Was Peter's healing of the lame man in Acts 3 based on the power of the resurrection or on the power of the Messiah?
Peter's healing of the lame man in Acts 3 was not based on the power of the resurrection but on the power of the Messiah—the Christ, the Lord Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God. He took the man by the hand and said, "In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk."
Les explains that the healing of the lame man in Acts 3 was an extension of Judaism, not church language or church government. There is no mention of bishops, deacons, pastors, or how to behave in the house of God in these early chapters. Peter heals the lame man not on the power of resurrection but on the power of the Messiah, the Christ, the Lord Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God. In Acts 3:6 Peter takes him by the hand and says, "In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk." This was appropriate because Peter was continuing what Christ had been doing for three years, and Acts 1:8 promised that when the Holy Spirit came they would have power to do what He had been doing.
Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.
Why was Peter's healing of the lame man in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth appropriate?
It was appropriate because Peter was continuing what Christ had been doing for three years. The healing was not by resurrection power but by the power of the Messiah, the Christ, the Lord Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God. Acts 1:8 promised that Holy Spirit power would enable them to do what Jesus had been doing.
Did Peter heal the lame man by resurrection power or by the power of the Messiah?
Peter healed the lame man not by resurrection power but by the power of the Messiah, the Christ, the Lord Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God. He took the man by the hand and said, 'In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk.'