Satan wanted to sift Peter as wheat

31 ¶ And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:

32 But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. (Luke 22:31-32)

This little bit happened at the last supper as Jesus gave instructions to His disciples.

For a long time I wondered what was meant by “that he may sift you as wheat” and what was bad about it. In my head it evoked an image of a person with wheat on a screen and trying to force it through to strain out the non-wheat. But that confused me because it seemed more like a purification message. But Satan doesn’t want to purify us. So I knew I wasn’t getting something.

Finally, I realized that Jesus didn’t mean “putting through or filtering,” he meant the “shaking” part.  Because sieves have to be shaken hard to get the wheat through. The image of sifting is that of trying to make us feel unstable in our faith and jerked back and forth by what's going on around us. That made a lot more sense. Satan does want to shake us; he wants to keep us from moving forward in faith.

Also, it was an appropriate time for Jesus to warn Peter of this. Jesus had preached that His followers were to have faith in Him, and then Jesus was about to allow Himself to be taken, tried, condemned, beated, mocked, whipped, and crucified to sacrifice His life.  He knew it might shake their faith. He knew Peter, as chief apostle, would have an especially hard time with it.

The JST has another interesting bit. “Satan hath desired you, that he may sift the children of the kingdom as wheat.”  This tells us that Satan didn’t just want to shake Peter; he wanted to take possession of him and thereby shake the rest of the kingdom of God. This tells us how important it is for leaders of the church to keep their faith strong so that they can help strengthen the rest of the church.

I think the verses also have two important principles to help when Satan tries to shake us: prayer (praying for ourselves and others) and preventing our faith from failing. Fervent prayer is a great way of re-orienting my wandering or sin-enticed or fearful thoughts toward Christ. Also, I know by experience that if I continue to act—keeping the commandments, doing my duty—that keeps my faith from weakening. Action builds faith, and faith leads to action. “Tis better far for us to strive, our useless cares from us to drive.”  

I can also testify that our Heavenly Father continues to warn us of difficult experiences that we will have to face. I've seen that in my life. I haven't been warned of everything difficult, but I've been warned of enough things that I can testify of it. It has showed me that Heavenly Father knows the end from the beginning, that He knows me, and that He knows when a warning will help me better than allowing me to walk through it blindly. Getting the warning doesn't make me special, it just means that Heavenly Father knows I need it for my salvation and deliverance.

What is the value of a trial of faith?

6 Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations:

7 That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ: (1 Peter 1:6-7)

These verses really resonated with me recently.

Trials of faith are really uncomfortable at times, so it is startling and encouraging to find Peter’s perspective that they are more precious than gold. 

I have to really wonder where Peter gained this perspective.  How did he learn to appreciate the worth of his trials of faith?  Was it from his associations with Christ?  Was it from experiences with persecution after Christ’s resurrection? 

I think this tells us something about Peter’s inner life, that he pondered on the things that he went through and that he could see ways that his trials of faith had yielded some good things that he considered so valuable that he wouldn’t ever have wanted to exchange for any amount of money.

You also see hints in this scripture that Peter had an impression that some trials of our faith may not receive the full praise and honor and glory they deserve until Christ comes.

What trials of your faith do you consider more precious than gold?  

One of mine is my testimony of paying tithing that I gained the summer before my second year of college.  The blessings from that experience went far beyond my financial concerns of that school year and continue today (and I don't just mean my continued commitment to paying tithing).

I have a number of trials of faith I am going through right now that have lasted a very long time and previous testimonies I have received have kept me going.

What about you?

KJV versus JST on private interpretation of the scriptures

KJV:

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. (2 Peter 1:20-21)

JST:

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scriptures is given of any private will of man.

21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. (JST 2 Peter 1:20-21, JST emphasized)

The KJV phrase about private interpretation makes it seem like people are not allowed to have their own ideas of what scriptures mean.

The JST, on the other hand, takes this completely out and reemphasizes that scripture comes by God’s will by the movement of the Spirit and not according to what man wants.  (This gives God the freedom to give more revelation than men expect or think is needed and on topics seemingly unconnected which may address future needs unanticipated by men with their limited vision.)

With the phrase about private interpretation taken out, the Saints are given the freedom to apply the scriptures to themselves in addition to the ways that are generally accepted and taught in the church.  The Saints don’t have to wait for the church to tell them what to think about a scripture; they can study things out themselves and come to their own conclusions.  It essentially gives freedom of thought.

It also reemphasizes the importance of capturing all the inspiration and revelation give to us that we can and being ready to listen, even if it isn’t convenient, even if it isn’t expected, even if it is more or different than what we hoped for.

Who knows where or what the general authorities were doing as they were given inspiration about what to speak on in general conference.  We get the benefit of preparing ourselves to receive their words, but other times in life, revelation comes when and where we don't expect.  Who doesn't feel they could improve their spiritual listening skills?  I know I could.

Letting Down the Nets One More Time, Luke 5:6-11

 3 And he [Jesus] entered into one of the ships, which was Simon’s, and prayed him that he would thrust out a little from the land. And he sat down, and taught the people out of the ship.

4 Now when he had left speaking, he said unto Simon, Launch out into the deep, and let down your nets for a draught.

5 And Simon answering said unto him, Master, we have toiled all the night, and have taken nothing: nevertheless at thy word I will let down the net.  (Luke 5:3-5)

I wonder if Peter would have obeyed Jesus if he hadn’t heard Him teach first.  Perhaps the teaching softened his heart and built up great respect.  So when Jesus asked Peter to go launch out and let down his nets, Peter was willing to try, for the sake of this great teacher who was in his ship, long fruitless night notwithstanding.   I think it also says something about Peter’s humility and faith; even though he had already done his best with nothing to show for it, he was willing to try one more time. 

6 And when they had this done, they inclosed a great multitude of fishes: and their net brake.

7 And they beckoned unto their partners, which were in the other ship, that they should come and help them. And they came, and filled both the ships, so that they began to sink.

8 When Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord.

9 For he was astonished, and all that were with him, at the draught of the fishes which they had taken:

10 And so was also James, and John, the sons of Zebedee, which were partners with Simon. And Jesus said unto Simon, Fear not; from henceforth thou shalt catch men.

11 And when they had brought their ships to land, they forsook all, and followed him. (Luke 5:6-11)

This miracle of a large catch after previously catching nothing has a great lesson in it about the Lord’s ability to instruct toward success.   As the Lord promises Peter that from now on he will be catching men for God, Peter gets a sense of the success that the Lord can make of Peter’s missionary efforts as well, if Peter will be open to instruction. 

I think this story also has a lesson for us as we struggle to share the gospel in an increasingly secular world.  Some of us may have shared our convictions with others for a long time and yet have nothing to show for it.  We may have given up.   Yet do we not hear an echo from those days telling us to push out into the deep (out of our comfort zone), and let down our gospel nets.. one more time? 

The great example of Cornelius in Acts 10

Reading about Cornelius in Acts 10, it is easy to see why he got to be the first Gentile to receive the gospel without first converting to Judaism.  He was an amazing man.   The scriptures describe him as

·      devout (v2)

·      one that feared God (v2)

·      (all his house feared God as well (v2), which indicates he had taught all of them what he believed and why in such a way that they accepted and adopted those beliefs themselves)

·      gave much alms to the people (v2)

·      prayed to God always (v2)

·      obedient; he immediately does what the angel tells him to do (v7-8)

·      has great hopes of what God will do for him, such that he wants to make sure all his friends and family are in on it too (v24,33)

·      fasts 4 days to prepare himself while waiting for Peter to come (v30)

·      great respect for Peter, who he is told to listen to (v25, 33)

This is the man to whom an angel was sent.  When we consider the level of righteousness Cornelius had attained even out of the church, it is obvious that his faith was sufficient for it.  It causes me to ask myself whether I am at that level, or whether I have some improving to do.

 3 He saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the day an angel of God coming in to him, and saying unto him, Cornelius.

 4 And when he looked on him, he was afraid, and said, What is it, Lord? And he said unto him, Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God.

 5 And now send men to Joppa, and call for one Simon, whose surname is Peter:

 6 He lodgeth with one Simon a tanner, whose house is by the sea side: he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do.  (Acts10:3-6)

The angel tells Cornelius, “Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God.” (v4)  What commendation!  What would it be like to have an angel say this to us?  It makes me ponder whether I have a commendable level of alms and prayers.

I think it is significant that when the angel came to Cornelius, he pointed him to the leaders of the church.  Could the angel have preached to Cornelius?  Possibly.  But it shows how anxious the Lord is that people follow the earthly church authority according to the pattern revealed.  Thus, true spiritual manifestations to nonmembers sincerely seeking the truth will always point to the church in such a way that the seeker will recognize the church as having what they are looking for.  True manifestations from God will not point anywhere else.

It is neat to me that as soon as Cornelius has this vision from the angel, he does several things:

·      He obeys and sends people to fetch Peter

·      He starts fasting and doesn’t stop ‘til Peter gets there, which takes 4 days

·      He tells all his friends and family and gathers them all together so they can be there to share in the glorious message of what must be done.

25 And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.

26 But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man. Acts 10:25-26)

No doubt Peter is chagrinned to come in and find himself the object of Cornelius’s worship.  But Cornelius can be forgiven for this mistake.  After all, if an angel comes and tells you that you need to listen to a certain person, it would be easy to believe that the person was greater than an angel!  (That God gives men priesthood power shows His great condescension to mortal men that angels also speak with respect of church leaders..)

There is a bit of humor in this story as well.  If you read closely, neither Peter nor Cornelius know what is going to happen when they meet.  Cornelius knows Peter is going to tell him something very important, and Peter knows he has to go to Cornelius without doubting or disputing to tell him something, but doesn’t know why. 

Peter: Why are you come?

Soldier messengers: Cornelius wants to hear words from you.

Peter: Okay.  (goes to Cornelius)

Peter: For what intent have you sent for me?

Cornelius: We are all present before God to hear all things that are commanded thee of God.

This is funny to me because usually when we speak, we want to say something that addresses a problem or concern the audience has.  Cornelius, however, was open to anything and everything.  Thus, Peter had to have revelation that it was time to preach the gospel to the Gentiles so he could know what to do with the “blank check” opportunity given him.

I really like this story because it reminds me that this is the Lord’s work and He prepares the way for it to be accomplished.  He prepares the people who will be part of it, and He prepares the conditions.  I bet if we were to examine the history of the church and its new entrances into new countries, we’d find amazing stories of miracles of preparation and acceptance.  (Ever heard the stories of gospel pioneers in Africa?  Amazing stuff.)  The Lord’s work is the same, yesterday, today, and forever.

Peter talks about God’s view of time

But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing,

that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years,

and a thousand years as one day. (2 Peter 3:8)

I across some interesting differences in the JST for the above verse:

But concerning the coming of the Lord, beloved,

I would not have you ignorant of this one thing,

that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years,

and a thousand years as one day. (JST 2 Peter 3:8)

First, I notice that the JST turns Peter’s saying from “don’t be ignorant” to “I would not have you ignorant,” which is a substantial alteration of tone from commanding to charitably solicitous for the saints to learn something that he believes will help them a lot. (This for me hints that the concept will have more importance to us than we think.)

The second change seems inconsequential, but when plumbed, it yields intriguing suggestions. We are used to this idea that one day to the Lord is a thousand years and a thousand years as one day, but the JST seems to take away the sense that this conception of time for the Lord is general, and instead applies it only to the COMING of the Lord. How can that be, if the coming of the Lord is only one point in time?

But concerning the coming of the Lord…

one day is with the Lord as a thousand years,

and a thousand years as one day.

To me this seems to say that when the Lord comes, the changes of a thousand years will be packed into one day and wickedness of the past thousand years will seem like a bad dream of a day, and going forward into the Millennium, it will seem each day as if we’d always been doing things that way for a thousand years.

How might this help us? The context of this verse shows that Peter was addressing those who doubted the second coming and who thought that history would just continue on unchanged as it had for centuries, since they had not seen anything change the whole world so abruptly. This verse helps by explaining that whether the state of things has been a thousand years long or one day long, the Lord can work such marvelous changes that one thousand years of habits and traditions seems like one day, a tale that is told.

I know there are also people who prefer to think that God is not governed by the linearity of time passage. We tend to want to think of God as a time traveler when we doubt His ability to plan so far in advance and doubt His power to work His will among men, especially among the stubborn and unbelieving. However, any of us who have seen the Lord’s tender mercies in our lives and who have considered all the little conditions that had to be put into place so far in advance to bring them about know that if the Lord can be so merciful in such subtle ways to us, then He does indeed know all and have all power to work His will, preparing far in advance for the changes to come.

This verse could also be a statement about how the Lord explains the second coming in the scriptures, which, if we have been alert, we will have noticed. The Lord dwells upon the good, the anticipated events with such great detail that it is as if one day lasts a thousand years. He also brushes over the evil days, such as the time that Israel has been scattered, as if it were only a short time, packing a thousand years of history together and speaking of it as if it were only one day. If we were to put a name to this, we could call it “the accordion time model,” stretching out the good and collapsing the bad. I've seen this in the Book of Mormon too, such as when Nephi explains to his brothers that Israel will be scattered, but then will be gathered again. We see it in the Book of Isaiah as well, where the scattering of Israel is predicted and then the gathering of Israel is predicted in the very same chapter.

How does this help us? It helps us not feel cheated if bad times seem to last longer than the scriptures seem to give us an idea of. It also gives us an idea of the Lord’s way of thinking—He dwells upon the good times and anticipates them centuries and even millennia in advance, rather than dwelling upon the bad.

From Samuel, prophecies of Christ

Peter says this to the people after healing the lame man:

22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.
24 Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days. (Acts 3:22-24, emphasis added)

Every time I run across these verses, I can’t help but wonder, “When did Samuel foretell of those days?” Elsewhere too, Jesus says that Samuel and all the prophets spoke of Him, and I couldn’t recall anything Samuel said like that.

So I decided I needed to look closer at Samuel’s life in the Old Testament. As I studied 1 Samuel, I first started to see that Samuel’s life was a type of Christ.

• Samuel was born to a woman who otherwise would not have children—Hannah was infertile. (Christ was born to a woman who otherwise would not have had children—Mary was a virgin.)
• Samuel was the firstborn son of his mother (Christ was the firstborn of His mother)
• Samuel was given to the Lord all the days of his life. (Christ was given to the Lord all His life.)
• Samuel grew up serving amidst wicked priests. (Christ grew up among hypocritical scribes, Pharisees and the corrupt sanhedrin.)
• Samuel hid none of the things from Eli the priest that God had said against Eli. (Jesus hid none of the things from the chief priests that God had said against them.)
• Samuel prayed for all Israel (1 Sam. 7:5) (Jesus interceded for all covenant Israel.)
• Samuel traveled around Israel to judge them. (1 Sam. 7:16) (Jesus traveled around Israel to teach the people.)
• Samuel witnessed how Israel rejected the Lord as their true king and wanted a man instead. (1 Sam. 10:19) (Jesus was rejected as “king of the Jews” when the Jews cried “we have no king but Caesar!”)
• Samuel was cleared of any guilt or injustice. (1 Sam. 12:3-5) (Jesus was innocent of any wrong-doing.)

Seeing Samuel’s life as a type of Christ is helpful, but we are interested in seeing how Samuel prophesied of Christ. I found a few instances, somewhat disguised.

“And on whom is all the desire of Israel? Is it not on thee, and on all thy father’s house?” (1 Sam. 9:20) This was spoken to Saul before Saul was anointed king, but it was also true of Christ, who was the Messiah all Israel looked forward to, as well as his father’s royal Davidic lineage.

Samuel’s specific instructions to Saul that he should go to Gilgal and wait seven days until Samuel would come and show him what to do (1 Sam. 10:8) is a type of Christ instructing the apostles (Acts 1) to wait for the promise of the Father of the Holy Ghost to be poured out on them, which it was on the day of Pentacost, 8 days later (Acts 2).
“And Samuel said to all the people, See ye him whom the Lord hath chosen, that there is none like him among all the people?” (1 Sam. 10:24) Samuel was speaking of Saul, but the words were also true of Christ. There was none like Jesus among all the people, considering his nature was part man and part God.

“the Lord hath sought him a man after his own heart, and the Lord hath commanded him to be captain over his people” (1 Sam. 13:14) This is Samuel’s words of rejection and chastisement to King Saul after Saul committed an act of unrighteous dominion by offering sacrifices that he didn’t have authority to offer. Jesus truly was a man after Heavenly Father’s own heart, being perfectly united in purpose and mission with Him in all things.

27 And as Samuel turned about to go away, he [Saul] laid hold upon the skirt of his mantle, and it rent.
28 And Samuel said unto him, The Lord hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of thine, that is better than thou.
29 And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent. (1 Samuel 15:27-29)

These are Samuel’s words to Saul after Saul disobeyed instructions to completely wipe out the Amalekites. In verse 29, Samuel testified to the complete truthfulness and integrity of Christ as one who had no need to repent because he was “not a man,” which I take to mean “not a fallen man.”

I also found three other people in 1 & 2 Samuel who seemed to be prophesying of Christ: 1) Hannah, 2) the man of God who chastised Eli, and 3) Nathan.

Hannah

“The Lord killeth, and maketh alive: he bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up." (1 Sam. 2:6) Here Hannah spoke of Christ’s power of resurrection.

The man of God who reproached Eli

“And I will raise me up a faithful priest, that shall do according to that which is in mine heart and in my mind: and I will build him a sure house; and he shall walk before mine anointed for ever.” (1 Sam. 2:35) Christ was a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek and did everything according to the will of Heavenly Father.

Nathan

12 ¶And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.
13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. (2 Samuel 7:12-13)

Nathan’s prophecy, which spoke of the establishment of the kingdom by a son who would come from David. It speaks of a human being, Solomon, who would build a house for God. However, elements of the prophecy could be interpreted as having messianic meaning.

Having found all these instances of prophecy, it seems I’m going to have to go through all the other prophetic books and look for prophecies of Christ. (That will have to be another post, though.) It’s nice to know exactly what Samuel said that prophesied of Christ.

Lessons from Peter’s deliverance from prison in Acts 12

1 Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church.
2 And he killed James the brother of John with the sword.
3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.) (Acts 12:1-3)

This seems to indicate how Herod is being affected spiritually by his past action. After having killed one righteous man, the killing is not liable to stop. (see also verses 19-20)

4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people. (Acts 12:4)

I wonder exactly what Herod intended to do. If we measure this attributed intention by how Pilate tried to release Jesus to the Jews during the Passover, it seems like Herod planned to release Peter, but if we look at what Peter says to himself after leaving prison, it seems like Herod intended to kill Peter. (Peter said to himself, “the Lord hath…delivered me out of the hand of Herod, and from all the expectation of the people of the Jews” (Acts 12:11) I’m kind of unclear on this.

5 Peter therefore was kept in prison: but prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto God for him. (Acts 12:5)

This seems to show the power of prayer and how it can help not just us in our troubles, but our friends in their troubles too. It seems to show that uniting in prayer with others has great power.

6 And when Herod would have brought him forth, the same night Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains: and the keepers before the door kept the prison.
7 And, behold, the angel of the Lord came upon him, and a light shined in the prison: and he smote Peter on the side, and raised him up, saying, Arise up quickly. And his chains fell off from his hands.
8 And the angel said unto him, Gird thyself, and bind on thy sandals. And so he did. And he saith unto him, Cast thy garment about thee, and follow me.
9 And he went out, and followed him; and wist not that it was true which was done by the angel; but thought he saw a vision.
10 When they were past the first and the second ward, they came unto the iron gate that leadeth unto the city; which opened to them of his own accord: and they went out, and passed on through one street; and forthwith the angel departed from him.
11 And when Peter was come to himself, he said, Now I know of a surety, that the Lord hath sent his angel, and hath delivered me out of the hand of Herod, and from all the expectation of the people of the Jews. (Acts 12:6-11)

Peter’s reaction of “Now I know” is very interesting. It is almost as if he hadn’t expected this miracle. Maybe after James had been martyred Peter thought it was his turn next; being resigned to die for his witness was commendable. The cool thing is, that resignation would certainly make it all the more of a pleasant surprise to be delivered.

Also, I see something of myself in his delayed reaction. When I’m in the midst of something miraculous, I hardly ever realize it until I get to the end and start thinking about how improbable it all really would have been without the Lord. Every obstacle overcome strengthens my sense of the Lord’s power.

12 And when he had considered the thing, he came to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered together praying.
13 And as Peter knocked at the door of the gate, a damsel came to hearken, named Rhoda.
14 And when she knew Peter’s voice, she opened not the gate for gladness, but ran in, and told how Peter stood before the gate.
15 And they said unto her, Thou art mad. But she constantly affirmed that it was even so. Then said they, It is his angel.
16 But Peter continued knocking: and when they had opened the door, and saw him, they were astonished. (Acts 12:12-16)

This is a cute little story that seems so true to life—the excitement that so addles Rhoda that she forgets to open the door but has to go tell everybody Peter’s there.
Yet she also shows us a pattern of faithful witness. When Peter knocked, she came to listen. She knew Peter’s voice. (Recognize when the prophets speak.) She told others Peter was there. (Prepare others to hear the prophets.) And even when people said she was crazy, she constantly affirmed the truth. (Stick to your testimony of what you know is true.) And of course, when they all find out that she was telling the truth, they are astonished. (Just think how astonished the world will be when they finally find out that we’ve been telling the truth all along.)

In this story, it seems odd that the church was gathered together to pray for Peter, yet they had such a hard time believing that he was knocking at the door. We often assume that the church was praying for his deliverance, but based upon their reaction to Rhoda’s news, it almost seems like deliverance was one of the furthest things from their minds. What could they have been praying for besides that? Perhaps it was prayer similar to that in Acts 4:27-30, that he would be bold and have the Spirit, that he would be strong even in the face of martyrdom. This might be why they thought Rhoda had seen Peter’s “angel” (his resurrected body); they thought he had already been martyred.

Thinking about this has showed me there is great wisdom in praying for strength in trials more than to be delivered from them. Deliverance is a wonderful thing and I like it just as much as anyone, but I’m beginning to see that if I ONLY pray to be delivered from trials, then I tend to think that only deliverance from trial shows the Lord's care for me. It makes my understanding of God’s love dependent upon the quality of my circumstances. But the quality of my circumstances is definitely a bad way to measure of God’s love. God’s love is independent of our circumstances, and His care for us is tailored to both our needs and His purposes.

But this line of thought also makes me wonder how I can keep my “faith to endure” from shrinking my “faith in God’s power to deliver.”

17 But he, beckoning unto them with the hand to hold their peace, declared unto them how the Lord had brought him out of the prison. And he said, Go shew these things unto James, and to the brethren. And he departed, and went into another place.
18 Now as soon as it was day, there was no small stir among the soldiers, what was become of Peter. (Acts 12:17-18)

That “no small stir” makes it sound like an understatement even when it isn’t. We see it over and over that guards of escaped prisoners are put to death. That’s why the guards of Jesus’s tomb were concerned; the body was gone and they could be put to death for dereliction of duty. The soldiers guarding Peter would be executed for losing Peter, even though they didn’t know how it happened. In Acts 16, Paul and Silas’s jailer was about to commit suicide when the earthquake opened all the prison doors; he thought all the prisoners were gone and that he would be executed. The way this happens over and over, it is obvious that guarding apostles and prophets in prison is extremely risky business.

19 And when Herod had sought for him, and found him not, he examined the keepers, and commanded that they should be put to death. And he went down from Judæa to Cæsarea, and there abode. (Acts 12:19)

I wonder how Herod took Peter’s escape. Considering Herod was trying to please the Jews, he must have known that he was imprisoning Peter unjustly. Peter’s escape should have been a message to him that God is in charge, and if Herod would not do justice to a holy man, then God would override him and could remove him. All Herod does is execute the keepers and move to some other city.

20 ¶And Herod was highly displeased with them of Tyre and Sidon: but they came with one accord to him, and, having made Blastus the king’s chamberlain their friend, desired peace; because their country was nourished by the king’s country. (Acts 12:20)

Although it doesn’t say why Herod was highly displeased with people of Tyre and Sidon, I think I can speculate a little, based on Herod’s character and the situation. Herod had imprisoned Peter to please the Jews, so when Peter escaped maximum security prison, it made Herod look really bad. (The Jews must have said to themselves,“If someone like Peter can escape prison, none of us are really safe from the ‘real criminals.’”) Verse 19 says Herod “sought for [Peter], and found him not,”; we can imagine this desperate manhunt with soldiers swarming everywhere. When manhunts are unsuccessful, it’s always the man in charge who looks bad, so Herod’s reputation must have suffered even more when Peter couldn’t be found. I don’t assume that there was enough free speech at that time for people to openly mock Herod in safety, but there must have been whispers and rumors noting that Herod’s failures were signs of incompetence. This would have made Herod really mad at whoever seemed to be originating the rumors. Suffering from a damaged reputation would have driven him to try to overcompensate somehow with a display of greatness.

21 And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them.
22 And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man.
23 And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.
24 ¶But the word of God grew and multiplied. (Acts 12:1-24)

Even with all Herod’s attempts to stop the church by targeting its leaders, he failed. Instead, the work grew and multiplied, and Herod suffered. I think this story is valuable because it shows that even though persecution from government leaders is difficult to go through, that opposition still can’t stop the Lord’s work.

Now here’s a few extra random insights I gained from this story.

Extra #1: It is interesting to see what obstacles Peter overcomes when the angel leads him out of the prison. He was bound with two chains, one to each soldier, who were right next to him (v6). He had 16 soldiers guarding him (v4). He was in a cell in a prison ward, which was in another ward, which was inside an iron gate. (v9-10) It is clear the Peter was in extra-high security imprisonment, probably because of the previous time that James and Peter were released from prison by an angel in Acts 5:17-21. If God can get Peter out of a high security prison, then how much more can He get us out of our spiritual prisons!

Extra #2: For a long time I overlooked that all this occurred at Easter time, or rather, at Passover. Looking at this incident in terms of the celebration of Passover, it is perfectly fitting that the Lord commemorated Israel’s deliverance from Egyptian bondage by delivering Peter from Herod’s prison. The opening of the gate by itself was like the parting of the Red Sea. It is a fitting sign of the Lord’s favor to the church. Further, this gives us some insight as to why Herod’s death is described afterward. The writer wanted to show how Herod also played the part of Pharaoh, with his opposition leading to his death.

Extra #3: This story seems to make a comparison between Peter and Herod as leaders. Compare their reactions to their success. When Peter is miraculously delivered, he told everyone how the Lord did it. When Herod made his grand speech, he takes all the credit for himself and allows the people to ascribe to him the powers of a god. (Except God doesn’t let that go on for long; sudden smiting and being eaten by worms make it obvious that Herod isn’t really a god.)

Extra #4: Compare the actions of the followers of these two leaders. The members of the church pray FOR Peter when he is in danger. They don’t pray TO him. On the other hand, Herod’s people desire peace with Herod and they flatter him that he’s a god when he makes a great speech. One wonders if any of them prayed to him (or for him) when he got smitten with his worm-eaten disease.

To sum up, what principles do we get from this story?

• Uniting in prayer with others is powerful.
• Pray to be strong in troubles, and deliverance will be a wonderful surprise.
• Thinking about miracles after they occur and realizing what parts were miraculous helps us learn about the Lord’s power.
• By sharing with others what the Lord has done for you, others can learn about the Lord’s power too.
• Constantly affirm what you know to be true, and eventually (whether early or late) people will discover the truth.
• The Lord can deliver from maximum-security prisons and from maximum-security sins.
• Not even hostile government leaders can stop the Lord’s work from going forward.

Acts 2: Peter’s sermon at the spiritual outpouring of Pentacost

It used to puzzle me how Peter used the gift of tongues to preach the need for Christ. I would read through his words and I had a hard time catching the logic behind it. Recently, I was able to finally see it.

PENTACOST SERMON

1. This outpouring of spiritual gifts had been prophesied by Joel.
   


2. [continuing the quotation of Joel] At the same time, scary things are going to happen too before the great day of the Lord came.
   
   
   
   1. (This establishes the need for salavation.)
      


3. Anyone who called on the Lord would be saved.


4. Jesus of Nazareth (crucified and resurrected) is the Lord to call on for salvation and is the Messiah.
   
   
   
   1. Jesus was approved of God.
   
   
   2. He did miracles.
   
   
   3. You crucified Him.
   
   
   4. God raised Him up again.
      
      
      
      1. David prophesied of him.
         
         
         
         1. "Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell."
         
         
         2. "Thou wilt not suffer thine holy one to see corruption"
         
         
      
      
      2. David had to be prophesying of Christ because David is dead.
      
      
      3. David saw beforehand Christ's resurrection
      
      
      4. We are witnesses that Christ is risen
      
      
   
   
   5. Christ is exalted and on the right hand of God, shedding forth the Holy Ghost, which is what you are seeing now.
   
   
   
   
   1. David prophesied of this ascension too, though not ascended himself.
      
      
      
      1. "The Lord said to my Lord, sit on my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool"
      
      

When the people ask what they should do, Peter says:

1. Repent and be baptized every one of you




1. In the name of Jesus Christ


2. For the remission of sins




2. You shall receive the Holy ghost (which you have seen operate here)


3. The promise is to you here and also to you from far away, whoever is called by the Lord. [also from Joel quotation]


4. Save yourselves from this perverse generation.

Conclusion: There is logic Peter's words and most of the complexity comes as he cites scripture to explain that Psalms spoken by David were in anticipation of the death and resurrection of Christ.

Peter's "Lord, thou knowest I love thee" and the response

15¶ So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.
16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.
19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me. (John 21:15-19)

Recently I was thinking about this incident and wondering why it seemed like the Savior wasn’t acknowledging that Peter loved Him.

I thought about how it has been said that this was a redo of Peter’s three denials of Christ, as if Peter is getting the chance to do it over and get it right this time. Then I thought about the peculiar prophecy Christ gives Peter afterward about how Peter would die. Why was that cheerful little bit of news given right then?

Finally I realized that prophecy WAS the reassurance that Christ knew Peter loved Him. It doesn’t sound reassuring because after all, it is a death prophecy, but consider this—at the last supper, Peter’s protestation that he would die for Jesus was the impetus of Christ’s previous prophecy that Peter would deny Him three times. But this time, after Peter repeats his love of Christ, Christ prophesies Peter’s death. It shows that Christ knew Peter really did love Him and would die for his love. It’s as if Christ says, “Yes, Peter, I know you love me because you are going to die feeding my sheep. You will die doing your duty.”

I think if the Lord told me I would die doing my duty, then that would be reassuring to me and give me confidence in the middle of personal trials.

Peter’s Unusual Test of Christ’s Identity

22 And straightway Jesus constrained his disciples to get into a ship, and to go before him unto the other side, while he sent the multitudes away.
23 And when he had sent the multitudes away, he went up into a mountain apart to pray: and when the evening was come, he was there alone.
24 But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves: for the wind was contrary.
25 And in the fourth watch of the night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea.
26 And when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were troubled, saying, It is a spirit; and they cried out for fear.
27 But straightway Jesus spake unto them, saying, Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid.
28 And Peter answered him and said, Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on the water. (Matthew 14:22-28)

This part of the story has made me wonder more and more as I’ve grown older. It seems so odd on so many levels. Why try to test the identity of the Savior in such a dangerous way? It’s like saying, “If it is really you, Jesus, tell me to do something miraculous that is likely to drown me if it isn’t really you.”

Maybe Peter really knew it was Christ. But this presents us with another problem. If Peter really knew it was Christ, wouldn’t that make his request into a badly concealed plea to experience what it was like to walk on the water himself? It would seem so. And you can’t just ask for miracles just to consume it upon the lust of your curiosity. That’s not what miracles are for. And it is not likely that Christ would gratify that kind of thing.

So it seems we must assume that Peter really was in doubt about whether it was Christ walking on the water. It seems we really must grapple with why Peter chose to test the Savior’s identity in such a dangerous way. Common sense would dictate that he think of a test that placed him in no jeopardy no matter what the result was. Why, Peter, why did you do what you did?

What if Peter had used his priesthood and tried to command the being to depart? An evil spirit would have departed when adjured in the name of Christ. But Christ might have departed too, in obedience to His own name. That wouldn’t tell the apostles anything about the identity of the being that they saw.

Perhaps Peter thought of the evil spirits that had entered into the pigs and caused the pigs to run into the sea and drown themselves. Maybe he thought one of them had risen out of the water and was trying to continue its evil work. The madness of the pigs certainly was a very strong lesson about the destructive tendencies of evil spirits. A man deceived by an evil spirit would be led to destruction.

And the being that was coming across the water to them could only be one of two entities. Either it really was Christ as claimed, or it was an evil spirit, because no good spirit would ever attempt to impersonate Christ. If it were an evil spirit, detecting that was imperative, to prevent it from deceiving the apostles and leading them on to destruction.

Then it occurred to me that perhaps Peter was not thinking of saving himself when he made that unusual request. His intent was to save the other apostles by making himself a sort of guinea pig. He must have thought, If I do something it tells me to do and then am destroyed, then it will be obvious to everyone else that the thing is evil, and they can resist it.

So Peter told the thing to prove it was Christ by bidding him to come on the water, knowing full well that he would be bid “Come” no matter what. (If it were Christ, Peter would be able to walk on the water. If it were an evil spirit, it would still tell Peter to come in order to kill him. Not only would the evil spirit not have power to save Peter, it would maliciously try to destroy him.) No matter who it was out there, Peter was leaving the boat.

What courage and love that must have taken!

29 And [Jesus] said, Come. And when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the water, to go to Jesus.
30 But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying, Lord, save me.
31 And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt? (Matthew 14:29-31)

It seems incredible that just as he was doing something so miraculous, Peter would doubt. But then maybe we are assuming that walking on the water was as easy as walking across a room. And maybe Peter assumed it would be that easy too and found out that it wasn’t. He had to push against a “boisterous wind”. It must have been so strong that he began to feel like he was going to be blown away or blown off his feet into the sea. And as he began to fear, his faith left and he began to sink.

But at least he knew he could cry out to Jesus to be saved. And Jesus did save him.

One lesson I draw from this incident is from Peter’s walk on the water. In the middle of what was an obvious miracle, he discovered unexpected opposition, and it caused him to doubt the miracle even as it was occurring. I think sometimes that happens to me when I’m in the middle of participating in what is obviously a miracle, doing something I thought was impossible. So often when I encounter opposition in the middle of it, I begin to doubt what is happening. I begin to doubt if I can see it through to the end. And then the miracle begins to fail. This story shows me that I need to keep my eyes on Christ, keep my mind filled with faith, and not doubt the miracles as they are happening.

Something else this story shows me is that it tells us something about true authority. To detect true authority you have to follow it. You have to expect and receive miracles for following it. And sometimes, like it did for Peter, obedience to that divine command to “Come” requires that we do what seems impossible.

Ananias and Sapphira: No room for distrust in consecration

1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession,
2 And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles’ feet.
3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?
4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.
5 And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things. (Acts 5:1-5)

This is rather an alarming story. It’s alarming nature stems from the fact that the punishment (death) of this fellow Ananias (and later his wife Sapphira) seems to us to be far out of proportion to the sins committed—selfishness, lying to the Holy Ghost, and lying to God. Because of this, it behooves us to carefully study this story to understand exactly why Ananias incurred the wrath of God to such an extent so that we can avoid making the mistakes he made.

It might help us to first make some observations about this story. We must make sure that we see the events with an eye of faith. This will put us in a frame of mind to understand the higher wisdom of God in it.

First, I observe that Peter knew by the Holy Ghost and the spiritual gift of discernment all about what Ananias had done. Peter could have let it pass, but he didn’t. The intelligence Peter received seemed to have come with the conviction that it was his responsibility to confront Ananias with the truth to show him that God knew all about what Ananias was doing and that Ananias couldn’t put one over God or his apostles.

Second, I observe that Peter did not call down any sort of curse on Ananias. He asked Ananias why he had thought of doing it. "[W]hy hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?.... why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart?" (Acts 5:3-4)

Peter’s words suggest that the Holy Ghost had been working on Ananias to give the full price of his possessions to the apostles and Satan had been working on him to withhold part, and that Ananias had yielded to the temptation and had rationalized (told rational lies) to justify his actions to himself.

The question that will no doubt come to all of us about Ananias’s deeds is “Sure, it is great to give all your possessions to the church, but what is so bad about deciding to only give half?”

The answer can only come if we understand the nature of the offering Ananias was pretending to make. We are very used to the idea of offerings when you give as much as you feel inclined to. However, this doesn’t seem to be the type Ananias was making. He seems to have been pretending to make an offering of consecration, of the strictest all-or-nothing variety.

Something I realized as I looked closely a few verses in the chapter just before this story is that the early church’s consecration was carried out quite similarly to the method of consecration revealed to Joseph Smith.

Here’s the revelation given to Joseph Smith in 1831:

30 And behold, thou wilt remember the poor, and consecrate of thy properties for their support that which thou hast to impart unto them, with a covenant and a deed which cannot be broken.
31 And inasmuch as ye impart of your substance unto the poor, ye will do it unto me; and they shall be laid before the bishop of my church and his counselors, two of the elders, or high priests, such as he shall appoint or has appointed and set apart for that purpose.
32 And it shall come to pass, that after they are laid before the bishop of my church, and after that he has received these testimonies concerning the consecration of the properties of my church, that they cannot be taken from the church, agreeable to my commandments, every man shall be made accountable unto me, a steward over his own property, or that which he has received by consecration, as much as is sufficient for himself and family.
33 And again, if there shall be properties in the hands of the church, or any individuals of it, more than is necessary for their support after this first consecration, which is a residue to be consecrated unto the bishop, it shall be kept to administer to those who have not, from time to time, that every man who has need may be amply supplied and receive according to his wants. (D&C 42:30-33, emphasis added)

Those who desired to consecrate their properties were to lay everything in front of the bishop, who was acting in the stead of God, to receive their offering. The offering was to be a tangible testimony from the saint symbolizing their knowledge that everything belonged to the Lord.

Here’s how it was done in the New Testament:

32 And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common….
34 Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
35 And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. (Acts 4:32,34-35)

I’m going to rearrange the order of some of those elements to make it more clear. Here’s my ultra-unofficial version:

32 And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own;
34 for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
35 And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need; so they had all things common, Neither was there any among them that lacked.

These were the circumstances in the church at the time of Ananias’s story. Maybe Ananias felt like he was under a little bit of social pressure to do what others were doing. We’ve already noted that the Holy Ghost had also been working on Ananias in this respect. Perhaps he felt like he was being forced. If he was being forced, any of us can understand why he might try to hold something back for himself.

However, Peter tells Ananias that force had never entered into the case. “Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power?” (Acts 5:4) To me this suggests that Ananias had had a choice to consecrate or not and that he wouldn’t have been penalized if he had chosen not to. It also suggests that he could have given it in part of he wanted to, as long as he hadn’t pretended to completely give it all. There had to be something about laying it at the apostles’ feet that ceremonially implied that he was giving it all.

Another thing that we have to remember about this act of laying everything at the apostles’ feet is that once all was given, it was the apostles’ turn to give back--“distribution was made unto every man according as he had need” (Acts 4:35). Everyone received their stewardship as though from the hands of God. It would take strong faith to give everything you had and trust that the apostles would be both fair and charitable and counsel with you to make sure you were given everything you needed. It would take great discipline of mind and heart to be content, to refrain from envy.

With this in mind, we begin to see Ananias’s fault. He wanted to look like he was giving it all without actually doing it. And he lay only part of his possessions at the apostles’ feet, expecting that they would distribute a stewardship to him afterwards. He didn’t give it all because he didn’t trust that he would be given enough for his needs, so he was hedging his bets. He doubted the apostles’ generosity because he wasn’t very generous himself. He couldn’t believe in that kind of complete charity. The thing is, consecrating all you have isn’t about trusting to the mercy of man—God’s apostles. It’s about developing inner charity and trusting that God will provide for you if you have sudden needs after having given away that comforting mound of surplus. Saying you are not holding back anything from God when you really are shows distrust in God’s ability to provide, and if you are taking a covenant to consecrate and give it all, that is lying to God.

And we LDS know how high and holy the covenant of consecration is. It stands to reason that there is terrible price to be paid if that covenant is broken or taken “in vain” with feigned words.

You and I do give of all we possess to help build the kingdom. We give time, talents, and so much energy! We pay tithing, which could be seen as a minimum sum that we consecrate. We pay fast offerings, donate to temple funds, perpetual education funds, missionary funds, humanitarian aid funds, and so on. We do all of this, more or less, to greater or lesser degrees, in all varied combinations of focus. We give so much already! I wonder what is stopping us from going the rest of the way?

Nothing is really stopping us from laying our possessions at our bishop’s feet and then receiving our stewardship. Sure, it doesn’t seem to be done today, but that doesn’t mean we can’t start to do it. We just have to be willing to give it all if we do.

This story also gets me thinking. It reminds me that someday this practice of consecrating our possessions will begin again in the church. It shows me most emphatically that we cannot and will not be forced to do it. We must choose it of ourselves. It shows me that if it begins in the church and I find myself unwilling to do it myself, I should not allow myself to feel pressured to do it. It has to be a completely voluntary act to give it all and hold nothing back. There is no halfway consecration. It’s all or nothing.

Now, here’s another thought that occurred to me that was rather intriguing. This act of laying it all out on the line reminds me a little of a technique used by some professional organizers to help their clients de-clutter a room. Everything in the room is pulled out and put in the front yard and the driveway and then the client gradually puts back in the room just what they need. Of course, the client hasn’t given it all up in the beginning, and they will still need to work on letting go at the end, but all the same, it shares some elements of consecration.

So this kind of gets me thinking that it might be possible to make up an exercise for ourselves, a thought experiment if you will, to see how we would do at this if we were really to consecrate all we possessed and lay it at the feet of the bishop and his counselors. Are you up for this? Yeah, this might take some time, but the self-knowledge gained will probably make it totally worth it. Get ready to use your imagination.

First, make a list of everything you own, leaving nothing out. (Inventories are useful anyway for insurance purposes in the event your house burns down or something.)

Second, pretend you have consecrated the whole list and are laying it before your bishop. Imagine what it would be like. Imagine yourself signing a deed to transfer it to the ownership of the church. Pretend you are now completely without possessions.

Then pretend that your bishop asks you to tell him what you need as part of your stewardship. Imagine that he asks you to “go shopping” or pick out what you need from a catalogue that happens to be the list that you have just presented to him. Do you know what you need? Circle or highlight everything you have chosen from the list..

Then your bishop asks you if there is anything you need for your stewardship that is NOT listed. What would you say? Can you say exactly what it would be without hesitation?

This might be a good exercise to try for family home evening just to see what would happen. (To some it might be an exciting challenge, while to others it might seem like a test of Abrahamic proportions.) Allow each family member to help decide what they need for their stewardship. (Maybe you will find you have to teach an impromptu lesson about “greed versus unselfishness”.)

This exercise could help prepare us to do the actual deed.