Tuesday, October 26, 2010

The Acts 2 Church today?

Is it possible to have an Acts 2 Church today?  If it is, what would it look like?  Several months ago someone on facebook asked a similar question, posting this as their status: "I'm throwing this out for discussion: What would an Acts 2 Church look like today?"  Quite a few people responded, but one commenter pretty much summed up what the rest said — "It would be a group of believers totally Spirit-filled and Spirit-directed in everything they did as the Church and as individuals.  Everything would be done out of sincere love for Christ and for each other, not out of obligation.  There would be healings and miracles, and the message would make an impact on their hearts and touch their spirits in such a way that not responding and leaving unchanged would be wrong.  And not only would worship be out-of-this-world amazing, prayer would be absolutely wonderful.  To sum it up, Acts 2 shows us the Church in its purest form; it's what we would be today if we'd but follow its pattern."

Sounds wonderful, doesn't it?  The problem is, if the Book of Acts, let alone its second chapter, shows us the pattern we should follow, why does no one consistently follow it?  One reason is that no one can follow it today.  God has made it impossible, and all attempts to do so can only end in confusion and frustration.

First of all, Acts presents a changing program.  It is rightly called a "book of transition," i.e., of transition from God's past program of Law to the present.  So how can we use it as pattern for our practice today if it keeps changing?

And what message should we preach?  Should we call men to "repent...and be baptized...for the forgiveness of their [your] sins and offer them Messiah's return and the establishment of His kingdom, as Peter did (Acts 2:38; 3:19-21)?  Or, should we proclaim the message that Paul later "received from the Lord Jesus": "the gospel of the grace of God" (Acts 20:24)?  I believe the Church today, using Acts as its pattern, is teaching a confused mixture of both.  How can we preach what Peter preached in Acts 2 and 3 and the wonderful truths of Romans, Ephesians and Colossians without causing confusion?

Also, where and to whom should we preach?  Should we begin at Jerusalem as the twelve did (Acts 1:8; Lk 24:47) or go with Paul "far away to the Gentiles" (Acts 22:21)?  Should we go to "the Jews only" as the followers of Christ did in early Acts (Acts 11:19) or should we say with Paul: "Your blood be upon your own heads...from now on I will go to the Gentiles" (Acts 18:6)?  Obviously, if our purpose is to reach the Jews first, we would now find greater numbers of them in N. America and Europe than in Jerusalem.

And what economic program should we follow; the pattern of Acts 2 and sell off all our investments and have "all things in common?"  Or, should we keep our private possessions and give to the Lord's work "every man according to his ability" (Acts 11:29)?  And if we follow the pattern of Acts 2, can we rest assured that none of us will be needy (Acts 4:34)?  Or, will we end up like "the poor saints in Jerusalem" (Rom 15:26)?

Moreover, if we could use Acts as a pattern and faithfully carry it out, could we count on divine intervention in persecution or not?  Could we expect angelic deliverances like the twelve, or would we find ourselves shut up in prison, delivered to death, forsaken by man and seemingly by God, like Paul?  Don't forget that when Israel sealed her rejection of Christ, God recalled the gifts of miraculous power given at Pentecost (Rom 8:22-23; 1 Cor 13:8, 13; 2 Cor 4:16; 5:2; Phil 2:26-27;1 Tim 5:23, etc.).  I know there are those who maintain they possess these powers today, but the evidence is not very convincing.

The fact of the matter is, it's impossible to follow Acts 2 as a pattern for the Church today, and if attempted, can only result in presenting to the world a confused and incoherent testimony.


(to be continued)

No comments:

Post a Comment