Was Acts 2:36 a Necessary Inference?

by Terry Wane Benton

Peter presented many powerful points of evidence from the Jews' own scriptures and eyewitness testimony in Acts 2:22-35, and he brought his presentation of evidence to a conclusive “therefore.” This word signals that he draws necessary inferences from the facts presented. “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly ...” This means that Peter does not think it is a “possible inference” among other possible inferences, but that this is the only inference that can be legitimate, and that necessary inference is that “God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.” (Acts 2:36).

The miracles, wonders, and signs Jesus performed were done through Him “in your midst, as you yourselves also know” (Acts 2:22). They could not dispute that Jesus worked miracles in their midst. That is one clear piece of evidence confirming God was with Him (John 3:1).

The fact that

• “God raised up” (Acts 2:24) Jesus from the dead,
• David’s Psalms 16 agrees with this (Acts 2:25-31),
• Eyewitnesses were testifying of Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 2:32),
• The Spirit had been poured out in clear display on that day (Acts 2:33), and
• Jesus had “ascended into the heavens” in agreement with scripture (Psalms 110) to be at God’s right hand.

This was all the evidence needed to force the logical conclusion, the inescapable conclusion, and the necessary inference that God has made Jesus both Lord and Christ.

It does not matter if the majority of the Jewish leaders refused to face the evidence and agreed with Peter. It does not matter if they “disputed” Peter’s conclusion in their minds. It was dishonest to refuse to face the facts Peter presented. Dishonesty may cause people to “dispute” a necessary inference, but disputing the conclusion does not make the conclusion only an opinion or just a possible inference. Many times, a necessary inference is disputed because a party refuses to be honest. The facts and the necessary inference remain facts and remain necessary inferences.

The only rock-solid conclusion, the rock on which Jesus promised to build His church, is the truth that Jesus is both Lord and Christ. There is no other possibility that can also be legitimate. You either stand on this rock to the reward of eternal life, or that rock will crush you and expose your eternal ruin. The factual evidence Peter presented that day forced a necessary inference. That is what evidence does.

What is your conclusion?