seems to alternate between the mention of both Peter and John and of Peter alone in this chapter.
Peter’s memorable words to the beggar (v. 6) indicate that they were in touch with the power of Jesus. “The name of Jesus” signifies his authority here. The name in Semitic thought “expresses the very nature of [a person’s] being. Hence the power of the person is present and available in the name of the person.”3 Marshall reminds us that “Jesus himself had no need to appeal to a higher authority such as the name of God.”4
Peter’s Speech (3:11–26)
THE EXUBERANT RESPONSE of the healed cripple gives prominence to the miracle, and that in turn becomes a launching pad for Peter’s speech. Many features typical of evangelistic speeches to Jews in Acts appear here.
Although both the Pentecost speech and the temple speech call to repentance, review the story of Jesus, and cite Scripture, they are complimentary rather than simply repetitive. Different aspects are emphasized and new perspectives are introduced, broadening the picture of Jesus’ significance for the people of Jerusalem.5
The people’s astonishment over a miraculous happening provides the launching pad for the speech. A new feature is Peter’s serious effort to deflect glory from himself and John. He asks why the people are staring at them “as if by our own power or godliness we had made this man walk” (v. 12). Peter then refers to “the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers” (v. 13a)—a description relevant to his Jewish audience. The miracle is presented as glorifying the one they “handed . . . over to be killed” and “disowned” (vv. 13b–14).
Peter makes significant Christological statements in this speech. As at Pentecost, the “name” of Jesus receives emphasis; Acts 3–4 have eight references to it.6 Longenecker sees this as significant because “the Name (to onoma) was a pious Jewish surrogate for God and connoted his divine presence and power.”7 The speech begins and ends with the expression of Jesus as God’s “servant” (vv. 13, 26). This directs us back to the messianic servant of Yahweh in Isaiah 42–53. The Septuagint uses the same word (pais) in those passages. Jesus is also called “the Holy and Righteous One” (v. 14), “the author of life” (v. 15), and “a prophet like [Moses]” (v. 22, citing Deut. 18:15, 18–19). As at Pentecost, he is called “the Christ” (v. 20).
The death of Christ is again given as a fulfillment of prophecy (v. 18), and again God is said to have raised up Jesus (v. 15), with the apostles being witnesses of the resurrection (v. 15). Jesus is the one appointed or designated as their Messiah (v. 20; cf. 2:36). This reminds us of Romans 1:4: “who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.” The resurrection was something like an ordination of Christ, when he was confirmed on earth for who he really is.
Peter refers to the fulfillment of Old Testament promises when he says that times of refreshment will come as a result of their repentance (v. 19). This was part of the Jewish hope. But Peter clarifies that this will come only when God sends the Christ following their repentance and cleansing (v. 20). This anticipates to the second coming of Christ. Thus, while the messianic age has dawned, it has not yet been consummated. In the present age, “he must remain in heaven” (v. 21a; cf. 2:33–35), but only until the time of the final restoration promised by the prophets (3:21b). The noun used here (apokatastasis, “restoration”) is from the same root as the verb in the disciples’ question about God’s restoring the kingdom to Israel (apokathistano, 1:6).
Jesus extends that restoration from Israel to all things, but it will happen at the end of time when God will be “all in all” (1 Cor. 15:28). We can assume that these are all parts of Jesus’ teaching about the kingdom and that they were included in Paul’s teaching about the kingdom (Acts 19:8; 20:24; 28:31). Thus, we find two points of eschatology in this evangelistic sermon. On the positive side is the promise of the restoration of all things (3:19–21); on the negative side is the threat that those who do not listen to Jesus will be completely cut off (v. 23).
The use of the second person plural “you” here is significant. At the start of his speech Peter clearly places responsibility for the death of Christ on his audience (vv. 13–14). In the middle of his speech he gets conciliatory by saying that he knows they “acted in ignorance” (v. 17). He ends his speech on a positive note, reminding them that they are “heirs of the prophets and of the covenant” (v. 25) and that God’s servant was sent first to bless them via repentance (v. 26). Just prior to that, however, he issues a strong warning about those who do not listen being cut off (v. 23). This warning is in the third person because it becomes real only if they reject the message. This message, then, is not an abstract and detached discourse on the Christian gospel. It is an urgent plea that pulsates with the need for personal response.
Peter cites many blessings to the audience. He reminds them of the promise of universal blessedness made to Abraham (v. 25). As Isaiah promised before (Isa. 43:25), their sins will “be wiped out” (Acts 3:19). Barclay reminds us that “ancient writing was on papyrus and the ink had no acid in it. It therefore did not bite into the papyrus like modern ink, but simply lay on top of it. To erase the writing a man simply wiped it away with a wet sponge.”8 One of the blessings of the resurrection is that people will be turned from their wicked ways (v. 26). This is in keeping with the many promises of the Old Testament regarding the new covenant, where God himself will give people the ability to keep the law (Jer. 31:31–33; Ezek. 11:19; 36:26). Repentance and forgiveness will also result in “seasons of refreshment . . . from the presence of the Lord, that he may send him who has been designated as your Messiah—namely Jesus” (v. 20).9 We have already seen the blessings to come in connection with Christ’s consummating history (v. 21).
Bridging Contexts
OUR PASSAGE GIVES us a description of the typical evangelistic ministry among Jews in the early church. As we seek to apply it to today, we will particularly look for principles of ministry that we too can follow.
Team ministry. Through the alternation of the use of Peter and John and Peter alone in this passage, we have a good example of the team ministry of the evangelist Peter. This style is found throughout Acts. When Jesus sent out his twelve apostles and the seventy disciples, they were sent out two by two (Mark 6:7; Luke 10:1). When Peter rose to speak on the day of Pentecost, he “stood up with the Eleven” (Acts 2:14). When he talked of his witness, he said, “We are witnesses of this” (3:15; cf. 2:32; 5:32). Peter was not a lone voice; he had a ministry team backing him when he spoke. Peter and John ministered as a team after this incident too (8:14). When Peter went to the home of Cornelius on his historic visit, he took six brothers with him (10:23; 11:12).
When the first missionary team for Gentile evangelization was commissioned, the Holy Spirit wanted two people set apart (13:2). When this team broke up, both Paul and Barnabas took others along to form their own teams (15:39–40). We know that Paul almost never traveled alone. He had his traveling Bible school, where he trained “interns” like Timothy and Titus. Even when Paul went to Rome as a prisoner, Luke was with him (27:2). In his last letter written from prison, Paul asked Timothy to join him quickly and to bring Mark along (2 Tim. 4:9, 11).
Only in exceptional cases, such as Philip the evangelist, do we see ministry performed alone in the New Testament. Even in Philip’s case we cannot be sure he went to Samaria alone, for other disciples may have gone there with him when they were scattered. (It seems clear, however, that he was alone when he met the Ethiopian eunuch.) Jesus, of course, always had his disciples with him, unless he wanted to be alone in prayer. In other words, we can safely say that in the Bible, working in teams is the normal style of ministry.10 We are not always told how the teams operated as far as the responsibilities of the members are concerned. Paul asks that Mark be brought to him “because he is helpful to me in my ministry” (2 Tim. 4:11). Presumably the teams worked according to the giftedness of the members as described in 1 Corinthians 12.
Deflecting glory from the evangelist. We have noted how Peter made a serious effort to deflect glory from himself. People often associate power with the instrument of miraculous occurrences. If not, they at least say that this person was used because he is a holy or great person. Peter vigorously refuted the idea that the healing of the crippled man was done through their power or godliness (v. 12). Instead, it was done “by faith in the name of Jesus,” and even that faith “comes through him” (v. 16). Luke does not say whose faith is being referred to. He perhaps deliberately leaves that question open so that the focus will be entirely on Christ.11
Peter and Paul both try to deflect glory from themselves elsewhere in Acts (10:26; 14:14–15). This is a refreshing change from what Luke describes in his Gospel, where the disciples began disputing among themselves as to which one was the greatest (Luke 9:46; 22:24). They have finally heeded Jesus’ warning that “everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and the one who humbles himself will be exalted” (Luke 14:11; 18:14; cf. 9:48; 22:26).12
A complete message. Luke records a large number of the features of a good evangelistic message. Peter identifies with his audience in that the message starts by answering questions in the people’s minds about the miracle. The heavy use of Jewish terms for God and for Christ, the references to their national hopes and aspirations, and the appeal to their Scriptures also demonstrate his effort to identify with the audience. The message has explanation (vv. 12–16), accusation (vv. 13–15), exposition (vv. 13–15, 18, 21–22, 24–26), conciliation (v. 17), appeal (vv. 19, 22), promise (vv. 19–22, 24–26), and warning (v. 23). Finally, the frequent use of the second person plural brought the message straight home to the hearers.
While the message was personalized and direct in its application to the hearers, the bulk of the space was given to explanation, exposition, and promise. The content of the gospel is most important. That is something we can easily forget in our efforts to be relevant. The use of warning and accusation shows us that there is a negative side to our presentation too. The gospel is always good news. But for that good news to be relevant we must often present the bad news of people’s sin and warn them of its consequences.
A significant feature in the evangelistic sermons in Acts is the primacy of a person’s relationship with God. While human aspirations and problems are dealt with and are often the launching pad for evangelism, ultimately what matters is what God has done in Jesus for humankind and how individuals respond to that. What attracts a person to Christ may be the answer Christ provides for a problem he or she has. That is natural, and therefore the apostles often started with questions people had. But they used those questions as stepping stones for presenting the foundational truths of the gospel, which are what ultimately matter. Soon in the evangelistic process or in the process of follow-through care, people must realize what these unchanging foundational truths of the gospel are.
A rounded or holistic ministry. Peter’s complete message was the result of a ministry that was rounded in terms of emphases and activities. It started by dealing with a human need, evidenced in a person they encountered on the street. This led to a miracle and then to a sermon, which was strong on intelligent argumentation, using concrete evidence from Scripture and experience for the truthfulness of Christianity. The message consisted primarily of a rational case for the truthfulness of Christianity. People usually come within the sound of the gospel in order to avail themselves of the power of God for personal needs. But they stay because they know Christianity is the truth. Therefore the evangelistic message proclaimed by the “miracle worker” Peter also focused strongly on the truthfulness of Christianity. Like Stephen and Paul, Peter was a miracle-working apologist.
A powerful ministry. A complete message and rounded ministry is ineffective without spiritual power. Peter and John exhibited this power when they commanded the man to walk (v. 6). They were clearly in touch with God’s power. We must always ensure that all our ministry is done in the power of the Spirit. Those without the gift of healing may not have the boldness to make the same type of statement that Peter made, resulting in the healing. But all ministry should be done in the power of the Spirit.
Contemporary Significance
TEAM MINISTRY TODAY. The value of team ministry today cannot be overstressed. Ecclesiastes 4:9–12 gives four benefits of teams:
• Greater fruitfulness: “Two are better than one, because they have a good return for their work.”
• Help in times of personal failure: “If one falls down, his friend can help him up. But pity the man who falls and has no one to help him up!”
• Warmth of affirmation in times of need: “Also, if two lie down together, they will keep warm. But how can one keep warm alone?”
• Strength to face attacks: “Though one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. A cord of three strands is not quickly broken.”13
Recently we have seen clergy with prominent ministries fall into serious sin. Many have noted that they did not have any group to which they were accountable. The pitfalls of a traveling ministry are well known. Traveling ministers often stay in hotels, which cater to the sexual gratification of traveling businessmen. After a tiring day of ministry, when we are emotionally and spiritually drained and have no strength for serious activity like studying or writing, it is easy to watch something unclean on TV in the privacy of the hotel room. No one knows about it. But several such incidents can leave us seriously polluted and vulnerable to more serious sin.
Some prominent ministers never travel alone, though not all of us can afford this luxury. Even then, it would be good for us to make sure that we have the backing of a team. I send out a prayer letter to a few people before every trip I make so that they will pray for me at every stage of my journey. I always request prayer for personal purity. On my return I report to my colleagues on how I fared, especially in my TV watching.
Ideally we should be staying in homes, which will help us identify with the people among whom we are ministering. This was how it was done in the early church (see discussion on 9:43). In Bible times the inns were likewise morally and hygienically unclean. I have also found it personally helpful to ask for a roommate who will effectively be my teammate when I am doing high pressure ministry, such as Bible expositions at a large conference. I was greatly ministered to at an Urbana missions conference, where I taught the Bible, through the friendship of American missions pastor Paul Borthwick, who volunteered to be my roommate.14
Deflecting glory from ourselves. Not only did Peter and John not go after glory, they strongly resisted it when it came unsolicited. How alien this is in a culture that places so much emphasis on appearance. Politicians hire organizations to make them look good in public. We see people unashamedly bragging about their achievements on TV. It is even common to hear Christian leaders talking at length about their achievements.
John the Baptist reflects the biblical attitude when he said, “He [Jesus] must become greater; I must become less” (John 3:30). A good principle to help us overcome the pitfalls arising from the temptation to win glory for ourselves is not to risk lifting up ourselves. Instead, we should concentrate on lifting up others and especially lifting up God. We can leave it to God to lift us up when he thinks it is fitting to do so.
We frequently find Paul lifting up his younger colleagues. He mentions their names along with his in the opening of his letters (1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor. 1:1; etc.). He writes glowing tributes of people like Timothy so that the church may accept them (2 Cor. 8:6–24; Phil. 2:19–24). The only times that Paul vigorously defended his own position was when the gospel was at stake and false teachers were questioning his credentials in their efforts to lead people away from the true gospel (see 2 Corinthians and Galatians). He did, of course, present his ministry as an example for others to follow (see Acts 20:17–35).
When we realize that none of us deserves the ministry we have been given and that we have our ministry only because of God’s mercy (2 Cor. 4:1), it becomes difficult to take any glory for ourselves. We should be so thrilled that God has given us this call that we should focus on giving him all the glory. And when we realize how he lifts us up, we should be so filled with joy and gratitude that we give ourselves to lifting up others. This is why many famous but humble servants of God, such as evangelist Billy Graham and Bible scholar F. F. Bruce, are also known for the way they have encouraged and praised other Christian ministries and ministers. This was brought home to me a few days ago as I watched Billy Graham being interviewed by Larry King. I was amazed at the many good things he said about so many people.
Proclaiming a complete message today. Peter’s presentation of the gospel had a completeness to it. Conscientious heralds of the good news need to work hard at incorporating different features of the gospel in their presentation. In Bible times, when this message was given to Jews, nothing was said to introduce God since the listeners already had a basic understanding of God. But Paul’s messages to Gentile audiences began with that topic before Jesus was presented (14:15–17; 17:23–29). This becomes significant today when presenting the gospel to “post-Christian” Western audiences and to non-Christians all over the world.
There are some features here that we may find difficult to incorporate into our message. In a world so interested in enjoying life in the here and now, the prospect of the Lord’s return and the judgment are not easy to proclaim. It is the same with the call to convict people of their sin. Without ignoring these features of the gospel, as we are tempted to do, we should work hard at using our creativity to find convincing and attractive ways to present these truths.15
We also noted that though we may begin our proclamation with the felt needs of people, soon in the process of evangelism people should realize what the unchanging truths of the gospel are. People must be led to understand who God is, what he has done, especially through Christ, how we can receive his salvation, and how we can enjoy a relationship with him. This is why many churches use a historic creed as the base for their courses in preparing people for baptism, confirmation, or church membership.
If people are not aware of the foundational factors of the gospel, so basic to Christianity, they are headed for a warped Christian experience and will experience problems in weathering the storms of life. Those who see Christianity primarily as an answer to personal problems will find it difficult to continue in the path of obedience when they see no immediate solution to their problems. By contrast, one whose life is founded on the eternal realities of the gospel knows that even in the darkest night, those realities remain unchanged. There is a security that enables them to face the crisis and to realize that it is not as big as it may seem. God remains on the throne, so we trust him and do all we can to obey him, fully knowing that he will look after us.
In each culture people usually focus on one part of human experience and ignore others. Today’s world finds a high place given to feelings. But if this dethrones truth about God from the supreme place in our lives, we are destined to unfulfillment, for feelings are too brittle an area of human life to build our security on. The Earl of Shaftesbury was a great social reformer in Britain, who did a great service to the nation by championing the cause of the oppressed in this newly industrialized nation. On his twenty-seventh birthday he pledged himself in writing to seek two things: the honor of God and the happiness of human beings; and he let his life be used by God to achieve these two things. But he always had his order right. Thus he said, “All life is reduced to a transaction between the individual soul and the individual Savior”; and, “My faith is summed up in one word, and that is Jesus.” With such an attitude we will not go wrong.
Thus, in the many problems and opportunities of our lives and ministries, let us never forget what is most important: who God is, what he has done for us in Christ, and how we should respond in obedience. In order to keep that uppermost in the church, may that also be uppermost in the procedure we adopt to incorporate people into the church—evangelism.
A rounded or holistic ministry. As noted above, the ministry of Peter and John, along with Paul and Stephen, exercised a threefold ministry of apologetics, evangelistic preaching, and healing. Often today different churches major on different aspects of the evangelistic challenge. Some are strong on miracles and weak on persuasion through the truth of Christianity. Others are excellent on theology and apologetics but weak on praying for the needs of non-Christians and presenting the miraculous power of God as an attractive feature of the gospel.
Would that there were more scholars in the church who also exercised some of these sign gifts. This could help us avoid the unhealthy extremes of arid and dull scholarship on the one hand, and fiery, uncontrolled sign-mania on the other. Yet, while we would like to have people like this in the church, nowhere is it said that this combination is the expected norm. That is, we cannot take a principle from this passage that everyone working in the miraculous must also be outstanding apologists. But when we do have this combination, we praise God for an unusual gift and wish for more of it to be manifested in the church.
True, if such persons were found in the church, some might look down on them as generalists, who have no significant contribution to make to the progress of the kingdom. It is sobering for us, living in an age of specialists, to note that often great doctrinal and evangelistic progress in the church in the New Testament era and, for that matter, right through history, was through the thinking and active ministry of generalists (e.g., Augustine, Luther, Calvin, and Wesley). Augustine was actually reluctant to go into pastoral ministry because of his desire to specialize in contemplation and theology. But he was “conscripted” to the pastorate against his will by the church in Hippo while on a visit to that city—and he stayed on there as a pastor-theologian for almost forty years.16 These great theologian-practitioners were, of course, following the example set by their Master, Jesus.17
In our age efficiency has become such an important factor that generalists are bound to experience frustration. It seems like a waste of time for a brilliant preacher, who preaches to a large congregation each Sunday and to thousands more through radio and TV, to spend many hours in the home of a dying member of his church. Thus, we have ministers of visitation to do that work. Similarly, a seminary professor, who is producing brilliant works of theology, may consider it a waste of time to spend an hour or two counseling with a depressed student who is doing badly. So seminaries have specialists in counseling to handle this type of challenge. Specialists from such an environment may produce impressive results, but they will lack the penetrative insight that can truly impact a culture with the truth of God. Such insight is born through the coupling of involvement in the lives of people and of careful study of the truth.18
The oft-quoted difference between efficiency and effectiveness is helpful to remember in our pragmatic age: Efficiency is doing a thing right, whereas effectiveness is doing the right thing. Ministers who will take up the cross of frustration and fatigue that may accompany a commitment to integrating the various disciplines will model effective and penetrative proclamation of truth. True, we have no scriptural or historical warrant for the claim that we do not need or should not use specialists. The church has been served with distinction by effective specialists, who were, however, not so specialized as to neglect human need when they encountered it. What we do not need are those unhealthy specialists who are so concerned with their particular disciplines that they do not bother to integrate that with human need. A sensitivity to human need is a corrective to the excesses of unhealthy specialization. The great theologian Karl Barth preached with some frequency to inmates in the Basel prison—which he referred to as “my favorite pulpit.”19
A powerful ministry. We must never forget that all the work in the early church was done in the power of the Spirit. In our comments on 1:1–8 we reflected on the importance of the fullness of the Spirit for ministry. Peter’s words in verse 6 expressing his economic poverty but commanding the crippled man to walk remind us that far more serious than economic poverty is spiritual poverty. An economically poor church that is able to harness the power of God is actually a rich church.
It is sad that with the increase of riches, dependence on God and consequently spiritual power often become less. It is unfortunately possible to use things that money can buy, such as a wonderful gymnasium for the youth and a grand pipe organ for worship, to have an impressive program and mask spiritual poverty. Economic poverty is sometimes a gift, for it forces us to look to God for strength. It is said that the theologian Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) once called on Pope Innocent II when the latter was counting out a large sum of money. The Pope remarked, “You see, Thomas, the church can no longer say, ‘Silver and gold have I none.’ ” Aquinas replied, “True, holy father, but neither can she now say, ‘Rise and walk.’ ”20