THE POWER AND AUTHORITY OF THE NAME OF JESUS IS THE ONLY WAY TO SALVATION from Acts 4

THESIS: THE POWER AND AUTHORITY OF THE NAME OF JESUS IS THE ONLY WAY TO SALVATION

I. THE NAME OF JESUS

A. BELIEF IN THE NAME OF JESUS

1. ONLY PATH TO SALVATION
2. A RELATIONSHIP NOT RELIGION

B. THE RESPONSE TO THE NAME OF JESUS

1. THE CONVERSION OF THE CROWDS
2. THE ANGER OF THE RELIGIOUS MAJORITY

II. THE POWER OF THE NAME OF JESUS

A. THE AUTHORITY OF THE NAME OF JESUS

1. RELATIONSHIP TO GOD THE FATHER
2. OTHER NAMES OF JESUS

B. THE HEALING NATURE OF THE NAME OF JESUS

1. PHYSICAL HEALING
2. SPIRITUAL HEALING

III. THE REJECTION OF THE NAME OF JESUS

A. REJECTION OF GOD'S MESSENGERS

                                               i. REJECTION OF MOSES/JOSEPH

                                              ii. REJECTION OF STEPHEN AND PETER

B. THE CHARGES FOR PREACHING IN THE NAME OF JESUS

                                               i. THE RETRIAL OF JESUS' NAME

                                              ii. THE PENALTY FOR SPEAKING IN JESUS' NAME

The Book of Acts was written during a remarkable time in church history, and contains some of the most valuable information concerning the actions of the early church fathers ever recorded. There were many spiritual victories during that time period, as well as the suffering of persecution at the hands of those who had rejected Christ while He lived and walked among men. Peter, who had walked with Jesus during His life, was not spared from the persecution that many of these early Christians suffered, and faced his own share of trials and difficulties. During one such trial, recorded in Acts 4:7, Peter was allowed to answer the question: "By what power or by what name did you do this?" (ESV) Peter responds that Jesus is the source of this power, but Acts 4:12 reveals the deeper meaning behind everything Peter has done: "And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved." (ESV) Peter believed that the power and authority of the name of Jesus is the only way to salvation.

Peter believed that the name of Jesus was the only way to salvation for men. This was the purpose of his journey and what brought him before the lame beggar in Acts 3. The beggar had asked for silver and gold, but what he received was much more important: he was healed. Acts 3:6-7 reveal the miracle that was performed: "But Peter said, 'I have no silver and gold, but what I do have I give to you. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk!' And he took him by the right hand and raised him up, and immediately his feet and ankle were made strong." (ESV) The apostles Peter and John did not have silver and gold to offer the crippled man, but what they did have “was the power to bring about a miraculous cure in the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, even in the absence of any direct request, or of an explicit faith of the crippled man in that name.”¹ The miracle that was performed here revealed a much larger picture than a man being healed. This miracle was a sign pointing directly to God, and the authority He had given His "servant Jesus who had been crucified but had been raised from the dead."² Peter had shared not only the gift of healing to this man, but the path to salvation and the forgiveness of his sins as well. Because of this, and other reasons, Peter was brought to trial, because Peter had "boldly declared that 'salvation' comes through 'no one else' but Jesus ('no other name'), not the Maccabean heroes or the Sadducees or anyone else."³ The ramifications of this message were clear: "If there is salvation in no other name, then obviously one must make a commitment to that sole name that brings salvation."⁴

There is more to this story than Peter just declaring the name of Jesus. Peter was not preaching that more religion was necessary, but that a relationship with the person of Christ was the key to salvation. This is evidenced further in Acts 19, when the sons of a Jewish high priest named Sceva attempted to use the power of the name of Jesus without having a relationship to the person. This did not have a good outcome for them, and in verses 15-16 the demon responds: "'Jesus I know, and Paul I recognize, but who are you?' And the man in whom was the evil spirit leaped on them, mastered all of them and overpowered them, so that they fled out of the house naked and wounded." (ESV) There is no power available to anyone in the name of Jesus without the relationship to the person of Jesus. It was "very obvious that Jesus believed that only through a personal relationship with Himself can one know God. Peter boldly proclaims this to the elite Jewish leadership."⁵ The Jews that had gathered had plenty of religion, but what they lacked was a personal relationship with God through His Son Jesus Christ.

When sharing the Gospel, there are two possible outcomes to the situation: The first is that the person listening will accept what is being presented, and will either make a declaration of faith or agree to consider the matter further. The second outcome is an all out rejection of the Gospel message. This was true of the crowd that had gathered together to hear Peter speak before the council in Acts 4. Luke records in Acts 4:4 that: "many of those who had heard the word believed, and the number of men came to about five thousand." (ESV) The message that Peter had presented had taken hold in some of the people who had attended the speech that Peter had made just previous in Acts 3. Peter seized the moment, and when he "saw the amazement of the people, he spoke to them, explaining that God had glorified Jesus, that is, revealed his true nature, and that by faith in his name had the lame man been healed.”⁶ They had had understood that "Peter was referring to both national deliverance and personal salvation in this address."⁷ This was something that the Israelites had been waiting for since the Garden of Eden, when God had promised that the Messiah would crush the head of the Serpent in Genesis 3:15.

Not all who had heard Peter's message, however, received it with the same reaction of accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. Luke records in Acts 4:2 that the priests, the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees were not as enthused as some of the others in the crowd had been at hearing Peter teaching in Jesus' name, and they were "greatly disturbed because they were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection from the dead." (NASB) The word "disturbed" comes from the Greek word diaponeomai, which also means "to toil through, or to be worn out"⁸, meaning that hearing Peter preach in Jesus' name throughly exhausted their religious nature. Their primary concern was the keeping of the peace between the Jews and Rome, but they were also "concerned about the source of the disciples' teaching and the possibility that their emphasis on the resurrection could lead to a major messianic insurrection with serious political repercussions. They were concerned about authority, proper accreditation, law and order, keeping the peace."⁹ The religious majority had failed to see the fulfillment of prophecies in Jesus, and ultimately had failed to recognize the authority that comes in His name.

With Peter's statement there are several assumptions that must be made. First is that there is some innate power in Jesus' name. The second assumption is that the power must have come from God Himself, for only by His power could the miracle have been accomplished, let alone Salvation. The power in the name of Jesus comes directly from His relationship to God the Father. What name is this? "It is the same name that Moses heard in the wilderness as he watched a flame devouring a bush, the name that he challenged Pharaoh with, the same name that fed the Israelites in the wilderness, and the same name that the prophets challenged the people to obey."¹⁰ When looking at the text and considering Jesus' name, “'In the name of' is a New Testament idiom that means all the name stands for and all that stands behind the names.”¹¹ The other names of Christ heavily weigh on His divinity and His authority.

Names carry a certain degree of importance in Scripture. As "the names of God are given in Scripture to reveal the nature of God, so the names of Christ reveal truth concerning Jesus Christ. These names, however, refer to various aspects of the second Person of the Trinity, sometimes emphasizing His deity, at other times emphasizing His humanity. Some of these names reflect His character, while others emphasize various aspects of His work.”¹² Another name for Jesus is "Son of God", and when this expression "is used by and of Christ, it is obviously a reference to His divine relationship to God the Father."¹³ Jesus says in John 8:18: "I am the one who bears witness about myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me." (ESV) The name of Jesus points back to the authority granted to Him by the Father.

There are other names by which Jesus is referred that help establish His relationship to the Father. The name "Only Begotten Son" is one of them. The "Bible identifies angels, Jews, and Christians at various times as sons of God, but the relationship that exists between God the Father and Jesus christ is different. The term 'only begotten' is used to describe the unique relationship between the Father and Jesus."¹⁴ John also describes Jesus as being "the word" in John 1:1. Jesus is "called the Word of God because this phrase over 1200 times in the Old Testament to refer to the revelation or message of God. Jesus Christ was also the message, meaning, or communication from God to men."¹⁵ Because of Jesus' relationship to the Father, and the authority of His name, there is definitely power that is associated with the name as well.

One of the reasons that Peter was facing this particular round of persecution in Acts 4 is because of the healing miracle that he had just performed previously. There exists a healing power in the name of Jesus, made obvious by the miracles that were performed, not only by Peter, but other believers as well. Peter's particular confession as to the healing power of the name of Jesus “points to God as the source of the healing power, the God who raised Jesus from the dead and who makes possible the miracle worked in the name of Jesus.”¹⁶ Peter further exemplifies this healing nature in the name of Jesus when he speaks with fellow believers after his trial before the Sanhedrin, and in Acts 4:29-30 he tells them: "And now, Lord, look upon their threats and grant to your servants to continue to speak our word with all boldness, while you stretch out your hand to heal, and signs and wonders are performed through the name of your holy servant Jesus." (ESV)

There is not only power for physical healing in the name of Jesus, but spiritual healing as well. 1 Corinthians 6:11 embodies what is perhaps the more important healing that takes place, which is spiritual healing. It states: "But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God." (ESV) The name of Jesus is a "name of power, it is a name of liberation, it is a name of love, it is a name of compassion, it is a name of justice, it is a name of peace.”¹⁷ This name demonstrates so much more than just healing for a sick person, or a lame beggar. This is the which "brings power, the name of Jesus Christ brings transformation in the world; but it also brings confrontation with the powers of evil in this world.”¹⁸ Jesus invited all people to receive this spiritual healing in Matthew 11:28-30: "Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light." (ESV) Not all who hear the name of Jesus, however, choose to receive this healing. There are those, like the men gathered at Peter's trial, who not only rejected Jesus, but had a history of rejecting God's messengers as well.

The religious people of Peter's day had a long track record of missing the mark. Throughout Jewish history, the Israelites have constantly rebelled against God, and rejected His messengers, both in the Old Testament, and in the New Testament as well. In the Old Testament it was the rejection of not only the prophets, sent by God to deliver His instructions to His people, but of the Patriarchs as well. During his speech in Acts 7, Stephen spoke of the rejection that Joseph and Moses each experienced, and how it took that message being delivered twice before it was received. Acts 7:13 reveals that it was on their second visit the house of Jacob finally understood that God was trying to rescue them from the famine that was spreading throughout Canaan. Moses was rejected as well, and in Acts 7:35, this is revisited by Stephen when he said: "This Moses, whom they rejected, saying, 'Who made you a ruler and a judge?'-this man God sent as both ruler and redeemer by the hand of the angel who appeared to him in the brush." (ESV) Peter ties this together in Acts 4 by quoting Psalm 118:22, referring to Jesus: "This stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone." (ESV)

The Jews living in Peters time continued this tradition of rejecting God's messengers, and it is recorded throughout the book of Acts how they continually placed Jesus' name on trial by way of His apostles. Stephen's story is the most prominent in Acts, and he brings up their rejection of God's messengers in Acts 7:51-53: "'You stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit. As your fathers did, so do you. Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who announced beforehand the coming of the Righteous One, whom you have now betrayed and murdered, you who received the law as delivered by angels and did not keep it." (ESV) Stephen would be stoned for his defense of the name of Jesus, and Peter would have probably suffered the same fate, if it were in God's will. Peter was on trial for preaching in Jesus' name, and for exercising the power that comes in that name. Peter understood, however, that it was not he who was on trial, but this was actually another trial of Jesus' name and authority.

The familiar scene is set, with all the themes of the trial against Jesus' name: "The healing name of Jesus, which proves his resurrection and points to his salvation, the guilt of the Jews who rejected him."¹⁹ Peters use of Psalm 118 points directly to the guilt of the Sanhedrin, as "they were the 'builders', the leaders of the nation, who rejected the very rock on which God's people are to be built."²⁰ By being dragged before the Sanhedrin, it is evidenced that the anger that is being directed at Peter is the anger that the Jews felt towards Christ, and Peter's response shows that this was “the defense of the good name of a victim of injustice, a name that is also proclaimed as the name of the expected One, the Savior.”²¹ Peter was not arrested because He performed a miracle, the Sanhedrin could not escape the testimony of the very man who was healed as he was present for the trial. The temple officials arrested the apostles and interrogated them because of the name the miracle was performed in, on the “question of authority.”²²

The penalty was harsh for preaching in Jesus' name during the time of the book of Acts. Stephen would receive the ultimate penalty for this charge in Acts 7:58-60, where he is stoned to death. James would also suffer the same penalty at the hands of Herod the king in Acts 12:2, where he is killed by the sword. Not all of the apostles would experience death, but they would still experience the anger of the religious Sanhedrin in other ways, such as when they are imprisoned and beaten in Acts 5:40, after Peter again reminds them in 5:30: "The God of our fathers raised Jesus, whom you killed by hanging him on a tree." (ESV) The apostles were prepared to die for the name of Jesus, and in some cases the religious leaders of the day were ready to give this sentence to them. The apostles were convinced “that they were following a superior calling, in other words, responding to the word of God.”²³

Peter's declaration in Acts 4:12 flies in the face of all other religions, including the Law which the Sanhedrin held so dear. Regardless of the consequences, Peter knew that Salvation was found in no other, and was willing to die for his obedience to the name of Jesus. Because of the authority of His name, Christians must be in full obedience to God. It is “this verse which rings like a bell in the history of the Christian church whenever it is faced with persecution. It is a verse that has people lifted up, ordinary, weak, human beings, and made them stand firm and say with Martin Luther, 'here I stand I can do no other.'”²⁴ If there is "salvation in no other name, then obviously one must make a commitment to that sole name that brings salvation”²⁵, and it was this commitment that caused Peter to speak these words which have held truth since the very dawn of creation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Boesak, Allan Aubrey. “In the Name of Jesus: Acts 4:12.” Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 52 (September) 1985.

Ching, Julia. “No Other Name.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 12, no. 2–3 (June) 1985.

Constable, Thomas L. “Notes on Acts.” Dr. Constable’s Expository Notes. 2014. http://www.soniclight.com/constable/notes/pdf/acts.pdf.

Culpepper, Hugo H. “Acts 4:12.” Review & Expositor 89, no. 1 (December )1992.

Polhill, John B. Acts. New American Commentary 26. Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2001.

The Strongest NASB Exhaustive Concordance. (NASB updated ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan), 2004.

Towns, Elmer L., Theology for Today, Mason, OH: Cengage Learning, 2008.

Utley, Bob. “Luke the Historian: Acts.” The Study Bible Commentary Series, New Testament, 3B. (November) 2012.

1 Julia Ching, “No Other Name.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 12, no. 2–3 (June 1985) 256.

2 Ibid., 256.

3 Thomas L. Constable, “Notes on Acts.” Dr. Constable’s Expository Notes. (2014) 283.

4 John B. Polhill, Acts. New American Commentary 26. (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2001) 144.

5 Bob Utley, “Luke the Historian: Acts.” The Study Bible Commentary Series, New Testament, 3B. (November 2012) https://bible.org/seriespage/luke-historian-acts.

6 Hugo H. Culpepper, “Acts 4:12.” Review & Expositor 89, no. 1 (December 1992) 85.

7 Thomas L. Constable, “Notes on Acts.” Dr. Constable’s Expository Notes. (2014) 83.

8 The Strongest NASB Exhaustive Concordance. (NASB updated ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan 2004) 1278.

9 John B. Polhill, Acts, New American Commentary 26. (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2001) 142-143.

10 Allan Aubrey Boesak, “In the Name of Jesus: Acts 4:12.” Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 52 (September 1985) 51.

11 Hugo H. Culpepper, “Acts 4:12.” Review & Expositor 89, no. 1 (December 1992) 85.

12 Elmer L. Towns, Theology for Today, (Mason, OH: Cengage Learning, 2008) 160.

13Ibid., 161.

14Ibid., 162-163.

15Ibid., 164.

16 Julia Ching, “No Other Name.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 12, no. 2–3 (June 1985) 261.

17 Allan Aubrey Boesak, “In the Name of Jesus: Acts 4:12.” Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 52 (September 1985) 55.

18Ibid., 53.

19 John B. Polhill, Acts, New American Commentary 26. (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2001) 144.

20Ibid., 144.

21 Julia Ching, “No Other Name.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 12, no. 2–3 (June 1985) 258.

22 Ibid., 256.

23 Ibid., 253.

24 Allan Aubrey Boesak, “In the Name of Jesus: Acts 4:12.” Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 52 (September 1985) 50.

25 John B Polhill, Acts. New American Commentary 26. (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2001) 144.