Acts 2:1–47

The wording here has an unusual note of fullness, one we hear nowhere else. This feast alone has seven sabbaths in between to mark it out. It is the feast of weeks. Among Greek-speaking Jews, the number fifty gave this feast its name, so it is called "Pentecost." What then was fulfilled when the day of Pentecost was fully come? The Father made good His promise. It was that matchless promise about which the Lord Himself had said, "It is to your advantage that I go away." What could outweigh the blessedness of His presence with His disciples on earth? The gift was another Advocate — not just gifts, but Himself baptising them. This was no longer a hope but an accomplished fact.

Here we have the day of Pentecost in picture, and what began then. There was a new grain offering of two wave loaves baked with leaven. In Acts 2 we have the fulfilment. The Holy Spirit gathers God's people together and presents them before Him, joined to all the preciousness of Christ in life, death, and resurrection. The Passover is His death. The wave sheaf is His resurrection. The two wave loaves baked on the fiftieth day are the Holy Spirit forming the Church of God. But why two loaves? There are not two Churches of God on earth, one Jewish and one Gentile. When God asks for witness, His usual way is two witnesses. Christ was risen — the wave sheaf. Christians — the two wave loaves — are able witnesses to the power of His resurrection.

In the second occurrence, Acts 2:1, I see no reason to doubt that the disciples were assembled in the same place together. But here we also find the word homou, the corrected reading in place of homothumadon, "with one accord." Homou properly refers to place: "at the same place." It can also mean simply "together," even where the sense of place is lost. So the believers were waiting for the promise of the Father, as the Lord had instructed. All the facts point to their being gathered in one place at this time, when the Spirit baptised them in the wondrous grace of God.

Those on whom the Spirit came were a praying people, in this resembling their Lord. They were also people of one accord, and as a result in one place. The one place is not named: it may have been the upper room of Acts 1, but more probably, in view of the crowds that heard the Spirit-given utterances, some court of the temple, such as Solomon's porch. At any rate the thing was real and powerful and could not be hidden.

Acts 2 relates the fulfilment of this promise, in answer to the spirit of dependence shown in their united prayers.

The start of the Church is deeply interesting, because it shows how the saints were drawn together. The Church's first group was small indeed, but from that day a deeper and larger work would go on. The Spirit of God came down, and that formed His Assembly. So I say it again: the day of Pentecost was the birthday of the Church of God, because it had never existed before. From Abel onwards individual saints and servants of God had existed, but they were not in the Church. John the Baptist and the thief on the cross died too early. The Lord Jesus had not yet risen to be the Head of the Church, and no one could yet be united to Him.

The Holy Spirit of God is the real uniting force that has bound the church together as a living organism. He came down from heaven with this in view. The Spirit did not come from any earthly religious centre, but "from heaven." Heaven then is the point of control for the Church of God. Can we doubt that if the Spirit came from heaven, it was with a view to attaching us to Christ who is in heaven?

This sound comes from heaven because Christ was there. It did not come from the temple but from heaven, stamping the mark of what is heavenly on this company.

It is like the sound of a powerful sustained breathing: that is how I think the words should be understood. Everyone agrees the word means "blowing" or "breathing" rather than "wind," which is what the ordinary versions have. A storm cannot supply the symbols here. To stay consistent, "sustained" is a better word than "rushing"... The idea it suggests is a power that inspires and gives life, though it is more than human — a heavenly power. It is not fitful or, as we say, impulsive. It lifts and carries on with divine energy.

The sound heard here was like "a rushing mighty wind," and another translation says it was "a violent impetuous blowing." That word "blowing" suggests "it kept on blowing." This would teach us that the Spirit was beginning something here that was to continue. "Violent" would suggest irresistible power. Again, the word "blowing" means a breathing, though it is not the word translated "breathed" in John 20:22. There it was the inbreathing of life; here it is the inbreathing of power.

The coming of the Holy Spirit of God is likened to "a rushing mighty wind." This would show that the Spirit's power is irresistible. We have heard of winds reaching such high speed that they tear up giant trees by the roots as if they were rows of bowling pins. The word for wind and the word for spirit are the same in Greek. The wind cannot be seen, but its power is felt; so the influence of the Holy Spirit can be felt, and yet not seen in bodily form.

This was a wholly new thing, so signs came with it. They were of two kinds: the violent blowing that filled all the house, and the divided tongues as of fire that sat on each one. So the Spirit showed His presence in a general way for the whole house, and in a special way as power of testimony for each.

But when the day of Pentecost had fully come, this earth became once more a dwelling place for God in the person of the Holy Spirit. That sound like a rushing mighty wind filled all the house where the disciples of Christ were sitting in Jerusalem. From that moment the Spirit has never been absent from the earth for a single moment. God had come to earth to dwell on it for the third time in the world's history. How favoured is this earth! A globe so small, yet God's habitation is found on it!

The one place is not named. It may have been the upper room of Acts 1. But crowds heard the Spirit-given words, so more likely it was some court of the temple, such as Solomon's porch.

The temple, so magnificent, was left desolate (Matt. 23:38). Though the priests were very busy, all was hollow; the substance was gone. But in the upper room the Spirit was the glory. A poor place by comparison, yet the scene of the divine presence.

This was an entirely new thing, so signs came with it. These signs had a twofold character. There was the violent blowing which filled the whole house. There were also the divided tongues as of fire which sat on each one. So these signs showed the Spirit's presence in a general way for the whole house, and in a special way as power for testimony for each.

The way the Spirit came was quite different in the two cases. On the Lord He came like a dove. With the disciples the form was "divided tongues as of fire." Why the difference? He came upon the Lord Jesus in a form suited to the character of that blessed One whom He was sealing. Christ was the meek and lowly One. What better picture of meekness than a dove? As for the disciples, they were to be witnesses, as the Lord had told them. So the sign for them was tongues.

The divided tongues meant testimony — the power of God in testimony, the word in testimony. Such testimony carries everything before it, just like fire, which destroys and judges all that comes in its way. And it was not merely one tongue, but each one divided into many, which sat on each disciple. The idea was this. The Spirit of God was there. The testimony of God in grace was no longer for the Jew alone. It was to go out to the ends of the earth.

The judgment of God had inflicted these various languages on them. It had broken up their ambitious project at the tower of Babel, where they joined together to build a unity of their own. But the grace of God went out exactly where His judgment had placed them. If a crushing blow laid their pride in ever so many separate ditches, the grace of God went out to those ditches. It blessed them where they lay, and raised them out of their fallen state.

These tongues were seen on that occasion, and we never read of them being seen again... And "as of fire" may foreshadow the effect of the word of God. The word discerns the thoughts and intentions of the heart (Heb. 4:12)... Fire is an emblem of judgment. The three thousand bore witness to the power of the word to act on consciences before night closed on that eventful day. Cut to the heart, they cried out in agony of soul, "Brothers, what shall we do?" The word reaches the conscience now, and it acts as judge within. Light shines in, and shows a person what he has never seen and judged before.

We find also that they were "as of fire." What does this imply? Simply that grace reigned through righteousness. There was that in man which called for judgment; and the cross had fully met it; there sin had been judged. This testimony was to be founded on the cross, and therefore the divided tongues "as of fire."

There were not many spirits present. There was only One, for the word says "it sat upon each of them"... So they received power from the Spirit to speak a variety of languages. They spoke in many different ways, but one Power directed them all.

Let us look first at the different groups brought before us. There are the one hundred and twenty formed this day into the Church — God's assembly. There are the Jews standing around them — the "Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven" (v. 5), those to whom Peter afterwards preached. Finally, there are those Peter refers to in his address — "all who are far off," a well-known Bible term for Gentiles. So we have the threefold division the Spirit of God makes elsewhere — the Church, the Jews, and the Gentiles (1 Cor. 10:32). Together they represent the whole world.

What a remarkable event! What a striking coincidence! In His infinite wisdom and perfect grace, God arranged for people from every nation on the face of the whole earth to be in the city of Jerusalem at that exact moment. So even if the twelve apostles failed to carry out their commission, all could still hear the precious news of God's salvation. And each would hear it in the very dialect their mothers used when they first whispered the words of a mother's love into their infant ears.

The tongues were certainly used to catch the attention of the Jews from other countries, who flocked to Jerusalem for this feast, or were otherwise staying there. What confounded these strangers from so many lands was that each one heard the disciples speaking in his own language. The residents and visitors in Jerusalem, whose piety gave them weight, were the last people to welcome religious innovation. Yet they judged the languages to be real. To them the evidence was overwhelming. It would have been impossible if the variety of languages had not been a plain and certain reality, and of that they were competent judges.

Devout men at Jerusalem gave unsolicited testimony about what came from the lips of the disciples. These devout Jews, from every nation under heaven, heard and testified that the words of the Galilean company were in the language each of them was born into. Whatever language each disciple spoke, it was as grammatically correct and as clear in meaning as those devout Jews could have spoken themselves. It was no meaningless jargon, no babbling, no gibberish, but intelligent language, which some in that crowd could confirm to others was their own native speech.

So God overcame the confusion brought in at Babel (Gen. 11), though the time had not come to remove it altogether. He intended the gospel for every creature. God gave the law in one language, and to only one people. But the gospel of God's grace, God's precious testimony about His Son, could not be limited that way. Gentiles and Jews were equally needy, and all should have the offer of the Saviour.

This reminds us again of that far greater announcement of grace. It sends a message of repentance and forgiveness, to be preached in the name of Christ among all nations. But that message is to begin "at Jerusalem." It is to all nations, for all are guilty, but it begins at the blackest spot in all the world. There is no mention of the terrible guilt of the city, and no mention of the bold and blasphemous hatred of its leaders. In sovereign, unconditional grace, God proclaims forgiveness in the Name of Jesus to the very city that nailed Him to the Cross.

The sound drew them to the spot. There they heard the disciples speaking in the tones and accents that belonged to each one. Many of them were far from home. In that country Aramaic was the language of the common people, and Greek was fairly well understood as the language of trade in that day. Yet they heard voices that spoke to them in their own mother tongue, and told of the mighty works of God.

News of what had happened spread, and the crowd came together. They were bewildered, because each one heard the disciples speaking in his own language. This completely reversed what happened at the tower of Babel (Gen. 11). There the Lord confused the language of the people so that they would not understand one another's speech. And it was not only that each heard in his own tongue, but in his own dialect.

Some have tried to find in the account the same kind of senseless jargon... others argue for a highly excited or ecstatic style of speech, suited to telling out the marvels of grace... The older rationalists supposed it was no other than their native tongue. Others, from Gregory of Nyssa and Cyprian to Erasmus and men of our own day, added to this the strange idea that the Spirit caused the crowd of foreigners to hear, each in his own tongue! But Gregory of Nazianzus rejects that notion. It makes the marvel lie with the hearers rather than the speakers, and that is contrary to the clear statement of Scripture.

God's judgment had inflicted these various tongues on them. It had completely broken up their ambitious plan to join together and build a unity of their own through the tower of Babel. But the grace of God went out exactly where His judgment had placed them. If a crushing blow laid their pride in many separate ditches, then the grace of God went out to those ditches. It blessed them where they lay, and raised them out of their fallen state.

But the languages were as real as they were different from their mother tongue, or from any language learned in the ordinary way... God had given His law to Israel, and that law was in itself the expression of man's moral duty. What could testify more clearly that He was now about to make known His grace in the gospel to every race and tongue? ...This was not the wiping out of difference in language. Nor was it the power that will one day make the whole earth of one lip and the same speech. It was grace lifting its objects and instruments above the effects of that judgment at Babel.

By an exercise of His power He had made dealings between nations difficult, in some measure. By power joined with grace He made provision that different nations, and those speaking different tongues, should hear about His Son and about salvation in their own language, with nothing to hinder them. Bewildered, amazed, and in doubt (or, perplexed) — this is how Luke describes the crowd. Bewildered, when each man heard his own language. Amazed, as they remembered that those addressing them were Galileans. Perplexed, since they could not understand what it meant. Something new, something strange, had undoubtedly happened.

Confounded, amazed, and in doubt (or, perplexed) — this is how Luke describes the crowd. Confounded, when they heard each man his own language. Amazed, as they remembered that those who addressed them were Galileans. Perplexed, since they could not understand what it meant.

It is likely that the Galileans pronounced words differently, or that the language spoken in Galilee was not as refined as the language spoken at Jerusalem. That is what gave Peter away when he spoke. But the voice of that same Peter, under the power of God, was mighty on the day of Pentecost. Even so, the hearers said, "Are not all these who are speaking Galileans?" They were surprised to hear such men speak in foreign tongues. They were all the more surprised because no prophet was ever expected from there, nor any good thing from Nazareth.

God will have a wonderful witness going out from His House. But He will have that witness carried out by His own witnesses. And His witnesses are for the most part the poor and feeble of this world. So in Acts 2 we read, "Are not all these who are speaking Galileans?" Galileans, of course, were the simple country folk — the peasantry. And Peter, "an unlearned and ignorant man," was their leader.

But there is an awkward difficulty in the way of calling them imaginary tongues. All the different nations whose languages these were understood them. "Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language?" And then Peter speaks to the Jews in theirs. Now this fact is the substantial point of the whole affair. It was what struck the multitude. It converted three thousand people. The Church begins its existence, and it was formed because this multitude understood what was said.

Gregory of Nazianzus rejects that idea. It places the marvel with the hearers rather than the speakers, and that goes against the clear statement of Scripture. So do all these empty theories.

There had been a Man on earth who never thought of Himself, but only of God and His glory. He "humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross." As a result, God has put Him in the place that man in Genesis 11 could not reach. And the Holy Spirit comes down and reverses the judgment of Genesis 11 for a time. The difference of language did not disappear. But the divine grace and power that will one day make the whole world speak one language lifted the disciples above the effects of Babel's judgment. They had never learned those languages, yet they could speak in as many languages as their hearers had.

This happened because the word spoken and received was the incorruptible seed. It did not happen because the preacher spoke it in a language new to him, one he had never learned in the ordinary way. The living and energetic word of God awakened sleeping consciences. The speeches in other tongues only awakened surprise and wonder in the hearers. That wonder converted no one, and it left the great mass in Jerusalem more hardened than ever.

The two words dialektos and glossai are by no means synonymous. When the Spirit wished to express the language of each individual, the first was the right word. When the point was the sum total of many different languages, the second was the fitting expression.

It was not only that each heard in his own tongue, but in his own dialect.

Interpreters have given strange and conflicting explanations of this. There is no need to notice them. Though it was a miracle, the fact is simple. It is plain that this crowd of people of many languages heard these men, who were obviously Galileans, speaking in these tongues. The miracle, as someone long ago remarked, was with those who spoke, not with those who heard; and therefore the speakers used real languages.

But treating them as imaginary tongues runs into an awkward difficulty. All the different nations whose languages these were understood them. Now this fact is the substantial point of the whole affair. It was what struck the crowd. Three thousand people were converted by it. The Church begins its existence; it took form because this crowd understood what was said.

The Galileans probably had a different way of pronouncing words. Or the language spoken in Galilee was not as refined as the language spoken in Jerusalem. That is why people detected Peter by his speech. Matt. 26:69, 73; Mark 14:70. But the voice of that same Peter was mighty on the day of Pentecost, under the power of God. The hearers still said, "Are not all these who are speaking Galileans?" Acts 2:7.

The judgment of God had inflicted these various languages on them. It had shattered their ambitious plan to join together and set up a unity of their own through the tower of Babel. But the grace of God went out exactly where His judgment had placed them. If a crushing blow had laid their pride in ever so many separate ditches, then the grace of God went out to those ditches. It blessed them where they lay, and raised them out of their fallen state.

The Holy Spirit enabled the messengers of grace to deliver their message in the very tongue in which each was born. What precious proof that God wanted to reach man's heart with the sweet story of grace! The law from the fiery mountain was not published like that. When God was telling what man ought to be, He spoke in one tongue; but when He was telling what He Himself was, He spoke in many.

The God of all grace would have each one hear of full salvation. And hear of it in those very words in which his infant ears had listened to the earliest whispers of a mother's love — in "his own native language." It did not matter whether the language was soft or harsh, refined or rough. The Holy Spirit would use it to carry the precious message of salvation right home to the poor heart.

In the time of the apostles, so many different languages in the earth were a serious obstacle. They made it hard to carry out their commission to go into all the world and preach the gospel quickly and easily. But at the very start these servants of the Lord saw that this difficulty was nothing when met by the energy of the Spirit of God. In a moment He was able to give the disciples power to speak to men in their own dialect about "the mighty works of God."

These strangers came from many lands, and each one heard the disciples speaking in his own language. That is what confounded them. Aramaic, or Greek and Latin, may have spread widely across the then known world. Even so, this list is careful and varied. It runs from the north-east to the west and south, which seems to be why Judea comes between Mesopotamia and Cappadocia. So it is pointless to tell anyone who believes such a list that the inspired writer means no more than a few distinct languages.

In the New Testament this word does not mean the part of the earth now called Asia. It does not cover the whole of Asia Minor either. It means only the western part of Asia Minor. Attalus III Philometor, king of Pergamos, left that region to Rome in 133 B.C. The province, with Ephesus as its capital, included Caria, Lydia, and Mysia. In Acts 2:9-10 "Asia" does not include Cappadocia, Pontus, Phrygia, or Pamphylia. All of those belong to Asia Minor.

Cappadocia: a district in the east of Asia Minor. Visitors from there were at Jerusalem at the feast of Pentecost. Peter includes this district when he addresses his first letter to the scattered Jews. Acts 2:9; 1 Peter 1:1. The district extended as far east as the Euphrates.

The Medes are first mentioned when Shalmaneser took Samaria and carried away the Israelites. He placed some of them "in the cities of the Medes." 2 Kings 17:6; 18:11... There were some bearing the name of Medes present at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost.

On the great day of Pentecost we find "devout men" in the audience who came from the very regions to which the ten tribes were deported.

But one awkward fact stands in the way of calling these imaginary languages. All the different nations whose languages they were understood them... Now this fact is the substantial point of the whole affair. It was what struck the crowd. Three thousand people were converted by it. The Church begins its existence, formed because this crowd understood what was said.

In Acts 2 we see the blessed One coming down in infinite grace. He meets man in the very circumstances where his sin had placed him. The Holy Spirit enabled the messengers of grace to give their message in each hearer's own native language. This is precious proof that God wanted to reach man's heart with the sweet story of grace! The law from the fiery mountain was not announced like this. When God was telling what man ought to be, He spoke in one language. When He was telling what He Himself was, He spoke in many.

"But it shall come to pass in the latter days, that I will bring again the captivity of Elam, says Jehovah." Here mercy triumphs at last over judgment... God will show His goodness towards Elam when the kingdom comes. Calvin and others refer its fulfilment to Acts 2:9. That only shows how little such men enter into either the old or the new.

A Greek city, the capital of the classic Cyrenaica, in the north of Africa, and the people of the same place. Some from there were present on the day of Pentecost, and they had a synagogue in Jerusalem. Simon, who carried the cross of the Lord, was a Cyrenian.

What confounded these strangers from so many lands was that each one heard the disciples speaking in his own language. Aramaic, Greek and Latin may have spread widely over the world of that day. Even so, this list is careful and varied. It runs from the north-east to the west and south. (That seems to be why Judea comes between Mesopotamia and Cappadocia.) It is pointless to tell anyone who believes such a list that the inspired writer means only a few distinct tongues.

God caused those who received the Holy Spirit to speak in the different tongues spread over the Gentile world. He did not cause all the converts to speak the Jewish language. Instead, He caused the Jews, gathered from their dispersion among all nations, to speak the tongues of the Gentiles. It was a magnificent witness of the grace that was going out to the Gentiles to meet them where they were. The judgment of God had inflicted these various tongues upon them. It had completely broken up their ambitious project at the tower of Babel — joining together to build a unity of their own. But the grace of God went out exactly where His judgment had placed them.

In Genesis 11 divided tongues were sent in judgment. In Acts 2 divided tongues were sent in grace. The blessed God of all grace would cause each one to hear of full salvation. Each would hear it in the very words in which his infant ears had listened to the earliest whispers of a mother's love — in his own native language. It did not matter whether the language was soft or harsh, refined or rough. The Holy Spirit would use it to carry the precious message of salvation right home to the poor heart. Divided tongues had once been given to scatter in judgment. Now they were given again to gather in grace — not around an earthly tower, but around a heavenly Christ.

The name given to anyone from among the nations who embraced Judaism. The name may be said to be a Greek word, formed from a verb meaning "to come to." The Greek Old Testament uses it where the Hebrew has "the stranger" who lives among you. If all the males in the family were circumcised, such people could eat the Passover and offer a burnt offering or sacrifice.

Still, those who heard and believed the gospel that day were Jews and proselytes only. The Lord had stretched out His hands in vain to a disobedient and contrary people. Those hands were already pointing to all the nations, who also would hear.

There were "strangers" from Rome at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost. No doubt they heard the gospel there. Some may have been converted and carried the gospel back with them.

God in His wisdom ordered that no apostle should plant the gospel in the imperial city. Rome cannot truly boast of a church that began with an apostle, as Jerusalem, Philippi, Corinth, Ephesus and many smaller places can. We know that on the day of Pentecost, when God first gave the Holy Spirit, there were Roman Jews staying in Jerusalem who heard the gospel there.

The mercy of God was now about to reach great numbers of people, in the very languages that men of old had been condemned to, in His just displeasure. People were present from every quarter. Most of them were Jews, or Jewish proselytes. What do you think the Lord's servants spoke about? About Jesus, and not about themselves. That day "the wonderful works of God" was their glorious theme. In many languages they opened up the truth of His love, the wonderful death of His Son, and the way God was glorified by that death.

The Holy Spirit enabled the messengers of grace to deliver their message in the very tongue in which each was born. This is precious proof that God wanted to reach man's heart with the sweet story of grace! The law from the fiery mountain was not given this way. When God was telling what man ought to be, He spoke in one tongue; but when He was telling what He Himself was, He spoke in many. Man's pride and folly had built a barrier. Grace broke through it, so that every man could hear and understand the good news of salvation — the wonderful works of God.

These strangers came from many lands. What confused them was that each one heard the disciples speaking in his own language. Aramaic, Greek and Latin may have spread widely over the known world. Even so, the list here is careful and varied, running from the north-east to the west and south. It is pointless to tell anyone who believes that list that the inspired writer means no more than a few distinct languages. The residents and visitors in Jerusalem did not judge so. They were devout men, so their judgment carried weight, and they were the last people to accept anything new in religion. To them the evidence was irresistible.

They were bearing witness to Christ and His death and resurrection. Of course they knew exactly what they were saying. But by a miracle they could say it in a language they did not normally know. Their hearers too understood what they were saying. Expect these two things wherever the true gift of tongues is in use. In effect this would reverse, in a wonderful way, what God did at the tower of Babel, when He confused men's languages (Genesis 11:5-9). In the church there would now be understanding and fellowship between nations that had long been far apart.

The gift of speaking in a tongue (in 1 Corinthians) was an entirely different thing. Those who heard it did not, like those in Acts 2:11, hear in their own language. They could not understand what was said unless it was interpreted.

Neither Paul nor Titus is said to have planted the gospel in Crete. From Acts 2:11 it seems very likely that the good news reached the island almost from the great day of Pentecost. It was a question therefore for Titus to follow up that setting of things in order which the apostle began.

Confounded, amazed, and in doubt (or, perplexed) — this is how Luke describes the crowd. Confounded, when each man heard his own language. Amazed, as they remembered that those speaking to them were Galileans. Perplexed, since they could not understand what it meant. Something new and strange had clearly happened. What did it mean? That was the impression made on many who were there… No one denied that something unusual had happened. Yet no one could give a good explanation.

God was now speaking to them through people, through vessels guided by the Holy Spirit. When God speaks, He wants souls to hear and understand… He had once used His power to make communication between nations difficult, at least in some measure. Now, by power joined with grace, He made sure that people of different nations and different languages would hear about His Son, and about salvation, in their own language, with nothing in the way.

So we see this great crowd gathered together in Jerusalem. They were full of amazement at what they were hearing about the wonderful works of God, each in his own language. They ask, "What does this mean?" And the answer is, "Jesus Christ is exalted and glorified." Peter makes this fact known to them in his powerful speech.

No wonder these strangers in Jerusalem were amazed and perplexed at such an event. No natural man can understand the origin or the working of such divine power. In honesty, he can only express perplexity; in mockery, he can only make some absurd suggestion such as "they are full of new wine."

But others — most likely Jews born in the land, who did not understand the different languages — mocked…

Those who hear are amazed — as well they might be — and say, "What does this mean?" Some ask honestly, What does this mean? — and it is a most blessed thing to ask honestly what God means — yet, sadly, others mocked. How sad, my friend, to be counted among the mockers, either then or now. Do not forget that if you mock in the day of His grace, God can do the same in the day of your calamity. (See Prov. 1:20-33.)

As usual, men arrange themselves into more than one class — some astonished, others hostile and scornful. Peter takes the lead in explaining with seriousness and clarity. He plainly denies the unworthy charge of drunkenness. The early hour alone should have silenced it. It was really what Joel spoke of — not the fulfilment as it will be in the last days, but an outpouring of that kind.

Confounded, amazed, and in doubt (or, perplexed) — that is how Luke describes the crowd. Confounded, when they heard each man his own language. Amazed, as they remembered that those who addressed them were Galileans. Perplexed, since they could not understand what it meant. Something new, something strange, had undoubtedly happened. What did it mean? That was the impression made on many who were present. But others mocked, saying, "They are filled with new wine." These were very probably native-born Jews, who did not understand the different languages. No one disputed that something unusual had happened. Yet no one could give a satisfying explanation.

In classic Greek this word normally means the sweet unfermented juice of the grape. Even so, it is certain, from Acts 2:13 compared with verse 16, that this is not its New Testament sense... The context shows that the wine meant here was well known to make people drunk. Mere irony! some object. But if the sneer of the Jewish scoffers had been ironical, would an apostle have replied so seriously, "These people are not drunk, AS YOU SUPPOSE" — not merely as you say?

"Full of new wine," the mockers had said — an easy solution, as they thought, of that strange and startling sight which they witnessed. But the charge was easy to refute, and its folly was plain. The time of day should have made the accusers keep silent — it was only the third hour. Men were not in the habit of getting drunk by nine o'clock in the morning. The disciples were not drunk with wine. They were filled with the Spirit.

Peter declared that the exaltation of Christ explained everything: "Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God... He has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing." The Lord Jesus was above; that is why there was power below. But it never entered their minds that the marvels of the tongues came from the One who had been crucified so recently. He was now in supreme power at the right hand of God.

On the day of Pentecost the crowd mistook the Spirit's action in the apostles for the effects of wine. This shows that the action of wine on the natural man imitates or counterfeits the action of the Spirit of God in the believer. In fact, when any of the early Christians were filled with the Spirit, they were lifted out of themselves. They became vessels for the expression of the Spirit's power, whether in testimony or in praise.

If we are set on being Spirit-filled, we should guard against anything that would imitate it without being it. We should never mistake excitement for the Spirit's anointing... Do not confuse the natural excitement of wine with the Spirit's power, which takes a man outside of himself.

The disciples were so full of joy and power that some mocked and said, "They are filled with new wine." They were indeed full of new wine, but it did not come from this earth. It was the new wine of heaven.

Some ask honestly, "What does this mean?" It is a most blessed thing to ask honestly what God means. But others mocked. How sad, my friend, to be counted among the mockers, either then or now. Do not forget that if you mock in the day of His grace, God can do the same in the day of your calamity.

As always, people fall into more than one group: some amazed, others hostile and scornful. Peter takes the lead and explains, with weight and clarity. He denies the shameful idea that they were drunk. The early hour alone should have silenced that charge against God-fearing people.

God, however, would not leave them in doubt. So the apostles stood up (we last read of them sitting), and Peter lifted up his voice. He spoke aloud, to an audience he surely never expected. The first Christian sermon was about to begin.

This is all the more striking in the twelve apostles. We heard of their sharp differences and their jealousy of one another. How like other believers and other servants of the Lord in every age! The presence of the Lord only held it in check; it never removed it, as the Gospels honestly tell us. Now see the same men after the Holy Spirit was given. By His power their words and ways showed only the activities and affections of the life they had in Christ. "Peter, standing with the eleven" — they were now truly one.

Then Peter stood up with the eleven. What grace, that Peter of all the apostles should be so used! What overflowing grace that he should be the first to preach in the name of the risen Jesus! This was the preaching of a restored backslider. Grace had worked so deeply that he could calmly accuse the Jewish nation of denying and crucifying their Messiah. They might have replied that he had denied Him too. But Peter had confessed his sin and been forgiven; and his conscience was clear and happy before God.

We see the same cleansed conscience in Peter. He charges the Jews with what he had done in a worse way himself. The soul cannot bear to rest on what it knows will condemn it. So where there is no certainty about forgiveness, there is always some deceit in the heart. Once we see our sins as completely "blotted out," we have no interest in making our sinfulness look smaller.

But look at this same man fifty days later. Now he faces no servant girl, but the whole crowd who had rejected Christ. Without a tremor he stands up as spokesman for them all, and lays the awful crime of Christ's death at their door. What made the difference? Was it only that Peter's soul was restored? Ah — he was filled with the Spirit, and knew no fear.

Peter has nothing to do with letting people into heaven. Christ has the keys of heaven, be sure of that. He keeps those keys, but in His service down here He may and did use Peter, and put into his hands two keys with which to administer the kingdom of heaven. Why not one key? He had to open two doors. In Acts 2, where he preached his first sermon on the day of Pentecost, he put one key into the Jewish door, and opened the way for them to get blessing. The name of that key was "Repentance," I think. In Acts 10 he went down to Caesarea and opened the door to the Gentiles, and the name of that key was "Believe."

"Full of new wine," the mockers had said — an easy solution, as they thought, of that strange and startling spectacle they were watching. But the charge was easy to refute, and its folly plain. The time of day should have made the accusers keep silent — it was only the third hour. Men were not usually overcome with wine by nine o'clock in the morning. The disciples were not drunk with wine. They were filled with the Spirit.

The third hour of the day was the hour of the daily sacrifice. The custom was to go without food and drink until it was offered, especially on feast days.

The devil will invent any reason to get rid of the testimony of God, but usually shows his folly in doing so, and especially so here. The custom among the Jews was not to break their fast before the morning sacrifice. So they had not eaten, much less drunk.

No natural man can understand where such divine power comes from or how it works. If he is honest, he can only say he is puzzled. If he is mocking, he can only make some absurd suggestion such as "they are full of new wine." Peter does not ignore the suggestion, thoughtless and irresponsible as it is. He stands up together with the eleven apostles and dismisses the mockers' remark with a blunt reminder: it was only the third hour of the day, about nine in the morning. Then he goes on to give the real explanation of the divine power that had been shown among them.

Peter declared that the exaltation of Christ explained everything. His words were: "Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God … He has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing." The Lord Jesus was above; that is why there was power below. It never entered the people's minds where the marvel of the tongues came from. It came from the One who had recently been crucified and who was now in supreme power at the right hand of God. Because they were astray about the truth of Christ, the Jews could not understand what was taking place.

He plainly denies the unworthy idea of drunkenness. The early hour alone should have silenced that charge against God-fearing souls. It was really what Joel spoke of. It was not the fulfilment as it will be in the last days, but an outpouring of that kind.

Alongside the call in Ephesians 5:18 to be filled with the Spirit there is the other one: "Do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery." If we are set on being filled with the Spirit, we should guard against anything that imitates it without being it. We should never mistake excitement for the Spirit's anointing… Do not confuse the natural excitement of wine with the power of the Spirit, which takes a man outside himself (see Acts 2:13-17). They are as different in origin as flesh and spirit.

"Full of new wine," the mockers had said — an easy answer, as they thought, to the strange and startling sight they were watching. But the charge was easy to disprove, and its folly clear. The time of day should have kept the accusers quiet — it was only the third hour. Men were not used to being overcome with wine by nine o'clock in the morning. The disciples were not drunk with wine. They were filled with the Spirit.

The point he insists on was this — the wonder in front of them in Jerusalem was one their own prophets should have prepared them for. "This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel." He does not say that it was the fulfilment of the prophet. Men, theologians, have said so, but not the Spirit of God. The apostle only says, "This is that which was spoken." That was its character. How far it was to be carried out then is another matter. It was not the excitement of nature by wine, but the heart filled with the Spirit of God, acting in His own power and in all classes.

"And it shall come to pass afterward that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh"... God speaks here of the time when He shall have re-established the Jews in their land, for He says, "My people shall never be ashamed"... This is after the blessing of the people, so that they may enjoy it. But when the day of Pentecost is there, Peter says, "This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel," Acts 2:16. Yet the Holy Spirit came on only a small number, because the nation had not received Christ.

Students of Scripture have often noticed how patiently God bore with the Jews through the first seven chapters of Acts. Until Stephen's death, we might say, the Lord was ready to return to the repentant nation. Sadly, the nation was not ready to have Him, and so God's purposes went on to their fulfilment for the Church. If they had received the truth as a nation, Joel's prophecy would have been fulfilled in full. As it was, that fulfilment, for Israel, waits for a future day.

"All flesh" here, we think, stands in contrast to Israel only. And Peter's heart at that moment must have been full of this. The last words he had heard from the Lord's lips as He ascended to heaven were "to the ends of the earth." He was filled with the Holy Spirit, who had come to bear witness to the world. Filled, gifted and inspired by the Holy Spirit, the apostles spoke — not the language of the Jew only, but many different tongues. The blessing was for all... All flesh does not necessarily mean every individual, but that all nations are in view.

Peter's first use of the prophecy in Joel is similar to the Lord's use of Isaiah 61 in Luke 4. There He stopped at "to preach the acceptable year of the Lord"; the time for the "day of vengeance" had not come. So here, Peter ends with the words, "Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved," because this was the end of his ministry.

Notice the point he presses. The wonder in front of them in Jerusalem was one their own prophets should have prepared them for. "This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel." He does not say that it was the fulfilment of the prophet. Men, religious teachers, have said so, but not the Spirit of God. The apostle only says, "This is that which was spoken." That was its character. How much of it was carried out then is another question. This was not nature stirred up by wine. It was the heart filled with the Spirit of God, acting in His own power and in every class of people.

He stops in the middle of a verse... Peter stops at the general statement of salvation, which is true for every age. He deliberately holds back from quoting the end, which belongs only to the future, when the Lord returns to reign at Jerusalem. The Apostle was guided by God. Who on earth at that moment, apart from the Holy Spirit, knew what was about to happen, or the character of the work that must come before Israel's blessing?

If you look at Joel it is clearly this: "And it shall come to pass afterwards." That means after God has restored Israel, and set them in blessing in their land, and they own Messiah. Then they get the Spirit... "and afterward I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh." Now here Peter changes the word "afterward" and puts in "the last days," and so takes in a distinct testimony.

For the Jew these are the last days, and they run on to the millennium... And the fulfilment of Joel's prophecy about the pouring out of the Spirit will come after the church is removed, and before those days close.

Isaiah and Ezekiel predict it, but they tie it to the last days, and to a blessing God would give Israel. On this matter their view as prophets stopped at the borders of the nation. Joel is different. His range of vision takes in all flesh... God was about to go beyond the narrow bounds of Judaism and to minister blessing to Gentiles. So saving grace would be known by some of all flesh, not only by some of Israel's race.

Indeed, the prophet's words here reached beyond what that day accomplished. "All flesh" cannot rightly be limited to Israel. God was soon going to bring Gentiles to the name of Christ, and He will bless the nations in the future kingdom.

But there was a new thing God would give them. He would pour out His Spirit upon all flesh. The young men and the old men of the people would have visions and dreams. Even on the male and female servants this rain from heaven would fall.

It is to be noted that in the last days when God pours out His Spirit on all flesh the sons and daughters will prophesy, and the young men shall see visions, and the old men shall dream dreams. This will be the way that God will make known His mind in those days.

In this time of grace the Holy Spirit is here. He belongs by right to every individual Christian and to the Church of God. It is ours to walk in the Spirit and to be filled with Him. Many are unclear about this. They see that the spiritual condition of the Church as a whole is low, and they grieve over it. But they think the only cure is another outpouring or baptism of the Spirit. This is not the case, however sincere they may be. The real need is more simple faith in the mighty fact that the Holy Spirit is present on earth. Let us use the power we have, and God will honour the effort.

Notice the point he insists on. The wonder now in front of them in Jerusalem was one their own prophets should have prepared them for: "This is what was spoken by the prophet Joel." He does not say it was the fulfilment of the prophet. Men, theologians, have said that; the Spirit of God does not. The apostle simply says, "This is what was spoken." That was its character. How far it was to be carried out then is another matter. This was not nature excited by wine. It was the heart filled with the Spirit of God, acting in His own power and in every class of people.

We need only note that it came on all — young and old, male servants and female servants. There is no trace of a clergy, or of any group the gift was limited to. The wording says the opposite. And it was not only the apostles: a hundred and twenty were there, and women among them.

Prophesying has no necessary link with the future, as some suppose. Nor is it preaching or teaching in general. It is forth-telling rather than fore-telling. It is speaking to a person in a way that puts him in the light of God — of God's dealing with his heart and conscience. It gives His mind.

"Women" were expressly named in Acts 1:14. At that point the disciples, close together as they were, were still only separate people holding to the Lord in faith, giving themselves with one mind to constant prayer. The one Spirit had not yet come down from heaven to unite them and baptize them all into one body. Joel's prophecy, applied to the gift at Pentecost, assumes that women were to have a share in the promise of the Father, and in its mighty result.

This is also all that can be said of the passage in Acts 2:17-18. The daughters of Israel, the Lord's "female servants," were to prophesy — but where? Not in public preaching, for even "the law" forbade them that.

It really was what Joel spoke of — not the fulfilment as it will be in the last days, but a pouring out of that same kind. In fact the prophet's words went beyond what that day carried out. "All flesh" cannot be limited to Israel. God was soon to bring Gentiles to the name of Christ, and He will bless the nations in the future kingdom.

But we must remember what happens when the day comes for God to pour out the Holy Spirit again. That outpouring will not gather out a people for heaven. It will serve God's purposes of grace on the earth — that is the difference. Then it will be plain that God gives the Holy Spirit to men quite apart from their being Jews. So on the day of Pentecost, when everyone there was a Jew, the miracle of Gentile languages still showed that God did not mean to stop there, but to go out to all the nations.

Notice the point he presses: the wonder in front of them in Jerusalem was, after all, one their own prophets should have prepared them for. "This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel." He does not say it was the fulfilment of the prophecy. Theologians have said so, but the Spirit of God has not. The apostle only says, "This is that which was spoken." That was its character. How much of it was to happen then is another question.

Many passages in the New Testament use the phrase "that it might be fulfilled." That phrase is missing where Joel's prophecy is used in Acts chapter 2. Instead we read that Peter said, "But this is that which was spoken by the Prophet Joel." There is a great difference between this word and an out-and-out declaration that the passage was fulfilled. Peter's words point out that something like what happened on the day of Pentecost had been foretold by Joel. But they do not claim that Joel's prophecy was fulfilled there and then.

Plainly, the wonders in heaven above and the signs in the earth have not even yet come to pass (Acts 2:19). Verse 43 tells us that "many wonders and signs were being done through the apostles." But those were not the ones Joel foretold: "blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke," the sun turned to darkness and the moon to blood. God did pour out His Spirit in Jerusalem as He had promised, so to that extent the prophecy came partly true.

God will make a striking outward display of His power before the judgment falls. He always sends a witness ahead of the event itself. He does not strike before He warns. He deals with us the same way every day… These wonders are bound to catch people's minds and attention, but they will not take them to heart. Deluded, and hardened under God's judgment, they will turn a deaf ear to it all. So the great and terrible day of the Lord will overtake them like a thief.

When they repent, the Holy Spirit will be poured out on them and on all people. Peter quoted this in Acts 2:16-21, but the nation did not repent; only a remnant turned to the Lord. There will also be signs in the heavens and on the earth before the great and terrible day of the Lord. According to the historians, there were some such signs before the destruction of Jerusalem. So this passage, quoted in Acts 2, may have had a partial fulfilment then, though it still waits to be fully proved true in a future day.

It was less prominent, but still clearly there: the Spirit of God had brought home to them the reality of judgment… All nature would shake before its Judge, and that judgment was close at hand.

This hope may come true this very night. There is nothing at all to wait for… And, blessed be His name, when He does come for us, He will not come with terror, wrath and judgment. He will not come with blackness and darkness and storm. Those things belong to "the day of the Lord," as the apostle Peter tells the Jews plainly in his first great sermon.

It is strange that all these commentators use the word "fulfillment" for this prophecy. They say Peter called the day of Pentecost the fulfillment of what Joel wrote. But the Holy Spirit did not use the word "fulfillment" at all. He avoided such a statement on purpose. Many passages in the New Testament use the phrase "that it might be fulfilled." Peter does not use it here. Instead he says, "But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel." … Peter's words point out that Joel had predicted something like what took place on the day of Pentecost. They do not claim that Joel's prophecy was fulfilled there and then. … The outpouring of the Holy Spirit had taken place, but not in the full sense given in Joel's prophecy. He came for a special purpose, the formation of the Church, and for this purpose He is still on earth.

The verses he quotes (Joel 2:28-32) were not completely fulfilled when God poured out His Spirit at Pentecost. Verses 19 and 20 at least will be fulfilled only at the time of the tribulation period. Yet his words "this is that" show that God was doing an unusually striking work, in line with that prophecy. Such partial fulfilments are not unusual in Scripture.

God will show His power in a remarkable, visible way before He carries out the judgment. God always sends a testimony before the thing itself. He does not strike before He warns. He deals with us the same way every day. What Christian feels God's discipline before the Spirit of God has warned him? … He gives us the chance, if one may say so, to set ourselves morally right; and if we do not take the lesson, then the sorrow comes. So it is here too. These wonders are bound to catch people's minds and attention, but they will not truly heed them. … They will turn a deaf ear to it all, and so the great and terrible day of the Lord will overtake them like a thief.

On the day of Pentecost Peter speaks of "the day of the Lord, the great and magnificent day." … In all these passages, and in 1 Thessalonians 5, the phrase points to sudden and overwhelming judgments on the wicked. Those judgments open the way for Christ to set up His kingdom on earth by power.

Signs in the sun. These probably stand for the darkening and change of those in supreme authority over the earth in the last days.

In Joel the sun is darkened and the moon turned to blood before the day comes. I take it that if the sea in the appointed area literally becomes like the blood of a dead man, then the moon is literally turned into blood too. But then that is before the great and terrible day of the Lord in Joel.

Christ may come for His people tonight. Nothing stands in the way. … And when He does come for us, He will not come with terror, wrath, and judgment. He will not come with blackness and darkness and storm. Those things belong to "the day of the Lord," as Peter tells the Jews in his first great sermon on the day of Pentecost … "the sun shall be turned to darkness and the moon to blood, before" — what? Before the coming of the Lord for His people? No; but before "the day of the Lord comes, the great and magnificent day."

He stopped in the middle of a verse. "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved." Joel gives a reason for that. He adds, "For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those who escape, as the LORD has said, and among the survivors shall be those whom the LORD calls" (Joel 2:32). Peter stops at the general statement of salvation, which is true in every age. He carefully avoids quoting the end, because it applies only to the future, when the Lord returns to reign at Jerusalem.

Peter's first use of the prophecy in Joel is like the Lord's use of Isaiah 61 in Luke 4. There He stopped at "to preach the acceptable year of the Lord" — the time for the "day of vengeance" had not come. So here Peter ends with the words "Everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved," because this was the end of his ministry.

It was really what Joel spoke of: not, of course, the fulfilment as it is to be in the last days, but an outpouring of that nature. Indeed, the prophet's words went beyond what that day saw accomplished, for "all flesh" cannot fairly be limited to Israel, and God was soon about to bring in Gentiles to the name of Christ.

Peter says, in effect: this is the first instalment of the prophecy of Joel… I have no doubt the complete fulfilment of Joel's prophecy remains for a future day, when the Jews are again in their land — a restored people. So Peter is careful not to say it is the fulfilment… But you, my reader, if you miss salvation now, will never come in for it then.

Joel had added the necessary condition of salvation in the trouble of those days. It could hardly be called a condition at all. To "call upon the Name of the Lord" (that is, of Jehovah) would so naturally be what anyone turns to in trouble. Yet even here, sadly, man's unbelief might turn this into a stumbling-block — something to fall over and perish. For Jehovah had already come to them, and they had rejected Him!

At Pentecost the apostles preached and prayed in the spirit of these scriptures, in the name of the holy Servant Jesus. They said, "Everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." And they announced with force, "There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."

What is required of men in order that they may be saved? Simply to "call" upon the name of the Lord. This was all Israel could do while they were suffering in Egypt. To shake off Pharaoh was impossible; to get rid of the taskmasters was out of the question; but they could cry to God. In the same way today, the one who calls upon the name of the Lord, acknowledging Him as his only hope, will be saved.

The calling spoken of here is not the vague cry of an uneasy conscience, but the cry of faith… Sadly, as we are solemnly warned, the cry "Lord, Lord" may come from lips whose sound never came from a believing heart.

It is clear that, if it is everyone who believes in Jesus, the Gentile comes in as well as the Jew. There is no difference; the same Lord is rich to all who call upon Him. It is beautiful to see this phrase, "There is no difference," repeated here. The apostle had used it before with the addition "for all have sinned." Sin puts all men on a level in ruin before God.

Along with all this, Peter sets out in the fullest way the weakness and humiliation of Jesus. And this is the same Jesus he kept testifying was now raised to the highest place in the heavens. This is very striking in these early sermons of his. Jesus had been slain, Peter says, treated as nothing, handed over, denied, seized, killed, hanged on a tree. He puts no restraint on language like this. And in the same spirit, he seems to glory in the despised name of "Jesus of Nazareth." He has it on his lips again and again.

Men despised Jesus of Nazareth, but God approved Him. The miracles that marked the whole course of His public ministry were God's witness to His worthiness and to His claims. They were the seal of God's approval placed upon Him. This verse is like a key, unlocking for us the real force and meaning of all miraculous signs and gifts.

Peter then presses upon Israel the facts about this Lord Himself, "Jesus of Nazareth." He does not preach Him as the Son of God, as Paul did right after his conversion (Acts 9:20). He preaches Him as "a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs." The mighty works show divine power. The wonders stress their effect on people. The signs point to spiritual truth. Of these things the people themselves were witnesses.

Acts 10:38 shows that this points to the service of the Holy Spirit, for there we read that "God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power." He truly became Man — humble, dependent, obedient. Even if we cannot fathom the deep mystery of His Person, we may at least learn this. When He went about doing good, and healing all whom the devil oppressed, He did not do it by any divine, personal, inherent power as Son of God, though He is Son. He did it as Man by the power of the Holy Spirit.

The evidence of Christ's heavenly mission was full and undeniable, and open for all to see. It was so clear that Peter charged the Jews on the day of Pentecost with full knowledge of His credentials. The apostle declared that God had attested Jesus of Nazareth to them "with mighty works and wonders and signs … as you yourselves know" (Acts 2:22). Not one voice from that crowded audience rose in protest.

Though God attested Jesus of Nazareth "with mighty works and wonders and signs" (Acts 2:22), the main object was not to convince stubborn unbelief. It was to encourage and confirm weak faith.

According to Peter's testimony about the witness given to Jesus, the very things that proved Christ had come from God will be the very things that lead the Jews to receive the false Christ in the last days. Compare this with 2 Thessalonians 2:8-9: "Then the lawless one will be revealed … with all power and false signs and wonders." So, just as the Jews rejected what God did among them by Jesus of Nazareth, they will receive what Satan will do by that wicked one. And all this, as the apostle goes on to say, is because they did not receive the love of the truth.

Peter goes on to give a lovely testimony to the Lord. He points to the beautiful life of his Master: what He had been doing, and how He had been blessing people everywhere. They knew it well. But then what a charge he makes! He boldly lays their guilt on them. Terrible accusation! They were guilty of the murder of their Messiah, and of refusing the Son of God. Only seven weeks before, they had refused the Lord. They chose Barabbas instead — a robber and a murderer. They had cried, "Away with him, crucify him," even though Pilate, the Roman governor, had declared Him innocent.

What then had been the outcome? They, the men of law, had used the hands of lawless men — of the Gentiles — to crucify and kill Him. That might seem to disprove His claims. But no. Everything that happened had its place in the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, and it was by that plan that He was given up. Apart from it, all man's efforts would have been useless!

Two different words are translated as 'crucified'. One is the common word, which comes from the word 'cross'. The other appears only once in the New Testament, and it means 'nailed' or 'fastened' to the cross. This shows the audacity as well as the folly of man in committing this act.

How blessed it is to turn away from man and all his wickedness, and to learn this. The death of our Lord Jesus Christ was not only the result of man's evil. It was also the result of the counsels of God. He was "delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God," when men took Him with wicked hands to crucify and kill Him. God knew what men would do with His Son, and took the occasion of man's wickedness to work out His plans for the blessing of mankind. When Pilate delivered up Jesus to be crucified, God delivered Him up for our trespasses (Rom. 4:25).

A knowledge of persons and events before they exist. It is one of the divine attributes of God, by which persons were foreknown by Him and events determined. It is a capacity altogether beyond the mind of man to grasp.

God had given Him up to this according to His "definite plan and foreknowledge." God knows how to make the wrath of man praise Him and carry out His purposes of blessing. Yet this does not lessen man's responsibility in the matter. Verse 23 clearly shows that the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man do not clash in practice. In theory we may still find the two hard to fit together.

On one side, unbelief and rebellion and blasphemy were left free to run their course when the moment came. His own people rejected Jesus in the most shameful way, and they urged the Gentiles to crucify Him. On the other side, all of this was so that He might become a propitiation for the sins of His own who believed, yes, for the whole world. If that was man's inexcusable wickedness, this was God's sovereign grace. If they were the instruments of their own spite, He gave One who had been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

First, as to conviction of sin, he brings home to them the fact that they rejected Christ. Here the Holy Spirit presses their sin home. It was not now a question of this or that wrongdoing. They had refused to believe in Christ — they had rejected Him.

When was He justified beyond dispute? When He was raised from the dead. This was the standing justification of Him whom man crucified. If lawless hands slew the Lord of glory, God raised Him up, having loosed the pains of death: such was His answer to man.

Our Lord's soul would not, could not, be held by the unseen world, neither could the Holy One "see corruption"! This last part, of course, has to do with His body. But because of what He was — the "Holy One" — if He went into death He had to come out, for resurrection was inherent in Him. (John 11:25; 2:19.) A perfect, heavenly, holy Man could not be held by it. Death had no claim upon Him, and no seed of it in Him!

They killed Him, God raised Him — and then the cause of this, in the Lord's high personal glory. He loosed the pains of death because it was not possible that He should be held by it. "For David speaks," and so on. The hindrance to death's power, as it is stated here, is not the inherent power of the Lord, as we have it in Romans 1, declared to be the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, but the personal glory and dignity given Him by the counsel of God as the One witnessed of by the Spirit in David; and not in David only, but in all the Scriptures.

It was not possible, therefore, that He should be held by death (Acts 2:24), since all that righteousness required had been done. Only one answer could be given to such a work and such devotion — to be "raised from the dead by the glory of the Father," and to the throne in heaven.

The word ōdin occurs only four times in the New Testament. It refers literally to the pangs of a woman in childbirth, and it has that sense in 1 Thessalonians 5:3. Twice it refers to the pangs that will seize the wicked when God's judgments are poured out on the earth, Matthew 24:8 and Mark 13:8; and once it refers to the pains of death endured by the Lord, Acts 2:24.

He is risen, not like Lazarus, Jairus' daughter, and others, to return to corruption, but never to die again (Acts 13:34). Death has no more dominion over Him (Rom. 6:9). He is alive, then, for ever — the living One (Rev. 1:18). What is more, He was raised because it was not possible that He should be held by death (Acts 2:24). For He was holy and righteous, and His resurrection proclaims that.

His resurrection was the loosing of the pains of death (see Acts 2:24). Death, of course, had no claim on Him personally. It had one substitutionally, since He took up our cause and on the cross assumed our liabilities. So His resurrection involves the loosing of us from all pains and penalties. He was set free, but so were we. He was "delivered for our offences and raised again for our justification" (Rom. 4:25). Because of this, His resurrection is often called the receipt God has placed in the believer's hand. It announces the complete discharge of all the believer's debts, which the Lord Jesus took up in His death.

Was David writing of himself? Impossible. He had died and was buried, and his tomb was with them, still holding his dust. Clearly his tomb was well known at that time. And all were perfectly agreed that he, the first of his line, had not risen from the dead. Yet he wrote of One who would die, and would shortly afterwards be raised.

No truth is clearer to the spiritual mind, or more important to the student of Scripture, than this: Jesus is the sum and substance of the Spirit's testimony in Scripture. If we do not see this, Scripture becomes to our poor foolish minds a maze of dark places. His name is the clue and the thread through it. Reader, when you study Scripture what do you look for in it? Testimony to Jesus, or something about yourself?

The same psalm gives the clearest proof that the most absolute trust in God would mark the Messiah through all His life. He was to lay down His life with trust in God just as unbroken and perfect in death as in life. And in the end He would stand in resurrection. So it is the psalm of confidence in God, and that confidence goes right through life, death, resurrection. It was seen in Jesus, and clearly it does not apply to David who wrote it.

No one but He could say, "I have set the Lord always before me." Never for one moment did He turn aside from the way of perfect obedience. Because He obeyed like this, Jehovah was always at His right hand to hold Him up. So He would not be moved, no matter what lay before Him. Passing into death as the dependent Man, death could not hold Him.

Psalm 16 places Christ fully — though perfect — among men, in His walk of righteousness in owning Jehovah. The living God takes up His cause, so that death is not to have dominion over Him.

A friend at our right hand is a friend at our side, to whom we can turn at any moment. So David can say, "I have set the Lord always before me: because He is at my right hand, I shall not be moved." The wicked man trusted in himself. He "said in his heart I shall not be moved," and then came under the judgment of the Lord. The godly man, trusting in the Lord at his right hand, can say, "I shall not be moved."

When the time came for Jesus to be received up, what enabled Him to set His face steadfastly to go to Jerusalem? It was because He had, with purpose of heart, set the Lord always before His face. Satan tried every means in the path of Jesus to shift Him off the place of dependence and obedience. He could not succeed. Jesus had said to the Lord, "You are my Lord." He had set Him before His face, and the Lord was at His right hand. Therefore He could not be moved.

Such is the path open to the believer. Sadly, we have to admit how little we know of its blessedness. And yet, suppose day by day we set the Lord before us as our one object: to serve Him, to please Him, to do His will. Shall we not find that He will be at our right hand to support us? With that support, nothing will move us or turn us aside — no trying circumstances, no opposition, slights or sufferings we may be called to meet.

The same psalm gives the clearest proof about the Messiah — and no Jew could doubt that the psalm was speaking of the Messiah. He would show the most absolute trust in God all through His life. He was to lay down His life with a trust in God just as unbroken and perfect in death as in life. And in the end He would stand in resurrection. So it is the psalm of confidence in God that runs right through life, death, resurrection. It was seen in Jesus. It does not fit David, who wrote it.

Was David writing of himself? Impossible. He had died and was buried, and his tomb was among them, still holding his dust. Clearly his grave was well known then. And everyone agreed that he, the first of his line, had not risen from the dead. For centuries that psalm had been read. Probably everyone in the crowd knew it. But until that day none of them could point to anyone who had died and say, "Here is the man."

Christ lived in constant dependence and unswerving obedience. The result was that His heart was glad in a world where He was a "man of sorrows and acquainted with grief," and that His glory (that is, His tongue) rejoiced. There is something very beautiful here: the Hebrew word for "glory" also means "tongue." So it was with Christ. His tongue was His glory, and it rejoiced, because He used it only for the glory of His Father and God. Our tongues, sadly, are often our shame. Every word spoken by that blessed tongue was a word of truth, love, grace and wisdom.

His heart rejoicing, His tongue glad, His flesh resting in hope, was because of the certainty of resurrection. His soul would not be left in hades, which is the unseen state of separation from His body. Also, "Your Holy One" would not see corruption. This of course refers to His body. The spirit and soul had left it, so it lay in a state of death — yet it would not see corruption.

In Psalm 16:9-10, where the Lord Jesus speaks prophetically, the distinction between "My flesh" and "My soul" is clearly indicated.

The path of life that the Lord walked led through death. This is not death as making atonement for His people, but death that shows the blessedness of a life death cannot touch. It is the path of life through death. Here the prospect of death raises no cloud on His spirit. So far from being cast down at the thought of death, His heart is glad, His tongue rejoices, for His flesh will rest in hope. For the one walking the path of life, death is only a means to a fuller enjoyment of that life. The natural man walks the path of death, and at that very moment gloom and dread fill him. The one walking the path of life is marked by joy, praise and the rest of hope.

The Lord's joy remains even in view of death. His confidence is still in God: "You will not leave My soul in Sheol; neither will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption." Christ is indeed the "Holy One." But believers are "holy and beloved," and as such they can know the blessedness of the life of Christ as man. They too can look ahead with confidence, knowing that God will not leave the soul in death nor the body in corruption.

Was David writing of himself? Impossible. He had died and was buried, and his tomb was among them, still holding his dust. Clearly his grave was well known then. And everyone fully agreed that he, the first of his dynasty, had not risen from the dead. Yet he wrote of One who would die, and would shortly afterwards be raised.

Hades never means the grave, as some claim, although the imagery of the grave may naturally be applied to it. It is still clearly distinct. It stands in the same relation to the soul as the grave does to the body... So in the words quoted about the Lord in Acts 2:27, "you will not abandon my soul to Hades" refers to the soul. "Or let your Holy One see corruption" refers to the body. The apostle Peter separates them in the same way when he explains the psalm.

The word "hell" in that verse is not "Gehenna," the lake of fire, but "hades" (or in Hebrew "sheol"), which does not indicate a place, but a state. It is the unseen state of the soul and spirit as separated from the body. So His spirit and soul were in the unseen condition called "hades." But they were in the place called "paradise," the third heaven. In resurrection God would not leave His soul in that unseen condition. Nor would He let His body see corruption. Soul and body would be reunited.

"Holy One" here is not the same as "saints in the earth." "Saints" are those set apart — consecrated to God. Your "Holy" One is one who walks in devotion to God, pleasing to Him. It is Christ known in this character... Notice that it is "Your Holy One," One who morally belongs to God by the perfection of His character.

"Your Holy One" is the flesh of Jesus (Acts 2:27, 31). The title comes from Luke 1:35. That word set the human nature of Jesus apart from every stain, and kept it in full favour and acceptance with God.

The Lord was completely sinless. So we can understand how His blessed holy body saw no corruption, for corruption is the effect of sin. The blessed Lord had fully settled the question of sin by His atoning death on the cross. So death could have no further claim on Him. When sinful bodies die, death holds its sway and the process of decay starts at once.

Death could not hold Him fast — the death that He, the Holy One, had submitted to for sin, for God's glory. Nor was it possible to break the Scripture that said, "For you will not abandon my soul to Hades, or let your Holy One see corruption." ... Here Peter, and Paul in Acts 13:33-37, declare that God fulfilled it by raising Jesus from the dead. It was not fulfilled in David, still less in anyone else.

Christ is indeed the "Holy One," but believers are "holy and beloved," and, as such, can know the blessedness of the life of Christ as man. They too can look on with confidence, knowing that God will not leave the soul in death nor the body in corruption.

Twice in the New Testament the Psalm is applied to Christ. The apostle Peter quotes verses 8-11 to prove the resurrection of Christ (Acts 2:25-28). The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews applies the principle of the first verse to prove that Christ shared in human nature (Hebrews 2:13). So we have the warrant of Scripture for applying the Psalm to Christ personally.

In the sixteenth psalm, David speaks in the first person, yet he clearly speaks of Another than himself. That One was perfect in a perfect pathway. He kept the LORD always before Him, and the LORD was therefore always for Him. This gave unwavering steadiness to all His steps. So it was a pathway of life, even though it led through death. In it His flesh rested in confident hope. God would not abandon His soul to Hades, nor let piety such as His see corruption. Beyond, the face of God was the brightness before Him.

So He would rejoice through it all, and pass through death with unclouded hope. His flesh would rest in hope; as a man He did not fear death. The LORD, whom He trusted, would not leave His soul in Hades, nor let His Holy One see corruption. His soul would go to the place of departed spirits and His body to the place of corruption, yet He would not be left in the one or see the other. The LORD would show Him the path of life through death, and beyond it.

The lie that the disciples came by night and stole Jesus away, while the soldiers slept, is useless. Peter does not even notice such an unworthy excuse. He simply states the great truth on which the gospel rests: "Whom God raised up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for Him to be held by it." ... Indeed death could not hold Him fast. He, the Holy One, had submitted to it for sin, to God's glory. Nor could the Scripture be broken which said, "You will not abandon My soul to Hades, or let Your Holy One see corruption." So He was shown the path of life through death, with fullness of joy in the presence of God His Father.

On His side too, Jesus, the ever blessed Man, lives to God. His holy nature as Man finds its untold, unmeasured bliss in God. He knows God infinitely, perfectly, with all the powers of the One risen from the dead. He is in the condition and the place where God has planned to put man in the closest relationship and privilege. He stands in the full light of all that God is. From that nearest and dearest place — may we reverently say it — the heart of Jesus rises up in ever happy and holy delight in God.

The secret of this joy is found in having the glorious end in view. The path of life may pass through a world of sorrow. It may lead through the valley of the shadow of death. But at last it ends in the presence of God. For Christ, and for those who are Christ's, this is the Father's presence. Here, among the sorrows of earth, we may taste the cup of life. There, among the joys of heaven, we shall enter into the fullness of life.

In this place of death He makes out a path for us. His Father and God shows Him the "path of life." He was the life. But the path of life had to be tracked through this place of death, where not one thing testifies of God — one wide waste, where there is no way. Christ has tracked the path Himself... The gospel shows He gives it to those who believe.

In "men and brethren" (Acts 1:16; Acts 2:29, and so on), there are not two classes. The sense is "men who are brethren," or, in our own way of speaking, simply "brethren."

"Head of a family." In the New Testament this title belongs to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the ancestors of the Israelites, and to the twelve sons of Jacob. David carries it too. Acts 2:29; Acts 7:8-9; Heb. 7:4. Other passages call these same men "the fathers."

Was David writing of himself? Impossible. He had died and was buried, and his tomb was with them, still holding his dust. Clearly his tomb was well known at that time. And everyone agreed that he, the first of his royal line, had not risen from the dead. Yet he wrote of One who would die, and would soon be raised. For God would not leave that One's soul in Hades (the place of spirits without bodies), and He would not let His body see corruption.

Certainly no one could say all this of David himself. No one could credit him with such perfection. His monument among them showed that he had seen corruption, like everyone else. So he was not speaking of himself. There was only One this could describe.

Paul reasons in much the same way as Peter did in Acts 2:29-31; and both with unanswerable power. Only one man, the Messiah, was to see no corruption while tasting death. David in his own generation served the purpose of God, but he saw corruption. So did all his descendants, except that One of whom he prophesied in the Spirit. Scripture cannot be broken.

In his reasoning here, the apostle cites Psalm 132. That is the great psalm of the kingdom settled forever in the son of David. … This, and this alone, explains the uniquely glorious character of the kingdom, even on its earthly side. Even now the King is risen from the dead. This stamps permanence on it as nothing else could: yet it is the kingdom of a man. Only it is man risen from the dead, for in all things He must have the pre-eminence (Col. 1:18).

Where is David, the man after God's own heart, in his glory? His tomb is with us today; the gates of Hades had prevailed over the king. Solomon in all his glory and wisdom, where is he? His tomb also is with us today; the gates of Hades had prevailed. All the great ones of the Old Testament had passed away.

The Psalm writer speaks in the first person all the way through. I, me, or my turns up in every verse. Was David writing about himself? Impossible. He had died and was buried, and his tomb was there among them, still holding his dust... People had read that Psalm for centuries. Most likely everyone in the crowd knew it. But to that day none of them could point to anyone who had died and say, "Here is the man."

David was surely aware that he was describing more than his friend's betrayal... So we see that David knew he was an instrument in the hands of the Spirit of God. Through him God announced in advance His purposes about Christ: both His allowing the wickedness that brought Him to the cross, and the grace that by that very means accomplished our redemption.

In verse 11 it is the expression of the divine purpose, "The LORD swore to David a sure oath from which he will not turn back: 'One of the sons of your body I will set on your throne.'"... So when Christ, as the Son of David, is in the Spirit's view, the promise is unconditional, because it announces God's purpose in grace. But when David's own children, his immediate descendants, are in view, whether they stay on his throne depends on their responsibility.

In his argument the apostle cites Psalm 132, the great psalm of the kingdom settled for ever in the son of David... This, and this alone, explains why the kingdom is so glorious, even in its earthly side. Even now the King is risen from the dead. Nothing else could stamp it with permanence like that. Yet it is still the kingdom of a man — only a man risen from the dead.

The Lord's manhood was real because He was born of Mary, "the Virgin" of David's house. If He had not truly been the Son of God on the other side, the truth of His Godhead would have been overthrown. And if He had not held the legal rights of Solomon's line through Joseph — though Joseph was only His supposed father — He would not be the true Messiah under the oath God swore to David.

Peter would have them know what David has shown: for that Son whom David calls his Lord there would be a time of waiting for the Kingdom, with enemies opposing... So the pause before He takes David's throne is itself a proof that Jesus is the Messiah, instead of an argument against it. And it is David himself who testifies to this.

Now the Messiah rejected by the Jews sits on the throne of God His Father, in contrast with His own throne, which He is to take another day. Neither David nor any other sat on the Father's throne... At His coming again He will sit upon the throne of David according to the prophecy before us and many more.

Was David writing of himself? Impossible. He had died and was buried, and his tomb was with them, still holding his dust. Clearly his tomb was well known then. And everyone agreed that he, the first of his dynasty, had not risen from the dead. Yet he wrote of One who would die and would soon be raised. God would not leave that One's soul in Hades — the place of spirits without their bodies — nor would He let His body see corruption.

His soul would not be left in hades, which is the unseen state of separation from His body. Also, "your Holy One" would not see corruption. This of course refers to His body. The body was in a state of death, because the spirit and soul had left it. Yet it would not see corruption.

Psalm 16:10 teaches that the Lord would not leave Messiah's soul to Hades, any more than His body to see corruption. "To leave in" does not seem to fit either the Hebrew or the Greek in the correct text. Early superstition made much of that error, and many revive it today.

His soul was in hades, His body in the grave. Death separated His soul from His body, but divine power held both, so to speak, for His resurrection and glory. I see no difficulty here. His soul was in paradise, His body in the grave. Hades is only the invisible place of departed spirits, nothing more.

It is clear that our Lord could not go to a place of torment. It is just as clear that His soul was without its body, while His precious incorruptible body lay in the grave those memorable three days. The Lord was perfectly sinless. So we can understand how His blessed holy body saw no corruption, for corruption is the effect of sin. The blessed Lord had also fully settled the question of sin by His atoning death on the cross. So death could have no further claim on Him. When sinful bodies die, death holds its sway and decay sets in at once. In this verse our Lord's incorruptible body and His soul without its body were not to be left in death and hades. On the third day body and soul were re-united and His glorious resurrection took place — proof that the work of redemption was complete.

Peter does not even notice such an unworthy excuse. He simply states the grand truth on which the gospel rests… The word of God through David pointed to the resurrection of the Messiah. God showed Him openly, when risen, to witnesses He had chosen beforehand. But indeed death could not hold Him fast. He, the Holy One, had submitted to death for sin, to God's glory. Nor was it possible for the Scripture to be broken which said, "You will not leave My soul to Hades, nor let Your Holy One see corruption." … Here Peter, and Paul in Acts 13:33-37, declare that God fulfilled this when He raised Jesus from the dead. It was not fulfilled in David, and still less in anyone else.

What did the apostles regard as an essential feature of the resurrection? Let Peter instruct us, as he did his hearers on the day of Pentecost. David, he said, spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, "that He was not abandoned to Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption." Peter did not preach a resurrection of the person apart from the body that died.

In Acts 2:33 Peter speaks of Jesus, "being by the right hand of God exalted," and in Acts 5:29-31 the "other apostles" join in the same blessed theme — "Him has God exalted." Peter uses the word "exalted" to describe the Lord's present position. It is the same word used in John chapters 3, 8 and 12 for the "lifting up" of the Son of Man! That truly touches our affections, and touches them deeply. He who endured the cross with all its shame has been "highly exalted" by God.

The "right hand" speaks of authority, power, and eminence. According to Exodus 15:6, delivering and subduing power belong to the right hand. In Genesis 48:14 the right hand gives blessing that is sovereign and cannot be taken back. Acts 2:32-36 hails His exaltation as God's approval of Him, and at the same time as a reversal of man's judgment.

As the exalted Man, Jesus had received the promised Holy Spirit from the Father, and had poured Him out on His disciples. At His baptism He received the Holy Spirit for Himself, as the dependent Man. Now He receives the same Holy Spirit on behalf of others, as their Representative. By pouring out the Spirit these others were baptized into one body and became His members.

It was not simply God putting His Spirit into the prophets and others. It was a man exalted to glory, who received it to give it to others. So Psalm 68 says, "Received in respect of man," or as Acts explains it, "for men." But He received it as man, for them.

There were clear signs in front of them, and shown through them, that the Father's promise had been fulfilled. The promised Holy Spirit was not in Himself something the senses could take in. Still, outward power came with Him. This distinction matters greatly. Otherwise, when these outward signs are absent, men are in danger of overlooking and denying that incomparable gift, which was always above its effects.

Peter points to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit as proof of a glorious fact. The risen Jesus had "been exalted by the right hand of God," and had "received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit." The Spirit's presence on earth was and is unanswerable proof. It shows not only the resurrection, but also that the risen Jesus has left this world and gone to the Father.

David himself had not ascended to the heavens, any more than he had risen from the dead. The One David spoke of was to sit in the seat of administration and power until His foes were made His footstool. So here is the conclusion of the whole matter. The pouring out of the Spirit, which they had seen and heard, proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that God had made the crucified Jesus both Lord and Christ.

But when Christ went up on high, He received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit. What amazing comfort, confidence, and rest this should give us! Suppose the Holy Spirit had been given straight to us. We might well think that if we did not behave as we should, the gift could be taken back.

So Peter cites another psalm. It shows that the Messiah had to ascend and sit at the right hand of Jehovah. He had shown just as clearly that resurrection was foretold of Him and of no one else. "For he says himself, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool." Who was the man that sat at God's right hand? No one could pretend it was David. It was his Son, the Messiah. This matched exactly what the apostles had seen for themselves.

We freely grant that David did not ascend into the heavens. The Lord says the same of Himself after He rose, and yet He had been in Paradise with the pardoned thief... the departure of the spirit to God is never counted as "ascension."

His sitting at Jehovah's right hand proclaimed in the clearest way that, though a man, He would also be God... Then Peter quoted it in Acts 2:34, and Paul in Hebrews 1:13. Both dwell on the words of Jehovah, "Sit at my right hand." Who in David's day could have said that of David's son, unless the Holy Spirit guided him and spoke through him? So we learn that the Psalm foretold the Lord's ascension. No one who accepted the Psalm as the inspired Word of God could question that authority.

Psalm 132 secures the risen Son of David as the everlasting King on His throne in Zion. It brings the rich privileges that belong to His kingdom on earth and in Israel. If Psalm 132 does that, the quotation from Psalm 110 testifies to His present exaltation in heaven. The proof of this was conclusive. The Father had now fulfilled His promise and given the Holy Spirit. They could see and hear that outpouring beyond dispute.

This can refer to no one but the Lord Jesus. He is therefore David's Lord. The prophecy does not show Him taking His throne at once. It shows Him seated at God's right hand for a set time, before God would subdue His enemies under His feet.

Are souls, when they are subdued by grace, made the footstool of their Conqueror? We have always understood that when men are converted they are united to Christ — made one body and one spirit with Him... This all makes sense if the psalm predicts Christ's exaltation to the right hand of God. There He waits in patient grace until the moment He receives commission to tread down His enemies, placed under His feet as a footstool.

Peter takes up these words in this way in his appeal to the nation at Pentecost, and his appeal was most powerful. He set two ways open to his hearers. One was surrender to Him whom God had set at His right hand. If they refused that, the other was to be crushed beneath His victorious feet. And it must be one or the other for every soul of man.

Would anyone object to the thought of a man in heaven? Peter credits another Psalm to David too, and so does the Book of Psalms. It had foretold this: "The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at My right hand, until I make Your enemies Your footstool." David's Lord was to sit at Jehovah's right hand. David's Lord had done that. The proof of it was there in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, which had taken place that day.

The Lord drew attention to this Psalm (Matthew 22; Mark 12; Luke 20), and clearly asserted that it was about the Messiah. He asked the Pharisees whose son the Christ was, and pointed to David's words calling the Messiah "My Lord." By this He showed that, though David's son, He must be greater than the son of Jesse, King of Israel. And His sitting at Jehovah's right hand proclaimed in the clearest way that, though a man, He would also be God.

But another day was to dawn, and we are introduced to it as soon as we begin to read Psalm 110... now He speaks to Him in resurrection, saying, "Sit at My right hand, until I make Your enemies Your footstool." Jehovah acknowledges Him as Lord and places Him at His right hand — but it is "until…" There is a prospect before Him. The seat He is to occupy is high and exalted, yet it is provisional, until that prospect becomes reality. The day of His poverty is over. The day of His patience is begun.

We have, then, two entirely distinct and contrasted periods. In the first, Christ sits at the right hand of God. He holds the acknowledged title of universal supremacy, but He waits for His enemies to be made His footstool. During this period, God bears with the enemies in patient grace, and gathers the co-heirs who are to sit with Him on His throne. This period fills the gap between the resurrection of Christ, the firstfruits, and the resurrection of those who are Christ's at His coming. The other period starts when Jehovah makes Christ's enemies His footstool. Then He begins to crush them by His power, and to subject all things to Himself in actual fact.

But God said to Christ, "Sit at My right hand, until I make Your enemies Your footstool." And the Lord Jesus Christ, rejected by man, is sitting at God's right hand as Man. He waits there until His enemies are made His footstool. Patient grace is working meanwhile to call sinners to a knowledge of the salvation which He has worked out.

The words declare His Deity, for they tell us that He was David's Lord. They also proclaim His exaltation, which followed His humiliation and rejection by men. Peter takes them up in this way in his powerful appeal to the nation at Pentecost. He set two ways before his hearers. One was surrender to Him whom God had set at His right hand. Refusing that, the other was to be crushed beneath His victorious feet. And it must be one or the other for every soul of man.

Being "made" Lord and Christ is quite consistent with His having been both during His time on earth. These things were always His, but now He was officially installed as such, as the risen and glorified Man. Wonderful news for us; but terrible news for those who had been guilty of His crucifixion. It simply guaranteed their dreadful damnation, if they persisted on their course.

Think of a professed commentator like Dr. C. Wordsworth. He committed himself, and the Dictionary of the Bible with him, to the astonishing error that God made Jesus to be Jehovah! He refers to Acts 2:36, which is about official glory, not about the Deity of Jesus or His being Jehovah.

But there is more in the title "Lord" than authority. He has been put into that place of power to give out the grace of God to men. That is a very important side to this great title. In Acts and in Romans you will find salvation tied again and again to Him as Lord. "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved" (Acts 16:31)… The Lord Jesus Christ is on the throne of God to give out to men the grace of God.

Jesus is Lord in a new way. He was always Lord, because of who He is in His Person: God the Son. But now, as Man, He has been made Lord of all… On earth He was the Christ, the Messiah of Israel, God's Anointed. But Israel refused Him, and put their Messiah on a cross. At God's right hand He is God's Anointed, not only in relation to Israel, but as Head over all things.

This can refer to no one but the Lord Jesus, who is therefore David's Lord. Prophecy speaks of Him not as taking His throne at once, but as seated at God's right hand for a set time, before God would put His enemies under His feet. For those who have faith this is plain to see. The conclusion is triumphant and inescapable… Israel had rejected Him. But God has raised a solemn issue with them by raising Him from the dead and giving Him the highest place of glory and honour.

Their eyes were opened and what did they discover? That they were actually against God Himself — the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And about what were they at odds with Him? About the law? No. About the prophets? No. About the rites and ceremonies, the statutes and institutions of the law of Moses? No. All this was true and bad enough. But there was something far beyond all this. Their guilt had reached its peak in the rejection and crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth.

Peter takes up these words in his appeal to the nation at Pentecost, and his appeal was most powerful. He set two ways open to his hearers. The first was to surrender to Him whom God had set at His right hand. The other, for those who refused that, was to be crushed beneath His victorious feet. And it must be one or the other for every soul of man.

This solemn appeal to conscience rested on Scripture testimonies that were direct and undeniable. Its effect was both instant and lasting. The truth of God searched His people and spared them nothing. His grace met them in sovereign goodness, and established them in the Christ Whom they had so blindly and wickedly rejected.

Peter testified about the One whom they had refused and killed, but whom God had exalted. That testimony had the most powerful effect: "They were pricked in their heart." That is, they were convicted. You have there the very first effect of the action of the Holy Spirit on the souls of men. The Spirit convicted them of their sins and reached their consciences. These men stood face to face with their guilt. The Lord put them on trial, so to speak, and brought them into the presence of God. He did not only charge their sin on them; He made them conscious of what that sin was. There was a clear break between them and God.

Three thousand were added to their number — many times the size of the original company. This addition did not come from Peter's striking eloquence. It did not come from anything powerful or attractive in the company of those who professed the Lord Jesus Christ. It came entirely from the power of the Holy Spirit.

When the gospel went out, many were pricked in their hearts. This was not like some in Acts 7:54 who were "cut to the heart" — there the flesh was cut, and they stoned Stephen. Here they were pricked in their heart, in their affections, and were brought down in repentance. They ask at once, "What shall we do?"

It was a real work of God in the conscience. They were not merely persuaded, but pricked in heart. There was submission to His person whom they had just crucified, and this through faith in God's word. This was not mere remorse. It was not just a change of mind either. It was real judgment of self before God. They now took His side against themselves and against their own unbelieving evil in the past. And they cast themselves on Him whom they had so bitterly despised to their own ruin.

Their sin was set before the people. They were pricked to the heart, and said to Peter, What shall we do? The loud, unruly will was gone: no more "Crucify Him, crucify Him." Sin has done its act, and can never undo it. The folly of it comes home to the heart with distress. "What shall we do?" They are turned; they have come to distress and godly sorrow.

Besides its literal meaning, the word was used for people linked together morally or as a nation. It was also used for those who made up the Jewish nation. Acts 2:29, 37 (where the expression "Men and brethren" should be translated simply "Brethren").

These people were pricked in their heart and said to the apostles, "What shall we do?" It would not be scriptural to say they were already saved. For that would set aside what Scripture means by being saved in the full sense of the word.

Where conscience is seriously affected, the answer is near at hand. First they are to repent. That points to the way they had treated their own Messiah. Then they are to be baptized, which publicly reverses their public rejection of Him.

Listen to Peter's address on the day of Pentecost, at the opening of the book of Acts. It was the most fruitful sermon ever preached in this world. It ended with the glorious result of three thousand souls! And what did Peter preach? He preached Christ, and he called on men to repent. Yes, the great apostle to the Jewish people insisted on repentance — judging yourself — real sorrow of heart before God.

"Repent" — a good word… What is repentance? It is judging yourself… Why be baptized? That would test the reality of their repentance, if it existed. Go, and publicly own His name in the waters of baptism, as seven weeks ago, in Pilate's hall, your voice was heard crying, "Away with him, crucify him."

Baptism before remission! This is not God's usual order, but the very reverse. When Peter proclaimed Jesus to Cornelius and his friends, they first received the remission of their sins, then the Holy Spirit, and after that baptism was granted to them (Acts 10:43-48). God departed from the usual order on the Day of Pentecost for a very important reason. Only seven weeks earlier these people had been guilty of the murder of the Son of God… Their baptism put them outside "the crooked generation." God's judgment was about to fall on that generation through the Romans.

Baptism saves in a similar way, not for eternity but from a world that rejects the Lord Jesus Christ… By being baptized they publicly dissociated themselves from their own nation, which had rejected the Messiah. Of course, baptism is a symbol of burial with Christ in His death (Romans 6:4). So baptism saves outwardly, but it is only a picture of what saves for eternity — the precious sacrifice of Christ. That sacrifice becomes yours only through faith in Him.

Peter's words, wrongly interpreted, have led to much confusion. People have built doctrines on these words, especially about water baptism. Those doctrines are taught nowhere else in the Bible, and they contradict the gospel… Remember that Peter was speaking to people who had openly rejected Jesus. So they had to admit their wrong in public. They had to own Him openly as Messiah — the one they had disowned when they handed Him over to lawless men.

The great point of the passage is the personal coming of the Spirit. The power to speak in unknown tongues, the power to do miracles, and the power to preach were only the signs and effects of the presence of the Holy Spirit. Receiving Him personally is the grand thing in Acts 2. The gift itself is infinitely greater than any effect it could produce.

There was no discrimination now.

They heard of forgiveness of sins through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. They believed on Him. They received forgiveness. At once, without a moment's delay, God gave each of them the Holy Spirit… Paul's teaching in Ephesians agrees perfectly with what happened at Caesarea, where Cornelius heard the gospel: "In him, when you believed, you were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit."

Peter pointed to repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ as the way to remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. As he points out in verse 39, the promise in Joel is to repentant Israel, to their children, and even to distant Gentiles. So the first Christian sermon already has in view the spread of gospel blessing to Gentiles. Remission of sins and the gift of the Spirit carry with them all Christian blessings.

The gift of the Holy Spirit spoken of here is the special and lasting privilege of the Christian and the church. It is as distinct from new birth by the Spirit as it is from the gifts we read so much about in the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles.

To win over the wavering governor Pilate, the people had lightly said, "His blood be on us and on our children!" (Matthew 27:25). Now the proclamation cancelled that vow for the repentant Jews and their children. They were admitted to a place of privilege on earth — the house of God. The promise was to the very people who had so blatantly abused God's approach to man in Christ.

In God's arrangements the Jews were near, as Peter declares (Acts 2:39), and Paul also (Ephesians 2:13). The Gentiles were far off. Now, for those of the latter who are in Christ, that difference is abolished for ever by the blood of Christ. For them there is now no privileged nation that shuts them out for ever. There is a privileged people, but everyone in Christ makes it up.

The Church — the dwelling place of God — has now been built, and the gift of grace is proclaimed to both Jews and Gentiles. God declared the way by which the Jew and the Gentile, in His sovereign grace, could pass out of the two outer circles into that new sphere formed that day. Both of those circles lay in the kingdom of darkness, where Satan reigned. In that new sphere the Spirit of God acted and dwelt.

His words seem to carry a sense beyond Israel: how far he entered into their force himself, perhaps none of us can say. We know that afterwards, when Peter was called to go to the Gentiles, he found it difficult. It is hard to suppose, then, that he fully understood his own words. However that may be, the words were according to God, whether or not Peter fully appreciated them when he spoke them.

The apostle closes by assuring them of Israel's share in the blessing. That blessing had a wider range, as Joel had declared about the day he spoke of. The promise, he tells them, is for you and for your children; but beyond these, for all that are far off — the Gentiles. Yet it is not a claim anyone holds. Even Israel could have no claim. Everything depended entirely on the call of God's grace — the call of "the Lord," that is, Jehovah, our God.

The details of the conversion of Cornelius in Acts 10 and 11 show the ability of God to bring this about. Neither the prejudice of the Jew nor Peter's hesitation could stop God pouring out the gift of the Spirit on the nations.

Then Peter urged them, solemnly and earnestly, to save themselves from that crooked generation. But here the historian has not reported everything Peter said. He spoke many other words of the same urging kind, and they have found no place in inspired Scripture.

These "many other words" meant, I take it, good, sound, plain preaching, which had most blessed results. Peter was in splendid form that day, because he was full of the Holy Spirit.

This was by no means all the apostle urged on that memorable day. But out of many more and different words, it was enough for the Holy Spirit to recall the exhortation, "Be saved from this perverse generation." For now God was about to separate as well as to forgive and deliver. At the very least, the salvation goes beyond guilt and sin. He would set them apart from that perverse generation, which was hurrying on to its quick ruin. It was rejecting the gospel, as it had rejected the Messiah Himself. Out of that set-apart people, now proved utterly crooked and rebellious, He would have His own saved, for His own glory and in a new way… For we too, though Gentiles by birth, belong to this new family of God and new testimony of Christ.

"Save yourselves from this crooked generation" was a call to cut themselves off from the nation that had killed its Messiah. It was a call to get into the city of refuge. In practice the Church of God became "the city of refuge" for every Jew who had stained his hand with his brother's blood — for everyone who had helped to kill the Lord.

The particular point Peter makes, both in his sermon and in his letter, is that baptism cut the link between the repentant, believing Jews and the unrepentant, unbelieving mass of that nation. That lies on the surface of Acts 2, and we believe it is involved in 1 Peter 3:21, for his letter was written to believing Jews. He tells them that baptism corresponds to the waters of the flood, which long ago cut the link between believing Noah and his household and the godless world… They suffered much from that godless mass. But they were saved from its fate, whether in this life, at the destruction of Jerusalem, or in the world to come.

In this verse the Jews were urged to save themselves from "this crooked generation." In being baptized they were saving themselves (not saving their souls) from a generation that had rejected the Lord Jesus.

Peter then adds, "Save yourselves from this crooked generation." But you say, "How can I save myself?" By coming to Jesus, the living Saviour, and clearing out of the world that is under judgment. "You are in the wrong company today," Peter is saying in effect; "come out from among them."

When three thousand Jews became anxious enquirers, Peter said nothing about conquering the Jewish nation for Christ; he urged them in the opposite direction, saying, "Save yourselves FROM this crooked generation."

'Gladly' is the reading of the Received Text. Textual scholars reject it on plenty of evidence, because the oldest and best manuscripts do not have it... The gospel may be precious and comforting, but deep seriousness would mark souls who had only just repented, and for reasons that searched them to the bottom. A 'glad' reception would fit better with a revival movement and its usually shallow results. The work at Pentecost was both deep and wide. Three thousand souls in one day was no small catch, and it was in every way fitted to prove that a Divine person had just come in grace as well as in power, both to save and to gather.

They were a separate company. Baptism, as we all know, presents the idea of separation. In that day, and in this day, there is the great world system, ruled by the power of evil and the will of men. But God also formed a new circle, and the Holy Spirit lived in that circle... Baptism took the converts out of this world's circle and brought them into the Christian circle. Baptism is the figure of death. In effect they said, "We are dead to the world we once lived in. We have left it so that we could come into that new circle of life and love where God dwells."

The Jews as a nation were like a sinking ship. To be baptized was to cut your last link with them, and that meant salvation from their national doom. So Peter said in Acts 2:40, "Save yourselves from this crooked generation."

First, the word psuche clearly means "life," as in Matthew 2:20... Next, it stands for the general fact of conscious feeling and existence — the activity of the inner man — without saying where it comes from or what it is... And it stands for persons, as in Acts 2:41, 43 and 7:14.

The last verse of the chapter tells us who added them and what they were added to. The Lord Himself added them, and He added them to the Church... The closing words, "such as should be saved," do not mean that they were unbelievers, or that He added them so that they might be saved. The nation had rejected Christ and was heading for judgment. Those who believed and were baptized would be saved from that judgment... This matters greatly, because Catholicism, and those who follow it, tie salvation to belonging to the Church, instead of making the Church the Assembly of those who are saved.

The same day three thousand souls received Peter's word of testimony and were added to this company already formed (Acts 2:41). And it became a daily event that the Lord was adding together such as should be saved (Acts 2:47).

Moses brought down the law, carved on stone tablets, only to find it already broken. That day three thousand men died by Levi's sword. Three thousand law-breakers were thrown into eternity unblessed (Ex. 32:28). The Holy Spirit came down to bear witness to a Saviour who had gone up to heaven. That day three thousand souls were brought to that Saviour, and He blessed and saved them. Three thousand took their stand for the Lord. They had judged themselves, believed the truth, and received forgiveness of sins, and the Holy Spirit as the seal of their faith.

The moral impression was great and immediate (v. 43): "fear came upon every soul." It was not less, but more, because it came from God's presence in grace, not from judgments that alarm for a moment and then give way to a deadly reaction. "And many wonders and signs were done through the apostles." These displays of power were not only amazing, but meaningful. They revealed the One Who worked through His servants, showing His own character and ways.

A powerful, though painful, witness to His presence! Fear fills every heart, both inside and outside. In fact, the presence of God is a serious thing, however great its blessing.

Nor were outsiders unconcerned. Fear came on all of them, and the apostles did many wonders and signs. These no doubt kept up the awe that the miraculous powers of speech at Pentecost had first stirred. But the historian has not told us what those wonders and signs were. Clearly the displays of the Spirit were many and striking.

These three words, chosen by God, explain what miracles are. They were "wonders," because they caught the attention of the people. They were "signs," because they showed that God had visited His people, and that what the Lord Jesus did marked Him out as the promised Messiah. And they were "powers," because they were beyond human ability.

The gospel of salvation through a crucified and ascended Christ was a new thing on the earth. So God was pleased to confirm this announcement of His great salvation by outward, public signs. Then those who heard the apostles' message would have no fair excuse for refusing to believe it, or for turning down what it offered.

The apostles also did many wonders and signs, as the Lord had foretold. In this way God bore public witness to the truth of what the apostles said (Heb. 2:4). It was clear proof that God Himself was bringing in this new era. Once Christianity was established, such signs and wonders were no longer necessary.

The signs that went with Philip's preaching were never given to everyone. They were meant to bear witness to the risen Lord, so they went naturally with the preaching of the word. At first, for the same reason, they seem to have been limited to the apostles, who were trusted with a special testimony to the resurrection.

The words themselves do not require a meeting in one place. Their literal meaning is "for the same thing." They express sameness of aim, not sameness of place. The same phrase comes again in verse 44: "And all who believed were together and had all things in common." We know how suddenly and widely the truth spread on that one day. Are we to think they were all gathered into a single room? The Spirit of God is describing their habitual life in unity, not merely their assembling, as it would appear.

First, we see the effect and blessings of the Divine Presence in the assembly. The believers felt the Holy Spirit's presence among them, and the blessed effect was this. It bound their hearts together in a holy and loving fellowship. It made them let go of earthly things. It led them to merge their personal interests in the common good.

Their hearts followed the One whom earth rejected to the place where He had gone. That made the things of earth of little value in their eyes. So they "were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need" (Acts 2:45). They did not understand union, because God had not yet revealed that mystery. But they practised unity in a most blessed way. There were no suffering poor in the early church in Jerusalem.

Some try to make this look like the socialism of our day. The effort fails once we see the unique position of the believers at Jerusalem. There were large numbers of strangers, and many poor. Needs were great and pressing; love was warm, faith was bright. Even then the giving was voluntary, never forced. That is the complete reverse of what socialism demands. The love and the faith remain for all time. Each believer decides the conduct, though generosity is always the mark of those who have learned from God.

This state of things suited the church perfectly while it was all in Jerusalem, in the full early bloom created by the ungrieved Holy Spirit. Once believers were gathered to the Lord in other places, we find it no more. Sharing of goods, where grace carried it out, could by its very nature only be right while all the members were in one place. When the Lord worked in other places, those believers were just as near in divine relationship as the ones in the same city. What was special to the assembly in Jerusalem then merged into wider, more ordinary forms of love toward all the saints, wherever they lived.

As Peter says to Ananias, no one ever demanded that believers give their goods to the assembly. No one even mentioned it to them. It was the free power of the Holy Spirit working in love to others. They set up no community of people or goods at all. They freely gave up what was their own where it could be made useful, and most blessed it was. Acting in the spirit of it will always be blessed, though there are no apostles at whose feet I may lay what I have to give. Riches are as dangerous now as then, devotedness as acceptable now as then.

The world had never seen such a sight before. Never had love risen like this above the selfishness of nature — not only in that land and race, but in any other. It came through the power of divine grace, in the name of the Crucified One now seen by faith on high. It was sweet fruit of the Spirit. It was as far as possible from a claim or a command, however right the voice of divine authority may be in its place. But here was the flow of divine love, mighty yet unasked for, embracing everyone born of God, without reserve or limit.

There was no communistic law among these gathered saints; it would have spoiled everything if there had been. It was a unity of heart that allowed none of them to say that what was really his belonged to him. The sale of lands and houses was optional and unasked for, as we see by the very naming of those who did this. There was therefore no general surrender of personal title, but a love that held nothing back from another's need. Where the need went deeper, those who had possessions sold them, so that no one lacked. They laid the money at the apostles' feet. It is not that everyone necessarily sold all they had. This was simply how the need was met.

The effort to make this look like the socialism of the day fails completely when we see the unique position of the believers at Jerusalem. There were large numbers of strangers, and many poor. Needs were great and pressing; love was warm, faith was bright. But even then it was voluntary, not forced — the complete opposite of what socialism demands. The love and the faith remain for all time. Each believer decides what to do, though generosity is always the mark of those who have learned from God.

Their affections followed earth's rejected One to the place where He had gone, and this made the things of earth of very small value in their eyes. Accordingly, they "were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need." There were no suffering poor in the early church in Jerusalem.

There was a remarkable form that the grace took as an outward sign. It appeared in the very thing a Jew would have been as unlikely as anyone in the world to part with. No one has ever thought of the Jew as remarkable for that readiness to lay down everything he has. But that was exactly what the Spirit of God worked within them. He had come to give men another being, another relationship, and that was the effect of it. The earth was nothing, and the things on the earth were nothing.

Sharing goods in grace could, by its very nature, only be right while all the members were in one place... We then have instruction and encouragement of the most precious kind about giving. We find it in Romans 12; 1 Corinthians 16; 2 Corinthians 8–9; Galatians 6; Ephesians 4; Philippians 4; 1 Timothy 6; Hebrews 13, and elsewhere. Those passages assume no state of all things common. They speak instead to rich and to poor, and appeal to each accordingly.

There was a famine in those days (Acts 11:27-30). The believers in Jerusalem were also especially poor because of the "Christian communism" they practised at the beginning (Acts 2:44-45). Their poverty, however, gave Gentile and Jew the occasion to build practical bonds of Christian fellowship.

There was as yet no clear break of the tie with Judaism, at least with the circumstances of its worship. We know that in principle the cross does make a break with all that belongs to the first man, and a break that cannot be repaired. But old habits were strong, and the joy overflowing in their souls was strong too. For the moment this made them, I may say, better Jews. There was something now within them far stronger than any drink that had ever filled the old skins of the law. Those skins were sure to burst before long.

They still went to the temple every day. This came from the love that still waited on His ancient people. God allowed it and used it as a testimony to the nation. But the temple after all was not where they could enjoy what was peculiar to themselves. The bread in which they remembered what had made all things new to them was broken at home.

They broke bread at home, in contrast with the temple. It might be the very same house in which the breaking of bread always took place. They would choose the most suitable place — near enough to reach easily, and large enough to hold as many brothers and sisters as possible.

Here the text draws a distinction between eating their food and breaking bread. It does so because elsewhere we do find breaking of bread used of an ordinary meal — in the last chapter of Luke, for instance. Here the breaking of bread was not the ordinary meal. It was the remembrance of the Lord Jesus, as He Himself appointed before He went on high. To prevent confusion, the Holy Spirit joins it with the ordinary taking of food.

Two religious facts are stated in evident connection: their continuing with one accord in the temple, and their breaking bread at home. Both are distinct from their taking of food (which does refer to ordinary meals) with gladness and singleness of heart.

Acts 2:46 is the clearest proof that when unusual circumstances call for it — and spirituality alone can judge that rightly — it is not an unauthorised thing to take the Lord's Supper every day.

At the beginning they broke bread every day; Acts 2:42, 46. When gatherings had formed everywhere, and zeal had weakened, they met only on the first day of the week, the day of the Lord's resurrection. This was not a rule, but Luke speaks of it as a custom well known everywhere among the Christians.

Eating with gladness and singleness of heart tells us that the common routine of life had taken on a fresh, delightful fragrance because of their common joy in the Lord.

And how happy they were! They had Christ, and that was enough. No system of theology, creeds, set of forms or anything of the kind that historical Christianity is full of — "Nothing but Christ." Joy and singleness of heart are two great marks of the true believer.

Even ordinary meals shone with the happiness of His presence. How much more the meal where all His self-sacrifice was before their eyes! So they praised God. And all the people looked on them with the same favour they had once shown Christ Himself in His earlier days.

And how happy they were! They had Christ, and that was enough. They had no system of theology, no creeds, no set of forms — none of the things historical Christianity is full of. "Nothing but Christ." Joy and singleness of heart are two great marks of the true believer.

People round about took account of them. They saw the kind of people they were. There was a change in those people, and they now had a good report. Before, they had been taken up with rites and ceremonies in the Jewish faith. Now all this was changed. They were showing love to each other. They were showing features of Christ in their daily walk — oh, what a change there was! People saw it, took account of it, and it made them think.

Their praise to God was spontaneous and genuine. At this moment the people in general looked on them with favour. The leaders, of course, did not share it (ch. 4:1-2).

Christ adds to the Church... No one can "join" this Church. No pastor, however successful, can "add to the membership." It is Christ who does the adding. All merely voluntary "joining," or human "adding," is like waxwork apples fastened to a living tree. It is like an artificial limb attached to a live body. He is the One who "builds" His Church (Matthew 16:18). It is His body, and every true believer is a member. Now here is my little finger; it is a member of my body. But how did it become a member? Or when did it ever "join"? It did not join by any choice of its own, and no clever surgeon attached it. God, my Maker, joined it to my body.

The early Church had such power and holiness that the unsaved would not dare to join themselves to it. They felt they did not have what these born-again believers had. But when any were saved, they were added to the Lord, not to men or organisations. They found themselves naturally one with the believers, already joined to the Church of God.

So the assembly was formed. Day by day the Lord added to it the remnant of Israel. They were to be saved from the judgments that were to fall on a nation which had rejected the Son of God, their Messiah. And, thank God, they were saved from yet deeper ruin. God brought into the assembly those whom He spared in Israel. He owned that assembly in this way, by the presence of the Holy Spirit.

"And the Lord added together those that were being saved" — that is, a class of people marked out in this way, sharers in salvation. Someone had asked the Lord about that class during His life: "Lord, will those who are saved be few?" (Luke 13:23). Day by day people could now see that class growing in numbers.

At the beginning "the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved" (Acts 2:47). Soon "false brothers" crept in and weeds were sown. The house was filled with all kinds of vessels, and a faithful person was to keep himself clean from them. It was filled with a form of godliness without power, and the faithful one was to turn away from that.