Sermon Without a Conclusion

Perhaps you noticed my sermon title, “Sermon without a Conclusion.”  Don’t worry; it doesn’t refer to this morning’s message. 

I’m referring to what many think of as the first sermon in the history of the Christian church:  the sermon Peter preached on the Day of Pentecost.  The text for my sermon—which will have a conclusion—is Acts 2:22-47.  If you regularly read this blog, you know there are several sermons drawn from this seminal chapter.  In this one I try to tie several threads together.

You’ll remember a crowd had been attracted by the sound of the Spirit-filled disciples as they praised God in several foreign dialects.  These dialects were familiar to members of the multi-national crowd but shouldn’t have been familiar to the Galilean followers of Jesus. Made curious, some in that crowd asked, “What does this mean?”  Peter’s sermon was preached in response to that question.

The Sermon

After a brief word to explain the phenomena the crowd was witnessing, Peter turns to his real theme:  God was at work in the world through Jesus of Nazareth.

Throughout the rest of Acts the apostles would return again and again to this theme. 

Here Peter emphasizes several key issues. .

1. The mighty miracles for which Jesus was so well-known were done by God’s power (22b).  During his earthly ministry some had accused Jesus of being in league with the devil; Peter immediately lays that notion to rest.

2.   Peter boldly addresses the issue of the crucifixion.  He unhesitatingly reminds the crowd of their role in sending Jesus to the cross.  He insists that the crucifixion was illegal and was carried out by “lawless men.”  But even as he does this he offers a twist on the story:  The crucifixion, far from being a tragic accident, was “according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God.” (v. 23) 

In time, writers like Paul would more fully explain how the cross played a role in God’s plans.  Paul and other New Testament writers would explain how the cross was the key to God’s offer of reconciliation to fallen humanity.  There’s no indication that Peter treated the issue, perhaps because he was eager to move on to an even more startling announcement.

3.  Though Jesus had died on the cross, God raised him up. (cf. 32)  This may have been the church’s first public declaration of the resurrection.  The claim to have been witnesses of the Risen Christ underscores why this was an important qualification for those who would fill the role of apostle.  Peter uses Psalm 16 to support the resurrection. 

The psalm predicted the resurrection would happen; the apostles proclaimed that the resurrection had happened.

4.  Christ was exalted to the right hand of God.  (33a) The conclusion of this matter affirms that God has made or proven this very Jesus to be “both Lord and Christ.”  In time, “Jesus is Lord” would be an early confession of faith.  “Lord” carries an implication of deity.  Within the very shadow of the temple Peter announced that the Man who had been condemned as a blasphemer by the Jewish authorities was, in fact, the long-awaited Messiah, the Anointed One. 

That was the gist of his sermon.  Throughout Acts Luke uses short summaries of the apostles’ sermons.  He does the same here.  Still, even in summary this is a remarkable message.

The sermon contained a great deal of theology, careful reasoning from the Jewish Scripture.  Of course, Peter knew his crowd and knew they could follow what he was saying.  Peter made profound claims about Jesus, claims that would certainly stun some of the listeners.  The claim that Jesus was both Lord and Christ would not be an easy one to accept, especially as the Jews had crucified Him. 

Peter’s sermon had a powerful impact on his listeners.  They were, “cut to the heart” or “moved to the depths of their hearts” (Ber).  The message “went straight to their hearts.” (Moffatt)  The listeners did not leave it at a feeling of conviction but sought direction from the disciples, asking, “What shall we do?” 

Peter answered with a twofold imperative and a promise

            1.  They were to repent.  Repentance involved a change of mind in which they would not only change how they saw Jesus but also reorder they lives according to their new insights.  As a consequence they would be escaping from their “perverse generation.” 

            2.  They were to be baptized.  In baptism they would publicly align themselves with the movement and declare themselves to be committed to Jesus Christ. 

Some three thousand made that commitment that day.  In time being baptized would be an invitation to persecution and trial.  It remains the same for Christians in some countries today.  In Saudi Arabia, for example, becoming a Christian is, on the books at least, a capital offense.

The text implies that some did not respond.  There is no reason today’s church should be surprised when the same thing occurs.

The Aftermath

Ever the historian, Luke shares the aftermath of that first sermon.  His brief description of the life of the early church has inspired longing in the hearts of many who have read it.  In pursuit of the congregational lifestyle it portrays some Christians have tried to recreate the outer characteristics that marked the lives of these first Christians.  They have shunned “church” buildings, insisting that meeting in homes is the only proper way to do church.  They have insisted on a kind of benevolent communism, sharing of goods and wealth.  One church I know of actually requires its members to attend Bible studies five or six nights a week.

These groups, though well-intentioned, fail to see that Luke is trying, not so much to describe what these early Christians did as to describe the kind of people they became.

à They became the kind of people who were eager to learn, to discover more about what God had been doing in Jesus Christ.  They had much to learn.  They had to abandon false ideas and embrace new, correct ideas about God’s Messiah. 

à  They became the kind of people who were committed to the fellowship and to worship.   That is, they regularly gathered together for worship that included public worship and small group experiences.   They benefited from being with one another. 

à  They became the kind of people who were willing to make sacrifices to help their fellow believers (45).  This was not forced communism.  Nor was it universal.  It was voluntary as each person sold property to meet needs.  This was an attitude toward property, not a policy toward property.

à  They became the kind of people who saw miracles happen regularly.  Some commentators believe verse 43 should be reproduced in today’s church—literally.  While most of us would welcome it, I doubt if we really expect it.  Still, it’s not going too far to hope that a church might become a place of miracles where broken hearts are mended and troubled minds are calmed.
            à  They became they kind of people who made a positive impact on their community.  As another translation puts it, “they won the respect of all they people.”

Then and Now

The time has come to make some observations about then and now.  While some characteristics of first-century culture might be like ours, too much is different for us to expect to be able to duplicate the life of the early church exactly.

But what can we expect of a church that takes that early church as a model to emulate, to use as a pattern for what a church should be.

To the extent we intend to carry on Christ’s work in the world we must keep several facts about the early church in mind:

1.    We would expect that church to center its message upon God’s activity in the world through Jesus of Nazareth.

            à  The wonder of the Incarnation.

            à  The impact of his life.
            à   The benefit of his death.
            à   The victory of his resurrection.

2.  We would expect that church to call people to a clear commitment to Christ.

à The first public expression of that commitment was baptism.

à The value of commitment is also reflected in the tendency to delineate between those who are saved and those who are not saved.

3. We would expect that church to give the highest priority to worship.

4.  We would expect that church to seek to be a community of joyous fellowship marked by practical expressions of love.

5.   We would expect that church to encourage its members to exhibit the kind of integrity that will make a positive impact in the community.

A Conclusion—to this sermon, at least!

Tomorrow is St. Patrick’s Day.  I’ve long admired the Irish saint—who was really English but don’t tell any one.  Edward Cairns has written of Patrick as a model church-builder.  He was successful because he continued the tradition go telling the story of what God did through Jesus Christ. 

The truth: wherever the story of God’s activity in Jesus is told, lives are changed.

That’s why the sermon in Acts 2 is, in a sense, without a conclusion.  If the church ever stops telling people what God had done through Jesus, its days are numbered.