The Book of Acts 2:22-36 - Peter preaches about Jesus
Acts 2:22-36 · Bob Eckel · Feb 16, 2014
Acts (2014), No. 07
Holly Hills Bible Church
https://hollyhillsbiblechurch.org/teaching/messages/4926417544204

Transcribed from the recording by SermonAudio, so expect the occasional misheard word.

I think we need to read it in its entirety. Men of Israel, hear these words. Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know, This Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.

God raised him up, loosing the pains of death, because it was not possible for him to be healed by it. For David says concerning him, I saw the Lord always before me, for he is at my right hand that I may not be shaken. Therefore, my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced. My flesh will also dwell in hope. For you will not abandon my soul to Hades, or let your Holy One see corruption. You have made known to me the path of life. You will make me full of gladness with your presence.

Brothers, I say to you with confidence about the patriarch David, that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Being therefore a prophet, And knowing that God had sworn an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on the throne, he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh seek corruption. This Jesus God raised up, and of that we are all witnesses. Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this to you that you yourselves are seeing and hearing. For David did not ascend into heaven, but he himself says, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.

Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God hath made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified. So let's look at the first three verses. I joined two and three verses together throughout the passage to kind of look at them similarly.

The men of Israel hear these words, Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs, which God did through him in your midst. As you yourselves also know, Him being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have catered by lawless hands, have crucified and put to death, whom God raised up, and have loosed the pangs of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by the cross. Notice the audience. This is a gentile audience.

Peter is talking to Israel and ultimately as we'll find out as we proceed in Acts that the ministry of Peter and Paul gets divided going forward. Although last night at our Bible study we looked at Paul addressing Israel again in terms of the need for them to heed the Esau Jacob division in terms of ultimately becoming the true seed of Israel. So anyway, these passages are directed towards the men of Israel.

And so for whence did Jesus come? And was this what the Jews expected? Where is he from? I don't think it is worth it. Well, the verses says we're asking a redundant question from Nazareth. Is this where the king of the Jews would be proceeding from? No. Wasn't it like nothing good comes from Nazareth or something? This was an area where, in fact, there was no expectation at all. Of course, they didn't read the prophecy in terms of Bethlehem, right? At least they were ignoring that. But this was a man coming from an area of Israel that was not expected to be their king. So his credibility, notice it here. What's his credibility based on? In terms of the Jews, what are they looking for?

Miracles? Wonders? How would you describe a wonder? I came up with inexplicable. I don't know how else to describe it. Something that happens that a miracle could be water turned to wine. I guess that could be a wonder too. I'm not sure how carefully we can distinguish those things.

And signs, these are all noted as, I think, Christ's credibility for who he was. And, you know, that's what the Jews were looking for, right? But they still didn't believe, did they? I mean, they saw all these signs and miracles. You know, some people believe that Christ healed everyone that he touched.

John says he did so much more than I can even record. So here we have a godly man who is in fact doing everything that people needed to see in the way of a sign to get their still disbelief. Weren't there other people kind of charlatan types kind of doing some of the same stuff too?

Let's look at Mark 3.22.

This is the way the Jews interpreted it, at least some of the Jews. And the teachers of the law who came down from Jerusalem said he is possessed by Beelzebub, by the prince of demons. He is driving out demons. Yeah, so I guess the question comes up, what's the source of these miracles and these signs? I mean, it could be the devil. The devil was capable of doing such things. Is the devil capable of doing that today?

Probably. Certainly. I don't know. Is he alive and well doing miracles, doing all these wonders and things? Yeah, if God's permission though, right? Doesn't he have to have permission to do anything? The devil may be doing a miracle or something. Well, I don't think we have any reason to think he can't do it. But but what's interesting is he did these signs and miracles to illustrate the fact that he was God.

And yet there are still some that just explain it away. And that's you know, that's still human nature. There was this. debate this week between, or was it last week, between Kinham and Bill Nye? Yeah, I actually saw it. I didn't get a chance to watch it, but I heard one of the things that Bill Nye said is, well, I'm just looking for one piece of contradictory evidence and I'll change my opinion. Well, I really don't think he will because You see here, people take something miracle and they just explain, oh, that's the devils.

And even the Bible, you know, that passage on Lazarus said, even if someone from the dead came, they still would have believed. They have Moses and the prophets. So it's funny. It's interesting how even though God gives every reason for us to believe in him and God gave every reason for them to believe that Jesus was God, there are still those that find a way to explain it away and say, oh, he's He's just doing the works of the devil there. It's the same today. Mankind can still explain these things away that God has given us as an example of his beauty. One comment about that.

We're going to see the skepticism really that is there as we proceed through the passage that you read this morning. But secondly, are we living in an age where we need signs and wonders? I mean, I don't have anybody in this room, I doubt it, but we don't need to see any more signs and wonders, right? I mean, what are we looking for? And there is a body of the membership of the church probably still looking for this. I mean, these perhaps are tongue speakers, et cetera, who are looking for some miraculous acts yet to occur.

But you know, everything's been done. God's proven himself, right? We don't need any more evidence. I think in that argument between Nye and Ham, the thing that I thought was so impressive is, were you there? I mean, as a scientist, we try to do things repeatedly to prove that they're true in the laboratory. You know, evolution versus creation is they're both theories scientifically. Nobody was there to observe these changes. It's not an experiment that can be repeated to prove its validity.

So, I mean, you have to kind of sort that out for what it's worth. A little bit tangential to our topic this morning, but it's science and miracles and ultimately Christ portrayed. And Peter's saying, wake up! You had all this evidence and you didn't believe it. Think about the disciples too. They were doubters. Really? I mean, they saw and witnessed all this, but there's Christ on the cross. And until he was resurrected from the dead, they weren't so convinced either.

Well, I do think it speaks to the fact that God has given us no excuse. He's given mankind no excuse. The record is there. The signs and the wonders that Jesus did, were there. So for man to say, to write him off and say, well he wasn't God, he didn't do, he wasn't who he said he was. No, you don't have an excuse. God has given us every reason to believe what he has said and that's what Peter is saying. You know, you know this stuff happens. How are you going to explain away? What are you going to do with this knowledge that you have?

Well, but then we have Mark 3.22 that documents at least some really believe it was the devil that was doing these things. But from God's perspective, that's what I'm trying to point out. And it says in the verse, which God did through him and never missed.

It's all around them. It's not like this is happening up in Galilee. Here's all the Jews in Jerusalem. And in fact, this is all occurring around you. Yes, some of it happened up in Capernaum and other areas, but a lot of it's happening in Jerusalem, too. And which state? No. And it's interesting. No is I know, or gnosis, or epic gnosis.

This is the I know, which is simply acknowledge. Kind of like the traffic light is red. Or Holly and Yale is a intersection a little bit south of here. That's head knowledge. And he's saying to these men of Israel, this is factual. You've seen these miracles, signs and wonders. What's the matter with you? Some translations say this one. It doesn't say man, and some of the translations don't say him. It says this one, pointing, of course, to the Lord Jesus Christ. This is an emphatic pronoun. So it just doesn't say this man, da, da, da, da, da.

I mean, this is emphatically the Lord Jesus Christ. being delivered is perfect passive. isn't that an interesting verb test? Christ did the will of his father. so this is something in the past that continues to have presence in terms of interpretation. that Christ was the passive lamb, the lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world. he was given for that purpose by the father. And here it really demonstrates that more by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God. So a few verses, Romans 1, 4, and declared or determined to be the Son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead. Again, declared, determined for this purpose.

Revelation 13.8, all who dwell on the earth will worship him whose names have not been written in the book of life of a lamb, slain from the foundation of the world. So the slain from the foundation of the world pertains to Christ, not those who are not written in the book of life. And I think we'll come back to this in this passage. What happens to the dead outside of Christ? versus what happens to us as believers.

And again, a bit of doctrine in Acts 2. All right, foreknowledge. It's interesting from a medical perspective, the term is best translated prognosis. And when we think of prognosis, we're making a diagnosis clinically. And prognosis is kind of what the expectations are of this diagnosis under these circumstances. So foreknowledge meant Christ was the perfect passive gift of God. foregoing or actually the prognosis is he would save all men from all sin for all time. Kind of an interesting interpretation of that. I was surprised to see that as the Greek word.

And Peter appears to be attributing his crucifixion to the men of Israel. In some verses it says ye, which means ye men, not you a single man, but all of you. But some texts admit ye have taken. Was Peter here accusing Israel for crucifying Christ? Do you think? Well, the Jews were the ones who were kind of proactive participants in this, weren't they?

But have you ever talked to a Jewish person who's doubting the truth of the gospel and then If you say to them, I did this once, and the Lord showed me very quickly, don't ever do this again. He was saying that you, the Jewish people, were the ones who crucified the Lord Jesus Christ. And this guy, who was fairly well versed in Christianity, really got defensive about that. And that's because if you look at by lawless hands, that really means that it was done outside the law of the Jews. And that term can be transmitted wicked.

But then each one of us. and personalize this too, can't we? It's not just the men of Israel who crucified Christ, it's all of us in this room. On the same token, there's a whole historical interpretation of that which has really done injustice to the truth of God where God obviously, Christ gave us, he says no man takes my life from me, I have power to lay down and take it up again. Here I am, and yet at the same time Peter points out and other scriptures point out it was the Jews responsibility because they were there as a people group that they crucified Christ and yet you look through the Middle Ages, improper interpretation of Christianity, Christians so called, says it was the Jews, let's persecute the Jews, and that had now created in our time a real discriminatory act of that which is nothing to do with the scripture.

Well, yeah, I was challenged in that one occasion. I feel like I'm a Jew in terms of defending his Jewish faith versus Christianity. So in our modern day you really have to be careful of how you, yeah. And he was right, but here's what we call rightly dividing the word of truth, right? You know, I don't know, when I was unsaved until I was 30, I was very credible to the Lord God, people pulling things out of scripture and making a point from that verse versus that verse. I thought that was heretical, actually. I thought it was just, you know, that made me really doubt the truth of Christianity. But yes, the Jews, I mean, Peter's saying to you Jewish men, you guys are responsible because of what you did in the days before the crucifixion really, you know, allowed this to happen. You're responsible. But yet, we can't look at it that simply.

Let's turn to Romans 5.8 and 1 Peter 3.18.

So James, you take 1 Peter 3.18, and Holly, you've got your Bible list.

Margaret, can you take Romans 5.8, please? I can. So James, go ahead.

1 Peter 3.18. For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit. OK. Are we just? according to a lot more scripture, Romans 5, 8. But God commanded his love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. And there are an infinite number of verses, almost, that point to the fact that all fall short of the glory of God, right?

It's just not the Jew, but the Jew was the race or group of men that ultimately were allowing this kind of a proactive and somewhat aversive manner to allow the cross to occur. But then all this was in God's hands. Yeah, it kind of had to be that way, right? Because the Gentiles wouldn't have crucified him because he didn't do anything wrong. So it really could only have been the Jews, right? And what's this? Washing their hands of it? Who washed their hands of this?

Pilate. Is Pilate a Jew? No. Pilate's a Roman. But in order to fulfill the prophecies, it had to be, as Holly said, it had to be the Jews because that was how he was going to be crucified. And Margaret, why was Christ crucified? Why was he crucified? Was it the wonders and signs and miracles? What was the crime? Why did the Jews want him crucified? They were afraid. He claimed to be God? Exactly. And the Gentiles would have said, yay, so what? The big deal is lunatics out there claiming to be the son of God, so what? Political freedom, right? I think we failed that one, but this was all in God's hands.

Raised up and loose the pains of death. I'm going to challenge you. Describe the pains of death. Notice I didn't provide any answers for you here. Pains of death. By the way the commentators described this a number of different ways and I'm not sure which is right. I just thought we could discuss for a few minutes what we think the pains of death are. Death is separation.

So the pain of death for the Lord Jesus Christ I think some of us would believe that asking his heavenly father to take this task away from him was one of concern of separation not because of the physical pain that he was experiencing. But also taking the sin of the world, here you have a perfect man who now takes on the sin which he had never experienced. So he did not know sin, he would suddenly be surrounded by it for all, from the sin of all time. Another good point. Like fear of death? Do you think Christ feared death? No, it takes away. The fear of death. Well, it took away the pain of death. One of the pains of death would be the fear of the unknown to follow, do you think? Right. Okay, that's good.

And I think when his father turned his face from him, that separation from his father, who he was so close to. Okay, that would be the pain of death for him, for sure. You know, some people point only to the physical pain, and I think that was probably a component, but yeah, Jeremy. It probably doesn't make a whole lot of difference. My translation says the pangs of death.

The what? Pangs. P-A-N-G-S. P-A-N-G-S. But the next phrase says because it is not possible for him to be held by it. So it's almost the, I mean death is permanent from a human standpoint. But for Jesus it wasn't. It wasn't possible that he was permanently in the grave forever because he's gone.

I think that's a great point and again all these points we've made here I think are to some extent accurate. But the pain of death for the unsaved is body deterioration and no hope, right? So the pang of death, that's a good translation, the pain could possibly be, you know, this earthly and physical deterioration of the physical body with no hope of anything to follow.

Okay, good. I think we've captured, yeah. Well, I was just going to point out, he, and I think it's Sarah, he did suffer. He did die. He did suffer. Absolutely. So it's not like God removed... It wasn't the death that he went through. When we think of the actual passing from life into death, it was not pleasant for him at all. That's kind of the whole point, right? He suffered more than we will ever realize.

So the actual process of death, the physical process of dying, was not... God did not remove any of that, but once he was dead, he didn't remain dead. He didn't, like you say, deteriorate. His body resurrected. But didn't he loose the pains of death for us?

That's kind of how I was interpreting it. I think that's fine. Ultimately, this is a set of scripture that can be totally applicable to us, although it's directed to the men of Israel. These are truths that pertain to the believer today as much as then.

So the pains of death, we think about it, are getting there and what happens when we're there? It's all encompassed into the pains of death. Well, if you read 24, it says, whom God hath raised up, have he loosed. So God is the one that loosed the pains of death. Well, you look at the next page. Because it was not possible that he should be hold of it. Yeah, I mean God was the one that loosed the pains of death for Christ. Because it's impossible for him to be found like the rest of men.

How do we interpret, and I think maybe James said this, but it was maybe Jeremy. I think James said this, no one takes it from me Christ said, but I lay it down myself and I have the power to lay it down and I have the power to take it up again. This command I have received from my father. So what's the deal here? If he's got the power to lay his own life down, which he passively did. And it says I can raise it up again too. Did Christ reflect his ability to be risen from the grave or was he in fact saying I have the power not to be crucified?

Both. Yeah, all of it. To do whatever he wants. He says, you folks, you know, even in John chapter 10 where they took up stones, well that's right there, they took up stones to stone him. And they said, well why are you killing me, you know, for what I've done, the works I've done? And they said, no, because you being a man make yourself to be God. And so they realized he was planning. And so they said, if you're the Christ, tell us plainly. He said, I've told you before. He says, but you've seen all the works. They proved to you that I'm God. And that's when they wanted to kill him. And so he says there, he says, you guys are picking up stones, but it means nothing because I'm the one that's in control of my life.

If I die, I have the power to raise myself back up again. You have nothing, except he acknowledges here that this command I received from my father, this command or this authority, this power that I have to take my life, to give my life, to bring my life back, comes from God the Father. And so it matches Acts chapter 1, where it is the Father that has loosed him. So in a sense, though, he depended solely on his father for guidance and direction here.

Right. And he asked the cup to be taken away simply from a selfish perspective. He didn't want to be separated from his heavenly father. Well, for me, you know, This could be a cup of suffering, not a cup of separation. The Bible does clearly state that he was not separated and God did not turn his back on him.

Contrary to popular belief. Really? On the cross? Actually, the Bible nowhere says that God turned his back on Christ. The quote that is, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? That's where we interpret it. But that comes from Psalm 22, which specifically says later in the psalm, No, you did not. refused my cry and you did not turn your back on me when I cried to you. That's actually not exactly what that specific story says in Psalm 22. Anyway, that's a different story.

Well, I thought it had to do with sin. The penalty of sin is not punishment. The penalty of sin is death. So Christ paid the penalty by dying just like the Lamb did not take upon himself and absorb those sins. That was a symbolic aspect of Christ where Christ took upon himself our sins. Or the penalty for our sins, which is death. But that God couldn't look at sin. So when Jesus took him on, then he took on the sin that God couldn't look at. Which means that God couldn't look at the lamb either that became the sacrifice of sin.

And yet God says, even in Revelation, it says that those who are tortured in hell are always before the face of God the Father. And so God is always cognizant of that punishment for sin and hell. So it's not that God turns his back on sin, because God always beholds.

And the smell of Sodom and Gomorrah, he says, that noise has come up before me. I see that. And Christ and God himself said, I'm going to go down into Sodom and Gomorrah and I'm going to see. whether that is true or not. So God there beheld that sin face to face and said yes I abhor that and I punish it by destruction but in the sacrifice of Christ then it was the penalty of sin which was paid, which is death, that Christ then conquered because he was not able to be held by it. He is God and so of course I threw that. That blows me away. That's not just death anyway. We can take that for another one. It does relate to what power did he have and his power really was relinquished to God's plan for his people. Throughout Christ's ministry, he continually said, it's not mine, it's the Father's. The Father's going to send the Spirit.

How often do we try to live our own lives in our own power and not in that same acknowledgment? I thought that was the biggest suffering of Christ is that he was separated from his father. More so than any physical torture or anything. I thought that moment of being disconnected was the biggest sacrifice. according to James, perhaps I'm misinterpreting that.

Anyway, I think that's something we can all look at, what the Spirit is. Yeah, certainly. Okay, good. Let's move on here because we're going to need to catch up here a little bit. But this is good. That's what this Sunday School is all about, is conversation and discussion about the Word of God. So anyway, if you're in Doyle's collection there, he didn't have any agenda at all. It's just how things move. All right, but do relax. We've got an agenda because we have this whole thing. I thought Roger gave me a lot of verses today.

The next four verses say, For David says concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is at my right hand, that I may not be shaken. Therefore, my heart rejoiced, and my tongue was glad. Moreover, my flesh also will rest in hope, or you will not leave my soul in Hades. Nor will you allow your holy one to see corruption. You have made known to me the ways of life. You have made me full of joy in your presence."

So this is simply psalm 3. 16, 8 through 11. And the Septuagint, this is the Septuagint translation. And just as a reminder, the Greek translation of the Hebrew of the third century BC was, in fact, what we call the Septuagint. So this is the Greek form of Psalm 16. And I'm quoting Constable here.

In this psalm, David spoke of God as being at his right hand, a figure for close association and powerful assistance. Peter saw Jesus' presence in heaven at God's right hand as an extension of what David had written about. So that's the interpretation of Kassel. I couldn't really say it any better than that. So God was at David's right hand? What's it say? David spoke of God being at his right hand.

That makes it a little narcissistic. Any other thoughts about that? Well, David speaketh concerning him. That's not reflexive. It's of Christ. It's not himself. Reflexive would be David speaks concerning himself. But this particular grammatical expression is David speaks concerning the pronoun somebody else. In his reference, it's Christ. Yeah, I think for he pertains to the Lord Jesus Christ, that's why it's capitalized.

I don't know whether I put that in the way. No, but you're right. You're right to capitalize on that. All right, so no, David is preceding, again, the Son of God in the right hand, although he didn't perfectly see that. There's no question about that. Now, notice the hope and the joy of both David and Peter here. First of all, the heart rejoiced in the tumultuous life. I mean, evidence that these are good things. Secondly, he's spared from Hades. And in the Old Testament, this is Sheol, the place of departed spirits. This is kind of a separate kind of place. And it's not looked at as good. Hades is the absence of light, darkness.

That's the direct interpretation of the word. And the statement that the body would not suffer decay expressed the belief that God would keep him, or even us, from ultimate deterioration. There's an interesting correlation there, I'm not reading my head here, but with the resurrection of Lazarus. Lazarus had been in the grave for four days, and when he came he said, well I'll go back and sit on this.

Well he's been in there for four days, by this time he stinketh. And which means corruption has set in. Christ was risen and not, you know, there's a definition to say when corruption occurs. But if their popular mindset was four days and you start to think three days and. And of course, the difference between resurrection and restoration is Lazarus was restored life. It's not a new body yet. OK, that's a good point, I think, in terms of the demolition. And then in Revelation 30, 13, it says, the seed gave up to dead. This, I think, is really kind of interesting here. The seed gave up to dead who were in it. And death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them.

And they were judged, each one according to his works. There's the people not written in the book of life. It says that the sea gave up the dead, and the dead who were with them, and they were judged. I mean, the idea that death had not only separation, but it actually had decay as part of it. And they're their judge. This is a great white throne judgment.

So those who have died outside of Christ, in fact, will be brought forth in some form, but presumably not in resurrected bodies. Who knows what these unsaved look like when they're brought before the Great White Throne. Death is decay and humiliation and it occurs in our bodies too, doesn't it? Yet we have a hope that extends far. That revelation passage is misprinted here.

And you're not supposed to add to the word? What's that? You're not supposed to add to the word. Oh, okay. So I'm not converted? I would like to, but I doubt it. Somebody can correct that for us, my bad. Alright, so the right hand is always the inverse.

Then talking about the sum, I think it is presentations on Hebrews. And, you know, just to give you an example of that, in Matthew chapter 20, interesting, I'm listening to this on the way to work now, by the key. He talked about this just a few days ago. And he said to her, meaning the mother of these disciples, what do you wish? And she said to him, Grant that these two sons of mine, they sit one in your right hand and the other on the left in your kingdom. So the idea is, give one of these sons of mine the right hand. And by the way, the other one is sitting on your left. And she wasn't particular in terms of which one.

Now, then I might not be shaken or moved. We won't take time to look at the psalmist verses. But there is the positioning of the Old Testament saint, quote unquote, who lived by faith, expecting that in God they're not moved. They're stayed and confident in that position.

And overall, I think these verses point to Christ's resurrection and enthronement, ultimately, than before coming. You may be known the ways of life, and you will make me full of the joy of your presence. And this is the resurrection life, do this understanding. So Philippians 4, one, therefore, my beloved, and long for, brethren, my joy and crown, so stand fast on the Lord, beloved. So I think this can be pushed forward in a small sense in the terms of application of the life we want to live in Christ. All right, the next four verses.

Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us today. Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, he would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that his soul was not left in Hades, Nor did his flesh see corruption. This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses." Notice that Peter is speaking freely here. There's no, I mean, he says, I'm speaking freely. He's not tied down by any tradition of the law of Moses.

The patriarch or pedigree kind of means head of the fathers. And David's tomb has been identified. So in other words, David is kind of part of his pedigree that leads to Christ. And of course, the throne of David needs to be distinguished from the throne of Christ. And we'll come to that in a minute. Jerry. Just real quick. My translation says, brothers, I may say to you with confidence about the Patriarch David. So rather than saying, let me speak freely, I don't know if you got a chance to look into that. I didn't look at other versions on this. But I mean that seems like two very different connotations. Speaking freely and then speaking with confidence.

True. In some ways you can envision them similar, but in some ways they may be very different too. Yeah, I like that better actually. So that's a good point. All right. So we can look at the evidence that David's buried and it's somewhere on the south side of Jerusalem. And so.

1 Kings 2.10, Nehemiah 3.16 both point to a burial site in Jerusalem for David. I guess you can go visit that. When we were there we didn't go visit David's grave, but it's in evidence. And unlike Jesus, David's not resurrected, right? So the contrast there. But the promise through the prophet David of the Lord Jesus Christ and his resurrection is noted here by Peter. So David's passage here reflects on the idea that resurrection will occur.

In Psalm 132.11, it says, the Lord has sworn in truth to David. He will not turn from it. I will set up upon your throne the fruit of your body. I'm going to talk a little bit about this throne now.

In Psalm 89.3 and 4, I've made a covenant with my chosen. I have sworn to my servant David, your seed I will establish forever. and build up your throne to all generations.

Now the throne of David and the right hand of the Lord Jesus Christ are different thrones and we need to distinguish the two. How much more evidence really does the skeptic need in terms of what David was prophesying here, in terms of how what he's looking forward to, and ultimately the fact that Christ would not remain in Hades, ultimately relates to the truth of the scripture in terms of who Jesus Christ is and what we're expecting his death and resurrection to stand for historically and personally today. And no, not stated is that Jesus is sitting on David's throne, an earthly not heavenly place.

David's throne is here, right? And will be here. Whereas Christ's throne is in heavenly places. So these are different places for these thrones. David's throne is not a heavenly throne. I mean it's an earthly throne. And that will be occupied by whom? By the Lord Jesus Christ, right? His second coming. And David's throne will be fully occupied by the king. I mean the expected Messiah at the time of the scriptures. Two different times. Let's turn to 2 Samuel 7, 11-16. This may be somewhat helpful, but I'm not sure it's the perfect answer to these two different times. 2 Samuel 7, 11-16.

And as since the time that I commanded judges to be over my people Israel, and have caused thee to rest from all thine enemies, also the Lord telleth thee that he will make thee in house. And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.

He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men and with the stripes of the children of men. But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. and on house and on kingdom shall be established forever before thy throne shall be established forever.

What is the throne we are talking about there? The promise to the Jews. And so called the throne of David, but yet the throne of David is to be occupied not by David. It is to be occupied by the Lord Jesus Christ. So we want to make sure that we interpret this correctly, because it does not say that Jesus is sitting on David's throne here at this time. It's saying that there's a promise of David's throne. But ultimately, as we go back to other scriptures, we see that that's an earthly throne with a kingdom to be ruled by the Lord Jesus Christ and not the heavenly place where Christ, in fact, sits. So this, in verse 32, refers back to this one man in verse 22. So if you kind of look at this, it's again referring back to the Lord Jesus Christ at the beginning of the passage we're looking at today.

And we, meaning men of Israel, are the witnesses. And let's look at Acts 1-8 again in terms of the witness that is provided. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth. Okay, so Peter is reminding them that ultimately they are witnesses, those who have been enthroned by the Holy Spirit at the time of Pentecost, and that ultimately you men of Israel are responsible for this task of coming to believe that Christ truly saved us and the prophecy has been fulfilled.

Alright, therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, this is the heavenly throne, this is where Christ is going, as we've been told by many of the passages. And having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he poured out this which you now see and hear, that David did not ascend into the heavens, this bends it down.

But he says himself, the Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand till I make your enemies your footstool. Therefore, let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ. A lot in this section here.

Yes, sir. And just one fact from the statement there that David did not ascend into the heavens. speaks mainly to the point that when he said that he wasn't there and so he was referring to a place that was outside of his current location. So how could he refer to himself if he were sitting on earth referring to the throne of God?

Absolutely. That's an excellent point. Good. All right, so let's look at this in a little bit more detail. Therefore, and again, when it says therefore, what's it there for? Well, I listed a few things that I thought maybe exemplify this. David is in the tomb, and the Lord Jesus Christ is exalted. That's one of them. Therefore, based on this, the truth is David is dead and buried in the tomb, and the Lord Jesus Christ has been buried, resurrected, and placed at the right hand. The Holy Spirit's been given, which, by the way, in the text they could see and hear.

They could see there were witnesses to the fact. that Pentecost related to an indwelling of the spirit to lead them in the ways of God through the power that exists in the new creation they are in Christ Jesus. That's doctrine, not an act. But we know from Paul's writings that this is ultimately directed towards exemplifying the new man of Christ we all are. Of course, John had written about this to some extent, didn't he, in terms of the promise of the Holy Spirit and what his goal would be. The third point is the Lord Jesus Christ has been triumphant over death and positioned at the right hand.

And we see that both in Psalm 110.1 and Hebrews 1.3. We don't really need to turn there right now. Fourthly, for Israel, he is both Lord and the Christ. I was wondering why we needed to really deal with both of these here, but I think there's a reason for that. Dekiria means Lord, Messiah with expectant and really presence of power, a master, sovereign presence. A little bit different meaning than Christos, which we'll come to.

So John 17.2, you have given him authority over all the flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as you have given to him.

So again, that's the power of the word Jesus Christ. And Ephesians 1, 20 to 22, something that relates to our walk in the confidence in the word we get today, when he worked in Christ, when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality, power, and might demanding. And every man that is named, not only in this age, but also in that which is to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him to be head over all things to the church." So I mean, this is a position of sovereignty, of power, of confidence, and relates to the term Asai. Yeah. Well, I mean, it seems like the whole he is Lord in Christ.

So I haven't looked at it enough yet. I know in one of the commentaries we have, I forget who, but he says that basically throughout much of the book of Acts, the offer of the kingdom was still relevant to the people of Israel. So there was still a chance that if they accepted Christ as the Messiah, that he would establish his kingdom, is what this one commentator said. So I don't know about that, but looking at this passage here, Peter is saying, look, there's this Messiah that to redeem you, but also the one that's going to sit on the throne of David. This is the Christ, the Jesus that you knew. So I have to wonder if by emphasizing the fact that he is both Lord and Christ, if he's saying to them, you know, that this is the Messiah that David and all the people in the Old Testament, you can still accept him as your Messiah. I don't know, but there's definitely a, there seems to be a kingdom emphasis in this sermon that Peter's given to the men of Israel here, so I just wonder how much I wonder how that plays into the whole idea of the kingdom and the Jews.

I think as the new believing Jews came to an increasing understanding, they would put the kingdom into perspective as much as the prophecy has not yet been fulfilled there. These are fairly, I think, new believers fairly ignorant about this role of Christ coming. By the way, Messiah's correct interpretation for both of these is just their implications are different. Christos is more the anointed one, whereas again the Messiah Kyrios is more the power and the sovereignty of the Lord Jesus. Looking back at Matthew chapter 22, the Pharisees were asking Christ a number of questions and trying to confuse him. And so Christ asked them, Christ, who do you say that he is?

And they said the son of David. And then he pointed back to this exact same verse. And he said, well, then, you know, if he's the son of David, then how come David called him the Lord, saying, you know, set my right hand to the Lord. And he said from that day forth no man dared to ask him any more questions. So all these Jews that were standing here remembered likely the very last question that anyone had dared ask Christ regarding this verse and when Peter brings it up they think, That's a good point, because you had just said, whosoever shall call upon the name of the Kirios, the Lord, shall be saved. Meaning God himself. And here, you have made this same Christ, the same Jesus, Lord, God, and Messiah. And so, that points back to exactly what Jesus said when he was on this earth. How does this happen? Well, because it's true!

And I think a good measure of that confusion for them at this point was because they realized, didn't you ask Christ that? No, we're not asking him anything because we can't answer what he asked us. And from that point on, they said, what are the questions we have? And that may have been a lingering question in their mind. Well, what does this mean with David? And Peter explains it here to say, Jesus is God, the one that you should call upon to be saved. But he's also Christ the Messiah. And this is the one of whom Christ spoke.

Well, this quote from the Old Testament about making your enemies your footstool comes up time and time again in scriptures often quoted in Hebrews and quoted here and I think elsewhere. What do you make of that? I didn't go there in the handout, but making your enemies your footstool. What's that? What's that imply?

Yeah, we I think we looked at that last last week. The domination of a king. I think that actually, was it last week or was it the week before that? I think Byrne did. Byrne did. That's where I remember it from. The fact that it's a king who has conquered his enemy and is now satisfied with that conquering by demonstrating the fact that you are now in a most vulnerable position being ruled by me. Remember the law will be written in the heart of the kingdom too. I mean, that's a whole different relationship than it is with the body of Christ today. So I think that that relates to the kingdom age.

And ultimately, that's a prophecy. And the House of Israel is going to be responsible here for all they know and have experienced. And I mean, Peter's addressing these Jews, in fact, because of all of the evidence that he points through this preaching that they've been exposed to all this. So you do need to be. It's possible to what you know. It's an act of faith, isn't it? I mean, our faith is believing what God's revealed. And he revealed a lot in what they had eyewitness to at the time. But it relates to all of us.

Again, Romans 3.3, all sin did fall short for the glory of God. I mean, we look at this as direct to the men of Israel. But I think we can't dismiss the fact that these same biblical truths as were portrayed and presented to them are actually there for all of us. Good. All right. Good discussion. And we're going to stop there. So.

I mean, plus, I do say very thank you for your word and the truth that's in it. Thank you for the opportunity we have to come together and discuss it. And what may we be aware of the truth that's in Scripture and realize the responsibility we have to understand that and the privilege we have to apply that to our lives. We just thank you for that, for your truth. We pray this in your name. Amen.