Questions on Acts 3

http://www.freerepublic.com | Self

[LearsFool]

Some will tell you the Bible can't be understood. Others say you can't understand it without a theology degree, or an ordained teacher, or a special vision/revelation.

I challenge those claims, and invite everyone to read Acts 3 and see whether the following questions are too difficult. And when you're done, you might find you know more than your preacher. :-)

1. What was the lame man expecting to receive from Peter and John?

2. Did the people recognize this man? Why were they amazed when they saw him?

3. How had the Jews treated their Messiah/Christ?

4. What proofs are given in Acts 3 to show them that Jesus is the Christ?

5. Just as in ch. 2, we find good news and bad news. What's the good news in v. 19?

6. What's the bad news in v. 23?

7. Is it possible to just "sit on the fence" and not make a decision either way about Jesus?

8. Who received the gospel first? How does 3:25-26 fit with 1:8?

Extra credit: Does Peter fully understand the significance of what he says here in vv. 25-26? (Hint: You might have to read a few chapters ahead to find the answer.)

[LearsFool]

To promote study, discussion, and greater understanding of the Scriptures.

Previous question lists:

Questions on Acts 1

Questions on Acts 2

[knarf]

gott’a go, but I’ll be back .... LOVE this stuff

[LearsFool]

I’ll look for your answers later then. :-)

[drypowder]

I am a Christian that is still learning. I have posed this question in several venues and have yet to receive an answer. Several places in the New Testament it is written that Jesus tells people to Take Up their Cross and to follow Him. I understand the Cross to be symbolic of Christ’s crucifixion thus symbolic of Christianity. Did the cross have a religious significance in the days of Jesus and if not, why would Jesus use the term “take up your cross”?

[pgkdan]

bump for later.

[Boogieman]

Well, it was normal practice for the Romans to make prisoners carry their own crucifixes to the hill of Golgotha, so I think the phrase would have been generally understood as a reference to that.

However, I think Jesus was also being prophetic. He knew from the start that He would be crucified, so even if the disciples didn’t understand the full significance of the phrase He was using, He knew that they (and we) would appreciate it later.

[rjsimmon]

Did the cross have a religious significance in the days of Jesus and if not, why would Jesus use the term “take up your cross”?

The significance of the phrase "take up your cross" pointed to the the absolute conviction that the physical device required. The convicted prisoner carried their cross to Golgotha where they died. Jeshua told His audience that to follow Him required 100% conviction.

The same holds true for baptism. Although it was merely symbolic, partaking in the act required 100% conviction on the part of the one being baptized. The Jewish leaders watched those being baptized and would forbidden from attending the synagogue, which was the social and religious center of Jewish society.

Christ's teaching required nothing less than total commitment to Him and a separation of the old way.

[sauropod]

bfl study

[afsnco]

In Jewish culture, one of the worst things was to be executed as a “criminal.” Christ was shocking them with this symbolism, confirming that Christians would be reviled and hated. Sort of a warning that the cost can be very high indeed to be a Christian.

[LearsFool]

As others have well noted, taking up one's cross refers to being willing to give up everything - up to and including one's life - in service to the King. It's not a reference to wearing symbols to demonstrate one's holiness, as the hypocrites did, "to be seen of men" (Mt. 23:5ff).

Take a look at this passage, and I bet you'll see what Jesus is getting at:

"Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven.

Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.

He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it." - Mt. 10:32-39

[JAKraig]

I think it is rather absurd to believe that anyone needs a theology degree to understand the Scriptures. The writers, at least of the New Testament, had no theology degrees, instead they lived for three years with the Savior Jesus Christ.

The lame man was expecting silver or gold.

When the lame man got up leaping into the Temple the people in the Temple definitely recognized the man and wondered how it was that he was doing what he was doing. When they asked questions of Peter, Peter gave them a lecture/sermon. Peter explained how it was that the man was healed by what power it had happened and how they, the Jews in attendance at the Temple, were among those who just disowned Jesus and threw him to the wolves to be crucified.

While not explicitly forgiving those in attendance Peter explained to them that he realized that they did what they did in ignorance and that therefore God would accept their repentance and forgive them.

Peter explained who Jesus was by listing the references to other prophets in the past and explaining that Jesus had fulfilled all the prophecies.

While the good news is that they could be forgiven of their mistakes if they repent the bad news is they will suffer eternally if they don't.

Many people in our society today think they will sit on the fence and avoid offending anyone and avoid offending God but that concept is preposterous, the Savior condemned people for not being hot or cold but for being lukewarm they would be spewed out of the mouth. Fence sitters are as guilty as those who nailed the Savior to the cross and will be punished in the same way if they do not repent just like those who hammered the nails will be punished if they do not repent.

Peter makes it clear that the descendents of Abraham were very privileged to be the first to receive the good news of Jesus Christ but that through the descendents of Abraham the whole world would be blessed because the good news would be taken to the whole world where all could partake in the Gospel. Peter did fully understand the significance of being a descendent of Abraham, of being a Jew and how that through the Jews the Gospel would reach the entire world and gave his life to help that to happen.

Other people may interpret the Scriptures differently than me that does make not make them more right or less right than me, what I have said is what this means to me and after all is said and done that is what is really important to me. If it means something different to you then I'm ok with that.

[drypowder]

Freepers are great, thank you all very much.

[LearsFool]

Right. No need to spend years in seminary or be dependent on those who have. Careful reading of the Scriptures is the way to find the right answers!

Good answers, by the way. :-)

While not explicitly forgiving those in attendance Peter explained to them that he realized that they did what they did in ignorance and that therefore God would accept their repentance and forgive them.

Very well said. This is right in line with what Jesus said on the cross, isn't it?..."Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do." (Lk. 23:34) The conditions for their forgiveness would be first preached on Pentecost, and now we hear them again, as Peter seizes this opportunity.

I was hoping for a bit more explanation for question #4, though. For instance, in addition to the prophecies, Peter submits the case of the healing of the lame man as a proof that God has raised Jesus from the dead and glorified Him. And he also offers himself and John as witnesses of that resurrection.

Here's what I was getting at with the "extra credit" question: Today we know that the gospel is not only for Jews but for Gentiles also. As Jesus said in Acts 1:8: "ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."

Yet at this point in the story (Acts 3), the gospel is being preached only to Jews and proselytes (converts to Judaism). In a few chapters, the gospel will spread to Samaria. And later, Peter will be the one chosen to preach to the first Gentiles. So not only is it down the road a ways, but it'll take several different signs from God before Peter understands His will regarding the Gentiles.

Here in Acts 3, we have Peter referring to something yet in the future, and which (it seems to me, at least) he has only the vaguest understanding of. (And yet he still speaks with complete trust in whatever the Lord's plan is for Gentiles!) Something to ponder, perhaps.

Thanks for contributing to the study! :-)

[Pollster1]

I challenge those claims, and invite everyone to read Acts 3 and see whether the following questions are too difficult.

I agree in general. The Bible was intended to be understood by the reader and was written with that in mind; it means what it says.

[LearsFool]

Indeed!

So...psst...what did you put for #6? :-)

[BipolarBob]

" Did the cross have a religious significance in the days of Jesus and if not, why would Jesus use the term “take up your cross”?"

First start at the beginning. Deuteronomy 21:23 "He who is hanged is accursed of God." Jesus took this curse of sin on Him for our sins. Crucifixion is an extremely painful humiliating way to die. Jesus voluntarily died in our place.
"Take up your cross" can be put another way. 1 Corinthians 15:31 "I die daily". Paul said he died every day he lived since being saved. Why? He died to self. He gave up selfish desires. He was in the world but would not partake of sinful activities such as gluttony, lust, greed and other things the world holds up for us to grasp. To live for Christ is to take up the cross.

[imardmd1]

7. Is it possible to just "sit on the fence" and not make a decision either way about Jesus?

"Sitting on the fence" IS a decision -- to go to Hell.