Daily Thoughts from Acts: “What Shall We Do With These Men?” (Acts 4:13-22)

Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated, common men, they were astonished. And they recognized that they had been with Jesus. But seeing the man who was healed standing beside them, they had nothing to say in opposition. But when they had commanded them to leave the council, they conferred with one another, saying, “What shall we do with these men? For that a notable sign has been performed through them is evident to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and we cannot deny it. But in order that it may spread no further among the people, let us warn them to speak no more to anyone in this name.” So they called them and charged them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John answered them, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge, for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard.” And when they had further threatened them, they let them go, finding no way to punish them, because of the people, for all were praising God for what had happened. For the man on whom this sign of healing was performed was more than forty years old.  (Acts 4:13-22 ESV)

The court did not see Peter and John as stupid, but expected them to be ignorant.  They had not had the benefit of training from the accepted rabbis of the day.  They were common men, expected to be cowed and afraid at their arraignment.  But instead they had spoken with the boldness given by the Holy Spirit.  The Sanhedrin members attributed their boldness to having been taught by Jesus.  And in a sense, that is true.  But we have seen that Jesus’ teaching took a long time to alter the behavior and thinking of these disciples and his coming to them via the Holy Spirit (John 14:16-20) gave them empowerment that transformed them from timid men who spoke boldly when life was not on the line to men who faced the possibility of their own death with courage and verbal prowess.

We also learn for the first time that the man who had been healed in Jesus’ name was also brought into court and no doubt had been jailed like the apostles had.  He stands as living proof to the Sanhedrin that a miracle had been performed by God.  You would think that in the face of this obvious Divine outpouring of healing they would acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah.  But they had found a way around this before (Matthew 12:24) and were committed to denying Jesus’ claims and holding on to what in their minds was great power.  So they had to spin what had happened.  And they had to stop the apostles from teaching in Jesus’ name.

Their command to do so was toothless.  They could threaten but they could not carry out their threats or they would have felt the wrath of the people of Jerusalem who had seen this miracle performed.  Nevertheless, it was a command from governing authority and, as Scripture teaches, we are to obey such authorities.  But here Peter and John teach us that this command to obey authority is set aside if said authority is asking us to do something directly contradictory of God’s commands.  And Jesus had commanded his followers to proclaim the gospel in his name to all nations.  They would obey Jesus rather than human authorities.

Does this mean we as Christians should refuse to serve homosexuals who want us to do something that might appear to endorse gay marriage, and should we reject a Supreme Court decision that would possibly make it illegal to refuse service?  This is certainly the conscience of some, but may I suggest that it is not really the same thing as Peter and John are talking about.  If I put on a wedding cake for a gay couple a slogan endorsing gay marriage, am I endorsing gay marriage?  If I perform a wedding as a justice of the peace for a gay couple given legal rights to marry, am I endorsing gay marriage?  More importantly, am I denying God’s direct command to me?  I don’t believe so.

Jesus gave us the example to follow in this respect.  He ate with “sinners” (tax-collectors, prostitutes, etc.) and gave the appearance to the Pharisees that he was endorsing their lifestyles.  He let a prostitute wash his feet with her tears and hair, leading Simon to believe he was ignoring her sinful life.  He was willing to go the home of Zacchaeus, a tax-collector, though undoubtedly some would think he was therefore soft on betrayers of the nation who worked in close association with their Roman conquerors and often extorted more money than taxes required.  But Jesus was not soft on sin nor endorsing these sinful behaviors. He was loving these sinners.  And they loved him.  They were at the same time accused in their consciences of their sin.  Jesus demanded righteousness but did not let failure to be righteous separate him from sinners.  In fact, the only people he did not affirm and treat gently were those who were judgmental of sinners rather than helping them, that is, the Pharisees.

The testimony Jesus had with the Pharisees was entirely different than what he had with sinners, and it was the testimony he had with sinners that meant everything to him.  How will we help non-Christian homosexuals come to God if, unlike other sinners, we choose not to serve them for fear of being perceived as endorsing their sin?  Are we endorsing wrongly divorced couples if we make a cake for them that says, “God’s right choice for me” or some such slogan that seems to let them off the hook for a sinful divorce?  Are we going to check into the lifestyles of everyone we are asked to serve to make sure that by serving them we are not endorsing sin?

Jesus said, “I have some to seek and to save that which was lost” (Luke 19:10).  Can we join Jesus in his search by receiving those he sends us to love and serve?  Perhaps we convey a message like, “I do not endorse what you are doing, but I endorse you as someone who is special to God and I delight to serve you in His name.”  Oh that Christians were associated with a message like that rather than the one, “I can’t serve you because you don’t conform to a Christian lifestyle.” 

I know there are many situations you have faced or could imagine that might cause you to question how you should respond.  We can ask ourselves what Jesus would do and have help knowing that answer by our observation of him in the Gospels.  We are at a crucial juncture in our country over this and related issues.  How do we best reflect the heart of Jesus?

Question:  Should a pastor perform a wedding for a gay couple?

Answer:  No.

The state has authorized pastors to do weddings specifically for the purpose of representing the Christian faith.  The couple could get married by a justice of the peace but have chosen a pastor instead because the pastor speaks to marriage from the perspective of Christ’s teachings.  The pastor is supposed to be faithful to Jesus’ teaching and the wedding must be in accord with Jesus’ teaching.  So an evangelical pastor who views the testimony of Scripture to be that only a man and a woman should be married must not marry a gay couple.

But at the same time the pastor should speak love to the gay couple who asks the pastor to marry them, affirming them as God’s creations in His image as well as affirming Scripture’s teaching about marriage.  The pastor must refuse to wed them but also refuse to condemn them.  This is an opportunity for discipleship, not rejection.